Infowars: DHS Lists ‘Liberty Lovers’ as Terrorists
While I am certainly not in the habit of linking to Alex Jones’ Infowars site–I find that credibility is difficult to develop and very easy to lose, and I’ll just keep it at that–it is a known fact that Janet Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security, and the Obama administration as a whole, feels more comfortable looking inward for terrorist threats than it does acknowledging threats from overseas, i.e. fundamentalist Muslims.
Of course, this president has actually been competent when it comes to pulling the trigger on drone attacks and what not, but when it comes to sticking your neck out and calling a spade a spade, such as with Iran and its burgeoning nuclear program and ulterior motives, he has been sorely lacking. Yet, while this administration dismisses Iran’s repeated threats to wipe Israel off the map and engages in further diplomacy with the damn Taliban, THESE are the people that the Department of Homeland Security thinks we should keep an eye on:
- Americans who believe their “way of life” is under attack;
- Americans who are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”;
- People who consider themselves “anti-global” (presumably those who are wary of the loss of American sovereignty);
- Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”;
- Americans who are “reverent of individual liberty.”
Well, now — that reads like a checklist for some of the best and most loyal Americans I know. And, frankly, that means that I might just be a terrorist according to the Department of Homeland Security as well.
As I noted before, this wouldn’t be the first time that DHS looked inward. In early 2009, Napolitano’s DHS released a directive in which the Department was instructed to scrutinize returning war veterans and right-leaning political activists as extremists. Here at America’s Right, back when we had the time to write about any issue at length, I wrote about this issue at length.
In Federalism, the New Extremism, I wrote the following:
You and I are right-wing extremists, my friends. According to Napolitano, single-issue groups like those who oppose abortion or oppose illegal immigration are “rightwing extremist” groups. According to Napolitano, even believing that our federal government should be limited in scope is enough to garner the “rightwing extremist” group moniker.
To be fair, DHS did indeed recently release a similar assessment of the threat from “leftwing extremist” groups. Released on January 26, 2009, six days after President Barack Obama’s inauguration, the assessment entitled “Leftwing Extremists Likely to Increase Use of Cyber Attacks over the Coming Decade” focused more, however, on acts of civil disobedience from environmental groups and Internet-borne hacking attacks on sensitive installations.
Looking at them side by side, the most striking thing about the pair of assessments is that, in the “leftwing” assessment, groups and individuals which pose threats were never characterized as “domestic leftwing terrorists” or members of “small terrorist cells” or “lone wolves,” but instead were merely “leftwing extremists” whose tactics and actions are painted to look more like irritations and Internet pranks than “real” terrorist actions such as those apparently posed by concerned Americans on the political right — including those weirdo American veterans returning from combat to their country, or whatever remains of it.
In fact, while the ten-page “rightwing” assessment uses the recently-verboten term “terrorist” or “domestic rightwing terrorist” or variations of same no fewer than eleven times, in its “leftwing” counterpart, the worst that the leftists are called is “extremists.” The leftist report uses the term “terrorist” only twice, and even then only in generic terms. And the one reference to “terrorist activities” points to the Appendix, which discusses only animal rights and environmental “extremists” and “anarchist extremists,” the latter of which are as close to “terrorists” as the assessment comes.
Curiously enough, the assessment focusing on the threat from the right was released on the very same day when thousands upon thousands of concerned Americans gathered to voice opposition to an overreaching, bloated federal government, a government so far removed from the ideas, ideals and principles put forth by our nation’s founders. As it turns out, each and every one of those thousands and thousands of people are “rightwing extremists.”
It’s all so typical of an administration and political party bent on defusing and silencing dissent by any means possible; any means, that is, other than actual substantive debate. It’s the same tactic employed with the so-called Fairness Doctrine: can’t compete with common sense? Silence the opposition through legislation. The difference here, however, is that Janet Napolitano has not simply quashed dissent, but in the process has indicted tens of millions of Americans as “terrorists” at a time when she seems incapable of calling true, unadulterated evil by its name.
In The Tenth Amendment, Hypocrisy, and Right-Wing Extremists Like You and Me, the great Rick Saunders wrote the following:
As The Chosen One and his cadre of apparatchiks continue to steer the ship of state into waters even more perilous than those off the coast of Somalia, the most recent preview of what lies ahead for people like Perry comes in the form of a just-declassified and released report from the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”). If anything is more in danger of being hijacked than a cargo ship in the Gulf of Aden these days, it is the United States Constitution in the District of Columbia.
The hypocrisy of the current administration and, in particular, the DHS regime under Secretary Janet Napolitano, starts on the first page of the “assessment,” entitled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.”
The DHS, now headed up by former Arizona Gov. Janet “What Budget Calamity?” Napolitano, has produced a document which reads like a draft criminal indictment of all things conservative, libertarian or even vaguely Republican. And perish the thought that someone would look to the Tenth or (shudder) the Second Amendment to try to learn of one’s rights under the Constitution.
Underscoring the abject hypocrisy of the DHS “assessment” and the mentality of its authors, whoever they may be, the report throughout refers to the targets of the report as “domestic rightwing terrorists,” “rightwing extremists,” “small terrorist cells” and “rightwing extremist radicalization.”
This from the same woman who, less than 30 days ago, stated that the terms “terrorist” and “terrorism” were being given the administration’s Orwellian Newspeak scrub and that, henceforth, the Obama administration would refuse to characterize Islamist murderers of civilians as “terrorists” and that “terrorism” itself would now be known only by its politically correct alias, “man-caused disasters.” Napolitano has apparently become a big fan of Napoleon the pig’s axiom in Animal Farm that “all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others” only, in her view, Islamist acts of decapitation are “man-caused disasters” while the only persons now capable of “terrorism” are “domestic rightwing terrorists.”
Disgusting, but oh, so typical.
What emerges is an ugly image of the United States Department of Homeland Security and its commandant calling the Islamist decapitation of a conscious, screaming Daniel Pearl a “man-caused disaster” while the legitimate concerns of non-Obots that their Constitution is being fed through a turbocharged industrial shredder constitute the rumblings of “domestic rightwing terrorists.”
Want some choice quotes from the report? How about the perceptions of “many rightwing extremist groups” that gun control legislation might eviscerate their Second Amendment rights and cause weapon and ammunition stockpiling and that “[s]uch activity, combined with a heightened level of extremist paranoia, has the potential to facilitate criminal activity and violence.”
Point one, “paranoia” is an unjustified fear. Remember, the first thing that dictatorships do when solidifying power is the disarming of the citizenry. Point two, since when did a citizen’s concern over rights protected by the U.S. Constitution become an acceptable basis for the slander that this will “facilitate criminal activity and violence?” The obvious, ominous answer seems to be: January 20, 2009.
The sad–and telling–thing to glean from all of this is that, three-and-a-half years into this administration, nothing has changed. For this administration, the greatest threat is not the threat of economic collapse or Islamic terrorist attack or even the complete eradication of the Israeli state; the greatest threat for this administration is that an increasingly informed populace will spoil its designs for power in perpetuity.
This administration has seen the Tea Party, a group that parades the new DHS list of terrorist characteristics like a badge of honor, grow and ebb and flow and become a new, destructive force for the left and for statist thinking. Through fomenting class warfare, this administration has sown the seeds of its own group of activists, but had to sit on their hands as the #Occupy crowd stopped protesting peacefully and started destroying property, defecating on police cars, and raping women in their flea-ridden tents.
Now, like a cornered dog, this administration is prepared to fight to the death. And, in renewing its Orwellian focus on those legitimate, patriotic groups that substantively oppose their politics, this administration is once again gathering kindling for a Reichstag fire.