Is the DHS watching returning veterans? Only when they join far-right hate groups
By David Neiwert Friday Apr 17, 2009 1:00pm
Well, the talkers at Fox, along with the rest of the right-wing propaganda machine, just can't stop talking about that Department of Homeland Security bulletin about the potential threat of right-wing domestic terrorism. Which means, as always, that they are spreading the bullmanure far and wide.
Of course, what they're doing in the process is essentially substantiating one of the central theses of my book The Eliminationists -- namely, that the gravitational effect of the extremist right on mainstream conservatism in recent years has pulled conservatism even farther right, to the point that the differences between them are rapidly vanishing. Hey, if they want to make my point for me, I'm all too happy to let them.
Now, here are the main talking points raised by Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and their guests about the DHS bulletin:
-- Beck says the report specifically singled out veterans and targeted them for investigation of possible far-right extremism.
-- Byron York says the report really was based on nothing but speculation, since in its opening lines it explains there is no evidence of specific plots yet.
-- York adds that the similar report on left-wing terrorists named specific groups, while the right-wing report was more amorphous (and thus had less "meat on its bones") since it did not list any specific groups.
-- Col. Ralph Peters (last seen attacking President Obama for his "weakness" on the Somali pirates just before Obama's order freed that ship captain) says this report is the product of military-hating "Hollywood" people in the new Obama administration.
-- O'Reilly says the report was "unnecessary," cooked up by a bevy of myopic "far left" liberals freshly ensconced in their DHS offices.
-- O'Reilly tells Beck that these liberals' myopia leads them to ignore Al Qaeda while pinning the terrorism label on ordinary conservatives. (He echoes Pat Robertson in this claim.)
All of it, of course, is wrong. Complete, freshly laid, unfettered bullmanure.
OK, I'm going to walk quickly through these backwards, since the first talking point is the most pervasive and most in need of addressing:
-- This bulletin was just one of several assessing various terrorism threats to our national security; because these bulletins were intended for local law-enforcement officials, they necessarily focused on domestic threats. Overseas-based threats are a completely different bailiwick and would not be part of this particular assessment, but that doesn't mean the threat is being ignored or that, for that matter, Homeland Security's ongoing focus on Al Qaeda has dropped even one iota since Janet Napolitano took over.
-- Neither O'Reilly nor Peters appear to have watched what Shepard Smith reported on Fox the day before: Namely, that the bulletin was ordered by the Bush administration, well before Obama took office, and was conducted by Bush-hired intelligence specialists.
-- York is right that the DHS was much more specific in its similar bulletin about left-wing extremists. But there's a reason for that: Far-right extremists absurdly outnumber eco-terrorists, by an exponential factor. It's easy for DHS to list ELF and a handful of other far-left groups capable of acts of terrorism because that's about all there are. On the other hand, there are over 900 hate groups in the SPLC's database, including a large number of them outfits fully capable of (in fact, some essentially built around) inflicting violence on the public. If York (and Michelle Malkin, who's made a similar claim) wanted more specifics in this bulletin, there'd have been quite a bit of ink and space wasted listing them all. If Byron wants a few, let me give him just those in New York state, where he lives. There are 25 of them there. Or just look around a little: Do the names National Socialist Movement, or National Alliance, or Stormfront, or White Aryan Resistance, or Aryan Nations ring a bell anywhere?
-- What the report says is that DHS "has no specific information that domestic rightwing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence", which is very specific language that is quite correct in what it does say -- but it doesn't say that this assessment is based on speculation about economic stresses and political anger. Rather, as anyone can assess from reading the bulletin itself throughout, it's predicated on a good deal of solid factual data regarding the activities of far-right extremists. Some of this, as we'll see, comes from FBI intelligence; and some of it from publicly available sources.
-- Finally, and most on the tip of wingnut tongues, is the claim that the report "singles out" all returning veterans as potential recruits for right-wing extremists. In reality, the report only singles out returning veterans who become active in violent hate groups.
Here's the actual language of the report:
U//FOUO) Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.
This is, in fact, precisely accurate -- and as we pointed out White Supremacist Recruitment of Military Personnel Since 9/11) found that the numbers of identifiable neo-Nazis within the ranks was quite small (only a little over 200), but warned:
Military experience—ranging from failure at basic training to success in special operations forces—is found throughout the white supremacist extremist movement. FBI reporting indicates extremist leaders have historically favored recruiting active and former military personnel for their knowledge of firearms, explosives, and tactical skills and their access to weapons and intelligence in preparation for an anticipated war against the federal government, Jews, and people of color.
... The prestige which the extremist movement bestows upon members with military experience grants them the potential for influence beyond their numbers. Most extremist groups have some members with military experience, and those with military experience often hold positions of authority within the groups to which they belong.
... Military experience—often regardless of its length or type—distinguishes one within the extremist movement. While those with military backgrounds constitute a small percentage of white supremacist extremists, FBI investigations indicate they frequently have higher profiles within the movement, including recruitment and leadership roles.
... New groups led or significantly populated by military veterans could very likely pursue more operationally minded agendas with greater tactical confidence. In addition, the military training veterans bring to the movement and their potential to pass this training on to others can increase the ability of lone offenders to carry out violence from the movement’s fringes.
This is underscored by a Wall Street Journal story today outlining the FBI work that both produced this assessment and the operation that followed:
The FBI said in the memo that its conclusion about a surge in such activities was based on confidential sources, undercover operations, reporting from other law-enforcement agencies and publicly available information. The memo said the main goal of the multipronged operation was to get a better handle on "the scope of this emerging threat." The operation also seeks to identify gaps in intelligence efforts surrounding these groups and their leaders.
The aim of the FBI's effort with the Defense Department, which was rolled into the Vigilant Eagle program, is to "share information regarding Iraqi and Afghanistan war veterans whose involvement in white supremacy and/or militia sovereign citizen extremist groups poses a domestic terrorism threat," according to the Feb. 23 FBI memo.
Michael Ward, FBI deputy assistant director for counterterrorism, said in an interview Thursday that the portion of the operation focusing on the military related only to veterans who draw the attention of Defense Department officials for joining white-supremacist or other extremist groups.
"We're not doing an investigation into the military, we're not looking at former military members," he said. "It would have to be something they were concerned about, or someone they're concerned is involved" with extremist groups.
It's important to understand how FBI investigations into these kinds of activities take place: The FBI is constrained by DOJ guidelines that do not allow them to investigate organizations merely because of incendiary rhetoric or politically worrisome beliefs. They only open investigations into the activities of members of such groups when there is evidence of actual criminal activity.
And it's at that time that the presence of an extremist with a military background becomes not merely relevant, but potentially important. This is especially so considering one of the realities of the extremist right -- namely, that the vast majority of its members are incapable of anything remotely resembling a terrorist act; what they actually specialize in is the Verbose Bellyache. Yet simultaneously they have developed over recent years a decidedly militaristic culture that prizes actual military background.
So when investigators begin dealing with potential criminal or terrorist activity by right-wing extremists, the presence and involvement of people with military backgrounds -- particularly with skill at armaments -- is a huge red flag. Because these kinds of people transform these groups from Verbose Bellyachers to potentially competent -- lethally competent -- extremist cells.
The most famous example of this, of course, is Timothy McVeigh. But -- contrary to what the right-wing talkers have been saying this week -- McVeigh is hardly the only example of what happens when an alienated veteran is radicalized by these kinds of belief systems -- he's just the most famous. There have, in fact, been a number of veterans who have played significant roles in the radical right in recent years, including acting as terrorists. Besides McVeigh, for instance, there is also Eric Rudolph, who spent two years in the 101st Airborne Division at Fort Campbell in Kentucky, attending the Air Assault School there, and earning the rank of Specialist/E-4.
Then there was our old friend Col. James "Bo" Gritz, ex-Green Beret and Special Forces veteran:

Though he adamantly denied harboring such beliefs much of the time he was promoting militias back in the 1990s, Gritz is now a full-fledged adherent of Christian Identity.
More recently -- and certainly more relevant to the point here -- there's the case of Kody Brittingham, recently of the U.S. Marines:
Brittingham, 20, was with Headquarters and Support Battalion, 2nd Tank Battalion, when he allegedly made the threats against Obama, president-elect at the time. Brittingham was administratively separated from the Corps on Jan. 3.
Brittingham’s legal troubles began in mid-December, when he and three other Lejeune Marines were arrested by Jacksonville police in connection with attempted robbery. He was charged Dec. 16 with attempted robbery, breaking and entering, and conspiracy. His bond was set at that time.After his arrest, Naval investigators found a journal allegedly written by Brittingham in his barracks room, containing plans on how to kill the president and white supremacist material, a federal law enforcement official told The Daily News of Jacksonville.
This points to a significant dimension of the problem: The recruitment of young men into the military who already harbor white-supremacist beliefs.
It's been long reported that hate groups and other extremists, including neo-Nazis, have been making actual inroads into the ranks of the military in recent years. A July 2006 report by the SPLC found this infiltration occurring at an alarming rate. Neo-Nazis "stretch across all branches of service, they are linking up across the branches once they're inside, and they are hard-core," Department of Defense gang detective Scott Barfield told the SPLC. "We've got Aryan Nations graffiti in Baghdad," he added. "That's a problem."
The source of the problem, as the report explained, was the extreme pressure military recruiters were under to fill their recruitment quotas. "Recruiters are knowingly allowing neo-Nazis and white supremacists to join the armed forces," said Barfield, "and commanders don’t remove them . . . even after we positively identify them as extremists or gang members." The military downplayed a neo-Nazi presence in the ranks, Barfield added, "because then parents who are already worried about their kids signing up and dying in Iraq are going to be even more reluctant about their kids enlisting if they feel they’ll be exposed to gangs and white supremacists."
An example of this kind of crossover is the case of Shaun Stuart, a young man from Montana who returned from Iraq ready to join the National Socialist Movement, and gave a speech three years ago at the state Capitol steps in Olympia:

And, as we noted awhile back, there are predictable results:
Earlier this year, the founder of White Military Men identified himself in his New Saxon account as "Lance Corporal Burton" of the 2nd Battalion Fox Company Pit 2097, from Florida, according to a master's thesis by graduate student Matthew Kennard. Under his "About Me" section, Burton writes: "Love to shoot my M16A2 service rifle effectively at the Hachies (Iraqis)," and, "Love to watch things blow up (Hachies House)."
Kennard, who was working on his thesis for Columbia University's Toni Stabile Center for Investigative Journalism, also monitored claims of active-duty military service earlier this year on the neo-Nazi online forum Blood & Honour, where "88Soldier88" posted this message on Feb. 18: "I am in the ARMY right now. I work in the Detainee Holding Area [in Iraq]. … I am in this until 2013. I am in the infantry but want to go to SF [Special Forces]. Hopefully the training will prepare me for what I hope is to come."
One of the Blood & Honour members claiming to be an active-duty soldier taking part in combat operations in Iraq identified himself to Kennard as Jacob Berg. He did not disclose his rank or branch of service. "There are actually a lot more 'skinheads,' 'nazis,' white supremacists now [in the military] than there has been in a long time," Berg wrote in an E-mail exchange with Kennard. "Us racists are actually getting into the military a lot now because if we don't every one who already is [in the military] will take pity on killing sand niggers. Yes I have killed women, yes I have killed children and yes I have killed older people. But the biggest reason I'm so proud of my kills is because by killing a brown many white people will live to see a new dawn."
This phenomenon reflects the increasingly military style of the Far Right in recent years, particularly the militias in the 1990s, who openly recruited veterans and current military members. The two cultures have become increasingly enmeshed, as embodied by Steven Barry's recruitment plan for neo-Nazis considering a military career as a way to sharpen their "warrior" skills.
And yes, the economic conditions are a worrying potential, particularly given the rising tide of hate-group activity in America:
Last year, 926 hate groups were active in the U.S., up more than 4% from 888 in 2007. That's more than a 50% increase since 2000, when there were 602 groups.
This is where I wonder about the grotesquely skewed priorities of the conservative movement and its leading pundits. Because all the yammering has been fearmongering about the DHS potentially targeting ordinary conservatives -- especially VETERANS!!!! -- when in fact there is not a scintilla of evidence they have done so or are considering it.
Yet in the meantime, as we just pointed out, these right-wing extremists who are the subject and the raison d'etre of this bulletin are also known lethal threats for the men and women who work in law enforcement:
* In the United States, 42 law enforcement officers have been killed in 32 incidents in which at least one of the suspects was a far-rightist since 1990.
* 94% of these incidents involved local or state law enforcement. Only two events—high-profile attacks at Ruby Ridge and at the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City—involved federal agents. Much more common are events like the tragic Pittsburgh triple slayings.
* Attacks on police by far-rightists tend to occur during routine law enforcement activities. 34% of the officers killed by far-rightists were slain during a traffic stop, and a number of law enforcement officers have been killed while responding to calls for service similar to the domestic violence call that precipitated the Pittsburgh murders.
So while the folks at Faux News fearmonger for the sake of yet-unharmed veterans and conservatives, they're completely turning their backs on the interests of the men and women who risk their lives each day serving as law-enforcement officers.
Evidently, not even three dead cops in Pittsburgh can convince them otherwise.








Login or Register to post comments.
The right wingers and teabaggers thought the Patriot Act was good thing and told us that NSA spying on Americans would keep us safe and now suddenly they are unhappy. Damn, there is no pleasing this minority which keeps getting smaller day by day.
I seriously doubt you'll find too many teabaggers that think that the Patriot Act was a good thing.
Take a look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd2tg8gxCDU
on the Negroes and Mexicans, as well as AY-Rabs, they'll eat it with a spoon...
between neocons and teabaggers - teabaggers are neocon tools.
You guys are so clever and smart. Geniuses, really.
Strange, I thought I was agreeing with your position. How does that merit the snarky comment?
maybe 'teabaggers' meant the organizers, sponsors and de facto leaders of the teabagging fauxroots movement?
they certainly supported the PATRIOT ACT.
by reading your posts all week that you've ever had a lucid thought in your life.
The majority of Americans where scared as hell after 911 and made it easy for the Patriot act to pass most would just pass any thing in the name of safety not unlike the kind of fear over the economy that is causing irresponsible bills to pass without being read lately. More on topic I think the author of this blog is irresponsible in trying to lump the bottom feeders in the images above into a group that includes some very fine American men and women. Helping to cause the kind of division that make this blog possible.
Neither the author of the blog nor the DHS report are "trying to lump the bottom feeders in the images above into a group that includes some very fine American men and women." And if people would read more carefully, instead of going with the right-wing spin, they'd be able to see that.
NOWHERE has anyone said that veterans are right-wing extremists that must be watched. What has been said - and is an accurate statement - is that these extremist groups are TARGETING veterans and trying to recruit them as members.
In other words, those extremist groups are trying to victimize these returning veterans, and use them for their own purposes.
So the report says that veterans are only watched when they join Right-wing Extremist groups. Law enforcement should be watching EVERYONE who joins. There should be no reason veterans are singled out in the report.
To say extremist groups will use veterans and their skills for their own purposes is silly. Unless extremists groups are going to use tanks or fighter jets then veterans are not much use to terrorists.
McVeigh used a bomb made of fertilizer not an M-16. The military has no such class. He likely learned to do that off the internet.
You might want to rethink that theory. It happened in early 1995. As I recall, the internet wasn't nearly as big back then. The odds of him finding such info online are pretty remote, as opposed to the odds that he learned about it from some other white supremacist with the knowhow.
But you're sort of right - that's not an example of military training. How about the case of a guy who calls himself Sobobor, went to a nazi website, and with a hearty Seig Heil, bragged that he was joining the army, and was going to learn to defuse IEDs. In order to do that, you learn to make them.
Or the gang members who join up, learn military tactics, and then teach those tactics to their gang member buddies, and use them on ordinary cops when they get out.
Catching on to the connection yet?
And by the way - I'm pretty sure they do watch everyone who joins.... the point is that the ones with military training and experience might just be a bit more dangerous than the average schmuck off the street with a lousy job and a bad haircut.
I just cant watch or listen to The Clown anymore.
mainly because all their recent actions point all of this to them.
From Beck, to Hanitty, to O'Reilly, to Malkin, to Coulter, to ad infinitim, they have fed raw meat to the violent moron's who make up this movement.
It's a tough day when you think you're sitting pretty, but the mirror on the wall tells you that you're a part of the ugliest group of all.
they're watching Glen Beck. Some of his close personal friends belong to these white supremacist groups.
The further to the right they go, the further to the right they HAVE to go. They will allienate so many moderate republicans in the process that they will doom themselves to years of insignificance. It's kind of fun watching them kill themselves off!
shock only works when it is shocking, obviously. and rightwing shock jocks have to crank up the crazy in order to be continually shocking. they have to in essence, out-shock their previous day's shock.
Thorough and well researched. Sadly, facts do not come into the equation over at Faux sNooze. Let's see if the trolls come up with a list of equally recent and relevant "left wing terrorists".
... was an attack on federal law enforcement?
Wow. Just, wow.
The Ruby Ridge standoff started when the Weavers shot and killed a federal marshal doing surveillance near their property (during which firefight Samuel Weaver was also killed).
No, dude.
It started when the hidden and camouflaged marshals started throwing rocks at the cabin. That got the dogs riled up. The marshals then shot one of the dogs. That pissed off the kid who started firing aimlessly into the woods. That's when the marshals shot the kid (in the back while he was running away)
And there is NO EXCUSE for shooting the baby and mother through the window. NONE.
(disclaimer: I do not in any way support Randy Weaver's white supremacist views.)
Thank you.
Nor do I
Incorrect. Bill Degan was shot quite a distance, about an eighth of a mile, from the cabin, and he was not throwing rocks at the window. He was on the perimeter of their property with a group of six marshals who were trying to determine why cameras they'd set up for surveillance were not operating. Their work attracted the interest of the dog, so Randy, Sam and Kevin set out from the cabin with the dogs to investigate. The dog sniffed out Degan from his hiding spot and so he shot it in a vain attempt to keep his position secure. Obviously, it didn't work, because that's when Sam opened fire on him.
You can read all this in the final report.
I have been on the site, FWIW, and checked all the key locales out for myself. I used to live not far from there.
Final reports often are found to be bias in favor of the ones writing them.
http://www.reason.com/news/show/29386.html
And remember it was the Federal Govt who paid the surviving Weavers money in compensation. for their losses and invasion of their property.
Nearly four million dollars.
--------------------
'When Congress becomes Faux'
'How I learned to stop worrying and love my Federal government/censors'
http://www.reason.com/news/show/132594.html
Re the Ruby Ridge tragedy, the great defense attorney Gerry Spence deserves praise of all Americans who support the Constitution.
Those marshals shot Samuel Weaver's dog first after they had thrown rocks at the house to see if the dogs would react, then they shot Samuel Weaver in the back.
Samuel Weaver was 14 years old.
Dog reaction or not even as backwoods or backwards as everyone thinks we are in Texas. We learn (at a very young age) you never shoot anyone in the back especially not a 14 year old kid. I am against racism of any kind. Being bi racial myself it would be more than hypocritical to harbor racist views but there are many out there who do. Just because you lean to the right does not mean you’re a klan member , aaron brother or any of the other slime ball racist groups.
Given the many instances of local law enforcement killing people of African descent who were neither armed nor threatening (like the 1985 bombing of MOVE in PA & the 2007 murder of Sean Bell in NY) I do not buy any defense for those at Ruby Ridge who were both armed AND threatening.
The same people outraged and defensive about Ruby Ridge wouldn't/didn't utter a word about the murder of Sean Bell, and the bombing of MOVE because what really concerns them is that it happened to someone who looked like them and was armed to the teeth but was still outgunned. When it happens to an unarmed person of color the hue & cry from the rest of the general public is weak, muted, or non-existent.
They don't mind law enforcement agencies that shoot or bomb first and ask questions later, as long as it is not one of their own kind.
Including Ruby Ridge as an "attack on federal law enforcement" is a big blot on an otherwise well-written article. The Ruby Ridge tragedy was caused by the Feds.
... the "otherwise well written article" part. However, in Dave Neiwart's defense, he didn't write the part about Ruby Ridge; that was pure Department of Homeland Security double-speak.
Fox News is all propaganda, all the time. But propaganda for whom?
Used to be the Republican Party, of course. But in looking at photos from the "Palin rally writ large" tea party thing Fox organized, I was struck by the fact that those attending seem to have been what I called on my own blog a "Collection Of Conspiracy KookS." Many of them were advocating patently contradictory positions, the only commonality being a racist subtext: for example, Obama is a Hitler and simultaneously a Stalin.
Taken individually, the discrete conspiracy kooks are dangerous. And anyone who says otherwise is either lying or deluded. But they cannot be said to comprise a single party or movement. The Republicans can't co-opt this, because how could they create a platform? Would they claim that Obama is a right-wing fascistic left-wing socialist? How could they propose policy? The result would be all-in intramural mud wrestling.
So, again, for whom is Fox propagandizing? The anarchists? Hmmm.... Now that I think of it....
but aren't you assuming that the repugs are trying to take a coherent approach to policy in order to be constructive? Perhaps the only goal here is to slime Obama, draw attention and trigger civil unrest.
that's why. Time to bring out the McCarthy playbook again
actively watched returning vets who joined the VietNam Vets Against the War...they infiltrated our meetings and membership, bugged phones, all kinds of shit...
Yes, the COINTELPRO work was a lot of what inspired the current DOJ guidelines for the FBI regarding civil liberties.
How well these guidelines are observed is an open question, of course, but in my experience field agents adhere to them pretty rigorously.
So tired of ridiculous consumerism. Would like to read my news without someone constantly plugging a book and asking me to buy a Crooks And Liars shirt that's made in China. Almost as tired as the grade school name-calling like "Falafel O'Reilly". Embarrassingly childish.
Did you go to all the trouble of signing up here seven minutes ago just to say that? Wow! You must be really tired now.
the discussion involves the antics of those like Orally and Beck and this guy calls Neiwert childish?
Actually I called any of the contributors to this blog childish who use childish name-calling in a blog about politics. I'd much rather see well-written posts about politics than see someone regurgitate the same tired but oh so clever names of right wing figures.
I completely respect David's posts but find the recent continuous and unnecessary plugging of his books (as a referral to amazon.com no less) distracting from the content of the message.
The intent of your huge handful of posts to date is to deride the author and other commentors here because we're "childish". We're all dying to be impressed by your keen political insight and commentary (instead of just your name calling).
No, it was to deride the author's plugging of his book in the majority of his recent posts. I have the same respect for David's posting as I did before his tenure as a marketing lackey, it's just slightly embarrassing to see someone so desperate to see their book go up in Amazon rankings.
n/t
LOL
Coming from someone who posts as their cat about a fake incident on Britian's Got Talent (you realize that they have auditions and this wasn't some miraculously spontaneous moment right? that all the "real humanity" shown was faked and set up?), I'll take this as a... well nothing, you post as you're freaking cat.
Bless your heart. (as we say in the south) You just have no sense of humor, do you? I have fun with my blog and if you don't like it, be sure to never return to it. I don't want to cause you more anger. As for my feelings regarding, Susan Boyle, my admiration for her voice stands!
I don't read your blog so don't worry that you could post anything that would "anger" me (funny accusing me of being angry with a name like pissed off patricia). Do you seriously think that posting as your cat is funny and I just don't get it? I have ten cats and I don't think I could live my life without having something furry crawling around but I would shoot myself in the face if I ever lowered myself to posting as a cat.
I think Susan Boyle has an amazing voice too, I just don't agree with them using her as a prop to push some false and misleading narrative about humanity just to keep their ratings up. You fell for it hook line and sinker just like most of the viewing audience. But then again, you post in a blog as if you were a cat so one shouldn't expect too much right?
I'm going to have to flag your play no flag. If you don't like ads you must be an anti-capitalist, dare I say, a commie? There is a simple solution to that, by the way. Just write a nice check to replace the ad revenue and maybe all those ads will disappear.
I actually said nothing about the ads and I don't even notice or pay attention to them.
I am an anti-capitalist but I am not a communist.
Thanks for trying to play.
If you "completely respect" my books, then why don't you similarly respect my need to make a living at it?
Moreover, I'm not plugging it at every turn. But when the occasion arises, I'd be stupid not to point out its relevance to a given post.
That's how authors make livings. They sell books. When they have books fresh on the shelves, it's essentially their duty to plug it whenever they can. Otherwise, they're not writing for very long.
If you had actually gotten far enough to ever see a book of yours published, you would be doing precisely the same thing. Either that, or looking for a new agent, because agents don't long tolerate authors who won't promote their books.
It might be different if I were a big-name author with fat advances and a yacht. I'm a regular schlub working out of his garage in Seattle. I have to scramble for every sale I get, and I don't mind having to do the work.
I like writing for a living. If you like reading my books, you'll permit me the right to plug them.
As someone who has previously been critical of your book plugs and a few of your conclusions, I liked this defense of your use of promotional opportunities. Since you like to link back to your own previous posts and you are likely to draw future critiques when mentioning your published work, keep a link to this comment handy. That way you can save space by simply saying, "Hey, like I said before (Link), I like to write and I gotta eat to do so."
Enjoyed this post thoroughly.
It is always the same thing with these guys. Say your against the war they say your are against the troops, say we should be careful about veterans becoming involved with hate groups they say you are agains the troops. They never take responsibility for their actions they always deflect or grab some group to put in front of them and then say you are criticizing them. They are actually cowardly in the fact that they never address your criticizm or point. Instead they hide behind the innocent and pretend you were actually insulting them. VEterans should be sick of this shit by now. BILLO, BECK, HANNITY fight your own fights if you guys are so tough and stop hidding behind Vets. Address the report on its merrits.
O'Reilly and these other clowns are absolutely shameless in their continual non-fact based blather. They just bloviate with each other on programs that are like TV's version of inbreeding. So O'Reilly will parade Beck, Peters, or Ollie North on his show, while Beck will do the same. Alternate viewpoints? Nah--only when they want to bash someone or O'Reilly wants to get off on having a guest's mike cut.
Both sides are responsible for the division here not just the right. I remember one of the first times I posted here I was pre judged right off the bat. The blame goes both ways and the fact is fanatics on both sides have built the fence so very high there is no safe way to sit on it anymore.
Its an artificial construct by the string pullers (of both sides) anyway.
but most of the angry haters on the right are so because they don't have a clear grasp of reality. while most of the haters on the left are mad because they just had to watch the right plow through the country like king kong's kid having a temper tantrum, and then have to listen to the right explain how the last eight years was the lefts fault.
if it's scary on the huge fence, pick the side of reality. it's like saying your on the fence between science and magic.
"PATRIOT NETWORK ALERT 030809"
---------------------------------------------------------------
" PLEASE DISTRIBUTE TO ALL AMERICANS - THIS IS NOT A DRILL!"
---------------------------------------------------------------
"Make sure to pass this information on to folks who may not be aware."
Redacted: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXBODYXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
With a contact address as follows... Is it legit?
**[2909 South George Drive, McConnell AFB, Kansas 67210]
PS. I've handled it accordingly.
?
I knew that the SPLC is a very good, worthwhile organization, but I never really have looked closely at their web site. Never knew there were so many hate groups....30 alone in my home state of Missouri.
I'll have to look at the SPLC site more often.
As for Beck, O'Reilly, York, and the others....they're really such clowns. O'Reilly NEVER calls someone a "right wing loon"; no, it's always a "left wing loon." He has said in the past that the left wing hate far outweighs the right wing hate....as evidence, he typically points to the Daily KOS and indirectly to Keith Olbermann ("NBC", as he likes to say, not "MSNBC"). He refuses to admit that there are very dangerous loons and crazies on the right, the same that Beck does. So, naturally, BillO jumps on the bandwagon about the right's criticism of this DHS report in order to preserve his claim that the left wing is far more dangerous than the right.
David, I think you've been quite modest in the advertisement of your book on C&L. I'll have to buy it.
I don't have a problem with people doing this, unless they're someone like BillO the Clown who shamelessly promotes that his latest book is on the New York Times Best Seller list while in a segment earlier in his show, he blasts the New York Times as part of the "liberal smear machine." Or a case I saw a couple of months ago....BillO the Clown made some crack about Al Franken promoting his latest book, when at the same time, BillO promotes his own books.
...has the biggest irony cannon on the market.
to get training on weapons and munitions for the coming race war?
similarly for gangbangers?
the employer of last resort is a factory for the production of killers.
Where've you been? What else has the military ever been for? I don't think these people are too far from understanding the purpose of our military excursions anyway. They are imperial efforts to subjugate brown people with resources we want. Now who is fooling themselves? These white supremacists? Or Liberals?
if these people woke up tomorrow and everyone was white they would probably immediately start hating over religious issues. oh wait, they do that too.
Why isn't anyone saying this over and over? THE SECOND WORST ACT OF TERRORISM IN THIS COUNTRY WAS DONE BY A RIGHT WING NUT WHO WAS FORMER MILITARY!!!
Yes, McVeigh was former military. He also worked at an armored car company and as a security guard. What's your point?
The idea that veterans need to be watched as potential domestic terrorists because of their skills and knowledge is ridiculous. If that were true then everyone who knows how to light a match needs to be watched as a potential arsonist.
Just what kind of person would have the best suited skills and knowledge necessary to defeat the Department of Homeland Security? The answer is simple, an employee of Homeland Security, of course! So where's the DHS memo telling law enforcement to keep an eye on DHS employees?
Thank you, David, for this informative post. It's always hard to know how accurate something is, but you've certainly given me food for thought. I still think, however, you haven't addressed the main point. Let's look at the first quote:
"DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities"
On the surface, it seems like a perfectly rational and measured assessment, and if the intent of this report is simply for law enforcement to pay special attention to members of violent extremist organizations with military training, then great, that makes sense. This vital distinction, however, is completely absent from the above statement, thus giving it the potential for the public to see it as placing all veterans in an "at risk", i.e. undesirable group.
Assuming innocent intent on the part of DHS, I would at least rate this as poor wording. There is a strain of thinking in the U.S. among a small but vituperative minority that is decidedly anti-military. Needless to say, such a statement is a vindication of their fantasies. Particularly nasty is the clause "their violent capabilities". I think I know who DHS is refering to with the pronoun "their", but I also think there are a few who don't.
More poor wording can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhLq9NPLv0M
P.S. I know it was for official use only, but it still looks a lot like unsupported profiling.
What about john Malvo? the guy who shot all those people in Washington? He was ex military too.
I read the report. It has a concern about ex military people.
In a way it makes sense. They were trained for combat and they have a right to be disgruntled if we do not as a Country, take care of their medical, psychological needs when they return.
They are not returning to a great economy. They fought whether we agree with Iraq, or not for us. We need to treat them kindly in return.
My concern is all those 'contractors" and mercenaries from KBS.
Where did they pick up those skills before Iraq and what will they do with them after????
As a retired reservist of over 20 years service I am deeply insulted by this Reno clone at the helm of DHS. Why did Napolitano allow this drible to escape from her agency basement. (Hey, maybe there is something to rumors about secret CIA research programs after all!).
You fools elected a dedicated/iberal/Socialist/Marxist/Communist (Liberalism taken to it's logical absurdity) and placed them power and Obama and Fellow Travelers/Useful Fools are now in the White House. The people who shaped this man's character read like who's who of Marxists in Amerika. Was it not this man who on an election stump said he wanted to create a civilian security force who would be more better equiped and more powerful than the U.S. Military? For what purpose? I think this was already tried in Soviet Russia, NAZI Germany, and Communist Red China with very good results if you want a dictatorship! He has expanded domestic electonic surveillance beyond what Bush did. Why? Rahm is in charge of the GPS enhanced census mandated by the UN now so the dems can jurymander the congressional districts before the midterm elections. The control of the internet was taken from Commerce and Rahm also has that now.
Sorry folks, as a white, Christian, straight, working, tax paying, one time gun owning, retired military man who believes in the sovereignty of the American nation state, (Oh my God they are profiling, quick someone, call the ACLU!); I am not getting a real warm and fuzzy feeling about President Obama and the company he keeps! Pray for our new president and as God to guide him. (Oh my God - How scandalous a public mention of faith here on the shrine of liberal BLOGERS!)Now, where do I report for Political Reeducation, Komrades? (Gee I hope Obamateer, Bill Ayers is not incharge, as I have read his Prairie Fire Wheater Underground Manafesto and it don't look good for us hardcore capatilists...)
1969: VICTOR CHARLIE IN THE WIRE, 2009: VICTOR CHARLIE IN THE WHITE HOUSE...
http://cryptome.org/spy-right.pdf
If anyone is hip to Bittorrent, maybe seed?
Login or Register to post comments.