The Government Will Never Hurt Good People…….

We are re-visiting history again in 2013.  A recent Washington Times article highlights a recently published paper from a seriously agenda driven “think tank” member, Arie Perliger.  [learn more about Arie Perliger here]

-2(Via Washington Times)  A West Point think tank has issued a paper warning America about “far right” groups such as the “anti-federalist” movement, which supports “civil activism,  individual freedoms and self-government.”

The report issued this week by the Combating  Terrorism Center at the U.S. Military  Academy at West Point, N.Y., is titled “Challengers from the Sidelines:  Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right.”

The center — part of the  institution where men and women are molded into Army officers — posted the  report Tuesday. It lumps limited government activists with three movements it  identifies as “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement  and a fundamentalist movement.”

The West Point center typically focuses reports on al  Qaeda and other Islamic extremists attempting to gain power in Asia, the  Middle East and Africa through violence.

But its latest study turns inward and paints a broad brush of people it  considers “far right.”

Eat Your own Damn PeasIt says anti-federalists “espouse strong convictions regarding the federal  government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural  tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights. Finally,  they support civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government.  Extremists in the anti-federalist movement direct most their violence against  the federal government and its proxies in law  enforcement.”

The report also draws a link between the mainstream conservative movement and  the violent “far right,” and describes liberals as “future oriented” and  conservatives as living in the past.

“While liberal worldviews are future- or progressive -oriented, conservative  perspectives are more past-oriented, and in general, are interested in  preserving the status quo.” the report says. “The far right represents a more  extreme version of conservatism, as its political vision is usually justified by  the aspiration to restore or preserve values and practices that are part of the  idealized historical heritage of the nation or ethnic community.”

Tea Party sign 2The report adds: “While far-right groups’ ideology is designed to exclude  minorities and foreigners, the liberal-democratic system is designed to  emphasize civil rights, minority rights and the balance of power.”

The report says there were 350 “attacks initiated by far-right  groups/individuals” in 2011.

Details about what makes an attack a “far right” action are not clear in the  report, which was written by Arie Perliger, who directs the center’s  terrorism studies and teaches social sciences at West Point.  (read more)

The report pdf is available HERE  Then consider this well written deconstruction which outlines the strategy of the progressive movement and their intentions at defining the new danger.  CLICK HERE


This entry was posted in A New America, CIA, Clinton(s), Communist, Conspiracy ?, media bias, Political correctness/cultural marxism, Potus Gun Ban, Socialist, States, Statism, Tea Party, Uncategorized, United Nations. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to The Government Will Never Hurt Good People…….

  1. 22tula says:

    Crosstalk – News Round Up – January 18, 2013
    Jim Schneider – West Point @ 2:39

    “West Point: ‘Far Right’ Dangerous To U.S.”
    by Michael Carl

    “The Corner”
    By John Fund – January 18, 2013


  2. jordan2222 says:

    So…….. I am now considered to be an unlawful/illegal combatant. If I were to wear a red, white and blue uniform, what would I be? Uh, oh.. I think I am having an identity crisis.


    • allhail2 says:

      Welcome to the club. Between this nonsense and the gun control BS, the government would essentially criminalize 1/2 – 2/3 of the country. The question is this if they have thought it out this far, exactly what are they going to do with MASSIVE non compliance? The different angles and positions the feds are taking regarding different issues are going to create some interesting bedfellows in response to the power grabs.


  3. 22tula says:

    Lt. General Jerry Boykin (Ret. – USA) – December 22, 2012

    West Point – Before Its News – January 5, 2013

    “The Lie of ‘Separation of Church and State’ & the U.S. Supreme Court’s Usurpations of Power” By Publius Huldah – June 19, 2009; revised October 24, 2010

    “God’s Gift of Unalienable Rights & Article VI of the Constitution:
    The Sword & Shield to stop islamization of America.”
    By Publius Huldah – September 19, 2010
    Post Script,(video), added July 22, 2011


  4. Sharon says:

    From the article, 2013:

    “While liberal worldviews are future- or progressive -oriented, conservative perspectives are more past-oriented, and in general, are interested in preserving the status quo.”

    From Woodrow Wilson (again!), 1912 Presidential Campaign

    All that progressives ask or desire is permission–in an era when “development,” “evolution,” is the scientific word–to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact [1] that a nation is a living thing and not a machine.

    Some citizens of this country have never got beyond the Declaration of Independence, signed in Philadelphia, [2] July 4th, 1776. Their bosoms swell against George III, but they have no consciousness of the war for freedom that is going on today[3] .

    [1] Look at the language of Woodrow Wilson and compare it to just that one line from the article; the same nonsense we’ve heard echoed over and over again in the last 10 years–accusations about the status quo, accusations that anyone who is unwilling to destroy our foundations for some supposed “new cause” is thereby obviously in favor of deliberately and unnecessarily injuring whole groups of people

    [2] President Wilson had his information wrong. The Declaration of Independence was not signed on July 4th, 1776. It was first voted on and approved on July 2nd, 1776 (12 colonies affirming; New York abstaining). An identical vote was taken on July 4th, 1776 (12 colonies affirming, New York abstaining). No signing of any kind.

    After the July 4 vote: Congress ordered that the document be authenticated and printed. But it would be another month before the engrossed copy was signed by the delegates. p. 136,

    The actual signing of the document would not take place until Friday, August 2… p. 137

    John Adams, (David McCullough)

    [3] “the war for freedom that is going on today” The intentional straw man tossed up by Woodrow Wilson sounds familiar, doesn’t it? It’s the same language we’re constantly hearing now–phrasings that assume that “everybody knows” that there are brand new causes afoot in the land, brand new abuses shedding blood all around us–brand new things that require brand new foundations. This approach is not original and did not begin when King Obama I took the throne. It has been around for at least one hundred years and counting.

    The question is: Why do progressives hate our Constitution? The reasons/excuses they give are flimsy and phony. So, what is the real reason that they hate our Constitution?


    • griz1234 says:

      Because it prevents them from doing the things they want to do.

      As the founding fathers intended.


      • Coast says:

        I think you’re right. Sadly the general public thinks that the Constitution provides a framework for our rights, when in reality it provides a framework for what government can and cannot do to our rights. Big difference. Recently at work, there was a short article on the Constitution written by our HR department. It was talking about how government employees, upon hiring, take an oath to the constitution, and how that document provides for our rights. This gave me an opportunity to give my staff a good lesson on what it really does…including talking about the 1st and 2nd amendment. I also gave them a copy of this:
        I had very favorable feedback and zero complaints, out of a staff of 22 people..


    • howie says:

      Because the Bill of Rights is not compatible with a totalitarian police state.


  5. Sharon says:

    In case we need a fresh reminder of how “good people” get turned into “bad people” by just turning up the volume:

    If Andrew Cuomo’s outright dishonesty is not enough, former Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, who also supported frivolous lawsuits against the gun industry, added still more outrage. These words should mobilize all supporters of the Bill of Rights, and alienate his own side in the bargain:

    “…the good thing about Newtown is, it was so horrific that I think it galvanized Americans to a point where the intensity on our side is going to match the intensity on their side.


    Read more:


    • howie says:

      All these op’s were in the can. Ready to go with fast and furious. When that flopped they were put on the shelf to await the next incident like the school murders. Media and the Crats took them down, dusted, them off, and off they went.


  6. lovemygirl says:

    I mentioned the other night that Barack appointed Holder to see which “dangerous” groups might have fallen through the cracks for the no gun list… I’m thinking we may fall onto that list soon.


    • lovemygirl says:

      The West Point paper (p. 17 caught my attention) coupled with the following Executive Order.
      4. Direct the attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.


  7. Sentenza says:

    There are no dangerous weapons, there are only dangerous men.


    • howie says:

      Yep. It appears that one portion of the new democracy (majority rules when there is no constitution) has nothing in common with another portion of this society. Irreconcilable differences. There should be a divorce. Maybe some restraining orders. ( don’t we wish)
      There can be no common good when the parties have nothing in common.


      • chevymisty says:

        This just reminds me of my Husbands ideal government. I mean its still not perfect…but it might just work alright. In his government there are three Groups and just for the sake of not typing it all out every time there is Group A Group B and Group C. Group A will have everything handed to them. Grey Jump suits for clothing, communal housing (one room with a kitchen) free food (Cheese, Milk, Water, Bread, you know the basics) And that’s about it. They wont get much more than that but they will be alive and well and wont have to work. Group B can and will (depending on their income) have whatever they want. They will work hard and pay for there things. None of their income will go to the other groups. (Group A will mainly be ran off of income brought in by the government as the government will be run like a business and not a government). IF the B’s can afford it they will have it. Of they can’t they wont. Group C is your criminals. Will more than likely be ran by the mob. They will be in a barricaded walled off “city” of their own. If they try anything on the A’s and B’s they will be bombed at their own expense. Any one person (as long as their crimes are not to horrible) can be interchanged between all three groups. You no longer wanna work. Well you are now an A unless your family will take you in. You are an A but you wanna work now? great come find a job. Once a criminal but no more? done your time willing to change come over to A or B. Everyone gets what they want.

        Like I said a few kinks here and there still and he can explain it better than I but that’s the main jist of it.


    • texan59 says:

      “Once the resistance has been demonized, its members will be quickly identified and denounced by the compliant citizenry, labeled as the enemy, and be dealt with by law”

      In case they aren’t sure, I’m self-identifying right now. Come and get me. 👿


  8. Wraith says:

    …which supports “civil activism, individual freedoms and self-government.”

    When this became seen as ‘dangerous,’ that’s when America died.


  9. recoverydotgod says:

    At the link….wikipedia is quoted. What I notice is the Combating Terrorism Center was established with private funding.
    The Combating Terrorism Center is an academic institution at the United States Military Academy (USMA) in West Point, New York that provides education, research and policy analysis in the specialty areas of terrorism, counterterrorism, homeland security and weapons of mass destruction. Established with private funding in 2003, it operates under the aegis of the Department of Social Sciences of the USMA. – Source: Wikipedia

    Here’s a couple links:


  10. czarowniczy says:

    We called West Point officers ‘ring knockers’ as some would, when trying to impress you with their lineage, tap the ring on the table to let you know they were from the Point. Don’t read too much into the report – the military, as a whole, is not about to start espousing the principles of the left any time soon. West Point is a military college that is staffed with a lot of non-military instructors who are picked for their knowledge in the area they are hired to teach in, not their political viewpoints. West Point is a professional military leader (bureaucrat) institution and does not produce all of the Army’s officers, just those that are generally (no pun intended) thought of a lifers and professionals. Most officers are grads of public schools and while the Point grads may look down their noses at them, it’s the person and not the school that makes a leader. I’ve served under officers from the Point, ROTC and direct commissioning and have found great leaders, as well as toads, from all of the venues. The students at the Point are about as likely to buy leftist propaganda produced by the staff as those in public schools, and for a person to make a career in the military you just about have to love country over cash. There are some strange ducks out there ( the late Gen Shalikashvili comes immediately to mind) but their influence tends to dilute over time. I worry less about leftist officers invading the ranks than I do a leftist president incrementally turning the military over to non-US control. I can see the POtuS downsizing our military, turning the remainder into a ‘national defense’ force and to ensure that it won’t be a force for projecting oppressive American colonialism force overseas, allowing a NGO (UN) to have a say in how it’s used. Clinton came cklose to that and I’m seeing traces of that in this mis-Administration.


  11. rocker124 says:

    This is an interesting article about gun control and the effect that it is having on our population.

    I hope I am not posting too many articles from other blogs, but I think it is important to share good articles. at least it is encouraging to find out we are not alone.


  12. Pingback: Another example of background checks for gun owners targeting “mentally ill conservatives” – The Brenner Brief

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s