100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Government threatened Foley family | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/fbi-president-obama-is-a-domestic-terrorist FBI Inadvertently Classifies President Obama As a Domestic Terrorist Definitions of Terrorism in the U.S. Code 18 U.S.C. � 2331 defines "international terrorism" and "domestic terrorism" for purposes of Chapter 113B of the Code, entitled "Terrorism": "International terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics: Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law; Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and Occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.* "Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics: Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law; Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S. 18 U.S.C. � 2332b defines the term "federal crime of terrorism" as an offense that: Is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct; and Is a violation of one of several listed statutes, including � 930(c) (relating to killing or attempted killing during an attack on a federal facility with a dangerous weapon); and � 1114 (relating to killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the U.S.). * FISA defines "international terrorism" in a nearly identical way, replacing "primarily" outside the U.S. with "totally" outside the U.S. 50 U.S.C. � 1801(c). Source: FBI.gov Awesome info! You know by this definition, the police of Ferguson are domestic terrorist. Many of the leaders of the Tea-party movement are domestic terrorist. Oh and news reporters are clearly in violation of section (i). And business men that buy their favor in the government. I wonder why none of these people are being arrested and sent to Guantanamo bay! Oh wait I know! I know! maybe because the law itself is flawed and if say the pres was arrested or anyone else, there would be a supreme court decision on the law, and the law itself would be struck down and All (By this I mean every single person in Guantanamo bay that we have locked up for being a terrorist) would be set free. EVERYONE! I don't think you want that do you? Who said he wuz gonna' shet down Gitmo? Again, So, if it's against the law to deal with terrorists, why isn't Hussein in jail? He just traded 5. Yep. That's right. Five top level terrorists for one deserter. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
michelake
on
Sat 09/13/14 07:57 AM
|
|
In May, 2001, Al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group Abu Sayyaf kidnapped Martin and Gracia Burnham, a Christian missionary couple living in the Philippines. While Bush was out in the Rose Garden making his tough-sounding speech, his administration was negotiating a ransom payment to retrieve them. They arranged an indirect payment of $300,000 to the terrorist network in exchange for the couple
Quote from http://aattp.org I am sure that there are many more cases that Governments negotiate under the radar of the public eye. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In May, 2001, Al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group Abu Sayyaf kidnapped Martin and Gracia Burnham, a Christian missionary couple living in the Philippines. While Bush was out in the Rose Garden making his tough-sounding speech, his administration was negotiating a ransom payment to retrieve them. They arranged an indirect payment of $300,000 to the terrorist network in exchange for the couple Quote from http://aattp.org I am sure that there are many more cases that Governments negotiate under the radar of the public eye. Great info. However, this article is happening under Husseins admin. He traded five top terrorists for one measly deserter. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/fbi-president-obama-is-a-domestic-terrorist FBI Inadvertently Classifies President Obama As a Domestic Terrorist Definitions of Terrorism in the U.S. Code 18 U.S.C. � 2331 defines "international terrorism" and "domestic terrorism" for purposes of Chapter 113B of the Code, entitled "Terrorism": "International terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics: Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law; Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and Occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.* "Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics: Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law; Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S. 18 U.S.C. � 2332b defines the term "federal crime of terrorism" as an offense that: Is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct; and Is a violation of one of several listed statutes, including � 930(c) (relating to killing or attempted killing during an attack on a federal facility with a dangerous weapon); and � 1114 (relating to killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the U.S.). * FISA defines "international terrorism" in a nearly identical way, replacing "primarily" outside the U.S. with "totally" outside the U.S. 50 U.S.C. � 1801(c). Source: FBI.gov Awesome info! You know by this definition, the police of Ferguson are domestic terrorist. Many of the leaders of the Tea-party movement are domestic terrorist. Oh and news reporters are clearly in violation of section (i). And business men that buy their favor in the government. I wonder why none of these people are being arrested and sent to Guantanamo bay! Oh wait I know! I know! maybe because the law itself is flawed and if say the pres was arrested or anyone else, there would be a supreme court decision on the law, and the law itself would be struck down and All (By this I mean every single person in Guantanamo bay that we have locked up for being a terrorist) would be set free. EVERYONE! I don't think you want that do you? Who said he wuz gonna' shet down Gitmo? Again, So, if it's against the law to deal with terrorists, why isn't Hussein in jail? He just traded 5. Yep. That's right. Five top level terrorists for one deserter. Wow you don't pay attention do you! Asked and Answered! You have all the information that you need! Do I really have to repeat my self? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
willing2
on
Sat 09/13/14 08:14 AM
|
|
http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/fbi-president-obama-is-a-domestic-terrorist FBI Inadvertently Classifies President Obama As a Domestic Terrorist Definitions of Terrorism in the U.S. Code 18 U.S.C. � 2331 defines "international terrorism" and "domestic terrorism" for purposes of Chapter 113B of the Code, entitled "Terrorism": "International terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics: Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law; Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and Occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.* "Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics: Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law; Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S. 18 U.S.C. � 2332b defines the term "federal crime of terrorism" as an offense that: Is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct; and Is a violation of one of several listed statutes, including � 930(c) (relating to killing or attempted killing during an attack on a federal facility with a dangerous weapon); and � 1114 (relating to killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the U.S.). * FISA defines "international terrorism" in a nearly identical way, replacing "primarily" outside the U.S. with "totally" outside the U.S. 50 U.S.C. � 1801(c). Source: FBI.gov Awesome info! You know by this definition, the police of Ferguson are domestic terrorist. Many of the leaders of the Tea-party movement are domestic terrorist. Oh and news reporters are clearly in violation of section (i). And business men that buy their favor in the government. I wonder why none of these people are being arrested and sent to Guantanamo bay! Oh wait I know! I know! maybe because the law itself is flawed and if say the pres was arrested or anyone else, there would be a supreme court decision on the law, and the law itself would be struck down and All (By this I mean every single person in Guantanamo bay that we have locked up for being a terrorist) would be set free. EVERYONE! I don't think you want that do you? Who said he wuz gonna' shet down Gitmo? Again, So, if it's against the law to deal with terrorists, why isn't Hussein in jail? He just traded 5. Yep. That's right. Five top level terrorists for one deserter. Wow you don't pay attention do you! Asked and Answered! You have all the information that you need! Do I really have to repeat my self? So, you support dealing with terrorist or no? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
willing2
on
Sat 09/13/14 08:31 AM
|
|
So, you support dealing with terrorist or no? Funny! Because if you replace Liberal with Republican. It actually makes sense.  Are you asking if I support dealing with terrorists or terrorism? Actually, my question was; Do you support dealing with terrorists like Hussein did? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Serverousprime
on
Sat 09/13/14 08:25 AM
|
|
So, you support dealing with terrorist or no? Funny! Because if you replace Liberal with Republican. It actually makes sense. Are you asking if I support dealing with terrorists or terrorism? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/fbi-president-obama-is-a-domestic-terrorist FBI Inadvertently Classifies President Obama As a Domestic Terrorist Definitions of Terrorism in the U.S. Code 18 U.S.C. � 2331 defines "international terrorism" and "domestic terrorism" for purposes of Chapter 113B of the Code, entitled "Terrorism": "International terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics: Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law; Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and Occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.* "Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics: Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law; Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S. 18 U.S.C. � 2332b defines the term "federal crime of terrorism" as an offense that: Is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct; and Is a violation of one of several listed statutes, including � 930(c) (relating to killing or attempted killing during an attack on a federal facility with a dangerous weapon); and � 1114 (relating to killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the U.S.). * FISA defines "international terrorism" in a nearly identical way, replacing "primarily" outside the U.S. with "totally" outside the U.S. 50 U.S.C. � 1801(c). Source: FBI.gov Awesome info! You know by this definition, the police of Ferguson are domestic terrorist. Many of the leaders of the Tea-party movement are domestic terrorist. Oh and news reporters are clearly in violation of section (i). And business men that buy their favor in the government. I wonder why none of these people are being arrested and sent to Guantanamo bay! Oh wait I know! I know! maybe because the law itself is flawed and if say the pres was arrested or anyone else, there would be a supreme court decision on the law, and the law itself would be struck down and All (By this I mean every single person in Guantanamo bay that we have locked up for being a terrorist) would be set free. EVERYONE! I don't think you want that do you? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This will be a long post, so I apologize for this ahead of time.
Q: Do you support dealing with terrorism? A: Yes I support the idea that we as a sovereign country have the right to protect our citizens from undue harm. I support the idea that we as a people have the right to stand against what we deem as injustice. I Support the idea that we as a country has the right to defend ourselves from hostile actions from groups with the intent of attacking people within the borders of the united states of america. That being said, I feel that the issue of how we should deal with terrorism needs to be revisited. Because, as the two of you eloquently have shown. That many of the citizens of US are in gross violation of being a domestic terrorist. This list includes, The President of the united states of america; the secretary of state; most of the NSA, CIA, and Secret Service; many of our elected officials in both the federal senate and house of representatives; the entire tea-party movement would be considered a terrorist group; the KKK; many Catholic priests; CEO's of many different companies; Parents of children who bully or cyber bully; the children who bully and or cyber bully; Glen Beck, Sara Palin, and mostly all of the fox news reporters; the entire Ferguson police department; Green peace; that one boat company that was preventing Whaling in the northern Pacific; some police departments other then the Ferguson PO; The list continues.... ... .. . .... . .... ...... ... As this list deals with many people that while are considered by law a "Terrorist", I do not consider them a threat to the national security, nor are they a threat to the public. Q:Do you support dealing with terrorists? A: YES! Like above we need to devise a way of dealing with these problems, like for instance people being murdered and injured in the streets of Boston last year. Again How we deal with a "Terrorist" is a completely different issue, and I will add is also a completely different issue from how to deal with "Terrorism" in general. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This will be a long post, so I apologize for this ahead of time. Q: Do you support dealing with terrorism? A: Yes I support the idea that we as a sovereign country have the right to protect our citizens from undue harm. I support the idea that we as a people have the right to stand against what we deem as injustice. I Support the idea that we as a country has the right to defend ourselves from hostile actions from groups with the intent of attacking people within the borders of the united states of america. That being said, I feel that the issue of how we should deal with terrorism needs to be revisited. Because, as the two of you eloquently have shown. That many of the citizens of US are in gross violation of being a domestic terrorist. This list includes, The President of the united states of america; the secretary of state; most of the NSA, CIA, and Secret Service; many of our elected officials in both the federal senate and house of representatives; the entire tea-party movement would be considered a terrorist group; the KKK; many Catholic priests; CEO's of many different companies; Parents of children who bully or cyber bully; the children who bully and or cyber bully; Glen Beck, Sara Palin, and mostly all of the fox news reporters; the entire Ferguson police department; Green peace; that one boat company that was preventing Whaling in the northern Pacific; some police departments other then the Ferguson PO; The list continues.... ... .. . .... . .... ...... ... As this list deals with many people that while are considered by law a "Terrorist", I do not consider them a threat to the national security, nor are they a threat to the public. Q:Do you support dealing with terrorists? A: YES! Like above we need to devise a way of dealing with these problems, like for instance people being murdered and injured in the streets of Boston last year. Again How we deal with a "Terrorist" is a completely different issue, and I will add is also a completely different issue from how to deal with "Terrorism" in general. WTF????????????    
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This will be a long post, so I apologize for this ahead of time. Q: Do you support dealing with terrorism? A: Yes I support the idea that we as a sovereign country have the right to protect our citizens from undue harm. I support the idea that we as a people have the right to stand against what we deem as injustice. I Support the idea that we as a country has the right to defend ourselves from hostile actions from groups with the intent of attacking people within the borders of the united states of america. That being said, I feel that the issue of how we should deal with terrorism needs to be revisited. Because, as the two of you eloquently have shown. That many of the citizens of US are in gross violation of being a domestic terrorist. This list includes, The President of the united states of america; the secretary of state; most of the NSA, CIA, and Secret Service; many of our elected officials in both the federal senate and house of representatives; the entire tea-party movement would be considered a terrorist group; the KKK; many Catholic priests; CEO's of many different companies; Parents of children who bully or cyber bully; the children who bully and or cyber bully; Glen Beck, Sara Palin, and mostly all of the fox news reporters; the entire Ferguson police department; Green peace; that one boat company that was preventing Whaling in the northern Pacific; some police departments other then the Ferguson PO; The list continues.... ... .. . .... . .... ...... ... As this list deals with many people that while are considered by law a "Terrorist", I do not consider them a threat to the national security, nor are they a threat to the public. Q:Do you support dealing with terrorists? A: YES! Like above we need to devise a way of dealing with these problems, like for instance people being murdered and injured in the streets of Boston last year. Again How we deal with a "Terrorist" is a completely different issue, and I will add is also a completely different issue from how to deal with "Terrorism" in general. WTF???????????? If you want to include the pres for article three for trading those people. you will have to include the rest for breaking articles one and two. With that said I'm done. this will be my last post on this thread GL. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@ Willing2
"He traded five top terrorists for one measly deserter. " So that makes you feel angry right ? Obama should not give in to terrorists this way. Obama and his ministry want you to think like that. So your opinion will be tougher on terrorists. "members of the Foley family have said the government threatened to prosecute their family if they had raised and paid the money for the ransom sought for the life of their son, James Foley." This make you outraged...right? Because Obama should have negotiated this time. Many Presidents have done that in their past. Even Bush did. So why did Obama not let the family pay for the ransom then ? I cannot see CNN or NBC on my tv. But i doubt there is going to be a lot of coverage about this. And if they will question the USA government over this. I am pretty sure they will have very evasive answers to it. They will say.. Oh it was done because of national interest.. And we try to negotiate and it did not work.. Or any other excuse. yesterday i saw a man on tv that was being bullied because his view on what really happend on the twin towers. The man lost his son. I think he had a right to give his opinion about it. Warped, distorted or not. Instead of treating him with respect. He got bullied over the news station. Saying he was unpatriotic etcetera. I think that in a democracy and with freedom of speech. Everyone is entitled for his/her opinion. He just got attacked, riddiculed and bullied on mass after this. The vast majority of the News is in corporate and government hands now. They will tell you what to think. And off course the media is one of the most powerfull weapons in keeping a population unaware of what is really going on. And in sync with it's government. I don't think that there is any News station in the world that is totally objective by the way... Anyways i said before that i do not want to get into conspiracy theories. But i think that Obama wants support for starting a war in Syria now. ISIS is the new "bad guy" now. Although it was funny because the USA supported ISIS already in Syria. They wanted them to overthrow Assad so badly. But they need public support for this. Because the Russians and the Chinese will veto against it. So therefore it is pretty convenient. How horrible this might sound. That the ones that got beheaded where Americans. So the public opinion will be on the side of the government. And all options to war are open. John Kerry already went to Egypt today. To gain support for attacking Syria. Assad forbids the USA to start the war on ISIS now. Eventhough ISIS is attacking Assad. So why would he do that ? They are there to have him get rid of ISIS, right ? I think Asad has a totally different view on that.. But like i said it is only a theory.. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
mysticalview21
on
Sun 09/14/14 01:15 PM
|
|
most kidnappings are political and depends on who does the kidnapping on how the USA deals with it ... now they where trying to find them and get them out secret mission till after they moved them remember...
and of course most families want their own back unharmed ...and i do believe even if they payed them ...they would have still killed them being the kind of group they are ... running Christians out of their homes into the hills... taking some for slaves and raping the women & girls and possibly even men and boys ... and hopefully with a United Coalition and Irk army put back in place ... Isis will be defeated ... and their resources put back in to what they have destroyed... its a very good plan but it is always a who knows ...once it gets started even more ... and i am sure this President does not want this to go on and on being he did not want war there to begin with ... an I am not the co. who owns lucky charms :.) so this is all just speculation... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Conrad_73
on
Sun 09/14/14 01:17 PM
|
|
most kidnappings are political and depends on who does the kidnapping on how the USA deals with it ... now they where trying to find them and get them out secret mission till after they moved them remember... and of course most families want their own back unharmed ...and i do believe even if they payed them ...they would have still killed them being the kind of group they are ... running Christians out of their homes into the hills... taking some for slaves and raping the women & girls and possibly even men and boys ... and hopefully with a United Coalition and Irk army put back in place ... Isis will be defeated ... and their resources put back in to what they have destroyed... its a very good plan but it is always a who knows ...once it gets started even more ... and i am sure this President does not want this to go on and on being he did not want war there to begin with ... the Soviets used to make short Shrift of things like that! The Story goes,they would snatch someone close to the Kidnappers,and send small Bodyparts until the Hostages were released! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
mysticalview21
on
Sun 09/14/14 01:28 PM
|
|
most kidnappings are political and depends on who does the kidnapping on how the USA deals with it ... now they where trying to find them and get them out secret mission till after they moved them remember... and of course most families want their own back unharmed ...and i do believe even if they payed them ...they would have still killed them being the kind of group they are ... running Christians out of their homes into the hills... taking some for slaves and raping the women & girls and possibly even men and boys ... and hopefully with a United Coalition and Irk army put back in place ... Isis will be defeated ... and their resources put back in to what they have destroyed... its a very good plan but it is always a who knows ...once it gets started even more ... and i am sure this President does not want this to go on and on being he did not want war there to begin with ... the Soviets used to make short Shrift of things like that! The Story goes,they would snatch someone close to the Kidnappers,and send small Bodyparts until the Hostages were released! so does the mafia ...whats the point.... we should do that to gain ground on them ... I thought they just killed someone high in their group... |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
detaildon
on
Sun 09/14/14 02:17 PM
|
|
someone who can needs to post. a homeland insecurity report. I am sorry to say that every body here would probably be considered a terrorist...
it wont matter from what date,, they all say the same thing... was given a hard copy one time...its sad that it has come to this. cant figure out how to down load pictures forum... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Everyone's first mistake is believing the corporate media spin televised for the masses to promote the govt/corporate/banker agenda one way or the other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
willing2
on
Mon 09/15/14 09:14 AM
|
|
Stupid liberals seem to always defend double standards.
oBozo trades 5 top Terrorists for one deadbeat deserter - Legal Parents try to raise ransom to free son - illegal. Makes perfect sense to idiots. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJ-TLZcS0Es |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Mon 09/15/14 02:51 PM
|
|
US Government Denies Threatening Foley Family Last week, Diane Foley, the mother of executed journalist James Foley, told the media that the federal government threatened to file lawsuits against her and her family if they raised money to pay the ransom for their son. Following Diane Foley's claims, the family of Sotloff corroborated their story and said that they had faced the same threats from the government. OOPS! Caught lying again! One has to wonder if this POTUS and his admin is capable of telling the truth!? http://benswann.com/us-government-denies-threatening-foley-family/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=nl 
|
|
|
|
|
