Skip to comments.The Constitution Is A Subversive Manifesto Per DHS
Posted on 04/18/2009 2:16:25 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The Department of Homeland Security Report titled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" was first brought to light by Stephen Gordon at The Liberty Papers Blog. The Report was issued a week before the scheduled Tea Parties across the country, and is all over the news today. Reading the report is depressing, not because it reveals any current threat, but because of the shoddy definitions and analysis.
One thing that is not clear from the news reports, to begin with, is that the Report specifically states that there is no current real threat, even from the most extreme White Supremacist groups: "Threats from white supremacist and violent anti-government groups during 2009 have been mostly rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry out violent acts." From the news accounts, you would think there was an actual threat, but that is not so.
But the even bigger vice is how a "rightwing extremist" is defined. I don't disagree that the few remaining White Supremacist groups should be in any definition, but DHS puts a distinctly political spin on the definition (emphasis mine):
Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.
This definition is so broad as to include anyone who seeks to preserve the foundation of our federal-state constitutional distinction, under the 10th Amendment ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people"), because such a person could be deemed to "reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority." So Texas Governor Rick Perry, who has come out in support of preserving the constitutional integrity of Texas now should be on the DHS' extremist and radical watch-list.
Similarly, the reference to "abortion or immigration" is purely political. Why pick those two subjects? If someone is planning violence, that is one thing. But vocalizing one's view on a subject and seeking to influence the government are protected by the 1st Amendment ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances").
Only in a highly politicized bureaucracy could the Constitution be viewed as a subversive manifesto.
UPDATE: Michelle Malkin has a detailed analysis of the Report. The Anchoress has a good discussion.
American Power and The Sundries Shack are collecting sources on the Tea Parties tomorrow. And So It Goes In Shreveport has a countdown. Whiskey Fire has penis envy so bad it hurts.
UPDATE No. 2: Transterrestial has a copy of what a DHS Report on left-wing extremists would look like, using the same pathetic reasoning (h/t Instapundit).
Who knew? The Founding Fathers were terrorists according to the Obamabots.
This is one of the problems with DHS. Go to their website and click on their organizational structure. It is a huge bureacracy sitting on top of seven operational agencies. I work in an agency in DHS and all the people in our office now qualify as right wing extremists. Don’t expect agents from a DHS agency to be knocking down your doors anytime soon. We will have to go through our purge first. ;)
But your fellow American's thank you and your colleagues for it. If the purge comes, you'll be sure to let us know.
John has a long mustache.
And the media propaganda machine will be telling us every day how it is so over....
Be ready for the real fight...I thank you, sir, for your service. We may need you again.
You may very well do just that (go through a purge).
These people are very, very serious about their plans. They thought that they were in for the long haul when BC got elected. When Gore lost, the decision was made, if/when they regained power, they were NOT giving it up...peacefully.
I wouldn't sweat this report that much. It won't have any effect on the everyday operations of DHS. It is basically a product of having to write something to justify their existence.
If you want to be worried about a real threat look at the product of the first workplace enforcement by ICE in the "Obama Era." The head of DHS and DOJ questions the airtight case constructed by the agents, and gives the illegals that were arrested work permits while they await deportation proceedings. My bet is that none of them ever get sent home.
BTW many here on FR, though not me unfortunately, railed against the very idea of the DHS and Patriot Act at the time of their creation. Those folks can give the rest of us a very big I Told You So!!
Does it not seem than an ex parte decision was made to exterminate the US Constitution
and then anyone wanting to protect or defend it,
or having a natural allegiance to it.
Wake Up America!
Like the rest of the BHO Regime, the DHS is run by idiots.
AND BUY A FIREARM AND LEARN TO USE IT! BEETER TO HAVE A GUN AND NOT NEED IT OR TO NEED IT AND NOT HAVE IT!
I told you so. :)
I bet they wouldn't have liked the guys much that wrote it either. Come to think of it, I'm sure the feeling would be mutual.
~~ and don’t forget lotsa ammo and gold.;)
Be Ever Vigilant!
* There have been 29 years of war in last rolling 100 years:
* Democrats have presided over 12 years, Republicans 17.
* All 12 years for the Democrats there was a draft - not counting 2009 yet.
* 4 of the 6 wars counted were started on Democrat watch.
* 8 of 17 yrs presided over by Republican POTUS that had a draft were started when a Democrat was POTUS.
So, given that Charles Rangel has consistently called for a draft, and given the suspicion of "right-wing extremism" associated with the current volunteer professional military, and given Obama's call for mandatory service for all Americans, e.g., a civilian force every bit as well funded as the US military, how does this bode for a return of the (military) draft?
Indeed, most federal agencies rely on a bureaucratic structure that favors hiring of people with former "federal experience". In most cases, that means ex-military. Oh, sure, you have a veneer of "true believers" regarding whatever a given agency's mission happens to be - but they are vastly outnumbered by the plain old bureaucrats - and many of *them* are the people who pay the agency's bills, maintain office leases, arrange travel - all the infrastructure stuff that the perfumed few at the top take for granted.
If DHS does an internal purge, it will cripple your agency and all the others under the Homeland Security umbrella, possibly for years. And hurricane season approaches. The "perfect storm" may be brewing, and I'm not just talking about tropical cyclones.
The beginning is nigh!!
Where’s the love??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.