Tuesday, November 27, 2007
S.1959 - Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007
Dear Senator Susan M. Collins:
Regarding S.1959 - Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:56:./temp/~c1103Do7Xu:e871:
I am a citizen of the United States since birth. I vote. I pay taxes. I helped get a new library built in my city. And, I am seriously concerned that this legislation can be used for censorship, mind control, and physical and mental imprisonment.
Here are my findings about your findings.
"The Congress finds the following:
"(1) The development and implementation of methods and processes that can be used to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States is critical to combating domestic terrorism."
CONCERNS: First, I need to know evidence of flagrant domestic terrorism that is currently being investigated in this country. Who determines when radicalization becomes violent enough for measures to be taken? How many incidents of homegrown terrorism have been reported, and which incidents can be used as examples? Also, violence is already covered by the laws which are already on the books. What makes ideologically based violence different?
"(2) The promotion of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence exists in the United States and poses a threat to homeland security."
CONCERNS: What promotion are you referring to? Again, without examples, our senate will blindly vote for this without consideration of the ways this can be abused. After all, the House of Representatives did. Can you elaborate the promotion that you refer to here?
"(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."
CONCERNS: I am on the internet a lot of the time, and I doubt I have seen anything to inspire me to participate in violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism. What in the name of all that is holy are YOU watching?
Similarly, if someone has tendencies toward violence, they don't need the internet. Remember books? They can inspire, and incite? Are you going for book burning next?
"(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."
CONCERNS: Who are these terrorists based and operating in the US? Shouldn't this be made clear to all of us so we can respond to our senators in an intelligent manner so they are truly representative of their constituents?
"(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."
CONCERNS: Poverty. Joblessness. Homelessness. Mental Illness. Lack of Education. The ever elusive American Dream. Debt. Hatred. There are 10 commandments lying around somewhere that you could probably refer to, and it wouldn't cost the taxpayers a lot of money to look at.
"(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."
CONCERNS: This sounds like you are inventing a threat that does not exist for the purpose of instilling more fear into American citizens. I would think that by now, we're about as fearful as we can get before we all start hiding in our cellars. Potential rise? What is the potential? Can I see some graphs to chart domestic terrorism? Wasn't Oklahoma City enough? And with what resources are already cash strapped states going to use to solve this? In Illinois, we can't even insure our buses will run in Chicago next year due to lack of funds. Now they're going to have the job of putting down a potential threat that you won't even give examples of here?
"(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."
CONCERNS: That's a good thing, that they won't be targeted. But, internet viewers will be suspect, won't they? Anyone who makes and posts videos will be suspect, won't they? In this one stroke you have put millions of people into the 'suspect' category. In fact, I'll be suspect, because I make and upload videos. And again, without the internet, the same 'prone' individuals could read a book and accomplish the same. You want a police state with martial law over hapless citizens who just want to watch the game and be left alone. Those of us who are paying attention will be carted away first, I suppose.
If you wish to see my videos you can find them here:
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=gabrielized
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=BetterAngels
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=MarkhamJournal
http://www.livevideo.com/gabrielized
"(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 and lawful permanent residents."
CONCERNS: Have you been paying attention to the signing statements of our current President? We don't even have the right to habeas corpus any more. This section is a joke - and it's not funny.
"(9) Certain governments, including the Government of the United Kingdom, the Government of Canada, and the Government of Australia have significant experience with homegrown terrorism and the United States can benefit from lessons learned by those nations."
I tried to find out where you got your founding information on this bill. I found this speech:
http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/speeches/mueller062306.htm
Remarks Prepared for Delivery by Director Robert S. Mueller, III Federal Bureau of Investigation, The City Club of Cleveland
Cleveland, Ohio June 23, 2006
But, I looked a little further. I used these search terms:
homegrown terrorism violent radicalisation Center for Excellence. canada england australia /2006_03
A couple of the first articles I found were these:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/2006_03.php
http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/2006_04.html
But the 9/11, Toronto, Madrid, London, and Oklahoma City attacks had happened years before.
So why did 'violent radicalization' and 'Center for Excellence' become buzz words recently?
Here's just one theory.
Could it be that the clamor for the U.S. to pull out of Iraq would make defense contractors nervous? No more no-bid contracts for billions of dollars, so let's whip this up to keep our defense industry happy. Or else they won't contribute to our campaigns any more. ¶ 9:43 PM
Regarding S.1959 - Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:56:./temp/~c1103Do7Xu:e871:
I am a citizen of the United States since birth. I vote. I pay taxes. I helped get a new library built in my city. And, I am seriously concerned that this legislation can be used for censorship, mind control, and physical and mental imprisonment.
Here are my findings about your findings.
"The Congress finds the following:
"(1) The development and implementation of methods and processes that can be used to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States is critical to combating domestic terrorism."
CONCERNS: First, I need to know evidence of flagrant domestic terrorism that is currently being investigated in this country. Who determines when radicalization becomes violent enough for measures to be taken? How many incidents of homegrown terrorism have been reported, and which incidents can be used as examples? Also, violence is already covered by the laws which are already on the books. What makes ideologically based violence different?
"(2) The promotion of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence exists in the United States and poses a threat to homeland security."
CONCERNS: What promotion are you referring to? Again, without examples, our senate will blindly vote for this without consideration of the ways this can be abused. After all, the House of Representatives did. Can you elaborate the promotion that you refer to here?
"(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."
CONCERNS: I am on the internet a lot of the time, and I doubt I have seen anything to inspire me to participate in violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism. What in the name of all that is holy are YOU watching?
Similarly, if someone has tendencies toward violence, they don't need the internet. Remember books? They can inspire, and incite? Are you going for book burning next?
"(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."
CONCERNS: Who are these terrorists based and operating in the US? Shouldn't this be made clear to all of us so we can respond to our senators in an intelligent manner so they are truly representative of their constituents?
"(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."
CONCERNS: Poverty. Joblessness. Homelessness. Mental Illness. Lack of Education. The ever elusive American Dream. Debt. Hatred. There are 10 commandments lying around somewhere that you could probably refer to, and it wouldn't cost the taxpayers a lot of money to look at.
"(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."
CONCERNS: This sounds like you are inventing a threat that does not exist for the purpose of instilling more fear into American citizens. I would think that by now, we're about as fearful as we can get before we all start hiding in our cellars. Potential rise? What is the potential? Can I see some graphs to chart domestic terrorism? Wasn't Oklahoma City enough? And with what resources are already cash strapped states going to use to solve this? In Illinois, we can't even insure our buses will run in Chicago next year due to lack of funds. Now they're going to have the job of putting down a potential threat that you won't even give examples of here?
"(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."
CONCERNS: That's a good thing, that they won't be targeted. But, internet viewers will be suspect, won't they? Anyone who makes and posts videos will be suspect, won't they? In this one stroke you have put millions of people into the 'suspect' category. In fact, I'll be suspect, because I make and upload videos. And again, without the internet, the same 'prone' individuals could read a book and accomplish the same. You want a police state with martial law over hapless citizens who just want to watch the game and be left alone. Those of us who are paying attention will be carted away first, I suppose.
If you wish to see my videos you can find them here:
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=gabrielized
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=BetterAngels
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=MarkhamJournal
http://www.livevideo.com/gabrielized
"(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 and lawful permanent residents."
CONCERNS: Have you been paying attention to the signing statements of our current President? We don't even have the right to habeas corpus any more. This section is a joke - and it's not funny.
"(9) Certain governments, including the Government of the United Kingdom, the Government of Canada, and the Government of Australia have significant experience with homegrown terrorism and the United States can benefit from lessons learned by those nations."
I tried to find out where you got your founding information on this bill. I found this speech:
http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/speeches/mueller062306.htm
Remarks Prepared for Delivery by Director Robert S. Mueller, III Federal Bureau of Investigation, The City Club of Cleveland
Cleveland, Ohio June 23, 2006
But, I looked a little further. I used these search terms:
homegrown terrorism violent radicalisation Center for Excellence. canada england australia /2006_03
A couple of the first articles I found were these:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/2006_03.php
http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/2006_04.html
But the 9/11, Toronto, Madrid, London, and Oklahoma City attacks had happened years before.
So why did 'violent radicalization' and 'Center for Excellence' become buzz words recently?
Here's just one theory.
Could it be that the clamor for the U.S. to pull out of Iraq would make defense contractors nervous? No more no-bid contracts for billions of dollars, so let's whip this up to keep our defense industry happy. Or else they won't contribute to our campaigns any more. ¶ 9:43 PM
