November 23, 2024

Idavox Archives

Archived articles originally found on the One People's Project website.

THE RATTLED RIGHT: HOW CERTAIN CONSERVATIVES MADE A DHS REPORT ABOUT FASCIST TERRORISTS ALL ABOUT THEM


Okay, so it’s been about a week or so since the Department of Homeland Security report came out about right-wing extremists, and for some reason the conservative media went completely insane. When you do what we do, you learn to just stand down for a bit and just watch how things like this go. The one thing we definitely noticed was that not all of the conservatives lost their mind. Only the conservatives that people had called out in the past for their politics of hatred and division are the ones who took particular offense at the DHS report. And now they have gone into phase 2: defaming DHS Secretary Janet Napalitano with the traditional smear campaign. Simply put, screw ’em. This is the crowd who has been spending the past nine years attacking all Muslims and saying they should be fine conceeding a few civil liberties for the sake of security if indeed they aren’t terrorists. Honestly, that’s one of the reasons why they are freaking out: they are afraid they will be the ones making the concessions now! The other reason is the fact that they are guilty of associating or promoting those extremists. There has never been an anti-immigration rally were we didn’t see someone from that crowd there. They made their way into the Conservative Political Action Conference. The conservatives like Virgil Goode and Tom Tancredo mainstream conserv keep speaking at paleoconservative (i.e. suit-and-tie Nazi) events. Now they have to face the fact that people were paying attention to all of this and want something done about them forcing full-on fascists into political power. This is the same reaction they gave us when Eric Holder said that we were a “nation of cowards” in addressing racial matters, which means they are scared that something is about to go down. We think they are right, and before the year is up, some hate group or prominent person in the scene might catch some serious hell. Meanwhile the shreiking continues, and David Neweirt provides his take on how loud it has gotten. One of those things is the fact that this bulletin was actually ordered by the Bush Administration! Napalitano’s predecessor Michael Chertoff had a hell of a lot of faults, but the one area that he was dead on target was dealing with right wing extremists. Lest we forget, it was back in 2003, when as a Deputy Attorney General Chertoff was snatching up white power activists left and right and sending them to jail, that we started the White Power Chopping Block! The problem has been however that the GOP beyond the Bush administration never wants to do anything about this element. Democratic administration don’t have such hangups. The Michigan Messenger also has an interesting piece too. Radio show host Michael Savage is filing suit against the DHS for the report. And we are sure this will be about as much as you will hear about it.

Orincus

Michael Steele works up a nice head of paranoia over the fake DHS controversy

— by Dave

Well, we knew that the fake controversy over the Department of Homeland Security’s domestic-terrorism report was really all about whipping up paranoia among the Republicans’ right-wing-populist footsoldiers.

But we really didn’t expect their leading officials and pundits, like Michael Steele and Sean Hannity, to be hearing the black helicopters whupping overhead already:

Steele: You know, they’ve got their eye on the 3,000 Americans who assembled in Indiana last night, in Evansville, Indiana, to profess their continued effort to save the life of the unborn. Sarah Palin and myself and 3,000 other Americans who’re concerned about the life issue were gathered there. And I’m sure there was somebody in the room with a notepad and a camera taking snapshots and writing down names.

Of course, Steele is just doing his part. The more paranoiac, the merrier.

I’m realizing why so many people at the Seattle Tea Tantrum were looking at me so suspiciously. It wasn’t that they thought I might be liberal; it was that they thought I was a DHS agent.

Cross-posted at Crooks and Liars.

Is the DHS watching returning veterans? Only when they join far-right hate groups
Saturday, April 18, 2009  

— by Dave

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 d
id 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 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.

… 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 some
thing 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:

BoGritz1_eba41.jpg

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_dff69.JPG
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:

Shawn Stuart-764380_36d56.jpg

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.

Cross-posted at Crooks and Liars.

3:03 PM Spotlight

Pat Robertson urges his callers to crash Homeland Security hotline
 

— by Dave

Pat Robertson, on The 700 Club yesterday, got in on the collective right-wing teeth-gnashing over that Department of Homeland Security bulletin on the threat posed by right-wing extremists in America.

You know, the controversy that’s been demonstrated to be a lot of hot air — not to mention a terribly revealing one about how mainstream right-wingers see themselves.

Not that such mere trifles would ever deter Pat Robertson. His attack on the DHS yesterday, alongside his coanchor Terry Meeuwsen, featured an unending stream of flatly false information and mischaracterizations. Plus, of course, the requisite gay-bashing and liberal bashing, all wrapped up in a neat little ball:

Robertson: If that had been a Republican, there would be outrage and screams for Janet Napolitano to resign immediately. That — Terry, you’re somebody who favors life, wants to keep little babies alive. Somebody who has been a veteran and served our country as a proud member of the military. Somebody who is opposed to the left-wing policies of the administration and who wants to express his or her views as they are entitled to under our Constitution, these people are now being stigmatized as terrorists! This is an outrage!

Ladies and gentlemen, I want you to do something about it. If that doesn’t get you excited, I don’t know what would. And I want you to call a number. This is the Department of Homeland Security.

[Reads number]

… And just say you protest. This is an outrage!

And Janet Napolitano has got a lot of explaining to do. And that lame excuse she was giving — ‘Oh, I’m sorry they characterized all veterans that way’ — I mean, come off it!

Meeuwsen: The report was the report. I mean, it is astonishing that it was allowed to leave under that —

Robertson: It — it shows somebody down in the bowels of that organization is either a convinced left-winger or somebody whose sexual orientation is somewhat in question.

But it’s that kind of thing, somebody who doesn’t think that we should have abortion on demand, is labeled a terrorist! It’s outrageous!

Then, after a news segment that ended with a story about Somali pirates, Robertson gets back to his rant:

Robertson: These people [pirates] are terrorists. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization. The extreme Muslims are terrorists and they are being trained to destroy America.

So what does our Homeland Security Department come out with? They say, well, the real terrorists are people who are conservative, who are former veterans of the United States military, who believe in the sanctity of human life, and who don’t like the policies of the current administration. These are the major threat to America.

Now, that in my opinion, is an outrage. And I think if you don’t speak out against it, it’s going to be allowed to stand. So I want to give you that number again. Ring those phones up there in Washington, let them know people care.

[Reads number]

That you protest this — ah, stigmatism of law-abiding Americans as being right-wing threats to America.

[Repeats number]

And if you jam up their lines, good for you!

While I could think of a few organizations whose lines it might be a good idea to jam, Homeland Security would not be one of them.

Hell, if Janet Napolitano and Obama were half the tyrants Pat Robertson makes them out to be
, wouldn’t they be charging him with an act of terrorism?

I’ll have a lot more about the DHS bulletin and the wingnut furor around it later today.

[A hat tip to Becky.]

Cross-posted at Crooks and Liars.

10:58 AM Spotlight

Shepard Smith blows the ‘DHS is picking on the Tea Parties’ meme out of the water
Friday, April 17, 2009  

— by Dave

Shepard Smith brought that rarest of things to Fox News yesterday: amid the cacophony over the Tea Parties, he actually committed an act of journalism. In the process, he also managed to also bring a voice of sanity to the nonstop right-wing shrieking at Fox over the recent Department of Homeland Security bulletin about the possible rise of right-wing extremism.

In fact, Smith confirms everything we’ve reported here: Not only is the report focused entirely on the very real problem of the lethally violent potential of extremist right-wing terrorism, but mainstream conservatives’ wailing and teeth-gnashing over it is — besides being an egregious display of a persecution complex — if anything a tacit admission of their own complicity in fueling extremist rhetoric.

Catherine Herridge looked into the claims of the Malkinites and essentially blew it all out of the water:

Herridge: Essentially, the driver in these intelligence assessments is the downturn in the economy. What they say, essentially, is that when people have less money, that they’re out of work, they feel disenfranchised. This is fertile ground for groups on the left as well as groups on the right.

And you remember, from reporting on this show, Shep, that even at the end of last year, prior to the inauguration, the Department of Homeland Security under the Bush administration was sounding the alarm about the potential for right-wing groups to act, specifically because of the economy, and also because America was going to have its first African-American president.

Smith: So if this bulletin from April 7 looks at the right-wing groups, is there a bulletin that looks at left-wing groups as well?

Herridge: Yeah, we were able to obtain that bulletin as well. It came out in January, and didn’t get — there it is — didn’t get the same attention. It looked specifically at groups like the Earth Liberation Front, or ELF, groups that in the opinion of Homeland Security, in the future will try and attack economic targets and specifically use cyber-attacks, because they see that is sympatico, or in concert with some of their other beliefs.

So there are two assessments. The one on the left, the one on the right is the one that’s getting the attention because of the leak.

… I would point out that both of these assessments, Shep, were commissioned under the Bush administration. It takes some time to do them. They only came out after he left office.

Smith then featured an interview with intelligence specialist Mike Baker, who confirmed Herridge’s reporting further and suggested that conservatives were grasping at some self-revealing straws here.

Still, that didn’t prevent Sean Hannity, only a few hours later, from pontificating at length with Joe the Plumber about how the mean DHS was targeting the tea parties:

They never learn. Indeed, it seems the more wrong the wingnuts are, the more relentless they become. This morning, Janet Napolitano went on Fox to try to explain, and apologized that it came out looking bad — though that was more the fault of her critics. Here’s DHS’ official statement.

Cross-posted at Crooks and Liars.

2:50 PM Spotlight

That DHS domestic-terror report isn’t about the Tea Parties — it’s about the Poplawskis
Thursday, April 16, 2009  

— by Dave

One of conservatives’ least endearing social traits is that It’s All About Them. Always.

In the video above, you can see everyone from Rush Limbaugh to the usual Fox talking heads ranting and whining that the recent internal Department of Homeland Security intelligence report on right-wing domestic terrorists was inspired by government fear over today’s Tea Parties.

As if. Do any of these people have any idea how long it takes to compile this kind of threat assessmen
t? Ah, but how can we forget? On Planet Wingnuttia, all the world revolves around them and their serial dumbassery.

Minnesota Independent has a wrapup on all the right-wing bloggers who leapt to the assumption that the DHS report was aimed at the “tea parties.”

Then there’s Lou Dobbs:

He’s so certain it’s All About Him, he even put up one of his fake polls asking if someone like himself might be a domestic terrorist:

Our poll question tonight is: Do you think a person concerned about borders and ports that are unsecured, illegal immigration, Second Amendment rights or returning veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is likely or even possibly probable, as the Department of Homeland Security suggests to be a right-wing extremist? Yes or no. Cast your vote at LouDobbs.com. We’ll have the results here later in the broadcast.

OK, here’s a cluestick for the wingnuts: This report, and the timing of its release, is not about Tea Parties. It’s also not about Latino-bashers, except to the extent that Latino-bashers like Dobbs get the serious haters all worked up.

It’s about Richard Poplawski. And the dozens, if not hundreds, of little latent Poplawskis out there, waiting to pop off and kill more police officers, or just as likely, a crowd of innocent bystanders.

Of course, you all would like us to forget about Richard Poplawski as soon as possible, wouldn’t you, given the mainstream right’s culpability in that case?

The Department of Homeland Security more than likely couldn’t give a rat’s patoot about today’s right-wing Tea Tantrums, because they’re mostly exercises in futility and stupidity anyway.

But I’ll tell you who they do care about: the people in uniform who go out every day and put their lives on the line to keep you and I and our families and neighborhoods safe — that is, the men and women in law enforcement. People like those three officers in Pittsburgh, who had no reason to suspect a killer was about to ambush them.

A recent study by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism lays out in painful detail the very real threat that right-wing extremists pose to people in law enforcement:

Research led by Dr. Joshua D. Freilich (John Jay College, CUNY) and Dr. Steven Chermak (Michigan State University) and funded by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) has revealed a violent history of fatal attacks against law enforcement officers in the United States by individuals who adhere to far-right ideology.

* 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.

* Firearms were the most common type of weapon used during these fatal anti-police attacks. 88% of the incidents involved guns, while only 6% involved explosives and 6% involved knives. 81% of the victims were killed by guns.

* Only 12% of the suspects in these attacks were members of formal groups with far-right ideologies. The vast majority—like Poplawski—acted alone. This greatly complicates law-enforcement efforts to anticipate which individuals might pose a threat to police officers.

* Beyond these law enforcement murders, far-right violence presents a broader threat to national security and American citizens. Since 1990, far-rightists have been linked to more than 275 homicide incidents in 36 states. These crimes have resulted in the more than 530 fatalities, including the 168 victims murdered by Timothy McVeigh when he bombed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. The vast majority of these suspects are white and male, with almost 70% being 30 years old or younger.

So please, wingnuts, enjoy your little exercise in narcissism today. Because no one really cares.

Just don’t whine so loudly when the adults in the room go about their business without paying you a lot of attention. Really, it’s not all about you.

Cross-posted at Crooks and Liars.

2:35 PM Spotlight

Conservatives indict themselves with shrieking over DHS report on right-wing terrorism
Wednesday, April 15, 2009  

thumb_mediumCowarts_80390.JPG

My my my. The right, led by Michelle Malkin, is up in arms over the Department of Homeland Security’s internal intelligence report on right-wing extremism and its post-Obama resurgence.

Malkin’s headline wails:

“The Obama DHS Hit Job on Conservatives Is Real”

So, I have a question for Malkin: Are you saying that mainstream conservatives are now right-wing extremists?

Because, you know, the report — which in fact is perfectly accurate in every jot and tittle — couldn’t be more clear. It carefully delineates that the subject of its report is “rightwing extremists,” “domestic rightwing terrorist and extremist groups,” “terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks,” “white supremacists,” and similar very real threats described in similar language.

Nothing about conservatives. The word never appears in the report.

Because, you know, we always though
t there was a difference between right-wing extremists and mainstream conservatives too. My new book, The Eliminationists: How Hate Talk Radicalized the American Right, does explain that the distance between them has in fact shrunk considerably, thanks to the help of people like Malkin.

And now she’s evidently intent on shrinking it further:

By contrast, the piece of crap report issued on April 7 is a sweeping indictment of conservatives. And the intent is clear. As the two spokespeople I talked with on the phone today made clear: They both pinpointed the recent “economic downturn” and the “general state of the economy” for stoking “rightwing extremism.” One of the spokespeople said he was told that the report has been in the works for a year. My b.s. detector went off the chart, and yours will, too, if you read through the entire report — which asserts with no evidence that an unquantified “resurgence in rightwing extremist recruitment and radicalizations activity” is due to home foreclosures, job losses, and…the historical presidential election.

Well, Michelle, it’s an “indictment of conservatives” if you say so. The report itself, in fact, is all about accurately identifying very real looming threats. And, while it’s obvious Malkin hasn’t been paying attention, there in fact is considerable data coming over the transom to indicate that there’s a real problem looming with the far right.

Don’t forget: Before he’d even been sworn into office, we had skinheads [photo above] being arrested for plotting Obama’s assassination.

Malkin complains that the report indulges in “anti-military bigotry” by warning that returning veterans who have been radicalized, or were already right-wing extremists, are a particular threat:

(U) Disgruntled Military Veterans

(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

Well, as we’ve reported previously, this is in fact a well-identified problem. The FBI says so too:

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.

Yet quoth Malkin:

There’s no hackneyed left-wing stereotype of conservatives left behind in this DHS intelligence and analysis assessment. I asked both DHS spokespeople to tell me who, specifically, the report was accusing of “rightwing extremist chatter” and which “antigovernment” groups are being monitored as “extremists.” They say they’ll get back to me.

I’d be astonished if any of the groups identified by right-leaning law-enforcement organizations like the FBI and DHS were actually anything identifiably mainstream conservative — though of course it’s important to remember that hate groups like VDare — which runs Malkin’s column at their website — the Federation for American Immigration Reform, and American Renaissance have been doing their damnedest to blur that line over the years. And sites like Free Republic are rife with extreme Patriot-style rhetoric, too.

Look, however, at some of the things the report says:

Paralleling the current national climate, rightwing extremists during the 1990s exploited a variety of social issues and political themes to increase group visibility and recruit new members. Prominent among these themes were the militia movement’s opposition to gun control efforts, criticism of free trade agreements (particularly those with Mexico), and highlighting perceived government infringement on civil liberties as well as white supremacists’ longstanding exploitation of social issues such as abortion, inter-racial crimes, and same-sex marriage. During the 1990s, these issues contributed to the growth in the number of domestic rightwing terrorist and extremist groups and an increase in violent acts targeting government facilities, law enforcement officers, banks, and infrastructure sectors.

(U) Economic Hardship and Extremism
(U//FOUO) Historically, domestic rightwing extremists have feared, predicted, and anticipated a cataclysmic economic collapse in the United States. Prominent antigovernment conspiracy theorists have incorporated aspects of an impending economic collapse to intensify fear and paranoia among like-minded individuals and to attract recruits during times of economic uncertainty. Conspiracy theories involving declarations of martial law, impending civil strife or racial conflict, suspension of the U.S. Constitution, and the creation of citizen detention camps often incorporate aspects of a failed economy. Antigovernment conspiracy theories and “end times” prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition, and weapons. These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia movement.

Everything about this is exactly accurate in every detail. But it also reminds people like Malkin just how much they themselves have been trafficking in this kind of extremism. She may not intend to be helping inflame white supremacists — but she is.

What’s actually happened is this: The DHS accidentally held a mirror up to Michelle Malkin. And she’s shrieking at the self-recognition.

Cross-posted at Crooks and Liars.

Michigan group files suit over government report on right-wing extremism

Michigan Messenger

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), an Ann Arbor-based Christian legal group, has filed another lawsuit against the government
, this one on behalf of right-wing talk show host Michael Savage and others over a new report by the Department of Homeland Security concerning the dangers posed by right-wing extremists. You can see the full legal complaint here.

The TMLC seems to specialize in filing lawsuits with little hope of succeeding on the merits. This is the same group that filed suit against AIG last year because one of its subsidiaries sells a type of insurance that complies with Muslim legal restrictions, prompting some of the top legal scholars in the nation to scoff at the complaint. In fact, the plaintiff in that case, Michigan native Kevin Murray, is also a plaintiff in the new case.

This case appears to be little better. Like the AIG complaint, it’s mostly filled with political boilerplate rather than serious legal arguments. That’s a surefire way to annoy a judge. I emailed a copy of the complaint to Daniel Ray, a professor of constitutional law at Cooley Law School’s Oakland campus and he replied that it was “clearly a PR suit that shouldn’t survive a motion to dismiss and comes dangerously close to Rule 11 sanctions.” Rule 11 is a provision of the Federal Rules on Civil Procedure that allow a court to levy sanctions against an attorney for filing a suit that is clearly frivolous.

It’s especially ironic that the group objects to DHS keeping an eye on right-wing extremists less than two weeks after Richard Poplawski, a white supremacist with ties to far-right organizations, opened fire and killed three police officers in Pittsburgh. We have an unprecedented increase in white supremacist activity in response to the election of the nation’s first African-American president, we have groups and individuals stockpiling huge amounts of ammunition and guns flying off the shelves, we have a vast increase in the number of credible threats being handled by the Secret Service, and we have right wing groups openly talking about revolution. And the government shouldn’t be keeping an eye on right-wing extremists?

Translate »