The following comment was left on my post about Janet Napolitano by Lone Ranger, whose blog is called: Important Stuff--Or Not .I thought it was right on, so I am reproducing it here for all to read.
Those right-wing terrorists are scary, alright. Because a lot of them got bomb-making experience in the military -- like Timothy McVeigh. That's actually what Janet Napolitano said on Fox and Friends Thursday.
Last I heard, gunners aren't taught how to make explosives. But let's assume Napolitano's paranoid fears are correct. I have some questions.
Where did Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn and the other members of their Weathermen terrorist organization get their bomb-making training (well, except for the three who blew themselves up)?
Where did the leftist Unabomber, who was influenced by Al Gore, get his bomb-making training?
Where did the members of the eco-terrorist organizations Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front get their bomb-making training?
And, why aren't any of THESE people mentioned in that report?
In fact, why isn't the government itself in that report? I seem to recall another manly woman named Janet who terrorized 79 men, women and children to DEATH in Waco.
Oh, and Napolitano admitted that she didn't actually READ this report, she was BRIEFED on it before she authorized its release. So, our country is run by lawmakers who don't read the bills they pass and unelected bureaucrats who don't read the reports and regulations they shove down our throats.
Now THAT is scary!
9 comments:
Yikes! It's quite a shock to get up at O-Dark:30 and be confronted with your own face. I'm honored!
Actually, there was a report on left-wing terror groups released in January. But the two reports are quite different.
First let's look at the January report.
"(U//FOUO) DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines leftwing extremists as groups or individuals who embrace radical elements of the anarchist, animal rights, or environmental movements and are often willing to violate the law to achieve their objectives."
That's pretty specific.
Now, let's see who the Obama administration defines as dangerous.
"It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."
Gee, I guess democrats ARE inclusive. That includes just about anyone opposed to Obama's policies. Groups opposed to abortion or immigration? I'm thinking if 19th century democrats had written a report like this, they would have included groups opposed to slavery.
You have no problem listing out left wing extremist groups...
Yet you have issue with right wing extremist groups getting any attention at all.
The KKK, Neo Nazi's, skinheads, and deranged folks like Timothy McVeigh, and the abortion clinic bomber have killed more people in pursuit of their radical beliefs than the sum total of all the left wing radical groups you could name...
Extremism is not a value exclusive to the left; there are radical right wing groups and they are as intent to see their beliefs enacted as any left wing group.
It might behoove you to find a way to disassociate conservative beliefs from the extreme right wing elements such as Timothy McVeigh, the KKK, Neo Nazi's, and abortion clinic bombers, or conservatives will end up being thrown in the same corner with that bunch much like what was done to liberalism and leftists....
What goes around comes around...
Unless you want to defend Timothy McVeigh, Neo Nazi's, and such much like the liberals were expected to defend the left wing extremists that you noted.
The KKK was founded by democrats. In fact, the democrats still have a former KKK recruiter as a senior leader in the Senate. Abortion clinic bomber??? Pffft. 1.2 million babies die in abortion clinics every year. The Nazis were NOT right wing. They were the National SOCIALIST Party. When have you ever heard of a right wing organization calling itself socialist? AND the Nazis had a cozy relationship with Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood. You have a might skewed view of history. You wanna get me started on the crimes against humanity committed by democrats? All you have to do is ask. OR, you could read all about it at my blog.
Thank you bro. Joe for posting this, I might have missed it otherwise. Right on, Lone Ranger (pun intended!)
Hey, Lone Ranger
Have you seen that Google is now showing the old Lone Ranger TV show on its new channel?
Nope, I didn't know that, Snag. But, I have the episodes on DVD.
TAO: As you know, I visit your blog a lot and actually agree with some of your thinking...admittedly not all.
However, I must say you sometime seem to have trouble descerning what a post is ABOUT.
No post can cover every aspect of every problem, but must focus on one.
Lone Ranger's comment was ABOUT the difference in the way the left is treated compared to the way the right is treated.
It was DHS who wrote these reports, not some "right winger."
In the reports, the left wingers mentioned are those who specifically embrace anarchy, animal rights, etc. The right wingers are evil if they focus on a single issue.
One interesting statement in the report: “...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 . . . carrying out violent acts.”
Another is a footnote: "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."
Those that are maily anti government, those that reject federal authority in favor of local and state authority and individuals dedicated to a single issue.
That's me.
I guess I am a dangerous, right wing extremist in the style of Temothy McVeigh.
Hey, Joe...I am all for animal rights but I think PETA is a bunch of nuts! So, what does that make me?
Get a bunch of drug heads together for some world economic summit and they are defined as what? Liberals, leftists, whatever...
So, how does it feel to find out that you have something in common with right wing hate groups?
I personally don't think my local government and or state government are any better than the federal government...does that give me anything in common with Timothy McVeigh?
The DHS report was a bunch of crap just like most everything that comes from DHS. In fact the color coded terror alert thing was a joke.
Believe it or not there are folks that are on the right of me and on the right of you and I personally do not want to embrace them nor do I want to associate with them nor do I want to defend them.
The same thing holds true for democrats and liberals.
We tend to forget in the course of our political debates that there are looney nuts on both sides....
So, I don't go off and lump Richard Ayers and PETA, or Greenpeace with every moderate, liberal democrat...because at the same time I know that conservatives can be lumped with some pretty crazy folks also.
I don't want another Timothy McVeigh attack anymore than I want Islamic Terrorists to attack this country.
The democratic groups you mentioned like animal rights are just as much one issue groups as abortion rights are...
So, do you want our government to focus on leftists and let folks like Timothy McVeigh blow up buildings and kill Americaans?
When you say you are an extremist like Timothy McVeigh are you saying that you agree with what he did? Are you justifying the killing of innocent men women and children?
Its no different than justifying the bombing of abortion clincs because they perform abortions...
TAO: Sometimes I can't tell whether or not you are serious. "When you say you are an extremist like Timothy McVeigh are you saying that you agree with what he did? Are you justifying the killing of innocent men women and children?"
My cheek is very sore from having my tongue so firmly inserted therein.
I in no way identify with McVeigh. I am the exact opposite of him (let's see what you make of that one).
I do not support violence as a way of effecting change unless I need to change the behavior of someone who is attacking one of my loved ones or my country physically.
There is one possible exception, and that would be when my government becomes oppressive in the same way Britain was oppressive to the colonists.
Even then there would have to be a large number of those who understood the peril as I did before forceful action would be justified.
Post a Comment