Hate groups infiltrating military

**kbm8795** · 07-09-2006, 03:20 AM

Hate Groups Are Infiltrating the Military, Group Asserts

By JOHN KIFNER
Published: July 7, 2006
A decade after the Pentagon declared a zero-tolerance policy for racist hate groups, recruiting shortfalls caused by the war in Iraq have allowed "large numbers of neo-Nazis and skinhead extremists" to infiltrate the military, according to a watchdog organization.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks racist and right-wing militia groups, estimated that the numbers could run into the thousands, citing interviews with Defense Department investigators and reports and postings on racist Web sites and magazines.

"We've got Aryan Nations graffiti in Baghdad," the group quoted a Defense Department investigator as saying in a report to be posted today on its Web site, www.splcenter.org. "That's a problem."

A Defense Department spokeswoman said officials there could not comment on the report because they had not yet seen it.

The center called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to appoint a task force to study the problem, declare a new zero tolerance policy and strictly enforce it.

The report said that neo-Nazi groups like the National Alliance, whose founder, William Pierce, wrote "The Turner Diaries," the novel that was the inspiration and blueprint for Timothy J. McVeigh's bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building, sought to enroll followers in the Army to get training for a race war.

So much for the idea of fighting terrorism. . .I guess con-servatives feel better training neo-Nazi groups to terrorize Americans back home later by sending them to protect America from Iraqis lobbing paper airplanes across the ocean at us. And, of course, the plans and the story get much better:

"The defense secretary at the time, William Perry, said the rules were meant to leave no room for racist and extremist activities within the military. But the report said Mr. Barfield, who is based at Fort Lewis, Wash., had said that he had provided evidence on 320 extremists there in the past year, but that only two had been discharged. He also said there was an online network of neo-Nazis.

"They're communicating with each other about weapons, about recruiting, about keeping their identities secret, about organizing within the military," he said. "Several of these individuals have since been deployed to combat missions in Iraq."

The report cited accounts by neo-Nazis of their infiltration of the military, including a discussion on the white supremacist Web site Stormfront. "There are others among you in the forces," one participant wrote. "You are never alone."

And ya gotta just grab the flag and cross and wave it proudly over this crap - when the soldiers talk about what they are planning to do when they come home:

An article in the National Alliance magazine Resistance urged skinheads to join the Army and insist on being assigned to light infantry units.

"Light infantry is your branch of choice because the coming race war and the ethnic cleansing to follow will be very much an infantryman's war," he wrote. "It will be house-to-house, neighborhood-by-neighborhood until your town or city is cleared and the alien races are driven into the countryside where they can be hunted down and 'cleansed.' "

He concluded: "As a professional soldier, my goal is to fill the ranks of the United States Army with skinheads. As street brawlers, you will be useless in the coming race war. As trained infantrymen, you will join the ranks of the Aryan warrior brotherhood."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/07/wa...in&oref=slogin

Now we're trainin' Timothy McVeighs. . .

Do we feel safe yet?

**joesmooth20** · 07-09-2006, 03:27 AM

I'm in the Military, never came accross any nazi types though. It doesn't shock me that it's happening by any means.

**JOHNYORK** · 07-09-2006, 03:29 AM

o word it could be said that it resembles a can of cannelli beans

**Witmaster** · 07-09-2006, 09:25 PM

So KBM.... just what are you trying to say here?

**911=InsideJob** · 07-09-2006, 09:47 PM

I heard somewhere that some gangstas join the military just for the training and then they go back and share it with there homies.

Note: 5 of the 9/11 hijackers, including Mohammed Atta recieved military training in Florida during the 90's. That's where they had military training and learned english. The dean of one of these schools told the San Jose Mercury that Bush ordered 9/11 and trained the hijackers.

**lnvanry** · 07-09-2006, 10:03 PM

Originally Posted by 911=InsideJob

I heard somewhere that some gangstas join the military just for the training and then they go back and share it with there homies.

Note: 5 of the 9/11 hijackers, including Mohammed Atta recieved military training in Florida during the 90's. That's where they had military training and learned english. The dean of one of these schools told the San Jose Mercury that Bush ordered 9/11 and trained the hijackers.

**KelJu** · 07-09-2006, 10:36 PM

Originally Posted by 911=InsideJob

I heard somewhere that some gangstas join the military just for the training and then they go back and share it with there homies.

Note: 5 of the 9/11 hijackers, including Mohammed Atta recieved military training in Florida during the 90's. That's where they had military training and learned english. The dean of one of these schools told the San Jose Mercury that Bush ordered 9/11 and trained the hijackers.

Just shut the fuck up dumbass.

**lnvanry** · 07-09-2006, 10:40 PM

Originally Posted by KelJu

Just shut the fuck up dumbass.

**kbm8795** · 07-09-2006, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by Witmaster

So KBM.... just what are you trying to say here?

um...let's see....that we are kinda short on recruiting goals. . so the rules get bent a little or maybe more. . .and some unsavory kinds of people are slippin' right on into the service.

**KelJu** · 07-09-2006, 11:22 PM

Originally Posted by kbm8795

um...let's see....that we are kinda short on recruiting goals. . so the rules get bent a little or maybe more. . .and some unsavory kinds of people are slippin' right on into the service.

The recruitment goals weren't very strict before 9/11.
I was going into the marines right out of high school back in 2000. I talked to the recruiters and they basically prepped me for the examinations at MEPS.
They told me what to say and what not to say to make sure I got in. I was told to lie about injuries I had had, illnesses that I had, medications that I had taken, and anything else you could name.
While I was at MEPS, I saw some of the most pathetic lowlifes I have ever seen. Most of those kids were thug wannabes, and the others were just criminals that haven’t been arrested yet.

**goandykid** · 07-10-2006, 02:50 AM

Meps?

**TJ Cline** · 07-10-2006, 04:10 AM

Originally Posted by kbm8795

um...let's see....that we are kinda short on recruiting goals. . so the rules get bent a little or maybe more. . .and some unsavory kinds of people are slippin' right on into the service.

Hell they have changed every rule...They now let you in up to 42, you no longer need a GED or High School degree, and they also now let in some Felons......

**Witmaster** · 07-10-2006, 07:45 AM

Originally Posted by goandykid

Meps?

Military Entrance Processing Station

**Pepper** · 07-10-2006, 07:53 AM

Originally Posted by Witmaster

So KBM.... just what are you trying to say here?

The same thing he is aways saying.

**Witmaster** · 07-10-2006, 07:53 AM

Originally Posted by KelJu

The recruitment goals weren't very strict before 9/11.
I was going into the marines right out of high school back in 2000. I talked to the recruiters and they basically prepped me for the examinations at MEPS.
They told me what to say and what not to say to make sure I got in. I was told to lie about injuries I had had, illnesses that I had, medications that I had taken, and anything else you could name.
While I was at MEPS, I saw some of the most pathetic lowlifes I have ever seen. Most of those kids were thug wannabes, and the others were just criminals that haven’t been arrested yet.

Yea, I can see how you could come to that sort of conclusion when seeing new (potential) recruits at the MEPS station. I saw a lot of the same thing.

I've also seen those same "thug wannabees" transform into good Soldiers and Marines. One of the great things about the military is it offers a tremendous opportunity to those people who might not ever get a chance to improve thier lives otherwise.

Of course, it's very easy to sit on the sidelines and pas judgement on these kids having not been with them to see thier progress throughout thier tour in the military.

Sure, there are some bad apples in the bunch. You'll get that in any organization.

Still, I am still confidant in the quality and professionalism of our training and the developement of new recruits.

**Witmaster** · 07-10-2006, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by kbm8795

um...let's see....that we are kinda short on recruiting goals. . so the rules get bent a little or maybe more. . .and some unsavory kinds of people are slippin' right on into the service.

Ahhhhh ok. Just as long as you're not trying to imply the U.S. Military is a bunch of Racist Neo Nazis. That would be rather judgemental, don't you think?

**Pepper** · 07-10-2006, 08:00 AM

Originally Posted by Witmaster

Ahhhhh ok. Just as long as you're not trying to imply the U.S. Military is a bunch of homophobic Racist Neo Nazis. That would be rather judgemental, don't you think?

You left out homophobic.

**Witmaster** · 07-10-2006, 08:02 AM

Originally Posted by Pepper

You left out homophobic.

Oh yea, thanks. I guess I could have just said "Bigots" and summed it all up in one package.

**kbm8795** · 07-10-2006, 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by Pepper

You left out homophobic.

Nice try...but the military has already shown themselves to be "homophobic," with that duplicitous policy of "don't ask, don't tell" which is rather arbitrarily applied. Of course, that's another issue entirely from the subject of this thread.

Any cheap shot to get off the subject.

**kbm8795** · 07-10-2006, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by Witmaster

Oh yea, thanks. I guess I could have just said "Bigots" and summed it all up in one package.

Don't give yourself too much credit here, Wit. The lead of the story was:

A decade after the Pentagon declared a zero-tolerance policy for racist hate groups, recruiting shortfalls caused by the war in Iraq have allowed "large numbers of neo-Nazis and skinhead extremists" to infiltrate the military, according to a watchdog organization.

Sometimes I wonder if con-servatives suffer from reading comprehension problems.

**KelJu** · 07-10-2006, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by Witmaster

Yea, I can see how you could come to that sort of conclusion when seeing new (potential) recruits at the MEPS station. I saw a lot of the same thing.

I've also seen those same "thug wannabees" transform into good Soldiers and Marines. One of the great things about the military is it offers a tremendous opportunity to those people who might not ever get a chance to improve thier lives otherwise.

Of course, it's very easy to sit on the sidelines and pas judgement on these kids having not been with them to see thier progress throughout thier tour in the military.

Sure, there are some bad apples in the bunch. You'll get that in any organization.

Still, I am still confidant in the quality and professionalism of our training and the developement of new recruits.

You are right. I have no idea what ever came of those kids. Most likely, the majority of those kids were taught some discipline and made fine solders and human beings.
I re-read my post, and it sounded different than I had originally intended. All I was saying was that recruitment goals were never strict in the first place. And that has always been the case. I also understand that some of the worst civilians make some of the best soldiers.
I am not someone who shits on the military as a whole, because I think our military is awesome and commands respect for its ability to get the job done. I will however, shit on the parts that deserve to be shit on, such as the chief and commander. But hey, that is another 200 threads already so I will stick to the point.

**Pepper** · 07-10-2006, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by kbm8795

Any cheap shot to get off the subject.

I don't see how it is a cheap shot. I told him he left off your view that the military is homophobic. Your reply admits that you have that view. I see no cheap shot.

Most liberals believe that anything short of 100% acceptance of the gay lifesyle is "homophopic." I don't know you that well, so I could be wrong, but I'd bet I am much more tolerant of you views on sexuality that you are of my views on religion.

**kbm8795** · 07-10-2006, 11:19 AM

Originally Posted by Pepper

I don't see how it is a cheap shot. I told him he left off your view that the military is homophobic. Your reply admits that you have that view. I see no cheap shot.

That viewpoint is rather irrelevant to the text of this story, Pepper. And since the thread really contained very little of my "viewpoint" on the matter, other than a few lines that the Pentagon's enforcement of their policy on this particular matter is crap, I'm struggling here to see the relevance of your remark on the topic.

Most liberals believe that anything short of 100% acceptance of the gay lifesyle is "homophopic." I don't know you that well, so I could be wrong, but I'd bet I am much more tolerant of you views on sexuality that you are of my views on religion.

Don't give me that "most liberals" crap. Who says "most liberals believe that anything short of 100% acceptance of the gay lifestyle is "homophobic?" Do you honestly think people go around making up percentages of "acceptance" of the rights of other full citizens? Either the Constitution applies to everyone or it doesn't.

What you don't understand is that from what I've seen in my own research, most gays don't give a damn about your personal views on sexuality or your personally chosen "religious" beliefs. Why should they? Do you care what they think about your own? Shouldn't they be allowed the chance to vote on your choices?

Those are personal views that apply to your own life. If you consider it "intolerant" when you are required to treat every other law-abiding citizen as equal to yourself, then that's your chosen religious issue - not mine. It's too bad con-servatives can't remember that little caste system when they ask for tax money.

I'm not tolerant of self-sanctified pseudo-christians who select biblical verses from a religious cafeteria so they can use them as a cover to persecute others. Your personal peepee excitement is not a basis for special constitutional or statutory rights in a nation in which everyone is supposed to be guaranteed equal protection under the law, even though you use your "religious" beliefs as the basis for deserving special rights.

Who is supposed to give a damn whether you support "100% of the gay "lifestyle" - whatever the hell that is? Does it innately affect you? Do you honestly expect every citizen on the street to stop and ask you if you "approve" of their right to live freely as American citizens? Are you so self-important that, just because you chose to believe something that allegedly elevates your place in society that everyone else is required to believe that same thing or they are intolerant of your choices and must have constitutional amendments limiting their right to seek redress for grievances?

You see, there's a cognitive difference here. Try as they might, con-servatives can't prove that people are gay by choice. But we do know that religious beliefs and interpretations are chosen. Which means you can choose something else anytime you want...and people do it all the time. You choose to believe that another group of American citizens are only. . .say. . .worth 80% of your own value. You can wrap that up with a pretty biblical interpretation bow all you want - but for godsakes, take responsibility for that choice.

When people pull out that "christian" card and use it to claim that it gives them special rights to exhume someone else's body from a grave and move it hundreds of miles because they were "sinners" and the law has to reflect that religious belief or you'll feel persecuted - then yep - I'm not tolerant. It isn't your death, your grieving, your church, or your relationship being stomped on, or your "unmarriageable" partner tossed out on the street and his property stolen. Is that your church asking those other people to suffer so the congregation won't feel insecure about some chosen beliefs?

There - you made me get off the topic of this thread, which was about a report on the increase of members of hate groups being accepted into a military that is struggling to meet recruitment goals. A more relevant statement might have been a question about why so few college Republicans are opting to serve our country at a time of war.

Operation Yellow Elephant.

**Pepper** · 07-10-2006, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by kbm8795

Don't give me that "most liberals" crap.

I stopped reading right there.

I think you are little too worked up about this.

**Witmaster** · 07-10-2006, 11:38 AM

Originally Posted by kbm8795

Don't give yourself too much credit here, Wit. The lead of the story was:

Sometimes I wonder if con-servatives suffer from reading comprehension problems.

Well, First... I'm not sure what you mean by "giving myself too much credit". That was a sidebar conversation with Pepper and not directed to anyone but him.

Secondly, you've consistantly shown a propensity towards attempting to discredit the integrity of the military. Mostly from an "anti-war" position but always heavily imbedded with an Anti-Bush position.

I just firgured this was just more of the same rhetoric.

You actually had me briefly encouraged for a minute there until you pulled the trigger on your marathon response to Pepper.

This whole thread began in a discussion about alleged recruitment flaws and racist military members and you changed tracks entirely to start slamming Christians and Republicans?!?

You need to have a sidebar with Decker. He and I can be proverbial "mortal enemies" on certain political subjects but a least we can stay on topic and agree on good scotch

**kbm8795** · 07-10-2006, 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by Pepper

I stopped reading right there.

Which is, of course, why you brought up that topic.

I think you are little too worked up about this.

Actually....not at all. But all you did was pop in, drop the "homophobic" thang to throw off the thread, and wait for a response. I gave you the response.

I'm not surprised that you'd put two hands over your ears and sing "la la la la la la la". That's pretty much what this country has been seeing throughout this Administration.

At least it looks like we'll have some well-trained street gangs when the boyz and girlz come home.

**kbm8795** · 07-10-2006, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by Witmaster

Well, First... I'm not sure what you mean by "giving myself too much credit". That was a sidebar conversation with Pepper and not directed to anyone but him.

Sorry...I pulled the wrong quote from one of your posts. This was in response to your post about being judgemental.

Secondly, you've consistantly shown a propensity towards attempting to discredit the integrity of the military. Mostly from an "anti-war" position but always heavily imbedded with an Anti-Bush position.

Really? The military is made up of individuals, not robots. How does this article "discredit the integrity" of the military? Is this another con-servative attitude that it is impossible for human institutions to fuck-up and anything being reported that contradicts that is some deep, unpatriotic, traiterous plot?

[B]

I just firgured this was just more of the same rhetoric.

You actually had me briefly encouraged for a minute there until you pulled the trigger on your marathon response to Pepper.

Yeah...one wonders why he brought that subject up. . .

This whole thread began in a discussion about alleged recruitment flaws and racist military members and you changed tracks entirely to start slamming Christians and Republicans?!?

Uh...nope. I think someone else changed that direction.

You need to have a sidebar with Decker. He and I can be proverbial "mortal enemies" on certain political subjects but a least we can stay on topic and agree on good scotch

Ahh...well, we could have stayed on topic too. I haven't seen you necessarily disagree with the topic yet. I was starting to see some interesting insights from those of you who are in the military, or have served.

**Witmaster** · 07-10-2006, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by kbm8795

Ahh...well, we could have stayed on topic too. I haven't seen you necessarily disagree with the topic yet. I was starting to see some interesting insights from those of you who are in the military, or have served.

I never said I disagreed with the topic. In fact, I tend to agree with it to an extent.

I just find your whole premis on this matter to be suspicious, in that, I find it hard to believe that you hve a genuine concern for recruitment shortfalls in the military.

I'm more inclined to think that you're attempting to cast a shadow of doubt across the integrity of our ranks and foster the silly notion that the military has been overrun by the KKK.

Honestly, I kinda figured this thread was a prelude into the latest story about the soldiers who were arrested for murder and rape in Iraq. I can see how one would play the "race card" in that case.

**TJ Cline** · 07-10-2006, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by Pepper

I don't see how it is a cheap shot. I told him he left off your view that the military is homophobic. Your reply admits that you have that view. I see no cheap shot.

Most liberals believe that anything short of 100% acceptance of the gay lifesyle is "homophopic." I don't know you that well, so I could be wrong, but I'd bet I am much more tolerant of you views on sexuality that you are of my views on religion.

I would say " Most liberals" just want them to have the same rights as all Americans.

**kbm8795** · 07-10-2006, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by Witmaster

I never said I disagreed with the topic. In fact, I tend to agree with it to an extent.

I just find your whole premis on this matter to be suspicious, in that, I find it hard to believe that you hve a genuine concern for recruitment shortfalls in the military.

Really? Why would I, as an American citizen, not have a genuine concern about recruitment shortfalls which may result in enlisting members of white supremacist groups who want to start a race war at home?

I'm more inclined to think that you're attempting to cast a shadow of doubt across the integrity of our ranks and foster the silly notion that the military has been overrun by the KKK.

That's just sad. The integrity of our ranks is compromised if that policy has been made lax in order to fill those ranks. This appears to be just the latest report of compromises we've been making in order to get the job completed. We have 300 million people in this country - surely we have enough good ones to fill a uniform. And this bending the rules isn't only happening with street gangs . . .with the gays, some units have resorted to refusing a discharge hearing until they've been sent overseas and completed their tour of duty - then they are booted out. And there have been some cases of recruitment of people with ADD or other physical/mental issues which wouldn't have passed normal scrutiny. As Foreman pointed out - they raised the enlistment age, another indicator of some problems. The whole point of raising the issue of those problems is to protect the integrity of our ranks.

Honestly, I kinda figured this thread was a prelude into the latest story about the soldiers who were arrested for murder and rape in Iraq. I can see how one would play the "race card" in that case.

I wasn't even going to bring that story up - it's not like 1000 soldiers were involved. Some of the reports I've read point to repeat deployment stress, some people with personality disorders and other issues which may or may not have contributed to those actions. It's true that it reflects on the military, but I doubt anyone believes that 130,000 soldiers in Iraq are all conducting torture, raping civilians and deliberately murdering everyone. Those things happen in every war, no matter how much training and how much glory we attach to the fighting - but they shouldn't be overlooked because it can undermine the entire purpose and effort or our presence there. If the people in a town get so pissed off after a few of our guys go off the deep end, it just puts more of our troops at risk from the people we're supposed to be trying to protect. And then it takes our efforts away from securing the country to fighting those who weren't against us in the first place. I don't see that story as an indictment of the military - it's a danger to the military. And so far it appears that the Pentagon is trying to handle it.

Thread: Hate groups infiltrating military

Thread Tools

Display

Hate groups infiltrating military

Similar Threads

I Don't Hate Jews , I Hate Israel

Standing Military vs Seated Military

Internet Groups

Military Rules for the Non-Military Personnel

Posting Permissions