One of the worst posts ever on this blog.

Do you really think that right-wing extremists pose no problem? How about that fine vet Timothy McVeigh?

This is all a lot of "fauxtrage". Few of the people clamoring even believe there is anything wrong with the DHS report—just as Newt Gingrich knows perfectly well that American presidents have shaken hands and smiled with Soviet leaders, Chinese leaders, and his claim that Obama smiling with Hugo Chavez was unprecedented is just another lie to increase the fear and panic of the rabid.

How about that fine vet Timothy McVeigh?

I could count twice as many domestic terrorists who are left-wing non-veterans among President Obama's personal acquaintances alone.

Given that Obama's personal friends are only some 0.000001% of the population, that's a pretty frightening statistic.

Well, there's McVeigh, and then there's... ... ... ...

There are 2 differences between McVeigh and Bill Ayers. 1.Competence. Ayers body count wasn't for lack of trying. The bomb that killed his crew was designed for an ROTC dance. 2.Nobody on the right would have given McVeigh the time of day whether his bomb was a dud or not. Certainly not made him an intellectual leader.

FBI 10 most wanted list is out. The only domestic terrorist on it? Daniel Andreas animal rights activist. From a group the sets off real bombs, not rhetorical ones.

Whats outrageous about this 'homeland security' nonsense is that the FBI has 9 Al Qaeda terrorists on its list and 1 animal rights bomber. But this DHS report focuses on veterans and conservatives.

Has the world turned completely upside down? And could there be much more proof Napolitano has turned the department into a political arm of the administration?

For those of you who haven't read it (or even heard about it yet) here is the DHS report from 2008:

White Supremacist Recruitment of Military Personnel Since 9/11

It's odd that it's never mentioned?

here's some notable quotes:
(U//FOUO) White supremacist extremists hope to revitalize the white supremacist movement by exploiting antigovernment sentiment among opponents of the overseas conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although some veterans of these conflicts have joined the extremist movement, they have not done so in numbers sufficient to stem declines among major national extremist organizations, nor has their participation resulted in a more violent extremist movement.

Obviously, this whole document is better written than the new one, but these threats that Obama 'invented' where distributed last year as well, to almost 0 fanfare. Shocking.

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.

The report, like its cousin devoted to the far left, is banal. But insulting?

Although some veterans of these conflicts have joined the extremist movement, they have not done so in numbers sufficient to stem declines among major national extremist organizations, nor has their participation resulted in a more violent extremist movement.

Declining numbers, no more violent than before.

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.

That just seems strange. What led to those problems in the 90s? The Gulf War? Somalia? Yugoslavia? If so, we should be seeing orders of magnitude greater problems from troops returning from Iraq/Afghanistan, don't you think? And yet we aren't. Kinda makes me suspect that McVeigh and his ilk had a completely different source for their problems than this facile load of codswallop would have us believe.

Context is critical. Of course DHS can include material related to radical right wing threats. The question is should that be the main, if not the only, threats recognized by the agency? Obviously not.

I was opposed to this ugly department when it was proposed, opposed it under Bush, and now i despise it under Obama. This has all the potential to be a politically motivated hatchet committee, if not a secret police. Everything the black helicopter folk imagined about the ATF etc is very easy to imagine with the DHS.

Its a big pointless bureaucracy with the most dangerous attribute known to man- a government department with a huge budget looking for a mission.

Compare and contrast: DHS Memorandum - Terminology To Define The Terrorists: Recommendations From American Muslims.

I'm worried about making it a habit, but like Mark Buehner I opposed the creation of DHS, and the possibility that I will like its performance under Obama better than I liked it under Bush does not change my mind.

Having said that… if there are right-wing groups that are looking to recruit unemployed computer programmers, then by all means let the FBI report on the phenomenon. But that doesn't seem to be the case. Surveillance of these groups suggests that in Real Life, their interest is in converting persons with military experience.

Say, what ever happened to the member of the military who said he couldn't follow Obama's orders until he saw a Birth Certificate?

Right now (as opposed to Bill Ayres' heyday) the noise of the far right is much louder than anything on the left. I might add that it seems to be seeping into mainstream right-wing discourse, witness Glenn Beck weeping for his country's benighted future under Socialist Fascist Obama.

So calling Obama a socialist is now a sign of readiness to blow up buildings and people? Guess you'd better put me on that DHS list too. Or maybe it's instead time to bring back that word - 'chilling' - that the left bandied about so freely during the Bush regime.

FBI 10 most wanted list is out. The only domestic terrorist on it? Daniel Andreas animal rights activist.

The Feds have decided that ELFs and ALFs and other eco-terrorists (who have racked up an impressive record of actual violence) are not "left-wing". They call them "special interest terrorists".

As you can see from the new DHS report, having a special interest in anything except for Michele Obama's clothes might make you a terrorist.

BTW, the FBI has a domestic terrorist top ten which consists of two Black Liberation Army terrorists, two Puerto Rican terrorists, two Vietnam-era leftists, and four Animal/Earth terrorists. No veterans of Iraq, or even Vietnam.

No, Mark. I don't think I would credit the four police dead in Oakland to the left. You just might have an argument that Mixon was motivated out of some sort of black nationalism, but it looks closer to the truth to say that a few black nationalists are treating as a martyr a street-criminal who just blasted away hoping to make a getaway.

Poplawski, on the other hand, appears to have been motivated by white supremacist and anti-Obama fantasies laid on top of mental instability.

And while I feel the Animal Liberation types well-deserve the terrorist label, I don't think they fit either right or left especially well. Many style themselves as anarcho-libertarians.

Guess you'd better put me on that DHS list too

You, me...Newsweek....

a street-criminal who just blasted away hoping to make a getaway.

Sounds like the last days of the Weathermen, exclusive of the President's BFFs.

It can't be seriously argued that white supremacists are a part of the right while black nationalists aren't a part of the left, which I guess is why AJL is the one advancing the argument.

I don't doubt in the least that there are homeland security risks that come from the Right.

I don't doubt in the least that there are homeland security risks that come from the Left.

I don't doubt that there are dangerous right-wing groups doing bad things.

I don't doubt that there are dangerous left-wing groups doing bad things.

One McVeigh vs an Ayers, etc. What is disturbing is this, the current administration is of the Left and it seems is attempting to demonize all dissent and opposition from the Right. That is just the way it looks from my perch. And I am a charter member of the VRWC. (Not really but I want to see the paranoids go nutso.)

Chew on this: (I hope the formatting is preserved)

Small Signs of Decline by Robert Heinlein:

"I want to mention one of the obvious symptoms: Violence. Muggings. Sniping. Arson. Bombing. Terrorism of any sort. Riots of course - but I suspect that little incidents of violence, pecking away at people day after day, damage a culture even more than riots that flare up and then die down. Oh, conscription and slavery and arbitrary compulsion of all sorts and imprisonment without bail and without speedy trial - but those things are obvious; all the histories list them.

I think you have missed the most alarming symptom of all. This one I shall tell you. But go back and search for it. Examine it. Sick cultures show a complex of symptoms as you have named... But a dying culture invariably exhibits personal rudeness. Bad manners. Lack of consideration for others in minor matters. A loss of politeness, of gentle manners, is more significant than a riot.

This symptom is especially serious in that an individual displaying it never thinks of it as a sign of ill health but as proof of his/her strength. Look for it. Study it. It is too late to save this culture - this worldwide culture, not just the freak show here in California. Therefore we must now prepare the monasteries for the coming Dark Age. Electronic records are too fragile; we must again have books, of stable inks and resistant paper."

H/T Gerard @ American Digest

Look at what is happening not your narration. Banks that took TARP money and now want to pay it back are not going to be allowed to do so? Why? Because Fedzilla wants to convert the TARP monies to stock and possibly become a majority shareholder? Oh, crap! The list seems to go on.

Demonizing Veterans is not a very smart move. There are lots and lots of us who did the right thing and served. We did the best we could. We came home and tried to live normal lives. Now we have a regime in DC making us the enemy? This is just wrong and only cements what many feel is wrong with the current crew in DC.

Look, I haven't written much because my view is more nuanced than I have written thus far, and it was not coming across well in writing.

1) This is clearly a crappily written report, that was rushed out of the department. Including:

a) Basing alot of data on issues from the last Clinton administration (with no relationship to their organizational state today)

b)Using language which does not clearly denote specifics and groups they are looking for

c) Using over-zealous versions of events to discuss the groups they want observed.

Still though, the basic fact that right-wing extremist groups (like the Neo-Nazi's) are IN FACT recruiting US troops as the 2008 report says, means that I am annoyed by the poor explanation of the report, it's certainly nothing new either. It is certainly not calling all US troops as links to US extermists. It's saying extremists may try to contact US troops. Correlation does not lead to causation.

The fact that left-wingers WERE IN FACT mentioned in January means that they've got two reports on two different political terrorist groups out simultaneously.

And to some extent, I think DHS is trying to hard to 'think outside the box', to terrorist-events they haven't seen yet. And they're doing it in piss-poor fashion. The idea (in and of itself) isn't terrible (investigating groups that profess a desire for violence before violence comes to pass), but the execution leaves much to be desired.