Read the fine print (emphasis added)."* (U) 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."By this definition anyone, for instance, adhering to states rights to resist tyranny or anyone opposed to abortion falls under their definition of a right-wing extremist. Way too freaking broad of a brush. It's inexcusable."The high volume of purchases andstockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipationof restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primaryconcern to law enforcement"Right. A similar effect happened with tickle-me-elmo's once, when word of a Christmas shortage hit the media. Were they being hoarded by sesame street extremists?"Most statements by rightwing extremists have been rhetorical, expressing concerns about the election of the first African American president,"Hold on.. who's playing the race card here!?"but stopping short of calls for violent action."Ya don't say. Maybe most of us don't want violence, just a chance to show our hand.Here's a prerequisite to understanding our position, and if you don't give it any credit at first, give it a half hour at least.<a class="user" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw</a>
This is disgusting. All this is is the statists who would disregard the law, & our rights, trying to use propaganda to convince as many of you as possible that those who have sworn to uphold their oath to the Constitution are extremeists, and are to be feared. This is not a partisan issue. This is a statist vs people issue. George Bush, Clinton, etc, have violated the Constitution, & Obama has done, & will do nothing, to correct it. Don't believe the bulls**t, people.U.S. Citizens that have sworn to protect our Constitution, military or not, are true patriots, & heroes. Mercenaries that follow any order that are given to them, military or not, are thugs, & the enemy of the people.Legality does not = morality. Statute does not = legitimate law. The "Just following orders" defense didn't work at Nuremberg for the Nazis, & it won't work for you mercs who violate your oaths, & aggress against the people. Despite what you may believe, or what anyone tries to tell you, you are responsible for your own actions.Don't allow the statists to divide us and conquer, the way they always do! This is not a bs, partisan, issue! This is an issue of freedom, & the statists, regardless of their claimed party affiliation, who would see us disarmed, or spread this propaganda, are our enemy.
Your talking about neocons. They’re just a different kind of big government liberals. True conservatives are pretty much more pissed at what bush did than the democrats because I could never vote for Obama or McCain since they voted for and supported most of Bush's biggest criminal acts. Funding an illegal war, keeping the patriot act, supporting telecom’s corps under FISA, and this s**t. Bush was a crook, and Obama is going down the same path.I do agree, it's frustrating and it’s very hypercritical of the neocons, but I see it on both sides. The patriot act was a big bitch by the left until Obama got in. Now you don't hear them complaining anymore. People like big government when their side is in power.
I wasn't whipped up into hating muslims. I only have network news and they love islam. I am not in the military so who whipped me up into a serious distrust of islam but the muslim?Bush was the worst thing to hit conservatism since watered down unbiblical Christianity began being preached from the pulpits. Bush was a nightmare. The only change that is being offered is purely a change from one idiot to another, each with his own fool hardy, anti-freedom, socialist ideas, of which, obama's are clearly not his own. You are a fool to think that the politician from either party represents hope for you and yours. These parties are so crooked and self focused that they are systematically undermining every area of our society and constitution for their own power- you are a pawn and are easily deluded by the great "false prophet"- the mainstream media . You are a fool to continue to put your trust in these criminals. You actually think that virtue can come out of Washington? Why.... because obama says that you can trust him with conviction? Really?.... Obama speaks well and that is enough for you? If you actually thought for yourself you would realize that the far right represents the only opposition to these corrupt forces, but you are stuck on the novelty of a black man who "is well spoken" says Joe Biden, being president- damn the issues! I am all for a black man in office. If all you fools want is a black man, throw me a bone and lets elect JC Watts or Alan Keys. I would take either of these men in a heart beat faster than I would take mccain or bush, or any of the other fools that ran for the republican nomination. Open your eyes fool. These people have as much contempt for you as they do everyone else. The moment you oppose their whims you too will be swallowed up. Just like in Germany when the nazis came to power, the citizenry found out that it wasn't about the Jew as much as it was about destroying all opposition. You think you are special? That makes you a fool.
I didn't know that I was purporting to argue. Personally, I think that was more of an opinion than an argument. I presented my conclusion at the beginning of my post and then my reasoning why I thought that the article was incorrect in its content. But really, what would you like me to prove? I opined that the argument was fallacious because it was attempting to provide a correlation between two objects that were not correlated. Further, it was fallacious because it advances a view that by saying X, a subgroup of Y, you have said that Y is Z. (By saying that there is a danger of veterans being recruited (group X is the veterans that are in danger, while Y is all veterans) you are saying that all veterans are unpatriotic). When in reality, all that the report was saying was that veteran that were sympathetic to right-wing extremists were in danger of being recruited. But somehow this means that all veterans are sympathetic to right-wing extremism. What do you want for proof? If the article didn't meet its burden for proving its point; then why should I have to meet a completely vague burden to you?
What's sad is that it would not surprise me that you will have some pretty pissed off veterans. The government sends them over to a bulls**t war, many lose their lives, and many of the ones that come back are severely wounded. Then these same veterans have to find out the entire war was absolute bulls**t perpetrated on them by a lying, criminal government. On top of that these guys are trained killers. It would not surprise me that many of these guys strike out violently against the government. To be honest, I would not really have a problem if they did.
Closed AccountApr 24, 2009
Read the fine print (emphasis added)."* (U) 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."By this definition anyone, for instance, adhering to states rights to resist tyranny or anyone opposed to abortion falls under their definition of a right-wing extremist. Way too freaking broad of a brush. It's inexcusable."The high volume of purchases andstockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipationof restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primaryconcern to law enforcement"Right. A similar effect happened with tickle-me-elmo's once, when word of a Christmas shortage hit the media. Were they being hoarded by sesame street extremists?"Most statements by rightwing extremists have been rhetorical, expressing concerns about the election of the first African American president,"Hold on.. who's playing the race card here!?"but stopping short of calls for violent action."Ya don't say. Maybe most of us don't want violence, just a chance to show our hand.Here's a prerequisite to understanding our position, and if you don't give it any credit at first, give it a half hour at least.<a class="user" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw</a>
jjdiggleApr 24, 2009
This is disgusting. All this is is the statists who would disregard the law, & our rights, trying to use propaganda to convince as many of you as possible that those who have sworn to uphold their oath to the Constitution are extremeists, and are to be feared. This is not a partisan issue. This is a statist vs people issue. George Bush, Clinton, etc, have violated the Constitution, & Obama has done, & will do nothing, to correct it. Don't believe the bulls**t, people.U.S. Citizens that have sworn to protect our Constitution, military or not, are true patriots, & heroes. Mercenaries that follow any order that are given to them, military or not, are thugs, & the enemy of the people.Legality does not = morality. Statute does not = legitimate law. The "Just following orders" defense didn't work at Nuremberg for the Nazis, & it won't work for you mercs who violate your oaths, & aggress against the people. Despite what you may believe, or what anyone tries to tell you, you are responsible for your own actions.Don't allow the statists to divide us and conquer, the way they always do! This is not a bs, partisan, issue! This is an issue of freedom, & the statists, regardless of their claimed party affiliation, who would see us disarmed, or spread this propaganda, are our enemy.
akhomesteadApr 25, 2009
Your talking about neocons. They’re just a different kind of big government liberals. True conservatives are pretty much more pissed at what bush did than the democrats because I could never vote for Obama or McCain since they voted for and supported most of Bush's biggest criminal acts. Funding an illegal war, keeping the patriot act, supporting telecom’s corps under FISA, and this s**t. Bush was a crook, and Obama is going down the same path.I do agree, it's frustrating and it’s very hypercritical of the neocons, but I see it on both sides. The patriot act was a big bitch by the left until Obama got in. Now you don't hear them complaining anymore. People like big government when their side is in power.
Closed AccountApr 25, 2009
I wasn't whipped up into hating muslims. I only have network news and they love islam. I am not in the military so who whipped me up into a serious distrust of islam but the muslim?Bush was the worst thing to hit conservatism since watered down unbiblical Christianity began being preached from the pulpits. Bush was a nightmare. The only change that is being offered is purely a change from one idiot to another, each with his own fool hardy, anti-freedom, socialist ideas, of which, obama's are clearly not his own. You are a fool to think that the politician from either party represents hope for you and yours. These parties are so crooked and self focused that they are systematically undermining every area of our society and constitution for their own power- you are a pawn and are easily deluded by the great "false prophet"- the mainstream media . You are a fool to continue to put your trust in these criminals. You actually think that virtue can come out of Washington? Why.... because obama says that you can trust him with conviction? Really?.... Obama speaks well and that is enough for you? If you actually thought for yourself you would realize that the far right represents the only opposition to these corrupt forces, but you are stuck on the novelty of a black man who "is well spoken" says Joe Biden, being president- damn the issues! I am all for a black man in office. If all you fools want is a black man, throw me a bone and lets elect JC Watts or Alan Keys. I would take either of these men in a heart beat faster than I would take mccain or bush, or any of the other fools that ran for the republican nomination. Open your eyes fool. These people have as much contempt for you as they do everyone else. The moment you oppose their whims you too will be swallowed up. Just like in Germany when the nazis came to power, the citizenry found out that it wasn't about the Jew as much as it was about destroying all opposition. You think you are special? That makes you a fool.
nattybumpoeApr 26, 2009
I didn't know that I was purporting to argue. Personally, I think that was more of an opinion than an argument. I presented my conclusion at the beginning of my post and then my reasoning why I thought that the article was incorrect in its content. But really, what would you like me to prove? I opined that the argument was fallacious because it was attempting to provide a correlation between two objects that were not correlated. Further, it was fallacious because it advances a view that by saying X, a subgroup of Y, you have said that Y is Z. (By saying that there is a danger of veterans being recruited (group X is the veterans that are in danger, while Y is all veterans) you are saying that all veterans are unpatriotic). When in reality, all that the report was saying was that veteran that were sympathetic to right-wing extremists were in danger of being recruited. But somehow this means that all veterans are sympathetic to right-wing extremism. What do you want for proof? If the article didn't meet its burden for proving its point; then why should I have to meet a completely vague burden to you?
Closed AccountMay 16, 2009
What's sad is that it would not surprise me that you will have some pretty pissed off veterans. The government sends them over to a bulls**t war, many lose their lives, and many of the ones that come back are severely wounded. Then these same veterans have to find out the entire war was absolute bulls**t perpetrated on them by a lying, criminal government. On top of that these guys are trained killers. It would not surprise me that many of these guys strike out violently against the government. To be honest, I would not really have a problem if they did.