What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Rightwing Extremist and Rightwing Terrorists (2 Viewers)

Neofight said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
tommyGunZ said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
It's not like the DHS report prevented those human lives from being lost, either.
True. Richard Clarke's memo also didn't prevent the terrorist attacks on 9/11. Is that an indictment on the reports, or the action (or lack thereof) based on the reports? Is it logical to point out reports that accurately predict future events and suggest that they were wasteful and shouldn't be generated thereafter?
It's not an indictment of the DHS report. That report wasn't meant to prevent attacks like this.Which is why these attacks aren't a vindication of the report, and don't show its usefulness.
What was the intention of the report writers?
To assess and describe certain risks relating to certain types of terrorism, and encourage local law enforcement agencies to report any suspicious activities to the DHS and FBI.As far as an individual, acting alone, walking into a museum (or church) and shooting a security guard (or abortion doctor) goes, there's really nothing helpful the report can offer to prevent that. Now that it's happened, I'm sure it has been reported to the DHS and FBI. But it would have been anyway.

The type of stuff that the report wants local law enforcement to keep the DHS & FBI apprised of prospectively, presumably, are group activities involving Neo-Nazis, skinheads, and those who reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority. :lmao: So the feds can keep a closer eye on them.
So a general warning and a not very useful one at that. Do you think local authorities are better off without guidance from the FBI, DHS, et al.?In this climate, which it seems to me the report accurately portrayed, one would think you would need all the help you could get.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
tommyGunZ said:
He claims these threats shouldn't be taken seriously b/c they're the type of threats local law enforcement can handle. I'd argue that local law enforcement wasn't able to handle these 3 attacks in a manner that prevented human life from being lost, so I'm not convinced help from the feds isn't necessary.
It's not like the DHS report prevented those human lives from being lost, either.
That's because both the right wing extremism report and the left wing extremism reports are unclassified, which lends to the vagueness of the reports.One of my neighbors is Captain serving in the WV State Police and I had a chance to talk to him tonight about the museum shooting yesterday. I mentioned DHS report on right wing extremism and he furrowed his brow a bit asking,"Where did you read this?" I mentioned the that both reports are on the net, to which he responded, "Oh the unclassified reports."

He proceeded to suggest that his briefings from DHS are much more detailed and classified...and usually do not consider 90 year old men a threat.

He also added that he thought it was a shame the security guard died as his union requested bullet proof vests as a necessity for working on the capitol mall, but the private company didn't see it that way.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Neofight said:
What was the intention of the report writers?
To assess and describe certain risks relating to certain types of terrorism, and encourage local law enforcement agencies to report any suspicious activities to the DHS and FBI.As far as an individual, acting alone, walking into a museum (or church) and shooting a security guard (or abortion doctor) goes, there's really nothing helpful the report can offer to prevent that. Now that it's happened, I'm sure it has been reported to the DHS and FBI. But it would have been anyway.

The type of stuff that the report wants local law enforcement to keep the DHS & FBI apprised of prospectively, presumably, are group activities involving Neo-Nazis, skinheads, and those who reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority. :thumbup: So the feds can keep a closer eye on them.
The FBI was warned of Roeder's attempt to vandalize an abortion clinic on Saturday, and the following day he killed Dr. Tiller.Not much can be done in 24 hours.

 
pantagrapher said:
tommyGunZ said:
Two months later, and two right wing terrorist acts later, it appears that the DHS report was on point.

Any of those laughing two months ago care to offer a retraction?
Of course not. They're already trying to assure each other that von Brunns is a lefty.
It would be hlpful if everyone could share the same definition of "right" and "left".This guy was fueled by hatred for Bush, hatred for religion and hatred for Jews. I wasn't aware these were necessary elements of the "right" in America.

ETA: Isn't the "right", in its purest form, a definition of those who prefer the Founders' definition of individual liberty and limited federal government, as per the original Constitution, protecting the rights of all citizens who are created equal, allowing each man to rise and fall on his own efforts; and the pure "left" defined as those who would prefer to forgo those individual liberties and redistribute income through government intervention, so all men, regardles of individual effort, are restricted such that they live equally?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It turns out that, since 9/11, there's been a lot more right-wing terrorism in the U.S. than Muslim terrorism.

An officer from a large metropolitan area said that “militias, neo-Nazis and sovereign citizens” are the biggest threat we face in regard to extremism. One officer explained that he ranked the right-wing threat higher because “it is an emerging threat that we don’t have as good of a grip on, even with our intelligence unit, as we do with the Al Shabab/Al Qaeda issue, which we have been dealing with for some time.” An officer on the West Coast explained that the “sovereign citizen” anti-government threat has “really taken off,” whereas terrorism by American Muslim is something “we just haven’t experienced yet.”

Last year, for example, a man who identified with the sovereign citizen movement — which claims not to recognize the authority of federal or local government — attacked a courthouse in Forsyth County, Ga., firing an assault rifle at police officers and trying to cover his approach with tear gas and smoke grenades. The suspect was killed by the police, who returned fire. In Nevada, anti-government militants reportedly walked up to and shot two police officers at a restaurant, then placed a “Don’t tread on me” flag on their bodies. An anti-government extremist in Pennsylvania was arrested on suspicion of shooting two state troopers, killing one of them, before leading authorities on a 48-day manhunt. A right-wing militant in Texas declared a “revolution” and was arrested on suspicion of attempting to rob an armored car in order to buy weapons and explosives and attack law enforcement. These individuals on the fringes of right-wing politics increasingly worry law enforcement officials.

Law enforcement agencies around the country are training their officers to recognize signs of anti-government extremism and to exercise caution during routine traffic stops, criminal investigations and other interactions with potential extremists. “The threat is real,” says the handout from one training program sponsored by the Department of Justice. Since 2000, the handout notes, 25 law enforcement officers have been killed by right-wing extremists, who share a “fear that government will confiscate firearms” and a “belief in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”

Despite public anxiety about extremists inspired by Al Qaeda and the Islamic State, the number of violent plots by such individuals has remained very low. Since 9/11, an average of nine American Muslims per year have been involved in an average of six terrorism-related plots against targets in the United States. Most were disrupted, but the 20 plots that were carried out accounted for 50 fatalities over the past 13 and a half years.

 
The President of PERF, the main organization cited in the article, is none other than Charles Ramsey, former Marion Barry appointee (IIRC) and lifelong left-wing police chief.

Anybody who knows D.C. and the Chandra Levy case is :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: by now.

I'd also like to know where the funding for PERF comes from.

This was an ideological hit piece in the op-ed pages of the NYT. MT, this is neither valid nor sound, I would bet. In before the craziness starts, in while all it took was a quick link to find the most laughed at police chief in D.C. history is the President of the organization that supplied this information, in before the politicization of the already politicized starts.

eta* It could have been Anthony Williams who appointed him. I'm absolutely not looking this up nor giving this time, and I'm only going to do it off of the top of my head it seems so outlandish.

eta2* I'd love to see funding disclosures and partnerships and domestic agendas of all groups involved.

eta3* If my tone is off, it's because these things are nerve-wracking and infuriating to me. To trace both the lifelong politics of these people, the organizations that fund them and their organizational politics, the domestic agenda they seek to impose, and where the links and "news" takes place on the page of otherwise respectable papers takes a long time, something that shouldn't be diminished when rebutting wild claims like this one.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Meet Vice-President J. Thomas Manger of PERF.

His commitment to the highest ethical standards for policing and his enactment of new policies to increase departmental accountability earned significant recognition from the community, including the Fairfax County Human Rights Commission Award for outstanding contributions, and the N.A.A.C.P.’s Community Service Leadership Award. In 2012, Chief Manger was inducted into the Montgomery County Human Rights Hall of Fame.

:lmao: :lmao:

PERF TURF!

 
On a more serious note, I would encourage any right-wing "extremists" to watch this episode of Firing Line between William F. Buckley and Dore Schary of the ADL. From 1966, which isn't even as long as the left has been accusing the right of housing "right-wing" "extremism." Much like in this instance, Buckley grills Schary, and the audience, IIRC, finds that there are communist sympathizers in the ADL. Funny stuff.

http://www.amazon.com/Firing-Line-William-Buckley-Extremism/dp/B007Q35P18/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1435040548&sr=8-1&keywords=william+f.+buckley%2C+dore+schary

Schary was a playwright and a Hollywood guy. Here's a clip of the show.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HXNYX5ONgA

An awesome summation, written by Buckley himself, I would guess.

A crackling debate on political extremism, Right and Left. It is our host's contention that Mr. Dore Schary and his organization are rather more alert to the former than to the latter:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
11/20/11: Bomb Threat at Occupy Fort Myers Ryan Komosinski, 22, of Cape Coral, Florida, was arrested for threatening to bomb the Fort Myers police department. After a Facebook search, the police found a comment posted by Komosinksi that announced: “I’m bombing the FMPD, [expletive] them.” Komosinski was reportedly enraged over the arrest of fellow protester Constance Galati, who was arrested on Thursday for trespassing, resisting arrest, and assaulting an officer. But not to worry, fellow protesters insist that Ryan Komosinksi is “a very good kid.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/282993/occupy-wall-street-blotter-nathaniel-botwinick
 
11/13/11: Three Men Arrested With Explosives in Connection to Occupy Portland Three men from Occupy Portland were arrested during a traffic stop after officers suspected they had marijuana in their possession. Upon searching the vehicle, the drugs were discovered. The officers also found within the car firecrackers and two commercially made mortars inside glass canning jars. The three men “told authorities that they knew the canning jar would explode, causing glass shrapnel to fly and possibly cause injury.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/282993/occupy-wall-street-blotter-nathaniel-botwinick
 
Two uniformed NYPD officers were shot dead Saturday afternoon as they sat in their marked police car on a Brooklyn street corner — in what investigators believe was a crazed gunman’s ­assassination-style mission to avenge Eric Garner and Michael Brown.

 
It turns out that, since 9/11, there's been a lot more right-wing terrorism in the U.S. than Muslim terrorism.

An officer from a large metropolitan area said that “militias, neo-Nazis and sovereign citizens” are the biggest threat we face in regard to extremism. One officer explained that he ranked the right-wing threat higher because “it is an emerging threat that we don’t have as good of a grip on, even with our intelligence unit, as we do with the Al Shabab/Al Qaeda issue, which we have been dealing with for some time.” An officer on the West Coast explained that the “sovereign citizen” anti-government threat has “really taken off,” whereas terrorism by American Muslim is something “we just haven’t experienced yet.”

Last year, for example, a man who identified with the sovereign citizen movement — which claims not to recognize the authority of federal or local government — attacked a courthouse in Forsyth County, Ga., firing an assault rifle at police officers and trying to cover his approach with tear gas and smoke grenades. The suspect was killed by the police, who returned fire. In Nevada, anti-government militants reportedly walked up to and shot two police officers at a restaurant, then placed a “Don’t tread on me” flag on their bodies. An anti-government extremist in Pennsylvania was arrested on suspicion of shooting two state troopers, killing one of them, before leading authorities on a 48-day manhunt. A right-wing militant in Texas declared a “revolution” and was arrested on suspicion of attempting to rob an armored car in order to buy weapons and explosives and attack law enforcement. These individuals on the fringes of right-wing politics increasingly worry law enforcement officials.

Law enforcement agencies around the country are training their officers to recognize signs of anti-government extremism and to exercise caution during routine traffic stops, criminal investigations and other interactions with potential extremists. “The threat is real,” says the handout from one training program sponsored by the Department of Justice. Since 2000, the handout notes, 25 law enforcement officers have been killed by right-wing extremists, who share a “fear that government will confiscate firearms” and a “belief in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”

Despite public anxiety about extremists inspired by Al Qaeda and the Islamic State, the number of violent plots by such individuals has remained very low. Since 9/11, an average of nine American Muslims per year have been involved in an average of six terrorism-related plots against targets in the United States. Most were disrupted, but the 20 plots that were carried out accounted for 50 fatalities over the past 13 and a half years.
I guess Im not following along. Are you saying that if someone is anti government, as these people seem to be, they are right-wing extremists?

 
With no resolution and Ferguson natives feeling a sense of injustice, many have taken matters into their own hands. 43 year old Deputy Percival White was gunned down at a local Krispy Kreme after stoping by to get donuts and coffee. The assailant, 34 year old Jerome Williams, shot White 4 times in the chest, piercing his heart causing him to die instantly on the scene. Williams was taken into custody moments later. When asked about his motive, Williams stated that he woke up that morning and decided that he would kill a random white policeman in Mike Brown’s honor.

 
It turns out that, since 9/11, there's been a lot more right-wing terrorism in the U.S. than Muslim terrorism.

An officer from a large metropolitan area said that “militias, neo-Nazis and sovereign citizens” are the biggest threat we face in regard to extremism. One officer explained that he ranked the right-wing threat higher because “it is an emerging threat that we don’t have as good of a grip on, even with our intelligence unit, as we do with the Al Shabab/Al Qaeda issue, which we have been dealing with for some time.” An officer on the West Coast explained that the “sovereign citizen” anti-government threat has “really taken off,” whereas terrorism by American Muslim is something “we just haven’t experienced yet.”

Last year, for example, a man who identified with the sovereign citizen movement — which claims not to recognize the authority of federal or local government — attacked a courthouse in Forsyth County, Ga., firing an assault rifle at police officers and trying to cover his approach with tear gas and smoke grenades. The suspect was killed by the police, who returned fire. In Nevada, anti-government militants reportedly walked up to and shot two police officers at a restaurant, then placed a “Don’t tread on me” flag on their bodies. An anti-government extremist in Pennsylvania was arrested on suspicion of shooting two state troopers, killing one of them, before leading authorities on a 48-day manhunt. A right-wing militant in Texas declared a “revolution” and was arrested on suspicion of attempting to rob an armored car in order to buy weapons and explosives and attack law enforcement. These individuals on the fringes of right-wing politics increasingly worry law enforcement officials.

Law enforcement agencies around the country are training their officers to recognize signs of anti-government extremism and to exercise caution during routine traffic stops, criminal investigations and other interactions with potential extremists. “The threat is real,” says the handout from one training program sponsored by the Department of Justice. Since 2000, the handout notes, 25 law enforcement officers have been killed by right-wing extremists, who share a “fear that government will confiscate firearms” and a “belief in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”

Despite public anxiety about extremists inspired by Al Qaeda and the Islamic State, the number of violent plots by such individuals has remained very low. Since 9/11, an average of nine American Muslims per year have been involved in an average of six terrorism-related plots against targets in the United States. Most were disrupted, but the 20 plots that were carried out accounted for 50 fatalities over the past 13 and a half years.
I guess Im not following along. Are you saying that if someone is anti government, as these people seem to be, they are right-wing extremists?
"A right-wing militant in Texas declared a “revolution” and was arrested on suspicion of attempting to rob an armored car in order to buy weapons and explosives and attack law enforcement."

Your take away here is "anti government"?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So now we're comparing the worst of the worst from the fringe elements of both sides to determine which side "wins?"

What happens when it's decided one sides lunatics commit more murder than the other side?

 
So now we're comparing the worst of the worst from the fringe elements of both sides to determine which side "wins?"

What happens when it's decided one sides lunatics commit more murder than the other side?
:goodposting:

There are violent extremists on both sides. If somebody on "my side" walks up and shoots a couple of cops because he doesn't recognize their authority, I hope he gets caught and spends the rest of his life in prison. He can rot for all I care, and I don't want to have anything to do with his associates.

 
Digging up a six-year old thread? Nice :fishing: , Maurile. What the heck. I'll bite.

http://www.jammiewf.com/2015/ny-times-right-wing-anti-government-extremism-is-the-leading-source-of-ideological-violence-in-america/

The article also cited the George-Soros funded New America Foundation, as their list of consultants for the findings. Bergen’s reports also cited NAF’s findings, which used inconsistent and absurd presumptions on what makes a person “right-wing.” For example, the New America study lists clear examples of domestic violence as cases of “right-wing terrorism” because of fragmentary details of hearsay.
This is just like when people claim there are "record numbers of deportations" under the Obama administration when all that is really happening is that apprehended, and subsequently released, illegals are counted as "removed" simply because they have been processed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials. Cleverly manipulating data might make for great ideological sound bites but it doesn't make it factual.

In closing, "Only Difference Between Dylann Roof and Bill Ayers Is Legitimacy Among the Left."

Bill Ayers is an unrepentant domestic terrorist.

Dylann Roof is an unrepentant domestic terrorist.

Bill Ayers despises America.

Dylann Roof despises America.

Bill Ayers’s terror group The Weather Underground targeted and murdered innocent people.

Dylann Roof targeted and murdered innocent people.

Bill Ayers used murder and violence and terror as a weapon for political change.

Dylann Roof used murder and violence and terror as a weapon for political change.

Bill Ayers wanted a race war.

Dylann Roof wants a race war.
Barack Obama, the mainstream media, the Left in general are not appalled by the idea of a domestic terrorist targeting innocent people in the hopes of starting a race war.

Not if he’s Bill Ayers — not if he’s one of their own.

If Obama wants to lecture America about race, maybe he shouldn’t have chosen to launch his political career in the living room of a terrorist who called for a race war.
 
This is just like when people claim there are "record numbers of deportations" under the Obama administration when all that is really happening is that apprehended, and subsequently released, illegals are counted as "removed" simply because they have been processed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials. Cleverly manipulating data might make for great ideological sound bites but it doesn't make it factual.
I didn't know that. That's good news. I thought he was actually deporting them.

 
It turns out that, since 9/11, there's been a lot more right-wing terrorism in the U.S. than Muslim terrorism.

An officer from a large metropolitan area said that “militias, neo-Nazis and sovereign citizens” are the biggest threat we face in regard to extremism. One officer explained that he ranked the right-wing threat higher because “it is an emerging threat that we don’t have as good of a grip on, even with our intelligence unit, as we do with the Al Shabab/Al Qaeda issue, which we have been dealing with for some time.” An officer on the West Coast explained that the “sovereign citizen” anti-government threat has “really taken off,” whereas terrorism by American Muslim is something “we just haven’t experienced yet.”

Last year, for example, a man who identified with the sovereign citizen movement — which claims not to recognize the authority of federal or local government — attacked a courthouse in Forsyth County, Ga., firing an assault rifle at police officers and trying to cover his approach with tear gas and smoke grenades. The suspect was killed by the police, who returned fire. In Nevada, anti-government militants reportedly walked up to and shot two police officers at a restaurant, then placed a “Don’t tread on me” flag on their bodies. An anti-government extremist in Pennsylvania was arrested on suspicion of shooting two state troopers, killing one of them, before leading authorities on a 48-day manhunt. A right-wing militant in Texas declared a “revolution” and was arrested on suspicion of attempting to rob an armored car in order to buy weapons and explosives and attack law enforcement. These individuals on the fringes of right-wing politics increasingly worry law enforcement officials.

Law enforcement agencies around the country are training their officers to recognize signs of anti-government extremism and to exercise caution during routine traffic stops, criminal investigations and other interactions with potential extremists. “The threat is real,” says the handout from one training program sponsored by the Department of Justice. Since 2000, the handout notes, 25 law enforcement officers have been killed by right-wing extremists, who share a “fear that government will confiscate firearms” and a “belief in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”

Despite public anxiety about extremists inspired by Al Qaeda and the Islamic State, the number of violent plots by such individuals has remained very low. Since 9/11, an average of nine American Muslims per year have been involved in an average of six terrorism-related plots against targets in the United States. Most were disrupted, but the 20 plots that were carried out accounted for 50 fatalities over the past 13 and a half years.
I guess Im not following along. Are you saying that if someone is anti government, as these people seem to be, they are right-wing extremists?
"A right-wing militant in Texas declared a “revolution” and was arrested on suspicion of attempting to rob an armored car in order to buy weapons and explosives and attack law enforcement."

Your take away here is "anti government"?
I wonder how I could possibly get that sort of take away?

that the “sovereign citizen” anti-government threat has “really taken off,”

man who identified with the sovereign citizen movement — which claims not to recognize the authority of federal or local government — attacked a courthouse in Forsyth County, Ga

In Nevada, anti-government militants reportedly walked up to and shot two police officers

An anti-government extremist in Pennsylvania was arrested

training their officers to recognize signs of anti-government extremism

 
I saw this today and I just wanted to point something out.

Alexandrea Cortez confronted this official about why the FBI doesn’t treat white supremacists the way it treats other terrorists.

This may seem like an obvious implication of racism or hypocrisy on the face of things, but if you listen to the FBI rep it's not on the FBI, there really is no law apparently against domestic terror groups. Foreign terror groups, yes, domestic no. It's not up to the FBI to reclassify things to fit a law just so they can add charges to people's conduct, they have to follow the law.

But more importantly apparently there is no law about domestic terror organizations.

 
I saw this today and I just wanted to point something out.

Alexandrea Cortez confronted this official about why the FBI doesn’t treat white supremacists the way it treats other terrorists.

This may seem like an obvious implication of racism or hypocrisy on the face of things, but if you listen to the FBI rep it's not on the FBI, there really is no law apparently against domestic terror groups. Foreign terror groups, yes, domestic no. It's not up to the FBI to reclassify things to fit a law just so they can add charges to people's conduct, they have to follow the law.

But more importantly apparently there is no law about domestic terror organizations.
IIRC the ACLU opposes domestic terrorism laws that fall outside the scope of actually committing terrible acts of violence. 

So cases like Hasson they don't support. Cases like tree of life, they would, but does that really matter? Several counts of murder and hate crimes doesn't get the job done? 

I am not trying to put any words in your mouth here in any way. Not sure exactly what view point you were coming from, just trying to add some discussion.

 
IIRC the ACLU opposes domestic terrorism laws that fall outside the scope of actually committing terrible acts of violence. 

So cases like Hasson they don't support. Cases like tree of life, they would, but does that really matter? Several counts of murder and hate crimes doesn't get the job done? 

I am not trying to put any words in your mouth here in any way. Not sure exactly what view point you were coming from, just trying to add some discussion.
I agree, and it's appreciated. I guess my point was that the FBI testimony was fair and accurate, the guy's point was if Congress doesn't like it they should just make an equivalent law like they have for foreign terror groups.

I give credit to Cortez for drawing it out but I think what happens is people get so angry about racism / bigotry etc. claims under Trump that the policy gets missed. This is really is a policy fix.

ACLU may be right, and folks like KKK or Antifa or ELF that we usually consider extreme but not illegal might all of a sudden present the government with a situation on its hands of arresting large groups of people.

 
... Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers.

During the 1990s, these issues contributed to the growth in the number of domestic rightwing terrorist and extremist groups and an increase in violent acts targeting government facilities, law enforcement officers, banks, and infrastructure sectors.

_____________________________________________

....

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.
^Bolding original.

The OP was referring to the 2009 report that was originally commissioned and started under the Bush administration and released in the Obama administration. 

Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment

 
Just some notes on past Trump language:

President Donald Trump and his allies are using the same inflammatory language they’ve used to describe violent gangs to defend the separation of undocumented children from their parents at the border.

Trump on Tuesday tweeted that immigrants would “pour into and infest” the United States and questioned parents’ decision to send children unaccompanied to the border. The tweet came a day after Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen referred to the “flood” of immigrants, and Fox News host and Trump ally Laura Ingraham described the border crossings as a “slow-rolling invasion of the United States.”

...

Such heated rhetoric has a long history in anti-immigration politics. Trump’s latest salvo comes just weeks after Trump stirred controversy by stating that some immigrants being deported “aren’t people, they’re animals” – a comment he and the White House said was meant only to apply to members of the MS-13 gang.

The White House embraced the ensuing controversy, blasting out a 488-word release that repeatedly described members of the gang as “animals.”

“What sort of creatures infest? Vermin infests,” said David Livingstone Smith, a professor of philosophy and expert in dehumanization and racism and the author of the forthcoming “Making Monsters: The Uncanny Power of Dehumanization.” “The attitude that one takes to vermin – to cockroaches, to rats, to infestations of ants – is to exterminate them. That’s what it says.”

...

Immigrant advocates said there’s typically a clear political purpose behind such language.

“A government cannot commit open, widespread and notorious violations of human rights under both international and domestic law without substantially dehumanizing the people that they’re inflicting the pain upon to desensitize the nation to the injustices or make the injustices appear okay,” said Jonathan Ryan, executive director of Texas-based Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, a group aiding families being separated at the border.

“The only way to participate in such cruelty is to dehumanize them,” he added.

Trump and his allies – including Nielsen at Monday’s press conference – frequently seek to conflate all undocumented immigrants with gang members, particularly those affiliated with MS-13, a gang with Salvadoran origins.

“They endanger all of our children,” Trump said of those crossing the border illegally in a speech to the National Federation of Independent Businesses on Tuesday.

In fact, only a small fraction of illegal border crossers have connections to gangs.

Congress is considering various pieces of legislation to halt the separation of families, but Trump appears committed to continuing to employ the same rhetorical attacks as he calls for strict control of immigration.

“Roughly half a million illegal immigrant family units and minors from Central America have been released into the United States since 2014 at unbelievably great taxpayer expense,” Trump added Tuesday. “Nobody knows how much we're paying for this monstrosity that's been created over the years.”
Politico, June 2018

 
We're on track for a million illegal aliens to rush our borders. People hate the word "invasion," but that's what it is. It's an invasion of drugs and criminals and people. We have no idea who they are, but we capture them because border security is so good. But they're put in a very bad position, and we're bursting at the seams.
- Donald Trump, 3/15/19

 
Well and what they're doing they're taking, and by the way that's not even close to our record because if you go back 13 -- 14 years ago it was crazy numbers but I don't want this. I want people to come in legally, we want the people that we want and I want a merit based system, but we shouldn't have anybody, they shouldn't be able to walk through Mexico. And now I've told Mexico, if you don't stop this onslaught, this invasion, people get angry when I use the word invasion, people like Nancy Pelosi that honestly they don't know what the hell they're talking about. I watched her -- she was saying we have to protect Mexico, we have to take care of Mexico, look, I'm dealing with Mexico right now. They send in $500 billion worth of drugs, they kill 100,000 people, they ruin a million families every year if you look at that, that's really an invasion without the guns.
Donald Trump, 6/6/19, when he was on Laura Ingraham's show, supposedly to talk about D-Day.

- eta - Unfortunately there are multiple other instances of Trump using the invasion/invading language with regards to Mexicans or Hispanics.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The racist theory that underlies terrorism in New Zealand and the Trump presidency

- Wapo, March  2019

Bolding original.

- This is especially relevant because the El Paso killer cited the Christchurch killer's manifesto as his inspiration.

This is "the Great Replacement Theory":

In the aftermath of a white supremacist terror attack in New Zealand on Friday, President Trump offered his “warmest sympathy" and “solidarity” with the victims, their families and compatriots. But that’s about it.

The Australian-born suspect, Brenton Harrison Tarrant, killed at least 50 people in two mosques in the city of Christchurch before being apprehended by authorities. On social media and in a 74-page manifesto circulated online, he made clear that his attacks were fueled by hatred of Muslim migrants, whom he described as invaders threatening the demographic integrity of a white nation. Like other ethno-nationalists in the West, he imagined himself as part of a broader warped history, inscribing on his weaponry the names of medieval warriors of Christendom who fought the armies of Islamic empires.

When Trump asked New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern how he could help, she reportedly suggestedhe offer his “sympathy and love for all Muslim communities.” But the U.S. president spent the weekend on Twitter once more decrying immigrant “invaders” and defending a Fox News host who had just been suspended for Islamophobic remarks. At no point did he communicate any wider empathy for Muslims around the world or explicitly condemn white supremacy. Two days after the slaughter in Christchurch, Trump had yet to speak with his ambassador in Wellington.

What has happened in Christchurch is an extraordinary act of unprecedented violence. It has no place in New Zealand. Many of those affected will be members of our migrant communities – New Zealand is their home – they are us.

— Jacinda Ardern (@jacindaardern) March 15, 2019

This weekend, rather than focusing on the global rise of white nationalist militancy, Trump and his lieutenants downplayed its threat. Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, was even compelled to atone on national television: “The president is not a white supremacist,” he insisted. But too often in these instances, Trump’s dismissals and disavowals ring hollow.

Not for nothing did Tarrant hail Trump in his bigoted manifesto “as a symbol of white identity and renewed purpose.” Trump built his political career in part by weaponizing anti-Muslim sentiment in the West, promising sweeping bans against Muslims, grandstanding against Syrian refugees, and winking encouragement toward domestic extremists on the far right.

Trump is not to blame for the tragedy in Christchurch. But, as an editorial in The Washington Post noted, there isn’t much daylight between the “garden-variety racism” of Tarrant’s manifesto and the far-right nativism at times espoused by Trump and his advisers.

My colleagues pointed to the particular emphasis Tarrant seemed to place on the “great replacement” theory, a belief popular among the West’s far right that white populations face “genocide” as a result of declining birthrates and mass immigration. In his manifesto, Tarrant pointed to the formative impact of a trip to France in 2017, where he was disturbed by the number of Muslims he saw in a midsize French town.

“As I sat there in the parking lot, in my rental car, I watched a stream of the invaders walk through the shopping centre’s front doors,” Tarrant wrote. “For every French man or woman there was double the number of invaders. I had seen enough, and in anger, drove out of the town, refusing to stay any longer in the cursed place and headed on to the next town.”

Europeans greatly overestimate Muslim population, poll shows, with greatest perception gap in France https://t.co/KcSSz9bfrj pic.twitter.com/ldblbNZfEJ

— Guardian Data (@GuardianData) December 14, 2016

Though immigration levels have dropped significantly in Europe since 2015 — and though Muslims are a small minority in virtually every European country — this belief remains a virulent mobilizer of the European far right and has spread in various forms both across the Atlantic and to the Antipodes.

Renaud Camus, the polemicist whose thesis in his 2012 book “The Great Replacement” almost certainly influenced Tarrant, decried the gunman’s actions in an interview with The Washington Post. But he felt little concern over how his ideas were being interpreted by far-right politicians and proliferated in the online echo chambers where Tarrant stewed in his hatred.

“To the fact that people take notice of the ethnic substitution that is in progress in my country?” he ventured to my colleague James McAuley. “No. To the contrary.”

Camus is hardly an outlier. Former Trump adviser Stephen K. Bannon has invoked the writings of Jean Raspail, whose deeply racist 1973 novel “The Camp of the Saints” conjured an epochal influx of swarthy migrants subsuming France. In 2015, French far-right leader Marine Le Pen urged her supporters to read the book.

Raspail is more blunt about what he thinks should be the necessary response to migration. "There is going to be a resistance movement, and it has begun,” Raspail told journalist Sasha Polakow-Suransky in 2016. “If the situation becomes the one I predict — catastrophic — there will certainly be resistance that is both tough and armed. … Without the use of force, we will never stop the invasion.”

To some, that the ideas of figures like Raspail and Camus even get politely aired in mainstream media and viewed as part of a legitimate debate is itself the problem. In recent days, commentatorshave pointed to a whole ecosystem of punditry and news coverage in the West that has helped normalize certain forms of Islamophobia.

As the Atlantic’s Adam Serwer wrote in a lengthy essay on American nativism, white nationalist angst over migration — whether it’s Latino arrivals at the border or the Muslims next door — hinges on tacit mainstream acceptance of the “replacement” theory: “The most benignly intentioned mainstream-media coverage of demographic change in the U.S. has a tendency to portray as justified the fear and anger of white Americans who believe their political power is threatened by immigration — as though the political views of today’s newcomers were determined by genetic inheritance rather than persuasion,” Serwer wrote.

A central contention of the Trumpist view on immigration, Serwer added, contends “that intrinsic human worth is rooted in national origin, and that a certain ethnic group has a legitimate claim to permanent political hegemony in the United States.”

That is, in essence, white supremacy. Trump “ought to state unambiguously that the New Zealand suspect’s ‘replacement’ ideology is an unacceptable trope in civilized discourse,” declared The Post’s editorial.

But don’t hold your breath.


 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top