Posted on 04/20/2009 8:39:29 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Janet Napolitano continues to thrash around for any rationalization she can find for the DHS report that painted political organizing on abortion, federalism, and immigration as potential national-security threats and called returining military vets a danger to the country they served. Yesterday on CNN, Napolitano tried explaining that the DHS doesn’t see these vets as threats. The DHS sees them as saps who don’t know any better than to fall into extremist traps:
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on Sunday portrayed veterans as victims – not perpetrators – of right-wing extremism as she sought to combat the political controversy arising out of an April 14 Homeland Security memo warning that returning soldiers could be ripe for domestic terrorism participation.
“The report is not saying that veterans are extremists. Far from it,” Napolitano said on CNN’s State of the Union. “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.”
Yes, the poor dears are victims that obviously can’t decide themselves not to join violent groups … none of which the report bothers to name, by the way. Unlike the report on left-wing extremism, which names several known groups with track records of violence, the DHS report that Napolitano continues to defend never bothers to name an actual threat. Instead, it repeatedly states that DHS has no data on actual threats:
The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues.
And how does the DHS identify “domestic rightwing* terrorists”?
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.
So the Federalist Society has gone from being a group that follows the Constitutional tradition to being a potentially dangerous extremist group! And what did the report actually say about veterans? Page 2, the first mention of veterans in the report, makes veterans sound more like perps than victims:
The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.
That doesn’t say that terrorist groups will exploit senseless veterans and trick them into becoming violent terrorists. It presumes that veterans have a predisposition to become violent extremists because of the difficulties that they have “reintegrating into their communities.” It’s the latest corollary to the every-Vietnam-vet-is-a-powderkeg belief. It’s not until two pages later that the report mentions the issue of recruitment and radicalization. And on page 8, we get this rather large section header: (U) Disgruntled Military Veterans
Napolitano is not only condescending towards veterans in her latest rationalization, she’s being completely dishonest about the way the DHS assessment treats returning combat vets. The report identifies them as a potential national-security threat to the country which they defended on the front lines.
DHS needs to stick to watching the groups themselves, and not people exercising their First Amendment rights and returning military veterans. In fact, the first thing Napolitano should do is to actually get threat data, instead of making up a bunch of scare stories about political dissent while not bothering to identify actual known racist and white-supremacist groups with track records of violence who should be watched.
You go, girl(?)—it’s established fact that returning vets ARE victims or they wouldn’t have found themselves in Iraq in the first place. Please stay on at DHS, and please, PLEASE continue to relay the claims of your party-mates so faithfully.
HALP US JON CARRY - WE R STUCK HEAR IN RITE WINGED EXTREEMISM GROOPS!
Keep telling yourself that. The military of today is quite different than the military of my days. Today you have gangbangers joining to gain military skills, you have liberals of many stripes joining to get their education paid for, you have kids that had no other choice in life but to join who will probably do exactly as they’re ordered (as they’re taught), etc. There are plenty of LIBERALS in the military. To delude one’s self into thinking that there are no pinkos in uniform is dangerous.
I will grant that most of the military will choose correctly, but you still have many that won’t.
This is what hurts most. Bimbo McCain running around with her lips flapping. Daddy and Lieberman selling us down the rat hole today and not a peep from what's his name at the RNC. Nothing....
Just keep throwing those GOP fund raising solicitations into the trash can.
Yeah, as soon as you correwctred me, and I looked at my reply, I felt so immediately foolish .... what a whale of a tale ... heh heh heh.
Napo knows EXACTLY who Bill Ayers is. She also knows the truth about Oklahoma City. But, she's on their side so don't expect any sympathy form her... If its bad for traditional America, it is good for the Revolution!
I'm beginning to think the unthinkable. We need a military coupe. Generals take over the office of the president until (a) his citizenship is confirmed or (b) the 2012 election comes around. Obama isn't competent. Biden is brain damaged and Pelosi just spent $4 TRILLION in Chines money and put it on our tab.
The USA has become a joke...
No, we don’t need or want a military coup. Then we become just like any other banana republic and our military’s credibility is destroyed. Our military then becomes suspect as it relates to being subservient to civilian authority.
Who would then trust the military to never intervene ever again? What if the military became dominated by liberals who didn’t like the conservative government? No, it’s an extremely sharp two-edged sword you’re playing with there.
What we need to do is to continue to keep the pressure on in a rational manner. Anything else marginalizes the efforts conservatives make, once your marginalized you lose credibility.
SZ
Put the heat on your Congrescritters to DEMAND Napolitano’s resignation!
Write your Senators!!
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Write your reps!!!
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
Great article ! Thanks for the link.
Looks like we have to depend on Canada for news.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/10339
I called mine today.
Napolitano's report is a mere prelude for surveillance that may already be underway.
Just what kind of delusion, specifically, did you detect in my post? He said it. In public, and on record. I don't find it necessary to tell myself things, but I will tell you this: Our Armed Services have been around for a long time. I could give a good goddamn what you think of their character, and neither could they. But when someone smugly suggests that I am somehow delusional when I don't reflexively think of, say, the United States Marine Corps as "pinkos in uniform", then I don't believe the danger is in my thinking. Either I am absolutely on the wrong forum, or you are.
It’s interesting that YOU agreed with an ABSOLUTE statement about our military wholeheartedly supporting patriots and when I clearly pointed out that not ALL of the military are patriots you get your panties in a knot and cherry pick that which offended you. TS. I am not on the wrong forum, you don’t know how to read a complete thought and then comprehend what was posted without attempting to make it personal.
I KNOW for a FACT that there are pinkos in uniform for the very reasons I posted. What do you know for fact?
We have tons of military people and families right here on FR who can tell us what it’s like nowadays.
Are there tons of libs and gangbangers with your men, Mystery-AK?
I agreed with nothing. I’m post 12. Read it again.
The way your post was written implied agreement because you didn’t correct him. The way I read it, by omission, you supported the contention made that “at least we KNOW whose side the military will be on” as fact and then you mentioned bambi’s civilian force as someone to watch out for (that I believe is fact).
All I’m saying is this, don’t assume that just because a man or woman is in uniform that they’re on our side. As much as I want to believe that they’ll do the right thing and that many will, 100% doing so is not realistic.
Why not ping the person Skid was addressing as well?
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.