The Terror Bill of 1996 The Anti-Terrorism Act of 1996 Gives extensive new authority to federal law enforcement agencies, bring the US ever closer to a police state. Ironically, the World Trade Center bombing engineered by the FBI was the initial impetus behind the bill. The Alfred Murrah Federal Building bombing in Oklahoma City created bipartisan support for the bill at a time when it was being stalled by civil liberties advocates. Activists managed to hold the bill off for another year, but it was finally passed in April 1996. S. 390 was introduced February 10, 1995 by Sen. Joe Biden (D-Delaware) and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania). H.R. 896 was introduced the same day in the House by Rep. Charles Schumer (D-New York) and Rep. Dicks. The bill passed the Senate in June 1995, but was held up in the House by intense lobbying by what was called "an unusual coalition" of gun rights groups and civil liberties organizations. Such coalitions are unusual to someone stuck in the traditional right-left frame of mind, who does not yet realize that people can be committed to all individual rights and not just a select few. The bill finally passed the House in March 1996, and was signed into law in April 1996. The Law The Center for National Security Studies (CNSS) issued an excellent analysis of the bill, along with information on the FBI and trends. The National Coalition Against Repressive Legislation (NCARL) summarized the bill in 1995. The 1996 law finally enacted contains essentially similar provisions: Secret Evidence - Burden of Proof Reversed Permanent resident aliens and citizens arrested under this bill would have to prove they should not be held in jail before trial. Secret evidence could be used in the detention hearings and at trial that only the judge could see, not the defendant or his/her lawyer. This evidence can be produced by anonymous informants. FBI Promise to Honor First Amendment reversed In a portion of the 1994 Crime Bill the FBI was prohibited from investigations based on speech or beliefs, and indeed the FBI itself has made such promises. This bill unconstitutionally lifts that restriction in restricting humanitarian aid to any so called “terrorist” group.. Expanded Presidential Power The President can arbitrarily label groups and organizations as "terrorist", and criminalize fundraising for humanitarian aid even remotely related to groups not in favor with the Administration. The President's choice is called "non-reviewable" in the legislation. Expanded Definition of "Terrorism" The Bill is written so broadly that prosecution will almost have to be based on political beliefs and associations, and the President has the arbitrary power to declare "terrorists" under this bill as a result of said beliefs or associations. Punishment for Lawful Actions Permanent resident aliens can be deported or indefinitely jailed for their affiliations or political activity, with no judicial review. Citizens can be jailed for the same. New Federal Funding The law authorizes $1 billion in new federal spending over five years. The amount includes an additional $100 million for one of the most terroristic organizations in the United States, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. The Critics On April 24, 1995, the American Civil Liberties Union issued a press release quoting their Executive Director Ira Glasser, In past times of tragedy and fear, the government has harassed, investigated and arrested innocent people solely because of their race, religion, national origin, speech or political beliefs. In the 1920 Palmer raids, thousands were improperly arrested and jailed in 33 cities as a response to a frightening wave of bombings. People were summarily deported based on their national origin and their political association. During World War II, the federal government committed what is now universally seen as an act of racism and war hysteria when it incarcerated Japanese-American citizens. In the 1950s, legitimate fears of Soviet threats were used to convert dissent into disloyalty. People were spied upon and punished on the basis of political beliefs and associations instead of criminal evidence. In the turbulent 1960s, the government again engaged in widespread infiltration and surveillance of organizations opposed to the Vietnam war and those trying to win equality for African-Americans. Again, normal standards of criminal evidence were abandoned; instead, race and political beliefs became a cause for suspicion. We must now try to avoid that same mistake. The government should certainly investigate vigorously based on criminal evidence. But no one should be targeted because they believe in the Second Amendment, or belong to far right organizations. No matter how much we may disagree with some of those organizations, we must not target people associated with them in the absence of credible evidence of criminal conduct. Vince Miller, Director of the International Society for Individual Liberty, said the following in an April 26, 1995 message to LiberNet: The "Counter-Terrorism Bill" however, concentrates enormous police powers in a domestic equivalent of the National Security Council, and gives the President tremendous arbitrary power to declare who is a domestic or overseas "terrorist" -- a decision which this legislation says shall not be subject to appeal! The bill authorizes secret trials for citizens and immigrants who are merely accused of lending support (including humanitarian aid) to domestic or international "terrorist" organizations, and these accusations may be made by anonymous informants. The bill says that individuals arrested under this act may be declared ineligible for bail, may be detained indefinitely until trial, and will be considered guilty until proven innocent -- the direct opposite of American principles of justice that have protected the freedom of innocent people for over two hundred years. If the individual cannot somehow prove his or her innocence, than he will be summarily deported if a "green-card" resident, or put in jail for up to 10 years if a citizen -- while still not necessarily having been proven guilty of any real crime. It is worth noting that if the President has arbitrary standards for declaring individuals or groups "terrorist", standards and targets can change according to short-term political goals. Syria was a "terrorist state" until George Bush needed them to help fight Iraq. Iran has been an alternate ally and enemy, as has Iraq, some Afghan groups, the ANC and numerous others. How is one to know what aid is legal and what may be suddenly not?