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.

 

Are liberals going to be the ones in the prison camps?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 12:29 PM
link   
I am continually blown away by the demonization of liberals. I see the police state ratcheting up
(see SC armoured police vehicle thread)

and I remember the "if you're not with us you're with the terrorists" type spiel increasing so much so that a sitting US Senator is equated with Sadaam hussain and Osama Bin Laden.

I hear about how liberals are for pedaphila over in Hungary (Liberalism).

Minorities are demonized. Gays are demonized. Democrats are demonized. Liberal conservatives are demonized. Are we all to be cannon fodder?

On the other hand I know this sword cuts both ways. The definition of Domestic terrorism keeps getting bigger. I hope my right leaning friends see that a fascist state is going to take their guns away because we should put all of our faith in a protective police NANNY state.

I am getting nervous.

Put this in what ever forum it belongs in.




posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by stikkinikki
 


I don't know how many times I've had to read liberals exaggerate about "conservative terrorists". They always bring up McVeigh as their proof and reason why we should all vote democrat.

The problem with democrats, is that they say and do lots of things to open themselves up to that sort of criticism.

Anyway, no liberals wont be locked up in camps. What the hell?



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dronetek
reply to post by stikkinikki
 


I don't know how many times I've had to read liberals exaggerate about "conservative terrorists". They always bring up McVeigh as their proof and reason why we should all vote democrat.



I never EVER said you should vote democrat. I was bringing up a point about domestic terrorism and its expanding definition. ELF and militias both being labeled as terrorists. have you seen what the government does with accused or suspected terrorists. lock em up without charge or access to an attorney. The left and right have common ground here in being alarmed at increasing governmental control over our private lives. I am just wondering what all these preparations for a supposedly eminent terrorist attack on US soil are going to be used for.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dronetek
reply to post by stikkinikki
 


I don't know how many times I've had to read liberals exaggerate about "conservative terrorists". They always bring up McVeigh as their proof and reason why we should all vote democrat.

The problem with democrats, is that they say and do lots of things to open themselves up to that sort of criticism.

Anyway, no liberals wont be locked up in camps. What the hell?


Who is anyone to criticize?? We live in America where one mans beliefs should be respected as much as the next. Why would you criticize someone for not seeing it the way you do??



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Uh, the Earth Liberation Front IS a terrorist organization. I'm confused as to why you would use them as an example of any expanding definition of domestic terrorism. Any group that gets its rocks off setting fire to million dollar structures, spiking trees, and destroying other people's SUVs is almost worse than the Islamo-fascist terror groups we're fighting in the Middle East. At least the I-F's believe they're doing "Allah's work" whereas the damn ELFs destroy things just for the sake of destruction.

ELF members who are caught setting fires and spiking trees shouldn't have access to an attourney. They should only have access to a bullet right between their eyes for having absolutely zero regard for humanity and zero regard for property rights.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Any group that gets its rocks off setting fire to million dollar structures, spiking trees, and destroying other people's SUVs is almost worse than the Islamo-fascist terror groups we're fighting in the Middle East.


wow, i'm going to have to let this comment ferment for a while until it makes sense. Just so I am not making assumptions, are you trying to say that destruction of personal property is more of a concern than actual violence against other humans?



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:18 PM
link   
no bullets between the eyes!
sheesh. whatdya trying to do, burdman, prove their point by representing conservaties and then threatening people with extermination?

i don't think the camps are for just one side of the equation. i think they are for anyone who fits a specific type of profile that has nothing to actually do with your political party. i haven't nailed it down yet, but i'm paying very close attention.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Any group that gets its rocks off setting fire to million dollar structures, spiking trees, and destroying other people's SUVs is almost worse than the Islamo-fascist terror groups we're fighting in the Middle East.




Seriously. That tree spiking thing is no different than sending exploding packages by mail. You got some working class schlub with a wife and kids and home doing an already dangerous job now he has to put up the possibility that some whiny college hippie with well-to-do parents in Malibu jamming setting spikes to maim or kill him for earning an hourly wage.

There are some lunatics I can understand, blow up a politicians office, snipe an OBGYN, even shoot a cop I can see the motivation behind all that as awful as they all are but send a shard of metal through some guys chest for retrieving lumber? If we had like 3 trees left to protect maybe I could understand it.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by scientist
 


What do you think spiking trees is?



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by scientist
 


Nice job ignoring the next sentence of my paragraph, dude. It wasn't a comment on the nature of the crime but rather, on the impetus behind the crime. Islamic terrorism is, of course, worse as it is directed at killing people above all else. However, there's also a religious movement behind it with a percieved promise of a direct reward afterward. The same cannot be said for eco terrorism, who's sole driving force is purely destruction and the resulting fear they hope it brings.

Don't worry, there are plenty of bullets for both the eco terrorists and the islamo-fascists. I wasn't letting them off the hook with my statement.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by stikkinikki
 


That is a good one, I guess the word liberal will become obscene so they will be dissenters, dissenters will be the new breed of homegrown terrorist and homegrown terrorist will be persecuted.

I guess you are right it will be prison camps waiting for them.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Hi marg, and excellent point Op.

Yep if you are the praying type, this would be a good time.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:25 PM
link   
In jail? the way things are headed? 10-15 years ago I woul dhave put up a vicious argument to the contrary, but look at post 911 USA right now it just that much of a leap anymore. The concept of political determent camps seems to be becooming more real every day.

Heck, just marginalizing them would have the same effect as locking them up.


[edit on 9/4/08 by FredT]



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Don't worry, there are plenty of bullets for both the eco terrorists and the islamo-fascists. I wasn't letting them off the hook with my statement.


heh, that's really all I ask.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:34 PM
link   
I wasn't very clear about the ELF and militias being labeled domestic terrorists. I hold no love for the ELF at all. They burnt down the Center for Urban Horticulture at the University of Washington several years ago. They did this because of some problem they had with cloning poplar trees or something similar. That place had a great library and some of my former professors had their offices there. So *&^% the ELF.

my point I was trying to make was that after 911 a lot of Abrab looking folks in the US were rounded up because the terrorists were supposedly Arabs as well. Follow that reasoning and you can see where environmentalists and protestors could be massively rounded up after an ELF attack. Similarly if a group or individual "gun nut" went postal in a crowd would we begin to see law abiding gun owners rounded up for failing to turn in their semi automatics?

it's the slippery slope I am worried about after a real or staged terrorist attack.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:34 PM
link   
well just to give you some idea how all this generalization is hurting everyone:

let's consider joe q. public. joe goes to work at the lumber mill. perhaps he sweeps up the mess and converts the shavings into a green, environmentally friendly fertilizer that is used to grow new trees. he loves nature and the outdoors. he has several pets, whom he takes remarkably good care of, and a few adopted kids from china, to boot. the spike hits him instead of the guy mangling the tree. now we have a dead joe. back at joe's house we find that he contributes charitable donations to various "save the environment" programs, has energy conserving appliances, recycles and drives a car that has zero carbon emissions.

it's never as cut and dry as it looks. people, especially idealistic folks, can be manipulated into a frenzy in which they sincerely believe the world is that black and white, and it simply is not!



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by stikkinikki
 


great idea, since liberals are the biggest threat to America that we have today.

I can't wait until they start rounding up all the hateful libs...



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by stikkinikki
 


I find it interesting that your topic header is about liberals going to these phantom camps, and you're trying to paint the extreme-extreme left environmentalists & "gun nuts" as potential future victims of a bias against liberals. Since we've covered the far left, let's take the "gun nuts" on.

If we're looking to jail all liberals, then why in the blue hell would we go after gun nuts? It was the Lord & ruler of the liberals, Bill Clinton, who tried to get legislation passed that would have defined virtually any semi-automatic firearm as an assault weapon and would have mandated turning these weapons over to the authorities under penalty of law. Thankfully, the Brady Bill that passed didn't fully implement this provision and, even more thankfully, George W. Bush wisely allowed that bill to expire without renewal.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by stikkinikki
 


I find it interesting that your topic header is about liberals going to these phantom camps, and you're trying to paint the extreme-extreme left environmentalists & "gun nuts" as potential future victims of a bias against liberals. Since we've covered the far left, let's take the "gun nuts" on.


Last I checked we are still under GOP executive power and possibly facing at least four more years, potentially under a far right wing religious zealot should McCain kick the bucket. Some (maybe just one) of you WOULD like to see us rounded up. problem is that any sweep of liberals is going to end up getting conservatives as well because where does the government draw the line? I quoted the term "gun nuts" on purpose as I do not care for the term but think it is thrown around just as much as slurs against the left.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by stikkinikki
 

It was the Lord & ruler of the liberals, Bill Clinton, who tried to get legislation passed that would have defined virtually any semi-automatic firearm as an assault weapon and would have mandated turning these weapons over to the authorities under penalty of law.


Then perhaps you can see the wisdom of not granting the Presidential office any further powers that allow suspention of Habeas Corpus etc etc.

For the record I phrased the thread title in a question form for the purpose of discussion which it has generated.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join