New DHS folly: The Domestic Extremism Lexicon

posted at 12:55 pm on May 1, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The Janet Napolitano-led Department of Homeland Security strikes gold again with a follow-up to its April 7th report casting conservative political positions as indicators of threats to national security.  Raw Story and the Daily Beast report that DHS produced a “lexicon” cataloguing the clues to detect extremists, which include Doc Martens and opposition to drivers licenses for illegal aliens — but somehow never gets around to mentioning Muslim extremists, such as the dozens of Somali immigrants in the Twin Cities who mysteriously disappeared:

The Department of Homeland Security set off a firestorm earlier this month when a memo surfaced that warned of right-wing extremists. The memo, which was issued to law-enforcement officials, suggested that extremists driven to dire straits by the Obama administration could recruit returning veterans to help produce Timothy McVeigh-like terrorism. Now, The Daily Beast has obtained another DHS memo, and this one identifies an even more far-ranging group of “extremists.”

Partisans leapt to decry the first DHS memo as part of a Democratic conspiracy to marginalize right wingers. But it became clear that DHS’s broad descriptions of extremists (“mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority”; “may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration”) were symptomatic of an ongoing agency problem that crossed ideological lines. Indeed, earlier memos surfaced that targeted left-wing extremists with the same uncomfortably vague descriptions. For example, one memo warned that anarchist extremists “embrace a number of radical philosophical components of anticapitalist, antiglobalization, communist, socialist, and other movements.”

The new memo obtained by The Daily Beast locates an even wider-ranging group of extremists among us. You could safely say it crosses liberal and conservative lines: Entries range from Mexican separatists to antiabortion extremists to racial Nordic mysticism. (Islamic groups are specifically excluded from this document.)

All you Odin followers need to get yourselves registered with the DHS, pronto, and stop watching Kröd Mandoon.  Perhaps this broad-ranging assault on political thought will wake up the Left to the noxious ideological bent of Napolitano’s DHS.  It should at least give Chris Dodd something to do, since he scored big political points on Hillary Clinton for her support of Eliot Spitzer’s plan to give licenses to illegal aliens.  Is Chris Dodd being trailed by DHS?

(U) anti-immigration extremism: (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who are vehemently opposed to illegal immigration, particularly along the U.S. southwest border with Mexico, and who have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism to advance their extremist goals. They are highly critical of the U.S. Government’s response to illegal immigration and oppose government programs that are designed to extend “rights” to illegal aliens, such as issuing driver’s licenses or national identification cards and providing in-state tuition, medical benefits, or public education.

The definition of right-wing extremism is back:

(U) rightwing extremism: (U//FOUO) A movement of rightwing groups or individuals who can be broadly divided into those who are primarily hate-oriented, and those who are mainly antigovernment and reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority. This term also may refer to rightwing extremist movements that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

The following demographics get mentioned, but not Muslims:

  • White nationalists
  • Black nationalists
  • Mexican nationalists
  • Puerto Rican nationalists
  • Violent religious sects
  • Jewish extremism

Hey, I’m not going to argue that there aren’t threats within all of these groups, and at least this focuses on actual known groups rather than just political discourse. But doesn’t this list seem a little … incomplete?  And is Jewish extremism really more of a threat than Muslim extremism?  Here in the Twin Cities, we haven’t seen Jewish immigrants suddenly disappear and conduct suicide bombings in Somalia.  Isn’t DHS just a wee bit curious about that?

According to Raw Story, DHS recalled this memo as soon as it went out in late March, which makes their April 7 memo on right-wing extremism even less understandable.  If this is the quality of work being done at DHS, then Janet Napolitano needs to get the axe — and she’s not alone.

Update: One commenter thinks “violent religious sects” covers the Muslims without naming them.  Not exactly:

(U) violent religious sects: (U//FOUO) Religious extremist groups predisposed toward violence. These groups often stockpile weapons, conduct paramilitary training, and share a paranoid interpretation of current world events, which they often associate with the end of the world. They perceive outsiders as enemies or evil influences; display intense xenophobia and strong distrust of the government; and exercise extreme physical or psychological control over group members, sometimes isolating them from society or subjecting them to physical or sexual abuse and harsh initiation practices.

That’s very generic.  Why not just name names?  The left-wing extremism report focused on specific groups as proven threats; this and the April 7 report give very generic and broad-reaching descriptions.  And note that DHS had no problem getting specific enough to mention Jews, Mexicans, blacks, and others.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

The resemblance is almost uncanny.

john1schn on May 1, 2009 at 8:45 PM

I guess I should be more careful about the razorwire, land mines and machine guns I’ve just installed in the front lawn.
I thought it prudent due to the extentsive bomb-making factory I have in the basement, but perhaps I should rethink this.
They might be on to us.

12thMonkey on May 1, 2009 at 10:56 PM

The resemblance is almost uncanny.

john1schn on May 1, 2009 at 8:45 PM

That was very funny. i still visit but mostly for the links in the link viewer at the top of the page.

Greed on May 1, 2009 at 10:58 PM

(U) anti-immigration extremism: (U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who believe that the law of a country should be followed and apply to everyone equally.

And I noticed that at the bottom of the document, there are e-mail addresses for comments about the contents. Looks like an invitation to me.

AmericanDad on May 1, 2009 at 11:39 PM

That was very funny. i still visit but mostly for the links in the link viewer at the top of the page.

Greed on May 1, 2009 at 10:58 PM

The sad part is, Chucky the dancing clown doesn’t even see his own hypocrisy. He wants to have free speech, but like all good little socialists, he only wants it for himself and his sycophants in his echo chamber. Anyone doubts it, read a few threads, especially when sharmuta is getting going. They slobber all over Charles, now (not very) affectionately known as Nancy.

john1schn on May 1, 2009 at 11:56 PM

The sad part is, Chucky the dancing clown doesn’t even see his own hypocrisy. He wants to have free speech, but like all good little socialists, he only wants it for himself and his sycophants in his echo chamber.

Charles has that “don’t impose your morality on me” vibe going but he’s obviously trying to do the same thing, as you mention here john1schn.

Anyone know what he meant herewhen he wrote “Meanwhile, I’m amazed that Ed Morrissey is apparently planning to ignore the fact that he made a serious error in his post about the latest DHS memo.”

mufsidoon on May 2, 2009 at 12:00 AM

Anyone know what he meant herewhen he wrote “Meanwhile, I’m amazed that Ed Morrissey is apparently planning to ignore the fact that he made a serious error in his post about the latest DHS memo.”

mufsidoon on May 2, 2009 at 12:00 AM

I’m glad I wasn’t around for the Kristallnacht bannings that he imposed on people who dare to believe in creationism. Oh yes, he enjoys making light of the fact that one of the education board in TX is a creationist, but, hey, that’s an easy target. It’s ok to piss off a Christian, he won’t slice ou into bite size morsels, like some practicioners of other religions will. I bet his attitude would be much different if Christians weren’t so willing to turn the other cheek.

I’m not advocating ANY violence, just wondering why the Nancy likes to go for the easy insult, rather than try to go for the title. Cowardly?

john1schn on May 2, 2009 at 12:34 AM

So it turns out that Charles at LGF is no different than most democrats or radical moderates. I’ve read his site for years and enjoyed it, but since the election, he as well as other moderates have gone off the deep end.

I was commenting on his post about this post of Ed’s. He was being disingenuous and pompus by appearing to answer my questions with links that didn’t answer my questions. And of course throws out insults if you disagree with him and infers you are stupid.

When I posted a comment about him not answering my question with the links he provided, he deleted the comment and called it hate mail! Of course it wasn’t, but my comment was never seen so he appears to be the one in the one who knows “all.” He simply couldn’t answer the question, so “poof” you’re gone. What an embarassment he has become.

These moderates spent the last 8 years bashing the Dems while the Republicans were in office and now they’re bashing the Republicans when the Dems are in office. It’s all about their desire for a centrist party. Funny way to win hearts and minds!

Whippet on May 2, 2009 at 12:52 AM

I still read LGF fairly regularly, but now CJ has me scratching my head more often than not. His commentary on this one is another example.

Red Cloud on May 2, 2009 at 12:55 AM

“Anyone know what he meant herewhen he wrote “Meanwhile, I’m amazed that Ed Morrissey is apparently planning to ignore the fact that he made a serious error in his post about the latest DHS memo.”

That’s what I was commenting on when he banned me. He’s playing the circle-jerk tactic. And the victim. Must have learned that out there on that Left coast.

Whippet on May 2, 2009 at 12:56 AM

Strat-sphere is another moderate that banned me for respectfully disagreeing with him. They both scream about the “right wing” name calling everyone who doesn’t agree with them, by name calling everyone that doesn’t agree with them!

And Charles is trolling the comments like I’ve never seen over the years. There’s a real hatred for Conservatives on both sites. They’ll have lefties calling them every name in the book and allow them to continue commenting, but if a Conservative disagrees you’re done. I guess they’re more scared than they’re letting on.

Whippet on May 2, 2009 at 1:01 AM

I’m glad I wasn’t around for the Kristallnacht bannings that he imposed on people who dare to believe in creationism. Oh yes, he enjoys making light of the fact that one of the education board in TX is a creationist, but, hey, that’s an easy target. It’s ok to piss off a Christian, he won’t slice ou into bite size morsels, like some practicioners of other religions will. I bet his attitude would be much different if Christians weren’t so willing to turn the other cheek.

I’m not advocating ANY violence, just wondering why the Nancy likes to go for the easy insult, rather than try to go for the title. Cowardly?

john1schn on May 2, 2009 at 12:34 AM

LGF is no friend of radical Islam, but lately it’s become obvious he fears Christians more.

Whippet on May 2, 2009 at 1:09 AM

sorry about that john1schn. That quote didn’t work at all!

Whippet on May 2, 2009 at 1:10 AM

Anyone know what he meant herewhen he wrote “Meanwhile, I’m amazed that Ed Morrissey is apparently planning to ignore the fact that he made a serious error in his post about the latest DHS memo.”

mufsidoon on May 2, 2009 at 12:00 AM

From first paragraph of the memo:

This product provides definitions for key terms and phrases that often appear in DHS analysis that addresses the nature and scope of the threat that domestic, non-Islamic extremism poses to the United States.

It’s an “oops” from Ed and then CJ being a bit quick to berate for not correcting. No idea if Ed has been online to see and make a correction/update.

Anyway my take on all of this: despite the unpleasently vague nature of these documents remember actions speak louder than words. A memo is not going to put you in jail for opposing illegal-immigration. You should be careful of crying wolf too soon.

VeniVidiVidic on May 2, 2009 at 1:52 AM

Ho…ly…frak.

Cylor on May 2, 2009 at 2:36 AM

This all looks like the prelude to some sort of action. I think most of the generic descriptions are throw-aways. When mass DHS-initiated arrests are made at the next Tea Parties, they’ll have the cover of saying “they matched one of the many groups described. We’re not targeting any group.”

This is very worrisome.

stonemeister on May 2, 2009 at 3:47 AM

Chucky the dancing clown is bleeding eyeballs on his dite; he needs more, so he manufactures this controversy and complains about Ed’s oh-so-serious faux pax. LGF has become irrelevant, much like the media Johnson hoped to replace. Of course the media sucks the news out and injects opinion, much the way Charles is doing now.

john1schn on May 2, 2009 at 8:47 AM

I hardly doubt anyone is going to forget about Islamic Terrorism, when they sent the President’s plane to ground zero for a photo op, they reminded the entire country it was like a huge slap to everyone’s “collective” forehead. So who is really concerned about “The Gang That Can’t Shoot Straight” Really who ????

First of all the reaction time to these supposed list of extremist, isn’t so great, they have to write what they need to fill the teleprompter, and then they have to make sure it is scrolling properly so the PSA President can announce it LOL! These are bureaucrats who is surprised they are acting like bureaucrats? The one thing you can count on they will be constantly skrewing up….This administration isn’t smart enough to fire Napolitano? Even the Obama drones get she is a total waste so she isn’t working as a distraction or deflection. Now Joe Biden on the other hand he is an old master, too funny this is the opposition folks. 2010! 2010! 2010! say it with me, who is going to lose lots and lots of seats in the House and Senate in 2010!

Dr Evil on May 2, 2009 at 9:59 AM

The irony here is that Obama’s former pastor Rev. Wright was an unabashed “black nationalist” whose preaching was rooted in “black theology” (look up James Cone). Thus according to DHS Obama himself would be a suspected extremist.

SunSword on May 2, 2009 at 10:32 AM

The Obama DHS memos show the same unwillingness to try to understand those unlike them that the left sees in the right. They sound like deaf and blind anthropologists trying to describe the latest Broadway musical. They don’t have a clue what’s going on.

Paul-Cincy on May 2, 2009 at 12:33 PM

You know it occurs to me that if they keep adding people to the subversive lists, then they in Washington DC will eventually be outnumbered. Maybe that’s why we’re paying for Hamas-tied Palestinians to immigrate to the US. Maybe that’s why all of the immigration reform. They’re bringing in reinforcements? We are seeing paranoia in action in Washington DC. This sounds like a pre-liberation Iraq scenario.

Driefromseattle on May 2, 2009 at 2:42 PM

I’d like the report to name even one violent act by anti illegal immigration advocates. The right could name numerous violent acts by pro illegal immigration advocates of the leftwing variety. I wonder if Tom Tancredo is being wiretapped by DHS?

eaglewingz08 on May 2, 2009 at 7:06 PM

“When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”
Thomas Jefferson

” The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
Thomas Jefferson

” The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
Thomas Jefferson

“Americans need never fear their government
because of the advantage of being armed,
which the Americans possess over the people
of almost every other nation.”
James Madison

“When the Government fears the People to be armed, the People need to fear that government.”
James Madison

“”No legislative act contrary to the Constitution can be valid.
To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy (agent) is greater
than his principal; that the servant is above the master;
that the representatives of the people are superior to the people;
that men, acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers
do not authorize, but what they forbid. It is not to be supposed that
the Constitution could intend to enable the representatives
of the people to substitute their will to that of their constituents.
A Constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by judges as
fundamental law. If there should happen to be a irreconcilable variance
between the two, the Constitution is to be preferred to the statute.”
Alexander Hamilton

I am a Consatitutionalist, a veteran, a gun owner, an NRA member, a Christian and a father; I am on this list but I have good company, our FOUNDING FATHERS.

nelsonknows on May 2, 2009 at 7:07 PM

Charles is on a member-banning rampage lately over at LGF. I’ve been a reader there, granted, for only about a year or so now, but I’ve enjoyed most of his work in that time. Then I woke up to find my account banned one morning shortly after my own post where I disagreed with his opinion on Glenn Beck. I hadn’t even done more than post it under his links as I normally would with anything currently relevant enough to warrant it. But I write an opinion that disagrees with his own and, poof, I’m gone. Well within his rights to run his site how he chooses, to be sure, but nevertheless, pretty ridiculous.

aic4ever on May 2, 2009 at 8:50 PM

How about an “Obama” lexicon? How many different names do people call Obama? That would be useful information! In fact, I am willing to go that extra mile and create a wikipedia entry!

jdkchem on May 2, 2009 at 9:54 PM

“Tax Resisters” eh? well, somebody has noticed that the money is down. O-hole is setting up the IRS to do some kicking down doors.

GunRunner on May 2, 2009 at 10:39 PM

Language has been used as a weapon by the left for a long time….notice how terms are defined before the battle is waged. What the average person thinks a term means may be very different than what the official definition is.
We laugh at Clinton saying ” it depends on what the definition of is is”, but he understands that language can be very tricky to negotiate.
What is my point? Picture yourself at the next protest, if you went to a tea party and decided you”d do it again. Some law enforcement type, not necessarily identifiable as one, sidles up and starts asking questions about what you believe. You think that you’ve made contact with another freedom loving patriot, and admit that you think that the federal gov has stepped on states rights too much, think that the border laws should be enforced, that we are all equal before the law and should be treated that way, think the constitution is the law of the land, etc. etc….( a lot of conversation can happen in 2-3 minutes, when someone asks your opinion at a political rally).
In reality, you’ve just admitted to being in at least four of Janet Napolitano’s aforementioned “extremist groups”, and off to the re-education camp you go. OK, the camps aren’t there yet, but you get the idea.

The terms get defined, they don’t mean what you think they do. Saying you believe in something that the government has defined, or re-defined, could get you in trouble in this kind of environment.

OneEyedJack on May 3, 2009 at 4:12 AM

As for LGF- it’s like he’s been replaced by a pod-person. I barely recognise the site any more.

Did you catch his tinfoil hat moment when he claimed that Bin Laden’s been dead for years but the US government is concealing that fact-

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/33520_Osama_Bin_Dead_%28For_a_Long_Time%29

Jay Mac on May 3, 2009 at 7:17 AM

How much more proof is needed that Obama is commiting TREASON?
Here it is;
http://www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2009-02-04-E9-2488

Cybergeezer on May 3, 2009 at 9:12 AM

As for LGF- it’s like he’s been replaced by a pod-person. I barely recognise the site any more.

Did you catch his tinfoil hat moment when he claimed that Bin Laden’s been dead for years but the US government is concealing that fact-

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/33520_Osama_Bin_Dead_%28For_a_Long_Time%29

Jay Mac on May 3, 2009 at 7:17 AM

Wow. Chucky the dancing clown has always believed that UBL has been worm food for a long time, but this is the first time that I remember him going into Loose Change territory…

john1schn on May 3, 2009 at 10:24 AM

LGF has ALWAYS been a GOP lockstep site. If you actually hold the GOP accountable you will be banned. GOP locksteppers are becoming as gutless as the leftist freaks.

nelsonknows on May 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM

Don’t foprget folks, Allahpundit threatened to ban people that critisized his opinion of Glenn Beck also, how soon we forget or do you want me to find THOSE posts in the archives?

nelsonknows on May 3, 2009 at 6:23 PM

Oh, please, nelsonknows…LGF has not ever been a mouthpiece for the GOP. There are increasingly fewer conservatives on the site now, but Chuckles the dancing clown has never been a GOP backer. He may have noticed that the Bush memos were fake, but that was AFTER others had, and he made the comparison nice and shiny so he would get more hits, driving up his revenue. With Chuckles, it’s ALL about the money. Left, right doesn’t matter. Remember when being free to make your opinions was OK on the site, as long as you didn’t violate the TOS? Well, even he doesn’t need to worry about those anymore. He’ll ban you for looking up banned members. He’ll ban you for saying “Heh.” Don’t laugh. It happened. He’ll ban you for posting critical information about him at OTHER sites. Chuckles is a putz, he’s always been a lib, and only 9/11 made hime jump on the anti-jihad bandwagon.

He used to be critical of the fact that Muslim women were forced to wear the burkha; now he advertises Muslim romance on his site.

LGF ain’t GOP; it’s all about the $$$$. Chuckles has gone over to the dark side in his quest for green. He doesn’t have principles; he has a bottom line.

john1schn on May 3, 2009 at 6:58 PM

I can’t believe this post didn’t have more pages of comments…

So, in typical BLB fashion:

F*** You, Janet.

bluelightbrigade on May 3, 2009 at 8:15 PM

It’s really a surprise that we can understand Janet, and DHS, at all. It’s extremely hard to talk with your foot in your mouth.

This woman is up for consideration for the SCOTUS? Are they insane?

Can I borrow this doc for my blog? It makes the perfect companion piece for the other document they released.

Timothy S. Carlson on May 4, 2009 at 12:02 PM

U//FOUO

Interesting that it’s all marked unclassified // for offical use only

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on May 4, 2009 at 12:03 PM

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson

Let’s roll.

long_cat on May 4, 2009 at 11:01 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3