Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

As Pressure Mounts To 'Demilitarize' Police, Sovereign Citizens Arm For War

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by AKBill View Post
    The cross over membership is a real problem if the Tea Party would come out heavily against the Militia/Sovereign/III%/Oath Keeper types there would be some validity to the argument but they don't. Take the Bundy situation in Nevada, the Tea Party and many of there Public figures were busy denouncing the actions taken by BLM while the Militia/III%ers/Oath Keepers and other associated idiots were backing up there rhetoric with arms.
    Originally posted by JasperST
    Post your evidence that the TEA party is a catch all group of fringe right wing activists. And what that even means. Do you consider fiscal responsibility extremism, for example?
    I haven't seen anyone on this forum denouncing fiscal responsibility as "extremist." You're bordering on a strawman argument there. What is plain, though, is that some self-identified Tea Party folks are willing to accept anyone who shares a small government type mindset or who is critical of the current administration. The Bundy situation is a great example. As that situation unfolded, I saw several prominent Tea Party conservatives singing his praises ("Standing up for liberty against the nanny state!") despite some pretty clear evidence that Bundy was a run-of-the-mill anti-government sovereign citizen.

    I was once sympathetic to the Tea Party movement, but no longer. I distanced myself when they seemingly began to embrace anyone with a grudge against the federal government. I am a limited government conservative, not anti-government, and the rhetoric from some of these extreme libertarians is too crazy for me. I will continue to advocate for limited government but I won't identify as "Tea Party."
    LPSS
    Police Officer
    Last edited by LPSS; 10-19-2014, 06:47 PM.
    "Screw that. We can make bullets faster than they can make terrorists. Kill them all. Every last one." -Interceptor

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by LPSS View Post
      I haven't seen anyone on this forum denouncing fiscal responsibility as "extremist." You're bordering on a strawman argument there. What is plain, though, is that some self-identified Tea Party folks are willing to accept anyone who shares a small government type mindset or who is critical of the current administration. The Bundy situation is a great example. As that situation unfolded, I saw several prominent Tea Party conservatives singing his praises ("Standing up for liberty against the nanny state!") despite some pretty clear evidence that Bundy was a run-of-the-mill anti-government sovereign citizen.

      I was once sympathetic to the Tea Party movement, but no longer. I distanced myself when they seemingly began to embrace anyone with a grudge against the federal government. I am a limited government conservative, not anti-government, and the rhetoric from some of these extreme libertarians is too crazy for me. I will continue to advocate for limited government but I won't identify as "Tea Party."
      The TEA party folks typically are law abiding citizens. You'd probably have to go to a LE function to find a group of more law abiding citizens. Anyone broad brushing the movement to associate it with violent extremism is the one creating the false association.

      You saw several TEA party types sympathetic to Bundy. Wow. I was sympathetic too but was against the armed confrontation and said so here at the time, like most conservatives. I don't know what would have happened and glad it didn't get ugly but if government goes overboard it's bound to happen. And that's the main objection for me. For some people there is no such thing as government overreach and that was the heart of the discussion at the time. But it had nothing to do with the TEA party.

      I've heard extremists in any category or group I can think of but I don't identify the ideology with them.

      Comment


      • #63
        Jasper

        Lets take a quick check of right wing Christian Terrorism McVeigh, Cox, Rudolf, Christian Identity (arian nations, skin heads), The KKK, The IRA, I can go on and on

        As for the Christian Theocracy movement in the Tea Party you give me five national leaders in the movement I'll give you five quotes where they advocate laws based on Christian morality

        This is not to say the Left doesn't have just as much going on I just don't work left wing


        As for the Bundy situation you had people taking an armed overwatch position against local cops and federal agents, I have no idea how you justify that but to each his own.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by AKBill View Post
          Jasper

          Lets take a quick check of right wing Christian Terrorism McVeigh, Cox, Rudolf, Christian Identity (arian nations, skin heads), The KKK, The IRA, I can go on and on

          As for the Christian Theocracy movement in the Tea Party you give me five national leaders in the movement I'll give you five quotes where they advocate laws based on Christian morality

          This is not to say the Left doesn't have just as much going on I just don't work left wing

          As for the Bundy situation you had people taking an armed overwatch position against local cops and federal agents, I have no idea how you justify that but to each his own.
          McVeigh wasn't a Christian at the time, obviously you've researched this carefully. You can go on and on but I have no idea why. You stopped broad brushing and broke out the paint sprayers.

          You don't work left wing? I'm supposed to provide leaders and you can provide quotes on moral laws based on Christianity? You mean like male/female marriages? I didn't support Bundy, you can't read.

          Go back to "working right wing" in the Pizza Hut breakroom.

          Comment


          • #65
            Jasper

            No need to be insulting, you asked for examples of Christian Terrorist I gave you some, and yes there are many more than I posted. The point here is not to say "all Christians are Terrorists" the point (the same one I'm making about the Tea Party) is that in certain areas of Domestic Terrorism the suspects tend to fit a profile that includes membership in the Tea Party, and adherence to some form of Christianity. That is how we do our jobs looking for those things that are in common and finding out why.

            The same holds true for Sovereign Citizens, although every case is different most have ties to certain groups, similar socio economic positions, and religious ideals.

            As a libertarian, I often don't agree with what my government does or how they do it, that doesn't mean I can ignore those things I find uncomfortable or don't agree with when assessing a threat.

            The idea here is to find people going down these paths early enough so that we don't have to put them in prison, or pick up the pieces after an event.

            I feel we've kind of hijacked JJ's thread at this point so I'm done defending my position on the whole Tea Party thing.

            Comment


            • #66
              No, I asked you, with your plethora of investigative experience "working right wing" to cite examples of the TEA party adopting terrorists, Christian or otherwise. Your department apparently didn't did too deeply into McVeigh but that's beside the point. Tending to fit the profile of run of the mill TEA party types doesn't do it.

              You didn't defend anything. Maybe your department should transfer you to working left wing for a while because I think the stress has gotten to you. Or is the break room not large enough?

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by JasperST View Post
                McVeigh wasn't a Christian at the time, obviously you've researched this carefully. You can go on and on but I have no idea why. You stopped broad brushing and broke out the paint sprayers.
                Whoa, what?

                McVeigh was raised, and confirmed at the age of 17, as a Roman Catholic.

                In July 1994, nine months before the bombing, McVeigh sent a 23-page letter to his childhood friend, Steve Hodge. It contained the following:

                I know in my heart that I am right in my struggle, Steve. I have come to peace with myself, my God and my cause. Blood will flow in the streets, Steve. Good vs. Evil. Free Men vs. Socialist Wannabe Slaves. Pray it is not your blood, my friend.
                His beliefs wavered during his years in the military, but in 1994 he tried attending the Seventh Day Adventist Church and found that organized religion didn't really appeal to him. According to interviews he gave in 1996 and 2001, he had always believed in a Christian God, even though his ties to the Catholic Church had grown weak.

                He received the Roman Catholic sacrament a few minutes before his execution, but there's nothing unusual about a death row prisoner embracing organized religion right before death.

                That said, I don't think his Christian beliefs (Catholic or otherwise) were the driving force behind his terrorism. The Christian Identity religion seemed to play a far more important role, but CI is not something I'd consider Christian, other than the name. The CIM beliefs were deeply integrated into just about every aspect of the posse comitatus/aryan nation/militia/"patriot" movement of the 1980s and 1990s. It's freakishly disturbing stuff, especially 30 years out of context.

                Comment


                • #68
                  That's why I said he wasn't at the time.

                  www.theguardian.com/world/2001/jun/11/mcveigh.usa4

                  In a letter to the Buffalo News daily in New York state yesterday, McVeigh used the word "sorry" for the first time, but instantly rendered it meaningless. "I am sorry these people had to lose their lives," he wrote. "But that's the nature of the beast. It's understood going in what the human toll will be."


                  There was anger in Oklahoma City yesterday after his claim that the bombing of a federal government building was a "legit tactic" in his war against the excesses of central government. Yesterday, his lawyer compared his role to that of a pilot who drops a bomb on a foreign country killing women and children. "He does feel for people but he doesn't feel like he did anything wrong," Mr Nigh said.


                  In his letter, McVeigh said he was an agnostic but that he would "improvise, adapt and overcome", if it turned out there was an afterlife. "If I'm going to hell," he wrote, "I'm gonna have a lot of company." His body is to be cremated and his ashes scattered in a secret location.
                  JasperST
                  Bigfoot Country
                  Last edited by JasperST; 10-20-2014, 05:58 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    2001 was six years after the bombing. That's why I posted about religious opinions he expressed in 1994 and 1996.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by JasperST View Post
                      No, I asked you, with your plethora of investigative experience "working right wing" to cite examples of the TEA party adopting terrorists, Christian or otherwise. Your department apparently didn't did too deeply into McVeigh but that's beside the point. Tending to fit the profile of run of the mill TEA party types doesn't do it.

                      You didn't defend anything. Maybe your department should transfer you to working left wing for a while because I think the stress has gotten to you. Or is the break room not large enough?
                      I can give you concrete examples of Tea Partiers committing ideological violence and supporting those that commit or plot violence, but I'm not interested in insults and rude responses.

                      Again, stay safe.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by jjmacnab View Post
                        2001 was six years after the bombing. That's why I posted about religious opinions he expressed in 1994 and 1996.
                        You posted:
                        " know in my heart that I am right in my struggle, Steve. I have come to peace with myself, my God and my cause. Blood will flow in the streets, Steve. Good vs. Evil. Free Men vs. Socialist Wannabe Slaves. Pray it is not your blood, my friend."

                        And to you that proves he was a Christian? Can you explain? He said he dropped out of it, so you believe he meant after the bombing? Which Christian principle do you believe he was following then?

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by jjmacnab View Post
                          I can give you concrete examples of Tea Partiers committing ideological violence and supporting those that commit or plot violence, but I'm not interested in insults and rude responses.

                          Again, stay safe.
                          Interesting. Your response to me was me talking to someone else (or was I?). You SHOULD support your claim if you are going to insist TEA party people are committing ideological violence (what the hell is that anyway?) and supporting those that plot violence. You throw the bombshell out there, don't support jack then feign righteous indignation? Give me a break.
                          JasperST
                          Bigfoot Country
                          Last edited by JasperST; 10-20-2014, 07:21 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by AKBill View Post
                            Jasper

                            Lets take a quick check of right wing Christian Terrorism McVeigh, Cox, Rudolf, Christian Identity (arian nations, skin heads), The KKK, The IRA, I can go on and on

                            As for the Christian Theocracy movement in the Tea Party you give me five national leaders in the movement I'll give you five quotes where they advocate laws based on Christian morality

                            This is not to say the Left doesn't have just as much going on I just don't work left wing


                            As for the Bundy situation you had people taking an armed overwatch position against local cops and federal agents, I have no idea how you justify that but to each his own.
                            The IRA are/is right wing?

                            I realize that the IRA is decades old and has had several various incarnations calling themselves "IRA". Still, Sinn Fein and the at least the most active of the current "IRA" are far from right wing. They're moon-bat crazy socialist and communist driven leftists.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              I was talking about Christian terrorists not necessarily right wing

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 2499 users online. 161 members and 2338 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 158,966 at 05:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X