Your opinion. I say an organization that has a long and well documented history of the support of terrorism has the burden of proof that they have changed their ways, not the other way around.

Nice try in an attempt to label those who disagree with you as supporting McCarthyism. "That dog won't hunt", Willie "Cigar" Clinton.

It is not a matter of disagreeing with me.

It is a matter of how we do things in this country.

Your guys and gal smear organizations and citizens in this country with alleged evidence and innuendos about their "affiliations" and refuse to document it with facts.

That my friend is McCarthyism at its worst.

No it has to do with the organization you are trying to legitimize. You don't get to define, "how we do things in this country". You don't get to set the bar as a faceless nameless poster on a web forum. What are your credentials that allow you to do that?

The history of the Muslim Brotherhood is well documented. Prove me wrong.

Where is the documented evidence that the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Muslim Students Association (MSA) or Muslim American Society (MAS) have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Or that Arif Alikhan or Kareen Shora, two muslims serving in the DHS and who have been smeared by your friends based on inuendo and undocumented "evidence", have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood

McCarthyism in its newest iteration.

So, they will die to establish Islam. What does that mean to you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy3MG...layer_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2jgQ...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYEV0...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYFnE...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqJw8...eature=related

Would that be like posting videos of selected Tea Party members making racists remarks and concluding that the Tea Party is racist?

You're the one who's missing the point.

But as to your off-subject point, you're wrong. On many issues the citizens of this country damn well need to know what our government is up to in our name. Why in the hell do you think the framers gave us those beloved Second Amendment rights that your side always crows about?

We haven't found reason enough to overthrow the government to this point, but you'd bloody well best believe that if my government is TORTURING people, "We the People" need to know about it so we can put a stop to it to the extent we are able. And if the right circumstances present themselves, you're damn straight I'll be taking up arms in the formation of an "organized militia" if necessary.

Oh, SNAP!

Oh Snap!

What fucking duplicity!

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/201...nsin-hate.html

Fuck off. You just don't always need to know. I don't care about the rest of your liberal tripe.

I can see no good coming from a government being able to secretly torture people. This never ends well.

Also, the Muslim Brotherhood are a joke. They are loud, but say nothing. Nobody in Egypt who isn't an actual member listens to a word they say.

OH Snap to that bitch!

http://ironicsurrealism.blogivists.c...-walker-image/

http://richc.myarchive.us/2011/02/wi...d-with-unions/

http://richc.myarchive.us/2011/02/wi...d-with-unions/

YOU have to prove yourself right. Burden of proof is on you. You can't make a statement and not back it up with documented facts, then tell someone else that burden is on them.
INNOCENT until proven guilty. Not the other way around.
Just like in a law suit, burden of proof is on the person making the accusation. You are making the accusation, therefor, it is your responsibility to provide the proof.

When we look at what the people need to know about what the government is up to, there are a number of different perspectives, and they certainly don't all have the same answer.

Surely anyone can understand that if a government has charged the military or some other agency to deal with a certain individual, it's not going to be helpful if everyone in the country knows what's going on, therefore the people find out after the fact and then wonder why they weren't consulted.

The purpose of having a democratically elected government is so that every person has the right to have a say in who represents their own personal views in government because we all understand that if every decision had to be made with the approval of every person, we'd never get anywhere.

So, you vote for your representative and trust that they're going to make the right decisions on your behalf. If you're not happy with it, you don't vote for them again.

If you don't vote, IMO, you shouldn't have a right to complain either way.