Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

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...

...The report from DHS' Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines right-wing extremism in the U.S. as "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 anti-government, 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."

"[T]he consequences of a prolonged economic downturn – including real estate foreclosures, unemployment and an inability to obtain credit – could create a fertile recruiting environment for right-wing extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and government authorities similar to those in the past," the report says...

..."Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans likely would attract new members into the ranks of right-wing extremist groups as well as potentially spur some of them to begin planning and training for violence against the government," the report continues. "The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by right-wing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement."

Most notable is the report's focus on the impact of returning war veterans.

"Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to right-wing extremists," it says. "DHS/I&A is concerned that right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize veterans in order to boost their violent capacities."...

...It also suggests the election of an African-American president and the prospect of his policy changes "are proving to be a driving force for right-wing extremist recruitment and radicalization."

The report also mentions "'end times' prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition and weapons. These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as the violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia movement."

"DHS/I&A assesses that right-wing extremist groups' frustration over a perceived lack of government action on illegal immigration has the potential to incite individuals or small groups toward violence," the report continues.

The report states the DHS will be working with state and local partners over the next several months to determine the levels of right-wing extremist activity in the U.S.

houndawg wrote:What dumbass came up with the DHS anyway? Defund them immediately.

travelinman67 wrote:

houndawg wrote:What dumbass came up with the DHS anyway? Defund them immediately.

Say, aren't you a veteran?

Hmmmm...

"H-O-U-N-D-A..."

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:mcveigh types are apparently a growing problem... if what my buddy at fbi has suggested is accurate (he can't say much... but what he does say is that their rhetoric is heating up, and there is concern) then i really can't say i'm overly surprised by this.

i'd like to know what the "problem" with this report is. basically it's saying what any expert on domestic terrorism and extremist movement would say. i would add that biker gangs are likely to be growing in size and influence for the same reasons.

travelinman67 wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:mcveigh types are apparently a growing problem... if what my buddy at fbi has suggested is accurate (he can't say much... but what he does say is that their rhetoric is heating up, and there is concern) then i really can't say i'm overly surprised by this.

i'd like to know what the "problem" with this report is. basically it's saying what any expert on domestic terrorism and extremist movement would say. i would add that biker gangs are likely to be growing in size and influence for the same reasons.

So...seems to me the three most logical resolutions are...

L.E. should start setting up files and surveiling every veteran, pro-life Christian, and immigration reform citizen who's expressed distrust in current political situation.

or...

Outlaw speech and activity deemed "against" the government.

or...

Washington needs to pull it's head out of it's ass and recognize they shouldn't attempt do do wholesale rewrites of laws and regulations that took 230 years to fine tune, ESPECIALLY when those changes include significant restrictions to civil rights.




(hint for TTBF...the answer's the third choice.)

TTBF, you may "feel" that these concerns from right wingers are unfounded or overblown, but they do not. And when it reaches a degree when DHS, FBI and other L.E. are expressing concerns over the response of a fairly large sector of citizenry, whether you "feel" it's warranted or not...it's time to stop what you're doing and start listening.

travelinman67 wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:mcveigh types are apparently a growing problem... if what my buddy at fbi has suggested is accurate (he can't say much... but what he does say is that their rhetoric is heating up, and there is concern) then i really can't say i'm overly surprised by this.

i'd like to know what the "problem" with this report is. basically it's saying what any expert on domestic terrorism and extremist movement would say. i would add that biker gangs are likely to be growing in size and influence for the same reasons.

So...seems to me the three most logical resolutions are...

L.E. should start setting up files and surveiling every veteran, pro-life Christian, and immigration reform citizen who's expressed distrust in current political situation.

or...

Outlaw speech and activity deemed "against" the government.

or...

Washington needs to pull it's head out of it's ass and recognize they shouldn't attempt do do wholesale rewrites of laws and regulations that took 230 years to fine tune, ESPECIALLY when those changes include significant restrictions to civil rights.




(hint for TTBF...the answer's the third choice.)

TTBF, you may "feel" that these concerns from right wingers are unfounded or overblown, but they do not. And when it reaches a degree when DHS, FBI and other L.E. are expressing concerns over the response of a fairly large sector of citizenry, whether you "feel" it's warranted or not...it's time to stop what you're doing and start listening.

Cap'n Cat wrote:


Big reaches, T.

houndawg wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:
So...seems to me the three most logical resolutions are...

L.E. should start setting up files and surveiling every veteran, pro-life Christian, and immigration reform citizen who's expressed distrust in current political situation.

or...

Outlaw speech and activity deemed "against" the government.

or...

Washington needs to pull it's head out of it's ass and recognize they shouldn't attempt do do wholesale rewrites of laws and regulations that took 230 years to fine tune, ESPECIALLY when those changes include significant restrictions to civil rights.




(hint for TTBF...the answer's the third choice.)

TTBF, you may "feel" that these concerns from right wingers are unfounded or overblown, but they do not. And when it reaches a degree when DHS, FBI and other L.E. are expressing concerns over the response of a fairly large sector of citizenry, whether you "feel" it's warranted or not...it's time to stop what you're doing and start listening.

T'man! Where you been bro? You're about eight years too late, but better late than never, I guess.

UNI88 wrote:

houndawg wrote:
T'man! Where you been bro? You're about eight years too late, but better late than never, I guess.

I would imagine that left-wing extremism increases during a Republican administration and right-wing extremism increases during a Democatic administration. And the Feds are going to be interested in monitoring potential trouble areas. How is this different than what was probably done to keep an eye on the left when Bush took office?

Cleets Part 2 wrote:T-man I suggest you up your blood pressure medication during the next 8 years of Obama's presidency

travelinman67 wrote:

Cleets Part 2 wrote:T-man I suggest you up your blood pressure medication during the next 8 years of Obama's presidency

I figure they'll be kicking down my door any day now, so if all goes well...the Federal Re-education Camp will pick up the tab so I can save my Medicare part B.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:your presumption that "every veteran will be suspect" is absurd.

Cleets Part 2 wrote: And T-man, the idea that "they" will be kicking down your door makes another presumption...
That "they" actually give a sh!t about fat old malcontent disenfranchised Rush Limbaugh fanatics...

travelinman67 wrote:

Cleets Part 2 wrote: And T-man, the idea that "they" will be kicking down your door makes another presumption...
That "they" actually give a sh!t about fat old malcontent disenfranchised Rush Limbaugh fanatics...

And that applies to me how?

Cap'n Cat wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:
And that applies to me how?

You're a Conk bully, that's how. Ain't no one taking anything away from you. You Conks treat this presidency like it's the age of Stalin.

D1B wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:


You're a Conk bully, that's how. Ain't no one taking anything away from you. You Conks treat this presidency like it's the age of Stalin.

Tman is fvcking with all of you. Dude is genius.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano apologized to veterans after a report issued by her department said troops returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were at risk for being recruited by right-wing extremists.

"To the extent veterans read it as an accusation ... an apology is owed," she said during an on-air interview on FOX News Thursday, a day after veterans' groups and members of Congress blasted her for the report, which they said libeled members of the armed forces...

...At least one veterans group, however, wasn't moved by Napolitano's mea culpa.

"It wasn't an apology in my view," said Pete Hegseth, chairman of Vets for Freedom. "It was one of those non-apology apologies. She was sorry that veterans were offended. She should either apologize for the content of the report as it stands or they should rewrite the report and reissue it."

Hegseth, an Army veteran who served in Iraq, said the report represents a "gross misunderstanding and oversimplification" of the country's service members. He did not call for Napolitano's ouster, but said he would accept her resignation.

"If she volunteered to step down, that'd be very honorable of her," Hegseth said. "It would be a recognition of what she did."

Napolitano Apologizes, But Why?
by Liz Halloran
NPR.org, April 16, 2009 ·

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano apologized Thursday for references to the potential recruitment of military veterans by extremists that appeared in a recent assessment of the threat of domestic right-wing groups. But was her mea culpa really necessary?

travelinman67 wrote:Dem. Congressional Chair of Homeland Security Committee Rep. Bennie Thompson rightfully takes DHS Secretary Neonazinapolitano to the woodshed...

http://homeland.house.gov/SiteDocuments ... -66614.pdf



...and Neonazinapolitano ends up "apologizing"...sort of...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first10 ... extremism/

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano apologized to veterans after a report issued by her department said troops returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were at risk for being recruited by right-wing extremists.

"To the extent veterans read it as an accusation ... an apology is owed," she said during an on-air interview on FOX News Thursday, a day after veterans' groups and members of Congress blasted her for the report, which they said libeled members of the armed forces...

...At least one veterans group, however, wasn't moved by Napolitano's mea culpa.

"It wasn't an apology in my view," said Pete Hegseth, chairman of Vets for Freedom. "It was one of those non-apology apologies. She was sorry that veterans were offended. She should either apologize for the content of the report as it stands or they should rewrite the report and reissue it."

Hegseth, an Army veteran who served in Iraq, said the report represents a "gross misunderstanding and oversimplification" of the country's service members. He did not call for Napolitano's ouster, but said he would accept her resignation.

"If she volunteered to step down, that'd be very honorable of her," Hegseth said. "It would be a recognition of what she did."

...but at least one propoganda outlet made no bones where the stood...stoking the fire to keep the looneylibtrain-a-chuggin...NPR (surprise!) runs to her defense...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... t=1&f=1001

Napolitano Apologizes, But Why?
by Liz Halloran
NPR.org, April 16, 2009 ·

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano apologized Thursday for references to the potential recruitment of military veterans by extremists that appeared in a recent assessment of the threat of domestic right-wing groups. But was her mea culpa really necessary?