Homeland Security On Guard For 'right-wing Extremists'

FirefightnRick · April 14, 2009

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94803

Rick

BeanCounterGrad'03 · April 14, 2009

I don't see anything wrong with what was quoted in the DHS report. Seems like common sense that "right-wing extremists" with military training would be a greater threat than those with no military training.

I agree that the Missouri report should never have been issued...as the officer stated in the article. Definitely should have been reviewed and discarded before ever being released.

eulesseagle · April 14, 2009

bc-

the country is full of military vets. once a label is established on one group where do you stop classifying other groups as extremists? you already have various religious extremists, gun totin' extremists, pro and anti abortion extremists (as examples) and unfortunately the list goes on.

Coffee and TV · April 14, 2009

Seems like common sense that "right-wing extremists" with military training would be a greater threat than those with no military training.

I can't really think of any myself...

BeanCounterGrad'03 · April 14, 2009

bc-
the country is full of military vets. once a label is established on one group where do you stop classifying other groups as extremists? you already have various religious extremists, gun totin' extremists, pro and anti abortion extremists (as examples) and unfortunately the list goes on.

I think the issue, then, is not that military vets were brought up as potentially being more dangerous "extremists", but the definition of extremist itself. I agree with you that the term extremist should be more defined. Here's my definition of "extremist":

Anyone willing to commit physical harm to persons or property to make their beliefs known or to attempt to force their beliefs on others.

Just my rough attempt at it...feel free to challenge it.

eulesseagle · April 15, 2009

I think the issue, then, is not that military vets were brought up as potentially being more dangerous "extremists", but the definition of extremist itself. I agree with you that the term extremist should be more defined. Here's my definition of "extremist":
Anyone willing to commit physical harm to persons or property to make their beliefs known or to attempt to force their beliefs on others.
Just my rough attempt at it...feel free to challenge it.

bc-

you have no argument out of me on that.....good def.

meangreendork · April 15, 2009

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94803
Rick

I don't think they're singled out as threats. It's a lot like studying demographics - and in this case, those who own multiple firearms, are current or former military, and any other list of things are probably bigger threats and are easier to recruit into right-wing extremist groups. That is actually a legitimate concern, assuming this PDF is legit. All it takes is for someone to cross the line from their political beliefs into mis-directed action and they become terrorists. It's a lot like how you have pro-life extremists, and far-left extremists who border on violence to spread their message.

Domestic terrorism is as much a concern as terrorism from the Middle East and terrorism from Mexico's criminal element.

hickoryhouse · April 15, 2009

I can't really think of any myself...

It doesn't take military training, just being a little of your rocker....

FirefightnRick · April 16, 2009

It doesn't take military training, just being a little of your rocker....

LOL! The problem for the rest of us now is that one of those guys above was brought to Justice in the DEATH HOUSE. The other however, got off free, then was able to put his right hand man in the WHITE HOUSE.

Rick

Edited April 16, 2009 by FirefightnRick

UNTflyer · April 16, 2009

Hilarious. Leftists screeched and cried when nobody in government called them unpatriotic, yet they are OK with DHS calling returning veterans potential terrorists.

And the rest of us fight about it.

We're doing exactly what the government wants us to do- argue amongst ourselves while they drive the country right into the ditch.

oldguystudent · April 16, 2009

The ones you really gotta look out for are those wily academics!

emmitt01 · April 16, 2009

Hilarious. Leftists screeched and cried when nobody in government called them unpatriotic, yet they are OK with DHS calling returning veterans potential terrorists.
And the rest of us fight about it.
We're doing exactly what the government wants us to do- argue amongst ourselves while they drive the country right into the ditch.

Gosh, you couldn't be more right (pun intended). How silly that anyone should be concerned by the ultra-right with training in moving and shooting, firearms proficiency, explosives and urban warfare. Nah, no threat from a potential fringe demographic with religious and/or racial motivations. None at all. We all know that anger over the changing government agenda couldn't possibly be acted upon...the right has never produced a terrorist. <_<

UNTflyer · April 16, 2009

Gosh, you couldn't be more right (pun intended). How silly that anyone should be concerned by the ultra-right with training in moving and shooting, firearms proficiency, explosives and urban warfare. Nah, no threat from a potential fringe demographic with religious and/or racial motivations. None at all. We all know that anger over the changing government agenda couldn't possibly be acted upon...the right has never produced a terrorist.

What? What is that? Do I detect sarcasm? You completely missed my point and resorted to the lowest form of discourse and building up strawmen to burn them down.

But again, I refuse to be snared by this distraction from our government. Partisan bickering keeps them in power.

Vote against the incumbent... throw all the bums out.