Extremist “patriot” groups and other armed militia have undergone a dramatic resurgence in America, their numbers more than doubling in the past year amid growing Right-wing fears over expanding federal power and gun control.
Such groups – a mix of libertarians, gun rights advocates and survivalists – appeared to be in terminal decline before the election of Barack Obama, according to monitoring bodies.
The Southern Poverty Law Centre, which tracks extremist organisations, says it has so far counted more than 300 patriot groups this year, at least double last year’s total of 150. The real total will be much higher as many groups do not go out of their way to publicise their existence.
A similar wave of anti-government groups, some of whose members dress in camouflage gear and conduct military training at weekends, sprung up during the Clinton administration.
However, SPLC researchers said there was a new race factor reflecting President Obama’s ethnicity and immigration fears.
The groups themselves reject accusations of racism but agree that many members are deeply worried about gun control, are angered by the federal economic rescue packages, and are dismayed by government interference in areas such as health care. They voice frustration at what they perceive as America’s international decline.
Tensions are running high and some fear major bloodshed springing from a minor event. A law enforcement official told the SPLC that “all that’s lacking is a spark”.
[More]
They left out one very important group: constitutionalists. And patriot should not be in scare quotes.
‘Rednecks’ I say.
Such groups – a mix of libertarians, gun rights advocates and survivalists – appeared to be in terminal decline before the election of Barack Obama, according to monitoring bodies.
:O
I’m shocked!
These guys are already bringing guns to tea parties and talking about how the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants. The FBI and Secret Service will do all they can to keep him alive but there just too many far-right wackos out there in a culture where “freedom” consists of stockpiling weapons and de-stigmatizing hate speech. With Fox, Rush Limbaugh, etc leading them on it’s only a matter of time.
When the far left and the far right join in the Politics of Hate and Demonization, it is time for the vast center-left and center-right of this country to speak up and call them out equally.
http://www.bipartisanpolicy.org/news/idea-gallery/2009/08/20/lanny-davis-ideal-gallery
Whats next for the american red necks, overthrow Canada’s present left leaning government?
Jack, you’ve got more trolls than the Brothers Grimm.
Not trolls, Murray. Just different points of view. That’s fine with me as long as everyone keeps it clean.
Real trolls don’t last on this site very long. I can “disappear” them in mere seconds as I do on occasion.
Happy new year. You have a good one.
Cynapse you have let hyperbole get ahead of you.
American citizens are very strong on independence. They are much more vigilant about the actions of the Government (by the people , for the people) that Canadians are.
They believe that the citizenry are the true power of the nation, and government operates at the will of the people.
So when you have a government that is ignoring the will of the people (almost 60% against Obamacare for instance), and when the government belittles the demonstration of a couple of million of its citizens, you can be sure there is going to be trouble brewing.
The realization is sinking in that the people have been had. Americans have a history of not taking kindly to this sort of thing.
The legislators have to realize that they are there to serve the country, not the other way around.
Interesting times.
My prediction is that you will not see an armed innsurrection, but you will certainly see civil unrest, perhaps in the form of many citizens opting for jail instead of going along with the government mandates.
By the way, neither Fox or Rush is leading anything except they are leading in viewership. Making a prediction is not the same as encouraging.
So being a Patriot is now equal to being a extremist? Since when is a white man in camo with a gun being extreme. I thought wrecking America by installing socalist ideals would be looked upon as being a little extreme. Anyone in camo protecting their country, regardless of color age or sex, is a patriot. A patriot would rather be out walking their dog, fishing , or cutting the grass, but someone has to be willing to stand up and be accountable. In short if you hate your country your not a patriot.
Running around in camo with a gun means just that. It’s your intent that makes you extreme, patriotic or otherwise.
Sudden desire to go to war over the election of America’s first black president and his subsequent willingness to provide health care to the poor sounds quite extreme to me. Extremists rarely see themselves as such so there is probably little merit in debating whether this position is extreme.
Dam, this is tedious.
Cynapse, you know dam well that the fact that the president is black has nothing to do with anything.
The problem is that Obama has squandered all the good will and hope from people who voted for him.
It is his agenda that is repulsing Americans (including his supporters). Health care is one item, but there are many more. Most recently, The release of a terrorist who brutally murdered American soldiers, His inept handling of the Christmas day attempted bombing.
Providing health care to the poor is not even covered in the plan, although it may be before all is done. What is covered is a bureaucratic nightmare of epic proportions.
It is an order of magnitude worse than anything we complain about in Canada.
The American people are starting to realize what a total incompetent they have
elected.
If Obama was white, he would be still incompetent.
So to disagree with Obama is to be a racist…….Right?
This kind of dishonesty is exactly whats wrong with politics in Canada and in the U.S.
Cynapse, you know dam well that the fact that the president is black has nothing to do with anything.
For those rebel-flag loving mountain boys? Think again.
The problem is that Obama has squandered all the good will and hope from people who voted for him.
And those kind of people protest. They don’t run into the mountains with guns talking constitution like Obama’s some kind of African dictator.
It is his agenda that is repulsing Americans (including his supporters). Health care is one item, but there are many more. Most recently, The release of a terrorist who brutally murdered American soldiers, His inept handling of the Christmas day attempted bombing.
Again the response is protest. That would be physical demonstrations or negative op-eds. But when you pick up a gun and start talking about patriotism or tyranny, you’re no longer just expressing political disagreement.
Let’s flip the situation and see if it makes sense to you -
Group A – Protests in the streets about “Bushitler”, gets their asses kicked by the cops, writes nasty stuff in their blogs about the police
Group B – Stockpiles weapons and plays war games in the forest; insists that Bush is overtaking the country and have the constitutional duty to remove him by whatever means necessary
You know damn well the feds do not see these two groups as equal. One would be branded domestic terrorists and added to the no-fly list. Why should the same not be done for right win militias?
So to disagree with Obama is to be a racist.
This kind of dishonesty is exactly whats wrong with politics in Canada and in the U.S.
The only dishonesty I see if you trying to equate gun toting psychopaths (the same ilk responsible for their own terrorist acts) to general political dissension. All dissenters are not equal, Lee. Say it! The right is using that “people keep accusing me of being a racist for disagreeing with Obama” excuse to sneak in all kinds of extremism that goes well beyond mere differences in policy.
What is changing the political landscape is that the “independents” are waking up to the fact that it is the same incompetents who tell them “the system works” who are now going to be closing Mayo Clinics and instead having unionized apparatchiks give them ObamaCare.
Obama ran on fiscal responsibility and yet he has already tripled the deficit.
He was going to close the symbolic Gitmo …and send these jihadists back to Yemen??? Letting them loose to target us again?
The White House thinks the War on Terror is just a war on crime. When they catch a terrorist in Detroit they read him the Miranda rights and lawyer him up.
It ain’t just “mountain boys” that think this is nuts. A lot of liberals at the Metropolitan Opera in New York are worried about the new trials of jihadists coming to their town.
The reason to be optimistic is because Obama and his handlers live in denial and mistakenly think the dissenters are simply “rebel-flag loving mountain boys”. There’ll be a sea change in the elections this year.
If it is wrong for the White House to think this is a war on crime, and the White House (even under Bush) insists it’s not a war on Islam, and the right wing apologists claim it’s not a war against the Afghan/Iraqi people then what is it? The definition and goals seem to change every few months. Is it any wonder we’re not “winning”?
As for opposition to Obama, it doesn’t matter how many people oppose him – those militia types are still suspect and should be watched just like the terrorists are.
Maybe I am just naive, but i have no problem at all defining what i think Bush meant. It is a war against terrorists. Therefore when you have apprehended a terrorist, it should be treated appropriately. It doesnt matter what the nationality of the terrorist is.
They need to be treated differently than your everyday, garden variety common criminal.
As i stated previously, i do not accept the possibilty of the shooting revolution that you are speaking of. I am talking about the discontent that applies across all parties and walks of life in America right now.
Obama had a golden opportunity to do so much good with the backing of the majority of voters. Instead, he has squandered all that good will by his arrogance, ineptness, and absolute refusal to consider any proposals that didnt come from the Democrats.
Witness his statement to the Republicans who were trying to suggest some different approaches.–”We won”.
Witness the attacks on any who might disagree with him. When have you ever seen a president attack a private citizen in a national speech? When have you seen a President attack a TV network?
This is the kind of thing that will be the end of him.
I wouldnt be surprised if there are impeachment possiblilities being considered. Not gunplay.
“(even under Bush) insists it’s not a war on Islam”
But Cynapse surely you agree Bush was right about it not being on Islam; but it is on Islamists. Unfortunately Bush could not bring himself to say it is a War on Islamists, so he used Terror. But Obama uses “man made disasters”.
I agree with you, we need to name the enemy. And it sure isn’t just a “good war” in Afghanistan. It’s the whole region blowing up, we see another suicide bomber event today in Pakistan where Muslims are killing 70 Muslims at a sports event; or Islamists killing Islam. It’s mind boggling, tragic … I agree with you Cynapse we need to stop changing the definitions. There is way too much political correctness about debating problems in the region.
They are imploding and killing themselves. After 9/11 Bush did succeed in pushing the war back into the region, after it had exploded our way, he took the war to them. We cannot just defend, we must go on the offensive too. And Iraq is the model and hence Iranians want to be like that too. Thus we’ll see more and more upheavals against tyranny in the region.
I also agree “those militia types” are suspect, which is why Bill Ayres, Obama’s Weather Underground buddy should be watched too. This isn’t a left/right thing. It’s just common sense.
Nom:
1) Yes, it’s fair to say that the war is on Islamists and not Islam. But, as you’ve pointed out, neither president so far has said so. Moreover, the major champions of the war (ie right wing pundits) launch wholesale attacks on Islam rather than just its radical elements. Read Mark Steyn? Gates of Vienna? They make no distinction – the advancement of anything Islamic is categorically “evil”. Someone needs to define this war directly (assuming their real reason is palatable to the masses) and draw up troop timetables to suit. Also, if this is a real coalition let’s make it representative – there may be 60 countries involved but they’re not all contributing significantly.
2) If Iraq is the model then the Islamists have all but won. More than a few reports show regular Iraqis talking about how much worse their lives are post-Saddam than with the dictator. Sectarian and tribal violence has exploded, regulated by foreign forces that have no knowledge of or respect for the local culture. As our justifications change, the only thing that remains clear to Iraqis is that American troops control their central cities and American contractors are making great $$ while they go hungry. What can the long term civilian reaction be?
3) Can you say, with a straight face, that the Weather Underground has been a growing concern for the past few decades … or are you just struggling to find an equivalent to the bustling militia movement so that the “left” gets some negative press as well? This is not South America – the left is harmless here.
Nom: I thought the Iraq war was all about finding ‘weapons of mass destruction’ (which werent there) not about Al Quida or was it really all about oil?
And I agree with Cynapse, once the Americans leave Iraq, all hell will break loose with tribal warefare, similar to whats going on in Afghanistan.
However, the west must carry on with seeking out and destroying the real enemy, no matter where they are, Al Qaida.
As for opposition to Obama, it doesn’t matter how many people oppose him – those militia types are still suspect and should be watched just like the terrorists are.
It’s a mistake to get all hung up throwing around Obama’s name with that of the militia’s as though it’s some new phenomena brought on by a black man being in the Oval Office. These groups have been around for a long time, they’ve got a long hit list they’d like to shorten and they don’t give a rat’s behind what party has a rep in the Oval Office. It’s also immaterial to them what colour that person might be. We (RCMP) had dealings of mutual interest with the USBP, ATF and USINS back in the late 70′s directly related to the Posse Comitatus, to site just one example. There was a Canadian connection to this group. The U.S. Federal Government, lead by the POTUS but including representatives of both parties, is just one enemy of the Posse Comitatus and numerous other similar groups, period. These militias, with ranks full of armed dangerous loons, deserve plenty of ‘watching’ by authorities, and they get it. They did before Obama and they will after him.
1.“Read Mark Steyn?” Got a signed copy of America Alone. He says the same as I do… Islamists are the problem. So does Salim Mansur and he’s a Muslim. Steyn does get overly upset with the “moderates” for not speaking up. For that matter, so does Jack. But given the POTUS appeasing ways with despots, if I were a moderate Muslim I might sit tight and hedge my bets on who’s going to win this.
2. Sure, it’s been real bad for the minority, elitist, ruling class of Ba’athist. Yes, their lives of UN Food for Palaces are over.. too bad. That’s why Iraq is the model because it ended the 2 class system. As the middle class grows over time Bush will be a hero there.
3.Who you hang out with defines who you are. I hang out with cops like Jack. The POTUS hung out with Ayres and a long list of other unsavories upon which there should have been due diligence. I’ve already agreed that militia type behaviour needs to be watched. But in the case of Ayres, with whom Obama partnered, we have a guy linked to terrorist activities and who is a known capitalist hater. The MSM did not do its job.
UV, you need to read VDH’s 23 reasons for going there. Too bad that Bush listened to Tony Blair who needed cover at the UN. Colin Powell made his pitch on WMD at the UN and everyone agreed , even Chirac, that there were WMDs. There were , 5000 Kurds had been killed by Chemical Ali. But yes too mush lazy emphasis was placed on WMDs. Saddam had oil and could buy whatever he wanted as soon as the no-fly zone went down. That would be a good reason to take him out. He was a very bad guy and funded all kinds of bad stuff not to mention the invasion of Kuwait.
“Also, if this is a real coalition let’s make it representative – there may be 60 countries involved but they’re not all contributing significantly.”
We agree Cynapse.
For example, the Germans have provided needed Kitchen Police duty to support our troops there but they aren’t the front line. Consequently PMSH is spending a lot of his political capital on the young girls going to school in Afghanistan for the first time. But we have the radical fringe in Parliament attacking him ( many of them feminists, hypocritical to the cause) for the detainees which are a NATO problem not a Canadian problem. I do not want to waste the opportunity for conservatism to take place in my country by running more risk on the detainee file. So maybe we should pull out.
All these military blood and treasury expenditures have to be in our own self-interest and the radical fringe in Ottawa needs to be held accountable for the killing fields that will follow if they can’t connect the dots.
Moreover, the major champions of the war (ie right wing pundits) launch wholesale attacks on Islam rather than just its radical elements.
Well then it’s long overdue that Islam stands up and makes that difference abundently clear isn’t it? What are they waiting for? I’m not talking about the odd press release here and there denouncing some radical event. Last September 50,000 Muslims participated in a march of unity for Islam. Well, if they feel so strongly about the actions of the radicals in their religion, why didn’t they or don’t they organize 50,000 Muslim march and pubicly denounce terrorism and the Islamic radicals for all the world to witness?
I happen to be genuinely concerned that time is running out. Left or right won’t matter neither will Islam or its radical elements be differentiated between by Americans if the radicals realize their dream of detonating a dirty or nuke bomb on U.S. soil. Think all in the family. Overreaction? Then what would America’s response be? Indecisiveness, apologies, remorse or guilt? Too late, they already tried all those in 2009. Surrender? Not a chance of that happening. American anger would explode more violently than could ever been imagined. Think the unimaginable. Think holy war. Think genocide. Couldn’t ever happen? Think again.
http://thelastcrusade.org/2009/09/16/muslims-to-mount-massive-march-on-washington/
Re: #21 — “All these military blood and treasury expenditures have to be in our own self-interest and the radical fringe in Ottawa needs to be held accountable for the killing fields that will follow if they can’t connect the dots.”
They will be my friend — they will be.