this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2025
93 points (100.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

8543 readers
85 users here now

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
pangyuehung@lemmy.ml
yogthos@lemmy.ml
93
Trump’s NSPM-7 Labels Common Beliefs As Terrorism “Indicators” (www.kenklippenstein.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by davel@lemmy.ml to c/usa@lemmy.ml
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It’s hard to overstate how much different NSPM-7 is from the over 200 executive orders Trump has frantically signed since coming back into office.

NSPM-7 directs a new national strategy to “disrupt” any individual or groups “that foment political violence,” including “before they result in violent political acts.”

In other words, they’re targeting pre-crime, to reference Minority Report.

The Trump administration isn’t only targeting organizations or groups but even individuals and “entities” whom NSPM-7 says can be identified by any of the following “indica” (indicators) of violence:

  • anti-Americanism,
  • anti-capitalism,
  • anti-Christianity,
  • support for the overthrow of the United States Government,
  • extremism on migration,
  • extremism on race,
  • extremism on gender
  • hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family,
  • hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on religion, and
  • hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on morality
top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world 31 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Suggesting a separation of church and state potentially violates 3 of those.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

Separation of church and state is traditional American values. Violating a separation of church and state is against traditional American values and anti American

[–] Bonesince1997@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago

What are traditional views on morality? Like how the death penalty has been used on innocent people? How it's OK for Trump to weasel out of his legal responsibilities? What morality are you even talking about?

[–] Fandangalo@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago

“Extremism” and “hostility” are complete wiggle words, along with “traditional American.”

A traditional American view on race is a person of color is 3/5ths of a person. We’ve evolved past that, at least most of us with a brain & conscious have.

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 weeks ago

But the Trump administration are the ones constantly and repeatedly violating all those ‘indica’. That’s kinda weird.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago

Is raping children on this list?

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 weeks ago

We’re all centrists now.

  • extremism on migration,


https://www.npr.org/2021/06/07/1004074139/harris-tells-guatemalans-not-to-migrate-to-the-united-states

  • extremism on race,


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Dolezal

  • extremism on gender


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_(Saturday_Night_Live)

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I would say that Trump and the republicans violated most of these. Violations of the separation of church and state are anti-American, violating the constitution is anti-American and a violation of traditional values, kidnapping people and violating habius corpus is anti-American and a violation of traditional values….I could go on and on but I think you all get the picture

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Are these directives revokable?

[–] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes, by another president. If we get one.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I was wondering if courts may be a recourse...

[–] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order

Theoretically, but in practice the supreme court would probably hand wave any accusations of the orders being unconstitutional. In actuality a new president would be the remedy.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's not an executive order, as the article details the difference.

[–] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Apologies, found the one for presidential directives: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_directive

However, two thirds of congress in the house and especially the senate is equally unlikely.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 1 points 2 weeks ago

Oh thank you, I need to work on my query skills, I searched the abbreviation.

With all the ones left in place, that says a lot about the "reasonable" party.

[–] molestme247@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Soon as they stop I'll stop talking like them, and I'll follow the Bible like they do, not at all, and till then, fuck em.