HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Terrorists

Wed Jan 27, 2016, 05:32 PM

Terrorists

The bundy bunch aren't occupiers. They aren't protesters. They aren't concerned patriots. They are terrorists, plain and simple.

15 replies, 2126 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 15 replies Author Time Post
Reply Terrorists (Original post)
Mendocino Jan 2016 OP
C_U_L8R Jan 2016 #1
Johnyawl Jan 2016 #2
MisterP Jan 2016 #3
Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #4
Mendocino Jan 2016 #5
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2016 #6
Mendocino Jan 2016 #7
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2016 #8
Mendocino Jan 2016 #10
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2016 #12
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2016 #11
Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #9
Mendocino Jan 2016 #13
Snobblevitch Jan 2016 #14
TampaAnimusVortex Jan 2016 #15

Response to Mendocino (Original post)

Wed Jan 27, 2016, 05:44 PM

1. They're toast.

Law enforcement has had enough of their bullshit. What happens next is on them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C_U_L8R (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 27, 2016, 06:24 PM

2. I think they'll more resemble frozen vegetables once the FBI cuts the power off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Johnyawl (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 12:21 AM

3. yah, but celery and carrots don't vibrate

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mendocino (Original post)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 12:41 AM

4. I do not agree with their actions,

but calling them terrorists is just so much hyperbole.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Snobblevitch (Reply #4)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 01:24 AM

5. US Code of Federal Regulations

Terrorism-The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives.

Seems to fit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mendocino (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 01:28 AM

6. And tney will not charge since it is extremely hard to prove

 

Sedition might be easier and they will not either. Plenty of other charges that they can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #6)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 01:31 AM

7. Be that as it may

they are still terrorists. I wouldn't give them the satisfaction of calling them anything less.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mendocino (Reply #7)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 01:34 AM

8. You can call them whatever you want

 

they are engaged in armed sedition, not terrorism. It is a fine legal point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #8)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 01:35 AM

10. I never said they should be charged with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mendocino (Reply #10)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 01:36 AM

12. words have meanings

 

and we should reserve words for when they actually apply

In this case, it does not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mendocino (Reply #7)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 01:35 AM

11. And here you are

 


18 U.S. Code 2384 - Seditious conspiracy

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678,  1, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 103322, title XXXIII,  330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mendocino (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 01:34 AM

9. What civilian population is being terrorized?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Snobblevitch (Reply #9)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 01:42 AM

13. Families of police and federal employees

judges, Indians, local residents and other ranchers that have voiced opposition. People there have been intimidated, a vast majority of the locals want them out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mendocino (Reply #13)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 04:03 PM

14. Hell, I want them out.

But they have taken over a building and have not fired a shot. The feds are not close enoight to be shot. I think calling these idiots terrorists minimizes the terror caused by actual terrorists. That term is being thrown aroundd quite loosely on DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mendocino (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 28, 2016, 06:05 PM

15. Right... like the repugs call Ferguson rioters "terrorists" for the same reason...

Right or left, its hyperbolic vitriol designed to demonize ones political enemies.

Be careful of your tactics, they may come back to bite you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread