Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 9/11, al-qaeda, Anti-War, Big Brother, Bloggers, Britain, Concentration Camp, Conditioning, Congress, Continuity of Government, Control Grid, death camps, DHS, Dictatorship, Dissent, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Empire, enemy combatant, Europe, european union, facism, Fascism, fema camp, Fema Camps, Fox News, free speech, George Bush, glenn beck, H.R. 645, halliburton, Homegrown Terrorism, Homeland Security, house senate, HR 1955, HR 6166, hr1955, internet, KBR, Martial Law, maryland, Media, Military, Nazi, obama, operation endgame, orwell, Police State, Popular Mechanics, Propaganda, Protest, Psyops, Romans 13, Ron Paul, Senate, Spy, Surveillance, thought crime, Thought Crime Bill, thought crimes, thought criminal, United Kingdom, US Constitution, War On Terror | Tags: Henry Waxman, Jane Harman, National Defense Authorization act, National Security Presidential Directive 51, NDAA, NSPD 51, Peter Dale Scott
Glenn Beck on Fema Concentration Camps
San Francisco Chronicle
February 4, 2008
Since 9/11, and seemingly without the notice of most Americans, the
federal government has assumed the authority to institute martial law,
arrest a wide swath of dissidents (citizen and noncitizen alike), and
detain people without legal or constitutional recourse in the event of
“an emergency influx of immigrants in the U.S., or to support the rapid
development of new programs.”
Beginning in 1999, the government has entered into a series of
single-bid contracts with Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and
Root (KBR) to build detention camps at undisclosed locations within the
United States. The government has also contracted with several
companies to build thousands of railcars, some reportedly equipped with
shackles, ostensibly to transport detainees.
According to diplomat and author Peter Dale Scott, the KBR contract
is part of a Homeland Security plan titled ENDGAME, which sets as its
goal the removal of “all removable aliens” and “potential terrorists.”
Fraud-busters such as Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, have
complained about these contracts, saying that more taxpayer dollars
should not go to taxpayer-gouging Halliburton. But the real question
is: What kind of “new programs” require the construction and
refurbishment of detention facilities in nearly every state of the
union with the capacity to house perhaps millions of people?
Sect. 1042 of the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA),
“Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies,” gives the
executive the power to invoke martial law. For the first time in more
than a century, the president is now authorized to use the military in
response to “a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, a terrorist attack
or any other condition in which the President determines that domestic
violence has occurred to the extent that state officials cannot
maintain public order.”
The Military Commissions Act of 2006, rammed through Congress just
before the 2006 midterm elections, allows for the indefinite
imprisonment of anyone who donates money to a charity that turns up on
a list of “terrorist” organizations, or who speaks out against the
government’s policies. The law calls for secret trials for citizens and
noncitizens alike.
Also in 2007, the White House quietly issued National Security
Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51), to ensure “continuity of
government” in the event of what the document vaguely calls a
“catastrophic emergency.” Should the president determine that such an
emergency has occurred, he and he alone is empowered to do whatever he
deems necessary to ensure “continuity of government.” This could
include everything from canceling elections to suspending the
Constitution to launching a nuclear attack. Congress has yet to hold a
single hearing on NSPD-51.
U.S. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Venice (Los Angeles County) has come up
with a new way to expand the domestic “war on terror.” Her Violent
Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (HR1955),
which passed the House by the lopsided vote of 404-6, would set up a
commission to “examine and report upon the facts and causes” of
so-called violent radicalism and extremist ideology, then make
legislative recommendations on combatting it.
According to commentary in the Baltimore Sun, Rep. Harman and her
colleagues from both sides of the aisle believe the country faces a
native brand of terrorism, and needs a commission with sweeping
investigative power to combat it.
A clue as to where Harman’s commission might be aiming is the Animal
Enterprise Terrorism Act, a law that labels those who “engage in
sit-ins, civil disobedience, trespass, or any other crime in the name
of animal rights” as terrorists. Other groups in the crosshairs could
be anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration activists,
environmentalists, peace demonstrators, Second Amendment rights
supporters … the list goes on and on. According to author Naomi Wolf,
the National Counterterrorism Center holds the names of roughly 775,000
“terror suspects” with the number increasing by 20,000 per month.
What could the government be contemplating that leads it to make
contingency plans to detain without recourse millions of its own
citizens?
The Constitution does not allow the executive to have unchecked
power under any circumstances. The people must not allow the president
to use the war on terrorism to rule by fear instead of by law.
Source: San Francisco Chronicle
http://noworldsystem.com/2009/02/0..horizes-fema-camps-in-us/
http://www.prisonplanet.com/art..2006/240506femaplan.htm
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 2008 Election, 2nd Amendment, 4th amendment, al-qaeda, Anti-War, Barack Obama, Big Brother, Bloggers, Britain, Concentration Camp, Conditioning, Congress, Control Grid, DHS, Dictatorship, Dissent, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, enemy combatant, Europe, european union, facism, fda, free speech, Homegrown Terrorism, Homeland Security, house senate, HR 1955, internet, maryland, militarized police, Military, Nazi, obama, orwell, Police State, Protest, Psyops, re-education, s. 1959, Senate, Soviet Union, Spy, Surveillance, thought crime, Thought Crime Bill, thought criminal, United Kingdom, US Constitution, War On Terror | Tags: Ministry of Love, ministry of truth, university of maryland, Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Preventi
Thought Crimes Agenda Already Being Implemented
Lee Rogers
Rogue Government
August 8, 2008
The Department of Homeland Security is moving towards implementing a provision of the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 otherwise known as the thought crimes bill. This is despite the fact that the legislation has not been signed into law. The House version of the bill HR 1955 was passed by a margin of 404-6 where as the Senate version of the bill S 1959 is still awaiting action. One of the bill’s provisions gives the Department of Homeland Security the authority to fund a University based Center of Excellence to study ways to thwart what the government believes are extremist belief systems and radical ideologies of individual Americans. In other words, if the government doesn’t like the way you think, they are going to have teams of social scientists and behavioral experts trying to figure out the best way to deal with you. As it turns out, the Department of Homeland Security is already funding a Center of Excellence to study thought criminals in the United States at the University of Maryland. This shows that it doesn’t matter if S 1959 is defeated or not, as they are moving forward with this agenda with or without Congressional approval. In reality, Congress is nothing more than a staged circus to make people falsely believe that they actually have a say in what the government does. The Department of Homeland Security is funding research to setup an Orwellian system to deal with political dissenters under the guise of fighting terrorism and they care not if it is in accordance with what the people want. Another words, be prepared for the possibility of a future with re-education camps as a real life Ministry of Love system is implemented.
The following is taken from Security Products Online detailing the Department of Homeland Security’s funding of this Center of Excellence that will study thought crimes or as they like to call it the threat of homegrown terrorism and violent radicalization.
A team of more than 50 social scientists, armed with new federal funding, will extend its research into radicalization and the formation of terrorist groups in the United States and abroad. The researchers will also study the effectiveness of counter-terror strategies, as well as efforts to build community resilience to attacks.
Now, let’s take a look at section 899D of HR 1955 and we’ll see that what’s proposed in the bill has for all intents and purposes already become a reality.
`SEC. 899D. CENTER OF EXCELLENCE FOR THE STUDY OF VIOLENT RADICALIZATION AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM IN THE UNITED STATES.
`(a) Establishment- The Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish or designate a university-based Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States (hereinafter referred to as `Center’) following the merit-review processes and procedures and other limitations that have been previously established for selecting and supporting University Programs Centers of Excellence. The Center shall assist Federal, State, local and tribal homeland security officials through training, education, and research in preventing violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States. In carrying out this section, the Secretary may choose to either create a new Center designed exclusively for the purpose stated herein or identify and expand an existing Department of Homeland Security Center of Excellence so that a working group is exclusively designated within the existing Center of Excellence to achieve the purpose set forth in subsection (b).
`(b) Purpose- It shall be the purpose of the Center to study the social, criminal, political, psychological, and economic roots of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States and methods that can be utilized by Federal, State, local, and tribal homeland security officials to mitigate violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism.
`(c) Activities- In carrying out this section, the Center shall–
`(1) contribute to the establishment of training, written materials, information, analytical assistance and professional resources to aid in combating violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism;
`(2) utilize theories, methods and data from the social and behavioral sciences to better understand the origins, dynamics, and social and psychological aspects of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism;
`(3) conduct research on the motivational factors that lead to violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism; and
`(4) coordinate with other academic institutions studying the effects of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism where appropriate.
The Department of Homeland Security is providing roughly $12 Million over 3 years to fund this research. Among the planned research includes building a database of U.S. extremist crime, studying how social networks spread thought crime, tracking sympathy and support for terrorism in the United States among various communities, studying the phony European white Al-Qaeda threat and much more.
The government has no business funding research studying the political beliefs of people and determining who may or may not be a potential terrorist based upon a vague definition of homegrown terrorism and violent radicalization. In fact, the definitions of these terms as defined in HR 1955 and S 1959 are up to the interpretation of the government. This means that a homegrown terrorist could potentially be anybody the government doesn’t like. Not only is it unconstitutional, but it opens up the flood gates for a tyranny only theorized in novels like George Orwell’s 1984. The social scientists that are being funded in this program could potentially suggest the implementation of programs that could include the round up of people for re-education based upon any sort of criteria even if no real crime has been committed. Literally, the Department of Homeland Security is funding research to go after people who have political beliefs and ideologies that are contrary to the agenda of the establishment. Unfortunately for the American people, they are employing the services of some very smart people to do this. Who knows what these people will come up with but considering what they’ve already done, it won’t be in the best interest of freedom.
In the Soviet Union, political dissidents and intellectuals were labeled crazy and put in mental institutions or slave labor camps. Could the same thing happen in the United States? After these scientists finish their research, it very well could considering what we see with the militarization of police and growing technological spy grid here in the United States. How can we assume that their recommendations will defend liberty when everything else the government has done in order to fight this phony terror threat has been contrary to the principles of freedom?
Particularly interesting is how they are concerned about activity on the Internet. Many freedom oriented radio networks and web sites have been formed over the past decade to protest what is becoming an increasingly corrupt and criminal government. The free flow of information is a real threat to the establishment and they are scrambling for ways to determine how to put the lid on it.
In closing, it is disturbing that the Department of Homeland Security would fund a program before a bill authorizing the action is signed into law. The provisions in the thought crimes bill represent the potential for total despotism and tyranny and even if a few of the provisions are implemented like this Center for Excellence funding, it marks a severe threat for liberty. These government terrorists must be defeated and there needs to be an investigation into the funding of this research which is unconstitutional on its face.
Obama Supports Thought Crime Bill
http://noworldsystem.com/2007/12/13/obama-supports-thought-crime-bill/
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, Big Brother, brainwashing, Conditioning, DHS, Dissent, domestic terror, Founding Fathers, free speech, glenn beck, Homegrown Terrorism, Homeland Security, HR 1955, Media, Media Fear, orwell, Patriot Act, Police State, Propaganda, Protest, Ron Paul, rosie o' donnell, s. 1959, thought crime, Thought Crime Bill, thought criminal, US Constitution, War On Terror
While You Slept Your Congress Took Away Your Constitution
http://www.politicallore.com/unca..dered-a-possible-terrorist/63
Civil Libertarians Warn of ’Patriot Act Lite’
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18779.htm
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 2-party system, 2008 Election, Barack Obama, Big Brother, DHS, Dissent, domestic terror, Founding Fathers, free speech, Homegrown Terrorism, Homeland Security, HR 1955, left right paradigm, martin luther king, Neolibs, orwell, Police State, Protest, s. 1959, Senate, thought crime, Thought Crime Bill, thought criminal, US Constitution, War On Terror
Obama Supports Thought Crime Prevention Bill
Jessica Lee
Indypendent
December 11, 2007
Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama says that he will support the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act (S. 1959). According to the automatic email responses constituents are receiving from his office, Obama appears to be straddling the fence between preserving civil liberties and being tough on terrorism.
“The American people understand that new threats require flexible responses to keep them safe. They also insist that our responses to threats respect the constitution and do not violate the basic tenets of our democracy,” Obama’s email said. Several people who have written to Obama have posted his response on various blogs, including “Justin” who’s personal blog was picked up on diggs.com.
“I wrote Senator Obama (my senator from Illinois) about this act, which is now in a committee of his (the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs). I asked that he read the bill (not to insult his intelligence, but after the Patriot Act it appears this is a necessary request for most senators), and that he recognize the dire consequences that could result from its vague language,” Justin wrote Dec. 6 below the post of Obama’s email. “He’s quite eloquent, you’ve got to give him that. This act ‘includes provisions prohibiting the Department of Homeland Security’s efforts from violating civil rights and civil liberties of U.S. citizens.’ Didn’t we used to have something like that? What was it called? Oh right… The Constitution.”
The House version of the bill, H.R. 1955, passed Oct. 23 by a vote of 404-6 under the “suspension of the rules,” a provision that is available to quickly pass bills considered “non-controversial.”
Obama is on the 17-member Senate Committee for Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, where S. 1959 was introduced by Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) Aug. 2. “I will keep your important comments in mind as I work with my colleagues on the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. I will work to ensure that this legislation helps to achieve our domestic security objectives while protecting civil liberties and constitutional rights,” Obama stated in his email to Justin.
Many scholars, historians and civil liberties experts say they fear that the proposed bill will set the stage for future criminal legislation that be used against U.S.-based groups engaged in legal but unpopular political activism, ranging from political Islamists to animal-rights and environmental campaigners to radical right-wing organizations.
“This bill fits the pattern we are seeing coming out of Congress – both Republican and Democratic – of a continued campaign of fear, which gets into heads of Americans that we now need to start criminalizing ideology,” said Alejandro Queral, executive director of the Northwest Constitutional Rights Center. He said he is very concerned about the bill’s vague definitions of “violent radicalization,” “homegrown terrorism,” and the terms within the definitions including “extremist belief system,” “violence” and “force.”
“What is an extremist belief system? Who defines this?” Queral questioned. “Planes flying into the World Trade Center is an extremist belief, but are anti-abortion activists extremists? Are individuals who liberate mink extremists? These are broad definitions that encompass so much, which need to rather be very narrowly tailored. It is criminalizing thought and ideology, rather than criminal activity.”
Jules Boykoff, an assistant professor of politics and government at Pacific University and author of Beyond Bullets: The Suppression of Dissent in the United States, told The Indypendent said he is concerned about how the government is broadening the definition of terrorism.
“Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act is a law that created a new brand of terrorists, the ‘domestic terrorist.’ Under this definition, the civil rights work Martin Luther King, Jr. did could have been construed as an act of ‘domestic terrorism,” Boykoff said.
In a Nov. 30 Common Dreams article, ‘Homegrown’ Suppression of Dissent,’ Boykoff provided a historical-based critique of who could be included under the umbrella definition of terrorism. “Even a cursory look backward through U.S. history reveals heroic figures who could be dubbed ‘violent radicals’ or ‘homegrown terrorists’ under the proposed bill, from U.S. revolutionaries like Sam Adams to gun-toting slavery abolitionists like John Brown to militant civil-rights organizers like Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr.”
House Hearing Presentation Links 9/11 Truth Sites to Terrorism
http://noworldsystem.com/200…1-truth-sites-to-terrorism/
S. 1959 Eviscerates Free Speech
http://rense.com/general79/rduh.htm
Senate Bill 1959 to Criminalize Thoughts, Blogs, Books and Free Speech Across America
http://www.newstarget.com/022308.html
Truthout: The Violent Radicalization Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/112907J.shtml
Law Teachers Oppose HR 1955
http://nlg.org/news/index.php?entry=entry071127-093332
Huffington Post: The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act
http://www.huffin….adicalizatio_b_74091.html?view=screen
Senate Could Vote On Thought Crimes Bill Soon
http://www.jbs.org/node/6474
House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=4682
Filed under: 1984, 4th amendment, 9/11, Airport Security, al-qaeda, Big Brother, catastrophic event, Department of Defense, DoD, FBI, Hegelian Dialectic, Homeland Security, HR 1955, nebraska, Pentagon, Police State, Posse Comitatus, Problem Reaction Solution, Psyops, thought crime, Thought Crime Bill, US Constitution
The High-Tech Police State Begins at the Mall During Christmas
TruthNews
December 7, 2007
As should be expected, in the wake of the mall shooting in Omaha, our rulers, or rather their “experts,” are calling for our “beloved malls” to be turned into Gestapo zones same as our airports.
“Shopping centers, which are considered by security experts a ‘soft’ target for terrorism, already implemented tighter security measures following the attacks of September 11, 2001,” reports AFP. “But American shoppers are reluctant to accept even measures that would force them to go through metal detectors or be frisked by guards to enter their beloved malls, said Malachy Kavanagh, spokesman for the International Council of Shopping Centers.”
Of course, they may very well change minds with a few more shootings by deranged teenagers cranked up on pharms or another “Pearl Harbor event” of the sort that ushered in the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act (or more accurately the decider-commander martial law act), and will no doubt ensure speedy approval of the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, or the Thought Crimes bill.
“While Shoppers who were surveyed in focus groups indicated they would rather not have to go through metal detectors, they appeared willing to accept them if the government raised the terror alert level,” Malachy Kavanagh averred. “Measures installed after September 11 include closer coordination with local police, the use of high-resolution cameras that can read car license plates in parking lots and the inspection of delivery trucks. Some malls even have bomb-sniffing dogs.”
All of this dovetails nicely with the latest FBI warning issued last month that al-Qaeda may strike during Christmas, unleashing horrific violence because they hate our freedom to shop and deck the halls.
“If you look back through the years, this is a tactic and practice of Al-Qaeda to express threats during the Christmas season,” FBI special agent Ross Rice said at the time, adding that the information had not been corroborated.
Indeed, completely uncorroborated threats, in fact pure and unadulterated nonsense, as the well-documented CIA created terrorist group, never sufficiently connected to the events of September 11, 2001, appears entirely impotent, more a Freddy Kruger cut-out designed to scare the little ones at Christmas than pose a sincere threat.
Even so, the Pentagon is on the case. “The Defense Department … has a system in place to support local law enforcement officials in case of a terror attack in a shopping center, said Paul McHale, the Pentagon’s assistant secretary for homeland defense,” never mind, once upon a time, there was something called Posse Comitatus as our ancestors realized allowing the military to commingle and even supplant local police was not a good idea.
In order to soften the hard edges of the prospect of combat soldiers at the mall, Mr. McHale told AFP such may not be necessary, at least not now. “But McHale, whose position was created to supervise the Pentagon’s homeland defense activities, said deploying heavily armed patrols was not the solution.”
“We cannot remain the kind of nation that we are, that we want to be, that we intend to be in terms of freedom, if we emphasize security by turning civilian gathering places into armed fortresses,” McHale said at a news conference on post 9/11 security on Thursday.
“The better approach is not to try to harden shopping malls, turn them into armed compounds with a security presence that is chilling in its very character,” he said.
“The better approach is to achieve that kind of defense … through the lawful collection of information that gives us advance warning that an attack may occur.”
In other words, say hello to the neighborhood snoop system, soon to become a vital component of the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, flushing out al-Qaeda types high and low — or, at minimum, those of us who share a “discontent” with the government, now to be detected by the neighborhood fireman as he conducts inspections, no Fourth Amendment required in order to rifle through your books, videos, and underwear drawer looking for “hatred” directed against the government. In order to realize this enmity, the Ministry of Homeland Security is busy at work tutoring our fire-fighters and paramedics.
“These random acts of violence can strike anywhere — at schools, office buildings, post offices — anywhere law-abiding citizens are present,” Simon Property Group, which owns several US malls, said in a statement after the massacre. “Law enforcement and security prevention measures, no matter how good, cannot forestall a tragedy such as this from happening.”
Well, at least, not short of erecting a high-tech police state, an all-pervasive and all-knowing electronic Panopticon.
Unleash a few more “random” killers stupefied by mind-altering drugs and killing helpless women and children — preferably at the same time al-Qaeda strikes because they hate us for our freedom — and many of us will be begging for a police state, as Heinz Kissinger knew all too well when he declared for his masters, the Bilderbergers:
“Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government.”
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th amendment, Anti-War, Big Brother, Bloggers, DHS, Dissent, domestic terror, fda, Founding Fathers, free speech, Homegrown Terrorism, Homeland Security, HR 1955, OKC bombing, orwell, Police State, Protest, Ruby Ridge, s. 1959, Senate, thought crime, Thought Crime Bill, thought criminal, timothy mcveigh, US Constitution, Waco, War On Terror
ACTION ALERT:
Call Your Senators and Tell Them to Refuse H.R. 1955 (S.1959)
http://hsgac.senate.gov/index.cfm?Fuseaction=About.Membership
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Senate Could Vote On Thought Crimes Bill Soon
JBS
November 30, 2007
When the full Senate returns to Washington in early December, they will soon begin to schedule floor votes on several pieces of legislation. One such piece of legislation is the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.
With two versions of this bill currently in the Senate (H.R. 1955 and S. 1959), the legislation could attack First Amendment rights by mandating the government to clamp down on free speech online, among other things.
It should be remembered that following the Oklahoma City Bombing, the Clinton administration blamed not just the indicted perpetrators, Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols and Michael Fortier, but also all those who had like McVeigh, Nichols and Fortier protested against the government’s deadly actions at Waco and Ruby Ridge. Time magazine and other media organs joined the administration in charging that these “anti-government” protesters were actually “ideational co-conspirators” with the OKC bombers.
Like President Clinton, President Bush now equates opposition to his policies, especially concerning the War in Iraq and the “War on Terror,” as unpatriotic, or even treasonable. We are perilously close to losing our precious right to freedom of expression.
Would Americans be liable for arrest and prosecution under the “Violent Radicalization,” “Homegrown Terrorism,” or “Ideologically based violence,” provisions of H.R. 1955 and S. 1959, for example, for stating that citizens must be armed to protect themselves against government-imposed tyranny? Perhaps not just yet, but it is not at all farfetched to suggest that such a state of affairs could quickly develop, especially considering the virulent anti-gun bias of the elites in the media and government.
Having recently freed themselves by force of arms from the tyranny of King George and understanding full well the importance of an armed citizenry for the preservation of liberty, our Founding Fathers were adamant that Americans have the means and the determination to oppose any similar tyranny that might develop under the proposed new national government.
Thomas Jefferson was inflexible on the issue, asserting: “No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist (No.28): “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government …. ”
Noah Webster expressed the same principle this way: “The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States.”
Patrick Henry declared: “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined …. The great object is that every man be armed.”
George Washington averred that firearms are “the people’s liberty teeth.”
However, under H.R. 1955 and S. 1959, each of these Founding Fathers might be prosecuted for “planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual … to intimidate or coerce the United States government.”
To take immediate action on the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, click here [1].
To donate to The John Birch Society’s legislative alert system, click here [1].
Thank you,
The John Birch Society
Standing for family and freedom since 1958
Law Teachers Oppose HR 1955
http://nlg.org/news/index.php?entry=entry071127-093332
Huffington Post: The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act
http://www.huffin….adicalizatio_b_74091.html?view=screen
Senate Bill 1959 to Criminalize Thoughts, Blogs, Books and Free Speech Across America
http://www.newstarget.com/022308.html
Truthout: The Violent Radicalization Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/112907J.shtml
S. 1959 Eviscerates Free Speech
http://rense.com/general79/rduh.htm
House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=4682
Filed under: 1984, 2-party system, Big Brother, HR 1955, orwell, Police State, thought crime, Thought Crime Bill, US Constitution, War On Terror
House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
Rogue Government
October 25, 2007
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.
noworldsystem.com 