72 Types Of Americans That Are Considered “Potential Terrorists” In Official Government Documents- You can now be considered a “potential terrorist” just because of your religious or political beliefs.

submitted by christnmusicreleasesIndependent from activeprp.law.blog

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

No - this is a lie.

2011 document regarding 'Equal Opportunities' training, uploaded and context changed by these assholes:

https://www.judicialwatch.org

[–]Velocity 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Perhaps you should elaborate on your opinion.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

OK - let's start with the title:

72 Types Of Americans That Are Considered “Potential Terrorists”

No - this is a lie (there is also no reliable evidence for this)

In Official Government Documents- You can now be considered a “potential terrorist” just because of your religious or political beliefs.

No - this is a lie (there is also no reliable evidence for this)

Let's consider the source: https://activeprp.law.blog

Klark Jouss is an ultra-right-wing blogger and organizer devoted to spreading misinformation and disinformation.

He also did this: https://sennwoop.home.blog/author/yourbrohome1f4fb5076f/

And this: https://clickwooz.wordpress.com/author/yourbrohome1f4fb5076f/

And this: https://sevenwoop.wordpress.com/author/yourbrohome1f4fb5076f/

As well as this: https://allsexpress.wordpress.com/

And: https://my72.news.blog/author/yourbrohome1f4fb5076f/

Perhaps consider also who posted this: christnmusicreleases

Consider that the sources used by Jouss were provided by Judicial Watch, Inc., which is a well-established company devoted to spreading disinformation. They are very well funded and produce impressive reports that are intended to trick people into believing their conspiracy theories. The result is that people who read thes lies argue with people who are duped by them, and in the meantime, the US is now 27 trillion in debt because of tax cuts and other abuses by the 1%. Who funded the disinformation campaigns? The 1% Who will pay for the loans from China? You and me. Why did it get this bad? Because we were duped into arguing about facts by websites that are corporate and special interest shills. Judicial Watch and Jouss are helping the 1% fleece the 99%. Judicial Watch gets an 'Equality' training document from 2011 and makes it seem like a terrorist checklist, and then tries to scare others into believing that they'll be on it. Saidit, watch your backs. ...

[–]Velocity 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

What then is the intended context for mentioning a varied and disparate range of ideologies in regards to equal opportunities training?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The process in Human Resources at universities and elsewhere has been updated and expanded - due more recently to BLM - to something now called, 'diversity training', or similar, addressing approaches to under-represented and marginalized groups and how to deal with them. Thus equality and equity are now under the diversity umbrella for HR training of staff, who have to attend a 3 hour training exercise and answer exam questions thereafter. The potential problems they list are in that 'equailty' document linked above, as well as the approaches of racists, sexists, micro-aggression, and especially the importance of the "outcome" of one's actions, by contrast with the relatively unimportant "intention".

[–]Velocity 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Would partly agree with you. This article has been around for awhile. It's understood that the 1% frequently agitate both sides of the contrived political spectrum via editorialized/sensationalized mis/disinfo in order to increase conflict and division.

While still taking the document at face value. If being read correctly, it still stands as an endorsed gov document that categorizes anyone that "ideologically colors outside the lines" as being dangerous. However the headline leans towards being at least alarmist considering the context.