Violent Radicalization & Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act

[tRiViUm256]

George Orwell was only a little over 20 years off. Not bad.

[Ragamuffinized]

Are you stupid.? Obviously not, Do you really believe for one second that anyone who's going to be violent or subversive is going to care what is on a piece of paper? that is censored and rewritten by our so-called government! This country has gone to hell in a hand basket, because no one is truly willing to stand up for the definition of democracy. We -- our country are all owned by corporations cast to the wayside because we've discarded God. Get a clue. Welcome to politically correct!

[FLAMEROX777]

This would essentially be a public 'gag order' to shut people up who would criticize, oppose, and or object to Federal Government's enacted laws, actions, and moving us as a nation towards the deterioration of national sovereignty? They consider conscientious objectors as 'home grown terrorists'??

[pmcrimson]

@FLAMEROX777 Ah, I should really update the info in the video description. This video was from 2008 and, thankfully, the bill died in committee. Check the govtrack link above for more specific information.

Thanks for watching the video and for your comment!

[pmcrimson]

@FLAMEROX777 Ah, I should really update the info in the video description. This video was from 2008 and, thankfully, the bill died in committee. Check the govtrack link above for more specific information.

Thanks for watching the video and for your comment.

[Ragamuffinized]

@FLAMEROX777 it's interesting because I think that we're both on the same side. However, unfortunately I think so are they. Not everyone in the world has the finances to compete against the machine. I commend you on your efforts, reluctant to believe that they will be effective. My best advice is history. Just as in the 60s the masses were effective because they were educated they will be effective now. Education isn't the only aspect additionally faith and belief are required.results = action.

[TheJourney000]

Thank you so much for doing the research we all should be doing! You are awesome hun!

[pmcrimson]

Thank you so much!

[samsonofjesus]

they are all in d c oboma is there leader too tear america down turn it over to the islam people , wake up america before you have no freedom left .

[pmcrimson]

1) Obama isn't a Muslim.

2) Even if Obama was a Muslim, that wouldn't be a bad thing. It's the extremists of Islam, like the extremists of Christianity, who are the problem. Run-of-the-mill Muslims are decent, normal people.

3) Since you care so much about freedom, I wonder, What activism did you participate in to protest the Patriot Act?

[EyebreathH20]

Keep up the fight sista!!!

Holding a Rally on 9-11-08 In Kansas City MIssouri, All Come!

[Psilo007]

welcome to 1983 or is it 84.....

u know what i'm saying!

[jc8ward]

You should have danced this.

[pmcrimson]

Hahahah, now that would have been some fun choreography to come up with. :-)

[undeadpresident]

The labelling of criminal acts such as assault, murder, vandalism, etc, as "terrorist" involves the military in enforcement and furthers their consolidation of power over the people and political processes of the nation. By their own definition, the military is a terrorist organization. The military plans, threatens, and uses force and violence, and the threat of force or violence, to further political and social objectives. War = Terrorism. Eisenhower warned of the military industrial complex.

[expansiondg]

I have been looking at videos about HR 1995 for the last few days. Disturbingly, today i entered HR 1995 into the search engine and NONE of the relevant videos came up. I had to enter "thought crimes" and "homegrown terrorism" to find the relevant videos. Why do you think that is? Do you think Youtube is trying to interfere with learning about this important issue? Please let me know your thoughts.

[pmcrimson]

Huh, interesting. I searched HR 1995 on YouTube myself and you're correct that none of the relevant videos come up. Were they coming up before?

I'm not ready to call it censorship too quickly, though. What could YouTube (or their owners, Google) possibly gain from this bill?

Interestingly, when I searched for S 1959, lots of relevant clips came up. That's the version of the bill that still needs to be passed.

[pmcrimson]

Ah, as you mentioned, it's actually HR 1955, So there aren't any problems searching for it on YouTube. Thanks for the update. I'm just mentioning it here in case others read this and get curious.

[mcplanetearth]

what they are afraid of is the truth getting out . The internet is decentralized and the TV media is centralized and is AT war with hardworking honest Americans . They want to kill freedom of speech of people who cry foul like 9-11 being a inside job for which I know for a fact it was a inside job!

[pmcrimson]

I agree that the decentralized nature of the Internet is its greatest strength. That's precisely why blogs, YouTube, and other discussion forums are so fascinating.

That being said, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. There are distinctions of criminality to consider: 1) negligently not preventing a crime, 2) knowingly allowing a crime, 3) actively supporting a crime, and 4) acting out a crime oneself. ...

[pmcrimson]

If you're absolutely certain about 9-11 being a government conspiracy, then what is it that convinced you? What is the irrefutable proof that clinched this idea for you? What criticism has been brought up to challenge this proof, and why do you find it unconvincing?

[schober316]

By "tradition" I mean laziness and thoughtlessness.

[schober316]

Of course, since this has never been argued to be the case (that every country is a potential terrorist threat), we must assume that this is not the intention of the "force or threat of force" clause and it is simply a poor definition which has been carried over to said bill because of tradition.

As for why the ACLU would oppose anything... irrelevant, just like the ACLU.

[pmcrimson]

The problem, of course, is that where technicalities and loopholes like this exist, they tend to get exploited, especially for political gain. That's why not only the ACLU but also The National Lawyers Guild, the Society of American Law Teachers, and others want the wording to be more specific.

Hahaha, I just knew there was an ACLU snub coming. But hey, I like *my* civil rights being protected. I'm not finished using them yet. *smiles*

[schober316]

I acquiesce to the fact that the definition is indeed vague. I do not know what force or threat of force specifically covers, but it has beent he dictionary definition for years, making the point moot.

In fact, I agree that the definition is entirely inaequate, as it has been widely used to condemn the United States as "terrorist" -- but based on this same logic, every country, ever, exists by mere virtue of threat of force, making Every. Single. Last. One. Of. Them a terroristic nation.

[pmcrimson]

So you're saying "force or violence, or the threat of force or violence" has been recognized internationally as *the* definition of terrorism? Was that recognition part of a U.N. resolution or something?

I do find it interesting that, not only wars, but all economic sanctions would be "terrorism" under that definition, as would all political protest (even of the form Gandhi did).

[schober316]

So pretty, too bad your head is full of air.

This definition is not vague at all. "Force or threat of force" is a standard definition for terrorism.

"Going after people's agendas or ideas whether or not they've done anything".

Yeah, it's called conspiracy to commit.

[pmcrimson]

Okay, then please explain two things.

1) What act of terrorism would be considered an act or threat of force but not violence?

2) Why do The National Lawyers Guild, the Society of American Law Teachers, and the ACLU all oppose this legislation precisely? Because according to their official statements, it is precisely because of the vague wording stated.

[pmcrimson]

Also, conspiracy to commit violence is different than merely holding a radical view. The point of this bill is to investigate people holding radical views that might, perhaps, someday turn violent; NOT people already planning a violent attack of some sort. We would need no special bill to investigate them because, of course, what they're doing is already illegal.

[PGAJAMIE411]

Are you some kind of terrorist? Is this why you are spouting this hate speech? I, for one, wish you would stop hating America so much. The government loves us so much and you say not nice things about it. If that is not evidence of your potential as a terrorist, what is? George Bush should send soliders to your house and arrest you for scaring me. Now, shut up, take your fluoride water, keep an eye out on your neighbor, and praise the government!

Keep up the good work.

[pmcrimson]

Hahaha, thanks! Your comment made me smile.

[nicolatwo]

Thank you for your nice comment. I subscribed to you. Do you live in Japan? Are you half Japanese? Of course the terrorism acts should be in the media, but of course they will not talk about it, because the media is bought by the right wing agenda. Have you heard about AETA? That's another criminal offense to our civil rights. Take care. Love and Peace. Nicola

[pmcrimson]

I lived in Japan for a year, teaching English abroad. I'm back in the U.S. now.

AETA I haven't heard about. Could you send me a few good articles that talk about it?

Thanks for subscribing!

[nicolatwo]

You can find AETA on Google. That's where I read about it. I first found out about it through PETA. I don't have any info on it saved in my files. So just check Google for AETA, it will bring up different articles. Take the website of the governmental definition. With this law and the other law that denies "terrorists" a legal representation, they can just detain animal rights activists and lock them away without a trial, notification of family, and keep them indefinitely in fema camps.

[jjuran]

Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism? Frankly I'm more concerned about violent imperialism and homegrown totalitarian regimes.

'Planned use' == thoughtcrime.

Forgive me if I'm a bit resigned about the whole thing. I'm an idealist, and I find the descent of the US heartbreaking.

[pmcrimson]

*noted*

Thanks for the response.

[rjprofiteer]

Civil Liberties? Are you an American or a democrat?

[pmcrimson]

*smiles*