Fighting for democracy is not a terrorist activity.

[passy]

But will it be labeled as such when people start taking to the streets to protest against fraudulent election results ?
Will there be massive imprisonment of protesters ?
If there is actual protest, when will that protest reach critical point ? Will it allowed to go that far ?
Will the * administration finally reveal its true nature and shows us what a bunch of fascists they really are ?
When looking for answers to all these questions one must realize that the administration now has the legal basis for imprisoning anyone they consider to be an "enemy combatant", a label that they can freely apply to anyone.
The only justification they need is that these "combatants" are fighting against the interests of the country. Those interests could be political, social or even economical. Election reformists, environmentalists, civil rights protectors, democrats, liberal judges, leftist media types, could all be portrayed as disruptors, traitors, saboteurs or terrorists because they dare to protest against the government and the interests it claims to protect.
The groundwork has already been laid; in numerous speeches, members of the administration have already told us what constitutes treasonous behavior. How many times have they accused the democrats of harming the nation with their anti-torture stance?
The argument that fighting against election fraud is somehow unpatriotic is quite easy. Terrorists don't believe in democracy, communists didn't either; why is it that people don't "believe" in election results, do they not have faith in our democracy, are they only interested in revolution ? One needs only to look at the government and media response to the events following the Mexican elections. Whereas the government was positive to the Orange revolution in the Ukraine, their silence and contempt over the efforts of the Mexicans who are trying to reclaim their democracy, demonstrates a dramatic change in attitude.
As we inch closer to the election and the demise of the GOP, we can expect that messages coming from the administration will hint at a possible severe repression of protesters, painting them as anti-democracy terrorists, in a typical Rovian reversal ploy: to attack your opponents with their own strength.
Isn't "freedom fighters" already a terrorist adjective?
Will "democracy saviors" become one too?

PS: Of course one of this will be of any importance if the Iran offensive gets the go ahead.

[autorank]

1. Rate this up!!! KR I agree completely.

We are now subject to what ever irks the boy king, his boss Mr. C, and the Quisling Corps that supports all of this.

A few supporting points:

Some people in the anti war movement are finding themselves on the "no fly" list. They obviously consider anti war protesting a dangerous sign. They can take away your right to fly. Hmmm...

The protesting of anything gets you in trouble, with one big exception. The May Day protests by the
Latino community didn't get touched by the para military swat teams we've built up for no good reason.

If we start a war, then protesting that would clearly provoke the ire of the * administration and make anyone subject to arrest and, let me remind everyone, torture.

Protesting elections - oh, I'm sure they'll be out there in full force smacking that down.

The trashing of the constitution is a grave crime.

You said: Isn't "freedom fighters" already a terrorist adjective?
Will "democracy saviors" become one too?

I'm afraid so. EXCELLENT POST!

[passy]

2. Kick

[leftofthedial]

3. "terrorist" means whatever someone in king george's cabal

says it means

they've already begun labeling lapdog Democrats in Congress "terrorists"

and the congressional democrats are about 99 notches below most of us here at DU

[passy]

4. Does that make us superorrists?

[passy]

5. kick