Earlier this week, a report was released by Obama's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that warned police departments, throughout America, to be watchful for the rise of right-wing extremism (See Full Story). The approving authority of that report, the head of DHS, Janet Napolitano, specifically referenced returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan as being possible recruits for this kind of radicalism. In support of her shoddy theory, she referenced back to a 13-year old event involving Timothy McVeigh --- a military veteran --- and the bombing of the Murrah building in Oklahoma City. Apparently, this one event in the 233 year history of the United States is the sole rationale for her report.
Having enlisted and served from 1968 to 1974, I think I can legitimately speak to the nature of those who have served and are serving in our United States Military.
First and foremost, those who enlist in our military are patriots. They will risk losing their own lives in defending this country and its policies; both abroad and here at home. There is "no" sign hanging over the door of any military recruiting office that says: "Left-wing liberals need not apply!" In essence, the military is a microcosm of the United States with liberals, conservatives, and independents proudly serving their country. To say anything otherwise would imply that liberals don't serve in the military and are less patriotic; and, I doubt that any Democrat, especially Janet Napolitano, would ever think that to be the case. In fact, blacks, who are primarily Democrats, make up about 17 percent of the military's population. That's higher than the 13 percent of blacks in the general population. And, I hardly think that Blacks are the "sole" liberals serving in the military.
Millions upon millions of military have served this country over our history. Tens of thousands of men and women leave the military every year because they either retire or because they have decided to leave after having served only one or two enlistment periods. Roughly speaking, the current and former military make up about 10% or about 30 million of our nation's population. To use one situation, Timothy McVeigh, as rationale for a potential, internal, extremist attack is simple statistical nonsense. Ms. Napolitano has a higher risk of being personally hit by lightning than having a repeat of the Murrah Building attack.
Now, I'd like to give Ms. Napolitano something bigger to worry about...
Much of our civilian police force is made up of ex-military. Some might actually be right wingers! I don't know if she considered whether or not our police departments should be conducting internal investigations to see if any real "right-wing extremists" are "hiding" like secret cells within their ranks. What's worse, much of the our nation's commercial airline pilots are ex-Air Force and ex-Navy pilots. Shouldn't we be worried that some number of right-wing conspirators are at the controls of one of those 250 ton bombs that are flying over our heads?
In reality, the left wing has conducted more attacks on America than any so-called right-wing extremists. Mr. Obama has a close friend, William Ayers, who is a perfect example of a left-wing, anti-American extremist who attempted to destroy government buildings and who didn't hardly worry about killing Americans in the process. In fact, he has publicly stated that he has no regrets for what he did. To me, left-wing environmental groups like the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) and Animal Liberation Front (ALF) are more of a daily threat to our lives than any skinheads living in Idaho. At least the skinheads are more easily identifiable than those nuts. Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, was a college mathematician and a professor. Using the McVeigh analogy, it might be more appropriate for our cops to be watching every PhD in America who teaches mathematics at one of our very, left-wing Universities like Berkley or Harvard; both former Kaczynski alma maters. But, the liberal Ms. Napolitano would probably think that would be silly. Right?
I just think that Obama and Napolitano are creating another bogey man for them to downplay those on the political right. This is "SOP" for any Democrat. This is their method of dividing and conquering in political terms. Let's not forget the "vast right-wing conspiracy" that Hillary Clinton referred to constantly, and personally blamed for Bill's inappropriate use of a cigar in the Oval Office. In Hillary's mind, it wasn't Bill's act, but rather, the use of it by the right-wing to take down Bill. Furthermore, it just another example of the left's hatred of our military and what that military represents. No matter how many times they go to Walter Reed Hospital or lay wreaths on a soldier's grave, they really don't, deep down inside, respect any military veterans.
I am concerned that we might be attacked again. But, I think we should be less concerned about our ex-military being responsible for any attack and more concerned about the "weak" attitude of this current, liberal government in preventing an attack. The fact that we have gone back to the days of Bill Clinton and his treatment of terrorism as a police action and not a military concern is more worrisome than anything else. After all, it was Clinton's soft-0n-terrorism attitude that lead up to 9/11. It was Bush's tough-on-terrorism attitude that kept us safe for the last 7+ years. That's a reality.... and, not some political posturing!
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Our Military And Right-Wing Extremism
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Funny how our ex military is capable of "terrorism", but fanatical arabs are only capable of "man made disasters". You can't profile a 20y/o Arab with a Koran getting on an airplane, but you can profile a 20 y/o American military vet!
Post a Comment