"War on Terror"

he danger is the legislation's vague definitions of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism and the commission's power to label individuals and groups as possible terrorists. Violent radicalization, for example, is defined as "the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating

Airport security lines can annoy passengers, but there is no evidence that they make flying any safer, U.S. researchers reported on Thursday.

There are many causes for concern in HR 1955. The legislation specifically singles out the Internet for "facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process" in the United States. Such language may well be the first step toward US government regulation of what we are allowed to access on the Internet.

There has been a long tradition of fear-mongering legislation in the United States directed against groups and individuals believed to threaten the established order.

I invite my colleagues to join my efforts to restore the US Constitution by enacting the American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007.

"The Justice Department's attempt to quash Mr. El-Masri's pursuit of justice discredits the Department's mission, to 'prosecute on behalf of justice,'" said Virginia Sloan, president of the Constitution Project. "Rather than stand accountable for its actions this administration has

Sir, Not a crumb of evidence substantiates Jack Goldsmith's encyclical that Islamist terrorists

are too terrifying for traditional criminal justice ("The global convergence on terror", August 1)

Most recently, the Pentagon announced last week that it is shutting down its TALON database, which held secret files on local antiwar activists.

A terrorist watch list compiled by the FBI has apparently swelled to include more than half a million names.

Privacy and civil liberties advocates say the list is growing uncontrollably, threatening its usefulness in the war on terror.