A Department of Homeland Security report warns that rightwing extremism is expected to escalate. Domestic terrorism is cited, at the hands of white supremacists, and returning military veterans. The nine page report has been distributed to law enforcement agencies. See photos and view a video.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano
While Homeland Security Janet Napolitano refuses to use the term “terrorism,” or “terrorist,” to label those who attacked America and continue to plan to attack America, “domestic rightwing terrorism” is used thoughout this report.
President Barack Obama has “distanced” himself from this report, according to the Washington Times. While a reported majority voted for a Black president, President Obama will not address his administration’s accusation that that violence may be perpetrated because a Black man sits in the White House.
Next, will we hear that Napolitano isn’t responsible either? It’s doubtful that Homeland Security would issue such an explosive report without Barack Obama’s knowledge. This report points the finger directly at anyone willing to protect the U.S. from forces threatening Constitutional rights. Napolitano is calling America out, and setting the stage for opposition of State sovereignty laws, our Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms, our opposition to illegal immigration, and private industry’s right to fight against government take-over.
This report is in pdf format. The following is a partial outline of the report contents, which are labeled “unclassified.” Direct quotes about why there is a perceived threat of rightwing extremism are at the end of this article.
Titled: Rightwing Extremism: current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment
1) The election of the first African American President is spawning domestic terrorism. “Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration….”
2) Possible new legislation to restrict gun laws may spawn domestic terrorism.
3) Returning military veterans may resort to domestic terrorism. Right wingers may “recruit” combat veterans “to boost their violent capabilities.”
4) An recent example of rightwing extremism is the shooting deaths of the three police officers in Pittsburgh, PA on April 4, 2009.
5) “Rightwing extremist chatter on the Internet continues to focus on the economy…” “Anti-Semitic extremists attribute these losses to a deliberate conspiracy conducted by a cabal of Jewish “financial elites.”
6) Violence is expected due to “rightwing extremist groups’ frustration over a perceived lack of government action on illegal immigration….”
Taken from the first page of the “unclassified” report
Threats from white supremacist and violent antigovernment groups during 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry out violent acts. Nevertheless, the consequences of a prolonged economic downturn - including real estate foreclosures, unemployment, and an inability to obtain credit — could create a fertile recruiting environment for rightwing extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and government authorities similar to those in the past.” [Note that these "confrontations" are not named, but later in the report the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing is mentioned.]Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.
The report sites the possibility of new gun law legislation as a possible reason for rightwing extremism:
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.
A footnote on the first page warns that rightwing extremists in the U.S. are “primarily hate-oriented,” and says that a “single issue” can spawn extremism “such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”
If “rightwing extremism” is to be considered Domestic Terrorism, and includes protecting the Second Amendment, protecting State’s sovereignty and demanding the rule of law be upheld when deciding an illegal immigrant’s rights, then it’s time to draw up our own list of domestic terrorists, and returning military veterans will not be on it.
Homeland Security (Photo)
Homeland Security (Video)










April 14th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
I see the point. When people feel our country is giving into our enemy, they take drastic measures. But to say that such actions are only carried out by right wingers, is ignorant
and irresponsible on the part of Homeland Security. As if somehow only people on the right commit hanis crimes.
With Obama and the other nitwits apologizing
for America being a leader and bailing out most of the world I am sure it will be blamed on talk radio, FoxNews and ROTC.
Why does Ms. Napolitano and other women have that little spot of white hair? I call it the skunk look. It is like talking to someone with a lazy eye. That is all you look at.
April 14th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
I don’t think we needed an official report from DHS to know this.
There has been massive hoarding of guns and ammo since Obama’s election by conservatives who falsely believe that the President will “take their guns away” and just last week a militant white supremacist assassinated four police officers for that very reason.
The President is always threatened, now more so than ever. Why deny the obvious?
April 14th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
” don’t think we needed an official report from DHS to know this. ”
So, I see some minds are already made up ?
It seems contemptuous at the least when the day before republicans (mostly) are going to hit the streets in what is a rare occasion for them, this report comes out.
Looks like when we organize to voice out aginst the fed we see fear mongering at its best coming from the left.
Thats whats “obvious”
“There has been massive hoarding of guns and ammo since Obama’s election by conservatives who falsely believe that the President will “take their guns away””
Oh, our beliefes are false and yours are real ?
First of all most of the guns being purchased are not to incite militant excercises they’re being bought because we fear the anarchy that might be as a result of the most ridiculous destructive economic policies the country has ever seen that will and have already caused a significant rise in crime. Not to mention the threat from our enemies being greater due to this limp wristed appeaser we have in office.
And yea, he has posed more of a threat to our right to bear arms than any president has in a long time most recently by having some BS propaganda drummed up that the cartels weapons are coming from here. That has been proven false
“and just last week a militant white supremacist assassinated four police officers for that very reason.”
He wasnt anything, right or left, he was nut job that doesnt speak for the majority of concerned conservatives.
(more fear mongering)
“The President is always threatened, now more so than ever. Why deny the obvious?”
Why deny that he put himself in this position by causing the biggest partisan divide this country has ever seen, it has little to do with color.
This is just more of the type of race injection we see that traditionally comes from the left except this time its coming directly from the fed only as a means to place blame ahead of time should any sicko do such a horrible thing.
Also seems like some good propaganda for the left to use in upcoming election stumps.
Its all bull.
April 14th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
[...] micky at 2:22 pm (3) Read [...]
April 14th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Hey Obvious, Get your facts straight. If it’s the 3 police officers killed in Pittsburg, he was a nut case that happen to have guns. The 4 police officers that were killed in Oakland was by a black criminal thug that ambushed the police. I don’t think he was a right winger or a white supremist. They need to enforce the gun laws we have now. Don’t add more.
April 14th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
I have to say I’m not entirely pleased with the use of “right wing” in the description. There are a lot of what I would call “hardcore right wingers” on this site, but nothing approaching violence. I think this report intends to shine a light on other Tim McVey’s ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVey ) out there.
He was an extremist and deluded. Sure, he was probably “right wing” but associating him with other right wingers perverts the meaning. As a democrat, I may speculate that someone like micky is not grounded in fact or is distorting reality beyond anything remotely reasonable (and he’d say the same of me), but the true focus of this report has nothing to do with anyone even close to micky.
The report is clearly ham-fisted and their language cripples the message. I don’t blame right pundits for calling them on it. I certainly won’t defend it.
April 14th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
Rob, nice try at makin sh*t up in your sleep.
What was “distorted” in that post ? Or do you always just make up these false arguments after you pratically validated my position ?
Pfft.
April 14th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
“As a democrat, I may speculate that someone like micky is not grounded in fact or is distorting reality beyond anything remotely reasonable (and he’d say the same of me)”
Do you really not understand that? I’m just saying that as people that come down on the opposite sides of things much of the time, that’s how we might mutually feel of one another. The point being that we might casually call each other “deluded”, but neither of us should lumped in with someone like a Tim McVeigh, who was a truly a deluded and dangerous individual.
I said you might say the same of me, a Democrat, demonstrating it comes down to perception. Our perceptions help shape our views. I used you in the example b/c I thought you’d get it. I didn’t mean to offend, and am sorry if I did.
April 14th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
To be clear, I wasn’t saying anything was distorted in your post. I didn’t even read it!
April 14th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
“how we might mutually feel of one another. ”
Speak for yourself.”
I just got done informing some “deluded” leftist on another blog how the lefts radicalism has cost more lives in this world than any other ideology on the planet in our history.
” To be clear, I wasn’t saying anything was distorted in your post. I didn’t even read it!”
Well, you should be careful and read the posts or will it be construed that you’re responding to them. They’re not there for decoration ya know ?
But its cool, alot of misunderstandings happen in print. A lot gets lost when you dont have a real voice behind it.
Sometimes my attitude from a blog I just left seconds ago will carry over
April 14th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
“Speak for yourself.”
Well I would certainly call you deluded, but it’s fine with me if you don’t want to call me that
(note smiley face to express I’m joking)
April 14th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
Sorry, I’m having a hard time at another blog and I’m really pis$$ed at this one idiot in particular so things arent coming out right and its not fair to unsuspecting innocents.
My ability to change composures at a seconds notice is failing today.
Anyway, yea, this document is getting a lot of heat right now.
Theres nothing factual to back it up, it seems like it was all an intentional slam job and people from the veterans affairs to guys like me are asking WTF ?
April 14th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
This seems to me to be a case of hyper attentive a$$ covering just in case something does happpen. The only real danger I see is the gvt using a gun registration list to later take them.
April 14th, 2009 at 7:08 pm
It’s my opinion that this report is intended to incite. It has been distributed to police somewhere. Let’s face it, how many rightwingers have we heard about violently attacking illegal immigrants. It’s usually the other way around.
How many rightwingers have we heard about planning to recruit kill-worthy vets. None.
How many rightwingers can we call “white supremacists and antigovernment?” There will always be Timothy McVeighs out there just as there will always be the Bill Ayers of the world. More from the liberal side that hold America hostage: those trying to imprison men like Ramos and Compean, and liberal judges who have empathy for rapists.
How many rightwingers have expressed anger over the fact that an African American is in the White House?
The second amendment is another thing. We are Americans and we will fight any legislation or any one threatening to encroach on our right to keep and bear arms, but nothing suggests that these struggles will be physical or violent.
The report said it: they claim there is “rhetoric” but absolutely no planning. It’s liberals that riot in the streets, smash windows, burn cars, and close down the schools when they want the kids on the streets to protest.
This is an attempt to close down events like tea parties and whatever comes next, and set the police on edge. This is an attempt to destroy the rule of law.
I think in most areas of the country, the police will be furious about these characterizations, because the people who care about the issues in this report are the people that live in their neighborhoods.
What is infuriating is the idea that people want the Second Amendment upheld and want the law to guide our immigration policy can be labeled “white supremacist.”
April 14th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
why do i feel like the american people are being terrorized by our own government and media?
April 14th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
Linda, because they are!!!
April 15th, 2009 at 12:57 am
So in other words, according to y’all, if Obama gets shot, it will have been his own fault.
That’s real convenient. Real convenient indeed. It is also totally nuts.
The truth is, this country is crazy. It always has been. It is the best and the worst, all rolled up into one. There are a lot of crazy people out there. Deny this at your own peril.
The Homeland Security Report in question is presumably based on fact, on data. It is not supposed to be politics. Therefore, your accusations are very serious. If what you say is true, then very serious crimes are being committed by the Obama administration. I just want you to try to think about what you are saying. You cannot just come out and say something, and not be willing to follow it through to its conclusion. You are saying it is all a big lie. Something supposedly based upon fact, upon data, upon intelligence, and spelled out as such, it is all a falsehood. This is a serious charge, and such a charge requires evidence. It requires specifics. If you are not prepared to present these specifics, then your arguments carry no weight. Your arguments are nothing more than conjecture, smoke and mirrors, and will not be taken seriously by anyone other than the aforementioned people, the nuts, the crazies, people who you really don’t want to pander to, and if you do, then you and they are one and the same.
If the GOP and the conservative movement is going to revive, this is not the way to do it. Goldwater said that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. You seem to be working overtime to turn it into one.
April 15th, 2009 at 4:30 am
As reported on the cable news stations,there has been absolutely no conversation about vets possibly coming back and being right wing terrorists.The letter from Home Land Security is baseless,no facts supporting this theory what so ever.But the news channels are now talking about if you have a Ron Paul sticker on your car you could be considered a domestic terrorists.Obama was a idiott for putting this left wing “cook” in this position to start with.And a note on more gun control.
CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, reacting to the “Ominous Spending” lands bill tactic to force more gun control on U.S. citizen’s said “the sneak attack on guns reveals the Democrats clear intention to outlaw guns everywhere” “Obama “has been lying to the nation when he says he will not take guns away.”
April 15th, 2009 at 8:06 am
“So in other words, according to y’all, if Obama gets shot, it will have been his own fault.
That’s real convenient. Real convenient indeed. It is also totally nuts.”
That statement in itself is a reflection of the modus operandi behind the HS report in saying that something will happen before theres any proof that such potential even exists.
The report is based on nothing but speculation, just like that statement.
“The truth is, this country is crazy. It always has been. It is the best and the worst, all rolled up into one. There are a lot of crazy people out there. Deny this at your own peril.”
If its coming from someone as crazy as you its to be taken in a different context in that you may percieve a normal mainstream conservative as crazy.
“The Homeland Security Report in question is presumably based on fact, on data. It is not supposed to be politics. Therefore, your accusations are very serious. If what you say is true, then very serious crimes are being committed by the Obama administration.”
It is not based on fact, read it.
“(U//LES) 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. The economic downturn and the election of the first
African American president”
The crime being commited here is a blatant defamation and slander of an entire segement of our country that is designed to vreat paranoia on the left and anger on the right.
The document itself is designed as a “I told you so” right after the violence its designed to create.
Since you’re ignorant to the fact that there is no fact supporting this report that renders the remainder of your post irrelevant
April 15th, 2009 at 8:26 am
Micky, no worries. There’s definitely people on the left that are prone to going over the top, not being honest with themselves, or not very logical.
The folks from my own party that bug me the most are the Rachel Maddows and Keith Oblermans of the world. They are so snarky and think everything Republicans believe is a big joke without merit. It is not helpful. They know better, but like Beck and Limbaugh, they must put on a show, and it seems the only thing that gets ratings is indignation and mocking your opponent, twisting the facts as needed.
Jon Stewart on the other hand, is awesome. He’s a pretty straight shooter. Not perfect of course, but soooo funny!
April 15th, 2009 at 8:58 am
@arch: You’re looking at this the wrong way. You say calling this announcement a speculative, politically-driven act is a serious accusation that might approach libel.
Well how about this for a serious accusation: those who are concerned with maintaining a government consistent with our Constitution should be branded as possible terrorists. In effect, that is what this announcement says. There are absolutely no specific, demonstrable threats discussed. It is a vague, politically charged manifesto; even assuming the “information” (if you can call it that) is correct, how is a law enforcement organization supposed to even respond to it? Should they be pulling over people with Ron Paul bumper stickers?
The burden of proof is not on those of us who have a problem with this statement; it does not require us to present “specifics”, as you say, to object. Rather, it is the government that is tasked with providing specifics instead of attacking an entire arena of political thought. They completely failed to do so in this case.
April 15th, 2009 at 9:07 am
And the ones in my party that irk the f*ck out of me are the religious zealots that make us all look like a bunch of fire and brimstone “missionary position only” autocrats.
I’m an Christian no doubt but am all too educated on what organized religion has done to the world.
Our forefathers were almost all devout Christians but some of these religious fanatics seem to think that because of that fact the whole country must adhere to the doctrine when really the only thing we should adhere to are the judeo christian bases that are in the constitution which reflect common decency with or without a belief in God.
They seem to forget that even the God fearing Christians who wrote the bill and constitution realized the toxicity of mixing church with state yet they would like to have everyone believe that because of that the churches voice should be first in line to be heard over political issues.
Huckabee, Pat Robertson and the Falwell are just a little too “peachy keen alter boy” for my taste and pretty scary if they were allowed to write policy
April 15th, 2009 at 9:20 am
really the only thing we should adhere to are the judeo christian bases that are in the constitution which reflect common decency with or without a belief in God.
Great post Micky. I am so sick of the contention from the religious right that without religion there are no morals. I’m sorry, but I don’t need to believe in God to have something against murder, rape, theft, etc etc.
Are many of the principles set forth by the Constitution also found in the Bible? Of course. They are also found in almost every major thought system man has ever devised, from Christianity to Buddhism to Secular Humanism. There can absolutely be a morality absent any supernatural beliefs.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:29 am
Yeah, great post micky. I definitely have respect for fiscal conservatives. I feel like I can speak logically with them, even if we disagree.
April 15th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Well, maybe we all should start searching for candidates that reflect those qualities and to sell that package of ideas to the public instead us all always having one extreme form of left or right shoved down our throats.
Many of the pre requisites that our candidates are required to come with dont always really add to or sustain their ability to lead.
Rhayader.
Yea, the difference is that the morals my faith is attached to involves me answering to something else whereas those who respect the same morals but dont believe in a moral authority need a certain amount of integrity to be honestly accountable to themselves.
But, if theres a record of good leadership and results I’m not going to hold a lack of faith against that candidate