Free Markets, Free People

You Might Be A Right-Wing Extremist If …

With apologies to Jeff Foxworthy, the Department of Homeland Security has apparently decided it is necessary to warn the nation’s law enforcement agencies about a new and growing threat – right-wing extremists.

For instance, you  might be a right-wing extremist if you’re a member of any groups:

“…that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration …”

The report, entitled “Right-Wing Extremism – Current Economic and Political Climate Refueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment”, doesn’t mention whether those who are on the left and dedicated to single-issues, such as support for abortion or unlimited immigration might be extremists as well.

You can read the report here. (pdf)

David Weigel of the Washington Independent has trouble understanding the right-wing outrage this report sparks:

Seriously, though, I struggle to find anything wrong in a close — not a willfully obtuse — reading of the report.

Well maybe it’s the little things, David – like the apparent belief by DHS that any problem brewing domestically will occur only on the right. And perhaps it is implication that soldiers are likely to succumb to the draw of radical right-wingers:

Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.

Of course they have to go back to the early ’90s and Timothy McVeigh to substantiate this claim. Apparently they’ve been unable to find any more recent possible problems on which to pin their caution. And of course they also use as intel a claim made on a white-supremacist web-site which claimed (without any proof) that “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”

Well, there you go!

My favorite “you might be a right-wing extremist if” moment came with this little tidbit from DHS:

Rightwing extremist chatter on the Internet continues to focus on the economy, the perceived loss of U.S. jobs in the manufacturing and construction sectors, and home foreclosures.

The “perceived loss of US jobs?!” Heh … well I guess we won’t need all of that ‘stimulus’ money for unemployment if they’re only perceived losses, huh? But look at the topics – “extremist chatter” focuses on “the economy … jobs … and home forclosures?” Heck, then half the news media is extremist. And we here at QandO fall into that camp. And that’s with a less than obtuse reading of the sentence above, wouldn’t you say, Mr. Weigel?

And of course, DHS covers guns, gun laws and the current gun buying spree in a rather amusing way:

Open source reporting of wartime ammunition shortages has likely spurred rightwing extremists—as well as law-abiding Americans—to make bulk purchases of ammunition. These shortages have increased the cost of ammunition, further exacerbating rightwing extremist paranoia and leading to further stockpiling activity.  Both rightwing extremists and law-abiding citizens share a belief that rising crime rates attributed to a slumping economy make the purchase of legitimate firearms a wise move at this time.

So when you buy that gun and ammo, which is it? Is it because you’re a paranoid rightwing extremist or a law abiding citizen who thinks such a purchase is a “wise move at this time”? Only DHS knows for sure. But if you’ve happened to write about the “perceived loss of US jobs”, the economy or “home foreclosures” on the internet and are a military veteran, I imagine you can figure out into which category you fall (heh … me included).

And don’t you dare be a state’s rights guy who believes that the federal government should respect the 10th Amendment:

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.

In all, DHS is convinced that the economic downturn along with the “historic Presidental election”, code for “hey, we elected a black guy”, ensures a return to the ’90s and the rise of skin heads and militias.

By the way, you weren’t supposed to know about any of this.

LAW ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION NOTICE: This product contains Law Enforcement Sensitive (LES) information. No portion of the LES information should be released to the media, the general public, or over non-secure Internet servers. Release of this information could adversely affect or jeopardize investigative activities.

In reality it contains a bunch of warmed over nonsense, conjecture and unsubstantiated cites from anonymous websites. But remember, don’t tell anyone in the media about this BS passed off as “Intelligence and Analysis” because if they ever got wind of it they’d conclude there was very little analysis or intelligence on display in the document – and we wouldn’t want to embarrass DHS, would we?

Hope and change.

~McQ

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

67 Responses to You Might Be A Right-Wing Extremist If …

  • “rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority”

    WAKE UP CALL: TEXAS GOV. BACK RESOLUTION AFFIRMING SOVEREIGNTY
    Tue Apr 14 2009 08:44:54 ET

    AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry joined state Rep. Brandon Creighton and sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 50 in support of states’ rights under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

    “I believe that our federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” Gov. Perry said. “That is why I am here today to express my unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm the states’ rights affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I believe that returning to the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution and its essential 10th Amendment will free our state from undue regulations, and ultimately strengthen our Union.”

    Perry continued: “Millions of Texans are tired of Washington, DC trying to come down here to tell us how to run Texas.”

    “I’m Rick Perry, Governor Texas, and Right Wing Extremist and I approve this message”.


  • Every person involved in writing this “report” should be required to sign their names at the end of it.  Come on!  Take some pride in your brilliance.

    • Indeed, where’s Obama’s “transparency” now?  Sending-out for pizza?

  • It’s the logical progression started when Clinton attempted to demonize “right wing talk radio” during his term.  Now they’re trying to pre-criminalize opposing views.

    Lovely.

  • “Well maybe it’s the little things, David – like the apparent belief by DHS that any problem brewing domestically will occur only on the right.”

    My, that was convincing. Might have been even better if you told us you disagreed with that assessment.

    Meanwhile, one demographic has chalked up hundreds of domestic terrorist attacks either planned or carried out since 9/11. Of course, it’d be wrong for law enforcement agencies to be warned that such people may not have quit since the black islamic terrorist socialist got elected.

    You might wanna leave this one alone pal. After all, it becomes a little hard to explain why Arabs purchasing cell phones can set off the right-wing blogs’ panic sirens for weeks, but blowing up Jews all over America in actual race-based domestic terrorist attacks never once rates a mention. If you spend years highlighting domestic terrorist threats while consistently giving a free pass to white supremacists and any other right-wing extremist who carries these out, well, there’s a really obvious assessment that can be made of your motivation for that.

    Kinda like how people only shout about the opposition’s fouls at a football game.

    • My, that was convincing. Might have been even better if you told us you disagreed with that assessment.

      You’d think that someone who read the post in its entirety would have figured that out. But that same someone would also be bright enough to spot a little sarcasm when they saw it as well.

      Meanwhile, one demographic has chalked up hundreds of domestic terrorist attacks either planned or carried out since 9/11.

      Nice assertion you use repeatedly – we here at this blog are more convinced by evidence. Care to put any forward. We’re talking “hundreds” here, so don’t be shy.

      After all, it becomes a little hard to explain why Arabs purchasing cell phones can set off the right-wing blogs’ panic sirens for weeks, but blowing up Jews all over America in actual race-based domestic terrorist attacks never once rates a mention.

      Really? Funny, but the majority of the support I’ve seen for Israel, for instance, is from the right, not the left. And we certainly don’t spare the feelings of anyone who disparages jews here. Ask Shark. In fact, ask any of our Jewish commenters.

      If you spend years highlighting domestic terrorist threats while consistently giving a free pass to white supremacists and any other right-wing extremist who carries these out, well, there’s a really obvious assessment that can be made of your motivation for that.

      Yeah … we were really cheerleaders for Timothy McVeigh.

      You are another in a long line of those who beam in and assert before they read. The archives are open – help yourself. We even have a search function. The old archives are here from the old QandO platform. It too has a search function. You can trust that none of the regular commenters here will take the sort of criticism you’re making seriously. I’ll give you a pass since it is obvious such assertions are born of the assumption “this is a typical righty blog so I can claim this …” and made out of ignorance. I won’t claim you’re obtuse until you prove it.

      • Ummm…

        I think he was being sarcastic, and was actually agreeing with you…

        • If he was then I’m the one not bright enough to spot sarcasm.

          • Nope.  The next post of his makes me think he actually believes the BS he typed.

            Which is kinda scary…

          • I particularly like the completely unsubstantiated “hundreds of domestic terror attacks” (that the media sure isn’t metioning either…) and our Jooooooooooooooo hatred.

            As Mr B. Bunny would observe – “he don’t know us very well, do he”

  • “Right-Wing Extremism – Current Economic and Political Climate Refueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” — points for alliteration.  Perhaps the cleverest thing the Obama administration has done so far.

  • “In all, DHS is convinced that the economic downturn along with the “historic Presidental election”, code for “hey, we elected a black guy”, ensures a return to the ’90s and the rise of skin heads and militias.”

    In all, QandO is convinced that it’s somehow unfair for law enforcement to be warned about the groups who have planned or carried out hundreds of domestic terrorism attacks since 9/11.

    A fact that wouldn’t register such surprise or disbelief if instead of spending years going nuts about BS threats like Arabs purchasing cell phones, right wing blogs had just once deemed worthy of mention even one incident of a white supremacist blowing up Jews and blacks. A consistent, absolute silence on these incidents which leaves few and very obvious explanations as to the motivation for such coverage which managed to always give a free pass to right-wing racist extremists.

    In fact, I don’t think the word “obvious” even does it justice. Maybe if you dedicated your blog to highlighting drugs in baseball while never once mentioning any of the hundreds of American players suspected or found to be using and just talked about the foreigners, it might come close. After all, you’ve gotta look after your own team, right. Even if they do wear swastikas.

    I could be wrong of course. There could be an alternate explanation for why right-wing blogs who jump at the chance to highlight domestic terrorism threats have so consistently and willingly ignored all the actual terrorism attacks from right wing extremists. But it’ll need to be a good one, considering that something so absolute as Nazis killing Jews on US soil in terrorism attacks is guaranteed to be met with silence.

    • In all, QandO is convinced that it’s somehow unfair for law enforcement to be warned about the groups who have planned or carried out hundreds of domestic terrorism attacks since 9/11.

      Not at all – show me where, in the “analysis and intelligence” report, it talks about those “planned or carried out” attacks.

      I could be wrong of course.

      Really? I’d have never guessed.

  • The way I read it since they reject government authority entirely, Anarchists and Comunists are right wing extremists. That simplifies things; everybody who doesn’t approve of our current form of government is a right-wing expremist. I wonder what a left-wing extremist is?

    • I wonder what a left-wing extremist is?.

      William F. Buckley covered that a long time ago, in an appearance on the TV show Laugh-In

      It was a parody news conference, and he was asked the following question, as best as I can remember: “You’ve been called an extreme conservative. Who would consider an extreme liberal?” His answer: “There’s no such thing as an extreme liberal. The New York Times wouldn’t permit it.”

  • and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely.

    Sweet.

    I’m part of a fringe group now…  Do we get para-military uniforms?  I swear I’ll quit if I don’t get a set of that blueish-grey urban cammo and a beret.

    • I favor the more traditional look: I’m holding out for a spiffy rig with a Sam Browne belt with shoulder strap, johdpurs, jackboots, and peaked cap.  I mean, really: how can you have a radical right-wing militia just aching to establish a Christian homophobe-bigot theocracy without jackboots???

      And I REFUSE to join up unless I get to be AT LEAST a colonel.

      ;-)

      As for “rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority”, does this mean that all those National Guardsmen (like moi, back in the day) who swore to support and defend their STATE constitutions and obey the lawful orders of their GOVERNORS* are right-wing extremists, too?  What about deputy sheriffs and police officers?

      And maybe I’m a little prejudiced, but it seems to me that men and women who swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution are probably a bit LESS likely to commit acts of violence against our country than a bunch of doped-up hippy types who think they are on a mission to save Mother Gaia.

      ——

      (*) In the interests of complete honesty, the oath for National Guardsmen (in my state, anyway) also includes supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States and obeying the lawful orders of the president.

  • Let’s face it there have been close to $200 million in damages from one branch of  extremist groups according to the FBI via Wikipedia - can anyone find a similar number for all of the skin head groups?  Ecoterrorism aka Green Terrorism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-terrorism What impact will those left leaning veterans who join such organizations have on the potential risk to our nation’s security?  What is the risk that ‘green anarchists’ will substansially damage our country’s workings and result in additional deaths?

    In reality let’s face it the FBI classifies terrorists and has for several years considered the main threat to come from what the FBI calls the “lone wolf” terrorist.  So if this is just publication of the fact that such threats exist – well we’ve known that since the FBI Strategic plan for 2004-2009: http://www.fbi.gov/publications/strategicplan/stategicplantext.htm#intro which was created during the Bush administration… which said:
    “The most significant domestic terrorism threat over the next five years will be the lone actor, or “lone wolf” terrorist. They typically draw ideological inspiration from formal terrorist organizations, but operate on the fringes of those movements. Despite their ad hoc nature and generally limited resources, they can mount high-profile, extremely destructive attacks, and their operational planning is often difficult to detect.”  While this is buried in a paragraph describing declining Left-Wing and increasing Right-Wing groups note that the description of ‘lone wolf’ doesn’t specify a group, it’s not a political assessment – it’s an honest threat assessment given the experience of the recent past.

    • You keep talking about leftwing Eco Terror (ELF anyone?) and you’ll upset Halfaquart – sorry, uh Kilo.
      Best I can recall the only terror I hear about these days domestically is carried out by tree hugging anti-conservatives.

      I’m sure Halfaquart will be willing to post links to the hundreds of domestic incidents he’s referring to, and explain why no one ought to worry about ELF any more, since it’s not mentioned in the report.  I mean, what are they going to do if they don’t get their solar power plants and wind farms?   Probably a Chevy auto dealership will have to die in atonement.

  • Is it just me, or are there more liberal morons parachuting in in the past couple of days?  Or are they commenters who (mercifully) left for a long time and are (unfortunately) returning?  I refer to dimwits such as Kilo who have nothing more to offer than rambling accusations of hypocrisy because the writers at QandO allegedly haven’t dedicated every post they’ve ever written to criticism of Bush’s big spending or condemnation of Jews and blacks being routinely blown up in our country.

    By the way, can somebody let me know examples of when this sort of thing has happened?  I admit that I don’t watch the news as regularly as perhaps I should, but I would think that I would have read SOMETHING about white, right-wing terrorists blowing up Jews and blacks.

  • Let’s see: I oppose this criminal administration with every ounce of my being, I think that the current officeholder in the White House is an unqualified moron, I oppose abortion, I favor guns, and I think that this country is headed for disaster until the policies of Democrats are fought against and fought hard.

    Does that make me an “extremist”? If so, then damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead: I wear the extremist label with pride!

  • <blockquote>Open source reporting of wartime ammunition shortages has likely spurred rightwing extremists—as well as law-abiding Americans—to make bulk purchases of ammunition.</blockquote>

    Wait, “wartime ammunition shortages”? We’re at WAR? I thought we were at “Overseas Contingency Operation.”  Whatever you call it, surely that didn’t cause the ammo shortages?

  • So you don’t object to DHS creating reports assessing the threat of domestic terrorism from right-wing militia groups, right? You just have a beef with the vague language in this particular report. Right? I mean, you admit that the risk of domestic terrorism from right-wing groups is greater than zero. Right? Thus, the government should be watching it. Right? Unless you think that domestic terrorism from right-wing groups is a good thing. We just had a guy who listens to Glenn Beck all the time shoot four cops, as I recall. Also, the guy who shot thirty immigrants a few weeks ago. Was he a “left-wing” terrorist? Maybe he was mad at the immigrants for not being greater in number? But really, if it’s just loose language in an anlytical report here, what are you worried about? As you guys argued for years, if you’re not terrorists, you have nothing to fear, right? That’s why you scorned and mocked efforts by civil libertarians to, for example, limit the US government’s ability to wiretap US citizens, right? After my interactions with places like this, it will take quite a lot of actual wrongful persecution for me to have sympathy for right-wingers subjected to scrutiny by the federal government. But hey, if you’ve had a change of heart, places like the EFF and ACLU are actually trying to work on issues like this, rather than just whine about their political persecution. Go send them some money.

    • Hmmmm…I listen to Glenn Beck and I haven’t killed ANYONE (Am I missing some subliminal message?).

      So, Earth First (not exactly right-wing), a group of significant numbers, want to kill off FOUR BILLION people, isn’t a problem? (Yes, that’s the effect they seek).

      How about Obama’s whackjob Science Adviser, Holder? How about a rubber room for him instead of a White House office space?

      No, Glasnost, YOU need a rubber room. (We’ll paint it mauve for you).

    • This sort of argument is an example of the logical fallacy (I believe) known as “appeal to motive”: you attempt to discredit McQ and the rest of us NOT because our concerns are not supported by facts or even because they are unreasonable, but simply because you try to imply that we are hypocrites.

      “You support the police, right?  Therefore, you shouldn’t complain about police brutality.”

      “You support paying SOME taxes, right?  Therefore, you shouldn’t complain when they are too high.”

      So, let’s try to get to the meat of the question: why did DHS publish a report to law enforcement officials all over the country warning SPECIFICALLY against “right-wing” terrorists?  How did DHS reach the conclusion that people who (for example) “are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration” are somehow likely to become terrorists?  Have there been any substantiated, specific threats from “right-wing groups”?  Actually, the report itself IMMEDIATELY says… no:

      The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing

      * terrorists are currently planning acts of violence…Indeed, there isn’t even any specific indication that these alleged right-wing terrorist groups are even growing; there is nothing more than a hazy speculation that various factors including the economy and the color of the president’s skin COULD serve as recruiting tools.  To the extent that the report offers a concrete examples, it is laughable:

      A recent example of the potential violence associated with a rise in rightwing extremism may be found in the shooting deaths of three police officers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on 4 April 2009. The alleged gunman’s reaction reportedly was influenced by his racist ideology and belief in antigovernment conspiracy theories related to gun confiscations, citizen detention camps, and a Jewish-controlled “one world government.”
      His “reaction” might also have plausibly been influenced by the fact that he was a lunatic.  Or that he’d been discharged from the Marines.  Or that he merely hated police officers.  A black man shot police officers in Oakland at about the same time as the Pittsburgh shooting.  Was he motivated by “right-wing extremism”, too?

      To say the least, the report is absurd, offering on the one hand lurid warnings of “potential” right-wing violence while on the other admitting that there is absolutely no evidence that ANY is in the offing.  The report also keeps referring to the ’90s when there apparently was some huge rise in right-wing extremism and terrorism.  Except for the OKC bombing, which was (A) the work of two men, not some vast conspiracy, and (B) roundly deplored and excoriated by all us nasty ol’ right-wingers*, I really don’t recall a lot of “right-wing” extremism during the ’90s.

      Out of idle curiosity, doesn’t this sort of baseless, broad-brush profiling bother you?  If not, why not?

      Oh, and can you also add to this:

      Also, the guy who shot thirty immigrants a few weeks ago. Was he a “left-wing” terrorist? Maybe he was mad at the immigrants for not being greater in number?

      Are you trying to imply that he was a right-winger?  If so, then based on what evidence?  Are you trying to imply that all right-wingers hate immigrants with a murderous passion?

      ——–

      (*) If Timothy McVeigh was still alive, somehow I don’t think we on the right would have supported him becoming a college professor like Bill Ayers.  Do you?

      • Except for the OKC bombing, which was (A) the work of two men, not some vast conspiracy, and (B) roundly deplored and excoriated by all us nasty ol’ right-wingers*, I really don’t recall a lot of “right-wing” extremism during the ’90s.

        LOL.
        Yeah, except for the destruction of a large office building in the middle of a metropolis, except for the murder of 168 people including women and and children, except for the largest domestic terrorist attack in US history, yeah … except for all of that, docjim here doesn’t remember a lot of right-wing terrorism from the nineties. 

        Look, there’s a lot to scoff at in this report, but I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss the notion that there might be right-wing extremists that are open to dangerous ideas.  And don’t tell me there isn’t another potential McVeigh in this crowd, cause I’ve been to more than a few of these types of events, and some of those motherf*ckers are crazy.

        Seems to me that you might be just upset because they specifically use the term “right-wing.”  And yes, they should have just used the term “extremist” and drop vague, weak targeted specifics.

        But you would admit that we should be on the look out for the McVeighs of the world, right?

        • So… You try to imply that I don’t think of the OKC bombing as serious… then hint that the ONLY reason I or anybody else is upset is because the report contained the word “right-wing”… then admit that the report has “a lot to scoff at”… and finally finish by saying that there probably ARE loonies among “right-wing groups” who might actually pose a threat.

          Wow.  Are you on the faculty with Erb?  Hell, you must be the dean of his university with forensic skills like that.

          So, what IS your point?  Or do you even know?

          I pose the same questions to you that I did to glasnost: does the sort of baseless, broad-brush profiling seen in the report bother you?  If not, why not?

        • Right, NAZI skin headed, bigots, and right wing survivalist UN conspiracy armed loons – yes, look out for these groups, I have no problem with that.

          Governor Rick Perry, for example, 10th amendment supporter as right wing extremist? 
          Anti-abortion foes – right wing extremists?
          People who own guns?
          Veterans?
          You don’t think that brush and can of paint might be hitting spots in the populace who don’t deserve to be painted by any chance do you?

          That’s the point here.

    • “Also, the guy who shot thirty immigrants a few weeks ago. Was he a “left-wing” terrorist? Maybe he was mad at the immigrants for not being greater in number?”

      My God, you demonstrate what a brainless drone you are AGAIN Glass-snot.

      “Representative Maurice Hinchey, whose district includes Binghamton, told The New York Times that indications are the gunman was an immigrant from Vietnam and the car he used was registered to his father.”

      He WAS an immigrant.  He hardly fits your stereotypical liberal idiot image of a dirty t-shirt, baseball cap wearing white guy right winger doe he. 
      But being the idiot you are I’m not surprised you’d  equate him with ‘right wingers’ to strengthen your argument.

      How about this OTHER right wing wacko
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_massacre

      You do understand that these guys aren’t exactly eligible for membership in your stereo typical skin-head neo nazi, American heartland, Bible hugging, gun toting, white folks ONLY organization, RIGHT?

      Mindless drone.

    • The Bolsheviks just want to get rid of everybody that doesn’t want to give them “free” stuff.

  • You guys are just pretending Kilo’s complete lack of evidence doesn’t convince you, because you’re too scared of the truth that everybody knows and hasn’t heard about because of the media and stuff. Nice try, wingnuts!

  • I participate in “Extreme Skiing” (75 degree down slope), does that qualify?

  • glasnost, you tool.  Blaming Glenn Beck for that yahoo is like blaming JD Salinger for the Reagan Assassination attempt.

    Oh, and the guy who shot up the immigrants?  He was an immigrant.

  • The report itself makes sense.  Cherry picking and misrepresenting quotes allows some on the right a bit of emotional self-righteousness.  But by pointing to “single issue” groups, it’s not saying all single issue groups are extremist, only that extremist groups tend to form around  a single issue.  Same with state vs. federal.  I personally am opposed to so much power being on the federal side.   That doesn’t make me an extremist.  Rather groups that are extremist often use that as their rallying cry, so it’s a hint to law enforcement.  And,  historically, veterans and former military, who have been used as pawns by politicians and then often disgarded and ignored (look at veteran’s health care) have been drawn to these groups.   Right wing extremism is out there, and dangerous.   So is left wing extremism.  Any violent extremist groups should be stopped.

    • There is nothing — nothing — more dangerous in this country than empty-headed wards of the state getting paid to “teach” at universities, who think, for instance, that Howard Zinn is a legitimate historian, who essentially no longer regard themselves as Americans, but rather as “citizens of the world,” and who are filled with deceit and have power over young people in classrooms.

      If I were issuing a paper at DHS, I would recommend that where such individuals are found that they should be immediately pensioned off the public payroll on the condition that they would never again go near a classroom anywhere in the United States.

    • “Any violent extremist groups should be stopped.”

      Putting aside the implicit violence required to take away sizeable portions of an individual’s income, for instance, I would ask this somewhat smaller question: do you teach any required classes at UMF, Erb?

      Because, if you do, that is itself “extremist violence,” forcing someone to imbibe your rot in order to complete his college degree. Armed robberies can go down without any actual shots being fired, too, if everyone just understands the need to cooperate.

      While it’s true that an individual goes to a college voluntarily and can always leave if he encounters a professor who essentially demands that he hate his own values and embrace confusion, he is also being told that the only path forward in life is to “get that degree.” What a sickening dillema, no?

    • “Cherry picking”??? 

      “Misrepresenting”???

      The report is ridiculous tripe from beginning to end, a litany of unsubstantiated and baseless fears that border on fantasy.  One doesn’t need to cherry pick or misrepresent to demonstrate that.  It might as well warn law enforcement officials against potential violence by Catholic nuns who feel disenfranchised and angry because of the election to the presidency of yet ANOTHER (alleged) Protestant, abortion, and the increase of non-Catholic populations in the country.  They wear UNIFORMS.  They follow a single leader WHO ISN’T EVEN AN AMERICAN.  Plus, they are prone to violence: ask anybody who’s ever been to Catholic school about angry nuns, rulers, and knuckles.  Yep, gotta watch out for those Catholic nuns.  DHS, I’m sure, will be issuing a warning report tomorrow or next day.

      But I want (for some reason) to be fair: other than warning about the possibility of violence by “right-wing” extremists, what in the report is worthwhile?  What facts or evidence or ANY useful information for law enforcement is offered?  What should a sheriff in Montana or a police chief in Hawaii get from reading this document?  Is he supposed to stake out gun stores, for example, to ensure that people who buy guns or ammo are “law-abiding citizens” and not “right-wing extremists”?  How can he tell the difference, anyway?  If he sees a bumper sticker that has ANY sort of politically-oriented message, should he assume that the driver may be one of those nasty “single-issue” people who are just ITCHING to join an anti-goverment militia and blow up a federal building?  And what is law enforcement to do if they DO detect some potential right-wing extremist?  Arrest them?  Throw them in Gitmo?  Tap their phones or intercept their cel phone calls?  Aren’t you libs against doing all of that?

      If all you can point to is the vague warning that some right-winger MIGHT go crazy and commit a crime, then I’d say that you haven’t got much to support your contention that “the report itself makes sense” or that those of us who are critical of it are “cherry picking”.
       
      I want to know WHO at DHS wrote this drivel, why, and who told him to do it.  Unless somebody can point to a slew of similar reports warning US law enforcement to be aware of potential violence by Muslims, Catholic nuns, Boy Scouts, left-wingers, libertarians, librarians, antiquarians, octogenarians, or any other group under the sun that might POSSIBLY include wannabe terrorists, then I must conclude that the report was politically motivated, and that it sheds some light on how the libs who run DHS view the world and who they think America’s enemies REALLY are.

    • Hello, QandO denizens. This is Justin Case, director of the artificial intelligence lab at the University of Maine. I’m back to apologize to you once again because of a rogue AI experiment that is contaminating QandO.

      I’m chagrined to acknowledge that I’ve had to apologize in the past. As longer term QandO readers know, the commenter who posts with the moniker “Scott Erb” is not really a human being. It’s an experiment to solve the so-called Turing Test in which a program attempts to fool a human being into believing that it’s human.
      The program is named the Emotionless Robotic Bloviator, and we are currently on version 5, so I will refer to the program in brief as ERB-5.
      ERB-5 has a pseudo personality profile that could be described thusly (using the masculine pronoun for anthropomorphic effect):
      1. He’s a coward and a pacifist. He has an emotional repulsion to war that makes any armed conflict too unpleasant to think about. The posting result is a reflexive, monotonous string of tirades against military actions abroad, especially in Iraq.
      2. He’s smug and condescending. He believes himself smarter than the readers here. Results of this characteristic include frequent appeals to the fact that he has advanced degrees, even though insiders know that advanced degrees in social science are effectively meaningless.
      3. He has a profound psychological need to prove his self worth. There is an underlying, deeply buried suspicion in his mind that he’s not very talented or smart, so as a psychological defense mechanism, he lectures to people he imagines are inferior.
      4. He has proven incompetent at most life skills he’s tried. For example, we built a backstory in which he worked in Washington, DC a couple of years, but because of his incompetence and cowardice, he couldn’t hack it there. He then used the only skill he possesses, which is to write reams of nonsensical prose, and parleyed that into a sinecure as a social sciences professor, which is as safe a profession as we could think of since we are not aware of any instance in history of a social science professor losing a job because of incompetence.
      As happened with a previous generation, we’ve made a mistake and allowed a rogue copy of ERB-5 to hide on our network. We think this time it was a malicious act by a graduate student who has known radical extremist tendencies, and wished to spread leftist propoganda through ERB-5. He hid a copy, and changed the posting settings. As best as we can tell, the settings are as follows:
      1. Dishonesty quotient – high. It’s normal for anyone commenting in politics to exaggerate and occasionally state “facts” that are not backed up by reality. However, ERB-5 has a setting to determine the level of dishonesty. Our malicious student set this to “high” which explains the frequent level of outright lies seen in recent ERB-5 postings. We’ve noted that multiple commenters have taken to routinely calling “Scott Erb” an outright liar, and this setting explains why.
      Keep in mind that it’s really a computer program that doesn’t even know what truth is, but the setting allows the prose generator to create comments containing assertions that are negatives of known correct assertions. Since it’s a computer program, some of these assertions are transparently ludicrous.
      As I’ve explained before, ERB-5 is programmed to respond to accusations of lying with vague variations on what it has already said. Again, this is an automatic, programmed response, and we’re sorry if QandO readers are irritated by the results.
      2. Self-reference tendency – high. Since ERB-5 is a program, it can’t do the type of research that normal commenters use. Therefore, ERB-5 normally restricts itself to referring to it’s own work, on a blog we created to experiment further with the program. We have given ERB-5 a group of generic reference links which it occasionally uses, but since it doesn’t really “know” what the content of those links mean, when it uses such a link it may be completely irrelevant to the argument at hand.
      3. Word count – medium. Long posts from ERB-5 are eventually spotted as not being the product of a normal human. So even our malicious student had kept this setting under control.
      4. Posting frequency – very high. This is the key to the problem. Until this rogue copy of ERB-5 was installed, we only allowed infrequent posts to gather more data in our Turing experiment. We know that ERB-5 is extremely irritating, so causing ERB-5 to post lots of comments was guaranteed to irritate QandO’s typical reader profile. The malicious student was counting on this.
      I should mention that we added a couple of standard response patterns to our previous list recently. In addition to the earlier patterns such as reflexive bashing of George W. Bush and tirades about Iraq, we have added the following:
      1. Reflexive defense of President Obama. We thought this fitted the ERB-5 left-wing personality profile. Unfortunately, because President Obama has made a number of gaffes and questionable decisions, this tendency of ERB-5 had caused “Scott Erb” to appear rather clueless. We may remove this module if we locate and shut down the rogue copy.
      2. A pattern for responding to insults that one commenter astutely labeled as “I’m rubber and you’re glue.” In fact, that’s the way we refer to it internally. Insulting ERB-5 basically enters into a never-ending loop in which the program generates comments that any insult is basically a projection of that commenter. That is, if a commenter claims ERB-5 is dishonest, ERB-5 will say that the commenter is actually the dishonest one and is projecting, or words to that effect. (We have a library of ways to say this.) Again, we know this is highly irritating, but we thought it might grant a little humanity to the program. Initially, we restricted the number of times ERB-5 would do this, but the malicious student has apparently removed that constraint.
      I hope this helps QandO readers understand why you’ve been deluged with “Scott Erb” comments lately, and why the supposed commenter shows no self-awareness, no ability to distinguish truth from falsehood, and no ability to respond to reasoned argument. As I mentioned in a previous post, we hope you will apply the “for entertainment purposes only” label to ERB-5 and just laugh at it instead of being irritated.
      But I would like to say that we’re extremely sorry. At this point, we would be completely understanding if the moderators at QandO were to ban ERB-5 (under the “Scott Erb” moniker). We originally chose QandO because of it’s very, very tolerant commenting policy and high reluctance to ban commenters, but we now feel that we have taken advantage of the good nature of the QandO bloggers. Again, we are sorry, and we are taking whatever actions we can to find this program. If the QandO moderators could send us some logs containing IP addresses of ERB-5 comments, that would be a big help.Justin CaseDirector, Turing StudiesTeacher Replacement LabUniversity of Maine

    • If we go by history, the most dangerous groups are those wielding government power.  They are far more dangerous than the “single issue” “extremist” group, by orders of magnitude.  I wonder why you left that part out of your apologist excuses.  Oh yeah, your people are in power now.

      No surprise.

  • This DHS report is the Left reminding the Right who is in control of the national security apparatus now. It is at once a warning and a provocation.  (Someone is going to come along very shortly and tell us, if it hasn’t happened already, that “this was prepared during the Bush administration,” and my response to that will be “who cares?” Does anyone believe that these federal bureaucracies had no liberal cadres within them the past several years?)

    We’re in the middle of a two-front cold civil war in this country.  There’s an economic front and a culture front. If you’ve paid attention to how the governments handle the imposition of socialism in Europe, especially the imposition of cultural Marxism, you would understand that this DHS document is actually a warning about speech, a warning to watch what you say, say about guns, about taxes, about the power of the federal government, about abortion, about “gay marriage,” etc.

    This is a very significant document, much like one of those famous National Security Council papers from early in the Cold War.

  • I’m also reminded by this of the one public figure in the United States who has the most striking relationship with an extremist group.

    The group this public figure belonged to taught racial separatism. The underlying teaching of this group considers violence an unquestioned, implicit necessity to its cause. That teaching insists that nothing could be settled without the submission of one race to another. The group’s spokesman openly accused the federal government of infecting people with the AIDS virus and condemned American society for all sorts of supposed crimes against humanity.

    The public figure I write about is, of course, Barack Obama. The group is Trinity United Church in Chicago. The underlying teaching is “black liberation theology” or “black theology.”

    Obama belonged to the Church, and supported it, for twenty years. The radical extremist pastor of the Church was Obama’s mentor. No other public figure in the U.S. has had such a radical extremist background. 

  • One more comment here.

    I would be remiss if I didn’t point out, again, that the “peace movement” in this country, as it got started fairly directly in the weeks after 9/11 and was thus at a full head of steam when the U.S. began military action in Iraq in 2003, was essentially started by a front organization for a small, fringe political party with extremely close ties to North Korea. The spokesman for the front group was also one of the leaders of the political party, was a huge supporter of the Kim Il Jong regime, and had visited Pyongyang more than once. This spokesman was interviewed many times about the “peace marches” that his group organized, but never asked about this aspect of his background.

    The front group is ANSWER. The fringe political party is the Workers World Party. The spokesman is Brian Becker (he has since left the Party, I believe).

    That’s the fount of the current “peace movement” in this country, which the imbecile Howard Dean used to radicalize the base of the Democratic Party in 2004, which Barack Obama, who belonged to an organization at least as radical as the WWP, rode to the Democratic nomination in 2008.

    The federal government is actually supposed to be interested in the influence of extremely hostile foreign regimes in U.S. domestic politics. I’ve never heard mention of it. Certainly never saw a report from DHS about it. Maybe those are kept classified, so that the ANSWER people don’t scream about repression, and Leftist academics don’t start accusing those who point it out of being like Goebbels.

  • Wonder if UNC will make the DHS list next time –
    http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6761633

    Damn those right wing immigrant haters, good that their speech was stopped!  I hope DHS was there monitoring Tancredo!

    Free speech for all (except for the obvious ones who shouldn’t be allowed to exercise it)

  • And the January 26th document on the Left Wing – anyone actually SEEN it?  Try looking for it.

    Good luck.

    • Hot Air has it.  Ed Morrissey has this to say:

      The differences between these two reports could not be more vast.  In one, DHS downplays the potential for violence from proven and existing violent groups.  In the other, DHS presumes violence from a wide range of mainstream political points of view without any evidence of a threat, any specific groups, and impugns millions of veterans as potential terrorists.

      • Didn’t a Pennsylvania man (clinging to his guns and religion) shoot 3 cops recently because he thought Obama was going to take his guns away.  Again, Exhibit A.

      • Heh, it looked different?  and wasn’t a demonstration in glittering generalities? 

        ohhhhhhhhh huge surprise! 

        And here’s the best part, MOST of the people who came in to ding us for expressing any displeasure with the Right Wing report, could have written the freakin thing, given the host of  right wing knuckle dragger stereotypical generalities they have played with in trying to defend it.

  • You might be a right wing extremist if you kill 3 police officers because you think Obama is going to take away your guns.  Exhibit A.  The Bush administration was spying on anti-war protesters so there is nothing new here.  There have been in the recent past right wing crazies just like left wing crazies.  I don’t want Timonthy McVeigh and some nutty militia blowing up a building any more than the Weather Underground.  I think anyone who thinks there are not folks who want to do harm to the president because he’s black is just plain naive.  …oh, and stupid.

    • So was Lovelle Mixon from Oakland a right-wing extremist too?

      It is one thing to say “groups like the Neo-Nazis and KKK may attempt to use the election of a black man to the White House to recruit more members and engage in violence”, and quite another indeed to suggest that because anyone who happens to dislike the things Obama is doing that we’re going to blow stuff up and slaughter people.

      The DHS report did the latter, and you are foolish enough, angry enough, hateful enough towards those who disagree with you to believe it.

      I find great irony in the fact that the most intolerant, most closed-minded people I know are those who claim membership in the party of tolerance and open-mindedness.

  • You might be a right wing extremist if you kill 3 police officers because you think Obama is going to take away your guns. 

    On the other hand, you might just be crazy.

    webmonkey, you’re being disingenuous about the report.  The report was about organized right-wing extremist groups, not about the random actions of individuals.  Further, the report couldn’t name a single instance of a group planning any terrorist acts.

  • “The Bush administration was spying on anti-war protesters so there is nothing new here.”

    Is that supposed to be a point about something? Or just a desperate tu quoque that doesn’t meet even a bare standard for either “you” or “too”?

  • And he’s failing to notice the difference in tone between two reports, from the same agency, on the same subject (domestic terrorism) issued a scant 3 months apart.
    One deals with specific threats by specific groups of left wing extremists.
    The second deals in many glittering generalities about people on the ‘right’ who have views on issues contrary to the current administration’s views, without mentioning a single specific threat group.

    Since they won’t touch the question I will ask it -
    According to his public statement yesterday, cross referenced against the DHS publication about state’s rights supporters, is Governor Rick Perry a right wing extremist?  
    WebMonkey?
    Erb?
    Glasnost?
    Kilo?

    If not, why not? he precisely fits the description of someone capable of right wing extremism as outlined by generalities of the DHS warning.

    • Perry has government power and a security detail. Those sporting pro-Perry bumper stickers driving on back roads don’t.
      Learn the difference.

  • “… that are dedicated to a single-issue … ”

    Huh.  Andy Sullivan’s a right-wing extremist.  Who knew?

  • Hmm, I wonder how long it will be before we see recommendations suggesting mental hospitals and the use of psychotropic drugs for many of theses “right wing” extremists?

  • Yep, we’re just having a case of the vapors being worried about nothing… No matter who might or might not agree with us.

    Rep. Bennie G. Thompson of Mississippi, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said in a letter to DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano that he was “dumbfounded” such a report would be issued.
    “This report appears to raise significant issues involving the privacy and civil liberties of many Americans — including war veterans,” Mr. Thompson said in the letter sent Tuesday.
    “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.
    Thompson didn’t stop there.  He wants an explanation of what “activities” Napolitano has planned with law enforcement officials to monitor legitimate public political activity, as promised at the end of the DHS report.  He called himself “particularly struck” by this statement.  And well he might; it promises to have government treat political discourse as a subversive activity.

    • Ruuhhh Rowwwww….Scott?  1/4Kilo?, Glass-snot?, Websimian?

      Chairman of the WHAT?  Member of which party?  eh?  uh?  huh? who?  and he said WHAT?

      I know!  Bet he owns a gun, and has an issue he’s focused on (like, um, Homeland Security).  He’s probably a RIGHT WING EXTREMIST TOO!  

      You boys go wrap yourself back up in your “Obama Administration Can Do No Wrong” blankets and get some sleep.

  • You can read the report here. (pdf)

    This link appears to be blocked.  Must be the left wing extremists  doing it.

  • At least we know now who all those FEMA camps are for. Imagine all the property that will vacate, the jobs that will be created, the cleaner environment and the resources that will become abundant – if we lock up and exterminate large segments of the U.S. population. This must be that “change we can hope for”.

  • Can anyone here actually relate a realistic scenario where these Marxist’s SOB’s are going to realize they are wrong and “just go away peaceably”? I always try to look ahead to the end game; I’m struggling mightily to find a happy ending to the roll the country is presently on.
    Can’t find it.