Oh sure, any time anybody hears about someone carrying an ‘assault rifle’ in public or police officers being shot at, it’s always the white guy that they blame first.
[quote]lixy wrote:
jawara wrote:
lixy wrote:
And just to be sure, don’t forget to go through your neighbors’ trash.
Well if their wasn’t that little problem with the bomb at the airport in Glascow they would’nt need the posters or the hotline.
Yeah, right! They’re so swamped with “little problem[s]” that they need a dedicated line.
http://www.met.police.uk/campaigns/counter_terrorism/index.htm
Gimme a break![/quote]
You give me break!!! You call me a terrorist and you STILL won’t say anything negative against radical Islam!!! So lemme get this straight Muslim on non-Muslim violence is fine but when a non-Muslimdoes somthing to protect themsleves somthing’s wrong???
The following is a leaked document titled “2009 Virginia Terrorism Threat Assessment.”
http://www.infowars.com/media/vafusioncenterterrorassessment.pdf
Good read.
Right in the first paragraph.
This kind of talk really scares me.
This one just struck me as funny. I mean who would have thought that anarchists would have trouble organizing?
This was definitely a good find. I do find it troubling that groups with no record of terrorist actions can be called terrorists groups.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Right in the first paragraph.
While there is no intelligence that indicates terrorists are currently
planning attacks in Virginia, the presence of extremists, evidence of trends linked to terrorism, and the abundance of potential targets, suggests that the potential for Virginia to be targeted remains significant.
This kind of talk really scares me.
[/quote]
My favorite piece of doublespeak from this shitpile of a report:
“Although activities by these groups have been non-violent, all are linked to individuals or ideologies that have endorsed violence as a legitimate tactic.”
So a member of any group associated in any way with the armed forces, law enforcement agencies, martial arts clubs, football and hockey teams, or Mahatma Gandhi (“I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence.”) is, by this ridiculous line of reasoning, a potential terrorist.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Right in the first paragraph.
While there is no intelligence that indicates terrorists are currently
planning attacks in Virginia, the presence of extremists, evidence of trends linked to terrorism, and the abundance of potential targets, suggests that the potential for Virginia to be targeted remains significant.
This kind of talk really scares me.
My favorite piece of doublespeak from this shitpile of a report:
“Although activities by these groups have been non-violent, all are linked to individuals or ideologies that have endorsed violence as a legitimate tactic.”
So a member of any group associated in any way with the armed forces, law enforcement agencies, martial arts clubs, football and hockey teams, or Mahatma Gandhi (“I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence.”) is, by this ridiculous line of reasoning, a potential terrorist.
[/quote]
I don’t have a problem with police knowing and summarizing potential problems in their jurisdiction. There were just several parts of this that rubbed me the wrong way. If some things would have been worded differently it wouldn’t have been a bad internal summary.