What is Digg?179 Comments
- SilverStandard, on 10/29/2007, -1/+62You know what kills more people than terrorism every year? Peanuts.
- SeethisPass, on 11/08/2007, -5/+38That's a defense?????????
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 10/28/2007, -3/+35Uh, I see nowhere on that link that describes what the bill actually does. You guys are just as bad as Fox News by making your own opinions into facts.
- cindylauper, on 10/29/2007, -5/+34Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to add provisions concerning the prevention of homegrown terrorism (terrorism by individuals born, raised, or based and operating primarily in the United States).
Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to: (1) establish a grant program to prevent radicalization (use of an extremist belief system for facilitating ideologically-based violence) and homegrown terrorism in the United States; (2) establish or designate a university-based Center of Excellence for the Study of Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States; and (3) conduct a survey of methodologies implemented by foreign nations to prevent radicalization and homegrown terrorism.
Prohibits the Department of Homeland Security's efforts to prevent ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism from violating the constitutional and civil rights, and civil liberties, of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents.
I may be missing something, but it doesn't sound so awful? - xstnothing, on 10/30/2007, -5/+23 From the Bill: "`(2) The promotion of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence exists in the United States and poses a threat to homeland security."
I believe that's the current role of the United States government, isn't it? - redDC143C, on 10/30/2007, -1/+19Dennis Kucinich voted no.
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 11/02/2007, -2/+20I would've believed you even more if you added one more exclamation to your sentence.
- chase001, on 10/27/2007, -7/+24So this is how a Republic dies... with cheers and applause.
- Lane, on 10/30/2007, -10/+27Star wars quote "My lord.... is this.. legal?... I will make it legal...Yes my lord!"
- greenblob, on 10/30/2007, -9/+26Ron Paul didn't vote...
- Myonosken, on 10/29/2007, -1/+18I don't see how this is thought police.
- P1d40n3, on 10/29/2007, -1/+17SEC. 899F. PROTECTING CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES WHILE PREVENTING IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM.
`(a) In General- The Department of Homeland Security's efforts to prevent ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism as described herein shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, or civil liberties of United States citizens or lawful permanent residents.
`(b) Commitment to Racial Neutrality- The Secretary shall ensure that the activities and operations of the entities created by this subtitle are in compliance with the Department of Homeland Security's commitment to racial neutrality.
`(c) Auditing Mechanism- The Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer of the Department of Homeland Security shall develop and implement an auditing mechanism to ensure that compliance with this subtitle does not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, or civil liberties of any racial, ethnic, or religious group, and shall include the results of audits under such mechanism in its annual report to Congress required under section 705.'.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of contents in section 1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting at the end of the items relating to title VIII the following:
Now don't get me wrong diggers; I distrust the government just as much as the rest of you. But COME THE ***** ON. Who here actually read the damn bill? I did. And I found this section that explicitly protects civil liberties.
Are we going to become no better than Fox News? Mindless reaction? Come on people. Read the damn bill. - timpkmn89, on 10/27/2007, -0/+15It's basically offering the states a grant to research how to prevent home-grown terrorism. The bill states that the money can't be used for law enforcement, and at the end mentions that it "shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, and civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents."
- jdpeek0, on 10/29/2007, -1/+13and no one else here actually read the bill. there is no thought crime bill here, misinformation
- jacobsor, on 11/02/2007, -1/+13Has anyone here actually read the bill? It creates a commission to look at domestic terrorism. One of those "blue ribbon"-style committees that will issue a report that everyone will then promptly ignore. No new "crimes," much less "thought crimes."
Everyone take a deep breath... nothing to see here. - jhshukla, on 10/28/2007, -0/+11terrorism is peanuts compared to peanuts?
- cindylauper, on 10/29/2007, -1/+12why?
- vinwal, on 10/30/2007, -19/+29This is absolutely disgusting!!!!!!!!!!
- Beatmiser, on 10/28/2007, -1/+11Can someone please translate the part of this that makes private thought even radical private thought illegal?
"Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to add provisions concerning the prevention of homegrown terrorism (terrorism by individuals born, raised, or based and operating primarily in the United States).
Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to: (1) establish a grant program to prevent radicalization (use of an extremist belief system for facilitating ideologically-based violence) and homegrown terrorism in the United States; (2) establish or designate a university-based Center of Excellence for the Study of Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States; and (3) conduct a survey of methodologies implemented by foreign nations to prevent radicalization and homegrown terrorism.
Prohibits the Department of Homeland Security's efforts to prevent ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism from violating the constitutional and civil rights, and civil liberties, of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents."
...Because all I see is a Grant, a Study, and interviews with other nations... - acidblue, on 10/27/2007, -0/+10agree.
- john2kx, on 11/08/2007, -0/+9lol, come on, it's sarcasm.. don't digg down.
- logicalnoise, on 10/27/2007, -2/+11So this is how a Republic dies... with thunderous applause.
*fixed* - KPPRICE, on 10/28/2007, -0/+8Did anyone actually think of reading the bill rather than relying on the OP's word?
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.195 ...
Read SEC.899F... there's no way a questionable arrest or lawsuit would hold up in court. - dschep, on 10/30/2007, -0/+8http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=4003 ... really?
- felman87, on 10/27/2007, -1/+9Only in America
- soks86, on 10/29/2007, -1/+9It is not a bad bill. At least not as bad as they say. It basically establishes a committee for 18 months whose job it is to research into homegrown terrorism. That be it.
- hades8408, on 10/28/2007, -1/+9I just don't get it. I am one to automatically distrust the government, but I don't understand how this is a though crime bill. Can someone give me an example of what will happen if this bill becomes law?
- dschep, on 10/28/2007, -1/+9He can't even vote nay?
- stillasleep00, on 10/27/2007, -1/+9Kucinich voted nay...
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 10/29/2007, -3/+10I see no mentions of thought crimes in the bill.
- iFungus, on 10/30/2007, -2/+9Fail.
- inactive, on 10/29/2007, -0/+7In nudar's defense, Putin apparently thinks that, too. Seems to be a common mistake these days.
- jacobsor, on 10/28/2007, -0/+7It creates a committee to look at domestic terrorism. Does that enrage you?
- crazyben, on 10/28/2007, -0/+6Thought crime has nothing to do with this bill. I couldn't even find the provision that was close enough to be though crime for me to point out your mistake... Every single digger who dugg this responsible for failing the public. Dugg down for complete inaccuracy.
- lead2thehead, on 10/29/2007, -1/+7Dear submitter,
Please READ the article before you write the headline. This has nothing to do with though crime. - cressida81, on 10/29/2007, -1/+7digg this crap down. This has nothing to do with "thought crime" if you digg this up you must be illiterate.
- Strayfire, on 10/27/2007, -0/+6This bill implements additional measures for the prevention of the *application* of *violent* radical ideology. Though this may be considered a step towards fascism, it DOES NOT restrict or illegalize our thoughts. OP, you phrasing this the way you did is propaganda that is just as bad as FOX News, and the rest of you idiots that didn't even bother to read the bill and blindly placed your trust in the OP are even worse.
- felman87, on 10/28/2007, -0/+6Damn those peanuts! Congressmen! solve this problem!
- chase001, on 10/30/2007, -17/+23We are now at the precipice of Fascism and the People won't get of their asses and do anything about it.
- Ramble, on 10/28/2007, -4/+10So what are you doing about it then? As a member of the international community we're all worried by your moron for a president, we don't want America to ruin Europe like they're trying, please get rid of him.
- TheFinaleofSeem, on 10/30/2007, -1/+7Kneejerk *****. Did you guys actually read the goddamn bill? Did you miss the part at the end where it was explicitly stated that the DoHS could not violate civil liberties or constitutional rights, something that wouldn't even be necessary in a bill like this? It's a specific commission set up to study and deal with something that would otherwise be handled by the FBI. Big ***** deal. Can someone point out what the hell is so sinister about this bill?
- edzilla, on 10/29/2007, -1/+7Nah, this is digg, diggers don't read, they _react_
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 10/29/2007, -1/+7@cindylauper
obviously because nudar thinks that the collapse of the Soviet Union hasn't happened yet (or better yet, glasnost) - atheinostic, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5If it isn't an American Flag, its probably either a terrorist or a bomb.
- pcobs2001, on 10/27/2007, -0/+5As much as I'd like to blame Bush, and use this to push a democratic agenda, the bill doesn't seem to have anything to do with thought police.
The full text can be found at http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill= ...
In particular see section 899F below.
SEC. 899F. PROTECTING CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES WHILE PREVENTING IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM.
`(a) In General- The Department of Homeland Security's efforts to prevent ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism as described herein shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, or civil liberties of United States citizens or lawful permanent residents.
`(b) Commitment to Racial Neutrality- The Secretary shall ensure that the activities and operations of the entities created by this subtitle are in compliance with the Department of Homeland Security's commitment to racial neutrality.
`(c) Auditing Mechanism- The Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer of the Department of Homeland Security shall develop and implement an auditing mechanism to ensure that compliance with this subtitle does not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, or civil liberties of any racial, ethnic, or religious group, and shall include the results of audits under such mechanism in its annual report to Congress required under section 705.'. - ghostfish, on 10/28/2007, -0/+5This is a horribly inaccurate title and description, there is nothing wrong with this bill, did any of you actually read it? There is no mention of anything remotely similar to "thought crime". Buried.
- SuperCUBE, on 11/08/2007, -2/+7Why the ***** are you getting dugg up
- TheFinaleofSeem, on 10/29/2007, -2/+6Read the damn bill. It's a commission set up to simply deal with some things that the FBI would deal with otherwise. No new powers are granted, no thought police. Nah, you don't want to read the bill, just a sensational headline that completely distorts the reality of the situation.
- Ryan121, on 10/28/2007, -0/+4Yes in a voyager episode they could view your memory's to prove you did something like murder. I think that's what you are referring to.
- inactive, on 10/27/2007, -0/+4I was going to ask what the bill actually was, since it was overwhelmingly passed I figured it wasn't nearly as bad as the headline sheep here made it out. Thanks for posting some of it.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 175 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is