It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Defense Department guide calls Founding Fathers ‘extremist’

page: 2
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 09:05 PM
link   
www.smithsonianmag.com...

Someone once said if you send a white guy and black guy back in time that the white guy would be in awe like, "wow there's George Washington one of our founding fathers I about to go talk to him." The black guy would be like, "run n!&&@ its George Washington!" I guess my point is as great a country we are now and I'm grateful for their vision and sacrifice, I'm not going to make them out to be angels imo they like a lot of people in charge were morally bankrupt.

Replace George Washington with Thomas Jefferson. ..Washington did free his slaves but Thomas Jefferson wasn't a great man what so ever.
edit on 23-8-2013 by Jahari because: (no reason given)


But on topic yes I would consider a revolutionary extreme.


edit on 23-8-2013 by Jahari because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 09:11 PM
link   
should be called stupidity, Brain dead of the modern caveman aka. defense department



posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Bassago
 


What is really telling here is this snippet.


The guide also repeatedly tells readers to use the Southern Poverty Law Center as a resource in identifying “hate groups.” The SPLC has previously come under fire for its leftist bias and tendency to identify conservative organizations....


This is the same SPLC that has identified Ron Paul supporters, as if they fit within
an extremeist category. Mind you, the DHS employee preparing for race wars also
is in the SPLC puplications.

Madness, sheer madness.
They are calling good evil.


S&F


ETA: this is DOD....wth?
edit on 23-8-2013 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 09:27 PM
link   
So I found the document the article is referring to here.

However, in that 133 pages the 'offending' part is as follows:

The colonists who sought to free themselves from Britishrule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are justtwo examples.


So...again, 133 pages and this one half of a sentence is the only thing that we're focusing on.

There are extremist right-wing organizations and individuals. I see nothing wrong with the document itself.



posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 09:32 PM
link   
So I guess this leaves us with a rather large problem. How do we begin to turn this tide back against those who would destroy everything that made this country great? Communication comes to mind. We need to communicate with those in the upper levels of the DoD and 1) let them know we stand against this anti-American philosophy and 2) try to find out which of the upper ranks believes as we do. With the NSA spying email seems like a dangerous option. Ideas?



posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by links234
So I found the document the article is referring to here.

However, in that 133 pages the 'offending' part is as follows:

The colonists who sought to free themselves from Britishrule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are justtwo examples.


So...again, 133 pages and this one half of a sentence is the only thing that we're focusing on.

There are extremist right-wing organizations and individuals. I see nothing wrong with the document itself.


from the OP link:

Besides a brief reference to 9/11 and another to the Sudanese civil war, the guide makes no mention of Islamic extremism.
Hmmm.




There are extremist right-wing organizations and individuals. I see nothing wrong with the document itself.
AND, there are Ultra-Extremist Left-wing organizations and individuals too !!

--- Just thought I would keep the table level.

Looks like they used the old "Silence Is Golden" routine.

What they DON'T say is sometimes more revealing than what they DO say !!




edit on Aug-23-2013 by xuenchen because:




posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Read the document, it mentions left-wing extremists: Anarchists, eco-warriors, black seperatists. The document mentions the Pol-Pot communist massacres as well.

It mentions a wide range of extremist organizations in broad, generalized terms.



posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by links234
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Read the document, it mentions left-wing extremists: Anarchists, eco-warriors, black seperatists. The document mentions the Pol-Pot communist massacres as well.

It mentions a wide range of extremist organizations in broad, generalized terms.


Well now your getting somewhere !!

Can you quote some directly ?

[ I wonder if that would have been mentioned if I hadn't posted ? Hmmm ]



posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by links234
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Read the document, it mentions left-wing extremists: Anarchists, eco-warriors, black seperatists. The document mentions the Pol-Pot communist massacres as well.

It mentions a wide range of extremist organizations in broad, generalized terms.


So you zip-read through 133 pages and found found references to "left-wing extremists: Anarchists, eco-warriors, black separatists and Pol-Pot?" You're really fast.

Personally I'm unconcerned with the likes of Pol-Pot. It's when they target groups that believe in individual freedoms and state rights I worry. That makes those pushing this training traitors to the USA. Very simple.



posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Well, right wrong or indifferent, THIS part is interesting...


Extremists Traits
1. What type of person belongs to an extremist group or follows an extremist ideology?The terms extremism or extremist are almost always applied by others to a group rather than by a group labeling itself. People within an extremist group will deny that they practice or advocate violence; instead they would more likely call themselves political radicals.
2.According to George and Wilcox, there are a number of specific traits or behaviors that tend to represent the extremist style. As a caution, we are all fallible human beings, and some of us may resort to these behaviors from time to time without bad intentions. With extremists, these lapses are not occasional; rather, they are habitual and a strongly established part of an extremist’s character.
a.Character assassination
b.Name calling and labeling
c.Irresponsive sweeping generalizations
d.Inadequate proof behind assertions
e.Tendency to view opponents and critics as essentially evil
f.Dualism worldview
g.Tendency to argue by intimidation
h.Use of slogans, buzzwords, and thought-stopping clichés
i.Assumption of moral superiority over others
j.Doomsday thinking
k.Belief that it’s okay to do bad things in the service of a “good” cause
l.Tendency to personalize hostility
m.Emphasis on emotional responses, less so on reasoning and logical analysis
n.Hypersensitivity and vigilance
o.Use of supernatural rationales for beliefs and actions
p.Advocacy of double standards

(Visit the document for explanations of the traits)

Seems to describe a significant portion of ATS now a days, doesn't it?

Maybe it's time to contemplate our navel for a spell....



posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Montana
Well, right wrong or indifferent, THIS part is interesting...


Extremists Traits
With extremists, these lapses are not occasional; rather, they are habitual and a strongly established part of an extremist’s character.
a.Character assassination
b.Name calling and labeling
c.Irresponsive sweeping generalizations
d.Inadequate proof behind assertions
e.Tendency to view opponents and critics as essentially evil
f.Dualism worldview
g.Tendency to argue by intimidation
h.Use of slogans, buzzwords, and thought-stopping clichés
i.Assumption of moral superiority over others
j.Doomsday thinking
k.Belief that it’s okay to do bad things in the service of a “good” cause
l.Tendency to personalize hostility
m.Emphasis on emotional responses, less so on reasoning and logical analysis
n.Hypersensitivity and vigilance
o.Use of supernatural rationales for beliefs and actions
p.Advocacy of double standards

(Visit the document for explanations of the traits)

Seems to describe a significant portion of ATS now a days, doesn't it?

Maybe it's time to contemplate our navel for a spell....


Actually I would not describe a significant portion of ATS like this at all. When I read this it seemed an absolute bulls-eye to our current government, particularly the executive branch and the democratic party. Personally I'm not and will never be a member of either political party, just call them as I see them.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Playing the Devil's advocate here, but I'm sure to the King and his court, the Founding Fathers were most certainly held to be extremists, after all, they caused a revolution, didn't they?



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Bassago
 


So what you're saying is, as long as you're not being described as an extremist it's ok?

reply to post by xuenchen
 


Page 39 descibes black seperatists:

Black Separatist– Typically oppose integration and racial intermarriage; want separateinstitutions or even a separate nation for Blacks. Most forms of Black separatism arestrongly anti-White and anti-Semitic, and a number of religious versions assert thatBlacks are the Biblical “chosen people” of God. Other groups espousing the same beliefswould be considered racist. The same criteria should be applied to all groups, regardlessof color.


Page 43 describes anarchists and eco-warriors:

Anarchism– A political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,or undesirable. National anarchists appeal to youths in part by avoiding the trappingsof skinhead culture—light jackets, shaved heads, and combat boots—in favor of hooded sweatshirts and bandanas. They act the part of stereotypical anarchists asenvisioned by most Americans outside of far-left circles: black-clad protesterswreaking havoc at political conventions and anti-globalization rallies.

Eco-Warriors– Environmental activist’s who take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals. An eco-warrior can be someone non-confrontational, such as a tree-sitter, or someone who engages in direct action.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by links234
 


Very good.

I will rescind 80% of my comment about commie infiltration.

The remaining 20% is up for grabs.

I need to see which groups have the most emphasis.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by links234
reply to post by Bassago
 


So what you're saying is, as long as you're not being described as an extremist it's ok?


What I said was that Pol-Pot was of little concern to me. As far as Black Separatists, if people want to have their own communities and institutions then my advice is to butt out and leave them alone. Anarchists, well maybe if the government wasn't so overreaching and doing so many illegal and unconstitutional things they wouldn't be a problem (if they even are now.)

This labeling of extremism is the same old story with corrupt power. Divide people and keep them suspicious of everyone else.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


I mentioned earlier that it's a pretty generalized document. There's no specific emphasis on one group over another. I'm suprised you're willing to rescind so much of your earlier commie comments. Here I was, thinking you were unreachable.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by links234
reply to post by xuenchen
 

I'm suprised you're willing to rescind so much of your earlier commie comments. Here I was, thinking you were unreachable.


Wow, like the personal attacks much?

edit on 24-8-2013 by Bassago because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Bassago
 


I am an extremist afterall.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Montana is absolutely right and has pointed out what for me is the most significant problem.
(By the way, the lesson involved is on pages 32-47 of the document, so you can save some time.)
The DOD has given a name to the evil doers, "Extremist," but they never seem to come up with a logical definition of it. This administration and, I suppose, earlier ones to some extent, have made an art of redefining words.

Remember Clinton with his problem with defining "is?" Or Obama's changing a major terrorist attck to a "man caused disater?" Or the government declaring that MAJ Hassan's attack at Ft. Hood resulting in so many deaths is "Workplace violence?" That's what's happening here. Look at the definitions they start off with:

• All nations have an ideology, something in which they believe. When a political ideology falls outside the norms of a society, it is known as extremism. When extremists take their ideology to the next level and believe that it is the only right ideology to follow, it becomes supremism.

Extremism – A term used to describe the actions or ideologies of individuals or groups who take a political idea to its limits, regardless of unfortunate repercussions, and show intolerance toward all views other than their own.

Extremist – A person who advocates the use of force or violence; advocates supremacist causes based on race, ethnicity, religion, gender, or national origin; or otherwise engages to illegally deprive individuals or groups of their civil rights.


So, they say, extremism is a political ideology falling outside the norms of society.

But they also say extremism is the action of individuals showing intolerance of all different views.

And, that extremism is taking ideas to their limits regardless of "unfortunate" repercussions.

But to be an extremist you must advocates violence or law breaking to deprive people of civil rights. or have supremacist ideas based on protected classes.

What is to be made of this dog's breakfast of confusion? Nothing at all. I believe that's the point. Any person or group may be declared an extremist under one of these categories, or be declared to have extremist characteristics under the list Montana quoted.

And yes, many, if not the majority, of ATS posters share many of these characteristics.

It is not a useful guide to anything, rather it is fear mongering.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Bassago
 




If the founders of our nation were extremist than I for one am happy to be in company with them.
Very sad for a human to say something like that,extremist sad!







 
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join