Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Attempting to Understand the Federal Government


Recently, a couple of documents surfaced that warned law enforcement of Right Wing Extremists. The first of these documents to be leaked was the MIAC report from Missouri. This document was made public in February of 2009. The second of these documents was Janet Napolitano's DHS document of which an edited version was made public in April of 2009.

Unfortunately, these documents highlight the Federal Government's need to limit free speech. The following is a list of speech or thinking that the government uses to identify Right Wing Extremists:
  • Opposes restrictions on firearms
  • Opposes lax immigration
  • Opposes the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship, and the expansion of social programs
  • Opposes continuation of free trade agreements
  • Opposes same-sex marriage
  • Has paranoia of foreign regimes
  • Fear of Communist regimes
  • Opposes one world government
  • Bemoans the decline of U.S. stature in the world.
  • Upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India
Some items in the above list deal with the Federal Governments refusal to abide by the Constitution of the United States of America. Some items are pro America anti Globalism. Some are social policy. However, they all have an interesting commonality in that they oppose current progressive politics.

The unfortunate message is that those that do not agree with those progressive policies must be vilified and given a title such as "Domestic Terrorist" in an attempt to marginalize the views, polarize society, and create an official "bad guy".

While the list includes items that are not "Politically Correct", there are no anti American sentiments. In fact, most are directed at protecting the country from foreign interests.

In short, this list does little more than identify the agenda and create a political environment where it is acceptable to "hate" those that dare assume that the Federal Government is not bigger than the States or the Constitution of the United States of America.

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Janet Napolitano: The Real Questions We Should Be Asking


The recent revelation by Janet Napolitano of the redefinition of "Terrorism" has created both fear and outrage among those that love the United States of America.

Incidents that were previously considered "terrorist acts" (referring to acts performed by foreign combatants targeting Americans or American interests) are now called "Man-Caused Disasters".

Terrorism is now reserved for Americans that do not agree with the Anti-American policies of the Obama administration or the illegal expansion of power that the people within the political structure of our government are currently exploring.

In short, we should not be interested in an apology. We should also not be interested in her firing. However, we should be asking some very important questions.

1. How long has this information been available to law enforcement?

The documents were partially released to the public. We have not seen the original versions. We have not seen the complete documents. At the point that "we the people" were able to view the documents, they had already been made available to the Law Enforcement community. How long have these documents been in use by Law Enforcement?

2. Who ordered the creation of these documents?

Janet Napolitano likely hasn't the power to, on her own, create a policy of treating Americans as villains because they do not agree with the Federal Government. It is a fairly large step to move focus from foreign combatants to Americans when creating an enemy in the eye of public opinion. The contents of the documents should be of less concern than finding out WHO it is that wants Americans vilified for loving their country.

3. What is the end game?

This is the question that inspires "fear" in the hearts and minds of Americans. Why would the government need to create a fake sense of "bad guy" that can be applied to those who speak or think differently than the Federal Government? The most obvious answers range from marginalizing political opponents to creating an atmosphere where the FedGov can get popular support for rounding up people that think they still have a First Amendment right to free speech.

ATF, FBI, Secret Service, and Military personnel will always think twice about randomly raiding an American residence on American soil for political reasons. But what if you take that person exercising their freedom of speech, their 2ND Amendment, and their love for the United States of America and make them out to be a TERRORIST? Suddenly, you get the ability to send armed people into law abiding citizens homes and shut them up with impunity.

Simply associating a law abiding citizen with Timothy McVeigh will create a sense of danger and urgency. No one will ask why. The news will report a great victory in defeating a terrorist.

Will this happen? Why has the Federal Government unleashed a negative marketing campaign on the very people that support the documents that allow it to exist? Has the Federal Government grown to the point that it supersedes the Constitution of the United States of America? Is the fear of playing by the rules so condescending that the Federal Government would choose to vilify the citizens that have somehow escaped the indoctrination they should have already absorbed?

Friday, April 17, 2009

DHS(Civil Liberties) Feelings About Released RWE Warning


News Story: http://tinyurl.com/c6mv24
RWE: Right Wing Extremist

According to the news, Civil Liberties officials at the DHS were not happy with some of the language used in the RWE release. It would seem that people might find it offensive.

Unfortunately, this entirely misses the point. The words used to describe the individuals to look out for are not the problem. The fact that they are officially making it a point to begin polarizing society is the problem.

The people being labeled as "bad" or "potential terrorists" or people to "watch" are the enemies of "bad government" or "oppressive government". This is particularly scary in that government is overstepping it's bounds as seen in it's attempt to assume non-existent power and exert that power over industry and the state governments.

However, the fedgov knows that it only has to convince a significant portion of the country that the unindoctrinated are somehow "evil" or "dangerous". Those that believe in the United States of America, it's Constitution, it's Union of States, and the limits of fedgov are now being treated as if they are traitors to their country.

This is a classic redefinition of terms. When the fedgov moves to break the laws which made this nation official, they are the ones "attacking" the country. When they usurp the title of United States of America they defy that the States are individual and united within a "specific" framework. When they overcome the will of the state governments they attack those states. Since there is no ability to hide the Constitution or change history overnight, the fedgov redefines the roles.

Under this redefinition, those that adhere to the Constitution of the United States of America are now to be considered RWE (Right Wing Extremists) and dangerous to the government. This begins to paint the "good guy/bad guy" picture in the heads of those that blindly trudge through life with no concern for anything other than what the government offers them in handouts and misinformation. With enough time and reinforcement, the average sheeple will begin to forget the Constitution and believe that real Americans are somehow Terrorists.

Sadly, it makes me wonder if the USA will have it's own Tiananmen Square once the government has achieve it's propaganda campaign against it's own citizens. Remember, Freedom of Speech only applies to them and their supporters. With this new watch list, opposing opinions are now officially "dangerous" to the state.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

AAIM:DS (Anti-American Indoctrination Media: Daily Show


Why do I watch the Daily Show?

- Centralizing yourself to a single news outlet limits your ability to understand the news and get the concepts that literally "drive" society and information.

- To understand the indoctrinated (those who get news/information/knowledge from a single source).

- To gauge the level and direction of indoctrination.

- Because it's funny.

Sadly, many people confuse humor with fact. Individuals who rely upon John Stewart for accurate reporting will find themselves led like sheep to information and conclusions based in the comedic twists of fact that are required to achieve a punch line.

On a number of occasions, I've found myself discussing an issue with an overly confident purveyor of "fact" that was obviously gleaned from John Stewart. After listening to their points, I acknowledge that I also watched that episode of the Daily Show. From there, you are able to talk about the facts of the matter w/o necessarily having to argue directly with the agenda of the writers of a television show which are not part of that conversation.

In short, you can't discuss issues with people that are indoctrinated by the media unless you understand what weapons have been used against them. If you get all of your news from ABC, MSNBC, CNN, FOX, etc. you will find yourself unable to accurately form an opinion other than the one handed to you.

It is healthy to get information from multiple sources, preferably with different agendas, in order to read between the lines. If base your opinions upon what you are told, then you're missing the truth, which lives between the lines...

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Document: Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment


IA-0257-09
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
(U//FOUO) Rightwing Extremism:
Current Economic and Political
Climate Fueling Resurgence in
Radicalization and Recruitment
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
(U) LAW ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION NOTICE: This product contains Law Enforcement Sensitive (LES) information. No portion of the LES information
should be released to the media, the general public, or over non-secure Internet servers. Release of this information could adversely affect or jeopardize
investigative activities.
(U) Warning: This document is UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (U//FOUO). It contains information that may be exempt from public release under the
Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). It is to be controlled, stored, handled, transmitted, distributed, and disposed of in accordance with DHS policy relating to
FOUO information and is not to be released to the public, the media, or other personnel who do not have a valid need-to-know without prior approval of an authorized
DHS official. State and local homeland security officials may share this document with authorized security personnel without further approval from DHS.
(U) All U.S. person information has been minimized. Should you require the minimized U.S. person information, please contact the DHS/I&A Production Branch at
IA.PM@hq.dhs.gov, IA.PM@dhs.sgov.gov, or IA.PM@dhs.ic.gov.
(U//FOUO) Rightwing Extremism: Current
Economic and Political Climate Fueling
Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment
7 April 2009
(U) Prepared by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch, Homeland Environment Threat Analysis
Division. Coordinated with the FBI.
(U) Scope
(U//FOUO) This product is one of a series of intelligence assessments published by the
Extremism and Radicalization Branch to facilitate a greater understanding of the
phenomenon of violent radicalization in the United States. The information is
provided to federal, state, local, and tribal counterterrorism and law enforcement
officials so they may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks
against the United States. Federal efforts to influence domestic public opinion must be
conducted in an overt and transparent manner, clearly identifying United States
Government sponsorship.
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Page 2 of 9
(U) Key Findings
(U//LES) The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific
information that domestic rightwing* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence,
but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about
several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first
African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and
recruitment.
— (U//LES) 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.
— (U//LES) Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first
African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new
members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal
through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.
(U//FOUO) The current economic and political climate has some similarities to the
1990s when rightwing extremism experienced a resurgence fueled largely by an
economic recession, criticism about the outsourcing of jobs, and the perceived threat to
U.S. power and sovereignty by other foreign powers.
— (U//FOUO) 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.
— (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.
(U//FOUO) The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and 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
capable of carrying out violent attacks.
* (U) 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.
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Page 3 of 9
— (U//FOUO) Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans
likely would attract new members into the ranks of rightwing extremist groups,
as well as potentially spur some of them to begin planning and training for
violence against the government. The high volume of purchases and
stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation
of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary
concern to law enforcement.
— (U//FOUO) Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are
attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing
extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to
boost their violent capabilities.
(U) Current Economic and Political Climate
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that a number of economic and political factors are
driving a resurgence in rightwing extremist recruitment and radicalization activity.
Despite similarities to the climate of the 1990s, the threat posed by lone wolves and small
terrorist cells is more pronounced than in past years. In addition, the historical election of
an African American president and the prospect of policy changes are proving to be a
driving force for rightwing extremist recruitment and radicalization.
— (U) A recent example of the potential violence associated with a rise in rightwing
extremism may be found in the shooting deaths of three police officers in
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on 4 April 2009. The alleged gunman’s reaction
reportedly was influenced by his racist ideology and belief in antigovernment
conspiracy theories related to gun confiscations, citizen detention camps, and a
Jewish-controlled “one world government.”
(U) Exploiting Economic Downturn
(U//FOUO) Rightwing extremist chatter on the Internet continues to focus on the
economy, the perceived loss of U.S. jobs in the manufacturing and construction sectors,
and home foreclosures. Anti-Semitic extremists attribute these losses to a deliberate
conspiracy conducted by a cabal of Jewish “financial elites.” These “accusatory” tactics
are employed to draw new recruits into rightwing extremist groups and further radicalize
those already subscribing to extremist beliefs. DHS/I&A assesses this trend is likely to
accelerate if the economy is perceived to worsen.
(U) Historical Presidential Election
(U//LES) Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment
tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential
administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and
citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Page 4 of 9
(U//FOUO) Perceptions on Poverty and Radicalization
(U//FOUO) Scholars and experts disagree over poverty’s role in motivating violent radicalization or
terrorist activity. High unemployment, however, has the potential to lead to alienation, thus increasing
an individual’s susceptibility to extremist ideas. According to a 2007 study from the German Institute
for Economic Research, there appears to be a strong association between a parent’s unemployment
status and the formation of rightwing extremist beliefs in their children—specifically xenophobia and
antidemocratic ideals.
ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns
and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the
present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in
expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential
sympathizers.
— (U//LES) Most statements by rightwing extremists have been rhetorical,
expressing concerns about the election of the first African American president,
but stopping short of calls for violent action. In two instances in the run-up to the
election, extremists appeared to be in the early planning stages of some
threatening activity targeting the Democratic nominee, but law enforcement
interceded.
(U) Revisiting the 1990s
(U//FOUO) Paralleling the current national climate, rightwing extremists during the
1990s exploited a variety of social issues and political themes to increase group visibility
and recruit new members. Prominent among these themes were the militia movement’s
opposition to gun control efforts, criticism of free trade agreements (particularly those
with Mexico), and highlighting perceived government infringement on civil liberties as
well as white supremacists’ longstanding exploitation of social issues such as abortion,
inter-racial crimes, and same-sex marriage. 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.
(U) Economic Hardship and Extremism
(U//FOUO) Historically, domestic rightwing extremists have feared, predicted, and
anticipated a cataclysmic economic collapse in the United States. Prominent
antigovernment conspiracy theorists have incorporated aspects of an impending
economic collapse to intensify fear and paranoia among like-minded individuals and to
attract recruits during times of economic uncertainty. Conspiracy theories involving
declarations of martial law, impending civil strife or racial conflict, suspension of the
U.S. Constitution, and the creation of citizen detention camps often incorporate aspects of
a failed economy. Antigovernment conspiracy theories and “end times” prophecies could
motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition, and weapons.
These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist
individuals and groups in the past, such as violent Christian Identity organizations and
extremist members of the militia movement.
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Page 5 of 9
(U) Illegal Immigration
(U//FOUO) Rightwing extremists were concerned during the 1990s with the perception
that illegal immigrants were taking away American jobs through their willingness to
work at significantly lower wages. They also opposed free trade agreements, arguing that
these arrangements resulted in Americans losing jobs to countries such as Mexico.
(U//FOUO) Over the past five years, various rightwing extremists, including militias and
white supremacists, have adopted the immigration issue as a call to action, rallying point,
and recruiting tool. Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policy
generally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment,
but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed
against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent.
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremist groups’ frustration over a
perceived lack of government action on illegal immigration has the potential to incite
individuals or small groups toward violence. If such violence were to occur, it likely
would be isolated, small-scale, and directed at specific immigration-related targets.
— (U//FOUO) DHS/I&A notes that prominent civil rights organizations have
observed an increase in anti-Hispanic crimes over the past five years.
— (U) In April 2007, six militia members were arrested for various weapons and
explosives violations. Open source reporting alleged that those arrested had
discussed and conducted surveillance for a machinegun attack on Hispanics.
— (U) A militia member in Wyoming was arrested in February 2007 after
communicating his plans to travel to the Mexican border to kill immigrants
crossing into the United States.
(U) Legislative and Judicial Drivers
(U//FOUO) Many rightwing extremist groups perceive recent gun control legislation as a
threat to their right to bear arms and in response have increased weapons and ammunition
stockpiling, as well as renewed participation in paramilitary training exercises. Such
activity, combined with a heightened level of extremist paranoia, has the potential to
facilitate criminal activity and violence.
— (U//FOUO) During the 1990s, rightwing extremist hostility toward government
was fueled by the implementation of restrictive gun laws—such as the Brady Law
that established a 5-day waiting period prior to purchasing a handgun and the
1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act that limited the sale of
various types of assault rifles—and federal law enforcement’s handling of the
confrontations at Waco, Texas and Ruby Ridge, Idaho.
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Page 6 of 9
— (U//FOUO) On the current front, legislation has been proposed this year
requiring mandatory registration of all firearms in the United States. Similar
legislation was introduced in 2008 in several states proposing mandatory tagging
and registration of ammunition. It is unclear if either bill will be passed into law;
nonetheless, a correlation may exist between the potential passage of gun control
legislation and increased hoarding of ammunition, weapons stockpiling, and
paramilitary training activities among rightwing extremists.
(U//FOUO) Open source reporting of wartime ammunition shortages has likely spurred
rightwing extremists—as well as law-abiding Americans—to make bulk purchases of
ammunition. These shortages have increased the cost of ammunition, further
exacerbating rightwing extremist paranoia and leading to further stockpiling activity.
Both rightwing extremists and law-abiding citizens share a belief that rising crime rates
attributed to a slumping economy make the purchase of legitimate firearms a wise move
at this time.
(U//FOUO) Weapons rights and gun-control legislation are likely to be hotly contested
subjects of political debate in light of the 2008 Supreme Court’s decision in District of
Columbia v. Heller in which the Court reaffirmed an individual’s right to keep and bear
arms under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but left open to debate the
precise contours of that right. Because debates over constitutional rights are intense, and
parties on all sides have deeply held, sincere, but vastly divergent beliefs, violent
extremists may attempt to co-opt the debate and use the controversy as a radicalization
tool.
(U) Perceived Threat from Rise of Other Countries
(U//FOUO) Rightwing extremist paranoia of foreign regimes could escalate or be
magnified in the event of an economic crisis or military confrontation, harkening back to
the “New World Order” conspiracy theories of the 1990s. The dissolution of Communist
countries in Eastern Europe and the end of the Soviet Union in the 1990s led some
rightwing extremists to believe that a “New World Order” would bring about a world
government that would usurp the sovereignty of the United States and its Constitution,
thus infringing upon their liberty. The dynamics in 2009 are somewhat similar, as other
countries, including China, India, and Russia, as well as some smaller, oil-producing
states, are experiencing a rise in economic power and influence.
— (U//FOUO) Fear of Communist regimes and related conspiracy theories
characterizing the U.S. Government’s role as either complicit in a foreign
invasion or acquiescing as part of a “One World Government” plan inspired
extremist members of the militia movement to target government and military
facilities in past years.
— (U//FOUO) Law enforcement in 1996 arrested three rightwing militia members
in Battle Creek, Michigan with pipe bombs, automatic weapons, and military
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Page 7 of 9
(U//FOUO) Lone Wolves and Small Terrorist Cells
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that lone wolves and small terrorist cells embracing violent rightwing
extremist ideology are the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States. Information
from law enforcement and nongovernmental organizations indicates lone wolves and small terrorist
cells have shown intent—and, in some cases, the capability—to commit violent acts.
— (U//LES) DHS/I&A has concluded that white supremacist lone wolves pose the most
significant domestic terrorist threat because of their low profile and autonomy—separate from
any formalized group—which hampers warning efforts.
— (U//FOUO) Similarly, recent state and municipal law enforcement reporting has warned of the
dangers of rightwing extremists embracing the tactics of “leaderless resistance” and of lone
wolves carrying out acts of violence.
— (U//FOUO) Arrests in the past several years of radical militia members in Alabama, Arkansas,
and Pennsylvania on firearms, explosives, and other related violations indicates the emergence
of small, well-armed extremist groups in some rural areas.
ordnance that they planned to use in attacks on nearby military and federal
facilities and infrastructure targets.
— (U//FOUO) Rightwing extremist views bemoan the decline of U.S. stature and
have recently focused on themes such as the loss of U.S. manufacturing capability
to China and India, Russia’s control of energy resources and use of these to
pressure other countries, and China’s investment in U.S. real estate and
corporations as a part of subversion strategy.
(U) Disgruntled Military Veterans
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and
radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from
military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the
capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out
violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist
groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from
the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.
— (U) After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military
veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing
extremist groups.
— (U) A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 that “large numbers
of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now
learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”
— (U//LES) The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement
that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have
joined extremist groups.
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Page 8 of 9
(U) Outlook
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that the combination of environmental factors that echo
the 1990s, including heightened interest in legislation for tighter firearms restrictions and
returning military veterans, as well as several new trends, including an uncertain
economy and a perceived rising influence of other countries, may be invigorating
rightwing extremist activity, specifically the white supremacist and militia movements.
To the extent that these factors persist, rightwing extremism is likely to grow in strength.
(U//FOUO) Unlike the earlier period, the advent of the Internet and other informationage
technologies since the 1990s has given domestic extremists greater access to
information related to bomb-making, weapons training, and tactics, as well as targeting of
individuals, organizations, and facilities, potentially making extremist individuals and
groups more dangerous and the consequences of their violence more severe. New
technologies also permit domestic extremists to send and receive encrypted
communications and to network with other extremists throughout the country and abroad,
making it much more difficult for law enforcement to deter, prevent, or preempt a violent
extremist attack.
(U//FOUO) A number of law enforcement actions and external factors were effective in
limiting the militia movement during the 1990s and could be utilized in today’s climate.
— (U//FOUO) Following the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah federal
building in Oklahoma City, the militia movement declined in total membership
and in the number of organized groups because many members distanced
themselves from the movement as a result of the intense scrutiny militias received
after the bombing.
— (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.
— (U//FOUO) Although the U.S. economy experienced a significant recovery and
many perceived a concomitant rise in U.S. standing in the world, white
supremacist groups continued to experience slight growth.
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A will be working with its state and local partners over the next
several months to ascertain with greater regional specificity the rise in rightwing
extremist activity in the United States, with a particular emphasis on the political,
economic, and social factors that drive rightwing extremist radicalization.
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Page 9 of 9
(U) Reporting Notice:
(U) DHS encourages recipients of this document to report information concerning suspicious or criminal
activity to DHS and the FBI. The DHS National Operations Center (NOC) can be reached by telephone at
202-282-9685 or by e-mail at NOC.Fusion@dhs.gov. For information affecting the private sector and
critical infrastructure, contact the National Infrastructure Coordinating Center (NICC), a sub-element of the
NOC. The NICC can be reached by telephone at 202-282-9201 or by e-mail at NICC@dhs.gov. The FBI
regional phone numbers can be found online at http://www.fbi.gov/contact/fo/fo.htm. When available,
each report submitted should include the date, time, location, type of activity, number of people and type of
equipment used for the activity, the name of the submitting company or organization, and a designated
point of contact.
(U) For comments or questions related to the content or dissemination of this document, please contact the
DHS/I&A Production Branch at IA.PM@hq.dhs.gov, IA.PM@dhs.sgov.gov, or IA.PM@dhs.ic.gov.
(U) Tracked by: CRIM-040300-01-05, CRIM-040400-01-05, TERR-010000-01-05

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Political Bashing ... The Never Ending Saga!


Regarding a DCCC.org post with the normal D vs R rhetoric. Of course there were lots of proD moderator approved comments. Here is my summation of how both sides suck ;-)

link: http://dccc.org/blog/archives/bachmann_i_want_peoplearmed_and_dangerous_on_this_issue/

Funny how both sides like to twist things so far in their direction that everybody starts to sound like an idiot.

Obama is more socialist/marxist than American in direction.
(requiring bank participation in order to allow government control is an obvious start)

Regarding her comments on Thomas Jefferson: Yes, when the government starts assuming power that it was never given, they probably do leave the people no option other than what Thomas Jefferson mentions.

She's no more over the top than whoever wrote this email and sent it out. If both sides were concerned with the well being of our country instead of pushing agendas and indoctrinating their audiences, the country, as a whole, would probably get something done.

When will the Democrats and Republicans stop petty fighting over made up issues? Probably when their leaders stop taking orders from the people that give them money and marching orders.

When somebody asks if you are Democrat or Republican, if you would say D or R, just replace admit that you're sheeple that do whatever the guy with "your letter" tell you.

Monday, April 6, 2009

Are FEMA Camps built to hold "True Americans" (patriots or terrorists)


One of the common questions in these uncertain times happens to revolve around the FEMA camps. In short, these are facilities designed to securely hold between 20,000 and 40,000 people.

Those that are aware of these facilities call them "concentration camps". This is primarily because they are guarded and designed to keep people inside rather than to keep people out. A video tour of a facility reminds one of doomsday movies where zombies are running rampant and the powers that be are quarantining people that may be infected with some virus.

Beyond the first impressions, the theory behind the camps is scary to those that do not trust the government and are worried that their Constitutional rights are hanging by a thread. While we do not know how those in power would actually use these facilities, we do know that they "can" do things that would normally be considered unheard of in the United States of America.

Unfortunately, we did see armed US military forces in New Orleans stripping people of their weapons, taking over buildings, and entering privately occupied homes with assault weapons drawn on law abiding citizens. We also saw troops patrolling the streets, that when interviewed, said they would much rather be patrolling in a foreign country as they had no stomach for shooting Americans in an American city.

In short, we don't know what the "plan" is. However, we do know that military forces can and have been placed in our own country with our own citizens as the target of their missions. The government is being trusted to have the best interest of the people at heart. Hopefully talking about it in a blog like this doesn't earn you a place on their list. With a 40,000 person capacity, the government would have to be selective about who was "chosen" to live in one of these facilities.

Among the unfortunate happenings in our current time, we have Obama enacting "change" that does little more than continue in the steps of Bush while devaluing our economy and destroying the hopes of our children. These are the things that make us fear the indoctrination that created mindless Obama supporters that are too blind to see that he's identical to the guy they hated and could not wait vote out of office.

Thursday, April 2, 2009

Who Really Rules The World?


I've run into this question a number of times since the start of the 2008 Election hype. Before Obama skyrocketed on to the scene, my assumption was that Hillary was going to be the next president. This assumption dated back to when GWB became president in 2000. Although it was expected that a Democrat would be president by the time he finished his two terms, I had fully expected that Democrat would be Hillary. Leave it to Obama to make me look like an idiot. :-)

Enough digression. As with any crime, you need means, motive, and opportunity to direct politics. In order to begin understanding who "really" runs our government (kinda have to know before you can figure out who runs the entire world.), one needs to take a look at our policy, economy, and demographics to begin creating a framework to identify what forces are in play.

"Follow the money" is often a good rule of thumb. However, this does not account for the opportunistic nature of humanity. As such, we have to assume that not everybody that is profiting from a specific program or policy is the creator of that program or policy. As people, we have the ability to work within the bounds of a system, find loopholes, and exploit them for profit. Given that, there will always be people capable of profiting from a situation even if there was no conspiracy on their part to create that situation.

So, back to the matter and hand. In order to begin to understand who runs things, we have to find a verifiable trend over a large time period. Of course, the most obvious would be the banking industry that allegedly tricked our politician into setting up the fed in the early 1900s. While the FED itself doesn't run the country, it is often considered a tool (or secondary organization) for influencing the will of those that do run things.

Of course we're assuming that something is happening "behind the scenes" to dictate policy and that the people dictating that policy are not those that have been elected by the people.

Since I'm not connected to these groups, I cannot definitively say what goes on behind closed doors. However, I will leave links to some information about the various groups assumed to have varying degrees of policy making power for our government.

Bilderberg Group
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group

Bohemian Grove
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohemian_Grove
Pacific Union Club
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific-Union_Club

It's interesting to read. Of course there are references to Masons and Illuminati to be found, but at least the above referenced groups have had verifiable meetings during the time period in question.

Happy reading!

The Mortgage Crisis

The mortgage crisis could not have been an accident. The people that "approved" the mortgages KNEW that:

  1. Were going to have prohibitive payments in 12 to 24 months
  2. Were going to be on property worth far less than what they sold for within 12 to 24 months
  3. Would be forclosed on because they couldn't sell for the amount of the mortgage

Bankers blame it on homeowners making bad decisions or not having foresight. However, those bankers get very uncomfortable when you point out that these mortgage were all approved by bankers that get PAID to know the market and it's trends.

When you point out that regular people like you and I saw this coming back in 2004/2005, they start to tap their fingers and look around nervously.

The short answer is that they set us up and we don't know "why".

Mortgages traditionally require people prove they can make the payments even when the market is not headed down. The banks knew exactly what they were doing...

The Media On It's Knees

Why is it that the mainstream media is clamoring on their knees in front of Obama as if their unwarranted affection will somehow lower his zipper and give them what they so desperately seem to want?