Right Wing Extremist Gets Arrested

Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
2,252
Reaction score
2,946
Location
Kingman, Arizona
I saw this on another Forum. Should be a wake-up call for all Americans.

http://www.arizonashooting.com...opic.php?f=2&t=75151

Here is another view point from the New York Post:

THE VET 'THREAT'
By RALPH PETERS

April 16, 2009 --
HOLLYWOOD and countless professors warned us: Military vets are drooling trailer-trash who beat their wives and, at best, wind up as homeless street people -- at worst, as homicidal psychos deformed by war.
Now, thanks to our ever-vigilant Department of Homeland Security, the full extent of the danger has been revealed: Our so-called "war heroes" are rushing back to join right-wing-extremist hate groups to overthrow our government.

Let's not quibble about little things like evidence. The Obama administration just knows that vets are all racist, Jew-hating crazies waiting to explode. Thank God, DHS has a fearless leader, Janet-from-another-planet Napolitano, who isn't afraid to call white trash "white trash."

In this administration's published opinion, those who've served in our military are a menace to society and the state. And DHS's racist, bigoted implication is that the only danger comes from white, Christian vets (there's not a whisper about minority violence).

Thanks for bringing us together, Mr. President.

Racism is racism. The left-wing propaganda document published officially by your government under the title "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" may be the shabbiest US Government publication of our time.

The report warns that "the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists . . . carrying out violent acts."

The document's evidence? None. It contains no hard data, no statistics. It's nothing but a racist, anti-military opinion column that might pass muster in The New York Times, but shouldn't be issued by our government.

The report adds that "rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans" who "possess combat skills." The point? Our hayseed, uneducated, unskilled, wacko vets aren't able to think for themselves and will be patsies for right-wing fanatics. Guess that's how things look from Harvard.

Then the report warns us that "a prominent civil-rights organization reported in 2006 that 'large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the armed forces.' "

Which civil-rights organization? The Rev. Jeremiah Wright's? Why not name it? Why accept this bigoted hearsay? Where's the proof? Where's the data?

And where are those "large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis," anyway? Last time I checked, American Nazis had trouble mustering a couple dozen overweight losers in Halloween costumes.

Of course, Timothy McVeigh is invoked. Repeatedly. He's the sole example of a violent anti-government vet the report's drafters could produce. And there's no mention of the fact that, when he tried to join Special Forces, McVeigh promptly washed out and soon found his butt on the street. No, McVeigh will serve as eternal evidence that a homicidal nut lurks within every former soldier.

In just 8½ pages of text, the report manages to link our veterans to anti-Semitism, racism, economic failure and those dangerous citizens who think illegal immigration's a bad idea. Oh, and vets can't be trusted with firearms.

Your tax dollars at work.

But never fear: Obama's commissars at the Department of Homeland Security have already responded that DHS simultaneously issued a report on extremist danger from the left. It's title? "Leftwing Extremists Likely to Increase Use of Cyber Attacks over the Coming Decade."

Get the point? Left-wing extremists aren't violent (and right-wingers are too stupid to understand computers). Timothy McVeigh can be invoked, but let's not mention Bill Ayers, our president's good buddy (until he became inconvenient) or his murderous wife. Left-wing fanatics might make a little online mischief, but, hey -- kids will be kids.

Read both reports. You'll find that those on the political right (not just vets) are unable to cope with the stress of economic hardship, the real-estate crisis or job loss. Not a word about those issues driving leftists to extremes. They're just defending animal rights and the environment (honest -- read the reports).

Narco gangs aren't a threat, either. And the real and present danger from Islamist fanatics resident in our country goes unmentioned -- even though there's plenty of data on that threat. The only anti-government violence DHS fears comes from crackers with carbines.

And from chumps so dumb they joined the military.

We're the threat to our fellow citizens. You and me.

Our first minority president just took a giant step toward creating the most bigoted administration since that of arch-segregationist Woodrow Wilson.

Apologize to our veterans, Mr. President. And send Ms. Napolitano back to the minors.

Ralph Peters is so stupid he served in our military for almost 22 years.
 
Register to hide this ad
I saw this on another Forum. Should be a wake-up call for all Americans.

http://www.arizonashooting.com...opic.php?f=2&t=75151

Here is another view point from the New York Post:

THE VET 'THREAT'
By RALPH PETERS

April 16, 2009 --
HOLLYWOOD and countless professors warned us: Military vets are drooling trailer-trash who beat their wives and, at best, wind up as homeless street people -- at worst, as homicidal psychos deformed by war.
Now, thanks to our ever-vigilant Department of Homeland Security, the full extent of the danger has been revealed: Our so-called "war heroes" are rushing back to join right-wing-extremist hate groups to overthrow our government.

Let's not quibble about little things like evidence. The Obama administration just knows that vets are all racist, Jew-hating crazies waiting to explode. Thank God, DHS has a fearless leader, Janet-from-another-planet Napolitano, who isn't afraid to call white trash "white trash."

In this administration's published opinion, those who've served in our military are a menace to society and the state. And DHS's racist, bigoted implication is that the only danger comes from white, Christian vets (there's not a whisper about minority violence).

Thanks for bringing us together, Mr. President.

Racism is racism. The left-wing propaganda document published officially by your government under the title "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" may be the shabbiest US Government publication of our time.

The report warns that "the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists . . . carrying out violent acts."

The document's evidence? None. It contains no hard data, no statistics. It's nothing but a racist, anti-military opinion column that might pass muster in The New York Times, but shouldn't be issued by our government.

The report adds that "rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans" who "possess combat skills." The point? Our hayseed, uneducated, unskilled, wacko vets aren't able to think for themselves and will be patsies for right-wing fanatics. Guess that's how things look from Harvard.

Then the report warns us that "a prominent civil-rights organization reported in 2006 that 'large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the armed forces.' "

Which civil-rights organization? The Rev. Jeremiah Wright's? Why not name it? Why accept this bigoted hearsay? Where's the proof? Where's the data?

And where are those "large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis," anyway? Last time I checked, American Nazis had trouble mustering a couple dozen overweight losers in Halloween costumes.

Of course, Timothy McVeigh is invoked. Repeatedly. He's the sole example of a violent anti-government vet the report's drafters could produce. And there's no mention of the fact that, when he tried to join Special Forces, McVeigh promptly washed out and soon found his butt on the street. No, McVeigh will serve as eternal evidence that a homicidal nut lurks within every former soldier.

In just 8½ pages of text, the report manages to link our veterans to anti-Semitism, racism, economic failure and those dangerous citizens who think illegal immigration's a bad idea. Oh, and vets can't be trusted with firearms.

Your tax dollars at work.

But never fear: Obama's commissars at the Department of Homeland Security have already responded that DHS simultaneously issued a report on extremist danger from the left. It's title? "Leftwing Extremists Likely to Increase Use of Cyber Attacks over the Coming Decade."

Get the point? Left-wing extremists aren't violent (and right-wingers are too stupid to understand computers). Timothy McVeigh can be invoked, but let's not mention Bill Ayers, our president's good buddy (until he became inconvenient) or his murderous wife. Left-wing fanatics might make a little online mischief, but, hey -- kids will be kids.

Read both reports. You'll find that those on the political right (not just vets) are unable to cope with the stress of economic hardship, the real-estate crisis or job loss. Not a word about those issues driving leftists to extremes. They're just defending animal rights and the environment (honest -- read the reports).

Narco gangs aren't a threat, either. And the real and present danger from Islamist fanatics resident in our country goes unmentioned -- even though there's plenty of data on that threat. The only anti-government violence DHS fears comes from crackers with carbines.

And from chumps so dumb they joined the military.

We're the threat to our fellow citizens. You and me.

Our first minority president just took a giant step toward creating the most bigoted administration since that of arch-segregationist Woodrow Wilson.

Apologize to our veterans, Mr. President. And send Ms. Napolitano back to the minors.

Ralph Peters is so stupid he served in our military for almost 22 years.
 
I don't want an apology from the president - I want him out of office before we lose the country. You can label me what you want for serving 24 years in the military to include Korea and Vietnam. Guess I'm just another one of the radicals
icon_mad.gif
 
Carry openly if allowed. Be prepared to encounter LEO's who don't know this is legal. Be polite, respectful, and don't hesitate to file formal complaints and/or charges if they overstep their authority. A right unused is a right abrogated.
 
This is why I am no longer as big a supporter of the police has I used to be. I was a police officer for a time back in the 70's. The politics drove me to quit. Most of the guys I worked with (no women on the job back then) were great people. They were dedicated portectors of the community. Today I'm sure those types are still on the job but I find they are few and far between. Mostly they are like these two shown here. They didn't know what the policy or law was but still harrased a man who wasn't bothering anyone. If this guy was a bad actor they would not have needed to wait until he was away from the crowd. The crowd probably would have helped the police had a bad guy resisted them. Instead because they we're unsure of what they were doing but because a gun was involved they thought they needed to do something. So a citizen who was apparently doing nothing illegal was detainted and his personal property confinscated for a time. This is not why we have police. I know there are LEO's on this site and if they are like the ones I used to work with this is not directed at you. I'm sure those LEO's know whom and what I write about. jaegan you are right on the money.
 
Do all police forces discriminate against women applicants without fat butts?
 
One more story:
Police Stop Man For Carrying Gun Out In Open
April 22, 2009
MILWAUKEE COUNTY, Wis. -- As WISN 12 News was interviewing a West Allis man about his past arrest for carrying a gun in the open, police confronted him again Tuesday night -- one day after the state's attorney general ruled it's legal.

"Somebody called the police that somebody was walking around with a gun on their hip," a West Allis police officer said.

"I would fit that description," Krause said.

"That would be you," a West Allis police officer said.

Police arrived up to investigate Krause while 12 News was interviewing him about his previous arrest for carrying a holstered gun on his hip outside his home. One officer saw Krause's gun and asked what agency he's affiliated with.

"I'm the same guy I was when you arrested me the last time," Krause said.

The officers asked for his name and called dispatch.

"The reason I'm checking is because felons can't have guns in Wisconsin," West Allis police said.

Krause is not a felon. He's a certified firearms instructor.

"Pretty much any time my pants are on, I'm armed," Krause said.

That includes carrying a gun outside his home as Wisconsin's attorney general has ruled is legal.

"I'm totally opposed to it. I do not think we need more guns on the streets," state Rep. Leon Young said.

Young, a former Milwaukee police officer who represents part of Milwaukee's north side, said he's working on fast track legislation to clear up confusion with Wisconsin's gun law.

"If you're walking down the street with a gun in your hand and people can see it or you've got one in your holster here and people can see it, it's going to create a disturbance," Young said.

But until there's a new law, the officers explained to Krause, the attorney general's ruling is brand new to them and they'll act accordingly.

"How it was explained to us is that if somebody calls and makes a complaint -- in other words, they feel threatened -- they feel it's causing a disturbance or they feel that it's disorderly in some fashion. They call us and we respond and we investigate it," a West Allis police officer said.

"This is America. If we don't stand up for our rights, you know, what are we doing here? What have people fought and died for? Why'd we found this country?" Krause said.

Krause was not arrested, and he said the officers Tuesday night acted professionally, although he disputes whether they should have confronted him.

The officers said in a different situation they would likely still order someone carrying a gun to the ground until they could make sure the situation is safe.

Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said his memo was simply intended to "clarify" the law, and he does not believe more people will start openly carrying guns because of it.

Gov. Jim Doyle hopes it won't change how police officers respond when they see weapons.

"Our advice was people are permitted to openly carry firearms -- that it wasn't in and of itself disorderly conduct. We intentionally didn't go into any factual-based scenarios because they're all different," Van Hollen said.

"I assume that local DAs and local police departments are gonna continue to act as they already have," Doyle said.

Police Response

Milwaukee's police chief said he'll go on telling his officers to take down anyone with a firearm despite Van Hollen's finding that people can carry guns openly if they do it peacefully.

Chief Ed Flynn said officers can't assume people are carrying guns legally in a city that has seen nearly 200 homicides in the past two years.

He said that means officers seeing anybody carrying a gun will put them on the ground, take the gun away and then decide if the person has a right to carry it.

Flynn said it's irresponsible to send a message that if someone carries a weapon openly, no one can bother them.

Milwaukee-area police chiefs have a monthly meeting on Wednesday, and they're expected to discuss this issue.

Shorewood Police Chief David Banaszynski is the leader of the state chief's association.

He said many departments are asking questions about how to deal with people openly carrying firearms.

He said it may end up being a community-by-community, case-by-case issue fraught with the potential for danger.

"Now, with open carry, which is legal, there may be no training. I could hand you my handgun, you could walk down the street carrying it with no training whatsoever. To me, there is a lot more danger now with people thinking, 'I have the right to carry it so I'm going to carry it, and not have the training,'" Banaszynski said.

Guns are still prohibited in schools and any private property owner, including businesses, can ban firearms.
_______________________________________________
 
Milwaukee's police chief said he'll go on telling his officers to take down anyone with a firearm despite Van Hollen's finding that people can carry guns openly if they do it peacefully.

Chief Ed Flynn said officers can't assume people are carrying guns legally in a city that has seen nearly 200 homicides in the past two years.

He said that means officers seeing anybody carrying a gun will put them on the ground, take the gun away and then decide if the person has a right to carry it.

So, in other words you are just a cop-killing psycho until someone tells them different. So much for innocent until proven guilty.
 
This is more than a little sad. I carry 24/7 either open or concealed. Where I live I get more remarks like " it's good to see an armed citizen" from LEO than any other remarks. Thank goodness I live in a free state.
 
I just don't see the upside to open carry. It obviously draws a lot of attention, and most of the time it's not the good kind of attention.

I am thankful that I am allowed to carry concealed. No one ever sees it, questions it, or flips out over it.

I know that there are those who vehemently support open carry. We have had this discussion more than a few times here. I do not claim that those people are wrong in doing so, but boy oh boy do they bring attention to themselves! I much prefer to be invisible while I go about my business, very sufficiently armed.

WG840
 
If I am not mistaken Wisconsin has no concealed carry law. It is more than a little ironic that the same politicians that will not pass pass a concealed carry law are "up in arms" about an existing open carry law.
 
Open carry shouts to them "SHOOT ME FIRST!"

There was a time in this country when men carried firearms openly as a matter of course. At that time, only criminals concealed their weapons. Men of integrity had nothing to hide.

I carry any way I damn well please, open or concealed. I'd much rather excercise a God given right and educate some sheep than live my life in fear that I'll be the first one shot. That is just cowardly thinking and says nothing about situational awareness. My statement is not "Shoot me first", my statement is "if you are looking for an easy victim, you won't find one here, so take it elsewhere".

And remember folks, while we have all fallen in love with the Privlege our masters have so graciously afforded us in the Granting of CCW permits, some of us still consider that to be an infringement of our 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms. Our founders would be mortified at how weak and pathetic we have become.
 
I feel very uncomfortable reading this article. I am a Veteran, I belong to the NRA, and the IL Rifle Assoc, I am a member of the Catholic Church. According to the article I should be under observation by the "authorities".
 
Originally posted by H Richard:
I feel very uncomfortable reading this article. I am a Veteran, I belong to the NRA, and the IL Rifle Assoc, I am a member of the Catholic Church. According to the article I should be under observation by the "authorities".

"should be" ???
People like you already are. Like the guy in the midwest stopped because of his bumper sticker. They might not have eyeballed "you" in particular yet, but SOME in government and law enforcement are already "looking"
 
Originally posted by wbraswell:
Milwaukee's police chief said he'll go on telling his officers to take down anyone with a firearm despite Van Hollen's finding that people can carry guns openly if they do it peacefully.

Chief Ed Flynn said officers can't assume people are carrying guns legally in a city that has seen nearly 200 homicides in the past two years.

He said that means officers seeing anybody carrying a gun will put them on the ground, take the gun away and then decide if the person has a right to carry it.

So, in other words you are just a cop-killing psycho until someone tells them different. So much for innocent until proven guilty.

and friends and family back in this state wonder why I moved.
With a law enforcement community that has grown into the dangerous assumption that everything should be illegal and having a very blurry view of their own limitations, compounded by legislators at the state and local level that will fire off new legislation every time a rookie cop sings the blues about rights he thinks the people should not have, I became a Nebraskan.
Open revolt should have happened years ago in WI.
While it does have a few densely populated cities, its mostly a rural demographic in which such vintage 1970 big city attitudes are to the detriment of its population at large.

while WI is an "open carry" state. this fact is crippled by DNR regulations that dictate that weapons be unloaded when you are walking along any public road. This pretty much cripples your ability to mount a defense in public
 
Back
Top