U.S. House of Representatives passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
Folks, as much as I wish it was, this is not one of my satires. Your representatives vote can be seen here.
House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
10-25-2007
www.roguegovernment.com
Lee Rogers
The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed HR 1955 titled the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. This bill is one of the most blatant attacks against the Constitution yet and actually defines thought crimes as homegrown terrorism. If passed into law, it will also establish a commission and a Center of Excellence to study and defeat so called thought criminals. Unlike previous anti-terror legislation, this bill specifically targets the civilian population of the United States and uses vague language to define homegrown terrorism. Amazingly, 404 of our elected representatives from both the Democrat and Republican parties voted in favor of this bill. There is little doubt that this bill is specifically targeting the growing patriot community that is demanding the restoration of the Constitution.
First let’s take a look at the definitions of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism as defined in Section 899A of the bill.
The definition of violent radicalization uses vague language to define this term of promoting any belief system that the government considers to be an extremist agenda. Since the bill doesn’t specifically define what an extremist belief system is, it is entirely up to the interpretation of the government. Considering how much the government has done to destroy the Constitution they could even define Ron Paul supporters as promoting an extremist belief system. Literally, the government according to this definition can define whatever they want as an extremist belief system. Essentially they have defined violent radicalization as thought crime. The definition as defined in the bill is shown below.
`(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.
The definition of homegrown terrorism uses equally vague language to further define thought crime. The bill includes the planned use of force or violence as homegrown terrorism which could be interpreted as thinking about using force or violence. Not only that but the definition is so vaguely defined, that petty crimes could even fall into the category of homegrown terrorism. The definition as defined in the bill is shown below.
`(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
Section 899B of the bill goes over the findings of Congress as it pertains to homegrown terrorism. Particularly alarming is that the bill mentions the Internet as a main source for terrorist propaganda. The bill even mentions streams in obvious reference to many of the patriot and pro-constitution Internet radio networks that have been formed. It also mentions that homegrown terrorists span all ages and races indicating that the Congress is stating that everyone is a potential terrorist. Even worse is that Congress states in their findings that they should look at draconian police states like Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom as models to defeat homegrown terrorists. Literally, these findings of Congress fall right in line with the growing patriot community.
The biggest joke of all is that this section also says that any measure to prevent violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism should not violate the constitutional rights of citizens. However, the definition of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism as they are defined in section 899A are themselves unconstitutional. The Constitution does not allow the government to arrest people for thought crimes, so any promises not to violate the constitutional rights of citizens are already broken by their own definitions.
`SEC. 899B. FINDINGS.
`The Congress finds the following:
`(1) The development and implementation of methods and processes that can be utilized to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States is critical to combating domestic terrorism.
`(2) The promotion of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence exists in the United States and poses a threat to homeland security.
`(3) The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.
`(4) While the United States must continue its vigilant efforts to combat international terrorism, it must also strengthen efforts to combat the threat posed by homegrown terrorists based and operating within the United States.
`(5) Understanding the motivational factors that lead to violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence is a vital step toward eradicating these threats in the United States.
`(6) The potential rise of self radicalized, unaffiliated terrorists domestically cannot be easily prevented through traditional Federal intelligence or law enforcement efforts, and requires the incorporation of State and local solutions.
`(7) Individuals prone to violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence span all races, ethnicities, and religious beliefs, and individuals should not be targeted based solely on race, ethnicity, or religion.
`(8) Any measure taken to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism in the United States should not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights and civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents.
`(9) Certain governments, including the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia have significant experience with homegrown terrorism and the United States can benefit from lessons learned by those nations.
Section 899C calls for a commission on the prevention of violent radicalization and ideologically based violence. The commission will consist of ten members appointed by various individuals that hold different positions in government. Essentially, this is a commission that will examine and report on how they are going to deal with violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. So basically, the commission is being formed specifically on how to deal with thought criminals in the United States. The bill requires that the commission submit their final report 18 months following the commission’s first meeting as well as submit interim reports every 6 months leading up to the final report. Below is the bill’s defined purpose of the commission. Amazingly they even define one of the purposes of the commission to determine the causes of lone wolf violent radicalization.
(b) Purpose- The purposes of the Commission are the following:
`(1) Examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States, including United States connections to non-United States persons and networks, violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in prison, individual or `lone wolf' violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence, and other faces of the phenomena of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence that the Commission considers important.
`(2) Build upon and bring together the work of other entities and avoid unnecessary duplication, by reviewing the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of--
`(A) the Center of Excellence established or designated under section 899D, and other academic work, as appropriate;
`(B) Federal, State, local, or tribal studies of, reviews of, and experiences with violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence; and
`(C) foreign government studies of, reviews of, and experiences with violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence.
Section 899D of the bill establishes a Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States. Essentially, this will be a Department of Homeland Security affiliated institution that will study and determine how to defeat thought criminals.
Section 899E of the bill discusses how the government is going to defeat violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism through international cooperation. As stated in the findings section earlier in the legislation, they will unquestionably seek the advice of countries with draconian police states like the United Kingdom to determine how to deal with this growing threat of thought crime.
Possibly the most ridiculous section of the bill is Section 899F which states how they plan on protecting civil rights and civil liberties while preventing ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism. Here is what the section says.
`SEC. 899F. PROTECTING CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES WHILE PREVENTING IDEOLOGICALLY-BASED VIOLENCE AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM.
`(a) In General- The Department of Homeland Security's efforts to prevent ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism as described herein shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, and civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents.
`(b) Commitment to Racial Neutrality- The Secretary shall ensure that the activities and operations of the entities created by this subtitle are in compliance with the Department of Homeland Security's commitment to racial neutrality.
`(c) Auditing Mechanism- The Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer of the Department of Homeland Security will develop and implement an auditing mechanism to ensure that compliance with this subtitle does not result in a disproportionate impact, without a rational basis, on any particular race, ethnicity, or religion and include the results of its audit in its annual report to Congress required under section 705.'.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of contents in section 1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting at the end of the items relating to title VIII the following:
It states in the first subsection that in general the efforts to defeat thought crime shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights and civil liberties of the United States citizens and lawful permanent residents. How does this protect constitutional rights if they use vague language such as in general that prefaces the statement? This means that the Department of Homeland Security does not have to abide by the Constitution in their attempts to prevent so called homegrown terrorism.
This bill is completely insane. It literally allows the government to define any and all crimes including thought crime as violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. Obviously, this legislation is unconstitutional on a number of levels and it is clear that all 404 representatives who voted in favor of this bill are traitors and should be removed from office immediately. The treason spans both political parties and it shows us all that there is no difference between them. The bill will go on to the Senate and will likely be passed and signed into the law by George W. Bush. Considering that draconian legislation like the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act have already been passed, there seems little question that this one will get passed as well. This is more proof that our country has been completely sold out by a group of traitors at all levels of government.
Bad shit and look at the "good guys" and "pretty good" types such as Pete Stark, John Murtha, Barbara "Let Us Not Become the Evil We Deplore" Lee who voted FOR it. Pardon my violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism.
What is ideologically, based violence and / or terrorism? Talk about obfuscation and an all-catch phrase. Do they mean violence because of some ideology? Don't all violence stem from some sort of ideological stance or cerebral disposition regardless? Is this simply rehashing hate crime legislation - but in a war against terror paradigm? Does this signify pre-emption coming home from its journey abroad?
Science fiction is never more than a few decades ahead of society - so we finally have our thought police. The UK already has its version - guess it's our turn across the pond.
It is apparent however the flow and ebb of the gravitational forces between freedom, apathy and fascism will necessarily, lead some smart folk to develop mechanisms to congregate on the web anonymously.
Good luck all, keep your mind blank of thoughts, think of snow or the sea and make sure to walk counter clockwise around edifice.
___________________
"As often as Herman had witnessed the slaughter of animals and fish, he always had the same thought: in their behavior toward creatures, most of mankind are Nazis"
--Isaac Bashevis
other than the obvious outrageousness of this bill -
=================
(1) "and other faces of the phenomena of violent radicalization"
=================
this ENSURES that they get every type of conduct, including anything they feel might "lead up to" violent radicalization, like maybe 'scathing criticism' of the government and 'cursing at it and its officials'.
and (2)
=========================
"(2) Build upon and bring together the work of other entities and avoid unnecessary duplication, by reviewing the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of--
`(A) the Center of Excellence established or designated under section 899D, and other academic work, as appropriate;
`(B) Federal, State, local, or tribal studies of, reviews of, and experiences with violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence; and
`(C) foreign government studies of, reviews of, and experiences with violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence.
================
This ensures that experience, tactics, and policies of zionist think tanks and the israeli government are adopted whole, without examination.
This is incredible.
The scariest thing about it is how many representatives voted for it.
Please, tell me that Kucinich isn't one of them.
---------------------------------------
"Money" has no value - people do.
of a recent post I did about an article written by a US military officer in a military magazine:
What do Blue-collar workers and the Taliban have in common?
The Taliban were first, now they're coming after the disillusioned blue-collared workers.
---------------------------------------
"Money" has no value - people do.
Any group opposed to the sham "two party" system would fall into the net of this bill. Any opposition to government is disallowed. It's the vote numbers that tell the tale on this one - 404 to 6.
I see this bill as the most dangerous piece of legislation passed to date - worse than the patriot act.
This is the kind of move that precedes a major event. And it came out of nowhere like a crack of thunder.
Ron Paul didn't vote. 404 sheep.
-----------------------
"Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly."
How could you put this bill into the law when 'Terrorism' has no legal definition?
You can take some one to the court for Rape, Theft, Embezzlements, Arson, Murder, Spying for a foreign country, ..., because they are legal offenses and therefore have legal definitions. But you can't take some one to the court for Fascism, Anarchism, Atheism, Sexism, Racial Supremicism, ..., because they are social ills, not legal offenses and therefore have no legal definitions.
I read it again. So this is an attempt to 'create' a legal definition.
I simply took some or's out of the above definition of terrorism:
===
3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM-
The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force by a group based and operating primarily within the United States to intimidate or coerce the civilian population of the United States in furtherance of political objectives.
===
Doesn't this apply perfectly to the enforcers of this law?
Re: "But you can't take some one to the court for Fascism, Anarchism, Atheism, Sexism, Racial Supremicism, ..., because they are social ills, not legal offenses and therefore have no legal definitions"
Please do not link Atheism with these other "social ills". You expose yourself as being as bass ackwards as the Roman Catholics were during the Inquisition. I consider myself a morally upstanding/ outstanding citizen who does not happen to believe in God and it really ticks me off that people consider that a social illness. That really was a naive thing to say.
was in quotes, which signals that the author has some qualms with the term. Besides, Atheism was one in a list of ideas that were presented in order to point out that the new law aims to proscript ideas and not actual crimes in the physical world. A pre-emptive piece of legislation has been created to rein in thoughts and ideas in the US. Even though, the bill surrounds its pronouncement in the language of combating violence, the aim of the bill is not to counter dissent.
Instead the law aims to stifle thoughts perceived to advocate, support or threaten violence.
The idea that the state can go inside one's head decipher and deduce violence from thoughts/statements then to make such thinking subsecptible to criminalization is indeed, ominous.
____________________
"As often as Herman had witnessed the slaughter of animals and fish, he always had the same thought: in their behavior toward creatures, most of mankind are Nazis"
--Isaac Bashevis
My apologies. It certainly didn't come out right. I meant to say that this is how the legal system looks at it, not how "I" look at it. Nevertheless I should have said "social issues" instead. I myself do not subscribe to any religion.
My apologies to you! It is not you who created the stigma or listed the idea as has been pointed out. It is ominous and things are hitting closer to home every day. My best to you.
An extremist is someone with a agenda who will intentionally violate the civil rights of anther human.
Extremists recruit terrorists.
It is near time to achieve progressive sophistication in a similar matter and correctly categorize "gang members" as terrorists. There are extremist gang members in the USA that exhibit the same social aptitude.
I do appreciate that people state their concerns about the continuing development of homeland security. If it is necessary, force it to become perfected.
Technology is rapidly advancing and a the accessibility to intervene into any worldwide destination by anyone should require abidance to the most sophisticated law.
The insertion of these clauses insures that racial gangs or immigrant groups can't be classified as terrorists:
I see this legislation specifically targeting third party political organizations who become disenfranchised to the point of civil disobedience and specifically the growing 911 truth movement.
Can we start a grass roots civilian steered referendum that basically states that ALL laws passed during Bush Admin. is subject to a total review (by ?) before it's legality is accepted. If a website can collect more than 50% signatures, that by itself will be a big political embarrassment to the congress in the world.
Instead of a web site petition, collect funding for a petition to be printed in newspapers across the country.