U.S. Homeland Security Issued Report on “Leftwing Extremists” in January

April 15th, 2009 By: Michael Merritt | Tags: ,

dhsIn my earlier article on a U.S. Department of Homeland Security report about rightwing extremist activity in the coming months and years, I challenged readers to point me to a similar report on leftwing extremists, in order to prove that the government wasn’t playing a partisan game.  A few ended up following through, though I still had to find my way to the actual report.

According to an article by Fox News, the government released the report, entitled “Leftwing Extemists Likely to Increase Use of Cyber Attacks Over the Coming Decade,” on January 26, days after the current president was sworn into office.  This is proof that the earlier report, at least, was started while the previous administration was in power.  The existence of the earlier document also gives weight to the claims by some commentators in this Michael van der Galien’s article that the other report about rightwing extremists was also commissioned by the DHS during the Bush administration.

Indeed, the Fox News article reports that these have not necessarily been ordered by one administration or another, but is an ongoing series of analysis into all sorts of extremism:

The report, issued last week, is part of an ongoing review of extremists on both ends of the political spectrum. [...]

DHS spokeswoman Sara Kuban said the April 7 assessment is one in an ongoing series published by DHS ”to facilitate a greater understanding of radicalization in the United States.” [...]

“This is the job of DHS, to assess what is happening in this country, with regard to homegrown terrorism, and determine whether it’s an actual threat or not, and that’s what these assessments do. This is nothing unusual. These assessments are done all the time. This is about awareness,” the official told FOX News on Monday.

The earlier report on leftwing extremists suggests that such groups prefer causing economic damage by means of cyber-terrorism, believing that these attacks are of a non-violent nature. It further concludes that because businesses are becoming increasingly reliant on technologies such as the Internet, that attacks in this manner are likely to increase.  However, it also notes that leftwing extremists are not foreign to violent actions, citing bombing and arson as some non-cyber attacks done by these groups in the past.

While this news of the earlier report (and its similar format) makes me feel more confident that the latter was just a part of an ongoing review, I still disagree with the paragraph in the one about rightwing extremists that seeks to “define” who these people are.  There is no similar description in the leftwing extremists report, though it does note that they are likely to be involved with  animal rights activism.  Yet, it does not state other political positions, such as being pro-abortion, pro-immigration, or a deference to the federal government.  Where were these?

The other report wasted time with trying to define rightwing extremism, as if its defnition can be solely applied to those groups.  Leftwingers can be just as racially biased as rightwingers.  And anarchism has long been seen as being an ideology of the left, though nowadays it spans the political spectrum (libertarianism was also once considered a lefty philosophy too).  So that paragraph was either poorly written at best, and a last minute political addition as worst (the comments about Obama’s election would also have been added after November 4th).  I hope it was the first option.

So hopefully the DHS can learn some lessons from this mini-scandal and take time to better read through their reports in the future, as to not appear to be unfairly targeting certain segments of the population.

(H/T ThinkProgress)

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Darrell
    April 15th, 2009 at 09:42
    Reply | Quote | #1

    The problem isn’t “cyber-terrorism”; it’s that the government(s) that is use this excuse to further violate the constitutional rights of its own citizens. They create the problem, ignore the people that have the solution (while accusing them of terrorism) and then lie about it in the mass media. The truth is successfully silenced and people are oppressed psychologically. America is falling and so is Obama’s dream to rule the world. The entire world knows this and while people keep the government busy by being sympathetic to “cyber-terrorists”, the real enemy approaches America’s back door. From the inside out and the outside in at the same time, this country will not find peace until it stops mentally oppressing its own people and physically oppressing the people of other sovereign nations. Raising security only invites superior innovation and strategy on the behalf of those who oppose the true systematic terrorism which is actually being waged by those who claim to fight terrorism. God help us all-

  2. J Cline
    April 15th, 2009 at 12:54
    Reply | Quote | #2

    What needs to happen is simply the abolishment of DHS. If the agency cannot remain focused on external/foreign threats coming INTO the U.S., which was the purpose of its creation in the wake of 9/11, then it has ceased to serve a useful function.

    The FBI is capable of covering any domestic terrorism concerns, just as it has always done. DHS, just like BATF before it, is an agency constantly in search of new threats to justify its bloated existence, and it will manufacture threats if necessary. Ergo, reports like these.

    For any group to be a threat, it needs to demonstrate the capability and intent. This rush to categorize and lump some developing political lobbies into “extremist” categories just smacks of desperation. It’s time for DHS to go.

  3. R.D. Moore
    April 15th, 2009 at 13:49
    Reply | Quote | #3

    DHS is just attempting to scare the American people. These guys are also trying to justify an inefficent, costly, government bureaucracy that isn’t needed. No big deal. Everything will sooner , or later come to and end. The Sun is half burnt out and nothing lasts forever. Go fishing and enjoy life. Oh, don’t forget to pay your taxes to support these overpaid, worthless, jerks.

  4. John Krats
    April 15th, 2009 at 17:25
    Reply | Quote | #4

    The U.S. Government is run by and for totalitarian Marxists. Government employees have become enemies of the U.S. Constitution and liberty in general. They are no different than the Soviet Unions leaders and apparatchiks.

    As university trained traitors. They live in fear of “their” subjects for good reason. They are outnumbered and outgunned.

    Their media organs, the NY Times, The Washington Post, the LA Times, the Chicago Tribune, CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC are no different than the Soviet state propaganda organs Pravda and the State government television network.

  5. Alex
    April 16th, 2009 at 07:25
    Reply | Quote | #5

    @J Cline
    Are you kidding? Have you forgotten what the largest terrorist attack was in this country before 9/11? Ever hear of OKC? Ignoring threats within our country, when our country possesses far more weapons of mass destruction and economic power than any other, is quite possibly the most asinine thing I’ve heard this week (and I’ve heard a lot).

  6. C Albanese
    April 16th, 2009 at 10:39
    Reply | Quote | #8

    We are very upset about the “Right Wing Extremists” document; it was scary, insulting and you have to wonder what the ultimate goal of Obama and his gang of thugs are? What has happened to our United States? Isn’t their anyway legally that we can be protected from our own government and the everyday new atrocities that they keep coming up with?

    Today a very important thing happened…the 75 “Tea Parties” that took place. Our hope for our future lies with this ground swelling of people from every class and political points of view. We all should join this group, keep building in numbers and scare the politicians into realizing who will be voting them out! If we don’t keep the momentum up we shall loose a very special tool; one we should be extremely proud of. It should be kept UN-political (if there is such a word), non violent but the pressure should be on until we get
    rid those in Congress that are causing the problems, this President and work for term limits in the Senate and Congress.
    As I see it Term limits must be our goal or we are doomed to this corrupt bunch of people that have lost touch with the constitution and our rights! Let’s take back our country from the greedy, misguided individuals that now are calling the shots! We should be calling the shots and today’s “Tea Party” is just the way to do it! Please encourage your friends and families to take part in the “Tea Party’s”, write letters to Congress.org regularly and find ways to put a list of emails and addresses of all the our elected officials and start communicating at least once a week. We can change government to reflect the good people of these United States. I was so very proud of everyone that took part today; I only wish we could have done so; next time we will be there.

  7. BaFein
    April 16th, 2009 at 15:14
    Reply | Quote | #9

    @J Cline
    “What needs to happen is simply the abolishment of DHS. If the agency cannot remain focused on external/foreign threats coming INTO the U.S., which was the purpose of its creation in the wake of 9/11, then it has ceased to serve a useful function.

    The FBI is capable of covering any domestic terrorism concerns, just as it has always done.”

    Maybe you missed it, Cline. The point of the DHS was to identify _all_ threats, regardless of origin, and to take in the _combined_ intel of the FBI, CIA and other agencies. And the FBI didn’t do such a good job of spotting the 9/11 plot, now did they?

  8. DCTO
    April 18th, 2009 at 16:43

    Oh, c’mon. So the earlier report left out a description of the range of left-wing groups out there — that in no way diminishes the credibility of either report. We’re all grown-ups here people. There’s no need to cry because one report (correctly) points to certain groups as having violent potential. It’s not talking about your 90-year-old grandmother that doesn’t believe in abortion.

    This debate is a conscious attempt by Fox and conservative commentators to blur the issue and as a result, people are missing the forest for all the trees. The issue is that in times of economic hardship, extremists groups may find fertile recruiting ground.

    What’s really fascinating is the irony in the latter report — it suggests right-wing groups are most likely to benefit from the current economic crisis, which is incredibly bizarre considering it was right-wing ideology, with its obsession with unfettered free markets, lack of regulation, minimal government and bowing to the all-mighty dollar, that got the world into this mess in the first place.

    The American people should be pleased that the DHS is tracking threats – be they foreign or home-grown – to the country and publicly, transparently reporting on them.

    Finally, part of living in a democracy is a free, open debate on concrete issues. Fox News and the other people complaining have overinflated their artificially bruised egos to obfuscate a real issue, allowing them to turn a real news story into a farce. Then again, isn’t that what Fox News is all about?

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.