It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Another Shooter Caught at White House

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 07:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: lostbook
It's not surprising if you spend anytime listening to AM radio or visit right wing websites, I'm surprised there hasn't been more of this. Just read any political thread here on ATS.



Weird I listen to AM radio all the tine and have yet to hear anyone that I listen to advocate for the harming of the president........

Nice copout though......

There are a lot of political threads on ATS that do not agree with Obama but just because youre critical of someone doesnt mean you wish harm on them........

What have we come to in this Republic when we cannot even disagree with someone else , w out making them an enemy worthy of bodily harm?

I think you need to rethink your own vitriol before casting your gaze onto others.........




posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 07:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

But Congress has a lower approval rating than the president but right wing media isn't constantly attacking them like they do Obama.

Nor are they under attack like Obama, hell Bush was more unpopular than Obama but he didn't have to deal with this kind of crap!!!


Wrong on all accounts, if you actually listened to talk radio you would hear A LOT of talk about congress and the disdain for republicans and their dog and pony show.........and how they have lost the sight of conservative values........

Your post lead me to believe you dont honestly listen to them or try to get any real perspective from them....

Whats more telling is how two people within the first half of the page already attributed this to conservatives and AM radio.......

WITHOUT knowing ANYTHING about the background of this person.......or perhaps any of the recent people who created the breaches......

This says a lot more about YOU and that mindset, then it does those you accuse , with absolutely NO facts
edit on 11/21/2014 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 08:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: SubTruth
I have to ask, what do YOU mean when you say progressive? It seems to me that this term ought to be positive, rather than having a negative meaning attached to it, since progress would ordinarily be well received, not poorly thought of.

Progress after all is normally a good thing. One who makes progress in getting the homeless off the street and into programs which allow them a route back to living in a dwelling place, would be making progress. One who prevents and shines light on corruption in police forces and public offices, could be considered to be making progress, and allowing progress to be made in other areas as resources once embezzled, become free for the doing of public works and the like.

Either people who use this term are using the wrong terminology to describe the targets of their dislike, or the name is deliberately misleading.

I certainly cannot understand why someone who wants to make progress, could attract the ire of the average citizen? Please explain this discord!


The answer should be readily apparent to a learned individual (and I believe you are one...don't mistake that comment as an attempted insult): Progress is subjective.

What may be considered progress by you may not be progress to me because of the secondary and tertiary problems that it creates. Your examples are fine examples of acceptable progress to me, but Progressives (capital "P") have commandeered the term and turned it into something akin to a socialist agenda. They believe that government is the primary catalyst of this "progress," and in doing so give more power and money (which removes both from 'the people') to a central body that has increasing control of our lives already.

In your examples, a Progressive wouldn't just get the homeless person into a program, they'd created a bloated gov't program, then provide subsidies and government jobs for said individuals as a "solution" and call that "progress." A Progressive would actually try and shut down said whistleblower (as our President and his administration has put forth effort to do in the past) in lieu of embracing them (but, in reality, all parties tend to do that unless it's against their opponents).

Progress in its purest form is a good thing, but like many things that have become politicized these days, progress is unpure and ambiguous now. Like I said, one man's progress is another man's wrong direction, so to assume or claim that all "progress" is a good thing just doesn't hold water. Take Obama's immigration action he announced last night (Thursday)--a minority of Americans approve of how he's doing what he's doing, yet some would claim that this is progress. I would argue that it is a regression back to a government where one man has too much power, which is something that America was created to avoid. So, not everything is a progressive move to everyone on everything at every time.

My point is that my view of progress is removing control and power and size of federal and state governments, while Progressives have the opposite mindset. My progress is not the same as theirs, and may not be the same as yours, but it's still defined as progress nonetheless, even if it's not your idea of the definition of the word.
edit on 21-11-2014 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 08:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: lostbook
Just heard this on the local news here in DC. Another person has been caught at the White House and this time it's a woman named April Lenhart.




A 23-year-old woman was arrested for carrying an unregistered handgun near the White House late Thursday evening.
She has been identified as April Lenhart of Michigan. Secret Service officials say she has not been cooperative in interviews.
Wednesday, a man who claimed Pres. Obama called him directly and asked him to go to the White House, was arrested for unlawful possession of a rifle.
The Secret Service has been under scrutiny since a Texas Army veteran, Omar Gonzalez, leapt over a White House fence on Sept. 19 and charged into the White House. Gonzalez made it way all the way into the East Room before he was tackled, thanks to a string of Secret Service failures detailed in an internal review out last week.


Things are not looking good for Obama. I hope he lives to see the end of his Presidency. What says ATS?

www.nbcwashington.com...


Why does the headline/title of this article say "SHOOTER?" No one was shooting. No one was shot. Therefore there is no "SHOOTER." None. That's a complete misrepresentation of the events, and it does not reflect even the headline of the article that the post refers to.

No need for grandstanding. Just post a true subject.



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 09:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: chuck258
a reply to: lostbook

The title of your thread says 'Another Shooter Caught at Whitehouse"

I was not aware being in possession of a pistol in the mish mash labyrinth of Washington DC's gun laws automatically made someone a shooter?

Does that mean if I see a drunk on the street on the strip in Vegas I've just spotted another drunk driver whos going to run over another 2 female siblings.



Ok, so maybe I was a bit too hasty when I posted; it was spur of the moment. So, it was not indeed a "shooter" but it is a woman from Michigan with an unregistered handgun near the Whitehouse. The more instances like this happen, the more instances there will be in the future from copycats.

I know there are plenty of people who dislike Obama and his policies but killing him isn't the answer. As more and more people go to the W.H. with guns in their possession the possibility of someone trying to kill him become more and more apparent.
edit on 21-11-2014 by lostbook because: word add



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Gotcha.

So what are being called Progressives nowadays, are actually contributing to a concentration of power toward the centre of government, rather than progressing the aims of the individual States, and rather than putting power into the hands of citizens within those States?

That sounds like a regressive approach, rather than a Progressive one to me!



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   
I think it is fair to call anyone with a gun a shooter, as they have most probably shot a gun in their lives. I wouldn't stand behind the label "killer" or "criminal", but shooter is totally appropriate. If the connotation of the word shooter is negative, doesn't that say more about the gun culture than the word?



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Your title is disingenuous and misleading. There was no "shooter" near the WH, it was a demonstrator with a gun noticed holstered on her hip. There was no attempt on the Presidents life nor bullets flying. Pretty much a non-event yet the media feels it necessary for us to know "the President is in danger".
Looks like we're being set up for upcoming event with all these breaches in security and guns on private citizens around the White House.



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Asktheanimals

I already said this...



Ok, so maybe I was a bit too hasty when I posted; it was spur of the moment. So, it was not indeed a "shooter" but it is a woman from Michigan with an unregistered handgun near the Whitehouse.........


However, the point is that there is a definite "build-up" of individuals with guns around or near the White House. He may not be a popular guy but he is still our President. Bush was worse and there weren't this many threats on his life. Yes, there were no shots fired but maybe there would have been if she weren't stopped.

edit on 21-11-2014 by lostbook because: word add



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 11:17 AM
link   
I don't think it's a crime to have an unregistered firearm.

Any law,ordinance,statue that goes against the constitution of the U.S. in the least little bit is considered null and void. Example: the brady bill.

Hint:If you live in the U.S., learn the constitution and how to defend your rights outlined there in.

That's where a lot of Americans are getting taken advantage of; they don't know their rights and they are unknowingly giving them up and being prosecuted unlawfully by many that have taken an oath to uphold the constitution, but they are violating that oath which constitutes treason.

You see? That's the ploy some are taking up; to take away our/your rights in order to lord over the U.S.



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: lostbook
a reply to: Asktheanimals

I already said this...



Ok, so maybe I was a bit too hasty when I posted; it was spur of the moment. So, it was not indeed a "shooter" but it is a woman from Michigan with an unregistered handgun near the Whitehouse.........


However, the point is that there is a definite "build-up" of individuals with guns around or near the White House. He may not be a popular guy but he is still our President. Bush was worse and there weren't this many threats on his life. Yes, there were no shots fired but maybe there would have been if she weren't stopped.


Im sorry. Just having a gun on her did not mean she was heading to the white house to try and get in. ALso would you be cooperative with SS interrogation if you knew they would use what you say and tyr to put you in prison? If they are so concerned about guns they need to strip the police there too of them.



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 11:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: dUmPsTeR
I don't think it's a crime to have an unregistered firearm.

Any law,ordinance,statue that goes against the constitution of the U.S. in the least little bit is considered null and void. Example: the brady bill.

Hint:If you live in the U.S., learn the constitution and how to defend your rights outlined there in.

That's where a lot of Americans are getting taken advantage of; they don't know their rights and they are unknowingly giving them up and being prosecuted unlawfully by many that have taken an oath to uphold the constitution, but they are violating that oath which constitutes treason.

You see? That's the ploy some are taking up; to take away our/your rights in order to lord over the U.S.


Well, luckily for me, you don't have the authority to interpret the Constitution, so your opinion of it doesn't actually mean anything. We have a group of people already assigned to interpret the Constitution, and they disagree with you.



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: lostbook
It's not surprising if you spend anytime listening to AM radio or visit right wing websites, I'm surprised there hasn't been more of this. Just read any political thread here on ATS.



Weird I listen to AM radio all the tine and have yet to hear anyone that I listen to advocate for the harming of the president........

Nice copout though......

There are a lot of political threads on ATS that do not agree with Obama but just because youre critical of someone doesnt mean you wish harm on them........

What have we come to in this Republic when we cannot even disagree with someone else , w out making them an enemy worthy of bodily harm?

I think you need to rethink your own vitriol before casting your gaze onto others.........


I have to agree with LDragon's statement. The right wing propaganda machine is well-known for inciting hate and anger towards people or groups of people they disagree with. This can be seen in the way they approached those that question 9/11, anti-Israel, Obama/democrats, muslims......etc.

It is not unreasonable to expect that once in a while one of those listeners of talk radio, or a FoxNews viewer, may snap at some point and do something stupid or violent. Hell, the internet is full of webpages, videos and audio files of the right wing nuts espousing some very hateful and dangerous beliefs.

Of course we don't know anything about this person and we cannot say if she was a right wing extremist, but I just wanted to expand on LD's comments and agree that the right wing echo chamber can and does breed a lot of ignorance and hate.



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: lostbook

originally posted by: chuck258
a reply to: lostbook

The title of your thread says 'Another Shooter Caught at Whitehouse"

I was not aware being in possession of a pistol in the mish mash labyrinth of Washington DC's gun laws automatically made someone a shooter?

Does that mean if I see a drunk on the street on the strip in Vegas I've just spotted another drunk driver whos going to run over another 2 female siblings.



Ok, so maybe I was a bit too hasty when I posted; it was spur of the moment. So, it was not indeed a "shooter" but it is a woman from Michigan with an unregistered handgun near the Whitehouse. The more instances like this happen, the more instances there will be in the future from copycats.

I know there are plenty of people who dislike Obama and his policies but killing him isn't the answer. As more and more people go to the W.H. with guns in their possession the possibility of someone trying to kill him become more and more apparent.



Spur of the moment? I prowl the news day and night, not once yesterday was there a report of anyone shooting at the whitehouse. I say again, Washington DC has some of the most confusing gun laws and restrictive gun laws that also constantly change. The woman may simply have not been fully informed of how gun laws work in DC, though I will give you that she, as a gun owner, has a responsibility to research gun laws of a locale they plan on traveling too. And once again, she was arrested for possession of a handgun, not SHOOTING ANYONE. She had it in a holster which tells anyone with a brainstem she likely intended no harm, if someone is trying to hide a gun they typically put it in their pants, not try and put it on a bulging holster on their hip.

Also, just because someone is in proximity to the President does not mean they want to kill him. Millions, upon millions of people carry a weapon EVERY DAY and do not commit a crime with it, I see no reason why this woman should be considered any different.

Change the name of your thread, stop sensationalizing and demonizing my right to self defense.



posted on Nov, 21 2014 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: sheepslayer247

The same exact thing could be said for the left wing........

Again as ive said, i listen to talk radio almost every single day, various people and i have YET to hear any of them call for violence on any minority or the president........NOT ONCE.......

I find this highly hypocritical thinking coming from the left with the likes of people like Sharpton, Jackson, Farahkahn

And recently the president himself who is promoting the protesters in Missouri to keep "on course" despite the violence and destroying of property they have propagated over the months.......

come on man



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join