http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/14/federal-agency-warns-of-radicals-on-right/

4/14/2009 4:29:12 PM

Interestingly enough, Missouri was doing this about a month ago, too. Although with those craaaaazy libertarians.

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/132250.html

To quote the post, "Look out! He's got a Bob Barr button!"

Also, here is the document in question:

http://images.logicsix.com/DHS_RWE.pdf


[Edited on April 14, 2009 at 4:34 PM. Reason : link.]

4/14/2009 4:33:45 PM

Missouri officials caught a bunch of hell over it and retracted it. I want to see how the left justifies it.

4/14/2009 4:35:12 PM

An official return to the Clinton era? Staff, policies... why not a scare about right-wing militias to boot?

Maybe we'll see the economy come roaring back if we just reproduce the exact conditions of the 90's...

4/14/2009 4:37:10 PM

they might try to bring back Janet Reno and his goons to start shooting people.

4/14/2009 4:38:19 PM

Quote :

"This webpage is not available. The webpage at http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/14/federal-agency-warns-of-radicals-on-right/ might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address."

4/14/2009 4:44:13 PM

If I wanted to get the outraged right opinion, I'd just tune in to boortz, which is where I'm betting 100% you got this (or at the least, he got it from drudge).

I try to listen to the guy nearly every day, at least for a few minutes. It's a waste of my time and anyone that doesn't already hold his views to go on for 10-15 minutes about how he is a radical and glenn beck is a radical and basically anyone that has a conservative ideology is a radical. I mean, I realize he is just selling air time and book appearances and shit, but I just can't be motivated to listen to him be outraged every other day about stupid shit.

4/14/2009 5:16:58 PM

Quote :

"which is where I'm betting 100% you got this (or at the least, he got it from drudge)."

I posted where I got my first link, and the second was from a friend.

Good thing you're not a betting man, no?

4/14/2009 5:22:07 PM

^^ I like hearing Boortz rail against the right about social issues and those silly Tea Partys but as soon as he starts spewing his backwards, obtuse environmental philosophy I want to punch kittens.

4/14/2009 5:33:45 PM

As far as I can tell, DrSteveChaos is not the op. And my comment doesn't follow one of yours, so why would you think I was talking to you?

I took a look now (not before or after that last post)

http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/index.html

and look what is at the top,

Tuesday, April 14, 2009
THAT HOMELAND SECURITY DOCUMENT...

4/14/2009 5:37:29 PM

It seems like a good precautionary note to me. I'd be worried about bitter crazy people who feel that they should be stockpiling guns to keep the government in check.

When you mix in the irrational hatred that comes from racism, you have a breeding ground for people like McVeigh.

And I don't see where it indicates that "dissent is terrorism."

[Edited on April 14, 2009 at 5:48 PM. Reason : ]

4/14/2009 5:47:58 PM

yea. I mean if they were keeping tabs on right wing radio personalities that would be one thing.

Watching racist right wing militias is pretty much the same as watching left wing environmental nutjobs.

For the most part they're harmless wackos, but occasionally they light something on fire/blow something up.

4/14/2009 5:59:36 PM

4/14/2009 6:29:17 PM

Quote :

"As far as I can tell, DrSteveChaos is not the op. And my comment doesn't follow one of yours, so why would you think I was talking to you?"

Because I accidentally read an "of" into your post?

4/14/2009 7:05:02 PM

"dissent" really?

READING COMPREHENSION

4/14/2009 7:21:33 PM

I do not condone it by i find this kind of a dramatic irony considering how the right was happy to label anti-war protesters as terrorist sympathizers.

4/14/2009 9:36:13 PM

it's one thing to be labeled a "terrorist-sympathizer." it's entirely another to be labeled a terrorist.

not that I disagree with the sentiment you expressed

4/14/2009 10:47:40 PM

where in that article (as little credibility as the washington times has) is there anything about rightwingers being labeled terrorists?

it says that right-wing extremism is up. and that doesn't really seem far-fetched. when do you think the last major right-wing (home-grown) domestic terror attack happened?

[Edited on April 14, 2009 at 10:53 PM. Reason : .]

4/14/2009 10:53:00 PM

well, the point is "watch of for them damned right wingers, they might be the next terrorists!"
there wasn't really a case of "watch out for them anti-war protesters. they might be the next terrorists!"

to be fair, there was no real DHS at the time of 9/11 or the beginning of Dubya's term. But, I'd bet there might have been similar proclamations coming out of DHS then against left-wingers, too. Thus the reason I agree w/ the sentiment

4/14/2009 11:08:06 PM

did you catch all the stirred-up crap about eco-terrorism a couple years ago? or the stirred up crap during the anti-war protests all over the country in 2002/2003?

there are right-wing extremist groups. i would even say judging from our own history that they're more likely to be violent than the left-wing groups. i mean really, what's the news here?

Quote :

"well, the point is "watch of for them damned right wingers, they might be the next terrorists!""

and no, it really wasn't. it was that "there already are right-wing extremist groups that have already plotted violent acts within the united states."

the only thing that really went out on a limb at all that i read was the speculation as to why the groups had grown, but a black dem (who many think is a muslim non-citizen) president and an economic downturn seem like decent guesses.

[Edited on April 14, 2009 at 11:15 PM. Reason : .]

4/14/2009 11:12:14 PM

if they only pointed to "groups that have performed or plotted acts in the past," that would be one thing. But, the report practically lists the conservative platform, which a far cry from just "group X which did Y."

listing abortion, small-gubment, and anti-illegal immigration, specifically, is what I have a problem with. It's not saying "anti-abortion group X..." It's saying "some groups, who are against abortion, we should look out for. Some groups, who are against illegal immigration, we should look out for." THAT is wrong.
Would you really be happy if they listed education supporters as potentially dangerous? Would you be happy if they listed universal-healthcare advocates as potentially dangerous? I sure as fuck wouldn't be happy with that, either!

This report is plainly listing ideologies ahead of listing specific groups or actual activities, and it is listing ideologies that are independent of violence in their own right, and that is what is wrong.

4/14/2009 11:28:23 PM

or maybe the washington times is just framing it that way to rile people like you up. (IMAGINE THAT!? a conservative rag distorting the truth)

show me where in the report it does what you're saying:

https://secure.wikileaks.org/leak/us-dhs-right-wing-extremism-2009.pdf

[Edited on April 14, 2009 at 11:33 PM. Reason : .]

4/14/2009 11:30:52 PM

is that like a liberal rag covering up a negative story about a liberal presidential candidate the month before the election? hmmm...

before you start slinging mud, have something to back it up with. The title of the document is, and I quote:

Quote :

"Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment."

Sorry, but there's not really any better way to put it... The report was clearly aimed at right-wing groups...

4/14/2009 11:34:01 PM

where did i say it was about anything other than rightwing groups. you just seem to be attaching this nefarious political agenda to the report. it is based on pretty solid historical evidence. what was the last left-wing terrorist attack in the united states?

4/14/2009 11:37:12 PM

Quote :

"there are right-wing extremist groups. i would even say judging from our own history that they're more likely to be violent than the left-wing groups. i mean really, what's the news here?"

Really? Right-wingers tore up Seattle during the WTO meetings? Blow up animal research facilities? Vandalize construction equipment?

They sure are active, those right-wingers.

[Edited on April 14, 2009 at 11:39 PM. Reason : .]

4/14/2009 11:38:40 PM

Quote :

"(U) Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

Boom, lists the ideologies, and none of those are explicitly violent. Even though it mentions violence in the previous sentence, it doesn't give it the latitude to then, effectively, say "conservative ideas are potentially violent!"

The point being, why does it have to be right-wing extremists? Where is the report about left-wing groups? Obama is fucking FRIENDS w/ a guy that blew shit up! Where is even a nod to that? PETA commits all kinds of violence, yet no nod to them... THAT is the reason that people are painting this out as a partisan piece of shit. Because, frankly, it IS partisan.

4/14/2009 11:42:02 PM

NEWS FLASH:
Every side has crazy extremists!

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE:
People on one side are biased against the other!

4/14/2009 11:42:30 PM

4/14/2009 11:45:54 PM

^^^it's spelling out the typical motivations for right-wing extremist groups. and the report is predicting/observing a rise in said groups. right wing groups have killed people in this country. be it okc bombing, abortion bombings or the KKK. it is not unreasonable for the DHC to keep tabs on these groups.

[Edited on April 15, 2009 at 12:02 AM. Reason : ^]

4/15/2009 12:02:20 AM

Summary of the article: Homeland security office believes small groups of right wing white people hate the new left wing half-black president.

Pffft... who wasted their time writing this report? What a waste of my tax dollars! I'm sure the KKK has more members now than ever. But it's nothing new nor unexpected. What's next? A 10 page report stating that SUV's are less popular due to high gas prices?

4/15/2009 12:20:36 AM

^^ and I don't disagree that DHC should keep tabs on groups that have committed violence in the past. But it's entirely another thing to say that groups opposed to abortion pose a threat or that groups opposed to big government are a threat.

4/15/2009 8:37:03 AM

Yes we should be entirely reactionary. That way when shit geos dowm we can freak out and say "Why the hell was no one paying attention to those guys?!"

This report was a waste of time and money but they also have reports on the New Black Panthers, the National Socialism Movement, and Radical Islam so this commission is not just profiling conservatives. Its just a law enforcement body trying to lay out what they are looking for in potential threats, not Big Brother. The mistake, if the report had to be written, was not trying hard enough to keep the thing internal

4/15/2009 8:52:21 AM

Quote :

"The point being, why does it have to be right-wing extremists? Where is the report about left-wing groups? Obama is fucking FRIENDS w/ a guy that blew shit up! Where is even a nod to that? PETA commits all kinds of violence, yet no nod to them... THAT is the reason that people are painting this out as a partisan piece of shit. Because, frankly, it IS partisan."

Read the article; the report on left-wing groups came out in January.

Here, I'll even link a copy of the report for you--from Fox News, no less.


http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Leftwing_Extremist_Threat.pdf

[Edited on April 15, 2009 at 5:48 PM. Reason : zomg link]

4/15/2009 5:46:48 PM

And keep in mind, that under the Patriot Act, fed agents can write their own secret search warrants and pry into your lives at will.

How excited are republicans now with their Patriot Act?

4/15/2009 10:57:09 PM

i just cant get over the bias of washington times

4/15/2009 11:19:55 PM

you also can't manage to master the multiplication table for the number "1," what's your point?

4/16/2009 12:25:11 AM

^that should be a suspendable post...at least post something that would make sense for me not to know

4/16/2009 12:29:10 AM

I would say that makes sense, lol

4/16/2009 12:31:30 AM

SO GLAD WE HAVE A NEW FACE TO HATE!

Let's see if she gets the Palin treatment!

4/16/2009 9:08:00 AM

thats a dude marko.

4/16/2009 9:33:16 AM

HOORAY!

[Edited on April 16, 2009 at 10:01 AM. Reason : ]

4/16/2009 9:59:49 AM

There were ridiculous reports about left wing groups a while back too

http://www.scribd.com/doc/12251436/DHS-Eco-Terrorism-in-US-2008

The bush admin mentioned right wing terrorist groups too.

http://file.sunshinepress.org:54445/fbi-military-nazis-2008.pdf

Quote :

"FBI report: "White Supremacist Recruitment of Military Personnel since 9/11," 7 July 2008 This is a report from George Bush's FBI: Although individuals with military backgrounds constitute a small percentage of white supremacist extremists, they frequently occupy leadership roles within extremist groups and their involvement has the potential to reinvigorate an extremist movement suffering from loss of leadership and in-fighting during the post- 9/11 period.... FBI reporting indicates extremist leaders have historically favored recruiting active and former military personnel for their knowledge of firearms, explosives, and tactical skills and their access to weapons and intelligence in preparation for an anticipated war against the federal government, Jews, and people of color. FBI cases also document instances of active duty military personnel having volunteered their professional resources to white supremacist causes.... A review of FBI white supremacist extremist cases from October 2001 to May 2008 identified 203 individuals with confirmed or claimed military service active in the extremist movement at some time during the reporting period.... According to FBI information, an estimated 19 veterans (approximately 9 percent of the 203) have verified or unverified service in the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Twelve of these have primary affiliations with the national organizations NSM (7), NA (4), and AN (1), six with skinhead groups, and one with white supremacist criminal gangs. FBI information indicates the activities engaged in by these individuals reflect those by veterans in the extremist movement generally since 9/11."

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/news/item.jsp?site_area=1&aid=197

Quote :

"Department of Defense investigators estimate thousands of soldiers in the Army alone are involved in extremist or gang activity From the Southern Poverty Law Center, 7/7/06: Under pressure to meet wartime manpower goals, the U.S. military has relaxed standards designed to weed out racist extremists. Large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the armed forces. Department of Defense investigators estimate thousands of soldiers in the Army alone are involved in extremist or gang activity. "We've got Aryan Nations graffiti in Baghdad," said one investigator. "That's a problem.""

Debate over, yes? Right wing radicals were a problem for Bush's admin, too.

[Edited on April 17, 2009 at 11:47 AM. Reason : .]

4/17/2009 11:45:34 AM

right-wing military extremist?
.... or just a crazy person?

http://www.nwfdailynews.com/news/cartwright_16963___article.html/elizabeth_deputies.html

Quote :

"On Sunday, lawmen still were investigating why Joshua Cartwright, a 28-year-old U.S. Army Reserve soldier with a history of violence, killed Okaloosa County sheriff's deputies Burt Lopez and Warren "Skip" York at a gun range in Crestview. ..... An offense report filed against Cartwright the day he died outlines an angry husband who threatened his wife, kept guns and knives on hand, was "severely disturbed" that Barack Obama had been elected president, and believed the U.S. government was conspiring against him. "

Or would I be accused of slandering all the fine folks of the US Military to make the suggestion than some of them might have extremists views?


this happened last week in the very small NW Florida town my g'ma lives in, where I am visiting now, or I would not have heard about it.

4/27/2009 4:25:45 PM

i use to do data entry from home using records from okaloosa co

4/27/2009 4:34:16 PM

more than likely, he was severely mentally ill. Id say that played a larger part. Its very sad that he killed two cops though

4/27/2009 4:34:44 PM

"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism" ~Howard Zinn

4/27/2009 4:40:39 PM

we should actually keep this thread alive to document all the right wing kooks that the DHS tried to warn us about before fox news and republicans went apeshit


West Side man John Zaubler charged with threatening Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/06/05/2009-06-05_west_side_man_charged_with_threatening_judge_sonia_sotomayor_president_obama.html

Arrest warrant issued for Daniel James Murray, man 'on a mission to kill' President Obama

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/06/05/2009-06-05_arrest_warrant_issued_for_new_york_man_who_threatened_to_kill_president_obama.html

and of course

Security tight for Tiller funeral

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-naw-tiller-funeral7-2009jun07,0,5957036.story

to be continued, most likely and most unfortunately

[Edited on June 6, 2009 at 9:23 AM. Reason : ,]

6/6/2009 9:21:57 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Ayers

6/6/2009 11:02:43 AM

Yes, Bill Ayers is a not very nice man. But I think it's a little more important for us to follow up on people making threats right now, unless you think we should post guards around every former felon ever or something.

6/6/2009 11:11:39 AM

^^ Hahahaha. B-b-b-b-b-but, Bill Ayers!!!

6/6/2009 11:27:49 AM