Connecticut Department Of Thoughtcrime

Connecticut legislature proposes a new state police unit to investigate terrorism.

But only “far-right” terror, natch: (Emphasis added)

The proposal, which was unveiled Wednesday as part of the state Senate Democrats’ “A Just Connecticut” agenda, would publicly fund a new state police department that specializes in investigating “far-right extremist groups and individuals,” according to a news release.

Senate President Pro Tem Martin Looney said the proposal is aimed at combating “potential” hate crimes but stressed that his caucus has no intention of persecuting people for their political beliefs, the Hartford Courant reported.
“Unfortunately, people who entertain hateful beliefs … are protected as long as [those beliefs] don’t result in hate-crime actions. That’s what we’re talking about,” Mr. Looney told reporters Wednesday. “We want to be more aggressive in enforcing our laws and identifying likely sources of potential domestic terrorism acts against religious institutions and ethnic institutions.”

Big Left has been trying to make “terror” (not to mention “racism, misogyny, white supremacy, Naziism and transphobia”) synonymous with “conservatism” for years – which is almost more insidious than the inevitable statutory persecution that this measure signals.

Connecticut Republicans, such as they are, at least are showing some backbone:

Senate Minority Leader Len Fasano, a Republican, said there is “strong bipartisan support against any type of terrorism” but he took issue with the proposal only mentioning right-wing extremism.
“When they put a right-wing label on extremism, they do that to elicit a political response,” he said, the Hartford Courant reported.

The Democrat messaging strategy in a word: gaslighting.

5 thoughts on “Connecticut Department Of Thoughtcrime

  1. In the olden days, government taking action against someone because of their political beliefs was Bad. The Framers even wrote a whole Amendment about it, just to make extra-double-really sure we got the point.

    Oh, but this isn’t about beliefs. It’s only about actions. Which you haven’t taken, but might, so we’d better tap your phones, infiltrate your work with spies, interrogate your friends, threaten to prosecute their children if they don’t give up dirt on you. You know, all the stuff that was deemed perfectly acceptable in Crossfire Hurricane. We have to do that, because the risk you might act out is too high.

    We can’t wait until you actually do commit a crime, we must act to prevent you from committing crimes that we know you’re thinking of committing.

    And the fact that you object is all the proof we need, you wrecker, you kulak.

  2. “Unfortunately, people who entertain hateful beliefs … are protected as long as [those beliefs] don’t result in hate-crime actions.”

    This will change if any of the Dems gets elected.

  3. “Unfortunately, people who entertain hateful beliefs … are protected”

    The mindset of a leftist: The Constitution is an impediment. Reminds me of a certain former president…

  4. So liberals are now mind-readers to be able to detect hate crimes and hate speech? Got it</I

    @jimf: I see tons of would-be psychics on social media who start out their screed complaining how Trump was "triggered" by the Lemon-Wilson-Ali circle-jerk about Trump and his supporters being boomer rubes. I've yet to get a satisfactory answer on how they know what another person is thinking/feeling. More likely, I'd argue they're exemplifying Berg’s Seventh Law.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.