Missouri Targeting Extremists?

[tarcone]

A memo from the Director of Public Safety in Missouri found its way to the public.

hxxp://rawstory.com/news/2008/Missouri_retracts_police_memo_which_labeled_0326.html

Pretty scary stuff.

[MJ4H]

Is this the thing that people think says all Ron Paul supporters are terrorists? Because the way this has been blown out of proportion lately has been ridiculous. If that isn't what it is, never mind.

edit: yeah that's it. The "memo" pretty much doesn't say anything that that article says it says. Or, at the very least, "links" is used way too strongly.

Good ammo for the paranoid conspiracy theorists out there, though. They completely flipped their lid over this.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Didn't we do this a couple of weeks back?

(and didn't Sportsdigs do it like two months ago?)

[Karlifornia]

Yes, this is completely horrif-zzZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Nothing to see here.

[JPhillips]

So now I guess I need to teabag the MO Director of Public Safety too.

[Big Fo]

It's just as disturbing as it was a few weeks ago.

[tarcone]

Sorry fellas. Missed it on here. Saw it as a page 5 AP story in the local newspaper. Searched for it on the internet.
And, yes, i think teabagging the Mo Director of Public Safety would be a good idea. Although, it may get you on his "list".

[panerd]

I started the original thread and I think it goes to a bigger point than anything to do with the actual story. Why does the mainstream media take 2 weeks to cover a story is well known to a lot of people that long ago? And you are going to give me the standard laugh and quote (What rock have you been living under panerd?)? But I think there is more to it than that. Not that the mainstream media is being forced not to be critical of the current government by the powers that be but they are doing it because they are all in bed together. (Queue another "What rock have you been living under panerd?") But sadly there are people that are so blinded by arguing the partisan bullshit back and forth that they don't realize this is true for whoever is in power. So while Democrats see it for Bush after 9/11 and Republicans see it for Obama right now, the simple fact is that has always been going on. And they are scared of a third party that would totally change the corrupt system. Going back to why they don't cover news when it happens but put it on page 5, 2 weeks later.

Be careful if you are a third party supporter who lives in Missouri... - Front Office Football Central

[panerd]

Originally Posted by Karlifornia

Yes, this is completely horrif-zzZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Nothing to see here.

OK, I agree that it is possibly much ado about nothing, but how is this for perspective? The profiling story appeared on our local NBC station's website page about a week ago. (About 10 days after the story was out there through other alternative media) Not a big deal? Fine. The front page of the website currently has breaking news about the Octo-Mom's car being vandalized.

Baby seat thrown through octuplet mom's van window | ksdk.com | St. Louis, MO

Remember this is a St. Louis tv station. I think I would rather they cover something of some substance. (Troopers possibly profiling supporters of Ron Paul...Car vandalism in California)

[JPhillips]

I'll give you that the two parties have created a number of obstacles that effectively close off third parties, however, this isn't some new development. Third parties, with the exception of the Republican Party, have never had long term success in the US. This isn't a massive conspiracy, it's just the way our system has evolved. As someone mentioned in another thread, even if a third party enjoys some modest success, those ideas will be incorporated into the platform of one of the major parties and support for the third party will dissipate.

Those of you who are Ron Paul supporters also need to realize that he's not very popular. Even in the Republican primaries he couldn't get close to winning. His support is extremely deep, but very narrow. Nobody needs to work to keep Paul from the White House, because he'll do a plenty good job on his own.

Almost all of us are enamored with the idea of a third party that finally champions what we believe to be important. The rub, though, is that we all think different things are important. This idea that the most bitter Bush an Obama haters can come together to support the same candidate is unlikely in the extreme. People believe different things and while a general sense of "throw the bastards out" may be popular, when you start picking candidates those differing beliefs are going to fracture any initial support there might have been.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I'll give you that the two parties have created a number of obstacles that effectively close off third parties, however, this isn't some new development. Third parties, with the exception of the Republican Party, have never had long term success in the US. This isn't a massive conspiracy, it's just the way our system has evolved. As someone mentioned in another thread, even if a third party enjoys some modest success, those ideas will be incorporated into the platform of one of the major parties and support for the third party will dissipate.

Those of you who are Ron Paul supporters also need to realize that he's not very popular. Even in the Republican primaries he couldn't get close to winning. His support is extremely deep, but very narrow. Nobody needs to work to keep Paul from the White House, because he'll do a plenty good job on his own.

Almost all of us are enamored with the idea of a third party that finally champions what we believe to be important. The rub, though, is that we all think different things are important. This idea that the most bitter Bush an Obama haters can come together to support the same candidate is unlikely in the extreme. People believe different things and while a general sense of "throw the bastards out" may be popular, when you start picking candidates those differing beliefs are going to fracture any initial support there might have been.

My issue is that something like this isn't news or interesting to this country but they care about the Octo-Mom or Rhianna going beat up. You could say it is because the news gives people what they want, but I argue the news conditions people to want pure bullshit while choosing not delve into true issues that really effect reader's lives and would probably be more interesting to people if they were put on page 1.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by panerd

My issue is that something like this isn't news or interesting to this country but they care about the Octo-Mom or Rhianna going beat up. You could say it is because the news gives people what they want, but I argue the news conditions people to want pure bullshit while choosing not delve into true issues that really effect reader's lives and would probably be more interesting to people if they were put on page 1.

But I don't see much difference between this memo and the Rhianna story. I grew up when police spent their time writing memos on satanists, so police departments writing generalized memos full of overly broad categorizations isn't really news to me.

edit: It just occurred to me that MO cops were the ones that said any adults playing Animal Crossing were likely child predators. It seems that this has far less to do with political/media conspiracy and far more to do with a general practice of overly broad profiling.

[MJ4H]

To me there is a considerable difference between saying something like people that are into citizen milita type groups often support 3rd party candidates like Ron Paul (which is essentially all this brief said, which tends towards the like duh obviously category) and No adult should own the game Animal Crossing and if they do it is probably for a terrible reason (which is just blatant ignorance since the game is very popular with adults and is next to impossible to exploit in the way they claim anyway).

[panerd]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

To me there is a considerable difference between saying something like people that are into citizen milita type groups often support 3rd party candidates like Ron Paul (which is essentially all this brief said, which tends towards the like duh obviously category) and No adult should own the game Animal Crossing and if they do it is probably for a terrible reason (which is just blatant ignorance since the game is very popular with adults and is next to impossible to exploit in the way they claim anyway).

Did you read the memo or just the article? Just wondering because in the memo after detailing police officers to watch out for (among other things) 3rd party bumper stickers it concludes...

"Implications for law enforcement...

You are the enemy"

Seems a little more than just a warning of a casual relationship between militia members and Bob Barr bumper stickers.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by panerd

Did you read the memo or just the article? Just wondering because in the memo after detailing police officers to watch out for (among other things) 3rd party bumper stickers it concludes...

"Implications for law enforcement...
You are the enemy"
Seems a little more than just a warning of a casual relationship between militia members and Bob Barr bumper stickers.

But ever since Barr lost his fucking mind that's not exactly what I'd call a reach.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by panerd

Did you read the memo or just the article? Just wondering because in the memo after detailing police officers to watch out for (among other things) 3rd party bumper stickers it concludes...

"Implications for law enforcement...

You are the enemy"

Seems a little more than just a warning of a casual relationship between militia members and Bob Barr bumper stickers.

I have read the memo and lots of dissecting of it.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by panerd

I started the original thread and I think it goes to a bigger point than anything to do with the actual story. Why does the mainstream media take 2 weeks to cover a story is well known to a lot of people that long ago?

I have no idea when the "alternative media" published the story because I avoid alternative media. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, which is how frequently alternative media and blog reports are.

The story didn't break wide because it wasn't really a story until the Lt. Governor demanded the Public Safety Director be fired. And the real reason anyone should be fired is that the memo was sent out riddled with typos and bad grammar.

As for the question of "Missouri Targeting Extremists?" -- is there anyone opposed to that? Aren't we supposed to be targeting extremists? The report isn't talking about rounding up every Ron Paul supporter. The report is talking about keeping an eye on militia groups. I grew up in southwest Missouri and trust me, there are WAY too many people down there who think it's time to take up arms against the government and starting shooting people.