TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › American Right Wing Extremist Threat
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

American Right Wing Extremist Threat

post #1 of 72
4/14/09 at 12:15pm
Thread Starter 
Our returning war veterans are a particular threat.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94803

Quote:
WASHINGTON – A newly unclassified Department of Homeland Security report warns against the possibility of violence by unnamed "right-wing extremists" concerned about illegal immigration, increasing federal power, restrictions on firearms, abortion and the loss of U.S. sovereignty and singles out returning war veterans as particular threats

There is a link to the actual report embedded in the article.

Sooo, now our military is a potential, terrorist threat. I am appalled but not surprised
Reply
post #2 of 72
4/14/09 at 12:48pm
Is this supposed to be new information or some kind of surprise? Groups like the KKK have consisted partly of small numbers (like it says in the report) of "disgruntled or disillusioned" military after every war since the big one between the states.
Reply
post #3 of 72
4/14/09 at 1:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Our returning war veterans are a particular threat.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94803




There is a link to the actual report embedded in the article.

Sooo, now our military is a potential, terrorist threat. I am appalled but not surprised
That is an absolute oversimplification. Did you read the actual report, or are you simply relying on WorldNetDaily's spin? (Its columnists include Chuck Norris, Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter, and Pat Boone, so there obviously is one).

The report itself draws interesting parallels to the nineties and the likes of Timothy McVeigh, among other things, but doesn't state that the U.S. military is a potential terrorist threat.
Reply
post #4 of 72
4/14/09 at 1:27pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
That is an absolute oversimplification. Did you read the actual report, or are you simply relying on WorldNetDaily's spin? (Its columnists include Chuck Norris, Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter, and Pat Boone, so there obviously is one).

The report itself draws interesting parallels to the nineties and the likes of Timothy McVeigh, among other things, but doesn't state that the U.S. military is a potential terrorist threat.
You must have missed this part.

Quote:
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.
That is from the actual report. If that isn't calling returning war vets a potential terrorist threat I don't know what is.
Reply
post #5 of 72
4/14/09 at 1:34pm
Thread Starter 
I have heard the word, "fear mongering" bandied about on this forum when the War on Terror has been discussed. To me, this is fear mongering.
Reply
post #6 of 72
4/14/09 at 1:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I have heard the word, "fear mongering" bandied about on this forum when the War on Terror has been discussed. To me, this is fear mongering.
It just sounds like reality to me. The fact that small numbers of veterans join such groups is a fact indeed, and has been for centuries. Some very notable assassinations and rebellions throughout history were carried out by military veterans.
Reply
post #7 of 72
4/14/09 at 2:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
You must have missed this part.



That is from the actual report. If that isn't calling returning war vets a potential terrorist threat I don't know what is.
Quote:
DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and
radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from
military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the
capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out
violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist
groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from
the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.
— (U) After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military
veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing
extremist groups.
— (U) A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 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.â€
— (U//LES) The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement
that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have
joined extremist groups.
It would be a gross exaggeration to say the report is calling all returning vets a potential threat, or to assume that all military vets are immune to recruiting by extremist groups.
Reply
post #8 of 72
4/14/09 at 2:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
It would be a gross exaggeration to say the report is calling all returning vets a potential threat, or to assume that all military vets are immune to recruiting by extremist groups.
Exactly! I don't understand what's appalling about this, the threat is of EXTREMISTS not everyone who is right wing. Extremists are always dangerous and with a government thats on the left right wing extremist they are obviously seen as a threat but nowhere does it say that ALL military veterans are right wing extremists!
Reply
post #9 of 72
4/14/09 at 2:46pm
If any returning veterans would happen to join extremist groups I would be willing to wager that it's a very, very small percentage. Most just want to come home and get on with their lives.

I'm as disgusted with the government as anybody (and mad at both of the major parties) but it has more to do with the government being way bigger than it should be.

I have no use for DHS.
Reply
post #10 of 72
4/15/09 at 7:03am
This makes it even more curious that it's getting so much attention. A DHS report critical of Left-wing extremists was issued first; in January. I'd not heard a thing about it.

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/...ist_Threat.pdf
Reply
post #11 of 72
4/15/09 at 8:00am
Thread Starter 
Cyber attacks.

I don't believe I said "all" returning vets.
Reply
post #12 of 72
4/15/09 at 8:04am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
It just sounds like reality to me. The fact that small numbers of veterans join such groups is a fact indeed, and has been for centuries. Some very notable assassinations and rebellions throughout history were carried out by military veterans.
So it is not fear mongering about small numbers of vets possibly joining terrorist groups but it is fear mongering regarding extremists that have blatantly said they want to attack this country and have done so. I got it now.
Reply
post #13 of 72
4/15/09 at 8:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
So it is not fear mongering about small numbers of vets possibly joining terrorist groups but it is fear mongering regarding extremists that have blatantly said they want to attack this country and have done so. I got it now.
Neither of them are fear mongering. Both reports appear to me to reflect the realities of life in this 21st century. The curious part is that one report is being derided for something it doesn't say, the other not even mentioned.
Reply
post #14 of 72
4/15/09 at 3:07pm
Thread Starter 
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ing-extremism/

Quote:
The American Legion on Tuesday criticized the report as unfairly stereotyping veterans.


I guess some veterans are upset at being called, "potential terrorists"
and the head of the American Legion is pretty upset.
Reply
post #15 of 72
4/15/09 at 3:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ing-extremism/





I guess some veterans are upset at being called, "potential terrorists"
and the head of the American Legion is pretty upset.
I'm quite sure that the veterans that are getting their opinions from all the pundits and conservative politicians crediting the report with something it does not say are quite upset. If it actually said something as simplistic as "returning veterans are an extremist threat", then I'd be upset too. But, it doesn't.

I'm a veteran, and I'm not upset, because I know what it says is true. I was offered a "position" when I got home from Beirut.
Reply
post #16 of 72
4/15/09 at 3:41pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
I'm quite sure that the veterans that are getting their opinions from all the pundits and conservative politicians crediting the report with something it does not say are quite upset. If it actually said something as simplistic as "returning veterans are an extremist threat", then I'd be upset too. But, it doesn't.

I'm a veteran, and I'm not upset, because I know what it says is true. I was offered a "position" when I got home from Beirut.
Since every article I have read links directly to the Report itself I don't think they are basing their ire on pundits. Give the vets a little credit. They can read you know.

Add that to the fact that they are, also, calling the anti-abortion people Right Wing Extremists also. Holy cow.
Reply
post #17 of 72
4/15/09 at 4:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Since every article I have read links directly to the Report itself I don't think they are basing their ire on pundits. Give the vets a little credit. They can read you know.

Add that to the fact that they are, also, calling the anti-abortion people Right Wing Extremists also. Holy cow.
Interesting, I've read several that don't link it at all, or even contain quotes from it in fact.

Calling the anti-abortion people that use extreme measures "extremists" is entirely accurate.
Reply
post #18 of 72
4/15/09 at 6:22pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
Interesting, I've read several that don't link it at all, or even contain quotes from it in fact.

Calling the anti-abortion people that use extreme measures "extremists" is entirely accurate.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ing-extremism/

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94803

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...remism-report/


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...s-terror-risk/

All four of those articles have links to the actual report.
Reply
post #19 of 72
4/15/09 at 10:53pm

When I said it wasn't linked on every available article, I was trying to give the complainers the benefit of doubt. But, with the complete report being so readily available to anyone that wants to read it, it makes one wonder about the reading abilities of people that consistently mis-quote it. Unless, of course, their motives are purely political, in which case, it's probably on purpose.
Reply
post #20 of 72
4/15/09 at 11:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Our returning war veterans are a particular threat
ANYBODY who's been outside the country, has relatives outside the country, has gotten mail from outside the country, has made a call outside the country, has gotten Email from outside the country, reads newspapers and magazines from outside the country, knows someone from outside the country, has dreams of someday spending a vacation outside the country, looks at pictures in an Atlas from outside the country, drives a car made outside the country, ........................................................... (ad infinitum, and I didn't even get started on the DOMESTIC threats that our government AND THE PEOPLE OF THE COUNTRY are so afraid of they quake at the thought that Big Brother might NOT be watching -- just so long as he's watching the OTHER guy.

(satirical comment on the whole topic of how our government wants to protect us, and how we want our government to want to protect us, and that's what leads to such outrageous concepts as suspecting returning war veterans)

Hey.....I'VE been outside the country; maybe I'M on one of their paranoia lists.
Reply
post #21 of 72
4/16/09 at 6:29am
I'm beginning to get the impression that people are more upset with the DHS daring to mention that taboo subject; "Right Wing Extremism" (you know, the subject the right wingers says doesn't exist ) than they are about who the report says is susceptible to recruiting attempts.

It appears that the very mention of veterans in the report is being contextualized into talking points to try to discredit the entire report and it's writers so that they won't dare try to bring the nasty secrets of those who shall remain nameless into the public arena ever again.
Reply
post #22 of 72
4/16/09 at 7:19am
Funny...even as you guys are defending her for the report, Janet Napolitano (Director of Homeland Security) is apologizing for offending veterans. Guess it wasn't just Cindy who was upset about the reference.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/firs...ing-extremism/
Reply
post #23 of 72
4/16/09 at 2:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
Funny...even as you guys are defending her for the report, Janet Napolitano (Director of Homeland Security) is apologizing for offending veterans. Guess it wasn't just Cindy who was upset about the reference.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/firs...ing-extremism/
To be honest, my intent wasn't to defend her, or the report. I was merely pointing out that the report is in fact, accurate in that regard. I've read the report 4 times, and still haven't figured out how anyone could be taking it as an accusation.

In the article, her apology is not for the content of the report, but just for how people perceived it. In fact, she said exactly the same things we've be saying.

Quote:
"This was an assessment, not an accusation," Napolitano continued. "It was limited to extremists those who seek to commit violence within the United States. And all this was meant to do was to give law enforcement what we call 'situational awareness.'"

"The last thing I want to do is offend or castigate all veterans. To the contrary, let's meet and clear the air," she said.
Reply
post #24 of 72
4/16/09 at 4:27pm
Thread Starter 
http://www.thomasmore.org/qry/page.taf?id=19

Quote:
Federal Lawsuit Filed Against Janet Napolitano Over Homeland Security’s Rightwing Extremism PolicyApril 16, 2009

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced today that it has filed a federal lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. The lawsuit claims that her Department’s “Rightwing Extremism Policy,†as reflected in the recently publicized Intelligence Assessment, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,†violates the civil liberties of combat veterans as well as American citizens by targeting them for disfavored treatment on account of the political beliefs. Click here to read the Law Center’s complaint.
Reply
post #25 of 72
4/16/09 at 4:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Ah, so I was right. The right is desperate to draw attention away from the fact that "Right Wing Extremism" actually exists.
Reply
post #26 of 72
4/16/09 at 5:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
Ah, so I was right. The right is desperate to draw attention away from the fact that "Right Wing Extremism" actually exists.
Funny how that works, isn't it Scary how many people buy into it
Reply
post #27 of 72
4/17/09 at 8:08am
Thread Starter 
Kind of like the ACLU is so worried about any mention of God will destroy the country.
Reply
post #28 of 72
4/17/09 at 9:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Kind of like the ACLU is so worried about any mention of God will destroy the country.
Actually, I don't recall seeing god or the ACLU mentioned in the DHS report or the articles either. Are we all taking about the same document?
Reply
post #29 of 72
4/17/09 at 9:59am
Thread Starter 
No, we were talking about lawsuits.
Reply
post #30 of 72
4/17/09 at 10:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
No, we were talking about lawsuits.
In all honesty, the idea of suing over something that a report doesn't actually say is pretty silly. The law center must feel they need some air time.

Unless, of course, the actual intent of the lawsuit is to draw attention away from what the report actually does say...like that there is such thing as "Right Wing Extremism".
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › American Right Wing Extremist Threat