Thread: S. 1959 = Goodbye Bill of Rights

S.1959
Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (Introduced in Senate)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



SEC. 2. PREVENTION OF VIOLENT RADICALIZATION AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM.

(a) In General- Title VIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 361 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`Subtitle J--Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism

`SEC. 899A. DEFINITIONS.

`In this subtitle:

`(1) COMMISSION- The term `Commission' means the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism established under section 899C.

`(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.

`(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.

`(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.

`SEC. 899B. 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.

`(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.

`( 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.

`(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.

SEE THE FULL TEXT OF S. 1959 AT:

http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/thomas

The correct Bill number is H.R 1955.

Tom Tancredo was talking about this House Bill tonight on radio.He says there are growing concerns with some legal and all illegal immigrants not assimilating and especially possibly radical Islamic immigrants.

Tom thinks we need some type of control to deal with radicals coming into our country. I agree.

Tom knows some worry it will effect our civil rights but says he has read the bill and does not think it would effect OUR rights but would protect us from radicals.

I thought this was called 1995... my bad on previous posts.

yeah, this is pretty bad, but I fear the 'sacrifice liberty for security' crowd will not care, of course the MSM will promote this as the panacea we need to "fight" the terrorism... In the course of 6 years, look at the legislation the government has come out with.. not good for us.

OK...thats good....reading it...it doesn't sound good....I trust Tom ...he knows how to read the gibberish

does not think it would effect OUR rights but would protect us from radicals.

Our rights are being ignored in favor of illegal aliens. I too think this is a bill to keep Americans under control when the amnesty is passed and we are declared a part of NAU.

Why do we need new laws for this? In WWII the government made all Japanese Americans (and many German and Italian Americans) swear sole allegiance to the USA. Those that didn't had their citizenship revoked, were placed in prision camps, and deported. Why not just do the same thing now using the same laws?

USPatriot wrote:

He says there are growing concerns with some legal and all illegal immigrants not assimilating and especially possibly radical Islamic immigrants.

I tend to agree. However, if the illegals were sent home there would be a lot less to worry about. The legals he's talking about are probably the children of illegal aliens (anchor babies) with parents that speak very little or no English and live in their own little communites.

OK I understand everyones concerns but I also know we have a growing problem with radical immigrants in our country.So what do we do ?

USPatriot wrote:

OK I understad everyones concerns but I also know we have a growing problem with radical immigrants in our country.So what do we do ?

Well, we definitely need to deport the illegals ones, yesterday!

Originally Posted by MW

USPatriot wrote:

He says there are growing concerns with some legal and all illegal immigrants not assimilating and especially possibly radical Islamic immigrants.

I tend to agree. However, if the illegals were sent home there would be a lot less to worry about. The legals he's talking about are probably the children of illegal aliens (anchor babies) with parents that speak very little or no English and live in their own little communites.

He mentioned Islamic immigrants.

I haven't read the entire bill yet but I see both sides of this issue.

I am glad congress is aware we have a problem finally !!!