Debunked: "Government Labels those who Grow Their Own Food ‘Extremists’"

Critical Thinker

Senior Member.
The claim:


Government Labels those who Grow Their Own Food ‘Extremists’
Updated: Wednesday, 12 February 2014 09:38
|
By Zelena




Those who mean to lord over us, such as the Department of Defense, have now called people who grow their own food ‘radical’ and extremists. Sound familiar? It’s just like the US calling other nations terrorists when our government has terrorized more of the ‘free’ world than we could even imagine. It has basically called its own citizens terrorists already with NSA spying.
How in the world has it come to this? Americans are becoming ‘serfs’ to their own government much the same way that the British monarchy forced self-sufficient farmers to divide up their land into mono-cropping plots so that they could tax the heck out of everyone and make them reliant upon the same system of tenet farming which then enslaved the masses.



What’s worse, even the founding fathers are considered ‘extremists’ by the Pentagon,according to a new training manual that labels farmers as such. This bit of information was discovered by the legal watchdog, Judicial Watch, as part of a Freedom of Information Act request, and was included in over 133 documents provided by the Air Force. To teach our military to root out ‘extremism’ in a ‘student guide’, those who would decide to grow some organic cabbage, non-GMO corn, and tomatoes, for example, would be considered a threat to national defense. Even though the document says that this is ‘for training purposes only’ and ‘do not use on the job,’ why on earth would such a reference be made? It is simply preposterous.

The manual goes on to pigeonhole those who would have the gall to grow their own food:

Content from External Source
I then googled:

1.JPG

and the only mention of this 'story' was on conspiracy websites.

I then specifically searched the site of (Politically Conservative) Judicial Watch for the story.


2.JPG



... and there was no such article. I even used the search feature on Judicial Watch, and that also returned no results referring to this story. Is this a complete fabrication???
 
Did you go to the source passages in the training manual? I can't download or open it for some reason.
 
Kind of. The lesson plan is on Judicial Watch. It does not mention farmers.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/2161-docs.pdf

Nor does the actual article:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-...gest-mainstream-conservative-views-extremist/

Judicial Watch: Defense Department Teaching Documents Suggest Mainstream Conservative Views “Extremist”

Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it has obtained educational materials from the Department of Defense (DOD) depicting conservative organizations as “hate groups” and advising students to be aware that “many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights, and how to make the world a better place.” The documents repeatedly cite the leftwing Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) as a resource for identifying “hate groups.”

Judicial Watch obtained the documents in a response to a Freedom of Information Act request (FOIA) filed on April 8, 2013. The FOIA requested “Any and all records concerning, regarding, or related to the preparation and presentation of training materials on hate groups or hate crimes distributed or used by the Air Force.” Included in the 133 pages of lesson plans and PowerPoint slides provided by the Air Force is a January 2013 Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute “student guide” entitled “Extremism.” The document says that it is “for training purposes only” and “do not use on the job.” Highlights include:

  • The document defines extremists as “a person who advocates the use of force or violence; advocates supremacist causes based on race, ethnicity, religion, gender, or national origin; or otherwise engages to illegally deprive individuals or groups of their civil rights.”
  • A statement that “Nowadays, instead of dressing in sheets or publically espousing hate messages, many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights, and how to make the world a better place.”
  • [W]hile not all extremist groups are hate groups, all hate groups are extremist groups.”
  • Under a section labeled “Extremist Ideologies” the document states, “In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements. The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are just two examples.”
  • In this same section, the document lists the 9/11 attack under a category of “Historical events.”
  • [A]ctive participationwith regard to extremist organizations is incompatible with military service and, is therefore prohibited.” [Emphasis in original]
  • The document details the “seven stages of hate” and sixteen “extremists’ traits.”
  • The SPLC is listed as a resource for information on hate groups and referenced several times throughout the guide.
  • Of the five organizations besides the SPLC listed as resources, one is an SPLC project (Teaching Tolerance) and one considers any politically or socially conservative movement to be a potential hate group (Political Research Associates).
  • Other than a mention of 9/11 and the Sudan, there is no discussion of Islamic extremism.
In April 2013, following a terrorist shooting at the Family Research Council (FRC) headquarters that occurred in August 2012, Judicial Watch filed multiple FOIA requests to determine what, if any, influence SPLC’s branding of hate groups had on government agencies. On its website, the SPLC has depicted FRC as a “hate group,” along with other such mainstream conservative organizations as the American Family Association, Concerned Women for America, and Coral Ridge Ministries. At the time of the shooting, FRC president Tony Perkins accused the SPLC of sparking the shooting, saying the shooter “was given a license to shoot … by organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center.”

Though the document released today by Judicial Watch was obtained from the Air Force, it originated in a DOD office and is, therefore. thought likely to be used in other agency components.

“The Obama administration has a nasty habit of equating basic conservative values with terrorism. And now, in a document full of claptrap, its Defense Department suggests that the Founding Fathers, and many conservative Americans, would not be welcome in today’s military,” said Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. “And it is striking that some the language in this new document echoes the IRS targeting language of conservative and Tea Party investigations. After reviewing this document, one can’t help but worry for the future and morale of our nation’s armed forces.”

Content from External Source
Judicial Watch is a conservative organization. Tea Party style. They are complaining because the lesson plan seems like it's pointing the finger at the type of "patriot" they represent, and because JW dislike the SPLC.
 
Last edited:
Kind of. The lesson plan is on Judicial Watch. It does not mention farmers.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/2161-docs.pdf

Nor does the actual article:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-...gest-mainstream-conservative-views-extremist/

Judicial Watch: Defense Department Teaching Documents Suggest Mainstream Conservative Views “Extremist”

Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it has obtained educational materials from the Department of Defense (DOD) depicting conservative organizations as “hate groups” and advising students to be aware that “many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights, and how to make the world a better place.” The documents repeatedly cite the leftwing Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) as a resource for identifying “hate groups.”

Judicial Watch obtained the documents in a response to a Freedom of Information Act request (FOIA) filed on April 8, 2013. The FOIA requested “Any and all records concerning, regarding, or related to the preparation and presentation of training materials on hate groups or hate crimes distributed or used by the Air Force.” Included in the 133 pages of lesson plans and PowerPoint slides provided by the Air Force is a January 2013 Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute “student guide” entitled “Extremism.” The document says that it is “for training purposes only” and “do not use on the job.” Highlights include:

  • The document defines extremists as “a person who advocates the use of force or violence; advocates supremacist causes based on race, ethnicity, religion, gender, or national origin; or otherwise engages to illegally deprive individuals or groups of their civil rights.”
  • A statement that “Nowadays, instead of dressing in sheets or publically espousing hate messages, many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights, and how to make the world a better place.”
  • [W]hile not all extremist groups are hate groups, all hate groups are extremist groups.”
  • Under a section labeled “Extremist Ideologies” the document states, “In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements. The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are just two examples.”
  • In this same section, the document lists the 9/11 attack under a category of “Historical events.”
  • [A]ctive participationwith regard to extremist organizations is incompatible with military service and, is therefore prohibited.” [Emphasis in original]
  • The document details the “seven stages of hate” and sixteen “extremists’ traits.”
  • The SPLC is listed as a resource for information on hate groups and referenced several times throughout the guide.
  • Of the five organizations besides the SPLC listed as resources, one is an SPLC project (Teaching Tolerance) and one considers any politically or socially conservative movement to be a potential hate group (Political Research Associates).
  • Other than a mention of 9/11 and the Sudan, there is no discussion of Islamic extremism.
In April 2013, following a terrorist shooting at the Family Research Council (FRC) headquarters that occurred in August 2012, Judicial Watch filed multiple FOIA requests to determine what, if any, influence SPLC’s branding of hate groups had on government agencies. On its website, the SPLC has depicted FRC as a “hate group,” along with other such mainstream conservative organizations as the American Family Association, Concerned Women for America, and Coral Ridge Ministries. At the time of the shooting, FRC president Tony Perkins accused the SPLC of sparking the shooting, saying the shooter “was given a license to shoot … by organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center.”

Though the document released today by Judicial Watch was obtained from the Air Force, it originated in a DOD office and is, therefore. thought likely to be used in other agency components.

“The Obama administration has a nasty habit of equating basic conservative values with terrorism. And now, in a document full of claptrap, its Defense Department suggests that the Founding Fathers, and many conservative Americans, would not be welcome in today’s military,” said Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. “And it is striking that some the language in this new document echoes the IRS targeting language of conservative and Tea Party investigations. After reviewing this document, one can’t help but worry for the future and morale of our nation’s armed forces.”

Content from External Source
Judicial Watch is a conservative organization. Tea Party style. They are complaining because the lesson plan seems like it's pointing the finger at the type of "patriot" they represent, and because JW dislike the SPLC.

I agree the original story is bunkum unless any Mainstream Conservative wants to point out just what is officially stated in that manual is against MC other than an explanation of current recruitment themes.

And there is absolutely nothing there about growing ones own food so NN's claim is also bunkum.

I should note that both groups in this case are by definition practicing extremism.
 
What's especially silly is that the training manual's purpose is clear, and all the terms used are explicitly defined. NN ignores this entirely, cherry picks two phrases from a later section and proceeds to assign their own spin to it.

You would literally have to not read the document to believe it states what is claimed.

[Page 35:]

derp.png

This page details a comparable Equal Opportunity Advisor role in the Navy.

Edit: here's a course outline from the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute.
 
What's especially silly is that the training manual's purpose is clear, and all the terms used are explicitly defined. NN ignores this entirely, cherry picks two phrases from a later section and proceeds to assign their own spin to it.

You would literally have to not read the document to believe it states what is claimed.

[Page 35:]

derp.png

This page details a comparable Equal Opportunity Advisor role in the Navy.

Edit: here's a course outline from the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute.
Both claims.

It is nothing but propaganda wars.

People don't understand what happens and why when you agree to serve in the military.
 
Both claims.

Yeah, the "TruthTube" article in the OP is just a copy/paste job from Natural Society, which is a fountain of conspiracy-themed alt-med. Among the other obvious problems, the original author apparently can't distinguish between "over 133 documents" and one 133-page document.
 
Why do these issues come up in an equal opportunity course?

It's not really "equal opportunities", it's about "Equal Opportunity and Treatment Incidents". Basically about hate crimes, and racial, religious, and sexual harassment. Extremism and Supremism generally includes racism and intolerance of outside groups.


An EOTI is an overt, adverse act, occurring on or off base, directed toward an individual, group or institution which is motivated by, or has overtones based on race, color, national origin, religion or sex which has the potential to have a negative impact on the installation human relations climate. An EOTI may include subjects other than military members, retirees, or family members.

  1. Incidents motivated by race, color, national origin, religion or sex are those in which the race, color, national origin, religion, or sex of those involved is perceived to have been a primary factor in its occurrence.

  2. Incidents with overtones occur when race, color, national origin, religion or sex of those involved is perceived to have been a contributing factor in the

    occurrence or severity of the incident.

Content from External Source
 
Last edited:
Back
Top