PDA

View Full Version : Obama Americans Fear Their Government More Than Terrorists


Comrade Crapski
04-30-2013, 10:57 AM
America’s enemies don’t have much to fear from the Community Organizer in Chief, but its people do. Even in the aftermath of Muslims bombing the Boston Marathon, Americans now fear the government more than terrorists:

A Fox News survey polling a random national sample of 619 registered voters the day after the bombing found Americans responded very differently than after 9/11.

For the first time since a similar question was asked in May 2001, more Americans answered “no” to the question, “Would you be willing to give up some of your personal freedom in order to reduce the threat of terrorism?”

Of those surveyed on April 16, 2013, 45 percent answered no to the question, compared to 43 percent answering yes.

In May 2001, before 9/11, the balance was similar, with 40 percent answering no to 33 percent answering yes.

But after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the numbers flipped dramatically, to 71 percent agreeing to sacrifice personal freedom to reduce the threat of terrorism.

Over the last dozen years, we have learned where the most profound threat lies — or at least, some of us have learned:

Bucking the trend, 51 percent of Democrats responded they would give up personal freedom to reduce the threat of terror, compared to 36 percent opposed.

Forty-seven percent of Republicans, on the other hand, opposed giving up freedoms, compared to only 43 percent in favor.

Yet independents were the most resistant, with only 29 percent willing to sacrifice freedom, while 58 percent stood opposed.

The solution is simple: use the Gang of Eight Quislings’ amnesty bill to import millions more Democrats, who will view Big Government the way a baby bird views its mother. Then we will have trust.

On tips from Bob Roberts and Pico’s Mexican Hairpiece.

http://moonbattery.com/watertown.jpg
Einsatzgruppen in Watertown

http://moonbattery.com/?p=29561

Bump
04-30-2013, 07:50 PM
you are much more likely to die due to lack of money, than by a terrorist.

HonestChieffan
04-30-2013, 08:13 PM
you are much more likely to die due to lack of money, than by a terrorist.


What if you have a lot of money?

LiveSteam
04-30-2013, 08:23 PM
What if you have a lot of money?

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/945409_494147840640250_1148495293_n.jpg

Comrade Crapski
05-01-2013, 09:04 AM
you are much more likely to die due to lack of money, than by a terrorist.

That's exactly what happened to Michael Jackson.

Prison Bitch
05-01-2013, 09:52 AM
People focus on what's in front of them. Again, few of us interact with Muslims so they don't occupy our minds all that much, save for the occasional blowups when they go nuts. But government is always around us, so it only makes sense we fear it.

Pitt Gorilla
05-01-2013, 10:02 AM
The question was,“Would you be willing to give up some of your personal freedom in order to reduce the threat of terrorism?”

My answer would have been no just after 911 and remains no now. It has nothing to do with fearing the government.

loochy
05-01-2013, 10:33 AM
People focus on what's in front of them. Again, few of us interact with Muslims so they don't occupy our minds all that much, save for the occasional blowups when they go nuts. But government is always around us, so it only makes sense we fear it.

I interact with Muslims and it makes me fear them less.

Prison Bitch
05-01-2013, 10:38 AM
I interact with Muslims and it makes me fear them less.

:BS:

Comrade Crapski
05-02-2013, 12:32 PM
Poll: 29% of Registered Voters Believe Armed Revolution Might Be Necessary in Next Few Years

Twenty-nine percent of registered voters think that an armed revolution might be necessary in the next few years in order to protect liberties, according to a Public Mind poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University.

The poll, which surveyed 863 registered voters and had a margin of error of +/-3.4, focused on both gun control and the possibility of a need for an armed revolution in the United States to protect liberty.

The survey asked whether respondents agreed, disagreed, neither agreed nor disagreed or did not know or refused to respond to the statement: "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties"

Twenty-nine percent said they agreed, 47 percent said they disagreed, 18 percent said they neither agreed nor disagreed, 5 percent said they were unsure, and 1 percent refused to respond.

Results of the poll show that those who believe a revolution might be necessary differ greatly along party lines:
• 18 percent of Democrats
• 27 percent of Independents
• 44 percent of Republicans

The poll found that 38 percent of Americans who believe a revolution might be necessary support additional gun control legislation compared to 62 percent of those who don't think an armed revolt will be needed.

Dan Cassino, a professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson and analyst for the poll, says:

"The differences in views of gun legislation are really a function of differences in what people believe guns are for. If you truly believe an armed revolution is possible in the near future, you need weapons and you're going to be wary about government efforts to take them away."

The poll was conducted nationally between April 22 and April 28, 2013.

http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/poll-29-registered-voters-believe-armed-revolution-might-be-necessary

http://i320.photobucket.com/albums/nn355/DanaFloyd80/Southern%20Stars%20and%20Bars/big_1458893.gif

jiveturkey
05-02-2013, 12:54 PM
Those are some eye opening poll numbers.

I can't even picture a scenario where an armed revolution would last more than a weekend. And how would it start? Are people going to take over local governments first or going rolling into DC?

Comrade Crapski
05-02-2013, 01:27 PM
Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw may soon receive $1 million from the state of Florida to set up a new violence prevention unit, but his recent comments encouraging people to turn in their neighbors are causing a firestorm.

“We want people to call us if the guy down the street says he hates the government, hates the mayor and he’s gonna shoot him,” Bradshaw told The Palm Beach Post. “What does it hurt to have somebody knock on a door and ask, ‘Hey, is everything OK?’ ”

“How are they possibly going to watch everybody who makes a comment like that? It’s subjective,” said Liz Downey, executive director of Palm Beach County's National Alliance on Mental Illness. “We don’t want to take away people’s civil liberties just because people aren’t behaving the way we think they should be.”

However, Senate budget chief Joe Negron (R) said he “got assurances from the sheriff that this is going to be done in a way that respects people’s autonomy and privacy, and that he makes sure to protect against people making false claims.”

“We know how to sift through frivolous complaints,” stated Bradshaw.

If approved by Florida Governor Rick Scott, Bradshaw's “prevention intervention units” will respond to phone calls on a 24-hour hotline with a knock on the door and a referral to services, if needed. The idea is to prevent crimes from occurring.

“Every single incident, whether it’s Newtown, that movie theater, or the guy who spouts off at work and then goes home and kills his wife and two kids, in every single case, there were people who said they knew ahead of time that there was a problem,” explained Bradshaw. “If the neighbor of the mom in Newtown had called somebody, this might have saved 25 kids’ lives.”

Source: The Palm Beach Post
Get More: Palm Beach County |
People are also Reading
Budget Deficits Grow as Millions of People Continue to Evade TaxesBudget Deficits Grow as Millions of People Continue to Evade Taxes Investment ContrariansSheriff Joseph McDonald Upset Over Death Threats After He Joked About Obama Assassination (Video)Sheriff Joseph McDonald Upset Over Death Threats After He Joked About Obama Assassination (Video)The 20 Highest Paid Actresses on TVThe 20 Highest Paid Actresses on TV tvovermind.comSheriff Joe Arpaio Arrests 6-Year-Old Illegal ImmigrantSheriff Joe Arpaio Arrests 6-Year-Old Illegal ImmigrantMommy-To-Be: Pregnancy In 3 StagesMommy-To-Be: Pregnancy In 3 Stages Madame Noire
What's this?

Follow us and never miss a story
You May Also Want to Read
IRS Filing Dates

What Are the Primary Values of the Muslim Faith?
Mormons & Holy Week

Judaism's Influences in Christian Religion
How to Keep Track of Bank Accounts

Difference Between Shareholder Value & Market Share
Top 5 Most Controversial News Stories Daily

Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter

Login or register to post comments

Comments
photoshock's picture
The Russians had something
photoshock - May 2 2013 - 11:51am

The Russians had something like what Ric Bradshaw is proposing, it was called the KGB. Internal security was handled in the same way that Ric is proposing, everyone was instructed and conditioned to inform on their neighbours as part of the security apparatus.

Is this what this nation has come to? We are now becoming so like the USSR of old that we actually accept being told that we are required to report our neighbours for seemingly insignificant violations of the law.

Login or register to post comments

Olderman's picture
"...The idea is to prevent
Olderman - May 2 2013 - 10:24am

"...The idea is to prevent crimes from occurring...

For more than 200 years the police have been a reactive force simply because citizens choose to obey the law: not be forced to obey.

The sheriff says that his department knows how to sift the grain from the chaf. Very likely. However, what is keepting the sheriff from retaining rumor, innuendo, parts of overheard conversations, etc. for 'just in case'?

The sheriff has good intentions, yet, this approach has too often in the past been abused to the point of denying one or more someone's a right because of a so called preponderance of evidence.

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/crime/sheriff-ric-bradshaw-tells-citizens-turn-people-who-hate-government

BucEyedPea
05-02-2013, 01:58 PM
I saw that over at Lew's yesterday. I'm gonna call my state reps. It's a Republican congress here. Shame on them.

Fish
05-02-2013, 03:04 PM
The overwhelming majority of those expecting revolution, wouldn't have the first clue what to do without the role the government plays in their lives.

Comrade Crapski
05-02-2013, 03:47 PM
The overwhelming majority of those expecting revolution, wouldn't have the first clue what to do without the role the government plays in their lives.

Loosen up the turtleneck, Preston.

Loneiguana
05-02-2013, 05:00 PM
Poll: 29% of Registered Voters Believe Armed Revolution Might Be Necessary in Next Few Years

Twenty-nine percent of registered voters think that an armed revolution might be necessary in the next few years in order to protect liberties, according to a Public Mind poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University.

The poll, which surveyed 863 registered voters and had a margin of error of +/-3.4, focused on both gun control and the possibility of a need for an armed revolution in the United States to protect liberty.

The survey asked whether respondents agreed, disagreed, neither agreed nor disagreed or did not know or refused to respond to the statement: "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties"

Twenty-nine percent said they agreed, 47 percent said they disagreed, 18 percent said they neither agreed nor disagreed, 5 percent said they were unsure, and 1 percent refused to respond.

Results of the poll show that those who believe a revolution might be necessary differ greatly along party lines:
• 18 percent of Democrats
• 27 percent of Independents
• 44 percent of Republicans

The poll found that 38 percent of Americans who believe a revolution might be necessary support additional gun control legislation compared to 62 percent of those who don't think an armed revolt will be needed.

Dan Cassino, a professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson and analyst for the poll, says:

"The differences in views of gun legislation are really a function of differences in what people believe guns are for. If you truly believe an armed revolution is possible in the near future, you need weapons and you're going to be wary about government efforts to take them away."

The poll was conducted nationally between April 22 and April 28, 2013.

http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/poll-29-registered-voters-believe-armed-revolution-might-be-necessary

http://i320.photobucket.com/albums/nn355/DanaFloyd80/Southern%20Stars%20and%20Bars/big_1458893.gif

http://www.empowernetwork.com/msycks/files/2013/01/benStillerDoIt1.jpg

Comrade Crapski
05-06-2013, 01:39 PM
And the beat goes on:

ALL phone calls in the US are recorded and accessible to the government, claims former FBI agent

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2319789/ALL-phone-calls-US-recorded-accessible-government-claims-FBI-agent.html

RNR
05-06-2013, 02:21 PM
Poll: 29% of Registered Voters Believe Armed Revolution Might Be Necessary in Next Few Years

Twenty-nine percent of registered voters think that an armed revolution might be necessary in the next few years in order to protect liberties, according to a Public Mind poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University.

The poll, which surveyed 863 registered voters and had a margin of error of +/-3.4, focused on both gun control and the possibility of a need for an armed revolution in the United States to protect liberty.

The survey asked whether respondents agreed, disagreed, neither agreed nor disagreed or did not know or refused to respond to the statement: "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties"

Twenty-nine percent said they agreed, 47 percent said they disagreed, 18 percent said they neither agreed nor disagreed, 5 percent said they were unsure, and 1 percent refused to respond.

Results of the poll show that those who believe a revolution might be necessary differ greatly along party lines:
• 18 percent of Democrats
• 27 percent of Independents
• 44 percent of Republicans

The poll found that 38 percent of Americans who believe a revolution might be necessary support additional gun control legislation compared to 62 percent of those who don't think an armed revolt will be needed.

Dan Cassino, a professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson and analyst for the poll, says:

"The differences in views of gun legislation are really a function of differences in what people believe guns are for. If you truly believe an armed revolution is possible in the near future, you need weapons and you're going to be wary about government efforts to take them away."

The poll was conducted nationally between April 22 and April 28, 2013.

http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/poll-29-registered-voters-believe-armed-revolution-might-be-necessary

http://i320.photobucket.com/albums/nn355/DanaFloyd80/Southern%20Stars%20and%20Bars/big_1458893.gif

It would be the shortest revolution in the history of mankind. This is not a third world country. This government will not be overthrown anytime soon. Any uprising would be foolish and very short lived~

BucEyedPea
05-06-2013, 02:56 PM
It would be the shortest revolution in the history of mankind. This is not a third world country. This government will not be overthrown anytime soon. Any uprising would be foolish and very short lived~

We could all just withdraw our support.

Bump
05-06-2013, 06:55 PM
We could all just withdraw our support.

all people would have to do is not show up for work and stop generating the elite more money.

Bump
05-06-2013, 07:10 PM
I mean, people talking about a revolution lol. I don't think that's gonna happen. Wouldn't really be much of a fair fight.

But people can't even protest. Because they just use the media to make any protesters look like a bunch of criminals.

How many of you here sided with the wall street crooks and called out the occupy people as lazy fuqtards? Everybody here did. That's a great example of how the government uses the media to control you.

Comrade Crapski
05-07-2013, 08:46 AM
all people would have to do is not show up for work and stop generating the elite more money.

Even a broken clock is right two times a day. :thumb:

Violence would not be necessary to break DC's iron grip.

If the 50% who produce, work and pay taxes united and just did a Cloward Piven in reverse, they could initiate the revolution.

It would only become violent once all the Obot-voters, white trash and Holders People went ballistic when the EBT funds tapped out.

King_Chief_Fan
05-08-2013, 06:08 AM
I mean, people talking about a revolution lol. I don't think that's gonna happen. Wouldn't really be much of a fair fight.

But people can't even protest. Because they just use the media to make any protesters look like a bunch of criminals.

How many of you here sided with the wall street crooks and called out the occupy people as lazy fuqtards? Everybody here did. That's a great example of how the government uses the media to control you.

Media didn't need to bring that up....we already knew it

Mr. Flopnuts
05-08-2013, 06:17 AM
all people would have to do is not show up for work and stop generating the elite more money.

I've said that for years. You want change? Stop participating. But it would never work. People aren't going to let their kids starve to death. Of course, they could always get food stamps. LMAO

WhiteWhale
05-08-2013, 06:18 AM
What if you have a lot of money?

You are immortal.

Dude never defines what a lot of money is. I'm assuming he thinks anyone with a job is rich.

Loneiguana
05-08-2013, 06:19 AM
Media didn't need to bring that up....we already knew it

Check out this picture of lazy, good for nothings. I bet these old men never did anything for their country but smoke pot.

http://wecanoccupy.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/occupy_wwiivet.png

/don't believe the lies

blaise
05-08-2013, 06:25 AM
Yeah, there was no sympathy for the Occupy crowd. It was all negative.

Now, the Tea Party, they were more fairly portrayed as racist psychopaths.

Loneiguana
05-08-2013, 06:30 AM
Yeah, there was no sympathy for the Occupy crowd. It was all negative.

Now, the Tea Party, they were more fairly portrayed as racist psychopaths.

The Tea Party had an entire cable news network pimping it.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/images/f/f2/Fncteaparties.jpg

http://mediamatters.org/static/images/item/fnc-20101019-fox_tpemap.jpg

WhiteWhale
05-08-2013, 06:32 AM
Check out this picture of lazy, good for nothings. I bet these old men never did anything for their country but smoke pot.

http://wecanoccupy.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/occupy_wwiivet.png

/don't believe the lies

It's just as stupid as people saying all the tea party people are racists. Opponents are going to take the worst people they can find at the events and then insist they are a microcosm of the entire event.

Stupid people who can't think critically will believe what 'their side' tells them. More than ever we live in a society of parrots.

blaise
05-08-2013, 06:32 AM
The Tea Party had an entire cable news network pimping it.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/images/f/f2/Fncteaparties.jpg

I know, so unfair. No media ever portrayed them as racists or anything. And the Occupy protests were just crucified over and over.

So unfair.

blaise
05-08-2013, 06:34 AM
I can't tell if Loneiguana is actually trying to make a laughable claim that the Tea Party was portrayed more favorably than the Occupy crowd in the media.

Mr. Flopnuts
05-08-2013, 06:35 AM
Nice. This thread turned into a big :deevee: fest.

blaise
05-08-2013, 06:35 AM
Nice. This thread turned into a big :deevee: fest.

So, it's like every thread.

Loneiguana
05-08-2013, 06:37 AM
I can't tell if Loneiguana is actually trying to make a laughable claim that the Tea Party was portrayed more favorably than the Occupy crowd in the media.

Well, again, an entire news network backed the Tea Party.

Can you make that claim for Occupy Wall street?

Are you trying to make the claim that the Tea Party was viewed less favorable in the media?

http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/foxnews2.jpg

http://politicalscrapbook.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/occupy_wall_street_fox_news.jpg

blaise
05-08-2013, 06:38 AM
Well, again, an entire news network backed the Tea Party.

Can you make that claim for Occupy Wall street?

Are you trying to make the claim that the Tea Party was viewed less favorable in the media?

http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/foxnews2.jpg

http://politicalscrapbook.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/occupy_wall_street_fox_news.jpg

Holy shit. That is what you're saying.

WhiteWhale
05-08-2013, 06:39 AM
I can't tell if Loneiguana is actually trying to make a laughable claim that the Tea Party was portrayed more favorably than the Occupy crowd in the media.

I don't have a horse in this race but both sides were both overly lionized and overly condemned based on bias party lines.

One of them was lying right?

No. All of them were lying. It's somewhere in the middle... the facts muddled by the selected narrative of partisan networks.

Political rhetoric has gone off of the deep end over the past 10 years.

Loneiguana
05-08-2013, 06:49 AM
I don't have a horse in this race but both sides were both overly lionized and overly condemned based on bias party lines.

One of them was lying right?

No. All of them were lying. It's somewhere in the middle... the facts muddled by the selected narrative of partisan networks.

Political rhetoric has gone off of the deep end over the past 10 years.

I don't really care much either, but to somehow claim the tea party was portrayed worse is crazy. If you believe that Find me a screen cap with cnn calling the tea party raciest similar to Fox calling all occupy criminals.

/one protest disappeared, the other became a political party with help from the media

Comrade Crapski
05-08-2013, 10:09 AM
Why is Nakoula Basseley Nakoula still in prison?

I wonder who the Obamugabe regime will make disappear next.

LOCOChief
05-08-2013, 10:38 AM
I wonder who the Obamugabe regime will make disappear next.

I would say there are 4 people on Obama's radar right now.

cosmo20002
05-08-2013, 02:45 PM
Why is Nakoula Basseley Nakoula still in prison?



Sentenced to a year in jail and three years probation for manufacturing meth. Violated probation in and recieved another year in jail in 2002.
In 2010, pleaded no contest to federal charges of bank fraud--had opened bank accounts using fake names and stolen Social Security numbers, deposited checks from those accounts to withdraw at ATMs. Received 21 months in jail and followed by five years probation, which included not using aliases and not using the Internet without prior approval from his probation officer. In 2012, pleaded guilty to four counts of probation violation and was sentenced to a year in prison and four years of supervised release.

Hog Farmer
05-08-2013, 06:08 PM
Stands to reason as our leader is a fucking terrorist.

Comrade Crapski
05-09-2013, 09:32 AM
Sentenced to a year in jail and three years probation for manufacturing meth. Violated probation in and recieved another year in jail in 2002.
In 2010, pleaded no contest to federal charges of bank fraud--had opened bank accounts using fake names and stolen Social Security numbers, deposited checks from those accounts to withdraw at ATMs. Received 21 months in jail and followed by five years probation, which included not using aliases and not using the Internet without prior approval from his probation officer. In 2012, pleaded guilty to four counts of probation violation and was sentenced to a year in prison and four years of supervised release.

Wait---

he did all that shit, and was still out on the street. Only when the Obamugabe regime needed a patsy was he arrested for making a silly youtube video NO ONE watched and blamed for inciting an Al Qaeda planned attack on the anniversary of 911 that murdered 4 Americans in cold blood while Obama slept 'cos he had a busy campaign schedule the following day.

Is that what you're saying, kOZmo?

If that's not what you're saying, then just shut your filthy corksucker because nobody here wants to hear your BS, lies and Obastard propaganda any more.

LOCOChief
05-09-2013, 09:55 AM
Wait---

he did all that shit, and was still out on the street. Only when the Obamugabe regime needed a patsy was he arrested for making a silly youtube video NO ONE watched and blamed for inciting an Al Qaeda planned attack on the anniversary of 911 that murdered 4 Americans in cold blood while Obama slept 'cos he had a busy campaign schedule the following day.

Is that what you're saying, kOZmo?

If that's not what you're saying, then just shut your filthy corksucker because nobody here wants to hear your BS, lies and Obastard propaganda any more.

Like I said he was an unkonown criminal until framed with the video. He's the perfect patsy

Prison Bitch
05-09-2013, 10:11 AM
/one protest disappeared, the other became a political party with help from the media


Um, the Tea Party is like 15% of the public whereas Occupy was a fringe element of 1/10th of 1% or even less. GMAFB with that comparison. Tea Party doesn't commit crimes either.

Bump
05-09-2013, 10:30 AM
Um, the Tea Party is like 15% of the public whereas Occupy was a fringe element of 1/10th of 1% or even less. GMAFB with that comparison. Tea Party doesn't commit crimes either.

the media sure is a powerful tool.

cosmo20002
05-09-2013, 01:05 PM
Like I said he was an unkonown criminal until framed with the video. He's the perfect patsy

He was unknown? Arrested and did time for making meth. Served 21 months for stealing Social Security #s and federal bank fraud, and was on 5 years probation. Doesn't sound "unknown" to me.

cosmo20002
05-09-2013, 01:08 PM
Wait---

he did all that shit, and was still out on the street. Only when the Obamugabe regime needed a patsy was he arrested for making a silly youtube video NO ONE watched and blamed for inciting an Al Qaeda planned attack on the anniversary of 911 that murdered 4 Americans in cold blood while Obama slept 'cos he had a busy campaign schedule the following day.

Is that what you're saying, kOZmo?

If that's not what you're saying, then just shut your filthy corksucker because nobody here wants to hear your BS, lies and Obastard propaganda any more.

He served time and was on probation. He violated it. Not that complicated.

LOCOChief
05-09-2013, 01:11 PM
He was unknown? Arrested and did time for making meth. Served 21 months for stealing Social Security #s and federal bank fraud, and was on 5 years probation. Doesn't sound "unknown" to me.

Yes he was unknown to you, me and anyone that has ever logged in to CP. Furthermore he was an unkown to the main stream media even in light of his criminal history you descibed. He wasn't known until someone fabricated the story of a video inciting a riot.

The state DP's initial response was a total fabrication.

cosmo20002
05-09-2013, 01:15 PM
Yes he was unknown to you, me and anyone that has ever logged in to CP. Furthermore he was an unkown to the main stream media even in light of his criminal history you descibed. He wasn't known until someone fabricated the story of a video inciting a riot.

The state DP's initial response was a total fabrication.

99.9% of all criminals are "unknown." There's a whole lot of people in jail and on probation right now--how many do you know by name?
The video did motivate protests across the Middle East that day.

LOCOChief
05-09-2013, 01:24 PM
99.9% of all criminals are "unknown" There's a whole lot of people in jail and on probation right now--how many do you know by name?


I think yuou jumped in a little late to grasp the context of my statement. He wasn't known by any of us for bank fraud, we became aware of him because Susan Rice said this guy made a video that incited a riot that resulted in 4 American deaths including that of US ambassador Stevens. Prior to her accusation we had no clue who this guy was.

Perfect patsy, had the background for the job and the video was just so shamefull.

cosmo20002
05-09-2013, 01:33 PM
I think yuou jumped in a little late to grasp the context of my statement. He wasn't known by any of us for bank fraud, we became aware of him because Susan Rice said this guy made a video that incited a riot that resulted in 4 American deaths including that of US ambassador Stevens. Prior to her accusation we had no clue who this guy was.

Perfect patsy, had the background for the job and the video was just so shamefull.

I grasped it just fine. What does his previous status of not being nationally known have to do with anything? I guess anyone convicted of something who was not previously nationally known is just a patsy?

You think everything is a govt plot--9/11, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Boston Marathon. Hey, none of those people were nationally known beforehand! Perfect patsies!

LOCOChief
05-09-2013, 01:46 PM
I grasped it just fine. What does his previous status of not being nationally known have to do with anything? I guess anyone convicted of something who was not previously nationally known is just a patsy?

You think everything is a govt plot--9/11, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Boston Marathon. Hey, none of those people were nationally known beforehand! Perfect patsies!



No you obviously don't have a handle on it. He's perfect because of his criminal background which was by national media standards insignificant and therefore unknown until Susan Rice made him the patsy by blaming the attack on a video.

LOCOChief
05-09-2013, 01:49 PM
You think everything is a govt plot--9/11, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Boston Marathon. Hey, none of those people were nationally known beforehand! Perfect patsies!

I don't think everything is a govt plot. Apparently I hold our government officials to a higher standard than you and you don't get it.

cosmo20002
05-09-2013, 01:52 PM
No you obviously don't have a handle on it. He's perfect because of his criminal background which was by national media standards insignificant and therefore unknown until Susan Rice made him the patsy by blaming the attack on a video.

I have a feeling that no matter who is accused of any crime, you can come up with reasons why the person is "perfect" patsy. Because he has a criminal history! Because he has no cirminal history! Because he's well-known! Because he's unknown!

cosmo20002
05-09-2013, 01:59 PM
I don't think everything is a govt plot. Apparently I hold our government officials to a higher standard than you and you don't get it.

I just read your stuff in the Benghazi thread--mysterious ships and arms trading. There always a secret govt plot.

LOCOChief
05-09-2013, 02:03 PM
I have a feeling that no matter who is accused of any crime, you can come up with reasons why the person is "perfect" patsy. Because he has a criminal history! Because he has no cirminal history! Because he's well-known! Because he's unknown!

lol Well I do think it's more befitting of a patsy candidate to have a criminal history don't you?

example who would make a better candidate for this:

A) A kindergarden teacher on maturnity leave for her 3rd child.
or
B) A conficted felon on probation.

cosmo20002
05-09-2013, 02:06 PM
lol Well I do think it's more befitting of a patsy candidate to have a criminal history don't you?

example who would make a better candidate for this:

A) A kindergarden teacher on maturnity leave for her 3rd child.
or
B) A conficted felon on probation.

Probably B. But give Alex Jones 5 minutes with scenario A and he'll have you swearing that the teacher did it.

LOCOChief
05-09-2013, 02:12 PM
Probably B. But give Alex Jones 5 minutes with scenario A and he'll have you swearing that the teacher did it.


Not me partner.

LiveSteam
05-09-2013, 02:15 PM
Not me partner.

Its funny how he thinks everyone here that hates Obama watches Alex Jones
Most of us cant stand the Jones.

LOCOChief
05-09-2013, 02:20 PM
Its funny how he thinks everyone here that hates Obama watches Alex Jones
Most of us cant stand the Jones.

Well at least he's right about hating Obama.

cosmo20002
05-09-2013, 02:27 PM
Not me partner.

I might have mixed you up with CoMoChief. Still, you seem willing to believe some outlandish stuff.

LOCOChief
05-09-2013, 02:33 PM
I might have mixed you up with CoMoChief. Still, you seem willing to believe some outlandish stuff.

Yeah because this government could never perpetrate "outlandish stuff"

I'm willing to look beyond what MSNBC tells me to believe.

Comrade Crapski
05-14-2013, 02:56 PM
We’ve only got 3 more years of his incompetence, corruption, power-drunkenness, and malignant left-wing radicalism to go.

http://myouthouse.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/obama-my-work-here-is-done-500x353.jpg

Comrade Crapski
05-16-2013, 12:56 PM
http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/303736.html

Obama's USSA.

Comrade Crapski
05-21-2013, 07:59 AM
The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 was originally established to protect American citizens from the federal use of military troops to enforce and execute the laws of the land unless expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. Since then, for over a century, this task has fallen upon local and federal law enforcement. But with the War on Terror taking center stage in the United States for the last decade, elements within the government have been working tirelessly to expand the mission of the US military on the domestic front.

First, they passed the Patriot Act, which gave the government sweeping new powers to categorize any individual as a terrorist, whether they are operating on foreign lands or here at home. In 2011, as America brought in the New Year, they signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act, which made it possible for American citizens who were categorized as domestic terrorists under the Patriot Act to be detained and imprisoned indefinitely without charge or trial.

Finally, last week we learned that, as President Obama came under fire for the many scandals rocking his administration, the government was quietly moving to give the Department of Defense unprecedented authority on U.S. soil, effectively nullifying Posse Comitatus.

Eric Blair of Activist Post writes:

First, the senate is debating an expansion of the already broad powers of the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) so the U.S. can essentially engage any area in the world in the war on terror, including America. Which brings us to the second development: the Pentagon has recently granted itself police powers on American soil.

Assistant Secretary of Defense Michael Sheehan told Congress yesterday that the AUMF authorized the US military to operate on a worldwide battlefield from Boston to Pakistan. Sheehan emphasized that the Administration is authorized to put boots on the ground wherever the enemy chooses to base themselves, essentially ignoring the declaration of war clause in the US Constitution.

While Americans were distracted with three developing scandals pushed by both wings of the mainstream media, sinister developments were taking place behind closed doors. In essence, the US military has granted itself the power to deploy troops on the streets of America without approval from the President or Congress, and the AUMF, which was originally designed to target the terrorists responsible for 9/11, has been expanded to give the government authority to use military assets on the domestic front without a declaration from Congress.

READ MORE

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/its-not-a-conspiracy-theory-it-is-happening-right-now_05202013