Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Chattanooga crying for more government

  1. #1

    Chattanooga crying for more government

    Government caused this you idiots, more government isn't going to make it better.

    From Drudge;

    Angry protesters in Chattanooga: When’s the government going to do something?

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...9f4_story.html

    CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. — Paula Proxmire was surrounded by screaming street preachers, angry protesters and unsettled mourners who had just arrived from Sunday church.

    Her son, Petty Officer 2nd Class Randall Smith, 26, had died Saturday from wounds suffered in a shooting rampage here. The attacker was an aimless, depressed 24-year-old Muslim man whose online postings suggest he may have been motivated by radical Islamist movements.

    Proxmire stood across from the bullet-riddled Armed Forces Recruiting Center, one of two military sites attacked by the gunman last week. She brushed back a strand of sweat-soaked hair and sobbed. Her son had been dead for barely one day. Around her people were screaming.

    “I can’t believe these people even come here to this country!” one woman yelled. “Why do they come here?”

    “Because they want to kill us,” a man answered.

    The television cameras edged closer to get a tight shot of Proxmire’s tears. The agitated crowd, many of them carrying holstered pistols, wanted to know why the Obama administration and the military weren’t doing more to kill Islamist extremists in Iraq, Syria or wherever they might be. They were furious at a U.S. military policy, enacted during the Clinton administration, that prevents recruiters from carrying firearms while on duty.

    “How many more mothers have to go through this before we finally do something about it?” yelled Darrell Gibbs, 55, pastor at Highways and Hedges Ministries. “How many mothers have to suffer like this, having cameras shoved down their throats?”

    The attack in Chattanooga, and the raw anger it has provoked here, illustrate the increasingly daunting odds that U.S. counterterrorism agencies face in an era marked by surging Islamist propaganda and a proliferation of disparate, self-radicalized, one-off threats.


    The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security have launched sweeping initiatives aimed at shoring up their ties to Muslim communities across the country, with special pilot programs underway in major cities such as Boston, Minneapolis and Los Angeles.

    But in many ways the bureau is working against itself. Arrests of suspects accused of planning travel to Syria, sting operations and expanded surveillance have at times alienated the Muslim communities that security agencies depend on for cooperation.

    [Tenn. gunman used drugs, struggled with clash of faith]

    FBI Director James B. Comey announced this month that the bureau had made at least 10 arrests over the past six weeks, part of a preemptive crackdown by authorities concerned about the prospect for a spike in attacks during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

    Chattanooga is not among the cities involved in the FBI’s pilot program. But with a Muslim population in the low thousands, it serves as an example of dozens of midsize cities where the FBI and other agencies will need to devote considerable resources if they are to be held to the increasingly impossible-seeming standard of disrupting every domestic plot.

    Tennessee is home to three FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces, in Memphis, Nashville and Knoxville. Even though there’s no task force office in Chattanooga, law enforcement officials here have maintained close ties to the Muslim community.

    When the Islamic Society of Greater Chattanooga held a *ribbon-cutting for its school and mosque complex in 2012, William C. Killian, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee, was a featured speaker along with the mayor and chief of police.

    “Bill Killian introduced us to the FBI,” said Bassam Issa, the president of the society. “It’s a very close relationship that we have with all law enforcement.” FBI officials and local law enforcement have come to the mosque’s open houses.

    But the close relationship wasn’t enough to stop Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez, who had attended the mosque irregularly and struggled with depression and drug use after college, according to friends and family.

    There are more than 100 FBI agents on the ground in Chattanooga, primarily from the FBI Knoxville Field Office, trying to piece together Abdulazeez’s path to radicalization and violence. “That’s going to take time,” one official said. “We may never know, but we are working toward that.”

    [Chattanooga shooter’s real, online lives seem to take divergent paths]

    Abdulazeez did not have an extensive social-media profile, officials said. U.S. officials are also looking for clues in his trips to Jordan, where he visited family.

    One possibility is that Abdul*azeez was just a troubled young man who responded to the torrent of hate-filled Internet messages from groups such as the Islamic State that are designed to inspire a single, troubled, lone gunman.

    Such attacks are in*cred*ibly difficult to detect and stop, officials said. The growing signs that Abdulazeez had self-radicalized and acted alone were of little solace to many in Chattanooga who were convinced the government was not doing enough to protect them.

    At Carl Poston’s family-owned gun shop, a few miles from Abdul*azeez’s home, demand for concealed-carry classes doubled in the days after the shooting. Shooter’s Depot, a gun store on the other side of town, said it had seen a fivefold increase, with as many as 100 people a day requesting spots in the gun classes.

    “I just can’t agree that the best we can do is pray for Chattanooga,” Hamilton County Public Defender Steve Smith wrote on his Facebook page. “I think the best we can do is ascertain who our enemies are, whether foreign or domestic, and then kill them. . . . This same thing will happen again, likely soon, unless our government can do a better job of identifying our enemies.”

    Even the Marines, who have grown grimly accustomed to combat casualties over the course of nearly 14 years of continuous war, viewed these deaths as somehow different and more unsettling.

    “When you’re in a combat environment . . . and someone gets killed by an IED or a direct-fire engagement, as horrible as that is, its easier to accept,” said Maj. Mike Abrams, who lost four of his Marines in the attack. “When they are stateside in Chattanooga, in the heartland of America, and they kiss their wife and kids and say goodbye and go to work and they get shot . . . the shock of that is much harder to accept and much harder to find meaning in.”

    Abrams said the Marines killed in the attack were being considered for Purple Hearts, an award traditionally reserved for troops killed or wounded in war zones.

    Throughout Chattanooga, people were coming up with their own ways to mourn the losses. The Islamic Society in Chattanooga had planned a big celebration Saturday for Eid, the Muslim holiday at the end of Ramadan, with inflatable moon bounces and tables full of sweets, but canceled it. “This is not a time for us to celebrate anything,” said Issa, the society’s president.

    Many left church services Sunday, changed out of their formal clothes and headed out to the two sites where Abdulazeez opened fire. Some huddled in small groups and prayed. Carl Ball, 70, planted an American flag in the ground in front of the building where the four Marines and the sailor had been shot. “How do you stop someone who wants you to kill them so they can go to heaven?” Ball asked. “How do you deter that?”

    A few miles away at the Armed Forces Recruiting Center, the other shooting site, the crowd was larger and angrier. “We need to be stronger,” said Tim Litt, a Gulf War veteran who came to the rally with a holstered Ruger pistol. “We need a stronger White House. We need to do more.”

    There were boisterous chants of “U.S.A.,” roaring motorcycles and television anchors doing live stand-ups. Proxmire, who had traveled from Delphos, Kan., was still trying to make sense of what had happened to her son, who was in surgery when she arrived in Chattanooga. “He was my hero,” she said. “He was my world.”

    Behind her, people were waving American flags and protest signs.

    A stranger pulled Proxmire out of the scrum, guided her toward a quiet spot near the road and hugged her. “I’m so sorry for your loss,” Alaina Fitzner, an Air Force wife, whispered to her. “We’re all behind you. You’re part of our military family, and we love you.”



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    go ahead give them purple hearts since the government made it clear the entire united states is a warzone
    A savage barbaric tribal society where thugs parade the streets and illegally assault and murder innocent civilians, yeah that is the alternative to having police. Oh wait, that is the police

    We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.
    - Edward R. Murrow

    ...I think we have moral obligations to disobey unjust laws, because non-cooperation with evil is as much as a moral obligation as cooperation with good. - MLK Jr.

    How to trigger a liberal: "I didn't get vaccinated."

  4. #3
    wouldn't this be like asking your rapist doctor to explain how you got an AIDS?

  5. #4
    What is the reasoning to not allow servicemen to be armed while on duty?
    "The Patriarch"

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    What is the reasoning to not allow servicemen to be armed while on duty?
    Among President Clinton’s first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones.
    Source
    “The spirits of darkness are now among us. We have to be on guard so that we may realize what is happening when we encounter them and gain a real idea of where they are to be found. The most dangerous thing you can do in the immediate future will be to give yourself up unconsciously to the influences which are definitely present.” ~ Rudolf Steiner

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by donnay View Post
    Thanks donnay. I'm just trying to figure out why he did it.

    Hmmm...more on the subject;

    I have called the Times’ managing editor for opinion, Richard Diamond, for comment, but the editorial almost certainly was referring to Army Regulation 190-14, which was issued on March 12, 1993, by the Department of the Army. [UPDATE: Diamond confirmed via email that 190-14 was the source for the excerpt above.] If the Times editorial board had taken the care to actually read that 14-page document, it would have realized that the impetus for the Army regulation was, in turn, Department of Defense directive 5210.56, which was issued on February 25, 1992, and was considered "effective immediately" for the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. Clinton, of course, did not take office until January 20, 1993. So if we’re going to blame a former president for a mass murder… see how ridiculous this all is?


    What’s more, that directive—signed by Donald J. Atwood, George H. W. Bush’s deputy secretary of defense—was by no means a “ban” on firearms at military installations. It explicitly authorizes DOD personnel “to carry firearms while engaged in law enforcement or security duties, protecting personnel, vital Government assets, or guarding prisoners,” and simply aims to “limit and control the carrying of firearms by DoD military and civilian personnel.

    The authorization to carry firearms shall be issued only to qualified personnel when there is a reasonable expectation that life or DoD assets will be jeopardized if firearms are not carried. Evaluation of the necessity to carry a firearm shall be made considering this expectation weighed against the possible consequences of accidental or indiscriminate use of firearms.”
    http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1...tary-gun-order
    "The Patriarch"

  8. #7
    Hmm...I guess I was wrong. It was Clinton's adopted Dad's deputy secretary of defense who implemented the "gun-free zone."

    It appears this “gun-free zone” type policy can actually be traced back to Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 5210.56, signed into effect in February 1992 by Donald J. Atwood, deputy secretary of defense under President George H.W. Bush.
    Source


    ETA:

    It was Clinton who started the ball rolling with regards to militarizing the police force.

    The National Defense Authorization Act of 1990 authorized the Department of Defense to transfer military equipment to law enforcement agencies "for use in counterdrug activities." This program led to the Department of Defense Excess Property Program (aka the 1033 Program). That one was created under President Bill Clinton by the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1997, and it authorized surplus military equipment to be sent to law enforcement agencies for, as the act states, "use in counternarcotics and counterterrorism operations, and to enhance officer safety."
    Source
    Last edited by donnay; 07-20-2015 at 11:03 AM.
    “The spirits of darkness are now among us. We have to be on guard so that we may realize what is happening when we encounter them and gain a real idea of where they are to be found. The most dangerous thing you can do in the immediate future will be to give yourself up unconsciously to the influences which are definitely present.” ~ Rudolf Steiner

  9. #8
    Supporting Member
    Phoenix, AZ
    Cleaner44's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    4
    Posts
    9,145
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Reagan
    Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.
    Reagan was right at least once in his life.
    Citizen of Arizona
    @cleaner4d4

    I am a libertarian. I am advocating everyone enjoy maximum freedom on both personal and economic issues as long as they do not bring violence unto others.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.


Similar Threads

  1. Will Anyone Be in Chattanooga on 4th of July?
    By kah13176 in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-03-2011, 12:58 PM
  2. Chattanooga
    By RogerLux in forum Tennessee
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-19-2011, 09:32 AM
  3. Who lives in Chattanooga?
    By WaltM in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 09-15-2010, 07:34 PM
  4. The Chattanooga Declaration
    By Mortikhi in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-03-2008, 06:34 PM
  5. Visiting Oregonians in Chattanooga
    By TeamSplashi in forum Tennessee
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-04-2008, 12:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •