DHS Report Says "Disgruntled Military Veterans" Might Be "Rightwing
Extremists"
By Chuck Baldwin
April 17, 2009


This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/c ... 90417.html


On the heels of the now infamous Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC)
report, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has just released an
"assessment" report entitled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and
Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment."
With virtually no references, documentation, or annotations, the report,
which was released to all branches of American law enforcement, demonizes a
host of citizens as having the capacity to become violent "rightwing
extremists."

The DHS report warns law enforcement to be on guard against anyone who
opposes illegal immigration, same-sex marriage, "free trade agreements," gun
control, the "New World Order," "One World Government," the outsourcing of
American jobs, the "perceived" threat to U.S. sovereignty by foreign powers,
abortion, "declarations of martial law," "the creation of citizen detention
camps," "suspension of the U.S. Constitution," or the abridgement of State
authority. Also branded are people who believe in "end times" prophecies,
and who "stockpile" food, ammunition, or firearms.

I dare say that at least 75% (or more) of the American people have beliefs
that fall into one or more categories of the above list. If you are one of
them, DHS suspects you of being a "rightwing extremist." But there is more.

The DHS report specifically warns law enforcement to be on guard against
"disgruntled military veterans," especially veterans returning from the wars
in Iraq and Afghanistan. You read it right.

Well, if anyone has a legitimate reason to be disgruntled, it is America's
veterans. After taking an oath to defend and support America and the U.S.
Constitution, they were ordered to fight a preemptive war of aggression in
Iraq; they were ordered to fight without a Declaration of War; they were
ordered to put their lives on the line, not for the safety and security of
the American people, but for international bankers, the United Nations, and
the "global economy." Then they returned home to a Department of Veteran's
Affairs that treats them as second-class citizens: VA hospitals are often
dirty and out-of-date; medical treatments are postponed; medications often
take months to arrive; and much of the promised care is never delivered at
all. If anyone has a right to be disgruntled, it is a military veteran.

That said, where is the evidence in the DHS report to substantiate the
necessity for American law enforcement to be on guard against potential
violence committed by military veterans? It doesn't exist. It is a blanket
charge without any substantiation whatsoever. The same is true for the rest
of the report. Without documentation, substantiation, or annotation, the
report broadly brushes a host of American citizens as being potential
"extremists" simply because of their political opinions. This is the same
kind of political profiling that we saw in the Missouri report.

Veterans groups nationwide are rightfully "up in arms" over the DHS report.
Feeling the wrath of public opinion, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano
yesterday "apologized" for "offending" veterans.

Fox News reported, "American Legion National Commander David Rehbein, who
blasted the report earlier this week as incomplete and politically-biased,
said he was pleased with Napolitano's apology." But not all veterans groups
share Rehbein's spirit of forgiveness.

Pete Hegseth, chairman of Vets for Freedom, snarled, "It wasn't an apology
in my view. It was one of those non-apology apologies. She was sorry that
veterans were offended. She should either apologize for the content of the
report as it stands or they should rewrite the report and reissue it."
Hegseth has it right!

Napolitano did not apologize for the report; she only said she was sorry
that vets were "offended" by the report. There is a vast difference. This is
the typical cow manure that we are accustomed to from non-elected
bureaucrats, especially federal bureaucrats.

And please notice that Napolitano offered no "apology" to pro-lifers,
proponents of the Second Amendment, constitutionalists, Christians, or
anyone else. She couldn't care less if any of these folks were offended. She
was only sorry that veterans were offended.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) also rightly blasted the DHS
report, saying its portrayal of veterans was "offensive and unacceptable."

House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said, "The
rightwing report uses broad generalizations about veterans, pro-life groups,
federalists and supporters of gun rights. That's like saying if you love
puppies, you might be susceptible to recruitment by the Animal Liberation
Front. It is ridiculous and deeply offensive to millions of Americans."

Ladies and gentlemen, the American people must put a stop to this burgeoning
political profiling that is currently being forced upon law enforcement. I
urge every reader of this column to immediately contact your U.S. House
member and two U.S. Senators, demanding that they put a stop to this right
now!

In the meantime, I believe we can also assume that the source of all of
these reports is either Morris Dees and his Southern Poverty Law Center
(SPLC) or the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), or both. If this is true (and we
desperately need some attorneys who are willing to file lawsuits in which
evidentiary material may be gleaned during discovery to substantiate these
assumptions), the SPLC and ADL--and those government bureaucrats who assist
them--need to be exposed and held accountable. The days of political
"witch-hunting" must come to an end. Furthermore, the days of radical
leftwing organizations, such as SPLC and ADL, being allowed to use federal
and state police agencies to demonize and terrorize private citizens because
of their political beliefs must also come to an end.

Obviously, DHS is still stinging from the embarrassment and setback of the
Missouri report, in which three of last year's Presidential candidates (Ron
Paul, Bob Barr, and myself) were personally named. In essence, people who
voted for and/or supported any one of us were directly labeled as being
potential dangerous "militia members." This blatant and outlandish
accusation resulted in a maelstrom of protest, which concluded with the
report being completely withdrawn. And this is exactly what people should
demand in the case of the DHS report: it should be immediately withdrawn!

The current DHS report does not include personal names, except the name of
Timothy McVeigh, who is used as an example of what any "disgruntled military
veteran" could become. It does, however, regurgitate the familiar themes of
the Missouri report: the same groups; the same beliefs; the same
generalizations; the same innuendoes; the same broad brushing; the same
warnings; the same mischaracterizations; the same political profiling.

As with the Missouri officials, Janet Napolitano has made a critical
misjudgment. By including veterans in her broad sweep of "rightwing
extremists," she has shown her true colors: and they are not Red, White and
Blue. Veterans throughout America should insist that not only must the
report be rescinded, but Ms. Napolitano must also resign.

P.S. My message this Sunday, April 19, will include a celebration and
commemoration of Patriot's Day, which--next to July 4--is America's greatest
day. This was the day the shot was fired that was heard round the world and
America's War for Independence began. I plan to read an eyewitness account
of the Battle of Lexington during my address. Watch online this Sunday,
April 19, at approximately 10:30 a.m. (Central Daylight Time). Go to

http://crossroadbaptist.net/live.html