Posts
By Rachel Ring
Ring@Fordham.edu
Recently, the United States Department of Homeland Security issued a report stating that veterans returning from war, pro life activists and ultra conservatives are deemed security risks to the nation. The Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has approved the reports and stands by them, associating the threat of American “right wing extremists” with those of foreign terrorists. “She stands by the report sent to law enforcement that lists veterans as a terrorist risk to the U.S. and defines ‘rightwing extremism, as including groups opposed to abortion and immigration”, writes the Washington Times.
Napolitano continued with, “Let me be very clear: we monitor the risks of violent extremism taking root here in the United States. We don’t have the luxury of focusing our efforts on one group; we must protect the country from terrorism whether foreign or homegrown, and regardless of the ideology that motivates its violence”.
Despite being offended at the fact that veterans and people who hold contradictory opinions to those in power are being attacked and compared to terrorists, is anyone really surprised? It’s utterly ridiculous that post war veterans are being included in a report of terrorism potential risks. Furthermore, for the democratic, very left leaning administration which aligns itself with such groups as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), it’s ironic and humorous that they would target groups that simply just don’t agree with their ideas and then label them as terrorists. This is quintessential liberal hypocrisy: you can have free speech as long as you agree with them, and if not, then you’re a risk to free society.
President Obama would be wise to have this report re-worded or speak out against it, but of course he won’t, because he’s not the centrist leader that he ran his election campaign on. He’s truly a left leaning liberal who would support the prosecution of people who are deemed “right wing extremists” who simply just differ in opinion with him on matters of gun control, immigration and abortion. He might want to re-read the Constitution, with a Second Amendment that protects the right to bear arms, the laws of the nation which demand employees be American citizens and thus have taxable income and lastly that American citizens have the right to life.
There are pirate attacks in Somalia carried out by REAL terrorists (where was the President when that crisis was going on?) and a porous border with Mexico through which Al Qaeda terrorists are desperately trying to infiltrate (and who most like currently are). Those are real, concrete threats.
The Department of Homeland Security has better things to do than focus on Americans who are not in line with the leftist ideology of the current President.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh
"Taxes are a joke. Regardless of what a political candidate "promises," they will increase. More taxes are always the answer to government mismanagement. They mess up. We suffer. Taxes are reaching cataclysmic levels, with no slowdown in sight ... Is a Civil War Imminent? Do we have to shed blood to reform the current system? I hope it doesn't come to that. But it might."
-Timothy McVeigh
"There's a lot of different scenarios... We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that."
-Texas Gov. Rick Perry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Rudolph
"In April 2007, six militia members were arrested for various weapons and explosives violations. Open source reporting alleged that those arrested had discussed and conducted surveillance for a machine gun attack on Hispanics....A militia member in Wyoming was arrested in February 2007 after communicating his plans to travel to the Mexican border to kill immigrants crossing into the United States."
-The "Right Wing Extremist" D.H.S. report.
Also, it was on orders from the Executive branch that the Navy attempt it's VERY successful rescue mission. What more do you want from the guy, would you rather he slap on a flight suit and grin 'n' gawk under a "Mission Accomplished" banner?
For future in-depth news commentary, I would suggest moving beyond Drudge Report headlines as your sources.
Yeah, how DARE they call people who blow up abortion clinics terrorists? They just have different opinions!
Very well written. And this game has been played before on the state level. This past February, the state of Missouri released what they called a "MIAC Strategic Report: The Modern Militia Movement."In this report, supporters of Ron Paul, Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin (conservative candidates) were described as "potentially dangerous militia members." It is an absolute joke how leftists claim to be champions of free speech, yet ridicule all those who oppose them.
All true, though Obama handled the pirate problem relatively well. Hezbollah has already penetrated the border with Mexico. Al Qaeda is ironically, less of a threat than they are. This administration must be stopped before we end up slaves in our own country. At the very least Janet Napolitano should be tried under federal law for violation of civil rights.
To the people at "The Paper." I (and I think very few people on this blog) would try and argue with you that there are no instances of right-wing extremist terrorism. However, the instances are relatively small and it is unfair to label ALL pro-lifers and returning veterans as possible suspects just as it is unfair to label ALL Muslims and Arabs as possible suspects.
So based on this offensively ill informed article, I'm assuming that none of you guys actually took a gander at the actual DHS report (which is available here: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=490506).
For a political ideology that prides itself on tough talk and pragmatic thinking, you'd wonder why it's so baffling to you guys that the government might be concerned with radical "right wing" domestic terrorism given the incredible historical precedent, and the fact that across the nation fearful conservatives are stockpiling weapons in record numbers while their leaders are hinting at secession.
This report (should any of you have given it a gander) addresses the possibility of political exploitation used to radicalize an otherwise peaceful and acceptable political philosophy by fear mongers and irresponsible leadership.
As silly as I personally may have thought it, your "tea parties" were a perfect example of a healthy, skeptical exercising of 1st Amendment rights, and most pro-life groups aren't going to bomb or attack abortion clinics, either. But that being said, it only makes sense to make sure that such populist uprisings aren't being pushed in a violent direction.
Just remember your gal Palin winning remarks about Bill Ayers who, I think, most of you would describe as a radical leftist "terrorist." It's not the ideology, it's the exploitation!
You have found two or three examples. Using Timothy McVeigh as an example of vets as terrorists is the exact same as using Khalid Sheikh Muhammad as an example of all Muslims. I have never heard a news story of any other vet turning violent for political reasons. Sadly, many vets usually hurt themselves through suicide and self mutilation more than they take it out on others. They are the last people who would want to hurt their country.
It is painfully obvious that Rachel Ring didn't go as far as researching the very document on which she is reporting.
As someone from Pittsburgh who was in town last month for the funerals of three police officers who were shot point blank by a young, heavily-armed white supremacist I can tell you there are more than "two or three examples" (as DSKohn asserts) of right-wing extremists in our country. If a report like this could stop even just one instance of something like this from happening, then it is completely justified.
An article about the shooting from Pittsburgh's daily newspaper, the Post-Gazette:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09095/960750-53.stm
"He was really into politics and really into the First and Second amendment. One thing he feared was he feared the gun ban because he thought that was going to take away peoples' right to defend themselves. He never spoke of going out to murder or to kill," said Edward Perkovic, who described himself as Mr. Poplawski's lifelong best friend.
Mr. Poplawski's view of guns and personal freedom took a turn toward the fringes of American politics. With Mr. Perkovic, he appeared to share a belief that the government was controlled from unseen forces, that troops were being shipped home from the Mideast to police the citizenry here, and that Jews secretly ran the country.
--From the article above. If this is not a right-wing terrorist, Rachel Ring, then who is?
Also, in general, I think Rachel Ring owes it to LF readers to defend her opinions. Why isn't she responding to comments?
"The Obama administration in January issued a warning about left-wing extremists. Both reports were initiated during the administration of President George W. Bush."
Just sayin..
Kate, white-supremacy and antisemitism are not right-wing values. The Liberty Forum stresses itself on the promotion of true right-wing principles (free markets, limited government, the respect for life, and liberty). If, we are to believe that racism and antisemitism are right-wing values then this report seems to be quite accurate. But, if we agree with the principles that we at the LF assert to be conservative, then there are very few examples of extreme right-wing terrorism. I do not recall the last time a group of free market economists murdered civilians to advance capitalism.
Saw this and thought of this terrible, terrible blog post:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090531/ap_on_re_us/us_tiller_shooting
Again. Jesus, Rachel Ring.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-06-10-shooter_N.htm
Post a Comment