cj> Ross Regnart: When Do Demonstrators Become Terrorists?


Richard Moore

Dear cj,

This article examines the 'Anti-Terrorist Act of 1996',
revealing it for what it is: the establishement of a fascist
police state.  One might wonder how such a Bill got passed
in the first place, and why there was virtually no debate.

I looked back over my Guardian Weeklys, in the Washington
Post section, to see just when it was passed.  I found only
the following tiny reference in the Aug 18 issue, in the
last paragraph of an article: "The House passed an
anti-terrorism bill before leaving for its August

I then went back to the July 28 issue, which covered the TWA
jet which went down just after leaving Kennedy airport.  The
headline on the front page of the Guardian says "TWA crash
yields bomb evidence".  "Well-place sources" said
investigators had already found "tell-tale chemicals
typically left by the detonation of an explosive device". 
Soon after that, investigators changed their minds and said
they couldn't find any reason at all for the crash.  But the
so-called Anti-Terrorism Bill had already gotten through the
hurdle of House passage.  The crash, and the spurious
'evidence', had done its job.

Following this article, I've included an old cj posting
which summarizes the extensive actual evidence regarding the
case, all of which points to a U.S. naval missile as being
the probable cause.  One plane full of dead people - a small
price to pay in order to get such a useful bill passed.


Delivered-To: •••@••.•••
Date:         Sat, 3 Feb 2001 12:37:31 -0600
From: Andrew Hund <•••@••.•••>
Subject:      When Do Demonstrators Become--Terrorists?
To: •••@••.•••

From RadTimes •••@••.•••

 When Do Demonstrators Become--Terrorists?
        by Ross Regnart

The Anti--Terrorist Act of 1996 appears aimed at public
dissent: The ACT contains language which can charge
law--abiding citizens of being agents or affording support
to terrorist organizations: Broadly written--intent to
commit terrorist acts is defined: (Appeared To Be Intended
Toward Violence or Activities Which Could Intimidate or
Coerce a Civilian Population; or To Influence the Policy of
a Government). (18USC Sec. 2331): Any picket line or
demonstration, alleged by police to have blocked or
obstructed public access, could qualify as "Terrorist
Activities" to intimidate or coerce a civilian population:
Terrorist charges make it possible for police to forfeit
attending demonstrators' homes used for meetings and the
vehicles they used for transportation to the event.

Concern: Police agencies may selectively charge a person or
organization with either a low level offense, or terrorist
offense, for the same illegal act: Example: A fist fight
between union demonstrators and persons crossing a picket
line, can be upgraded by police to charge union members with
(Terrorist Activity). The 1996 Anti-Terrorist Act, broadly
redefined "Terrorist Acts as involving any violent act or
acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the
criminal laws of the United States or any state." The
violent or physical act need not cause bodily harm:

The Act can be used by police to target any group of persons
that would dare demonstrate for or against any issue.



The 1996 Anti-Terrorist Act has wide reaching forfeiture
provisions. The Act utilizes the broad term (supporting
organizations that transcend boundaries). Any organization
or group that advocates support for a cause or organization
within a U.S. jurisdiction, or across a state line, or in
another country, is considered by U.S. Government to be
(transcending boundaries). Consequently, any environmental
group or organization is vulnerable to being charged with
supporting (terrorist activity) should any member of an
organization they supported--be charged by the U.S. or other
government, with having (intimidated or coerced a civilian
population; or influenced the policy of a government).
Please see USC18 2991, including additional provisions.

U.S. Government can now seize the assets of innocent
organizations and/or members alleged to have supported an
organization, group, or person(s) committing a terrorist
activity. Excessive government property forfeiture
provisions are tied to the 1996 Anti-Terrorist act: U.S.
Government can forfeit SOURCE ASSETS that supported
terrorist activity. So if a person for example uses income
from their business or bank account to support an
organization or persons the U.S. Government later alleges
committed or supported terrorist acts, the U.S. Government
may seize the contributor's business or bank account as a
SOURCE ASSET. Keep in mind, intimidation may qualify as a
terrorist act. So if the press or government has
criminalized an organization, the presence of the
organization's members at a demonstration or other event may
be enough for a police agency to allege the member's or
their organization (intimidated a civilian population; or
influenced the policy of a government) under 18USC 2991
International Terrorist Activities.

Government may now use the 1996 Anti-Terrorist Act to
selectively eradicate any group or person which is believed
to be objectionable.

CONCERN: Police can charge lawful citizens who attend
demonstrations and other public events with affording
support to demonstrators whose activities may constitute
Terrorist Activities under USC18 2991. Innocent attending
demonstrators run the risk of being charged as terrorists,
then having to prove that their presence at a demonstration
did not involve supporting the illegal activities of the
alleged terrorist demonstrators.

CATCH 22: Lawful demonstrators may be convicted simply
because they did not think to leave an event where some
demonstrators were committing illegal acts. Broad provisions
of the 1996 Anti-Terrorist Act may eventually scare-off
citizens from attending lawful demonstrations and/or
contributing money to progressive causes.

CONCERN: A corrupt government and/or its paid operatives,
may too easily cause the arrest of innocent demonstrators
and/or cause government forfeiture of their assets. Note:
Conviction of an activist or organization is NOT necessary
for government to forfeit an owner's property. U.S.
Government may civil forfeit a citizen's assets using only a
(Preponderance of Evidence) by showing an owner's property
was involved in a felony that would make it subject to

200 felonies can now cause government forfeiture of

Republican Congressman Henry Hyde got passed in Congress
(The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000) HR 1658. The
statue of limitations, the time period police have to
civilly forfeit property, begins five years from the time
police claim to have learned an asset was made subject to
forfeiture. Concern: Police can claim that anytime in the

CONCERN: Corporate security and private intelligence
companies now work so closely with U.S. police agencies,
they appear to merge. Private security corporations by
working closely with U.S. police agencies are in a position
to influence local and federal police as to which
political/environmental opponents should be arrested, or
have their assets forfeited. Note: Neither charged
defendants, nor anyone else, can use the Freedom of
Information Act to penetrate corporate information
banks to learn if a corporation illegally obtained or
provided information to a police agency. Increasingly,
corporate informants work both sides of the street when they
get paid for providing police the same information about,
e.g., a political or environmental group. It is a dangerous
trend in the United States when police agencies merge with
corporate security forces, become perhaps an illegal
enterprise, to violate a person's Constitutional and civil

Secret Witnesses, Secret Jurors, Secret Testimony, Hidden
Evidence: Once U.S. Government or police charge a person or
organization under 18USC 2991, (International Terrorist
Activity) the U.S. Government may use secret witnesses,
secret jurors, secret testimony, and other hidden evidence
to convict a defendant and/or forfeit their assets. All this
secrecy can be invoked by U.S. Government to protect alleged
national security, an ongoing investigation, undisclosed
witnesses and jurors. The same police agencies involved in
the investigation may get to share in the citizen's assets
after they are forfeited by the government. This is
especially dangerous since police routinely purchase

Persons charged under the 1996 Anti-Terrorist Act may have
difficulty defending themselves even against the death
penalty when they may not be allowed to know the secret
evidence against them, or cross examine government's secret
witnesses. Such Star Chamber Courts do not serve the
interests of a free society.

Had the 1996 Anti-Terrorist Act been in effect during the
days of COINTELPRO, 1960 through the 1980's, many
foundations and citizens to avoid risks such as being
charged as terrorists or losing their assets to forfeiture,
would have given contributions only to organizations that
the U.S. Government approved of, not to progressive
organizations or persons who would dare question or confront
government policies or attempt to legally stop corporate

time the squads have in their arsenal the 1996
Ant--Terrorist Act and new property forfeiture laws which
they may use to eradicate their political, environmental and
human rights opponents.

Note: The history of COINTELPRO may be quickly obtained on
the Internet.

 "Anarchy doesn't mean out of control. It means out of 
'their' control."
 -Jim Dodge
 "Communications without intelligence is noise;
 intelligence without communications is irrelevant."
 -Gen. Alfred. M. Gray, USMC
 "It is not a sign of good health to be well adjusted to a sick society."
 -J. Krishnamurti

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 00:00:34 -0800
From: •••@••.••• (Richard K. Moore)
To: "Multiple recipients of list •••@••.•••" 
Subject: cj#757> Update on TWA 800

Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998
Sender: Charles <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Hack on 800

This just appeared in Col. David Hackworth's newsletter
which usually spends its time fulminating about military
unreadiness, the folly of admitting women to the combat
forces and other issues of interest to grunts.  But Hack
doesn't like liars or coverups either.

  -   Charles   -

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 10:53:33 -0700
From: •••@••.•••
Subject: Defending America Newsletter 14 Jan 98



I barely noticed a small article at the bottom of an inside
page of the January 9th edition of "USA Today". It reported
that retired Admiral Thomas Moorer, former chairman of the
Joint Chiefs and an expert on missile weaponry, had
investigated the crash of TWA 800 with a veteran TWA pilot
and several retired naval aviators, including Commander
William Donaldson, who flew 89 combat missions over Vietnam
and was the Navy's senior accident investigator for five
years. They concluded that all evidence points to a missile
as causing the crash of TWA Flight 800 in July of 1996. This
story was not covered by any television news networks, nor
by most newspapers. Civilian airliners crash every year, but
no investigation has been as bizarre as that of TWA 800. The
mainstream media has decided not to cover this issue, and
ridicules anyone who questions the FBI's conclusion that a
mysterious spark caused an internal explosion.


Imagine that 150 people saw someone rob a bank, but a
subsequent FBI investigation found no evidence of criminal
activity because no bank robber was found. This is exactly
what happened in the case of TWA 800. Over 150 individuals
reported seeing a streak of light heading toward TWA 800, 34
of these witnesses were deemed highly credible by the FBI,
including two airline pilots and two Air National Guard
pilots who were flying nearby. One pilot, Major Fredrick
Meyer, is a lawyer with combat experience in Vietnam where
he had seen missiles fired at aircraft. After his first FBI
interview, he was ordered not to talk to the press. However,
once the FBI closed the investigation, they could no longer
justify the gag order. Major Meyer stated, "I saw, what I
swear to God, was military ordnance explode." (see "Navy
Times" 1-19-98; www.navytimes.com) However, the FBI
concluded that there is no evidence that a missile shot down
TWA 800.


For the first time in its history, the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) was not allowed to
control the investigation of the crash of a domestic
airliner. The FBI claimed jurisdiction because of possible
criminal activity. Other odd things followed:

    1) President Clinton issued an Executive Order denying Navy
    divers legal protection provided by the Whistle Blowers
    Protection Act.
    2) The FBI had soldiers wash all recovered debris with high
    pressure water hoses before testing for explosive residue.
    The FBI later justified this by saying that salt water was
    causing instant corrosion.
    3) An FAA air traffic controller who reviewed the radar
    tapes and told the press that a missile was visible, changed
    his mind the next day.
    4) A few days later, a retired United airlines pilot told
    the press that he had an air traffic control video which
    showed something streaking toward the 747. The FBI had said
    all missile theories were hoaxes, but seized his tape
    5) Although the FBI allowed the NTSB to reconstruct the
    debris, FBI agents often entered the hanger and removed
    debris without logging it out. The FBI kept some debris in a
    nearby hanger which was off-limits to crash investigators.
    6) The NTSB has been unable to explain why some of the
    debris shows holes and damage that was obviously caused by
    forces from outside the aircraft, and could not have been
    caused by an internal explosion.
    7) FBI agents who investigated the missile theory refused to
    consider that newer anti-missile warheads do not attempt to
    hit a target, but are designed to blow up in front of the
    target and throw ball bearings in its path.
    8) The FBI finally turned over TWA 800's flight data
    recorder information to the NTSB last month, which made it
    public. The retired Navy officers noticed a handwritten note
    "end of data", and that the last five seconds were lined
    out. They managed to read this deleted flight data, and
    concluded that an explosive force struck the left forward
    part of the cockpit and caused the plane to break up.


Once the FBI ended it investigation last November after
finding no criminal evidence, the NTSB could finally conduct
an open investigation into the cause of the crash, but
certain ground rules were set by the Clinton administration.
The NTSB could not interview any witnesses to the crash, and
the possibility that a missile caused the crash could not be
discussed. The FBI also refused to release many details of
its investigation to the NTSB, including information on the
Navy P-3 which was flying directly over TWA 800 when it
exploded, and is the type of aircraft used to monitor
missile tests.


A former police officer and husband of a senior TWA
stewardess was asked by TWA employees to dig into this mess.
He wrote an excellent book "The Downing of TWA Flight 800",
which provides very credible evidence that a Navy missile
fired over the horizon as part of a new "Cooperative
Engagement" tactics hit TWA 800. His key piece of evidence
was a small fabric sample from a seat which a TWA
investigator obtained for him. He sent the seat cushion to a
respected laboratory for testing, which confirmed that
missile residue was present.

He forwarded the sample to CBS News for further testing
which was to be used in a planned report on "60 Minutes".
However, when the FBI learned of the report, it seized the
sample from CBS news and the "60 minutes" story never
appeared. It then arrested a career TWA captain who was head
of TWA's investigative team for providing the sample, and
arrested the author of the book.


In the brilliant, yet politically incorrect Oliver Stone
movie, "Year of the Dragon", a Chinese mafia "triad" boss
attempts to bribe New York City police captain Mickey Rourke
to look the other way. He suggested that his corporation
could find him an extremely profitable position as a
security consultant after he retired from the police force.

This scene came to mind when the lead investigator for the
TWA 800 crash announced his retirement. James Kallestrom had
spent a hundred million taxpayer dollars and could not find
the cause of the crash of TWA 800, yet he is certain that it
was not caused by a missile. His failure to determine a
cause somehow caught the attention of a powerful
organization. According to Mr. Kallestrom, someone made him
an offer (during the investigation) which he could not
refuse, so he retired early from the FBI after closing the
TWA investigation to accept a position as a "security

The politicians keep saying, "My God, 230 people were
killed, do you really think our government would cover
something like this up?" Our Navy accidentally shot down an
Iranian airline a few years ago and lied about what happened
for several years; and those were Iranians who were killed,
not Americans. Billions of future dollars for defense
contractors are at stake, not to mention civil lawsuits, and
possible criminal charges of mass manslaughter. Our military
and the Clinton administration cover-up most blunders, why
should this be different? Admiral Moorer has demanded a
congressional investigation, but all the publicity hounds on
Capitol Hill seem afraid to step into this spotlight. If you
want to understand the press in this country, send a copy of
this to your local newspaper and ask them why they refuse to
report on this story.

-- Carlton Meyer

Richard K Moore
Wexford, Ireland
Citizens for a Democratic Renaissance 
email: •••@••.••• 
CDR website & list archives: http://cyberjournal.org
content-searchable archive: http://members.xoom.com/centrexnews/

Please take a look at 
    "A Guidebook: How the world works and how we can change it"

    A community will evolve only when
    the people control their means of communication.
            -- Frantz Fanon

    Capitalism is the relentless accumulation of capital for the
    acquisition of profit.  Capitalism is a carnivore.  It
    cannot be made over into a herbivore without gutting it,
    i.e., abolishing it.
    - Warren Wagar,  Professor of History, State University 
      of New York at Binghamton

Permission for non-commercial republishing hereby granted - BUT 
include and observe all restrictions, copyrights, credits,
and notices - including this one.