The ostensive purpose of the bill, called the “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007,” is to set up a federal commission to investigate groups or individuals within the US that pose a terrorist threat. But when you read the definitions, you will see that it is really about thought crimes. For the commission’s job is not to investigate non-existent domestic terrorism, but beliefs that promote terrorism.

(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.

Here is my favorite line:

“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.”

How long do you think it will be before that start regulating the internet?

Agreed.

“America is still building its empire. If I were to superimpose America’s history on top of Rome’s history, I would say that we are still in between the 1st and 2nd Punic Wars. We still have a couple hundred years before a true military state can take place . . .”

Here I think you are off by an order of one hundred. We are a couple of years away a police state. Look for political dissidents to be rounded with the next few years. All the laws are in place and the technology available to the state is far more advanced than anything the Caesars or the Stalinists had. As for the American people, I do not think there is much fight left in them. The state will take as much as it citizens allow. And they have already allowed as much as the citizens of Nazi Germany.

It is not reasonable to debate predictions. But since mine has a short timetable, it can be easily falsified. I’m hoping it is, but fear it will not be.

Good book: How Would a Patriot Act? by Glenn Greenwald.

However, what I don’t see is terrorism as a sin … or a crime. The government seems to be defining new crimes. As such, they are continuing to build up their statist religion. There is nothing more to it right now. The full ramifications of the 15th/16th Amendment were not felt until the Civil Rights Act almost 100 years after it was passed — and that was an amendment. This act will come and go, but the religion which it proclaims is being preached and reinforced. That is the trouble with it.

As far as I see it, America is still building its empire. If I were to superimpose America’s history on top of Rome’s history, I would say that we are still in between the 1st and 2nd Punic Wars. We still have a couple hundred years before a true military state can take place, so we should have lots of children, teach them to worship and obey God, home school or private school them, and wait for God to bless our obedience. After all, obedience is what changes the world. “Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.”

http://www.progressive.org/node/4027

Diomedes is an exception and offers more than propaganda. Good for him. My hope for the comments section is have genuine issues discussed intelligently.

Diomedes - you make a good point about illegal enemy combatants. I have three observations in response.

1) You fail to distinguish between the category of illegal combatant and how and who determines what an illegal enemy combatant is. Let’s grant the legitimacy of the category. As you note, the Geneva Convention defines the category of lawful combatant and so those who fail to meet these criteria are unlawful.

But here’s the problem. According to the Constitution, it is Congress not the Executive or its military tribunals that is given the authority to make rules about captures on land and sea (Article I, section 8). It is unconstitutional for the Executive to determine who is and who is not an enemy combatant without following the specific rules of Congress.

The Congress has unconstitionally handed its authority in this manner to the Executive by passing the Military Commissions Act. See my article, The Bill of Rights, RIP, for more on this.

2) Under the Constitution, American citizens may never be declared to be illegal enemy combatants. If an American wages war against his own country or gives aid and comfort to enemies, he has committed treason. And those accused of treason have a right to a public trial. Article III, section 2 reads:

“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhereing to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Wintesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

3) When a nation such as the U.S. illegally makes war against another nation or organization (assuming it can make war against an organization), it forfeits any Geneva Convention authority to declare those it is fighting against as illegal enemy combatants. Those who violate the law cannot claim the authority law when it is to their advantage.