"Domestic Terrorist" label alive and well

Two types of people: educated people who care about what their government does, and murderers.

Recently the U.S. media and Powers That Be decided it would combine the two into one group! The "Domestic Terrorist."

Here's an awful story of a man who killed a police officer; Officer Timothy Brenton, age 39, a field training officer, and married with two children, 11 and 8.

The Seattle police chief and CNN have decided to label the man who killed Brenton, and also believed to be behind the bombing of four police cars, a Domestic Terrorist.

Was he really a terrorist? What were his motivations. Do I deserve to be called a Domestic Terrorist because I read ATS??

Check out AllSeeingI's thread from Mar 13th, 2009 also. I urge you all to spread this new agenda/media trend! Put it on Facebook or however you communicate with the masses.

There should NOT be a tie to intelligent, in-the-know people and others who are murderers.

[edit on 7-11-2009 by notreallyalive]

Originally posted by notreallyalive

The Seattle police chief and CNN have decided to label the man who killed Brenton, and also believed to be behind the bombing of four police cars, a Domestic Terrorist.

Was he really a terrorist? What were his motivations. Do I deserve to be called a Domestic Terrorist because I read ATS??

[edit on 7-11-2009 by notreallyalive]

...if he was blowing police cars up, then yes. he was a domestic terrorist.

if a guy who goes around bombing things and killing police isnt a domestic terrorist then i want to know what qualifies you as one.

[edit on 7-11-2009 by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest]

The ATS post you cited refers to a news item from 2006, during the Bush administration. Back then, everyone was considered a terrorist, except for Mr. Bush and Dick Cheney.

I think that it's not "informed" people who are considered terrorists, but ones who advocate revolution or violence. And whatever the reason for advocating that, I feel it makes you a terrorist.

If the police kick in my door and find all manner of subversive literature in my apartment - say, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, even (shudder) literature from ACLU - they probably aren't going to like it much. That sort of stuff is too "free-thinking" for them. But they won't be able to say I'm a terrorist because of it. They'll dislike this stuff because it is, basically, anti-government. When it was written, the government it was against was England. Now that the US government has matured, it, too, finds the Constitution offensive and worrisome. Governments are about controlling the people; the Constitution is about freedom from control. The two don't get along, and the ones who are sworn to uphold the government aren't going to care for any freedom-loving crap like a Constitution.

Still, unless I advocate violence, or collect material or information on bomb-making or such, there isn't much terror in my behavior. Aside from Mr. Bush and a few fascists, most people actually do recognize the difference between informed disagreement with TPTP, and acts of terror.

[Edit:] I suppose I should add that the Founding Fathers were all criminals under English law, and the way they fought for freedom could be seen as terrorism or as being "insurgents". Fortunately, the system they set up allows for the peaceful change of government by the people. Unfortunately, we've almost given our power away to the government. If we aren't careful, we'll lose our legal right to change our government, and will be required to overthrow it. Let us hope we never allow it to come to this.

[edit on 11/7/2009 by chiron613]

Another interesting article:
Muslim leader found talks with Ft. Hood suspect disturbing

Hasan's relatives who live in the Palestinian territories have said they had heard from family members that Hasan felt mistreated in the Army as a Muslim.

"He told (them) that as a Muslim committed to his prayers he was discriminated against and not treated as is fitting for an officer and American," said Mohammed Malik Hasan, 24, a cousin, told the AP from his home on the outskirts of Ramallah, a Palestinian city in the West Bank. "He hired a lawyer to get him a discharge."

The Army major also had previously questioned the U.S. war on terror.

(snip)
"In retrospect, I'm not surprised he did it," Finnell said. "I had real questions about what his priorities were, what his beliefs were."

(snip)
"As a Muslim, you come into a community and the way you integrate normally -- I didn't see that kind of integration," he said. Danquah, a retired Army 1st sergeant and Gulf War veteran, did not tell the military about his conversations with Hasan.

"I didn't think it rose to that level of concern," he said, adding that he thought the military "chain of command should have picked it up" if Hasan had issues.

www.suntimes.com...

So this "muslim leader" throws reesponsibility right back to the military. They should have picked up on the fact that he had issues. Where does the shooter take the respnsibility to seek help for himself? I would think a psychiatrist that found himself troubled would seek help for himself.

Instead, he was found to be "clinging to his guns and religion."

Where have I heard that before?

The Ever present Commander in Chief chose to play golf or something rather than to go to Ft. Hood, but The Bush's showed up to go visit the wounded soldiers, who said time after time that they were honoured to serve their country.

Precious thoughts from men and women who had just been betrayed by what they had considered to be one of their own. Get that. Betrayed. Doesn't tell me they made fun of him. Seems Mr. Hasan lies a lot.

Does anyone else see anything wrong with that picture?

Oh, and Nidal Hasan is off the vent, which means he is most likely talking now...

And still people wonder "what his religion has to do with this?". Shameful.

World governments today would prefer to see the whole of humanity to be a lot less educated and a whole lot more taken up with Paris Hilton and NASCAR and professional wrasslin.

A 'domestic terrorist' may well evolve to define those who dare to challenge preferred concepts... those who deny ignorance and take their right to speak freely to heart and voice.

Originally posted by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest

Originally posted by notreallyalive

The Seattle police chief and CNN have decided to label the man who killed Brenton, and also believed to be behind the bombing of four police cars, a Domestic Terrorist.

Was he really a terrorist? What were his motivations. Do I deserve to be called a Domestic Terrorist because I read ATS??

[edit on 7-11-2009 by notreallyalive]

...if he was blowing police cars up, then yes. he was a domestic terrorist.

if a guy who goes around bombing things and killing police isnt a domestic terrorist then i want to know what qualifies you as one.

[edit on 7-11-2009 by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest]

Pretty sure "believed to be behind" is A WHOLE LOT different than being found guilty of such a crime.

Terrorist is not a person who does an act to another person, per se, it's someone who is trying to incite terror, in other words to a mass of people - terror is a mindset, not the affect on one person.

Originally posted by chiron613
The ATS post you cited refers to a news item from 2006, during the Bush administration. Back then, everyone was considered a terrorist, except for Mr. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Apparently we're not reading the same article. The link I posted was clearly published on Friday, March 13th, 2009.

reply to post by notreallyalive


ok. so take issue to them jumping to the conclusion that he did that.

not their use of the label of domestic terrorist.

how does that equal "am i a domestic terrorist for reading ATS"?

Terror is a state of mind, anyone who induces this could be called a terrorist.

The problem is in the redefining of our language. Fear is something that will be with us always. Fear is defined as a forward looking apprehension. So to label a freethinker a terrorist is like saying their thoughts could lead to actions that would inspire fear.

People that blow up cop cars are terrorists as they use violence in a coercive way(not saying this specific guy was). Terror or fear of the unknown future and what it brings is a very different part of our emotional consciousness.

These things are not equal.

Originally posted by Seiko
Terror is a state of mind, anyone who induces this could be called a terrorist.

The problem is in the redefining of our language. Fear is something that will be with us always. Fear is defined as a forward looking apprehension. So to label a freethinker a terrorist is like saying their thoughts could lead to actions that would inspire fear.

People that blow up cop cars are terrorists as they use violence in a coercive way(not saying this specific guy was). Terror or fear of the unknown future and what it brings is a very different part of our emotional consciousness.

These things are not equal.

I totally agree they're not equal. That's why it bothers me when the news ties some guy who killed someone, and the "fact" that he was known to have frequented conspiracy theory websites [1]. The Domestic Terrorist name is being spread in the news to include many average people, not just terrorists. I feel it's part of an agenda to separate knowledgeable, passionate people from the herd.

1 - this is concerning the security guard shooter. I don't have a citation right now.

Originally posted by Libertygal
Another interesting article:
Muslim leader found talks with Ft. Hood suspect disturbing

Hasan's relatives who live in the Palestinian territories have said they had heard from family members that Hasan felt mistreated in the Army as a Muslim.

"He told (them) that as a Muslim committed to his prayers he was discriminated against and not treated as is fitting for an officer and American," said Mohammed Malik Hasan, 24, a cousin, told the AP from his home on the outskirts of Ramallah, a Palestinian city in the West Bank. "He hired a lawyer to get him a discharge."

The Army major also had previously questioned the U.S. war on terror.

(snip)
"In retrospect, I'm not surprised he did it," Finnell said. "I had real questions about what his priorities were, what his beliefs were."

(snip)
"As a Muslim, you come into a community and the way you integrate normally -- I didn't see that kind of integration," he said. Danquah, a retired Army 1st sergeant and Gulf War veteran, did not tell the military about his conversations with Hasan.

"I didn't think it rose to that level of concern," he said, adding that he thought the military "chain of command should have picked it up" if Hasan had issues.

www.suntimes.com...

So this "muslim leader" throws reesponsibility right back to the military. They should have picked up on the fact that he had issues. Where does the shooter take the respnsibility to seek help for himself? I would think a psychiatrist that found himself troubled would seek help for himself.

Instead, he was found to be "clinging to his guns and religion."

Where have I heard that before?

The Ever present Commander in Chief chose to play golf or something rather than to go to Ft. Hood, but The Bush's showed up to go visit the wounded soldiers

Maybe he was a fiscal conservative and felt he was fighting government spending or over reach.

www.iraqbodycount.org...

102,424 civilians killed

@

$ 9, 761 811.79 a head


One thing for sure,,, I always expect homicidal maniacs to take responsibility for their
psychopathy.


[edit on 8-11-2009 by Janky Red]