Post by: Manedwolf on March 22, 2008, 09:02:51 PM
Quote
Olson grew up in Palmdale, where she participated on the high school pep squad, Girl Scouts and church Sunday school, according to her mother. After graduating from UC Santa Barbara, she moved to Berkeley in the early 1970s with her boyfriend and befriended several members of the SLA, an urban guerrilla group that advocated ending poverty and the Vietnam War, sometimes by violent means.
In November 1973, members of the SLA assassinated Marcus Foster, superintendent of the Oakland Unified School District, and wounded his assistant. Three months later the SLA kidnapped newspaper heiress Patty Hearst, 19, in her Berkeley apartment. Hearst was quickly absorbed into the SLA.
Four months later, six SLA members were killed at their hideout in a shootout with Los Angeles police. In retaliation, Olson planted pipe bombs beneath L. A. police cars. The bombs never detonated.
In November 1973, members of the SLA assassinated Marcus Foster, superintendent of the Oakland Unified School District, and wounded his assistant. Three months later the SLA kidnapped newspaper heiress Patty Hearst, 19, in her Berkeley apartment. Hearst was quickly absorbed into the SLA.
Four months later, six SLA members were killed at their hideout in a shootout with Los Angeles police. In retaliation, Olson planted pipe bombs beneath L. A. police cars. The bombs never detonated.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/22/BA27VP3K1.DTL
This is why I worry about the stuff going on now. It looks remarkably similar, and we've already seen a bombing. What is next?
Post by: De Selby on March 22, 2008, 09:12:36 PM
What is next?
A proper inquiry into anti-American activities by our fair leader, Sen. Mc...I mean, a proper accounting of true crimes against the state with no political bias and no railroading.
Post by: Strings on March 22, 2008, 09:15:20 PM
Can you say "ELF" or "ALF"? I knew you could!
Post by: De Selby on March 22, 2008, 09:27:03 PM
Why do you think, whenever folks mention terrorism here at home, I feel it necessary to point out the groups we already have that are willing to use violence?
Can you say "ELF" or "ALF"? I knew you could!
Can you say "ELF" or "ALF"? I knew you could!
Good point.
I really think that the danger with hyping terrorism is that all of our rights and privileges will eventually become subject to "balancing" tests-and when that happens we're all in serious trouble, because no individual right ever wins when politicians put it on the scale opposite "the lives of innocent children."
This has been true for privacy especially-"but what does your right to privacy matter when the government is going to save children with the information it takes?"
When politicians start talking about "balancing" individual rights with social needs, we all have cause to worry. And this is just one of those instances.
Post by: wooderson on March 22, 2008, 09:28:32 PM
Quote
It looks remarkably similar, and we've already seen a bombing.
"A bombing" at a historical site is "remarkably similar" to the SLA?
Really?
You serious?
F'real?
Post by: Manedwolf on March 22, 2008, 09:30:20 PM
Quote
It looks remarkably similar, and we've already seen a bombing.
"A bombing" at a historical site is "remarkably similar" to the SLA?
Really?
You serious?
F'real?
What the hell are you talking about? Times Square recruiting station?
As regards that sort of activity, I think it's time to bring an old word into play. Not terrorism. Sedition.
Post by: wooderson on March 22, 2008, 09:49:50 PM
Quote
As regards that sort of activity, I think it's time to bring an old word into play. Not terrorism. Sedition.
I concur. It's much easier to run the state if one's pesky opponents are eliminated.
Post by: Manedwolf on March 22, 2008, 09:53:46 PM
Now, where are we seeing white middle class college students again acting out in rage and ignorance against things like the military? Oh, right! BERKELEY again!
Same "causes". Same useful idiots. Same everything.
Tell me why it can't happen again, now?
Post by: De Selby on March 22, 2008, 10:00:59 PM
As regards that sort of activity, I think it's time to bring an old word into play. Not terrorism. Sedition.
Oh yes-read the original Sedition act and tell me how free and brave your homeland is under that rule.
Post by: Manedwolf on March 22, 2008, 10:02:50 PM
Of course, if a new act was written, CAIR would be out the door with a bootprint on its backside.
Post by: wooderson on March 22, 2008, 10:08:09 PM
Quote
Yes, the SLA was formed of a group of white middle class college students from Berkeley led by an ex-convict.
Uh-huh, and?Quote
Now, where are we seeing white middle class college students again acting out in rage and ignorance against things like the military? Oh, right! BERKELEY again!
So non-violently protesting "against things like the military" is analgous to assassination and kidnapping?You don't even really believe that. To borrow one of your pet phrases (where did you get that cliche from, anyway?), it's just very "useful" to you.
Quote
Same "causes".
Yeah, this is why I'm pretty sure you don't know anything about the SLA aside from its initials.The SLA has more in common with the Manson Family than with Weatherman, much less a real (and effective) left-terrorist group like the Red Army Faction or the Red Brigades.
Post by: Strings on March 22, 2008, 10:18:52 PM
Add in all the racial discord, and you have a fairly potent stew. all we need to do is wait for the heat to get high enough, and it'll combust.
Post by: wooderson on March 22, 2008, 10:21:30 PM
Quote
I'm pretty sure that, if they continue, it'll be gettin' violent: what I saw from protests in Berkley is that they're just waitin' on a spark...
Based on what, exactly?
Post by: Manedwolf on March 22, 2008, 10:25:00 PM
Quote
I'm pretty sure that, if they continue, it'll be gettin' violent: what I saw from protests in Berkley is that they're just waitin' on a spark...
Based on what, exactly?
If you're not paying attention and watching videos taken at such events, it's not up to other people to hold your hand and show you.
Find, watch, learn.
Post by: Strings on March 22, 2008, 10:27:30 PM
The folks "inciting" today's "youthful protesters" are following the 60s model. What they aren't paying attention to is the fact that many of their followers are FULL of rage, and not all that full of restraint. It's a kettle on the flames.
Only question (in my mind) is, how long before it boils over?
Post by: De Selby on March 22, 2008, 11:02:04 PM
I said the word, not the original act.
Of course, if a new act was written, CAIR would be out the door with a bootprint on its backside.
Of course, if a new act was written, CAIR would be out the door with a bootprint on its backside.
You're probably right-along with anyone who speaks out for the hugely unpopular cause of of Arabs and Muslims in America.
Is that a good thing?
Post by: Manedwolf on March 22, 2008, 11:07:48 PM
Unindicted terrorism co-conspirators that act as a fifth column and chill discussion of threats with attack lawyers, that's an enemy of the state.
Post by: MicroBalrog on March 22, 2008, 11:16:12 PM
Seriously, where is the line between war protester and seditionist?
Are there war protesters you find legitimate? Can you point me to them?
Post by: De Selby on March 22, 2008, 11:16:30 PM
Nope. Nobody in their right mind sees regular old advocacy groups as a threat.
Unindicted terrorism co-conspirators that act as a fifth column and chill discussion of threats with attack lawyers, that's an enemy of the state.
Unindicted terrorism co-conspirators that act as a fifth column and chill discussion of threats with attack lawyers, that's an enemy of the state.
Okay, if there's evidence of them being terrorists, why are they not indicted?
Oh that's right, because the material support law is ridiculously broad and has already resulted in a number of high profile acquittals...acquittals, mind you, not overturns on appeal or hung juries.
Your claims about CAIR are groundless-but so is most of what you say about Muslims, so I'm not surprised.
Post by: De Selby on March 22, 2008, 11:17:36 PM
So opposing the War in Iraq makes you an Enemy of America?
Seriously, where is the line between war protester and seditionist?
Are there war protesters you find legitimate? Can you point me to them?
Seriously, where is the line between war protester and seditionist?
Are there war protesters you find legitimate? Can you point me to them?
They're with all of the "good" Muslims he sees-that is to say, they don't exist.
Post by: Strings on March 22, 2008, 11:54:19 PM
Speaking here of folks that hold up placards, hand out leaflets, things like that. Peaceful folks.
People that try to actually "engage" recruiters, or force a confrontation? Might be time to be looking at charges...
Post by: seeker_two on March 23, 2008, 03:35:47 AM
Quote from: Manedwolf
What is next?
Seeing how civility on both sides is starting to wear thin, we may see some "counter-protests" this time around.....
Post by: Bigjake on March 23, 2008, 05:25:53 AM
So opposing the War in Iraq makes you an Enemy of America?
Seriously, where is the line between war protester and seditionist?
Are there war protesters you find legitimate? Can you point me to them?
Seriously, where is the line between war protester and seditionist?
Are there war protesters you find legitimate? Can you point me to them?
The line is when they cease being garden variety asshats with big puppets and illogical posters, and start blowing *expletive deleted*it up, attempting to cage Recruiters, and burning down subdivisions and SUV dealerships.
Rope. Tree. Domestic Terrorist. Some assembly required.
Post by: Bigjake on March 23, 2008, 05:27:07 AM
Your claims about CAIR are groundless-but so is most of what you say about Muslims, so I'm not surprised.
Can you say flying Imams?
Post by: wooderson on March 23, 2008, 06:12:12 AM
Quote
direct frelling observation. Of more "War is evil! The US is evil! Give peace a chance!" types than I really care to remember.
Ah, so based on nothing more than "I disagree with them." All your opponents are terra-ist loving seditionists who just might be terra-ists themselves, since they disagree with you.Glad we got that cleared up.
Post by: MicroBalrog on March 23, 2008, 06:16:17 AM
Quote
Can you say flying Imams?
The Insidious Blind Terrorist?
Post by: Bigjake on March 23, 2008, 06:25:00 AM
Quote
Can you say flying Imams?
The Insidious Blind Terrorist?
Nope, not him. these guys:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Imams_controversy
Post by: Strings on March 23, 2008, 08:58:27 AM
Guess what? You just stepped into the wrong argument.
>Ah, so based on nothing more than "I disagree with them." All your opponents are terra-ist loving seditionists who just might be terra-ists themselves, since they disagree with you.
Glad we got that cleared up.<
*GLEE*
You see, I get to interact with some of the folks we're talking about. The only thing that has kept 'em from stepping completely over the line has been a fear of consequences ("I might get caught"). The younger generation, in WAY too many cases, does not have that fear.
This isn't an "I disagree with them" bias: I've HEARD the talk of some on the far left, discussing ideas for overthrow and discord. Ignored it at the time, because talk is legal. But I've also been watching that younger generation, and THEY scare me: full of fire and idealism, and (for the most part) divorced from any concept of consequences.
But you'll just ignore this, dismiss it as paranoia or something. Since you know nothing about my experiences, or the circles I travel in, you can feel free to do that.
Oddly enough, I'll bet Rev Disk and Broken Paw could corroborate me on this one...
Post by: wooderson on March 23, 2008, 09:55:03 AM
Quote
Wooderson, I'm REALLY having trouble not going ad hominem at this point. You seem to expect folks to give out mass quantities of personal data to support their position, but enjoy completely dismissing whatever your opponent has to say.
I expect people to take reasonable positions grounded in reasonable evidence. "TEH EVIL MUZLIM LEFTIST KKKOMMIES ARE JUST LIKE THE SLA AND ABOUT TO INVADE" or whatever this week's variation might be fails on all counts.
Quote
You see, I get to interact with some of the folks we're talking about. The only thing that has kept 'em from stepping completely over the line has been a fear of consequences ("I might get caught"). The younger generation, in WAY too many cases, does not have that fear.
This isn't an "I disagree with them" bias: I've HEARD the talk of some on the far left, discussing ideas for overthrow and discord. Ignored it at the time, because talk is legal. But I've also been watching that younger generation, and THEY scare me: full of fire and idealism, and (for the most part) divorced from any concept of consequences.
"I SEEN IT WITH MY OWN EYES."This isn't an "I disagree with them" bias: I've HEARD the talk of some on the far left, discussing ideas for overthrow and discord. Ignored it at the time, because talk is legal. But I've also been watching that younger generation, and THEY scare me: full of fire and idealism, and (for the most part) divorced from any concept of consequences.
And all Republicans are brutal racists.
Why? Because I "interact with some of [them]." And they all hate black people and Latinos and think they should all be lynched.
Now, I'm not going to get into specifics, or name names, or make any sense at all. But because I disagree with them, and because I can anonymously cast aspersions on their character and potential acts, you should, like, totally believe me.
Dig?
Post by: K Frame on March 23, 2008, 10:11:18 AM
Why?
I can only guess that it's because anything that doesn't match lockstep with your own blindered views is immediately categorized as false, extremist, etc.
This entire thread has been on thin ice for some time and I sincerely doubt that it's going to get any better.