It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
Sorry Believers in the constitution . and the second amendment and who are 'anti government' are not terrorists.
Anyone who believes in the constitution is antigovernment.
Since the constitution is a protection FROM government.
There hasn't been any such real life scenarios any time in recent past where an insane Second Amendment supporter used a WMD. There is a reason and it's not based off of anything in the past. It must be something that they're anticipating (or) will (make it happen?) in the future. Your guess is as good as mine.
Just because something hasn't happened previously doesn't mean it can't happen.
Regardless of if you believe 9/11 or Pearl Harbor were inside jobs had either of those attacks happened previously?
Don't get me wrong, if all they were training for was this particular scenario then I think that would paranoid but training for any possible scenario isn't a bad thing.edit on 2014pAmerica/Chicago2808ppm by opethPA because: learning about chemistry sets and books.
Two school employees who are disgruntled over the government's interpretation of the Second Amendment plot to use chemical, biological and radiological agents against members of the local community
Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.) saw a recent town hall of his take a sharp turn to the unexpected. A YouTube video has surfaced showing one of Bridenstine's constituents suggesting that President Barack Obama "should be executed." “Obama is not president as far as I’m concerned," the woman can be heard saying in the clip. "He should be executed as an enemy combatant.” (Listen to the woman's remarks above, beginning at the 20-second mark.) Bridenstine let the woman finish her remarks, before responding. "Look, everybody knows the lawlessness of this president," Bridenstine said. "He picks and chooses which laws he's going to enforce or not enforce."
Documents from an Ohio National Guard (ONG) training drill conducted last January reveal the details of a mock disaster where Second Amendment supporters with “anti-government” opinions were portrayed as domestic terrorists.
Why yes 'left wing' extremists are 'anti government' and support the second.
No wait they don't.
Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly, founded Americans for Responsible Solutions as a way to encourage elected officials to stand up for both the 2nd amendment and safer communities
But, of course, it's all just a Commie Muslim Kenyan plot isn't it?
reply to post by Gryphon66
Yeah it also placed restrictions on that 'government'.
But the government today is nothing like what the founders 'created'.
I'm not saying they shouldn't train for a scenario such as those, but what is the purpose in using specific "perpetrators" such as disgruntled second amendment supporters? Why not just a generic "extremist" such as a radical anti government group? It wasn't mock up of radical militias or groups:
How likely do you think this specific scenario (terrorist 2nd Amendment supporter) would be to play out in reality? Enough so to be specifically trained for with mock ups?
Could they not think of more likely candidates for training?