Community Resolution from Berkeley, CA

George Bush, President

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Washington, D,C. 20500

Dear President Bush:

At the Council meeting of April 16, 2002 the Berkeley City Council approved the recommendation of the Berkeley Peace and Justice Commission to send a letter expressing Berkeley's concerns as follows.

In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 tragedy, our leaders have repeatedly reminded us that we should not allow the fear of terrorism to change the way we live. Indeed, the best way we can show true patriotism is to protect and defend the freedom conferred by the United States Constitution. Unfortunately, rather than affirming core Constitutional principles of free expression, this nation has lapsed into a chilling climate of conformity. As the birthplace of the Free Speech Movement, the City of Berkeley feels a special obligation to speak out against this dangerous trend that already has had serious consequences in intimidating or inhibiting free and open debate in Congress.

Barbara Lee, our congressional representative, required Secret Service protection due to death threats for doing nothing more than raising concerns about United States policy and voting in a manner that represented her constituents.

Congress itself has been so affected by this climate it has enacted a measure known as the "United States Patriot Act" without even bothering to read the full text of the statute. Far from being "patriotic," the failure of Congress to properly review and debate a bill that undermines coreConstitutional principles, and abandons what it means to be a free people. Indeed, section 411 of the Patriot Act itself poses serious First Amendment concerns:

It provides that lawful permanent residents can be subject to detention and deportation for "advocacy" that the Secretary of State determines to undermine "anti-terrorist" efforts. Under this provision, a legal resident-alien could be detained or deported for giving a speech opposing United States policies if the Secretary of State decides the speech undermines "anti-terrorist" efforts.

The Patriot Act also permits the deportation of any non-citizen who supports "terrorist activity." Although this sounds reasonable, by defining "terrorist activity" to be the use of a "weapon or other dangerous device .. to cause substantial damage to property," even if such damage caused no injury to any person, the "Patriot Act" permits the detention and deportation of legal permanent resident aliens for membership or contribution of funds to such groups.

This means World Trade Organization protesters, groups such as Green Peace, "Operation Rescue," "Plowshares," or even groups who trespass to commit non-violent civil disobedience by damaging fences to enter an area, could be deemed terrorist organizations. Nor would a person need to actually engage in any activity to be subject to detention or deportation: simply joining by mail and being listed as a member, or giving a contribution, would be enough to allow detention and deportation.

Such legislation amounts to surrender to those who wish to destroy our ability to have robust debate and discussion. It is a step in the direction of turning a nation that permits free speech into a garrison state where a controversial speech is all it takes to lead to detention and deportation. As we seek protection from those who seek to terrify civilians with mindless acts of terror, it is vital we heed the warning made by Benjamin Franklin: that those who would trade their liberty for security deserve neither.

We are especially disturbed to see the development of a multi-faceted assault on the tight to know. Since September 11, the federal government has taken steps to choke off sources of information, impose voluntary censorship agreements with the media, and pollute the information pool with disinformation. The riot to know is an essential component of freedom of speech and expression. This principle is recognized in federal law by Congress in passing the Freedom of Information Act, and is affirmed by Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that "...the right to freedom of expression" includes the "...freedom o seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds." Besides being federal law as a result of the United States treaty obligations, these attacks on the right to know are of particular concern to the City of Berkeley because the Berkeley Human Rights Ordinance (Berkeley Municipal Code 1.22.010), incorporates, almost verbatim, the language of the United Nations Charter, Articles 55 and 56, and states the "City of Berkeley shall promote .... universal respect for, and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms...." The United Nations Charter, a treaty ratified by the United States Senate in 1945, is also part of the "supreme law" of the land under the United States Constitution, Article VI, Section 2. Yet despite the recognition of the "right to know" by international, federal and local law, the "right to know" is under vigorous attack:

New York Times article reported that administration officials were choking off the flow of information to the public and Congress ("The New Washington Slogan: Start Watching What You Say," October 7, 2001, p. B 1).

Another Now York Times article reported, "...the first time in memory that the networks had agreed to a joint arrangement to limit their prospective news coverage" ("Networks agree to U.S. request to Edit Future bin Laden tapes," October 11, 2001, p. 1).

The decision to establish within the Pentagon an "Office of Strategic Influence" which would only rely upon truthful news releases, but proposed to use disinformation and other covert activities aimed at misinforming foreign media, whose reports could eventually be picked up and reported in local media. (San Francisco Chronicle, February 19, 2002 [from New York Times]). Fortunately, in response to the negative reaction by the public and media, the administration says it has closed this office.

The operation, for over five months, of a shadow government without informing Congress. Senate Majority leader Daschle said be did not know anything about the "secret government" that has operated since soon after the September 11 attack. Appearing on Fox News Sunday, Daschle was compelled "...to insist that there be some recognition that we've got three branches of government." ("Daschle asks Bush to inform Congress," The (West County) Times, March 4, 2002 p. A11).

The decision to limit the flow of information and/or pollute the information stream with disinformation in order to affect political debate will have, we fear, a corrosive effect on our democracy. Citizens in ademocratic state need to have accurate information if they are to be able to control their fate. To the extent that important decisions, such as who to vote for, and the course of legislative affairs, are influenced by disinformation from nefarious covert operations, democracy itself is effectively undermined.

We, the people of Berkeley, condemn these multiple attacks on the right to free expression and association, and call upon our elected officials, as well as on all persons concerned with liberty, to resist these efforts and all other efforts aimed at curtailing freedom of speech and expression.

Sincerely,

(signed)

Sherry M. Kelly

City Clerk

CC: Representative Barbara Lee

Senator Barbara Boxer

Senator Diane Feinstein,

Select media executives, including the San Francisco Chronicle

American Civil Liberties Union

Other first amendment, and civil liberty groups