Liberty vs White House Plan For Homegrown Extremism
December 10, 2011, Submitted by: Ken Tweet
The White House has unveiled a new strategy (Strategic Implementation Plan) “to fight homegrown terrorism”, named, the “Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States”.
“The plan outlines enhanced coordination between ‘local partners’ including schools and community groups, and federal law enforcement, and seeks to empower communities by teaching local officials to recognize violent extremism”
Having read the White House plan, which can be found here, the phrase “violent extremism” was used 88 times with the apparent purpose of highlighting the general purpose of the program’s mission of prevention. However, nowhere within the document had they defined the phrase ‘violent extremism’ in any way. That is unfortunate, because although the intention of the program may be good, the door may have been opened yet again regarding the further loss of American liberties.
The obvious presumption is that the inclusion of the word ‘violent’ implies the action itself. However the language within the document specifically and primarily calls for implementing methods that would enable recognizing ‘potential’ behaviors and actions that could lead to ‘extremism’.
Again, what is ‘extremism’? How many times have you heard the term ‘extremism’ thrown around by the media during the past decade? Pretty much anything outside of the normal (whatever that is…) is considered ‘extreme’ these days, with no room for in-between. Today’s culture has been brainwashed to believe that speaking out or challenging the status quo is a form of extremism…
Given that the Senate recently passed the ‘2012 National Defense Authorization Act‘ (which itself opens the door for trial-free, indefinite detention of anyone, including American citizens, so long as the government calls them terrorists), one might be skeptical of this recent White House program – Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States.
Interestingly, the word “resilience” was used 20 times in the document, always in the context of training and building recognition of behaviors and actions that may lead to ‘violent extremism’, from schools to community to local-state-federal law enforcement.
The following are excerpts from the White House SIP document:
Free societies face threats from a range of violent extremists.
(Implying that being ‘not-as-free’ would be better?)
The Federal Government is focused on three core areas of activity:
(1) enhancing engagement with and support to local communities that may be targeted by violent extremists;
(2) building government and law enforcement expertise for preventing violent extremism;
(3) countering violent extremist propaganda while promoting our ideals.
(…and, what is the definition of ‘violent extremism’, or how about simply ‘extremism’?)
Leveraging the wide range of tools, capabilities, and resources of the United States Government in a coordinated manner is essential for success. Traditional national security or law enforcement agencies such as DHS, DOJ, and the FBI will execute many of the programs and activities outlined in the SIP (Strategic Implementation Plan).
(Coordinated attacks usually work best, but, what are we attacking specifically?)
…prevent radicalization that leads to violence.
(What is ‘radicalization’? For example, is speaking out against the powers-that-be considered radicalism?)
Although both the National Strategy for Empowering Local Partners and the SIP specifically address preventing violent extremism in the United States, the delineation between domestic and international is becoming increasingly less rigid. Violent extremists operating abroad have direct access to Americans via the Internet, and overseas events have fueled violent extremist radicalization and recruitment in the United States.
(Whenever the government mentions the word, ‘internet’, my radar goes up…)
The Internet, social networking, and other technology tools and innovations present both challenges and opportunities. The Internet has facilitated violent extremist recruitment and radicalization and, in some instances, attack planning, requiring that we consider programs and initiatives that are mindful of the online nature of the threat. At the same time, the Federal Government can leverage and support the use of new technologies to engage communities, build and mobilize networks against violent extremism, and undercut terrorist narratives. All of our activities should consider how technology impacts radicalization to violence and the ways we can use it to expand and improve our whole-of-government effort.
(‘Opportunities’ for the internet and social networking using ‘new technologies’… What are these new technologies? Could it have something to do with automated logging of all internet activity while building profiles on individuals?)
It is important to recognize that the National Strategy for Empowering Local Partners represents the first time the United States Government has outlined an approach to address ideologically inspired violent extremism in the Homeland. While the objectives and sub-objectives listed in the SIP represent the collective wisdom and insight of the United States Government about what areas of action have the greatest potential to prevent violent extremism, we will learn more about our effectiveness as we assess our efforts over time, and we will adjust our activities accordingly.
(The government program will look to identify people with ‘ideology’ that fits a definition which is apparently yet to be defined.)
The Federal Government will help broker agreements on partnerships to counter violent extremism between communities and local government and law enforcement to help institutionalize this locally focused approach.
(‘Institutionalize’. To make part of a structured and usually well-established system. In other words, to make it ‘normal’)
DHS and DOJ will work to increase support for local, community-led programs and initiatives to counter violent extremism, predominantly by identifying opportunities within existing appropriations for incorporating CVE (countering violent extremism) as an eligible area of work for public safety, violence prevention, and community resilience grants.
(CVE ‘an eligible area of work’… Is this going to be something like a new TSA-type of bureaucracy?)
Based on direction from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), DHS led an effort to improve the analysis of homegrown violent extremism, including analytic tools to share with State, local, and tribal partners.
(Will the ‘analytic tools’ violate any of our constitutional rights?)
…requiring careful consideration of a number of legal issues, especially those related to the First Amendment. In many instances, it will be more effective to empower communities to develop credible alternatives that challenge violent extremist narratives rather than having the Federal Government attempt to do so.
(Looking for ways to silence the First Amendment perhaps?)
Our planned actions include Providing grants to counter violent extremist narratives and ideologies…
(Uh-oh, ‘grants’… Oh, that’s right, they can print as much money as they want…)
In summary, while we hope that the government will take the high road, an unfortunate realism is that when granted more power, more power corrupts, absolutely…
Be Prepared. If you enjoyed this, or topics of current events risk awareness and survival preparedness, click here to check out our current homepage articles…
Do you know the difference between being extremely specific (exact) and being vague is? Being dead on and clear means that a law stands as it is, there is no real room for interpretation, it is like it sounds. Now for a law or regulation that is vague or opaque, it is not easily understood, it leaves room for change, a lot of change. When something is not clear it gives power to those that have to be used to define it, the wonderful lawyers for one. When something can be shown to have many meanings it allows for those in charge to tweak it and bend it to FIT their own agendas. These plans are written for this reason, to be manipulated to whatever someone sees as necessary for the future without having to go back and pass something else. This gives much power to those that are part of this or anything PASSED.
When you look at the law of the land, you have to be an attorney with a law degree to be able to go into court and defend yourself in civil or criminal cases because there are so many meanings and references to a certain law or set of laws, it is not clear. Now something such as tax court is totally cut and dry, the laws here are usually very clear and you are either guilty or innocent of tax fraud, there is no real wiggle room here, it has been made this way for this purpose. The all mighty dollar talks and BS walks.
Another reason for the vagueness of this law is not to offend certain groups, While the media and government representives talk of some Timothy Mcveigh or that nut job that tried to assassinate that poor congresswomen, the REAL meaning of homegrown extremism is RADICAL U.S. MUSLIM. Those do not want to OFFEND those of Islam, but what the government is truly saying is that they are after Arabs and Muslim supporters, because they are the next likely terrorists.
I can totally understand targeting a specific group or belief as the probable attacker, after all you don’t hear any other group talk about death to America more than from Islam. This prissy, let’s not upset anyone, is what bothers me. In the government and media, let’s say what we really mean, especially when it comes to the laws passed. Everyone is so terrified to offend one group, even though they exactly mean what they say behind more comfortable, polite, and word friendly gestures.
Almost everyone in the media will not admit, but the next large scale terrorist attack on this country will very likely come from Islam. So what’s to hide, the group or religion that hates the United States the most is the next attacker? Not to say it cannot come from some group that hates the country, but if you were to place a bet, let’s hope odds makers do not have this morbid betting choice, which group of individuals will be the next attackers it would be Muslims.
The unfortunate circumstances from this plan for homegrown extremism is that some of the liberties that we cherish will probably be gone in the future because it will be used by those seeking advantages in power and their careers will abuse it. Terrible shame the government cannot be clear and defined with what could be a good safety and protection measure for all of us.
I doubt you’ll find a country that won’t see our government guilty of the most violent extremism in the history of man kind. This appears to be a preempted attempt to label Americans who wish to return the power to the people as violent extremists, when all along it is the law makers who swore to defend the constitution who are traitors.
hear, hear!
“High-Level American Officials Admit that the United States Uses False Flag Terror … And Warn of Future Attacks”
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/06/high-level-american-officials-admit-that-the-united-states-uses-false-flag-terror-and-warn-of-future-attacks.html
Unless law enforcement sees the error of the ways of their leadership, they will be sadly mistaken if they think they will be able to simply go home and relax after a hard day of cracking American skulls. They would soon be forced to move into “Green Zones” to protect themselves from the very people they are “policing”. And with them gathered in a Viet Nam style encampment, they will be easily found and concentrated for retribution from the very angry Americans who’s skulls they cracked earlier.
Internment / Resettlement Specialist
WOW.
@ Travis Hancock. Wonderful little piece of information for a nice Sunday. I triple the WOW exclamation. I like the under helpful skills it says: ability to think, that really says it all doesn’t it?
Clever piece of psyops used to con young and impressionable minds into believing they are thinking their brainwashed thoughts all on their own. I can’t wait to get my hands on those perverts who work their shit on our youths minds. I won’t be using psyops on them….it will be all hardware….
@All; Welcome violent extremists! Now you are one. Don’t think that you aren’t. You will have to answer for the fact that you are here on this site. Mouse or man; coward or hero? Chiller, I have tools…hardware…….I’m going to enjoy this, my favorite color is GREEN! You know, Hitler was elected. And elected in a society that eschewed violence due to their horrific losses in WW I. All that is necessary is that good people do nothing. The camel’s nose is not in the tent, his ass is!. Kill the camel now or delay it and fight for your life later. Simple math. Survive well. Enjoy.
man… anyone read Revelation lately? being locked up & imprisoned or killed for religious beliefs doesn’t seem so far fetched these days…
An interesting juxtaposition: Your latest post about internet censorship and the fact that you deleted my comment asking CHILLER to explain his comment “I doubt you’ll find a country that won’t see our government guilty of the most violent extremism in the history of man kind.” Is it out of bounds to ask this question?
@SweetPea, CountryGirl, GoneWithTheWind… You are all one in the same person (sorry to burst your bubble). Your comments are all from the same IP address. The reason your comment of reference (and several other of yours) never saw the light of day, is because those particular comments didn’t follow the ‘Comment Policy‘ that everyone is instructed to read prior to doing so. Often your comments fit the ‘troll’ definition to a T. Also, unfortunately, some other of your comments are personally berating to individuals. This is not accepted here. Additionally, for you to attempt to compare this sort of thing to the notion of government censorship of the internet is more than quite-a-stretch. The government does not own the internet, while I do own this internet site. It’s quite different.
@Ken; Seriously? I feel…sooo dirty. They are the same “persona”? OMFG! I’m so sorry I bit and took the bait on the other FLAMING post. Please explain what a troll is, to me now. I only know trolls by what my Meme said they were. If I had only known, I mean I was pissed and aggravated with the diatribe of continual nitpicking. I should have maintained my cool, but at some point you blow. My bad. Thanks for watching over us. If I am wrong, I don’t mind being wrong. JUST PROVE ME WRONG, that’s all I ask. Use facts and prove me wrong using logic and critical thinking skills, and I’ll apologize…….begrudgingly, but I will apologize. Survive well. Enjoy. Sweetpea, CountryGirl and GoneWithTheWind, I’ll remember those names. ESAD!!!