ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Radical Right

Security

Former Bush Official Places Blame For Oslo Attack On Norwegians For Not Being ‘Serious’ About Terrorism

Former State Dept. Official Christian Whiton

Just as news emerged yesterday about the terror attacks in Norway, the right wing here in the U.S. rushed to judgement, declaring that they were perpetrated by Islamic terrorists. But Norwegian authorities have since charged Norwegian right-wing “Christian fundamentalist” Anders Breivik, a move that appears to have confused conservatives about terrorism in general.

Today on Fox News, former Bush administration State Department official Christian Whiton acknowledged that the case in Norway “wasn’t Islamic terrorism,” but he quickly downplayed terrorist acts committed by those such as Breivik, saying it’s the first of its kind since the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. Whiton then attacked the Norwegians for not being serious about terrorism and claimed that European countries are susceptible to terrorism because they’re “neutral in the war on terror”:

WHITON: This wasn’t Islamic terrorism. It’s one of the first instances since Oklahoma City when terrorism on this scale was not Islamic. But steps you can take to defend your people and your government and your society against Islamic terrorism would also come in handy against lone wolfs as this is turning out to be. It just looks like the Norwegians didn’t happen to take them, nor did they approach terrorism in what frankly, was a serious manner I’d say.

GREGG JARRETT: Islamic terrorism is a problem in the Scandanavian countries. Were they just sort of turning a blind eye to it? [...]

WHITON: You know the problem in a lot of European counties is they think by being neutral in the war on terror as if any civilized society can be, that they won’t face the threats that we face. But that’s just not true, we do know al Qaeda and Islamic terrorist movements are targeting Scandanavian countries just like the rest of us.

Watch it:

Of course Whiton is wrong that the Oslo attack is the first act of terrorism since 1995 that didn’t involve Islamic extremists. Various nationalist and political terror groups have committed violent terrorist acts around the world since then, for instance the Real Irish Republican Army bombing in Omagh, Northern Ireland in 1998.

CNN contributor Erick Erickson had a similar bait and switch today on his Red State blog. He acknowledged that he was “wrong” to blame the Oslo attacks on al-Qaeda affiliated groups, but then defended his position saying that Christians aren’t as violent as Muslims:

First, those of us on the right who point out the now fairly common ties between terrorists and Islam do so largely because the secular left has become willfully naive. The fact of the matter is violence and Islam may not be very common among American muslims, but internationally it is extremely common and can fairly well be considered mainstream within much of Islam. Read Andy McCarthy if you suffer on the delusion that it is not mainstream.

With Christians, it is rather rare to see a self-described Christian engage in heinous terrorist acts. In fact, in as much as there is an Arab Street filled with muslims more often than not cheering on the latest terrorist act of radical Islamists, you will be very hard pressed to find a Christian who does not condemn the act regardless of the faith of the person doing the killing.

Erickson then asked, “why is the left so gleeful that the Norwegian is a ‘conservative Christian’?” No one is “gleeful” that Breivik is right wing or a “Christian fundamentalist.” Responding to terrorism requires dealing in facts and dispelling speculation based on pre-conceived ideology.

Alyssa

‘Footloose’ Remake Insults Evangelicals, Constitutional Lawyers, Our Collective Intelligence

You guys. There are SO MANY THINGS WRONG WITH THE FOOTLOOSE REMAKE (beyond the existence of yet another remake, and another movie where people in their 20s play teenagers, that is):

First, banning dancing is a stupid response to a drunk-driving incident. If I were a mainstream evangelical, or a sensible small-town preacher, I might be seriously vexed right around now. Second, if this is a reasonably integrated community (at least when it comes to illicit teenaged dance parties), one would imagine there is a lawyer worth his salt somewhere in hollering distance who will sue the city to get rid of a clearly constitutionally untenable dance ban if only for the free publicity and to get himself to a firm at a bigger city. And finally, I am kind of depressed that in a town that seems like it is maybe sort of a baby theocracy, fighting against said clearly unconstitutional dance ban in City Hall is the epitome of teenaged activism. At least Hairspray had some nod to the idea that integration is a dandy idea if only because it lets you date cute guys. I cannot imagine what life is like for gay kids in this burb.

I mean, I get it, nostalgia is mandatory, logic is optional. And I get that there’s nostalgia for a time when our problems were smaller and our differences seemed more resolvable — and it’s true that the culture war still matters, that the right to express yourself matters, particularly when you’re 17 or 18. But as much as I’d like to believe we’re going to resolve the rifts in our politics and all make it to the big dance together, I don’t really believe we’ve packed our shoes for the same party.

Politics

VIDEO: NH GOP Chairman Says U.S. Military Deaths Will Be ‘Completely In Vain’ If Obama Is Reelected

New Hampshire Republicans caused a stir earlier this year when they elected Jack Kimball, a far right Tea Party politician, as the new party chairman. Since his election, Kimball’s extreme views have been eclipsed by Republicans in the legislature, who have spent the past months slashing funding for healthcare, education, and other radical right priorities. However, recent video from a local Republican event may thrust Kimball back into the national limelight.

Last week, Kimball and several legislators gathered in Greenfield, NH for a “Flag Day Picnic” with party activists. Explaining the sacrifices made by people in the military, Kimball warned ominously that all would be “completely in vain” if President Obama is reelected next year:

KIMBALL: Ladies and gentlemen, I’m looking at what has happened. All that we treasure lost: people, the loss of life, people who are psychologically and physiologically damaged for life, the sacrifices of the families that supported then. All of this. And I wonder what we did. Look at who we put in the White House. You think about that and we realize the profound responsibility that we have this time. In my view, if we reelect this man, all that all of the people fought and died for is completely in vain.

Watch it:

(HT: Miscellany Blue)

NEWS FLASH

Bolton: U.S. Should Have Taken Out Syria’s Assad After Saddam Fell | On Fox News today, war hawk John Bolton said that it’s in America’s interest to overthrow the regime in Syria but apparently the U.S. passed up a good opportunity to do so in 2003. “The best time to have done it would be right after we overthrew Saddam Hussein when we had hundreds of thousands of of American troops in Iraq,” he said. Watch:

Politics

Architect Of GOP’s Constitution Reading On House Floor Says Social Security And Medicare Are Unconstitutional

This past January, the House GOP caucus insisted that the session of Congress be launched with a reading of the Constitution. The member of Congress who led this idea into fruition was Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and he was also the first reader.

But at a town hall meeting that took place last week and was captured on YouTube, Goodlatte showed his pre-20th century view of the Constitution. At one point during the town hall presentation, Goodlatte displayed a pie chart to the audience showing the various programs that consume the federal budget, with Social Security and Medicare consuming the biggest sections. One constituent, referencing the pie chart, said that everything on the chart is unconstitutional. Goodlatte responded that he agrees, but that the courts keep ruling the opposite way:

CONSTITUENT: Everything that the federal government does on that pie chart is unconstitutional [...] If I violated my marriage contract the way the federal government violates the constitution I’d be in divorce court tomorrow!

GOODLATTE: I hope you’re not. Here’s the deal. You’re absolutely right! But you have one problem, the Supreme Court ruling that these programs are constitutional.

At another point, a different constituent made a similar point, saying that he couldn’t find Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security in the Constitution. Goodlatte agreed that the programs aren’t in the Constitution, but reiterated that the courts have stretched the document to say that these programs are allowed:

CONSTITUENT: I have three points I’d like you to elaborate on if you could. I’ve searched my Constitution for 20 years and I can’t find Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security in there. Those are forced on the American people by the courts. Now, we’ve all accepted that and American people have bought into that, but it’s unconstitutional simple as that, to me, I can’t find it

GOODLATTE: Well, it’s not in the Constitution. The courts have stretched the Constitution to say its in the general welfare clause.

CONSTITUENT: So the courts are wrong, you can go back to Jefferson and check that –

GOODLATTE: Right, well we are where we are now.

Watch it:

It should be noted that Goodlatte voted, along with almost all House Republicans, for the GOP budget plan that would effectively privatize Medicare. Now we know why — he doesn’t think the health care system for seniors is constitutional in the first place. (HT: 2ndTCG YouTube account)

Politics

REPORT: Across The Country, Conservatives Shift Taxpayer Dollars From Public to Private Schools

As ThinkProgress previously reported, a handful of billionaires and right-wing think tanks and foundations are pushing school voucher legislation nationwide, with the effect of undermining public education. These schemes funnel taxpayer dollars to private schools with the promise of better education for students — a claim that has never been backed up with actual evidence.

While many of the conservatives who are for expanding vouchers claim they are not trying to undermine public education but rather inject more competition into it — “school choice,” as they call it — Wisconsin’s superintendent Tony Evers said yesterday that it is morally wrong for his state to be expanding taxpayer funds for Milkwaukee’s voucher program while at the same time slashing money for the state’s public schools:

Gov. Scott Walker’s proposal to expand the Milwaukee school choice voucher program to other Wisconsin school districts is “morally wrong,” state Superintendent Tony Evers told students and staff Monday at Green Bay Preble High School. [...] “Our public school system is under attack,” Evers said. “To spend hundreds of millions to expand a 20-year-old program that has not improved overall student achievement, while defunding public education is morally wrong.”

Indeed, it is a stunning statement on Walker’s priorities to have championed nearly $900 million in education cuts in his budget proposal while at the same time proposing a $750 million expansion of the state’s voucher system. Yet Walker isn’t alone in cutting back funding for public schools while expanding it for private schools. ThinkProgress has assembled a list of other states that are conducting a similar tradeoff:

FLORIDA: In Florida, Gov. Rick Scott (R) proposed nearly $3 billion in cuts to public education spending, claiming that he had no choice due to the state’s budget problems. Yet Florida Republicans — along with a bloc of Democrats who have received thousands of dollars in funding from related special interest groups — are simultaneously pushing school voucher legislation that is expected to cost “nearly $100 million in the upcoming fiscal year and would have a potential recurring cost of $242 million.”

NEW JERSEY: One of the first things New Jersey legislators did this year was to finance a school voucher expansion which “would cost about $825 million.” Yet at the same time, Gov. Chris Christie (R) slashed $820 million in school spending last year — meaning that there was an almost equal transfer of funding away from public schools towards private schools.

PENNSYLVANIA: In Pennsylvania, Gov. Tom Corbett (R) proposed nearly a billion dollars in education cuts, telling the citizens of his state that he had absolutely no choice, given budgetary constraints. Yet at the very same time, conservative legislators are, with Corbett’s backing, pushing a voucher plan that “is estimated to cost taxpayers $730 million in the first four years.”

By slashing funding for public schools while rapidly expanding funding for private, even religious, schools, these conservatives are showing their true colors. Their aim appears to be undermine public education and Americans should arm themselves with the facts.

For more on the war on public education, see today’s Progress Report, “The Billionaires Who Want To Privatize Our Schools.”

Security

As Congress And Netanyahu Line Up Against 1967 Borders, Most Israelis And Palestinians Support Them

Last week, in a speech on the Middle East, President Obama reiterated long-standing US policy that there should be a final settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that is based roughly on the pre-1967 borders and mutually agreed land swaps.

Despite the fact that Obama’s declaration was nothing new, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu blasted the idea of pre-1967 borders, even using a news conference with Obama to call the proposal “indefensible.” His chief political rival, Kadima’s Tzipi Livni, disagreed, noting that the pre-1967 borders is already American policy.

Now, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) is announcing that he plans to introduce a resolution condemning Obama’s advocacy for pre-1967 borders. Hatch sensationally claiming that Obama is “rewarding those who threaten Israel’s very right to exist“:

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) issued a press release today stating his intention to introduce a resolution next week disapproving of the policy concerning Israel that President Barack Obama announced on Thursday. “Israel is the United States’ strongest friend and ally,” Hatch said in the statement. “By calling for a return to the pre-1967 borders, President Obama has directly undermined her.”

Instead, Hatch said, “President Obama is rewarding those who threaten Israel’s very right to exist.” “This is not only ridiculous, but dangerous,” he said.

Yet what Hatch, Netanyahu, and their allies in the U.S. Congress are not saying is that most Israelis and Palestinians actually support a settlement based around 1967 borders with mutually agreed land swaps that result in a safe, secure, free, and prosperous independent Palestinian and Israeli states. Here is a roundup of some of the recent polling on the issue:

- PALESTINIANS SUPPORT PEACE: It a common refrain among those who would deny rights to the Palestinians that they are militantly opposed to Israel’s very existence and would never support a peaceful resolution. Yet the facts do not support this assertion. Polling conducted in 2009 indicated that 74 percent of Palestinians support a two-state solution based around the contours of the international consensus. Polling conducted in 2010 found that 71 percent support peace negotiations with Israel and that a majority of Palestinians oppose rocket attacks on the country. Last month, the top Palestinian diplomat at the UN asked that the international community support a solution based on the pre-1967 borders and mutually agreed land swaps.

- ISRAELIS SUPPORT PEACE: While the pre-1967 borders were portrayed as primarily a Palestinian demand by the mainstream media and conservatives, the truth is that most Israelis are actually in favor of withdrawing settlements and establishing roughly these borders in exchange for peace. In a 2010 Brookings Institution poll, a plurality of Israelis supported this border arrangement along with mutually agreed land swaps. More recent polling from the Joint Israeli Palestinian Poll conducted by the Truman Institute for the Advancement of Peace at Hebrew University and the Palestine Center for Policy and Survey Research found that 52 percent of Israelis support a peace agreement based roughly around the elements of the Saudi peace plan and Clinton Parameters, which would incorporate the pre-1967 borders, and that most Israelis support negotiating with Hamas. A 2011 poll conducted by a major Israeli newspaper shows that 53 percent of Israelis want Netanyahu to seriously engage in peace talks that includes significant concessions.

While it is true that mort Palestinians support this agreement than Israelis — the status quo is much worse for them — it is also true that narrow majorities of Israelis support the general contours of a peace proposal that Obama and the wider international community are endorsing. Netanyahu, Hatch, and their allies in the U.S. Congress and Israeli Knesset are staking out positions that are out of step with public opinion and reality. The question is whether Obama is will use the levers at his disposal to force them to the negotiating table.

Politics

Maine GOP Lawmaker Threatens To Shoot Photographer In Dunkin Donuts Parking Lot

Republican state representative Frederick Ladd Wintle is in custody today after allegedly threatening to shoot a photographer with the Maine Morning Sentinel in the parking lot of a Dunkin Donuts in Waterville. The representative from Garland, Maine, approached the photographer, Michael Seamans, in a deranged manner and then pointed a gun at him at point-blank range, according to the Portland Press Herald:

In what police termed a “bizarre” series of events, Wintle allegedly started talking to Seamans about the infant that died this week at Mid-Maine Homeless Shelter on Ticonic Street and said he was looking for the mother’s drug dealer.

News reports made no mention of drugs involved in the infant’s death and did not reveal the family.

He then pulled a .22-caliber handgun out of his pants’ waistband and pointed it at Seamans in the Dunkin Donuts parking lot, located on Kennedy Memorial Drive.

Police confirmed that Seamans was “an innocent bystander” who did nothing to provoke Wintle. The two men reportedly had never met before. Wintle seems to be something of an amateur historian, and has “penned a series of stories about his miss-spent youth and family, faith, and heritage.” In what appears to be Wintle’s website promoting his writing, his biography suggests an interest in hunting, saying he “was born on opening day of deer hunting season October 21, 1952.”

Politics

Delta Gave Georgia GOP Lawmakers Platinum Upgrades, Then Received $30 Million Tax Break

Three weeks ago, Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal (R) signed into law a major tax break for Delta Airlines — the world’s largest commercial airline — that would enable it to purchase jet fuel at a lower rate. The tax break blew a $30 million hole in the state’s budget, and was given to the company at a time when its profits are topping $1 billion:

Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal has signed a hefty tax break for Delta Air Lines Inc. The bill Deal signed into law on Wednesday will save the Georgia-based airline up to $30 million on jet fuel taxes over two years.

Supporters say the state must work to keep Delta in the state because it brings in millions of dollars in economic development. Opponents said when the tax break on jet fuel originated several years ago, the company was facing bankruptcy but it reported more than $1 billion in profits last year and doesn’t need the help now.

Many wondered why Deal and his GOP allies in the state legislature were so eager to reduce the flow of revenue to the state’s coffers at a time when budget cuts are forcing thousands of elderly Georgians to go without home-delivered meals and cutting deeply into the education system.

Now, a new investigation by Atlanta’s WSB-TV finds one possible answer why the state’s top GOP lawmakers gave Delta such a treasured tax break. The station found that Lieutenant Governor Casey Cagle (R) and five Republican leaders in the legislature were given free “upgrades to platinum or gold frequent flyer status,” which include access to special security lines, far more frequent flyer miles, and free upgrades to first class in some circumstances.

While the company did register the upgrades as campaign contributions, the station argues that the company undervalued them. Delta said the upgrades were worth $1,600-$2,400, but renowned consumer reporter Clark Howard said the actual value of the upgrades was closer to $10,000-$15,000 a year, and that they should be registered as gifts from lobbyists, not simple contributions. Watch WSB’s report about the upgrades:

Commenting on the case, Georgia Politico’s Dustin Baker writes, “There are much more cost-efficient ways to get bumped up to first class. Then again, since you’re paying for it with Georgia tax dollars, I guess it is pretty much free for you.”

Security

Obama’s Call For Israeli & Palestinian Borders To Be ‘Based On The 1967 Lines’ Mirrors Bush, Clinton Policy

Today in his speech on the Middle East and North Africa, President Obama said that “a lasting peace” between the Israelis and the Palestinians “will involve two states” and that “the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines.”

For some reason, the Beltway media is treating this as some kind of breaking news. Foreign Policy reported that Obama is altering U.S. policy and the Washington Post claimed that the Obama administration referred to the 1967 border as part of the solution “[f]or the first time.”

Next came the right-wing outrage that Obama hates Israel. Matt Drudge issued the marching orders soon after the speech ended with the headline, “Obama sides with Palestine.” Mitt Romney then accused Obama of “throwing Israel under the bus.” Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) said Obama “betrayed” Israel, saying on Twitter, “Obama’s call for 1967 borders will cause chaos, division & more aggression in Middle East & put Israel at further risk.” The far-right Simon Wiesenthal Center, which purports to promote tolerance, basically called Obama a Nazi, saying that “Israel should reject a return to 1967 ‘Auschwitz’ borders.”

But the problem is that this just isn’t new. Even President Bush in 2005 endorsed a two-state solution with negotiations based on the post-1949 Armistice, pre-1967 borders:

Any final status agreement must be reached between the two parties, and changes to the 1949 Armistice lines must be mutually agreed to. A viable two-state solution must ensure contiguity of the West Bank, and a state of scattered territories will not work.

And the 1967 borders were the basis for the two future states in negotiations during the Clinton administration. Then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, now Israel’s Defense Minister, signed a document “understanding that the negotiations on the Permanent Status will lead to the implementation of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.” UNSR 242, passed in November 1967, calls for the “withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict.”

NBC’s Chuck Todd noticed all the commotion, tweeting, “Surprised at venom re: 1967 lines. Has been part of the proposed solution for years.”

Ali Gharib contributed to this post.

Update

Andrew Sullivan has more.


Update

,Jeffrey Goldberg notes that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in 2009, “We [support]…the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state, based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps.”

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up