Napolitano rebuts the fearmongering over DHS domestic-terror bulletin
By David Neiwert Sunday Apr 19, 2009 11:18amTrying to respond to the insane eruption of self-revealing wingnuttery over that Department of Homeland Security bulletin outlining the coming wave of right-wing domestic terrorism, Janet Napolitano went on CNN this morning to talk it over with John King on "State of the Union":
NAPOLITANO: Here is the important point. The report is not saying that veterans are extremists. Far from it. What it is saying is returning veterans are targets of right-wing extremist groups that are trying to recruit those to commit violent acts within the country. We want to do all we can to prevent that.
And again, I regret that in the politicization of everything that happens in Washington, D.C., some people took offense, but when you read the report, what it was saying -- what it was saying is, look, we have a threat of terrorism within our own shores, and one of the groups being targeted to see if they will be aligned with that are some of our veterans. Let's make sure we prevent that.
KING: Do you regret the politicization, or do you regret the choice of words by your department? Could it have been written better, to maybe reduce the politicization?
NAPOLITANO: In retrospect, anything could have been written differently to prevent politicization, but I think any fair reading of the report says this is very consistent with other reports that have been issued before, they were issued before Obama was president, they're being issued now. They're meant to give people what is called situational awareness, and they're certainly not intended to give offense, far from it.
This confirms our earlier reportage, as well as our more thorough analysis of the bulletin and the response to it.
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 from the get-go, this is the view not merely of DHS, but of the FBI. A July 2008 assessment of the situation by the FBI (titled 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.
... 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.
Login or Register to post comments.
This report was intended for internal law organizations ONLY. Of course it was not word-smithed for public consumption! It was looking specifically into right-wing groups just as they have reports that looked into left-wing groups.
Now where is the investigation into which Bush hold-over traitor leaked this to the right-wing press????
I smell a mole.
Why did Malkin, Limbaugh, Beck et al instantly recognize this report as being about "them", i.e. "conservatives" which it is not? (Actually which they are not, but that's a different topic...)
In criminal law, it's called mens rea (guilty mind) -- a necessary element of any criminal prosecution.
The leaders of the American Reich know they are doing wrong, and doing wrong on purpose ... and it sure ain't a comfortable feeling for them.
..the wingnut rabble-rousers (Hannity, Limbaugh, Beck, Malkin, Coulter, Savage et al) are nothing but a pack of irresponsible media whores.
That the right-wing gets REALLY irritated when a mirror is shown to them?
Maybe they're.............VAMPIRES!
next teabag rally I'll hang a dressing mirror around my neck with the word sucker on it and walk around, if trouble happens just angle it towards the sun
Is wearing something that will quickly become a pile of sharp objects really a good idea? Make sure you have Kevlar under that sucker.
I probably wouldn't because the teabagger thingy was actually co-opted from the Paulites by the Republicans for an Obama hate fest.
It was their gig to begin with.
I still respect their position even tho I don't agree with most of it
What the hell is Napolitano apologizing for? These numbnuts get their panties in a twist and he thinks there's some need to wring his hands? Fuck that. Look, this is what the report says, which you'd know if you read it. If you people want to read things into it, knock yourselves out. But you'll be wrong. THAT would be an appropriate response. Well, after laughing very loudly.
I am so fucking sick of all this "offense" horseshit. We've managed to turn simple communication into the most mendacious meringue of nonsense all because somebody might get OMG OFENDED!!!11!! Government documents certainly should be as clear as possible; they're convoluted enough without having to tiptoe around somebody's old lady sensibilities. Fucking man up, already, and stop pissing like a bunch of babies.
The ones that they are trying not to offend are the ones that bitch and whine the most about political correctness.
One thing we know about that crowd: they can dish it out but they sure can't take it.
Whether the idiotic Malkin or inexcusably ignorant Beck know better or not, whover they get their marching orders from does know better.
But they see an avenue to foment dissatisfaction and turn it to their own uses.
Just as they are trying to redefine fascism as government intervention in business, they are trying to make violent, armed response to disagreement seem reasonable, even patriotic.
Don't believe for a moment that someone isn't orchestrating these misreadings for their own reach for power.
"A July 2008 assessment of the situation by the FBI (titled White Supremacist Recruitment of Military"
he was telling people what to write. It's obvious the CHOSEN ONE was pulling the strings of everyone, even while trying to be President. Candidates can't get more cocky than that; he IS the Manchurian Candidate, a Russian, Chinese, Iranian, communist, fascist, socialist, and despot of the worst kind.
People wake up. Drink the Kool-AID, and lets get back to the GLORY days of 2001-2008. The ONE has been in office 89 days too long. I got a tea-bagging rally to go to; I will try to enlighten the blind left when I get back, if I am not too sore from back-slapping, and whatever other type of slapping and slurping( Kool-aid flavor, of course) these TRUE Americans do.
...what the wingnuts have to say about the reports that some gang members go into the military specifically to learn more about weapons and tactics?
that it's a good thing because the military will "straighten them out".
"Do you regret the politicization...?"
Yeech. What was his next question, "Have you stopped beating your husband?"
leaking this sh*t out. That's the question.
Appointees that went career. Dan Froomkin wrote well on this subject Washingtonpost.com.
"KING: Do you regret the politicization, or do you regret the choice of words by your department? Could it have been written better, to maybe reduce the politicization?"
Assumption 1: The report was deliberately politicized. Evidence: None.
Assumption 2: The report was poorly written. Evidence: None.
Rethug hack John King doesn't fool anybody with half a brain. He should do well on CNN.
This is the equivalent of asking, "Do you regret shooting your wife instead of stabbing her?" or "Isn't it true that you wouldn't have killed your wife if she had been a better cook?"
John King epitomizes what is wrong with corporate media.
Bring back a free press, PLEASE.
any nads at all they would have just said F-U it wasn't a report meant for the public, only for law enforcement agencies eyes only and it wasn't meant to be politcized by the media or the Republican party
Today is the 14th anniversary of the bombing of the Murrow Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Timothy McVeigh was a veteran, and he was certainly recruited by domestic terrorists. I don't believe the incendiary media bigots of the right wing have ever apologized for the part they played in inciting that. In fact, I can't recall such people ever apologizing for anything, even though they are shrill in demanding them from others.
An interesting day to talk about right-wing
extremismterrorists. The Malkins, Becks, Limbaughs and the Hannity's can squawk all they want...all I want to hear is what they say after another right-wing terrorist blows up another building filled with Americans.The wording in the DHS doc was not the problem. The problem is that FOX put the conservative spin on it and MSM like King ran with it. It wasd always about the extremists targeting vets!
The operative phrase Napolitano uses is "any fair reading."
Which is the crux of the matter.
Eric Rudolph
Timmothy McVeigh
Both ex-military, both terrorist, both killed innocent Americans.
(I'm sure I didn't spell their names right)
How do we allow any Republican mouth piece to say one thing about this and not just slam them.
The report was requested by the G W Bush.
There was a report on left wing targets that came out in January.
This has to be the easiest smack down ever!! How does anyone let them whine about this?
so militia's are violent hate groups?
people who are against taxation without representation?
people agianst the bailouts of these banks?
or Ron Paul/Kucinich supporters who stand up for anti-war, liberty and right to privacy and all that stuff?
Those are the people singled out in the report.
Those people arent destroying this country, it's those 532 fucks in Washington, catering to special interests and lobbyists and not the wants and needs of the people. That's why people are being recruited. The government as become destructive in their means and it's our right as American's to replace those people.
There's talk of a million armed militia march coming soon to DC. It's being coordinated as we speak.
Those fucks in Washington need to be put in their place. We're not all bending over and taking it. You all can fight over dumb political bullshit and sit on your computers but some of us are going to do something.
You go for it. When you get out of jail, write a book about the experience, but first read the report you are bitching about because you don't have a clue what it says now.
Good luck to you. And remenber there's a difference between "there's talk of a million armed militia march coming soon" and a video game.
Oh and could you tell me when "coming soon" is so I can invest in stock in a coffin manufacturer?
Have you seen Jon Soltz from VetVoice on this issue?
Here's a snippet from military training slides for military personnel leaving the service:
The 2d Battalion, 46th Infantry warns its members:
"Soldiers are prohibited from active participation in organizations which promote supremacist causes, attempt to create illegal discrimination based on race, creed, color, gender, religion, sex or national origin, advocate the use of force or violence, or otherwise attempt to deprive individuals of their civil rights."
Geesh, you'd think that the military thought there could be a problem with servicemembers being recruited by extremist groups which advocate violence, or something.
Another Army presentation lays out what it calls "Right Wing Ideology":
• America is in moral and religious peril
• Satanic forces are about to seize control of the world.
• Religions other than their own are false and not important.
• Anti-government
Why haven't we seen this on any of the news programs?
To see these people who need to protect our country waste time on Right wing reactionary paranoia over an every few years standard threat assessment.
Then again they just don't care it seems if something happens because they are wasteing time they will just blame it on the democrats like they always do.
If you look online and download this PDF and got to the adobe document properties it was created January 23rd 2007 at 2:32:54 PM
The Right wing-nutO terrorists are terribly dangerous to the US and should be watched carefully.
as our Secretary of Homeland Security. Her rebuttal of the fear mongering is pithy and brilliant. For once, with her, I think there is someone with brains in that position. That helps me feel that the country is safer. Bush's appointees to that position never inspired any confidence in me that the country was safer with them in that position. They more or less just occupied space there. They were zeros, space holders, and didn't do anything to help make this country safer that I remember.
All who were left scratching their heads when Obama chose this obedient toady to head Homeland Security now can get a handle on it: a serious appointee, focused upon real terrorist threats (not imaginary, partisan ones i.e. the TEA parties) -like, say, a Rudolph Giuliani- wouldn’t have been a willing collaborator in a sham report trashing US vets for shameful political purposes.
Napolitano’s qualification for this job was purely being a liberal Obama sycophant… certainly not any skills, insight, or ability.
Her recent statements on Canadian border security illustrate how incompetent and puzzled she really is- completely lacking the credentials to be in charge of protecting our country from the likes of Al Qaida.
Trouble is, the narcissist Obama needs to be surrounded by mindless drones to confirm his omnipotence and pollyanna world view. But such appointments as Napolitano and Panetta to vital national security posts are a show of weakness that will surely encourage terrorists and other rogue characters who see America as their enemy- no matter how hard Barack tries to schmooze them.
Sadly, anyone who expected The One to place the nation’s practical defense interests above those of his own political security and radical agenda simply hasn’t looked at how he got this far in the first place.
http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot...
Apparently, folks who would call themselves "conservative" or "reaganite republican" not only have short memories, but also their hearing appears to be impaired. You watched the video right? She addressed your blatant misunderstanding guy/gal. Perhaps stick pictures would help. This the best you can come up with after 8 years with the dim-witted one from Texas creating havoc domestically and abroad? "Heck of a job Brownie" jar any conservative brain cells loose? Look out the big bad AlQaida's are coming to get you!
Login or Register to post comments.