Why does every say its the Reps. that are facist.........

skadistic

Caomhanach
Joined
May 25, 2004
Messages
15,239
Location
Land of Mary
When its the Dems. that give us gems like this.


House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
Posted: 2007/10/26
From: http://mathaba.net/rss/?x=568569

This bill is one of the most blatant attacks against the Constitution yet and actually defines thought crimes as homegrown terrorism.

by Lee Rogers
(Roguegovernment.com)

The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed HR 1955 titled the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. (new window) 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.

Here is where it *really* gets interesting...

Bill sponsor:
Rep. Jane Harman, D-CA (yes, you read it right...a Democrat) link

Vote breakdown:
Democrat Republican Independent
Ayes: 404 (94%) 219 185 0
Nays: 6 (1%) 3 3 0
No Vote: 22 (5%) 10 12 0
Required: 2/3 of 410 votes (274)

More Democrats votes yes than Republicans. Can't pin this one on the R's.

link
 
I blame it on both, I dont trust neither of those parties.

How can you blame a bill proposed and sponcered by a dem. on both parties?
 
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.

Hit this sentence and stopped reading. Just another "anti-centralized government whack job." (Underlining by me)
 
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.

Hit this sentence and stopped reading. Just another "anti-centralized government whack job." (Underlining by me)

So you didn't actually read the sections of the bill just the commentary? What great way to inform your self.
 
Why does everyone say Republicans are fascist, when Democrats give us gems like this.

From article: "Amazingly, 404 of our elected representatives from both the Democrat and Republican parties voted in favor of this bill."

219 Democrats, and 185 Republicans voted for this bill. It looks like a bipartisan effort to me.
 
219 Democrats, and 185 Republicans voted for this bill. It looks like a bipartisan effort to me.

How can you blame a bill proposed and sponsored by a dem. on both parties?
 
More Democrats votes yes than Republicans. Can't pin this one on the R's.

Thats only because there are more democrats in the house.

Only 3 dems and 3 reps voted against. 94% of all voted for, this is the weakest attack on dems or reps i have ever seen
 
So you didn't actually read the sections of the bill just the commentary? What great way to inform your self.

Hmmm let me clarify that statement. Stopped reading his rhetoric. Read the bill.
The bill is simple and straightfoward. It contains failsafes to protect citizens ( and lawful permanent residents such as myself) rights.

It is standard fare as these documents go, when read divulged of the articles authors hatred of "BIG" government.
 
There is little doubt that this bill is specifically targeting the growing patriot community that is demanding the restoration of the Constitution.

-10 credibily point, +10 tin foil hat point.

The bill even mentions streams in obvious reference to many of the patriot and pro-constitution Internet radio networks that have been formed.
-10 credibility point, +10 tin foil hat points, +10 Timothy McVeigh points.

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.
-10 credibility points, +10 tin foil hat points, +10 McCarthy points.

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.

-10 reading comprehension skill, -10 legalese skill

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.

Eh. Looks like that guy is not pointing out Dems like you are, Skad. And how is this any different than the Patriot Act?
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives#Current_composition

So 219 Dems voted for this bill out of 233 dems: 94%
185 Reps voted for this bill out of 200 total Reps: 92.5%

Looks like the Reps are as much in favor of that bill as the Dems.


The articles author at no point targets a particular Party. He merely foams at the mouth about the fact that "Big" government is trying to take away his ability to be a terrorist.

(My interpretation,leastways)
 
-10 credibily point, +10 tin foil hat point.


-10 credibility point, +10 tin foil hat points, +10 Timothy McVeigh points.


-10 credibility points, +10 tin foil hat points, +10 McCarthy points.



-10 reading comprehension skill, -10 legalese skill



Eh. Looks like that guy is not pointing out Dems like you are, Skad. And how is this any different than the Patriot Act?
Doubt the credibility of the commentary all you want I did. But you could always read the actual parts of the bill. I didn't say he was pointing to the dems. But to answer you.
Bill sponsor:
Rep. Jane Harman
, D-CA

and the 219 D'sthat voted in favour
Plus I never said it wasn't like the Patriot act. But since you brought it up. It isn't the Patriot act. If it was It would be the Patriot act. This is separate and
obviously not included in the patriot act, if it was there wouldn't be a bill all by it self.


But since the reps. are the evil fascists under emperor Bush and the dems. are the saviors who would never do anything to take away rights, how can that be when they pass, sponsor and support bills like this? If they were the anti-fascist then surely they would denounce such a bill.
 
The articles author at no point targets a particular Party. He merely foams at the mouth about the fact that "Big" government is trying to take away his ability to be a terrorist.

(My interpretation,leastways)

I never said he did target a particular party.
 
If you followed the provided link you would see the info is correct. And what does a link to Ron Paul have to do with anything?


Oh I just put that there because im a fan of ron paul sorry, the information was from one of your links and i was asking if it was correct.

Oh I read the bill and i dont like it.

""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.""

Thats a bad idea! Look at all those cameras in england, its like they adopted the idea from 1984.

Its madness I tell you madness.
 
Back
Top Bottom