It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Janet Napolitano Believes These Are the New Terrorists to look out for.....

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Isn't it a good idea to report suspicious activity, no matter who the people might appear as?
Also, by reporting something doesn't that make a record of the suspicious activity which later can be used by us conspiracy minded folks to point out later? I mean if, John Middleclass Whiteguy is a bomber/smuggler wouldn't it be nice to have a record of it being reported so later on when the MSM reports that it was Joe Foreigner Darkman someone can say, But wasn't there another guy reported as being suspicious?

i think the reason of the white/middleclass imaging in the ads is to try and get Americans to stop defining terrorists as being always being ethnic and/or foriegn (kinda like even us "normal folks" can be mad bombers).

So much stereotyping and profiling went into our average American heads about radical Islamic terrorists or those golldern fereners.
Even 40+ year old Clutch Cargo and Popeye cartoons used radical Islam, does anyone remember when the Angry oil baron set the oil fields on fire in Clutch Cargo? or remember Popeye's, enemy, Abu Hassan, who always said, Abu Hassan teach you lassan? (a play on the name Hussein and the word lesson)

Or hows about in every old war or spy movie where the bad guy had a German or Russian accent? (usually with a nasty scar on his face). Or Boris and Natasha, from Rocky and Bullwinkle? Or the thick glasses and buck teeth of those stinkin' Japs?

Perhaps in todays atmosphere (and the real world) we need to be reminded that the white/middle/class are also sometimes terrorists, eg: Timothy McVeigh, Ted Kaczynski, Joseph Stack, James von Brunn, etc.
i also thought it was a nice touch that in the first video it was a woman who was suspicious. (We can't leave out like the likes of the Manson family women or someone like Patty Hearst and her "friends/captors")

Are "They" trying to make us paranoid and "turn in" people we find suspicious? Yes, i think so. But, is that a bad thing? (no one want's to blow up, 'cept suicide bombers)

If someone left a unattended bag at the train depot wouldn't you rather mention it to the security or police than have potential harm come to yourself or others? And if it turned out to be just a misplaced bag, no harm done.

No matter who wants to blow me up or kill me, whether it's - gov. agents, religious kooks, or "home grown" terrorists doesn't it make sense to report suspicious activity?




posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 09:42 AM
link   
Yeah, but there's no one to report TSA goons to..........



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by simone50m
Yeah, but there's no one to report TSA goons to..........


Well, for them i guess all we can do is report it to each other (for now).



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 02:15 AM
link   
This is much better. Source: Injustice everywhere




posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by trika3000
 


No, no and no.

If you like to live in a constant state of fear perpetuated by our government, one that has you fearing your neighbors that you don't even know, then go ahead.

I choose not to live in fear. The big bad boogeyman is not on the other side of the world, they are right here in Washington. The big bad boogeyman is also not my neighbor and I refuse to treat everyone like a suspect.

Napolitano is a high grade biotch from hell and should not be listened to at all, at any time, ever.



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   


If you like to live in a constant state of fear perpetuated by our government, one that has you fearing your neighbors that you don't even know, then go ahead
reply to post by TheLoony
 


What does "living in a constant state of fear" have to do with reporting suspicious activity?
The ads stated to report suspicious activity not to be paranoid about it.

If i see someone doing something suspicious at my neighbor's house i'm gonna report it and my neighbors would do the same. i know all of my neighbors fairly well, we have BBQs together, wave to each other and help each other out if asked (you know neighborly type stuff).
We have to watch out for each other (all of us). i didn't see anything in the ads suggesting paranoia or being perpetually afraid of your neighbors.

On the other hand, being perpetually afraid that our government is constantly against us is forgetting (especially locally) that our government and police is our neighbors, family and friends.
Showing concern for and safety of our fellow citizens and ourselves isn't the same as "living in fear" and reporting things you find to be suspicious isn't the same as reporting nonsense about everyone.
Plus, reporting suspicious activity where you live makes good communal sense.

Whether someone believes the Oklahoma City bombing or garage attack on the World Trade Center ('93) was a terrorist activity or a government involved activity doesn't mean you should ignore possible explosive situations or crimminal activity.

Also, the PSAs being a type of propaganda (all PSAs are propaganda) i would think isn't it about time they changed the face of terrorisim from the people who we've stereotyped already? A lot of Americans were already suspicious and afraid of *______________ & ____________ *fill in stereotype and personal bias here.

Or are you thinking by making them non-stereotypical and looking like every/anybody it is just making that many more people we gotta be afraid of now?
Well, i would say, stop being afraid and just be alert to the possibilty some folks want to harm other folks (it's a fact of life). i really think the PSA was supposed to make you aware and call someone if you see something suspicious. Something i think most people would do anyway. Government propaganda is always too little too late (or is that done on pupose?)

You know these PSAs are most likely the PC way to address the complaints saying, 'Why is it always non-white foreigners being shown as terrorists?' It seems there is becoming a "Damned if they do - Damned if they don't" point of view on politics and policy.

Should we become involved or should we turn a blind eye if we see something that doesn't look quite right?
i tend to think the more we become involved the harder it will become for those who operate under the radar to carry on their activity (no matter who it is). Then if something is a govenment action (false flag or whatever), we as citizens would find it easier to say, 'Hey I reported that and they did nothing, see, check the files or phone records'.

The worst possibilty is someone reports something that they think is suspicious, yet has a simple explanation. Of course some goofy cops might get all worked about over it, but you gotta worry about goofy cops anyway, even getting a traffic ticket or jay walking can lead to some cops over-reacting.

So, did watching those PSAs all of the sudden make you afraid of white-middle-class people?
They didn't make me afraid. Actually, i seen them as kind of useless, simple minded and mundane like all government PSAs tend to be.

Do you really think there is some conspiratorial agenda behind them? Did you feel "mind contolled" by them?
i felt the message (or at least the message i seen presented) is that terrorists/crimminals aren't all dark, hairy and swarthy men from foriegn countries (because they're not).

Do you really think the ads were designed to make you "live in constant state of fear", "treat everyone like a suspect" and think your nieghbors are "Boogeymen", or did you really just wanna bitch about that "high grade biotch" Janet Napolitano and those who you consider to be "The big bad boogeyman" (right here in Washington).
Then are you not doing the same thing you say they are doing 'cept you have changed the people to fear as the people you want me to fear?

i choose to fear neither "Boogeyman" yours or theirs, and if i see suspicious activity from anybody that i deem suspicious i will report them to whomever i feel would do any good. i'll report it to the police, newspapers, NSA, ATS, Reddit, Twitter, even my FB friends or whoever could/would make a difference at the time and/or in the situation.

The PSAs posted here were pretty narrow in scope and in example, the folks doing the reporting seemed just like everyday type people going about their business. No one seemd panicked, freaking out or incredibly fearful.




I choose not to live in fear. The big bad boogeyman is not on the other side of the world, they are right here in Washington.


And even though you say you choose not to live in fear, you still refer to them as "big bad boogie men" and Napolitano as being the "Biotch from hell", so your words suggest you are at least a little afraid. After all Boogeymen and Hell are frightening ideas. Or were you using hyperbole to make a point? And the point being we should be afraid of "them"?

It's okay, you can be afraid of them. i (me) choose not to live in fear.
And if you're not afraid of them what difference does a dumb government public service announcement make?



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 03:45 AM
link   
Janet Napolitano is America's answer to Heinrich Himmler. Her mandate is essentially the same, as well.

The people who she wants to identify as domestic terrorists, are those who rightly identify that the American government is long overdue for being violently overthrown. If Jefferson was alive today, Janet would consider him a terrorist.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Well guys what did you expect with Napolitano. Napolitano was the governor of Arizona who got placed in charge of DHS and why?

When Obama was running against McCain, Napolitano and her selective staff put together a team to snoop on McCain's team. In his Phoenix office, they even had cameras up across the street at the elementary school and the Auto Repair shop (16th St/Missouri) watching the license plates of every car that entered into the McCain office complex. Most of McCain's staff couldn't take a piss without Napolitano's snoopers knowing about it first and tipping off the Obama campaign.

Since Napolitano's team did such a good job snooping on McCain--Obama thought first to put her in charge of DHS. It was all about politics, rather than securing the country. It was Bush and the Republicans who created Department of Homeland Security and Democrats felt and claimed that it was being used for the Republican political agenda. So Napolitano was put in charge, there were firings across different departments and transfers...and now the Democrats use it for the agenda that they accused the Republicans of using it for---an agency that is supposed to secure the country from FOREIGN attack being used to spy within America on non-Democrat parties. A huge section of DHS that USED to be for snooping on foreign terrorism has been diverted to accuse non-Democrats (tea partiers, Republicans, independents, etc.) of being possible "threats" to the gov't to snoop on them all.

Meantime...NONE of the American food supply has been secured by DHS. Especially from foreign threats. The example I can think of off the top of my head is an herbicide developed for desert weeds being sold by a foreign company to American cranberry swamp bog farmers (for the American holiday foods for Thanksgiving). Herbicides that were developed for desert-dry-arid weed conditions should never be sold to farmers of swampy bogs--the whole thing incredibly suspicious. And there's many other American holiday foods targeted by foreign companies....all not secured by DHS from foreign attacks.

Meantime...the border is not secure. For those of you who don't know...the bulk of the drugs smuggled across the Arizona border have a destination in Chicago---Chicago mafia families use the Arizona border for drug smuggling. It's the way it's always been. Obama administration (Illinois-Chicago elected) claims border is "secure" which has to do with which Chicago families put him in office.

Meantime...within the country no one is secure from any sort of biological endevor, nor some of the crap put into vaccines over the years. I think the only good news is that a judge finally ordered a few pharm companies to REMOVE mercury from their vaccine additives--but they don't have to eliminate mercury from the vaccines for another year...so that's not even DHS, but rather a civil suit in courts.

Well..look at it this way. All those DHS agents are feeding those kids those 4th of July and Thanksgiving day foods that they never secured from foreign attack. So...I guess they and their kids suffer for their lack of securing the country from foreign attacks since they wanted to use the agency for political--domestic agendas.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join