Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
#1 Oh my goodness, Foggy Bottom is far foggier on Islam than I thought.
These guys are going to get a lot of us killed.
Embrace Islam? So it can stab us in the back?
Have they ever read the Quran?
Those nutjobs are commanded by their religion to kill all of us that do not convert.
Give a lefty a desk and a pad of paper and you get this crap. The first thing Romney should do is cut the phones and internet, take away their pads and pencils, and send everyone of the people that wrote this to Somalia to embrace Islam first hand.
I need some aspirin, I have a migraine coming on and my nose is starting to bleed.
Posted by Bill Clinton 2012-04-25 10:13||
#2 If I think about this too much, I'll be pissing blood next.
Posted by Bill Clinton 2012-04-25 10:13||
#3 So we can get rid of the TSA now?
Posted by newc 2012-04-25 12:03||
#4 Can't yank everyone out of Afghanistan before you put this figleaf on.
Posted by rjschwarz 2012-04-25 14:37||
#5 Was State ever in the war on terror?
Posted by Water Modem 2012-04-25 14:55||
#6 In the New Jedi Order novels, the galaxy is invaded by the Yuuzhan Vong (who command a fleet of deadly bioships and combine all the worst aspects of the Aztecs, the conquistadores, and the Mad Mullahs, with extra emphasis on pain and suffering). The war was not over merely with the destruction of the Praetorite Vong and the defeat of Shedao Shai. No, the horror was still only beginning, as the suits on Coruscant found out the hard way--although the corrupt Supreme Chancellor did die a hero.
#8 Can we get rid of the DHS and TSA since its over then?
Posted by Yosemtie Sam 2012-04-25 16:31||
#9 "Was State ever in the war on terror?"
Sure, WM - on the other side.
Posted by Barbara 2012-04-25 16:48||
#10 Obama cannot claim victory as his personal accomplishment, unless the conflict has ended. Unfortunately he has thusfar been unable to bribe his way out of the conflict with the Taliban or the leadership of Pakistan.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-04-25 17:30||
#11 This is a little off base butt who cares this is for the Marine who was discharged for telling the truth- SCREW EVERYONE OF THEM JIHAD PROGRESSIVE COMMIE LOVING PIECES OF SHIT THAT SHOULD BE IN JAIL HOG TIED AND HOODS PUT ON THEIR HEADS AND THROWN IN HOLES OUT WEST FOR 23 HOURS A DAY! THE US CODE SPEAKS FOR ITSELF! F'EM ALL!
Posted by Glunter Sforza3954 2012-04-25 17:52||
#12 THE CRIME OF TREASON
The constitutional crime of treason has been rarely enforced (barely 30 cases in 225 years). At English common law, it has traditionally been the one carrying the most stigma, punishable not only by death, but a exceptionally cruel method of death. A treason conviction today still carries the death sentence, but nothing exceptional, and in fact, usually a pardon. The crime of seditious conspiracy (carrying a twenty year sentence) has mostly taken its place where the offenders are commonly referred to as "traitors." The last round of American use involved eight treason indictments following WWII: one for the mistreatment of prisoners; two for spying; and five for making propaganda broadcasts on behalf of the enemy (e.g. Axis Sally and Tokyo Rose). The constitutional basis for the crime of treason comes from Article III, Section 3, Paragraph 1 (codified in USC Section 2381), which reads: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or, in adhering to their Enemies, giving them aid and comfort." The "aid and comfort" clause has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to require proof of four elements where the two-witness rule is considered the hardest to prove.
an intent to betray the United States (which can be inferred from);
an overt act
witnessed by two people
that provides aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States
In practice, the crime of treason consists of two elements based on the two major clauses: adherence to the enemy; and rendering them aid and comfort. Both elements are necessary. It is legal for a citizen to intellectually or emotionally favor the enemy or harbor sympathies toward the enemy or even appear disloyal to their country (in the U.S. at least; other countries have different views of treason). As long as this citizen commits no act of aid and comfort to the enemy, there is no treason. Likewise, a citizen may legally take actions which do aid and comfort the enemy (say making speeches, going on strike, or profiteering in some way), but as long as there is no adherence to the enemy and their mental state betrays no intentional disloyalty, there is no treason. Perhaps someone knows what to do to get our country back and the list goes on!
Posted by Snaviter Hupineck9849 2012-04-25 18:13||
#13 Muslim Brother Hood at White House Walking with Al Qaeda in Egypt etc. etc. etc. Just go through the code book 7th grade level of reading at best!
Posted by Snase Poodle6754 2012-04-25 18:15||
#14 MATERIAL SUPPORT AND FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS
Providing direct material support in terms of "resources," "training," or "expert advice and assistance" is illegal if it occurs in proximity to terrorism. Sometimes called "proximity crime," direct material support to a designated terrorist organization is illegal under 18 USC. 2339A and 2339B (the "material support" laws). More indirect material support is illegal under 18 USC 2339 via the Anti-Terrorism Act (18 USC 2333). These laws have been challenged in court and amended by legislatures, but the basic idea stands -- that designation of a group as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) places everyone on notice that even mere (or indirect) support of any such organization is unlawful. Some courts, the 9th Circuit for example, in Humanitarian Law Project v. Reno (2000), have been troubled by the law's overly vague language. "Training" is a worrisome term because it could conceivably sweep in benign academic instruction, and "expert advice and assistance" could very well include free speech advocacy of some cause. The government's official interpretation is that any such training and expertise should be of a technical or scientific nature. This still raises questions about the right of association (i.e., "guilt by association"), and as McCormack (2005) puts it, also raises questions about vagueness and overbreadth as well as issues of due process regarding the methods of designating some organization terrorist in the first place.
Posted by Omulet Dribble1691 2012-04-25 18:17||
#15 Thugburg Rantburg
19947 records are archived on Thugburg.
Very nice. You know how to use a web form..
Do not dump a database data set in the comments again.
Posted by Uneager Noodleman7000 2012-04-25 18:29||
#16 Peace in our Time!
Posted by swksvolFF 2012-04-25 21:54||
#17 The Islamic struggle wasn't ended just becuz the Crusaders captured Jerusalem.
PEACE/ARMISTICE is a mere aberration.
MULLAHS > "ISLAM RULES, OR ISLAM IS DESTROYED".
Nice to think about, though.
Posted by JosephMendiola 2012-04-25 23:37||
#18 As for Treason, TOM CRUISE = "MAVERICK" IN "TOP GUN" > "I CAN TELL YOU, BUT THEN I'LL HAVE TO KILL YOU"!
Posted by JosephMendiola 2012-04-25 23:41||