You Are the Threat!

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on reddit
Share on delicious
Share on digg
Share on stumbleupon
Share on whatsapp
Share on email
Share on print

Right Wing Extremists


You may never have considered yourself a terrorist, but if you are a conservative a new government study indicates that you might well be:

The report’s author is Arie Perliger, who directs the Center’s terrorism studies and teaches social sciences at West Point. I can only imagine what his classes are like as his report manages to lump together every known liberal stereotype about conservatives between its covers.

As Rowan Scarborough of the Washington Times, who broke news of the report on Thursday, recounts:

[The Center’s report] says anti-federalists “espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights. Finally, they support civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government. Extremists in the anti-federalist movement direct most their violence against the federal government and its proxies in law enforcement.”

The report also draws a link between the mainstream conservative movement and the violent “far right,” and describes liberals as “future oriented” and conservatives as living in the past.

“While liberal worldviews are future- or progressive -oriented, conservative perspectives are more past-oriented, and in general, are interested in preserving the status quo,” the report says. “The far right represents a more extreme version of conservatism, as its political vision is usually justified by the aspiration to restore or preserve values and practices that are part of the idealized historical heritage of the nation or ethnic community.”

The report adds: “While far-right groups’ ideology is designed to exclude minorities and foreigners, the liberal-democratic system is designed to emphasize civil rights, minority rights and the balance of power.”

The Times quotes a congressional staffer who has served in the military calling the report a “junk study.” The staffer then asked: “The $64,000 dollar question is when will the Combating Terrorism Center publish their study on real left-wing terrorists like the Animal Liberation Front, Earth Liberation Front, and the Weather Underground?”

This is not the first time elements of the federal government have tried to smear conservatives with sloppy work and a broadbrush analysis.

Go here to National Review Online to read the rest.  The report was put out by the  Combating Terrorism Center at West Point.  The Obama administration is a flat failure at actually governing the country but they are Aces in their attempts to demonize their opponents.  Or, maybe not, judging how their attacks on the NRA seem to be falling flat.





More to explorer

Thought For the Day


I am truly surprised by this:   The Arizona Democratic Party is planning to hold a vote this week to determine whether

Saint of the Day Quote: Saint Joseph of Cupertino

  I like not scruples nor melancholy: let your intention be right and fear not. Saint Joseph of Cupertino     There


  1. “O, Columbia the Gem of the Ocean! . . . Thy mandates make tyranny tremble . . . ”

    Liberal propaganda: everybody that disagrees is a dangerous, evil person that should be liquidated. The same tune ever and always was by mass murdering progressives: Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, et al.

    Academia, the media and the Clinton regime similarly tried, convicted, and executed scores of citizens at Waco, TX in 1993. They werecondemned in the lying, liberal media and they were murdered by the government.

    Maybe we the people need to defund the USMA.

  2. The thing is that we aren’t even anti-federalists.

    Look at the references Conservatives use in our arguments: Madison, Adams, Washington, Hamilton, et al. I haven’t noticed even the slightest of anti-federalist sentiments in our own Paul Zummo, for example.

    I actually know an anti-federalist. He is a Southerner with a strong Libertarian streak to his Jeffersonian idealism. Given the spirited disagreements we’ve had, I don’t think he would call me an anti-federalist

    If one is going to use a word with an established definition in a published report, one should make sure one knows the definition of that term and can apply it correctly in discussion.

  3. I’m going to have to agree with Mr. Perliger. Right wing domestic terrorists abound. Just think of all of the acts of terror that right wing extremists have committed in the past ten years. There’s… uh. Well, never mind that. We know they do it all the time.

    A while back, DHS published a list of characteristics you might find in those pesky ol’ potential right wing domestic terrorists, and so I had to go back and re-think some of my positions so I would get off the list. I can proudly say that I am no longer a potential terrorist because I believe in overthrowing the constitution, killing unborn babies, and I renounced my status as a veteran who had taken an oath to defend the constitution.

    With my new-found cuddly-wuddly non-terroristic tendencies, I will embrace the centralization of government power in one man and seek to crush Christianity, driving that priest-ridden anachronism into the grave, one lion-mauled and waterboarded Christian at a time. After that, we go after the babies in the womb. None shall escape unless genetic testing shows that they are homosexual, in which case we shall demonstrate Lord Obama’s magnificent tolerance…. oh, wait. I guess I wan’t the terrorist after all. Okay, back to my old freedom-loving, Catholic self.

  4. I hope that we are a threat to the Democrats, the Administration, liberalism, progressivism, humanism, secularism and atheism. If we are not a threat, then we are doing something wrong.

    That said, the threat should never be one of the initiation of force. But everyone here at this blog knows (or should know) that. What is threatening to Democrats, the Administration, liberals, progressives, humanists, secularists and atheists is that most of us, in placing the highest value on human freedom and dignity, will respond with commensurate force to the initiation of force to coerce us into bowing to Caesar. In some cases martyrdom may result (and it always has in the past). In other cases, armed resistance is required (the Maccabean brothers in 160 BC and the Cristeros in Mexico in the 1920s).

    So yes, I want to be a threat (or at least a humble part thereof). How we think and what we are doing should be threatening to the Satanic forces of evil, and that is as it should be.

  5. Paul, we are a threat. Unfortunately, the other side asserts that we are a violent threat, no matter what we do to try to demonstrate otherwise. Case in point, a few months ago we got 90 people to show up at a school board meeting to protest Planned Parenthood’s involvement in our schools. The school administration looked visibly frightened by all of these people showing up. We were peaceful, and polite. At the next school board meeting they had security guards up the wazoo. Why is that? Nobody did anything even remotely considered disorderly. It’s because they consider us a threat. They assume that we will act like they do, which of course leads to their fear of the violence that they themselves promote.

  6. Common sense is subversion.

    Hysteria and lies are all they have.

    The following is true under the Obama regime. “Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act.” — George Orwell.

  7. Conservatives had better be a threat to those trying to usurp our Declaration of Independence. Constitution, and Bill of Rights.

  8. How do you emphasize both minority rights and a balance of powers, even before you add in “emphasis” on civil rights?

    Unless he meant “act like all interests have the same weight.” Still doesn’t make sense, since that just doesn’t work. (Great way to get power, though, being the guy in charge of deciding what’s fair.)

    Seriously, though, this just sounds like pop knowledge mud and gravel with all the gems removed.

  9. Anyone thought of doing something non-violent about it like suing the crap out of Arie Perliger, the center, and West Point?

  10. I don’t think there is a legal basis for such a law suit. A better tactic might be to attempt to enlist West Point alums, doubtless retired from the Army, to protest this pc waste of resources.

  11. Has anyone thought of submitting a Freedom of Information Act request concerning his salary; the syllabus of his course (“social” is not a science); his address; etc.?

    That’s the type of action Obama-worshiping facsists would take against we threats to the liberal, national wrecking ball.

  12. Look, I get the whole “shake in rage against liberals” thing, but there definitely are right-wing violent extremists out there. I haven’t read the study, so I don’t know how fair it is, but we all know that such people exist. I imagine that the average Academy man is going to run into right-wing starry-eyed suckups a lot more than, say, Occupiers who are enthralled with the military.

  13. Right wing extremism in this country Pinky is simply not a threat compared to the threat from jihadists. The Hutaree Militia Trial and the dismissal of the charges by the judge indicated the normal trajectory of these attempts by government informants to transform molehills into mountains.

    This type of ideological look at terrorist threats is not unusual for the director of the Center. When he was in Israel his focus was on the minute amount of Jewish terrorism rather than on Islamic terrorism.

    What is the chief objectionable feature of this study is the attempt to link mainstream conservatives to terrorism.

  14. I agree with Pinky, but while I am a right wing extremist and own a mini-14, I would never ever use it against another human being except in the God-aweful circumstance of self-defense, and then if I survived the experience, I would get my behind to confession pronto! Sure, there are Nazis and Fascists and Skinheads and others, but they aren’t the mainstream conservative movement. However, murdering unborn babies and sanctifying the filth of homosexual sodomy is the mainstream liberal movement, and that’s why it has to be destroyed. Yeah, that’s a volatile term, but it’s still correct. Furthermore, that doesn’t mean destroy it by guns, but destroy it by changing hearts and lives. Yet that is too extreme for liberals.

  15. Please don’t help the folks that insist Nazis, fascists and shaved Nazis are “right wing.” I’ll just point over at Jonah Goldberg and leave it at that!

    The guy was pretty clear who he was calling “right wing”– anti-federalists who do not have an “emphasis” on minority rights, “balance of powers” and civil rights.

    The guy’s strawman is bad enough without helping him.

    feel free to start listing the actual threats from anti-federalists.

  16. I haven’t read the study, so I don’t know how fair it is,

    But that didn’t stop you from commenting and making snide comments about the criticisms of it, did it?

    but we all know that such people exist

    No one’s denying that such people exist – we’re denying that they are a substantial threat to the security of this country.

    I do have to hand it to those who want to paint right-wing extremists as the true threat to peace and stability of this country, because they certainly make my little bit of satire all the more on point.

  17. I imagine that the average Academy man is going to run into right-wing starry-eyed suckups a lot more than, say, Occupiers who are enthralled with the military.

    A question– have you been around young officers lately?

    A decade back, my first officer was utterly horrified that someone who seemed like “such a nice girl” would have a Bush/Cheney sticker on her car.

  18. I didn’t intend to be snide. More like a little impatient.

    It’s the obligation of the person who’s criticizing the report to be familiar with it. If the author of this article has read the report, he didn’t indicate it. (I’m a big fan of Donald.) On that subject, this article said that the report made a distinction between the mainstream right and the nutty right. If so (and I have no reason to doubt it), then this report isn’t any sort of accusation against the mainstream right. It’s not saying that we are the threat.

    I agree that Islamic fanatics are a lot bigger threat to this country than any home-grown right-wing group. I’m not even sure why West Point has to teach people about domestic threats. But if they’re not teaching them about Islamic terrorists (or Islamist, or whatever), then there’s something really wrong. The battlefield commanders of the next few decades better understand Islamic fanaticism backwards and forwards, because they’re going to be dealing with it a lot.

    A bit off-topic, Paul, why would you feel the need to go to Confession after killing someone in self-defense?

  19. Because I will have killed a man, and regardless that I may think it was done in self-defense, I would still go to Confession because I do not belong alone inside my head without adult supervision, especially after such a horrific event as having to kill another human being.

  20. I submit that Nazis, skin heads, et al are not “right” at all. I point to Ludwig von Mises proposition of quadrants vs linear for the two axis: economic vs. goverance. Both Nazis and Communists are socialist, both are dictatorships, the only real difference is that the Nazis were national socialist and the Communists were international socialist. Not much of a difference if you ask me. But I swim agaist the river with the lefts faulty premise that Nazis are right of center.

  21. Don’t use too much logic, CL, keep in mind that it’s putting fascists and folks opposed to an overpowering federal gov’t in the same group.

  22. Liberals are not progressive or future oriented. They’re merely rehashing late 19th century Ideas of Marx, Malthus and Bismarck. Same old centralization and nationalization. Same old materialism, eugenicism, elitism, and inculturation of a national religion (read liberal secularism). Same old using social upheaval to take over more power.

Comments are closed.