Topic created by rabble rouser: When republicans advocate that “terrorists” and Democrats are aligned – what are their motives?
What do they really hope that this line of thinking will accomplish?
Do they think it will make America safer?
Do they think it will make Democrats go away?
Do they think it will weaken the “terrorists”?
Do they think that America can survive on another Republican Presidency and administration?
How could they think these things?
Nevertheless this is concerning When republicans advocate that “terrorists” and Democrats are aligned – what are their motives? which you may want to clear up problems them selves. Eventually this’ll help in many ways… and help make yourself significantly better. Desiring concerning When republicans advocate that “terrorists” and Democrats are aligned – what are their motives? could possibly be a way out someday.
Optimum solution:
Answer by Kim
its election time and its mud slinging at its best! So sad if you ask me!
Answer by pgb
The motive is survival of the American way of life.
Answer by Mercer Devil
They are following the model set by Mussolini and Hitler by demonizing a portion of the citizenry in an effort to seize totalitarian control. They believe the ends justify any means and that their stewardship would be for the greater good of the country.
Answer by LadyZania
They are basically just passing the buck! *sm*
Answer by ih8t4d
Because it works on the knucle-dragging right-wing.
Heck, they voted twice for a guy that holds hand with the world’s #1 terrorist!
Answer by Trumain
Answer: To your perverted rant posed as a question,,,Because they ARE ALIGNED in purpose!
As to your “Details” : I believe that they are in fact attempting to alert the citizens to the menace that is liberal thought.
Answer by The Crow
First and foremost: Some clarification. I’m a conservative as far as voting goes. I’m not yet 18, but when I do turn 18, I will vote for the best Republican candidate or I won’t vote.
Second: I don’t think that many republicans would say that that’s true. If any republican were to say that the democrats actually support the terrorists monetarily, I’d say they were either reeeaaalllly anti-democrat, or just plain stupid. And I think that Georgy boy is more anti-democrat than stupid. He’s not a stupid person, just definitely NOT a good orator.
And third:Those few Republicans that would say that, probably say it thinking (rather hopelessly) that it will damage the Democrats.
Answer by BekindtoAnimals22
It may just be in response to those who dare to mention that GHW Bush was in business with the Bin Laden family in the Carlyle Group in Saudi Arabia for a number of years. A Bin Laden family member helped bail out Arbusto, an oil company previously headed by GW Bush in Texas. They are family friends and investors but supposedly the business ties were cut after 911. Other Bin Laden family members were in the U.S. on 911 and were whisked back to Saudi Arabia in one of the first planes allowed back in the air.
Somehow they have tied the Iraq war with terrorism even though there weren’t any there until we showed up. This has caused many new radical sympathizers but somehow they don’t relate that with our error in attacking Iraq. They are just grasping at straws to show their support for a mistake and have twisted the democrats view of terrorism because they are in favor of being on the offensive no matter how many new terrorists it creates. They fail to acknowledge that nobody was against the war in Afghanistan which was based on killing the terrorists who attacked us.
Answer by gray wolf
All it is is party loyalty gone mad in an election year. It would be great if elections were based on issues instead of party loyalty.
By the way, it’s like the pot calling the kettle black when a neo-con Repub. speaks. You must remember, the current “Republican Party” is not a TRUE Republican Party any longer; they are “neo-cons and VERY dangerous! Even many Republicans are disgusted by the change sooooo
far to the right.
For THE CROW:
Choosing to vote for a “party” and not the best candidate is NOT the way to begin your voting career! Already you have a team mindset that probably came from some programming in your life by an adult or peer group–FORGET IT!
All I’m saying is use your own mind, do your own research, and choose the candidate that touches you the most–Repub., Dem., Green, Socialist, WHATEVER. I wish you good luck.
Answer by Lettie D
Directly, one thing and one thing only and that is to keep Republicans in the White House so they and their elite friends can continue to get richer. They care much more about the style and manner in which they (the Republicans) survive than a healthy an well rounded survival of America.
Answer by Joe T
I’m amazed people don’t laugh in their face when they make ludicrous statements like that. I know I do.
Who could take such lunatic ravings seriously?
Answer by Jennifer
They want weak minded followers to feel ashamed and treasonous for listening to what others have to say.
They want to create a connection between all groups that disagree with them, so as to make it seem to them that we are all just “evil”……… crafty rationalization skills at work.
I think Ron Paul can fix most problems we’re facing in this polarizing political environment, he is the best of both worlds, pro-life/anti-war, he’s the only one who brings people together.
Answer by Nicolas
They have studied history.
Answer by Anthony M
Truth needs no OTHER motive.
Dems want the US to lose in Iraq. Terrorists want the US to lose in Iraq.
Answer by allen a
democrat agenda is to win at any cost in 08,including hurting America ! the islamo facists agree and endorse the democrat candidates.check out al jazeera tv.they know the Republicans will continue to kick serious as*s till they are defeated.wake up kiddies, this is www4 and it will last at least 40/50 yrs if not longer.Now, should hillary or obama win then all bets are off.you may want to consider learning farsi and maybe investing in a couple prayer rugs.the dems have no balls to fight a war…………
Answer by worldinspector
They think it will scare dummies into voting Republican.
Another ridiculous example . . . while riding in the car with us recently, my 85-year-old mother-in-law, knowing we are Democrats, suddenly blurted out, “You’re not voting for Hillary, are you?”
I said she wasn’t my first choice, but I would vote for her if she is the Dem nominee, she responded by asking if we were aware that when Bill was President, Hillary decorated the White House Christmas tree with condoms?
“And did you know,” she continued, “that if Hillary becomes President she’ll put our Armed Forces under the United Nations and make them wear United Nations uniforms and that there won’t be any more American Army or Navy?”
Etc.
Where did she “learn” these things?
“I read it in a Christian magazine . . . and I heard it on the radio, too!”
Don’t laugh, last election it succeeded 25 million times.
Do know a lot better?
Leave your very own answer to the comments!
Enjoy the video? Subscribe! http://bit.ly/M0mU1V ◅◅◅ Want some gear? US Store: http://seananners.spreadshirt.com EU Store: http://seananners.spreadshirt….
In Post-NDAA Amerika, What is a Terrorist and Who Can Make You Disappear by Calling You One?
Graphic by means of In Post-NDAA Amerika, What is a Terrorist and Who Can Make You Disappear by Calling You One?
IN POST NDAA AMERIKA, WHAT IS A TERRORIST AND WHO CAN MAKE YOU DISAPPEAR BY
CALLING YOU ONE?
Since corporate fascist puppet president Barack Obama signed the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 into law this past New Year’s
Eve (NDAA: Public Law 112-81), the powers of indefinite detention claimed
under the post-9/11 Authorization for Use of Military Force Act (AUMF:
Public Law 107-40) have been codified. Now the mere suspicion of being a
"terrorist" is sufficient grounds for an American citizen – on American soil
- to be arrested and detained indefinitely without charge or trial. Obvious
questions of constitutionality aside, this should prompt at least the
cautious to ask questions like the following:
1. What is the legal definition of "terrorist"?
2. Who can make you disappear by calling you one?
To answer the first question, we searched the online version of the United
States Code – "the codification of the general and permanent laws of the
United States" – for a definition of "terrorist". And to our amazement, we
didn’t find one. Over 400 references to "terrorist" in the USC, yes. But a
specific definition, no. What we did find is this:
Title 8 Section 1182(a)(3)(B) defines "terrorist activity" but not
"terrorist":
(iii) "Terrorist activity" defined As used in this chapter, the term
"terrorist activity" means any activity which is unlawful under the laws of
the place where it is committed (or which, if it had been committed in the
United States, would be unlawful under the laws of the United States or any
State) and which involves any of the following: (I) The highjacking or
sabotage of any conveyance (including an aircraft, vessel, or vehicle). (II)
The seizing or detaining, and threatening to kill, injure, or continue to
detain, another individual in order to compel a third person (including a
governmental organization) to do or abstain from doing any act as an
explicit or implicit condition for the release of the individual seized or
detained. (III) A violent attack upon an internationally protected person
(as defined in section 1116(b)(4) of title 18) or upon the liberty of such a
person. (IV) An assassination. (V) The use of any – (a) biological agent,
chemical agent, or nuclear w!
eapon or device, or (b) explosive, firearm, or other weapon or dangerous
device (other than for mere personal monetary gain), with intent to
endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or
to cause substantial damage to property. (VI) A threat, attempt, or
conspiracy to do any of the foregoing. (iv) "Engage in terrorist activity"
defined As used in this chapter, the term "engage in terrorist activity"
means, in an individual capacity or as a member of an organization – (I) to
commit or to incite to commit, under circumstances indicating an intention
to cause death or serious bodily injury, a terrorist activity; (II) to
prepare or plan a terrorist activity; (III) to gather information on
potential targets for terrorist activity; (IV) to solicit funds or other
things of value for – (aa) a terrorist activity; (bb) a terrorist
organization described in clause (vi)(I) or (vi)(II); or (cc) a terrorist
organization described in clause (vi)(III), unless t!
he solicitor can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence !
that he
did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization
was a terrorist organization;
(V) to solicit any individual – (aa) to engage in conduct otherwise
described in this subsection; (bb) for membership in a terrorist
organization described in clause (vi)(I) or (vi)(II); or (cc) for membership
in a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III) unless the
solicitor can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he did not
know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a
terrorist organization; or
(VI) to commit an act that the actor knows, or reasonably should know,
affords material support, including a safe house, transportation,
communications, funds, transfer of funds or other material financial
benefit, false documentation or identification, weapons (including chemical,
biological, or radiological weapons), explosives, or training – (aa) for the
commission of a terrorist activity; (bb) to any individual who the actor
knows, or reasonably should know, has committed or plans to commit a
terrorist activity; (cc) to a terrorist organization described in subclause
(I) or (II) of clause (vi) or to any member of such an organization; or (dd)
to a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), or to any member
of such an organization, unless the actor can demonstrate by clear and
convincing evidence that the actor did not know, and should not reasonably
have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization. (v)
"Representative" defined As used in this par!
agraph, the term "representative" includes an officer, official, or
spokesman of an organization, and any person who directs, counsels,
commands, or induces an organization or its members to engage in terrorist
activity. (vi) "Terrorist organization" defined As used in this section, the
term "terrorist organization" means an organization – (I) designated under
section 1189 of this title; (II) otherwise designated, upon publication in
the Federal Register, by the Secretary of State in consultation with or upon
the request of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Homeland Security,
as a terrorist organization, after finding that the organization engages in
the activities described in subclauses (I) through (VI) of clause (iv); or
(III) that is a group of two or more individuals, whether organized or not,
which engages in, or has a subgroup which engages in, the activities
described in subclauses (I) through (VI) of clause (iv).
www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182
Title 18 Section 2331 defines "international terrorism" and "domestic
terrorism" [READ CLOSELY] but not "terrorist":
As used in this chapter- (1) the term "international terrorism" means
activities that- (A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life
that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any
State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the
jurisdiction of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be
intended- (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to
influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii)
to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or
kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of
the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by
which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate
or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum;
(2) the term "national of the United States" has the meaning given such term
in section 101(a)(22) of the Im!
migration and Nationality Act; (3) the term "person" means any individual
or entity capable of holding a legal or beneficial interest in property; (4)
the term "act of war" means any act occurring in the course of- (A) declared
war; (B) armed conflict, whether or not war has been declared, between two
or more nations; or (C) armed conflict between military forces of any
origin; and (5) the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that- (A)
involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal
laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended- (i) to
intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of
a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of
a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C)
occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2331
Title 22 Section 2656f(d) defines "international terrorism", "terrorism",
"terrorist group" and "terrorist sanctuary" but not "terrorist":
(d) Definitions As used in this section- (1) the term "international
terrorism" means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than
1 country; (2) the term "terrorism" means premeditated, politically
motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational
groups or clandestine agents; (3) the term "terrorist group" means any group
practicing, or which has significant subgroups which practice, international
terrorism; (4) the terms "territory" and "territory of the country" mean the
land, waters, and airspace of the country; and (5) the terms "terrorist
sanctuary" and "sanctuary" mean an area in the territory of the country- (A)
that is used by a terrorist or terrorist organization- (i) to carry out
terrorist activities, including training, fundraising, financing, and
recruitment; or (ii) as a transit point; and (B) the government of which
expressly consents to, or with knowledge, allows, tolerates, or disregards
such use of its territory and i!
s not subject to a determination under- (i) section 2405(j)(1)(A) of the
Appendix to title 50; (ii) section 2371 (a) of this title; or (iii) section
2780 (d) of this title.
www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2656f
I’m no attorney and I don’t play one on television. But after reading the
above, it seems to me that the short answer to the question "What is the
legal definition of terrorist?" is "That depends."
Now on to the second question: Who can make you disappear by calling you
one?
According to the Washington Post’s TOP SECRET AMERICA project, there are "45
government organizations (for example, the FBI) engaged in top-secret work
[that can] be broken down into 1,271 sub-units (for example, the Terrorist
Screening Center of the FBI)." I’m pretty sure they can. But they also
mention "4,058 government organizations involved in domestic
counterterrorism and homeland security" including 2,880 federal
organizations that work at the state level, such as the FBI’s Joint
Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs), plus 818 state and 360 local organizations.
I’m pretty sure they can, too. And then of course there’s the "1,931
companies engaged in top-secret work for the government." I’d wager some or
all of them can, as well.
projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/articles/m…
And that’s not all. We also have to consider the Nationwide Suspicious
Activity Reporting Initiative (NSI):
Using NaSI SARs (Suspicious Activity Reports), just about anyone can drop
the dime the makes you disappear: a hateful former spouse, a jealous or
jilted lover, that co-worker you’re always competing with, or maybe just a
nosey neighbor. All they have to do is fill out one of these forms and
click "Submit":
Thanks to the OccupyWallSt.org Forum and Reddit r/Politics posters who
contributed to the research for this release.
###
NO MORE LEFT. NO MORE RIGHT. TIME TO UNITE. STAND AND FIGHT!
IronBoltBruce via VVV PR ( veritasvirtualvengeance.com | @vvvpr )
Img:
veritasvirtualvengeance.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/suspe…
st.jpg
Vid: www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWvSFBVojjU
Spt: www.wepay.com/donate/ironboltbruce
#fascist, #fascists, #ows, #vvvpr
Key: suspicious activity, suspicious activity reports, suspected terrorist,
terrorist, terrorists, terrorism, international terrorism, domestic
terrorism, ndaa, ndaa 2012, national defense authorization act, big brother,
fascism, fascist, fascists, ows, occupy wall street, vvv pr
###
Sponsors that make our work possible:
Republicans “terrorists” and the Democratic Party is aligned to advocate – What is their motivation?