Posted on 08/15/2009 3:50:00 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson today condemned the methodology used by the Department of Homeland Security in issuing a controversial "right-wing extremism" threat assessment to law enforcement in April as "complete speculation."
"Our worse fears about what went into this memo have been confirmed. The government department that was supposed to be tasked with identifying domestic terrorist threats is apparently using news stories, kooky websites, and conjecture instead of actual hard intelligence reporting and analysis," said Wilson.
"This is a disgrace, and calls into question what it is that the so-called 'Extremism and Radicalizaton Branch of the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division' actually does," Wilson added.
Americans for Limited Government filed a Freedom of Information request in April demanding all documents related to the drafting of the controversial "right-wing extremism" memo. It has now received an interim response from the Department related to "All data and all studies, reports, or other documents regarding data created or reviewed by the Department in general to draft the Report… [and] on the specific groups listed in the footnote on page 2 of the Report that were used by the Department."
Those studies and reports included 217 pages, "releasable in their entirety, all of which are publicly available," according to the DHS FOIA response. All of the data used by the Department are available via the Internet. A summary of the web-links is included here.
In a recent edition of the Clews-Todd Report, ALG top researcher Don Todd recently gave his assessment of the memo and DHS' FOIA interim response, "Here you have a bunch of government bureaucrats surfing the web that come up with this crackpot website [http://whatdoesitmean.com], and then they alert all the police agencies in the country to look out for veterans, pro-lifers, and people that believe in states' rights."
FOX News today exclusive reported on DHS' response to ALG's freedom of information request.
"Not a single study or report was from any government source," said Wilson. "And again, there was no evidence of any actual active recruitment of 'disgruntled veterans' by these groups, no evidence showing that folks who purchase guns or oppose gun-control legislation are necessarily dangerous, and no evidence that the economic downturn or the election of Barack Obama that is fueling any actual 'resurgence' of 'extremism.'"
The memo had reported that "rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans".
"We already knew that the memo did not illuminate on any actual planned attacks or any groups known to be planning attacks, or any groups with histories of perpetrating attacks that are currently conducting any types of operational recruitment, meeting, or planning attacks," said Wilson.
"And now we know why," Wilson added, explain, "The background DHS used was not based on credible intelligence sources, reporting, and analysis. Instead, what we found is that the Department was apparently surfing the net to see what news stories happened to turn up to support a pre-determined conclusion," Wilson explained.
In defining "rightwing extremism," the Department of Homeland Security memo targets "groups, movements, and adherents… that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority" and "groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."
"We now know for a fact that DHS was monitoring political speech and thought, whether on the Internet or via other forms of communications," said Wilson, pointing to websites included in the DHS FOIA response that tracked gun-control legislation.
The memo had claimed that "Many rightwing extremists 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."
Previously DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said, "We are on the lookout for criminal and terrorist activity but we do not – nor will we ever – monitor ideology or political beliefs."
"DHS' response to our freedom of information request unfortunately confirms in no uncertain terms that their hunt for 'rightwing extremists' was nothing more than a witch hunt," Wilson concluded.
Yeah here’s a comment.
These SOB in power now have a plan. It is to ram socialism down our throats at any cost. The DHS memo set us all up as potential domestic terrorists so that they can declare martial law when it turns to crap on them which they knew it would.
newsmax
"...Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama described the U.S. Constitution as having “deep flaws” during a September 2001 Chicago public radio program, adding that the country’s Founding Fathers had “an enormous blind spot” when they wrote it. ..
“And in that sense,” Obama continued, “I think we can say that the Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day, and that the Framers had that same blind spot. I don’t think the two views are contradictory, to say that it was a remarkable political document that paved the way for where we are now, and to say that it also reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day.” Obama did not elaborate on the “fundamental flaw” that persists. Conservative talk host Rush Limbaugh pounced on Obama’s remarks during his Monday radio program. “Good Lord, ladies and gentlemen! I don’t see how he can take the oath of office, which is this: ‘I do solemly swear, or affirm, that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and I will to the best of my ability preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Said Limbaugh, “He has rejected the Constitution.”
"...To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf. ...
Michelle Malkin
By Michelle Malkin • October 26, 2008 11:44 PM
The blogosphere is buzzing about this video posted on YouTube Sunday night. It’s Barack Obama musing about how best to redistribute wealth in America in a Chicago Public Radio interview in 2001. Not whether, but how: Through the courts or through legislation? A caller asks The One to explain how he would do “reparative economic work.” Obama gives the legislative route two thumbs up as his preferred method of “breaking free of the constraints” placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution and then burbles about cobbling together the “actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.”
Nachum, didn't know if you had this info on your webpage. Maybe it could be used as the leading header on ALL of your pages.
Those guys are on their side, why the heck would they monitor them?
Good going!
Ha! Love your new tagline ;)
I guess his ‘01 speech is something we must never forget.
See #42, #43 and #44
Marked for research
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.