Wow...Look at the DOJ's New Position on Terrorism

[Three Wolves In Snow]

Originally Posted by ted08721

Environmentalists that are trying to save the environment are now classified as “eco-terrorists”

Well, some of them have been labeled that way for a very long time based on their actions. When you burn down a car lot full of cars, "to save the environment", you get labeled.

Not all of those who want to save the environment are terrorists, but groups like ELF and ALF, they are not innocent little people who are "only trying to save the environment".

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/22/us...tml?ref=topics

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/28/wo...ef=topics&_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/20/us...tml?ref=topics

6 arrested in series of ecoterror attacks in Pacific Northwest - tribunedigital-chicagotribune

These scum bags were all over Seattle when I lived there, and I believe they are still in operation there. I can't stand them because they are nothing but a bunch of egotistical, smug, arrogant, piles of waste who don't care who they hurt. And their claim that they do all of this for "the environment" is bs. You don't burn things down for the good of the environment...burning cars, destroying radio towers, burning down luxury homes...yeah, REAL good for the environment. They aren't FOR the environment, they are AGAINST people.

[Gungnir]

Originally Posted by greywar

Its interesting how many are going on blaming Obama.....and not recognizing that things like the patriot act got passed under Bush. The problem isn't Obama, or Bush. The problem is politicians of all stripes selling our liberties out from under us in the name of fear.

That's correct, and I completely agree. However Obama has had an opportunity to rollback or even tread water on this, and in fact he's pushed ahead on a number of these. He certainly has not reined it in. Of course he's also the only president to have executed US Citizens without due process. Even Bush only imprisoned them without due process and stopped short of issuing execution orders.

Originally Posted by greywar

Want a real leader? Pick someone who voted against the patriot act. In the senate, thats D-Feingold-and JUST him in the Senate, in the house thats a much larger number of people. 62 Democrats, 3 Republicans, and 1 independent-Bernie Sanders.

Patriot was only one thing, FISA has been corrupted to mean ISA (Intelligence Surveillance Act [Not just foreign]). There are many others too.

Originally Posted by greywar

By far the Democrats have voted against this more then the Republicans. Why? thats what I dont understand. I mean seriously listening to people here talk, I would have thought more Republican representatives would have voted against it. So why was it that more democrats did by a massive margin?

I don't like republicans either, voting in the US is voting for the less of two evils, that's no way to choose who to vote for, you always choose the one you dislike the least.

As for why Republicans voted for a bunch of anti-terror and internal security measures, well chances are it's because they were conflicted, they're the party of law and order and security. At the same time they're supposed to be the party of supporting and ensuring compliance with the constitution. I guess in this instance the military and surveillance lobbyists paid better than the constitutional lobbyists. Plus at the time the measures were introduced and supported by a republican president.

Problem is that have we passed the point of no return, in general the public wants more security and the only way you're going to get more security is to cede privacy and freedoms. Freedom is intrinsically insecure, maintaining privacy is intrinsically insecure. The Public wants security against threats foreign and domestic.