I was doing some research yesterday and ran across some articles discussing the Obama Administration’s definition of terrorism. One such article was from The Blaze, and I know that Glenn Beck is meticulous about his research, so I pursued the resources he shared, and sure enough, I found the report published by the Department of Homeland Security. I pulled the following from it:
“Detailed information on each category of ideological motivation can be found in the Profiles of Perpetrators of Terrorism-United States report compiled by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (Miller, Smarick, and Simone, 2011). Briefly, the report describes each category as follows:
Extreme Right-Wing: groups that believe that one’s personal and/or national “way of life” is under
attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent (for some the threat is from a specific
ethnic, racial, or religious group), and believe in the need to be prepared for an attack either by
participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism. Groups may also be fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation), anti-global, suspicious of centralized federal authority, reverent of individual liberty, and believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty. The first sentence includes everybody preparing for emergencies, including preppers, the Boy Scouts, and anyone else who follows the news. The second sentence includes just about everyone else. So why have all of the other criteria. Why not make it a one-page memo and move on? Just for kicks, though, lets look at the rest of the list.
Extreme Left-Wing: groups that want to bring about change through violent revolution rather than through established political processes. This category also includes secular left-wing groups that rely heavily on terrorism to overthrow the capitalist system and either establish “a dictatorship of the proletariat” (Marxist-Leninists) or, much more rarely, a decentralized, non-hierarchical political system (anarchists). Hmmmmmm…the Obama Administration is openly funding the Muslim Brotherhood and is arming radical Syrian rebel forces known to be primarily Al Qaeda, although Obama and John Kerry have tried to market the situation differently. In addition, Obama clearly is instituting a socialist/Marxist agenda.
Religious: groups that seek to smite the purported enemies of God and other evildoers, impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists), (this takes care of all Christians) forcibly insert religion into the political sphere (e.g., those who seek to politicize religion, such as Christian Reconstructionists and Islamists), and/or bring about Armageddon (apocalyptic millenarian cults; 2010: 17). For example, Jewish Direct Action, Mormon extremist, Jamaat-al-Fuqra, and Covenant, Sword and the Arm of the Lord (CSA) are included in this category. While this document contains the word “Islamists,” please be aware that Obama has since purged hundreds of documents of anything to do with Islam, Jihad, and Muslims. Apparently they are no longer to be considered any kind of a threat. According to FBI spokesman Christopher Allen, “The FBI purged documents according to four criteria: “factual errors”; “poor taste”; employment of “stereotypes” about Arabs or Muslims; or presenting information that “lacked precision.” I would like to see that criteria applied to the rest of the groups that Obama has targeted.
Ethno-Nationalist/Separatist: regionally concentrated groups with a history of organized political autonomy with their own state, traditional ruler, or regional government, who are committed to gaining or regaining political independence through any means and who have supported political movements for autonomy at some time since 1945. Each state in the union meets this criteria, doesn’t it? The Obama Administration has made a clear movement toward weakening state sovereignty, the Common Core Standards Initiative being a glaring example of this effort.
Single Issue: groups or individuals that obsessively focus on very specific or narrowly-defined causes (e.g., anti-abortion, anti-Catholic, anti-nuclear, anti-Castro). This category includes groups from all sides of the political spectrum. If the previous criteria did not catch just about every American in its net, this one certainly does. I don’t know of any person anywhere that doesn’t have at least one single issue that they feel very strongly about, and are ready to argue it or support it at a moment’s notice. From rights for students with disabilities and stopping Common Core, to pro-abortion, pro-life, gun rights, gun removal, gay rights activities, anti-gay…who isn’t on this list by this criteria alone? Isn’t the fact that we are FREE to disagree and have our beliefs one of the beautiful principles on which this country was founded?
When I sit back and digest this information, along with the wealth of reports regarding anti-Christian training in the military, homeschoolers now considered domestic terrorists, Obama’s open disparaging of the Constitution, and parents’ rights under government attack, I see a very clear and discouraging picture of where we are as a nation. This is a non-partisan issue. It’s an American issue.
I used to be concerned and speak out about our freedoms slowly eroding away right before our eyes and our being oblivious to it. Now, I am saddened because erosion was apparently too slow–the government now just uses a bulldozer right out in the open.
Have we not enjoyed these freedoms, holding them as fundamental to our nation’s survival? Have not thousands of military members and police men and women sacrificed heavily to protect these freedoms? Are we truly ready to just give them up.
I have no doubt that I am on a list of some sort, because I am not willing to go quietly. Are you willing to join me?