How we got here and where are we headed...?

Interestingly, just prior to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; and before the Federal Oklahoma building was blown up, federal bills were introduced to provide huge amounts of taxpayer money for police and federal agencies to fight terrorism. Subsequently the Patriot Act following 9-11-10 appropriated $billions for law enforcement agencies.  Similar legislation was introduced before the 1993 Trade Center Bombing and the Federal Oklahoma building bombing aimed mostly at destroying Americans’ civil liberties, not stopping terrorists despite being hype as such. The Patriot Act included most everything draconian that failed to pass in prior introduced anti-terrorist legislation.

The "Crime Control Act of 1993” was introduced two months before the 1993 bombing of the NY World Trade Center. Subsequently several provisions of "The Crime Control Act of 1993” were passed in the 2001 Patriot Act after the second bombing of the Trade Center.

“The Crime Control Act of 1993” also known as S.8 included huge appropriations for hiring and paying police and government agencies to pursue, prosecute and preempt domestic terrorist Acts. At the time terrorism was not a problem in the U.S. Under S.8, labor demonstrators could be charged as terrorists if police alleged they blocked public access, intimidated or coerced a civilian population. Subsequently, conservatives protested against S.8, something Senator Hatch who introduced the bill never expected. Despite the 1993 bombing of the NY Trade Center, S.8 did not pass.

Months before the bombing of the Federal Oklahoma building, the “1996 Anti-Terrorist and Death Penalty Act was introduced.” This act included many provisions found in “The Crime Control Act of 1993.” Then six weeks after the Oklahoma federal building was bombed, Congress passed the “1996 Anti-Terrorist and Death Penalty Act. This bill included provisions from in “The Crime Control Act of 1993.” For example: the section dealing with Secret Hearings—Secret Witnesses. Most other provisions of “The Crime Control Act of 1993” were passed in the 2001 Patriot Act after the 9-11 attack on the NYC Trade Center.

U.S. Police routinely purchase court testimony to convict defendants. Under the 1996 Anti-Terrorist and Death Penalty Act, prosecutors may use secret paid informants, secret testimony, secret witnesses and other hidden evidence to convict U.S. Citizens for terrorist acts. Defense against government terrorist charges, secret witnesses and against the Death Penalty, are difficult if not possible.

Horrors of “The Crime Control Act of 1993”

The Crime Control Act of 1993 would have “redefined illegal Search and seizure” and eliminated injured citizen’s law suits against government officials and agents under United States Code Title VII Section 2337.

Also incorporated in S8 were provisions taken from proposed S.45 titled the "Terrorism Death Penalty Act of 1991" Both bills contained language that could charge “law abiding citizens” with being agents of or affording support to terrorist organizations.

Very similar to the subsequent 2001 Patriot Act, “The Crime Control Act of 1993” intended to invoke government property forfeitures against persons’ that made Speeches, writings and/or attended assemblies alleged to break the law. Under S8: Any individual or organization in the United States who had or should have had knowledge that an associate might commit a terrorist act could be arrested and/or have their property seized by the government. How would someone prove they did not have knowledge?

The Crime Control Act of 1993 was written like Federal Drug Forfeiture Laws. A citizen who allowed their home or other real property to be used for an assembly would start out guilty having to prove they did not have knowledge of the unlawful methods of the organization or individuals they allowed to use their property.

See S.8 Definitions Title VII Section 2332

Politically active organizations and labor unions would have been especially vulnerable to broad provisions of The Crime Control Act of 1993 that defined bodily acts as "terrorist acts." A common fistfight at a demonstration or picket line could qualify as a terrorist act. The physical act need not cause bodily harm, as S.8 provisions referred to "involving any violent or bodily act" may be a terrorist act.

S.8 The Crime Control Act of 1993 Asset Forfeiture Provisions appeared aimed at public dissent and were written like RICO laws taking on the prospect of Political Property Forfeitures. Broadly written—intent to commit terrorist acts was defined: "appear to be intended (1) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (2) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion."

Under S.8: Any picket line that was alleged to have blocked public access could have qualified as a terrorist act to intimidate or coerce a civilian population. Should violence resulted for any reason at a public assembly, the Property Forfeiture Provisions of The Crime Control Act of 1993 could be triggered causing forfeiture of attending demonstrators' homes used for meetings and the vehicles they used for transportation to the event.