Why Ron Paul must win: H.R. 1955 and the road to HELL.

[Menthol Patch]

We must all recognize that a bill currently exists which if made into law would accelerate this nation on the road to hell. The title of this bill is HR 1955 the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. Did you oppose the Patriot Act? If so, you MUST oppose HR 1955. It would setup a commission that would decide what thought and speech is allowed in this nation. What does this mean?

THE CONSTITUTION IS SHREDDED.

Do you support a controversial issue like gun rights, drug legalization, the abolishment of the IRS, the abolishment of the federal reserve, parental rights, or an end to the War in Iraq? If this commission sees fit they could round up you and everyone you have communicated with about that issue. Don't think they could do that? The fact you have never advocated violence means nothing. All they have to do is label you a terrorist or some other "fear" inspiring name and your off to GITMO!

We MUST make sure Ron Paul wins the nomination. If he does not become president and wake the nation up to the TRUE meaning of freedom then this bill will only be the first of several. Many more will follow and in just a FEW YEARS the USA will be a total police state!

In the following post I will share a very good description of this bill from the following website.

http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=4682

Now, I know there will be a few people who jump up and scream that this is not a grassroots issue. However, this is a grass roots issue. They are ALREADY calling us terrorists and violent anarchists on television. This was NOT due to the "V for Vendetta" theme of the Nov. 5th project. They would have started calling us these names anyway! The fact of the matter is the government could use a bill like this to round up people who support freedom candidates!

[Menthol Patch]

House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
10-25-2007
www.roguegovernment.com
Lee Rogers

The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed HR 1955 titled the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. This bill is one of the most blatant attacks against the Constitution yet and actually defines thought crimes as homegrown terrorism. If passed into law, it will also establish a commission and a Center of Excellence to study and defeat so called thought criminals. Unlike previous anti-terror legislation, this bill specifically targets the civilian population of the United States and uses vague language to define homegrown terrorism. Amazingly, 404 of our elected representatives from both the Democrat and Republican parties voted in favor of this bill. There is little doubt that this bill is specifically targeting the growing patriot community that is demanding the restoration of the Constitution.

First let’s take a look at the definitions of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism as defined in Section 899A of the bill.

The definition of violent radicalization uses vague language to define this term of promoting any belief system that the government considers to be an extremist agenda. Since the bill doesn’t specifically define what an extremist belief system is, it is entirely up to the interpretation of the government. Considering how much the government has done to destroy the Constitution they could even define Ron Paul supporters as promoting an extremist belief system. Literally, the government according to this definition can define whatever they want as an extremist belief system. Essentially they have defined violent radicalization as thought crime. The definition as defined in the bill is shown below.

`(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.

The definition of homegrown terrorism uses equally vague language to further define thought crime. The bill includes the planned use of force or violence as homegrown terrorism which could be interpreted as thinking about using force or violence. Not only that but the definition is so vaguely defined, that petty crimes could even fall into the category of homegrown terrorism. The definition as defined in the bill is shown below.

`(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

Section 899B of the bill goes over the findings of Congress as it pertains to homegrown terrorism. Particularly alarming is that the bill mentions the Internet as a main source for terrorist propaganda. The bill even mentions streams in obvious reference to many of the patriot and pro-constitution Internet radio networks that have been formed. It also mentions that homegrown terrorists span all ages and races indicating that the Congress is stating that everyone is a potential terrorist. Even worse is that Congress states in their findings that they should look at draconian police states like Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom as models to defeat homegrown terrorists. Literally, these findings of Congress fall right in line with the growing patriot community.

The biggest joke of all is that this section also says that any measure to prevent violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism should not violate the constitutional rights of citizens. However, the definition of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism as they are defined in section 899A are themselves unconstitutional. The Constitution does not allow the government to arrest people for thought crimes, so any promises not to violate the constitutional rights of citizens are already broken by their own definitions.

`SEC. 899B. FINDINGS.

`The Congress finds the following:

`(1) The development and implementation of methods and processes that can be utilized to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States is critical to combating domestic terrorism.

`(2) The promotion of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence exists in the United States and poses a threat to homeland security.

`(3) The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.

`(4) While the United States must continue its vigilant efforts to combat international terrorism, it must also strengthen efforts to combat the threat posed by homegrown terrorists based and operating within the United States.

`(5) Understanding the motivational factors that lead to violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence is a vital step toward eradicating these threats in the United States.

`(6) The potential rise of self radicalized, unaffiliated terrorists domestically cannot be easily prevented through traditional Federal intelligence or law enforcement efforts, and requires the incorporation of State and local solutions.

`(7) Individuals prone to violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence span all races, ethnicities, and religious beliefs, and individuals should not be targeted based solely on race, ethnicity, or religion.

`(8) Any measure taken to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism in the United States should not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights and civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents.

`(9) Certain governments, including the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia have significant experience with homegrown terrorism and the United States can benefit from lessons learned by those nations.

Section 899C calls for a commission on the prevention of violent radicalization and ideologically based violence. The commission will consist of ten members appointed by various individuals that hold different positions in government. Essentially, this is a commission that will examine and report on how they are going to deal with violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. So basically, the commission is being formed specifically on how to deal with thought criminals in the United States. The bill requires that the commission submit their final report 18 months following the commission’s first meeting as well as submit interim reports every 6 months leading up to the final report. Below is the bill’s defined purpose of the commission. Amazingly they even define one of the purposes of the commission to determine the causes of lone wolf violent radicalization.

(b) Purpose- The purposes of the Commission are the following:

`(1) Examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States, including United States connections to non-United States persons and networks, violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in prison, individual or `lone wolf' violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence, and other faces of the phenomena of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence that the Commission considers important.

`(2) Build upon and bring together the work of other entities and avoid unnecessary duplication, by reviewing the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of--

`(A) the Center of Excellence established or designated under section 899D, and other academic work, as appropriate;

`(B) Federal, State, local, or tribal studies of, reviews of, and experiences with violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence; and

`(C) foreign government studies of, reviews of, and experiences with violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence.

Section 899D of the bill establishes a Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States. Essentially, this will be a Department of Homeland Security affiliated institution that will study and determine how to defeat thought criminals.

Section 899E of the bill discusses how the government is going to defeat violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism through international cooperation. As stated in the findings section earlier in the legislation, they will unquestionably seek the advice of countries with draconian police states like the United Kingdom to determine how to deal with this growing threat of thought crime.

Possibly the most ridiculous section of the bill is Section 899F which states how they plan on protecting civil rights and civil liberties while preventing ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism. Here is what the section says.

`SEC. 899F. PROTECTING CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES WHILE PREVENTING IDEOLOGICALLY-BASED VIOLENCE AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM.

`(a) In General- The Department of Homeland Security's efforts to prevent ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism as described herein shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, and civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents.

`(b) Commitment to Racial Neutrality- The Secretary shall ensure that the activities and operations of the entities created by this subtitle are in compliance with the Department of Homeland Security's commitment to racial neutrality.

`(c) Auditing Mechanism- The Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer of the Department of Homeland Security will develop and implement an auditing mechanism to ensure that compliance with this subtitle does not result in a disproportionate impact, without a rational basis, on any particular race, ethnicity, or religion and include the results of its audit in its annual report to Congress required under section 705.'.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of contents in section 1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting at the end of the items relating to title VIII the following:

It states in the first subsection that in general the efforts to defeat thought crime shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights and civil liberties of the United States citizens and lawful permanent residents. How does this protect constitutional rights if they use vague language such as in general that prefaces the statement? This means that the Department of Homeland Security does not have to abide by the Constitution in their attempts to prevent so called homegrown terrorism.

This bill is completely insane. It literally allows the government to define any and all crimes including thought crime as violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. Obviously, this legislation is unconstitutional on a number of levels and it is clear that all 404 representatives who voted in favor of this bill are traitors and should be removed from office immediately. The treason spans both political parties and it shows us all that there is no difference between them. The bill will go on to the Senate and will likely be passed and signed into the law by George W. Bush. Considering that draconian legislation like the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act have already been passed, there seems little question that this one will get passed as well. This is more proof that our country has been completely sold out by a group of traitors at all levels of government.

[Stealth4]

SO if it passed the house is it a done deal or what? Has it gone through the senate.?

[Menthol Patch]

It has passed through the house. I don't think it has passed the senate yet.

The problem is that if Ron Paul does not win there will be more of these bills.

This is only the start.

[Richie]

And to think I thought the Patriot and Military Commissions Acts were scary! They're icing on the cake compared to this one! Anybody know where we can find out who voted for this and who voted against it? Was Dr. Paul present?

[ThomasJ]

This passed the House with 402 votes (wtf are they thinking)

It will go to senate. I do not know when it will but we the people need to send letters to our senators letting them know to vote against it.

[Menthol Patch]

Dr. Paul did not vote on it. He was probably campaigning. I don't blame him for not voting on it. If he does not get elected there will be many more bills like this.

Here is the results.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll993.xml

Four hundred and four TRAITORS voted for it.

Only six (6) voted against it.

Twenty two did not vote.

[Menthol Patch]

This passed the House with 402 votes (wtf are they thinking)

It will go to senate. I do not know when it will but we the people need to send letters to our senators letting them know to vote against it.

The problem is if we do not elect Ron Paul there will be more bills like this.

[Stealth4]

very well timed article today -

"Watchdog: Countries committing rights abuses to fight terrorism"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071119/us_nm/commonwealth_abuses_dc

[uncloned21]

I don't see the part where you can be arrested for thinking.

???

[Menthol Patch]

We support Ron Paul. We support him because we THINK that liberty and freedom is a RIGHT.

They could state that anyone who shows evidence they think that way should be arrested.

[Menthol Patch]

bump

[Menthol Patch]

bump

[Bossobass]

Sue Myrick (R)

I'm simply stunned that 404 Congress men and women voted for HR 1955, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorist Prevention Act of 2007, including you, Ms. Myrick. Never before have I read a more blatant leap forward toward a Totalitarian government, devoid of the Constitution of the United States, here in America. NEVER.

Please do not try to justify this ridiculous bill. Save your breath. I have had it with this Congress and I will do everything in my power to see that your opponent, Harry Taylor, unseats you. I watched the USA Patriot Act, Real ID Act and Military Commissions Act be passed by you and your cohorts, I've read your response to my e-mail assuring me that the S&PP has nothing to do with the move toward the NAU and the Amero, and it sickens me. But, the overwhelming vote for this truly insane bill, HR 1955 is just too much.

Look for a grassroots campaign to unseat all who voted for this piece of trash in 2008.

Dave
__________________________________________

Just e-mailed the above to my Rep, who did indeed vote for the USA Patriot Act, the Real ID Act, the Military Commissions Act and this piece of garbage bill that appears to have been written by Chairman Mao or Josef Stalin.

I've had enough.

Bosso

[lastnymleft]

Dr. Paul did not vote on it. He was probably campaigning. I don't blame him for not voting on it.

It's certainly making my life more difficult, already. Because he didn't specifically vote "No", I've lost a Gravel supporter I was debating with.

Does anyone know exactly why Dr Paul is recorded as an "Abstain" on this piece-of-garbage legislation?

[thegearbox]

what good would it be to vote no? At this point the only differance he can make is in the oval office.

[RPinSEAZ]

That bill is not as nefarious as many make it out to be. It's simply setting up a commission to study terrorism and mandates a report to congress. Many are making this out as if they're banning free speech and the regulating the internetz, but it's just not true. Granted, it's a total waste of my taxpayer dollars, but not a thought crime bill by any stretch of the imagination.

[Menthol Patch]

what good would it be to vote no? At this point the only differance he can make is in the oval office.

I agree. The bill would have been passed if he voted against it or not.

[thegearbox]

That bill is not as nefarious as many make it out to be. It's simply setting up a commission to study terrorism and mandates a report to congress. Many are making this out as if they're banning free speech and the regulating the internetz, but it's just not true. Granted, it's a total waste of my taxpayer dollars, but not a thought crime bill by any stretch of the imagination.

I would agree with you if it weren't for the thousand of people being punished for life without trial down in Guantanamo Bay. At this point I put nothing, nothing past this Government.

[RPinSEAZ]

I would agree with you if it weren't for the thousand of people being punished for life without trial down in Guantanamo Bay. At this point I put nothing, nothing past this Government.

I have no trust in the government either. I also don't trust others to interpret things for me so I know what to think.

Have you read the bill? I have.

[freelance]

I don't see the part where you can be arrested for thinking.

???

Read between the lines.

[Richandler]

If this passes we as a people need to make sure it gets to the Courts as soon as possible it is Unconstitutional and needs to be removed as soon as possible. If the courts do nothing then it is time for more drastic measures. Million man march type things.

[paulitics]

That bill is not as nefarious as many make it out to be. It's simply setting up a commission to study terrorism and mandates a report to congress. Many are making this out as if they're banning free speech and the regulating the internetz, but it's just not true. Granted, it's a total waste of my taxpayer dollars, but not a thought crime bill by any stretch of the imagination.

It is extremely nefarious in conunction with the military comissions act, patriot act, John Warner defense authorization act, etc. If taken alone, I would not be as concerned, but being that US citizens are without habeus corpus, haliburton detention centers being built, and schmucks like Glenn Beck and O'reilly insinuating certain groups of people are aligned with islamofascists, it is unsettling to say the least. Look at the trend, not just one bill.

[Menthol Patch]

bump

[tnvoter]

bump

[leonster]

I don't see the part where you can be arrested for thinking.

???

The part where it says they are studying people who are "adopting extremist beliefs"

How do you measure that? Adopting beliefs? Can the NSA now read minds??

With the number of times the word "extremist" gets thrown around on the news--about normal conservatives, liberals... exactly how far do you have to go before you're a terrorist?

[leonster]

I emailed this to my two Senators. Write a unique version please, but if you need inspiration:


I am writing to voice my strong opposition to HR 1955 (I am not sure of the Senate number, sorry), the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.

It certainly sounds good from the name--Terrorism Prevention--but that is only a name. In reality, it is a very serious threat against liberties and the Bill of Rights. It allows for the labelling of terrorists as people who could be "adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change."

What is an extremist belief? Who decides on this? Is it only radical fundamentalists? Is it 2nd Amendment supporters who mention at a rally "keeping our guns as protection against tyranny" or harmless conspiracy theorists writing away their theories on the internet?

How do we know that someone is adopting a belief? Despite advances in technology, it is not possible to read minds, where the realm of belief lies.

And is "advancing political, religious, or social change" really a bad thing? It can be... but if we believe in our fellow man, we believe it is more often an agent for good in the world.

I understand the intent, and the pressures to "fight terrorism"--but I urge you to consider the possibility that this is a scary law that could someday be used to label US citizens who make idle comments as terrorists, and potentially strip them of their rights.

You took an oath to defend the Constitution. Please honor that. Would the founders vote for this law?

Thank you for your time and consideration.

[megasooner]

In plain english:

The bill is scary because the CENTER OF EXCELLENCE FOR THE STUDY OF VIOLENT RADICALIZATION AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM IN THE UNITED STATES is essentially given free reign to define the root causes of terrorism as they see fit.

For example: They acknowledge the internet is a significant factor they'd like the center to explore. What happens when several studies confirm this suspicion? Possibly a national firewall, or the ability to prosecute based off posted material in forums? In this situation, my post alone may be considered inflammatory and inciting violence against the government.

[alien]

I'm a little confused about this. I know that if they arrest me for just being a supporter; my wife and father and brother and sister, etc., etc. etc. would stand up and make a HUGE stink about this since they know without a doubt and would not take anyones word over mine that I have never done anything remotely close to terrorism by the correct definition. How would this stand if thousands of people were arrested and deported over a short period of time and all the others that really knew they were absolutely not terrorists were not going to stand for it. There would just be too much resistance, don't you think? I know if they took my wife away like that I would make some heads roll, literally. I can't live without her so what would I have to lose?