This is pretty embarrassing from the counter-terrorism shop West Point Center. It’s not just that it totally ignores radical left wing terrorism. The problem is that it uses too broad a brush to paint far right extremism as it tries to connect skin-head, militia type radicalism to mainstream conservatism.
And the fact that the author has a 2nd grade understanding of conservatism doesn’t help, either.
A West Point think tank has issued a paper warning America about “far right” groups such as the “anti-federalist” movement, which supports “civil activism, individual freedoms and self-government.”
Gee – I don’t know about you but supporting “individual freedoms and self-government” sounds like terrorism to me. Anyone who flies a Gadsen flag should be on a watch list. While they’re at it, they should round up Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and James Madison just to be safe.
The report issued this week by the Combating Terrorism Center at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., is titled “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right.”
The center — part of the institution where men and women are molded into Army officers — posted the report Tuesday. It lumps limited government activists with three movements it identifies as “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement.”
The West Point center typically focuses reports on al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists attempting to gain power in Asia, the Middle East and Africa through violence.
But its latest study turns inward and paints a broad brush of people it considers “far right.”
It says anti-federalists “espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights. Finally, they support civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government. Extremists in the anti-federalist movement direct most their violence against the federal government and its proxies in law enforcement.”
Why “anti-federalists?” I think he means “anti-government” where citizens see Washington as the enemy. That view may hold true for many on the right but to the extent that it results in terrorism, examples please.
Finally, there’s this bit of nonsense:
The report also draws a link between the mainstream conservative movement and the violent “far right,” and describes liberals as “future oriented” and conservatives as living in the past.
“While liberal worldviews are future- or progressive -oriented, conservative perspectives are more past-oriented, and in general, are interested in preserving the status quo.” the report says. “The far right represents a more extreme version of conservatism, as its political vision is usually justified by the aspiration to restore or preserve values and practices that are part of the idealized historical heritage of the nation or ethnic community.”
The report adds: “While far-right groups’ ideology is designed to exclude minorities and foreigners, the liberal-democratic system is designed to emphasize civil rights, minority rights and the balance of power.”
The report says there were 350 “attacks initiated by far-right groups/individuals” in 2011.
Details about what makes an attack a “far right” action are not clear in the report, which was written by Arie Perliger, who directs the center’s terrorism studies and teaches social sciences at West Point.
Were there really 350 attacks by far right individuals and groups in 2011? If the past is any indication, such a list might include attacks on police officers from an individual who has conservative books and magazines in his home. For example, an incident in Louisiana that killed 2 police officers occurred while the police were “investigating attack that injured another officer; 7 arrested, 2 of whom were injured in the shootout; several of those arrested had ties to the sovereign citizen movement.” Was the initial attack on a police officer motivated by politics? We don’t know. It’s also possible that police fired first, which would put an entirely different spin on the incident.
No one doubts the existence of racist and hate-filled groups that require monitoring. But both the DHS and West Point reports read as if they were laying the groundwork for a rhetorical attack on mainstream conservatism of the sort that President Clinton launched in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995, when he blamed talk radio for stirring up anti-government passions. No one should be surprised if supporters of new gun-control measures begin justifying them by referring to the West Point report.
The Obama administration raised eyebrows back in 2009 when Janet Napolitano’s DHS substituted the phrase “man-made disasters” for the dangers posed by Islamic terrorism. My sources inside Congress tell me they continue to worry that efforts to monitor domestic Muslim extremists as well as interdiction efforts against radical Islamists crossing the U.S. border are sometimes put on the back burner. The government denies this, but it seems to me its protestations would be more persuasive if it spent less time producing half-baked warnings about the danger of “right-wing extremists.”
Given the FBI’s infiltration of many radical left wing groups, we must assume they do the same to the right. But as the Sikh temple shootings show, there is far more danger from mentally unbalanced, lone wolf terrorists whose ideological leanings are largely irrelevant to their violence than there is from middle aged fat men running around the woods with an M-16. While militias and other far right wing groups can be a danger and should be watched (as should their counterparts on the left), history shows that political violence in America is rare and studies attempting to create an atmosphere of suspicion surrounding mainstream ideologues — right or left — distract from the real problem of domestic extremism.
Uh-oh, gotta watch out for those “rightwing extremist” veterans, old people and people who believe the Constitution means something…
Here are the facts:
-Aurora theater shooter- Registered Democrat, staff worker on the Obama campaign, member of Occupy Group
-Ft Hood, Texas shooter-registered Democrat Muslim
-Columbine, CO-Shooters-Students too young to vote but parents were registered Democrats and active liberals.
-Va. Tech shooter-Sent hate maile to Pres. Bush
-New Town Connecticut Shooter- Registered Democrat and openly hated Christians.
Here’s one more link, in all of the cases mentioned above these libs were taking prescribed psychotropic medication.
But the conservatives are the ones to fear? Right.
No need for me to comment….you have covered it perfectly.
There is also such things as rhetorical extremism from academia. It will not matter much, but I withdraw my support from West Point, as this has been put out under their imprimatur.
I’m sure that West Point depends heavily on your support, and will be saddened to hear this.
sounds to me that these so called ‘social science’ teachers are trying to redefine certain words like anti-federalist, and cram other groups onto the conservative bus destined for terrorism central. emphasis off muslim bombers and such. obama must have those guns, and redefining a terrorist to fit the def of those citizens not entitled/allowed to possess one is priority one. get the foot in the 2nd amendment door, then redefine the whole thing out of existence.
that stat on ’350 conservative groups/individuals involved in attacks in 2011 sounds like a good example of this redefining process. maybe somebody should remind these simpleton sociocommies that we have seen all these tactics before, several times (u.s.s.r., china, cuba, etc.).
so sad we send our young men and women to be indoctrinated by a bunch of marxists at once honorable schools like west point.
The best argument given by the Federalist to address the concerns of the anti-fedalist during the debates that hammered out our constitution was the division of power amongst co-equal branches of government at the Federal level and a respect for individual state sovereignty later enshrined by the 10th amendment. It would seem the anti-federalist had good reason to be concerned then, if they were alive today they could say “see I told you so!” as they grabbed their powder horns and semi automatic muzzle loaders off the mantle and exercised a little well regulated 2nd Ad. Reading that todays cadet class is getting indoctrinated against the very same document they well later swear to uphold is rather chilling. Statist new think is alive and well in our academies and paid for by the citizenry they may be a called on to put down.
I think you lose any right to complain about being considered possible source of violence against the country when, you know, you openly and repeatedly say you either will or may be violent against the nation. As have countless right wing congress people, pundits, and commentators. For example:
“If this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are going to start looking for second amendment remedies…” That by the GOP candidate for senate and republican state congressperson. Not a fringe figure.
“The ultimate task for the people is to remain vigilant and aware ~ that the government, their government is out of control, and this moment, this opportunity, must not be forsaken, must not escape us, for we shall not have any coarse but armed revolution should we fail with the power of the vote in November ~ This Republic cannot survive for 4 more years underneath this political socialist ideologue.” That by the GOP of VA official newsletter.
“If the government is not producing the results or has become destructive to the ends of our liberties, we have a right to get rid of that government and to get rid of it by any means necessary,” That by GOP congressional candidate Stephen Broden.
and on and on. These aren’t fringe character or random internet posters. These are the people who the right think are mature and responsible enough to run our country.
TL:DR- you can only foam at the mouth so long before people will reasonably assume you are rabid. The GOP has been foaming a long time now…
This is how it will go.
There will be a spark. A single incident. That won’t be from some fever dream neo-nazi group hiding out in the woods in Washington, it will be an unforced confrontation with a private homeowner initiated by police, perhaps executing a no-knock warrant on the wrong house. In it, the police will kill the homeowner, maybe members of the family, and then manufacture a scenario where the police are justified. Maybe in NY state, where the state law now contretempts the US Constitution and enumerated rights.
It will be like Waco, Texas, an earlier attempt by a Democrat Exectutive to impose federal will on crazy but otherwise lawful private sector activity. Just as Waco was the spark for McVea, so will the government initiated killing be the spark for what happens next.
Most people want the legal system to run it’s course and provide a proper remedy to the gun grabbing and overreach. But when the government starts to kill civilians, that will change the attitude of a lot of people, and they will begin to aupport other remedies.
I promise that there are crazies out there who would do something as crazy as Oklahoma City. Then the fire starts, That fire will not be put out by a man who’s sole talent is running for office.
Assume that gun confiscation is enacted, if for no other reason than you want it so much. Depending on the mood of the people who hold guns, maybe 90 percent of them would comply with an order to surrender them. That would leave only 30 million forearms in the hands of 8 million non-compliant free citizens; they would still outnumber any other armed body on the planet.
There are about 750,000 law enforcement officers in the entire US. Add to that Obama’s nascent brownshirt army, the TSA, and you still don’t equal 15% of the people who would remain under arms. Many of the police officers are unlikely to agree to participate in this effort, as proven by many responses by local law enforcement agencies regarding any federal attempts to enforce draconian gun laws.
I promise you, you do not want this scenario to unfold. Ask yourself what tactics would be employed by a scattered, poorly organized but motivated force as I have described. Have you ever heard of a man named Francis Marion?
Thank you for tacitly admitting that the west point report was correct.
Other than that while I’m aware of who Marion was it doesn’t make your point. In the time of the swamp fox yes a bunch of farmers with muskets were on par with a national army. Today That’s not remotely true.
Take a look at Iraq. It’s a country that is awash in guns. Yet when they were resisting US forces what was by far their best weapon? IEDs. Every time hey tried to make it a stand up fight the US military slaughtered them. Aks and mortars are no match for organized tank corps, helicopter gunships, satellite reconnaissance, drones, and one hell of an air force.
You and your fellow fetishists are nothing but a speed bump for a real military. Waco and Ruby Ridge proved that. In both cases very well armed groups of jutbags were steamrollered by the ATF and FBI *para*military forces.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
Do you think the young men and women who volunteer to serve in the armed forces of this nation, who take an oath to the Constitution of the United States, will stand with you? When you are party to the killing of their parents, their brothers and sisters, their communities?
I don’t.
I took the same oath.
Did they stand with Timothy McVeigh when he went domestic terrorist? No, then why do you think they’d side with McVeigh’s ideological children?
“Did they stand with Timothy McVeigh when he went domestic terrorist? No, then why do you think they’d side with McVeigh’s ideological children?”
You should note that blunderbuss revenge for the murders at Waco suits most the right not at all. And you should note all but the most blue states will do nothing towards confiscatory gun control after Newton, and that all these people buying new arms aren’t buying them to give them up on the say-so of words pretending to be laws.
I’m encouraged to read your delusions, Tlaloc. What makes you think anyone showed up in opposition, let alone “the People”, when those crimes occurred. And Ruby Ridge was far closer to it then you think.
If the murder of Mrs. Weaver had been known of, I don’t know that one fed could have come off that mountain but feet first.
As far as I can figure out, your anecdotal contributions would be considered rhetorical flourishes or perhaps even speechifying. Unless I’m totally wrong these would fall under the protection of the first amendment. Has this become
illegal? There have been MORE examples of massive government intervention or oppression on the rights of citizens.
David Koresh was a madman, sure, but how many people died due to the stupidity of the federal government? And
don’t forget Oklahoma City because it was a direct result of the Waco deaths. Ruby Ridge was a classic example of overreach by the federal government. Randy Weaver lost his wife AND son as a result of the FBI snipers. If I remember correctly, he was acquitted of gun charges he was initially arrested for. AND he won his wrongful death suit against the Federal government.
Don’t make the mistake of thinking the Federal government is benign. Any government whether it is local, county or state can and WILL infringe on your rights on issues as ignorant as telling you you cannot grow a vegetable garden in your front yard to as major as having the SWAT teams break in to the wrong house and kill either YOU or your dog. These are both fairly recent events. What do they say? OOPS? I don’t think that covers it, you know.
“I think you lose any right to complain about being considered possible source of violence against the country when, you know, you openly and repeatedly say you either will or may be violent against the nation.”
The vast majority — 90%+ — of the statements I have heard from the right are in the form of “IF…” — if firearms are confiscated, if the left continues to violate religious liberty, if the government steps up things like VIPR and other abuses.
From the left I don’t hear any “IF…” — I *see* actual attacks and plans to attack. Burning down a governor’s mansion. Attempting to kill a governor with firebombs. Plotting to bomb a bridge. Plotting to bomb sites in different cities. Beatings doled out for the “crime” of not toeing the left’s line. Bombs in research centers. Bombs mailed to scientists. Bombs, bombs, bombs, bombs.
(And the occasional riot.)
And what does the left do about the violent on its side, when they’re caught? Defend them, excoriate anyone who helped catch them, threaten the lives of those who caught them. Put them into influential academic posts. Have them give commencement speeches from their prison cells.
What does the right do when someone supposedly on our side commits terrorism? Put him down like a rabid dog.
Were these attacks carried out by prominent left wing politicians? Cheered on by them? Or were they the actions of fringe nutbags?
That’s the difference. Of course there are terribly deranged people on both the left and the right. The difference you call yours “senator” or “congressman.” It is precisely that kind of encouragement that has caused the fever swamp to become so noxious. The majority of the right has trapped itself in a false reality. This was most graphically brought home by the 2012 elections that the right by and large really thought were in the bag, because they cut themselves off from all info they don’t like.
That was the most obvious case but it’s been going on for years with the conservative news site, the conservative version of wikipedia, the conservative humor show, the conservative papers, et cetera ad nauseum. It’s a sick mindset that results in delusion. Case in point, despite governing on a platform almost entirely pulled from the 90s republican platform the right has convinced themselves that Obama is a far left ideologue. It’s disturbing how much kool-aid they guzzle daily.
“Case in point, despite governing on a platform almost entirely pulled from the 90s republican platform the right has convinced themselves that Obama is a far left ideologue.”
So you’re claiming the mid ’90′s republican platform included the assault weapons ban, compulsory nationally socialized medicine, and trillion dollar per year deficits to bailout Dem friendly businesses and bankroll “green” boondoggles, while slanting energy and regulatory policy away from growth and energy independence?
Never in my life did I ever think that I would live long enough to see that the government of the United States would consider that we who started a group, the Tea Party Movement to make the government through peaceful and electoral means, follow the Constitution of The United States and end the corruption that has become the status quo, be called WHITE EXTREMISTS. We have been called name after name by these angelic liberal congress people and referred to as racists and astroturf by these fine people. These fine people, some of who call themselves the “Congressional Black Caucus” have accused us of unspeakable racist crimes over and over and have refused to prove their charges even though a $25,000 reward was offered for proof and an estimated 700 cameras and cell phone cameras were recording at the event where they say we did it. My friends, it is a brave new world. Take nothing for granted.
America’s Founding Documents outline the remedies available to the Citizens when government becomes tyrannical. To take the same steps as our Founding Fathers did is to claim our inalienable rights of freedom and liberty. When a government becomes oppressive, the people of that nation have every right to stand against it. To not do so puts the future of our kids and grandchildren in danger. You may not agree, that is your prerogative, but you can never take that away from other men. The Left has the nasty habit of not just dictating but ordering what others may or may not do. That is tyranny. We will stand up for our Constitutional Rights, whether you like it or not matters little. The Constitution is clear on protecting and upholding the rights of the minority. If you don’t care for the rhetoric of the right, since when were you guaranteed the right to never be offended? Man up, and start to open your eyes as to what is being done to you. Read the Founding Fathers writing’s on issues of freedom, firearms ownership, sound money, and civil liberties. You might learn something.
I apologize for sending that without identifying myself.
Those within American mainstream governments(federal,state, county and municipal) who violate their oath to defend, preserve and protect the U.S. Constitution while at the same time they willfully and with treasonous intent undermine, abridge, sidestep, and otherwise abuse those edicts of the U.S. Constitution that created their positions of authority, can also be labeled extremists and terrorists. These same people fail to realize that by underrmining the very fabric of the U.S. Consitution, THE SUPREME LAW of the LAND, they leave no other recourse for true American patriots in honoring their own oath to defend, preserve and protect the U.S. Constitution. Any foreign agent of another government/nation that is brought to America’s shores and allowed to indoctrinate and alienate our warriors against their own people, is an extremeist, provocateur, and a sayanim of sorts and mustn’t ever be afforded the opportunity to corrupt or program the minds of those who take their oath to the U.S. Constitution seriously. Let those professors and instructors at our nation’s military academies and schools declare their alleginace to America or step down. If they are truely dual citizens, they MUST declare their allegiance prior to stepping foot on any military reservation to teach; places where American men and women died to protect. Swear alleagiance to America; deny your home country and maybe we’ll let you teach our brightest and bravest men and womaen.
I have yet to see any “militia” groups that are anything more than Constitutionalists and Christians. There may be some “skinhead” militias, but they are NOT right-wing, they are “national socialist” types! They are more left-wing than right-wing and could care less about the Constitution or individual freedoms!
Miltias are constitutional and wholly legitimate as a concept for community mobilization in the event of a disaster or national emergency. In our history they were also the last defense against tyranny, which is why “militia” is used in the wording of the 2nd. amendment!
I think that a lot of conservatives feel the need to distance themselves from “militias” because of the false image that the Left has been successful in creating in people’s minds!
Over the past four years, there have been a number of “reports” based on studies done by “?” in many cases. That West Point has sunken to the levels of the DHS, is seriously disappointing. That belief in our Constitution, or that government should get out of our everyday lives, is something most Americans believe in when that interfernce involves them directly. Until the, some apparently think its the ‘other guy’ who is the problem. The ‘Occupy’ movement demonstrated a serious penchant for violent actions. There were rapes, perhaps even a murder, there were assaults, there were windows broken out & fires set. Police were confronted & some injured. None of this happened when Tea Partiers met. In fact there is a report of one Tea Party rally where the park they met in was left cleaner than when they arrived. This is looking more & more like aPR campaign to establish credibility so government can take actions they deem appropriate, if & when the right speaks out! This is a shame & somene of independent mind needs to review all of this to uncover the patently obvious bias it conveys.
Thind about how you would condition a future generation of soldiers to turn on their own people. Just train the future officers to believe the good guys are the bad guys and vise versa. Then when the order comes down they will obey. Don’t believe it, look at Syria.
Move along, nothing to see here, just another institution of higher “education” looking to besmirch those who believe in the founding principles of the United States. You know, it’s dangerous to believe in freedom of speech, the right to keep and bear arms, individual responsibility, small government, lower taxes, and accountability by our elected representatives. NO! We can’t have that, that’s RIDICULOUS!! We must look to the future, we must be progressive and shed those silly principles. Collectivism and enslavement is the future!! The elite left knows far better than the serfs about how to live properly!
Just once, only once, I would like to see documentation or footnotes to substantiate this “350 right wing attacks”. Where and when did these so called attacks happen? What details constitute an “attack”?
It’s easy to make up numbers to prove a point in any study. This is why I do not believe polls or any statistics. Polls are all nonsense, often paid for by groups wanting to influence the public in the way they want.
I would also like to see the documentation that proves “family member are more likely to be killed by a gun in the house than not”.