Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Chances are your fellow campfire kindred spirit is............A Terrorist.

This was an article from July 2012. I missed it, but now I know I am a terrorist.

http://www.infowars.com/homeland-security-report-lists-liberty-lovers-as-terrorists/

"A new study funded by the Department of Homeland Security characterizes Americans who are �suspicious of centralized federal authority,� and �reverent of individual liberty� as �extreme right-wing� terrorists".




guilty as charged!!!

oh well

Guilty your honor.

Well I guess a lot of guys, formerly well thought of, who have statues and monuments in D.C. would be considered terrorists by the current administration.

I am pretty sure george washington among dozens of others, including those with signatures of the declaration of independence,would be considered so.

Well I have been called about everything else. I might as well be labeled a terrorist by the goobermint.

the scariest thing is that this is coming from Alex Jones.

wel, if you don't like alex jones, you can find it on WND a couple days earlier...


...not that it makes any difference who reports it, it's still the same story, and it definitely shows how DHS feels about people who share our views on liberty and freedom.

that, to me, is the scary part.
Add that report to the actions being attempted on the 2nd amendment.



... DHS Security report

It is amusing that they could characterize me as a terrorist so quickly, but have such difficulty labeling the ragheads who attacked a US Embassy and killed American Citizens on the anniversary of the world's largest terror attack, terrorists.

They protect their own.

BTW, I'm in.

Well my mamma always want me to be something in this world. I guess Terrorist is better than nothing

My attitude is not a secret


So end ALL lefty demorats.

Damn! I guess then that they have a cell at "Glub Gitmo" with my name on it already.

just remember that dude that shot up the folks at Ft. Hood? well, that was just everyday, run of the mill, workplace violence. not terriorism at all.

not everyone can be classified as a terrorist.

^^^^^^^^^This!!!

It was a long time ago that nappy had the whitepaper (no pun intended) that stated white, conservative, pro-life, religious, gun owners, probably veterans, were considered Right Wing Extremists.

Find out when I changed my username to Right Wing Extremist.

It was a while ago. *It was approximately mid September of 2009. Just an FYI.*

y'all been terrorists for a while and are just now figuring it out.

some of us knew all along...

Terrorists now and just a couple of new laws away from being criminals.

Looks like Jones got them shook up - if you go to the link, they have added a rather lengthy intro justifying their document

--------------

First, at no point has any START study defined persons "suspicious of centralized federal authority" and "reverent of individual liberty" as terrorists. Instead, we assigned ideological classifications only to groups that have already carried out completed or attempted terrorist attacks. This report is based on START's Global Terrorism Database which defines terrorism as "the threatened or actual use of illegal force and violence by a non-state actor to attain a political, economic, religious, or social goal through fear, coercion, or intimidation." The GTD includes information from unclassified sources (mainly news media) on nearly 100,000 terrorist attacks that occurred worldwide since 1970. Whenever possible, the GTD includes information on the perpetrators of these attacks, primarily groups or organizations.

Last year, START completed a project called Profiles of Perpetrators of Terrorism in the United States (PPT-US) that involved data collection on the organizations that have carried out violent attacks in the United States, based on the GTD definition of terrorism. Additional information on PPT-US can be found here: http://ter.ps/zn. Part of the PPT-US data collection project involved classifying the 'dominant ideology' of these organizations (not individuals).

Full definitions for these can be found in the PPT-US codebook, available on the 'Data and Analysis' tab of the PPT-US Dataverse page at http://ter.ps/zm. Again, it is critical to remember that these definitions are applied to organizations already identified as perpetrators of terrorist violence in the GTD. They are in no way used to define 'terrorists' themselves, either groups or individuals. This mischaracterization of our work is a logical fallacy on par with stating that because some apples are red, all things red must be apples.
Second, the Hot Spots Report has been criticized by Internet sources for excluding terrorism cases from 1993. When we began the Global Terrorism Database in 2002, we began with a prior unclassified data source that was missing 1993 data. We have never been able to completely restore these data. Hence, the Hot Spots Report is in fact missing 1993 data.



Because the main purpose of the report was to conduct a county-level analysis of terrorism in the United States, we felt it best to leave out incomplete information�which was the case for the 1993 data. We should have made this clear in the report and plan to do so in any future publications. However, it is also true that the report is missing only one year in a 39-year series�less than 3 percent of the total. Other 1970-2008 attacks identified by some Internet sources as missing from the report, including a 1994 van shooting, the 1997 Empire State Building shooting, and the 2002 El Al shooting are in fact included in the GTD and in the report. We should also point out that at the time we did the analysis for the Hot Spots Report, the most recent GTD data that were available ended in 2008. This means that the report excludes several high profile attacks that occurred after 2008, including the 2009 Fort Hood attack and the 2009 Arkansas shooting. The first two attacks are already in the version of the GTD on our website and the last one was added to the GTD last fall, and is slated to be included in our upcoming release of the data through 2011.


Finally, it is important to note that because the analysis in our report relied on ideology data from PPT-US, a group-level dataset, attacks are linked to ideologies when a specific group is attributed responsibility for an attack. This means that Tables 1-7 in our report are based only on those cases where we are reasonably certain of the group or organization responsible for the attack. Attacks by unaffiliated individuals are less likely to be included in this particular analysis, simply as a consequence of the ideology data available at the time the report was written. To be clear, this is not due in any way to an inclination to define these attacks as �not terrorism.� In addition, because the focus of this report is on concentrations of terrorism, we constructed these tables in such a way that all attacks that are not part of "hot spots" are excluded. Although some readers incorrectly interpret these tables as reporting no other terrorism for those particular time periods/locations/ideology combinations, this is certainly not the case. For a full explanation of the GTD�s data collection methodology and inclusion criteria, users are welcome to visit the START website:

Their backpedaling does nothing to change my view of them as a bunch of incompetent boobs profiting from our country's hardships.