Are These Idiots Being Serious?

[1969912 0]

"The written exam, given as part of Department of Defense employees’ routine training, includes a multiple-choice question that asks:

“Which of the following is an example of low-level terrorism?”

— Attacking the Pentagon

— IEDs

— Hate crimes against racial groups

— Protests

The correct answer, according to the exam, is "Protests.""


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,526972,00.html

EDIT: By "idiots", I mean the DOD.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[billvon 3,070]

Well, then. Let's hope they crack down on all the terrorism going on in Iran right now, then.

[1969912 0]

What about the dangerous and seditious "teabaggers"?

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[rickjump1 0]

Quote

What about the dangerous and seditious "teabaggers"?

The secret service has yet to visit me. Maybe it's because I'm too short or Montana was just too far.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[ErricoMalatesta 0]

I'm not sure why this is confusing.

'Internal pressure' and the dangers there of has been a running theme throughout American history.

[nanook 1]

Quote

The correct answer, according to the exam, is "Protests.""

Yes it is. Because it's rare, or non-existant, that terrorism can be a reason behind the protests. This is the DOD, not the police or the FBI. We have to protect our assets and be suspicious of any gatherings around our bases abroad or ships pierside in foreign countries. Protests are rarely dangerous even though there has been instances of staged protests to mask attacks, so therefore, they are "low-level". This our self-preservation concept, not a watchdog concept.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[lawrocket 3]

What about counter-protests?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

"The written exam, given as part of Department of Defense employees’ routine training, includes a multiple-choice question that asks:

“Which of the following is an example of low-level terrorism?”

— Attacking the Pentagon

— IEDs

— Hate crimes against racial groups

— Protests

The correct answer, according to the exam, is "Protests.""


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,526972,00.html

EDIT: By "idiots", I mean the DOD.

Where's the confusion? You typically go with the 'most correct answer' on a multiple choice test. Between hate crimes, IED's, a Pentagon attack, or a protest, what would you say the most correct answer is for low-level terrorism?

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[lawrocket 3]

Protesting the original poster, are ya?

You know what that makes you?

P.s. - note that if protests are soft terrorism then "though police" are counterterrorist forces.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Lefty 0]

That's some silly shit.

"...or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

To be fair, it doesn't say anything about not calling those assembled terrorists. They should have added another option on the exam: "expressing disagreement". I wonder what the answer would have been then.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[1969912 0]

And now:

" The Pentagon has removed a controversial question from its anti-terrorism training exam that labeled “protests” a form of “low-level terrorism,” calling the question “poorly worded.”

A Pentagon spokesman said the question failed to make clear the difference between illegal violent demonstrations and constitutionally protected peaceful protests...."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,527181,00.html

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[warpedskydiver 0]

A few years back Mayor Daley passed a law that made it illegal for more than two people to gather on the public streets.

He lost the ensuing lawsuit and now has a law that says you must have a permit to protest, unless of course you are a million illegal aliens.

[jerryzflies 0]

Quote

A few years back Mayor Daley passed a law that made it illegal for more than two people to gather on the public streets.

He lost the ensuing lawsuit and now has a law that says you must have a permit to protest, unless of course you are a million illegal aliens.

Mayor Daley doesn't pass laws.

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.