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.
originally posted by: EternalSolace
...can be labeled a potential domestic terrorist.
You seem to be misunderstanding a lot of that. You're missing out on the "and" and "if" and "when" and simply reading each point as though it stands alone.
You have freedom of opinion in the US, freedom of speech, freedom to own a gun...
originally posted by: EternalSolace
The biggest question: How's the public doing in holding their politicians accountable for upholding the constitution?
originally posted by: EternalSolace
I made the claim that believing in those things makes you, according to the government, a POTENTIAL 'domestic terrorist'. I didn't say having that opinion automatically makes you one.
The government isn't physically rounding up thousands of Americans. They're digitally rounding up thousands of American names. Now that is something to be concerned about.
Secret Service agent says Stout had several conversations during the past week with a confidential informant who is a former Aryan Nation member
Why aren't people demanding that Whites apologize for this sort of behavior?
I've been alive for 23 years, and in those 23 years there has been almost double the amount of terrorist plots in the U.S. by radical right wing/racists groups than there have been by Muslim extremists.
But yet I find it odd that it's the Muslims and the disease ridden, leprosy carrying, brown skinned people that I am supposed to fear?
originally posted by: EternalSolace
Is he really a terrorist? Or is he a pissed off American who is sick of continuous gross violations of the US constitution by the POTUS and a failed congress and justice department who refuse to address these violations?
originally posted by: Rocker2013
originally posted by: Rosinitiate
Sent an "informant" or better put an "inciter" to make him cross the line.
How exactly does one MAKE someone cross a line?
I agree that there are some people who are not mentally capable and probably led down a certain path by agencies looking for someone to show "results", but everyone has free will.
No one can "make" someone like this start murdering people or acting violently against their own society, unless they are genuinely psychologically ill. Even so, they are clearly still a threat to those around them.
No one "makes" another person act in this way, they choose to, and this makes them a threat.
originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: Rocker2013
I'm not going to go into this whole list, as there's around 25 areas with different suspicious activities for each category.
FBI “Communities Against Terrorism” Suspicious Activity Reporting Flyers
originally posted by: Rosinitiate
So I take it the term entrapment is lost on you?
originally posted by: EternalSolace
The whole thing with the public not being up in arms is that they're too ignorent to realize what's going on or apathetic to care.
originally posted by: Rosinitiate
a reply to: Rocker2013
I don't think I have ever read a story of some random stranger offering a grenade (or any other weapon) to another stranger to attack a crowd. Doesn't mean it isn't possible but doesn't strike me as a concern. There are however countless easily manipulated people out there and given the training of government agencies in "MindWar" tactics all these stories become suspect. Especially when every time I research the story they all begin and end the same way, using very questionable tactics.
originally posted by: Rocker2013
I'm sorry, I asked for examples of how the elected government are breaching the constitution. All you've offered there is an entirely reasonable list of leaflets asking people and businesses to report things that they find suspicious...
That bulletin, coupled with the government’s definition of a domestic terrorist, is far reaching. I could say that anyone who buys bulk ammunition, believes in small government, has a weapons "stockpile", believes in limited gun control, believes in privacy, and even believes that the government isn’t doing a thing about immigration can be labeled a potential domestic terrorist.
originally posted by: Rocker2013
originally posted by: Rosinitiate
a reply to: Rocker2013
I don't think I have ever read a story of some random stranger offering a grenade (or any other weapon) to another stranger to attack a crowd. Doesn't mean it isn't possible but doesn't strike me as a concern. There are however countless easily manipulated people out there and given the training of government agencies in "MindWar" tactics all these stories become suspect. Especially when every time I research the story they all begin and end the same way, using very questionable tactics.
If someone is planning a murder, do you only arrest them when they have successfully murdered? Is is considered "thought crime" to arrest them for merely planning to kill?
originally posted by: Rocker2013
originally posted by: EternalSolace
The whole thing with the public not being up in arms is that they're too ignorent to realize what's going on or apathetic to care.
So your response to this, instead of persuading people with political debate and the democratic process, is to take weapons and attack other people, the government and institutions to INFLICT a political ideology on the society you claim is ignorant?
You don't get to decide that people are just ignorant or apathetic and then recommend to take up arms against them. You do not get to choose which political path is the one the rest of your country MUST agree with!
If you (or anyone else) thinks that something is wrong, you use the freedoms and rights you have as a democratic citizen to challenge it. If you claim people are ignorant to your specific perceived reality, then haven't you completely failed to convince them? Have you even tried?
The reality is that whether you like it or not the public is not on your side, otherwise they would be voting for change. They're not, so you are a minority in your political paranoia, and it's entirely right that the democratically elected government use their powers to prevent potentially dangerous individuals from using terrorism to further their political cause.