TOON

Death Talkers

.....

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

    - "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Report, 07 April 2009

William Rivers Pitt
June 12, 2009 - TruthOut

.....

The much-maligned DHS report on the rise of right-wing extremism in America, released last April by Secretary Napolitano to conservative cries of outrage, appears to have been pretty much on the button.

Three days before the report was made public, three Pittsburgh police officers were shot to death by a right-wing gun-ownership extremist who believed President Obama was coming for his guns. One month after the report was made public, an anti-choice zealot named Scott Roeder gunned down Dr. George Tiller in the vestibule of Tiller's church in Kansas while his wife sang in the choir. On Wednesday, a security guard was shot and killed at the Holocaust Memorial in Washington, DC, by James W. von Brunn, a right-wing conspiracy theorist who filled pages on his blog with screeds about a Jewish world conspiracy and, you guessed it, Obama's so-called "false" birth certificate.

Where is all this fear, hatred and violence gaining its inspiration? I can think of a few examples.

Last March, Fox News personality Sean Hannity ran a poll on his web site asking readers what kind of revolution they'd prefer: military coup, armed rebellion or war for secession? "#3 seems most realistic," opined Hannity, "since it does present an opportunity for more homogeneous states to sort of capitalize on their homogeneity. However, it would likely lead to mass migrations of the minority partisans out of the rebel states. Of course, that may be fine with those states. Yet it seems that the ultimate paradox in any rebellion for freedom from within is that the ultimate goal is to impose the will of the rebels on everyone else through force. It seems the very foundation of representative democracy is ****tered if we accept that we exchange the power of ideas for the power of the sword upon each other. Nevertheless, I am still very interested in your own preferred form of revolt."

A month later, conservative radio host Glenn Beck accused President Obama of lifting the ban on embryonic stem cell research in order to begin genetic development of a new master race. "So here you have Barack Obama," said Beck, "going in and spending the money on embryonic stem cell research, and then some, fundamentally changing - remember, those great progressive doctors are the ones who brought us eugenics. It was the progressive movement and it was science. Let's put science truly in her place. If evolution is right, why don't we just help out evolution? That was the idea. And sane people agreed with it! And it was from America. Progressive movement in America. Eugenics. In case you don't know what eugenics led us to: the Final Solution. A master race! A perfect person. The stuff that we are facing is absolutely frightening. So I guess I have to put my name on yes, I hope Barack Obama fails. But I just want his policies to fail; I want America to
wake up."

Newt Gingrich claimed recently the United States is surrounded by "paganism." Mike Huckabee claimed recently the California Appeals Court decision to uphold the Prop. 8 ban on same-sex marriage was "a miracle from God's hands." Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh has accused the Obama administration of actively seeking to destroy the country by aiding terrorism and embracing socialism. The list goes on.

A pertinent section of the April DHS report:

  Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers.

  Historically, domestic rightwing extremists have feared, predicted, and anticipated a cataclysmic economic collapse in the United States. Prominent antigovernment conspiracy theorists have incorporated aspects of an impending economic collapse to intensify fear and paranoia among like-minded individuals and to attract recruits during times of economic uncertainty. Conspiracy theories involving declarations of martial law, impending civil strife or racial conflict, suspension of the U.S. Constitution, and the creation of citizen detention camps often incorporate aspects of a failed economy. Antigovernment conspiracy theories and "end times" prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition, and weapons. These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia
movement.

Where is all the fear and violence gaining inspiration? The same places it has been for a while now. Those right-wing media people keep talking, and people keep getting killed. Coincidence?

Ha.

.....

William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times and internationally bestselling author of two books: "War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You to Know" and "The Greatest Sedition Is Silence." His newest book is, "House of Ill Repute: Reflections on War, Lies, and America's Ravaged Reputation."

Sarah Palin's Dysfunctional Organization May Be Her Undoing

.....

Half-Baked Alaska

Kathleen Parker
June 10, 2009

.....

Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska and GOP "It" girl, can warm up the Republican base like a hot toddy in a duck blind. But further inside the party organization, the air is a little nippy.

Everyone seems to have a Sarah Palin story of ignored calls, mishandled invitations or unanswered e-mail. Disorganized is how one might charitably describe the Palin operation.

"Basically, it's just rude," says one political operative who is a Palin fan. "They've been running the great snub machine. That's the reason the boys in the Republican Party are unhappy with her."

That unhappiness has been building gradually in the past seven months, and it was on full display this week as the party faithful gathered for a fundraising dinner at which Palin originally was invited to speak. She was later uninvited, and Newt Gingrich took her place.

Watching the dinner-speaker spectacle develop, then unravel, then redevelop (Will she or won't she speak/attend?) felt like watching a middle-school romance in which a friend tells another friend that so-and-so has a crush on you-know-who, but don't tell anybody. A little silly, in other words. And embarrassing.

The "tick-tock" of what happened is a byzantine exercise in blame-shifting. Briefly, someone in Palin's "organization" accepted the original invitation in March, whereupon the dinner hosts issued a press release announcing that Palin would be the keynote speaker.

Yay!

But then, no, Palin had not accepted. In fact, the press release was the first she'd heard of it. The official story suddenly became that SarahPAC had jumped the gun and that Palin wasn't sure she could make the event. Enter Newt Gingrich. Then last week, so-and-so said she'd like to come, but you-know-who said, "We like someone else now."

There's more -- and stories vary -- but a common theme emerges: Seven months after the election, Palin still can't shoot straight. Unless something changes dramatically and soon, "Missed Opportunity" should be the title of her memoir.

By the time Palin returned to Alaska last fall, her popularity and fundraising ability were second only to Barack Obama's. Instantly, she was drowning in speaking requests. Boxes and boxes of invitations stacked up  and went unprocessed.

Without any effort on her part, 75,000 to 80,000 fans around the country organized pro-Palin groups. Said a frustrated Palin promoter: "All she had to do for those 75,000 people was hold an electronic town hall, and she couldn't get around to it."

Of course, it's not that Palin has nothing else to do. But her problem is the same as it was a year ago. She isn't ready. For whatever reason -- skittishness, distrust or, quite possibly, executive weakness -- Palin has been unable to make the transition from Alaska politics to the Big Game Hunt of the national arena.

Plenty of experienced people have tried to help. Veteran operatives created SarahPAC to raise money for staff to at least open mail and return phone calls. It was a Kevin Costner field of dreams: Create the Web site, and they came, all right. The PAC raised $400,000 in its first month without so much as asking.

What happened next?

Nothing.

"We couldn't get them to decide on office space," says my source. "You couldn't get them to be professional."

Palin's fiercely independent streak is part of her charm but also may be her undoing. It's one thing to campaign on an anti-inside-the-Beltway platform. But to play in the big leagues, you need people who know what they're doing.

You don't flirt and say "yes," and then say "no," and then say "maybe," and then show up expecting a bouquet. The tease is a risky business. Palin did get to walk across the stage with Gingrich -- to appreciative applause and a few whistles -- but she wasn't allowed to talk. Something about upstaging Gingrich.

Palin also managed to get in a few words during an interview with Fox's Sean Hannity, which aired Monday night during the fundraising dinner. But anyone listening to both Gingrich and Palin would find preemption concerns ludicrous. Palin may be more fun to watch, but Gingrich dominates on the battlefield of ideas.

Whether Palin can rally her resources by 2012 remains in serious doubt, even among her fans. Said yet another Palin admirer: "The problem is, she has had months to get it together and they haven't. They could have had an excellent national team and state team working seamlessly."

But they didn't.

More ’sickening’ truths about torture soon to be revealed

.....

David Edwards and Muriel Kane
June 11, 2009 - Raw Story

.....

A crucial CIA Inspector General's report from May 2004 is expected to reveal some long-hidden truths about the Bush administration's use of torture.

According to MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, "This report is sort of the big kahuna in terms of what we have been waiting to see from the government's own files on torture. That report, which is long and has been described by people who have seen it as 'sickening,' apparently stopped the torture program in its tracks."

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) recently warned in a speech on the floor of the Senate that almost everything we think we know about the Bush administration's torture program is wrong.

"There has been a campaign of falsehood about this whole sorry episode," Whitehouse stated. "We've been misled about nearly every aspect of this program. … Measured against the information I've been able to get access to, the storyline that we have been led to believe … is false in every one of its dimensions."

Maddow then asked Newsweek's Michael Isikoff whether the report will fill in the mission information to which Whitehouse referred.

"We don't know how complete the disclosures are going to be," Isikoff cautioned. "Will we see the complete unredacted report? That is the key question here."

"There are three key questions to look for," Isikoff explained. "Were there harsh interrogations that began before the … legal authorizations? … Did they go beyond what was authorized? … Did it go beyond just finding out about possible plots against the United States to provide other information, such as supplying possible evidence that could be used to justify the war in Iraq?"

Isikoff noted that there are footnotes in the torture memos already released which "quote from the Inspector General's report that what was actually done went beyond what was authorized — that how waterboarding was conducted, the frequency with which it was conducted, and the manner in which it was conducted was beyond what the CIA told the Justice Department it was going to do when the Justice Department authorized the technique."

Isikoff emphasized, however, that almost none of this information is being released voluntarily. It's being slowly pried out through Freedom of Information Act requests, most of them filed by the ACLU, and "it's become trench warfare — document by document."

"The CIA and the intelligence community has pushed back hard," Isikoff stressed. "People in the intelligence community never wanted this stuff out to begin with."

This video is from MSNBC's Rachel Maddow Show, broadcast June 10, 2009:

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/06/11/maddow-more-sickening/

Cheney still in crosshairs of Senate Intelligence probe

.....

John Byrne
June 10, 2009 - Raw Story

.....

Former Vice President Dick Cheney isn't out of the woods yet for his role in briefing Congress on the Bush Administration's secretive harsh interrogation program.

In a carefully worded statement to Mother Jones' David Corn for an article Wednesday, a spokesman for Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein indicated that the conduct of individuals who briefed Congressmembers on the CIA's interrogation program is under review.

"The Senate intelligence committee's study includes an examination of how the committee was briefed on the CIA's detention and interrogation program," Phil LaVelle, a Feinstein spokesperson, was quoted as saying. "This includes briefings of committee leadership, and is not limited by who conducted the briefing."

The Intelligence Committee's probe has been ongoing — quietly — since March.

But "there have been no public hearings," Corn writes. "In fact, Feinstein has made no commitment to hold hearings on this subject or to release a public report when the investigation is completed. The committee said in March that its investigation would take about a year.

"The committee has restricted this part of its review and is not examining briefings provided to other committees–such as the House intelligence committee–according to a congressional source familiar with the probe." he adds. "But given that Cheney briefed two senior members of the Senate intelligence panel, the committee can review what Cheney told Roberts and Rockefeller about the interrogation program and evaluate whether his assertions were supported by the facts. That is, the Cheney briefing is fair game for the Senate investigators.

Feinstein's spokesman declined to comment on whether the committee was investigating the 2005 briefing Cheney gave Senate Intelligence Committee members.

"The committee is not confirming or denying any specific aspects of its inquiry, including the witnesses it has or will be interviewing," Corn avers.