Department of Homeland Security getting crazy?

[SUBMAN1]

I guess all Americans are radical in their mind. WTF is happening to this country?

-S


JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Six Things You Should Know About the Homeland Security Report on ‘Rightwing Extremism’ (http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/04/15/napolitano_homeland_security/)


By Judge Andrew Napolitano
FOX News Senior Judicial Analyst

Homeland Security Warns of Rise in Right-Wing Extremism (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/14/homeland-security-warns-rise-right-wing-extremism/)
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report entitled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment”, dated April 7, 2009, which I have read, is apparently an unclassified summary of a larger classified report.


1. The summary contains few proper names, has no footnotes of any significance, lists very few sources, and is drafted with a prejudice against anyone who criticizes the role of the federal government in our lives today. It lumps together in its definition of “rightwing extremism” hate groups, anti-government groups, and single issue groups “such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”


2. The document itself cautions the reader that the document is “not to be released to the public, the media, or other personnel who do not have a valid need-to-know without prior approval” of the DHS. The document refers to itself as one of a series of intelligence assessments intended to “deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States.”


3. The thrust of this report is that in the present environment of economic instability, returning military veterans, those who fear of the loss of Second Amendment-protected rights, those threatened by an African-American president, and those who fear “Jewish ‘financial elites’” could all be a fertile breeding ground for groups whose power and ideas the government hates and fears. The document is essentially a warning for DHS and FBI officials to be on the look-out for rootless persons looking for the comfort of groups as they may be a danger to American security.


4. The summary (unclassified) document is terrifying. One can only imagine what is contained in the classified version. This document runs directly counter to numerous U.S. Supreme decisions prohibiting the government from engaging in any activities that could serve to chill the exercise of expressive liberties. Liberties are chilled, in constitutional parlance, when people are afraid to express themselves for fear of government omnipresence, monitoring, or reprisals. The document also informs the reader that Big Brother is watching both public and private behavior.


5. The whole purpose of the First Amendment is to guarantee open, broad, robust debate on the policies and personnel of the government. The First Amendment presumes that individuals — NOT THE GOVERNMENT — are free to choose what they believe and espouse, what they read and say, and with whom they associate in public and in private. The writers of this abominable report are particularly concerned with the expression of opinions that might be used to fuel ideas that challenge federal authority or favor state and local government over the federal government. Unfortunately, legislation passed during the past eight years gives the DHS and the FBI the tools to monitor everything from a telephone conversation to the keystrokes used on a personal computer without a warrant issued by a federal judge.


6. My guess is that the sentiments revealed in the report I read are the tip of an iceberg that the DHS would prefer to keep submerged until it needs to reveal it. This iceberg is the heavy-hand of government; a government with large and awful eyes, in whose heart there is no love for freedom, and on whose face there is no smile.
DHS report can be found here - http://video1.washingtontimes.com/video/extremismreport.pdf

[SUBMAN1]

More states are bucking the Feds - http://www.khou.com/news/local/politics/stories/khou090414_mp_rick-perry-10th-amendment.d7068e36.html

Texas this time.

-S

[Zachstar]

Yall make me laugh

DHS GREAT under bush but under a dem? PANIC! OH NOES!! They are looking at the real threat instead of saying "9/11" every 5 seconds.

Domestic terrorism from extreme left and right wings needs to be taken seriously

Of course every fool on the right will see this as some kind of conspiricy against repubs. Until the next pub gets in of course. The DHS is the best thing ever again.

[Tribesman]

Wow right wing extremists , would that be like that nazi nut who shot the police the other day because him and his friends on stormfront think the election of Obama is the sign that "ZOG" is getting stronger and is moving against them .
warns about the possible recruitment and radicalization of returning veterans.
Would that fit people like that fruitcake who blew up the federal building in oklahoma ?
Yeah you can understand why the government is worried about the possible rise of the fruitcakes , after all there is a real proliferation of some really crap conspiracy theories going on since the election .
I seem to recall one recently here about the evil government setting up concentration camps to lock up the population :hmmm:...was that you who posted that crazy theory Subman ?

[SteamWake]

They are looking at the real threat instead of saying "9/11" every 5 seconds.

So what exactly is this 'real threat' ?

[August]

Yall make me laugh

DHS GREAT under bush but under a dem? PANIC! OH NOES!! They are looking at the real threat instead of saying "9/11" every 5 seconds.

Domestic terrorism from extreme left and right wings needs to be taken seriously

Of course every fool on the right will see this as some kind of conspiricy against repubs. Until the next pub gets in of course. The DHS is the best thing ever again.

Yeah right. If the Bush era DHS had published a similar report listing vague liberal and leftist threats you would have been so outraged that folks could have warmed themselves with the flame posts you'd have made about it.

So where is your outrage now? The administration, in spite of beating the Bush adminstration over the head about it during the election, is now not only defending warrantless wiretapping but seeking to expand the program.

On top of that DHS is producing letters that any objective person would see as a threat, not against some radical bunch of stupid skinheads but against anyone who criticizes the federal government. Where is your outrage now? Was it all just election year politicking?

[NeonSamurai]

Here is a question, how do we know that the report even exists or that this story is true? It could be a fake or a hoax to polarize people more on the red/blue subject. I have to say I trust fox news for reliable news about as much as I would trust getting reliable news about the world from a 5 year old on the street (i say the same about CNN and most other news groups too that have a stake).

As for monitoring extremist groups, well I say go for it given what has happened in the past with such groups. Going to an extreme is never a good thing.

[Tchocky]

Congressman at a rally. McCaul (R-Texas)

It’s about our founding fathers who in 1773 threw a little party called the Boston tea party. And fought against tyranny and oppressive taxes, does that sound familiar? We’re continuing that revolution right here in Austin, TX today. Thomas Jefferson once said that the tree of liberty will be fed with the blood of tyrants and patriots. You are the patriots.

[Max2147]

Congressman at a rally. McCaul (R-Texas)
If I recall right McVeigh was wearing a t-shirt with that same slogan when he carried out his attack.

[XabbaRus]

I have to say I trust fox news for reliable news about as much as I would trust getting reliable news about the world from a 5 year old on the street (i say the same about CNN and most other news groups too that have a stake).


Personally I'd trust the 5 year old on the street. At least from a kid you get a direct answer to a question and it is in simple English.

[August]

If I recall right McVeigh was wearing a t-shirt with that same slogan when he carried out his attack.

He had a picture of Abe Lincoln on his shirt as well. Does that mean old Abe was a terrorist?

[NeonSamurai]

Personally I'd trust the 5 year old on the street. At least from a kid you get a direct answer to a question and it is in simple English.

It would also undoubtedly be more imaginative too. :DL But still equally wrong and having nothing to do with actual events.

[AVGWarhawk]

She has some explaining to do today.



http://www.drudgereport.com/bsn.jpg

[mookiemookie]

I guess civil liberties only become important when it's not your guy in power.

[Max2147]

He had a picture of Abe Lincoln on his shirt as well. Does that mean old Abe was a terrorist?
No, and neither was Thomas Jefferson.

But I think it's irresponsible at best to urge people to action by using a terrorist's motto that calls for the "blood of tyrants," especially when the people you're talking about the same issue that motivated that terrorist, and the people you're urging on are ideologically similar to that terrorist. It would be like getting a group of highly conservative Muslims who don't like the US together and urging them to action by reading a bunch of sword verses from the Koran in the middle of an anti-American rant.

The right wing in this country prides itself on taking action instead of just talking. That's why the extreme right is more dangerous than the extreme left.

What does the extreme left do in this country? They whine and b*tch, hand out stickers that say "Stop B*tching and Start a Revolution," then go back to b*tching. If they tried to build a bomb, they'd be more likely to blow themselves up than their target. So they just make a lot of noise. They're loud, they're annoying, but they're ultimately harmless because they don't actually do anything.

The extreme right is different. They're highly individualistic, so they believe their individual actions can make a difference. That makes them more likely to take action. They also have the knowhow. There's a reason that the DHS relelase mentioned returning veterans. Veterans aren't predisposed to the extreme right, but those who do join their ranks know how to plan operations and use guns and explosives. So while the extreme left is loud but impotent, the extreme right can actually do something. That's what makes them more dangerous.

[CaptainHaplo]

"Thats right - the out of power party is dangerous. Don't look at us liberals - we just talk about abolishing your gun rights, ignoring the constitution on issues such as states rights, freedom of speech, forcing stuff like gay marriage down the citizen's throats whether they like it or not, all while we take more and more of your taxes to pay for things like health care for the poor, or the "undocumented worker" and his or her family. Oh - and when we are doing things like reintroducing the "fairness doctrine" and bringing in 12 million new citizens who are going to vote for us because we give them what they want, thus securing our own power, don't worry. Don't fret at all when we write the laws - like the report discusses - defining anyone who disagrees with the federal governments range and scope of powers - in other words - OUR scope and powers over your insignificant lives - must be a threat to society. Just because we are in power and are moving to actually have these laws in place - along with the power to enforce them as we see fit - you don't lose one wink of sleep, ok? After all - we are liberals - we won't really hurt you - we just want whats best for you - and its our job to give it to you even if you don't want it."

Is that what you mean Max?

Just look the other way while the liberals do what they have wanted for decades?

Know why its all about those that lean right? And note that if you are any type of "one button" issue - like abortion or immigraton or states rights or simply a constitutionalist - your a threat. Why? Because how dare you question - how dare you use this "free speech" nonsense to backsass your betters. Its dangerous - you having the ability to think and speak your mind. Heck - these tea parties are dangerous - people thinking the government is taking to much money? HMMPH! Remember - the vice president said it was patriotic to pay your taxes. In fact - you should pay more - unless your an undocumented worker of course, then you should take your money and send it to Mexico. You should be thrilled to be paying to hand out condoms to teenagers - and when they don't work as needed - you should be rushing to pay for the abortion - or STD treatments needed.

And guess what - if the government decides that dairy products are one day harming the environment, or making people too fat, or anything else - and you happen to be a dairy farmer, don't be complaining when your shut down and your livelyhood stripped. Same goes for whatever other job you have... sooner or later it becomes the government AGAINST the people. And that is why this is so dangerous - to BOTH sides of political ideology.

And people wonder why I am going to run for PotUS.....

[Captain Vlad]

I didn't even know about this and it popped up today...had to cover a town hall with Senator Coburn, and one of the ladies in the audience asked about this.

I've only seen excerpts of 'a' report, and it mentioned that disgruntled servicemen might be vulnerable to recruitment by right-wing terrorist groups, which is a hell of a lot different than saying Ex-GI's are terrorists.

That particular point is probably valid. Extremist organizations of all stripes target the angry and disillusioned, and probably love being able to get their hands on honest-to-God military training. Like it or not, security organizations have to think about crap like that.

The rest of it...well...like I said, I only saw an excerpt, and that was in an AP story, so I won't comment on the rest. It does, on the surface and without examination, seem a little scary.

Especially since I have real issues with the entire concept of the Department of Homeland Security. And the name. Sounds very Third Reich.

[August]

But I think it's irresponsible at best to urge people to action by using a terrorist's motto that calls for the "blood of tyrants,"

First off the words of Thomas Jefferson are not a "terrorist motto" just because one solitary nut had it printed on the back of his t-shirt.

especially when the people you're talking about the same issue that motivated that terrorist, and the people you're urging on are ideologically similar to that terrorist.The same issue? McVeigh did what he did because he hated the government. That standard could be applied to everyone at one time or the other. The people that protest at these tea parties are no more ideologically similar to McVeigh than you are.

It would be like getting a group of highly conservative Muslims who don't like the US together and urging them to action by reading a bunch of sword verses from the Koran in the middle of an anti-American rant.Again, the words of Thomas Jefferson are NOT an "anti-American rant" and stop making racist associations. This ain't about the Muslims.

The right wing in this country prides itself on taking action instead of just talking. That's why the extreme right is more dangerous than the extreme left.The right wing also prides themselves on their loyalty and service to their country. I'd say that makes them far less likely to take violent action against it. Also the extreme left has indeed done a lot more than just talked about it. Sea Shepards, ALF, ELF, PFOC, Black Panthers, M-19 to mention a just a few US based leftist organizations that have done so.

[SUBMAN1]

Here is a question, how do we know that the report even exists or that this story is true? It could be a fake or a hoax to polarize people more on the red/blue subject. I have to say I trust fox news for reliable news about as much as I would trust getting reliable news about the world from a 5 year old on the street (i say the same about CNN and most other news groups too that have a stake).

As for monitoring extremist groups, well I say go for it given what has happened in the past with such groups. Going to an extreme is never a good thing.

http://video1.washingtontimes.com/video/extremismreport.pdf

Every paper has the story, that's how. See the above link. It is for the Washington Times and it is the 'unclassified' version.

-S

[Captain Vlad]

The right wing also prides themselves on their loyalty and service to their country. I'd say that makes them far less likely to take violent action against it.

Doubtful. There are right-wing nutcases just like there are left-wing nutcases, and all it takes to drive these kind of folks to violence is something offending their vision of how 'the country should be'.

For example, you and me likely have more than a couple of political differences, and I wouldn't even characterize myself as 'left wing'. Neither one of us, however, seems to be the type to seriously consider the other one to be deliberately turning the good ol' US of A into a communist workers paradise or a goosestepping fascist dictatorship.

But you have people on both sides...not very many thankfully...who would, and who would feel entirely justified in killing either one of us to further whatever vision of America they possess. They don't see it as betraying their country. Few people perceive themselves as the 'bad guy' after all.

[SUBMAN1]

Seems people are a little ticked off about this report:

-S

Republicans criticize report on right-wing groups

Apr 15 11:23 PM US/Eastern
By EILEEN SULLIVAN
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Republicans on Wednesday said a Homeland Security Department intelligence assessment unfairly characterizes military veterans as right-wing extremists. House Republican leader John Boehner described the report as offensive and called on the agency to apologize to veterans.

The agency's intelligence assessment, sent to law enforcement officials last week, warns that right-wing extremists could use the bad state of the U.S. economy and the election of the country's first black president to recruit members.

The assessment also said that returning military veterans who have difficulties assimilating back into their home communities could be susceptible to extremist recruiters or might engage in lone acts of violence.

"To characterize men and women returning home after defending our country as potential terrorists is offensive and unacceptable," said Boehner, R-Ohio.

The commander of the veterans group the American Legion, David Rehbein, wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano expressing concern with the assessment, which made its way into the mainstream press after conservative bloggers got wind of the analysis.

Rehbein called the assessment incomplete and said it lacked statistical evidence. He said the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing by military veteran Timothy McVeigh was one instance of a veteran becoming a domestic terrorist.

"To continue to use McVeigh as an example of the stereotypical 'disgruntled military veteran' is as unfair as using Osama bin Laden as the sole example of Islam," Rehbein said in the April 13 letter.

Napolitano defended the assessment and others issued by the agency.
"Let me be very clear—we monitor the risks of violent extremism taking root here in the United States," Napolitano said in a statement. "We don't have the luxury of focusing our efforts on one group; we must protect the country from terrorism whether foreign or homegrown, and regardless of the ideology that motivates its violence."

Napolitano said the department respects and honors veterans and that she intends to meet with Rehbein next week after she returns from a tour of the U.S.-Mexico border and meetings in Mexico City.

The agency describes these assessments as part of a series published "to facilitate a greater understanding of the phenomenon of violent radicalization in the United States."

In February, the department issued a report to law enforcement that said left-wing extremist groups were likely to use cyber attacks more often in the next 10 years to further their cause.

In September, the agency highlighted how right-wing extremists over the past five years have used the immigration debate as a recruiting tool.

Between September 2008 and Feb. 5, the agency issued at least four reports, obtained by The Associated Press, on individual extremist groups such as the Moors, Vinlanders Social Club, Volksfront and Hammerskin Nation.

But the references to military veterans in the recent report angered conservatives.

"The department is engaging in political and ideological profiling of people who fought to keep our country safe from terrorism, uphold our nation's immigration laws, and protect our constitutional right to keep and bear arms," said Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla.,

Texas Rep. Lamar Smith accused the department of painting "law-abiding Americans, including war veterans, as 'extremists.'"

Indiana Rep. Steve Buyer, the ranking Republican on the House Veterans' Affairs committee, said it was "inconceivable" that the administration would consider military veterans a potential terrorist threat.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D97JB5CO0&show_article=1

[August]

But you have people on both sides...not very many thankfully...who would, and who would feel entirely justified in killing either one of us to further whatever vision of America they possess. They don't see it as betraying their country. Few people perceive themselves as the 'bad guy' after all.

Well people can convince themselves of anything. For example there was a woman who shot her own son and herself the other day because she thought she was the anti-Christ.

But you're right. both sides have their violent radicals.

[CaptainHaplo]

Here is the thing. According to many of the criteria listed - I would be extremely high risk. However - I would be the first in line to act violently to STOP someone else from violently attacking my government. I don't care for our President's current policies, but he is the President. I don't like the taxes and overreaching of the government, but I would be one of the first to end a threat - with violence if necessary.

Thats what makes it so offensive - I'm apparently one of those "nutjobs" they worry about - when its the true NUTCASES they should worry about. You can't say "well anyone that is a single issue person" or that wants to reign in federal power is a whack job - but thats the problem - THEY BASICALLY JUST DID!

Instead of respecting my right to dissent - they are more worried about ANYONE that dissents. THAT is what makes it a threat to our freedoms. Things like this report MAKE more wacko's..... It alienates the people from the government.

[Freiwillige]

Janet Nopalitano is a whacko. We were blessed with her absolute liberal policy's in Arizona because she was our governer before becoming DHS leader. She was absolute in her open boarder policy. Now she's running DHS! Just to think that 15 years ago something like DHS would be laughed at. Guess what we have all been duped by the Repubs and the Dems. Freedoms are eroded daily under the flag of our own well being.

Let me quote a "terrorist" Thomas Jefforson. "Those who sacrafice freedom for security, deserve neither.":hmmm:

Uh oh I just quoted a founding father, Somebody stop me before I cause others to think for themselves.:o

[Sailor Steve]

Let me quote a "terrorist" Thomas Jefforson. "Those who sacrafice freedom for security, deserve neither.":hmmm:
A loose version of the quote, and it was from Benjamin Franklin.
http://books.google.com/books?id=W2MFAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA270&lpg=PA270t#PPA270,M1

[Enigma]

Conservatives are so incensed by the suggestion of the threat of right wing radicalism that they're considering overthrowing the federal government. :har:

[UnderseaLcpl]

Conservatives are so incensed by the suggestion of the threat of right wing radicalism that they're considering overthrowing the federal government. :har:

As much as I disagree with you on these issues, that was actually kind of funny.

[August]

Conservatives are so incensed by the suggestion of the threat of right wing radicalism that they're considering overthrowing the federal government. :har:

I don't think you'd be laughing if it happens...

[Sea Demon]

Conservatives are so incensed by the suggestion of the threat of right wing radicalism that they're considering overthrowing the federal government. :har:

Well this is due in part because the current Democrat led government is labeling average people with legitimate political concerns as "risks". Including Democrats who are not happy with unreasonable taxation and government largesse. And they apparently also believe military veterans who have served the country abroad should be considered as possible "extremists". It's a whole lot more complicated than just the phrase "right wing radicals".

DHS GREAT under bush but under a dem? PANIC! OH NOES!! They are looking at the real threat instead of saying "9/11" every 5 seconds.

Bush was actually using the apparatus to search for real domestic and foreign threats against the country such as Islamic radicals. So far, this new administration appears to be using it as a political weapon against average Americans who disagree with their domestic politics. I knew Democrats wouldn't be responsible enough to run these government agencies. It appears you have no idea what kind of threats actually exist, if you agree with the Obama administration that people who revere the 2nd amendment, people who want secure borders, and people who believe that taxation should be reasonable are extremists.

[SUBMAN1]

I think what you guys are missing is the one biggest angle on this whole article:

It is Profiling.

From what I read above, I guess liberals simply think that profiling is OK if they get to make the rules. Of course they are the first to speak up about profiling if it is about anyone other than someone from the right.

Once again, hypocrisy at its finest.

-S

[SteamWake]

Janet Nopalitano is a whacko. We were blessed with her absolute liberal policy's in Arizona because she was our governer before becoming DHS leader. She was absolute in her open boarder policy. Now she's running DHS! Just to think that 15 years ago something like DHS would be laughed at. Guess what we have all been duped by the Repubs and the Dems. Freedoms are eroded daily under the flag of our own well being.

Let me quote a "terrorist" Thomas Jefforson. "Those who sacrafice freedom for security, deserve neither.":hmmm:

Uh oh I just quoted a founding father, Somebody stop me before I cause others to think for themselves.:o

yup :nope:

[Tribesman]

Did anyone notice that the original report was compiled in 2007 ?

[Platapus]

Did anyone notice that the original report was compiled in 2007 ?

Shhh This is a blame Obama thread silly.

Keep them facts to yourself :nope: