Attorney General's Blunt Warning on Terror Attacks

reply to post by adjensen


A citizen is a citizen.
If they take away the constitutional right to a presumption of innocence for me, so will they for anyone.
The threat is to us all, IMO.

Originally posted by romanmel
reply to post by adjensen

 

A citizen is a citizen.
If they take away the constitutional right to a presumption of innocence for me, so will they for anyone.

Though I've read the article twice, I am apparently missing it, can you please cite a quote from the article where the Attorney General states that there is no longer a presumption of innocence, where all Americans are potential terrorists, and where he states that "not liking BigGov makes you a terrorist."

What I see, as I said, is a recognition that simply being an American is no indication that one is not capable of committing an act of terror.

Call me old fashioned, but I'd prefer that they catch the people who want to blow things up before they blow them up, particularly as these sorts seem to go up with their target.

reply to post by adjensen


Sorry you are having trouble reading the article.

The Atty Gen says this:

"It is one of the things that keeps me up at night," Holder said. "You didn't worry about this even two years ago -- about individuals, about Americans, to the extent that we now do. And -- that is of -- of great concern."

Now you see, when he says "individuals", "Americans" are making him "worry" and "of great concern", that doesn't say Islamists or Arabs. It's me and every other American citizen he is refering to.

Of course you have your right to not be concerned...that's fine as well.

reply to post by romanmel


Why'd you stop there? The article continues, right after your quote:

"The threat has changed from simply worrying about foreigners coming here, to worrying about people in the United States, American citizens -- raised here, born here, and who for whatever reason, have decided that they are going to become radicalized and take up arms against the nation in which they were born," he said.

In the last 24 months, Holder said, 126 people have been indicted on terrorist-related charges, Fifty of those people are American citizens.

.. snip ..

Holder says many of these converts to al Qaeda have something in common: a link to radical cleric Anwar Al Awlaki, an American citizen himself.

Hmmm... that sounds a bit closer to what I said, doesn't it?

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by romanmel

 

Why'd you stop there? The article continues, right after your quote:

"The threat has changed from simply worrying about foreigners coming here, to worrying about people in the United States, American citizens -- raised here, born here, and who for whatever reason, have decided that they are going to become radicalized and take up arms against the nation in which they were born," he said.

In the last 24 months, Holder said, 126 people have been indicted on terrorist-related charges, Fifty of those people are American citizens.

.. snip ..

Holder says many of these converts to al Qaeda have something in common: a link to radical cleric Anwar Al Awlaki, an American citizen himself.

Hmmm... that sounds a bit closer to what I said, doesn't it?

Oh, yes he's concerned about Anwar Al Awlaki...the guy who dined at the Pentagon with the "top brass" two months AFTER 9-11.

www.foxnews.com...

Hey Holder! ....

You're an attorney... right?

I know chances are you will never acknowledge the intellectual powerhouse and truly public discourse that is the ATS Commmunity... so it's unlikely that even if you did somehow see this post, you would respond to it.... but I have some rebuttal/questions for you.... and not being a pablum spewing MSM "journalist" the questions would be the kind you're most likely to avoid anyway... but what the hey... this IS America right? "Land of the free, home of the brave.... et. al?"

"What I am trying to do in this interview is to make people aware of the fact that the threat is real, the threat is different, the threat is constant,"

OK then, first off, the underlying assumption I infer from this is Americans don't believe the threat is real?

Point 1:

- We KNOW what threatens us. And it isn't ONLY disgruntled extremists thrashing about for opportunities to inflict pain. shock, and awe. (They have been around for scores of years - technically, much longer even.) Get off the "This is different!" script; it is demeaning and obtuse to force the image of "You don't understand." Besides, "terrorism" is a function of who is doing the deed, and who gets to describe it in the media.

What threatens us is YOUR idea of how to deal with that reality.

Point 2:

- You evidently prescribe to the theory that it is important to convince Americans that they either don't "get it" OR (more likely) that the OTHER American don't "get it." Thus creating the image of a divide in the national sentiment. You'd think you smart guys at the top would know better.

The threat is the establishment of a meme (or paradigm) that conforms to the idea that YOU (and your associates) should be the decider(s) and the American people should simply acquiesce to your self-described "wisdom" as how to confront the danger.... all based on the premise that "It's just TOO complicated and secret to explain to mortals and non-political types."

Oh, by the way ABC...

In a rare and wide-ranging interview, the attorney general disclosed chilling, new details about the evolving threat of homegrown terror, and touched on topics ranging from Wikileaks to the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

How about expanding that comment.... why "rare"? What exactly about "Homegrown Terror" is evolving, other than the PR job we are exposed to by the entertainment press? And in what way is Wikileaks part of the "Homegrown Terror" puzzle? Are you telegraphing something?

What was uppermost on his mind, however, is the alarming rise in the number of Americans who are more than willing to attack and kill their fellow citizens.

Explain this "rise" to us.. since you're not quoting but paraphrasing, I assume you would know the appropriately constructed response to that question. It seems unusual that he would identify the idea that increasing numbers of Americans are plotting to carry out attacks against, specifically, other Americans.

Back to our pal Eric...

"It is one of the things that keeps me up at night," Holder said. "You didn't worry about this even two years ago -- about individuals, about Americans, to the extent that we now do. And -- that is of -- of great concern."

Sorry you are having trouble sleeping. I'm surprised that you didn't worry about this two years ago, when most of your domestic surveillance operations have been underway for far longer....

"The threat has changed from simply worrying about foreigners coming here, to worrying about people in the United States, American citizens -- raised here, born here, and who for whatever reason, have decided that they are going to become radicalized and take up arms against the nation in which they were born,"

Explain "decided that they are going to become radicalized and take up arms against the nation in which they were born" please. Are you calling the act of extremism to be some kind of casual choice? Like deciding to be a Republican or a Democrat? Your more trusting audience members should be left with less of a vague statement... don't you think they deserve that much?

In the last 24 months, Holder said, 126 people have been indicted on terrorist-related charges, Fifty of those people are American citizens.

As a lawyer Mr. Holder is quite aware of the entirely objectionable nature of this statement. I wonder if that is why he wasn't quoted....

Being indicted doesn't mean you are guilty, or that the indictment has been subject to adjudication... in other words, no matter how many time you repeat the phrase, it doesn't make it true. Several very prominent and beloved colleagues of yours have been, should have been, or will be indicted themselves on various charges... all of which I'm sure you would not accept at face value....

Authorities suspect Awlaki helped mastermind last year's Christmas Day underwear bombing plot in Detroit, and a recent scheme to blow up cargo planes traveling from Yemen to Europe and the United States.

...Holder said that as a threat to the United States, Awlaki ranks right up there with Osama bin Laden.

I have always wondered if the frail mortal nature of Osama bin Laden was the reason for the new "face" we are seeing plastered on the never-ending, omni-present, 'oh-so-real,' threat of "home grown" terrorism. According to you they are God-like in their potential to harm us.... I can see why you're losing sleep. Try anti-depressants... that might help.

Does the charade ever get old? Many of us have been seeing through it for years... the more you push it, the worse it will be when people realize it's about public sentiment manipulation and political gamesmanship. You need America to be in fear... it is evident. That need makes you (pejoratively speaking) the weak element in the equation. In fact, it makes you a terrorist, doesn't it? Whether you "use" terrorism as a mean to invoke fear, you are a terrorist. If you "make use of" the "terrorist threat" to achieve political ends... you are equally a terrorist, and what's worse, you must be monitored to ensure you are not enabling terrorism for said purpose. Either way, once you play this silly media-based public relations game, you've joined their ranks. The "ends" DO NOT justify the "means" - they never did - they never will.

"He would be on the same list with bin Laden," the attorney general said. "He's up there. I don't know whether he's one, two, three, four -- I don't know. But he's certainly on the list of the people who worry me the most."

....

Awlaki is believed to be in Yemen, but thanks to the Internet, his reach is global, and his influence dangerous.

Mr. H, how can you, of all people NOT know where this new "home grown" terror is on the list? And, the Internet is a two-way street. It will take a lot more public relations and lies to convince Americans you can't find him on (or through) the Internet. It appears more likely that you can't "get" to him... and that is NOT the fault of the Internet.. it is the fault of POLICIES at home and abroad... and you KNOW that.

So why bring up the Internet at all? Oh... of course.... common man's voice.... must be stifled, etc, etc, .... How is Mr. Rockefeller anyway?

"The ability to go into your basement, turn on your computer, find a site that has this kind of hatred spewed ... they have an ability to take somebody who is perhaps just interested, perhaps just on the edge, and take them over to the other side," he said.

Oh.... Eric, Eric, Eric..., Don't be so dense... if they weren't on the Internet, HOW WOULD YOU FIND THEM? You speak of this as if it were rocket science... what kind of moronic strategy is it to make it impossible for true enemies to identify themselves? It would be like enacting a law requiring all terrorist to wear a mask so we can't see who they are. I would think you would WANT them on the net, blathering on about their agenda...

wait a second... if they are out 'there' on the "net" and "anyone can go into their basement" (nice imagery there Eric) and check them out; then even WE, the common people could see what they are up to,... we could become the TROLLS on their networks and harass them.... or would you prosecute us for that....?

anyone, anyone.., Buehler?

To combat the threat of Americans turning to al Qaeda and violence, the United States is monitoring scores of radicals and has set up stings to blunt the threat.

Whoa.... whoa! "Scores" of radicals?? What the hell? You mean as in "less than one hundred?" We are paying billions, and surrendering our precious freedoms so you can stop a hundred bad guys.... dude... bad idea to put in print. No wonder you rely on the media to 'create' the atmosphere of despair....

"Options are always given all along the way for them to say, 'You know what, I have changed my mind. I don't want to do it.' Everyone that we have charged has said, 'No I want to go forward,'" he said. "All those actions were designed to kill Americans.

Now how would you know that Eric? Is it because these are all those "radicals" your buddies in the bureau or 'contractors' have cajoled and romanced through the process of radicalization? Is this in the script so you can avoid the entrapment defense? How can you possibly sleep at night.....? Oh wait... you don't right?

Holder said the United States has made great strides in improving its ability to detect and block attacks, which is shown by the number of would-be terrorists who have been stopped before they could kill Americans. The intelligence community is working around the clock, he said, with little time off.

Man oh man.... "number of would-be terrorists" ... would-be... which will not deter you from prosecuting them AS terrorists will it? "Little time off" - from the picture you are painting, I should think that NO time off would be more appropriate...

"We are doing everything that we possibly can to keep the American people safe," Holder said. "We are vigilant, we are doing everything we can to keep our homeland secure,"

I must confess, that every time I hear one of you politically appointed types using the word "homeland" I feel a bit less secure.... She's our country, our nation, and more than that she is "E Pluribus Unim"... 'homeland' sounds kind of '1940's Germanic" if you will....

Turning to how terror suspects are tried, Holder said he still believes the "decision as to how people get prosecuted, where they get prosecuted, is an executive branch function. Even if those suspects are being held now at Guantanamo Bay. Holder said Congress should not be interfering with that.
"It's -- from my perspective -- a constitutional issue," he said.

The executive branch decides on matters of prosecutorial justice? .... I don;t know what to say..... SCOTUS have any feedback on that?

"It's -- from my perspective -- a constitutional issue..." DANGER, DANGER, ... Mr. Holden be VERY careful.. it is my understanding that people who speak publicly of "constitutionality" are deemed likely to be radicalized and potential 'homegrown' terrorists..... or does that only apply to "less equal" citizens? Perhaps those preordained as .... dangerous?

Despite acknowledging that the case was "ongoing" Eric, you chose to state:

"What Wikileaks did, at the end of the day, was harmful to American security, put American agents and properties ... at risk ... and I think for arrogant and misguided reasons," he said.

I suspect the only real offense was against the "property" you mention, and certainly it was "corporate" property of close allies of the corporate-government cabal... but I need to ask... would you have pursued and prosecuted "Deep Throat" and the Washington reporters responsible for breaking the "Watergate" scandal?

----


Whew....... I feel better.....

The only threat that keeps Holder or this administration "up at night" is transparency. They have stated their true feelings before. How long ago did big sis proclaim that people with Ron Paul bumper stickers and returning vets were potential terrorists.

It's funny that Hugo Chavez is now too clamping down on the internet. In the article linked below Chavez tells the people that his intent is to PROTECT the PEOPLE from "cybercrimes". Yet, in the same breath he includes "Social Responsibility Law" and "disrespect public authorities," "incite or promote hatred" or crimes are aimed at creating "anxiety" in the population, and the most relevant "incite or promote hatred" or crimes, or are aimed at creating "anxiety" in the population. Chavez's quotes sound as they could have come from the DOJ lately.Isn't ironic how we as a country now have more in common with a dictator than our founding fathers RIGHT of free speech.

'They have seen the enemy.....and it is us'
Full Article: www.washingtonpost.com...

reply to post by Maxmars


Now tell us how you really feel, Maxmars
.
Seems to me you may be one of those "American citizens" Mr Holder is "concerned" about. I prefer to refer to them as PATRIOTS.

Originally posted by romanmel
reply to post by Maxmars

 

Now tell us how you really feel, Maxmars
.
Seems to me you may be one of those "American citizens" Mr Holder is "concerned" about. I prefer to refer to them as PATRIOTS.

Thank you for allowing me to 'knee jerk vent' on Mr. Holder's 'rare' display of public statesmanship.

Much to his chagrin... I have no basement... perhaps that just makes me brazen.

Originally posted by Maxmars

Originally posted by romanmel
reply to post by Maxmars

 

Now tell us how you really feel, Maxmars
.
Seems to me you may be one of those "American citizens" Mr Holder is "concerned" about. I prefer to refer to them as PATRIOTS.

Thank you for allowing me to 'knee jerk vent' on Mr. Holder's 'rare' display of public statesmanship.

Much to his chagrin... I have no basement... perhaps that just makes me brazen.

I have no basement, as well.

Perhaps this alone will keep his PC radar from detecting us.

Mmmmm... S510, now a bit of booga booga threats about the bogeymen poisoning the food? Coincidence of course, but the timing?

Get back in line citizen for your DHS approved and supplied GM derived bread and biotech lab-grown meat substance! We'll keep you safe from the food terrorists... trust us!

Originally posted by Britguy
Mmmmm... S510, now a bit of booga booga threats about the bogeymen poisoning the food? Coincidence of course, but the timing?

Get back in line citizen for your DHS approved and supplied GM derived bread and biotech lab-grown meat substance! We'll keep you safe from the food terrorists... trust us!

Right, soilent green for one and all!

The only thing we have to fear is Holder, himself.

..........................

reply to post by romanmel


Geee, didn't Holder basically just hand the terrorists a win?

Let's see.....the purpose of terrorism is to strike fear into the hearts of civilians to effect a political gain or advantage, or cause some political change. So, our own Attorney General, even without a terrorist attack, has told his own citizens to "be afraid" "be willing to accept bad news."

Since 9/11/2001 we have also given up a sizeable portion of our rights and privacies, and almost 10 years later, we continue to give up more and more rights and privacies, because our government continually tells us to stay scared?!?!?!?!

So, did 9/11 defeat America? Two planes, and some questionably lucky architecture that supposedly brought down to aging buildings and resulted in a windfall for certain connected families, and the only real winners are the Federal Government? As a result of 9/11 and the subsequent government fear-mongering, now we have Patriot Act I and II, and we have DHS, and we have sweeping Federal Power of FEMA, and we have TSA, and we have new regimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Don't fear fundamental terrorists, fear the people that reaped the benefits when you look at the pure definition of terrorism, and you look at the results of the last attack and the scare tactics that followed. Decide for yourself what constitutes a terrorist and what one would wish to gain from an attack, look at the previous attacks and see who garnered the biggest rewards and who didn't. I haven't seen a single Muslim benefit from 9/11, but I have seen a lot of other people turn sizeable profits or garner significant new powers!

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by romanmel

 

...I haven't seen a single Muslim benefit from 9/11, but I have seen a lot of other people turn sizeable profits or garner significant new powers!

Oh say like....HALIBURTON?

Or the Federal Government...you know the one who is our "servant"?

reply to post by romanmel


Exactly! Who are the terrorists?

I would say the terrorists are the people that effected a political change, reaped financial rewards, and frightened a civilian populace.

I would say the "victims" were the scapegoats, the injured parties, and the people of the nation that gave up their rights and privileges in the name of safety from a manufactured enemy.

More like he sits up all night thinking how to dupe more patsies and planning the next imaginary threat to amerika..

"We're going to do whatever we have to do, to protect the American people" says Eric Holder.

Jesus Christ... These people are so near sighted it's scary. Why don't they just paint a huge red sign and stick it on the white house, that says "DICTATORS WELCOME".

reply to post by romanmel


I am so sick of people like our Attorney General friend. I really wish people would wake up to reality.

reply to post by romanmel


He sounds more paranoid then the people he thinks threaten him or the government, therefore he maybe either crazy or dumb, both of which make him into a tool and nothing more than that. And as far as "darkside" what kind of mystical mumbo jumbo does this guy think he maybe jiving with his cosmik debris? Maybe he has some kind of crystal ball or somthing, but so what maybe he needs to go watch the wizard of oz a few times, apparently he has not seen that bit of terrorist propaganda yet? Maybe he means the darkside of the moon or maybe the darkside of my moon? Not very sure why he speaks in Nostradamus quatrains or something, just more fear based mind control, from his point of view he sees terroism under every rock and I actually feel sorry for him, cause in the end himself and others will find exctly what they are looking for.....just like scientists that regardless of experiments already know the conclusions....all these pronoucements only make his own ideas less sensible, cause then he creates self fullfilling outcomes, now having said he feels surrounded by terrorists on the net he will have to defeat them or find them or make them up to fit his reality tunnel he has created , as far as a myth gets told otherwise all he does maybe just serve up chicken little sounding fear mongering, so he needs to setup a narrative and then show his proof....usually this happens when the whole case falls apart.....as in the past ten years, eg you mean grannies opposed to war are on the terrorist watchlist.....so for today what does that make the average internet user/ hacker the devil himself?

This just seems more like a liberal political mental disorder to me, sorry, but they are paranoid and so as a result will do and say crazy stuff to justify and magnify their incapacities, not to say conservatives don't have their disorders as well, but this borders on crazy talk when it comes to trying to control the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS to prevent a future Nostradamus like event.