It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Lock terror suspects up indefinitely say police

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 08:15 AM

Originally posted by johnsky
Oh well... I'd rather be labeled a terrorist, and stand for freedom, than sit down, and play nice.

Allow me to quote Winston:

"You have enemies? Good, it means you have stuck up for something in your life". Winston Churchill.

Very good post Johnsky... theres too much emphasis on long paragraphs on this site and not enough on true passion. Well done.

And thanks for that info on no-fly lists... I'll bear that in mind.

posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 09:00 AM

Originally posted by johnsky
I was told by the group that the best way to find out is NOT to call the Flight Agency, the best way is to actually attempt to book a flight. If it passes, just say, you changed your mind. Unless you actually do want to go on that flight.

Who is this so called group? I would like to know who is giving out stupid information like this, so I can write them a letter.

Read the ACLU FAQ to find out what you/they are saying.said is wrong

[edit on 7/15/2007 by shots]

posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 12:11 PM
I don't really mind this from happening, as long as their is any valid and substantial info for claiming that person X is a suspect.

If I walk into a shop with a long trenchcoat and they decide to keep me in custody because i'm ''suspicious'', then that's plain silly.
Even more so if they decide to keep me there because i'm ''denying'' that I was planning to do crime x, when they have no proof at all.

Of course there's always the messed up scenarios in which you are just at the wrong place at the wrong time, guess you'll have a problem then

posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 12:18 PM
I expect that there will be Judicial oversight on this...

At least, I bloody well hope so.

posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 01:44 PM
It wont go through, at least, I too bloody well hope it doesn't. The point is though, is that there is an element high up in the police force that deems it desirable. That alone is cause to worry.

posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 10:05 PM
Hm..Let's see the definition of a 'terrorist.'

One who utilizes the systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve political objectives, while disguised as a civilian non-combatant. The use of a civilian disguise while on operations exempts the perpetrator from protection under the Geneva Conventions, and consequently if captured they are liable for prosecution as common criminals.

Sounds like Bush to me, and his whole cabal. Maybe we should lock them up indefinitely and throw away the key. See how they'd appreciate it.

Not good enough, how about a second dose of definitions.

terrorist (a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities)

Oh wait. Uses terror as a political weapon. Looks like the whole government is guilty of that, why don't we just impeach all of them and start over. Heck, why don't we even use our Consitutional rights to impeach them.

'Often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities.' Well, who has been doing that?

'Those damn Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan are attacking the US and killed thousands of people on 9/11. Let's go bomb them!'

We have all been compliant with a terrorist organizations nefarious deeds. We are all to blame.

Even says in our 'Declaration' of Independence:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

We founded this country on the ground for liberty, what happened to those ideals? Have our corporate 'masters' run away with our freedoms and we are too apathetic to do anything about it?

From wikipedia:

Terrorism is a term used to describe unlawful violence or other unlawful harmful acts committed (or threatened) against civilians by groups or persons for political or other ideological goals. Most definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create fear or "terror", are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target non-combatants.

Used against civilians to create fear...Hm...Who has been doing this the past six years due to our 'war on terror.' More like WAR OF TERROR against the world, perpetrated by the Bush Adminstration among others.

It all comes back around to those who wish to use fear as a weapon of control. That sounds just like our current government.

Don't think I'm letting the Democrats off easy, they're possibly worse. At least the Neo-Cons have stated their goals, who knows what the Dems have up their sleaves.

Even the UN's definition of terror runs parallel to our government's actions (heck, even the rest of the world's governments, they're all terrorists in my mind):

The General Assembly resolution 49/60, adopted on December 9, 1994, contains a provision describing terrorism:

Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.

Any further questions? Or are my definitions not adequate enough? I can surely find more.

Ok, how about a definition from our own government, will that suffice?

The United States has defined terrorism under the Federal Criminal Code. Chapter 113B of Part I of Title 18 of the United States Code defines terrorism and lists the crimes associated with terrorism[9]. In Section 2331 of Chapter 113b, terrorism is defined as:

…activities that involve violent… or life-threatening acts… that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State and… appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and… (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States… [or]… (C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States…"

Any more questions?

[edit on 15-7-2007 by biggie smalls]

posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 10:25 PM
Ok, I found another interesting source (to say the least).

Remember that thing called the Patriot Act that was passed in 2001 as a result of the terrorist attacks on 9/11.

Well here's the source and a summary of points:

Title I: Enhancing Domestic Security Against Terrorism

Title II: Enhanced Surveillance Procedures

Title III: International Money Laundering Abatement and Anti-Terrorist Financing Act of 2001 - International Money Laundering Abatement and Financial Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001

Title IV: Protecting the Border

Title V: Removing Obstacles to Investigating Terrorism

Title VI: Providing for Victims of Terrorism, Public Safety Officers, and Their Families

Title VII: Increased Information Sharing for Critical Infrastructure Protection

Title VIII: Strengthening the Criminal Laws Against Terrorism - Amends the Federal criminal code to prohibit specific terrorist acts or otherwise destructive, disruptive, or violent acts against mass transportation vehicles, ferries, providers, employees, passengers, or operating systems.

Title IX: Improved Intelligence - Amends the National Security Act of 1947 to require the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) to establish requirements and priorities for foreign intelligence collected under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and to provide assistance to the Attorney General (AG) to ensure that information derived from electronic surveillance or physical searches is disseminated for efficient and effective foreign intelligence purposes. Requires the inclusion of international terrorist activities within the scope of foreign intelligence under such Act.

Title X: Miscellaneous - Directs the Inspector General of the Department of Justice to designate one official to review allegations of abuse of civil rights, civil liberties, and racial and ethnic profiling by government employees and officials.

Sorry about the quotes, I know its kind of cryptic reading.

Do you wonder why our Senators and Congressmen/women never read this darn thing?

They couldn't understand what the heck it means!

(One reason, I'm sure there's others).

Cr itics state patriot act abuses

Patriot Act abuses

ACLU claims cover up of Patriot Act abuses

Patriot Act: Targeting US citizens

I presented a powerpoint in high school when this act first came out. Most of my fellow classmates basically looked at me and said, so what? Some eyes were opened and my teacher was a bit freaked out that a law was passed to allow domestic surveillance on anyone.

Any comments?

Make sure to read the links before saying 'no its only being used to combat terrorism.'

Yeah, terrorism we've created...

Al Qaeda is supposedly lead by Bin Laden, an ex-CIA operative (could still be operational). Want sources? Search, don't make me do all your research for you.

We trained and created Al Qaeda along with the Taliban.

Read Here:

Would you like any more truth? Or is that too much for you?

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in