more totalitarian bullshit from the supreme court

[MaggieMae]

Oh you're fucking kidding me! Blu's whining about no longer being able to commit treason????

Fucking figures.

so you the trust the government with sole discretion on who is a terrorist group? and you realize this decision dealt with groups that posed no threat to the usa but were separatist groups in their own country that we decided to label terrorists? Also, I am sure you will be calling for all taxpayers to be charged with treason as we give money to hamas and they are a terrorist group as well by our list

Do you realize that their is a federal law which the President MUST adhere to when defining a group as a terrorist organization? He can't just say "you're a terror group now buddy"

U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2331

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 Immigration 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.

SOURCE

(Added Pub. L. 102-572, title X, Sec. 1003(a)(3), Oct. 29, 1992,
106 Stat. 4521; amended Pub. L. 107-56, title VIII, Sec. 802(a),
Oct. 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 376.)

REFERENCES IN TEXT

Section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act,
referred to in par. (2), is classified to section 1101(a)(22) of
Title 8, Aliens and Nationality.

PRIOR PROVISIONS

A prior section 2331 was renumbered 2332 of this title.
AMENDMENTS
2001 - Par. (1)(B)(iii). Pub. L. 107-56, Sec. 802(a)(1),
substituted "by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping" for
"by assassination or kidnapping".
Par. (5). Pub. L. 107-56, Sec. 802(a)(2)-(4), added par. (5).
EFFECTIVE DATE
Section 1003(c) of Pub. L. 102-572 provided that: "This section
[enacting this section and sections 2333 to 2338 of this title,
amending former section 2331 of this title, and renumbering former
section 2331 of this title as 2332] and the amendments made by this
section shall apply to any pending case or any cause of action
arising on or after 4 years before the date of enactment of this
Act [Oct. 29, 1992]."
SHORT TITLE OF 2004 AMENDMENT
Pub. L. 108-458, title VI, Sec. 6601, Dec. 17, 2004, 118 Stat.
3761, provided that: "This subtitle [subtitle G (Secs. 6601-6604)
of title VI of Pub. L. 108-458, enacting section 2339D of this
title, amending sections 2332b and 2339A to 2339C of this title,
and enacting provisions set out as a note under section 2332b of
this title] may be cited as the 'Material Support to Terrorism
Prohibition Enhancement Act of 2004'."
SHORT TITLE OF 2002 AMENDMENT
Pub. L. 107-197, title I, Sec. 101, June 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 721,
provided that: "This title [enacting section 2332f of this title
and provisions set out as notes under section 2332f of this title]
may be cited as the 'Terrorist Bombings Convention Implementation
Act of 2002'."
Pub. L. 107-197, title II, Sec. 201, June 25, 2002, 116 Stat.
724, provided that: "This title [enacting section 2339C of this
title and provisions set out as notes under section 2339C of this
title] may be cited as the 'Suppression of the Financing of
Terrorism Convention Implementation Act of 2002'."

Hmm, someone should bring that information to the attention of militant groups forming to overthrow the government as we speak. You know, the ones like the Oath Keepers.

 

[MaggieMae]

Oh you're fucking kidding me! Blu's whining about no longer being able to commit treason????

Fucking figures.

so you the trust the government with sole discretion on who is a terrorist group? and you realize this decision dealt with groups that posed no threat to the usa but were separatist groups in their own country that we decided to label terrorists? Also, I am sure you will be calling for all taxpayers to be charged with treason as we give money to hamas and they are a terrorist group as well by our list

Redacto in absurdum

You are a loon to basically try and translate the "If Al Quaeda isn't free to commit mass murder, none of us is free" argument. You damn well know that all aid that goes to these places is immedeately used to support the terrorists effort if only to free up funds elsewhere. To deny that makes you a bigger idiot than I estimated you to be.

Right now I don't trust our government to sit the right way on a shitter. They've deemed the middle class their enemy, have embraced radical socialism as rational thought and have put us on a collision course for national insolvency all for a quest of personal power, hoping to be one of the few that get off in a lifeboat before the nation sinks like a stone.

That being said the American people elected them to BE the authority that makes these decisions. You don't have an individual right to fund terrorists. Besides, what do you collective relativists know of individual rights and responsibilities? You just want to do what you want and have say in what other people do. Collectivism is great for other people but not for you.

I should amend my base statement about those who worship the alter of Liberalism/Marxism/Socialism/Progressivism/Communism/Fascism. It is the codification of hate, revenge, jealousy AND hypocrisy... for ultimately, they wish to be exempted from the world they create.

What drivel.

 

[MaggieMae]

Are you seriously trying to trump me with the Sedition Act? Get real.

I'm seriously trying to tell you that free speech has its limitations.

The Sedition Act is not the way to prove your point. I love it myself because it has a very rare status as being a law that was repealed before SCOTUS ever ruled on it, yet still cited by SCOTUS as an example of a law that is unconstitutional. It may be unique in that respect, but I am not enough of a law geek to know that for sure.

Please, keep trying to prove your point by using the Sedition Act, it is amusing.

The Sedition Act actually expired in 1800-something and was replaced by the Espionage Act during World War I. It was used effectively then to prosecute thousands of spies, but later determined to be unconstitutional and any such powers delegated to the states to decide.

 

[MaggieMae]

So you think it should be ok to help terrorist?

Every time an American oil company buys crude from OPEC, it is supporting countries that endorse terrorism. Just about everyone with a 401(k) pension plan or mutual fund has money invested in companies that are doing business in so-called rogue states, thereby supporting terrorism.

everyone who buys a GE product (which is 99% of people who shop) are indirectly funding Iran since GE is very cosey with them and does billions in business with them

So did Halliburton, all while screwing the government on Iraq contracts.

 

[MaggieMae]

So you think it should be ok to help terrorist?

Reagan thought so.

Guess you didn't read my post. Reagan didn't step on his dick like Obama. The Contras were not a designated Terror organization by the state department.

And you've been corrected. Selling arms to Iran was illegal. Selling arms COVERTLY to Iran was corrupt.

 

[MaggieMae]

Yes, Obama should arrest himself if he was doing his job. But, why start doing his job now???

No, Bush will not go to jail, but Obama will think about arresting him (stopped only because it would be doing his job and showing some kind (any kind) of leadership).

No, Ollie will not go to jail, the Contras weren't a designated terrorist organization by the US State Department. (See Reagan didn't step on his own dick like that).

Oh Reagan was as guilty as Oliver North. Are you kidding? There was a trade and arms embargo specifically against Iran at the time, and yet it was okay to secretly ship arms to Iran anyway? Colonel North admitted in his book that Reagan was fully aware of the shipments and approved of both the Iranian initiative and transfer of money to the Contras.

I don't know if what you claim is true or not, but I'm happy a pig in shit about it.

That was genius policy. Genius. It was only the stupid Dems that stopped the policy and thereby caused all the havoc we are now experiencing in the region. If they had stayed the fuck out of it, Iran and Iraq would have bled themselves white and had no ability to start trouble for anyone else.

Don't worry, I don't expect you to agree or even understand it. Just go on hoping Reagan and Ollie go to jail. (and, gnashing your teeth because they didn't)

So it's okay when a Republican president thinks he's above the law. Thanks for the confirmation.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Reagan thought so.

Guess you didn't read my post. Reagan didn't step on his dick like Obama. The Contras were not a designated Terror organization by the state department.

And you've been corrected. Selling arms to Iran was illegal. Selling arms COVERTLY to Iran was corrupt.

Stop, stop.....you're being too predictable!!!

I told you that you wouldn't understand it and you're not in a position to "correct" jack shit.

You're in exactly the same position as you were an hour ago and so am I.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Oh Reagan was as guilty as Oliver North. Are you kidding? There was a trade and arms embargo specifically against Iran at the time, and yet it was okay to secretly ship arms to Iran anyway? Colonel North admitted in his book that Reagan was fully aware of the shipments and approved of both the Iranian initiative and transfer of money to the Contras.

I don't know if what you claim is true or not, but I'm happy a pig in shit about it.

That was genius policy. Genius. It was only the stupid Dems that stopped the policy and thereby caused all the havoc we are now experiencing in the region. If they had stayed the fuck out of it, Iran and Iraq would have bled themselves white and had no ability to start trouble for anyone else.

Don't worry, I don't expect you to agree or even understand it. Just go on hoping Reagan and Ollie go to jail. (and, gnashing your teeth because they didn't)

So it's okay when a Republican president thinks he's above the law. Thanks for the confirmation.

Just a bunch of simpleton Dems playing politics with the country's foreign policy. Back in the day we used to all be on the same side when it came to whether we wanted America to win. In the 1980's Dems made clear that it was no-longer the case. They decided that tripping up a popular Republican president was far more important.

What Iran-Contra really was is a treasonous act by Congressional Democrats. Giving aid and comfort to America's enemies for political gain. Shameful.

But, keep deluding yourself....please.

 

[Big Fitz]

so you the trust the government with sole discretion on who is a terrorist group? and you realize this decision dealt with groups that posed no threat to the usa but were separatist groups in their own country that we decided to label terrorists? Also, I am sure you will be calling for all taxpayers to be charged with treason as we give money to hamas and they are a terrorist group as well by our list

Redacto in absurdum

You are a loon to basically try and translate the "If Al Quaeda isn't free to commit mass murder, none of us is free" argument. You damn well know that all aid that goes to these places is immedeately used to support the terrorists effort if only to free up funds elsewhere. To deny that makes you a bigger idiot than I estimated you to be.

Right now I don't trust our government to sit the right way on a shitter. They've deemed the middle class their enemy, have embraced radical socialism as rational thought and have put us on a collision course for national insolvency all for a quest of personal power, hoping to be one of the few that get off in a lifeboat before the nation sinks like a stone.

That being said the American people elected them to BE the authority that makes these decisions. You don't have an individual right to fund terrorists. Besides, what do you collective relativists know of individual rights and responsibilities? You just want to do what you want and have say in what other people do. Collectivism is great for other people but not for you.

I should amend my base statement about those who worship the alter of Liberalism/Marxism/Socialism/Progressivism/Communism/Fascism. It is the codification of hate, revenge, jealousy AND hypocrisy... for ultimately, they wish to be exempted from the world they create.

What drivel.

Yes I agree. Blu is spouting drivel.

 

[AllieBaba]

so you the trust the government with sole discretion on who is a terrorist group? and you realize this decision dealt with groups that posed no threat to the usa but were separatist groups in their own country that we decided to label terrorists? Also, I am sure you will be calling for all taxpayers to be charged with treason as we give money to hamas and they are a terrorist group as well by our list

Do you realize that their is a federal law which the President MUST adhere to when defining a group as a terrorist organization? He can't just say "you're a terror group now buddy"

U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2331

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 Immigration 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.

SOURCE

(Added Pub. L. 102-572, title X, Sec. 1003(a)(3), Oct. 29, 1992,
106 Stat. 4521; amended Pub. L. 107-56, title VIII, Sec. 802(a),
Oct. 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 376.)

REFERENCES IN TEXT

Section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act,
referred to in par. (2), is classified to section 1101(a)(22) of
Title 8, Aliens and Nationality.

PRIOR PROVISIONS

A prior section 2331 was renumbered 2332 of this title.
AMENDMENTS
2001 - Par. (1)(B)(iii). Pub. L. 107-56, Sec. 802(a)(1),
substituted "by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping" for
"by assassination or kidnapping".
Par. (5). Pub. L. 107-56, Sec. 802(a)(2)-(4), added par. (5).
EFFECTIVE DATE
Section 1003(c) of Pub. L. 102-572 provided that: "This section
[enacting this section and sections 2333 to 2338 of this title,
amending former section 2331 of this title, and renumbering former
section 2331 of this title as 2332] and the amendments made by this
section shall apply to any pending case or any cause of action
arising on or after 4 years before the date of enactment of this
Act [Oct. 29, 1992]."
SHORT TITLE OF 2004 AMENDMENT
Pub. L. 108-458, title VI, Sec. 6601, Dec. 17, 2004, 118 Stat.
3761, provided that: "This subtitle [subtitle G (Secs. 6601-6604)
of title VI of Pub. L. 108-458, enacting section 2339D of this
title, amending sections 2332b and 2339A to 2339C of this title,
and enacting provisions set out as a note under section 2332b of
this title] may be cited as the 'Material Support to Terrorism
Prohibition Enhancement Act of 2004'."
SHORT TITLE OF 2002 AMENDMENT
Pub. L. 107-197, title I, Sec. 101, June 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 721,
provided that: "This title [enacting section 2332f of this title
and provisions set out as notes under section 2332f of this title]
may be cited as the 'Terrorist Bombings Convention Implementation
Act of 2002'."
Pub. L. 107-197, title II, Sec. 201, June 25, 2002, 116 Stat.
724, provided that: "This title [enacting section 2339C of this
title and provisions set out as notes under section 2339C of this
title] may be cited as the 'Suppression of the Financing of
Terrorism Convention Implementation Act of 2002'."

Hmm, someone should bring that information to the attention of militant groups forming to overthrow the government as we speak. You know, the ones like the Oath Keepers.

You're a fucking idiot.

 

[blu]

how come the wimps who start these threads never answer the questions?

"do you think it's okay to aid terrorist"?

an actual terrorist group? no. but, again, I don't want the government deciding for me who is a terrorist group or not

 

[blu]

So you think it should be ok to help terrorist?

I don't trust the US government to be able to choose arbitary groups as terrorists. when gun control laws are put into effect and the NRA becomes a terrorist group I will see how you feel.

How much do you know about PKK or LTTE?

Are you seriously trying to equate the two groups I mentioned with the NRA?

I know a lot about all three groups. I don't think the NRA is a terrorist group, but wait until you get a real anti-gun president/congress and they start taking guns away. then you will see

 

[MaggieMae]

Do you realize that their is a federal law which the President MUST adhere to when defining a group as a terrorist organization? He can't just say "you're a terror group now buddy"

U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2331

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 Immigration 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.

SOURCE

(Added Pub. L. 102-572, title X, Sec. 1003(a)(3), Oct. 29, 1992,
106 Stat. 4521; amended Pub. L. 107-56, title VIII, Sec. 802(a),
Oct. 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 376.)

REFERENCES IN TEXT

Section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act,
referred to in par. (2), is classified to section 1101(a)(22) of
Title 8, Aliens and Nationality.

PRIOR PROVISIONS

A prior section 2331 was renumbered 2332 of this title.
AMENDMENTS
2001 - Par. (1)(B)(iii). Pub. L. 107-56, Sec. 802(a)(1),
substituted "by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping" for
"by assassination or kidnapping".
Par. (5). Pub. L. 107-56, Sec. 802(a)(2)-(4), added par. (5).
EFFECTIVE DATE
Section 1003(c) of Pub. L. 102-572 provided that: "This section
[enacting this section and sections 2333 to 2338 of this title,
amending former section 2331 of this title, and renumbering former
section 2331 of this title as 2332] and the amendments made by this
section shall apply to any pending case or any cause of action
arising on or after 4 years before the date of enactment of this
Act [Oct. 29, 1992]."
SHORT TITLE OF 2004 AMENDMENT
Pub. L. 108-458, title VI, Sec. 6601, Dec. 17, 2004, 118 Stat.
3761, provided that: "This subtitle [subtitle G (Secs. 6601-6604)
of title VI of Pub. L. 108-458, enacting section 2339D of this
title, amending sections 2332b and 2339A to 2339C of this title,
and enacting provisions set out as a note under section 2332b of
this title] may be cited as the 'Material Support to Terrorism
Prohibition Enhancement Act of 2004'."
SHORT TITLE OF 2002 AMENDMENT
Pub. L. 107-197, title I, Sec. 101, June 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 721,
provided that: "This title [enacting section 2332f of this title
and provisions set out as notes under section 2332f of this title]
may be cited as the 'Terrorist Bombings Convention Implementation
Act of 2002'."
Pub. L. 107-197, title II, Sec. 201, June 25, 2002, 116 Stat.
724, provided that: "This title [enacting section 2339C of this
title and provisions set out as notes under section 2339C of this
title] may be cited as the 'Suppression of the Financing of
Terrorism Convention Implementation Act of 2002'."

Hmm, someone should bring that information to the attention of militant groups forming to overthrow the government as we speak. You know, the ones like the Oath Keepers.

You're a fucking idiot.

Oath Keepers Oath Keepers – Guardians of the Republic

 

[ConHog]

Hmm, someone should bring that information to the attention of militant groups forming to overthrow the government as we speak. You know, the ones like the Oath Keepers.

You're a fucking idiot.

Oath Keepers Oath Keepers – Guardians of the Republic

Sorry Maggie a little kooky =/= terrorists

 

[sangha]

You're a fucking idiot.

Oath Keepers Oath Keepers – Guardians of the Republic

Sorry Maggie a little kooky =/= terrorists

Maggie never said "a little kooky = terrorists"

If you didn't make stuff up, you'd have nothing to say

 

[ConHog]

Oath Keepers Oath Keepers – Guardians of the Republic

Sorry Maggie a little kooky =/= terrorists

Maggie never said "a little kooky = terrorists"

If you didn't make stuff up, you'd have nothing to say

Why don't you get over your little infatuation with me and go play in traffic. I obviously never said that Maggie say anything of the sort. Anyone who can read understands that I was disagreeing that they are terrorists, not putting words in Maggie's mouth.

Maggie, Sangha is a perfect example of why I don't appear to be as unbiased as I was when I first got here. he's a fucking melon headed example of the many morons from the left who post here, many more than are from the right....

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I don't trust the US government to be able to choose arbitary groups as terrorists. when gun control laws are put into effect and the NRA becomes a terrorist group I will see how you feel.

How much do you know about PKK or LTTE?

Are you seriously trying to equate the two groups I mentioned with the NRA?

I know a lot about all three groups. I don't think the NRA is a terrorist group, but wait until you get a real anti-gun president/congress and they start taking guns away. then you will see

So out of the three groups the NRA is the only one that isn't a terrorist group. But you're banking on them becoming one in the future.

 

[ConHog]

How much do you know about PKK or LTTE?

Are you seriously trying to equate the two groups I mentioned with the NRA?

I know a lot about all three groups. I don't think the NRA is a terrorist group, but wait until you get a real anti-gun president/congress and they start taking guns away. then you will see

So out of the three groups the NRA is the only one that isn't a terrorist group. But you're banking on them becoming one in the future.

Well, just turn that around on blu and point out that IF gays were outlawed HIS GLAA would probably become terrorists.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Hmm, someone should bring that information to the attention of militant groups forming to overthrow the government as we speak. You know, the ones like the Oath Keepers.

You're a fucking idiot.

Oath Keepers Oath Keepers – Guardians of the Republic

So a group who pledges to support and defend the Constitution is somehow a militant group forming to overthrow the government? If the government is a tyrannical one then we should all support overthrowing it. But as it stands the Oathkeepers simply pledge to support and defend the Constitution. Why is that not a good thing?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I know a lot about all three groups. I don't think the NRA is a terrorist group, but wait until you get a real anti-gun president/congress and they start taking guns away. then you will see

So out of the three groups the NRA is the only one that isn't a terrorist group. But you're banking on them becoming one in the future.

Well, just turn that around on blu and point out that IF gays were outlawed HIS GLAA would probably become terrorists.

I don't like to play the "what if" games. I'll leave that to the leftwing losers.