Police chiefs to discuss terrorism at White House

page: 1
19
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
The time is nigh. This is being reported today, 18 January, 2012. The Obama Administration is hosting a White House conference for senoior state and local police officials to discuss homegrown terrorism, and give them bullet-point "warning signs".

I initially posted this in another thread, but after reviewing it, I believe it may warrant a thread of it's own, which is only my second in nearly 4 years at ATS. Yes, I believe it's THAT important.



In the 62 cases reviewed, the subjects increasingly spoke out against the government, blamed the government for perceived problems and did so in a way that caught the attention of other people in their communities, according to the senior counterterrorism official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the private White House event. Subjects became active on the Internet to espouse extremist views. In some cases, the subjects purchased weapons, ammunition or explosive materials.


Source: Police chiefs to discuss terrorism at White House

So then, speaking out against the government makes one a "domestic terrorist" now. Becoming active (esp. politically) on the internet makes one a "domestic terrorist".This is what is called a "chilling effect" on the First Amendment. it doesn't abolish it, it merely makes people afraid to exercise it. The same net effect - a chilling one.

One might ask what constitutes "extremist views" in relation to this meeting. I think it might be best to allow Law Enforcement to answer that question in it's own words. The following quote is from an 18 year Law Enforcement veteran who is still active in Law Enforcement:



No matter what topic the training session concerns, every DHS sponsored course I have attended over the past few years never fails to branch off into warnings about potential domestic terrorists in the community. While this may sound like a valid officer and community safety issue, you may be disturbed to learn how our Federal government describes a typical domestic terrorist.

These federal trainers describe the dangers of “extremists” and “militia groups” roaming the community and hiding in plain sight, ready to attack. Officers are instructed how to recognize these domestic terrorists by their behavior, views and common characteristics. State data bases are kept to track suspected domestic terrorists and officers are instructed on reporting procedures to state and federal agencies. The state I work in, like many others, have what is known as a “fusion center” that compiles a watch list of suspicious people.

So how does a person qualify as a potential domestic terrorist? Based on the training I have attended, here are characteristics that qualify:

Expressions of libertarian philosophies (statements, bumper stickers)
Second Amendment-oriented views (NRA or gun club membership, holding a CCW permit)
Survivalist literature (fictional books such as "Patriots" and "One Second After" are mentioned by name)
Self-sufficiency (stockpiling food, ammo, hand tools, medical supplies)
Fear of economic collapse (buying gold and barter items)
Religious views concerning the book of Revelation (apocalypse, anti-Christ)
Expressed fears of Big Brother or big government
Homeschooling
Declarations of Constitutional rights and civil liberties
Belief in a New World Order conspiracy


Source: Beware of Homeland Security Training for Local Law Enforcement, by An Insider

That last article mentions several interesting aspects of this new, kinder, gentler means of oppression. The author laments that:



During the past several years, I have witnessed a dramatic shift in the focus of law enforcement training. Law enforcement courses have moved away from a local community focus to a federally dominated model of complete social control. Most training I have attended over the past two years have been sponsored by Department of Homeland Security (DHS), namely the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).


He also explains how DHS is training Law Enforcement to use people's livelihoods against them if they really want to get 'em, but trumping up charges via a list of items that, by a stretch, CAN be used in a nefarious manner. or example, a plumber can be made into a domestic terrorist by listing that he has lengths of pipe in his garage - pipe is used to make... pipe bombs. Ergo, anyone with pipe laying around (i.e.plumbers) can be charged with "terrorism" if the authorities want them for something else badly enough, and that is what they are being trained to do.

All in all, that is a fairly informative read.

All of this in combination indicates the noose is tightening. There's more to add in, such as (but by no means limited to) the recent (past 10 years or so) and ongoing militarization of police forces courtesy of DHS disbursements of federal funds to buy local agencies - via buying them all manner of pretty, warlike baubles.

Did you know that a Texas county has their very own surveillance drone, courtesy DHS?



In Montgomery County, Texas, the sheriff’s department owns a $300,000 pilotless surveillance drone, like those used to hunt down al Qaeda terrorists in the remote tribal regions of Pakistan and Afghanistan. In Augusta, Maine, with fewer than 20,000 people and where an officer hasn’t died from gunfire in the line of duty in more than 125 years, police bought eight $1,500 tactical vests. Police in Des Moines, Iowa, bought two $180,000 bomb-disarming robots, while an Arizona sheriff is now the proud owner of a surplus Army tank.


Source: Local Cops Ready for War With Homeland Security-Funded Military Weapons

I'm no doubt already on the list, and so have nothing to gain by remaining low profile and slinking away into the night. I reckon I'll just have to stand where I am and hold my ground until the tanks batter the walls down. Note to DHS Surveillance: Flashbangs are heartily disrecommended. You won't like what happens if they fly here. Teargas will probably be all right (try to avoid the flammable curtains, eh?), but pepper spray seems to have little effect on me for some odd reason. Use it if you want - I've always got burritos and tacos around that need seasoning.


Now, I can hear the bots squalling about "Butbutbut all that was started under Bush!" So it was, perhaps, but Obama has done nary a damned thing to dismantle it, stop it, or even slow it down. On the contrary, he has intensified it.

P.S. - all I have done here is precisely what DHS claims to be doing, and which is a common intelligence practice - putting seemingly unrelated puzzle pieces together to see what the picture on the face of the puzzle really is. In this case, it is NOT a cute kitty laying in a flower bed. It looks like domestic terrorism to me, but not the sort that DHS is wanting to expose...




posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


He is reaching out to the bobby on the beat, here comes the final tyranny.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMindWar
 


Any and every war has foot soldiers of some sort. this is their attempt to indoctrinate soldiers for their side, and manufacture soldiers for the opposition, and I'm sure there is and end-game plan for it all.



edit on 2012/1/18 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Given the fact that the response to Occupy and the brutal crackdowns against the larger camps have been directed out of Incident Command Centers in Washington, D.C. since at LEAST late October, I'd say Obama is just bringing into the open what has been the defacto state of affairs for quite some time anyway.

Now I guess the mayors can directly call out federal agents in their shock troop gear and not have days of explaining to do. Now they can point to this meeting and say 'See.... It's the President..we are just following orders, don'tcha know
)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   
I hope Sheriff Joe is going to be there to tell them about all the terrorists that are streaming across our southern border with Mexico. They seem to have forgotten about them. Anyone can walk from Mexico to Arizona carrying guns, drugs, missile and bomb components, etc.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


yes, the Occupy camps were one source of dissent, and the private concerns they were protesting couldn't very sell send corporate security to break up the camps, so it fell to their governmental lackey to coordinate the effort, using for the most part local muscle.

Just like the opening post points out - "a dramatic shift in the focus of law enforcement training. Law enforcement courses have moved away from a local community focus to a federally dominated model of complete social control."

The fed arms, directs, and coordinates local police - in part through the DHS "Fusion Centers". It reminds me a bit of the guerrilla warfare model of the 70's and 80's in that respect. Some joker at a safe distance pulling the strings, and the locals go forth with the weapons the boss provides and throw the bullets.

This is worrying because it shifts control of local law enforcement from the people who actually pay the taxes to provide the service to a distant paymaster with no vested interest in the quality of law enforcement provided. All the federales want is control - peace doesn't seem to interest them much.

As an aside - perhaps - the federalization of state guard units that has been so prevalent recently may be another piece of the puzzle. That sort of thing has gone on forever, but I don't believe it has done so with the prevalence on display recently. Why federalize locals because of alleged "manpower issues", and at the same time complain that the military has to be pruned back?





edit on 2012/1/18 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
I hope Sheriff Joe is going to be there to tell them about all the terrorists that are streaming across our southern border with Mexico. They seem to have forgotten about them. Anyone can walk from Mexico to Arizona carrying guns, drugs, missile and bomb components, etc.


Why bother bringing your own weapons when crossing the border? I'm sure Holder is willing to up-arm them via his "Fast and Furious" Guns for Goons program!

Why spend your own hard-earned drug money when you can just visit "Uncle Eric's House of 'Splosives"?



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   
nenothtu,
Thanks for this thread, it IS very important and downright alarming.
Do you think that every LEO in the country would be willing to go along with this "federal mandate" when things turn ugly?

Last year I was looking into the Bankster's Field Day of foreclosure feeding frenzy...and there were numerous reports of Sheriffs and other "bearers of bad tidings" refusing to do so on grounds of decency and morality. I've read bunches of threads about how the guardsmen, active or retired, or the retired veterans would not stand for this kind of tyranny.

What, from your perspective, is their contingency plan for the dissident officers who might go through the training and be instructed to shoot now, ask questions later...but who in the execution of it refuse to follow any such orders?



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


No, I don't think every LEO will go along with this program. Sheriffs and their deputies are the least likely to follow along, but some will. The LEO that posted the blog is a case in point, and he's not alone. There are many out there who won't be swayed, and many who will. it's the luck of the draw. I think it will be interesting, perhaps, to see how much of that fancy DHS provided equipment "disappears" and winds up being used by the opposition if push comes to shove.

I recall other times, other places, where entire units (army and police) "defected" and took their toys with them when they went.



What, from your perspective, is their contingency plan for the dissident officers who might go through the training and be instructed to shoot now, ask questions later...but who in the execution of it refuse to follow any such orders?


Some will just "disappear" and show up among the opposition later, and some of the bolder ones will stay in place and feed intelligence. those guys will be the ones in real danger. If they're caught, they'll probably disappear, and just never turn up anywhere.

A simple refusal will be met with suspension or termination proceedings, I think. that would be for the beat officers in the bought departments.

If an entire department refuses to comply, that could get interesting. the Feds will brook no dissension within the ranks, and when they go to make an example of that department, things may get REALLY dicey. They'll probably try legal compulsion first - pitting federal courts against local departments - but if push comes to shove, and the local people realize that these officers stood in their favor against the feds, I'd imagine they'll get more popular support than necessary to carry the day.

Think a few companies of federalized guardsmen trying to have a go at a police department. Sure, that could get loud, but then stop to think what might happen if they realize that every living thing between themselves and the cops is actively trying to kill them... and this ain't going to be a "Kent State" moment with people trying to poke flowers in their gun barrels or just throwing rocks and bottles, or returning their smoking tear gas canisters to them... all those things thrown would undoubtedly be accompanied by more ... umm... more "original" objects.

I'll be honest here - I have a fairly good working relationship with the local constabulary, and if the feds were to give them grief over a refusal to enforce illegal edicts, the cops themselves will be the least of their worries if they try an assault.

There are rifles around that have been designed and tested to penetrate kevlar helmets at 800 meters or better. I'm guessing that they may have a hard time getting within 800 meters of the cops if the entire department were to revolt, and stand with the citizens instead. if they did that, they could be sure the citizens will stand with them, too..

In the bigger urban areas, it will be easier to pit the police against the citizenry. The antagonism there is already stronger, bolstered by a sort of anonymity. "Cop" sees "crackhead" rather than an individual, and vice versa. In smaller towns and rural areas, the chances go down, since more people know more people. "Joe" sees "Charlie", and the uniform or lack thereof is more of an afterthought. It's harder to shoot at a neighbor with a name than it is a generic, anonymous "miscreant of your choice".

A lot of people, probably a disproportionate number, seem to be thinking with that urban mindset when posting in forums, but I think that may be a function more of selective internet access than anything else.




edit on 2012/1/18 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 




Expressions of libertarian philosophies (statements, bumper stickers)
Second Amendment-oriented views (NRA or gun club membership, holding a CCW permit)
Survivalist literature (fictional books such as "Patriots" and "One Second After" are mentioned by name)
Self-sufficiency (stockpiling food, ammo, hand tools, medical supplies)
Fear of economic collapse (buying gold and barter items)
Religious views concerning the book of Revelation (apocalypse, anti-Christ)
Expressed fears of Big Brother or big government
Homeschooling
Declarations of Constitutional rights and civil liberties
Belief in a New World Order conspiracy


I seriously can't believe this list.
Un-freaking real.
I could spout off on how everyone of these views are common these days, but why bother.
These are normal, everyday conversations in this day and age.
I want to use 1000 curse words just to describe these fools that compiled this list.
But I don't want to get banned either.


Forget about it.
These imbeciles are just looking for excuses to lock people up.
That's what it seems like to me.

No wonder they built all those "FEMA" camps.
There's going to be alot of people to fill in those areas.
I bet half of this country talks or acts exactly like what is listed here.
Unreal.





edit on 18-1-2012 by havok because: clarity



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by havok
 


Exactly.

They've included a sizable majority of the population to demonize. This may prove to be a bite too big to chew. Furthermore, They are making natural allies out of what were formerly natural foes. Not the best of strategic moves. What it looks like to me is the false "left right dichotomy" in government circles being reversed - the People will find, through slick maneuvers of this sort, that they have far more to lose by remaining separate than they have to lose by banding together against a common foe.

This list includes many "right wingers", but Libertarians can go either way, and they are at the top of the listing. We've already seen the DHS Fusion Center co ordinations against the OWS crowd, predominantly "left-wingers". There are alliances to be made there, against a common adversary - those demonizing both "sides". The "sides" are not what they want us to think they are.

I hate to keep referring to John Titor, but he did say that the coming unrest would not be "right vs left", "black vs. white" or "urban vs rural". He never came right out and said what he believed the polarizations WOULD be, but the implication was the population against a police state. For all his faults, he does seem to have been a fairly astute prognosticator, projecting a potential future from the seeds he could see around him at the time (circa 2000). His time line appears to have been off, but the track appears similar.

That's DHS for you. The American Stasi (that sounds like a decent movie title!). Your tax dollars hard at work!



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Everyone, I mean, EVERYONE I've talked to in recent times have mentioned things on that list.
Especially about stocking food and supplies.
Heck, the FEMA website even suggests it for natural disasters!
SO does that mean everyone I am talking to are potential terrorists'?


Un-freaking-believable!







posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


From SOPA,to this.


Yes the noose is tightening,on the Average American.

Bravo for putting this thread together.




posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Could the terrorist be this lying, foreign national that We have as POUS?...People are finely waking up?

The Terrorist Within

Now let's wake up Our Mainstream Marxist (AP) media and Our 'corrupt' & 'racist' Federal Justice Dept!
edit on 18-1-2012 by truthRconsequences357 because: LM



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by havok

Heck, the FEMA website even suggests it for natural disasters!



Sort of gives a new depth to the idea of "manufacturing terrorists", doesn't it? Recommend that people do a thing, then use that very thing as an excuse to keep an eye on 'em if they do!



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
Lets put this into perspective.............

If a label such as "terrorist" is given to those who dont approve of Government,How many could be locked up "indefinitely" with this sort of poll?


Only 11% of the country approves of how Congress is handling its job and 86% explicitly disapprove, according to a Gallup survey of more than 1,000 people. By comparison, 13% of Americans said they approved of Congress in November.


Congress' Approval Rating Hits All-Time Low


Scary thought right?



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Yup, I'm developing new take on just where the "terrorists" live and what they wear - hint: it's not what Miss Janet wants me to think! These days, I'm leaning more towards the real terrorists wearing jackboots or 3 piece suits...

SOPA is a whole other piece of the puzzle. The intent appears to me to be an attempt to control communications lines, preventing coordination among elements within the population, and squelching the voicing of dissent. Step one. declare people who have legitimate gripes with the government as "potential terrorists", step two, monitor their communications as "persons of interest", step 3, when you have all you need to round them up, start blacking out sections of the internet "in the interest of national security" because those sections are obviously breeding "domestic terrorists" - NOT, of course, to keep them from coordinating and learning that the heat is on...


When you start slapping those puzzle pieces together, the picture that emerges isn't the one they put on the box!



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Agree.

The question,is how long before the majority have this question handed to them.

"Papers please?"



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthRconsequences357
Could the terrorist be this lying, foreign national that We have as POUS?...People are finely waking up?

The Terrorist Within

Now let's wake up Our Mainstream Marxist (AP) media and Our 'corrupt' & 'racist' Federal Justice Dept!
edit on 18-1-2012 by truthRconsequences357 because: LM


That sir, is another piece of the puzzle. Desensitize the population to the rule of law by flaunting the laws by those in power. It doesn't matter whether he's a foreign national or not, I believe that enough evidence has been presented that he's not a "natural born citizen". Even THAT doesn't matter, though. What matters is perceptions. If enough questions arise, and are simply blown off as irrelevant, the point is made - they don't have to follow the same law we do.

Special added bonus - those who question it can be labelled as "crazies", potential terrorists (fort questioning the government), etc, and whenever they raise the alarm later, that will be blown off, too.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
Lets put this into perspective.............

If a label such as "terrorist" is given to those who dont approve of Government,How many could be locked up "indefinitely" with this sort of poll?


Only 11% of the country approves of how Congress is handling its job and 86% explicitly disapprove, according to a Gallup survey of more than 1,000 people. By comparison, 13% of Americans said they approved of Congress in November.


Congress' Approval Rating Hits All-Time Low


Scary thought right?


Qaddafi had a higher approval rating at the end, and look what happened to him!





new topics
 
19
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join