DHS Report Targeting and Attacking Conservatives! Are You a Right-Wing Extremist?
This is unreal and I read some of it on Michelle Malkin’s website today! This is just insane and it shows the lengths of which the Obama administration will go in order to crush dissent, freedom of speech, the right to protest etc. Unless of course the speech, protests or dissenters are on the left and in favor of their policies.
To review the PDF document that was put together by DHS click here…
This report is a hack job and your B.S. meter should be going off ~ in fact I have two B.S. Meters that are reaching overload!
Well, color me bad and call me a right wing extremist. I oppose big centralized government that steps on first amendment rights and tries to force their beliefs on everyone else. I’m not sure why that is considered extreme, but I guess if you aren’t a conformist you are an extremist.
Here are a couple of sections from the report:
Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.
So basically, if I believe in the fundamental platforms of the republican party which is federalism, that means I’m an extremist? If I am a social conservative then I am an extremist? What about all those Prop. 8 protesters who vandalized churches and beat up old women? Were they not extremists? How about all those women who only vote one issue on the liberal side, pro-choice – would they not be considered extremists?
And as Ms. Malkin explains, extremists are normally tied to specific groups. They try to make “skin heads” part of the republican movement but technically they are anarchists and aren’t associated with any party. They forget to include the fact that most extremist groups have been on the left, many of which are environmental terrorist groups like ALF and ELF.
(U//LES) Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers.
This was all written by a far left loon to paint conservatives into a corner. Here they are again playing the race card, yet, Democrats have always been the party of racism and oppression… This is turning into insanity – Please Wake Up America!
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months to ascertain with greater regional specificity the rise in rightwing extremist activity in the United States, with a particular emphasis on the political, economic, and social factors that drive rightwing extremist radicalization.
Well, my fellow readers, bloggers and friends – I will probably be one of the first to be carted off to the “re-education camps” if DHS comes knocking – LOL – I’m laughing because this is so sad, pathetic and ridiculous.
Go to Michelle’s website for her write-up and opinion on the rest.
Expulsion threatened over prayer for sick teacher
Attorneys representing two students who have been threatened with expulsion by a California college because of a prayer for a sick professor say a federal judge has refused the school’s efforts to have the case dismissed.
“It’s outrageous,” said Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute, which is working on the case brought by students Kandy Kyriacou and Ojoma Omaga of the College of Alameda in Alameda, near Oakland.
“Since when does praying for a sick teacher to get well – with her consent – earn a suspension? This is not just a constitutional violation; it is a complete lack of common sense. These students were not looking for a fight, but since the school to this day insists that it can expel them if they pray again, we will have to resolve it in federal court,” he said.
The public-interest legal group said the decision by a San Francisco federal judge means the lawsuit will move forward.
The case was prompted by an incident just before Christmas in 2007 in which the students went to deliver a Christmas gift to a professor.
“Kandy found the instructor alone in her shared office,” according to Pacific Justice. “When the instructor indicated she was ill, Kandy offered to pray for her. The instructor bowed her head, and Kandy began to pray – until she was interrupted by another faculty member, Derek Piazza, who walked in and said, ‘You can’t be doing that in here!’ Kandy quickly left and rejoined her friend and fellow student, Ojoma Omaga. Piazza followed Kandy outside and repeated his rebuke.”
While the students reported they were surprised by the teacher’s aggressive behavior, they were stunned when, days later, they both got letters notifying them of the college’s retroactive “intent to suspend” plan.
The letters, however, provided no facts on which to make such a threat, listing only vague references to “disruptive or insulting behavior” and “willful disobedience.”
School officials informed them during administrative hearings that Kyriacou was being disciplined for praying for the sick teacher. Omaga was not part of the prayer, and her offense apparently was that she was with Kyriacou a short time later.
The lawsuit was filed when the college refused to rescind the letters, leaving the students in peril of suspension or expulsion for any other offense, such as praying on campus. The decision from U.S. District Judge Susan Illston turned back college attempts to deny the students a hearing on their complaint.
“To this day, the College of Alameda has never provided a real explanation for its threats to expel these students,” said Steven N.H. Wood of the Walnut Creek firm of Bergquist, Wood and Anderson, which is working with Pacific Justice on the case.
“But it has disciplined them for non-disruptive, private prayer between consenting adults. We will not stand by and let a college trample these fundamental rights,” he said.
Said Dacus, “It is alarming that a publicly-funded college would seek to suspend and expel students for praying on campus, then dig in its heels to defend an untenable, unconstitutional position. We are encouraged that the federal court has given us the green light to pursue this case.”
Well let’s hear it for a Judge (in Californina of all places) who has some common sense and cares about the Constitution.
