Powered by TypePad

« Reality Bites (And Performs Simple Arithmetic) | Main | He's Ready To Tell Us His Secret »

April 15, 2009



Anyone know if those dolphins trying to prevent the Somali Pirates from illegaly invading Chinese Ships are Extremeist Right Wing dolphins?



Andrew Sullivan's argument seems to be that in the face of his persistant caution to Conservatives about engaging in what he regards as risky political behavior, the consequences of that risky behavior have now come home to roost. Though I do not buy his argument, I do for once believe Andrew is close to actually writing about a subject of which he has personal experience, though he has the subjects doing the cautioning and the object engaging in the risky behavior exactly backward. Regardless, he closes his pedantic screed with the following:

"No hard feelings. Glad to have you back on the side of liberty.

One small question, though: Where the fuck have you been these past seven years?"

Andrew Sullivan, classless to the end.

Tom Maguire
I do for once believe Andrew is close to actually writing about a subject of which he has personal experience...

If true this next bit is awkward:

"No hard feelings.

Well, if Andrew watches any televised baseball or basketball game for ten minutes he will be advised as to how to, hmm, get back in the game.

I suppose his point is that if only we had opposed Bush's stretching of the Constitution today we would not need to be worried about a politicized DHS that considers every tax protestor, pro-life advocate, or opponent of immigration amnesty to be half an inch short of becoming a violent right wing extremist.

I say there is little connection - if the DHS surveils the heck out of every right wing "extremist" out there based on their political views and without regard for their predisposition to violence, it is a problem even if the DHS does do everything with scrupulous legality.

Peole don't need to worry abut getting sent to Gitmo (now, Bagram) - the DHS could put them on a no-fly list (just as lefties fantasized Bush was doing) and have local cops hand out parking and speeding tickets every time the target breathes.


There would have been extreme right wing violence at the Republican convention here in St. Paul last year, if only the leftists screaming about peace and breaking plate glass windows weren't being protected by so many police.

Captain Hate

I'm glad you guys don the hazmat outfits and read Thully's swill; I'd have to scrub with a steel brush and lysol afterwards.

No hard feelings? Fuck you to death, Andi.


And then there are those crazed veterans..

I think this memo is outrageous but, perhaps because I'm in the middle of Ezra Levant's wonderful book about PC run amok in Canada, I note that this story would be on the front page if it were not "right wing" extremists being cautioned about but antiwar activists (cite Ayers and Dohrn),CAIR supporters, and Muslims (yesterday there was a splash when a written communication--letter or email--from the Moslem chaplain at Harvard saw the light of day. He supported the notion of death to apostates.


In a world where up means down it is inevitable that terrorist means right wing republican.

Meaning must have a purpose otherwise Statist tyrants will crush whatever remains of Liberty with just a few well-chosen words.

All one has to do is to look at Western Europe to see America's demise.

LTC John

Loathsome politics aside - Tom makes a good point. This is just plain shabby work product. These folks are charged with protecting us? Or should I say "you"? Since, being a returned combat vet, I'm more a threat than a protector of the Homeland...

BB Key

Do the guys who wrote this stuff get to remain annynomous bureacrats or will they step foward and tell us about their sources and methods ?


I'm taking bets. How many people do you think will show up at the Tea Parties today?

Chuck Pelto

TO: All
RE: Another 'Indicator'....

....has just fallen into its proper place on the worst-case scenario: The Rise of the 'American Militia' mime. But this time, instead of some bozos at the state-government level, this is more insidious, the federal level.

Keep watching for more indicators such as federal legislation banning the ownership of weapons, a Reichstag-Fire event, such as another dupe like McVeigh blowing something up. [Note: There was a major omnibus 'anti-terrorism' bill before Congress when that happened in OKC. Fortunately, Republicans had just gained control and were more level-headed than the Democrats would have been.]


[If you're not paranoid, you're not paying attention.]

Rick Ballard

"This is just plain shabby work product."

DHS was set up as the federal dud employee dump, we shouldn't expect more than "shabby" from them. The Big Buffoon seems a bit nervous these days. Ordering the black African teenagers heads blown off didn't come off exactly according to plan and the "green shoots" in the Obaconomy have been hit by a hard late frost.

I'm too far away to attend any Tea Parties, my Citi cards have been canceled, I don't have any AIG policies to cancel, I can find most of what I need at Walmart and my current transportation is good 'til inauguration day 2013.

I suppose I should spend a little of the money saved on helping defeat the dirty socialists. Didn't Scott mention that he was raising money to help put Dodd out of work (and into prison)?

Chuck Pelto

TO: LTC John
RE: Indeed

"....being a returned combat vet, I'm more a threat than a protector of the Homeland..." -- LTC John

And even more so because your oath upon commissioning, like that I took in 1975, does not hold us to obeying the President of the United States. It requires that we...

"...uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."


[God is alive....and airborne-ranger qualified.]

Rick Ballard


No matter the outcome today - it's a good warm up for the Independence Day festivities. Or, perhaps Defend the Constitution Day would be more apropos?


Good question, Jane, and I think it's very relevant, since the tea parties are probably what's really scaring them. This right-wing extremist b.s. is just a way to get out in front of the story that's going to be written tonight.

If they can find one or two protesters with intolerant signs, they'll use the pics to paint the whole thing as evidence of the truth of Napolitano's (and Obama's) fantasies. I think the DHS memo is just an attempt to exert control over their opponents. And it has a nice fascist feel to it, too, which is bonus for lefties.

Bill in AZ

[I'm taking bets. How many people do you think will show up at the Tea Parties today?]

A whole lot more than will be reported by Pravda.

TM - time for a new rotating title:
"We're all Right Wing Extremists Now"

In fact, my sign for the Tea Party will be "Average White Wing Extremist"


One can be a domestic terrorist blowing-up police stations and private homes just as long as one is a tenured professor at a major university.

America's biggest problem is America is being educated by Darwinian apes who are devolving back to a primitive state of slime.

PS don't wad any panties....I'm just having fun with words.

Fresh Air

So was this bottom-rung investigation leaked and chirped out in a press release? If it was leaked, do you suppose the point was the same as the ACORN mission--to try to make Tea Party attendees look like stump-toothed, gun-toting, Mexican-hating members of the Alabama Anti-Wetback Militia? Thought so.

See, what you have here is the plain truth: We understand lefties, but they don't understand us. They can't stare at truth for fear of blindness.


I'm taking bets. How many people do you think will show up at the Tea Parties today?

More than few. There have already been local tea parties here, and there are now some scheduled for the State capital today. There was some Dim spokesman on the Radio this morning claiming that these tea parties were an "astroturfing campaign funded by big time Republican organizations." Uhm, or not.


Bill Whittle exhorts folks to attend a tea party today.

Soylent Red

LTC John is right. Shoddy work product. Take it from someone who knows: "Open Source" typically means "I found it on the internet". That factoid alone is enough to make me think twice about what and where I am seen on the internet. And the fact that I am thinking that way is enough to worry me greatly.


This really shouldn't surprise anyone. During the Clinton years, the FBI's anti-terror sections main priority was anti-abortion groups. The project was called http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_26_16/ai_63583803/>VAAPCON. They even had FBI agents writing up files on Falwell and all other prominent anti-abortion advocates and tracking the lobbying efforts of anti-abortion groups under the justification that anyone who opposed abortion was one step away from a bomber.

Of course, back in the 90s, that was ok because it wasn't like Al Qaeda was planning to attack the US, or infiltrating people here to attend flight school, or flying cross country to recon flights to use in a major attack or any other indications of possible threat to the US. Nope, the FBI was focused like a laser beam on the anti-abortion movement, and anyone who opposed abortion was a ligitimate target of investigation. This decision to focus on anti-abortion groups was made after the first bomb attack on the World Trade Center by the way.

I don't recall Sullivan complaining about that at all at the time though. Of course, for a Dem, criminalizing political opposition is second nature.


"Open Source" typically means "I found it on the internet".

I wondered about the use of this term. In the computer world, where it originated, it means that you are free to examine and modify the source code (namely, it is open) that when compiled becomes the program you run. There are various restrictions by the license used, but that is beside the point here.

Somehow I don't think "open source" here has anything to do with transparency, but that is the entire idea of open source.

So where's the code?

Captain Hate


I was thinking the same thing: Where's the Linux equivalent?

btw, speaking of media preoccupations, why isn't Cindy Sheehan speaking troof to power these days?


OTOH, Thully is an expert on risky behavior.


So, the real question is, is Obama preparing to sell a war on Right Wing Extremists Groups based on faulty intel?

Obama Lied! Democracy Died!


I know I'm scary. Haul me off to jail.


Where's the Linux equivalent?

Not to quibble, but let me quibble. The original open-source licenses were the MIT (for X11) and BSD (for Net/FreeBSD). Linux came later. So there are many open-source licenses, but all mean you have the underlying source.

But the point is absolutely right: what on earth does this term mean when there is no transparency?


is Obama preparing to sell a war on Right Wing Extremists Groups based on faulty intel?

Anyone opposing Obama will be labeled unpatriotic, or worse.


It really is a sad situation. Either this report is so bad because DHS is full of really incompetent people, or it is so bad because it is exactly what the DHS people wanted to produce; a justification to establish a VAAPCON type intel operation against the entire political opposition to Obama's agenda.


Federal agents will be videotaping the tea party participants today. Mark Davis, WBAP, just ran a clip where a producer asked (I apologize, I missed the man's name) someone at DHS that question and he would neither confirm not deny they were. Smile pretty Jane!



Get a tea bag and tie it to your rear view mirror. That gets you with us in spirit.

Amy predicts 50,000 tea partiers. I predict 8 million. Perhaps some of you will wager a number in between.

Oh and the people with the racist and extremists signs are being paid for by George Soros. Those are the people I intend to interview first.

Charlie (Colorado)

I'm taking bets. How many people do you think will show up at the Tea Parties today?

Can I have $10 on "lots and lots"?


O/T, but not really

I'm expecting the president to chastize Jamie Foxx and friends for their racist attack on Miley Cyrus.

Charlie (Colorado)

"Open Source" typically means "I found it on the internet".

When it doesn't mean "I puled it out of my ass."


Open source in the context of intelligence means analysis that's based on publicly available information - such as news reports, public web sites, brochures, leaflets, posters, etc, etc. - as opposed to, say, field reports from agents, or other data which is not public.

It doesn't have anything to do with the software meaning of the term. In fact, I think analysts talking about "open sources" may predate the software/copyright usage.

Charlie (Colorado)

DrJ, it really is a term of art that predates rms's white whale: open sources are things that are published or openly available instead of collected covertly by SIGINT or HUMINT. So CIA subscribes to all news feeds, has every embassy buying newspapers off the street (and probably now recording all TV channels all the time).

Notice this stuff is all classified (U), sometimes (U//FOUO) or (U//LES) -- unclassified, sometimes with the caveat "for official use only" or "law enforcement sensitive" -- which suggests there aren't any other sources and methods involved.


Having worked at DoD, anyone who ever put such a shoddy work together would have been taken out of that position. Open Source is more than just a few internet searches, and needs to be backed by other open source documentation (books, reference works, testimony, etc.) to demonstrate background and veracity.

Once you take out the material that is hearsay, not backed by actual evidence, and otherwise not corroborated by demonstrable reporting by multiple organizations you are left with a couple of non-militia, 'lone wolf' or sub-10 person groups. Tim McVeigh's actual operational group was at the sub-10 person range, but has indications of backing from overseas which has never been followed-up. Eric Rudolph, and the killer of Bernard Sleppian are 'lone wolf' attacks. For every one of those I'll see you a Squeaky Fromme and raise you a deranged Hinckley.

The 'militia movements' are always scary words to bypass the neglect of States and local communities to encouraging self-defense organizations with no permanent standing but can be called upon in times of 'invasion or Danger that will not admit delay' as is in Art. I, Sec. 10 of the US Constitution. States fought hard to get that in there and now neglect it, entirely.

Then there is the attempt to paint purely political causes as 'recruitment' venues for 'extremists'. Can we get some evidence of that, please, on the right? And what about naming groups that DHS has done with the Left, where are the groups that are into these nefarious activities? They name them for the left, but not the right, thus allowing the left to characterize those as a few groups that just don't represent them, but then allow any civil problems with civil government over taxation and actual authority to do certain things as 'extremist' on the other side of the fence. A similar bit for the left would read that 'global warming gatherings serve as recruiting opportunities for ELF'. Wouldn't that be nice to hear? Ditto with those wanting 'renewable' energy sources that cost too much and don't yield the efficiencies they are purported to gain. Bunch of ELF-leaning sympathizers! But you can't say that because the linkage isn't done by DHS.

Of course if you think this can only be used against the right, people on the left do need to look at the rise to power of left authoritarian governments and how quickly they get rid of initial sympathizers once their purpose has been served. By that point it is too late to complain because you never bothered to uphold the liberty of others, and now find it was your own you were tossing away.


Remember when Obama threw out a totally bogus statistic about anti-hispanic hate crimes during the election?

What was that?


tea bags

Please. Use loose tea. Tea in swimming suits is uncivilized.


David Cornball is po-ed at Gibbs about the Spanish Inquisition. LUN

I can't wait to see what the WH position is going to be.


There seems to be an analysis problem here. We are arguing that the big deal is that in this case the Government is incompetent in deciding who is and who is not a terrorist. As right as we are, we are nitpicking methods. In other words, we are saying that a big nanny state is just fine, as long as they do a good job identifying terrorists. We trusted the Government to get big and benevolent with surveillance. We gave them Patriot act, and Protect America act, and FISA reform, trusting that they would not elect to turn those powers against us. And now we have Obama, who all the sudden has abandoned his campaign promises to "protect civil liberties". Why? Because he wants to use the nanny state to collect taxes and monitor whomever he deems a terrorist... us. Sorry to admit this, but Sullivan hits more on the root of the problem. Making investigators use better methods or avoid PC motivations for investigations will not solve the root problem.


A few points, perhaps in mitigation, perhaps not:

1. This report is supposed to be one in a series of reports, per the introduction to it. There may be other reports going to law enforcement. Per the disclaimer on the document, these reports are not supposed to be public -- hence there is no easy way to find out.

2. The outfit that produced this stuff has been around a while. See the link for a description of the work of this group, and their methodology for producing reports.

3. Generally, when one of these reports becomes public, they always seem strangely lacking in substantive content. I don't work in govenment so maybe someone can opine -- is this typical, or is it just because the report is not classified?



There is a contribute button

He's still trying to get staff set up etc. Rob is featured speaker at Norwich CT. Tea party this afternoon. I plan on being there.

Except for this part of the oath
....and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me....
for all services except Army

Charlie (Colorado)

Having worked at DoD, anyone who ever put such a shoddy work together would have been taken out of that position.

But it looks like the sort of crap CIA promulgates all the time: homogenized, all facts removed, and suiting the political opinion of the drafter.

It's like I've said before: if they observe competence in an employee at CIA, they make them transfer to NSA. On the other hand, aspiring bureaucrats short on useful skills move to CIA.


The best part of the report for me is the use of the word terrorist when referring to Americans. Just make sure you call overseas terrorism "man made disasters". Well, we have a "man made disaster" right here at home. His name is Obama.

Charlie (Colorado)

Please. Use loose tea. Tea in swimming suits is uncivilized.

Signing loose tea legibly is going to be quite a trick.



oops.... I was wrong got confused by National Guard Oath and Oath of enlistment.

I should know better than to trust my memory.

Rob Crawford

Odd (OK, not really) that "Appalled" is defending this thing.


DC cops are taking tea bags away from protesters. Per The Corner.


Park police, not DC police. I think they are different entities.


well we saw with the two PDBs, the first detailed persons like the late Abu Haf al Masri (Mohammed Atef) and Seif Al Adel, Col Mokkawi, the second only a month from D day
excised that information and had none of the
details from the Phoenix Memo, or other info
like the presence of Al Midhar and Al Hazmi
in this country, The NIE's have also been very sloppy, the last relying almost entirely on Asghari, and leaving out the Mousavian letter to the Ayatollah, showing how they had fooled the PC-3 negotiators


This is from FactCheck, when Obama in a presidential debate claimed we had seen hate crimes against hispanics "skyrocket":

Obama's "Skyrocket" Dud

However, Obama was being overly dramatic when he said, "we have seen hate crimes skyrocket in the wake of the immigration debate."

That's saying a bit much. When we asked his campaign for documentation, they pointed us to the most recent FBI statistics, which actually show that the number of incidents classified officially as "hate crimes" went up 7.8 percent in 2006. (Figures for 2007, which would show what occurred during and after the highly charged debate on the House and Senate immigration bills last year, won't be available until much later in 2008.)

We think a 7.8 percent increase hardly qualifies as a "skyrocket." Looking only at the incidents in which Hispanics were targeted, "hate crimes" rose a bit more, 10.3 percent, but that's hardly a rocket-propelled rise either. Furthermore, the number of anti-Hispanic incidents fluctuates widely from year to year. During the last 11 years, the number of incidents nationwide has bounced around between a low of 426 in 2003 and a high of 597 in 2001, according to the FBI Uniform Crime Reports. It was 576 in 2006.

Cecil Turner

Sorry to admit this, but Sullivan hits more on the root of the problem.

Sorry, but that's dumber'n dirt. The need for FISA reform was primarily because a bunch of leftist twits (specifically including excitable Andy) decided to define "domestic surveillance" as including communications between overseas Al Qaeda members and unknown persons in the United States. Obviously we want to intercept those communications, and just as obviously, any system can be abused. The idea that we need a left-leaning jurist type to look it over provides little assurance against politicizing definitions, and guarantees the national defense portion will be ineffective.


Signing loose tea legibly is going to be quite a trick.

It's a might problematic hanging it from ones rear view mirror as well.

Charlie (Colorado)

3. Generally, when one of these reports becomes public, they always seem strangely lacking in substantive content. I don't work in govenment so maybe someone can opine -- is this typical, or is it just because the report is not classified?

Some of each. On one hand, most of the really good stuff will have come from protected sources, or by aggregation with protected sources, and would be classified at least confidential, probably higher. On the other hand, the whole process of making a report of this sort tends to homogenize it, as anything that could actually be proven wrong is removed, lest it return to bite. I did a piece last year on the "SNAFU Principle" that talks more about that effect.


And this, via Newsbusters, from an Obama fundraiser in spring 2008:

"A certain segment has basically been feeding a kind of xenophobia. There's a reason why hate crimes against Hispanic people doubled last year,'' Obama said. "If you have people like Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh ginning things up, it's not surprising that would happen."


I wonder if "Appalled" was worried about the Clintons using the FBI to conduct government funded opposition research against the pro-choice movement in the 90s?

Of course VAAPCON project (Violence Against Abortion Practisioners Conspiracy) wasn't a politicization of the DoJ. Because using the FBI to determine how anti-abortion groups are lobbying is a perfectly legitimate use of Federal law enforcement.

This report is going to be used to justify massive government funded opposition research against everyone and anyone who opposes Obama's agenda.


It seems obvious to me that this is part of the our-political-opponents-are-dangerous-knichledragging-women-and-minority-haters thang.
It has worked for the left since at least the mid-60's and it is being revived big time because of considerable middle of the oraders' opposition to the Dems' economic tax and spend bonanza.It was released now to undercut the tea parties' impact on the public consciousness.

Try getting the truth out thru the MSM screen. I dare you.


Sullivan's argument seems to be admitting one of two extraordinarily stupid things;
1. People on the right who criticize the government are equivalent to Islamic terrorists, or;
2. Surveilling Aryan Nation/Tim Mcveigh types is equivalent to the lefty canard of Bush checking up on left wing public library reading habits.

The problem here is the usual one of the left inventing a fantasy world and then responding to their own fairy tails (no more Sully jokes please).

The fantasy in this case of course is that Bush was surveilling innocent Americans merely for expressing the most benign of liberal dissenting views. Further, when DHS now seems to conflate mainstream conservative/libertarian dissent with Nazis etal we are supposed to act humbled because Sullivan warned us of this when Bush was going out of his way (too far IMO) to NOT conflate Islamic terrorists with American lefties.

Rick Ballard


Thanks for the link to Simmons' effort to oust Dodd. Now I'm torn between putting money into that run or into the Toomey effort to rid us of Specter.

I suppose sending money to both is probably the best solution.


"obviously, any system can be abused."

You can try to dodge responsibility here, but anytime you yield a "system" or a right or a power to a rotating king, you should be prepared to reap what you sow.


**KNUCKLE dragging***


I predict 4 million tea partiers. But it will not be easy to figure out how many people really showed up, esp. when the MSM starts writing their usual BS.

There are 64 tea parties scheduled for TX alone, according to Rick Perry.


As I said in the other thread, Caro just called from the Hartford Tea party - she reports 400 people so far.

D. Biernesser

Scott, as you noted above (thanks), the part of the oath about the President is for enlisted only.

As you noted, officers don't have that in their oath. Each service's oath of office may vary slightly (the Army's does). The USAF, as of 2004, used the version administered to Vice Presidents. (Which means that the Honorable Mr. Biden presumably swore this oath...)

I, A— B—, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.[8]


Hi All - So far I still have a job, but the next 6 months will tell...

OT Question for the attorney's:

I was on jury duty last week, as a juror - the trial was Count 1- Felony Forcible Rape, Count 2 - Felony assault to commit great bodliy harm. Victim was 15 at the time, defendant was 18.

In a nutshell, due to lack of evidence we could not convict WRT the two greater charges, nor the lesser charges to each count. The consensus was it was consensual and two liars in a he said/she said tug of war.

But my question is this: (Since the defendant admitted he did have consensual sex with the victim albeit no rape or assault was involved)we aquitted him on all counts. Can or will the state charge him now with statutory rape?


Corn should have used his followu-up thusly, "Don't be an ass, Gibbs, and don't play word games. You understand the thrust of the question, so now address it."

See how long the White House continues to play games when its unmentionables are hung out to dry in public.


Please. Use loose tea.

America: Love it and leaf it.


I suppose they could, enlightened unless somehoe it is considered to have been covered in the prior charges and therefore the state is barred under double jeopardy. I be they don't though..




I think we need to check Caro's math


Wow Scott, that is GREAT.

Rick - if you have to choose, choose Toomey.

Can or will the state charge him now with statutory rape?

My guess is that is discretionary. It would be around here.


Let's work on signs we can put outside our houses to make DHS' work easier.


Rob Crawford & ranger:

Not really defending the report (which looks like somebody's last minute paper for the junior high social studies class). I'm just curious about the context -- which may go a bit deeper than a simple "Obama wants to smear the right." My guess is that this was written without prompting by either Obama or Napolitano. Instead, it was likely an "inside job" written by the sort of folks that, when they are at the Department of Justice, irritate clarice.

Charlie (Colorado)

My guess is that this was written without prompting by either Obama or Napolitano. Instead, it was likely an "inside job" written by the sort of folks that, when they are at the Department of Justice, irritate clarice.

That's probable. The fact that it got released, and the timing, could be mediated by political appointees, though. It also appears that there is a similar report on left-wing domestic terrorism, but I haven't seen details of that.

However, for an instructive hypothetical, consider what the press reaction would have been if the equivalent left-wing report had been leaked just before a major antiwar demonstration during Bush's administration?


Appalled- much of the thinking in the report directly mirrors candidate Obama's assertions, as I quoted.

This is in the report:

"Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policy generally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment, but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent."

Whereas candidate Obama was daring enough to name Rush Limbaugh and Lou Dobbs as ginning up extremist anti-immigrant outrage that had led to an increase in hate crimes against hispanics (a false claim).

So you do the math.


White House is claiming Obama not aware of the tax protests.


Obama distances himself from the DHS report. Rush wonders how he can do that? Distance himself from his own cabinet members?


March CBO baselines are out.

Holy CARP!!!!!


Enactment of stimulus legislation and omnibus appropri­ations, a worsening of the economic outlook, and other factors have increased CBO’s projections of the deficit by more than $400 billion in both 2009 and 2010 and by smaller amounts thereafter. As a result, if current policies remain the same, CBO now anticipates that the deficit will total almost $1.7 trillion (11.9 percent of gross domestic product, or GDP) this year and $1.1 trillion (7.9 percent of GDP) next year, the largest deficits as a share of GDP since 1945 (see Table 1-1).

This may be old news to some.


Meanwhile, the MSM can't, or refuses, to get a handle on left wing violence: Media Having Trouble Finding Right Angle On Obama's Double-Homicide


White House is claiming Obama not aware of the tax protests.

And they tried to claim that Bush was in a bubble?



Is this for real?

Supposed to be from an ACORN Email.

Surely it's a hoax.

"As you may know a bunch of redneck traitors are planning a protest on April 15th involving waving around a few tea bags and demonstrating mild irritation at Prez. Obama for making them pay taxes. Here is your chance to do your duty for your president and country and send these fools an unmistakable message.

First of all you can sign up at Huffington Post to become a tea party reporter. It would be a good idea to meet some people to take names and also pictures if possible which should also be forwarded to Janet Napolitano at the DHS.

Next you can join with our comrades at ACORN who have plans afoot to disperse these traitors.

Basically the plan works like this - ACORN has infiltrated the redneck groups that are planning all this. On the 15th at the proper moment a van pulls up with 5 young black women with pro Obama signs. They will be peaceful and respectful. Our infiltrators will verbally attack them with profanity and racial slurs and physically push them around while our camera crew films. In a minute they take off and it is all over.

Doesn't seem like much till that night when the video gets put on the news and all you see are crazy hillbilly conservatives attacking innocent black counter protesters, shouting racial slurs and pushing them around.

You too can be a part of the glorious moment in history and help keep these traitors in check."


Nice to see you back, anduril.
Don't know it that's real or not, Po, but I'd say that's how it's done.


I think it's for real. I mean, they've got a photo of the crime scene and everything! Doesn't seem much crazier than some of the other shit that's going down. Look at it this way, if you can believe an Obama or Bernanke speech (Brace For Hyper-Inflation) then why not believe an Onion news article?


Hi, anduril! I just got back from the Austin tea party and didn't see any counterprotesters, for what it's worth. The rally was very well organized and quite peaceful, aside from loud cheering and applause of course. Since it's Austin I would have assumed this was as likely a city as any for counterprotesters to show up.

I posted my tea party recap on the other thread, but briefly, there were at least 1500 people there just after noon when Rick Perry took the stage. This was reported as 400 people by the local TV news station, and the story was filed at 11:53 am. Ridiculous.


Some context about the sort of thing these DHS reports are supposed to cover:

Terrorists are not the only violent domestic extremists who can potentially threaten our security at home. We are concerned with all types of violent extremists, including racial supremacists, anarchists, ecoterrorists, Islamic extremists, and animal rights radicals. The most active are environmental and animal rights extremists, whose actions have resulted in millions of dollars in property damage. Finally, white supremacists are the most capable of violent domestic radicals and have the potential to mount attacks on the scale of the Oklahoma City bombing. At the local level, the activity of groups like Hammerskin Nation and variety of outlaw motorcycle gangs is a constant concern. Our analysis of how different groups become radicalized—and the threats they pose to the U.S.—aids federal, state and local law enforcement in their efforts to provide security at home. All of our analysis is performed while abiding by applicable rules that protect the American people’s rights to privacy and civil liberties.

Source is a speech from Charles E. Allen, Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis /Chief Intelligence Officer
at Homeland Security (as of Oct 2008). LUN.

I wonder if this report was supposed to provide "balance" to earlier reports about enviro-terrorists and animal rights lunatics. There's no way to know without further leaks.



Here is a http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/15/the-vaunted-left-wing-extremism-report/>link to and Capt. Ed's take on the 2001 Leftwing Extremism report.

He notes that the report focuses on the threat of cyber attack, not actual physical attacks despite the fact that many of the specific groups cited actually conducted many physical attacks.

I attribute this to the fact that the grand shithead Richard Clark was head of Counter Terrorism, and cyber security was his "big thing" (so much so that he was eventually eased out and giving a job that let him focus entirely on cyber defense).

And, you still haven't addressed my main issue with this, which is that this type of report looks designed to justify a wide ranging opposition research operation by the DHS on anyone who opposes Obama's agenda, just as, in the wake of the first Twin Towers attack, the DoJ chose to set up the VAAPCON operation which focused on opponents of a key policy dispute to the Clinton administration rather than foreign radicals that had tried to destory a key financial center in the US.


I do not know how to post the DHS pdf file--Here is their report on left wing extremists:



Enforcement Sensitive (LES) information. No portion of the LES information

should be released to the media, the general public, or over non-secure
Internet servers. Release of this information could adversely affect or

investigative activities.

(U) Warning: This document is UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (U//FOUO).
It contains information that may be exempt from public release under the

Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). It is to be controlled, stored,
handled, transmitted, distributed, and disposed of in accordance with DHS
policy relating to

FOUO information and is not to be released to the public, the media, or
other personnel who do not have a valid need-to-know without prior approval
of an authorized

DHS official. State and local homeland security officials may share this
document with authorized security personnel without further approval from

(U) This product contains U.S. person information that has been deemed
necessary for the intended recipient to understand, assess, or act on the

provided. It has been highlighted in this document with the label USPER and
should be handled in accordance with the recipient's intelligence oversight

information handling procedures. Other U.S. person information has been
minimized. Should you require the minimized U.S. person information, please

the DHS/I&A Production Branch at [email protected], [email protected], or
[email protected].

(U//FOUO) Leftwing Extremists Likely to Increase

Use of Cyber Attacks over the Coming Decade

26 January 2009

(U) Prepared by the Strategic Analysis Group, Homeland Environment and
Threat Analysis Division.

(U) Scope

(U//FOUO) This product is one of a series of intelligence assessments

by the DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) Strategic Analysis

to facilitate a greater understanding of the emerging threats to the United

The information is provided to federal, state, and local counterterrorism
and law

enforcement officials so they may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or

to terrorist attacks against the United States.

(U//FOUO) This assessment examines the potential threat to homeland security

cyber attacks conducted by leftwing extremists, a threat that DHS/I&A
believes likely

will grow over the next decade. It focuses on the more prominent leftwing
groups within

the animal rights, environmental, and anarchist extremist movements that
promote or

have conducted criminal or terrorist activities (see Appendix). This
assessment is

intended to alert DHS policymakers, state and local officials, and
intelligence analysts

monitoring the subject so they can better focus their collection
requirements and analysis.

(U//FOUO) The key assumptions underpinning this report include:

- (U//FOUO) Cyber attack capabilities will continue to proliferate and be


- (U//FOUO) Some cyber attack capabilities will continue to outpace




Page 2 of 7

- (U//FOUO) Leftwing extremists will continue to focus on what they consider

economic targets.

- (U//FOUO) Economic enterprises and other organizations will become more

dependent on advanced information technologies.

(U) Source Summary Statement

(U//FOUO) This assessment reflects primarily intelligence reporting from
federal, state, and local

agencies at the Unclassified//For Official Use Only level. Key judgments are
based largely on field

agent reporting considered highly reliable and on law enforcement finished
intelligence. By design, the

judgments use an estimative analytic approach. DHS subject-matter experts in
the areas of domestic

leftwing extremism and cyber technologies provided support for threat and
trend analysis. In addition,

DHS/I&A examined leftwing extremist media for evidence pointing to
ideological shifts or changes in

motivation and intent. Government crime data specific to leftwing extremist
cyber attacks are

unavailable, but DHS/I&A assesses that open source and other data accurately
frame leftwing extremist

goals and motivations, although some of the sources may have provided
information intended to

deceive or mislead. Other open source information included business journals
and research institute




Page 3 of 7

(U) Key Findings

(U//FOUO) DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) judges that a number

emerging trends point to leftwing extremists maturing and expanding their
cyber attack

capabilities over the next decade with the aim of attacking targets in the
United States.

- (U//FOUO) The potential for economic damage, the individually-initiated

anonymous nature of cyber attacks, and the perception that cyber attacks are

nonviolent align well with the ideological beliefs, strategic objectives,

tactics of many leftwing extremists.

- (U//FOUO) The increasing reliance of commercial businesses and other

enterprises on cyber technologies, including interconnected networks and

remote access, creates new and expanding vulnerabilities that

leftwing extremists will exploit.

- (U//FOUO) The proliferation of cyber technologies and expertise as well as

public availability of online hacking tools and "hackers-for-hire" offer

extremists incentives to adopt a cyber attack strategy.

(U) Appeal of Cyber Attacks

(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that cyber attacks are attractive options to

extremists who view attacks on economic targets as aligning with their

"no-harm" doctrine and tactic of "direct action."

- (U//FOUO) Their no-harm doctrine includes claiming to ensure the safety of

humans, animals, and the environment even as they attack businesses and

associated operations.

- (U//FOUO) Many leftwing extremists use the tactic of direct action to

economic damage on businesses and other targets to force the targeted

organization to abandon what the extremists deem objectionable. Direct

range from animal releases, property theft, vandalism, and cyber attacks-all

which extremists regard as nonviolent-to bombings and arson.

- (U//FOUO) The North American Earth Liberation Front Press Office, the

arm of the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), published the following guidance

activists: "By inflicting as much economic damage as possible, the ELF can

a given entity to decide if it is in their [sic] best economic interest to

destroying life for the sake of profit."

(U//FOUO) Lone wolves and small cells can conduct highly-effective cyber

consistent with the strategy of leaderless resistance that many leftwing

embrace. DHS/I&A assesses that this facet of leftwing extremist operational



Page 4 of 7

will further encourage some extremists to improve their cyber attack
capabilities and

possibly encourage recruitment of individuals with sophisticated cyber
skills into their

trusted circles. Furthermore, extremists can apply their cyber skills in
support of a

number of different leftwing movements, a capability that is consistent with
the frequent

shifting of individuals among movements.

(U) The most common leftwing extremist cyber attacks (particularly within
the animal

rights movement) in the past several years have included deletion of user

flooding a company's server with e-mails, and other types of e-mail assaults
intended to

force businesses to exhaust resources.

- (U//FOUO) On 13 July 2007, an animal rights extremist hacked into a

U.S. company's computer system and deleted more than 300 associates' user

accounts. To restore the accounts, the perpetrator demanded that the company

sell its shares in a corporation that conducts tests using animal subjects.

- (U//FOUO) In October 2005, animal rights extremists launched an e-mail

against a Milwaukee, Wisconsin firm that held stock in an animal testing

laboratory. The firm subsequently sold its shares in the laboratory, with
losses it

estimated at approximately $1.4 million.

- (U//FOUO) In late April 2005, animal rights extremists overwhelmed a

U.S. company's computer server with e-mail, which the company claims

in a loss of approximately $1.25 million.

(U) Attractive Strategy for the Future

(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A judges that the cyber attack option will become

attractive to leftwing extremists as companies' reliance on cyber
technologies grows.

DHS/I&A also assesses that these extremists will improve their cyber attack

by keeping pace with emerging technologies and overcoming countermeasures

develop over the period of this assessment.

(U) Increasing Reliance on Cyber Technologies

(U//FOUO) Businesses and other enterprises rely on interconnected computer

for operational continuity, storage of vital data, and communications,

vulnerabilities that leftwing extremists could exploit. For example, the use
of integrated

(U) Leaderless Resistance

(U//FOUO) Leaderless resistance stresses the importance of individuals and
small cells operating

independently and anonymously outside of formalized organizational
structures or leadership in order

to increase operational security and avoid detection. Postings on extremist
websites and other online

media forums offer guidance on objectives, tactics, and target selection.
Followers are encouraged to

self-train, promote their own objectives, and conduct attacks on their own



Page 5 of 7

systems and remote access creates opportunities for computer intrusion and
data theft

through poorly-monitored or unsecured connections. In this target rich

cyber attacks likely will become an increasingly attractive option,
particularly on

businesses and industries that extremists consider high-priority targets.

- (U) The logging industry, a principal target for environmental extremists
and an

industry not traditionally associated with cyber technologies, now relies on

integrated systems to support forestry operations.

- (U) The farming industry also is experiencing a growth in the use of

technologies, such as Global Positioning Systems and remote sensing, to cut

and manage crop production. The agricultural industry often is a target of

environmental extremists who oppose genetically-modified crop production.

(U) Proliferation of Cyber Attack Tools and Expertise

(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A believes that the availability of cyber technologies and

such as online hacking tools and hackers-for-hire provides leftwing
extremists with

resources to augment their own homegrown cyber attack capabilities.
Resources and

capabilities for successful cyber attacks are becoming more accessible to
the public as

evidenced by online advertisements for hacking services and software. A
simple online

search provides users with numerous links to discussion forums and websites
that offer

hacking tutorials and information regarding exploitable system

In addition, illegal file-sharing sites allow pirated copies of hacking
software to be freely


- (U//FOUO) In October 2007, law enforcement authorities discovered a group

advertising hacking services to customers seeking passwords to the e-mail

accounts of spouses, employees, and business competitors.

- (U//FOUO) A website identified early in 2008 originating in the United

provided customers the ability to purchase and download hacking tools and

malicious codes as well as video tutorials on how to use the software.

(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A believes that the emerging trend exhibited by some

extremists of posting hacking-related materials on their websites signifies
their intent

to develop more robust cyber strategies over the coming decade.

- (U) The Anarchist Cookbook, continually updated and revised in online

and accessible on numerous anarchist, animal rights, and environmental

contains several chapters focusing on hacking techniques and tutorials.



Page 6 of 7

(U) Potential Range of Target Selection

- (U) Popular anarchist Internet

groups such as The HacktivistUSPER

and Internet Liberation FrontUSPER

promote hacking as a means of

direct action and publish links to

hacking resources on their websites.

(U) Potential Targets

(U//FOUO) Based on an analysis of previous limited attacks, both cyber and

and on the prospective growing advantages of cyber attacks in the future,

judges that potential targets likely will expand to include a broader set of

and critical infrastructure that extremists associate with harming animals

degrading the natural environment, as well as icons of capitalism and

- (U//FOUO) In addition, DHS/I&A judges that leftwing extremists will build

upon the perceived success of previous, noncyber attacks on secondary

organizations with business links to a primary target-and increasingly will

secondary and possibly tertiary targets. One animal rights extremist website

claims that attacks on secondary businesses have resulted in more than 200

companies severing ties with the primary target organization. Secondary

in previous, noncyber attacks have included financial partners and suppliers

associated with the principal target organization.

(U//FOUO) The international nature of many types of cyber attacks means that

more attackers will be available to attack a greater number of distant
targets, including

those in the United States. A recent study of noncyber attacks demonstrates
that a

majority of leftwing extremists previously have focused their efforts
locally and limited

their targeting to within 30 miles of where they live; global connectivity,
however, makes

the distance between the cyber attacker and the target irrelevant.

- (U) One extremist animal rights group's monthly newsletter stated that

in today's technological age, computer systems are the real front doors to

companies. So instead of chaining ourselves together in the physical

doorways of businesses we can achieve the same effect from the comfort

[sic] our armchairs.

(U) Hacktivism: The convergence of

"hacking" and "activism," using cyber

technologies to achieve a political end.

Hacktivism includes website defacement,

denial-of-service attacks, hacking into the

target's network to introduce malicious

software, information theft, insider attacks,

economic sabotage, and other malicious

Internet-based activities.

(U//FOUO) Huntingdon

Life Sciences (HLS)

(A UK-based company with

facilities in the United States

and a high priority target of

extremist animal rights groups.)

(U) Primary Target (U//FOUO) Wachovia BankUSPER

(Shareholder in HLS; attacked by

extremist animal rights group in 2007.)

(U) Secondary Target

(U//LES) Staples Office SupplyUSPER

(Provider of office supplies to HLS;

attacked throughout April and May

2008 by extremist animal rights groups.)

(U//FOUO) Investment Firms,

Shareholders, Indirect Service


(Advertising and Media, Legal,

Administrative, or Janitorial)

(U) Tertiary Target



Page 7 of 7

(U) Potential Indicators

(U//FOUO) The following highlight a range of signposts that may expose

extremists' intent-either domestically or abroad-to develop more robust
cyber attack


- (U//FOUO) Increasing number of statements by leftwing extremists

the use of cyber attack techniques.

- (U//FOUO) Increasing number of communiques published on leftwing extremist

websites claiming credit for cyber attacks.

- (U//FOUO) Suspicious cyber attack activity or increased frequency,
creativity, or

severity against traditional primary, secondary, and tertiary targets of


- (U//FOUO) Evidence that leftwing extremist groups or activists are
recruiting or

attempting to acquire the services of individuals with cyber capabilities.

(U) Reporting Notice:

(U) DHS encourages recipients of this document to report information
concerning suspicious or criminal

activity to DHS and the FBI. The DHS National Operations Center (NOC) can be
reached by telephone at

202-282-9685 or by e-mail at [email protected]. For information affecting
the private sector and

critical infrastructure, contact the National Infrastructure Coordinating
Center (NICC), a sub-element of the

NOC. The NICC can be reached by telephone at 202-282-9201 or by e-mail at
[email protected]. The FBI

regional phone numbers can be found online at
http://www.fbi.gov/contact/fo/fo.htm. When available,

each report submitted should include the date, time, location, type of
activity, number of people and type of

equipment used for the activity, the name of the submitting company or
organization, and a designated

point of contact.

(U) For comments or questions related to the content or dissemination of
this document please contact the

DHS/I&A Production Branch at [email protected], [email protected], or
[email protected].

(U) Tracked by: CRIM-040600-01-05, TERR-060100-01-05, TERR-060800-01-05

(U) Cyber Attack Terms

(U) Cyber attacks are malicious acts that degrade the availability,
integrity, or security of data. Cyber

attack techniques are constantly evolving; some examples include the

- (U) Unauthorized intrusions into computer networks and systems.

- (U) Website defacement or subtle changes to web pages in order to
disseminate false


- (U) Information theft, computer network exploitation, and extortion.

- (U) Denial-of-service attacks, typically by overwhelming the resources of
the system.

- (U) The introduction of malicious software into a computer network.



(U) Appendix: Leftwing Extremists

(U//FOUO) DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines leftwing
extremists as

groups or individuals who embrace radical elements of the anarchist, animal
rights, or

environmental movements and are often willing to violate the law to achieve

objectives. Many leftwing extremist groups are not hierarchically ordered
with defined

members, leaders, or chain of command structures but operate as

underground movements composed of "lone wolves," small cells, and splinter

- (U//LES) Animal rights and environmental extremists seek to end the

abuse and suffering of animals and the degradation of the natural

perpetrated by humans. They use non-violent and violent tactics that, at

violate criminal law. Many of these extremists claim they are conducting

activities on behalf of two of the most active groups, the Animal Liberation

and its sister organization, the Earth Liberation Front. Other prominent

include Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty; and chapters within the Animal

Defense LeagueUSPER, and Earth First!USPER.

- (U//FOUO) Anarchist extremists generally embrace a number of radical

philosophical components of anticapitalist, antiglobalization, communist,

socialist, and other movements. Anarchist groups seek abolition of social,

political, and economic hierarchies, including Western-style governments and

large business enterprises, and frequently advocate criminal actions of

scale and scope to accomplish their goals. Anarchist extremist groups

entities within CrimethincUSPER, the Ruckus SocietyUSPER ,and Recreate 68


So why am I releasing something which is supposed to be FOUO? Because the anti-right wing report was also FOUO and nevertheless received wide circulatiion..


Ya know, I wasn't planning on attending the local tea party until this DHS mess.

Now I'm going with three signs.

1) a pic of Ayers' mug shot and a pic of marines in Iraq.

caption next to Ayers: On Obama's Blackberry
caption next to the Marines: On DHS watch list.

2)Pics of Hitler and Stalin along with the front cover of the DHS report.

caption: first they made lists...

3) The UGLIEST pic of Janet Napolitano I could find (and geez, tough competition there!)

caption: Big Sister is watching,

Also, something with red white and blue with a bunch of tea bags stabled on.



It received wide circulation now because the administration seeks to paint people protesting today as angry mobs who are on the verge of violence.

They've name checked Santelli, Limbaugh, Dobbs, Cramer, and Fox news. They want people to see the opposition (to them) as dangerous.

They realized after the Sarah Palin "Kill him!" stories from the primaries that they could manipulate the media into reporting on the angry, dangerous mobs of the right.


verner, I never want to get on your wrong side.


I can't tell you how comforting it is to know that DHS has joined along with the CIA and FBI and DoS in producing really stupid intel assessments and exceeding by a long shot their reasonable mandate.



Without evidence of such a grand plan, I am not going to opine that it exists.

Where are these leaks coming from? It seems like the right wing press/blogs were the folks who got hold of these reports and released them, not the DU or MSNBC. Is somebody playing Michelle Malkin, FoxNews and Hot Air?


Reuters released this one. So I can't imagine it was a right wing plot..Perhaps someone at DHS is (rightly) concerned about the Dept's overreaching:

Judge Napolitano(no relation I take it):
"This document runs directly counter to numerous U.S. Supreme decisions prohibiting the government from engaging in any activities that could serve to chill the exercise of expressive liberties. Liberties are chilled, in constitutional parlance, when people are afraid to express themselves for fear of government omnipresence, monitoring, or reprisals. The document also informs the reader that Big Brother is watching both public and private behavior.

5. The whole purpose of the First Amendment is to guarantee open, broad, robust debate on the policies and personnel of the government. The First Amendment presumes that individuals — NOT THE GOVERNMENT — are free to choose what they believe and espouse, what they read and say, and with whom they associate in public and in private. The writers of this abominable report are particularly concerned with the expression of opinions that might be used to fuel ideas that challenge federal authority or favor state and local government over the federal government. Unfortunately, legislation passed during the past eight years gives the DHS and the FBI the tools to monitor everything from a telephone conversation to the keystrokes used on a personal computer without a warrant issued by a federal judge.

6. My guess is that the sentiments revealed in the report I read are the tip of an iceberg that the DHS would prefer to keep submerged until it needs to reveal it. This iceberg is the heavy-hand of government; a government with large and awful eyes, in whose heart there is no love for freedom, and on whose face there is no smile."

>Stupid and unconstitutional



The leaks are probably coming from the same kind of disgruntled career civil servants who leaked the existance of VAAPCON to Judicial Watch. There are still a few people in government who don't think that federal agencies should be used for political purposes (though the numbers are getting smaller and smaller all the time).



Probably not. Since the DoJ's case for the OKC bombing was an act committed by a single individual with support from 2 others, I don't see how one could spin that as a movement and the ATF bungled their case against the Mongols and I'm not sure what sort of political movement is behind better choppers and meth dealing. Remember this from the good ole' Clinton days.

Will make a nice hammer when leftist activists all over the country start making accusations to local and federal authorities against conservatives.

And give me a break on the anti-trade sentiment or anti-immigrant sentiment from the report. Obama campaigned on anti-NAFTA sentiments in the mid-west and once in power caved to the Teamsters demands to close the US-Mexico border to Mexican truckers. I seriously doubt the Teamsters and the Obama campaign can be considered "right wing".

And re: the FBI numbers, do they breakout the perpetrator's race or is it just a given that if it is a racially motivated attack it must be a right-wing, white-supremacist. Curious.


If Verner's going on the list, I want on it, too. Maybe some CNN reporter can piss me off at the tea party tonight and I can get on TV, too.

I imagine my 11-year-old son will get us some attention with his sign.

Side 1: "In 10 years I'll owe $75,000 in Gov't Debt!"

Side 2: "Who will bail ME out?"

Watch for us on TV. :-)


We'll all wave, extraneus.

The comments to this entry are closed.