• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

‘Red Scare History Burst Through My Door’

I don't know. Maybe warrantless wiretapping, siezure of assets without due process, indefinite detention without a trial, even killing people who are suspected of certain crimes.

Oh wait. You said next. All that has already happened.
HA! And Obama kept Git'mo open! Gotta love it....your Messiah takes office and fails to deliver :lamo
 
Uh, the definition of an anarchist is someone who already committed a crime or is planning on one.
The definition of Anarchist is:

" a person who rebels against any authority, established order, or ruling power"

It says nothing about violence.
As a general statement, I'm going to give the government a pass to harass and abuse the occupy X folks as much as they want. OcupyX'ers are retards. Even if the police had abused them, I'm going to actively condone it.

Having said that, there was a riot, and the cops had a warrant. Don't like it? Don't be part of the occupy crowd.

You give the government a pass to harass and abuse your own countrymen? Really? Would you want someone standing by, watching, and giving the 'OK' to beat your head in?
 
Last edited:
You give the government a pass to harass and abuse your own countrymen? Really? Would you want someone standing by, watching, and giving the 'OK' to beat your head in?
I wonder how many leftist Occupiers are re-thinking their position on gun-control-er, I mean, yes, the government is justified is using all means necessary to put down Occupiers, yes, oppressive government FTW.
 
Last edited:
Yup, totally justified imo. There was a riot, there was reasonable suspicion, there was a warrant. I hope the cops kicked some ass. Good for them.

You said the Occupy X folks. Do you mean all of them, a select few, what do you mean? Even the ones not being violent, which is the majority of them?
 
You said the Occupy X folks. Do you mean all of them, a select few, what do you mean? Even the ones not being violent, which is the majority of them?
Well we can't have the police or anyone in uniform or 'connected' take action. However, I would give money to an underground or shadow 'organisation' who, say, deployed a metric ****-ton of OC gas on any given occupy crowd.

Maybe we could some folks in the IRS to decide to audit members of occupy.

**** happens every day. Cars get keyed and facebooks get hacked all the time. If there were a trend of random acts of violence against members of occupyX, it would be a pure coincidence; just like all those city dump trucks blocking Westburo Baptists from protesting a funeral was a mere oversite. As I said, **** happens all the time.
 
Last edited:
The definition of Anarchist is:

" a person who rebels against any authority, established order, or ruling power"

It says nothing about violence.

So, by definition, a person who asserts they have rights is not an anarchist, at least here in the US where the having of rights is part and parcel of the established order and authority.

You give the government a pass to harass and abuse your own countrymen? Really? Would you want someone standing by, watching, and giving the 'OK' to beat your head in?

These are the .00001%, the dumb****s we'd rather not have as countrymen. So, yeah, when they're harrassed, as long as it's through warrant and proper process, it's rather enjoyable to see.
 
Actually, I'm pretty sure that the difference is that one of them has actually committed a crime, whereas the other only spouts bullsh*t from his facial orifice. It's kindof a big difference, actually.

And spouting such from one's facial orifice is protected by the First Amendment. Were it not so, we'd have a lot more people in prison and a lot less organic fertilizer being spouted from the facial orifices of pundits of all stripes.
 
Anarchists are criminals and traitors; not traitors to any particular state but to the very concept of a state. And now for our next lesson, what do we do with traitors?
Having a different political belief than you is not "traitorous".

Once upon a time, when America wasn't brainwashed by subhuman globalist scum, anyone who identified as an anarchist was prohibited from immigrating into the US.
Yea and that is called totalitarian.
And anit freedom.
 
Whoopi. Someone committed a crime, the cops investigated, then presented enough probable cause for a judge to issue a warrant and then the police executed a warrant. Whats the problem? It happened to a bunch of whaco nut jobs you liked instead of against those you didn't?

You want to use rhetoric like "Red Scare" to bring up memories of the House Commitee for Un-American Activities. Hardly, if the law wanted to find Un-American activities and "Reds", it would be raiding the White House and all offices associated with the Democrats political party, not some apartment complex in Seattle.
 
Whoopi. Someone committed a crime, the cops investigated, then presented enough probable cause for a judge to issue a warrant and then the police executed a warrant. Whats the problem? It happened to a bunch of whaco nut jobs you liked instead of against those you didn't?

You want to use rhetoric like "Red Scare" to bring up memories of the House Commitee for Un-American Activities. Hardly, if the law wanted to find Un-American activities and "Reds", it would be raiding the White House and all offices associated with the Democrats political party, not some apartment complex in Seattle.

Uhh what crime did they commit?
And uhhh what did they find via the warrant?
 
Uhh what crime did they commit?
And uhhh what did they find via the warrant?

Lets see, according to the article that you posted, there was a riot on May Day. Usually rioting is a criminal activity and a crime. So that was the crime that was commited. Since a search was conducted, there must of been enough evidence of probable cause for the judge to issue the warrant. Washington is a heavily liberal state, especially in cities, so I have to assume that that judge probably needed far more evidence for the warrant than would a judge in Texas issuing a warrant for the same thing against the same group.

What they found is irrevelent to the warrant. What the believed was present was relevent. Police executing search warrants do not always find what they were looking for and what probable cause led them to believe was there. That does not make the warrant wrong or an unconstitutional invasion of privacy. It just means either the evidence that lead to the warrant was wrong or those being searched did not have the evidence at the location the police thought. Sometimes, say like in Waco, someone tips off those being searched ahead of time.
 
Yea and that is called totalitarian.
And anit freedom.

Oh so according to you, the US government was totalitarian because it prohibited ANARCHISTS from immigrating into the US.

No offense but some people think so dangerous they need to be removed from society.
 
The definition of Anarchist is:

" a person who rebels against any authority, established order, or ruling power"

It says nothing about violence.

Lean:RightAnarchists in Wacco TX being killed:

waco%20massacre.bmp


Lean:Socialist like you cheered and smiled and threw parties.

So tell me, why do Lean:socialists cheer when Lean:rightAnarchists get killed but you guys defend Lean:leftAnarchists?
 
Oh so according to you, the US government was totalitarian because it prohibited ANARCHISTS from immigrating into the US.

No offense but some people think so dangerous they need to be removed from society.
What's worse is some don't think at all.
 
So, by definition, a person who asserts they have rights is not an anarchist, at least here in the US where the having of rights is part and parcel of the established order and authority.

You can have rights but still not like your government, you may dislike Barack Obama, but you still have your rights.

These are the .00001%, the dumb****s we'd rather not have as countrymen. So, yeah, when they're harrassed, as long as it's through warrant and proper process, it's rather enjoyable to see.

That's you're opinion. If you were harassed and beaten, Would you want your own countrymen to stand by and say 'He's a dumbass, why should we care?'.

Well we can't have the police or anyone in uniform or 'connected' take action. However, I would give money to an underground or shadow 'organisation' who, say, deployed a metric ****-ton of OC gas on any given occupy crowd.

Maybe we could some folks in the IRS to decide to audit members of occupy.

**** happens every day. Cars get keyed and facebooks get hacked all the time. If there were a trend of random acts of violence against members of occupyX, it would be a pure coincidence; just like all those city dump trucks blocking Westburo Baptists from protesting a funeral was a mere oversite. As I said, **** happens all the time.

Would you have a problem if Occupy X-ers were being harassed and beaten, even if they were not committing a crime?
 
Last edited:
Lean:RightAnarchists in Wacco TX being killed:

waco%20massacre.bmp


Lean:Socialist like you cheered and smiled and threw parties.

So tell me, why do Lean:socialists cheer when Lean:rightAnarchists get killed but you guys defend Lean:leftAnarchists?

What?

Does an Anarchist even lean? If they oppose government, they cannot have a political position, can they?
 
Lets see, according to the article that you posted, there was a riot on May Day.
Cool... That is not justification for a warrant..... Because a riot happened in town and these group is part of OLA that is not justification to bust down a door and search a permisis.
Interesting how they also did not find any "anarchist material".... Whatever that means...

Since a search was conducted, there must of been enough evidence of probable cause for the judge to issue the warrant.
Thank you Patriot Act.

Washington is a heavily liberal state, especially in cities, so I have to assume that that judge probably needed far more evidence for the warrant than would a judge in Texas issuing a warrant for the same thing against the same group.
This really isnt a "liberal, conservative" state issue.
 
Lean:RightAnarchists in Wacco TX being killed:

waco%20massacre.bmp


Lean:Socialist like you cheered and smiled and threw parties.

So tell me, why do Lean:socialists cheer when Lean:rightAnarchists get killed but you guys defend Lean:leftAnarchists?

I yelled when Waco happened? I support that kind of action? :doh
 
Would you have a problem if Occupy X-ers were being harassed and beaten, even if they were not committing a crime?
They're dumbasses, why should I care? They shouldn't be protesting this issue in the first place, so ****'em. We need a little Project Mayhem to come clean house. Same with Westburo Baptists.
 
Last edited:
Why shouldn't they be protesting?
Because it's not a genuine grievance held by the People. It's organised by special interest groups, hell the protesters were even being paid at points. It's not legit, it's an abuse of the right, and as such it needs to be put down. Now the cops can't do anything since these morons are within the letter of the law, so we need an extra-legal body to take action.
 
Because it's not a genuine grievance held by the People. It's organised by special interest groups, hell the protesters were even being paid at points. It's not legit, it's an abuse of the right, and as such it needs to be put down. Now the cops can't do anything since these morons are within the letter of the law, so we need an extra-legal body to take action.

If they're protesting it's a genuine grievance, unless your definition of 'genuine grievance' is something you agree with.

Also, do you mind telling me where you had heard protesters were being paid from?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom