Occupy Wall Street

Department of Homeland Security Gives Occupy Wall Street the "Rightwing Extremist" Treatment

|

Occupy Wall Street and its sympathizers are livid over a five-page report found in the massive cache of Stratfor emails recently published by Wikileaks. Circulated in October and titled "SPECIAL COVERAGE: Occupy Wall Street," the DHS report in question is based largely on publicly available information, such as news stories and Twitter feeds. The "ominous" part, writes Rolling Stone's Michael Hastings, is the analysis: 

"The growing support for the OWS movement has expanded the protests' impact and increased the potential for violence. While the peaceful nature of the protests has served so far to mitigate their impact, larger numbers and support from groups such as Anonymous substantially increase the risk for potential incidents and enhance the potential security risk to critical infrastructure (CI). The continued expansion of these protests also places an increasingly heavy burden on law enforcement and movement organizers to control protesters. As the primary target of the demonstrations, financial services stands the sector most impacted by the OWS protests. Due to the location of the protests in major metropolitan areas, heightened and continuous situational awareness for security personnel across all CI sectors is encouraged."

The Atlantic Wire's John Hudson rounded up some liberal reactions to Hastings' scoop: 

"The DHS document appears to be more concerned with protecting the mechanisms of the financial sector than in ensuring the safety of citizens who are exercising their First Amendment rights," wrote Allison Kilkenny in Truthout. "The suppression of Occupy is nothing less than an attack on those who would try to exercises their civil liberties, their rights and seek to energize democracy," wrote Fire Dog Lake's Kevin Gosztola. The article was re-blogged across scores of Occupy tumblers including Anticapitalist, Occupy All Streets and #Occupy Wall Street.

On Current TV last night, host Cenk Uygur blasted the agency for focusing exclusively on Occupy Wall Street. "The Tea Party… that happens to be pro-corporate America is not anywhere to be found here [but] when Occupy Wall Street is not pro-corporate America, all of a sudden, they need to be investigated by the Department of Homeland Security." 

Hudson also notes that the Tea Party has been observed by DHS, and includes a link to a May 2009 DHS report titled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurrgence in Radicalization and Recruitment." While the report doesn't explicitly mention the Tea Party, it does describe a slice of the American electorate that the Tea Party represents: 

The Department of Homeland Security is warning law enforcement officials about a rise in "rightwing extremist activity," saying the economic recession, the election of America's first black president and the return of a few disgruntled war veterans could swell the ranks of white-power militias.

A footnote attached to the report by the Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines "rightwing extremism in the United States" as including not just racist or hate groups, but also groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority.

"It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration," the warning says.

It says the federal government "will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months" to gather information on "rightwing extremist activity in the United States."

Replace "white power militias" with "anarchist black blocs"; "abortion or immigration" with "health care or unions"; "federal authority" with "captured regulators," and the DHS report about right-wingers could be about Occupy Wall Street. 

Which is why I think it's odd that someone as passionate about civil liberties and the right to assemble as Cenk Uygur (and the rest of the lefties quoted above) could fail to see the forest for trees. The State does not care if people are "pro-Corporate America," just as it does not care if people are "pro-Obama" (as some folks interpreted from the DHS report on right-wing extremism). What the State cares about is order

a state in which the laws and rules regulating the public behavior of members of a community are observed and authority is obeyed

This is why, when the State decides you are not on its side, it doesn't matter whose side you're on; whether yours is a community of a diverse group of white all colors of religious fanatics living outside of Waco, or a group of black liberationists living in the heart of Philadelphia; if you're an Occupier or a Tea Partier. All of you are disruptors. That's what matters.  

NEXT: Bill Passes House: Protests Near Secret Service Protected Folk Effectively Outlawed

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “On Current TV last night, host Cenk Uygur blasted the agency for focusing exclusively on Occupy Wall Street. “The Tea Party… that happens to be pro-corporate America is not anywhere to be found here [but] when Occupy Wall Street is not pro-corporate America, all of a sudden, they need to be investigated by the Department of Homeland Security.”

    WAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH! Eat it loser!

    1. apparently, Cenk missed out on the part where the TP NEVER got into battles with cops, NEVER commandeered public land, NEVER left its space in a shambles, and NEVER demanded that it be given someone else’s money. Other than that, he’s right; they’re the same thing.

      BTW, were Cenk and his ilk equally pissed when a previous DHS report named vets and gun owners as threats to the republic? If he/they were, I missed it.

      1. So the tea party is a bunch of cowardly pussies? Is that what you’re saying?

        1. What a surprise.

        2. What a surprise.

        3. …can’t read.

          1. The potential for violence is more prevalent in the Occutard movement. Hell, some of these twats think they’re being driven towards it, forgetting they have free will and an ability to NOT commit violence.

            1. Determinism, it’s what’s for dinner.

        4. Don’t rape or kill anybody, don’t break anything = “Cowardly pussies”

    2. They arrested four OWSers in front of the AT&T building in Kansas City yesterday. They were protesting an organization called ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council). Never heard of ALEC, they look like a good group.

      Here is their link on repealing Obama care.

      http://www.alec.org/publicatio…..obamacare/

      1. ALEC is the legislative arm of the KOCHTOPUS. No wonder you like it, you teabagging redneck.

        1. Liberal comments are invariably of such a high caliber.

    3. I’m an attractive, caring, honest, good hearted women in search of bilover to explore bisexuality. I, so I got a profile(lily green) on –Datebi dot c’0m–. It’s the first and safe place for men and women looking for intimate encounters, casual encounters. Come in and discover the excitement you deserve! ^_^

  2. All of you are disruptors. That’s what matters.

    No!!! What matters are GOOD INTENTIONS!!! TEH CORPORASHUNS!! INSIDE JOB!! JOBS ARE RIGHTS!! CAPITALIZM HATES DEMONCRACY!! SMASH STORE WINDOWS!!

    1. No!!! What matters is VOLUNTARY SLAVERY!!! TEH GUMMIT!! UTOPIA OF GREED!! TREE HOUSE ZONING!! DOMOCRAZY HATES KRAPITALISM!! SWEEP ASIDE THOSE PARASITES!!

      1. GOLDON AGES ORIGINAL SINS OF MANS AGRGICULTUREESS R EVULS!!11!!!

        1. Anybody seen my bag of Hostess baked goods? I’ve got a long night ahead of me pretending to be…..

          1. Ah, here they are, next to the DVR and flatscreen.

            1. Hey! Who the fuck took the bag with my “stuff”?!?!

              1. We did. We’re more primitive, thus more deserving.

                Now fuck off or I’ll club you over the head.

                1. Oh my fellow band mates your primitive internal organs can’t process all this sugar and partially hydrogenated fat….NOW GIVE ME THAT FUCKING BAG!

  3. you’d think the dumb hippies would be slightly impressed at least *someone* takes them semi-seriously.

    1. At least *someone* takes them semi-seriously.

      1. Nobody takes them seriously.

        1. “These are not just a handful of people living in the mountains. They’re everywhere,” says Michael Cascio, National Geographic Channel’s executive vice president of programming.

          ‘Doomsday Preppers’ Turn the Apocalypse Into a Hobby
          February 7, 2012
          http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy…..o-a-hobby/

          Many people living in non-state societies enjoy lifeways that a number of Americans seem intent on reinventing -such as close association with the land, small group size, and emphasis on oral traditions.

          ~Elman R. Service (1975), Origins of the State and Civilization: The Process of Cultural Evolution. New York: Norton.
          NON-STATE AND STATE SOCIETIES
          http://faculty.smu.edu/rkemper…..ieties.pdf

          1. …John Zerzan told me so.

            1. When can we expect the White Idiot to have his fatal infarction? I want to clear my calendar for the event!

          2. …you can live that way if you want.

            No need to ensure seven billion die for that to be a reality.

            1. So what libertarian society do you mean?

  4. There’s a Simpsons episode where Kent Brockman starts out a story with, “And from our ‘It’s Funny When It Happens to Them’ file…” I’m guessing that if Cenk Uygur ever saw that episode, he didn’t realize that line was supposed to be a joke.

  5. Occupy Wall Street and its sympathizers are livid

    I feel their pain.

  6. As ever, the Iron Law points the way:

    Me today, you tomorrow.

    Why the Occupants thought they would be immune from Security State scrutiny of the kind that was widely known to be practiced, is a testament to their ignorance and self-regard.

    1. Civilization originates in aggression abroad and repression at home. ~Stanley Diamond

      Yep, you agricultural city-Statist should expect internal repression. Get used to it; there is no “limited government” anywhere.

      1. …a Pinko. Says I can’t do the same.

        Primitard told me so.

        1. Rand herself?says to a Bolshevik: “I loathe your ideals. I admire your methods. If one believes one’s right, one shouldn’t wait to convince millions of fools, one might just as well force them.”

          How Ayn Rand Became an American Icon?
          The perverse allure of a damaged woman.?
          By Johann Hari | Nov. 2, 2009
          http://www.slate.com/id/2233966/

          Civilization (city-statism) is always a Trail of Tears.

          1. …for a return to the glorious past.

            Would he be sad if that many died? For utopia would be at hand!

            1. Actually Jason and I plan to dine on the carcasses! I have 12 cases of Stubbs barbeque sauce! Now just lay in a supply of charcoal and we’re good to go!

            2. Objection #5. Primitivists are genocidal maniacs whose planned “utopia” requires them to orchestrate the mass murder of 99% of the human population!

              I’ve saved the best for last. This is the single most common, and the single most powerful attack launched against primitivists by the progressivist camp…

              5 Common Objections to Primitivism, and Why They’re Wrong
              by Jason Godesky
              http://www.rewild.info/anthrop…..yre-wrong/

        2. Primitard really seems to be reliant on their City-Statist computer-techno-thingy-irritate-people-box

          1. I shoot arrows into it and magic comes out! Oh thank you Great Spirit Dolly Madison!

          2. Isn’t it hypocritical of primitivists to use modern technology?

            Civilization has precluded “running off into the woods” as an option fairly well. Hunting regulations pose serious encumberments, to say nothing of the fact that some meager income must be maintained to pay for hunting and fishing licenses, as well as taxes on land.

            5 Common Objections to Primitivism, and Why They’re Wrong
            by Jason Godesky

            http://www.rewild.info/anthrop…..yre-wrong/

    2. Nonsense! The “right” people are in charge! The whole thing must have just been some sort of mix up!

  7. Preach it, Riggs! The nail that sticks up gets hammered down.

  8. What exactly is so “ominous” about the DHS’s analysis?

    1. Work with us, Rev. It’s part of the act.

    2. That it was done at all?

      That it includes language like “potential security risk to critical infrastructure” that is just a step away (if that) from what would trigger the President’s indefinite detention powers?

      1. The fact that it was done at all doesn’t creep me out. I have no problem with assessing potential threats.

        As to your second, their occupation and destruction of infrastructure warrants that descriptor, and the problem is the indefinite detention powers, not DHS’s clinical and accurate description of OWS.

        1. Well, if they are a potential threat, we need to bomb them.

  9. Hey, the PM links aren’t open yet, so:
    “Canadian dad goes to jail when daughter draws picture of gun”
    http://blog.sfgate.com/sfmoms/…..gun/?tsp=1
    This approaches unbelievable.

    1. posted about that weeks ago

  10. Props to the tag-along cellar-dweller who is being ignored in epic proportions today. He is nothing if not persistent, and his dedication to a lost cause (not unlike our own) is deserving of respect, if not sympathy.

    1. No, it’s not.

  11. OWS actually has threatened physical harm against Jamie Dimon of Chase and Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman so this is justified.

    The irony is that those two are longtime Democrats. Of course the idiots at OWS are just aping Michael Moore anyway.

    1. Can’t be a real shrike post… he would have praised Obama somewhere along the way.

  12. The irony is that those two are longtime Democrats. Of course the idiots at OWS are just aping Michael Moore anyway.

    The irony of your response is that for a long time we have purchased democrats and they have been very very good to us! But you keep swinging for the fences Shrike.

  13. Let’s not forget that OWS and its members have also committed arson, rape, assault, destruction of property and shut down international ports. There is no comparison with the Tea Party.

    1. Again, I must insist that you desist in using my name in your partisan political hackery. Thx.

      1. A. It refers to George Jefferson
        B. Who mentioned party?
        C. Fuck you.

      2. Zombie Thomas Jefferson is a fucking mindless dumbass.

      3. Wow, a chance to say, “Fuck off Slaver,” and really mean it.

  14. What’s a “Cenk Uygur”?

    1. A Cenk Uygur is 1/10 of a Uygur, which is about a buck and a quarter USD.

  15. Two separate protests, two different countries, same day.
    http://oi41.tinypic.com/3450z6w.jpg

  16. re: R C Dean|3.1.12 @ 3:46PM

    Nope. It shows Occupants and Occupant-symps have a distorted/repressed/etc. but deep-down accurate awareness of their relationship with the state.

    Note that the form of Cenk’s passionate civil-libertarian objection to the DHS mildly shit-talking the Occupants isn’t moral or even political. It’s an objection based on etiquette. It’s “Not us?them. We’re family.” Under all the bullshit, the Occupants correctly understand themselves to be wholly on the side of the state, including its security apparatus (they’re auditioning for it), and their objection is that the state isn’t showing full and open reciprocation of their loyalty and promise of service to it.

    “Me today, you tomorrow” doesn’t make sense to them?because it doesn’t make sense to them.

    “Why would I come after myself?”

    1. Spot on.

    2. This falls exactly in line with the theory that OWS isn’t mad at corporations or conservatives st all, but protesting the division amongst liberals between the high and low elite. They have the same fancy education, cultural sensibilities and such, but yet they still aren’t part of the club, and they’re pissed.

      1. OWS isn’t mad at corporations, conservatives, or bailouts. It’s mad because it hasn’t gotten a bailout yet (even though it’s been bailed out every year since FDR was elected).

  17. Ha! Those of us who are actually planning to overthrow the government and take over the world would never protest in public or even post a comment about on it on the internet.

    Wait… did I just post write that?

  18. … maybe this is a good thing to divert attention away from the more quiet discontent who want to escape the government rather than change it or take it over.

  19. Loser thread.
    Move on.

  20. Does the DHS know the difference between right-wing and left-wing? Is it even important to make that distinction?

  21. When the government’s boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence.

  22. black liberationists living in the heart of Philadelphia;

    MOVE are anarcho-primitivists, like our good buddy, White Indian.

  23. Occupy? *Right*wing? Say what?

    A movement that bases itself on anticapitalist, anti financial industry rhetoric and is basically repeating language straight out of the leftist protests of the ’60s is somehow **right** wing?

    Suddenly, I’m given reason to doubt the competence of the DHS.

  24. Yeah, what a surprise to learn that deep down below the loud bellowing about their right to protest, there’s a tacit acknowledgement that the state should recognize that they’re the GOOD protestors, not the bad kind, and respond accordingly.

  25. “a group of black liberationists living in the heart of Philadelphia”

    So Mike Riggs supports Operation MOVE, a group of violently racist, far-left, thugs?

  26. “The DHS document appears to be more concerned with protecting the mechanisms of the financial sector than in ensuring the safety of citizens who are exercising their First Amendment rights,” wrote Allison Kilkenny in Truthout.

    Ensuring their safety from who?

    Themselves?

  27. Now, determine the type of watch you want to get them. What is that person’s lifestyle like? Are the a corporate executive? Perhaps a nice dress watch would be appropriate.
    Are they athletic? Perhaps a sports watch would be right for them.Rolex Daytona Swiss Mechanism-srl54 If they play water sports often, consider a watch that is water-resistant. Speaking of luxury watches that even the most discerning man would love to have are Patek Philippe.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.