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.

 

Obama wants KKK to be forced to name its members and supporters after Charleston church massacre

page: 1
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Right up front let me say this is supposedly an interview given to the Daily Mail (yes, I know all about the DM) so I wasn't able to find much else backing this up, other than other sites copy/pasting the same article or heavily quoting it.

The mayor of Charleston has supposedly told the DM that when he spoke to President Obama, the president informed him he wants to pass legislation forcing "right wing extremist" groups to name their members to the government and public. You "deserve to know if your neighbor is a bigot."

The mayor also says they talked about setting up a national government level watchdog group to monitor hate groups. Frankly I was under the impression the FBI does that already, as well as the Southern Poverty Law Center and other such groups, but I guess they want another group to do it as well.

Anyway, I found it an interesting article because of what it proposes to do. Taking it with the requisite grain of salt required for anything coming from the DM, I weighed that against the idea that this is supposed to be an interview. If the mayor didn't say these things, I imagine he'd be quick to make it known.

www.dailymail.co.uk...



+10 more 
posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Would not doubt it.

The Progressives have wanted to do this to ANYONE they consider an enemy. What better place to get your legislation and precedence in place than the vile KKK. Then move on to the gun owners, church members, or whatever "group" that is considered the "enemy" of the Progressive movement going forward.


+18 more 
posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:22 AM
link   
I'd love to see how many KKK members are involved in law enforcement.


+6 more 
posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

My knee-jerk reaction is favorable because I abhor all forms of supremecy. But the root of why Obama really would want this done is to set a precidence for other outings of other groups in his path.



posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker


Yes we have seen them go after member and contributor lists before.


+11 more 
posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Only when they give us the names of all secret societies, and name those societies and what they're about.

Oh, and while you're at it, we would like to see the wording of the TPP.



posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

Hmmm. I don't know that the Daily Mail would go so far as to fake an interview... but I wouldn't be shocked if they did. Also why would he give an interview to the DM and not an American news agency? At any rate, if this is true... Obama is way wrong. I hate the KKK, would love to know their names and faces but this would set a dangerous precedent IMO and I believe could be challenged Constitutionally, unless brought in under Homeland Security or the NDAA in which case the Constitution flies out the window.

I think Right-Wing extremists groups are the biggest threat America faces on the terror front but I have no interest in the government being able to instigate witch hunts, we've already done that to Muslim Americans... it needs to stop not be expanded.



posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:38 AM
link   
when i support a cause, i support it 100%. i feel like if anybody truly believes in something, they would have no trouble putting their name out there in association with it, regardless of the backlash they will get, because it's their belief. my father is pretty racist, and he has no trouble telling everybody, of every race, exactly what he thinks.



posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

That's my take on it. Hard to believe they would go so far as to fake a profile of somebody that's this much "in the spotlight" right now but....it's still the DM.

As terrible as those groups are, forcing private groups to disclose membership lists is a vast over reach of government authority I think. And that's not even getting in to the whole idea of who gets to define what groups are looked in to and who determines what an extremist group is and all that. The possibility for serious abuse of the whole thing is massive.



posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

Agreed, and I hope most people see it that way and don't go jumping up and down in support just because it's the KKK.



Off-topic but why the hell is the word w i n d o w, censored? It's gotten me twice now... lol.


+15 more 
posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

How about a list of Black Panther Communist groups attempting to subvert America a la Malcolm Muslism X?

Obama is not a friend. I say NO WAY.
edit on 27-6-2015 by tony9802 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: tony9802

You just puked words all over the place.

The Black Panthers don't hide their faces and are essentially gone. The New Black Panther Party doesn't either but I think there's like 5 of them and they're morons. Muslims don't believe in Communism and you probably don't know squat about Malcom X.



posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: tony9802

More like the Masonic Lodges and Mormons. They have great records of their members.

Can't have those old coots and people who store food with secrets unless they are progressive authorized agenda secrets... LOL
edit on 27-6-2015 by infolurker because: (no reason given)


+6 more 
posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 10:54 AM
link   
How about Obama publishing his list of Muslim Brotherhood members in and around his office? Do as I say, not as I do -and nobody will get hurt. What's good for goose is good for the gander. Keep buying more pens ashole!



posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Honestly that's my biggest concern. People will think "well hell the KKK is bad so this must be a good idea" and they ignore the ramifications of it beyond anything other than the klukkers.

It's a coding issue. I saw an explanation of it once but most of it sailed over my head beyond "coding issue." I think it doesn't happen unless it's at the end of the sentence. ETA - I think that's what it is. It's the window with a period after it. Screws up the code.
edit on 27-6-2015 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Do KKK members have something to hide? are they ashamed of themselves. You would think they would want to show off their white pride and glory in their membership to such a fine upstanding organization.

Why hide your face and your name if what you are doing is so righteous.



posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Police, politicians, military, bankers, education, health, baby sitters...
I'm sure there is a few more I could mention where it is paramount that the public deserve to know if any of these areas are being governed, overseen or influenced by a white supremacist terror group.



posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 11:29 AM
link   
The KKK are cowards. Out them all and round them up. An example needs to be made of those that hate their fellow man.


+1 more 
posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   
There's just no way right?

Did we learn nothing from the McCarthy era?

I'm all for pulling down the flag on public properties. I'm all for equal rights for LGBTQ.

However, the way this has all gone down - so quickly and with much gloating - makes me really worry about over-reach and the inevitable backlash.

One should always be gracious in victory as well as defeat.



posted on Jun, 27 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
Agreed, and I hope most people see it that way and don't go jumping up and down in support just because it's the KKK.


Yeah.. I think we know there will be plenty who support it for that very reason.

And yes, it obviously sets a precedent that will be used more and more as time goes on. It's a very old tactic, but it remains as effective today as any other time in our history.

I think what we can expect is a greater frequency of these things happening, with a focus on emotional outrage, until some sort of breaking point is reached.




top topics



 
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join