DHS 9-page Report on Rightwing Extremism

[Collin]

I didn't see the words "left-wing" in that PDF

Also from your article:

"In January, the same DHS office released a report titled 'Leftwing extremists likely to increase use of cyber attacks over the coming decade.'"

From your favorite source ;) The left wing extremist PDF, from your friends at the DHS.

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Leftwing_Extremist_Threat.pdf

Edit: I like that it is also nine pages long.

Edited Again: What I took away after reading both reports:

Right Wing Nutjobs - Trying to recruit ex-soldiers, using the new black president as leverage; are assholes that should cut it out

Left Wing Nutjobs - Trying to use computers to fuck with corporations and anyone else that goes against their beliefs; are assholes that should cut it out

[CorvallisBMW]

Edit: I like that it is also nine pages long.

Edited Again: What I took away after reading both reports:

Right Wing Nutjobs - Trying to recruit ex-soldiers, using the new black president as leverage; are assholes that should cut it out

Left Wing Nutjobs - Trying to use computers to fuck with corporations and anyone else that goes against their beliefs; are assholes that should cut it out

QFT. it's a two-sided coin.

But I don't see this report as being anything 'extreme' or 'threatening'. They're talking about preventing domestic terrorism. Call me crazy, but I don't think that's extreme. The report doesn't talk about squashing dissent or stopping free speech, it talks about the threat posed by extremists who wish to bomb, kill and maim innocent Americans. What's so threatening about that? I'm all for free speech, but the right to free speech stops when your speech becomes or incites violence.

If Maluco had stumbled upon the left-wing pdf first, I doubt a thread even would have been started.

[ragged325]

I didn't see the words "left-wing" in that PDF

I still don't believe that PDF to be legit.

If it is, it is scary what this administration is capable of as they are painting any dissenters as "right-wing extremists/terrorists"

E30 Cabrio, I've already reported you.

[E30 Cabrio]

So now Nancy Pelosi wants all guns to be registered.

What usually precedes gun confiscation?

Gun registration.

It's already happened in California.

Now they're also trying to pass a law in California to limit the number of bullets you can buy, and that you have to fingerprinted when you buy them.

This isn't really a left vs. right issue, it's a Government taking away the rights of the people issue.

It just so happens that in this case, the Government is on the Left and they are targeting people on the Right, and the Government is demonizing the people they are targeting by trying to paint them as extremists, or to tie them to extremists.

If you own a gun and don't approve of Obama as President, you're considered a "right-wing extremist" according to that PDF

Remember when the Oklahoma City bombing was blamed on "talk radio"?

I guess it really won't matter to some until the day comes when cars over XX years old are deemed not "green" enough and will be banned.

It's already starting to happen in California.

Another thing happening here in California is a plan to ban Plasma TV's over a certain size because they use too much electricity, and to ban Black cars in the future because they use more A/C then lighter colored cars.

No, I'm not making this up.

The goals of the Government in that PDF are far more frightening than the groups of people they are targeting.

Some of our elected officials want to ban Plasma TV's over a certain size, ban Black cars, ban guns, ban cars over 20 years old, limit the number of bullets you can buy, confiscate firearms, place limits on what is considered acceptable speech, giving blanket amnesty to millions of illegals, etc...

These are all laws that are being considered right now in California and in other parts of the US, some by the US Government itself.

[Maluco]

that was well spoken. I too am only looking at this as the government's actions on its people. I lean both left and right on many a issues. I guess some people just don't see the government's actions and agendas as others do. These types of reports and profiling is what paves the way for enforcement. That particular report was sent to the police. Do you really think the police need more reasons to profile and pull people over?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. - Thomas Jefferson

[E30 Cabrio]

From the report. p. 3:

(U//LES) Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool.


Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use.


Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment.



From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers.



--------------------------------------------



So if someone doesn't agree with Obama on immigration, citizenship, affirmative action, gun rights, etc...they are "right-wing" extremists and a threat according to this document.


The Obama administration is labeling dissenters as "extremists" who are a danger to society.


Where have we seen this before?

Oh, I also like the way they throw in the phrase "this historical election"

Obama never misses a chance to play the race card.

[hugh jass]

From the report. p. 3:

(U//LES) Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool.


Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use.


Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment.



From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers.



--------------------------------------------



So if someone doesn't agree with Obama on immigration, citizenship, affirmative action, gun rights, etc...they are "right-wing" extremists and a threat according to this document.


The Obama administration is labeling dissenters as "extremists" who are a danger to society.


Where have we seen this before?

Oh, I also like the way they throw in the phrase "this historical election"

Obama never misses a chance to play the race card.

there are many places you would be happier in than california, just sayin.....

[ThePotsy]

From the report. p. 3:

(U//LES) Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool.


Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use.


Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment.



From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers.



--------------------------------------------



So if someone doesn't agree with Obama on immigration, citizenship, affirmative action, gun rights, etc...they are "right-wing" extremists and a threat according to this document.


The Obama administration is labeling dissenters as "extremists" who are a danger to society.


Where have we seen this before?

Oh, I also like the way they throw in the phrase "this historical election"

Obama never misses a chance to play the race card.

I think you're missing the point here. All that report is saying is the 'extremist' groups (extremists being people who wish to do this nation/it's citizens harm) are using these things as a way to recruit people into their 'extremist' groups. It's not saying that you can't disagree with the government.

Take a deep breath and relax.

[CorvallisBMW]

So now Nancy Pelosi wants all guns to be registered.

What usually precedes gun confiscation?

Gun registration.

We all have to register our cars, what's the difference? Did license plates and drivers licenses precede the confiscation of cars?

[E30 Cabrio]

there are many places you would be happier in than california, just sayin.....

Can you factually rebut what I just wrote in the post you quoted above?

I'll post a quote from the PDF again:

" Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use."

How many Millions of people fit into the above category?

That's a pretty broad brush the Obama administration is paining people with.

[ThePotsy]

How many Millions of people fit into the above category?

I would say no where close to that number.

You're confusing 'extremists' with 'people who don't like Obama'.

There's a difference.

[E30 Cabrio]

We all have to register our cars, what's the difference? Did license plates and drivers licenses precede the confiscation of cars?

Cars get confiscated all the time for a variety of reasons.

Regardless, that's a false argument.

Some firearms have already been banned and confiscated in California and many of them retroactively, without compensation to the owners.

How would you feel if you spent a couple of grand on a prized firearm, then some politicians deemed your firearm to be illegal years later, years after you legally purchased it then after you registered it in good faith you get a letter ordering you under the penalty of imprisonment to turn over your firearm to the state and without a penny of compensation.

I don't think you would be very happy, would you?

I'll be waiting for your answer and please, no red herrings like "Well, I would never spend a couple of grand on a firearm"

Pelosi wants me to register my guns just like my car?

Fine, as long as I can take my gun out in public, just like I do my car.

But in California, the only people who get carry permits are politicians and actors.

People like State Senator Don Perata who has a carry permit but who wants to ban guns for almost everyone else.

Or guys like Sean Penn who has a carry permit despite having a conviction for domestic violence.

Why is it people like Penn and Perata allowed a carry permit, but if I apply for one, I'm denied?

[E30 Cabrio]

I would say no where close to that number.

You're confusing 'extremists' with 'people who don't like Obama'.

There's a difference.

I disagree. It is Obama who is confusing people who disagree with his policies as "extremists"

It's right there in writing - if you disagree with Obama on his policies on immigration, citizenship, affirmative action, gun rights, you are by default a right-wing extremist.

Read Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" - this is straight out of his playbook.

[Miasma]

http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/hsa-rightwing-extremism-09-04-07.pdf

Here is a updated link to the PDF that got taken down.

[CorvallisBMW]

Cars get confiscated all the time for a variety of reasons.

Some firearms have already been banned and confiscated in California and many of them retroactively, without compensation to the owners.

How would you feel if you spent a couple of grand on a prized firearm, then some politicians deemed your firearm to be illegal years later, years after you legally purchased it then after you registered it in good faith you get a letter ordering you under the penalty of imprisonment to turn over your firearm to the state and without a penny of compensation.

I don't think you would be very happy, would you?

I'll be waiting for your answer and please, no red herrings like "Well, I would never spend a couple of grand on a firearm"

Pelosi wants me to register my guns just like my car?

Fine, as long as I can take my gun out in public, just like I do my car.

But in California, the only people who get carry permits are politicians and actors.

People like State Senator Don Perata who has a carry permit but who wants to ban guns for almost everyone else.

Or guys like Sean Penn who has a carry permit despite having a conviction for domestic violence.

Why is it people like Penn and Perata allowed a carry permit, but if I apply for one, I'm denied?

I'm not debating the right to concealed carrying. I have no problem with concealed carry as long as people take a certified training class and go through the required licensing (just like getting a driver's license. Guns are just as dangerous as cars and should be held to similar standards).

And cars that are confiscated are confiscated for a reason, i.e. they did something illegal. That's much different than what you suggested would happen with guns (that they would simply be outlawed and taken away, regardless).

Now for the gov't to outlaw a gun that you already own and ask for you to turn it in is a big, big step. Even when the assault weapons ban was in effect, that never happened. No one was told to surrender the AR-15 they already owned. Sorry, but I don't see that ever happening.

But please, continue with your tin-hat-fueled tirade....