DHS Document Lists "Alternative Media" As Potential Terrorists (This Means You!)

DHS Document Lists "Alternative Media" As Potential Terrorists (THIS MEANS YOU!)

www.tdbimg.com

A new Homeland Security document that received little attention during last week’s swine flu coverage shockingly lists the “alternative media” with other radical extremist groups and implies that people who disagree with the mass media’s version of events are potential domestic terrorists.

The “official use only” document is entitled “Domestic Extremism Lexicon” and was released on March 26, two weeks before the infamous “right-wing extremists” report that generated so much media attention throughout April.

[edit on 4-5-2009 by Master_Wii]

Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 5 May 09 by Gools]

In the same breath as radical Cuban Communists, the “decentralized terrorist movement,” “lone terrorists,” “racist skinheads” and the Mexican separatist movement, we find an entry for “alternative media,” alongside the blurb, “a term used to describe various information sources that provide a forum for interpretations of events and issues that differ radically from those presented in mass media products and outlets.”

That’s right folks - the federal government is training its enforcers that people who don’t believe everything they see on Fox News, CNN or read in the New York Times are to be treated as a “threat” and a potential violent domestic terrorist.



www.tdbimg.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

In March and April of 2009, the DHS under Janet Napolitano, issued two very disturbing special reports on what the new administration considers to be the most dangerous terror threats to the Homeland. These reports were issued to local, county, state and federal law enforcement agencies. The March 2009 DHS report establishes a lexicon for what constitutes a “terrorist” of grave concern to DHS. Here’s the general directive from the report… (U) DHS encourages recipients of this document to report information concerning suspicious or criminal activity to DHS and the FBI. The DHS National Operations Center (NOC) can be reached by telephone at 202-282-9685 or by e-mail at [email protected]. For information affecting the private sector and critical infrastructure, contact the National Infrastructure Coordinating Center (NICC), a sub-element of the NOC. The NICC can be reached by telephone at 202-282-9201 or by e-mail at [email protected]. The FBI regional phone numbers can be found online at www.fbi.gov... When available, each report submitted should include the date, time, location, type of activity, number of people and type of equipment used for the activity, the name of the submitting company or organization, and a designated point of contact. The directive refers not only to “criminal” activities, but “suspicious” activities as well, and asks to be notified whenever such activities are noticed. What is “suspicious” is obviously left up to the interpreter, but the DHS report attempts to assist with that interpretation. So, what types of “suspicious” activities are they on the lookout for?

[edit on 4-5-2009 by Master_Wii]

Should anyone be surprised?

Visit most alternative media sites, even ATS, and you'll see plenty of idiots saying "I'm ready to take up arms against the government!" or "They'll have to kill me to take away my weapons!" and things like that.

Of course when you have an Internet full of citizens saying things like this, it's going to raise tons of red flags with the government that, those who admit these things, is allegedly monitoring.

I never quite understood what was so great about giving an alleged enemy your location, abilities, and intent...

I just think it's hilarious that people wonder why the government wants to crack down on sites that are full of claims about going to war with the government, starting a revolution, etc.. etc...

I can understand wanting to prvent people from blowing stuff up because that hurts people but the report seems pretty vaige. I mean does that mean that anyone who goes to alternative news sites might also be considered a terrorist?


[edit on 4-5-2009 by FunSized]

[edit on 4-5-2009 by FunSized]

are you even remotely surprised?

look through the threads here that deal with politics they are filled with thinly veiled (if veiled at all) threats against the 'established' government.

i completely understand that these tend to come from a perspective of the 'patriot' over that of the 'terrorist' but i doubt uncle sam and his crew would agree with that.

whats more, ats is a VERY balanced site that neither promotes such behavior nor allows its excessive use. so just image what other boards look like.

Originally posted by logician magician
Should anyone be surprised?

I guess great minds think alike! We must have posted 15 seconds apart. `

reply to post by Animal
I notice threads filled with "DISCONTENT". In a free country, we can write about things we do not like, or agree with.

You were saying?????.....

reply to post by dgtempe


Come on mate don't be intentionally daft. Talking about things you do not agree with is one thing, proposing revolution quite another.

While both are protected under the 1st amendment, the second is most defiantly going to attract the attention of the establishment.

Sorry that it bothers you...

reply to post by Animal


And what is so wrong with proposing revolution? After all this nation was founded in revolution against a tyranny that abused its citizens far less then the current regime.

Thought control is not befitting a "free society" and if a government seeks to control our thought regardless of our actions that it damn well is a tyranny and truly should be overthrown and done away with. Now by saying that I am not committing to any violent action nor do I pose a physical threat to anyone but as I said, If my words constitute some kind of ideological threat that must be restricted and/or put down then the time has truly come to cast off the shakles of tyranny.

reply to post by titorite


Somehow I think you might have just managed to make the list.

Everyone is on their "Terrorist list" except them. A truthful list would start with the CIA, FBI, ATF, DHS, etc. -- the REAL terrorists!

Originally posted by titorite
reply to post by Animal

 

And what is so wrong with proposing revolution?

In a nation where in the gernal political process the MAJORITY do nothing but sit on their rumps?

I would say if you were TRULY interested in creating change for the BENEFIT of the nation you would try to work within the system first by getting people to participate.

Simply choosing to bypass working with the system and destroying it, IMHO, shows a acute lack of true care and concern and is more representative of a negative path than positive one.

reply to post by justsomeboreddude


Defending yourself and your family is justified. Why sit back and let them do it? So they have high-powered rifles and a lot of ammo and weapons and governance. If you talk about this kind of stuff you're furthering their agenda by the way they define it. So talking about revolution is just going to give them more instance to invoke any potential laws they have yet to enforce.

reply to post by watchtheashes


right on dude.

that is why i loved gandhi and his concept of satyagraha.

so many of the self proclaimed 'patriots' who 'stand ready to defend us from the tyranny of the establishment' would do nothing but make our lot worse through their bumbling efforts.

sad, but IMHO true.

satyagraha on the other hand is specifically reasoned to do the opposite.

Originally posted by Animal

Simply choosing to bypass working with the system and destroying it, IMHO, shows a acute lack of true care and concern and is more representative of a negative path than positive one.

Then you would be of the mindset that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and the rest of this nations founders were all terrorists with no regard for their fellow countryman?

People have been attempting to work within the system for years. To this date it has not been very effective. In time, if we choose to continue to play by the rules imposed by a tyranny their will be no voice of dissent not because of public approval of the system but because the system will make the act of voicing opinions of dissent a crime as evidence by this bill.

If the mere act of voicing dissent and reading the opinions of others who agree has become a crime then this has become a full scale tyranny!






[edit on 4-5-2009 by titorite]

Well I will be the first to say I dont agree with what the government is doing right now as far as spending and some other rights issues, but you are not defending your family by starting a fight against someone who is not physically attacking you or your family. As one of the other posters said, instead of starting a freaking armed revolution why dont you work to form more political parties and work to vote out the people that are creating legislation you disagree with. That seems a bit more reasonable than getting a bunch of people killed. Now if they start attacking us physically it is on, but until then work within the framework our forefathers have given us for change. Its worked for a few hundred years more or less.


[edit on 4-5-2009 by justsomeboreddude]

Originally posted by titorite

Originally posted by Animal

Simply choosing to bypass working with the system and destroying it, IMHO, shows a acute lack of true care and concern and is more representative of a negative path than positive one.

Then you would be of the mindset that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and the rest of this nations founders were all terrorists with no regard for their fellow countryman?

Nope, I think the system they were fleeing was corrupt beyond repair and they did what they must. I think the current crisis in the USA is far from un-repairable and to simply destroy it would be foolish.

People have been attempting to work within the system for years. To this date it has not been very effective. In time, if we choose to continue to play by the rule imposed by a tyranny their will be no voice of dissent mot because of public approval of the system but because the system will make the act of voicing opinions of dissent a crime as evidence by this bill.

As I have already noted the MAJORITY do not participate. It is MHO that it is the fault of the PEOPLE and only the government as a consequence.

Wake the people, and they will LEAD the government.

If the mere act of voicing dissent and reading the opinions of others who agree has become a crime then this has become a full scale tyranny!

Take a few deep breaths mate.

No one said simply voicing or reading about dissent made you a terrorist.

Voicing a call for open rebellion is another thing entirely.

Action does not = violence.

Therefore action does not necessarily = terrorism.

Action that ='s violence ='s terrorism.

Really it is a pretty easy chain of logic to follow.

OK, if this is an easy chain of logic , then follow this:

A new Homeland Security document that received little attention during last week’s swine flu coverage shockingly lists the “alternative media” with other radical extremist groups and implies that people who disagree with the mass media’s version of events are potential domestic terrorists.

This site IS an alternative media source. For the crime of getting my news here as opposed to the boob tube WE shall be labeled potential terrorists.

And I do think our nation is Fubar but that does not mean I am gonna take up arms without being fired upon first. As long as the evils of a tyranny are sufferable the people will likely suffer rather than risk all for the unknown.

BUT, when you take away a mans right to what he can think and say a man without a voice will resort to fists to communicate his or her discontent.

I guess that explains the unmarked cop car outside of my house

But seriously, it is a little ridiculous that anyone that doesn't agree with current policy is considered a potential terrorist. It's the point of our "democratic republic" and our freedom of speech to encourage public debate about the issues facing OUR country? If any of our "leaders" would care to take a look through history our current policy has not always been the policy. They change, they evolve and inorder to accomplish this there has to be public discussion and debate. The msm does not do this, and I have yet to meet a person that believes there is any significant difference between the republicans and democrats either, perhaps while they are looking historical policies changes they can also reference to see that there have other political parties as well, hopefully one of these smaller parties will start to take off and we can have some leaders that do more than steal my money and take brides.



[edit on 4-5-2009 by searching4truth]