On April 7, 2009, the Department of Homeland Security released a report to US law enforcement offices under the title, Rightwing Extremism: Current Economical and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment. The report was concerned with the rise in right wing extremism. The problem with the DHS report is that it offered no specific information on the "rising."
The DHS instead targeted not specific groups, but the ideology of conservatives who believe in US Constitution amendment rights. The report cited examples of what "right wing extremists might do" if they opposed current or proposed government policy on gun control, abortion, illegal immigrants, and states sovereign rights designated by the US Constitution.
Mentioned in the report of right wing possible uprising:
*Groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority.
*Racist or hate groups (justifiable item, but no uprising activity cited)
*Opposition to abortion (opposition cited, but no activity or group named)
*Opposition to Immigrants Since no known group opposes legal immigration, we must decode this statement as "opposition to illegal immigration" and Obama's plans for blanket amnesty.
A Rasmussen Poll of April 16, 2009 showed that 66% of likely voters said it was very important for the government to improve border enforcement and reduce illegal immigration. Obama has likened immigration raids to "terrorists" in past statements, while Nancy Pelosi calls the raids "un-American." If you protested Pelosi's remarks, as I did with a fax to her, you may be on the hit list.
Perhaps, Janet Napolitano should put her ICE team on the list of domestic terrorists based on statements by the president, Speaker of the House, and Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) who compared ICE agency to the "Gestapo."
The language pitted against right wing ideology and "possible" uprising is vague and can be interpreted to mean whatever the DHS wants it to mean. However, there are moderate Democrats and Independents who still believe in personal liberties too. Will they be targeted next or have right-wingers won the contest without competition?
War Veterans:
War veterans were singled out as examples of "possible" disgruntled right-wingers that "might" be inclined to grow the ranks of white power militia. The description reveals that the report is slanted toward white veterans and therefore is discriminatory in tone and substance.
Many war veterans, who've resumed their lives and were not angry before, are angry now. After placing their lives on the line for their country only to be smeared by the DHS report is a cruel and unjustified statement for their patriotic efforts. The only military example DHS provided was Timothy McVeigh who was executed in 2001. (If you see Timothy McVeigh, report him to DHS right away)
Using one example of Timothy McVeigh, to denigrate war veterans is illogical. Using one man to smear veterans is tantamount to comparing one NFL player who was involved in a murder case to smear the entire NFL player roster. Would any rational person or responsible organization make that type of comparison?
When challenged by veterans, Napolitano made a statement that barely resembles an apology to the veterans. For everyone else mentioned, she stands behind the report.
House Democrat, Bernie G. Thompson of Mississippi is the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. He sent a letter to DHS Secretary, Janet Napolitano saying he was dumbfounded about the report that identified veterans as terrorist threats.
The Washington Post quoted Thompson as saying:
"This report appears to raise significant issues involving the privacy and civil liberties of many Americans - including war veterans," Mr. Thompson said in the letter sent Tuesday." Click here to download a PDF of the report.
DHS logic is difficult to understand in this vague report and leads me to wonder what they gain from releasing such a smear on a political group. They would gain if US law were destined to undergo a drastic change that right wing groups would vehemently oppose.
Are DHS and Janet Napolitano concerned that the legal adviser appointee to the State Department, Harold Koh, is going to overrule constitutional rights in favor of international law? In that case, it's highly beneficial to smear right wing ideology on US Constitutional rights, because Koh has made extraordinary claims that seem to indicate his desire to favor international law for our nation. (Bradley & Goldsmith)
Most conservatives are of right wing ideology to one degree or another and they're not generally called extremists for believing in the US Constitution until now.
To be fair, DHS has released reports about left wing extremists also, but in those reports they were specific about the activities and named the target groups. The DHS right wing report is full of innuendos that can be converted to legalese and mean what DHS wants them to mean.
As Mr. Thompson stated, the DHS report raises significant issues involving the privacy and civil liberties of many Americans. State and local police officials now have the freedom to target anyone who does not promote the admistration's agenda.