What makes someone a terrorist? Should people who express dissenting opinions, who act in a ‘confrontational’ manner automatically ‘domestic terrorists’? The White House seems to think so.
Lisa Monaco stated as much on PBS News Hour. She’s Assistant to the President for Homeland Security. She indicated one of the warning signs of ‘domestic terrorism’ that Americans could be missing is kids who become more confrontational. Does that sound right? Almost all teens go through a confrontational phase, so does that mean we should brand them or anyone else who appears ‘confrontational’ a terrorist? Sounds crazy, right?
Harry Reid seems to consider the peaceful protesters at the Bundy Ranch to be domestic terrorists just because they resist the Bureau of Land Management’s heavy-handed bullying and their illegal vandalism and treatment of livestock stolen from Bundy.
Senator Reid and other Democrats believe they can coerce and intimidate Americans, threatening violence and then claim anyone who doesn’t support their skewed view of the world, anyone who stands up and dares to argue is a ‘domestic terrorist’.
From the Heller decision….
“At the time of the founding, as now, to “bear” meant to “carry.” See Johnson 161; Webster; T. Sheridan, A Complete Dictionary of the English Language (1796); 2 Oxford English Dictionary 20 (2d ed. 1989) (hereinafter Oxford). When used with “arms,” however, the term has a meaning that refers to carrying for a particular purpose—confrontation. In Muscarello v. United States, 524 U. S. 125 (1998) , in the course of analyzing the meaning of “carries a firearm” in a federal criminal statute, Justice Ginsburg wrote that “[s]urely a most familiar meaning is, as the Constitution’s Second Amendment … indicate[s]: ‘wear, bear, or carry … upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose … of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.’ ” Id., at 143 (dissenting opinion) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 214 (6th ed. 1998)). We think that Justice Ginsburg accurately captured the natural meaning of “bear arms.” Although the phrase implies that the carrying of the weapon is for the purpose of “offensive or defensive action,” it in no way connotes participation in a structured military organization.”
Someone thinks “confrontation” is a right….
bull $#%&!@* you dam trator
now our freedom of speech is being challenged.
our representatives have become the terrorists.
COMPLY PEASANTS!!!! or you’ll be branded an outlaw terrorist.
one dam thing you cant beat the American people
the Govt is the terrorist
Ridiculous…that means Obama is a terrorist according to your definition!
100%, he uses terror tactics against the American people every day. every politician has forgotten who they work for, I don’t care what party they claim to be, Democrat, Republic, Independent or John McCain, the way they ALL lie to us is a form of terrorism as far as i’m concerned.
then I guess it really is time to start the Revolution.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/450695801732089/