Remember West Points far right list... I made it.

[tyroneweaver]

You Crazy Freedom-Loving Radicals - FITSNews

 

[OKTexas]

Yep, I made it also, I sent my congressman a link to the Washington Post article on it this morning.

 

[blackhawk]

Congratulations I'm sure many of us made this list I would not be surprised if I did as well.

 

[g5000]

So you guys are all members of extremist, violent far right groups, eh?

Because that is who West Point is talking about.

The people they are talking about would eat you for a snack.

Dumbasses.

 

[blackhawk]

So you guys are all members of extremist, violent far right groups, eh?

Because that is who West Point is talking about.

The people they are talking about would eat you for a snack.

Dumbasses.

No according to report in the link by the OP supporting things like limited government civil activism, individual freedoms and self-government makes you a violent far right extremist.
Here is part of the story from the Washington Times that states that pretty well.

The report also draws a link between the mainstream conservative movement and the violent “far right,” and describes liberals as “future oriented” and conservatives as living in the past.
Now does that sound like they are just talking about violent far right extremist or does it sound like they want to lump all conservatives into that group?
West Point center cites dangers of 'far right' in U.S. - Washington Times

 

[tyroneweaver]

So you guys are all members of extremist, violent far right groups, eh?

Because that is who West Point is talking about.

The people they are talking about would eat you for a snack.

Dumbasses.

The FBI and the ATF couldnt handle a idahoan that was a hill jack how could they handle a veteran

 

[OKTexas]

So you guys are all members of extremist, violent far right groups, eh?

Because that is who West Point is talking about.

The people they are talking about would eat you for a snack.

Dumbasses.

Since when does it have to be true for the left to claim it. Remember the Tea Parties are violent, even though no evidence has ever been produced.

 

[Oldguy]

It's not surprising that the Washington Times would misrepresent that study. After all, the Times was started by the "Rev" Sun Yung Moon (you know, the guy who claims he's the resurrected Jesus Christ) and his Unification Church as an anti-Communist, "conservative" anti-dote to the Washington Post. The Moon family owns it outright these days and it's never made a profit in it's 31 year existence. Consequently, it will say or do anything to try and entice people to buy their rag.

In any case, here's the whole study, even though I know none of you Nutter's will bother to read it. After all, it's much more fun and emotionally satisfying to just swim in the outrage, isn't it? Who cares about the truth when we can be mad, right?


http://www.ctc.usma.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/ChallengersFromtheSidelines.pdf

 

[Mad Scientist]

http://www.ctc.usma.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/ChallengersFromtheSidelines.pdf

Thanks for the link OldGuy. But you didn't read it did you? Well, that's just what you do. You're OldGuy.

From the study:

The anti-federalist rationale is multifaceted, and includes the beliefs that the American political system and its proxies were hijacked by external forces interested in promoting a “New World Order” (NWO) in which the United States will be absorbed into the United Nations or another version of global government.

Obama took a seat at the UN Security Council, an impeachable offense. Obama said that the Military serves the UN, Panetta agreed with him. Here's the exchange between Sessions and Panetta in video form since you don't like to read:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSzZAOQnYFI"]Panetta Publicly Admits U.S. Military/Obama Takes Orders from The U.N. - YouTube[/ame]

Bush New World Order Speech:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CWBTL33MpA"]Proof of NWO from George Bush SR New World Order - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Mad Scientist]

"Charges dropped against Michigan Militia".

From the AP:
https://www.timesrecordnews.com/news/2012/mar/27/critical-charges-dropped-against-michigan-militia/

A federal judge dismissed the most serious charges Tuesday against seven members of a Michigan militia who were rounded up as homegrown extremists accused of plotting war against the U.S., saying their expressed hatred of law enforcement didn't amount to conspiracy against the government. The decision is an embarrassment for the government, which secretly planted an informant and an FBI agent inside the Hutaree militia four years ago and claimed members were armed for war in rural southern Michigan.
U.S. District Judge Victoria Roberts granted requests for acquittal on the most serious charges: conspiring to commit sedition, or rebellion, against the U.S. and conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction. Only weapons charges remain against two of the defendants, who have been on trial since Feb. 13.
"The court is aware that protected speech and mere words can be sufficient to show a conspiracy. In this case, however, they do not rise to that level," Roberts said.

I post this not for OldGuy because he'll never listen. I post it for the benefit of whoever else reads this.

See what happens is that a bunch of good ole boys sit around talking about how they don't like Cops or Gov't, which is their right. Then the FEDS put a person in their midst who then says "Lets blow up a gov't building or shoot some cops" then arrest them all based on that.

Meanwhile the good ole boys never did nuthin' wrong. All they did was exercise their 1st Amendment Rights.

Also, Militia is "Defense activity or service, to protect a community, its territory, property, and laws", it's not Federal. Don't mix up National Guard and Reserve that get called up to invade countries for Oil or Gold or to kill Yellow People for the Military Industrial Complex.

The current gov't is looking to demonize Militias and Private Gun Ownership. Don't let it happen.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So you guys are all members of extremist, violent far right groups, eh?

Because that is who West Point is talking about.

The people they are talking about would eat you for a snack.

Dumbasses.

The FBI and the ATF couldnt handle a idahoan that was a hill jack how could they handle a veteran

an Idaho teahaddist hill jack veteran would be a walk through the playground for the fed bad boys. Don't ever doubt it.

 

[emptystep]

[From the report.]

Figure 1 - Attacks Initiated by Far-Right Groups/Individuals per Year

 

[blackhawk]

[From the report.]

Figure 1 - Attacks Initiated by Far-Right Groups/Individuals per Year

So how did they determine a attack was the result of the far right that is very unclear?

 

[emptystep]

[From the report.]

Figure 1 - Attacks Initiated by Far-Right Groups/Individuals per Year

So how did they determine a attack was the result of the far right that is very unclear?

You mean from the chart or from the 148 page document?

 

[OODA_Loop]

[From the report.]

Figure 1 - Attacks Initiated by Far-Right Groups/Individuals per Year

So how did they determine a attack was the result of the far right that is very unclear?

Does an abortion or gay rights group claim it in writing, three part carbon copy and floppy disc provided ?

Then definately far right.

 

[emptystep]

[From the report.]

Figure 1 - Attacks Initiated by Far-Right Groups/Individuals per Year

So how did they determine a attack was the result of the far right that is very unclear?

Does an abortion or gay rights group claim it in writing, three part carbon copy and floppy disc provided ?

Then definately far right.

Floppy disk? I would love to see intel running around their multi-billion dollar super computer looking for a floppy drive.

 

[blackhawk]

[From the report.]

Figure 1 - Attacks Initiated by Far-Right Groups/Individuals per Year

So how did they determine a attack was the result of the far right that is very unclear?

You mean from the chart or from the 148 page document?

Take your choice given people can have very wide definitions of what far right is and what constitutes a attack. If someone spray painted a Obama billboard would that be considered a far right attack? If a person say's I cant stand Obama and wish he was not the President would that be considered a far right threat? How much of this report is based on stuff like this and how much on actual attacks where stuff up is blown or where there is gunfire and people are killed ? Finally how much of this report is based on actual case history where you clearly know if there was a political motive and from what group and how much is based on speculation and opinion about who did what and why?

 

[OODA_Loop]

Dont like govt controlled healthcare ?

Hate attack.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Dont like govt controlled healthcare ?

Hate attack.

Nah, it's not. But if you say, "I hate Obamacare and I have my 2nd Amendment rights," then you are building a threat case against yourself.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Dont like govt controlled healthcare ?

Hate attack.

Nah, it's not. But if you say, "I hate Obamacare and I have my 2nd Amendment rights," then you are building a threat case against yourself.

What if you say "I hate the war on womens reproductive right and I have my 2nd Amendment rights" ?