Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
At the DHS, One Analyst For Many Right-Wing Extremists
Daryl Johnson, a conservative Mormon who headed the DHS unit analyzing threats from domestic extremists, was the principal author of the report.
With Norway still in mourning, the Southern Poverty Law Center has published an interview showing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has just one analyst studying the threat from domestic terror. There used to be six, but the department effectively dismantled the unit in the face of a conservative firestorm to a leaked 2009 report on right-wing extremism. Daryl Johnson, the GOP analyst who headed the unit, urged DHS in vain to pay more attention to the threat from the right. A list of the almost 100 instances of right-wing violence in the last 15 years here.
"Sad to say, we were right on this one. History has shown that...All we could do was say there is a trend emerging, and perhaps you should think about how you are using your resources."
27 Comments so far
Show AllIt unlikely many citizens of the USA are aware of these attacks. Had ONE been by a Muslim, the news would have been non stop for months.
US citizens are unaware of Congresswoman Giffords shooting and the deaths of others involved? They are unaware of the UniBomber? They are unaware of Waco, and Ruby Ridge? They are unaware of the gunning down of Dr. Tiller in his church on a Sunday? They are unaware of the Anthrax killings? They are unaware of Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma bombing? We're aware we're just told they are not as serious a threat. Which is funny because they happen the most often in our own neighborhoods.
You obviously did not read the LINK.
there are some 100 incidents of violence listed and of those only the Tiller shooting in the links.
The Mcveigh incident is not mentioned in the lower list. The Giffords incident is not mentioned. the Unabomber incident is not mentioned. Waco and Ruby Ridge is not mentioned.
Can you please READ the list first before commenting and then tell me HONESTLY which ones you are familiar with and HONESTLY tell me how many of US Citizens are familiar with the others.
Of the 100 detailed you gave 1......
Which link is that?
This one:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/publications/terror-from-the-right
I did find it. The blue links are hard to see on my computer. I try to always read the source documentation before I reply.
To answer your question after reading the list. I remember most of them. Especially the Madsen/Mowder murders. I studied horticulture with Winfield and knew Gary.
We now have two right-wing political parties, the far right Democrats and the extreme right Republicans, warmongers all, totally owned and operated by the MIC.
dkshaw,
I am sorry to disagree with you on this.
"........the far right Democrats and the extreme right Republicans, warmongers all"
...the far right Republicans and the extreme right Democrats, warmongers all. Example: Republicans torture, Democrats torture, murder and target assassinate US citizen.
If you check out the FBI web site, they say that 86% of terrorist attacks in this country are from conservative, white Christians. Only 8% is in any way related to Muslims. And yet we keep hearing about the things that AREN'T the problem and we ignore those things that ARE. Unfortunately, this is SOP for the govt', at this point. We are collapsing economically, and they hold hearings on Roger Clemmons and steroids in baseball. We are having the highest unemployment numbers since the great depression and the House is screwing around with the debt ceiling, something that has NEVER been done before.
Govt' has been playing divide and conquer on us for so long that they are completely incapable of actually doing the job. I think it's time we deal with the realities, and NOT keep letting them fiddle while WE burn.
Time to get the private money out of politics PERMANENTLY and give us a govt' that WORKS instead of just sells itself out for money.
thank you
To believe the foxs will monitor their kill in the hen house is debatable. and not likely...would you give yourself a paycut and make you have to spend xx number of dollars to get elected? Would you change the rules to alter your pensions? Congress people ARE NOT CIVIL SERVANTS...they are BLOOD SUCKING SCUM BAGS FILLING THEIR POCKETS WITH WHORE-PORATE MONEY.
let's shooot for this....ya right LET's Bust their union.
Congressional Reform Act of 2011
1. No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects asalary while in office and receives no pay when they are outof office.
2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in SocialSecurity. All funds in the Congressional retirement fundmove to the Social Security system immediately. All futurefunds flow into the Social Security system, and Congressparticipates with the American people. It may not be usedfor any other purpose.
*3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just asallAmericans do.
*4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise.Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%. *
5. Congress loses their current health care system andparticipates in the same health care system as the Americanpeople. *
6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose onthe American people.
*7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are voideffective 1/1/12. ****The American people did not make thiscontract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all thesecontracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor,not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizenlegislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then gohome and back to work.
One analyst?
How can (s)he keep on top of both the Quakers and PETA?
Goebbels sez: You nailed it!
"The Transformation of the American Conservative Movement into Fascism"
by Max Blumenthal
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/08/10/the-transformation-of-the-american-conservative-movement-into-fascism/
Wait.
Now I am meant to lament that the Department of Homeland Security is not doing ENOUGH spying on people?
What's next, calling for the Tea Partiers to be put down on the "No Fly List" and corralled into "Free Speech Zones"?
Anti-Abortion terrorists in Gitmo?
The events in Norway may remind us of the dangers of political and social extremists in a well-armed population.
But "Homeland Security" and other oppressive methods are not the way to solve the problem.
-matti.
I think Zimet et als political-tribal instincts are flaring up again.
Blue = good.
Red = bad.
Great Machines of Oppression like the Department of Homeland(sic) Security become managable, morally neutral tools in this mindset.
DHS "monitoring" of "leftwing" activists = bad.
DHS FAILURE to "monitor" groups espousing an extreme "rightwing" philosophy = also bad.
Like you and Jill, I was also struck by the problematic and conflicting premises in the article and comments.
On the one hand, the problem is defined as Amerikan law enforcement authorities, including state security agencies, being horribly biased in its selection of "terrorists", and consequent pursuit of terrorist threats.
It's an old story by now: militant Muslims and dark-skinned foreigners are prejudicially branded "terrorists", with left-leaning Amerikan environmental, anti-war, and civil liberties activists and organizations running a close second.
Whereas right-leaning racists, nativists, anti-abortionists, etc. are given a pass-- or downgraded to Lone Nut or Lunatic Fringe status and pieced off.
Law enforcement maintains a two-tier approach, with the former groups dealt with in a wholesale, systematic manner and the latter dealt with in a retail, discrete, relatively minimalist manner.
The beef is that right-wing terrorists are reprehensibly tolerated, and/or encouraged by the Establishment; conversely, the perceived, manufactured, and inflated threat of left-wing terrorism gets all the attention and action, including totalitarian surveillance, witch hunts, manufactured entrapment-based "sting" operations, etc.
The problem is that the simplistic response to this heinous disparity is itself a trap of sorts.
As you astutely point out, the credulous or unwary effectively demand that the law enforcement/state security agency Combine ramp up their operations to extend all of their worst excesses to the unconscionably-neglected right-wing terrorists.
This implicitly means buying into fundamental aspects of "(Homeland) security" and "terrorism" that are dubious and fallacious at best.
In seeking to remedy a perceived disparity, it perforce supports the fundamental existence of a draconian, totalitarian security-state apparatus. And it's utterly inimical to the "less is more" alternatives laudably pursued (at least publicly) in places like Norway.
PS: Like dubet (2:35pm), I'm also skeptical of the standard, settled Official Version of the Oklahoma City bombing; though the organization is well-intentioned, I'm inclined to take the Southern Poverty Law Center's findings with a grain of salt.
Instead of crying that all should be based on the first "tier" approach. I think we should go back to the old law enforcement policy of basing arrests on the facts of the case not implications. Surveillance should only come into play when a deed has been attempted and/or accomplished and the police have adequate grounds to suspect an individual or group of wrong doing. Blanket permissions in the interest of prevention are simply unconstitutional.
I agree. "Homeland Security" is and was never the real answer to anything but the rise of a whole new "security"/"intelligence" industry which is thriving. It's actually one of the most booming industries out there. Existing without oversight or accountability. All hail private industry!
the linked story begins with the official version of the Oklahoma bombing, which I do not believe...
I could not get any further...
reading lies doesn't educate, and a list of lies doesn't justify...
The Republican Party?
To believe the foxs will monitor their kill in the hen house is debatable. and not likely...would you give yourself a paycut and make you have to spend xx number of dollars to get elected? Would you change the rules to alter your pensions? Congress people ARE NOT CIVIL SERVANTS...they are BLOOD SUCKING SCUM BAGS FILLING THEIR POCKETS WITH WHORE-PORATE MONEY.
let's shooot for this....ya right LET's Bust their union.
Congressional Reform Act of 2011
1. No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects asalary while in office and receives no pay when they are outof office.
2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in SocialSecurity. All funds in the Congressional retirement fundmove to the Social Security system immediately. All futurefunds flow into the Social Security system, and Congressparticipates with the American people. It may not be usedfor any other purpose.
*3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just asallAmericans do.
*4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise.Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%. *
5. Congress loses their current health care system andparticipates in the same health care system as the Americanpeople. *
6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose onthe American people.
*7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are voideffective 1/1/12. ****The American people did not make thiscontract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all thesecontracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor,not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizenlegislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then gohome and back to work.
Someone asked, didn't see the blue 'here , I guess.
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/publications
My God, reading that list...and they arrest ministers for praying in the capitol.
Who are you America?
They arrest people for dancing at the Jefferson memorial, why should it surprise you?
http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Jefferson-Memorial-Dancing-a-No-No-122190509.html
Shouldn't "Homeland Security" be interested in protecting us from all threats. Is it really wise or constitutional to allocate resources based on religious, racial or political afiliations? That's really the most basic question we should all be asking. It's kind of like medicine. We no longer have GPs only specialists that only focus on one small issue and get paid extravagant fees for only a limited knowledge of the entire person. We end up seeing multiple specialists who never refer to the findings of the previous one. Not a really productive or successful model for the consumer.