West Point Defines Domestic Enemies to Prepare Troops to Take On AmericansBrandon Turbeville In the study, what Perliger defines as the Far-Right is actually a mixture of race hate groups with ordinary militias, anti-abortion activists, Libertarians/Anarchists, and conspiracy theorists. Perliger suggets that this Far-Right contingent is glued together by an identification with an anti-federalist ideology as well as a belief in a New World Order. According to Perliger, these groups are concerned with the corrupted and tyrannical nature of the federal government and its apparent tendency to violate individuals civilian liberties and constitutional rights. Perliger, who is the director of terrorism studies at the West Point Combating Terrorism Center writes in the Introduction to the study that its purpose is to provide a conceptual foundation for understanding different far-right groups and then presents the empirical analysis of violent incidents to identify those perpetrating attacks and their associated trends. Ruppert continues by stating, If those arent violations of individuals civil liberties and constitutional rights, I dont know what is. Yet, while Perliger defines three different branches of the far-right racist/white supremacy movement, anti-federalist movement, and fundamentalist movement the author lumps the three different branches into one, all while conveniently ignoring pertinent facts that might not back up his claims. Perligers paper notably lacks mention of the fact that a great many racist/white supremacy organizations are themselves either partially or even entirely staffed by law enforcement agents of government intelligence. Likewise, Perliger entirely conflates race-based movements (also likely infiltrated and controlled by government agencies) with what he labels the Christian Fundamentalist movement. This, as Madison Ruppert points out, is described with a complete lack of understanding (intentional or otherwise) as to what fundamentalism actually is. Yet, the anti-federalist movement (itself a variety of movements mixed together to provide an easier category for Perliger and his readers), is the most interesting when evaluating the West Point paper. According to Perliger, this movement is centered around a belief in a New World Order, and the recognition of the corrupted and tyrannical nature of the federal government and its apparent tendency to violate individuals civilian liberties and constitutional rights. In this regard, Perliger writes, In further summarizing the anti-federalist viewpoint, Perliger writes, Indeed, anyone even faintly aware of historical and current events would be hard-pressed to argue with the so-called anti-federalists in their analysis. Regardless, in light of the recent push for citizen disarmament, the paper tellingly states, Perliger, of course, does not attempt to challenge any of Thompsons claims as they are presented in this short quotation nor does he attempt to debunk any of the claims made by the anti-federalist communities that he so concisely repeats in the statement above. While, admittedly, it is not a stated goal of the authors study to defend his position and debunk those of his subjects, one would also be justified in concluding that Perliger does not attempt to defend his case simply because disproving the claims made by the anti-federalist activists as he presents them would impossible for him to do in a convincing manner. Yet the purpose of the paper is not to provide legitimate information about these groups as much as it is to terrify the reader West Point and other military trainees into believing that anyone who rightly supposes that their government is overstepping its bounds, violating their rights, or moving forward in otherwise unconstitutional directions is a conspiracy-obsessed, right-wing, racist fanatic who is intent on killing military, police, and minorities. Unfortunately for the author, however, a careful reading of his own argument causes it to fall apart at the seams. After postulating numerous reasons for the alleged violence of far-right groups ranging from political, socio-economic, geographical, and operational possibilities, Perliger attempts to turn to the actual numbers. At first, Perligers presentation of thousands of violent attacks per year (using 2010 statistics) is quite shocking since such attacks are not known to the general public and the mainstream media has not seized upon them at every available opportunity as one would expect. The actual level of violence in its own right, whether reported or not, would be concerning to say the very least. These numbers would be an even more concerning situation if they demonstrated that such attacks were on the rise. Unfortunately for the government argument, however, this is not the case as even Perliger has to admit when he says, Hence, in periods during which many streams of terrorism have shown improvement in their operational capabilities and, as a result, an increase in their tendency to engage in mass casualty attacks, the violent American far right shows stagnation, at least in terms of its ability to enhance the harm it generates. For instance, while the term right-wing violent attack might conjure images of lynchings, executions, or mass terror attacks, the statistics, even those presented by Perliger, tend to show a different reality. Indeed, the type of attack referenced in Perligers study is entirely unclear in terms of just what would constitute a right-wing violent attack. Indeed, when examining Perligers statistics, one can easily see that well over half of the attacks being described are actually proxy attacks (loosely defined term) against property, foiled attacks (which are wildly undefined, especially since the overwhelming majority of any foiled terrorist attack in the United States has been directed by the FBI), heavy damage to property, and cross burnings. Likewise, with so many acts of property damage and racial symbols being later determined to have been directed by the victims themselves, one must also call these numbers into question since they are left unclear in the study. Of those attacks designed to cause mass casualties, the Oklahoma City Bombing was no doubt included in the statistics, an obvious government-run false flag operation. Yet, even among the 42% of attacks described as involving specific human targets, the incidents are not necessarily connected with any political, racial, or religious origin. As with any attempt at methods of divide and conquer, there is the very real possibility that any violent attack leveled against any individual of minority status or non-right-wing political ideology is thus considered to be a specific human target attack. Under such loosely defined rules of categorization, since the incidence of specific human targets were overwhelmingly one on one or (at most) two on one altercations, a simple shoving match between two individuals in which one could be remotely considered right wing, racist, or religious could then be delineated as a violent right-wing attack. Since Perliger easily allows his own political bias to appear during the course of the paper and, since much of his political theory is based upon Israeli political scientist Ehud Sprinzaks Iceberg model of the structure of political movements, it is apparent that Perligers own methodology is likely devised in a manner that would allow even the most distant and unrelated events seem directly related to the core of political ideology Perliger has set in his sites. Such a concern is only compounded by the fact that one of Perligers main sources for his paper is the Southern Poverty Law Center, a notorious race-baiting organization that routinely accuses anyone who disagrees with the company line in regards to government policy as racist and potentially violent and dangerous. Not far behind, of course, is the citation of the Anti-Defamation League, an organization of similar race-based incredibility. In the end, Perligers report is nothing more than just another cog in the wheel of a military-industrial complex on overdrive in its attempt to brainwash new military recruits into believing that a terrorist lurks behind every bush. More importantly, these new recruits are being trained that such terrorists are no longer shadowy Muslims hiding in caves in Afghanistan, but good ol boys, gun owners, and average American citizens that will eventually have to be dealt with. Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He has a Bachelors Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutionsand Dispatches From a Dissident.Turbeville has published over 190 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbevilles podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com. 