Replies

And you just suggested it again by saying it should be criminalized.

Uh-huh. /s The fact is that you are oversimplifying my comment. I have NEVER suggested usurping the USC. EVER. To the contrary, and repeatedly. These protests are not about speech - my original comment never cited as such - but they have apparently made at least you believe it since you 'think' you found a bone; you couldn't be more wrong. SUCH is the effectiveness of their propaganda.

Ironically, under the ubiquitous Rules for Radicals promoted by the Zero cabal, those of us on the right are terrorized & persecuted by the left for merely for being on the right, let alone stating our case (e.g., the call from maxine waters et al to the left who, ironically, was never held to account for her words even though it calls for 'coercion' of civilians).

They are pushing us down a slippery slope and you're hedging the argument 'tomato' / 'tomahto' under the banner 'free speech'.

I must vehemently disagree.

Thus - just for you - I will elaborate:

So, when the looming collapse manifests and martial law is declared, who do you think is going to be criminalized:

Those supporting mooslims and the left (with tacit and/or direct support from our government),

...or those who oppose them?

Material support for anti-social actions & criminal order intended to, 1) intimidate or coerce civilians; or 2) affect government policy through coercion or intimidation; or 3) influence the government's conduct by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping is itself criminal under 18 U.S.C. § 2331; the problem is whether that applies domestically. Frankly, it damned well ought to (i.e., 'criminalized'), but my recollection of a long-ago read of Patriot Act - something FAR more egregious than what you're citing in your comments - is now a bit clouded and I've got other responsibilities on my plate for today.

Strictly defined, the protesters' actions are terroristic and, thus, those who support them may be prosecuted under existing statutes...but certainly NOT under the current status quo.

THAT is the nature of my specific comment.

The so-called 'unacknowledged crimes' here are a combination of the takeover of universities, corruption of youth by the left and all organized at the behest of a conspiracy originating in Martha's Vineyard and in concert with both his cohort in Bedford Hills & other foreign enemies. I posted earlier about the organization behind these protests; it would be rather ignorant to not believe that there is money flowing to these protests and their organizers as well. That's 'material support' for terrorism.

As I clearly stated in a comment earlier this morning:

It’s not about the ‘students’ or, for that matter, the protesters at all.

Maybe you just don't get the fact that the BLM BS was a trial run and that what's developing this month might just be the planned false flag to both turn the election in November AND seal our fate.

Petty disagreements on language over the protesters as we argue for/against defending the USC - rather than actually doing anything about it - is EXACTLY the type of infighting they seek to trigger...and this forum is chock full of it.

If we can't come to consensus on this, the USC and our Republic is doomed.