Napolitano Defends Report On Right Wing Extremism Risk

WASHINGTON — Civil liberties officials at the Homeland Security Department did not agree with some of the language in a controversial report on right-wing extremists, but the agency issued the report anyway.

The intelligence assessment issued to law enforcement last week said some military veterans could be susceptible to extremist recruiters or commit lone acts of violence. That prompted angry reactions from some lawmakers and veterans' groups.

Homeland Security spokeswoman Amy Kudwa said the report was issued before officials resolved problems raised by the agency's civil rights division. Kudwa would not specify what language raised the concerns.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano defended the report Thursday, but she said the definition of right-wing extremism that was included in a footnote should be changed.

In the report, right-wing extremism was defined as hate-motivated groups and movements, such as hatred of certain religions, racial or ethnic groups. "It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration," the report said.

"If there's one part of that report I would rewrite, in the word-smithing, Washington-ese that goes on after the fact, it would be that footnote," Napolitano said Thursday on Fox News.

The same definition was included in the agency's March 26 report on domestic extremism. Both reports were marked "For Official Use Only."

The report on right-wing extremists cites the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing by military veteran Timothy McVeigh as one instance of a veteran becoming a domestic terrorist.

Story continues below

advertisement

Several lawmakers, the American Legion and Vets for Freedom took offense to the intelligence review. The Veterans of Foreign Wars defended it as an assessment, not an accusation.

Napolitano said, "We do not mean to suggest that veterans as a whole are at risk of becoming violent extremists."

She also said: "I apologize for that offense. It was certainly not intended."

The top Republican on the House intelligence committee, Michigan's Pete Hoekstra, has asked the director of national intelligence's ombudsman to investigate the Homeland Security report for "unsubstantiated conclusions and political bias."

The senior Democrat of the House committee with oversight of the department said the report raises privacy and civil liberty issues. "This report appears to have blurred the line between violent belief, which is constitutionally protected, and violent action, which is not," Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., wrote in a letter to Napolitano.

The department's definition of left-wing extremism in the March 26 report includes a reference to violence, stating these groups that embrace anticapitalist, communist or socialist beliefs seek "to bring about change through violent revolution rather than through established political processes."

These reports are part of the department's routine analysis of intelligence information to give to law enforcement agencies guidance on possible security threats.

In February, the department issued a similar warning about possible cyber attacks from left wing extremists. In September, the agency reported that right-wing extremists over the past five years had used the immigration debate as a recruiting tool.

Since September, the agency issued several reports on individual foreign and domestic extremist groups such as al-Qaida and Hammerskin Nation, a skinhead organization. The Hammerskin assessment said many of the group's members received military training and fought in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The latest report has turned into a "political football," said Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif. Harman, who chairs a House subcommittee on intelligence and information sharing, said the report could have been written more artfully, but added that "it was a well-intended effort to describe to law enforcement what things to look for."

"If the result is to dumb down intelligence products that could prevent the next attack to the homeland, we will all lose," she said.

(This version CORRECTS to show that DHS would not specify which language raised concerns.)

Comments

[CommonSenseMom]

I think this is interesting:

Left-Wing Extremists are Americans who are human rights focused, environmental champions, believe in universal health care, equality for all races, creeds and sexual orientation and they work for world peace. They are a group that the government expects will step in to help people in need during hard economic times.

Right-Wing Extremists are gun-toting, white supremacist, war mongering, hate-filled, uneducated, small minded, paranoid fear mongers. They are a group that the government needs to monitor for violence during hard economic times.

WHY would anyone want to be a Right-winger?

[AndThenOneDay]

Extremists are people, whichever issue or cause they start out with, end up sanctioning violence and destruction. They have a lot in common regardless of their 'causes'. What I don't understand is the conservative hand-wringing over a class of criminals because they started out on the right before they went off the deep end. I don't care about the ones who go off the deep end from the left.

[Roguewolf]

Oh yes, left wing extremist are all non-violent. What world do you live in?

[FlamingLibrul]

When leftwing extremists get upset, they boycott, destroy property now and again- eg. animal testing sites, and protest. When rightwingers get upset, they have plenty of guns and ammo to back up their rage- Pittsburgh being the most recent example. Please provide a link to any leftwing shoo ting rampage in recent history.

[Petesdaddy]

I guess you must have missed last Sunday's 60 Minutes segment which featured people loading up on guns and ammo because they're afraid Obama is going to cancel their second amendment right to bear arms. There is actually a shortage of ammunition because people are buying it by the trainload. It was obvious from the people they interviewed that the people buying guns and ammo are not Democrats, but right-wing Americans who already have a house full of guns. They were buying AK47s and other assault weapons in record numbers.

[Roguewolf]

I do not own a gun, I am not racist, I am not hate-filled, I have a Masters degree. I am a conservative.

[33Greeper]

There you go again, conservative! No one is calling you right wing white supremicist lone wolf domestic terrorist. If you are offended, then maybe you are both a conservative and a domestic terrorist.

[JustMyWords]

I'm not doubting that there are rational conservatives. I meet them every day.

But that is not the group the report is focused on. The report is talking about extremists - surely you are willing to recognize that the word "extremist," by its very definition, is pointing out that those people are NOT the norm?

It doesn't matter whether the ideology is right or left - extremists take it too far. And there are people on both ends of the political spectrum that are willing to do things that most of us find abhorrent.

[bobfeld]

If what you say is true..the rushpublican party needs more like you.

[horsey]

you have to understand these right wing crazies need a big gun to feel powerful because their mind is so small.

they need someone to hate so they can feel better about themselves and that is why they would want to be a RWE.

[dezzertguy]

Those are zombie definitions. Obama fans use those for their justification.

[RightWingMarine]

clearly the only solution is to disband the military and depend on the fraternal good will of all nations to not invade us.

This was done to attempt to marginalize a segment of society and downplay their contributions to our nation. Are our troops above reproach? No, but it is reprehensible to accuse those returning from the wars our Congress authorized of plotting attacks on their country simply because they may disagree with some aspects of the govt and its actions.

[FlamingLibrul]

The only one's making accusations of soldiers plotting attacks is your precious rightwing. Keep spinning, but the truth remains the same. The more outrageous your assertions, the more you insure a Democratic majority, indefinitely. All sanity-loving Americans will read the hysteria coming from the wingnut chorus, and vote Democratic, out of fear of associating with the loonies. It's as simple as that.

[Roguewolf]

Really, I didn't know Nepalitano was a Republican?

[AndThenOneDay]

There is no such accusation.

[zerepas]

@RightWingMarine: The report did not accuse all returning war vets, but merely suggests evidence that a small sub-set of these are at risk. Throw in the people who categorically support the second amendment and you have a powder keg of a tragedy waiting to happen. Need you be reminded of Timothy McVeigh?

[RightWingMarine]

is there something wrong with supporting the second amendment? Are there any other parts of the Constitution you don't support?

[Skepticat]

With the huge numbers that have served in the military why should anyone be surprized if an extremely small minority become dangerous misfits. Lee Harvey Oswald was once a marine - McVeigh and army buddy Terry Nichols did more than just disagree with their government. Charles Whitman, the U of Texas sniper had army training. More than a few military types have committed robberies, rapes and murders over the decades while in the services, and all military branches have their own police and investigators for good reason. To their credit all branches do try to weed out obviously unstable dangerous types - and usually succeed.
The report didn't badmouth veterans - it only said that attempts could be made to recruit some disgruntled returning veterans into extremist causes. Why is this statement so hard to believe.

[33Greeper]

I think the DHS and FBI needs to watch you closely. Do you have a picture of Timothy McVeigh next to your pillow?

[Lemeritus]

That was uncalled for 33Greeper. Right wing he may be, but there's some truth in what he said.

[Roguewolf]

One Question Napolitano

The GOPers - by that we mean Rep. Eric Cantor's office - are pouncing on an interview today on "Morning Joe" with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, under this subject line: "Administration Permits Only One Question, No Follow-Ups About Extremism Report."

Today the Secretary went on Morning Joe but they were only allowed to ask one question.

"Apparently, when the Democrats promise an open administration, they really only mean open as long as you ask the questions they want asked and no follow-ups on controversial topics that everyone is reporting on," staffer Joe Pounder wrote in an email.

Anyway check out the transcript:

MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough: “I want to have a discussion afterwards about that interview.­”

MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski: “Now, we should be clear, they only wanted one question.”

Scarborough: “Yeah. So this morning, I got a call that she [Janet Napolitano] was going to be on the show and they said we could only ask one question …”

Brzezinski: “That was the agreement.­”

Scarborough: “…about this story yesterday. And I initially said, well, we're not going to do it then, because we don't allow people to tell us what they're going to talk about.”

Brzezinski: “Right.”

What happened to the most transparent administration EVAH.

[flexo]

There are some things that NO administration should be expected to be transparent about. Homeland Security is one such example.

[Roguewolf]

She can't talk about a report that is made public? Libs are hilarious.

[mafina]

Check out Freedomworks.org. led by Dick Armey. This is a character that needs to be disarmed. This man created hate and discontent while he was in the senate. What the dems need is to send out their own organization to disarm this lies perpetrated by Dick Armey.

[Avanti2]

What is wrong with http://www.freedomworks.org ?

I didn't see any General Betrayus Ad's or hate speech on the site.

[SonofLiberty1]

I don't own a gun and my Father never owned a gun.

But it bothers me to no end, when I hear and see reports that gun sales...es­pecially sales of
automatic type (really military) weapons are up all over this country.

Now the gun nuts, as I call them, always seem to say the same thing...th­at we need to protect ourselves especially if the government does something stupid....

Well, GWB, for all intents and purposes, was a Dictator for the last 8 years and he drove us into the ground..an­d they sat back and watched and didn't care these gun nuts...

But when we elect a Democrat as President, and the first Black American..­.gun sales go up?

Why?

It also bothers me that the same gun nuts, apparently don't understand that guns are fueling the drug wars in Mexico...

And additionally, the gun death rate seems to be worse all the time...

Apparently, it doesn't bother these folks one darn bit that any one of us can't walk down some city streets without wondering if we might get shot?

Apparently, it doesn't bother these folks one dam bit when little children..­yes even babies in their own cribs get shot.

I wonder if it's time to put the heat on the NRA and all gun nuts?

IF YOU WANT THE PRIVELAGE OF OWNING A GUN THEN MAKE IT SAFE FOR ALL AMERICANS TO WALK DOWN THE STREET WITHOUT FEAR!

[DontJustFollow]

what makes you afraid to walk down the street? is it the NRA members? when I have to drive through a rough section of town at night, I don't look out and think - this is so dangerous because all those people are gun nuts and NRA members - - -

be honest now... is that what you are really thinking?

why don't you do a study and contrast "gun nuts" and NRA members with those that are committing the crimes - let us know what you find.

[bobfeld]

Im not afraid to walk down the street. Im not paranoid.

[DontJustFollow]

when you drive through a bad part of town at night do you really fear all the NRA members and "gun nuts" you see?

do a google and research violent crime rates and see statistically how many of them are NRA members and "gun nuts" -

[bobfeld]

I REALLY do fear the gun nutsmore than the criminals.

[Avanti2]

You CANNOT purchase an automatic rifle or hand gun in the US or Canada. They have been Illegal since the 1930's. Only Government entities have those weapons.

[Avanti2]

In my state, Florida, gun deaths continue to go down relative to the increases in population over the past 20 years. Why? We instituted a Carry Law 20 years ago.

[rfshunt]

I wouldn't be so proud of Floriida if I were you.

"Illegal guns generally flow from states with weak gun laws to states with stronger gun laws. In states with strong gun laws, criminals find it more difficult to obtain guns from local sources and frequently must obtain guns from traffickers supplied by out-of-state gun dealers. ...

Georgia ranked number one in the nation in the total number of crime guns traced to Georgia gun dealers and recovered in other states in 2007, with 2,631 crime guns traced to Georgia and recovered outside the state last year. Florida ranked number two in 2007, with 2,328 crime guns traced to Florida dealers and recovered in crime in other states. Texas ranked number three, with 2,281 crime guns traced to Texas dealers and recovered in crime in other states.

According to the ATF data, these three states alone accounted for one-fifth of all crime guns trafficked across state lines and recovered and traced by law enforcement in 2007. "

http://www.commondreams.org/news2008/0611-05.htm

[wyatt1970]

hey sonofliberty maybe you should go back and read the constitution and bill of rights again, it is not a "priveledge"(try spell check) it is a right to be able to own a gun. no i am not a gun toting freak but i do believe americans have the right to own guns, but they should take aways guns from people who are dangerous and should not own them, but until they can do that don't punish me for what other people do. In the military i learned to use all types of weapons and i still like to shoot those weapons, but i have never gone out on a rampage. all the liberal/democrats(i am not going to call them names because they all should be respected to have their own views) scream about the wrong that republicans do but never own up to the wrongs that democrats do and there are the same on the other side of the fence, why can't people here agree to disagree and take instead of pointing fingers and name calling, democrats are just to blame as the rebublicans in this mess.

[greenriverkate]

As a Democrat, I own a gun, will forever own guns, will not give up my gun, and am responsible. I believe in the second amendment but the NRA is a bunch of idiots what don't want the responsibility that goes with gun ownership. We do not need AK47's in this country or any military auto weapons as they will get to the street and into the wrong hands. My parents were democrats, believed in the second amendment and all males in all the family were veterans. When it comes to the Constitution, there should be no "party" talk!!! Obama did not say he would take guns away. He said he wanted responsibility to go with gun ownership. Don't think that is asking too much. With that, I think everyone should have to take a class on guns, how to handle and store and protect children. That is being an adult. However, we have total idiots that leave guns around (in the name of their "rights") and we have children killed. Children should be educated also and I can back it up if you doubt me. Stop with the lib and whatever you call Reps. We are citizens of this country and the law applies to all of us just like the constitution.

[power1]

I'm glad to see the DHS has so much respect Veterans. This report with it's lack of facts and data is a complete embarrassment.

[FlamingLibrul]

The wingnut surge of unpatriotic fervor to tear down their government, because they don't like who's in charge, is the real embarrassment.

[Roguewolf]

Yes, you are absolutely right we should never question our government.

[nowarpleez]

This study was requested by Bush. It takes months to perform a study like this. If you're a veteran who plans attacks on your government, like Tim McVeigh, you should be called out.

[AndThenOneDay]

What do you think we should do to Bush, who requested the report?

[gotborked]

Why does this keep coming up as an argument? We all acknowledge that there are crazies on both sides that should be monitored. Requesting a report on extremists that are on the right-wing is not outrageous--in fact, it's probably a good idea. The substance of the report--like lumping people who are pro-life and veterans together with white supremacists--is what's outrageous.

[Roguewolf]

These reports come out on a regular basis, the difference is that in earliar reports they mentions specific groups such as code pink, PETA ,greenpeace, KKK, etc. This report talks about vets in general and has no data to back it up.

[islandchris]

Now I want to see an assessment of the risk from religious (especially "Christian" ) fundamentalists. The problem with the "right-wing" label is that it can easily be interpreted to cover the conservative spectrum, and I think the deeper threat is from religious groups. If you want to recall how effective assassination can be, consider the death of Yitzhak Rabin at the hands of a religiously motivated Jew. In the last four decades he was the only leader likely to have produced a sane and mostly just solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Iraq War is just part of the price we have all paid for that act.

[DontJustFollow]

excellent point, one has to look no farther than 911 to see what religious fundamentalists are capable of.

Most of all though - look to St@l in, M@0, and H/ t/er - names this site doesn't even want to allow. They were all ANTI-religious. They were absolutely fundamentalists and they did a lot more damage to humanity than any so called "Christian" groups - don't you think?

[rfshunt]

Not exactly accurate.

H/ t/er was a Roman Catholic and maintained relations with the Catholic Church while in power.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm

[synick]

Doubt it. More people have been killed in the name of Christ / God than any other reason in history.

[unprofor]

I usually only post when I start to see ignorance on the board. I served over 20 yrs in the military and currently work as a Dept of Army civilian. Think about your comments before you write them. The military is not a tool for the right or left. The military is America's armed services made of your sons and daughters who believe in maintaining a strong country. You have members of the military who are on both sides of the political spectrum. Most of you commenting on this topic seem to think that the military is a right wing tool. Wrong. The military is your constitutionally provided organization that provides for the common defense of America. It's not made up of gun loving crazed neo-nazis or any other sub-group. It is made up of your sons and daughters and is representative of America. The military is represented by people up and down the economic ladder, religons, races, political background, education, etc. In short is represents and looks like America. Any time that politicians or groups on the left or right try to use the military as a tool for their idiotic political fodder, we should not try to defend that group, but we should shout them down no matter what side they represent. DHS made a stupid comment. Groups on both sides trying to use this for political gain are shameful.

[DontJustFollow]

thank you.

[Avanti2]

Bravo, Bravo!

[FlamingLibrul]

Thank you for your service unprofor, but why is talking about a risk of returning veterans being recruited to ha te groups a stupid comment or accusation of neo- Na zi ism gone wild? Surely you know that there are hate-wing groups that exist within the military too, but they do not define the military. I spent the first 24 years of my life in the military culture, and graduated from a DoD school system. For me, the military was overwhelmingly conservative, but this is changing, as we enter deeper into the 21st Century.

Acknowledging potential danger is not the same as making accusations. The wingnut talking points machine has gone into overdrive, trying to convince everyone there is a conspiracy of blame going on. Divide and conquer is not what we need as a nation facing serious challenges right now- to say the least. The lack of patriotism and America First from the rightwing is disheartening.

[Roguewolf]

Because they have no data to back up there analysis.

[DontJustFollow]

your statement that the military "was overwhelmingly conservati­ve..." says it all.

the left has always worked to discredit our military and its mission. those that enlist are called dumb and/or poor. their commitment to serving a greater good is degraded over and over. their willingness so give their lives for others in this and other lands is mocked. our people are good and they know why they are serving and they know the truth about the good they do - all the attacks by the left will not change that. our boys and girls understand commitment, service, integrity, honor - all things that shape their lives and stand as example to the whole world.

what is disheartening is the constant bleating of the democrats that our missions and our people are a waste and now that even those that have served and survived are now to be feared.

remember what you democrats called our soldiers as they came home from east Asia -
The right did not do enough to defend our military then and I am proud to see we are not taking this latest attempt to defame and degrade sitting down.

[toypiano]

DHS made an important correlation. It happens to be something you object to, but that doesn't make it stupid.

One common thread among those who serve in the military is that they're disproportionately from lower socio-economic levels of the spectrum. That's an important part of the picture you're trying to paint, and it's just one way they actually are used as tools by the right wing.

There are more than a few "gun loving crazed neo-nazis," as you call them, in or from the military. And really, all it takes is one: Timothy McVeigh, for instance.

"White Supremacist Recruitment of Military Personnel Since 9/11"
FBI unclassified intelligence report
(July 2008, during Bush)
http://static.crooksandliars.com/files/uploads/2008/12/whitesupremacistrecruitmentofmilitarypersonnel2_a0a33.pdf

" 'Killing a Brown': New Evidence of Extremists in the Military"
SPLC Intelligence Project (Winter 2008)
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=971

"Nazis in the military: 'I'm so proud of my kills'" (December 2008)
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/nazis-military-im-so-proud-my-skills

"Hate Groups Are Infiltrating the Military, Group Asserts" (July 2006)
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/07/washington/07recruit.html?ex=1309924800&en=1be0e7d4e2aac8d3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserlan

"More Neo-Nazis in the Military" (July 2006)
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,104702,00.html?ESRC=topstories.RSS

"Military-Trained Gang Members Worry Police" (May 2006)
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=local&id=4140211

[MrsFonebone]

I watched her on the news and it was as though someone pushed a button and this non-stop. almost uninterruptible line of self-serving cliches and excuses came out. She hardly stopped for breath. And truly pointless comments like, "It's not an accusation, it's an assessment­." So there's no real threat? Or there is? What kind of bs is "situational awareness"--seems to imply a real situation, no?

And if we need special security research to find out that terrible economic times produce alienation and social upheaval etc etc then we are wasting even more taxpayer money.

[rfshunt]

You don't want us to be aware of a potential threat?

Why are the right-wingers soft on terrorism?

[greenriverkate]

In the name of God, stop! Potential threat? Hardly. Stop with the right and left wing crap. I know more democrats that have served since WWll til today than I do republicans. And saying that, my dad would be the first one to tell all you idiots, you don't turn around in a fox hole and ask what party they belong to or if gay or if a woman. That coming from a WWll veteran. I am sick of this crap. These are our veterans, our kids, our wives, our husbands, our daddy or mommy out there trying to keep this country safe. (i am against this war but not the veteran!). This report is wrong and should not have been released. It should have gone into the garbage heap. No facts, no support, no truth, just hatefulness. This report going to all police departments says it all and opens the door to discrimination against veterans. My God, there is no excuse for plain old stupidity and lack of common sense. Everyone knows a veteran. This is a voluntary group, not draft so where do you all get off with low class or low IQ'd people. These kids put their life on the line and that is more than any of you did. Easy to sit on your arses and pass judgement on our kids. This isn't a "party thing", it is an American Thing

[jesseandrews]

we all need to step back and look at where we are at , even if you did not votre for obama we should still be proud of being americans, we have the right to protest peacefully and freedom of speech to say what we feel as alonf as it does not hurt or put down others, please we are americans think before you talk and say only what you would not mine being said about you. i am proud to be an american

[historymatters]

I don't recall there being similar outrage by anyone when DHS released their report on potential problems with left-wing extremist groups. Once again, the right wing wants one set of rules for themselves, and another for anyone who dares to disagree with them.

[DontJustFollow]

good point - maybe you could site the report so we can all read it for ourselves?

you can do that can't you? funny how MSNBC and HP would have passed up the chance to use something like that.

can't wait to hear back from you -

[toypiano]

It's easy enough to google, follower. DIY.

Both reports have gotten coverage, but leave it to wingnuttia to have hissy tantrums about being called out for having hissy tantrums.

[k6007]

g. o. o. g. l. e. Don't get your news from cable or HP.

[Jamie Kowalski]

Since you asked, here it is:

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/hsa-leftwing-extremists-increase-in-cyber-attacks-dated-26-january-2009.pdf

Can't wait to hear back from *you*.

[Joudan]

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Leftwing_Extremist_Threat.pdf

Here you go DJF....Rea­d away...

[gotborked]

I have read them both. What the liberals here are overlooking (whether intentionally or not) is that conservatives are outraged not that a report on right-wing extremism exists just as a report on left-wing extremism does. Everyone knows that crazies exist on both sides of the political spectrum and that it's ok to monitor all crazies.

What is outrageous is how the report on right-wing extremism broadly defines what is extremist. For example: "It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a
single issue, such as opposition to abortion". This is outrageous not only because it is tyrannical to label as "extremist" a viewpoint that millions of law abiding Americans hold and that reasonable people can disagree on, but also because if grandma praying a rosary in front of the abortion clinic is the DHS's top concern, we're hosed.

[apduncan1]

I hear an echo ... Dallas, TX, and John F Kennedy. I hear the same rethoric ...

[steamboat]

Oswald was a LEFTWINGER (communist and Castro admirerer) and not rightwing.

[86masters]

Good ol' John B o n e r.

[Amunaka]

Well this is nothing that hasn't already been reported on ....boener get a clue..


Military-Trained Gang Members Worry Police
05/03/06

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=local&id=4140211

Hate Groups Are Infiltrating the Military, Group Asserts
Published: July 7, 2006


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/07/washington/07recruit.html?ex=1309924800&en=1be0e7d4e2aac8d3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserlan

[Avanti2]

Both articles are 3 years old!

The SPLC is a far left wing legal group that continues to gain funding and support by generating fear and what I consider hate speech.

[k6007]

lmao! Nice try:}

[Amunaka]

There ya go....righ­twing denial....­.good on you

[FlamingLibrul]

Oh, okay- the reports exist- which you demanded proof of, but since they are too old for you, they don't count now. And you wonder why liberals mock, jeer and point at the wingnuts..­.

[toypiano]

Napolitano is being bullied by the wingnuts in Congress, but she doesn't need to respond to their faux outrage. The report itself is important corroboration, but it doesn't actually take a federal report to show us who is threatened by an open democracy and given to violent extremism.

For instance, yesterday's teabagging tantrum was a convenient cover for racists to rail against a black man being president. The corporate lobbyists who planned the event may have had one idea in mind (helping rich white people avoid taxes while the poor do their bidding), but those who attended had their own agendas, too.

[DontJustFollow]

really. I missed all the references to race by those attending the rallies. The only place I saw it refered to or brought up was by democrats - - -

I guess it is a good way to whip up the base and stir the pot. I would bet Moveon.org has a bunch of fund raising email blasts going out today.

[FlamingLibrul]

Here you go: http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/04/racist_signs_at_tea_parties.php

You really don't understand the concept of Google, do you? You just beg to be proven wrong.

[Ionakr]

Then obviously you were not watching the same television stations that I watched. Every one that had a sign was white. There were but a handful (and I do mean a handful - you could count them on one hand) of blacks or latinos at those rallies. And the signs that they were holding up spoke for themselves. The depicted the Pres as Hitler, Stallin, a monkey, a sign said "hang them" and listed blacks and a few whites in congress that agree with the Pres. along with the Pres. They said we want to "take back" our country (but it was only whites saying it). They said the Pres was not an American citizen, etc. So if that is not racist I don't know what is. The report from DHS also mentioned about the first African/American President. Reminds me of JFK, MLK, RFK, Malcom X, and all others that fought and died to bring this country to where it is. Remember, racisim is very much present in many states. Why were they not protesting 1 to 2 years ago when Bush put us in this bind, raised taxes, started a unnecessary war, gave the first bailouts, etc?

[tiredofthesameoldstuff]

Dude there are hundreds of photos of the signs, t-shirts, as well as verbal comments by the tea baggers. If it was fashionable to wear the dunce hat you can bet it would have looked an old time klan rally.

[toypiano]

Why do you care what moveon.org does. I don't follow them, sorry.

Your marching orders come from wealthy corporate lobbyists anyway. They're using you to keep themselves rich at your expense, then pretend it's "grassroot­s." I'm surprised you didn't know that or check them out beforehand. Who are those lobbyist-led groups behind your teabagging? They are Americans for Prosperity, Freedom Works and American Solutions for Winning the Futures (ASWF), an organization run by uberRepublican Newt Gingrich.

Check it out:
http://savetherich.com/blog