[bush]

Originally Posted by thorn

After 3 readings of the bill (plus morning coffee) it appears to me that this bill forms a committee.

I see no new enforcement powers, nor new laws, nor new definitions of old laws/powers that are being redefined.... just looks like yet another pointless commission getting together for a round of security theater.

am i overlooking something obvious?

thorn

I'll go through a few things that bother me. Let me start by saying I'm extremely critical of any legislation - I don't trust anything government does. It's been proven time and time again that a government with power will abuse it, and I feel it's my duty as a citizen to remain alert and objective.

Sec 899B.
(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.
...
(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.

This is specifically targeting citizens of the United States. This isn't about Islamofascists blowing up buildings, this is about people like us. We have been recognized as a likely target.

I provide to you Exhibit A, a counter-terrorism flyer from the FBI. Pay special attention that "defenders of the Constitution" are considered domestic terrorists. Any police officers, soldiers, or elected officials in the house?



Also notice that referencing the US Constitution during a traffic stop makes you a potential terrorist. A sad thing indeed, when speaking of your rights makes you a threat to the establishment.

(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, or civil liberties of United States citizens or 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.
...
SEC. 899E. PREVENTING VIOLENT RADICALIZATION AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM THROUGH INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE EFFORTS.

`(a) International Effort- The Secretary shall, in cooperation with the Department of State, the Attorney General, and other Federal Government entities, as appropriate, conduct a survey of methodologies implemented by foreign nations to prevent violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in their respective nations.

`(b) Implementation- To the extent that methodologies are permissible under the Constitution, the Secretary shall use the results of the survey as an aid in developing, in consultation with the Attorney General, a national policy in the United States on addressing radicalization and homegrown terrorism.

`(c) Reports to Congress- The Secretary shall submit a report to Congress that provides--

`(1) a brief description of the foreign partners participating in the survey; and

`(2) a description of lessons learned from the results of the survey and recommendations implemented through this international outreach.

In other words, what can we do to make the US more Australian/Canadian/UK? Hints: Less guns, less criticism of government, and the willingness to give up freedom for security. I'm seeing this as a means to more control measures. Like we don't have enough.

I see a nanny-state forming in the image of the aforementioned countries. Joe Biden introduced another assault weapons ban (I have not read it, but I hear it rivals HR1022 in lunacy). The Patriot act remains in effect, and the government has asked for even more unchecked power to closely watch citizens.

If the threat of terrorism is so real, why do we only hear about the islamofascists from the mainstream media, and nothing about this? Neocon talking points revolve around how Islam is such a violent religion hell-bent on eliminating western civilization. So why no mention of the grave domestic threat?

Is it possible that our politicians recognize the real threat to their ruling class? Who are they more afraid of, the threat of Islam, or the dissatisfaction of 200 million citizens?