Tweet
Concern spreads over colonel's scenario of crushing a 'tea party insurgency'
Examiner
Anthony Martin, Conservative Examiner
8/10/2012
Excerpt:
"On Sunday a news report filed by this reporter focused on a training tool used by retired U.S. Army Col. Kevin Benson which features a fictitious scenario involving the crushing of a "tea party insurgency" in Darlington, S.C.
The scenario, and the news report about it, created a firestorm of controversy across the country that was not reported in the mainstream media.
Concern continues to spread today, however, as a major conservative media outlet, PJTV, produced a video Thursday outlining the multiple problems inherent with the colonel's scenario.
According to the featured commentators utilized in the PJTV video, a scenario that portrays the tea party as a terrorist threat does nothing but inspire rage on the part of those who know that no one involved in the tea party movement has been associated with terrorism in any way whatsoever. And what further enrages tea party activists is the fact that in spite of anti-government insurgents associated with the "Occupy Wall Street" protests, in which organizers and participants have been exposed for their subversive activity which has often led to violence, no scenario was created by the Army involving the crushing of the occupy movement.
Another commentator in the video noted that the military under the Obama administration has made sure that the words "Jihad" and "Islamic" are deleted from all official documents concerning very real threats to the safety and security of citizens. The administration went out of its way, for example, to avoid referring to the Fort Hood terrorist as an "Islamic extremist."
Yet when describing the frightening possibility that a U.S. city could be seized by an insurgency group, its mayor, police chief, and city council removed from office and placed under house arrest, the Army chooses to use the tea party, not an Occupy Wall Street nor a radical Islamist entity, as the insurgency group in the teaching tool.
The PJTV commentators described that choice as outrageous.
Further, the video portrays the attempt to smear the tea party in this fashion as "projection."
Projection is an old psychological term denoting the unconscious act of ascribing to others the characteristics that we ourselves possess. Thus, when the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department, and now the U.S. Army under Obama refer to tea party activists as "potential homegrown terrorists" who are prone to violence, they are actually describing themselves, particularly those who espouse a liberal political philosophy.
When former U.S. Rep. Gabriella Giffords, D-Ariz., was shot along with others in the infamous Tucson massacre of 2011, the Obama administration, the mainstream media, and liberal activists were quick to blame the tea party, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and Mark Levin for using "hateful rhetoric" that leads unstable persons such as the Tucson shooter to undertake such violent measures.
Yet none of the those mentioned as the sources for the hateful rhetoric have ever called for violence against anyone.
Several who posted comments on the PJTV video stated that they had attended Benson's workshop and that each time someone would point out the threat posed by groups such as Islamic extremists, or the Occupy movement, workshop leaders would turn their comments around to continue the established scenario that ordinary citizens are the ones who pose the threat due to their hysteria over Islam and liberal insurrectionist groups.
Yet the ones who routinely call for violence against those who steadfastly resist their collectivist plans are the liberals in academia, government, the media, and left wing activist groups.
Time Magazine's Joe Klein once accused conservatives shortly after the 2008 election that they were guilty of "sedition" and implied that sedition laws should be resurrected so that conservatives who resist the program being implemented by Barack Obama could be rounded up and jailed. Pamela Geller of the blog Atlas Shrugs has received countless death threats for merely reporting the facts on the activities of extremist Islamists. The Muslim Brotherhood stated recently that America will be "brought to its knees." Liberal commentators on various web sites have routinely called for the deaths of conservatives such as Dick Cheney and Michelle Malkin, and when former Fox News commentator Tony Snow was diagnosed with cancer, left wing hysterics stated that they hoped he would die a slow, painful death.
But these examples are only the tip of the iceberg. President Barack Obama stated in 2008 during the presidential campaign, "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun." Obama's friend and political ally Bill Ayers called for young people to kill their parents when he launched the very first "occupy" movement in Chicago in 1969. Ayers is also on record as stating that he supports the killing of tens of millions of conservatives unless they agree to be reeducated in his extremist liberal agenda.
Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn, have often stated that they have not changed their views at all since the 1960s and wish they had done much more to advance their agenda."
..........................
View the complete article at:
http://www.examiner.com/article/conc...rty-insurgency
Examiner
Anthony Martin, Conservative Examiner
8/10/2012
Excerpt:
"On Sunday a news report filed by this reporter focused on a training tool used by retired U.S. Army Col. Kevin Benson which features a fictitious scenario involving the crushing of a "tea party insurgency" in Darlington, S.C.
The scenario, and the news report about it, created a firestorm of controversy across the country that was not reported in the mainstream media.
Concern continues to spread today, however, as a major conservative media outlet, PJTV, produced a video Thursday outlining the multiple problems inherent with the colonel's scenario.
According to the featured commentators utilized in the PJTV video, a scenario that portrays the tea party as a terrorist threat does nothing but inspire rage on the part of those who know that no one involved in the tea party movement has been associated with terrorism in any way whatsoever. And what further enrages tea party activists is the fact that in spite of anti-government insurgents associated with the "Occupy Wall Street" protests, in which organizers and participants have been exposed for their subversive activity which has often led to violence, no scenario was created by the Army involving the crushing of the occupy movement.
Another commentator in the video noted that the military under the Obama administration has made sure that the words "Jihad" and "Islamic" are deleted from all official documents concerning very real threats to the safety and security of citizens. The administration went out of its way, for example, to avoid referring to the Fort Hood terrorist as an "Islamic extremist."
Yet when describing the frightening possibility that a U.S. city could be seized by an insurgency group, its mayor, police chief, and city council removed from office and placed under house arrest, the Army chooses to use the tea party, not an Occupy Wall Street nor a radical Islamist entity, as the insurgency group in the teaching tool.
The PJTV commentators described that choice as outrageous.
Further, the video portrays the attempt to smear the tea party in this fashion as "projection."
Projection is an old psychological term denoting the unconscious act of ascribing to others the characteristics that we ourselves possess. Thus, when the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department, and now the U.S. Army under Obama refer to tea party activists as "potential homegrown terrorists" who are prone to violence, they are actually describing themselves, particularly those who espouse a liberal political philosophy.
When former U.S. Rep. Gabriella Giffords, D-Ariz., was shot along with others in the infamous Tucson massacre of 2011, the Obama administration, the mainstream media, and liberal activists were quick to blame the tea party, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and Mark Levin for using "hateful rhetoric" that leads unstable persons such as the Tucson shooter to undertake such violent measures.
Yet none of the those mentioned as the sources for the hateful rhetoric have ever called for violence against anyone.
Several who posted comments on the PJTV video stated that they had attended Benson's workshop and that each time someone would point out the threat posed by groups such as Islamic extremists, or the Occupy movement, workshop leaders would turn their comments around to continue the established scenario that ordinary citizens are the ones who pose the threat due to their hysteria over Islam and liberal insurrectionist groups.
Yet the ones who routinely call for violence against those who steadfastly resist their collectivist plans are the liberals in academia, government, the media, and left wing activist groups.
Time Magazine's Joe Klein once accused conservatives shortly after the 2008 election that they were guilty of "sedition" and implied that sedition laws should be resurrected so that conservatives who resist the program being implemented by Barack Obama could be rounded up and jailed. Pamela Geller of the blog Atlas Shrugs has received countless death threats for merely reporting the facts on the activities of extremist Islamists. The Muslim Brotherhood stated recently that America will be "brought to its knees." Liberal commentators on various web sites have routinely called for the deaths of conservatives such as Dick Cheney and Michelle Malkin, and when former Fox News commentator Tony Snow was diagnosed with cancer, left wing hysterics stated that they hoped he would die a slow, painful death.
But these examples are only the tip of the iceberg. President Barack Obama stated in 2008 during the presidential campaign, "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun." Obama's friend and political ally Bill Ayers called for young people to kill their parents when he launched the very first "occupy" movement in Chicago in 1969. Ayers is also on record as stating that he supports the killing of tens of millions of conservatives unless they agree to be reeducated in his extremist liberal agenda.
Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn, have often stated that they have not changed their views at all since the 1960s and wish they had done much more to advance their agenda."
..........................
View the complete article at:
http://www.examiner.com/article/conc...rty-insurgency