Pentagon Trots Out New Definition Of Extremism, Targets Wrongthing

Wrongthink by Conservatives, of course

Pentagon has new definition for extremism in the ranks

The Pentagon on Monday issued a new definition of prohibited extremist activities providing military commanders with specific information that will help them determine whether service members are actively participating in extremist activities.

Commanders will also receive specific guidance for what to look for in past social media activity to help them identify whether a service member is participating actively in such activities.

The Pentagon’s new specific definition of prohibited extremist activities was prompted by the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol that led Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin to order an unprecedented one-day stand down for service members to discuss extremism in their ranks and what to do about it.

The Pentagon’s new definition goes beyond the previous definition of prohibited extremist activities that was considered too vague. But it maintains the focus on active participation in a prohibited activity as opposed to membership in a group, support for an ideology, or opposition to a political leader which are protected under the First Amendment’s right of expression.

Right, right, protected by the 1st Amendment. It looks like the military will be scouring members social media, and going after them specifically for their political beliefs.

Military commanders will be provided with a “two-part test” that first focuses on allegations of alleged extremist activity and then looks at whether there is active participation.

Fourteen categories will help commanders determine if a service member is an active participant in extremist activities. (snip)

The new policy will include guidance for how military commanders can take a service members past social media activity when reviewing whether that service member is actively participating in extremist activity.

So, a witch hunt.

The ABC article fails to provide any depth, because that would give the game away. The link in the first excerpt goes to the policy, and, starting on page 10, we see what they’re looking for. By their definition, if you are against abortion on demand you are an extremist. Donate to the wrong politician? An extremist. Democrats have tried to turn most on the political right into terrorists, so, military members who vote Republican will be extremists. The terms are actually not well defined, so, they can mean whatever the going Woke military says they are. And you can bet if you have one supporting the Oath Keepers and one supporting BLM/Antifa, the former is in big trouble while the latter isn’t. You can have one being a white nationalist and another being a black supremacist, and the white is in big trouble.

Don’t want to attend a critical race theory symposium or something similar? Extremist. This is going to cause a lot of people who would otherwise join the military from doing so, simply because they do not want to deal with the hassle, to go with all the other Woke stuff the military is doing, so, we’ll be left with Nancy and Soy boys, transgenders, and Wokesters who won’t fight.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

8 Responses to “Pentagon Trots Out New Definition Of Extremism, Targets Wrongthing”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    You should never take Teach’s word for anything.

    Teach: By their definition, if you are against abortion on demand you are an extremist. Donate to the wrong politician? An extremist.

    It’s a stretch from advocating the overthrow of the US government to being against abortion. If one advocates killing abortion providers or bombing clinics, then that’s a problem. See the difference?

    Here’s the long list of definitions from the actual document:

    (1) Extremist Activities. The term “extremist activities” means:
    (a) Advocating or engaging in unlawful force, unlawful violence, or other illegal means
    to deprive individuals of their rights under the United States Constitution or the laws of the United States, including those of any State, Commonwealth, Territory, or the District of Columbia, or any political subdivision thereof.
    (b) Advocating or engaging in unlawful force or violence to achieve goals that are
    political, religious, discriminatory, or ideological in nature.
    (c) Advocating, engaging in, or supporting terrorism, within the United States or abroad.
    (d) Advocating, engaging in, or supporting the overthrow of the government of the
    United States, or any political subdivision thereof, including that of any State, Commonwealth, Territory, or the District of Columbia, by force or violence; or seeking to alter the form of these governments by unconstitutional or other unlawful means (e.g., sedition).
    (e) Advocating or encouraging military, civilian, or contractor personnel within the DoD
    or United States Coast Guard to violate the laws of the United States, or any political subdivision thereof, including those of any State, Commonwealth, Territory, or the District of Columbia, or to disobey lawful orders or regulations, for the purpose of disrupting military activities (e,g., subversion), or personally undertaking the same.
    (f) Advocating widespread unlawful discrimination based on race, color, national origin,
    religion, sex (including pregnancy), gender identity, or sexual orientation.

    (2) Active Participation. For purposes of this section, the term “active participation” means
    the following, except where such activity is within the scope of an official duty (e.g., intelligence or law enforcement operations):
    (a) Advocating or engaging in the use or threat of unlawful force or violence in support
    of extremist activities.
    (b) Advocating for, or providing material support or resources to, individuals or
    organizations that promote or threaten the unlawful use of force or violence in support of extremist activities, with the intent to support such promotion or threats.
    (c) Knowingly communicating information that compromises the operational security of
    any military organization or mission, in support of extremist activities.
    (d) Recruiting or training others to engage in extremist activities.
    (e) Fundraising for, or making personal contributions through donations of any kind
    (including but not limited to the solicitation, collection, or payment of fees or dues) to, a group or organization that engages in extremist activities, with the intent to support those activities.
    (f) Creating, organizing, or taking a leadership role in a group or organization that
    engages in or advocates for extremist activities, with knowledge of those activities.
    (g) Actively demonstrating or rallying in support of extremist activities (but not merely
    observing such demonstrations or rallies as a spectator).
    (h) Attending a meeting or activity with the knowledge that the meeting or activity
    involves extremist activities, with the intent to support those activities:
    (1) When the nature of the meeting or activity constitutes a breach of law and order;
    (2) When a reasonable person would determine the meeting or activity is likely to
    result in violence; or
    (3) In violation of off-limits sanctions or other lawful orders.
    (i) Distributing literature or other promotional materials, on or off a military installation, the primary purpose and content of which is to advocate for extremist activities, with the intent to promote that advocacy.
    (j) Knowingly receiving material support or resources from a person or organization that
    advocates or actively participates in extremist activities with the intent to use the material support or resources in support of extremist activities.
    (k) When using a government communications system and with the intent to support
    extremist activities, knowingly accessing internet web sites or other materials that promote or advocate extremist activities.
    (l) Knowingly displaying paraphernalia, words, or symbols in support of extremist
    activities or in support of groups or organizations that support extremist activities, such as flags, clothing, tattoos, and bumper stickers, whether on or off a military installation.
    (m) Engage in electronic and cyber activities regarding extremist activities, or groups that support extremist activities – including posting, liking, sharing, re-tweeting, or otherwise distributing content – when such action is taken with the intent to promote or otherwise endorse extremist activities. Military personnel are responsible for the content they publish on all personal and public Internet domains, including social media sites, blogs, websites, and applications.
    (n) Knowingly taking any other action in support of, or engaging in, extremist activities, when such conduct is prejudicial to good order and discipline or is service-discrediting.

    • L.G.Brandon says:

      Right. So basically it’s a laundry list of how to oppress those who disagree with leftist communists without saying so. Thanks for printing that, it proves Teach’ points.

      It seems to place a lot of emphasis on extremist activities without naming the organizations that are extremist. Is Christianity extremist because it “advocates” not killing tiny people? Or perhaps Christians and Jews are extremist because they don’t support gays and trans?

      I assume being pro you-own-race is fine unless you’re white then it’s extremist. likewise killing white people in self defense would still be considered racist but murdering them with your SUV okay if you’re a black supremacist.

      The very idea that our military would even consider an anti American list like that is the reason we need to wipe these pigs out “by any means necessary”. Get them out of power and out of the country. We have laws against treason, sedition, espionage and such and anything like this is simply a Democrat ploy to exterminate normal Americans.

      • drowningpuppies says:

        Rimjob: You should never take Teach’s word for anything.

        Yeah, instead take the word of a miscreant who lied about joining the Army during the Vietnam war.

        Bwaha! Lolgf

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Let’s Go Brandon, once his team regains power over Americans, wants to deport Americans with different ideas. Does the US Constitution support that extremism?

        We DO have laws against treason and sedition.

        Sedition: conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state (Jan 6 comes to mind…)

        Treason: the crime of betraying one’s country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government (tRump and Jan 6 insurrectionists – tRump’s useful idiots, now headed to prison – come to mind)

        It’s looking as if many elected GOPhers (including tRumP and his unelected minions) conspired to stop the Constitutional certification of the 2020 Presidential election.

        We know that useful idiot, right-wing, reactionary extremists believed and obeyed tRump’s exhortations of a stolen election and stormed the US Capitol as part of the plot.

        In a functioning democratic republic with a functioning Constitution seditious traitors would be going to prison for their crimes (and some of useful idiots ARE being sentenced), but the elite GOP conspirators (tRump, Brooks, Bannon, Meadows, leaders of the Oath Keepers, IIIpercenters, Proud Boys etc) will no doubt escape. After all, they’re white males, and all they did was try to overturn an election.

        On Jan 6, after the building was cleared, at 8:06 p.m., VP Pence called the Senate back into session, and at 9 p.m., Pelosi did the same in the House. After debating and voting down two objections, Congress voted to confirm Biden’s electoral college win at 3:24 a.m.

        In other words, the Republican plot to overturn the election failed.

        • david7134 says:

          Look at Jeff work it. We desire to get rid of the people that don’t agree with us. But Jeff, the guy that does not understand a p value, completely changes what Brandon is saying, his favorite technique. No, Jeff, we desire to get rid of those that don’t abide the constitution. And, no, Trump did not subvert the constitution. He tried to fight the illegal election.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            david porter is mentally challenged. david porter doesn’t understand America or the Constitution.

            How do you plan to get rid of Americans you feel don’t “abide the Constitution”. We understand you’d be happy to have them killed.

            Did you finally find evidence that the election was stolen? Can you please share it?

  2. JG says:

    It is a way to destroy the military and make it “woke” so they can use it to attack America when the time comes. The question becomes is how bad will the military be after this and will they follow their leaders to go after Americans and not follow the Constitution.

  3. William Kemmler says:

    So let’s see.

    Internationally China now has an alliance with Iran. Iran is on the verge of going nuclear and is actively threatening the existence of Israel. Russia is poised to invade the Ukraine and has recently signed a military alliance with China. China is ready to invade Taiwan and overthrow its democratic government. And not only is the U.S. considered impotent to stop any of it we’re the laughing stock of the rest of the world.

    And here in the United States we have the highest inflation rate seen in decades. Covid is still a problem. Gas prices climbing with no end in sight. A supply chain problem that apparently has no solution. A president with severe mental deficit. A VP who isn’t qualified to clean the WH toilets. A corrupt democrat controlled Congress. Illegal vaccination mandates with a vaccine that is ineffective in producing durable immunity and with a very questionable safety profile.

    And the Biden regime is now more worried about purging the military of extremists and installing compliant military leadership that will follow the Biden regimes orders no matter their legality.

    Sounds like a plan to me.

Pirate's Cove