Now Thought Crime Is Terror In U.S by smonebkyn


More Info
									          Now Thought Crime Is Terror In U.S.
by Greg Corombos | WND | June 9, 2014

'There's an attempt to marginalize people who hold views that are sharply different'
The Justice Department is resurrecting a program designed to thwart domestic threats to the United
States, and Attorney General Eric Holder says those threats include individuals the government deems
anti-government or racially prejudiced.

The Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee was created in the wake of the 1995 Oklahoma City
bombing but was scrapped soon after the 2001 terrorist attacks as intelligence and law enforcement
officials shifted their focus to threats from outside the country. The committee will be comprised of
figures from the FBI, the National Security Division of the Justice Department and the Attorney
General’s Advisory Committee.

In his statement announcing the return of the committee, Holder said he remains concerned about the
specter of attacks prompted by Islamic extremists, but he said this committee will be tasked with
identifying other threats.

“We must also concern ourselves with the continued danger we face from individuals within our own
borders who may be motivated by a variety of other causes from anti-government animus to racial
prejudice,” Holder said.
According to reporting from Reuters, the
American Civil Liberties Union is
pushing back against the DOJ plan,
fearing “it could be a sweeping mandate
to monitor and collect controversial

Conservative groups are alarmed on
multiple levels. First, they see
themselves once again the target of an
administration that disagrees with them

“It appears there’s an attempt to
marginalize people who hold views that
are sharply different from those of the
administration and much of the establishment, said Horace Cooper, co-chairman of the Project 21
National Advisory Board. Project 21 is a network of black conservatives.

Cooper said plenty of presidents dealt with critical speech, particularly in opposition to the Vietnam
War and even the Iraq War. He said no president ever responded like this.

“We didn’t arrest them (due to their speech). We didn’t try to prevent them from being able to express
themselves on campuses, and we didn’t try to prevent them from trying to enter into the public square,”
he said. “This administration appears not to appreciate that lesson and says that the groups of people
that are not within their particular perspective ought to be considered the very threat … that the real
terrorist threat that comes internationally [presents].” Project 21 is a very vocal critic of what it
considers administration efforts to cloak liberal policies in the guise of racial equality. Cooper said
devoting resources to stop threats based on racial prejudice is a solution in search of a problem.

“We’re particularly bothered by mixing together so-called domestic insurrectionists and racists. There
is simply no anti-black or anti-minority underground movement in America that is threatening in any
way the stability of our government or the stability of local governments. There is just nothing like that.
That’s just a complete and total boogeyman,” said Cooper, who believes the Justice Department is fully
aware of the reality.

“When we see this administration talking as if the real threat is that if you’re a young black male,
you’re going to be shot, you’re going to be kidnapped or you’re going to be forced to prison without
actually having any charges against you, there’s simply no evidence to show that,” he said.

Cooper said Holder could solve this debate by compiling a report showing the real number of racially
motivated murders, kidnappings and bombings. He said that report will never come because he believes
the real motivation for this committee and this policy is entirely political.

“In our organization’s view, this is done, particularly the racial component, to create the false
impression to minority communities that it is the Obama administration that is here to help them and
another reason why, with all of the economic failings that they have provided to Americans generally
and minorities in particular, they should continue to consider giving away their vote to that particular
administration,” Cooper said.
In addition to the political maneuvering he
alleges is behind this committee, Cooper is
also deeply frustrated that this effort diverts
resources from what he considers more severe
and realistic threats.

“We are still under a threat watch. We still
have all of the security measures that we put
in place after 2001. The period of 2001-2008
was a period in which we thwarted more than
a few. Some of those have been made public.
But many of those still have not made public.
But what we’ve seen since the beginning of
the Obama administration is that many of
these attacks, whether they’re increasing or
not, are being more effective. They’re
actually happening,” Cooper said.

“To shift more resources away from the threat
that’s real to this theoretical problem is
harmful to the safety of Americans and is
more about a political agenda than it is in
protecting Americans.”

Now thought crime is terror in U.S.

Judge Orders NSA To Stop Destroying Evidence
For The Third Time
by Giuseppe Macri | June 6, 2014
Spy agency disrespects rule of law
A federal judge has ordered the government to stop destroying National Security Agency surveillance
records that could be used to challenge the legality of its spying programs in court.

U.S. District Court Judge Jeffrey White’s ruling came at the request of the Electronic Frontier
Foundation, which is in the midst of a case challenging NSA’s ability to surveil foreign citizen’s U.S.-
based email and social media accounts.

According to the EFF, the signals intelligence agency and the Department of Justice were knowingly
destroying key evidence in the case by purposefully misinterpreting earlier preservation orders by
multiple courts, multiple times.

In February, the DOJ asked the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to keep metadata beyond the
five-year retention limit to address pending lawsuits from organizations like EFF and the American
Civil Liberties Union, which alleged NSA illegally surveilled their clients.

According to multiple accounts, the DOJ made a purposefully flawed case for keeping such records,
fully expecting FISA Court Judge Reggie Walton to forbid such retention. He did, which allowed the
DOJ to tell plaintiffs that the evidence of their surveillance had to be destroyed.

A California district court trying EFF’s case then asked the DOJ in March to inform the FISA Court
about its case, and preserve surveillance data collected under both White House and FISA authority as
evidence. That order was ignored, forcing the EFF to file a temporary restraining order to halt the
data’s destruction, and appeal the case to the FISA Court.

Justice Department attorneys subsequently told FISA Court Judge Reggie Walton that they did not
receive a request to keep metadata collected under FISA authority as well as executive authority
(despite documents proving otherwise). After reviewing the case and correspondence between EFF, the
California court and DOJ, Walton ruled against the department, accused it of attempting to deliberately
mislead the court, and ordered a stay on the records’ destruction.

Earlier this week Justice Department lawyers informed organizations pursuing cases against NSA that
metadata gathered under FISA authority was still being destroyed, despite the March order. The
Electronic Frontier Foundation immediately filed an emergency temporary restraining order with Judge
White, who
moments later
issued an order
telling the
again, to stop.

“Defendants are
ordered not to
destroy any
documents that
may be relevant to
the claims at issue
in this action,
including the
[FISA] Section
702 materials,”
White wrote.

The DOJ was
furthered ordered
to file an
immediate response justifying its actions. It responded with a statement claiming it did not interpret the
prior restraining order to include Internet content interceptions, and that the department was under the
impression the court was still trying to determine if the order applied to such evidence.

The DOJ further requested that the judge issue a temporary stay on his order, and that failing to do so
would ”cause severe operational consequences.”

“It is not credible that, as the government contends, simply refusing to destroy during the next 18 hours
the communications it has intercepted will cause ‘the possible suspension of the Section 702
program,’” the EFF said in a statement late Thursday. “How can the preservation of these intercepted
communications cause a ‘loss of access to lawfully collected signals intelligence information’? That
information will remain accessible even though it is being preserved.”

The EFF alleged the government’s claim that it “never understood before this afternoon” the court’s
intention to preserve all data was difficult to believe.

“This, too, lacks any credibility, especially in light of the extensive discussions between Court and
counsel at the March 19, 2014 hearing on the evidence preservation dispute,” the statement reads. “The
government’s disregard for the past three months of its obligations under the court’s [temporary
restraining order] should not be retroactively blessed by granting a stay that permits the government to
continue destroying evidence.”


To top