I've gone through the first three points on the list from the OP's source, and again it's all about how to recognize and respond to extremist groups
in the military such as neo-Nazi skinheads, black separatists and even Eco-extremists.
Membership and activities of such groups are prohibited for military members, but it points out that membership is not illegal for the public.
It shortly explains broad political terms, and the stages that extremist hate groups that advocate violence may go through, from taunting to attacks
without a weapon (looking for lone victims) to eventually attacks with weapons.
Essentially it's describing bullies, and they must be stopped at the outset.
The eventual culture of violence in such groups may also lead to splinter groups, and clashes between factions.
This document seems to be repeated, at least from points 1-3.
It says that extremists affiliated to hate groups don't usually view themselves as such, but rather as political activists or dissidents.
Added to this, such groups recruit people by appealing to certain issues: That is, they present themselves initially as groups concerned about
civil rights, when they ultimately want to deny other groups outside their defined in-group their equal civil rights.
Therefore hate groups initially draw members by pretending to be about very sound issues:
Nowadays, instead of dressing in sheets or publicly espousing hate messages, many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights, and
how to make the world a better place.
Nowhere does it say that everybody who is concerned with such issues is an extremist, it just cautions against specific recruitment techniques.
In the first point on the OP list it also goes into further documents on military policy, such as sexual harassment or rights for people over 40, and
the physically disabled.
Eventually it paints certain scenarios for discussion.
For example, how should a supervisor or commander deal with a Muslim who keeps making disparaging remarks about women holding certain jobs, or a
situation where a female keeps rubbing herself against a male?
Actually it is all very interesting - but a hit list?
Not unless one thinks skinhead neo-Nazis, Muslim extremists or black separatists should be running the US military.
Actually the descriptions are so concise and helpful that I plan to use them in future posts and other blogs.
I might not always agree with US policy, but I'm quite impressed with their military integration policies.
I'm sure they must have had problems with extremist groups in the past, so there are probably sound reasons for discussing such groups.
At least in the first documents there's not even a mention of regular Christianity, Islam, nationalism or gays.
It mainly talks about groups who give the Nazi salute!
Even ATS has policies on taunting, threats, racism, celebrating Hitler, character assassination and so forth.
Of course ATS doesn't bar people from belonging to certain organizations, but everyone must stick to the T&C.
I don't see how this is very different.
If people don't like the US military's employment criteria, they can always work somewhere else that welcomes supremacists and extremists.
That makes me wonder about the person who compiled this misleading list.
He seems to have compiled a list of alarmingly misleading information taken out of context.
For what kind of groups is he really trying to recruit?
So far the only synopsis I could find on Michael T. Snyder was a rather disparaging one from RationalWiki:
While I wouldn't insult this author for his fundamentalist Christian beliefs, I think linking his stream of Christian conspiracy to violent hate
groups really cannot do his cause any favors.
Is the cause of skinheads who use baseball bats on their victims the cause of fundamentalist Christians?
I'd hope not.
But I might be wrong, and maybe it's surfacing now, as some recent, extremely violent Islamist-style anti-gay "execution" rhetoric amongst certain US
Christian groups seems to suggest.
Whatever the case, if anyone is concerned by this it should be evangelical and fundamentalist Christians, because their causes and motivations have
been hijacked and linked to those of neo-Nazis, racial supremacists and hate groups by this list.
edit on 8-9-2013 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)