It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ted Cruz: Resolution to declare Antifa a Terrorist Organization

page: 5
52
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
Oh, of course. I could have told you right after 9/11 that we would eventually be manipulated into accepting the idea of stripping American citizens of their rights by labeling them as terrorists. First thing that went through my mind when I heard about people who didn't have rights because they were called terrorists.

Now obviously I am not a Muslim or even really a left winger (I'm way more conservative than most liberals nowdays). But I would urge you to really think about what you're saying when you support stuff like this. It cannot be a coincidence that the last (roughly) 20 years since 9/11 have been a constant assault on the rights of American citizens. From BOTH parties. There are no sides left who believe you have rights unless they tell you you do. Think about that carefully.


I have to agree, I have no party anymore.

I believe in fast, easy immigration, a women's right to choose, dedication to the bill of rights, oversight on corrupt corps, a non interventionist military, no lobbying, and small govt'. Where does that leave me?




posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Mach2

www.bis.doc.gov... would that not run afowl of the office of anti boycott compliance or does that only apply to us companies and not the federal government?


Antiboycott Laws: During the mid-1970's the United States adopted two laws that seek to counteract the participation of U.S. citizens in other nation's economic boycotts or embargoes. These "antiboycott" laws are the 1977 amendments to the Export Administration Act (EAA) and the Ribicoff Amendment to the 1976 Tax Reform Act (TRA). While these laws share a common purpose, there are distinctions in their administration. Objectives: The antiboycott laws were adopted to encourage, and in specified cases, require U.S. firms to refuse to participate in foreign boycotts that the United States does not sanction. They have the effect of preventing U.S. firms from being used to implement foreign policies of other nations which run counter to U.S. policy. Primary Impact: The Arab League boycott of Israel is the principal foreign economic boycott that U.S. companies must be concerned with today. The antiboycott laws, however, apply to all boycotts imposed by foreign countries that are unsanctioned by the United States. Who Is Covered by the Laws? The antiboycott provisions of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) apply to the activities of U.S. persons in the interstate or foreign commerce of the United States. The term "U.S. person" includes all individuals, corporations and unincorporated associations resident in the United States, including the permanent domestic affiliates of foreign concerns. U.S. persons also include U.S. citizens abroad (except when they reside abroad and are employed by non-U.S. persons) and the controlled in fact affiliates of domestic concerns. The test for "controlled in fact" is the ability to establish the general policies or to control the day to day operations of the foreign affiliate. The scope of the EAR, as defined by Section 8 of the EAA, is limited to actions taken with intent to comply with, further, or support an unsanctioned foreign boycott.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

...label them a hate group, one step below terrorist at the very least.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 06:00 PM
link   
It's about time.
I called for the violent leftists to be classified as domestic terrorists back in 2016 after their despicable behaviour at the Trump rally, but they have got much worse and organised behind the fascist banner of Antifa.
They should be treated exactly as terrorists, with the leaders taken to Guantanamo.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

That is the point of the proposed legislation.

If it is a matter of national security export concerns, that is one thing, but if it becomes a situation where the government is legislating morality, or simply trying to quash someones, or some entities opinions, I call BS.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 06:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: projectvxn

My personal opinion this sets a dangerous course for some Orwell type crap.
We need to take a step back and put our ideals aside for a second. Come together and talk.
Page 1 of this thread really is the best. I encourage everyone to read every post.



I agree. Despite this being the Mudpit, I believe we can have a civil discourse on it.

The Mudpit isn't really the place for it though.
edit on 19 7 19 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I think the specific group responsible was labeled, and it was a specific group - Army of God, and not just "Christian". Clearly, domestic groups can and do get labeled as terrorist. In this case, it would be ANTIFA and not just leftists getting the label much like Weather Underground was labeled.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: RandomPerson
a reply to: DBCowboy

...label them a hate group, one step below terrorist at the very least.



The SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center) does that with any group they disagree with.

The KKK are labeled the same as a group that fights for women's rights against Sharia Law.

All hate groups.


Hell, the Tea Party or veteran's groups are probably labeled as hate groups by the left and SPLC just because we're pro-Constitution.


Many on the left are furious with Trump because they think he elevated North Korea's Kim stature.


Yet the left has done the same with Antifa. They glorify and glamorize this organization. If we're going to label Antifa as a hate group then we're going to have to label the democrat party as a hate group as well.

And how effective would it be when everyone is in a hate group?



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 07:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: DBCowboy

I think the specific group responsible was labeled, and it was a specific group - Army of God, and not just "Christian". Clearly, domestic groups can and do get labeled as terrorist. In this case, it would be ANTIFA and not just leftists getting the label much like Weather Underground was labeled.


We assign to much importance to labels when they've become meaningless.

Hate group this, terrorist group that.

When will any of us be labeled a hate group by the left because we want a strong secure national border?
edit on 19-7-2019 by DBCowboy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

We already have. I thought you knew.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: DBCowboy

We already have. I thought you knew.


I was out of the office a few days and my emails backed up.

I missed the memo.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 07:27 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Yep, and the COTUS is hate speech now too.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: DBCowboy

Yep, and the COTUS is hate speech now too.


Yeah, well, when you have a document that limits the size and scope of government, what do you expect?



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12
You are full of it. You don’t even make sense . Maybe you should talk to someone.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

No I’m looking to learn something about the world . You’re an attention whore that spells like a 4th grader.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 10:12 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

The data shows that most of the terrorist acts in the U.S. are committed by right-wing extremists, so if Antifa is labeled a terrorist organization, I would suspect that lots of right-wing extremist organizations would have to be, as well in order to maintain some semblance of reason in the matter. So I agree with you.

One would have to ask themselves if they are okay with that. It was Republicans that took away civil rights for terrorists in the first place, so a conservative would have to be okay with the possibility that some conservatives would have their civil rights taken away for their views.

I don't know if conservatives would be okay with that, they seem to like guns and their right to open rebellion. I'm sure at least some would condone terrorism done by their own in order to take down them libs.

If it can be proven that Antifa is a terrorist organization, I would be okay with that IF and ONLY IF conservatives were willing to accept the legitimate data showing an increase in domestic terrorism by right-wing extremists (the number-one terrorist group in the U.S.) and were willing to deal with that threat in the same manner.

I still am hesitant to take away civil rights for terrorists, no matter if they are on the left or the right, so it's a similar view to yours. But the time for that argument is over a decade past.
edit on 19pmFri, 19 Jul 2019 22:14:13 -0500kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)

edit on 19pmFri, 19 Jul 2019 22:14:36 -0500kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)

edit on 19pmFri, 19 Jul 2019 22:15:22 -0500kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)

edit on 19pmFri, 19 Jul 2019 22:15:56 -0500kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)

edit on 19pmFri, 19 Jul 2019 22:18:57 -0500kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

You need help with your reading skills, skipper.

I am against the idea.


*sigh*



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 10:17 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I know, I read your statement. I was just replying with my views. I probably wasn't clear enough with the post. I can edit it to be clearer. We differ a bit, in that I am willing to deal with Antifa as a terrorist organization if right-wing extremist terrorists are also dealt with, so I'm offering some sort of a compromise.

I have a problem with saying "you" instead of using a more appropriate word like "conservatives" or something like that. I wasn't talking about you specifically, but I was talking about "you" as in the sense of the reader in general.
edit on 19pmFri, 19 Jul 2019 22:20:04 -0500kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

So your compromise is MORE labeling and further losses of freedoms for even more people.

Ummm, no.



posted on Jul, 19 2019 @ 10:23 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I guess after some reflection, I'm only offering that up to show perspective to conservatives so that they can gain some empathy. They need to understand that the law doesn't discriminate based on political philosophy - as in between a left-wing or right-wing extremist. I don't actually support labeling organizations as terrorist organizations at this time, and I am still concerned about the deterioration of civil rights in this country. So I'll back off the compromise.

There is a rise in right-wing extremist terrorists, that is something that needs to be dealt with, how would you suggest dealing with that? I do agree that it is important to protect civil rights at the same time.

I also believe that we could see a rise in domestic terrorism on both sides if our nation continues to be divided, so it might be something that has to be dealt with.
edit on 19pmFri, 19 Jul 2019 22:27:13 -0500kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
52
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join