Homeland Security Considers All Conservatives A Threat
The American Legion Response to DHS
...The best that I can say about your recent report is that it is incomplete. The report states, without any statistical evidence, "The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks."
The American Legion is well aware and horrified at the pain inflicted during the Oklahoma City bombing, but Timothy McVeigh was only one of more than 42 million veterans who have worn this nation's uniform during wartime. 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...
...Herb London, president of the Hudson Institute, a Washington-based think tank, said DHS' latest report "clearly appears to censor right-wing opinion," while its earlier assessment of left-wing extremists does not."I must say it's chilling, it worries me a great deal," London said. "I never have encountered a time in American life when condemnation of a president is not permitted. This really did strike me as odd, indeed."
London called on President Obama to repudiate the right-wing report.
"What is the message here? That conservative organizations are not permitted to engage in any language that might be described as unfavorable to the president," London said....
Top Dem 'dumbfounded' by 'extremism' report
The top House Democrat overseeing the Department of Homeland Security is demanding that officials there explain how and why they wrote and released a controversial report identifying veterans as potential terrorist threats....
..."As I am certain you agree, freedom of association and freedom of speech are guaranteed to all Americans -- whether a person's beliefs, whatever their political orientation, are 'extremist' or not," Mr. Thompson said.
The report "blurred the line," and Mr. Thompson said he is "disappointed and surprised that the department would allow this report to be disseminated" to law enforcement officials nationwide...
Presumably he is upset because they did not keep the report top secret, like it was originally.
..."Rightwing extremism," the report defines in a footnote on Page 2, goes beyond religious and racial hate groups and extends to "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," said the report, which also listed as suspect gun owners and veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars....
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Six Things You Should Know About the Homeland Security Report on ‘Rightwing 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.”...
...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 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....
Um....
Prefer state or local authority
over federal authority? Check. Gun owner? Check. Reject government
authority entirely? Whenever and wherever feasible. I cling (bitterly of course) to the
standard espoused by the Founding Fathers that there should always be
the least possible amount of government necessary to govern the
greatest number of people. Opposed to abortion? Unless performed in
self-defense, yes.
I'm starting to get very nervous here. I state for the
record that I have no intention of suddenly and mysteriously
disappearing at any time in the foreseeable future. I am not suicidal. I
am happily married and have been for most of three decades. My finances
are no worse than usual. If I suddenly end up dead or missing, smell a
rat.
Welcome to the real Police State USA. Is it really any wonder that the Stalinists in the Democratic party are pulling this crap?
RIP U.S. Constitution, 1788-2009.
Reply to this
The part that floors me is that they are so brazen about it. Do they have some reason to be confident that I am not up to speed about? Have things already progressed even farther than I know about?
Reply to this
Because people are stupid and appear to have bought into the nonsense about the Messiah standing for Change (Stalin stood for change too.)
And ever since WWII, we've been systematically bombarded by the notion that American exceptionalism is bad, that we're the source of woes around the world. Look at how the previous president was hammered for having the testicular fortitude to actually DO something instead of wringing their hands and talking about having the UN pass new sanctions that don't work (cough*north korea*cough*iran*cough).
I'm praying for the alien invasion myself. Maybe after we kick their asses, we can start over.
Reply to this
[quote]
Because people are stupid and appear to have bought into the nonsense about the Messiah standing for Change (Stalin stood for change too.)
[/quote]
I keep remembering how Mussolini made the trains run on time. Unfortunately, the liberal revisionists have already succeeded in producing a couple of generations who are effectively illiterate when it comes to recent modern history. The only people who know about Mussolini, and Stalin, and Pol Pot et al are the ones who lived through it, and the ones like us who either heard about it from first hand witnesses, or who got stubborn and dug out the truth for themselves. "Those who fail to learn from history..." etc. I went to school with a kid whose family got out of South Vietnam after the fall of Saigon, and I worked with an old man who helped liberate one of the Nazi death camps. In fact, my Mom's eldest brother was a pra\\aratrooper into Germany in the final invasion. He helped open up one of the death camps too, I don't remember which one. For me, it is not just a vague theory. It is the look in an old man's eyes as he speaks, fifty years later of things he still can't forget, shudders, and takes another swig of whiskey. It is listening to a young teenage boy tell, calmly and flatly, about hearing artillery outside of his school and walking around bodies in the street.
But so many people in America nowadays have never been face to face with anything more real than Quake or Halo. It worries me.
Reply to this