Sorry RJ Eskow for making links to your blog posts my own lately, but RJ's latest is a necessary and important response to the phony victimization the right is claiming from Homeland Security (including on this blog because rightwing commenters are never original, just always spouting the latest party line, obviously, as in, when the market's going down it's all Obama but when it's going up um let's not notice that let's switch to Homeland Security picking on rightwing terrorists in latest report and pretend they didn't pick on leftwing terrorists in last year's report, etc.).
Anyway, for the clearest argument to expose the hypocrisy and phoniness of this latest rightwing red herring, read this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
That is so special. Right Wing, or anyone who is anti abortion, pro constitution a'la 1st, 2nd, 10th amendment, former military etc. is dangerous and should be watched like Al Quaeda. But wait, we can not watch or listen to Al Quaeda as they talk to conspirators in the US because that would violate their civil liberties and besides many liberal folks agree with Al Quaeda that America is the great Satan and should be taken down or at least diminished. Oh well, let's just watch and prepare for the evil that those grandmothers grandfathers moms and dads (and don't forget the kids) who attended and cheered for America and opened the rally in Denver by saluting the Flag and sang the National Anthem and spoke of the harm an ever encroaching Federal Government was doing. They were disappointed with both Democrats and Republicans and vowed to vote for people who would work to preserve the Constitution. DAM RIGHT WING TERRORISTS!!
There is only one conclusion that the liberal mind can come up when faced with that set of circumstances. Finally they have a group they can fear and hate because loving and working to preserve the Constitution is obviously subversive.
Bipartisan team stunned by 'extremism' allegations
'Veterans, families should not be viewed as a threat'
________________________________________
Posted: April 17, 2009
Members of both sides of the aisle in Congress are expressing outrage and seeking an investigation into a new Department of Homeland Security report on "extremism" that targets U.S. military veterans, opponents of abortion and supporters of other conservative causes.
U.S. Rep Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., was horrified at what he described as a "shoddy, unsubstantiated" document that was delivered to law enforcement across the nation.
According to the Washington Times, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said he was "dumbfounded" that the report was, in fact, released.
"This report appears to raise significant issues involving the privacy and civil liberties of many Americans – including war veterans," Thompson told Napolitano in a letter.
"As I am certain you agree, freedom of association and freedom of speech are guaranteed to all Americans – whether a person's beliefs, whatever their political orientation, are 'extremist' or not," Thompson said.
He said he was disappointed and surprised the report would be issued. And he demanded to know what types of further activities DHS had planned regarding the issue.
Oklahoma City.
Eric Rudolph
Ku Klux Klan
Neo Nazis
Anthrax Killer
Liberals preach against profilng, accept when it involves Conseratives. Apparently, I should be concerned about being targeted by the Obama administration for driving while being Conservative.
I have to call BS on you Jim. (An exercise in futility, I know). You left out a very important word. Liberals preach against "RACIAL profiling"; the notion that somehow by accident of your lineage, you should get closer scrutiny than anyone else in this country. Not only is racial profiling objectionable, but it's inefficient, given the shear number of people who fit in any given racial, religious or ethnic group.
Well put John!
Waterboarding, wallslaming etc.
It looks like Cheney has it right. The Obama administration has weakened us to another domestic attack. The Obamasiah makes the argument that it was wrong but has not released the results. Since the damage is done release the reults and let the public judge the worthiness of the policy.
CIA Confirms: Waterboarding 9/11 Mastermind Led to Info that Aborted 9/11-Style Attack on Los Angeles
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief
jmlally,
It escapes me as to how racial profiling is so different from gender, nationality or political persuasion profiling. It takes twisted logic, which you seem very capable of. I also note you have more than the normal quotient of BS. The Celtic heritage is probably responsible.
e.
Jim
The results are irrelevant.
As Bush almighty himself said:
"We don't torture".
(That goes in the Hall of Fame next to "I didn't have sexual relations with that woman"; "Read my lips, no new taxes"; and "I am not a crook")
Talk about "tortured logic".
"Political pursuasion profiling"? Is that some kind of euphemism that you came up with, or is it actually in the report?
I think there is a difference between suspecting every brown-looking person in an airport of terrorism ---and ---connecting the dots between weapons stockpiling; secessionist rhetoric; incitement to racial violence; incitement to armed rebellion; neonazism; skinhead gangs, etc and actual terrorist violence. If you ignore Klansmen, Nazis or Militiamen just because they might be registered Republicans, you are turning a blind eye to violence that happened before and could erupt again.
John M. Lally said...
The title of the Report is "Rightwing Extremism:
Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment""Rightwing Extremism" and "Radicalization" are a far cry from "Political pursuasion".
Quote: "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."Does it sound like they're talking about your garden-variety republican here?
Quote: "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."
-- Violent acts? Terrorists? Extremist Groups? Does it sound like they're talking about the little tea party whiners who were too timid to dump their teabags into the Potomac for fear of a littering charge?
Quote: — "(U//FOUO) Growth of these groups subsided in reaction to increased government scrutiny as a result of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and disrupted plots, improvements in the economy, and the continued U.S. standing as the preeminent world power."
-- Again, they're not talking about a meeting of the Federalist Society or the College Republicans here.
Quote: "— (U//FOUO) Militia membership continued to decline after the turn of the millennium as a result of law enforcement disruptions of multiple terrorist plots linked to violent rightwing extremists, new legislation banning paramilitary training, and militia frustration that the “revolution” never materialized." -- Isn't this a good thing? Shouldn't we encourage law enforcmetn to disrupt terrorist plots? Am I missing something here?
John, Thank you for your articulate explanations and references. I don't intend to get into it with Jim (we did that enough when we were kids and still do now and then on this blog) but want to point out that it's not a coincidence that these rightwing terrorist groups really blossomed in the 1990s after Reagan/Bush were replaced by Bill Clinton. His success not only as a politician able to play hardball politics with the rightwing Republicans but as a president (presiding over not only one of the longest stretches of peace and prosperity in our history but managing to co opt the Republicans on many of their pet issues, reducing the size of government (which increased under Reagan before Clinton and again under Clinton's successor Bush Junior) and the deficit (which ditto increased to the largest it had ever been in our history under Reagan and again under Junior) until he had in fact a surplus for the first time in decades, etc. etc. The frustrated rightwing of the Republican Party could not abide a democratically elected government that they couldn't control and as always looked for ways to not just delegitimize that government (under Clinton) and undermine it, but even to oust it (thus the phony charges of "murder" and the real but irrelevant charge of having sex with another consenting adult as a basis for impeachment, et-endlessly-cetera...
jmlally, You say yah yah, I say nah nah. I think we took the BS stuff as far as we can.
The question of the day and for the foreseeable future is torture and or enhanced interrogation. Did it save us from 9/11 II in LA? Since the Obamasiah is following the lead of the loony left, he should go right to the source and have W. charged with something.
We should have the congress censor:
Lincoln for imprisoning a congressman, hanging and shooting deserters and spies, Wilson for American Eagle Corps abuses, FDR for not disciplining US military for wantonly shooting Japanese and Germans in retaliation for atrocities and fire bombing Dresden, Truman for fire bombing and dropping the Atomic bomb on Japanese, JFK for the Bay of Pigs and killing the Diem Brothers, Nixon is off limits because of the pardon but Carter should be convicted of incompetence, Clinton for killing people in an aspirin factory. Obama should look at his own admininistration for abuses since hellfire missiles from above that kill Taliban and or Al Qaeda and their wives, kids and neighbors seems like the ultimate kind of torture.
"The question of the day and for the foreseeable future is ... Did it save us from 9/11 II in LA?"
NO! That is NOT the question. The former Administration is trying to MAKE that the question, and it is currently trying to gin up the evidence to support their answer.
THE QUESTION is whether the United States of America is a country that tortures prisoners of war (or enemy combatants or whatever you wish to call them). Do we ignore our own laws and our commitments to the world to torture individuals.
The ANSWER is no. No torture. Period.
I hope Obama is stupid enough to go after Cheney Bush. Produce the results, list the mealy mouth Democrats who were fully briefed and agreed and asked if the administration could do more to break KSM etc. and than acted holier that thou about enhanced interragation or torture or whatever. I believe Pelosis,Reid Rockerfeller Fienstein and other low life Democarats are saying they are shocked, shocked that this was going on. Now that Obama has released methods the damage is done. So bring it on Democrats, Bring it on Obama, the great diplomat who is only interested in his popularity as he trades adulation for national security. He went to Europe looking for troops/stimumlus and got nothing. He pushed for Turkish admittance to the EU and was told by the Germans and French to stay out of it. Sarkozy has mocked him in writing. The Israelis will have to attack Iran because they can not trust Obama to stand with them. In the Caribbean he cozied up to Ortega and Chavez while former allies Columbia and Mexico realize that they can not trust him. North Korea displays contempt for America and Obama.
However there is one winner. Jimma Carter may no longer be considered the worst president on international politics in the last hundred years.
There will be an investigation into US torture whether WE instigate it or not. It has already started in Spain. Obama needs to get on top of this, or the investigation will get out of our control. I agree that there aare a great many mealy mouth Democrats involved in this program. They probably include many of the "Blue Dogs" who are holding up the current administration's legislation-- but I think there will also be many Democrats who were too cowardly to stand up to post 9/11 jingoism. Let the chips fall where they may.
People, possibly thousands are alive in LA because Pres. Bush authorized water boarding. LA is a very liberal area. Can you imagine the mortification those poor folks feel because they are alive because of the" Decider". However they can take heart because Al Qaeda tends to repeat their efforts so there is a real possibility of going up in flames because of Obama and the Democrats will not waterboarding, use stress positions, walling etc. The LA folks may be dead but at least they will be true to their principles.
There has not been an attack on US soil since Obama took office. Ergo, (using republican logic), his policies have kept us safe.
Post a Comment