Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Harry Reid Says Bundy Ranch Incident is Not Over

By the same account, you don't know me or what I am.

YOU may feel I am extreme. Just because you say it, doesn't make it so.

You also make the second amendment about hunting. Which it's not.

You and Reid have both stated today that anyone that has guns is a terrorist.

So, amigo... Just when IS it ok to defend freedom and the constitution? When YOU say so? When the government says we have their permission to do so?

Hold your breath for that.

An open coloring book. (Ages 3-7)

Never expected to see so much liberalism being spouted from Montana.

No kidding.

Hear-hear.

Their last two governors and LONG-term senator are Democrats, some fools and frauds have to live there to vote those in to office.

Quotes, please.

First off, all people that came to protest at Bundy's were not militia. Far from it. Most were ranchers. And since when does carrying a gun make one a terrorist? Open carry is very legal by state law in Nevada.
Tim McVeigh WAS a terrorist. His actions proved that. Just as the people that were armed at Bundy's proved that they would not fire unless fired upon.

Second... The 2nd Amendment isn't about "hunting" or "Hunters" as he stated. It's about having the means to quell a government that isn't for the people anymore.

Now for Reid:



http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/04/1...r-domestic-terrorists-refers-to-federal/

Missoula ..... just saying

Reid and the BLM are the real terrorists. They should have been disarmed by the state police and lead away in shackles to a cell. Reid should be arrested and prosecuted for treason along with about 90% of Congress.

I hate detours into the weeds, but these weeds are too close to a field of study and an old job to not comment.

McVeigh was a crazy mass murderer and a delusional insurgent, but not a terrorist. While none of these are mutually exclusive and one may be all three, they are not the same.

The bombing of OKC and the Boston Marathon were both acts of domestic terrorism.

9/11 was an act of foreign terrorism.

The school shootings and such are acts of mass murder in my opinion.

I saw this in an article and thought it was relevant to all this.

From Claire Wolfe - the full quote:

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards. On the road to tyranny, we've gone so far that polite political action is about as useless as a miniskirt in a convent. ... Something�s eventually going to happen. Government will bloat until it chokes us to death, or one more tyrannical power grab will turn out to be one too many. ... Maybe it�ll be one more round of �reasonable gun control� or one more episode of burning children to death to save them from �child abuse.� Whatever, something will snap."

Another from Claire that's pertinent:

"Like �em or hate �em, these once peaceful gun owners...are feeling a lot like Jews of 1939 Germany. Maligned, lied about, persecuted and threatened."

In a nutshell:

To be a terrorist one must use violence as a part of a defined, organizes, and publicly expressed political movement.

To commit an act of terrorism one must target and attack an unarmed or noncombatant third party in order to exert pressure on the party against whom the terrorist demands political action.

McVeigh fails on both counts.

McVeigh was a crazy mass murderer and a delusional insurgent, but not a terrorist.

All this discussion as to whether Mcveigh was whatever whomever thinks is fine I guess.

Gotta comment that I'm NOT real warm and fuzzy about having fine Americans lined out in parallel with the crazy bastard.

You need to go back over to whatever liberal group stuck you here's site, and tell them you've been called out as an azzwhole, and a chit disturbing knob on a dog's pecker.

GTC

You gots a way with words, Cross.

That's pretty much what I was upset about, both in Reid's comments and the other yayhoo, here.

When comparison's such as these are made, and a lack of standing up to the watered down version of what is called a domestic terrorist, then we will surely all fit into the liberal attempts at vilifying anyone that is legally carrying a firearm, or speaks out against government over reach.

It is a dangerous road to travel.

That is precisely why it is so important to be clear and exacting about who and what is a terrorist and terrorism, rather than allowing the government and the Left to redefine the words to their advantage or to allow them to devolve into simple pejoratives.

They are sure selective about terrorists by definition and enforcement these days at the Obama camp.

Obama signs Ted Cruz bill into law, but says he won't enforce it
By Joel Gehrke | APRIL 18, 2014 AT 4:15 PM

President Obama on Friday signed into law a bill authored by Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz that would bar an Iranian diplomat from entering the United States, but immediately issued a statement saying he won't enforce it.

Obama decided to treat the law as mere advice. "Acts of espionage and terrorism against the United States and our allies are unquestionably problems of the utmost gravity, and I share the Congress's concern that individuals who have engaged in such activity may use the cover of diplomacy to gain access to our Nation," Obama said in his signing statement.

"Nevertheless, as President [George H.W.] Bush also observed, "curtailing by statute my constitutional discretion to receive or reject ambassadors is neither a permissible nor a practical solution." I shall therefore continue to treat section 407, as originally enacted and as amended by S. 2195, as advisory in circumstances in which it would interfere with the exercise of this discretion."

Obama frequently criticized President George W. Bush for such signing statements during his 2008 campaign. �Congress's job is to pass legislation," he said, as The Daily Beast recalled. "The president can veto it or he can sign it.�

�It is unconscionable that, in the name of international diplomatic protocol, the United States would be forced to host a foreign national who showed a brutal disregard for the status of our diplomats when they were stationed in his country,� Cruz said when he introduced the bill.

The legislation was directed at Hamid Abutalebi, whom Iranian President Hassan Rouhani tapped as U.N. ambassador, because of his alleged role in the 1979 student takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, in which 52 Americans were held hostage for 444 days. Abutalebi insists his role was limited to translation and negotiation.

Iran has said it will not withdraw his name, and has asked the U.N. to investigate the U.S. visa denial.


http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-sign...article/2547462

Just happens to be a matter of who they are in bed with.