What is House Bill 2899, the CVE and why it is important to use as citizens?

House Bill 2899 establishes a permanent agency under the umbrella of DHS, attaching it to the Homeland Security Act of 2002, and tasked with ‘countering violent extremism’.

The Secretary shall appoint within each appropriate component and office of the Department, including at a minimum, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Office of Privacy, the National Protection and Programs Directorate, the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, and the Science and Technology Directorate, an individual to serve as liaison to the Office for Countering Violent Extremism.

This is scary folks. A NEW agency that will be able to go after anyone who is against what the current Administration is pushing as it's agenda against our rights to free speech, guns and the American dream. They have the data...they know who you are...you gave it all to them.

Take a look at some of the verbiage...

a) Establishment.—There is in the Department an Office for Countering Violent Extremism. The head of the Office shall be the Assistant Secretary for Countering Violent Extremism, who shall be appointed by the Secretary. The Secretary shall also appoint a career Deputy Assistant Secretary for Countering Violent Extremism.

(b) Assignment Of Personnel.—The Secretary shall assign or hire, as appropriate, permanent staff to the Office for Countering Violent Extremism. In carrying out this subsection, the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable, seek to assign to or hire for the Office an individual who has a demonstrated background in technical matters, on and offline media, or marketing.

(d) Responsibilities.—The Assistant Secretary for Countering Violent Extremism shall be responsible for the following:

(1) Coordinating the Department’s efforts to counter violent extremism across all the components and offices of the Department that conduct strategic and supportive efforts to counter violent extremism. Such efforts shall include the following:

(A) Identifying risk factors that contribute to violent extremism in communities in the United States and potential remedies for Government and non-government institutions.

(B) Identifying populations targeted by violent extremist propaganda, messaging, or recruitment.

(C) Managing the outreach and engagement efforts of the Department directed toward communities at risk for radicalization and recruitment for violent extremist activities.

(D) Ensuring relevant information, research, and products inform efforts to counter violent extremism.

(E) Developing and maintaining a Department-wide strategy guiding policies and programs to counter violent extremism. Such strategy shall, at a minimum, address each of the following:

(i) The Department’s counter-messaging program pursuant to paragraph (2), including a plan to leverage new and existing Internet and other technologies and social media platforms to counter violent extremism, as well as the best practices and lessons learned of other Federal, State, local, tribal, territorial, and foreign partners engaged in similar counter-messaging efforts.

(ii) The Department’s countering violent extremism-related engagement efforts.

(iii) The use of cooperative agreements with State, local, tribal, territorial, and other Federal departments and agencies responsible for efforts relating to countering violent extremism.

(iv) Ensuring all activities related to countering violent extremism fully respect the privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties of all Americans.

(F) Identifying and recommending new research and analysis requirements in coordination with the Under Secretary for Science and Technology and the Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis and ensure the dissemination of information and methods for Federal, State, local, tribal, and territorial countering violent extremism practitioners, officials, law enforcement, and non-governmental partners to utilize such research and analysis.

(G) Assessing the methods used by violent extremists to disseminate propaganda and messaging to communities at risk for radicalization and recruitment.

(2) Establishing a counter-messaging program to craft strategic counter-messages to the propaganda and messaging referred to in subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) which shall—

(A) explore ways to utilize relevant Internet and other technologies and social media platforms; and

(B) maximize other resources available to the Department.

(3) Serving as the primary representative of the Department in coordinating countering violent extremism efforts with other Federal departments and agencies and non-governmental organizations.

(4) Serving as the primary Department-level representative in coordinating with the Department of State on international countering violent extremism issues.

(5) In coordination with the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, providing guidance regarding the use of grants made to State, local, and tribal governments under sections 2003 and 2004 under the allowable uses guidelines related to countering violent extremism.

(g) Violent Extremism Defined.—In this section, the term ‘violent extremism’ means ideologically motivated terrorist activities.

So, what will ultimately define violent extremism? Where do you fit in? I mean, sorry, but I would have to say that 82% of those who post to ATSNN would qualify. It is also being brought forward by the Chairman of the HHSC (House HOmeland Security Committee) so this is not some one-off oddball bringing up legislation.

Planned parenthood, defended by the admin is Eugenics from its start in the early 1900's and now a Gestapo like organization to surpress those who do not agree? It's beginning to feel more and more like 1935 and not 2015 in the US.


Link to Bill

Planned parenthood, defended by the admin is Eugenics from its start in the early 1900's and now a Gestapo like organization to surpress those who do not agree? It's beginning to feel more and more like 1935 and not 2015 in the US.

Could you explain how PP fits in to all this? I'm confused.

a reply to: introvert

Massive authoritarian actions are necessary to execute a corporate takeover.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: introvert

Massive authoritarian actions are necessary to execute a corporate takeover.

So House bill 2899 creates a new government agency with the power to assist in a corporate takeover of Planned Parenthood?

Is that what you're telling me?

a reply to: matafuchs

Great, the Office of Punitive Criticism and Strategic Reeducation sounds more like it.

Solutions to "violent extremism" that do not cost the taxpayers more money, and do not add bureaucracy:

- Full cessation of the War on Drugs, as it radicalizes regular Americans caught up in non-criminal behavior. Once you enter the crucible known as "prison" you are forced into a racially charged gang environment where you quickly learn the differences between "us" and "them". You also network with actual criminal offenders (the real "bad guys" who have killed, or who use violence as a tool to earn income or advantage).

- If addiction is an illness, then treat it clinically, not criminally. Unless we think you can cure depression or the flu with prison time, the logic just doesn't follow

- Expungement of all criminal records related to the above, with full amnesty given to any still serving

- Return control to the states for basic things like education, drinking age, etc, etc. People feel the Fed is over reaching, and a good move to quell that would be a shift back towards states rights. At least make folks feel like they have a voice in their governance.

- Employ common sense trade practices that will help return some industry to the US. Not saying we tariff the hell outta Chinese imports....but tariffs are effective way to level the playing field in the market. Regardless, idle hands are the devils playground, and productive men tend to be happy men. At least, in my experience.

The rest would all require positional complicity to do anything about. For example, the POTUS need not make reference to local events and their participants "acting stupidly" (or whatever he said). Our SCOTUS could, instead of creating law, simply address the inadequacies of law for the legislature to address. And Lord knows the medias reverence for the great mantra "if it leads, it bleeds" sure doesn't help.

But all that aside....there is no way in hell our nation needs yet another agency to address a vastly diminished need for policing. Crime is lower than any living human can recall it being. With almost all "crime" boiling down to manufactured nonsense resulting from ill conceived laws that attempt to legislate a morality.

a reply to: matafuchs

A NEW agency that will be able to go after anyone who is against what the current Administration is pushing as it's agenda against our rights to free speech, guns and the American dream

Are you saying that will be their sole purpose or just your thought on the matter?
Because it feels rather hyperbolic.



If it said its mission statement was to going only after islamic extremist would you have a problem?

Not all the people that are anti-gov are as passive as you think.

I don't necessarily think we need a new agency, but I do think we need to keep an eye on people that want to attack other people.

Also, where is the blame for the congress?
They have a hand in this as well no?

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: introvert

Massive authoritarian actions are necessary to execute a corporate takeover.

So House bill 2899 creates a new government agency with the power to assist in a corporate takeover of Planned Parenthood?

Is that what you're telling me?

Not necessarily, you are suggesting that profound idea.

But the new agency might be open to suggestions from Lobbyists.

In business I am a fan of the ratio driven model. Essentially, you have a ratio of cost to revenue for each type of cost. But in this way you can more easily determine what your target spend is when you either exceed or track behind budget. For example, if i budget 20k in labor on 60k in revenue, that would be a cost % of 33%. Thus, if i make 90k in revenue, I should expect labor to never exceed 30k.

It seems to me that we should force our government to account for this. If they want to spend more on policing the "domestic terrorists", then it should be at the expense of something else. But to spend more money on policing fewer crimes...that would be like you having a higher heating bill in the summer. It just doesn't make any sense in the checkbook.

I was simply pointing out the continuation of the Progressive agenda which wants to control our birthrate, our personal rights, our education, what we eat, what we buy, what we watch and what we interact with. PP was added since it is in the news right now and being so heavily 'protected' by the MSM and the current administration.

This creating of ANOTHER new agency is creating a way for the government to accost anyone who the government believes is against them. A blogger...a person with alternative views...someone on this site. You...or me.

I was using part of a bigger picture to show links to how a country will take over its citizens like in the 30's.

If it were to happen, do you know what we would have when they come you? for us? A bunch of jackasses with phones saying "#...whoa....you see that?...army guys shot that dude" Not stepping in. Watching. Keeping their heads down. That is what happens now. People walk the other way and the other half record it.

This is part (g) above

Assessing the methods used by violent extremists to disseminate propaganda and messaging to communities at risk for radicalization and recruitment.

what is considered violent extremist? A selfie with a gun and anti government beliefs? or do you need to be a convicted violent felon? Quite a bit in between there do you not think and you government is making the decision on which is which or is it both?

A domestic terrorist differs from a homegrown violent extremist in that the former is not inspired by, and does not take direction from, a foreign terrorist group or other foreign power. DHS defines a HVE as: A person of any citizenship who has lived or operated primarily in the United States or its territories who advocates, is engaged in, or is preparing to engage in ideologically-motivated terrorist activities (including providing material support to terrorism) in furtherance of political or social objectives promoted by a terrorist organization, but who is acting independently of direction by a terrorist organization.

That sounds like a quick hop skip and jump to controlling the Internet as well as free speech. So the government will now choose what is 'propaganda'?

I was really simply posting it so it would be seen by some who do not know how bad it is and wake up. The US is not going anywhere but change is coming. One way or another and I see this as another nail in that coffin.

A domestic terrorist differs from a homegrown violent extremist in that the former is not inspired by, and does not take direction from, a foreign terrorist group or other foreign power. DHS defines a HVE as: A person of any citizenship who has lived or operated primarily in the United States or its territories who advocates, is engaged in, or is preparing to engage in ideologically-motivated terrorist activities (including providing material support to terrorism) in furtherance of political or social objectives promoted by a terrorist organization, but who is acting independently of direction by a terrorist organization.

a reply to: matafuchs

Well the agenda you think is going on.

It is your opinion that will be targeting anyone and everyone.

Newsflash, there really is people who are so anti gov that will act violently on completely innocent people.
Recent events show that.

My opinion is that if this bill didn't include domestic terrorist that everyone would be all for it and see it as a step forward.

You are using your own hypothetical and worst case scenarios as if that justifies what you presenting.

DHS defines a HVE as: A person of any citizenship who has lived or operated primarily in the United States or its territories who advocates, is engaged in, or is preparing to engage in ideologically-motivated terrorist activities (including providing material support to terrorism) in furtherance of political or social objectives promoted by a terrorist organization, but who is acting independently of direction by a terrorist organization.

Sounds more like they for anyone that is primarily living and operating in the states.

I do agree we don't need a new agency though.

Because all the other agencies show up later and screw thinngs up ,now they want a more DIRECT hand to screw things up.

Oh please it's obvious what this is. Some of the masses are starting to get riled up, fed up with the status quot and those in power are starting to get worried as the seeds of revolution are starting to grow roots. As such, they are trying to take measures to put a stop to anything of any revolutionary nature as such could easily be labelled violent extremism. They're just tightening the noose is all...

Actually thinking about this, I'm worried that Bernie, who I like mind you, might be a Trojan horse candidate.

Someone to come in and do some good, while also doing the one thing they really need to put the nail into our coffins by taking away our weapons as well. What's a few years of prosperity for us all if the end result is we're left defenseless...

I'm not saying that's the case, I do like what Bernie's saying I agree with most of it, but... thinking on this... it's kind of a scarey thought... sorry for the random tangent... just something I realized while typing this how the two things fit so well...

Hmm $10M for 5 years...

And seven GOP sponsors. What a shock.

This from a government that uses violent extremism and regime change all over the world! You can't make this stuff up...

a reply to: Puppylove

Or there might be people who are actually trying to stop the senseless shootings we have in this country?'

I totally get the evil gov is trying to stop a revolution idea.
But some times we need to take a step back and maybe not look at it with our tinfoil hats.

Or not act like our tin foil hat ideas are the only possibility.

a reply to: Sremmos80

some risks need to be taken for the greater good. Such a system is bad because the potential for abuse is far greater then the risk we have by not having the system. We're better off without it. Or can you promise me this system will not be horribly abused like it has the potential to be?

Which is worse, this system abused?

Or some random extremist knuckleheads?

Which has greater more far reaching consequences?

YES!!! we need more agencies!!
agencies, agencies, AGENCIES!!
more more more!!
its the way to total control..of every aspect of life.
you just have to love agencies.

whew...had to get that out

a reply to: Puppylove

Or can you promise me this system will not be horribly abused like it has the potential to be?

I can't, and the flip side to that is you can't promise me it will either.

So that leaves us in the middle of it being able to either way.

The bill says it is going to look at people with any citizenship that primarily reside in the US.
Sounds to me like the guy that just shot up our service members would fall into that category.

Again I totally see why people would be wary of it, but I do think we need to do something.

a reply to: Sremmos80

No we're left with, not have it, things stay as they are, or we look for alternate methods, like fixing the societal problems creating this mess.

Or we do this, potentially stop some of what you're talking about, but risk something much much worse than the violence we currently have coming from it.

Not to mention if things get so bad a revolution is truly necessary, we'll be completely screwed. Say what you want, but only one switch needs to be clicked to turn this into an anti-revolutionary measure.

I don't think I'm comfortable signing away our ability to defend ourselves from a corrupt government as a nation.