how many freepers must commit terrorist acts before the goverment steps in?

[Gato Moteado]

of course, i speak of this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x881390

but we've seen several other terrorist acts emanating from freerepublic.com in recent times, including the freeper terrorist that mailed powder to keith olbermann and others.

and don't let these people get by with saying it's just a few bad apples...there was a concerted effort by all freepers to deny medical care to andy stephenson when he was in need of surgery while suffering from cancer. they were able to suspend funds meant for andy long enough to cause andy a lot of suffering and an earlier death.

make no mistake about it, freepers are terrorists. when can we count on the government to go in there and shut them down and start putting the cell leaders (like rimjob) in prison?

[Skinner]

1. The government cannot and should not shut down free republic.

The united states is still, thankfully, a free country.

[kiki]

2. But advocating violence and harm to others...

...is against the law, and even in a "free" country, one is not free to break the law. If a Muslim website made calls for the genocide of Westerners with the same regularity with which Freepers advocate "turning the Middle East to glass" (some Freepers have this charming sentiment in their sig line), or if a liberal website advocated the murder of dissenting politicians and civilians with the same frequency as FR, they wouldn't last two seconds.

The proof of the pudding becomes clear when, as we've seen today, these FReaks start acting out the sick fantasies that are the bread and butter of that site.

[YOY]

3. Gotta go with Skinner here

The same right that protects the FReeps, racists, Fred Phelps, and other hate sites protect all other forms of free speach that are much more beneficial. It's not the government's job to make that decision of what information (or misinformation) is dangerous and what is not.

I don't want someone to turn around and start using this crap on us as well.

[maxrandb]

4. It's an old argument, but still valid

that Freedom of Speech does not give you the right to yell "FIRE!" in a crowded movie theater.

Freaker Republic is like a gnat. I'm much more concerned with blow-hards like Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Coulter, Beck, etc., being given a forum on our public airwaves to accuse 52% of the country of treason.

You fill little Johnnie Freeper's head full of crap, like "Dems are out to take his guns, surrender to the terrorist, and fit "little Johnnie" for a turbin"...and then Little Johnnie Freeper takes an assault rifle, 2,000 rounds of ammunition, explosives and a napalm cocktail and kills someone, or many people...that's not "Free Speech", that's accessory to murder

[Solo_in_MD]

5. If a Muslim website made calls for the genocide of Westerners ...

they already do, and in the mosques, and yet they are allowed to continue.

This is far from a new story...initial reports were not clear on what the freeper had that was illegal

[Gato Moteado]

7. the US isn't quite as free as we'd like to believe

but your point is taken.

still, shouldn't the gov't be investigating FR for harboring terrorists (by the gov's own definition) and for the death of our good friend andy stephenson which they had a hand in?

[mondo obscurius]

6. Terrorism/terrorist

As I recall, these were among the first words to be co-opted and redefined into meaningless emotion-triggers by the neo-fascists. Along with "liberal", "democracy", "freedom" and "American". The equation is easy enough if you stop believing in the big lie of U.S. democracy. It's like this: you're not a terrorist if you want to slaughter the right "undesirables", in fact - you're as good as the hand of gawd. Say hello to one flavor of amerika's new and improved brownshirts.

m

[Catherine Vincent]

8. They're not all terrorists.

:evilgrin: