Study: Greatest Terrorism Threat In America Not Al Qaeda, It’s Right-Wing Sovereign Citizens


Study: Greatest Terrorism Threat In America Not Al Qaeda, It’s Right-Wing Sovereign Citizens

20140728_militia2_0

Radical right-wing groups who refuse to recognize the authority of the federal government, like those who flocked to Bundy Ranch and now parade around the U.S.-Mexico border, represent the clearest threat to their communities, even more so than Islamic terrorists or white supremacist groups.

That’s the takeaway from a new landmark study by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Response to Terrorism (START). The group surveyed hundreds of law enforcement officials and over 170 agencies across the United States in an effort to understand how the people tasked with stopping terrorism view the threats on the ground.

What the team discovered was that the notion of Islamic extremists plotting to blow buildings was far less likely than homegrown so-called “Sovereign Citizens” who stockpile weapons and hold a seething resentment towards the federal government. Consequently, 86 percent of those interviewed agreed that this movement posed a “serious terrorist threat,” the highest of any group inquired about.

Compare that to just 8 years earlier in a similar questionnaire found that nearly every agency was still thinking about Islamic extremism.

table2-start

What’s changed in the time between 2007 and now? The most obvious thing is the nation got its first African American president with the election of Barack Obama. Fueled by racism, conservative fear mongering and the threats of “socialism,” the sovereign citizen movement has seen its membership explode in the last few years. It’s no coincident that two of the biggest sovereign citizen groups The Three Percenters and The Oath keepers were both founded around the time Obama was first elected.

As the Anti-Defamation League explains:

Formed in March 2009 and led by Stewart Rhodes, a Nevada lawyer, the Oath Keepers encourage members of the military and law enforcement to pledge not to follow certain hypothetical “orders” from the federal government. These “orders,” including one “to put American citizens in detention camps,” and another “to disarm the American people,” echo longstanding conspiracy theories embraced by anti-government extremists, who claim that the U.S. government is creating a police state. The Oath Keepers try to appeal to military and law enforcement personnel by reminding them that they swore an oath to defend the Constitution “from all enemies, foreign and domestic,” and suggesting that now is the time to live up to that oath by resisting an allegedly tyrannical government.

The Three Percenters, formed in late 2008, are a loosely organized movement centered around an obscure, and not particularly accurate, Revolutionary War “statistic” that claimed that only 3% of the American population during the Revolutionary War participated as combatants in the war.  The group asserts that they are a modern counterpart to that mythical 3% of American Revolutionary-era patriots and also represent the three percent of the population of American gun owners “who will not disarm.”

The idea that Obama (who many view as a black, Islamic foreigner) is coming to take their guns and their rights resonates with a certain type of paranoid person. Situations like Cliven Bundy’s cattle ranch standoff only reinforce their sense that it’s them against the government. It’s no surprise then that law enforcement officers are extremely worried about what kind of violent, drastic plans these people are cooking up to fight their perceived oppression.

This isn’t just an intellectual exercise, either. In June, a husband and wife killed three people in a shooting rampage based in part around the idea that they were kicking off an anti-government “revolution.”

Forbes gives a chilling account of their final moments:

On June 8, 2014, Jerad Dwain Miller, 31, and his wife Amanda Woodruff Miller, 22, entered a Las Vegas pizzeria and without any provocation or warning, shot and killed two police officers sitting in a booth eating lunch.  The pair dragged the officers to the floor, took their weapons and ammunition, and draped a yellow flag over one of the bodies.  They placed a swastika-stamped manifesto on top of the flag, and pinned a note on the other officer’s body that read, “This is the start of the revolution.”

The couple continued their spree in a nearby Wal-Mart.  Jerad wore military-style clothing and body armor and he yelled to the Wal-Mart shoppers, “Tell the police the revolution has begun.”  To emphasize his announcement, he fired a round into the ceiling, while Amanda shot and killed a brave bystander who tried to stop them.  They engaged the police in a shootout for roughly fifteen minutes while hiding in a shopping aisle in the back of the store.  Amanda aimed her weapon at her husband, but he had already been hit by a bullet from a police rifle, so she turned the gun on herself and pulled the trigger while the police watched the couple through a security camera.

Just weeks before, the two had been seen at Bundy’s ranch parading around the premises with weapons daring police officers to try to take them.

It’s examples like that which may explain why sovereign citizens are one of the few potential terror groups that didn’t see a decline in their perceived threat. As their numbers swell and their anger rises, the odds of a major act of terror occurring would seem to rise.

Crazy Birther Kook Jerome Corsi Exposed As Plagiarist Fraud


Birther King Corsi Again Accused of Plagiarism
Between refining his farcical anti-Obama “birther” conspiracy theory, fear-mongering about a nonexistent planned merger between the U.S., Mexico, and Canada, and groundlessly declaring that oil is not derived from living things and is therefore an infinite resource, right-wing attack dog Jerome Corsi is one busy dude.

The weight of these responsibilities seems to have become too much for the poor dear, who has reportedly compromised his normally impeccable ethics with a bit of plagiarism. On Dec. 19, Corsi published in WorldNetDaily (WND) an “exclusive” article titled “Obama’s legacy of broken promises – in Kenya.” Purportedly based on the results of a long-term research project headed by an unnamed former member of the Kenyan parliament, the article details Obama’s failure to come through on financial promises the president allegedly made to the Kenyan government, including the donation of money to improve the village in which his Kenyan relatives live.

Thing is, much of the “exclusive” reporting was apparently ripped off from prominent news sources, including a 2008 article from the London Evening Standard and a 2011 piece from Agence France-Press, the French wire service. The accusations of plagiarism were first raised by Barackryphal, a blog touting itself as “a skeptic’s guide to birtherism,” whose producers illustrated evidence of Corsi’s plagiarism in a helpful color-coded guide denoting which material was stolen from which source.

Much of the cribbed material is specifically credited to WND’s team of anonymous Kenyan researchers, while only three pieces of information are attributed to their proper source, the 2008 Evening Standard piece. (In case you were wondering why Corsi didn’t go to Kenya himself to track down some anti-Obama dirt, recall that the indefatigable birther in 2008 was deported from that country for failing to have proper authorization to undertake his investigation into supposed “details of secret deep ties” between Obama and certain Muslim politicians in Kenya.)

Barackryphal reports that Corsi failed to respond meaningfully to its queries about his sources, claiming that the WND-commissioned report is “proprietary” and declining to answer specific questions about when the alleged investigation took place or what other stories the supposed Kenyan source has contributed to. Yet the revelation of plagiarism apparently didn’t go unnoticed at the WND bunker: An editor’s note added to the top of the story says, “The following article is based on a paid, 8,000-word report by Kenyan researchers commissioned by WND. Unknown to WND, the report included unattributed references to a July 25, 2008, story by the Evening Standard of London. WND included a link to the 2008 story to back up the claims of the report, which WND believed was original. WND regrets the error.”

If this is true, it means that when preparing his article Corsi somehow failed to notice that the Evening Standard reporter had access to the exact same quotes as Corsi’s unnamed Kenyan source and in many cases mysteriously used identical language in the explanatory material that fills out the rest of the story. WND’s editorial note makes no mention of the content apparently burgled from Agence France-Press.

This isn’t the first time Corsi has been accused of plagiarism. In 2006, far-right blogger Debbie Schlussel accused him of copying parts of her columns and using them under his byline, noting that he had even replicated a typo in her original work. In one of the few Schlussel declarations with which Hatewatch is ever likely to agree, she wrote, “If he’s going to rip people off, he can at least get it right and not rip off my original mistakes.” WND appears to have since taken down the article in question.

Corsi made the reverse error in his latest article, Barackryphal points out; he misspelled the last name of one of the individuals whose quote he appears to have cribbed from Agence France-Presse’s 2011 article. In a follow-up post, Barackryphal also highlights numerous other (slightly less egregious) instances of apparent uncredited borrowing by WND columnists.

And so, it seems, WND and Corsi have no problem making up news to suit their far-right agenda but seemingly can’t generate adequate original material to back up the true stories they might wish to tell. In their through-the-looking-glass world of forged birth certificates, creeping Shariah, gay Nazis, and potential antichrists, that just about makes sense.

Crazy Newt Gingrich Not Crazy Enough for the GOP


In a perfect demonstration of the extremism that now defines the Republican Party, Newt Gingrich was savaged by the other candidates in last night’s debate for not hating immigrants enough.

Ascendant Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich delivered an unapologetic defense of his views on immigration Tuesday night, declaring in a foreign policy debate that the GOP should not adopt a platform on immigration that “destroys families that have been here a quarter-century.”

Gingrich came under fire from multiple opponents for declining to say that he would turn out all of the country’s illegal immigrants in a forum hosted by CNN, The Heritage Foundation and The American Enterprise Institute.

The other “pro-family” candidates were all enthusiastically in favor of destroying immigrant families.

Don’t worry, though — Gingrich has more than enough craziness in the rest of his absolutist positions. He’s just smart enough to realize that alienating Latino immigrants might not be a good political move.

Via http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/39486_Gingrich_Not_Crazy_Enough_for_the_GOP