Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Can you believe that the teabaggers who loved Bush are now up in arms about loss of their rights?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-10 10:08 AM
Original message
Can you believe that the teabaggers who loved Bush are now up in arms about loss of their rights?
Edited on Thu Nov-18-10 10:36 AM by NNN0LHI
What a turn around eh? When they thought it was going to be just those dark skinned furiners getting the "treatment", there were no complaints. Now that they have discovered that its for them too they are completely hysterical. Hey teabaggies you are just as much of a possible terrorist as that guy named Mohammad sitting over there. You can thank your teabuddy terrorists like Timothy McVeigh for that. These baggers make me sick.

Don

-------------------------------------

http://teaparty.freedomworks.org/forum/topics/government-protection-or-loss?commentId=3578713%3AComment%3A255774&xg_source=activity

Government protection or loss of rights?Posted by T L C on November 15, 2010 at 5:39pm

Our government has decided that they need to see our nude bodies or demand intrusive body searches. They do this all in the name of safety as we fly. There is all this extreme caution at airports, yet not one terrorist has ever been caught by a TSA agent.

The 9/11 hijackers and the so-called Christmas day bomber were not found by TSA agents despite the fact the government had been alerted to the danger prior to the attacks. We know that the average terrorists are Muslim with dark complexions, and are between the ages of 17 and 34. If we know this, why do we have government personnel searching white elderly people and children? They do it in the name of being politically correct. They will pass up the opportunity to search someone fitting the profile of a terrorist and intimately search a child. They are also doing this in their war on drugs that has failed miserably.

----------------------------

Does this pink cheeked good old boy from California appear to have a dark complexion?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Yahiye_Gadahn

Adam Yahiye Gadahn

Adam Yahiye Gadahn (Arabic: آدم يحيى غدن‎, Ādam Yaḥyā Ghadan; born Adam Pearlman, September 1, 1978) is an American senior operative, cultural interpreter, spokesman and media advisor for the terrorist group Al-Qaeda. Since 2004, he appeared in a number of videos produced by Al-Qaeda as "Azzam the American" ('Azzām al-Amrīki, عزام الأمريكي, sometimes transcribed as Ezzam Al-Amerikee). Gadahn converted to Sunni Islam in 1995, at the age of 17, at a California mosque and is described as a "homegrown", meaning that he has converted to an ideology so firmly that he is now willing to harm his country of origin. He is believed to have inspired bin Laden's September 2007 video.

In 2004, he was added to the FBI Seeking Information – War on Terrorism list. On October 11, 2006 he was removed from that list, and placed on the Bureau of Diplomatic Security Rewards for Justice Program list of wanted criminals. On the same day, Gadahn was indicted based on the testimony of the FBI case agent E.J. Hilbert II, in the Southern Division of the United States District Court for the Central District of California by a federal grand jury for the capital crime of treason for aiding an enemy of the United States (i.e. Al-Qaeda). Gadahn is the first American charged with treason since Tomoya Kawakita in 1952.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-10 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
1. Lean back and enjoy it.
Be sure to remind them that Chertoff is making a bundle on this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-10 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. Yes, but we would do well to note how EFFECTIVE they are, and how
people respond to the strength of convictions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-10 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. When we complained about it when Bush was president they said we were siding with the terrorists
I wonder if the baggers are siding with the terrorists now?

I bet these sick fucks would like nothing better than to see a few airliners blown out of the sky under President Obamas watch.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-10 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Yes, they are hypocrites. It is good to point it out. My point is that
independant of issue, when they set to action, they are persistent and effective.

And yes, I too fully believe thay would like nothing more than another attack -and it didn't take Obama being president to want it. Even during Bushs' term there was a bit of that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-10 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
2. The freedom-loving pseudo constitutional scholars also get pretty quiet
when topics of racial profiling or Guantánamo come up
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-10 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
3. We tried to warn them when Bush was decimating our rights they weren't going to be happy when a...
Democratic administration took over. What? Did they think Homeland Security would be disbanded if a Democrat won?

OTOH, we have many here who appalled at Bush's overreach who now defend it because a Democratic administration does it.

Either our rights are worth defending against anyone of any party or they are not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-10 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
4. K&R
"We know that the average terrorists are Muslim with dark complexions, and are between the ages of 17 and 34. If we know this, why do we have government personnel searching white elderly people and children? They do it in the name of being politically correct. They will pass up the opportunity to search someone fitting the profile of a terrorist and intimately search a child."


Wow

Idiots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim__ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-18-10 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
7. Yes, of course. Teabaggers are just republican puppets.
This is exactly what I would expect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 12:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC