This is the information I found on the statements from the head of Homeland Security. The reason it could not be found on the DHS website is that it was a memo not intended to be released to the public.

On April 7, DHS sent a nine-page warning memo to law enforcement offices across the country titled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.”

The report includes a sweeping definition of the threat:

“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.”

I don't know about you but the language of this hits home on many fronts for me.

Very good point. The report was a warning to police to watch out for “those that are anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority (Gov Perry from Texas?), 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."

Since the bamster was elected, thousands of people have purchased ammo and firearms, and the report warns of "The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by right-wing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans."

Of course, any good communist or community organizer has to take a swing at the military, and they warned of "Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience.”

And of course if you believe in protecting our borders - "DHS/I&A assesses that right-wing extremist groups' frustration over a perceived lack of government action on illegal immigration has the potential to incite individuals or small groups toward violence."

The report also warned law enforcement agencies to watch for suspicious individuals who may have bumper stickers for third-party political candidates such as Ron Paul, Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin.

It further warned law enforcement to watch out for individuals with "radical" ideologies based on Christian views, or opposing abortion and federal taxes.

Did you notice that the document came from HLS and not the White House? So you think the "communist" himself with a 70% approval rating is behind it all.....You believe Obama himself is responsible for this outrage and was involved in the direction of this document? Whatever......

Napolitano apologized for the wording in the document.

It is the President who decides the person(s) who head up these federal departments. The agenda of these people decides what direction each of these agencies go. Napolitano is an Obama appointee, the Department of the Interior Secretary that closed leases for oil exploration in Wyoming is also and appointee, the Treasury Secretary (that isn't bright enough to do his taxes properly) is an appointee, etc. etc. You get the idea that the crowd that is in there wants to take the country in a direction many don't want it to go? I do. And it does start at the top.

If this was the Bush Administration you would be agreeing with me. The fact that you are apologizing for the apologist-in-chief is hilarious. And yes, I do in fact think that your marxist messiah is in fact responsible for this report – just like Moose pointed out. 70% approval rating is amongst your fellow socialists; not the American people. I have started a poll here in the forums, so let’s see how he does in here.

Nappy did not apologize for the report; she merely said she was sorry if any one was offended. In other words – she said veterans can go get f%$#ed.

http://forums.atvconnection.com/polls/311867-presidential-approval-poll.html

Believe it or not, I could care less who is in office for this kind of thing. As long as they are watching out for skin heads, natzis and the McViegh types I'm good with it. You're obviously a military guy, so I can understand the dismay....I hear ya there.

Apologizing....show me where I apologized for anybody.

I wonder? You think an ATV forum is a slice of "America"? I love the "not with the American people". News flash: Obama kicked McCain's a$$ because the American people voted him in by huge margins. Did you miss that part...it was about 3 1/2 months ago.

It's a security report. You think HLS is going to apologize for the whole security report? Think not.

(Newser) – Janet Napolitano apologized today for language in a recent Homeland Security report suggesting that veterans were more likely to be wooed by far-right extremist groups, CNN reports.


Good luck with your poll. It should be a valid sample of the "American public".

Yes, I agree with you. He's said the buck stops with him, so he's "responsible" as the boss. My point was that the man himself was not responsible for physically writing this document. I thought I made that pretty clear, but apparently not. Again, he was not personally responsible for the wording, as it was made to sound. No, I would not blame Bush for it either.

Elections have consequences Moose. Maybe if the Republican "crowd" didn't squander their 8 year run and drive the US into a ditch they'd still be a national party.

I'm a firm believer in healthy debate and having two strong parties to keep each other in check. They require each other for balance. This is part of the reason we are such a successful country. Democrats need Republicans and Republicans need Democrats. I just hope the far right doesn't alienate the masses and further degrade what's left of the GOP. I'd vote Republican again and expect I will at some point in the future if they can right the sinking idealistic ship.

I agree wholeheartedly with the fact that the Republicans didn't accomplish much in their 8 years. At the least they spared us from 4-8 years of Al Gore or 4-8 years of John Kerry. Bush was far from my ideal but the alternatives are mirrors of the direction the party in power is now going.

I vote more independently than by party. I have local elections where the Democrat State Rep. here in Massachusetts is tons more conservative than the Republican that is running. When it get to a national election I probably shouldn't even bother because, other than Reagan, there hasn't been a conservative win here in Massachusetts in the past half dozen years. I think much of the problem is that the GOP doesn't have a backbone to stand up to the liberals. It was interesting to see that a lot of the Democratic wins in the South were won by Dems. who are more conservative than the Reps. they replaced.

I think the poll in this forum is very valid, and seems to be doing just fine.

If that poll was run by CNN, and the results were reversed, I'm sure he'd accept the results then.