Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment

14 Apr

By USLaw

Concerned about the disenfranchising effects of the economic downturn, large numbers of returning combat veterans, election of first African American president, and a perception that gun control laws will soon be strengthened, Janet Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security issued a report alerting law enforcement agencies of potential threats posed by “rightwing extremists”. The report, excerpted and included in full below, describes how the current economic and political climate is fueling the resurgence in radicalization and recruitment of individuals who might commit acts of domestic terrorism and/or commit other crimes. The nature of the report’s content will undoubtedly spark debate about whether the federal government is seeking to squelch what could be taken to be lawful political dissent. This is especially so when the report came to public light on the same day the Texas Governor made a high profile statement warning the federal government to “back off” and respect state’s rights under the 10th Amendment.

Key Findings

Rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment.

The current economic and political climate has some similarities to the 1990s when rightwing extremism experienced a resurgence fueled largely by an economic recession, criticism about the outsourcing of jobs, and the perceived threat to U.S. power and sovereignty by other foreign powers.

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

Filed Under Citizen Justice | 11 Comments (trackback)

Octomom Above the Law– For Now

30 Mar

By Stacy Schneider, Esq.

It seems society can’t let go of the Nadia Suleman’s story and its desire to see the “Octomom” punished. With every move Suleman makes, including her latest “firing” of the free in-home child care services provided by a national charity, a question persists: Can she be charged with child abuse or neglect and stripped of her children for attempting to single-handedly mother 14 children, 8 of them premature infants? Well, she may have broken the taboos of parenting, but she hasn’t broken the law, yet.

Without reasonable suspicion of abuse or neglect, the state of California can’t terminate her parental rights, remove her children, or charge her with a crime. Being a welfare recipient, lacking financial resources, and being “crazy” do not constitute child abuse.

Child welfare and parenting law strongly favors children remaining with biological parents unless there is inadequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care, or supervision. The existence of any one of these conditions could constitute neglect. And if there is repeated neglect resulting in injury or harm to children, you would have a case of child abuse, punishable by jail and resulting in temporary or permanent removal of the children from the household.

Although Octomom had no resources when the octuplets were born (which predisposes the possibility of neglect), her circumstances have changed since her story has attracted a national spotlight. She probably already has generated enough money from book deals, interviews, and television appearances to provide the minimal support required by law. If she hires child caretakers, nurses, home health aids to help care for the babies (as no single mother on the planet can do it alone), the law will favor her remaining as their legal parent and guardian. There will be absolutely no legal cause to place her children in foster care or force her into a courtroom to defend criminal charges.

The law only requires that you be an adequate parent. It doesn’t require you to be a good parent, to be regarded as a successful parent, or to provide a preferred standard of living or “functional” home. As long as your children receive the minimum standard of care for that establishes their health and safety, you are safe from government interference in your parenting.

If the Octomom adequately nourishes and nurtures all of her 14 children, she is guilty of no crime and cannot be prosecuted. The only thing she may be guilty of is being a selfish and reckless parent.

Filed Under Octomom | Leave a Comment (trackback)

Michael Phelps Gets a New Depression Endorsement Deal

07 Feb

By USLaw

A cigarette sponsorship would come none to soon. Contrite pot smoking swimmer Michael Phelps was dropped by Kellogg’s Corn Flakes boxes, lost his US Swimming sponsorship, and may be subject to arrest in South Carolina.

(See more of Cathleen M. Rittereiser’s comic depression era captions on USLaw.com’s Bailout Report.)

Filed Under Michael Phelps | 1 Comment (trackback)

Searchable Madoff Map and Client List Database

06 Feb

By USLaw

A list of 10,000 Clients of hedge fund schemer Bernie Madoff was recently released, revealing nearly 10,000 different account names, the following pop culture figures among them:

Steven Spielberg and Jeffrey Katzenberg of DreamWorks along with their Wunderkinder Foundation and their financial adviser Gerald Breslauer.
Eric Roth, who wrote the screenplay for “Forrest Gump” and “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” lost all of his retirement money.
Mort Zuckerman, owner of the New York Daily News and U.S. News & World Report, had one of his charities fully invested in a fund that was fully invested in Madoff’s schemes.
Palm Beach Country Club along with Country Club social networks in Dallas, Chicago, Boston and Minneapolis.
Kevin Bacon and his actress wife Kyra Sedgwick, who may have lost millions.
Former Philadelphia Eagles owner Norman Braman.
Elie Wiesel’s Foundation For Humanity. Lost $37 million.
Wilpon Family and Saul Katz, owners of the New York Mets .
The late musical philanthropist Avery Fisher and former television host and 1971 Miss America Phyllis George.
New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg.
Actpr John Malkovich.
Artist and author Alexandra Penney lost bulk of her life savings.
Arpad Busson, Uma Thurman’s billionaire fiance.
Hall of Fame pitcher Sandy Koufax.
Talk show host Larry King.

A complete searchable database along with addresses and graphical mapping has been available by USLaw.com at Madoff Database.

Filed Under Wall Street Crime | Leave a Comment (trackback)

Will Michael Phelps Bong Hits Makes His Gold Medals Go Up In Some?

01 Feb

By USLaw

Golden boy Olympic swimming multi-gold medalist Micheal Phelps was photographed inhaling marijuana from a glass bong at a University Of South Carolina party in Columbia, South Caroline last November by England’s News of the World. Although not considered performance enhancers, the International Olympic Committee added marijuana and other social drugs to its list of banned substances after Canadian snowboarder Ross Rebagliati tested positive for marijuana during the 1998 Nagano Winter Olympics. Should 23 year old Phelps, who received 18 months criminal probation for driving while intoxicated (DUI) in 2004, test positive for the canibis, he could be banned from international swimming competitions, including the Olympics, for four years.

Meanwhile, though a positive drug test could derail the Olympian’s eligibility to add to his 14 Olympic medal count for the USA, an admission of using cocaine and a present day tobacco smoking habit didn’t prevent the other USA golden boy Barack Obama from taking the oath of office as US President.

Filed Under Barack Obama, Michael Phelps | 22 Comments (trackback)

« go back — keep looking »