According to DHS/MIAC all are potential Domestic Terrorists.

[Kodiak]

you go ahead and keep your head in the sand. Our own government has broadly targeted different groups in the past violating the civil rights of law abiding citizens. Why don't they mention some of the radical Islamic groups operating in this country? Because that wouldn't be PC. Why are their freedoms being protected while those of us who do not approve of the current administration are demonized?

 Nobody's rights have been violated by being mentioned in these reports. Their rights aren't violated until things like illegal wiretapping, etc begins. The only people being "demonized" here are those who are taking up arms and actively planning to attack the government. The Tea Party and Libertarians are not planning the later. The Hutaree militia, however, has.  These are reports on right wing militias, right wing militias have nothing to do with radical Islam. It would make no sense to discuss them in the reports, and if they did you'd probably be upset with them comparing right wing militias to radical Islam as well.  You are angry for much the same reason as American Muslims are angry for being continuously associated with Radical Islam. This was the DHS response to those complaints: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/dhs_crcl_terminology_08-1-08_accessible.pdf
I'll assume for the purpose of this argument that you are against the change in terminology. But would you be against the change in terminology pertaining to extremists in the right wing?

[SARC]

you go ahead and keep your head in the sand. Our own government has broadly targeted different groups in the past violating the civil rights of law abiding citizens. Why don't they mention some of the radical Islamic groups operating in this country? Because that wouldn't be PC. Why are their freedoms being protected while those of us who do not approve of the current administration are demonized?

 Nobody's rights have been violated by being mentioned in these reports. Their rights aren't violated until things like illegal wiretapping, etc begins. The only people being "demonized" here are those who are taking up arms and actively planning to attack the government. The Tea Party and Libertarians are not planning the later. The Hutaree militia, however, has.  These are reports on right wing militias, right wing militias have nothing to do with radical Islam. It would make no sense to discuss them in the reports, and if they did you'd probably be upset with them comparing right wing militias to radical Islam as well.  You are angry for much the same reason as American Muslims are angry for being continuously associated with Radical Islam. This was the DHS response to those complaints: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/dhs_crcl_terminology_08-1-08_accessible.pdf

 
I'll assume for the purpose of this argument that you are against the change in terminology. But would you be against the change in terminology pertaining to extremists in the right wing?

So according to you logic then nobodies civil rights will be violated by forthcoming AZ immigration laws.  If your a resident then you have no problem right? They are associating and advising LEO's to be suspicious of those who choose to display political paraphernalia that is contra to the current administration or expresses a differing political view.  The same way they will be advising LEO's to be suspicious of someone "who aint' from around here".  I experienced that level of ignorance from and LEO in Virginia, a VA state trooper pulled me, a blonde haired, blue eyed, english only speaking, active duty Navy, over and insisted that I provide him with my "green card" because I had New Mexico plates on my car.  New Mexico is the only state that says USA on the tag by the way.  He arrested me because I did not have documentation from INS, I only had a NMDL and a Military ID.  I was released upon arrival at his station by his superiors. I personally am not angry about anything I just choose not to remain ignorant of the administrations agenda.

[Kodiak]

I think there's a difference between a law that requires profiling and a report describing documented behaviors. Were legislation passed with content and requirements similar to 1070, pertaining to "right wing militias" and milsim stuff, etc., I'd be just as worried as I am about 1070.