DescentBB

A better answer would be that if a government started going after people who are not really doing wrong but hold contrary views (any number of the Ron Paul supporters), I would consider that fascist (correct me if I'm wrong--I know sometimes my definitions need work).

We were talking about essentially an abuse of government authority to target dissent. Not to say that that's necessarily what it really is.

an interesting article about a new study on \"strong profiling\" done by a mathematician.

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/200 ... screen.ars

Key paragraph:

Things go rapidly sour for this system, however, as soon as you have an imperfect profile. In that case, which is more likely to reflect reality, there's a finite chance that the screening process misses a likely security risk. Since it works its way through the list of individuals iteratively, it never goes back to rescreen someone that's made it through the first pass. The impact of this flaw grows rapidly as the ability to accurately match the profile to the data available on an individual gets worse. Since we've already said that making a profile is challenging, and we know that even authoritarian governments don't have perfect information on their citizens, this system is probably worse than random screening in the real world.

Testiculese wrote:Also, the Oklahoma bombing wasn't terrorism, it was revenge.

Maybe it was revenge but it is listed as a domestic terrorist attack in more than one place on the net.

http://www.cdi.org/terrorism/chronology.cfm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_te ... ents,_1995

Officer Down Memorial list these fallen Officals who died in the Oklahoma bombing. Note the cause of death.

Special Agent Paul Gregory Broxterman
United States Department of Housing and..., US
Wednesday, April 19, 1995
Cause of Death: Terrorist attack

Special Agent Kenneth G. McCullough
United States Department of Justice - D..., US
Wednesday, April 19, 1995
Cause of Death: Terrorist attack

Senior Special Agent Paul Douglas Ice
United States Department of the Treasur..., US
Wednesday, April 19, 1995
Cause of Death: Terrorist attack

Senior Special Agent Claude Arthur Medearis
United States Department of the Treasur..., US
Wednesday, April 19, 1995
Cause of Death: Terrorist attack

Special Agent Donald R. Leonard
United States Department of the Treasur..., US
Wednesday, April 19, 1995
Cause of Death: Terrorist attack

Special Agent Mickey B. Maroney
United States Department of the Treasur..., US
Wednesday, April 19, 1995
Cause of Death: Terrorist attack

Assistant SAC Alan G. Whicher
United States Department of the Treasur..., US
Wednesday, April 19, 1995
Cause of Death: Terrorist attack

Special Agent Cynthia Campbell Brown
United States Department of the Treasur..., US
Wednesday, April 19, 1995
Cause of Death: Terrorist attack


http://www.emergency.com/oklabomb.htm

It'll be an interesting day when ya'll are running to Montana 'cuz we're the last lines...

Participation in a militia can be anywhere from full-time to just weekend service (such as my participation). Most of the Freemen I know have jobs, families, property, etc.

There's nothing wrong with operating a legal militia. It's when you get splinter groups that perform terrorist acts in the NAME of YOUR militia that they DESERVE the name terrorist. The Montana Free Men are a legal and respected institution and it's often confused with these renegades.

Lothar wrote:If one of the above is true, the question becomes, how should the information be used? If "this person is a Muslim" or "this person is a Ron Paul supporter" is your only piece of information, it's pretty obviously not enough to go on.

Maybe--I suppose whether it's obvious depends on what "to go on" consists of. If "to go on" is making an arrest or wiretapping, I think that this is obvious. But what about something less intrusive like weighting "random" searching? I suppose it's still obvious to me in this case, but if it were obvious in general, there wouldn't be so many vocal proponents for doing this. >_>

Yes, I could. I am a descendant of Seth Warner and my family has a long history in both Militia's and the Military. It is the duty and responsibility of this country and its citizens to uphold and defend the Constitution of this country. Not to let the Liberal's or anyone else re-write it to suite there self serving needs.

It is now been retracted with a investigation as to the origins:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/politics/story/64917.html

It's back but this time it's at the national level. I Wonder if they will use the Tea Parties today as proof that the right are radicals.

Federal agency warns of radicals on right

http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf

The answer is yes.

Insurrectionist wrote:...I Wonder if they will use the Tea Parties today as proof that the right are radicals....

I think the report is part of the Obama team plan to continue painting any opposition with the broad brush of right wing nutcases. the timing of making this report public to coincide with the Tea Parties is no coincidence.

They have been setting this defense up for a while now starting right after the election talking about Rush Limbaugh is the "leader of the Republican Party" and they will continue to try to link the extremists with anyone who disagrees with the policy of Team Obama.

You all know how the race card works...well this is the right-wing-wacko card.

Challenge the administration on immigration, taxes, welfare, terrorism or any number of issues and they no longer have to engage in a debate on the substance instead they just release a soundbite of a rightwing nutbag complaining about the same issue and the media will go after the reaction of the rightwing to the implied association instead of asking the Obama team for response to the initial issue.
Good media doggy....

It'll be interesting to note just how far this administration itself will go to demonize the opposition, in the fashion in which Obama spoke against Rush Limbaugh. It's obvious that there are many people behind them chomping at the bit to do so, but the actions of the people in positions of responsibility are what I would be watching.

A lot of the people against this are honest, hard-working people, from what I've seen, and it's a position of common-sense. A lot of people in this world are just not in their right minds (not in touch with reality), and unfortunately they're the ones running the federal government right now. It's encouraging to see the stands that some state governments are taking, in light of that.

I heard Neil Boortz make an observation today that was kind of worrisome considering what it might portend.

Obama's administration has warned us that people who dare to promote third party politics, and/or war Vets or Ron Paul supporters, tax protestors etc. should be watched as possible domestic terrorists but Islamic fundamentalists who plot to commit mass murders upon our civilians are no longer going to be called terrorists.
So if you served in the U.S. military and attended a \"Tea Party\" you are profiled by the Homeland Security Department as a potential terrorist but if you actually helped carry out the Sept. 11th 2001 attack killing close to 3000 innocent American citizens you were taking part in a \"man made disaster\".

There is something fundamentally wrong with our Presidents logic that in my opinion goes beyond partisan rhetoric and is born of true left wing radical ideology.

Not when you consider his willingness to bow to Arab potentates and grasp hands with South American dictators there isn't.

Heh man are those $#@$ eating grins or what?