The questions with regard to who could be considered an iminent threat to the US government, is the unspoken subject which these journalists keep dancing around.

Conservative Refocus

Barry Secrest

Among many American citizens who frequently criticize the Obama Regime, a document revealed in early 2009, which was written by the US Dept of Homeland Security, is more than enough to raise alarms as to who, exactly, might be considered a threat to US Security.

The document specifically indicated “Right-Wing Extremists” and those opposed to abortion and illegal immigration as possible terrorist subjects.

According to the Washington Times, DHS Director Napolitano defended the report before being forced to redact it:

Ms. Napolitano defended the report, which says “rightwing extremism” may include groups opposed to abortion and immigration, as merely one among several threat assessments.

So, this is at least in part,  why an uproar has been growing over exactly who the Obama Regime might consider as a threat to the US Government.

The other side of this story speaks to the fact that the white paper which was exposed, does not seem to clearly speak to foreign threats in other lands, only. In striking addition, the Obama regime,  along with most Democrats, came out strongly against any sort of enhanced interrogation techniques, namely waterboarding, but seems almost giddy in its pursuit of immediate death by drone for those who are deemed threats by the state.

Is there a severe cognative disconnect at work within the logic being displayed by the Obama regime in this particular light?

All of this may leave the way open to interpretation, by government bureaucrats,  regarding who might be considered outside of the normal citizens rights as predicated by the US Constitution, a document that has been frequently abused by those currently in power within the US.