New Obama Czar will hunt right wing extremist.

[Dot Com]

ZOMG Stephie. CNS News?

You need a logical fallacy/debate 101 refresher.

Well, it's from /fairfax..probably a unionized government worker protecting its phony "job"....

brilliant post rw low-info troll boi

 

[Bob Blaylock]

And this is what most conservatives do: lie.

 

[tyroneweaver]

wow, you voted for all this? what country are we living in?

snip:
Americans seen as possibly more threatening than Islamic jihadists
Published: 6 hours ago


Leo Hohmann About | Email | Archive


Just two weeks after it announced a plan to globalize local police departments through the “Strong Cities Network,” the Obama administration has added a new tool in its fight against “violent extremism.”

A new position within the Justice Department – yet to be filled – will focus on investigating lone-wolf domestic terrorists or “extremists.”

The person who heads this new effort will target extremists who plan mass shootings, hold racist, bigoted or anti-government views or see themselves as “sovereign citizens.”

The new position at the Justice Department, dubbed the “domestic terrorism counsel,” will serve as the main point of contact for U.S. attorney offices nationwide and will identify trends across cases, help shape strategy and “analyze legal gaps that need to be closed,” said Assistant Attorney General John Carlin.

It is not clear what Carlin meant by that statement.


“The legal gaps are probably laws that need to be changed,” said John Whitehead, founder of the Rutherford Institute and a longtime constitutional attorney.


“I’m sure it’s gun laws,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, another watchdog agency.

The FBI has confirmed it has active ISIS investigations in all 50 states. And Islamic-inspired attacks have occurred in recent years in Chattanooga, Tennessee; Garland, Texas, and Fort Hood, Texas. Other examples include the Boston Marathon bombing and the Oklahoma City beheading of a Christian woman.

But the Justice Department sees Islamic jihadists as no more dangerous than mentally ill actors such as Dylann Roof, the Charleston, South Carolina, church shooter who killed nine black Christians.

In fact, Justice officials have indicated these home-grown “right wingers” are possibly more numerous and dangerous than the jihadists.

SNIP:
Where is Congress?

The problem with these programs is a lack of clear definitions, said Whitehead. What is “violent extremism,” and what is “terrorism?” Are they the same?

“The government will be defining what extremism is. I’m going to write a letter to the Justice Department and ask them, ‘Can you please define it right now?’ Congress should already be asking this. Do we want to go back to those 2009 memos under Janet Napolitano where returning vets and anti-abortion activists were named as potential extremists to be watched?” he asked, referring to Obama’s former secretary of homeland security.

“So what Americans are facing here, these are bureaucrats making rules,” Whitehead said. “Congress is not voting on it. There is no representative government going on here. This is autocratic rule by oligarchy.”

ALL of it here:
Read more at New Obama czar will hunt ‘right-wing’ extremists

Read more at New Obama czar will hunt ‘right-wing’ extremists

Most of the terrorist activity in the U.S. in recent years has come not from Muslims, but from radical Christianists, white supremacists and far-right militia groups.

10 of the Worst Terror Attacks by Extreme Christians and Far-Right White Men

And what's the criteria. If your rw it's a terrorist attack. If you're a muslim it's labeled work place violence or some else
Sounds pretty bogus
Your list is so phony it doesn't even list the twin towers as a terrorist attack let alone not even on there
Oh I get it. I you're a muslim it was mechanical failure

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Here are a few stories from about a year ago, that seem to tie in to this thread…

“Project Truthy”, a government-backed project to study the dissemination of views and opinions labeled as “hate speech”, “misinformation”, “partisanship” and other expressions deemed unfavorable by the government. In itself, not really threatening,but certainly an abuse of taxpayer resources, and suggestive of more sinister motives.

• The government wants to study ‘social pollution’ on Twitter
• Feds Creating Database to Track ‘Hate Speech’ on Twitter

In a thread on another forum, at about the time these stories broke, we had a handful of wrong-wingers staunchly denying the obvious thread that this story suggests, and the possible sinister motives and application. As the debate wore on, this new story came to my attention.

• FEC Democrat pushes for controls on Internet political speech

Here, we have Anne M. Ravel, the vice-chair of the Federal Election Commission, calling for the ability of the federal government to impose regulations on political messages expressed over the Internet.

The FEC deadlocked in a crucial Internet campaign speech vote announced Friday, leaving online political blogging and videos free of many of the reporting requirements attached to broadcast ads — for now.

While all three GOP-backed members voted against restrictions, they were opposed by the three Democratic-backed members, including FEC Vice Chair Ann M. Ravel, who said she will lead a push next year to try to come up with new rules government political speech on the Internet.

·
·
·​

“Some of my colleagues seem to believe that the same political message that would require disclosure if run on television should be categorically exempt from the same requirements when placed in the Internet alone,” said FEC Vice Chair Ann M. Ravel in a statement. “As a matter of policy, this simply does not make sense.”

She said the FEC should no longer “turn a blind eye to the Internet’s growing force in the political arena,” and she vowed to force a conversation next year on what changes to make.​

So, a year ago, we have a project supported by the Democrat=dominated Executive Branch of government, to analyze online expression and search for messages deemed “subversive”, and tied into that, a Democrat FEC commissioner openly expressing a desire to regulate such expression on the Internet.

And now, a year later, we have an Obama-appointed “czar” specifically assigned the job of rooting out “right-wing extremism”.

 

[BlindBoo]

Ahhhh, more bizarre czars and scary tales...........

how many unelected "czars" did obama appoint? Why? What do they do specifically?
How much tax money goes to paying them their "staff", their office space, government funded pensions and healthcare......etc..etc..

You know czar is a media term right? All presidents appoint them.