Recession fueling right-wing extremism, U.S. says

Originally posted by madhatr137
Hold on, let me trawl through my memory banks and see if I can pull out some Right-Wing words of wisdom that the Lefties heard time and time again when warning of the threat of government intervention and surveillance by the DHS at its inception and expansion...

"If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to worry about..."

Seriously though...the only reason that the Right-wingers are in a tizzy right now is because they're lacking political power at the moment, not realizing that government organizations, such as the DHS and DOJ are, supposedly, separate from political biases. For instance, Right-wing extremist groups have been very high on the FBI watch list since the mid-90s. Why?

Simple reasons.
..................

Should we remind you something some of us have been telling you for years? The United States is being infiltrated by those who want to completely destroy it, destroy the Constitution, the Bills of Rights, and every value by which this nation was founded, and transform it into a Socialist, or worse the last stage of a Communist nation..

Now, if you are a gun owner the leftist state claims you can be a terrorist.

If you believe in the Constitution of these United States, and on the Bills of Rights as unalianable rights given to all Americans by the forefathers, you can be a terrorist.

If you are a veteran, the leftist state claims you can be a terrorist.

If you believe for a second that it is possible, or it could be possible that prophecies come true, you can be a terrorist according to the leftist State.

If you hoard ammunition, because it is clear part of the next step will be to disarm, or null the American Second Amendment right to own, and bear Arms, you can be a terrorist.

If you hoard food because you are seeing that we are in an economic mess, which could leave us without much money, hence without being able to buy food, you can be a terrorist.

If you are religious, and or a Spiritual person, you can be a terrorist.

If you, and your family are part of any of the above group, and maybe I missed some, you are being labaled as possibly being part of a right wing extremist terrorist organization.

Has the Republican Party been partly responsible for all of this? Yes, it does appear so. But what has been the goal all along? The transformation of this nation into either a National Socialist state, like 1930's Germany, or worse, a Communist state.

Deviating from the principles by which this Republic was founded is what has allowed this to happen.




[edit on 15-4-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

Originally posted by Mudler
I have to disagree with the notion that the left wing controls America at the moment. Sure, by american standards the democrats are left-wing radicals but they are really pretty much centrist. And america is becoming more and more authoritarian, not moving closer to the left.
It is true that left-wing extremists are pretty much dormant in the US and therefore not given attention, but it seems to me that the current situation makes people turn to both extreme camps, after all the ongoing political struggle is primarily the people versus the government, not the right-wing versus the left. Nice post though, interesting to hear.

Really? why is it then that Socialist programs are being implemented as we speak? Is it because the nation is turning into Right Wing extremism? no.

The Forefathers of this nation were the Right Wing extremists according to this document, and any American who believes in those unalianable rights, and values which made this nation possible, and believe in what our forefathers fought so hard for.

Read what this document is claiming, what a "Rigfht Wing Extremist" is, which defines exactly the values, and freedoms our forefathers fought so hard for, and which they guaranteed for all future generations of Americans.





[edit on 15-4-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by Mudler
I have to disagree with the notion that the left wing controls America at the moment. Sure, by american standards the democrats are left-wing radicals but they are really pretty much centrist. And america is becoming more and more authoritarian, not moving closer to the left.
It is true that left-wing extremists are pretty much dormant in the US and therefore not given attention, but it seems to me that the current situation makes people turn to both extreme camps, after all the ongoing political struggle is primarily the people versus the government, not the right-wing versus the left. Nice post though, interesting to hear.

Really? why is it then that Socialist programs are being implemented as we speak? Is it because the nation is turning into Right Wing extremism? no.

The Forefathers of this nation were the Right Wing extremists according to this document, and any American who believes in those unalianable rights, and values which made this nation possible, and believe in what our forefathers fought so hard for.

Read what this document is claiming, what a "Rigfht Wing Extremist" is, which defines exactly the values, and freedoms our forefathers fought so hard for, and which they guaranteed for all future generations of Americans.





[edit on 15-4-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

i was just watching msnbc because i wanted to see the left slant this document. someone on there stated "this has nothing to do with republicans". and the republican that was on said, "how come it was convenient to launch this memo a few days before the tea parties started?" the liberal didnt have an answer and just laughed because he felt uncomftorable.

Ultimately by doing things like this the DHS will only make things worse. There are parallels to this in the 1800s in Europe with the powers that be creating self fulfilling prophecies. By cracking down on the people out of fear of revolt the government caused the people to revolt.

Targeting those of faith and especially veterans will only create what they fear to happen. People at the top need to crack open some history books and look at the mistakes that are being repeated. They are going to scare people into being extremists.

That kind of mess doesn't help anyone. It only leads to civil disorder and unrest.

Originally posted by chise61
Why is it that anyone that is "stockpiling" weapons and ammo is automatically labeled as a right wing extremist ? Because someone wants to stock up on ammo because they are trying to pass legislation to encode all ammo does NOT make them an extremist.

It seems like anybody that believes in the constitution of these United States and the the core beliefs that founded this country are all too quickly labeled as "right wing extremist" lately. I wonder why that is, could it possibly be that these are the very people that see this government for what it really is and what it's really trying to do ? Could it be that they are running scared because they see that more people are starting to open their eyes to what a joke, and how truely anti-American this government has become.

This government that now openly disrespects and disregards our constitution and our constitutional rights, that openly disregards our immigration laws and in fact wants to give an estimated 12 million illegel immigrants legal status, that wants to weld more power over this country than it has a right to, has the audacity to label American citizens that believe in the fundementals of this country as the ones who are a threat to this country

I agree with you that just because you stockpile weapons and ammo does not make you an extremist. However, it does make the probability of you being or becoming an extremist more likely.

The "right-wing extremist" label has become more popular because...well, the right wingers are out of power now. They are disenfranchised, angry, and afraid of the new direction of the country.

You preface your beliefs with "anybody who believes in the Constitution", as if your beliefs (that happen to fall on the right from what I can tell) are the only Constitutionally valid ones. You then continue to go on about the anti-American government, which means by approximation anyone who agrees with the big government is Anti-American. Then you continue with imagry of people "opening their eyes" as if they have been enlightened and reborn against the tyranny of the government. Do you see how this could be interpreted as possibly dangerous to not only the government but the people who support it?

The big kicker is your next paragraph, when you preface your opinion with "this government that now openly disrespects and disregards our constitution"...Well, I'm sorry to say but "this government" had been trampling on our rights ever since the election of 2000, and the protests from the right-wing during the last 8 years seemed few and far between (Note: not saying you didn't agree or that everyone fell in lock step with Bush, I'm saying generally it wasn't heard as much).

reply to post by sos37


Unbalanced? You mean unbalanced like it was in 2000-2006 when the Republicans were in complete control and everything the Bush Administration wanted was “rubber stamped” right through? Yeah, you’re right, it is unbalanced…except the difference is that unlike 2000-2006 when it was unbalanced in the Bush Administration’s favor, we have visible signs of fracturing of the Democratic party.

Extremist Liberals? You mean extreme like the Neoconservatives who illegally started war in the East, unethically gave no-bid contracts to their associate companies, deregulated the financial market to allow companies to pursue incredibly dangerous leveraging schemes in order to maximize profits at the expense of the taxpayer(which is a large part of why our economy was headed into a recession even as far back as 06-07) violated both international and domestic law in a “the ends justify the means” idiom…enacting “faith based” initiatives, banning life-saving medical research on religiously moral grounds…

In a year the Democrats will pass laws that will seriously compromise American’s Rights and Civil Liberties? You mean like engaging in warrantless domestic spying, denying habeas corpus and due process to their, tortured, prisoners of war(excuse me, “enemy combatants”) while lying and smiling about it….or how about creating “free speech zones” miles away from any significant location when protests are expected to occur? Or how about the “no fly” lists where you don’t know IF you’re on it in the first place and have no way of finding out WHY you’re on it if you are. Oh yes…I forsee the Democrats…the party that we have been trained into believing are the weaker of the two, the party that has no idea how to defend America in this time of crisis, the party that doesn’t care about National Defense…that THEY, are suddenly going to turn around and militantly repress the population and take away all their Civil Liberties and God given Rights in a much more insidious manner than the Republicans ever could or would…


To bring it back into the tone of the thread...as someone said, it was the Republicans that put all of these powers in place...did they expect to rule forever? Would they be donig any different if they were still in power? No. Will they be in power again, relatively soon...Yes... And they'll go right back to doing the same as they did under the Bush Administration.

reply to post by chise61


I think they fear veterans, especially combat veterans, because these are people who have dared to take action. They know what it feels like. They have experienced taking action. Most of us just talk about things. We believe this and that, want to change this and that, but it's mostly talk. Sure we do things like get married or change jobs, things with consequences that must be lived with and new skills learned but it's not the same as doing stuff with immediate consequences and accountability.

I think that's one of the biggest vulnerabilities of our current president. It has always been talk with him. Deals and bargains and behind the scenes machinations. Buddies and supporters and networking. The closest thing he does to direct action is go to the gym ever day. He has no experience of accountability for what he says, let alone what he does.

I think too that many of our young soldiers (I don't know about the older officers--no knowledge) are very ethical people. They are not fools who take orders without thinking. They know what they are doing and why they are doing it. A thinking, ethical person who is capable of taking direct action is dangerous to those who are deceivers who are manipulating and attacking with words and robbing us of our future prosperity. It's interesting that it is felt that veterans are more dangerous to the current government than in support of it!

As for anti-government sentiment, Bush was attacked by many, many folks as well as almost all the media and the vast majority of entertainers as the one who stole the presidency and he and cheney were called every name in the book for 8 solid years, so why suddenly is it unacceptable to question or criticize the sitting president?

Originally posted by earlywatcher
I think they fear veterans, especially combat veterans, because these are people who have dared to take action.

Over 70% of those in uniform at the time did not vote for Obama.

Now, the use of "right wing extremist" and "law abiding citizen" in the same breath is both troubling and puzzling. I understand the need for assessments, even on potential domestic threats to the government self preservation. However, what I'm curious about is the potential "solution" for these potential "threats"....

This is expected.
Did anyone really think it would or will turn out with warm and fuzzies?
Hope but don't expect for anything to turn out good. Not immediately anyway.
They can slap a label on me. I will stand for my beliefs. I will be ready or as ready as possible. How many others can say the same. How many will run away into their corners and try to take back what they said and did? I don't know but this, in my mind is just another turning point in this road to global dominance.



Somehow I told you so just doesn't seem to quite cut it....




Edit to say: S&F!



[edit on 15-4-2009 by N3krostatic]

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
[edit on 15-4-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

Ok. Firstly, what's with the whole "you're a terrorist" thing? Is it the LEFT that really is known for calling people terrorists? For believing in prophecies? Being spiritual? Being a veteran? Where the hell did you hear those accusations? I don't think any of those people are terrorists, even though veterans have comitted war crimes. Terrorism is defined as using fear to sway opinions, often trough violence. Those who do that are terrorists.
National socialism is in conflict with communism.
In the time before Hitler got the power there were huge street battles between the nazis and communists, but the nazis happened to win. Most of those "communists" were stalinists so the difference would be minimal anyways. We are not allies in any way with that fascist scum. National socialism is not at all what the left wants, even though the economy is centralised.
Socialism means the workers control the means of profuction, nazism denies them that. That is quite a difference.
You can't have a communist state, as communism is stateless. We don't want a dictatorship at all. It's all about definitions, you use the american "red scare" definition most right-wingers use. Communism is not synonymous with dictatorship.

And your other post. Did I say the changes happen because people are far-right? I said oridinary civilians will be drawn to right and left extreme groups because of the situation. Bailouts are a socialist thing? I think it is a horrible idea to give money to the people who screwed up in the first place. Again, our definitions of socialism differ. The socialists who support it only does so because thousands will loose their jobs, not because they sympathise with the financial elite who benefits most. Learn what socialism is, what the different tendencies stand for (huge differenes there). The founding fathers? Back in the 1700s there was no real right and left, maybe by todays standards they were, but it's interesting how people say communism is outdated and at the same time advocating an economical system used a century before communism became a real movement. Things change in 300 years, the population a hundred times bigger and the social situation totally different. I believe people have the right to free speech, beliefs, all the bill of rights stuff. I only disagree with the private ownership of the means of production (by extension other's labour) being a "right". Bottom line is, stop learning about communism in a 1950's history book and use some more serious arguments, not just assuming people on the left call you a terrorist for doing this and that.

Originally posted by madhatr137
.....................

Extremist Liberals? You mean extreme like the Neoconservatives who illegally started war in the East, unethically gave no-bid contracts to their associate companies, deregulated the financial market to allow companies to pursue incredibly dangerous leveraging schemes in order to maximize profits at the expense of the taxpayer(which is a large part of why our economy was headed into a recession even as far back as 06-07) violated both international and domestic law in a “the ends justify the means” idiom…enacting “faith based” initiatives, banning life-saving medical research on religiously moral grounds…
.....................

Oh boy....every politician, maybe except Obama who apparenlty knew the future, or it was just because like always he abstained from voting, voted for the war.

The war was never illegal, since several times have the United States engaged in military conflict without making a formal declaration of war and it has NEVER been illegal...

Don't try to blame the right for the war when most Democrats agreed to it, yet they then blamed Republicans fas a political tool.

Even during the Clinton years, Clinton organized a campaign to unify nations to fight against Iraq. Not to mention that through Clinton's administration Iraq was bombed.

Yes, Republicans also passed some UnConstitutional laws, but don't come here claiming the war was the cause of the recession, when it is well known that wars create more jobs.

You are trying to blame the right, yet it is clear that the goal has been to implement a National Socialist state, or a Communist state.

It was through Democrats, and even some Republicans who used to be Liberals, and Democrats in the past that Socialist programs have been implemented.

The goal from the beginning has been the slow implementation of socialist programs to nullify, or destroy the Constitution of the United States, the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights...

READ what is being said in this new document. It makes the forefather of this nation as "right wing extremists", as well as those Americans who believe in preserving the unalienable rights that were given to us by our forefathers through those documents which shaped this nation.

]

[edit on 15-4-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

Originally posted by Mudler

Ok. Firstly, what's with the whole "you're a terrorist" thing? Is it the LEFT that really is known for calling people terrorists? For believing in prophecies? Being spiritual? Being a veteran? Where the hell did you hear those accusations? I don't think any of those people are terrorists, even though veterans have comitted war crimes. Terrorism is defined as using fear to sway opinions, often trough violence. Those who do that are terrorists.

...hello....read the document, and the article given by the original poster.......

This article is showing the present Socialist administration is labeling as terrorists Republicans, conservatives, Constitutionalists, and any other American who advocates the REPUBLIC and the documents which the forefathers of this nation agreed to sign, and guaranteed for ALL future generations of Americans....

Originally posted by Mudler
National socialism is in conflict with communism.

They are two sides of the same SOCIALIST system.. Hitler and the NAZIS were also against Capitalism which is part of the true Socialist and Communist doctrine.

Originally posted by Mudler
In the time before Hitler got the power there were huge street battles between the nazis and communists, but the nazis happened to win.

....Trotsky and Stalin had different views of what Communist Russia, or U.S.S.R. should be, and they had many arguments about it. Does this mean they were not both Socialists/Communists?.........

Originally posted by Mudler
National socialism is not at all what the left wants, even though the economy is centralised.

It is what they, and TPTB in the west are implementing, and you alongside many others are apparenlty agreeing to it.

Originally posted by Mudler
Socialism means the workers control the means of profuction, nazism denies them that. That is quite a difference.

No....Socialism means THE STATE owns the means of production claiming it represents the people, but since individuality is not allowed for the good of the STATE, it does not represent the people...

Originally posted by Mudler
You can't have a communist state, as communism is stateless. We don't want a dictatorship at all. It's all about definitions, you use the american "red scare" definition most right-wingers use. Communism is not synonymous with dictatorship.

Really?... tell that to the people around the world who have lived under such dictatorships.... Any system in which there are laws, and in Communism there are laws, is a STATE....

Originally posted by Mudler
............ Learn what socialism is, what the different tendencies stand for (huge differenes there).

No thank you, I LIVED, and EXPERIENCED true Socialism/Communism and didn't just read about the fairy tales the Socialists/Communists claim....

Originally posted by Mudler
The founding fathers? Back in the 1700s there was no real right and left, maybe by todays standards they were, but it's interesting how people say communism is outdated and at the same time advocating an economical system used a century before communism became a real movement.

.... The founding fathers agreed and clearly stated that all states in the Union should GUARANTEE a REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT...

U.S. Constitution - Article 4 Section 4

Article 4 - The States
Section 4 - Republican Government

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

www.usconstitution.net...

Perhaps it wil do you well to actually read the Constitution of the United States before you make statements such as the one above...

A "true" Republican is a person who advocates the REPUBLIC and is against all forms of dictatorships. Yes, many Republicans in power do not represent a TRUE Republican.

Originally posted by Mudler
Things change in 300 years, the population a hundred times bigger and the social situation totally different. I believe people have the right to free speech, beliefs, all the bill of rights stuff. I only disagree with the private ownership of the means of production (by extension other's labour) being a "right". Bottom line is, stop learning about communism in a 1950's history book and use some more serious arguments, not just assuming people on the left call you a terrorist for doing this and that.

This does not give you the right to dissolve the Republic, nor does it give you the right to take away, or change the Republic to something different from what the forefathers of this nation fought for....

And about your comment on "all the Bill of Rights stuff" perhaps you should make yourself more familiar with the documents by which this nation was created, because it is obvious you are ignorant about it.

BTW, about your statement about "the Red Scare" it is happening exactly as those of us have said for many years yet some people like you still claim this is not happening?...





[edit on 15-4-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

Why exactly would we want America under the British crown? And I suppose you know the constitution in your head, what parts of the constitution conflicts with the concept of workers running the economy and owning the factories themselves? I'd really like to hear that.

And some more: The USSR was a republic. China IS a republic. East Germany was a republic. I do not approve of them but my point is, a republic doesn't equal "good", it has to be a democratic republic. I want a directly democratic libertarian socialist republic. I also oppose dictatorship. Funny that. Republics are quite popular.
You say you have lived trough true socialism/ socialism? You were in part of those communes in Spain during the civil war or something? If you say you lived in Russia I'm afraid you haven't experienced socialism. And no, I am right about that part, socialism means worker control of the economy. Marx-Leninists will interpret this as state control, I and many others do not.

[edit on 15-4-2009 by Mudler]

I also think something worth noting is the considered definition of extremists and militia. I admit I have some guns. I don't have a arsenal or anything like that. I have a few as in 3. I feel it necessary to have a decent amount of rounds.

According to the way things are going these guys below can be considered extremist's.

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."

~George Washington


"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."

~Thomas Jefferson


"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."

~George Mason


Part of the general idea is that extremist's are ones that will stand by their views and beliefs and will not be swayed. Many of us here on ATS would be considered extremist's just because of our specific beliefs. This kind of reminds me of the patriot act, in that labels are sometimes just handed out for detaining people. It also seems that if you own X amount of rounds or guns or have X amount of what might be considered conservative beliefs (conservative as in supporting the original constitution and seeing through the veil of lies) you are labeled potential threats.

Now in order to take control of potential threats and those that would stand for their beliefs. labels are handed out in order to isolate and detain or prosecute the potential threat for further establishment of control. From there information is tweaked and reported tweaked by the media making you think that those extremist's are getting what they deserve.

What is a potential threat? It seems to be anyone, like the founding fathers, that supports the original set of beliefs and anyone that really understands what is happening behind the curtain. I am too many times reminded of 1984 by George Orwell.

This imaginary radical group of extremist's that is thought to reside everywhere and that infiltrates our jobs to our school's are usually just like us. They are us. I am not saying extremist's do not exist as they very much do. The problem is that fear, media and everything else has brought the people, us, to believe they exist everywhere when in fact it sometimes seems by doing that, they can effectively label "us" (me and you) as citizens and get away with it.

We are now approaching Act 3, the final act.
Stand or kneel.

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
...the Bills of Rights as unalianable rights given to all Americans by the forefathers, ...

While I agree pretty much with the rest of your post, this statement is incorrect.

The reason those rights are considered "inalienable" is because they were said by the forefathers to be GIVEN BY GOD.

Inalienable: incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred

Originally posted by Mudler
Why exactly would we want America under the British crown? And I suppose you know the constitution in your head, what parts of the constitution conflicts with the concept of workers running the economy and owning the factories themselves? I'd really like to hear that.

What in the world are you talking about?....

It is the left that want to give out the sovereignty of the United States over to other countries, including the UN.....

The forefathers of this nation fought against the British crown as they fought for the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE....

I already gave you one article in the Constitution which clearly state what form of government should be guaranteed to all states....

Again, in Socialism the people do not own the means of production, the STATE DOES.....

In True Socialism private property is not allowed, it is the STATE which owns all, claiming it represents the people, but since individuality is not allowed for the "good of the many", the people are not represented, but rather those few who are in power in the Socialist State claim to know what is best for the people....

BTW, yes I do know the Constitution of these United States, and I am well versed in the Declaration of Independence, and the rights guaranteed to ALL Americans by the Bills of Rights...



[edit on 15-4-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

Originally posted by N3krostatic I don't have a arsenal or anything like that. I have a few as in 3. I feel it necessary to have a decent amount of rounds.

I'm afraid according to the slave state media what you've got there is an arsenal.

State Police find arsenal after routine traffic stop ... Luke Huizinga was charged with possession of a large-capacity firearm, possession of a firearm, seven counts of possession of a high-capacity feeding device, unlawful possession of ammunition, and possession of a dangerous weapon (brass knuckles), State Police said.

What did he have?

The items found included a Bushmaster 16-inch rifle with a night scope and pistol grip, a Remington 12-gauge shotgun, and five knives. A .50-caliber bullet was found in the suspect's pocket; the remainder of the contraband was found in the car, police said.

A shotgun and a rifle = arsenal. Now the poor kid is f-ed for life all because he drove through a slave state that didnt take kindly to his kind.

Edit to add link to story I was sourcing: www.boston.com...

[edit on 15-4-2009 by thisguyrighthere]

"Right-wing Extremism"

Another offensive grammatical constructive by our Gov... this time against our own.

Where is the evidence of this right wing extremism?

What violence are they doing?

Are the tea parties considered right wing extremism?


Personally, I haven't seen any evidence of any extremism here recently.

...and now this from the BBC.. It's like the world media are co-ordinated or something... Oh wait, it's because they don't investigate things themselves often, they normally take it from the wires.

news.bbc.co.uk...