So for example, the Navy SEALs that just killed those pirates could be placed on a watch list if they don’t support gay marriage or abortion.
[quote]jawara wrote:
So for example, the Navy SEALs that just killed those pirates could be placed on a watch list if they don’t support gay marriage or abortion.[/quote]
You must obey the Obamessiah, or you are a threat to National Security.
[quote]jawara wrote:
So for example, the Navy SEALs that just killed those pirates could be placed on a watch list if they don’t support gay marriage or abortion.[/quote]
No, that is not what it is saying.
It is saying that if you question the government you might be a “terrorist”. They are getting ready to move on the people that try to upstart. They know it is coming – and it is.
BTW, soldiers are not allowed to question anything their leaders say. They just obey like good little trained robots. I thought you knew this…?
Jawara, please make a note when you edit an existing post.
Given some of the threats even here on PWI, homeland security should be watching out for this… it is their job.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
jawara wrote:
So for example, the Navy SEALs that just killed those pirates could be placed on a watch list if they don’t support gay marriage or abortion.
No, that is not what it is saying.
It is saying that if you question the government you might be a “terrorist”. They are getting ready to move on the people that try to upstart. They know it is coming – and it is.
BTW, soldiers are not allowed to question anything their leaders say. They just obey like good little trained robots. I thought you knew this…?
[/quote]
“Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to right-wing extremists,” it says. “DHS/I&A is concerned that right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize veterans in order to boost their violent capacities.”
So add this and some of my other “right wing” views and they very well may put me on it.
Check out this article about making political statements in uniform: http://op-for.com/2007/08/political_statements_in_unifor.html
[quote]jawara wrote:
“Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to right-wing extremists,” it says. “DHS/I&A is concerned that right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize veterans in order to boost their violent capacities.”
[/quote]
I would agree with this. Just as they probably want people that write, are good public speakers, have money, or influence with other groups of people.
This is precisely the reason I regret not going in as a young man. I could personally give two shits about serving my country over seas. I would just like the training to serve my fellow countrymen here if need be.
I am really on the fense with thesewatch lists. Part of me doesn’t like the idea of “watching” people that haven’t done anything wrong. On the other hand, I think our law enforcement needs to profile to some extent. As long as they aren’t bugging your private property or otherwise infringing on your individual rights, I say you just have to deal with it. If you aren’t doing anything illegal, you shouldn’t have to worry about it. If you are doing something you shouldn’t be doing, you better be smart about it and assume you are on some sort of watch list.
[quote]
Check out this article about making political statements in uniform: http://op-for.com/2007/08/political_statements_in_unifor.html[/quote]
I can actually see reasoning behind this. The uniform is a trademark or is owned by the military. The military should not be a political. So wear a t-shirt that says I am an Army Sergeant, but don’t where you uniform. Much like UPS might not like a driver parking his truck outside a strip joint and going inside wearing his uniform.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Given some of the threats even here on PWI, homeland security should be watching out for this… it is their job. [/quote]
What has been said on here that you construe as a threat the federal government should investigate? I read a good amount of the posts here and
don’t recall anything of this nature.
I have read a lot of intelligence briefings, many of them that were not released to the public. This DHS report is different from most of them. While there is some reason to be concerned about the really nasty fringes of the right wing, the threat is hugely overstated. But the overstatement of the threat from neo-Nazis, christian identity nuts and Klansman is not the really sinister part of this report. It is the careful nexus that was drawn between those genuinely dangerous and evil people and the rest of the population who are exhibiting certain beliefs or behaviors. I am sure I don’t need to go over every broad brush stroke that was used.
This report smells to me of the Southern Poverty Law Center and a bad character named Morris Dees. His tactic has been to provide free reports to law enforcement agencies in the US in the form of a rag known as the Intelligence Report. It details white extremists crimes and make no mistake, these guys are evil motherfuckers. They should certainly be under surveillance(but their body count historically puts them way below Islamic terrorists and street gangs in terms of priorities). However, he will then tie in legitimate entities like gun rights groups, right wing talk show hosts and non-violent anti-illegal immigration activists. He has been doing this so long, law enforcement
often regards his propaganda as something authoritative.
I would not be surprised if he had a hand in this. Even if not, it is a page directly out of his book.
I have been railing against this politically motivated shit for years. It has no place in domestic security and law enforcement. Hopefully this will brew into a crazy shitstorm.
[quote]JD430 wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Given some of the threats even here on PWI, homeland security should be watching out for this… it is their job.
What has been said on here that you construe as a threat the federal government should investigate? I read a good amount of the posts here and
don’t recall anything of this nature.
[/quote]
Someone flat out suggested harming the president. For what it’s worth, the “normal crew” on PWI jumped on him pretty quickly and said that it was inappropriate. Maybe someone with a better memory than I could dig up that thread.
There’s also been some anti-mulsim rhetoric that I think was right on the line. One poster suggested that the US should create “Death Camps.” While most of it is harmless, there have been instances where I think people could probably benefit from some professional help.
There’s also been a lot of talk about owning guns and “knowing what to do when the revolution comes.” One poster suggested that the rural areas will eventually “rise up” against the urban areas as the rural areas “are being completely ignored.” Alone this isn’t worth an investigation…but if I were a fed and read this, you can bet I’d search that posters previous posts and see if there was anything there.
While I would guess the vast majority of this type of talk is simply internet tough-guy stuff, I see nothing wrong with the Feds looking into such comments. I would guess PWI if fairly tame compared with some other sites. But threats on the president or his family should be taken very seriously IMO. And I don’t care if that is GW Bush or “B Hussain Obama”
[quote]Chushin wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
There’s also been some anti-mulsim rhetoric that I think was right on the line. One poster suggested that the US should create “Death Camps.”
Unless you can present this post, I will add “unable to read” to my opinions of you.
And “Internment” does NOT equal “Death,” Mr. Grad School.[/quote]
[i]"I don’t want those guys at Gitmo tortured anymore than you do. They should each be humanely shot in the head.
Then, the Iranians, who unleashed these vermin on the planet, should be bombed into the Stone Age. Make Iran a prarie and let the buffalo roam…"[/i]
http://www.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/more_torture_pictures
How 'bout this?
[quote]Chushin wrote:
lixy wrote:
Chushin wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
There’s also been some anti-mulsim rhetoric that I think was right on the line. One poster suggested that the US should create “Death Camps.”
Unless you can present this post, I will add “unable to read” to my opinions of you.
And “Internment” does NOT equal “Death,” Mr. Grad School.
[i]"I don’t want those guys at Gitmo tortured anymore than you do. They should each be humanely shot in the head.
Then, the Iranians, who unleashed these vermin on the planet, should be bombed into the Stone Age. Make Iran a prarie and let the buffalo roam…"[/i]
http://www.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/more_torture_pictures
How 'bout this?
How is that the same thing as “create death camps?”
[/quote]
Well these would be permanent institutions that existed for the sole purpose of killing people.
We call that a “death camp”.
Unless of course he called for US troops to kill Muslims in Americas streets.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
There’s also been some anti-Muslim rhetoric that I think was right on the line. One poster suggested that the US should create “Death Camps.”
Unless you can present this post, I will add “unable to read” to my opinions of you.
And “Internment” does NOT equal “Death,” Mr. Grad School.[/quote]
You can call me “unable to” whatever you’d like, Mr. Nihongo Jouzu. I’m not really sure why you’re attempting to “call me out” for this particular point anyway. You are not the poster I was speaking of, and the expression “death camps” was shocking enough to stick with me. But feel free to google it yourself.
Why this btw? Have YOU called for internment camps? Or do you simply support anything anti-Muslim?
[quote]Chushin wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
There’s also been some anti-mulsim rhetoric that I think was right on the line. One poster suggested that the US should create “Death Camps.”
Unless you can present this post, I will add “unable to read” to my opinions of you.
And “Internment” does NOT equal “Death,” Mr. Grad School.[/quote]
Fuck it, you probably can’t use google or you wouldn’t have made this post. I’ve done it for you:
FormerlyTexasGuy wrote:
Yes I do think Guantanamo should have been more of a death camp. I also think we should have wiped the Afghan, Iraqi and Iranian people out indiscriminately with a huge atom bomb or two.
http://www.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/obama_cronyism?id=2701275&pageNo=1
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Given some of the threats even here on PWI, homeland security should be watching out for this… it is their job. [/quote]
What was past is prologue…
“For the next five years, Germany’s large cities suffered political violence between left-wing and right-wing groups, both of which committed violence and murder against innocent civilians and against each other, resulting in many deaths. The worst of the violence was between right-wing paramilitaries called the Freikorps and pro-Communist militias called the Red Guards, both of which admitted ex-soldiers into their ranks.”
[quote]Chushin wrote:
lixy wrote:
Chushin wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
There’s also been some anti-mulsim rhetoric that I think was right on the line. One poster suggested that the US should create “Death Camps.”
Unless you can present this post, I will add “unable to read” to my opinions of you.
And “Internment” does NOT equal “Death,” Mr. Grad School.
[i]"I don’t want those guys at Gitmo tortured anymore than you do. They should each be humanely shot in the head.
Then, the Iranians, who unleashed these vermin on the planet, should be bombed into the Stone Age. Make Iran a prarie and let the buffalo roam…"[/i]
http://www.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/more_torture_pictures
How 'bout this?
How is that the same thing as “create death camps?”
[/quote]
Chushin is correct. When you let your enemies live, you are in effect telling them that they have a moral right to do whatever they are doing. “Hey, they don’t kill us…they must agree with us!!”
Kill or be killed, right and wrong, good and evil; The world is actually a very simple place.