Comments on: S 1959: Thought Crime Prevention Act of 2007 http://www.bloggernews.net/112102 High-quality English language analysis and editorial writing on the news. Thu, 26 Nov 2009 09:06:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Colin Watson http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-173221 Colin Watson Mon, 31 Dec 2007 04:24:54 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-173221 We're overlooking the fact that this bill criminalizes nothing. It simply establishes a commission to investigate radicalization, rather than attempting to ban it. It does not say that this (which, by the way, will remain legal): "(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." Is this (which has always been illegal): "(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." S 1959 only investigates radicalization, it does not criminalize it. The commission's purposes are: "(1) Examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States... (2) The Commission shall... conduct a survey of methodologies implemented by foreign nations to prevent violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in their respective nations. (3) Build upon and bring together the work of other entities and avoid unnecessary duplication, by reviewing the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of..." It is not tasked with defining new crimes or prosecuting individuals, and in fact lacks the power to do so. When it submits its report, it could recommend a ban on "thought crime", but this seems highly unlikely. How about saving the outrage for then? We must continue to watch our representatives vigilantly, especially during an administration with a callous disregard for our liberties. But this particular bill does no direct harm. No new crimes, and certainly no thought crimes, are codified. We’re overlooking the fact that this bill criminalizes nothing. It simply establishes a commission to investigate radicalization, rather than attempting to ban it.

It does not say that this (which, by the way, will remain legal):
“(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.”

Is this (which has always been illegal):
“(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.”

S 1959 only investigates radicalization, it does not criminalize it. The commission’s purposes are:
“(1) Examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States…

(2) The Commission shall… conduct a survey of methodologies implemented by foreign nations to prevent violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in their respective nations.

(3) Build upon and bring together the work of other entities and avoid unnecessary duplication, by reviewing the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of…”

It is not tasked with defining new crimes or prosecuting individuals, and in fact lacks the power to do so. When it submits its report, it could recommend a ban on “thought crime”, but this seems highly unlikely. How about saving the outrage for then?

We must continue to watch our representatives vigilantly, especially during an administration with a callous disregard for our liberties. But this particular bill does no direct harm. No new crimes, and certainly no thought crimes, are codified.

]]> By: William Cormier http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-152034 William Cormier Thu, 13 Dec 2007 01:48:01 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-152034 There is a nation-wide protest that is gaining momentum by the day against this Bill, and we need everyone to join in solidarity to make enough calls to the Senate and emails that it will effectively crash the system as it did when Joe Biden did when he called for calls to Washington on a different issue. There still isn't any mention of this Bill on the MSM, and it appears there's actually a press blackout - ordered by who I can't prove, but no mainstream outlet will talk about it or even allow it to be discussed. This should be a wake-up call to America as a whole, and we must join in solidarity to defeat this unconscionable attack against the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the rule of law. There’s A Press Blackout on S 1959, the Thought Crime Prevention Bill; Why? http://justanothercoverup.com/?p=343 First, It Was War On Crime, Then Drugs, Next Terror, Now It’s War On Americans http://justanothercoverup.com/?p=342 Today Is Critical, And We Must Join-in To Kill S 1959 http://justanothercoverup.com/?p=334 This movement is growing at a remarkable pace, and if we all join-in and pledge to make at least two (2) calls per day to the White House and Senate, we have a chance to kill this odious Bill before it gets out of committee. Thanks You William Cormier There is a nation-wide protest that is gaining momentum by the day against this Bill, and we need everyone to join in solidarity to make enough calls to the Senate and emails that it will effectively crash the system as it did when Joe Biden did when he called for calls to Washington on a different issue. There still isn’t any mention of this Bill on the MSM, and it appears there’s actually a press blackout - ordered by who I can’t prove, but no mainstream outlet will talk about it or even allow it to be discussed. This should be a wake-up call to America as a whole, and we must join in solidarity to defeat this unconscionable attack against the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the rule of law.

There’s A Press Blackout on S 1959, the Thought Crime Prevention Bill; Why?
http://justanothercoverup.com/?p=343

First, It Was War On Crime, Then Drugs, Next Terror, Now It’s War On Americans
http://justanothercoverup.com/?p=342

Today Is Critical, And We Must Join-in To Kill S 1959
http://justanothercoverup.com/?p=334

This movement is growing at a remarkable pace, and if we all join-in and pledge to make at least two (2) calls per day to the White House and Senate, we have a chance to kill this odious Bill before it gets out of committee.

Thanks You

William Cormier

]]> By: Jeff Moore http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-147823 Jeff Moore Sat, 08 Dec 2007 08:18:38 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-147823 Comment from: Jeff Moore [Visitor] If the authors of S.1959 were not condoning or turning a blind eye to torture, had not bombed and destroyed Iraq, and had not signed another Democratic bill S. 333 to encourage Bush to subject Iran to economic and other acts of war, I think we'd have nothing much to worry about. But they have quite extreme and violent ideas and can't be persuaded out of them, even by electoral results. The fact that they behave as if lots of people in this world are "jealous of our freedoms", and repeat mantras like "all options on the table", should leave little doubt about their sanity and humane sensibilities. Our homegrown extremists aren't just expounding bipartisan agreement about the idea of violence: Lebanon, Haiti, Iraq, Iran, and Venezuela have all experienced extreme violence, threats of violence or coups against their goverments from this group within the last 6 years. We, that is those of us who are not elected, need our own "commission" to begin to get a handle on the violence and corruption eminating from our federal system. To continue imagining that our electeds are going to quit their savage ways and respond to the real environmental and human needs in this world is darkly amusing. The City of Fallujah once had 300,000 people. Our "leaders" destroyed 80% of the homes and businesses in an seige that compares to Hiroshima. But of course it could be said that Japan had an army opposed to us at the time. Samara, Rhamadi, and parts of Bagdad have recieved some of the same treatment (collective punishment). They of course have no army, only people who are determined to throw off a brutally led occuppying army, more than half of which is mercenary. Am I "radical"? Are our leaders radical, extreme, violent? Who is this "Center for Excellence" that will inherit the work of this commission? Are they thinking of privatizing more of their radical ideas? Comment from: Jeff Moore [Visitor]
If the authors of S.1959 were not condoning or turning a blind eye to torture, had not bombed and destroyed Iraq, and had not signed another Democratic bill S. 333 to encourage Bush to subject Iran to economic and other acts of war, I think we’d have nothing much to worry about.
But they have quite extreme and violent ideas and can’t be persuaded out of them, even by electoral results.
The fact that they behave as if lots of people in this world are “jealous of our freedoms”, and repeat mantras like “all options on the table”, should leave little doubt about their sanity and humane sensibilities.
Our homegrown extremists aren’t just expounding bipartisan agreement about the idea of violence: Lebanon, Haiti, Iraq, Iran, and Venezuela have all experienced extreme violence, threats of violence or coups against their goverments from this group within the last 6 years.
We, that is those of us who are not elected, need our own “commission” to begin to get a handle on the violence and corruption eminating from our federal system.
To continue imagining that our electeds are going to quit their savage ways and respond to the real environmental and human needs in this world is darkly amusing.
The City of Fallujah once had 300,000 people. Our “leaders” destroyed 80% of the homes and businesses in an seige that compares to Hiroshima. But of course it could be said that Japan had an army opposed to us at the time. Samara, Rhamadi, and parts of Bagdad have recieved some of the same treatment (collective punishment). They of course have no army, only people who are determined to throw off a brutally led occuppying army, more than half of which is mercenary.
Am I “radical”? Are our leaders radical, extreme, violent?
Who is this “Center for Excellence” that will inherit the work of this commission? Are they thinking of privatizing more of their radical ideas?

]]> By: Alex M http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-145953 Alex M Thu, 06 Dec 2007 03:50:11 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-145953 This was brought to my attention from one of my clients today. What I have read this far is truly unbelievable. As a twenty year old now coming into society as a young independent man it has become very sad to me that the American Constitution is being destroyed. I am very scared of the fact that Americans today are being distracted watching reality tv while in the mean time their rights are being taken away and destroyed. It amazes me that blogs are the only place to really find this info and it is not found in the NYTimes or the Washington Post. I can say for myself that from hear on out I will become a lot more politically involved and ensure that my friends and family do the same. God help this country. This was brought to my attention from one of my clients today. What I have read this far is truly unbelievable. As a twenty year old now coming into society as a young independent man it has become very sad to me that the American Constitution is being destroyed. I am very scared of the fact that Americans today are being distracted watching reality tv while in the mean time their rights are being taken away and destroyed. It amazes me that blogs are the only place to really find this info and it is not found in the NYTimes or the Washington Post. I can say for myself that from hear on out I will become a lot more politically involved and ensure that my friends and family do the same. God help this country.

]]> By: Jen Clark http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-144884 Jen Clark Wed, 05 Dec 2007 05:28:13 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-144884 I'm just as scared as you guys. I don't label myself conservative or liberal (I've often been accused of both, depending on the topic), but I don't think this is an issue where it matters. We should all be afraid of any bill that takes away our right to free speech. It's the destruction of our Constitution, and what kind of United States of America would we be without our Constitution? And I think Stan is correct to point out that even though this bill has Bush Administration written all over it, a Democrat was the one who put this dreadful piece of garbage forth in the House of Representatives. The reason I could see Jane Harmon wanting a bill like this one is because of her undeniable connections to the military industrial complex, which are her true constituents (her district is home to the headquarters of Northrup Grumman, Raytheon, Boeing, and others). They have a lot to lose if the Department of Homeland Security, and its big-brother projects, are shut down. It just goes to show that we need to stop looking at the 'D' or 'R' next to the politician's names. They need to be judged as individuals, based on their actions and their votes. They are either with the Constitution or against it. Anyone involved in this bill is obviously on the wrong side. I’m just as scared as you guys. I don’t label myself conservative or liberal (I’ve often been accused of both, depending on the topic), but I don’t think this is an issue where it matters. We should all be afraid of any bill that takes away our right to free speech. It’s the destruction of our Constitution, and what kind of United States of America would we be without our Constitution?

And I think Stan is correct to point out that even though this bill has Bush Administration written all over it, a Democrat was the one who put this dreadful piece of garbage forth in the House of Representatives. The reason I could see Jane Harmon wanting a bill like this one is because of her undeniable connections to the military industrial complex, which are her true constituents (her district is home to the headquarters of Northrup Grumman, Raytheon, Boeing, and others). They have a lot to lose if the Department of Homeland Security, and its big-brother projects, are shut down.

It just goes to show that we need to stop looking at the ‘D’ or ‘R’ next to the politician’s names. They need to be judged as individuals, based on their actions and their votes. They are either with the Constitution or against it. Anyone involved in this bill is obviously on the wrong side.

]]> By: Henry B Stevens http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-144096 Henry B Stevens Tue, 04 Dec 2007 12:40:23 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-144096 Hank330 I'm scared. I've searched both the NYTimes and the Washington Post the last week for HR1955. Nothing found. A search of blogs for 1955 gives many, many links. Why the silence of two national daily newspapers? Have they been tipped off to remain silent so the only people speaking up are on blogs and can all be identified? Frightening, don't you think? s/hank330 Hank330

I’m scared. I’ve searched both the NYTimes and the Washington Post the last week for HR1955. Nothing found. A search of blogs for 1955 gives many, many links. Why the silence of two national daily newspapers? Have they been tipped off to remain silent so the only people speaking up are on blogs and can all be identified? Frightening, don’t you think? s/hank330

]]> By: Stan http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-143979 Stan Tue, 04 Dec 2007 10:10:25 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/112102#comment-143979 I'm a conservative, and I am also quite shocked at the vague and overly broad language the bill uses, to say nothing of the contemptible support from both parties. Both of us on the outer ends of the political spectrum agree, this is an outrageous bill that can be used to target political activists, which is why it is rather cunning, as it depends on the predictable apathy of the center. My knee jerk reaction to it, being sponsored by Jane Harman, was, great more big government from the leftist control freaks, but as you point out, control freaks run rampant in both parties. I hope it dies. I’m a conservative, and I am also quite shocked at the vague and overly broad language the bill uses, to say nothing of the contemptible support from both parties. Both of us on the outer ends of the political spectrum agree, this is an outrageous bill that can be used to target political activists, which is why it is rather cunning, as it depends on the predictable apathy of the center.

My knee jerk reaction to it, being sponsored by Jane Harman, was, great more big government from the leftist control freaks, but as you point out, control freaks run rampant in both parties. I hope it dies.

]]>