You Are A Terrorist

reply to post by adjensen


Declaring knowledge of ones rights is done in many ways other than simply saying "I know my rights!!!".

I know I have certain rights. I know you do as well.

I could refer to the Constitution if you would like, but according to the feds, if I were to make too many references to it, I could be considered suspect.

Do you really think the feds simply dont create characteristics of "terrorists" out of thin air? What better way to expand the police state than to expand the number of suspects?

reply to post by adjensen


I would highly recommend you re-read the article. It states:

The problem is, according to numerous law enforcement advisories, training manuals, seminars and other literature, the federal government defines political activism, flying American flags, wearing Levi jeans, being nice, looking “normal” and going scuba diving all as signs of domestic terror.

Key phrase being : all as signs of terror

Furthermore, it is suggesting on the contrary, that :

By encouraging Americans to “report suspicious activity” that includes such behavior, the feds are knowingly on a mission to chill political dissent, by making people afraid to exercise their constitutional rights in the fear that their neighbors will turn them in to the authorities unless they rigidly control their behavior and don’t risk even patently benign activities being misconstrued.

So how does actions being labeled acts of terror, and the encouragement of the American people to " rat" on each other suggest anything other than the labeling of individuals and their actions?

I love my country. I love the ideals my country was founded upon. I proudly fly the American flag. If that makes me a terrorist....so be it.

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
Do you really think the feds simply dont create characteristics of "terrorists" out of thin air? What better way to expand the police state than to expand the number of suspects?

Is it a fact that, in the past, there have been militia groups that have committed violence against law enforcement officers? Cops who were executing a warrant (such as local hero Gordon Kahl) or who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time? Of course it is, so these characteristics didn't "come out of thin air", they are simply behaviours typical of people who are members of these groups. Nowhere does it say "this is illegal" or "this makes you a terrorist", so even if you were to paper your car with upside down flags and go up the coffee shop every day to argue your rights with the cops on break, you're not going to be charged with anything.

"More suspects"? Suspected of what? Arrested for what? Convicted of what?

reply to post by adjensen


I'm sure some of those "evil militia types" also drank milk. That would be a characteristic, but it certainly isnt listed.

They most likely wore shoes too. again, not listed.

Ever happen to think that whatever actions are brought against police/government are the results of years of abuse by police/government?

Government continually invents victimless crimes, why do you think that is?

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by adjensen

 

I would highly recommend you re-read the article. It states:

The problem is, according to numerous law enforcement advisories, training manuals, seminars and other literature, the federal government defines political activism, flying American flags, wearing Levi jeans, being nice, looking “normal” and going scuba diving all as signs of domestic terror.

Key phrase being : all as signs of terror

Source of above text: nutty website.

Source of nutty website's claim that "flying an American flag is a sign of a terrorist": A Missouri law enforcement training document describing one characteristic of militia groups is flying the flag upside down.

Are you seriously so vapid or desperate to hate your government that you'll take a two year old flyer that describes militia groups and believe that it says "If you fly the American flag, you are a terrorist"? How can you possibly think that anyone rational believes that if you "act nice", you are a terrorist?

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
Ever happen to think that whatever actions are brought against police/government are the results of years of abuse by police/government?

Who cares? That's not the issue!

Do I think the government is awesome? No! Do I think that we, as citizens, should do more to protect our rights and limit government? Absolutely, and I've been voting Libertarian for over 30 years!

But this, this is just plain idiocy, and it makes sensible people who DO think that we're losing control of those who are supposed to serve us look like paranoid lunatics, and that only serves one side of the argument.

reply to post by adjensen


Just because we may be paranoid doesnt mean they are not out to get us.



The actions of government speak for themselves. They are on the fast track to total control.

If someone feels they are right to execute a few government agents, who are we to say they are wrong?

reply to post by adjensen


Why don't they list people that wear leather jackets and ride Harley Davidson motorcycles? I know that the Mongols MC and other OMGs have targeted cops, used explosives, and actively trafficed weapons as well as drugs and people. It is easy information to find if you do a little research.

Why do they ignore hardened criminals that terrorize their communities? Why not add OMGs since they traffic drugs and guns? Those are activities that put money in the pockets of terrorist and drug cartels according to the FBI.

Instead they list things that could point to nearly any American. Then they ask you to report anybody that fits the profile. It does sound to me like they are trying to silence dissent. Especially when you add in things like the NYPD demanding ID from protesters at a legal gathering. LEOs of all levels have been reported video taping protests and taking pictures of the atendees even when the gathering was legal.

I think Alex Jones is over reacting. I think he is the Rush Limbaugh of the conspiracy theory world. However, I do believe that we better start taking things real serious. The government has used drastic measures to silenc opposition in the past. The FBI's own files show that they had files on thousands and thousands of people in the 1960s. They actively tried to disrupt many organizations that challenged the status quo.

I find it hard to believe that the same thing isn't happening now. Especially when more than half of the country has expressed a lack of confidence in the government and disagreement with many new initiatives.

ETA:

Here is something interesting.

Here at home, it's the DHS that is enamored with collecting photos, video images and other personal information about U.S. residents in the hopes of teasing out terrorists.

...All together it has given Memphis $11 million since 2003...

"We have got things now we didn't have before," said Memphis Police Department Director Larry Godwin, who has produced record numbers of arrests using all this new analysis and technology. "Some of them we can talk about. Some of them we can't."

One of the biggest advocates of Memphis's data revolution is John Harvey, the police department's technology specialist, whose computer systems are the civilian equivalent of the fancier special ops equipment used by the military.

Harvey collects any information he can pry out of government and industry. When officers were wasting time knocking on the wrong doors to serve warrants, he persuaded the local utility company to give him a daily update of the names and addresses of customers.

reply to post by adjensen


Under the flag code section 8a states :

The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.

And yet:

A North Carolina couple who were terrorized by a police officer who had recently returned from Iraq are now fighting back, after sheriff's deputy Brian Scarborough broke into their house, assaulted them and then arrested the Kuhns for the crime of flying an upside down U.S. flag. Mark and Deborah Kuhn of Asheville, North Carolina made headlines last week when they were arrested for flying an upside down U.S. flag, a commonly recognized sign of distress, in their backyard, after police claimed they were violating a statute for "desecration of the flag".

This country could be deemed in distress would it not?

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
If someone feels they are right to execute a few government agents, who are we to say they are wrong?

I, for one, would saying that killing anyone, government agents or not, is wrong. Do you treat all life with the same amount of indifference, or just those that you disagree with?

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by adjensen

 

Why don't they list people that wear leather jackets and ride Harley Davidson motorcycles? I know that the Mongols MC and other OMGs have targeted cops, used explosives, and actively trafficed weapons as well as drugs and people. It is easy information to find if you do a little research.

Probably because it would be a pretty clueless cop who didn't know that a 1 percenter didn't represent a different encounter than some joker riding a crotch rocket or a BMW.

Instead they list things that could point to nearly any American. Then they ask you to report anybody that fits the profile.

There are two documents cited in that article. The first is a legitimate LEO educational flyer describing militias. The second is a crudely done flyer that appears to have never been released. The "list of things" and "request to report" you're citing come from the flyer that wasn't released, so I'm not sure how germane it is.

If you want to see the illegitimacy of it, read your own words -- "things that could point to nearly any American". Of what value would such a discernment be, to anyone? One might as well say "In most cases, terrorists have two arms and hair." Unless the laws have changed, I'm pretty sure that's not illegal, and unless perception has changed, I'm pretty sure that's a useless description.

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by adjensen

 

Under the flag code section 8a states :

.. snip ..

This country could be deemed in distress would it not?

Which, I presume, would be their defence if it ever went to court, and, were I on the jury, I would not vote to convict them of anything, as they've committed no offence.

reply to post by adjensen


No.


I believe Janet Napolitanos life is worth far less than someone who isnt trying to actively infringe upon my liberties.

I would hope everyone does.

I have no problem whatsoever with anyone who doesnt screw with me. If you, or a government agent would pass laws, policies, or institute protocols that limit my freedoms, then there would be a problem.

Most people's lives have value. Government agents , police officers, and "public officials" on the other hand are worthless.

LOL!

First someone makes a thread calling most Americans Stupid, then someone makes a thread calling Americans Fat, and now there is a thread calling us Terrorists. I'm really depressed, these threads really hurt myself-esteem. I don't know who I am anymore!

But someone tell me if I am such a "Stupid-Fat-Terrorist" why is the government so worried about what I do?

I would say that everybody is a suspected terrorist. It is now considerred suspicious to take pictures of boats while waiting on your family.

When I read this I began to understand why some people are so up in arms. This just seems to be over the top.

Monitoring America pg4

Suspicious Activity Report N03821 says a local law enforcement officer observed "a suspicious subject . . . taking photographs of the Orange County Sheriff Department Fire Boat and the Balboa Ferry with a cellular phone camera." The confidential report, marked "For Official Use Only," noted that the subject next made a phone call, walked to his car and returned five minutes later to take more pictures. He was then met by another person, both of whom stood and "observed the boat traffic in the harbor." Next another adult with two small children joined them, and then they all boarded the ferry and crossed the channel.

All of this information was forwarded to the Los Angeles fusion center for further investigation after the local officer ran information about the vehicle and its owner through several crime databases and found nothing.

Authorities would not say what happened to it from there,

Really, a guy takes some pictures of interesting scenery and makes a phone call. So, he must be up to something. That means his car is run through the system. From there the owner's name is run through a multitude of databases. Then it is sent to a fusion center. At the fusion center they determine if the suspicious activity should be sent to the FBI or not. There is no way of knowing if the person's name and information is purged from the system when it fails to be sent to the FBI.

If the suspicious activity report does make it to the FBI it will stay in the Guardian database. It doesn't matter if the case is pursued or dropped. Once the car owner's name is in the database it is there for ever as being part of an investigation.

The most disturbing thing is that the FBI can say they don't know if it was terrorist related or not. That would mean that the car owner's file stays open for at least five years. During that time information such as occupation, income, pictures, residential history, and any other information in their commercial and government "partnership" databases.

Sounds to me like everybody is a suspected terrorist.

The question is, is the actions of the USG in regards to the infringement of our rights,all in the name of National Security, a legitimate reason for us to step aside and allow this travesty upon us? Hopefully those whom embrace our way of life would say no.

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.

reply to post by adjensen


These aren't the only papers of this sort. The DHS released a report stating that Veterans could be terrorist threas because they have trouble reintegrating in to society. They also listed people that opposed restrictions on firearms as possible lone wolf terrorist. They have also said people that "percieve" a loss of American manufacturing are likely terrorist. They also said that conspiracy theorist, those worried about an American economic collapse, people worried about illegal immigration, and fundamentalist christians that believe these are "the end times" are all potential terrorist.

DHS has painted wide swathes of America as "potential terrorist" time and again.

DHS on Right Wing Extremism

I wouldn't call people's fear illegitimate. I would call Alex Jones's list over blown and exagerated.

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by Logarock

 

You know this stuff actually started under Bush right? Don't forget the office of Total Information Awareness that he tried to get created.

This is about a usurption of control by the CIA and military industrial complex.

Yes. Under bush the language was a bit more legal. That report the OHS put out was something else.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater

Originally posted by adjensen


No, that isn't what they are saying, at all. Find me any document, published by a reputable source, that says anyone who demonstrates that they know their rights is a terrorist. The source document for this article isn't one, because I've read it and it says nothing of the sort.

Now that the matter at hand is settled, anything else I can help you with?

Once again, this document doesn't say that. It says "these are characteristics of certain groups" that the FBI views as being potentially terrorists, and none of the characteristics says "declaring knowledge of their rights."

They are not going to say that in these sort of documents. It would sort of undermine the documents intent to create fear and would raise the question to the reader. Its like when McVey was captured the press was quick to point out that he had a copy of the Federlist Papers in his possesion.