Obama’s DHS Targets Right Wing
Apr 13, 2009 Political
The Obama Department of Homeland Security has a report out that targets what is described as Right Wing extremism. In the report there are discussions about radical right wing groups like returning veterans and skinheads. The definition of a radical right wing group can be a single issue thing like those opposed to abortion. I never saw where those in favor of abortion were labeled as radical left wing extremists.
(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.
I imagine that only the right is involved in hate.
This is another attempt by a governmental agency to paint the right as a bunch of hate mongering racists. The entire premise behind the report is that right wingers are upset that a black guy was elected to the presidency.
Pam at Atlas Shrugs has a very long list of the supposed things to worry about with regard to the right wing, those radical people who have been keeping America safe since her birth (while bed wetting liberals sucked their thumbs). I will focus on one particular item, gun control. This should make some of the liberals who comment here happy because they love when they can lie about Obama and his gun record.
The report states:
(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//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. [all emphasis mine]
The DHS is admitting in the report that there are proposed firearms restrictions and weapons bans. There is no room for them to deny this or say it is out of context. It does not say that if there were a gun ban it clearly states that PROPOSED imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans and it says that because the Obama administration wants to do just that.
The DHS is classifying the right as a bunch of military veterans, hate groups, and skinheads who want to cause trouble because of the first black guy being president. They point to one incident that happened in Oklahoma and try to say it represents all of the right wing. Veterans should be especially weary of these people because they will be gunning for you, so to speak.
Pam Geller has much more on this and she points out a lot of items. I only focused on the gun issues because this is the way they start. Make a group an enemy and show it is violent, demonize it and then show that guns must be removed in order to keep them from causing trouble. Jews went through this in Nazi Germany. And you all wonder why people are buying guns and ammo. It is because government trying to make us the enemy.
I will say this. I find it very disturbing that the Obama administration under its Nazis in DHS would classify the right as full of extremists and point to the Oklahoma City bombing as some sort of proof that a right wing extremist cabal exists and that extreme care should be taken to keep the right wingers from causing problems but ignores the attacks of 9/11 as proof of a Islamic Radical extremists. It seems that we go out of our way to say that we are not at war with Islam and that Islam did not attack America and all the other crap we have heard as politicians groveled at the feet of Muslims. We cannot say that Islam is at war with America or make broad generalizations but the DHS can write a whole report about right wing extremism based on a bombing of a federal building by a nut.
Islamic attacks on 9/11, just a bunch of misunderstood muzzies who we somehow ticked off. Oklahoma City bombing, a right wing extremist movement that shows all veterans are out to destroy the country they took an oath to protect…
Read the entire report. It shows what your government is up to. It demonstrates how the Saul Alinsky group of Socialists running this country intend to demonize American citizens, many of them veterans, and try to force gun laws in order to get what they want and squash any opposition.
They better hope it never comes to that.
As for the report. It is labeled Unclassified/For Official Use Only and I don’t know who obtained it or anything like that. It is not for distribution outside the government (mostly because they want to hide their Nazi activities) but since it is public I will provide the link. I do not have it on my server and do not want it there.
If they wanted it to be a secret they should have guarded it better. In any event, I am glad it is public. People need to know what the thugs in DHS, under the direction of Obama, are doing.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: alinsky, communism, dhs, gun control, jews, nazis, Obama, right wing, socialism, veterans
The Army Of Won
Mar 24, 2009 Political
Barack Obama has been busy mobilizing his drones to get out and “encourage” people to sign pledges to support him and his budget. This is a nothing more than a huge waste of time. What does signing a pledge actually mean? A person who did not want to be bothered could sign it and then just do what he wanted. Look how many people filled out multiple voter registration cards just to keep from being bothered by ACORN.
It seems to me that Obama and his minions have a long term goal in mind. Like the Borg (from Star Trek, The Next Generation) the Obamabots move from area to area sucking more people into the Obama Army until they have overwhelming numbers. Then they can compel people to do what they want trough the use of force. As the Borg would say, resistance is fyootile.
Think this is far fetched? Think the Obama folks are peaceful people who only want to encourage those already enamored with the MEssiah to step up their support? Well, you would be half right. According to the Birmingham News the Obamabots have their marching orders:
Those who gathered at Kelly Ingram Park in downtown Birmingham were urged to enlist others who share Obama’s vision and to stay away from trying to convert naysayers.
“We’re looking for supporters,” said DeHaven of Hoover, one of the event’s organizers. “We’re not looking for a fight. That will come later, when we have an army.”
They intend to keep encouraging Obama supporters until they have strong enough support, or an army, to fight. It is quite clear they intend to fight as soon as they have an army. That is a good tactical move but they will be asking for trouble if they think the Obama storm troopers can get support by fighting.
I know that the libs will read this and tell me that the person meant fight as in a good debate but they could do that without the army. One forms an army when one is looking for more than a verbal fight.
The national security force and the Obamabots will be the brown shirted jackboots who try to compel compliance and support.
Join the resistance because resistance is NOT fyootile.
Related:
McClatchy
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Maybe Veterans Should Pay For Their Own Care
Mar 14, 2009 Political
During the campaign there was all this noise that Bush and the Republicans had let down the veterans of this country and had not properly taken care of those who were wounded because of Bush’s “illegal” war. Obama told people that he would do many wonderful things to take care of veterans because, as we know, only the government can run health care efficiently.
It was ridiculous to even suggest that Obama cared more for vets than McCain or Bush did. Bush increased the VA Budget by more nearly 60% and McCain voted against bills dealing with vets because he believed some of the provisions in them were wrong. It is important to see all the components of a bill to avoid unintended consequences. For instance, if one did not pay attention he might sign an Executive Order lifting the ban on federal funding for Embryonic (which is a fertilized egg Mr. Clinton) Stem Cell Research and then sign a bill banning federal funding for it. That is what happens when one fails to pay attention.
The Obama administration is floating the idea of making veterans pay for health care for service connected injuries. Currently, vets who use the VA for non service related items like the flu use their private insurance to pay for it. Obama’s plan, which is being considered, would require the vets to use their priate insurance to pay for any visit including those for service related injuries.
Of course this will never fly and will be soundly defeated long before it ever gets any serious consideration. The nation has an obligation to provide the care and even Obama cannot change that. There are probably many Democrats who would like to do it but they know it would be political suicide.
But considering such a thing brings up a few interesting points. First we have to look back a few years ago when a big stink was made about the conditions under which wounded warriors were living. Walter Reed hospital came under fire because of a building it was using to house the injured. The building did not belong to the Department of the Army (DA) and the DA was not responsible for its repair. Walter Reed is on the BRAC list and is set to shut down some time in the future and that means spending money on repair is not an option. Couple all this with months of delays in care for our troops, paperwork problems, computers that run on different systems and can’t “talk” to each other, and the numerous other problems that were exposed and you end up with a full blown investigation. You end up with commanders being relieved of their command and finger pointing as to whom takes care of the troops better. What we all miss is the underlying problem and its implication on our society as a whole.
The Veteran’s Administration is a government agency that runs government health care. It is responsible for ALL the health care of our eligible veterans and it has been around for a very long time. One would think that it would be able to provide great services at low cost. It is obvious that Obama would like private insurance to pay for the service related injuries but that is not part of the deal. The government is obligated to pay for the troops injuries. What is a crime is that they must go to the VA to get the care in the first place.
Our troops should be able to go to real, non government, hospitals that are not bloated like the VA. They should be able to get care and have the government billed for it. This would reduce greatly all the problems with the health care system that is run completely by the government.
Remember now folks, the VA has had a very long time to get things right and they still have all the problems people associate with the government “red tape.” Now, the government wants to take that well run success and force it on the entire population under some misguided idea that everyone is entitled to free health care. Notice how I wrote that? You see, everyone in this country (those here legally) has a right to access to health care and as far as I can tell that exists. What people do not have a right to is for someone else to pay for it. People should be required to pay for their medical care just like they pay for other things and if they have to, it should be paid for over time. There is NO RIGHT to free health care and there is certainly nothing that says it is government’s job to provide health care.
All one needs to do is look at the VA model to know what the rest of the country will get if health care is nationalized. It will be so expensive that decisions will be made by administrators as to whom gets care. Obama wants vets to use their private insurance for service related injuries because the care of the VA is expensive. When they have effectively mandated health care coverage and have eliminated or reduced private insurance how will they reduce costs? They can’t push it to insurance that does not exist so they will ration it.
We have learned a little from this story. The first is that Obama does not care for veterans one iota more than Bush or McCain did and those suggestions in the campaign were ridiculous then as they are now. We learned that government run care is extremely expensive, wrought with inefficiency, and not on a par with that provided int he private sector. We learned that universal health care is a STUPID idea that has failed everywhere it has been tried.
Keep this in mind. When Fidel Castro needed surgery he did not allow his socialized medicine to take care of him, he flew surgeons into his country. When Ted Kennedy was diagnosed with a brain tumor he did not fly to Canada or Europe to be treated. He went to the best the US has to offer.
Under universal health care Kennedy might have been seen because he is part of the elite who run the country. You can bet your bottom dollar that any regular person who had the same demographics as ole uncle Ted would not have all that money spent to take care of a brain tumor. How many people from other countries (especially the wealthy, rulers and connected) come here for care? Why is that?
We never see the celebrities going to Europe, or Canada, or Cuba for their medical care. I wonder how many times Michael Moore has been treated in these other countries. It would be interesting to see what he does should he develop a terrible illness. I am betting he would not ask to be shipped to the countries he applauded in his crockumentary.
Obama’s desire to cut costs associated with veteran care is an insight into the problems of Socialized medicine which is what the VA and Medicare (as well as Medicaid) are all about. Government has never run these things efficiently. Why does anyone think that giving them a larger part of the health care system will make them do it better.
And you can bet, Obama and all the politicians will NEVER use Socialized medicine when they can be like Uncle Ted and get great care anywhere.
Some might look at the idea of charging vets for their service related as a problem and it is. However, the whole sordid mess exposes the dark underbelly of Socialized medicine and how terrible it would be for us.
Others:
Don Surber
Hot Air
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: health care, Obama, payment, socialism, socialized medicine, veterans
With Obama, Big Brother Is Watching You
Mar 1, 2009 Political
Remember not too long ago when the Real ID issue was front and center? Remember how all the so called civil liberty organizations were opposed to this “National ID”? The original Real ID was supposed to be a way for states to have uniformity in the ID process because it mandated a certain kind of ID. There were many organizations who were opposed to the concept.
I was not too fond of the whole thing because it was another intrusion of the government. The government laid out a list of items that were required for a license to meet the Real ID standard. All well and good but it added additional cost to states for the licenses. This cost was not paid for by the federal government and the states were going to pass them on to the people receiving the licenses. The cost of one of these was reported to be over $100.
Real ID went by the wayside and now the feds want something called the Enhanced Driver’s License (EDL) which sounds nice enough but it has a Radio-frequency identification (RFID) chip in it.
Janet Napolitano opposed the Real ID when she was Governor of Arizona but now that she is in charge of Homeland Security she is in favor of the RFID embedded devices. The difference is, they are saying that we are not doing Real ID and instead going to “enhanced” driver’s licenses. The enhancement is the RFID and that is the change from Real ID.
For those who do not know, and RFID is a little electronic device that sends out an infra red signal that can be read. How it is powered (active or passive) is another issue but they all work the same. Some stores and been embedding them in products so shopping carts can be pushed past a reader and all items charged to the customer. They have a purpose but making people carry them is not a good one.
Several years ago RFIDs could be read from nearly 70 feet. I am certain it is farther by now but 70 feet is problematic enough. Suppose the police start equipping cars with an RFID reader. They could then drive around reading who is in a car and if someone they happen to have a warrant for or who is wanted for any reason is detected they could then manufacture a reason to stop the car.
Suppose you wanted to attend a gun show, pro or anti government rally, church, synagogue or mosque, and the government wanted to know who was attending these places. What would stop them from sending an operative in with a reader to get a list of who was there? People at gun shows could be placed on a list of gun owners (or potential gun owners), people at a rally or protest could be listed and placed on some type of watch list. People who attend certain religious services could be singled out for one reason or another. The government can require an EDL to buy a gun and then use the information to create a database of gun owners.
Banks and other businesses could put RFID readers near the entrance and then obtain information about who has entered. It could be used for a number of things. However, the most disturbing would be a government that decided to put RFID readers all over town to track movements of people.
Sound far fetched? There are over 20,000 closed circuit cameras in England and Chicago wants one on every street corner. How far away would the reader be?
I will not get one of these unless I absolutely have to and then I would never remove my license from my vehicle. I have other identification that will get me anywhere my license will so I could leave it in the car. It is also possible to wrap RFIDs in aluminum foil and keep the signal from getting out though this is not a 100% fix. There are companies that sell wallets that block RFID transmission. The moonbats could just carry theirs under their tin foil hats…
Sounds like a minor issue but the government is too intrusive as it is and with Obama and his desire to make this a Socialist country the government will become more intrusive. Makes me wonder why Napolitano changed her mind and why the civil liberties organizations are not all up in arms.
Silly me, Bush was the one taking our liberties. The Real ID under him was oppressive but now that The Evil Won is in, they have nothing to worry about…
I guess it won’t be too long into the future before government is implanting these in children as they are born. That is assuming the liberals actually let them be born…
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: big brother, enhanced driver's license, Obama, real id, rfid, socialism
They Will Try To Take Your Guns
Feb 12, 2009 Political
The Obama administration and the Democrats following him do not like the Second Amendment. They refuse to follow it and it takes lawsuits before they pay attention and even then they disagree with the rulings. The state of Maryland infringes on the rights of gun owners by putting a number of barriers in place to prevent people (who are not well connected) from carrying a firearm. At the federal level, it will not be long before the Obamatrons use the crisis to confiscate guns.
The Socialists at the Brady Campaign for Gun Control want guns taken from law abiding citizens. They think guns are the problem when thinking people know that criminals do not obey laws. Criminals have guns now and they are not allowed but the morons at Brady do not understand. They want to impose Socialism on the citizens of the US and the way to do that is to disarm people.
Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed.”-Sarah Brady
That is the task of Obama and the rest of the radical left. They can’t do it outright so they will do an end around. They can claim that George Bush shredded the Constitution but they are the ones who are working around it. Case in point, Rahm the Ballerina Emanuel thinks that people on the No Fly list should be denied the right to buy a gun. According to Emanuel, if you are on that list of terrorists then you are equal to them and do not have the right to buy a gun. How many people have been added to that list by mistake? It seems to me that Ted Kennedy was on it at one time. Does that mean Kennedy cannot drive a car (his weapon of choice)?
The end run involves the no fly list. What would stop the anti gunners in the Obama government from adding people to that list to keep them from obtaining guns? They would be within the law and “not” violating anyone’s rights even though that would be the intent. I would not put this past them because they will do whatever it takes to ban guns in this country. It will be a much safer America if all guns are banned. Look at how safe Obama’s and Emanuel’s Chicago is with their stringent gun laws. Yep, no murders there….
Here is what Rahm had to say about the No Fly list and guns:
All the signs are there. They want Socialism and in order to do that they must disarm us. The reason we have a Second Amendment is because our Founders knew about the tyranny of government. As long as we have guns we cannot be enslaved. But they will try. HR 45 that Bobby Rush introduced, an Attorney General who does not believe in individual rights to own firearms, and Emanuel and his No Fly List end around.
Buy guns and ammo.
If Dr. Joan is right about evolution (no science to support it but…) then the fittest need to survive.
Big Dog salute to Delta Brother WT
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: gun control, Obama, rahm emanuel, socialism, tyranny