Thursday, April 16, 2009

Janet Napolitano should apologize or resign

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano should apologize ... or resign. Saying she stands by a controversial report suggesting veterans and other law-abiding Americans could be a terrorism risk, she has drawn fire from both sides of the aisle.

The Washington Times reported:
In her statement Wednesday, Ms. Napolitano defended the report, which says "rightwing extremism" may include groups opposed to abortion and immigration, as merely one among several threat assessments. But she agreed to meet with the head of the American Legion, who had expressed anger over the report, when she returns to Washington next week from a tour of the U.S.-Mexico border.

"The document on right-wing extremism sent last week by this department's Office of Intelligence and Analysis is one in an ongoing series of assessments to provide situational awareness to state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies on the phenomenon and trends of violent radicalization in the United States," Ms. Napolitano said in her statement.
Because she stands by the document, Ms. Napolitano should apologize or resign.


Anonymous said...

i agree with the article u got an offical making of the wall statements about a group if it would have been a republican or conservative they would have been signaled out as a RACIST , how about janny

The Donkey said...

The document originated in the Bush administration and is similar to one on leftist extremism released in January.

zen said...

Why would you self-identify "law abiding citizens" with "rightwing extremism?" Seems strange to unify yourself, or your like-minded souls, with those that are dangerous. But hey, I guess that's your choice.

Liberty Newspost said...

Janet Napolitano should resign. The report basically calls people of any type of conservative thought a potential terrorist threat, without qualifying it with actual events. This is a blatant politicization of the department. This is unacceptable and Dangerous.

Anonymous said...

She needs to go! make her step down. If anyone is a threat it's HER! SHE IS A JOKE AND A MORON.

Lynn R. Mitchell said...

Donkey, can you provide links to where this originated in the Bush administration?

Anonymous said...

I can't wait for the lawsuit to be filed in Michigan against Ms. Napolitano. I can't wait to see her thrown out of office due to her direct failure to uphold the United States's Constitution (as she demonstrates her Liberal, Left Wing Agenda). I wonder how she looks in a prison jumpsuite? Will they make her hair a special color to match the designer orange? Too bad they shut down Gitmo, we have one more for that Country Club.

Charlie Fugate said...

She should resign. Her "apology" in fact was for nothing. An apology was owed, only to the extent that veterans viewed the report as accusatory."

And why would the left-wing report be released officially, but this one not? If it were commissioned by the Bush administration, should it not have been released at the same time as this "assessment?" Political games. The simple fact remains that the definition offered in this "assessment" does indeed target conservatives. Read it carefully, Zen, the DHS makes that comparison, not us. There is a direct correlation asserted by DHS that is plainly visible in the "definition" on page two.

zen said...

The equivalency of mere conservative issues with radical, violent, ideological extremism is being made by the right themselves. It's the classic victim-hood syndrome at play.

The report states (my bolds):
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.
The last bit is what is being taken out of context. The context not that these preference on these issues make individuals or groups extreme, but rather the context is that extremists may be dedicated to these issues.
Are you seriously denying that violence by anti-abortion proponents or anti-immigrant activists exists? Seriously?!

This report is an official release. That's exactly what "UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY" that appears on the top and bottom of every single page of the report means.

Anonymous said...

Zen - If Janet Napolitano was simply pointing out examples of "single issues" shouldn't enviro-nuts, PETA freaks and Islamo-Facists have been listed as well? Had she included any violence-prone liberal groups in the write-up you can bet she would be out of a job by now (and thereby a potential terrorist threat herself given that she would unemployed)

zen said...

Considering this report warns of rightwing extremists and is titled as such, noting liberal groups would be out of place. There was a separate report for leftwing groups, but I suppose you just simply that fact.

Anonymous said...

Geared towards "primarily hate oriented groups"? Why is it that you see pro-life supporters praying outside clinics but pro-choice supporters screaming at the pro-lifers? Which are the hate filled? Why are pro-lifers the extremists when it's the pro-choice party that support the murder of babies? We're the extremists? I'm sorry about the clinic bombings because violence is not the answer. Are pro-choicers sorry about the bloodbaths going on inside the clinics? Where is our conscience? How can Mr. Obama talk about standing by America's values when America supports abortion? We slaughter the most innocent among us. I'm a woman, I'm a nurse and I'm 52. I was a teenager when Roe VS Wade was legalized. I was as stunned then as I am now. Otherwise intelligent people accepting the murders of babies by the millions. If you're for abortion then at least acknowledge that it is the taking of human life, quit with the semantics already about a "blob of cells". When it comes down to it we are all blobs of cells. The difference between you and the unborn? Time. Not viable and able to sustain themselves alone outside the womb? Most of us know at least one person that is not able to sustain themselves outside the womb alone. Abortion is America's shame. We've lost our value and our respect for the most basics of human rights...the right to life. The head of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was a flaming racist. Look her up. She didn't start PP to help the poor and minorities. She believed their numbers needed to be kept down. (Who else did that? Let me think...oh, yes, Hitler.) She believed the poor and minorities polluted white America. Look at your hero pro-choice voters. Read about her and her not so noble intentions. Read her words. We bought it hook, line and sinker. Shame on us. I've never marched or prayed outside a clinic. I vote and I pray privately. Guess that makes me an extremists. I read that if someone is vocal and agrees with you then they are simply enthusiastic. If they are vocal and they disagree with you then they are extremists. Shame on Napolitano for trying to take away our right to even feel the way we feel. She insulted veteran's, prolifer's, people of faith, people who want immigration LAWS enforced and more. She needs to resign.

zen said...

Anonymous, I appreciate you taking the time to comment. I think your comments perfectly illustrate that there are differences between vocal activists and a violent, dangerous element of extremism surrounding the issue you choose to focus on, abortion. Your comments highlight the very difference.
You point out that "clinic bombings" occur and I'm glad to hear you disagree with them. It is the unlawful, violent reaction that is a threat to society and thus a matter for DHS to warn of, and makes that sub-group "extreme."

I do understand that you view abortion as murder. But like it or not, it is codified under the law. Being a nation of law and order means that there are peaceful, legal methods of recourse and policy change that do not include setting off bombs. Which again is the duty of the DHS agency to respond to.

There is a clear and tangible difference here. As well, the same goes for veterans. The mental health troubles that many returning vets struggle with is very real, and is only further complicated by those who deny it, and dishonestly twist the intent of the report.

It amazes me that conservatives would self-identify with the violent, extremism being warned against in the report. Or, maybe it doesn't. There appears to be a deep-seated need to drawn strength from being a victim, and a strange us-versus-them mentality that motivates the right. Especially for those self-described "people of faith" it all seems so counter-intuitive to focus so strongly on humanities differences, than our similarities. Pity.

USAF Retired said...

It is appalling and most unprofessional for anyone, especially an elected or appointed official to make such incorrect and slanderous statements. She slapped the face of the US Military, the men and women who give her liberty and freedom to make such wild and preposterous statements. She does not belong in the office she currently holds. Who knows which group she will falsely attack next. USAF Retired