Feds say these nuts "Had to be Taken Down"

[Contumacious]

So the FBI is monitoring these people, a group which has existed apparently for years with just ranting and raving, and now they are terrorists because the Feds believe the leopard has changed its spots? That a bunch of blowhard losers will suddenly take up arms and come out shooting? That claim would take a lot of proof to convince me.

Of course the government has an agenda. Just like they did in Waco, A new law banning some type of firearms and/or militia training I suspect is in the offing.

.

 

[William Joyce]

Redneck psychos, they're the worst. They are too stupid to understand how this would have affected so many families. Not only would their loved ones have died but by a terrorist act committed by their neighbors?

How freaking uncivilized can they be? They're animals.

Yes, Muslims who actually kill are just "diverse", while whites who were set up by the feds are "animals" who are "stupid."

 

[Newby]

The Obama administration has been trying to bring the people at Gitmo to trial, or didn't you notice? Once they are tried and convicted, their incarceration at Gitmo will end, as they will be moved to real prisons. But again, YOU are the one who keeps trying to divert the conversation to my support or non-support of the current occupants of Gitmo, not I.

And of course, you haven't addressed my actual point, which was:

If Muslim terrorists are in fact being held without trial at Gitmo, then why wouldn't fanatic, right-wing Christian terrorists be subject to the exact same treatment?

Do you have no answer for that?

In legal terms the Hutaree shitbags are US Citizens so they automatically are legally entitled to many Rights not conferred upon non-Citizens.

Many of the people originally assigned to Gitmo were also US citizens.

Really? Where did you hear this?

 

[CurveLight]

The Obama administration has been trying to bring the people at Gitmo to trial, or didn't you notice? Once they are tried and convicted, their incarceration at Gitmo will end, as they will be moved to real prisons. But again, YOU are the one who keeps trying to divert the conversation to my support or non-support of the current occupants of Gitmo, not I.

And of course, you haven't addressed my actual point, which was:

If Muslim terrorists are in fact being held without trial at Gitmo, then why wouldn't fanatic, right-wing Christian terrorists be subject to the exact same treatment?

Do you have no answer for that?

In legal terms the Hutaree shitbags are US Citizens so they automatically are legally entitled to many Rights not conferred upon non-Citizens.

Many of the people originally assigned to Gitmo were also US citizens.

It makes sense many originally assigned to Gitmo
were US citizens. They were in the Navy when Gitmo
was built in 1898.

 

[CurveLight]

In legal terms the Hutaree shitbags are US Citizens so they automatically are legally entitled to many Rights not conferred upon non-Citizens.

you mean like the rights conferred on the MS-13 Shitbags?....who have a hell of a lot of non-citizens in their ranks....but at one point had the ACLU telling the LAPD ....."you cant do this and you cant do that....these guys have rights"...is that what you are talking about?......

What does ms-13 have to do with the fact these shitbags are US Citizens?

 

[Zona]

Great Job by the FBI keeping us safe. Terrorists are terrorists no matter where they come from

Shouldn't we wait till they've been convicted before finding them guilty? Just a thought.

I agree. In fact, I think they should be let out on bail for a at least a year!

 

[Vast LWC]

So the FBI is monitoring these people, a group which has existed apparently for years with just ranting and raving, and now they are terrorists because the Feds believe the leopard has changed its spots? That a bunch of blowhard losers will suddenly take up arms and come out shooting? That claim would take a lot of proof to convince me.

Of course the government has an agenda. Just like they did in Waco, A new law banning some type of firearms and/or militia training I suspect is in the offing.

.

You suspect, eh?

Right-wingers have been "suspecting" this for some time now. Hasn't happened yet.

The Obama administration has made absolutely no indication that they are in any way going to restrict gun rights, so your suspicion has no basis in reality.

 

[AllieBaba]

They will.

"Although he is now trying to run from his anti-gun past, Barack Obama would be the most anti-gun president
in American history. Here are four of the many facts in his record of opposing gun owners:
Obama voted to allow the prosecution of law-abiding citizens
who use a firearm for self-defense in the home.1
Just this year, Obama supported Washington, D.C., laws banning handguns
and making self-defense illegal—in your own home.2
Obama supported a 500% increase in federal taxes on guns and ammunition.3
Obama voted to ban hundreds of rifles and shotguns commonly used for
hunting, including single-shot, over-under and side-by-side shotguns.4"
http://www.gunbanobama.com/Template...f49a0ca86/Documents/NRA_obamausatoday1009.pdf

 

[AllieBaba]

"In 2000, Barak Obama cosponsored a bill that would have limited the purchase of handguns to one per month. That may not sound significant, but the truth is, such a bill would impede the rights of law abiding citizens. There is no justifiable reason to limit the ability of people who have no criminal record from purchasing any legal fire arm. Obama at the same time also voted against allowing people to violate local fire arms bans even in the case of self protection."
"Obama also supports the banning of all semi-automatic weapon sales and transfers. When most people hear "semi-automatic weapon", they think of the gun in the hand of the gang banger. That may be true, but there are a lot of other guns that are semi-automatic, which would also be included in such bans. Shotguns, for example, that are used by bird hunters would fall under the ban. The only reason to try to ban a whole class of gun, with such a wide stroke, is to start the progression of banning all guns eventually."
Barak Obama's Gun Control Positions - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com

 

[Vast LWC]

Really? Where did you hear this?

Two high profile examples are Jose Padilla and Yaser Hamdi, American Citizens designated as "Enemy Combatants" by the Bush administration. They were held in Guantanamo for years without Habeus Corpus.

 

[Vast LWC]

"In 2000, Barak Obama cosponsored a bill that would have limited the purchase of handguns to one per month. That may not sound significant, but the truth is, such a bill would impede the rights of law abiding citizens. There is no justifiable reason to limit the ability of people who have no criminal record from purchasing any legal fire arm. Obama at the same time also voted against allowing people to violate local fire arms bans even in the case of self protection."
"Obama also supports the banning of all semi-automatic weapon sales and transfers. When most people hear "semi-automatic weapon", they think of the gun in the hand of the gang banger. That may be true, but there are a lot of other guns that are semi-automatic, which would also be included in such bans. Shotguns, for example, that are used by bird hunters would fall under the ban. The only reason to try to ban a whole class of gun, with such a wide stroke, is to start the progression of banning all guns eventually."
Barak Obama's Gun Control Positions - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com

You're using his votes as a State Senator to control guns in Chicago, which don't even ban guns, as proof that he intends to institute some national policy banning firearms.

 

[AllieBaba]

Why yes, yes I am.
You're a genius!

 

[Darkwind]

I don't get it.. you're for freeing the alleged MUSLIM terrorists...

and for jailing the alleged CHRISTIAN terrorists.....

Something about that smells funny.

How about equal treatment for ALL suspected terrorists?

Sounds good.

Where does it say in the article that these people were taken off a field of battle, engaged in combat with US Forces? I seem to have missed that part of the story.

 

[Vast LWC]

Why yes, yes I am. You're a genius!

That's very, very flimsy, at best.

There's a big difference between a local law on firearms to prevent gang violence in Chicago, and instituting a national ban on firearms.

Are you denying Illinois individual state rights to make their own decisions on firearms?

 

[Vast LWC]

I don't get it.. you're for freeing the alleged MUSLIM terrorists...

and for jailing the alleged CHRISTIAN terrorists.....

Something about that smells funny.

How about equal treatment for ALL suspected terrorists?

Sounds good.

Where does it say in the article that these people were taken off a field of battle, engaged in combat with US Forces? I seem to have missed that part of the story.

Since they were an organized group engaged in rebellion against the United States government, as far as they're concerned, they did in fact fit that profile, wouldn't you say?

 

[AllieBaba]

Why yes, yes I am. You're a genius!

That's very, very flimsy, at best.

There's a big difference between a local law on firearms to prevent gang violence in Chicago, and instituting a national ban on firearms.

Are you denying Illinois individual state rights to make their own decisions on firearms?

Lame.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Really? Where did you hear this?

Two high profile examples are Jose Padilla and Yaser Hamdi, American Citizens designated as "Enemy Combatants" by the Bush administration. They were held in Guantanamo for years without Habeus Corpus.

Fact is when it was dioscovered that Hamdi was a US citizen he was moved out of Gitmo. He is no longer a US citizen.

Neither men were illegally detained.

 

[Vast LWC]

Really? Where did you hear this?

Two high profile examples are Jose Padilla and Yaser Hamdi, American Citizens designated as "Enemy Combatants" by the Bush administration. They were held in Guantanamo for years without Habeus Corpus.

Fact is when it was dioscovered that Hamdi was a US citizen he was moved out of Gitmo. He is no longer a US citizen.

Neither men were illegally detained.

US Citizens, detained for years without Habeus Corpus, given no rights to trial. And "Neither men were illegally detained."?

You certainly have an interesting interpretation on Constitutional law...

But this is a tangent, I was asked to provide examples of US Citizens detained in Gitmo, and I did. The legality of said acts is fodder for another thread.

 

[Newby]

Really? Where did you hear this?

Two high profile examples are Jose Padilla and Yaser Hamdi, American Citizens designated as "Enemy Combatants" by the Bush administration. They were held in Guantanamo for years without Habeus Corpus.

That's two, not 'many'.

 

[AllieBaba]

Lol.