Department of Homeland Security getting crazy?

[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.

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 ...was that you who posted that crazy theory Subman ?

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Zachstar

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

So what exactly is this 'real threat' ?

[August]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

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.

[August]

Originally Posted by Max2147

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]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

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. But still equally wrong and having nothing to do with actual events.

[Max2147]

Originally Posted by August

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.

[XabbaRus]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

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.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by 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.

http://video1.washingtontimes.com/vi...mismreport.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