Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Obama's Safety: Fear Grows for President as Hate Groups Thrive on Racial Backlash

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by heyo
 


"Cause i mean, with how horrible this guy is apparently doing, these examples are borderline pathetic."

Methinks you give them entirely too much credit...broderline


Thanks for the reply, we'll have to do this again sometime...




posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   
man that fella in the brown shirt needed his face smashed, big or not, kick him in the gonads



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by budski
"I think the president has, in effect, triggered fears amongst fairly large numbers of white people in this country that they are somehow losing their country, that the battle is lost.


Oh MY GOD!

The MSM has finally figured out that the MAJORITY OF TAXPAYERS are WHITE!

I thought that was a closely guarded secret.

Way to spin it.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 


I'd appreciate it if you showed that this statement cam from the article posted rather than from me.

There's a difference.



Thanks



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Heres a old story that most probly havn't heard of.


It has all the makings of a great story. But outside of the US state of Maine and select counter-terrorism circles, you won't have heard about it. For this is a story with all the right ingredients but one wrong ingredient.

On the right side is a leaked FBI intelligence report, Obama's inauguration, a multi-million dollar trust fund, a woman, uranium, thorium, the first attempt to build a "dirty bomb" on US soil, and, of course, murder.

On the wrong is the body of James G. Cummings, white supremacist millionaire, found in his Belfast home on December 9, 2008, shot to death.

After local police attended the scene, the FBI moved in and sealed off the building. Men in protective suits descended on the home but police refused to comment about what they found. Mrs. Cummings was taken into custody.

Then on January 12, 2009, Wikileaks revealed a confidential FBI field intelligence report on the incident as part of a Presidential inauguration threat analysis.[1]

According to the FBI report, Cummings had four lots of one gallon containers of bomb-grade hydrogen peroxide, uranium, thorium (also radioactive), lithium metal, thermite, aluminum powder, beryllium (radiation booster), boron, black iron oxide and magnesium ribbon.

While the radiation levels from Cummings initial device would have not have been physically significant compared to its explosive and toxic effects, had Cummings set off the device in Washington DC, during Obama's Presidential inauguration, its psychogenic effect may have hospitalized thousands.

The FBI states it also seized literature on how to build “dirty bombs” and information about cesium-137, strontium-90 and cobalt-60 and other radioactive materials.

There was also evidence linking Cummings to white supremacist groups, including Cummings' membership application to the US National Socialist (Nazi) party.

Local tradesmen who worked at the Cummings home told Maine reporters that Cummings was an ardent admirer of Adolf Hitler and had a collection of Nazi memorabilia around the house, including a prominently displayed flag with a swastika. Cummings claimed to have pieces of Hitler’s personal silverware and place settings.[2]

Though the Associated Press independently confirmed the Wikileaks FBI report, no-one outside of the Maine press (and Wikileaks) wanted to tell their readers about the first credible "dirty bomb" plot on US soil.



wikileaks



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 12:35 PM
link   
I am a licensed concealed gun permit holder.

Wearing a weapon in the open is a very uncool thing to do.

At least we hicks in Georgia hide ours in a purse, fanny pack or in a holster with an over shirt.

The guy that wore his in the open at a political function is asking for
trouble.

I do not take my weapon with me when I go to Tea Parties or Protest Marches. Well, maybe a knife or two but no gun.

Seems like the news media is getting rather radical.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   
It is execrable to being nonchalant towards this news.

Why you ask? If President Obama was assassinated, what do you think will happen? Mass rioting, and civil disobedience, and martial law on the horizon. Even a simple attempt on his life would trigger mass unrest within certain communities.

[edit on 14-8-2009 by infinite]



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Make Speed Limit 45
I don't get it. He's half black and half white so where is the racial angle?. Are the hispanics threatening him???


For true racists, this is the worst kind! One drop of black makes you non-white, and one drop of white makes you non-black.

I don't agree with it, but the logic that he should be above racism is exactly wrong! He is a target of racism from all sides!

NOW, for the OP! The MSM is trying their best to find racial motives in all of this, and they are having a hard time! For every 1 racist that they find, there are 1000 normal protestors that don't like the policies and agenda of this administration!!

Why doesn't MSM report on the real issues?



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
It is execrable to being nonchalant towards this news.

Why you ask? If President Obama was assassinated, what do you think will happen? Mass rioting, and civil disobedience, and martial law on the horizon. Even a simple attempt on his life would trigger mass unrest within certain communities.

[edit on 14-8-2009 by infinite]


I completely disagree. All of the black people I know are surprised he made it this long. I hope nothing happens to him, I would rather see him voted out or impeached, but black people won't riot. They have expected him to get assassinated from the beginning! Especially after he picked Biden to be his successor.

His policies thus far, the general state of the economy, and the few actual racist groups all create a dangerous situation for him. Black people as well as white see this for what it is, and he hasn't helped his own popularity very much. A tenous situation has only become worse as a result of his actions.

Edit to add:
Democrats may RIOT! They are already on the verge of it now! They don't take criticism very well.


[edit on 14-8-2009 by getreadyalready]



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Just because they expect it doesn't mean there won't be problems. There would most definitely be riots.

These kinds of articles are laying the groundwork on who to blame should something happen to the President. Think of the repercussions if he were assassinated by the groundwork they are laying now.

What laws would be passed, what rights revoked ?



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Of course there is lots that the President can be faulted for. Who could get everything right the first time considering the mess he inherited; not to mention the corrupt political system he has no choice but to work with.

He did not create your #'d up government, he got voted into it. My opinion is that no one; not even Ron Paul, who is a part of the current system by the way, could do much better.

There is substance to the claims made in the article. Those people who supported Bush "no matter what" had little in the way of intelligent self control. Those same people are now exhibiting the same kind of lack of sense in blaming Obama for all of your ills. At least the Bush detractors had substantive claims.

Obama has had an impossible task. He is trying to work within the system, but as we all know the system is literally too messed up to do anything constructive with. I don't think he is the devil incarnate as so many on ATS believes. On the other hand he simply may not be up to the task of reforming things from within.

That may be an impossible task. Revolution may in fact be the only solution. I however, fear that that could go terribly wrong as well.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
It is execrable to being nonchalant towards this news.

Why you ask? If President Obama was assassinated, what do you think will happen? Mass rioting, and civil disobedience, and martial law on the horizon. Even a simple attempt on his life would trigger mass unrest within certain communities.

[edit on 14-8-2009 by infinite]


This is why I considered this important enough to post.

The implications you describe seem to escape many members though.

Ah well...



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


It's not the right wing. Nor is it the left wing.

Those are creations of the media.

Left wing is 100% government, right wing is 0% government.

These folks are actually centered, leaning left. Center because they would prefer an oligarchy, and left because an oligarchy of their own kind, limiting others.


Get your terms right kid.



Besides that, don't buy into that BS. If you want the president dead you're not necessarily racist.
Wishing you could shoot Hitler doesn't mean you hate whites.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by heyo
The death to obama guy should be charged, that is quite inexcusable. However, having a gun outside a rally could easily be a statement towards carryinga gun no? Pertaining to that certain ammendment? And the third example is a guy who's mentally insane. The nazi symbols are a statement towards obama's, allegedly, fascist ways, potentially.
I think your thread title is a good example of sensationalism.


For me, it was not that he openly carried a gun, which is our right in many places, I myself own more than one gun.

What really bothered me was that he also carried a sign which read "It Is Time to Water the Tree of Liberty." Which references a statement from Thomas Jefferson, the full statement would be "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

To me, when I saw this, my assumption was that he was supporting violence and not his legal right to carry a gun.

If he had just been at the meeting, listening and asking questions, actually learning, that would be different. But the fact that he openly carried a loaded weapon, WITH such a sign, demonstrates that he was actually advocating violence to force his opinions.

Harm None
Peace



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


I really don't appreciate the patronising tone "kid"

I concentrated on the right because the article did, and the rules say that a commentary appropriate to the article should accompany breaking news submissions.

Care to address the issue being discussed?



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


Certainly. You should have the right to do and say as you will until you threaten directly the life of another.

If a man wants to carry a gun at a protest and is license, it's his right. If some dude wants to say death to Obama on a sign, it's his right to. I know that if I wasn't lazy, I'd be in the protest years ago calling for Bush's head. I may not agree with the current protesters, but it's his right. Somebody can say death to Muhammad, Jesus, and Buddha for all I care. It's there right to.

Until they are charging at someone with a weapon, they are secured in their right to say whatever they wish.


As to you, you're trying to left-right divide it. And the simple fact is that it is not. These are people who want to take down the current government and replace it with an oligarchy of their own credentials. They are neither right nor left, nor represent the people on either side. They are motivated by their own hatred, and their own disgust. And to try and blame it on every "right wing neocon" is simply silly. None of them I see have said more then to hope he fails.

[edit on 14-8-2009 by Gorman91]



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Well now, there I would disagree.

Not with the rights you mention - in the US they are perfectly legitimate if a little rash.

I absolutely divide the left and right - I know it can be said that one is as bad as the other, but that is also denying the fundamental differences between the two philosophies, especially now that Obama is in power.

The military industrial complex is a direct result of the right wing capitalism which prevailed at certain times, until it became an entity in its own right.
Once that happened it became an unstoppable beast.

Which is why the US finds itself in the position of spending more on non existant threats than on looking after its own.

Obama wants to change that.

The right wing don't like it.

Hence the overt marginalisation strategies that we are seeing, along with whipping up popular support against him via the medium of lies and disinfo.

A simplistic version, but I'm sure you get my drift "kid"



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by infinite
 





Why you ask? If President Obama was assassinated, what do you think will happen? Mass rioting, and civil disobedience, and martial law on the horizon. Even a simple attempt on his life would trigger mass unrest within certain communities.


SIGHhh There have been other attempts on Obama's life and several threats. There were also attempts on Bush's life, Clinton's life and the lives of other presidents according to a retired Secret Service type. Given the size of the US population not to mention the population of the world as a whole that only makes sense.

The only thing new is the big play up in the MSM. Usually the information is buried to keep the nut cases from getting ideas.

I would not be surprised if the PTB plan to off Obama so they have an excuse to declare martial law and round up "home grown terrorists". They did not hesitate to off JFK when he slipped his leash. If I was Obama I would be very worried. I am sure the PTB would prefer to deal with Biden.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


well actually because the military industrial complex seeks to enlarge government control through corporatism, it's actually a left wing movement.

Right wing would be the desire to eliminate the state. Shockingly, communism is an extreme right wing, as it ultimately seeks to make people without a government and rule on their own communal togetherness.

This will explain it.



www.youtube.com...

The last 50 years has been nothing short of people that claim to be on different sides seeking the same exact thing: power and control.

You can call them pinky commies, or you can call them neocons. Same old crap in truth. They all want an oligarchy of their own control.

In actuality, it is not left vs right. It is a majority of people who favor limited government, against a minority of people who favor enlarged government. And there are democrats and republicans are both side evenly divided.



The terms you use are created to spin things out of control, an example is right here. You all them right wingers who want to kill the president. They are not. They are supporters of the oligarchy. Center, left leaning. They are ignorant of liberalism and ignorant of freedom. They view freedom as their group having rights and no one else.

If people would stop dividing left vs right, as you are here, you would find most people, democrats and republicans, find themselves wanting limited government, interpreting it differently. I being a socialist, favor limited government providing the means of allowing industry and production to occur. I favor a government run health care system where the government simply pays doctors, with no bureaucracy and no insurance company. Just a yearly inspector for corruption. This is a good system, however it is taken by democrats of the oligarchy supporters and used as an excuse to expand government, and taken by republicans of the oligarchy supporters and used to merge corporations with government, essentially reaching the same ends of a government in control of the means of production and control of the people through monopoly and fear.


So again, this is not a right vs left issue. People are simply divided on how to do it without government interference. Those against the current reforms are against the bureaucracy, as am I. However you tell them you're going to pass a system like the one I describe, they'll probably support it.

But God forbid that the small people organize together. And so the oligarchy tries to keep you divided by believing you are on different tracks. But it's really the same one painted a different color.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 





Well now, there I would disagree. Not with the rights you mention - in the US they are perfectly legitimate if a little rash. I absolutely divide the left and right - I know it can be said that one is as bad as the other, but that is also denying the fundamental differences between the two philosophies, especially now that Obama is in power.


You are falling for the divide and conquer crap. Clinton (D), Bush (R) and Obama (D) are following the exact same path laid out for them by the Bankers and Corporate cartels. That Obama is any different than Bush is a mirage.

I have followed an issue (farming) for the last 15 years and researched it for decades before that. The policies never changed from Clinton's ratification of the World Trade Organization's Agreement on Ag to Bush's agreement to "harmonize" US laws to Obama's attempt to enact those laws International laws.

Good grief, Robert Shapiro, CEO of Monsanto was President Clinton's advisor on foreign trade and Dan Amstruz, VP of Cargill was appointed to write the Agreement of Ag during the World Trade Negotiations How much more proof do you need that the democrates are ppupets dancing to on Corporate strings! Vilsack, a Monsanto shill, appointed by Obama to as Sec of Ag instead of someone like Dr Mike Pollan??

Farmers figured out Obama was bad news when there was talk of Ann Vennaman as his VP. She also has connections to Monsanto and the law firm that started all the lobbying crap.





new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join