In the ultimate pass-the-buck-ness, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano blamed a low-level bureaucrat on the premature release of a report which cited returning veterans as being susceptible to the recruitment efforts of right-wing extremist groups:

Napolitano blamed one of her agency’s analysts for prematurely sending out the intelligence assessment to law enforcement, according to Craig Roberts, an American Legion member who attended the meeting. The report says veterans returning from Iraq or Afghanistan could be susceptible to right-wing recruiters or commit lone acts of violence.

“She essentially admitted fault within her office,” Roberts said.

Legion National Commander David Rehbein said, “I think the session in Secretary Napolitano’s office will go a long way to help our returning veterans in the future.”

After the meeting, Napolitano issued a statement saying the department “has fixed the internal process that allowed this document to be released before it was ready.”

Craig Roberts is right in that Napolitano “admitted fault within her office,” but she did – by no means – accept responsibility for the assertion. Rather, Napolitano explained that some number-crunching desk jockey flubbed, but who is ultimately responsible for the release of documents like this? Let’s not play the blame game, Janet. It happened under your watch; therefore, it’s your fault.

Also, Napolitano explained that DHS “has fixed the internal process that allowed this document to be released before it was ready.” Does this mean she fired the person who allowing the publication to go to print before she looked it over?

The point is, if Napolitano’s assertion is correct – that a report of this magnitude was published outside of her knowledge in her own department – then this should raise a red flag immediately. Does Napolitano know what she’s doing? Is she in control of her department? These are all very relevant and pertinent questions.

From the National Post:

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?

The gentleman in the top-center of this photograph is one of my good friends, Aaron. A few years ago, he decided to join the Marines. I am just speculating, but I would suggest that Aaron joined the Marines for two reasons: (1) a crazy devotion to the ideals and concepts outlined in the documents written by our Founding Fathers, and (2) a willingness to uphold those ideals so that his friends, family, and future generations may exercise the freedoms and rights granted to every Man.

Several days ago, however, the Department of Homeland Security – headed by former Governor Janet Napolitano – issued a study that suggested Aaron – and the thousands of other men and women just like him – might in some way attempt to subvert the government because of economic frustrations brought on by the events of the last 6 to 8 months.

In this study, entitled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” DHS officials targeted returning veterans from conflicts such as the first Gulf War in the early 1990s as “disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.” They went further by suggesting that some of these military men and women joined extremist groups, yet stopped short at naming anyone other than Timothy McVeigh.

I mean, if we’re going to say this problem is an epidemic – or that DHS should be spending a considerable amount of time on this issue – then let’s find maybe ONE other person? Just one?

Why not turn our attention to the domestic terrorists of the Left? SDS. The Weather Underground. Bernadine Dohrn. William Ayers. The countless other Leftist anti-Americans who sought to subvert the government in the ’60s and ’70s…

What is interesting to note is that this Administration has toned down the talk on global terrorism – oftentimes taking the word “terrorist” out of the discussion when referring to Muslim extremists – and ratcheted up the talk on domestic terrorists, or American military veterans to you and me. DHS even titled the investigation into these veterans and others as Operation Vigilant Eagle!!!

Now, I’m not saying that a member of the military would not go off half-cocked and attempt to do something irresponsible or dangerous, but so might the post man or an angry driver or the quiet man who works in the photo lab at the local Wal-Mart. I mean, why target one specific group? If you’re going to step up police state surveillance – hell – let’s watch EVERYBODY.

Homeland Security was wrong to issue such a report, and Napolitano was wrong to defend it so readily.

The Department of Homeland Security published a study indicating the rise of right-wing radicalism in the wake of economic trouble. The next logical leap for the Left would be to try to compare the Tea Party events to some sort of extremist organizing. Wait for it. Wait for it.

The April 7 report, which Reuters and other news media obtained Tuesday, said such fears were driving a resurgence in “recruitment and radicalization activity” by white supremacist groups, antigovernment extremists and militia movements. It did not identify any by name.

 

DHS had no specific information about pending violence and said threats had so far been “largely rhetorical.”

 

But it warned that home foreclosures, unemployment and other consequences of the economic recession “could create a fertile recruiting environment for right-wing extremists.”

 

“To the extent that these factors persist, right-wing extremism is likely to grow in strength,” DHS said.