FACEBOOK
TWITTER
The Armed Right’s Violent Rhetoric
President Obama said the gun control task force headed by Vice President Biden has given him “a list of sensible, common-sense steps that can be taken to make sure that the kinds of violence we saw at Newtown doesn’t happen again.” Sensible and common-sense! Who could be against that?
As America prepares for the Second Inaugural of its first African-American president – and as demands grow for some commonsense gun control after a horrific school massacre – the Right is arming itself amid hysterical rhetoric about the need to “shoot tyrants,” ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar notes.
By Paul R. Pillar
A public discussion at the Council on Foreign Relations last week was concerned with identifying particular trouble spots and troublesome issues around the world that are apt to demand policy attention during 2013. One of the speakers, David Gordon of the Eurasia Group, mentioned in passing that an issue he was not worried about this year was radicalism in developed countries. He did not specify what variety of radicalism; probably most in the room simply assumed he was referring to the Islamist variety.
That variety, after all, as it manifests itself both at home and abroad, has now been for some time almost the sole preoccupation in the United States as far as violent radicalism is concerned. When Peter King, as chairman in the previous Congress of the House Committee on Homeland Security, conducted a series of hearings on terrorist threats in the United States, the subject was all Islamist, all the time.
One hazard of such a narrow focus on one type of radicalism is to reduce the likelihood we will notice the rise of other types. Different types of radicalism, and the subsets of it that involve terrorist violence, come and go in waves, as they have over the past several decades.
The rise of any one wave is generally related to the broader political environment in two somewhat antipodal ways. The radicalism usually is embedded in a larger mood, movement or ethos. But it also usually is a reaction against some political trend or development.
While keeping these patterns in mind, it would be useful to look again at a report that was prepared four years ago in the Department of Homeland Security. The report was titled Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment. Its release led to an uproar among those on the Right who were uncomfortable with any government report acknowledging that there is American extremism on the Right.
Janet Napolitano is the third Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security
Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, evidently anxious to reduce her vulnerability to charges of politically-inspired analysis, responded by withdrawing the report, saying it had not been properly vetted within the department. DHS’s analytical work on right-wing extremism has reportedly been reduced to a single employee.
The report, which nonetheless made it into the hands of news agencies, may be one of the more worthwhile reads among government documents having such a short official shelf life. The report stated that although there were at the time no known plans among right-wing extremists to commit specific acts of terrorism, such extremists “may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues.”
One of those bits of grist for the fear-mongering was “the election of the first African-American president.” Another was the prospect of gun control:
Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans likely would attract new members into the ranks of right-wing extremist groups, as well as potentially spur some of them to begin planning and training for violence against the government. The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by right-wing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement.
The report-writers likened what they were seeing to what was happening with this extremist fringe in the 1990s. Although we have not witnessed in the subsequent four years anything like a repetition of the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995, other indications suggest the report was on to something.
Charles Blow in the New York Times alludes to some of this when he notes, using data compiled by the Southern Poverty Law Center, that the anti-government “Patriot” movement has burgeoned since 2008, having grown to more than 1,200 groups nationwide by 2011. More than a fourth of these are militias that perform paramilitary training.
Now in 2013, we are about to have the second inauguration of that same African-American president, the one with the foreign-sounding name. Gun control is also again prominently on the national agenda, owing mainly to more mass shootings in schools.
Fox News commentator Andrew Napolitano.
And some of the rhetoric that melds resistance to gun control with a broader anti-government agenda is nothing short of frightening. Here’s what Fox News commentator and — believe it or not — former judge Andrew Napolitano (no relation to Janet) wrote last week:
“The historical reality of the Second Amendment’s protection of the right to keep and bear arms is not that it protects the right to shoot deer. It protects the right to shoot tyrants, and it protects the right to shoot at them effectively, with the same instruments they would use upon us.”
If shooting, or bombing, growing out of this type of attitude starts, we should already have a fairly good idea of what the perpetrators are opposed to. We ought to reflect as well on the other part of how a wave of extremism fits into the larger political environment — i.e., how it is the extreme tail of some more broadly shared way of thinking.
The roots of current anti-government sentiments are diverse, of course. And as for the gun control part of this, we know that the lobby opposing controls is as rich and potent as ever. We also should acknowledge the growth of a form of political intolerance in which some people believe that having their particular preferences prevail is so important that it is worth inflicting, or threatening, harm to the country.
It looks as though we are about to see a non-kinetic form of this again in Congress in a few weeks. We should not be surprised if extremists use the kinetic form.
Paul R. Pillar, in his 28 years at the Central Intelligence Agency, rose to be one of the agency’s top analysts. He is now a visiting professor at Georgetown University for security studies. (This article first appeared as a blog post at The National Interest’s Web site.)
CNN : Alex Jones vs Piers Morgan Gun Control Debate.
WRH : Michael Rivero’s take on CNN’s AJ vs PM Gun Control Debate
Related Posts:
Short URL: http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/?p=220304
Posted by Editor on Jan 15 2013, With 0 Reads, Filed under Americas, Asia, Bahrain, Causes, China, Editors' Picks, Egypt, Europe, Global, Iran, Israel, Life, Middle East, Oceana, Of Interest, Oman, Palestine, Peace, Syria, United Kingdom, Yemen. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
COMMENTS
To post a comment, you must login using Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail in the box below.Don't have a social network account? Register and Login direct with our site and post your comment.
Before you post, read our Comment Policy - Legal Notice
Maidhc Ó Cathail writes:
“It’s more than a little ironic that the most ardent advocates of gun control for Americans such as the pro-Israel Anti-Defamation League are the very same people who demand that American taxpayers continue to lavish Israelis with as much weaponry as they desire “to defend themselves,” i.e. by slaughtering Palestinian and Lebanese civilians with impunity. Leaving aside arguments over the relative legitimacy of state terrorism versus non-state terrorism, one can hardly imagine the likes of Bloomberg and Schumer advocating background checks as passionately for Israeli settlers to prevent a Jewish extremist like Baruch Goldstein from acquiring a gun to massacre Palestinian civilians.
“So, how do we account for such blatant double standards? Could it be that Israel’s fifth columnists are worried that if enough Americans ever become aware of how much their “unbreakable bond” with Israel has cost them in blood, treasure and credibility, they might have an American [problem] on their hands?
“As if on cue, the Anti-Defamation League has issued a press release in response to the Newtown school massacre. The ADL’s purported concern for the children of Connecticut, however, stands in stark contrast to its clear indifference to the children of Gaza. When the Israel Defense Forces killed 34 children and wounded 274 others in its recent “Pillar of Cloud” onslaught on the world’s largest open air prison, the “civil rights” group rushed to justify the killing. Among its numerous “online resources, reports, statements and other materials” designed to explain in typical hasbara style “Why Israel is Fighting Back” were a press release expressing support for the “targeted military action” and a blog post condemning the “extreme comments” and “anti-Semitism” of critics of Israel’s slaughter of innocents.
“The Second Amendment may be the last remaining obstacle to the imposition of a full-blown Israeli-inspired “Homeland Security” police state on the American people. And given the Israel lobby’s decisive influence over U.S. foreign policy, the rest of the “free world” too is already well on its way to this fascist New World Order.”
Let’s face it, the Jews did 9/11. It wasn’t the Illuminati, the elites, the corporations, the Republicans, the banksters, Goldman Sachs or the unions. It was the Jews. It took hundreds of thousands of JEWS in the media, government, Congress, the judiciary and elsewhere to pull off the event, the coverup and the framing of the Hollywood-created “Al Qaeda” and the near-dead “Osama Bin Laden” to pull it off.
In short, it was the biggest ever terrorist event, perpetrated by the most successful and evil crime syndicate EVER.
Let’s not even mention Islam and “terrorism” in the same sentence, without first talking about the Pro’s….. the inventors of terrorism……. THE JEWS.
Thanks for all you do, Debbie. We love your site.