karlkat
10-10-2008, 01:59 PM
Congress never created the FBI
: Read notes following 28 U.S.C. § 531 to find that Congress didn't create the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI simply appeared in the Department of Justice -- it is an administratively-created entity, so cannot exceed authority originally vested in the Attorney General or the Department of Justice. Statutory authority vested in the FBI and the Attorney General is found at 28 U.S.C. § 535:
The Attorney General and the Federal Bureau of Investigation may investigate any violation of title 18 involving Government officers and employees...
Administrative creation of the FBI is confirmed in The United States Government Manual, 1996/97 edition, page 349:
"The Federal Bureau of Investigation was established in 1908 by the Attorney General, who directed that Department of Justice investigations be handled by its own staff..."
This administrative authority is also extended to Federal Agencies, and employees in regard to treaties entered into by the United States concerning terrorism.
U.S. Supreme Court
BOOS v. BARRY, 485 U.S. 312 (1988)
As a general proposition, it is of course correct that the United States has a vital national interest in complying with international law. The Constitution itself attempts to further this interest by expressly authorizing Congress "[t]o define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations." U.S. Const., Art. I, 8, cl. 10. Cf. The Federalist No. 3, p. 43 (C. Rossiter ed. 1961.
Well does Congress sit in assembly to implement treaties, "[t]o define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations."? Yes they do. Following is reference to the Congressional committee to implement a treaty with Europe concerning terrorism. This by the way is the same committee that wrote the Patriot “Act”.
TITLE 22 > CHAPTER 7 > SUBCHAPTER II-B > § 276m
§ 276m. United States Delegation to Parliamentary Assembly of Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE)
(a) Establishment
In accordance with the allocation of seats to the United States in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (hereinafter referred to as the “CSCE Assembly”) not to exceed 17 Members of Congress shall be appointed to meet jointly and annually with representative parliamentary groups from other Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) member-nations for the purposes of—
(1) assessing the implementation of the objectives of the CSCE;…..
Here’s the definition of terrorism according to the Council of Europe
Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism
Warsaw, 16.V.2005 http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties/Html/196.htm#ANX
The member States of the Council of Europe and the other Signatories hereto,
Recalling that acts of terrorism have the purpose by their nature or context to seriously intimidate a population or unduly compel a government or an international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act or seriously destabilise or destroy the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation;
Have agreed as follows:
Article 5 – Public provocation to commit a terrorist offence
1 For the purposes of this Convention, "public provocation to commit a terrorist offence" means the distribution, or otherwise making available, of a message to the public, with the intent to incite the commission of a terrorist offence, where such conduct, whether or not directly advocating terrorist offences, causes a danger that one or more such offences may be committed
Article 8 – Irrelevance of the commission of a terrorist offence
For an act to constitute an offence as set forth in Articles 5 to 7 of this Convention, it shall not be necessary that a terrorist offence be actually committed.
Here’s the conforming Agreement located in the Patriot “Act”.
(USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001
SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113B > § 2331
(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
While terrorism should be condemned, and punished, what about all the talk about thought crimes. The FBI is crusading to bust up groups that are attempting to (in their views) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion. What about Constitutional Rights to free assembly, and free speech, these aren’t in a real sense “crimes”, and furthermore who’s liable?. The answer is in a treaty. Parts are listed below.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_documents&docid=f:td008.110.pdf
PROTOCOLS OF 2005 TO THE CONVENTION CONCERNING
SAFETY OF MARITIME NAVIGATION AND
TO THE PROTOCOL CONCERNING SAFETY OF
FIXED PLATFORMS ON THE CONTINENTAL SHELF
ADOPTED BY THE
INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE
IN LONDON ON OCTOBER 14, 2005, AND SIGNED BY
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ON FEBRUARY 17, 2006
The Protocols are an important component in the international
campaign to prevent and punish maritime terrorism and the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction and promote the aims of
the Proliferation Security Initiative. They establish a legal basis for
international cooperation in the investigation, prosecution, and extradition
of those who commit or aid terrorist acts or trafficking in
weapons of mass destruction aboard ships at sea or on fixed platforms.
How thoughtful of the E.U and Congress to enter into a treaty that applies in maritime jurisdiction (high seas). Not enforceable in the several states of the union
.
New offenses
Paragraphs 5–7 of Article 4 of the 2005 SUA Protocol
also create four new categories of offenses under the Convention:
using a ship in a terrorist offense; transportation
of WMD, delivery systems, and related items; transportation
of a terrorist fugitive; and accessory offenses. It does
so principally by adding three new articles to the Convention:
Article 3bis, 3ter, and 3quater.
Article 4(5) of the 2005 SUA Protocol adds Article 3bis
to the Convention.
Counterterrorism offenses
Article 3bis(1)(a) makes it an offense for a person to unlawfully
and intentionally, with the purpose of intimidating
a population, or compelling a government or an
international organization to do or abstain from doing any act (i) use against or on a ship or discharge from a ship
any explosive, radioactive material or BCN weapon in a
manner that causes or is likely to cause death or serious
injury or damage;…..
So in addition to the actual crime of terrorism, there’s a nuance. a thought crime, if you will, it’s referred to as an accessory offence,
Accessory offenses
A comprehensive framework creating criminal liability
for accessory offenses is provided in Article 3quater, which
is added to the Convention by Article 4(7) of the 2005 SUA
Protocol. Subparagraph (a) of Article 3quater makes it an
offense to kill or injure any person in connection with any
offense under Articles 3(1), 3bis, or 3ter of the Convention.
Subparagraph (b) of Article 3quater makes it an offense to
attempt to commit an offense under Articles 3(1),
3bis(1)(a)(i)–(iii), or 3quater(a) of the Convention. Subparagraphs
(c) and (d) of Article 3quater make it an offense to
participate as an accomplice or organize or direct others in
connection with any offense under Articles 3, 3bis, 3ter, or
3quater(a) or (b). Finally, subparagraph (e) of Article
3quater makes it an offense to contribute to the commission
of one or more offenses under Articles 3, 3bis, 3ter, or
3quater(a) or (b) by a group of persons acting with a common
purpose. These accessory offenses are substantially
the same as those provided for by the Terrorist Bombings
Convention and the Terrorist Financing Convention. They
will strengthen the ability of the international community
to investigate, prosecute, and extradite those who conspire
or otherwise contribute to the commission of offenses
under the Convention.
Criminalization and jurisdiction under domestic law
Article 5(1) of the 2005 SUA Protocol modifies Article 5
of the Convention to add the offenses enumerated in Articles
3, 3bis, 3ter, and 3quater to the list of criminal offenses
that States Parties must make punishable by appropriate
penalties that take into account their grave nature.
Article 5(2) of the 2005 SUA Protocol adds to the Convention
a new provision, Article 5bis, to ensure liability for
legal entities as well as persons. Article 5bis requires
States Parties, in accordance with their domestic legal
principles, to take the necessary measures to enable a
legal entity located in their territory or organized under
their laws to be held liable when a person responsible for
the management or control of that legal entity has, in that
capacity, committed an offense under the Convention.
Such liability may be criminal, civil, or administrative and
is without prejudice to the criminal liability of individuals
having committed the offenses. Further, States Parties
must ensure that legal entities held liable for offenses
under Article 5bis are subject to effective, proportionate
and dissuasive criminal, civil, or administrative sanctions,
which may include monetary sanctions. This provision is
identical to Article 5 of the Terrorism Financing Convention.
Article 6 of the 2005 SUA Protocol makes conforming
amendments to Article 6 of the Convention, which requires
States Parties to establish jurisdiction over the offenses set
forth under the Convention. Each State Party is now required
to establish jurisdiction over offenses under Articles
3, 3bis, 3ter, and 3quater. Article 8(1) of the 2005 SUA
Protocol makes a similar conforming amendment to Article
8, paragraph 1, of the Convention to permit the master of
a ship to deliver to the authorities of any other State Party
any person who the master has reasonable grounds to believe
has committed an offense under Article 3, 3bis, 3ter,
or 3quater. Both provisions simply update the Convention
provisions to include the full range of offenses under the
Convention as revised by the 2005 SUA Protocol
So who is liable for a thought crime, or an accessory crime, why a federal agency or government employee, referred to as a legal entity. In this instant matter, the FBI would have authority to investigate.
Implementing legislation
Title 18, U.S. Code sections 2280 and 2281 implement
the Convention and the 1988 Protocol. Legislation necessary
to implement the 2005 Protocols is being prepared
for separate submission to the Congress.
The Departments of Justice, Homeland Security and Defense
join in recommending that the 2005 Protocols be
transmitted to the Senate at an early date for its advice
and consent to their ratification, subject to the understandings
previously described.
This legislation referred to in the above text would be a thought crime bill to implement the 2005 Protocols.
S. 1959: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention ...
A bill in the US Congress: A bill to establish the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism,
: Read notes following 28 U.S.C. § 531 to find that Congress didn't create the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI simply appeared in the Department of Justice -- it is an administratively-created entity, so cannot exceed authority originally vested in the Attorney General or the Department of Justice. Statutory authority vested in the FBI and the Attorney General is found at 28 U.S.C. § 535:
The Attorney General and the Federal Bureau of Investigation may investigate any violation of title 18 involving Government officers and employees...
Administrative creation of the FBI is confirmed in The United States Government Manual, 1996/97 edition, page 349:
"The Federal Bureau of Investigation was established in 1908 by the Attorney General, who directed that Department of Justice investigations be handled by its own staff..."
This administrative authority is also extended to Federal Agencies, and employees in regard to treaties entered into by the United States concerning terrorism.
U.S. Supreme Court
BOOS v. BARRY, 485 U.S. 312 (1988)
As a general proposition, it is of course correct that the United States has a vital national interest in complying with international law. The Constitution itself attempts to further this interest by expressly authorizing Congress "[t]o define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations." U.S. Const., Art. I, 8, cl. 10. Cf. The Federalist No. 3, p. 43 (C. Rossiter ed. 1961.
Well does Congress sit in assembly to implement treaties, "[t]o define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations."? Yes they do. Following is reference to the Congressional committee to implement a treaty with Europe concerning terrorism. This by the way is the same committee that wrote the Patriot “Act”.
TITLE 22 > CHAPTER 7 > SUBCHAPTER II-B > § 276m
§ 276m. United States Delegation to Parliamentary Assembly of Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE)
(a) Establishment
In accordance with the allocation of seats to the United States in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (hereinafter referred to as the “CSCE Assembly”) not to exceed 17 Members of Congress shall be appointed to meet jointly and annually with representative parliamentary groups from other Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) member-nations for the purposes of—
(1) assessing the implementation of the objectives of the CSCE;…..
Here’s the definition of terrorism according to the Council of Europe
Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism
Warsaw, 16.V.2005 http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties/Html/196.htm#ANX
The member States of the Council of Europe and the other Signatories hereto,
Recalling that acts of terrorism have the purpose by their nature or context to seriously intimidate a population or unduly compel a government or an international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act or seriously destabilise or destroy the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation;
Have agreed as follows:
Article 5 – Public provocation to commit a terrorist offence
1 For the purposes of this Convention, "public provocation to commit a terrorist offence" means the distribution, or otherwise making available, of a message to the public, with the intent to incite the commission of a terrorist offence, where such conduct, whether or not directly advocating terrorist offences, causes a danger that one or more such offences may be committed
Article 8 – Irrelevance of the commission of a terrorist offence
For an act to constitute an offence as set forth in Articles 5 to 7 of this Convention, it shall not be necessary that a terrorist offence be actually committed.
Here’s the conforming Agreement located in the Patriot “Act”.
(USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001
SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113B > § 2331
(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
While terrorism should be condemned, and punished, what about all the talk about thought crimes. The FBI is crusading to bust up groups that are attempting to (in their views) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion. What about Constitutional Rights to free assembly, and free speech, these aren’t in a real sense “crimes”, and furthermore who’s liable?. The answer is in a treaty. Parts are listed below.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_documents&docid=f:td008.110.pdf
PROTOCOLS OF 2005 TO THE CONVENTION CONCERNING
SAFETY OF MARITIME NAVIGATION AND
TO THE PROTOCOL CONCERNING SAFETY OF
FIXED PLATFORMS ON THE CONTINENTAL SHELF
ADOPTED BY THE
INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE
IN LONDON ON OCTOBER 14, 2005, AND SIGNED BY
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ON FEBRUARY 17, 2006
The Protocols are an important component in the international
campaign to prevent and punish maritime terrorism and the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction and promote the aims of
the Proliferation Security Initiative. They establish a legal basis for
international cooperation in the investigation, prosecution, and extradition
of those who commit or aid terrorist acts or trafficking in
weapons of mass destruction aboard ships at sea or on fixed platforms.
How thoughtful of the E.U and Congress to enter into a treaty that applies in maritime jurisdiction (high seas). Not enforceable in the several states of the union
.
New offenses
Paragraphs 5–7 of Article 4 of the 2005 SUA Protocol
also create four new categories of offenses under the Convention:
using a ship in a terrorist offense; transportation
of WMD, delivery systems, and related items; transportation
of a terrorist fugitive; and accessory offenses. It does
so principally by adding three new articles to the Convention:
Article 3bis, 3ter, and 3quater.
Article 4(5) of the 2005 SUA Protocol adds Article 3bis
to the Convention.
Counterterrorism offenses
Article 3bis(1)(a) makes it an offense for a person to unlawfully
and intentionally, with the purpose of intimidating
a population, or compelling a government or an
international organization to do or abstain from doing any act (i) use against or on a ship or discharge from a ship
any explosive, radioactive material or BCN weapon in a
manner that causes or is likely to cause death or serious
injury or damage;…..
So in addition to the actual crime of terrorism, there’s a nuance. a thought crime, if you will, it’s referred to as an accessory offence,
Accessory offenses
A comprehensive framework creating criminal liability
for accessory offenses is provided in Article 3quater, which
is added to the Convention by Article 4(7) of the 2005 SUA
Protocol. Subparagraph (a) of Article 3quater makes it an
offense to kill or injure any person in connection with any
offense under Articles 3(1), 3bis, or 3ter of the Convention.
Subparagraph (b) of Article 3quater makes it an offense to
attempt to commit an offense under Articles 3(1),
3bis(1)(a)(i)–(iii), or 3quater(a) of the Convention. Subparagraphs
(c) and (d) of Article 3quater make it an offense to
participate as an accomplice or organize or direct others in
connection with any offense under Articles 3, 3bis, 3ter, or
3quater(a) or (b). Finally, subparagraph (e) of Article
3quater makes it an offense to contribute to the commission
of one or more offenses under Articles 3, 3bis, 3ter, or
3quater(a) or (b) by a group of persons acting with a common
purpose. These accessory offenses are substantially
the same as those provided for by the Terrorist Bombings
Convention and the Terrorist Financing Convention. They
will strengthen the ability of the international community
to investigate, prosecute, and extradite those who conspire
or otherwise contribute to the commission of offenses
under the Convention.
Criminalization and jurisdiction under domestic law
Article 5(1) of the 2005 SUA Protocol modifies Article 5
of the Convention to add the offenses enumerated in Articles
3, 3bis, 3ter, and 3quater to the list of criminal offenses
that States Parties must make punishable by appropriate
penalties that take into account their grave nature.
Article 5(2) of the 2005 SUA Protocol adds to the Convention
a new provision, Article 5bis, to ensure liability for
legal entities as well as persons. Article 5bis requires
States Parties, in accordance with their domestic legal
principles, to take the necessary measures to enable a
legal entity located in their territory or organized under
their laws to be held liable when a person responsible for
the management or control of that legal entity has, in that
capacity, committed an offense under the Convention.
Such liability may be criminal, civil, or administrative and
is without prejudice to the criminal liability of individuals
having committed the offenses. Further, States Parties
must ensure that legal entities held liable for offenses
under Article 5bis are subject to effective, proportionate
and dissuasive criminal, civil, or administrative sanctions,
which may include monetary sanctions. This provision is
identical to Article 5 of the Terrorism Financing Convention.
Article 6 of the 2005 SUA Protocol makes conforming
amendments to Article 6 of the Convention, which requires
States Parties to establish jurisdiction over the offenses set
forth under the Convention. Each State Party is now required
to establish jurisdiction over offenses under Articles
3, 3bis, 3ter, and 3quater. Article 8(1) of the 2005 SUA
Protocol makes a similar conforming amendment to Article
8, paragraph 1, of the Convention to permit the master of
a ship to deliver to the authorities of any other State Party
any person who the master has reasonable grounds to believe
has committed an offense under Article 3, 3bis, 3ter,
or 3quater. Both provisions simply update the Convention
provisions to include the full range of offenses under the
Convention as revised by the 2005 SUA Protocol
So who is liable for a thought crime, or an accessory crime, why a federal agency or government employee, referred to as a legal entity. In this instant matter, the FBI would have authority to investigate.
Implementing legislation
Title 18, U.S. Code sections 2280 and 2281 implement
the Convention and the 1988 Protocol. Legislation necessary
to implement the 2005 Protocols is being prepared
for separate submission to the Congress.
The Departments of Justice, Homeland Security and Defense
join in recommending that the 2005 Protocols be
transmitted to the Senate at an early date for its advice
and consent to their ratification, subject to the understandings
previously described.
This legislation referred to in the above text would be a thought crime bill to implement the 2005 Protocols.
S. 1959: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention ...
A bill in the US Congress: A bill to establish the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism,