Ammo For Sale

« « Happy B-Day | Home | What makes a gun-rights liberal? » »

SayUncle: Potential Terrorist

The blogs are running amok and angry at the notion that the state of Alabama thinks libertarians are akin to terrorists. I take it as a compliment. Not the notion that I may be dangerous but the notion that my ideas are a threat to the state. That state needs to be challenged to keep it in line. Otherwise, it will run amok. And those ideas should come from the inside. AC has a good round up of it and notes:

So, it seems Libertarians are akin to terrorists now. The State of Alabama apparently believes that libertarianís point of view threatens the state.

Indeed, they do. But, the fact remains, they are just ideas.

But, and here’s the scary part, it’s not just the state of Alabama. The Phoenix FBI training manual tells would-be federales what to look for. Like:

Defenders of the U.S. Constitution against federal government and the UN
Groups of individuals engaging in para-military training
Those who make numerous references to the U.S. Constitution
Those who attempt to police the police
Lone individuals

Now, I’m no expert but one of those things is not like the others and might raise valid concerns. The rest are personality quirks and things responsible citizens should do.

More on who thinks you’re a terrorist here, here and here.

14 Responses to “SayUncle: Potential Terrorist”

  1. Red Says:

    Defenders of the U.S. Constitution

    That is quite possibly one of the scariest things I have ever read.

  2. #9 Says:

    Defenders of the U.S. Constitution

    Damn. I would be screwed if I lived in Alabama. That is one of the last places I would think this could happen.

  3. Sailorcurt Says:

    The biggest issue is that, once they have defined us as terrorists, they can put us on terrorist watch lists.

    I seem to remember something about the terrorist watch list being added to “prohibited persons”.

    See a trend here?

    Next step would be midnight “no knock” raids by the ATF.

    It pains me to say this but the truth of it is just becoming too strong to deny: The war’s coming. It’s just a matter of time.

  4. Rivrdog Says:

    This current kerfluffle over the “thought police” may have the (intended, un-intended, you pick) consequence of starting the actual fight to protect the Constitution even sooner than previously surmised.

    This has the sound of a (D)onk campaign platform initiative that would go like this:

    “The Democratic Party is much more concerned with fighting terrorists than the GOP. As proof, just look at the number of people who are armed and have said that under certain circumstances which THEY choose, they would begin hostilities against their government, even if YOU were in the way of their bullets. This number has risen sharply during the Bush administration. We, the Democratic Party, recognize that these people are a greater threat to our security than most of the Islamic fighters which Bush has been persecuting during his war, so Those People are the ones we seek to keep and eye on and especially, disarm.”

    I could see some for of that statement in the (D)onk platform next year. I could see some legislation based on it being signed by a new (d)onk POTUS.

    I could see us having the choice of fighting to end this attack on the culture and the Constitution, or rolling over, giving away all our guns, and stepping up to the Kool-Aid bar.

  5. Robert Says:

    I do with the LEOs and FBI would update the oath they take when they are sworn in. It might go something like: I do swear and affirm that I will protect and defend the status quo, my agency, my boss and my paycheck and pension against anyone who threatens them, even if they don’t and it’s just the boss doing a political favor.
    I further promise to follow all orders from above, period, no takebacks and no questions.

  6. Gringo_Malo Says:

    “It is sobering to reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence.” — Charles A. Beard

    BTW, the line about defenders of the Constitution is from the FBI, so you’re screwed whatever you’re in.

  7. straightarrow Says:

    Robert nailed the oath they actually observe.

    These people know we are not terrorists, they also know the majority are ignorant of the issue and will accept their word for it that by tightening the bands of domestic tyranny they are being secured. Never realizing that they actually are being secured, just like a prisoner or a slave is secured.

  8. #9 Says:

    You need to see this.

    When government officials that are sworn to protect the U.S. Constitution use belief in the Constitution as a profiling technique we need to take a serious look at their employment.

  9. Chris Byrne Says:

    Heh… I wonder what they’d think of this

    Perhaps this is a radical proposition…

  10. Volunteer Voters » Headlines And Hyperlinks Says:

    […] SayUncle: Potential Terrorist […]

  11. SayUncle » More on Lautenberg’s bill to deny due process Says:

    […] known terrorists, shouldn’t they be in jail? If they’re suspected terrorists (and who isn’t?), I’m afraid we have this thing called due process of law and we can’t just go […]

  12. Target Rich Environment » Blog Archive » PA State Government: Libertarians and Like-Minded are Terrorists Says:

    […] Random Nukular Strikes (here), good post, read the whole thing.¬† I got redirected from a¬†link (here)¬†to SayUncle, where the state of Alabama defined his political beliefs as terroristic.¬† Well, I […]

  13. SayUncle » SayUncle: Potential Terrorist - 2 Says:

    […] In Pennsylvania this time. Background here. […]

  14. SayUncle » SayUncle: Potential Terrorist Says:

    […] after the first couple of times, you get used to […]