What A Shock! - Napolitano Pulls BS Report About Right Wing Extremists

from The Washington Times
By Audrey Hudson
May 15, 2009

Report citing veteran extremism is pulled
Napolitano: Not vetted

A contentious "Rightwing Extremism" report that warned of military veterans as possible recruits for terrorist attacks against the U.S. was not authorized, has been withdrawn and is being rewritten, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told Capitol Hill lawmakers.

"The wheels came off the wagon because the vetting process was not followed," Ms. Napolitano told the House Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday.

"The report is no longer out there," she said. "An employee sent it out without authorization."

The report was shared with state and local law enforcement officials nationwide via the department's internal Web site on April 7, angering Republican lawmakers and military veterans who said it unfairly stereotyped veterans.

Ms. Napolitano did not say when the report was taken off the "intel Web site" and all Homeland Security Department Web sites, but she said it is in the process of being "replaced or redone in a much more useful and much more precise fashion."

Rep. Christopher Carney, Pennsylvania Democrat, said that as a veteran he "took offense personally," and his constituents were offended by the report as well.

"It really hit home hard to me and in our district," Mr. Carney said. "It's not a good start when I go to town hall meetings and I hear people calling for your resignation."

Ms. Napolitano said the report titled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," is not the only report she has seen that says veterans are targets for recruitment by racist and other hate groups.

"It was an assessment, not an accusation," Ms. Napolitano said.

"It didn't say that," Mr. Carney interrupted.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Verbal Terrorism by an ACORN mob again

photoshop credit Leo Alberti

This isn't free speech, this is verbal terrorism. I don't have any problem with protesters being their, because that all by itself visually indicates their disagreement with that particular foreclosure process. That's their free speech.

However, they don't have the right to disrupt. That's not free speech.
Rees

Health hazard: ACORN mob strikes
from Michelle Malkin.com
By Michelle Malkin
April 28, 2009 09:05 PM

They’re baaaaack. The housing entitlement mobsters of ACORN menaced a Sacramento foreclosure auction event today — and helped send an auctioneer to the hospital with chest pains. Homeland security alert, Ja-No? Left-wing extremism is on the rise:

A large crowd of protesters disrupted several foreclosure auctions today on the Sacramento County Courthouse steps, winning temporary cancellation of one Sacramento foreclosure and sending an auctioneer to the hospital with chest pains.

Bidders on the homes, all declining to provide their names, called the ACORN protest the first major disruption of an established auction schedule that plays out every weekday at the courthouse following 37,000 foreclosures in the capital region since Jan. 2007…

..As the first auction was to begin at 9:30 a.m. on the Sacramento County Courthouse steps, Los Angeles ACORN member Kathleen Thompson-Boons asked an unidentified auctioneer with LPS Financial Services of Sacramento “to stop the auction.”

When the auctioneer resumed seeking bids from nine potential bidders, Thompson-Boons asked again, prompting the auctioneer to say, “If you’re not going to bid, then go away.”

Seconds later, protesters surrounded the group, chanting, blowing whistles and creating a commotion that made it impossible to hear. The auctioneer, who had a pacemaker according to associates, began to collapse and was later taken to a local hospital.

The protest continued for about 90 minutes. ACORN members left after cheering a concession by LPS Financial Services to cancel a specific requested foreclosure auction for one Sacramento family. Minutes later, as the group left, the auctions resumed as scheduled.

Click to read the article and comments

McCain's Border Impotence Has Cost Him His Job - Meet His Replacement!

When Chris Simcox is elected U.S. Senator from Arizona, the tides in Washington will shift and NO ONE in Washington will be able to silence us any longer!!!

As President of the MCDC, Chris Simcox has:

*spent weeks and months on the Mexican border

*seen the mounds of evidence left in the trails of illegal immigrants

*personally discovered Islamic paraphernalia along the border

*seen the human corpses of illegal aliens left behind by their smugglers

*witnessed the tons of narcotics seized by U.S. Border Patrol

*experienced the horror of drug cartel and gang violence sweeping Phoenix and other cities

NO ONE can deny his leadership and experience in helping to expose the dangerous flood of illegal aliens into our cities and towns!

House GOP: Napolitano must go

from Hot Air.com
by Allahpundit
4-22-2009

She doesn’t know immigration law or how the 9/11 hijackers got here, and she can’t manage a report on a topic as sensitive as domestic terrorism without insulting vets, but hey — at least she doesn’t owe back taxes. Who could have guessed that the title of Most Hapless Obama Appointee would pass so soon from Geithner?

Nothing says “smart power” like having foreign media wonder how your chief of security got her job.

House Republicans are calling on Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to step down or be fired in the wake of a controversial department memo that has sparked indignant battle cries from conservatives and some veterans.

“Singling out political opponents for working against the ruling party is precisely the tactic of every tyrannical government from Red China to Venezuela,” said Texas Rep. John Carter, a member of the party’s elected leadership who has organized an hour of floor speeches Wednesday night to call for Napolitano’s ouster. “The first step in the process is creating unfounded public suspicion of political opponents, followed by arresting and jailing any who continue speaking against the regime.”

Click to read the rest of the Hot Air article and comments

Here is the article from The National Post

The border for dummies
National Post editorial board
National Post Published: Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Can someone please tell us how U. S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano got her job?

She appears to be about as knowledgeable about border issues as a late-night radio call-in yahoo.

In an interview broadcast Monday on the CBC, Ms. Napolitano attempted to justify her call for stricter border security on the premise that "suspected or known terrorists" have entered the U. S. across the Canadian border, including the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack.

All the 9/11 terrorists, of course, entered the United States directly from overseas. The notion that some arrived via Canada is a myth that briefly popped up in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and was then quickly debunked.

Informed of her error, Ms. Napolitano blustered: "I can't talk to that. I can talk about the future. And here's the future. The future is we have borders."

Just what does that mean, exactly?

Just a few weeks ago, Ms. Napolitano equated Canada's border to Mexico's, suggesting they deserved the same treatment. Mexico is engulfed in a drug war that left more than 5,000 dead last year, and which is spawning a spillover kidnapping epidemic in Arizona. So many Mexicans enter the United States illegally that a multi-billion-dollar barrier has been built from Texas to California to keep them out.

In Canada, on the other hand, the main problem is congestion resulting from cross-border trade. Not quite the same thing, is it?
Click to read the article and comments

Napolitano:"crossing the border is not a crime per se." Yes, she really said that.

Bulletin: Napalatano changes the immigration law all by herself. At least it looks that way. Wow, I didn't know her DHS position had that authority but I guess it does.

Question: Do we need to vote anymore? Does it make any difference? Obama's administration seems to be doing pretty much whatever they want. If they can't get it passed through the congress and senate, they'll just back door it.
Rees

Janet Napolitano said what?
from Michell Malkin.com
By Michelle Malkin
April 21, 2009

She said this on CNN over the weekend:

KING: A lot of Democrats in Congress want to you investigate [Joe Arpaio]. They think he is over the line. He says he is just enforcing the law and the problem is the federal government.

NAPOLITANO: Well, you know, Sheriff Joe, he is being very political in that statement, because he knows that there aren’t enough law enforcement officers, courtrooms or jail cells in the world to do what he is saying.

What we have to do is target the real evil-doers in this business, the employers who consistently hire illegal labor, the human traffickers who are exploiting human misery.

And yes, when we find illegal workers, yes, appropriate action, some of which is criminal, most of that is civil, because crossing the border is not a crime per se. It is civil. But anyway, going after those as well.

Full transcript here.

Julie Kirchner gently reminds the DHS Secretary of what the law actually says:

ENTRY WITHOUT INSPECTION IS A CRIME: In fact, pursuant to 8 U.S.C.
1325, crossing the border illegally is a crime–a misdemeanor for the first offense and a felony for the second and subsequent offenses. But of course, ignoring or mischaracterizing the law is a very convenient way for those in power to avoid the laws they find most inconvenient. Sadly, statements such as these are also a signal that Americans will have to wait a long time before their government articulates any credible immigration enforcement policy.

Jena McNeill at The Foundry sees through Napolitano’s parsing:

This ‘interpretation’ of the law by Secretary Napolitano seems to be the latest in an effort by the Obama Administration to scale back interior immigration enforcement efforts in the United States. As recently as March 28th, Napolitano made the decision to delay a series of immigration raids and other workplace actions aimed at finding illegal workers. At the same time, both President Obama and Secretary Napolitano have announced new initiatives intending to send the message that they take the issues at the southern border seriously. But the Administration cannot fight cartels while ignoring illegal immigration—people smuggling is part of the problem, not a separate issue. Legalization will only make matters worse. Granting the people here illegally asylum will only encourage more illegal border crossing. Likewise, failing to enforce workplace and immigration laws will only encourage more to ignore the law.

Yep, that’s The Plan.
***
There is now a Fire Napolitano website.
Click to read the article and comments

The Elite "Anti-America" Club

Can you name all the members?

photo collage by Rees

Don't be saying that Naughty "T" word! No, not Treasury, Terrorism!

If we can't say Terrorism, rather than 'Man-Caused Disaster', how about:
-Religion-Caused Disaster
-Religious Zealot-Caused Disaster
-Crazed Religious Zealot-Caused Disaster
or my favorite all-inclusive term:
-Islam-Caused Disaster
My last suggestion pretty much covers 99% of all the terrorist acts being committed.
Rees

Obama-Speak: Homeland Security Secretary Replaces 'Terrorism' With the Term 'Man-Caused Disaster'

Even as President Obama compares bankers to suicide bombers, his Homeland Security Secretary is suggesting the T-word, terrorism, is too inflammatory and representative of old-fashioned "politics of fear." She's announced a new term: "man-caused disaster." From an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel:

SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word "terrorism." Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?

NAPOLITANO: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word "terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.

But what if the suicide bomber is a female? Isn't it sexist to use "man-caused disaster"?
Click to go to the article