Constitutionalists and survivalists grouped with Al-Qaeda by Justice Department

[monkeybird]

http://publicintelligence.net/depart...tremism-guide/

[QUOTE]A recent Department of Justice guide for investigators of criminal and extremist groups lists

[Klayton]

It is the same politicians that are trying their hardest to remove our rights to own guns.

So no surprise there...

[Matt In Oklahoma]

Let me throw something at you all. A Constitutionalist who believes and works socially politically to change things is not a threat. You might be surprised at how many law enforcement feel the same way you do. However as with any group the radical elements are a threat. If you proclaim to be a Constitutionalist and wear 2 strapped down pistols and throw your favorite battle rifle over your shoulder and attempt to stroll into congress well you are a problem and will be in a report. If you decide that the local police have no right to pull you over because they are not elected and you shoot it out with them well you are a problem and will be in a report. If you are mad at the BATF and blow up some kids you will be in a report.
If you store food and water and when the next hurricane hits and your not on TV crying that the government didn't feed you enough you will not be in a report. If you grow your own garden and don't get a bacteria or virus from a food source you will not be in a report. It's common sense and don't let folks push your hater buttons.

[Klayton]

Matt, you make a good point. But let me add, when politicians actually feared the public, they didn't do so much BS.
They, through litigation, have made themselves above the law, and use your tax money for THEIR additional security. TO INCLUDE, their own survival bunkers paid for by the US taxpayers.

Because after TEOTWAWKI we need politicians more than we need farmers, right?!?!?!

[Matt In Oklahoma]

Agreed but keep in mind that just because they are politicians doen't mean they don't make the list too :). After all politicians are "the public" as well.

[mtncharlie]

The problem stems from the fact that we keep voting in lawyers - these people write, and then vote in, bills with so much legalese that an ordinary citizen may as well be trying to read Chinese. The bills, which have then become law, are worded in such a manner that they can then be interpreted however the people in power at the time wants them to be. If the People don't like the way it has been interpreted they can then ask for redress from the Supreme Court, however, if the law has been interpreted in a certain way for some time the Justices will allow the weight of that interpretation to stand. Lawyers have been stacking the deck for decades now, and we just keep letting them do it.

[610Alpha]

I wish the laws were written in a foreign language because then I could get a translation to English without needing a stinking lawyer to translate it for me:) Why can't they just say what they mean and mean what they say. This coming from the son of a lawyer.