Recently, Department of Homeland Security's issued its "Rightwing Extremism Policy" report: http://video1.washingtontimes.com/video/extremismreport.pdf
While this report is designated “Unclassified/For Official Use Only,” it was nevertheless somehow leaked to the public. If one reads the report carefully and as a whole, it can be seen that this report is nothing more than a sophisticated and subtle attempt at discrediting the Obama “natural born Citizen” eligibility movement. Superficially, the report appears to focus on certain elements of what it characterizes as American “rightwing extremist” groups. If the reader carefully considers each element of the report, it can be seen that virtually all of the report’s factors are actually part and parcel of the Obama eligibility movement. In the end, this report is nothing more than a clever, subtle, illegal, indirect attack on the First Amendment right of concerned Americans who continue to demand that Obama prove he is an Article II “natural born Citizen.”
One of the biggest clues to the report’s underhanded purpose is the fact that missing from the report’s list of rightwing extremist characters are those individuals who are currently battling the Obama eligibility issue (“birthers”). Why are not the birthers part of Ms. Napolitano’s rightwing extremist group and worthy of her blacklist? After all, everyone else that has anything bad to say about our federal government made the list. Based on my reading of many Obama eligibility blog comments, I would think that there are many birthers who would qualify for Janet Napolitano's intimidating blacklist which includes what the report calls "disgruntled military veterans" and others who under any reasonable interpretation of the First Amendment have exercised and continue to exercise their right to speak out and associate on issues concerning abortion, immigration, same-sex marriage, the environment, government spending, gun control, state sovereignty, militias, and the proposed new world order. How convenient to keep the Obama eligibility issue buried and out of the public domain as though it does not exist. I guess that Janet Napolitano, while she sees so many other millions of freedom-loving Americans as a threat to national security and therefore subject to scrutiny, investigation, surveillance, and intimidation, does not perceive any need to expose those who are battling the Obama eligibility issue to the same treatment.
Another clue as to the report’s true purpose is that while on the one hand Ms. Napolitano shows concern for national security by attacking these alleged radical, rightwing extremists, on the other hand she in her heroic efforts to safeguard America characterizes horrific murder and destruction committed by proven terrorists who are ready to die for their cause in the name of religion “man-caused disasters.” In explaining to Der Spiegel why she used the words she did when referring to terrorism, she said:
"In my speech, although I did not use the word 'terrorism,' I referred to 'man-caused' disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur." http://www.cfiflistmanager.org/firenapolitano1wnd.html.
I just wonder what DHS threat level code color she would assign to such “man-caused disasters.” I appears from such characterization (or better yet classic textbook euphemism) that to Ms. Napolitano, American “rightwing extremists” are a much greater threat to our nation’s security than real-life, murdering international terrorists (like 9/11 types) whom she says we should not fear.
Now let us see how the text of the report, under the pretext of protecting America from radical rightwing extremists, actually attacks and attempts to discredit those who are pursuing the Obama eligibility issue. The report emphasizes the historical election of the first African American president and the prospect of policy changes to be a driving force for rightwing extremist recruitment and radicalization. It emphasizes the “[m]any rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration. . .” It states that ‘[m]ost statements by rightwing extremists have been rhetorical, expressing concerns about the election of the first African American president . . .” It maintains that these individuals espouse their “racial and political prejudice” through “expanded propaganda campaigns . . .” It explains that rightwing extremism is made up partly of hate-oriented groups, movements, and adherents which espouse their hatred because of others religion, race, or ethnicity. It places “white supremacist” within this race-hating group. It continues that “[b]ecause debates over constitutional rights are intense, and parties on all sides have deeply held, sincere, but vastly divergent beliefs, violent extremists may attempt to co-opt the debate and use the controversy as a radicalization tool.” We have seen how Obama supporters have accused birthers of pursing the Constitutional eligibility issue only because an African American president won the election. These “white folks,” who are screaming that Obama is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” and therefore ineligible to be President, have been accused of singling Obama out because of the color of his skin. Many Obama supporters say that no white President in the history of the United States has been put through such attack. There are many in the birthers group that have also questioned Obama’s ethnicity (African American or Arab) and religion (Christian or Moslem). Hence, we can readily see where the race, ethnicity, and religion components come into the picture.
The report blames rightwing extremists of having “paranoia of foreign regimes.” It talks of these individuals harboring “[f]ear of Communist regimes and related conspiracy theories” with the government’s complicity in a foreign invasion or acquiescing to a “One World Government.” It adds that these individuals fear America losing international power and stature. We know that some of the birthers argue that Obama is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” because at his birth his father was not a United States citizen but rather a British citizen and later Kenyan and that Obama was also born a British citizen by descent from his father which citizenship then later also converted to Kenyan. The argument is that even assuming that Obama was born in Hawaii, he was born with dual nationalities, later acquired Kenyan citizenship, and even maybe Indonesian citizenship and therefore cannot be an Article II “natural born Citizen” because dual nationalities acquired at birth carry with it a conflict in allegiance and loyalty to the United States. These birthers have criticized Obama for proclaiming to the world that he is a “citizen of the world” and as such, he will not adequately protect America from foreign threat or invasion. Such allegiance and loyalty conflict is surely something that the President and Commander in Chief of the Military cannot have. Here, therefore, is the paranoia of foreign regimes, of that which is foreign, and of loss of American freedom to world control.
The report further states that rightwing extremist also comprise those people who reject federal authority and desire state sovereignty and those who reject government authority entirely. It puts in this hate group those harboring racist ideology and belief in anti-government theories. A quick look at web sites that support the position that Obama is ineligible will reveal that many of these sites are filled with comments regarding rejecting federal authority and opting for state sovereignty because the commentators believe that both the federal courts and Congress have refused to address the Obama eligibility issue.
The report blames anti-government conspiracy theories for people stockpiling food, ammunition, and weapons. Another look at Obama ineligibility web sites and their comments will reveal that many commentators, because they feel that their political institutions and leaders refuse to address the Obama eligibility issue, fear that there will eventually be a constitutional crisis of great proportions and that they will have to protect their families through self-defense. Indeed, many of these individuals have suggested that people stockpile food, ammunition, and weapon. These same individuals have commented on the government threatening to curb their Second Amendment right to bear arms.
The report specifically targets returning members of the military, labeling them “disgruntled military veterans” who are highly vulnerable to radicalization. It states: “The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.” We have seen many military personnel speak out on the question of Obama’s eligibility to be President. We have seen military personnel wanting to join eligibility lawsuits as plaintiffs. We have seen law suits with plaintiffs who are former military personnel. Now, this report tells us that the word of these military people cannot be taken seriously because they are “disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war.” But their radical actions can be dangerous because they are highly vulnerable to radicalization. Hence, the report is telling us that any military members, retired or active, who would dare be involved in any Obama eligibility law suit would fall into these categories of psychologically unstable military personnel.
The report tells us how these rightwing extremists conduct their hateful operations through “chatter on the Internet . . .” We know that the mainstream media (television, radio, and newspapers) has denied the birthers any public forum for expressing themselves. They have therefore resorted to communicating with themselves and others who may be interested and spreading the eligibility word through the internet. Indeed, the internet is where virtually all of the Obama eligibility information may be found.
After carefully reading this unsubstantiated report and considering the political context out of which it emanates, let us ask ourselves how sincere is Obama and his administration about protecting America through this report? Are Obama and his administration really protecting America or are they under the guise of national security just protecting their own political power and positions by despotic retaliation against and discrediting those who would dare question Obama’s eligibility to be President, all violative of these individuals’ First Amendment rights to free speech and association?
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
185 Gatzmer Avenue
Jamesburg NJ 08831
Email: apuzzo [AT] erols.com
TEL: 732-521-1900 ~ FAX: 732-521-3906
P.S. In addition to commenting below on this immediate post, please feel free to join the discussions and comments in this forum about the subject of the Natural Born Citizenship clause in Article II of our U.S. Constitution by [Clicking Here].