DHS ignored civil-liberties lawyers’ warnings on report; Update: Senators demand data, explanation
The DHS pushed its report out on right-wingers in one hell of a hurry, according to the AP. Internal reviews of the document showed concerns over potential civil-liberties violations before its publication, but DHS ignored them in order to quickly make the document public. What was the rush?
Civil liberties officials at the Homeland Security Department flagged language in a controversial report on right-wing extremists, but the agency issued the report anyway. …
Homeland Security spokeswoman Amy Kudwa said the report was issued before officials resolved problems raised by the agency’s civil rights division about analysts’ definition of right-wing extremism.
In a footnote in the report, right-wing extremism was defined as hate-motivated groups and movements, such as hatred of certain religions, racial or ethnic groups. It went on to say, “It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”
This answers the rather absurd meme that has popped up on liberal blogs, that the Bush administration is responsible for this report. First, while the Bush administration might have wanted an assessment of right-wing extremist threats, it didn’t necessarily want one that painted returning veterans and conservative thought on abortion, illegal immigration, and federalism as extremist threats, nor did it want a threat assessment that couldn’t find a threat and had no data on actual, specific groups. Secondly, and most obviously, this report was dated April 7, 2009, almost 3 months after Bush left office.
Just when does the new administration take responsibility for reports they release? 2013? For people who thought Bush was such a dunce, they seem to give him remarkable powers to control government months after he’s retired to Crawford.
Now we see that this wasn’t just left lying around from the Bush administration. In fact, it was such a rush job that Janet Napolitano couldn’t wait to resolve the obvious civil-liberty concerns raised by her own lawyers before shoving it out the door. Napolitano would later have to backtrack on the exact same language flagged by the attorneys by claiming that she didn’t specifically approve the report issued by her office and that she would have changed the language in hindsight. She had the opportunity to fix it before its release, but the completely threadbare report was deemed such a high priority that it went out anyway.
Now, what could have triggered that? Anyone know of events occurring just after April 7, 2009, that such an assessment could have painted as radical, extremist, and threats to national security? Hmmm.
The Wall Street Journal reports that the FBI has tracked a few veterans for extremist activity, but because they joined extremist groups, not because they’re veterans:
Michael Ward, FBI deputy assistant director for counterterrorism, said in an interview Thursday that the portion of the operation focusing on the military related only to veterans who draw the attention of Defense Department officials for joining white-supremacist or other extremist groups.
“We’re not doing an investigation into the military, we’re not looking at former military members,” he said. “It would have to be something they were concerned about, or someone they’re concerned is involved” with extremist groups.
That’s the way it’s supposed to work — and that’s the way it did work in the Bush administration, whose assessment of left-wing extremists focused on groups with histories of violent actions and on actual data showing threats.
Update: Via Michelle, Senators Coburn, Brownback, DeMint, Burr, Murkowski, Inhofe, and Vitter sent the following letter to DHS Secretary Napolitano yesterday concerning the DHS report:
April 16, 2009
The Honorable Janet Napolitano
Secretary
The Department of Homeland Security
310 7th street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20528-0150
VIA FASCMILLE
Dear Secretary Napolitano,
We write today concerning the release of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report titled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” prepared by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch, of the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division.
While we agree that we must fight extremists who are both foreign and domestic we are troubled by some of the statements your department included as fact in the report titled above, without listing any statistical data to back up such claims.
First, your report states that “Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists…” without listing any data to support such a vile claim against our nation’s veterans.
Second, the report states that the millions of Americans who believe in the Second Amendment are a potential threat to our national security. Why? Do you have statistics to prove that law-abiding Americans who purchase a legal product are being recruited by so-called hate groups?
Thirdly, the report states that those that believe in issues such as pro-life legislation, limited government, and legal versus illegal immigration are potential terrorist threats. We can assure you that these beliefs are held by citizens of all races, party affiliation, male and female, and should not be listed as a factor in determining potential terror threats. A better word usage would be to describe them as practicing their First Amendment rights.
Also, you list those that bemoan the decline of U.S. stature and the loss of U.S. manufacturing capability to China and India as being potential rightwing extremists. We would suggest that the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs in the manufacturing industry to foreign countries are not potential terror threats, but rather honest Americans worried about feeding their families and earning a paycheck.
In closing, we support the mission of DHS in protecting our country from terror attacks and are proud of the many DHS employees who make this possible in conjunction with our state and local law enforcement. We ask that DHS not use this report as a basis to unfairly target millions of Americans because of their beliefs and the rights afforded to them in the Constitution. We also ask that you provide us with the data that support the unfair claims listed in the report titled above and to present us with the matrix system used in collecting and analyzing this data?
Finally, we look forward to your prompt reply and we offer our assistance to DHS in our shared effort to fight terrorism both home and abroad by using data that is accurate and independent of political persuasion.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 12:56 PM
2.02a must have core dumped, the old version is up and running again.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 12:57 PM
Well, I have to give that to you. Who is a better expert on spitting on the graves of patriots than the lefies.
PS You won nothing.
I hate to make this a popularity contest but lets put it up to a vote.
Who handed who their ass today?
I of course, vote for myself.
HOT AIR POLL!!!
Hawk handed GAL her ass: 1
GAL handed Hawk his ass: 0
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 12:59 PM
Awww, just when I thought we were making progress. You lost this one. It’s not the end of the world.
BadgerHawk on April 17, 2009 at 12:59 PM
This is definitely a different getalife. This one can write and think in complex sentences.
kingsjester on April 17, 2009 at 1:00 PM
Hawk: 2
Gal: 0
BadgerHawk on April 17, 2009 at 1:00 PM
One more try, and then maybe you will get it…
She doesn’t care about the responses, just that she is getting a response. She doesn’t care about the responses…I will say it one more time, she doesn’t care what you post as long as you post.
There is one of her and 10 or so of “you”…so she posts once, and she gets several responses. If no response then she posts an insult, and on and on until you guys fall for it. That stops others from engaging and having a coherent “give and take” (hence the hijacking). That is what a hijacker does. Which is why often when she enters, many of the regular posters leave, leaving the few who get manipulated to trying to “expose her”. She knows that she is an idiot, that’s how she gets attention.
I will say it again “She doesn’t care what the response is, as long as she gets a response”. In that way she is controlling you, and others…you are being duped and being foolish responding to her, you are being manipulated by a lonely girl.
In other words, you are being suckered…sorry to be so direct, but you guys aren’t getting it. Until she can learn proper discourse, just like any child, ignore her.
right2bright on April 17, 2009 at 1:02 PM
Take off your tin foil hats.
There is only one getalife .
When you spew childish insults I win.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:02 PM
The obama administration/current DHS libel conservative positions as well. For example, they propose that right-leaning citizenry shows “opposition to …immigration.” There is no opposition to immigration on the right, lots of conservatives are first or second generation immigrants themselves. It is the illegal “immigration”, and a notion that those who break immigration laws should get rewarded for breaking those laws, that conservatives oppose.
runner on April 17, 2009 at 1:03 PM
quit polluting the thread
runner on April 17, 2009 at 1:04 PM
I have GALs goat tied up in my back yard as we speak. It was worth it.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:04 PM
From the mouth of babes.
Johan Klaus on April 17, 2009 at 1:06 PM
Yes. And well written, as well.
Loxodonta on April 17, 2009 at 1:08 PM
It is fun getting cons to actually think.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:08 PM
Agreed. I am all for Immigration. It’s the illegals that need to take their happy asses back home.
I’m also for my gun rights and it just follows that the reason I think so is a reason they need to think carefully about before they try to administer some law counter to what the 2nd affords me.
I believe in life at conception, why would I not hold the same believe in an innocent citizen unless they’re currently strapped to the execution table ready to get the happy juice. I would harm no other citizen unless they were trying to harm me. Right to life is just what it means.
I could go on, but it just stands that the report is a pretext for something to follow. Just like Bishop said.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:09 PM
It’s different actually interacting with people rather than just screaming at the TV, huh?
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:10 PM
Our Secretary of State is a former lawyer for the Black Panthers. Would that count as an extremist connection? Our president pals around with unrepentant terrorists. Is he on the list?
Absolutely incredible….
Wine_N_Dine on April 17, 2009 at 1:10 PM
I don’t watch fox er gop news.
I read.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:12 PM
I don’t do outrage. I do policy.
But it’s odd that your outrage appears to oscillate on an 8 year cycle.
TheUnrepentantGeek on April 17, 2009 at 1:17 PM
You think it is good policy?
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:19 PM
Take care GAL. You just remember that your side is starting to look like the Brown Shirts circa 1930s Germany. A lot of us have made a lot of sacrifices to ensure that “all” Americans have 1st, 2nd and 5th Amendment Rights. It would be a shame for us to lose them under a man like obama that our sacrifices also paved the way for.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:19 PM
You first.
Shall we see who can cite more examples of opposition political terrorism?
Why were there specifics in the leftwing assessment but not the right? Why is Napolitano apologizing? Why did folks within DHS take issue with the right wing report, but not the left?
I love making you progs think. One of these days I’ll see it happen, I’m sure.
TheUnrepentantGeek on April 17, 2009 at 1:20 PM
A better word usage would be to describe them as practicing their First Amendment rights.
ZZZZZZZZZing!
ladyingray on April 17, 2009 at 1:20 PM
Sure, hon. ;)
Win what?
baldilocks on April 17, 2009 at 1:21 PM
It meaning what? Flagrant pronoun abuse?
TheUnrepentantGeek on April 17, 2009 at 1:21 PM
Looks like you lost. Using your own rules.
rihar on April 17, 2009 at 1:22 PM
Tin foil hats huh?
Check THIS out!
Veterans a Focus of FBI Extremist Probe.
getalife, since we all know you haven’t done crapolla since you were born… I bet you are just happy as a hog in slop that no one is looking for your sorry ass!
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 1:23 PM
FIFJanet and the DHS, because I thought the progs agreed with that!
Rae on April 17, 2009 at 1:25 PM
Well, it’s good to finally see some Senators sending a letter. Nice. Now, what about every other Republican on capitol hill? Where are they?
And as for Get a life…. if he could use complex sentences, it apparently didn’t last long. Maybe he got sober and was so frightened he retreated?
Vanceone on April 17, 2009 at 1:25 PM
1. Amy Kudwa is not the so-called “Homeland Security Department’s Civil Liberty Officials”. There are no such “Civil Liberties Officials” in the Department of Homeland Security. The only thing that motivated this claim is PUBLIC OUTCRY FROM THE VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS ACROSS THE NATION.
2. “Washington-ese” ire from Napolitano, THAT’S irony, given that Obama pushed the former National CyberSecurity Chief out and replaced with a Washingtonian fascist who directs the NSA to breach Constitutional and Congressional limits to spy on American citizens far more broadly than ever before.
3. The devil is in the details.
Napolitano announced last night that she made this REPORT as an ASSESSMENT. AS IF there is nothing conclusive about an assessment that follows a thorough study; the assessment IS the judgment passed having considered all things in advance.
maverick muse on April 17, 2009 at 1:25 PM
Senators to DHS-”Dont start anything if you dont want to be finishing anything”. Go Brownback. To the rest of the senators-Awesome letter. Attn States:reaffirm your sovereignity laws.
canditaylor68 on April 17, 2009 at 1:26 PM
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:19 PM
I don’t have a side but the President will not give back the powers w got.
He will not take your guns and will not ban automatic weapons.
He will continue to spy like w and use executive power.
You can remove your tin foil hat and relax.
Adults are in charge. He knows the political consequences of stealing more freedom and wants a second term.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:26 PM
So many of these emails years ago were false, I tended to ignore them
You triggered me to re-investigate. Mainly because David Horowitz describes Hillary as one of the Protest leaders, and David at the time was a radical leftest leader, he knew the players as well as the supporters (communist party).
Many articles, this is the best and most accurate summary I could find.
Thanks for bringing that up, but it is not as “vile” as some of the emails make it out to be, but bad enough.
right2bright on April 17, 2009 at 1:28 PM
getaclue handed his ass, by at least half a dozen posters.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 1:30 PM
Get-a-clue once again displaying its ignorance. Yes, freedom is important, the rule of law is important, our constitution is important but none are above survival needs, the above are not suicide pacts!
All of our laws, our constitution, and freedoms are moot if our republic falls to our enemies because we elevated such things above survival needs!
Survival is the most important need; perhaps it would be beneficial for you to educate yourself on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs! You’ll note that physiological needs (survival) come first!
Again all of our laws, our constitution, the republic, etc. are moot should we be defeated by fascist Islam…our laws, constitution, etc. are not suicide pacts, surely even you can understand this principle, although based on your track record of illogical thinking and lack of critical thinking abilities I believe I’m giving you too much credit!
Liberty or Death on April 17, 2009 at 1:30 PM
You know, you do get tiresome when you get up on your high horse.
Nobody is forcing you to stay.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 1:31 PM
I bet getaclue doesn’t even know the meaning of the word “irony”.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 1:31 PM
You lose again. Your rules, remember?
rihar on April 17, 2009 at 1:31 PM
Er, we’re already not allowed to have automatic weapons. Google more before you discuss a subject. It’s always better when both sides are informed.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:32 PM
Your boy, er girl, J-Nap is the one running the show at DHS. And I don’t see any thought at all going into the hit piece that is the subject of this thread, especially overriding her own counsel to rush this nonsense to print.
What a disgrace.
Glad to see someone formally call her out on this. My question: Where the hell are the rest of the senators and members of the House–from both parties?
BuckeyeSam on April 17, 2009 at 1:32 PM
Liberty or Death on April 17, 2009 at 1:30 PM
“Give me libery or give me death.”
I will stay with my position and think handing over freedom in the name of security is a cowadly act and disgusting disrespect of those who died for our freedom.Period.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:33 PM
pssst, You missed another post where someone pointed out how misinformed you are.
We’re not allowed to have automatic weapons.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:35 PM
The Senators need to go full-court press and demand the resignation of Janet Napolitano. She is supposed to be in charge and she is deflecting and blaming others for the report. Obama also needs to step up and be a man and fire Napolitano. We need accountability. If this is Janet Napolitano’s M.O. then God help us if we are attacked again.
izoneguy on April 17, 2009 at 1:37 PM
It takes an anti-American radical to attack the “working class” and the “middle-class” as a threat. It takes global Socialism to coerce the extinction of the “working American” regardless of the citizen’s economic strata. It is the US Constitution that political pirates want to make disappear via their own terrorism against rule-of-law abiding citizens.
Whatever Obama feigns to give, he taketh away in spades.
Give an inch, lose a mile doesn’t come close to his extreme.
maverick muse on April 17, 2009 at 1:38 PM
I think the banned expired.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:39 PM
What are you smoking? Hawkdriver knocked the dog piss out of you, Wart Hog. And it was a pleasure to behold.
ladyingray on April 17, 2009 at 1:39 PM
Every article I’ve read refer to the critical “Civil Liberties Officials” as being in DHS. If they’re not, who are they? Or are you suggesting they don’t even exist and didn’t criticize the report, but were created to justify the back-peddling?
Explain, please.
Loxodonta on April 17, 2009 at 1:40 PM
so, therefore you are joining the military… when?
Or do you just defend liberty from the saftey of your Mom’s basement?
Romeo13 on April 17, 2009 at 1:40 PM
E
No sweetie, we’re not allowed to own automatic weapons. Do you need another thread-thumping?
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:40 PM
I thought you had GAL’s ass in the whooping shed…
canditaylor68 on April 17, 2009 at 1:43 PM
There is no “about” in your answer.
ladyingray on April 17, 2009 at 1:44 PM
Obviously, getaclue has no comeback to this horrible example of leftist policy at the very top of our government.
Will buy more guns, ammo, and canned goods today. Maybe a few more gold eagles, too.
Hey, all these things are useful in the future, even if the worst does not happen. Be a boy scout, be prepared.
I think the Tea Parties really shook up these axxholes.
riverrat10k on April 17, 2009 at 1:44 PM
Really?
I think in some States it is legal with proper paperwork.
Of course, the President of Mexico has a problem with selling them down there.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:45 PM
GAL Googling….
Automatic…
Automatic…
Oh, SEMI-Automatic…
Oh crap, how do I spin this with Hawk?
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:45 PM
I will stay with my position and think handing over freedom in the name of security is a cowadly act and disgusting disrespect of those who died for our freedom.Period.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:33 PM
Let’s talk about giving up Freedom. How about the freedom to be whatever you want to be in America, to grow your business into a success, or to fail without the threat of a government takeover? Or the freedom to protest the massive expansion of government and the amount of money they take from Americans? Or defending the unborn without being labeled a right wing extremist by a Left Wing Government and Lapdog Media?
And by the way, President Obama needs to quit apologizing for this country to the rest of the world. We are the greatest country in the world. And if he does not believe that, he needs to step down.
kingsjester on April 17, 2009 at 1:45 PM
Uh, actualy, we can… but you need a Class 3 Federal License to do so… and its pretty expensive…
Romeo13 on April 17, 2009 at 1:46 PM
Jon Soltz? The guy of VoteVets, noted leftist, affiliated with MoveOn, bad mouther of Iraqi vets… this guy is the source of supposed information? Ok, lets look at his sources…
He points to one presentation that has this proviso: “This information is general in nature and provided as a guide only”
This report places both gang and ‘extremist’ groups, not all of them ‘right wing’ nor following the basics provided at the beginning of the presentation of what extremist groups do. This is conflating two non-overlapping groups, both of which have different distinguishing charcteristics and divergent outlooks. What it is not is demonstrating ‘recruitment’ by such groups but is a warning about gangs and other groups putting individuals into the military. It then identifies behaviors and characteristics of the most general kind common to both gangs and extremist groups, and then has recommended courses of action upon finding them. It is not a report to demonstrate the military actively training these individuals, but trying to identify them within existing units so they can be brought to any further attention based on their activites.
The second is also a warning message presentation, in much more abbreviated format that points out the limitations of soldiers in their political activities, and what they can do, then goes on to point out that being a member of a group is not prohibited but not encouraged. It then goes into the consequences of breaking the laws that are in place for these areas and activities.
Thus neither is in support of violent groups, both are presentations to be given to let soldiers know what they are and are not allowed to do, and that doing activities that break those laws have consequences. Both encompass a wide array of groups including gangs, religious and ideology based organizations, and other fringe organizations that are unorganized or that have no definite structure to them. Basically it is ‘keep your eyes open for people engaged in these activities or groups’ sort of deal.
Mr. Soltz is mischaracterizing them to suit his own ideological outlook and goals. Anyone who has been through the DoD, even on the civil side, has been through similar classes and courses given on a frequent basis, usually annually. Such presentations are to raise awareness of those that would abuse the training provided by the US Armed Forces to ill ends, to bring such individuals to the attention of the command structure and find out just why they are there.
Not all members of gangs are active and some are trying to ‘go straight’ with this being a better way to do so than civilian activities. Such gang membership is a concern, but so long as no activities taken are prohibited or fall into an area of concern, such citizen soldiers are to be allowed their private beliefs. No matter how much we disagree with them, it is their actions, deportment and ability to do the job that matters.
How this sort of banal course presentation material can be turned around and said to support just the opposite is beyond me. And to try and do so is reprehensible.
ajacksonian on April 17, 2009 at 1:46 PM
Tin hat on—–Obama: ‘I have not backed off’ on assault weapons ban
Tin hat off…
canditaylor68 on April 17, 2009 at 1:47 PM
if you handed it a M-16… would it really know what the difference between full and semi?
I doubt it.
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 1:47 PM
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:45 PM
You might want to reaserch your position.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:47 PM
That is interesting, you really don’t have a clue as to your position…
Sit, comes to mind.
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 1:49 PM
Nice smack down. That witch with a capital “B” needs to resign.
Torch on April 17, 2009 at 1:49 PM
Actually you can own automatic weapons. It requires full registration, however, a special permit from, I believe, ATF.
I shot my buddys .50 cal machine gun. Awesome! But at about $2-5 a round, not something you want to practice with every day!
riverrat10k on April 17, 2009 at 1:49 PM
Okay, you just proved what every gun owner in the country always feared or outright asserted. People on the left that would control our gun rights have no freaking idea what they’re talking about. I have three SEMI-automatic weapons. Two rifles and a pistol.
How can you look at yourself in the mirror trying to control an aspect of another Americans life when you haven’t the first idea of what you’re talking about.
And don’t try to go on about you meant you can get a full auto with a special permit. No one here is going to buy that. You confused full and semi-automatic weapons.
Typical.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:49 PM
I know. That wasn’t GALs argument and I was just showing she was clueless.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:50 PM
Actually depending on the State, you can.
Semi’s in 80% of the U.S. and Full in very few.
I can own a full, but I don’t want to get the permit. I do not need a permit for a semi in my State though… so I can deal with that.
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 1:51 PM
And you might want to research the difference between a semi and full automatic weapon.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:51 PM
Not saying that I’ve done it, because that would be a violation of the law… but from back in my Navy days I happen to know that to change a M-14 from Semi to Full auto you need to change out one part…
/looks at the gun safe with his M-14 in it…
Romeo13 on April 17, 2009 at 1:52 PM
Actually you can own automatic weapons. It requires full registration, however, a special permit from, I believe, ATF.
Romeo has the cite. Class 3 is correct I believe, and expensive.
riverrat10k on April 17, 2009 at 1:52 PM
Yep, and I know about that as well. It isn’t hard to do at all.
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 1:52 PM
Yes, in some States like Kansas.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:50 PM
I win again.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:52 PM
The learning point here is that GAL didn’t know the difference.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:54 PM
as I SAID.. it depends on the State as well. You CAN have a Class 3 (350) for FEDERAL issue licence, but 80% of State do not let you have a Full, but a Semi! In those State you have to also fill out a Class 3 license with them.
In my State I do not have to have a Class 3 for anything but a Full. So I buy… semi.
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 1:54 PM
Nope, you never win, you didn’t know the difference.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:55 PM
Won? LOL you have no idea on gun laws, federal or otherwise and you WON?
WTF did you Win there Oh ye of little brain?
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 1:56 PM
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 1:55 PM
Still not man enough to admit it huh?
It’s just losing an argument and you are very good at it.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 1:56 PM
Okay, just to be sure everyone knows that you were clueless, by making the above statement, it’s proof you thought you were referring to semis by referencing the ban.
You win nothing, You were wrong. I can’t own an automatic weapon in some states and in others I need a special permit. When the “ban” was lifted, I could go out and purchase any semiautomatic rifle my little heart desired and and pistol with a gun permit.
Nice try.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 2:00 PM
BTW, if you are buying guns to sell later because you think the President will take them, you made a bad investment.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 2:00 PM
Right did not read the thread. Hawk, you sound suspicously like an entity on another board with a similar handle. If so, good to see ya here!
riverrat10k on April 17, 2009 at 2:00 PM
What site? I’ll tell you if I go there.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 2:02 PM
LOL, so tell me about reloading of ammunition?
Is that a “bad investment”. Or would you know what i am talking about? I doubt that as well.
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 2:02 PM
If you can find the primers….
ladyingray on April 17, 2009 at 2:03 PM
getaclue, the so called assault weapons law had nothing to do with automatic weapons. Those were banned back in the 1930’s.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 2:03 PM
All gun purchases are a good investment if they’re accurate and reliable.
Wish the same could be said for liberals.
hawkdriver on April 17, 2009 at 2:04 PM
GAL, when are you going to recognize that hawkdriver knocked the dog piss out of you?
ladyingray on April 17, 2009 at 2:04 PM
I did actually… gotta love gun shows!
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 2:05 PM
another myth that getaclue adopts and spreads without thinking. The automatic weapons in Mexico aren’t coming from the US.
MarkTheGreat on April 17, 2009 at 2:05 PM
Yeah, hubby’s M1 Garands have proven to be very good investments. ;-)
ladyingray on April 17, 2009 at 2:05 PM
At the last gun show here (2 weeks ago) the primers were gone by 10:00 AM the first day. Hubby missed it.
ladyingray on April 17, 2009 at 2:06 PM
Yes, “assault weapons”.
Unlike hawkdriver, I will admit a mistake.
My bad.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 2:07 PM
What are you looking for, there are a couple coming up here soon. I can keep an eye out for them.
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 2:07 PM
What is an “Assualt Rifle”?
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 2:07 PM
I think pretty much any he can get, but I’ll ask him. He only has about 20,000 and he’s getting panicky. LOL
ladyingray on April 17, 2009 at 2:10 PM
Who said anything about “handing over our freedom?” I fail to see how defending our republic and its citizens from the scourge of fascist Islam are equivalent to handing over our freedoms, quite the contrary, we are protecting our freedom!
I see no evidence of where American citizens are handing over their freedoms, not one American citizen in this war against fascist Islam has had to hand over any freedoms, I sure haven’t! Also, for those captured during this war that did turn out to be American citizens (Padilla and John Walker Lindh) they were provided all of their habeas corpus rights as afforded under the constitution for American citizens and tried in a US criminal court, they were given their due process, so your argument is once again weak and illogical.
So you go ahead in disregard the most basic and important need for humans (the need for survival) and cling to your irrational “handing over freedom” meme, however just remember it’s people like you that will end up beheaded or in the Islamo fascist death camps first!
I’ll leave you with this quote:
Liberty or Death on April 17, 2009 at 2:11 PM
If Miss Napolitano doesn’t get the axe, then this report is Obooba’s. He may as well have signed it.
Akzed on April 17, 2009 at 2:11 PM
A weapon used to kill cops over a dog pissing from a RW extremist.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 2:11 PM
LMFAO 20K… good Lord :). Yeah let me know…
upinak on April 17, 2009 at 2:12 PM
It’s an ugly rifle that shoots the same bullets a a pretty one of the same caliber.
Akzed on April 17, 2009 at 2:12 PM
Liberty or Death on April 17, 2009 at 2:11 PM
Nice quote but I will stick with mine.
getalife on April 17, 2009 at 2:13 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »