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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Trump Supporters Charged with Domestic Terrorism

page: 8
128
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:34 AM
link   

edit on 15-10-2016 by JinMI because: Answered in previous post




posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Gryphon66

That's not the point. The point is, political endorsements have nothing to do with the acts they committed, and the argument is silly.


I'm sure you don't want it to be the point, but it is indeed relevant. You're comparing hearsay to a personal statement.

What argument, exactly, is "silly"?


That who they support had anything to do with it.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Gryphon66

That's not the point. The point is, political endorsements have nothing to do with the acts they committed, and the argument is silly.


I'm sure you don't want it to be the point, but it is indeed relevant. You're comparing hearsay to a personal statement.

What argument, exactly, is "silly"?


That who they support had anything to do with it.


Who has made that argument?



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

The OP.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Gryphon66

The OP.


Perhaps you could quote that claim from the OP?



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Quote what claim?



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:39 AM
link   

“Folks, according to the Govt. and main stream media, do you know who is considered the biggest threat to the nation? It’s interesting. It’s listed as Veterans, Christian groups, Constitutionalists. have you seen or heard of an attack from any of these groups on this country?? Why would the govt. put this out?? Is it because most of the sheeple in this nation follows main stream media without question??”
-Curtis Allen, from Facebook


Sounds like half of ATS

edit on 15-10-2016 by imjack because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Did Mateen say anything about Hillary Clinton in his justification for the attack?


Did these guys say anything about Trump as justification for their plans? From what I see they only support Trump because he is an outside and threat to tear down the two-party structure. I didn't see anything that says they agree with any of Trump's policies.

They seem to be pro-constitution, pro-originalism, anti-progressivism to the point of violence.

From what we have seen, those qualities don't describe Trump very well.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Gryphon66

Quote what claim?


The one you're referring to.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Did Mateen say anything about Hillary Clinton in his justification for the attack?


Did these guys say anything about Trump as justification for their plans? From what I see they only support Trump because he is an outside and threat to tear down the two-party structure. I didn't see anything that says they agree with any of Trump's policies.

They seem to be pro-constitution, pro-originalism, anti-progressivism to the point of violence.

From what we have seen, those qualities don't describe Trump very well.


No, I've already stated that I have seen nothing that says that they were planning the terrorist attack in Trump's honor. They were waiting until after Election Day, but ...

They were described as Trump supporters because they are. There has never been any claim here, that I have seen, that they were offering this terrorist attack up for Trump.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Gryphon66

Quote what claim?


The one you're referring to.


You mean the argument?




These people are dangerous America, you had better recognize the threat posed to a nation if you allow these sorts of depraved degenerates any real access to power, political or otherwise.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I don't see anything in that "argument" linking anyone to Trump.

Are you saying that you do?

In your snippet, OP is talking about the danger that domestic terror represents.

Do you disagree that domestic terror is dangerous?

EDIT: In fact, OP is quite clear about who he is referring to with "these people"


originally posted by: aethertek

The Justice Department some years ago forewarned of the growing threat to American domestic security because of these homegrown right-wing conservative / reactionary militia groups, looks like they may have been on to something.

*snip*

These people are dangerous America, you had better recognize the threat posed to a nation if you allow these sorts of depraved degenerates any real access to power, political or otherwise.


edit on 15-10-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: aethertek



The Justice Department some years ago forewarned of the growing threat to American domestic security because of these homegrown right-wing conservative / reactionary militia groups, looks like they may have been on to something.


The DHS had a 2009 report that was forced to be removed from public viewing.

Inside the DHS: Former Top Analyst Says Agency Bowed to Political Pressure


While at DHS, Johnson and his team wrote the April 7, 2009 report, "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment." The report, which was intended for law enforcement only, was quickly leaked and caused a firestorm among some on the political right who accused DHS of painting all kinds of conservatives as potential Timothy McVeighs. In fact, it had merely pointed out that some domestic extremists focused on single issues like immigration and abortion and also noted that extremists were interested in recruiting military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.


What the public heard about it (besides conservative talk show outrage) were "facts" from conservative authorities like


Here's a statement from Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., a member of the House Homeland Security Committee.

"I am disturbed and personally offended by the Department of Homeland Security's view that returning military veterans and gun owners are likely to commit terrorist acts," he said.


except


This brings us back to Bilirakis' claim that DHS thinks that "returning military veterans and gun owners are likely to commit terrorist acts." This is a distortion of what the report actually said. The report said that right-wing extremists would try to recruit veterans, and that they would try to use gun control legislation as a "radicalization" tool. That's very different. We rate his statement Barely True.


source

from the first article, the DHS analyst leaves a scary, prophetic summary


What worries me is the fact that our country is under attack from within, from our own radical citizenry. There have been a lot of small-scale attacks lately, whether it's three mail bombs sent to U.S. government facilities in Maryland and D.C., or a backpack bomb placed near a [Martin Luther King Jr. Day] parade in Spokane, Wash., or two police officers gunned down at a traffic stop in West Memphis, Ark., [by antigovernment extremists in May 2010].

These incidents are starting to add up. Yet our legislators, politicians and national leaders don't appear too concerned about this. So, my greatest fear is that domestic extremists in this country will somehow become emboldened to the point of carrying out a mass-casualty attack, because they perceive that no one is being vigilant about the threat from within. That is what keeps me up at night.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I don't see anything in that "argument" linking anyone to Trump.

Are you saying that you do?

In your snippet, OP is talking about the danger that domestic terror represents.

Do you disagree that domestic terror is dangerous?

EDIT: In fact, OP is quite clear about who he is referring to with "these people"


originally posted by: aethertek

The Justice Department some years ago forewarned of the growing threat to American domestic security because of these homegrown right-wing conservative / reactionary militia groups, looks like they may have been on to something.

*snip*

These people are dangerous America, you had better recognize the threat posed to a nation if you allow these sorts of depraved degenerates any real access to power, political or otherwise.



Yes. It's in the title of the thread.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:58 AM
link   
So, if I understand you correctly, because they support Trump, Trump is bad, and by extension anyone else who supports Trump is also bad.

And I suppose the same can be said of hillary...

So, with the exception of the very few who TRULY do not support either, we are all deplorable and dangerous.

Your rabid bias has gotten the better of you.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Did Mateen say anything about Hillary Clinton in his justification for the attack?


Did these guys say anything about Trump as justification for their plans? From what I see they only support Trump because he is an outside and threat to tear down the two-party structure. I didn't see anything that says they agree with any of Trump's policies.

They seem to be pro-constitution, pro-originalism, anti-progressivism to the point of violence.

From what we have seen, those qualities don't describe Trump very well.


No, I've already stated that I have seen nothing that says that they were planning the terrorist attack in Trump's honor. They were waiting until after Election Day, but ...

They were described as Trump supporters because they are. There has never been any claim here, that I have seen, that they were offering this terrorist attack up for Trump.



Uh-huh ... just like the "russians" have done all the collusion to get Trump elected ... just like all of a sudden women suddenly remember and can't wait to accuse Trump of being a sex predator (unlike the women who have been doing this for Bill for decades despite all manner of abuse) ...

In other words, the truth that the system is entirely rigged is out there, so now TPTB need to create a reason for everyone to continue to hate and fear anyone who would have voted for Trump ... hence a bunch of yahoos who were going to attack the country after he was defeated.

Now they have an excuse to crack down on every single group that they want to list as a potential Trump supporter in a legal way using law enforcement.

It's like V and the scientists if you want to go pop culture.

One wonders if you would wake up when the happy camps begin or turn your blind eye even then.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I don't see anything in that "argument" linking anyone to Trump.

Are you saying that you do?

In your snippet, OP is talking about the danger that domestic terror represents.

Do you disagree that domestic terror is dangerous?

EDIT: In fact, OP is quite clear about who he is referring to with "these people"


originally posted by: aethertek

The Justice Department some years ago forewarned of the growing threat to American domestic security because of these homegrown right-wing conservative / reactionary militia groups, looks like they may have been on to something.

*snip*

These people are dangerous America, you had better recognize the threat posed to a nation if you allow these sorts of depraved degenerates any real access to power, political or otherwise.



Yes. It's in the title of the thread.


Ah, so you're changing your argument now, the proof is not in the OPs comment on who is dangerous but upon your interpretation of the title?

Does OP say anywhere that all Trump supporters are terrorists? Or not?

Is OP responsible for what you believe about what they said?



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I was under the impression he was talking about Trump supporters. If it is an irrelevant fact, then I agree with you. Yes terrorism is abhorrent.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Russian hacking is red herring in this discussion.

Sexual abuse charges are also irrelevant.

"In other words" ... okay, here comes your strawman argument ...

So, you're saying that the fact that the FBI tracked these individuals for months is a lie?

Did the FBI set them up? They were just good hard-working Americans planning to do a little demolition?

One wonders if you would consider writing in the genre of "conspiracy fiction" ... you're quite good at it.



posted on Oct, 15 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Gryphon66

I was under the impression he was talking about Trump supporters. If it is an irrelevant fact, then I agree with you. Yes terrorism is abhorrent.



No worries. It so happens that the three individuals were Trump supporters. The rest of their material seems to be standard right-wing "nuttiness."



new topics

top topics



 
128
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join