indirect
no, he did not believe that they were a direct threat, the closest thing is the 'global conspiracy'.
vegitation
a threat is when its a direct qoute and a warning is when theres something going to happen if they keep continuing the action
A Christian can indeed protect himself from a direct threat of harm!
dont start nothin dont be nothin
Because they were another super power who military strengh parraleled their own.
First Amendment rights are limited when a direct threat is posed either to an individual or to a group. It is a topic of controversy, since it is often difficult to tell what is a direct threat and what is simply a statement of opinion. In recent years, it has become a matter of national security according to some government officials, and the rights guaranteed under the first amendment have and most likely will continue to be pushed into the background when it is deemed "necessary."
You technically can not charge them for mental abuse. You can only get them charged if a direct threat towards you can be proven.
Cold war, the spread of communism was a threat to the western word
Take direct action and conceal the disclosure immediately as it constitutes a critical threat that must be rectified
As in WW1 against Germany, Australia was obliged to defend it's colony against Japan. So it recalled its troops from the Middle East where they were fighting a European war and faced this first major threat to itself. Previous commitments to wars were promoting the interests of Britain, not defence of Australia, but now Australia was under direct threat for the first time and the invasion of New Guinea posed a direct threat, and New Guinea became an essential part its own defence.