Vilifying America's Founders: Nuts at the Pentagon
Documents uncovered by Judicial Watch show the Pentagon needs intensive remedial classes in U.S. history, lest it continue labeling conservative organizations as “hate groups” and placing America's Founders among “extremist ideologies and movements.”
A Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute “student guide” titled “Extremism,” obtained by Judicial Watch from the Air Force via a Freedom of Information Act request, advises that today's extremists don't dress in sheets or espouse hate publicly. No, they “talk of individual liberties, states' rights, and how to make the world a better place.”
“The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule” are mentioned in an “Extremist Ideologies” section that outrageously equates the Founders with the secessionist Confederacy. Yet except for brief mentions of 9/11 and Sudan, the “student guide” omits Islamic extremism.
And it repeatedly cites the extreme-left Southern Poverty Law Center, which wrongly labels conservative organizations as “hate groups,” as a resource for identifying — you guessed it — hate groups.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton says it's “a document full of claptrap” that “echoes” language the IRS used in targeting conservative and tea party groups — another example of the Obama administration's “nasty habit of equating basic conservative values with terrorism.”
There must be no place in any government publications for such anti-American propaganda — and no government positions for those who put it there.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Tuesday takes
- Pittsburgh Tuesday takes
- U.N. Watch: More propaganda
- Alle-Kiski Tuesday takes
- Trumpeting ObamaCare: The Medicaid factor
- Greensburg Tuesday takes
- The Kane case: Distractions mount
- The F-35: Is it a lemon?
- Saturday essay: Cusps of change
- Sunday pops
- The Solyndra scandal: Government culpability