What is Economic Terrorism and is Labor Radical Stephen Lerner Guilty of it?
- Posted on March 24, 2011 at 4:49pm by
Emily Esfahani Smith
- Print »
- Email »
Thanks to Stephen Lerner’s detailed plan to bring down the U.S. economy by crippling the banks and causing the stock market to crash–so that the socialist utopia known as wealth distribution can ensue–“economic terrorism” has become the buzz-term among conservatives bloggers and talking heads at the moment, with people like Rush Limbaugh asking: “Is this not a form of terrorism this guy is preaching?”
The term “economic terrorism” is even gaining some traction on Capitol Hill. As we reported yesterday, Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah sent a letter to Eric Holder, asking the justice department to investigate Lerner. Chaffetz wrote, “The escalation of Mr. Lerner’s threats would clearly constitute domestic terrorism and pose substantial harm to the American people and the economy.”
But what is economic terrorism–and whatever it is, did Lerner in fact engage in it or incite it by saying the below?
We have an entire economy that is built on debt and banks so the question would be what would happen if we organized homeowners in mass to do a mortgage strike if we get half a million people to agree it would literally cause a new financial crisis for the banks not for us we would be doing quite well we wouldn’t be paying anything…
…So I think we weed out a very simple strategy: how do we bring down the stock market, how do we bring down their bonuses, how do we interfere with their ability to, to be rich.
In 2005, the Center of Security Policy of Geneva Definition organized a roundtable discussion of 45-some participants from governments, international institutions, the private sector, and independent consultants to discuss the very real threat economic terrorism poses to modern society. That roundtable, which included U.S. and European representatives, ultimately defined economic terrorism as any activity undertaken by a non-state actor which involves “coordinated and sophisticated or massive destabilizing actions in order to disrupt the economic and financial stability of a state, a group of states or a society (such as market oriented western societies) for ideological or religious motives.”
According to a report, “The roundtable’s main objective was to analyse a category of terrorist threats with potentially large-scale impact on complete economies.”
Economic terrorism was also the subject of a just-released report commissioned by the Pentagon in early 2009. The report blames economic terrorism–targeted financial strikes on the U.S. economy and by U.S. enemies–for the financial meltdown of 2008. “That the economic crisis was an intended purpose of a specific financial attack perpetrated by one or more actors driven by a combination of motives.”
In his speech, Lerner discusses causing “a new financial crisis.”
The Legal Question
But at root, whether Lerner is a so-called economic terrorist boils down to a legal issue, which must be understood within the context of U.S. law. That is to say, if Lerner engaged in or incited economic terrorism, then he would have been acting outside the boundaries of the law.
Experts on national security and the law, however, say that there is no specific legal definition of economic terrorism in U.S. law. Eugene Volokh, the law professor who runs the popular legal blog the Volokh Conspiracy, told me, “I’m unaware of any definition of the term – I don’t think it’s a legal term of art, or otherwise clearly defined.” And when I asked David Bernstein, a professor of law at George Mason University, for a definition of the term, he said: “I‘ve never heard of ’economic terrorism.’”
What we do have are statutory definitions of “terrorism” from which we may be able to extract what, in theory, “economic terrorism” would be. In his letter to Holder, Chaffetz cited the FBI’s definition of terrorism as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
Meanwhile, the Patriot Act of 2001–which is set to expire at the end of May–defines terrorism thus:
activities that (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the U.S. or of any state, that (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.
Both definitions of terrorism require an imminent danger to human life. Does Lerner’s statements rise to that level?
Nathan Sales, former deputy assistant secretary at the Department of Homeland Security in the Bush administration, told me that “It‘s hard for me to imagine a purely economic activity that could be ’dangerous to human life’ in that sense.” In his speech, Lerner uses the term “civil disobedience” to describe his plan. Civil disobedience is usually defined as non-violent illegal actions undertaken for the purpose of political protest.
Sales made a distinction between making a “threat” and inciting terrorism. He said that Lerner was “making a threat, sure, but not all threats rise to the level of terrorism. What sets terrorism apart from other kinds of threats is the use of physical violence, and often deadly violence, against protected civilian populations. This kind of economic gamesmanship seems to me to be something altogether different.”
Enter: The First Amendment
There is a further distinction to be made, which legally protects Lerner. The distinction between what Lerner said about desiring to cause instability to the US economy, and what he may do, which is in fact causing that instability.
Legal experts unanimously agree that what Lerner said is protected by the first amendment. Richard Epstein, a professor of law at New York University, explains that “ranting is political speech.“ But ”when he starts to buy munitions you have a problem.” In other words, political speech–ranting–can push against criminal law when illegal and violent activity incited imminently. “Immediacy is elusive but often decisive,” Epstein, below, tells me.
What about what Lerner is advocating? Could inciting people, en masse, to default on their loans in order to cause instability and wreak havoc on the US economy illegal? Todd Zywicki, an expert on bankruptcy law, doesn’t think so. Encouraging people to default on their loans is an “entirely legal activity.”
“The only way I could see this being a problem is if there are some sort of laws that would prohibit, for example, encouraging people en masse not to pay their taxes. But that, of course, would be incitement to an illegal activity,” Zywicki said.
While it may not be illegal to encourage people to default on their loans, Lerner specifically used the term “civil disobedience” to describe at least part of his plan–which means that something illegal would be happening. Rick Garnett, an associate dean at Notre Dame law school, said, “Actions in accord with speech like Mr. Lerner’s could, of course, bring the actor within the coverage of the criminal law. Traditionally, for example, the crime of ‘conspiracy’ is committed by people who agree to engage together in some other illegal activity, and to take some steps toward that goal.”
Does Terrorism Have to Involve Violence?
While by just making his speech, Lerner is on legally safe ground, there are elements of his plan that may approach something like economic terrorism. Benjamin Wittes, a national security expert at the Brookings Institution, tells me that, “There is definitely a species of terrorism that is targeted at civilian critical infrastructure of one sort or another.”
He went on to explain that, “one of the goals of terrorism much of the time or some of the time is to create panic and even disrupt day to day economic activities.”
Along these lines, a North Carolina judge declared just last week that peacefully circulating counterfeit money, as defendant Bernard Von NotHaus did, is “economic terrorism.”
“While these forms of anti-government activities do not involve violence, they are every bit as insidious and represent a clear and present danger to the economic stability of this country,” the judge said in declaring the verdict against NotHaus.
That’s “a mischievous use of the term ‘terrorism,’” says Wittes.
The point, however, is that there are certain forms of terrorism that do not involve inflicting physical harm on human beings, but could count as terrorism nonetheless: cyber-terrorism is the example Wittes cites. “It’s more hypothetical than real to date, although a lot of people are very concerned about it as a prospective matter.”
Lerner vs. Al Qaeda
Is Lerner’s plan another example?
Wittes makes an interesting point here. He says that Lerner is not guilty of inciting economic terror. However, if al Qaeda–or an al Qaeda representative–had made Lerner’s speech, we would undoubtedly identify that as economic terror. “Here’s the difference,” he begins: “When people who have killed people talk about bringing down the banks, and people who haven’t killed people talk about bringing down the banks, we know there is a difference in intention.”
Political context–which is no small thing–matters. Consider this example: a cyber-attack on the U.S. initiated by al Qaeda would be called “terrorism.” But that same attack, initiated by a pimply-faced 15-year old, would be called a “serious prank.”
“You would treat one as a serious threat to the United States, but you wouldn’t confuse the two,” Wittes explains.
“We know in our hearts there is a difference. One thing [Lerner] is not doing is engaging in war against the United States. When he talks about non-violent action to bring about political change within the United States, he’s not talking about killing people, or war, or a campaign to bring down the banks in the context of a violent campaign of killing people.”
Some of us may disagree with what Lerner says–we might find his future vision for the U.S. to be noxious–and we might hear hints of coercion and even violence in his speech, but as long as he keeps the munitions at home, and is not inciting mobs to violence, then he has a right to express his outlandish ideas.
But if Lerner takes it to the next level, as Rep. Chaffetz fears he will, does that constitute economic terrorism?
Popular Stories
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 591 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 417 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 415 Comments
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 385 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 376 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 417 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 415 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 385 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 151 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know 100 Comments- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 303 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 417 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (186)
LadyIzShy
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:38pmHe should be put on trial and spend a good LONG time in jail.. however I do not believe ANYTHING will come of this
Report Post »DagneyT
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:38pmI emailed my congressman, Lamar Smith, a Blaze link on this story today. Lamar was at my GOP women’s group meeting recently, and told me he had “subpoena power”, as chairman of the banking committee, so I asked him to use that power to learn about this terrorism threat. If any of you are constituents of Peter King, you need to inform him as well. He is the chairman of the terrorism committee.
Report Post »VLADTEPES
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:36pmKeep your gas tank’s full and the pantry plenty, some ammo wouldn’t hurt..
Report Post »Amazingoly
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:26pmLock him up now, then try to figure it out. He doesn’t like America, and is plotting to hurt America, so maybe he needs to leave.
Report Post »Warphead
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:38pmIf guilty of plotting the downfall of The US then he needs to leave alright, leave the planet that is. Since when did we become so “tolerant” that we just ignore someone who actively seeks ways to completely destroy our country, our freedom and our very lives? There are two ways of dealing with people like this. One is called a long drop and the other is a ride on o’l sparky. Either is fine with me.
Report Post »reckless
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 8:45pm.Lerner does’nt hate America. In fact, I tend to believe that he adores this country. Where else can he find a larger group of gullible idiot liberals to give his ridiculous ideas any creedence?
Report Post »kaijue
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:25pmHalf of the population depends on the Government to survive. Welfare, Social Security, Disability. Now collapse the economy and tell me again how they aren’t endangering the lives of these people. But then wasn’t that the game plan of Progressives from the very beginning; the purging of the “undesirables” from society so they stop draining all the resources.
Report Post »pandora
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:24pmWith the breaking of this story by Glenn and Rush also offering his opinion, you would think others would have some interest. I couldn’t find a thing about it in the Wall St. Journal. Not one blurb. I guess they don’t care that someone is trying to completely clapse the economy. There won’t be any need for the WSJ after that. Hmmm.
Report Post »commonsenseguy
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:23pmhave you had enough yet????? i have tried to tell people the left is not crazy,they know how far they can take everything, so again will we continue to take this crap and let the left continue to ruin our country or will we all join together and fight back, soros and the left have played every move two to three times over and over and know just how far they can go,so lets push back not with physical treats,but with the same tactics,people,one person can make a difference ,maybe you don’t get your name on the front page,but you can make a difference behind the scenes ,if you see are hear something that don’t sound are feel right, tell someone,like glenn,your senator ,anyone you trust hold these people to the fire,if the union protest,then protest the unions ,if they protest a business that they don’t like,support that business .please,this is only going to get worse,so buckle up for a wild ride. don’t let the left win,or take over with their onesided view .stand for what you say you believe in. again my wife and i have lost a lot over the last two years,so we have decided to go all in.if we lose we lose everything we still have,or we will gain back our freedoms that many of soldier have shed blood defending over the years,why would we allow their blood to be wasted??? so we are all in,we have joined others who have the same beliefs we have and are willing to lose everything just to save our country and our freedoms,so please decide now and lets get to saving lady liberty,she needs help now,before it is to late.pray and decide your direction.
Report Post »Redistributor
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:19pmThis guy is a peon. Nothing to worry about here.
Report Post »MotherRedDog
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:18pmOkay, let me get this straight. If this was a conservative guy the same age as Lerner (not the pimply faced kid comparison) would that be terror? I mean really, Janet put out regs on Right Wing Extremists since she was appointed. I’m not buying that Lerner is anything but a terrorist.
Report Post »thefisherman
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:15pmIs Lerner available for comment? Can Glen get him on the show?
Report Post »gatlinburg
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:14pmCould you imagine what would happen to a person or group of people, protesting by not filing their income tax… How serious would the Goverment react.
Report Post »commonsenseguy
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:26pm@gatlinburg,i think you are closer to that answer than you will ever know. the show is about to start,popcorn coke,candy,lights camera,action. just wish side will make the move first??? the left or right?????
Report Post »commonsenseguy
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:29pm@ gatlinburg,i hope you show my post before it was pulled.
Report Post »Chet Hempstead
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 9:22pmTheoretically there’s supposed to be a difference between the government and Morgan Chase.
Report Post »jb1972
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:09pmI think the picture of Mr. Lerner says it all. He’s an arrogant POS, who has probably begged on his knees to Bawney Fwank! His plan is wishful thinking but even most democrats and union workers will resort to self preservation over his idealogical plan to screw himself! But if they try, I will be in the market to buy some nice housing for next to nothing…….
Report Post »jblovesAmerica
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 7:38pmwhen the riots start-this guy gets hung 1st
Report Post »thegreatcarnac
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:08pmYes…the little communist trash IS guilty of it. YES…there is such a thing. ….and NO, the racists, anti-American holder will NOT prosecute it.
Report Post »SEOhio
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:08pmWe have too many damn lawyers!!!!!!
Report Post »psst
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:07pmOff Topic. But!!
Blaze, this story is delicioso.
Talking about toilet paper is fantastic. Afterall, we spend the darn thing here in ameriKa as “munny”
Omaha Mayor wants to add extra taxes on toilet paper.
http://www.omaha.com/article/20110323/NEWS01/703239866
In the past I have stated the government will mandate what brand we Must use. But I should have been more aware they also wanted to add extra taxes on it.
I guess it’s like tobaccy.“ Most” of US , including myself is addicted to TP.
Bet some folks will now wipe w/ tobaccy and smoke TP.
Report Post »steve-in-pa
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:06pmSince he is friends with Obama Holder will have to break out his double sided coin for this decision…heads, he gets off. Although he is white that is one point against him in Holders eyes.
Report Post »JohnQTaxpayer
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:06pmMr Lerner
If you hate this country, here is a rubber inner tube pick an ocean and get out
Report Post »Wilkins
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 9:12pmPatriotdave, that’s cold. Give him a brand new innertube, a patch kit and a pump. Also a wide sun hat, half a dozen water bottles, small tarp, plus a fishing kit with hooks and line. Then wish him God speed, also ‘fair winds and following seas’ as you push him off from shore. That way if he makes it, he can tell everyone he meets about your generous American heart ;-)
Report Post »katzenbacker73
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:06pmAll you need to know is he visited the White House 4 times.
Report Post »TAKE_NO_PRISONERS
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:05pmSounds like lawyer speak, terror is the ability to spread fear and uncertainty.in action or deed, Its that simple !!
Report Post »GetsGreased
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:02pmWhat economic terrorism has already been executed? Lehman was taken down almost overnight. Lerner isn‘t talking about this like it’s an experiment, but like it’s a strategy that has already been implemented and proven to be successful.
Report Post »herculesmom
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:02pmIf this person was a conservative (tea party member) Eric Holder would find a way to prosecute him.
Report Post »OneofMany
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:02pmAll those arguments are well and good, but what about the guy Glen Beck just spoke about who just got 15 years in prison for “economic terrorism” because he minted his own coins…? I mean if minting your own coins can be (without a doubt as in his case) proven to be a case for bringing down America via economic terrorism, then the Lerner guy is about 10 times as guilty.
Report Post »338lapua
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 6:16pm150 years? I am OK with that!
Report Post »OutOfTheAether
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 4:59pmIf a guy on North Carolina (?) can get put away for 15 years on “Domestic terrorism” for simply making a few gold coins, then I think it should also apply here as well. I think the precedent has already been met.
Report Post »Showtime
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:06pmCongress is working on it.
Report Post »Chet Hempstead
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 10:03pmOkay, the coin guy was not convicted of terrorism, he was convicted of making his own coins – which there is a law against. The prosecutor called it a form terrorism in his summation,,which is when prosecutors are allowed to present far-fetched legal theories and exaggerate the danger of not convicting the accused. Lerner can’t be prosecuted for terrorism, or anything else because like it says in this post if you read the whole thing, he hasn’t broken any laws.
Report Post »thepatriotdave
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 4:58pmHas anyone heard from Holder yet???
http://tinyurl.com/4rv8xsm
Report Post »Allen West agrees to debate CAIR official
P C BE DAMNED
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:21pmI call upon those who love America if you can deliever justice for your country to do so. We have no equal protection under the law. Eric Holder is a bad man and will not do his job. We are in need of help. If you have special abilities ( knowledge), we need your help. We may never be able to thank you but God will know. I will thank you in advance.
Report Post »smithclar3nc3
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:52pmI’m with you P.C. the progressives have used this pc crap to control the language an idiots in Washington have allowed this to go on for far tooo long.
Report Post »P C BE DAMNED
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 4:57pmDo we have mobsters that love America who could deliever a little justice for America?
joe conservative
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:05pmIf he’s not guilty of it, then nobody ever could be. Great job Glenn on getting this on tape for all to hear. There is a YouTube video that puts it all together. Check out the comments to see how people have sympathy for this plan. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myECZFA0iHI
Report Post »SavingtheRepublic.com
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:05pm^__^__^
More like mobsters in the admin PC!
I thought Beck did a good job the other day showing a clear example of how the govt defines it with the coin guy. So it applies to the coin guy (rightly so regardless of his intentions) but not to Lerner? Or do we have to stay tuned to see how the corrupt Holder will treat it? Hmm let me see he let the Black Panthers loose, thinks the country is racist …. I say nothing will happen to Lerner! from the DOJ as long as Holder and those with his belief system are present. All is not lost though….
Congress has the power to to handle this like Treason, they have done it in the past trying individuals under the treason act for espionage and sedition so dont try to say they can’t. This is why Beck brought this to us,b/c he knows we will pressure our Reps to do something when this corrupt admin wont. Maybe after that they do something about Holder and the rest of the Obama cronies!
Report Post »sleazyhippo
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:06pmThis site is like a Graveyard from 5:00 to 6:00 PM ET, MF, because so many are watching TV!
Report Post »grandma7
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:08pmThis is more than just this guy. Chase is the only major bank not controlled by Sharia Law Groups. Coincidence???
Report Post »ClassicalLiberal
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:09pmLet they do whatever they want so long as they pay the consequences. (repossessed house, bad credit, bad reputation, etc.)
“To the masses, the catchwords of Socialism sound so enticing… so they will continue to work for Socialism, helping thereby to bring about the inevitable decline of the civilization which the nations of the West have taken thousands of years to build up.” -Ludwig von Mises
Report Post »Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:19pmThe Freemen up in Montana spouted anit-Govt/USA rants and wanted to cede from the union. They were arrested and tried for several counts, one of them was trying to incite rebellion and open disobedience against the IRS. As I remember, that happened under Clinton, Janet Reno was AG.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:25pmUnder the administration and DOJ he will not be prosecuted in any shape or form; this is the clearest set of terrorism being planned against the USA and nothing is being done.
God help us now.
Report Post »TXPilot
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:25pmLerner could be prosecuted, but it’s not going to happen, because traitors don’t prosecute traitors.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:29pmDarmok:
I remember about that, antd how intense the debates became about how far the Clinton administration was going vs free speech and such. Thanks for the reminder on it.
I wonder how long it will be before the current DOJ or Homeland Security decides on their own or via the POTUS enough is enough and storms a tea party meeting with guns blazing like they attempted at Waco. (Note, I feel the Davidians did break some laws, just not deserving for the ATF to charge in with guns going off first and a sniper shooting a man armed only with a paint brush while painting a grain silo.)
Report Post »cheezwhiz
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:29pmIn my city and other surrounding cities, there is a strong movement happening UNDER THE RADAR with NO online presence at all ( hmmmm?) which is this :
Report Post »Local “‘organizers” get a bunch of people together at neighborhood levels in churches , the common theme being ALL these people are either in default of their home loans or have already being evicted and foreclosed on. Then after each and every address is documented , the vacant houses are checked by the “organizers ”. A few days later, the same people gather again and they are told 2 things :
1. If banks are foreclosing on you and you are still in your house, DO NOT LEAVE, DO NOT PAY, STOP MOWING THE LAWN
2. If you are out of your house and its still empty under bank’s possession , go back to the house, ENTER BY ANY MEANS and OCCUPY THE HOUSE because its your house.
These same “ organizers ”are also going around making a list of vacant houses in their territories and busting the locks of houses which seem to be isolated , to put in a bunch of homeless people there, with instructions to NOT MOVE even if the realtor shows up and surprises them .
The “ organizers ” are just a phone call away in case of trouble with the law or banks because within an hour a crowd of 100-200 people with signs and bullhorns can be gathered , with a local TV reporter in tow, to protest the cops or banks .
Is this happening anywhere else too? You won’t find it online …these people are discreet now
Showtime
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:36pm@sleazyhippo
Report Post »Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:06pm
This site is like a Graveyard from 5:00 to 6:00 PM ET, MF, because so many are watching TV!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And the headline:
What is Economic Terrorism and is Labor Radical Stephen Lerner Guilty of it?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I’m sure I could come up with an explanation of economic terrorism, and yes, Stephen Lerner is guilty of it; but because of what I learn here AND each afternoon on TV at 5:00, my head feels like an over-stuffed suitcase!!!
cheezwhiz
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 5:42pmEnter: The First Amendment
Report Post »There is a further distinction to be made, which legally protects Lerner.
———-
Does the 1st Amendment argument also apply to OC councilwoman
Deborah Pauly ???
NOTALOTTAYITTAYADDA
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 6:00pmKUDOS Cheez, the great info.
What this (so called) news is about is simple, “Let’s ID terrorism and ignore the tyranny going on in the backrooms of the finance industry.”
The ivy league aristocrats that caused the recent $65 TRILLION lose in value to the world economy, go on untouched.
READING “It Takes a Pillage: behind the bailouts, bonuses, and backroom deals from Washington to Wall street” N. Prins 09′
Gut wrenching to know what wall street gets away w/. Between Goldmansux, and the thousands of insurance Co that restructured to gain “BANK” status and TARP cash. Even “Liars Poker” Lewis shows how Soloman Bro had fed law passed to get by state laws preventing mortgages from getting on the stock market.
Report Post »READ A BOOK PEOPLE!
Ironmaan
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 6:05pmPc Be Damned—
Report Post »I agree with you 100%. We need to utilize unconventional tactics to “attack” these idiots directly.
http://guerillatics.com
cheezwhiz
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 6:25pmgrandma7
Report Post »This is more than just this guy. Chase is the only major bank not controlled by Sharia Law Groups. Coincidence???
————————
JPMC …the former employer of the latest WH employee William Daley .
Now thats some chronology of events I’d like to follow :P
specially in light of Stephen Lerner ‘s shoutout to JPMC in those tapes .
Coincidence ???
pajamash
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 6:29pm“Do we have mobsters that love America who could deliever a little justice for America?”
Really? In listening to the Francis Fox Piven piece on The Blaze today it made me think about being more aware of the posts here on The Blaze. P C – Ask yourself this question, “would you say this in a public place”?
Report Post »cheezwhiz
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 6:40pm@ NOTALOTTAYITTAYADDA
Report Post »IMHO, whatever this regime does is for the exclusive benefit of the following :
4G ( = Goldmansachs, GE, GM, Google)
3M ( = Marxists, Muslims, Mexicans )
Unless these entities are recipients of direct benefits , NO decision or policy happens in this regime
Miami
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 6:50pmYes,
they should be jailed and more so can we not prosecute Mr Holder for dereliction of duty even treason? I believed Bush‘s ties to the Saudis to boarder on treason but Obama’s ongoing relations with terrorist foreign and domestic go beyond what anyone would consider marginal. His latest action are blatantly Anti-American, blocking Americans from working our own oil fields while funding Brazil’s drilling.
Report Post »restorehope
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 8:04pmOk, don’t call it economic terrorism. There are other labels that would apply, such as inciting civil disobedience. Telling people to default on their home loans is inciting them to willingly break the law. It sounds like the head mobster telling his crew to deliberately commit a crime. And if there are people stupid enough to follow his directions, then they can join him in the slammer.
What about the crime of starting an insurrection? Telling union activists to disrupt business at banks un order to punish them is a planned insurrection. If the Injustice Dept is using the excuse that there is no definitive definition of economic terrorism, then they cannot be allowed to get away with that deflection.
We have to keep up the pressure, and keep their reluctance to follow the law under the spotlight.
Report Post »Even if it takes until 2012 to right this wrong, justice will prevail.
Reyrey
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 8:50pmIt will Start an investigation into “SEIU” and see if any plans and money spent to take on this task to crash wall street, follow the money. remember you can not yell fire in a movie threater, when there is no fire and anyone who is injury or kill you are held responsible
Report Post »Evileye
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 9:16pmfor conspiracy he needs to achieve an overt act.
Report Post »Free speech unless you cross a state line.
But Berry the Fairy want the same
there will be no prosecution.
overt act An act that could lead to a felony.
you don’t have to commit the felony.
Like 3 people having a conversation
one is FBI
one guy say let rob a fed bank
Freedom of speech.
The other guy say i will go start the car and does ( the overt act)
they never go rob the bank,but are guilty of conspiracy
Remember Abbie Hoffman when to told people burn there draft card?
then he crossed the state line to Illinois and they had him for conspiracy
Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 9:35pmDuring Clinton Admin: Ruby Ridge/Waco/Freeman/Brady Bill/OK City bombing which spurred a deep investigation into militias. All this went over the 1st and 2nd amendment and during that timeframe; the Republicans did not demand investigations into the DOJ ala Janet Reno. The one common fact is Democrats don’t abide by the constraints of the constitution. Now we have Obama trying to simply destroy the constitution and there is still the presence of a Clinton in the administration.
Report Post »Now, who wants pie?
ManThong
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 9:38pmLooks like a Nobel Prize is in store for this guy.
Report Post »G.W. Dobbs
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 11:33pmBirds of a feather…
Report Post »A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
Posted on March 24, 2011 at 11:35pmThe end goal of terrorism isn’t to terrorize, but to force compliance.
If terrorists didn’t have to kill anyone to make them comply, they would likely do that since you would have that many more slaves, adherents … what have you.
Destruction of property without loss of life is still war and tyranny, as our Founders noted.
“He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.”
“He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
“He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.”
“He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation …”
(^ achem – the UN)
Many of the offenses listed did not include physical violence. And the destruction of an individual’s store of value (cash, gold) – let me add “by someone other than the owner” – qualifies as tyranny.
As a side note, let me add this since it might come up in relation to this issue: cyber attacks against companies or individuals is a state matter – no Federal government necessary! If the Feds need to protect their own servers, then they should secure the Internet ONLY ON GOVERNMENT PREMISES!
Report Post »Ruler4You
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 7:07amLook, Osama said, right after the 9-11 attack, that his intention was to “destroy the U.S. economy.”
Whether or not our own government and like minded folks, like Lerner, are accomplices or they have a separate agenda to destroy America through our economy, doesn’t matter. The fact is they ARE doing it.
“Economic justice” “IS” a common and well known mantra of the communist left. It is a key element in their “fundamental” change they want applied to America. (Except to them).
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:17amTerrorism = using terror against a target or the public at large in order to bring about political change.
Collapsing an institution in order to distribute its largess is not terrorism. That’s warfare or grand theft (depending on the scale).
We’re really getting into a bad habit in this nation of calling nearly all criminal acts “terrorism”. The word has become almost meaningless.
Report Post »CDD
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:32amPC be Damned, the answer to your question is no given organized labors’s historical ties to organized crime!
Report Post »