Reply With Quote
Evidently, some people have been preparing for this for a long time.
no i did not say that.
Evidently, some people have been preparing for this for a long time.
as opposed to the geniuses who believe all the Olbermans, Bill Mahers, Katie Courics etc of the vast liberal media ?
I like this serious of thought-provoking, well produced Youtube videos:
Actually that isn't what the paper said at all.
Here's think link to the actual .pdf:
http://wnd.com/images/dhs-rightwing-extremism.pdf
For what it is worth:
the (U/FOUO) in that do ent denotes "Unclassified, For Offical Use Only"
Had to look up "U//LES" though.
That means Law Enforcement Sensitive.
Not an abbreviation I was familiar with. Neat.
The date of the report, i.e. 7 April 2009, makes it unlikely that it was ordered after Jan 20th, 2009, especially seeing as how it is a finalized analysis paper, presumedly proofed and vetted for content.
I would guess that it was mostly written though by November of 2008. It would not have been to hard to modify some of the language acknowledging who won the election.
Remember that who was running for president for the Dems has been known for well over a year, so language acknowleding an "historic election" didn't necessarily have to reflect who won. It would have been an historical election even if Obama had lost, simply because he was the first black major party candidate for that office.
More than likely the langauge and some of the content was tweaked towards the end to reflect this. It seems that the majority of the report could have been written anytime within the last 4 years or so.
Talk radio propogandizes right wing extremism. Thanks for playing. Now answer my question.
I listen to talk radio all day - and I have for years. I've also read books by Mark Levin, Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham - and NEVER have I heard them espouse violence of any kind. They don't condone those who use violence to further their ideals.
However, they are AGAINST illegal immigration, abortion, high taxes, intrusive government and trampling on the Cons ution - is that the extremism you're referring to?
More words of wisdom from Ms. Coulter.
"If those kids had been carrying guns they would have gunned down this one [child] gunman. ... Don't pray. Learn to use guns."---Politically Incorrect, 12/18/97
"I have to say I'm all for public flogging. One type of criminal that a public humiliation might work particularly well with are the juvenile delinquents, a lot of whom consider it a badge of honor to be sent to juvenile detention. And it might not be such a cool thing in the 'hood to be flogged publicly."---MSNBC 3/22/97
Sean Hannity: “I’ll tell you who should be tortured and killed at Guantanamo, every filthy Democrat in the U.S. Congress. ”
Ann Coulter: “I think a baseball bat is the most effective way these days” to talk to liberals.
my “only regret with [Oklahoma City bomber] Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building.”
Last edited by Bartleby; 04-15-2009 at 01:14 PM.
Well, there goes that whole "dont espouse violence" nonsense...
(begin edit)
[name-calling deleted]
(end edit)
If you have the decency to admit you were wrong about that, I will delete this whole post and apologize for being an ass.
If you don't, then you deserve it completely and without any reservations.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 04-15-2009 at 04:17 PM.
You can find a similar quote for every liberal clown on television as well. -- from Keith Olberman - to Bill Maher - to everyone at CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC and MSNBC. Can't really focus on the radio because nobody listens to those liberal clowns onthe radio -- I am sure we could find similar quotes for all the print media that is OWNED by the liberals as well.
Ok - Ok, I admit it - I WAS WRONG! Now are all of you happy? I said I had never heard them espouse violence. But much of what Ann Coulter says is sarcasm and tongue-in-cheek - but I suppose a person who was already unhinged could take her seriously.
Are you honestly putting Ann Coulter in the same category with Timothy McVeigh or the people who gun down innocent people? In the first quote, she's advocating self-defense; in the second quote she's talking about discipline.More words of wisdom from Ms. Coulter.
"If those kids had been carrying guns they would have gunned down this one [child] gunman. ... Don't pray. Learn to use guns."---Politically Incorrect, 12/18/97
"I have to say I'm all for public flogging. One type of criminal that a public humiliation might work particularly well with are the juvenile delinquents, a lot of whom consider it a badge of honor to be sent to juvenile detention. And it might not be such a cool thing in the 'hood to be flogged publicly."---MSNBC 3/22/97
But since we're cutting and pasting all these quotes from conservatives; how about you add some from the people who wanted Bush assassinated? And have you ever heard the calls from the "Hate Hannity" hot line? Now those are some vile, hateful people!
What.... are you talking about? Seriously, what could possibly lead you to believe that I'm comparing Ann Coulter and Timothy McVeigh? Because they're in the same thread? You tried to come in here with your high-minded view of your political pundits and tell everyone how they're saints. I was merely rebutting what is obviously a ridiculously faulty statement.
She's talking about children carrying guns. Is that something you support?In the first quote, she's advocating self-defense
Again, of adolescents. Do you think adolescents deserve this?in the second quote she's talking about discipline.
That's an interesting idea of "discipline".
Here's the difference: I don't fall at the feet of those "vile, hateful people" that call in to those shows. I don't follow them, know their names, or listen to them for hours a day. Your assertion is that "we" should be ashamed because random idiots call the shows you watch and rant aimlessly, when in reality they are faceless, nameless callers.But since we're cutting and pasting all these quotes from conservatives; how about you add some from the people who wanted Bush assassinated? And have you ever heard the calls from the "Hate Hannity" hot line? Now those are some vile, hateful people!
But you're finally getting the point. Those crazy people sound... a lot... like some of the people you listen to every day on the radio. Except you love those hosts for their (sponsored) crazed banter while ridiculing those of the opposite viewpoint.
Napolitano stands by "extremism" report
From http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ing-extremism/
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said she was briefed before the release of a controversial intelligence assessment and that she stands by the report sent to law enforcement that lists veterans as a terrorist risk to the U.S. and defines "rightwing extremism" as including groups opposed to abortion and immigration.
The outcry resulted in a demand from the head of the American Legion to meet with Ms. Napolitano, a request the DHS chief said she would honor next week when she returns to Washington from her current tour of the U.S.-Mexican border.
"The do ent on right-wing extremism sent last week by this department´s Office of Intelligence and Analysis is one in an ongoing series of assessments to provide situational awareness to state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies on the phenomenon and trends of violent radicalization in the United States," Ms. Napolitano said in a statement.
• Click here to download a PDF of the report.
"I was briefed on the general topic, which is one that struck a nerve as someone personally involved in the Timothy McVeigh prosecution," Ms. Napolitano said.
"Let me be very clear: we monitor the risks of violent extremism taking root here in the United States. We don´t have the luxury of focusing our efforts on one group; we must protect the country from terrorism whether foreign or homegrown, and regardless of the ideology that motivates its violence," Ms. Napolitano said.
• Related article: Legion objects to vets as terror risk
"We are on the lookout for criminal and terrorist activity but we do not — nor will we ever — monitor ideology or political beliefs. We take seriously our responsibility to protect the civil rights and liberties of the American people, including subjecting our activities to rigorous oversight from numerous internal and external sources," Ms. Napolitano said.
The nine-page do ent led "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," has caused an outcry from veterans groups, Republican lawmakers and conservative activists.
"Rightwing extremism," the report defines in a footnote on Page 2, goes beyond religious and racial hate groups and extends to "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," said the report, which also listed as suspect gun owners and veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
The American Legion on Tuesday criticized the report as unfairly stereotyping veterans.
"I am aware of the letter from American Legion National Commander (David) Rehbein, and my staff has already contacted him to set up a meeting next week once I return from travel. I will tell him face-to-face that we honor veterans at DHS and employ thousands across the department, up to and including the Deputy Secretary," Ms. Napolitano said.
"As the department responsible for protecting the homeland, DHS will continue to work with its state and local partners to prevent and protect against the potential threat to the United States associated with any rise in violent extremist activity," Ms. Napolitano said.
my problem with the report is that states nothing of value or interest with all of the "coulds" and "mights" and "possiblys." It reads like a term paper written by a freshman who was afraid to upset his professor.
i think you'd have to be unhinged to take ann coulter seriously.......or read one of her books.
A small percentage is a small percentage.
And there is no need for quotation marks.
Directly quoting the le of the Wash Times article.
I know.
coming from a guy that embraces the question mark.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
