"Stupak calls it what it is: "Domestic Terrorism""

[Kaleva]

"I was down in the cafeteria at lunch a few minutes ago. CNN was on the TV screens down there, and Rick Sanchez was talking to Rep. Stupak about the recent wave of violent rhetoric. The news about the white powder being sent to Rep. Weiner's office had just broken, and Sanchez asked Stupak: "Could you say this was domestic terrorism?"

Stupak replied, "Yeah, I guess you could call it domestic terrorism.""

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/3/25/850810/-Stupak-calls-it-what-it-is:-Domestic-Terrorism

[polichick]

1. Glad somebody has the guts to call it what it is...

I'd like an official statement by the FBI or Homeland Security.

[DevonRex]

2. That's exactly what it is. nt

[Bluerthanblue]

3. yes it is, and it's WRONG.

happy to rec.
:hi:

[customerserviceguy]

4. I wonder what the response here would have been

if Stupak and a few of his collegues had not gotten their way with the EO, and had let the bill die. I would imagine there might be violence against him, and I wonder how people would feel about it then.

[Birthmark]

5. What you would imagine is of no consequence.

Imagined threats and violence < real threats and violence.

[JuniperLea]

7. Bullshit...

Many states have made it a FELONY to even utter violent threats... they are called "criminal threats."

The Elements of the Crime of Criminal Threats
1. The defendant willfully threatened to unlawfully kill or unlawfully inflict great bodily injury on another person;

2. The defendant made the threat orally or in writing or by electronic communication device;

3. The defendant intended that the statement be understood as a threat and intended that it be received by the other person;

4. The threat was so clear, immediate, unconditional, and specific that it communicated to the other person a serious intention and the immediate prospect that the threat would be carried out;

5. The threat actually caused the other person to be in sustained fear for her or his own safety or for the safety of her or his immediate family;

AND

6. The other person's fear was reasonable under the circumstances.

Someone commits an act willfully when he or she does it willingly or on purpose.
In deciding whether a threat was sufficiently clear, immediate, unconditional, and specific, consider the words themselves, as well as the surrounding circumstances.
Someone who intends that a statement be understood as a threat does not have to actually intend to carry out the threatened act (or intend to have someone else do so).
Great bodily injury means significant or substantial physical injury. It is an injury that is greater than minor or moderate harm.
Sustained fear means fear for a period of time that is more than momentary, fleeting, or transitory.
If a threat is intended to and does induce a sustained fear, the person making the threat need not know whether the threat was actually received.




I'm seriously sick and fucking tired of people ignoring this... words do indeed matter!

[Birthmark]

9. Well, aren't you feisty!

A bit out of line, but feisty. I suggest that you read the post to which I was responding and then my response. And then see if that doesn't calm you down a bit.

Or not. Some people are determined to be dramatic.

[cascadiance]

6. Perhaps he's discovering how filled with hypocrites the "pro-life" movement really is!

One can only hope... Not holding my breath though!

[customerserviceguy]

8. He's going to have to start looking for a job in a short while

I think he's done the amazing feat of managing to piss off everybody at the same time.

[RC]

10. It's not "Domestic Terrorism" when the Republicans do it.

Only us.

[KittyWampus]

11. kick

[Kaleva]

12. DUer Turborama posts video & transcript of Stupack's interview

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x447793

[TomCADem]

13. Whoa! Stupak and I Agree On Something!

Terrorism - "the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear)."

Yup. It does sound like terrorism. Violance and threats of violance against Democratic members of Congress. Brown or Browning signs?

[Turborama]

14. Video

Here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x447793

:kick: