Obama Admin Tells Local Police Pro-Life Advocates May Engage in Violence, Extremism

[juliee]

Washington, DC – Just months into his administration, President Barack Obama is already targeting pro-life advocates as the Obama administration has released a document that claims pro-life people may engage in violence or extremism. The new document comes on the heels of one in Missouri that caused a national uproar.

LifeNews.com/nat4984.html

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Is he talking about something more violent than ripping apart a baby as it’s being born?

 

[rpp]

Washington, DC – Just months into his administration, President Barack Obama is already targeting pro-life advocates as the Obama administration has released a document that claims pro-life people may engage in violence or extremism. The new document comes on the heels of one in Missouri that caused a national uproar.

LifeNews.com/nat4984.html

Here is a blog entry that discusses this.
michellemalkin.com/2009/04/14/confirme-the-obama-dhs-hit-job-on-conservatives-is-real/

I have read the Homeland Security document. Not only does it attack pro-life advocates, it paints all combat veterans as Timothy McVeighs, those who support immigration laws, those affiliated with religious organizations, gun owners, those who lost their job or house recently due to the economic downturn, those who support flat tax, those opposed to raising taxes, and those who hold conservative political views as people capable to making terrorist attacks.

Essentially, the document states that anyone who disagrees with the current administration is a racist radical capable of acts of terrorism.

So in my case:
Pro-life? Yes.
Religious?: Yes - Catholic
Veteran? No, but I support the military.
Conservative? Yes
Gun owner? Yes
Lower taxes? Yes
Flat tax? Yes
Enforce immigration laws? Yes

So I guess I should be (already am?) on an FBI or DHS watch list. I suppose that goes for my 84 year old mother.

If this is not the first step into full-fledged Facism, (without, so far, genocide) then I have no idea what else this might be.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

You mean apart from the genocide of the unborn?

 

[rpp]

You mean apart from the genocide of the unborn?

EXACTLY!!! If you favor trying to stop this genocide and the killing of the most vulnerable, then you are a terrorist.

This is how they are calling evil good and good evil.

So Sailor, I guess you and I are in big trouble, eh?

 

[Polaris]

I think many valid points were raised in this article we reaped what we sowed.

salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/14/surveillance/

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

EXACTLY!!! If you favor trying to stop this genocide and the killing of the most vulnerable, then you are a terrorist.

This is how they are calling evil good and good evil.

So Sailor, I guess you and I are in big trouble, eh?

I guess. But I’d rather be in big trouble with this administration than God.

 

[cswalters]

October, a pro-life woman who received an unsolicited phone call from the Barack Obama campaign complained about his pro-abortion position. The call earned her a visit from the Secret Service, who were apparently given erroneous information from the campaign volunteer that she made a death threat.

I guess Freedom of Speech doesn’t exist anymore, in the name of National Security. God Help Us All. Not that I am supporting bombing abortion clinics, but, I don’t support slaughtering babies either.

 

[Biggie]

I think many valid points were raised in this article we reaped what we sowed.

salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/14/surveillance/

What valid points? This either reveals an ignorance of the real threats the country faces or a contempt for pro-life causes among other mainstream conscience issues.

The Patriot Act targeted material support for terrorist organizations and to prevent the US from becoming a primary base of terrorist operations. The likes of Bernardine Dohrn and Lynn Stewart have been prominent voices in opposition to it. Lynn Stewart, the attorney for Omar Abdel Rahman whose terrorist cell bombed the WTC in 1993, explained her attitude toward terrorism as follows: " I don’t believe in anarchistic violence, but in directed violence. That would be violence directed at the institutions that perpetuate capitalism, racism and sexism, and the people who are appointed guardians of those institutions, and accompanied by popular support." (Quoted from 1995 New York Times in “Unholy Alliance”, David Horrowitz, Regenery Publishing, 2004)

Where are the equivalent statements from Priests for Life, National Right to Life or any similar organization? To propose that those who support laws designed to address the former deserve to have the law corrupted to attack the latter is simply ridiculous.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

October, a pro-life woman who received an unsolicited phone call from the Barack Obama campaign complained about his pro-abortion position. The call earned her a visit from the Secret Service, who were apparently given erroneous information from the campaign volunteer that she made a death threat.

I guess Freedom of Speech doesn’t exist anymore, in the name of National Security. God Help Us All. Not that I am supporting bombing abortion clinics, but, I don’t support slaughtering babies either.

NO sane Catholic, or any sane Christian, supports bombing abortion clinics. Let’s get that straight please.

 

[Tigg]

Here is a blog entry that discusses this.
michellemalkin.com/2009/04/14/confirme-the-obama-dhs-hit-job-on-conservatives-is-real/

I have read the Homeland Security document. Not only does it attack pro-life advocates, it paints all combat veterans as Timothy McVeighs, those who support immigration laws, those affiliated with religious organizations, gun owners, those who lost their job or house recently due to the economic downturn, those who support flat tax, those opposed to raising taxes, and those who hold conservative political views as people capable to making terrorist attacks.

Essentially, the document states that anyone who disagrees with the current administration is a racist radical capable of acts of terrorism.

So in my case:
Pro-life? Yes.
Religious?: Yes - Catholic
Veteran? No, but I support the military.
Conservative? Yes
Gun owner? Yes
Lower taxes? Yes
Flat tax? Yes
Enforce immigration laws? Yes

So I guess I should be (already am?) on an FBI or DHS watch list. I suppose that goes for my 84 year old mother.

If this is not the first step into full-fledged Facism, (without, so far, genocide) then I have no idea what else this might be.

Yup…I’m sure I’m on the list as well. Their file on me should be one of the very larger ones! I’m only partly joking here…because this is becoming downright scary. I truly believe we are only living under an *ILLUSION *of freedom at this point. Anything could trigger something really nasty for us…even the Tea Party Revolts going on today. I fear when it happens, many won’t know what hit them.

 

[rookieonedge]

The Obama administration is engaging in political profiling. Maybe they should profile some of Obama’s old friends like Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dorhn, Tony Rezko and whoever was at the party kicking off Obama’s career at the Ayers’ residence.

Pro-lifers have to watch out for those “bubble zones.” We could end up in jail just by overstepping like the pastor in San Francisco. (Pastor Owen I believe). This administration is like a re-run of the Clinton days when Janet Reno considered pro-lifers terrorists. Former Senator Henry Hyde asked Reno a question concerning a bubble zone–that if a car with pro-life bumper stickers drove into the bubble zone, could the people in the car be arrested? She said they could be arrested.

So Obama thinks “right-wing extremism” is on the rise? Maybe he’d like to dialogue about that. (Mr. Obama, please call www.priestsforlife.org and, well, I have a list for you. You can even give me a call at my local pro-life group!)

My Church recently started a pro-life group of which I am a member besides the NRLC affiliate. I’m embarrassed to say that the group was so afraid to use the term “pro-life” in choosing a name for the group, much to my dismay, so they compromised with “right to life.” I really don’t see the difference, but I guess everybody else did. Our priest who attended the first couple of meetings wants us to stretch out and include the mentally ill, the poor, etc. . . instead of just focusing on the unborn. I argued that we have organizations for the above, and that’s why the pro-life movement began, to speak up for those who could not speak for themselves, the unborn baby–God’s most dependent children.

I heard the governor of Texas mentioning seceding as a possibility. Maybe I’ll pick up and move (after they close the border-- I think the state would do it).