Those of use who though the UK's Terrorism Act was bad ain't seen
nothing yet.
One of the side effects of the 'War on Terrorism' has been the
devaluation of the concept itself such that it can now be seen to
include almost anything the United States authorities do not like.
Considering the real and devastating acts of terrorism that are taking
place (including 9-11 itself), it is surprising that this amazing
further indignity inflicted on the survivors of terrorist acts, and the
general sense of utter ludicrousness of this devaluation is not more
widely discussed.
The most recent example is the Bill on terrorism currently being
discussed by the Oregon state legislature in the USA. The acts included
as terrorism include relabelling a videotape, sports bribery and
unlawful distribution of cigarettes (amongst a whole host of crimes,
most of which are more serious but have nothing to do with terrorism per
se). Terrorism is in general defined as any act intended to 'disrupt'
order, education, transport or government in Oregon - in other words
just about any form of civil, environmental or labour protest beyond the
most minimal level.
Don't believe me? Read it here:
http://pub.das.state.or.us/LEG_BILLS/PDFs/SB742.pdf
David.
|