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.

 

DHS Official: Using Terror Watch Lists To Infringe On Second Amendment Rights*Snipped

page: 1
21
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+4 more 
posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Ok who is this guy, and why is he not running the DHS ? Ok rhetorical question no need to answer. Because everyone knows why. The guy has at least a modicum of integrity, and doesn't tow the administrations line.

Alan Bersin,DHS Assistance Secretary for International Affairs,Chief Office for the Office of Policy. You sir Keep doing what your doing. The rest need FIRED.



REP. BLAKE FARENTHOLD: “Alright, I guess my concern with this is there has been a lot of talk recently about using these watch lists for purposes other than they were intended. For instance, in determining whether or not Americans are able to exercise their rights under the second amendment. Do you think it is appropriate that these lists be used outside of what they were designed for?”

ASSISTANT HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS ALAN BERSIN: “I have not heard that and I don't believe that it would be -- and I believe it would be apples and oranges.” REP. FARENTHOLD: “All right. Thank you very much.”


Hell yeah it's apples and oranges

We are in dangerous waters here. People. No Fly lists. Second Amendment RIGHTS, Terrorism. That would have far reaching consequences worse than the Patriot Act.

Stay diligent people, and keep the eye on the ball.

It is interesting though to see the administration really wants this. Because it can be abused. Their full frontal assault has failed miserably over the lat seven years.




posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

So profiling Muslims as terrorists is ok, but as soon as gun owners are profiled that is when the line is crossed? Gotcha.


+9 more 
posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 10:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Apparently profiling gun owners is ok.

At least muslims aren't treated like gun owners they don't have to ask the state for permission to exercise their RIGHTS.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Where would you draw the line then? I'm just saying comments like that don't help. So as you're clearly better informed and willing to be sarcastic to prove it, I'm sure you're about to tell us? Noi?

If not, why say anything at all?



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Apparently profiling gun owners is ok.


I don't remember saying that. Could you point me to where I said that?


At least muslims aren't treated like gun owners they don't have to ask the state for permission to exercise their RIGHTS.


Nah, they just get harassesed, beaten, and attacked by xenophobes while politicians actively ponder banning them from the country.
edit on 18-12-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Joneselius
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Where would you draw the line then? I'm just saying comments like that don't help. So as you're clearly better informed and willing to be sarcastic to prove it, I'm sure you're about to tell us? Noi?

If not, why say anything at all?



I don't like profiling of any form. I hate being profiled for wearing a damn tie dyed t-shirt when I drive to a music festival and I'd hate being profiled as a gun owner. And if I was a Muslim, I wouldn't want to be profiled for that either. Profiling is lazy detective work.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Miss the rampant gunphobia running across this country for the last seven years ?

I guess so.

But that's perfectly acceptable.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No one's going to know what you're getting at hence my post, clarify your position, lest this thread go into a never ending guessing game. WHAT is your position, right now it just seems to be defensive sarcasm..... Come on....

"Nah, they just get harasses, beaten, and attacked by xenophobes while politicians actively ponder banning them from the country". What does that have to do with this thread? Nothing at all, right......

We can all point to any 'minority' group as being victims of violence and abuse, but that's not what the OP is about....

And you first response does indeed come across as you saying that, as an outside observer I can attest to that. Maybe you didn't mean it, but that's what it is....



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:06 AM
link   
The thing I can't figure out is if the government is so sure of someone being a threat that they can create a no fly list, why not just bring charges and arrest them?



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Joneselius




No one's going to know what you're getting at hence my post, clarify your position, lest this thread go into a never ending guessing game. WHAT is your position, right now it just seems to be defensive sarcasm..... Come on...


In a word TROLLING.

Because it had nothing to do with Bersin's comments.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

If they actually got away with arbitrarily denying a persons rights simply by placing your name on a list, then we're all screwed.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated
The thing I can't figure out is if the government is so sure of someone being a threat that they can create a no fly list, why not just bring charges and arrest them?



Anyone can be put on a no fly list, and it doesn't take much proof of anything.

Suspicion alone is enough.

330 million Americans can be added virtually over nite.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Miss the rampant gunphobia running across this country for the last seven years ?

I guess so.

But that's perfectly acceptable.


Sure. Let's go with that.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Think I will go with the red herring fallacy.

www.nizkor.org...

Because none of it had anything to do with what Bersin Said.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Joneselius

There isn't much point in going into how I feel about this issue because I'm not going to get an honest debate in response. Plus the whole debate is ridiculous to begin with. It's just another neo complaining about liberals thread while he ignores times that he does those very same actions towards liberals.
edit on 18-12-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Edumakated
The thing I can't figure out is if the government is so sure of someone being a threat that they can create a no fly list, why not just bring charges and arrest them?



Anyone can be put on a no fly list, and it doesn't take much proof of anything.

Suspicion alone is enough.

330 million Americans can be added virtually over nite.


Exactly. That is my problem with it. And if the govt claims they have justification, then to heck with a no fly list. I want them arrested and charged.

It is like saying we know all these people are drug dealers. However, we don't want to go through the hassle of proving it in court, so we are just going to confiscate everything they own or bar them from conducting any kind of normal business.

How this is not unconstitutional is beyond me. I don't care if the entire list is a bunch of bearded muzzies who all belong to the most radical mosque. If the govt is so sure these people are a threat, they need to bring charges and prove it. Otherwise, leave them alone.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I don't even know what you are accusing me of doing a red herring on there. You accused me of not knowing about the gunphobia across the country for the last 7 years, I agreed and now you say red herring. Are we following the same conversation here?



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated




How this is not unconstitutional is beyond me. I don't care if the entire list is a bunch of bearded muzzies who all belong to the most radical mosque. If the govt is so sure these people are a threat, they need to bring charges and prove it. Otherwise, leave them alone.


I agree with that.

And it is unconstitutional, but hey it's guns.

They really don't count to them.

The CIVIL LIBERTIES of gun owners don't count for much in their world view.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:26 AM
link   
This argument has been brought forth quite a bit after Obama brought up using the watch list and it gets ignored as not fitting the outcome some people want. They stopped using stop and frisk in NYC because it was unconstitutional but using the no-fly list is okay despite being unconstitutional? As for the Muslim issue against actual Muslim citizens okay I'll admit is not the way to go. On the other hand if they are not citizens they have not got the protections of a actual citizen so profile away. I find it odd that extending rights to those who are not warranting them is the order of the day. I know a kid from Guatemala who is here on a student visa and gets harassed by the local police "checking up " on him. Is that too much for people from the ME and other Muslim countries? It's good enough for a kid from South America why not for someone from countries that have people joining extremist groups? And yes I know that people from Europe and the US have gone and joined but the one thing they all have had in common has been being Muslim.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:31 AM
link   
If the government can violate the 5th Amendment (due process) and deny rights simply by placing a name on a list, then we now live under a tyrannical dictatorship.

And any feckless individual or politician that supports this despotic act is definitely no friend of freedom or liberty.




top topics



 
21
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join