Sarah Palin’s Definition Of Terrorism

Tonight, Sarah Palin was interviewed by Brian Williams of NBC. Of course, she was with chaperone.

In the interview, Sarah Palin struggled with a  very narrow definition of "domestic terrorism". Apparently, terrorism does not include abortion clinic bombings.

This is the United States government definition of "domestic terrorism" under the Federal Criminal Code:

(5) the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that – 
      (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
      (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 United States.

Per the above definition, abortion clinic bombings would be classified as "domestic terrorism". To Palin, "terrorism" may be a convenient political term to use to score political points. But, US law is pretty unambigious. Sarah Palin is unfit for the office she seeks.


This entry was posted in Politics, Terrorism. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Sarah Palin’s Definition Of Terrorism

  1. Kaiser Kabir says:

    During the first few weeks of Palin’s appearance on the national scene it appeared that she had energised the Republican base. Now we know that all she energised is the extreme right-wing element of the Party which remains a smallish minority. Yet if the opinions of senior Republican commentators such as Krauthammer, Buckley, Brooks, et al is anything to go by then the choice of Palin has been disastrous for the Party.

    Worse still, even an extreme right-winger such as Buchanan seems to have withdrawn his support for her. He is quoted as saying that Palin, “… does not have a large information base.”

    All this begs the question as to why McCain made such a bad choice? Is it because of his poor temperament and impulsiveness? (Apparently, as a child McCain’s temper was so bad that his parents used to douse him in a bath of ice water to calm him down)

    Can such a man be trusted to be President?

  2. Vickie says:

    She is a SELF-PROCLAIMED RED NECK–she tried to start a consulting firm under a business license she took out from the State of Alaska in 2005 she PROUDLY named “Rouge Cou”–French for REDNECK. She knows what the connotation is., and she is proud of this? VERY TRASHY. A lot of people do not know this, and are appalled to find out. So SPREAD THE WORD!

    Here is the link to the state’s license site:

    Sarah Palin is not a smart woman, Alaskans know this but did not care when she was just our Governor, because Alaska has ZERO problems and an over-abundance of state wealth. So nothing can go wrong here, essentially. Everything Sarah Palin says about herself is and exaggeration of the truth.

    She is also incorrect about the number of employees “she” has. She did not correct McCain–no doubt because as with most things, she does not really know–that the State of Alaska employs only 15,000, not 24,000 as they claimed to Brian Williams. Furthermore, I am one of “her” employees (I am an Engineer, and I am much smarter than this woman and much more knowledgable about government and foreign policy, although I am far younger than she is), and as with all us State of Alaska employees, she absolutely has no control over any of us who work for her. So do not be fooled by her pretend experience in this category–she simply has nothing to do with her 15,000 employees.

    She has barely accomplished anything–she did not “take on” our previous governor, she ran against him–as is the method of conducting a campaign for public office. She wanted to be governor; he was the most unpopular governor in our history, so people thought she would be better than he, so it is all relative. Alaskans REALLY and truly do not scrutinize our politicians AT ALL–this is why she won, and this is why we only NOW are finding out how corrupt and unethical she is. It is absolutely ridiculous, although in her defense, I actually think she is ony this unethical because she is actually super stupid, and doesn’t really think a whole lot about her own behavior.

    It is scary to think that ANYONE would want this woman to be Vice President–or worse, thinks that she is capable of being President, if it came to that? But I suspect her only supporters are people who do not care beyond her superficial qualities, and do not even realize (or care?) that she lies, has no integrity, does not possess an ounce of wisdom, has no command of basic principals of federal government, and perhaps cannot tell that her comments or speeches are NEVER her own–they are someone’s thoughts formulated for her and shoved into her below-average brain–which is why her answers always seem so shallowly formulated. These people just don’t care about the truth, so one cannot convince them otherwise.

    It is the thinking people I care about: do not allow this woman to get away with this. She does not deserve our consideration or your vote.

    And NO, her ratings are not at 80% anymore in Alaska–I am so sick of them pretending is still is. After 1.5 years as governor, of course people said she was fine–that is not long enough for us to know any better, let’s be realistic. I liked her as governor, but she is in no way fit to be VP of this nation–that is a horrible joke gone wrong.

    Even though this state is super conservative, people are pissed at her that she has not contacted Alaska since late August (see, we have no problems, so the state can run itself without her) and are also bothered to find out about her wasting State money to take her daughters on vacations, allowing her husband to be part of all her meetings and produce the state budget, and firing our Public Safety Officer for not firing her ex-brother in law. This woman is sadly dumb.

    Her approval rating in Alaska is now about 50%–not something to be proud about, but they try not to mention it, don’t they?

    Posted by: Alaskan Against Palin | October 23, 2008 at 02:30 AM

  3. Vickie says:

    The previous was a copy of a response to this blog about Brian William’s interview.

    I just found it interesting to see what an Alaskan says about his Governor. I especially love the part where he says that the state has ZERO problems, so it is not that picky or discerning when it comes to picking a Gov. and that she had an approval rating of 80% because she had only been in for one and a half years and had not been “tested” yet.
    You know, I would wonder how she would react if a “domestic terrrorist” would blow up one of Alaska’s oil pipelines. Then and only then could she criticize Obama’s lack of experience.

  4. Red5243 says:

    There will undoubtedly be countless hours of PoliSci tomes devoted to this election for all of the positive reasons (a diverse slate of Presidential hopefuls, significant registration upticks, etc) and for the extraordinary negative elements (the reappearance of our collective national racism, the obscene fundraising, and the complete disregard for actual discourse by the GOP).

    But the most profound may be the emergence of a national candidate as a pop media darling. No, not my Junior Senator, Barack Obama. The discussion of the day seems to be looking past the election for Gov. Palin at opportunities for a hollywoodesqe transformation. Talk show? Media commentator?

    This interview merely confirms that she can follow a script with little personal thought or regard for the true nature of the people she wishes to lead.

  5. Robster says:

    The Yorkie is a cracker who believes that abortion clinic bombers are doing God’s work. End of story.

  6. Mash says:

    Kaiser, Kathleen Parker has an op-ed out on the WashPo today which is probably pretty close to what might have motivated McCain to choose Palin. Palin has been a disaster for McCain because it was a prism through which the country could judge his judgment.

    Red, the McCain campaign has devolved into farce. It feels more like American Idol than a presidential campaign. I cant remember a campaign in recent memory that has been so devoid of ideas.

    Robbie, right to the point 🙂

  7. Ingrid says:

    Mash, I read that oped an almost posted on it but do not agree with it. I mean, yes, women need to be told that a lot of men go gaga and all the blood in their brain goes straight to their ‘plumbing tool’?? WE did not need a study to tell us that. However, I wished I knew where I read this as a more plausible explanation; McCain wanted Lieberman, the GOP said absolutely not. This was McCain’s way of saying ‘up yours’ whilst at the same time pandering to what he thought had worked for the Bushies all those long 8yrs; pander to the extreme rightwing idiots. And like Karl Rove would approve, she’s being used as the attack dog.
    I’m glad though that this ordeal/drama is putting a serious strain on the GOP and is dividing them. In Europe, the neocons would be considered a separate righwing extremist group/party.. the republican party (even though I do not agree with a lot of their ideals/goals), ‘needs’ to get back to the way they were.. extremism on either side is never good for anyone..


  8. I admire Sarah Palin because she had also done a lot in the area of Politics specially in Alaska where she was a governor.

Comments are closed.