Radio host warns that agent provocateurs will commit terror to
frame patriots
Savage: Obama Regime Will Stage Violence To Crush Dissent
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, April 21, 2010
Popular talk show host Michael Savage has warned that the “illegitimate”
Obama regime is planning to use agent provocateurs to stage violence or
acts of terror in order to frame Tea Party members as violent extremists and
crush free speech in America.
Savage’s rant was in response to Council on Foreign Relations member and
Time Magazine journalist Joe Klein, who told Obama attack dog Chris Matthews
during an MSNBC interview that some of the rhetoric coming from Tea Party
members borders on sedition.
Savage also made reference to BIll Clinton’s comments to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer last week in which the former President implied that rising anger directed towards the federal government could cause another domestic terror attack on the scale of the Oklahoma City bombing to take place, which is nothing less than a veiled threat as anyone who has investigated the OKC bombing in any depth will understand.
Savage labeled Klein and his ilk “horses arses” for attempting to charge 80 per cent of Americans with sedition for dissenting against the government, stating that the majority of Americans see the Obama administration as an “illegitimate government”.
Savage said that it was Obama and not the American people who was committing sedition against the constitution by forcing policies upon the American people that they had never voted for.
“You want us to be arrested for speaking out against the President? Kiss my behind Joe Klein, how’s that for sedition?” proclaimed Savage.
Savage warned Americans not to be provoked into taking the bait and committing violence.
“They have probably sent agent provocateurs in there with guns – I can guarantee you that this government is going to do something along those lines,” said Savage, adding, “It doesn’t take a genius to know what this illegitimate band of gangsters is going to do next,” saying that a violent action somewhere in America will be conducted by an agent provocateur “that they sent into the crowds”.
“The October surprise that they have in mind for this world is not to be imagined,” continued Savage, “As we speak the enemies of freedom are planning their next move if it hasn’t been done already, they’ve already planted the agent provocateurs in the Tea Parties and they’re only waiting to set them off like the sleeper cells that Al-Qaeda allegedly had in the United States of America.”
“Mark my words, I would hazard a guess, knowing how politicians have worked who don’t have the interests of the people at heart….that the agent provocateurs have been planted like sleeper cells inside the Tea Parties and they’re gonna let them go off all at once, make no mistake about it they want that to happen, they want the flashes to go off, and they will be behind it in my estimation,” said Savage, adding that if action is not taken to stop it, “The iron heel fascism of the left will have crushed free speech in America.”
With the media ceaselessly hyping the inevitability of violence by obsessing about stories like “Jihad Jane” and the Hutaree raid, and then connecting it with libertarians, constitutionalists, tea party members and basically anyone who expresses dissent, the groundwork is clearly being prepared for some kind of false flag that will be used to frame the most vociferous critics of the Obama administration.
If President Obama wants to run again in 2012, he may need to prove
to the state of Arizona that he was in fact born in the United States.
That is, if the efforts of the fringe "birther" movement manage to turn
a small win into a big victory.
An amendment made by a Republican member of the state's House of
Representatives, Rep. Judy Burges, to a bill concerning how candidates
can get on Arizona's ballot, would require them to show documents to
prove they are a "natural born citizen."
Now dubbed the "birther bill," the provision won a preliminary 31-22 vote,
but the bill itself still faces a formal vote before it is sent to the state's Senate.
Attempts have been made in other states, such as Florida and Oklahoma, to introduce similar legislation. None of them have ever become law.
"Republicans continue to take Arizona down the wrong track by wasting taxpayers' time on frivolous legislation instead of working on important issues like health care for kids and seniors and education," said Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, a Democrat, in a statement.
Regardless of whether or not the bill is passed, it likely will face multiple legal challenges.
"While everyone has an interest in ensuring that only eligible citizens run for President, there are obvious issues with states implementing what could become a patchwork of different tests for a presidential candidate to prove his/her citizenship," said a spokesman for Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett in an e-mail to The Arizona Republic.
This latest effort by the "birther" movement to challenge Obama's eligibility as President comes on the heels of an Army doctor who faces a court martial for refusing to deploy to Afghanistan because the order is "illegal."
"I believe all servicemen and women, and the American people, deserve the truth about President Obama's constitutional eligibility to the office of the presidency and the commander in chief," Lt. Col. Terry Lakin said in a video statement posted on YouTube last month.
The conspiracy theory regarding Obama began during his campaign for President, with followers often arguing he was really born in Kenya, and that the certification of live birth his officials released is fake.
These claims have largely been dismissed by the general public.
Similar concerns regarding Sen. John McCain, who was born outside the United States in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936, were also also briefly raised in 2008. However, questions of his eligibility did not generate the same kind of fervor.
WE KNOW OBAMA IS DESTROYING AMERICA’S HEALTH-CARE SYSTEM. WE
KNOW HE’S DESTROYING OUR MILITARY. AND NOW HE’S DECIDED TO DESTROY
OUR SPACE PROGRAM AS WELL. THIS WEEK, OBAMA ANNOUNCED THAT HE’S
GOING TO END NASA’S CURRENT SPACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM. HE’S GOING
TO HAND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OVER TO PRIVATE COMPANIES. AND HE’S
GOING TO LET THEM TAKE OVER THE WORK OF BUILDING NEW SPACE SHUTTLES.
OBAMA SAYS HE THINKS THAT PRIVATE COMPANIES CAN BUILD THE CURRENT
SPACE SHUTTLE'S REPLACEMENT QUICKER AND MORE CHEAPLY THAN NASA.
BUT GUESS WHAT? THE SOONEST A PRIVATELY BUILT SPACE SHUTTLE CAN BE
READY IS 2014. AND WHAT IS OBAMA DOING IN THE MEANTIME TO GET ASTRONAUTS AND CARGO INTO SPACE? BUYING A TICKET ON A RUSSIAN ROCKET. HE’S BUYING SIX SEATS EACH YEAR ON RUSSIA'S SOYUZ SPACECRAFT FOR HOWEVER LONG AS IT TAKES THESE PRIVATE COMPANIES TO BUILD A REPLACEMENT.
AND JUST WHO ARE THESE PRIVATE COMPANIES? LOCKHEED MARTIN IS ONE. JUST THIS YEAR THEY’VE GIVEN $800,000 IN CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS TO DEMOCRATS. WHO ELSE? BOEING, WHO’S NOW BASED IN CHICAGO AND HAS GIVEN $900,000 SO FAR TO DEMOCRATS IN 2010. AND THOUGH OBAMA IS INCREASING NASA’S BUDGET BY 6 BILLION DOLLARS, MOST OF THAT MONEY WILL GO TO “SEED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.” IN OTHER WORDS, IT WILL GO TO PAY OFF THE SAME COMPANIES THAT JUST CONTRIBTED TO OBAMA’S FRIENDS. GIVE A MILLION, GET A BILLION. NOT A BAD INVESTMENT FOR BOEING.
SO OBAMA IS DESTROYING THE SPACE PROGRAM THAT GOT US TO THE MOON. AND HE’S MAKING US DEPENDENT ON RUSSIA – THE SAME NATION WE FOUGHT FOR DECADES IN THE SPACE RACE – TO GET ASTRONAUTS INTO SPACE. AND ON TOP OF IT ALL, HE’S USING NASA TO FUND A MASSIVE PAYOFF OF HIS CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTORS. SPACE CADET OBAMA MAY BE ABOUT TO BLAST OFF, BUT HE’S LEAVING AMERICA DOWN FOR THE COUNT.
Police chased reporters away from the White House and closed Lafayette Park today in response to a gay rights protest in which several service members in full uniform handcuffed themselves to the White House gate to protest "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
People who have covered the White House for years tell me that's an extremely unusual thing to do in an area that regularly features protests.
A reporter can be seen in the YouTube video above calling the move "outrageous" and "ridiculous."
UPDATE: U.S. Park Police spokesman David Schlosser tells POLITICO his service erred in pushing the reporters back, and stressed that the White House played no role in the move."That was strictly the U.S. Parks Police that screwed up – that has nothing to do with the Secret Service of the White House or the Administration," said Sergeant Schlosser. "We had some young officers who, when they were told to move the people back -- which we typically do when we're going to make arrests - they moved the people back a lot further than we typically do. That was a rookie, amateur error and they screwed up on that."
As some states consider bills to get more guns in the hands of gun owners, some states are considering bills aimed at banning open carry.
In California, the Democrat-controlled Assembly Public Safety Committee passed a measure banning “open carry.” The move is expected to draw opposition and will likely lead to a number of lawsuits.
Both sides are closely watching a Supreme Court case that challenges a Chicago ban on handguns kept in private homes for personal protection.
Justices are expected to issue their decision later this year, but the court earlier ruled that the District of Columbia could not impose similar limits without violating the Second Amendment right to bear arms.
The overriding question for California is whether the court will focus on the narrow issues pertaining to the Chicago case or answer broader questions, particularly whether state governments can enact gun controls.
In both Arizona and Oklahoma lawmakers are considering proposals of the pro-gun variety.
A bill allowing people with concealed-carry permits to openly carry weapons passed the Senate. House Bill 3354 passed Wednesday with no debate and now heads to the House. The vote was 33-15.
Sen. Tom Adelson, D-Tulsa, voted for it, saying he generally votes in favor of Second Amendment bills.
He said the state already has a concealed-carry law and that he didn’t think the measure was a “huge jump.”
Sen. Brian Crain, R-Tulsa, voted against the measure.
“I would not like to see 200 people carrying guns around Woodland Hills Mall,” which is in his district, Crain said.
In Arizona, Governor Jan Brewer has signed legislation allowing residents to carry concealed weapons without a permit. The law will take effect 91 days after the Legislature finally adjourns, something now scheduled for the end of the month.
"I believe this legislation not only protects the Second Amendment rights of Arizona citizens, but restores those rights as well,' Brewer said in a prepared statement.
An issue that has always ignited the passions, changes in gun laws have become increasingly present in state legislatures. The move is partly due to an uprising of gun activists concerned over the current administration’s stances on the Second Amendment. To date, the Obama Administration has signed laws allowing guns in national parks and it will likely not seek another Assault Weapons Ban.
President’s powerful right hand man drops bombshell on 17th anniversary of Siege
Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
Friday, April 23rd, 2010
A close advisor to Bill Clinton during his White House tenure dropped a bombshell this week on the seventeenth anniversary of the Waco siege.
Dick Morris, a longtime friend of Clinton and political advisor during his first term in office, told Sean Hannity that the President was not going to appoint Attorney General Janet Reno to a second term in office following the federal barrage on the Branch Davidian ranch at Mount Carmel.
“Bill Clinton orchestrated that takeover and in fact was so ashamed of what he did in Waco that he was not going to appoint Janet Reno to a second four year term” Morris stated.
“She told him in a meeting right before the inauguration day for his new term, that ‘if you don’t appoint me, I’m gonna tell the truth about Waco’ and that forced Clinton’s hand in reappointing her.” Morris continued.
Rather taken aback Hannity responded “I don’t remember you telling this story before.”
“No, it’s never been said before.” Morris answered.
The comments stemmed from a discussion regarding Clinton’s recent remarks that the Tea Party could “breed a new Timothy McVeigh”, with Morris explaining that McVeigh had stated that the BATF’s armed assault in 1993 had contributed to his violent mindset.
“I think that President Clinton might want to examine his own connection with the Oklahoma City bombing in terms of Waco, before he starts accusing people in walkers and wheelchairs who are trying to keep their medicare of being provocateurs” Morris asserted.
Before moving on Hannity said “Wait a minute, so what was the truth about Waco that Reno threatened to use against him?”
“I have no idea,” replied Morris, “but I know that he told me, Clinton told me that ‘I couldn’t not appoint Reno because she would have turned on me over Waco’.”
Watch the video:
Clinton Advisor: Reno Threatened To Tell The Truth About Waco If Not Reappointed
Morris’ contention is not to be taken lightly, according to Clinton’s communications director, George Stephanopoulos: “Over the course of the first nine months of 1995, no single person had more power over the president, and therefore over the government, than Dick Morris — no question about it.”.
Morris went on to become campaign manager of Bill Clinton’s successful 1996 bid for re-election.
The “truth” that Reno threatened to reveal, later came to light – the BATF fired the first shots at Waco and orders were given to use a prohibited chemical weapon in the form of CS gas grenades against the men, women, and children at Mount Carmel. This information was highlighted in the PBS Frontline documentary investigation Waco: The Inside Story, which reference FBI audiotapes and documentation.
While the cover story read that David Koresh burned his own family and followers to death in a mass suicide pact, the FBI later admitted firing the “potentially flammable devices” into the Davidian compound.
Morris’ revelation indicates that Clinton oversaw a cover up of the Waco siege and that Reno felt far enough removed from it to use it as an effective tool of political blackmail.
April 23, 2010 by Chip Barack Obama’s Dishonest Census Form
April 23, 2010 by Chip Wood
Barack Obama’s Dishonest Census Form
The White House couldn’t wait to trumpet the news: When President
Barack Obama completed his official form for this year’s census he
declared that he was… are you ready for this?… black.
For the next 24 hours, the announcement led the news in the national
media. It was the top story on CNN.com, the network news shows, cable
television and just about everywhere else I looked. For nearly a week,
you couldn’t escape it: “The President of the United States says that he
is black!”
Give me a break, please. Obama has been trumpeting his blackness for
decades. Appearing on Late Show with David Letterman back in 2009,
Obama brought the house down when he said, “First of all, I think it’s
important to realize that I was actually black before the election.”
Harty-har-har. When the laughter died down, Letterman played the
perfect stooge by asking, “How long have you been a black man?”
Lost in all the chortling are two very important points. First of all, Obama
isn’t really black; he is a person of mixed race. In the olden days, he would have been called a mulatto.
Second, the president had every opportunity to recognize this on the census form. It is no longer necessary to select between black and white (or Asian or American Indian, for that matter). If it is more accurate to say so, you can check two or three or even four boxes.
To the best of my knowledge, Tiger Woods has not disclosed what he said on his census form. But in the past he has identified himself as a “Cablinasian”—that is, a combination of Caucasian, black, Indian and Asian. It’s not only a more honest declaration than our president made; it also suggests that Tiger doesn’t take the matter of race as seriously as Obama does.
Then again, it’s his talent at golf, not his color that has made Tiger Woods one of the wealthiest and most famous athletes in history. While Obama obviously believes that it is his blackness that enabled him to become our president—not to mention a multimillionaire—thanks to the sales of his best-selling book, Dreams of My Father, which chronicled his search for his black identity.
His fixation with his black identity also helps explain why he and his wife Michelle could be members of Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity Church for so many years, without uttering a word of protest over his preacher’s overt racism. Obama remained a member in good standing of the church (which described itself as “an instrument of Black self-determination”) until it began to cost him votes.
But what about Obama’s white heritage? In declaring on the census form that he was black, the president in effect disowned his own mother; not to mention her parents—his maternal grandparents—who raised him for most of his childhood. All three were unquestionably white. The only black in the family was the father who abandoned him in childhood. I can appreciate how traumatic that abandonment must have been. But does that justify ignoring the white half of your heritage? Doesn’t that strike you as a tiny bit ungrateful?
By the way, there’s an interesting footnote here. While the changes to the census form were being debated 10 years ago, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and other civil-rights groups fiercely opposed allowing people to select multiple races to designate their heritage. At the time, they were concerned that too many “blacks” would check other boxes as well, with the result that “black” numbers would drop dramatically—thus reducing how much aid and other federal favoritism would continue to be bestowed on them.
It turns out that there was no basis for this concern: To the relief of everyone campaigning for more government benefits, any person who identified himself or herself as even partially black is included in the “black” total.
Does anyone besides me detect something incredibly racist in this whole issue? I keep thinking of the plot of “Show Boat,” one of the greatest musicals in the history of U.S. theatre. I’m sure most of you remember the 1951 movie starring Kathryn Grayson and Howard Keel. If you don’t, rent it sometime soon. It is absolutely enchanting.
In case you’ve forgotten, the plot turns on a bitterly racist fact of the times. Pete, the thuggish engineer on board the Cotton Blossom show boat, makes a play for Julie La Verne, the leading lady. Julie’s husband Steve, the leading man, beats him off. Swearing revenge, Pete tells the local sheriff that Julie is a mulatto and that she and Steve are guilty of miscegenation, which was a crime in Natchez, Miss., at the time.
Before the sheriff arrives, Steve takes a knife, cuts Julie’s hand, and swallows some of her blood. He then tells the law and the crew that he, too, is black—because he has “one drop of Negro blood in him.” Witnesses confirm that this is, in fact, true, and the sheriff drops the charges. Of course Steve and Julie have to leave the show and the ship.
In much of America at the time (the story takes place in the 1880s, when the scars of the Civil War still ran deep), one drop of Negro blood was all it took to be considered black.
I would like to believe that we in this country have come much further since then. I’d like to believe that the majestic words spoken by Obama at the 2004 Democratic National Convention are true, when he proclaimed, “There is not a black America and a white America and Latino America and Asian America.”
I’d like to believe it. But by his racist response to the U.S. Census, Obama has shown he doesn’t. In fact, his actions have delayed the day when they will be true. Shame on him for what he did… for denying his heritage and for helping make old wounds bleed anew.
Opposition to this reform has crystallized within the drug war establishment, and so has their spin.
April 23, 2010 |
The war on drugs will be on the ballot in California this November.
The nation will watch the state decide whether to tax and regulate
marijuana or continue to arrest adults for possession of this plant.
The vote on the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 will
impact many of the most important issues in the country today.
Californians will express how they want police resources used, if
adults who consume marijuana should be criminalized, how best to
deal with the tragic violence in Mexico, and what our priorities
should be in tough economic times. It’s no wonder that seven
months out, this issue has already generated thousands of news
stories around the world.
Opposition to this reform has crystallized within the drug war
establishment, and so has their spin. Here are their top five
talking points and the truth beyond them:
Drug Warrior Spin #1: Why would we authorize another harmful substance in our society?
The reality is that marijuana is already widely available in our society. Like it or not, it’s a mainstream recreational drug consumed by millions, including one in ten Californians last year, according to federal data. The California ballot initiative simply acknowledges that marijuana is here and that it’s more sensible to regulate this massive market, like we do with even more harmful drugs like cigarettes and alcohol. Prohibition of highly popular substances never works and brings terrible collateral damage. Alcohol prohibition didn’t keep people from drinking, but it did give us Al Capone and gun battles in the streets. No one dies over sales of Budweiser today.
Drug Warrior Spin #2: Regulation will cause marijuana consumption to skyrocket with addiction rates to match.
The truth is rates of marijuana consumption aren’t determined by penalties against it. If they were, the U.S. – which arrests an astounding 750,000 people for marijuana possession every year – wouldn’t have double the consumption rate of The Netherlands, where marijuana sales have been tolerated for decades. That principle holds true across this country as some states that lowered penalties against marijuana possession years ago have among the lowest rates of use while some states that retained harsh marijuana laws have among the highest. As for addiction, the risk of becoming dependent on marijuana is mild compared to most other drugs including alcohol and tobacco. In fact, most people who enter treatment for marijuana addiction in this country today are referred by the criminal justice system, but 65% don’t even meet the standard criteria for dependence.
Drug Warrior Spin #3: Regulating marijuana will aid drug cartels.
It is practically Orwellian to claim that state regulation of marijuana would benefit criminal cartels. More than 20,000 Mexicans have died in the last three years thanks to prohibition. There is nothing inherent about the plant that has caused these brutal murders. Banning marijuana makes it worth more than gold, so valuable that people are willing to kill each other over the right to sell it. By regulating marijuana and beginning to bring its production and distribution under the rule of law, we would eliminate the cartels’ existing monopoly and dramatically siphon their profits. They would be the biggest losers in this reform.
Drug Warrior Spin #4: Regulating marijuana would cost society more than the taxes it generates.
Taxing marijuana like alcohol statewide would generate $1. 4 billion in California alone, according to the state Board of Equalization. Californians will also save hundreds of millions in scarce law enforcement dollars currently devoted to enforcing these futile laws. Yet opponents say that drugged driving, increased health care costs, and lost productivity will end up costing much more than taxes would generate. By that logic, alcohol, which causes nearly 100,000 American deaths annually, should be illegal and warrant life without parole. The bottom line is that marijuana is California’s largest agricultural commodity, freely consumed by millions with no regulations or protections, and with no financial benefit to the state. In this economic climate, this is a reality we literally can’t afford to ignore any longer.
Drug Warrior Spin #5: What kind of message does regulating marijuana send to kids?
The irony is that failed marijuana prohibition does nothing to protect kids. Despite 30 years of “Just Say No,” half of high-school seniors admit to trying marijuana. Students are more likely to smoke marijuana than cigarettes and say it’s easier to buy marijuana than alcohol because drug dealers don’t ask for ID. Even more chilling, of the 78,000 Californians arrested for marijuana offenses in 2008, one in five was a child under 18 and half were under 30. Out of control access and mass arrests are prohibition’s true impact on our youth. State regulation will reduce that access, separate marijuana from harder drugs, and allow us to focus on effective youth drug education programs.
We will see these arguments play out repeatedly over the next six months. In the end, California will get to choose between two very different models of dealing with marijuana in our society.
After Fox News analysts spent most of Friday defending Arizona’s bill to target illegal immigrants, Judge Andrew Napolitano offered a different take on the controversial measure.
When asked about Gov. Jan Brewer, Napolitano said her signing of the bill into law will have disastrous consequences:
Napolitano: She’s gonna bankrupt the Republican Party and the state of Arizona. Look at what happened to the Republicans in California with the proposition –
Cavuto: What happens?
Napolitano: Ah, Hispanics — who have a natural home in the Republican Party because they are socially conservative — will flee in droves. She’s also gonna bankrupt her state, because no insurance company will provide coverage for this. And for all the lawsuits that will happen — for all the people that are wrongfully stopped — her budget will be paying for it. Her budget will be paying the legal bills of the lawyers who sue on behalf of those that were stopped.
This will be a disaster for Arizona — to say nothing of the fact that it’s so unconstitutional that I predict a federal judge will prevent Arizona from enforcing it as soon as they attempt to do so. That will probably be tomorrow.
The new law, which will take effect in late July or early August, was cheered by many, including Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whose tough crackdowns have made him a hero in the anti-illegal immigration community. He said it gives him new authority to detain undocumented migrants who aren’t accused of committing any other crimes.
“Now if we show they’re illegal, we can actually arrest them and put them in our jails,” Arpaio said.
Critics claim the bill will effectively encourage racial profiling. President Barack Obama branded it “misguided.” Hispanic groups across the country tend to agree with Napolitano’s assessment of the bill.
Immigrant advocates say the bill could worsen an already tenuous relationship between law enforcement and Hispanics in Arizona.
State Sen. Rebecca Rios, a Phoenix Democrat and fourth-generation Arizonan, said she’s concerned about her 14-year-old son being harassed by police because of his brown skin, black hair and dark-brown eyes.
“I don’t want my son or anyone else’s son targeted simply because of their physical characteristics,” Rios said. “There’s no reason I should have to carry around any proof of citizenship, nor my son.”
Once again, radio host Michael Savage has read the tea
leaves of the nation.
Once again, radio host Michael Savage has read the tea leaves
of the nation. Savage has a long history of nailing issues that no
one else really covers, yet are so important to the very backbone
of what’s left of our nation. For instance, he was
correct on his prediction of the Duke Lacrosse player’s case,
though the criminal who falsely reported a crime is still allowed
to walk free. He was correct in his dedication to the Haditha
Marines, so far all of them having been exonerated for any
wrong doing in the manufactured “massacre. Savage also
correctly predicted the outcome of the Dubai ports deal, the
Immigration Reform debacle of 2007 and many others.
The issue at hand is this: for years Michael Savage has said repeatedly that this country is controlled by, among others, Goldman-Sachs. Now, the media likes to portray those of us who see the writing on the wall as “conspiracy theorists”, “birthers”, “truthers” or whatever, as long as it ridicules something they are too stupid to investigate. The true sin of the modern age is willful ignorance. The semi-educated puffballs in the media need to invent a silly word to describe people who might just have a finger on the pulse of a nation being screwed by old blood and old money.
At any rate, Savage predicted the current furor over Goldman-Sachs simply by observing that the strings of what was once a powerful nation are being pulled by men in red power ties, not by men of conviction and concern for the Constitutional well-being of a nation. As we contemplate what we think will happen in November, let’s keep in mind that it takes such conviction and concern to actually do something. Whining at a Tea Party is one thing. Taking action is another thing altogether. There is an entire media army against this so-called “movement”. But I defy them to actually do something. While they fawn over the Republican propaganda of Rush and Hannity, it would best serve those actually willing to do something to heed Michael Savage, who is beholden to no one.
While I’m all about protesting and expressing outrage at the thug mob that has taken over this country, and the utter incompetence of the worst Congress in the history of this nation, it is always best to listen in the night for the call of Paul Revere.
In this case, it’s Michael Savage.
And there ain’t gonna be any lights to see until it’s too late.
Andrew T. Durham
Send email feedback to Andrew T. Durham
Biography - Andrew T. Durham
Andrew T.Durham is a graduate of State University at Albany, with a degree in Psychology/Philosophy. In the late 80's to mid 90's he was instrumental in creating ground-breaking outreach/prevention programs, as well as being a highly successful public speaker. A former acupuncturist and clinician (primarily to inner city adolescents), he has also been a consultant to the Massachusetts State Department of Public Health and several non-profit organizations. He is an accomplished musician - proficient in 7 instruments - , actor and author of 10 plays, 5 of which have been produced.
Military personnel blow the whistle on exercise which involved troops taking protesters to concentration camps
Kurt Nimmo & Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, April 29, 2010
In a shocking development that outstrips even
the infamous MIAC report, it has emerged via
whistleblowers that the U.S. Military in Kentucky
is training to confront Tea Party protesters and
anti-government demonstrators, who in official
intelligence advisories are described as bomb
-making terrorists.
On April 17, the Courier-Journal in Louisville,
Kentucky, reported on a military exercise dubbed
“Mangudai,” named after the special forces of
Genghis Khan’s Mongol army who could fight
for days without food or sleep. The Kentucky
newspaper portrayed the exercise as an effort t
o train soldiers to battle the Taliban in Afghanistan.
“Designed to test the limits of officers’ physical, mental and emotional endurance, the emerging Army exercise offered a revealing window onto modern combat training in the era of Iraq and Afghanistan,” Chris Kenning wrote for the newspaper. “Over three days last week, participants had to crawl on their bellies under real machine-gun fire, shimmy commando-style over a single rope high in the air and march for more than 22 miles through forests.”
But according to information received by The Patriot Post blog, there is another aspect to the military exercises not reported by local media.
“This week, I was contacted by a number of military personnel, enlisted and officer ranks, who expressed concern about a military exercise underway at Ft. Knox, the U.S. Bullion Depository. As with most such exercises, the Ft. Knox alert occurred in stages, as if real time intelligence was being provided at various intervals,” writes Mark Alexander.
Alexander cites an intel advisory issued on Friday, April 23, 2010, that identifies terrorist threat adversaries as “Local Militia Groups / Anti-Government Protesters / TEA Party” (see image below).
In short, the military was training in Kentucky to take on mythical militias — no word if they were of the FBI-created variety — and remarkably the non-violent Tea Party movement.
“Anti-Government – Health Care Protesters have stated that they would join the TEA Party as a sign of solidarity” during a protest at Fort Knox. The Tea Party “groups are armed, have combative training and some are former Military Snipers. Some may have explosives training / experience,” according to the intel report.
An intel report update, dated Monday, 26 April 2010, noted that a “rally at the Militia compound occurred,” and “Viable threats … have been made… Many members were extremely agitated at what they referred to as Government intervention and over taxation in their lives. Alcohol use ‘fanned the flames.’ Many military grade firearms were openly carried. An ad hoc ’shoot the government agent’ event was held with prizes (alcohol) given for the best shot placement.”
In addition to being drunkards, the report describes the Tea Party as bomb-throwers. “Components of bomb making are reported to have been on the site. Some members have criminal records relating to explosive and weapons violations.”
In response to the this “immediate threat,” the military established concentration camps for “mass arrests.”
QRF, short for the Quick Reaction Force of the 16th Cavalry Regiment and the 194th Armored Brigade were placed on two hour recall. “The 26 April order gives specific instructions for the 5-15 CAV (a 16th Cavalry battalion) to have weapons, ammo, vehicles and communications at ready, and it places the other 2,200 members of the units on two-hour recall. In other words, these orders are to gear up for defending Ft. Knox against Tea Party folks and their co-conspirators who oppose nationalization of our health care sector,” writes Alexander.
Military officers and enlisted personnel told Alexander about their concerns:
As one put it, the exercise “misrepresents freedom loving Americans as drunken, violent racists — the opponents of Obama’s policies have been made the enemy of the U.S. Army.”
They were equally concerned that command staff at Ft. Knox had signed off on this exercise, noting, “it has been issued and owned by field grade officers who lead our battalions and brigades,” which is to say many Lieutenant Colonels saw this order before it was implemented.
In fact, we can assume this “exercise” was orchestrated at the highest levels in the Pentagon. Lieutenant Colonels merely carry out orders.
An Army document entitled “Army Continuity of Operations Program (COOP)” spells out the militarization of the U.S. “Homeland” under Northcom.
In July, 2009, Infowars reported on a Missouri National Guard unit out of Camp Crowder engaged in a training exercise designed to take on a fictitious militant group. An earlier exercise in the Black Hills of South Dakota trained soldiers to confront an “insurgent group” with “a reputation for harassing convoys with ambushes and improvised explosive devices.”
In September, 2008, the Pentagon announced the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team would be deployed in the United States under the control of Northcom. “They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack,” the Army Times reported. (Emphasis added.)
Since the end of the Civil War deployment of the U.S. military inside the U.S. has been prohibited under The Posse Comitatus Act.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
U.S. Army Trains To Confront Tea Party Terrorists 140410banner4
In early 2006, the 109th Congress passed a bill containing controversial provisions granting the president the ability to use federal troops inside the United States in emergency situations. These changes (in Section 1076) were included in the John Warner Defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2007. In 2008, Congress restored many of the earlier limitations on the president’s ability to deploy troops within the United States, but Bush issued a signing statement indicating he was not bound by the changes. Obama has taken up with signing statements where Bush left off.
A report issued in 2008 by the U.S. Army War College discussed the use of American troops to quell civil unrest brought about by a worsening economic crisis. The report from the War College’s Strategic Studies Institute warned that the U.S. military must prepare for a “violent, strategic dislocation inside the United States” that could be provoked by “unforeseen economic collapse” or “loss of functioning political and legal order.”
For more than a decade the Pentagon has endeavored to acclimate Americans to the presence of troops on the streets. Instances of the Pentagon putting troops on the streets are numerous and have increased in frequency over the last few years.
In March of 2009, Infowars reported on U.S. Army soldiers dispatched in Samson, Alabama, supposedly in response to a rampaging gunman.
In December, 2008, the Marine Corps Air and Ground Combat Center and the local California Highway Patrol worked together “in a joint effort to reduce accidents and drinking and driving” in San Bernardino County, a blatant violation of Posse Comitatus.
The Iowa National Guard planned an exercise in the small town of Arcadia but rolled back the invasion after citizens complained about soldiers patrolling the streets of an American town.
Military police were positioned at the 2009 Kentucky Derby and in April of the same year 400 National Guard Combat Support Battalion troops were dispatched to “maintain public order” at the Boston Marathon.
In April of 2009, an Infowars reader sent a page taken from the Hardeman County, Tennessee, Bulletin Times announcing a seat belt checkpoint to be conducted on April 4 “in conjunction with a Homeland Security training exercise by the 251st Military Police in Bolivar who recently returned from Iraq.”
On April 15, 2009, we reported on how the Maryland National Guard was put on alert in anticipation of Tax Day nationwide Tea Party protests. A Force Protection Advisory issued on April 11 instructed the National Guard to be on alert during the Tea Party protests because Guardsmen and Guard facilities might become “targets of opportunity.” It was later learned that the Department of Homeland Security had put the protesters under surveillance.
Adding the Tea Party to the list of “insurgents” is a new and especially surreal development, but hardly an unexpected one considering the fear of the establishment to this growing political movement.
A poll conducted earlier this month found supporters of the Tea Party to be primarily white, male, married and older than 45.
“Of the 18 percent of Americans who identified themselves as supporters, 20 percent, or 4 percent of the general public, said they had given money or attended a Tea Party event, or both. These activists were more likely than supporters generally to describe themselves as very conservative and had more negative views about the economy and Mr. Obama. They were more angry with Washington and intense in their desires for a smaller federal government and deficit,” the New York Times reported.
They are not, as the DHS and the Southern Poverty Law Center would have it, disgruntled returning veterans, white supremacists, and violent militia members who hate Obama because of his skin color.
Over the last several months the government and corporate media have endeavored to portray this demographic as potentially violent and has fallaciously connected it to white supremacists and a mythical militia movement that is supposedly gearing up to attack the government.
If we are to believe the above report, the U.S. military is preparing to attack Tea Party supporters. All that will be required is an appropriate false flag event to set this act in motion.
Obama trekked to Quincy, Illinois, today to pitch his Wall Street shell game. Obama’s pitch is designed to coincide with the Goldman Sachs dog and pony show now dominating the corporate media.
The local Tea Party decided to greet the president but the local constabulary was having nothing to do with it — they sent out riot cops to intimidate the Tea Party protesters. It seems they were in cahoots with the Secret Service.
“In addition, the Secret Service told the Riot Police to ‘push the crowd back as far as you can, out of sight’… So, this is what your dear leader thinks of YOU America. He doesn’t want to even see your face or know of your existence if you don’t agree with his policy,” notes a blogger.
Meanwhile, in Arizona, pro-illegal alien demonstrators throw water bottles at cops and nothing happens. No riot cops are dispatched.
ee
Is something wrong with this picture?
From the Sharp Elbows blog:
11PM UPDATE from Gateway Pundit: We did everything the local police asked. We moved where they directed us. We moved when they asked us to. We double-checked that we were in an acceptable place on the street. We did not disobey the police and stand and sing God Bless America as some kind of protest. We stood on the corner and sang because we were told it was OK to stand on the corner and sing. That report is a complete whitewash for the Obama Administration’s overreaction to old ladies with American flags. And, if the Whig-Herald wants us to post video of the entire event…
Herald Whig: There were a few tense moments when the crowd moved west down York toward Third Street after the president’s motorcade arrived. A Secret Service agent asked the crowd to move back across the street to the north side. When the crowd didn’t move and began singing “God Bless, America” and the national anthem, Quincy Deputy Police Chief Ron Dreyer called for members of the Mobile Field Force to walk up the street.
DETROIT/FORT HOOD, Texas (Reuters) - Three times a week, Mike Lackomar climbs into his truck and drives the same delivery route through the suburbs of Detroit.
U.S.
Lackomar is an independent contractor for a private parcel company. If you live northwest of this battered city and you recently purchased something from a home shopping network, there's a good chance the 36-year-old handled your package.
But there is one small item that never leaves his truck: a green nylon satchel Lackomar jokingly calls "the football," a reference to the briefcase with codes for a nuclear strike kept close to the U.S. president. Inside, along with a pocket knife and a small first aid kit, is a sealed envelope containing codes, rallying points and detailed plans that Lackomar would use to mobilize his squad of armed citizen-soldiers in an emergency.
Lackomar is a team leader in the Southeast Michigan Volunteer Militia (SMVM), the largest and most visible of this state's many small private armies. He is a husband, a father and a musician. But his favorite picture on his Facebook page shows him standing in front of a snowmobile trailer packed with rifles, clips and ammunition boxes, a picture he laughingly admits looks "like an evidence photo from the 6 O'clock News."
The SMVM is one of 200 armed militias in the United States, a number that has quadrupled since 2008, according to the Anti-Defamation League, a civil rights watchdog, which says they may have 6,000 members and many other adherents.
MILITIAS: HARMLESS UNTIL THEY ARE NOT
The United States is one of the few Western democratic countries that permit independent militias.
Their rapid growth coincides with a sharp rise in partisan rhetoric as the November U.S. congressional elections draw nearer. Depending on your perspective, they are either patriots or paranoid. Experts in law enforcement and academia are divided as to how big an actual threat they may pose. But they all agree on one thing: the groups are very well armed.
"Most (militia groups) are merely in the rhetorical and defensive stage," said Brian Levin, professor of criminal justice at California State University and an expert on militias and domestic terrorism. "But we don't know which groups are going to be benign and which are going to be small incubators for radicalism."
His point was underscored by the arrest in late March of nine members of anti-government extremist group called the Hutaree, whose website says its name means "Christian Warrior." They were charged with planning a cop-killing spree intended to spark a broad insurrection.
And in February, a computer engineer angry with the government crashed a small aircraft into an office building in Austin, Texas, housing the federal Internal Revenue Service. In a rambling six-page statement, the man said he hoped his act would help make "American zombies wake up and revolt."
Until their arrest, the Hutaree were considered brothers-in-arms by other Michigan militia groups, including the SMVM. At least two of the men indicted by the government in the case briefly trained with Lackomar's group.
Before the group hatched its plot, the only rap against it in militia circles was that its training practices -- like run-and-gun target shooting -- were not the safest.
"I knew a couple of the guys that are sitting in jail right now. They were nice people," said Lackomar.
That is not to say he condoned the group's plan. One Hutaree member who evaded the police dragnet asked a member of Lackomar's group for help retrieving weapons and other supplies he had hidden at the group's safe house.
Instead, he got some unexpected advice: Turn yourself in. The suspect ignored the SMVM member, who went to the police.
Far from joining a rebellion, Lackomar's group and other militia members denounced the alleged plot and applauded the way the FBI and state police handled the raids.
"Nobody got hurt," Lackomar said. "There weren't any shots fired. They got everyone needed. They stopped the plan."
For that stance, Lackomar and other group members took some heat from what he calls "ultra-right ideologues" who consider the Hutaree victims of political persecution.
"TOYS"
Lackomar's group claims to have about 150 regular members and another 150 informal affiliates. At its annual field day and picnic recently, held not far from where the Hutaree are alleged to have hatched their plot, fewer than 100 people showed up.
All self-respecting militias pack what they call "toys" and the SMVM is no exception. Lackomar, who never served in the armed forces, favors an AK-74 assault rifle, an updated version of the iconic Soviet AK-47. Others in the group with army or marine experience prefer the AR-15, a copy of the M16 they used in their military days.
One member, a vice president of a financial services firm who prefers to be identified only by his radio call name, uses a Spanish version of the Heckler & Koch G3, a gun with a terrific report that Lackomar says "will rattle your fillings." Hence the man's call name: Thumper.
"When he's laying on the ground firing, the muzzle blast will dig trenches in front of him," Lackomar says with a hint of envy.
The lack of standardized weapons reflects both the ad hoc, volunteer nature of the SMVM and its egalitarianism.
There are no ranks, only positions like team leader and unit coordinator -- all decided by the group on a democratic basis. To become a voting member of the SMVM requires only two things, Lackomar says: possession of basic gear and a demonstrated competency with a weapon at 100 yards -- a hurdle that Lackomar says took him six months to clear.
Those two requirements aside, the SMVM insists it's open to anyone, regardless of race, color, religion or national origin. Lackomar nonetheless acknowledges the group's actual makeup is overwhelmingly white. "We're probably a little lopsided into the white end of the spectrum," he said.
THE MAD HATTER'S FOOTBALL
The SMVM trains once a month in a state park about 45 minutes outside of Detroit. The training, which includes a winter survival course, is designed to keep the unit in a state of readiness for an emergency.
For Lackomar, whose radio call name is "Mad Hatter," the emergency that triggers a militia response and tearing into "the football" might be a replay of a massive power outage in 2003 that paralyzed parts of the United States.
He ticks off other "tripwires" that might "drive our unit into action," including the imposition of martial law, a possibility many in the militia movement deem an imminent threat.
"The longtime discussion between militias has always been, 'What is the final straw?'" Lackomar said. "Freedom of speech has to be the final line. If we find ourselves in a situation ... where our freedom of assembly is suspended, demonstrations are outlawed or restricted, that's going to be the tripwire that sets everything off."
An assault on another militia group, like the Hutaree, could be a tripwire, too, Lackomar and others say. All it would have taken were for a few facts to be different.
"If what happened ... was a true crackdown on militias by a government run amok," he said, "not only would you have had the other units in Michigan say, 'Stop,' but it would have gone on all over the nation."
Lackomar provided two instances where he said the Michigan militia had activated -- at least on a small scale. Both involved standoffs between the police and a property owner who Lackomar said was being "crapped upon." The militia showed up, cradling but not pointing their weapons, as a show of solidarity with the property owner. In one case, Lackomar said the cops backed down. In another the property owner relented. No shots were fired or verbal threats exchanged.
Mike Vanderboegh, a militia veteran in Alabama who runs the influential blog called Sipsey Street Irregulars, adopts a more provocative tone in discussing what might trigger armed conflict.
"I can't see this (tension between federal authorities and the people) ending in any other way other than conflict," he said in an interview. "They (the government) truly believe that when they issue an order they think it will be obeyed. I don't see how that can end other than civil war."
PROTECTING THE CONSTITUTION
The militia movement has no single national leader and it contains wildly divergent strains of thought, according to militia members and experts. These include white supremacists and neo-Nazis; "Millenarians," who say major social transformation is imminent; and believers in "Christian Identity," a pro-white version of Christianity.
But the vast majority seem to be "constitutional" militias, fans of low taxes and small government -- values similar to those of many conservatives and the Tea Party movement.
They also see the possession of firearms as not only a right protected by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution but a patriotic duty, a symbol of the citizen's equal standing with the government.
At the heart of the movement is a fierce allegiance to the U.S. Constitution and a belief that its rights and freedoms are threatened by the government.
One leading light is Robert Schulz, founder and chairman of We The People Foundation, a non-profit that organized two national gatherings last year. The meetings popularized a check list of alleged constitutional violations cited by elements of the conservative Tea Party movement and militias, according to "Midwifing the Militias", a report by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a non-profit which tracks hate groups.
Such violations included undeclared foreign wars, gifting and lending money and credit to private corporations, unconstitutional tax levying and unenforced immigration laws.
"What we have is government ignoring the Constitution," Schulz told Reuters in interview.
"TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY"
Militia members like Lackomar, who is rare in his willingness to talk to the media, say that the movement is a healthy, democratic phenomenon with a real public benefit: providing an armed civilian alternative to the police and military. Although they don't quote Alexis de Tocqueville, the 19th century French observer of the United States, the militia members definitely see themselves as a deterrent to the "tyranny of the majority" that Tocqueville and others warned was a risk to the republic.
But the recent 15th anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing served as a chilling reminder of the danger posed by so-called lone wolves: individuals fired-up by the movement's rhetoric -- and trained in militia warcraft -- who go on to stage attacks without the wider group's blessing.
Timothy McVeigh, the man convicted of the bombing, briefly associated with militia in Michigan in the 1990s before breaking away. When he resurfaced, in 1995, he murdered 168 people.
Private armies have a long history in America. In the 1850s, in the run-up to the American Civil War, anti-slavery and pro-slavery militias clashed in Kansas and Missouri, for example.
The modern militia movement was stirred into action in large part by George H.W. Bush's "New World Order" speech in 1990. The president's rhetoric fed into longstanding fears among far right groups like the John Birch Society about internationalism and the United Nations.
The resurgence then was also boosted by deadly sieges involving federal law enforcement officers in Ruby Ridge, Idaho and Waco, Texas -- events militia members viewed as examples of oppressive government force used against citizens.
Today, militia members and experts say a number of factors are driving the new surge:
* The 9/11 attacks, which revived the notion that citizens should defend the United States against threats.
* The 2001 Patriot Act, passed in the wake of 9/11, which stirred fears that the government would use enhanced powers against ordinary citizens.
* Anger at government failure to stop mass illegal immigration from Latin America.
* The recent recession, the worst since the 1930s.
* The election in 2008 of President Barack Obama. Many see Obama as a Socialist bent on growing government, raising taxes and confiscating guns; his status as the country's first African American president exacerbated fears about him, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
* Healthcare reform, seen as exemplifying oppressive government power and intrusion -- the contemporary version of a 1994 ban on assault weapons that enraged the right wing.
The extent to which healthcare reform is galvanizing the militia movement cannot be overstated. In more than a dozen conversations with militia members in recent weeks, the topic came up over and over again without prompting.
Even Lackomar, who has no insurance and admits "I'm one paycheck away from disaster -- and I have been for years," says: "I hate the reform." What infuriates him, he says, is that it was enacted despite widespread opposition.
The Anti-Defamation League, which monitors militia websites, said anti-government extremists were widely citing healthcare reform as a justification for violence.
"Many militia members and other extremists believe that the recently passed health care legislation will be followed by the mass legalization of illegal immigrants, postponement or elimination of democratic elections, martial law and gun confiscation," it said.
CONSPIRACY THEORIES
Allegations of infringed liberties are amplified in some sections of the media and online where false stories flagging government plans to build internment camps to detain U.S. citizens in the event of unrest or to install a New World Order can find a willing audience.
"The Internet has really facilitated a lot of communications between the militias," Lackomar said. "It's also given a voice to a lot of the wacko element. So you have got to take the good with the bad."
Most law enforcement agencies see the bulk of militia members as law abiding citizens exercising their rights to associate, bear arms and speak freely.
But one factor separates the mainstream "anti-government right" from those on the fringe, said Mark Pitcavage, ADL director of investigative research -- conspiracy theories.
"If your conspiracy theories are pretty limited and mild, like Obama is not really a citizen, or if they're generic, like Obama is a Socialist and he wants to turn this into a Socialist country, that's one thing," he said.
"But if you have specific conspiracy theories about the New World Order, the unholy trinity, FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) concentration camps, martial law or door-to-door gun confiscation, then you have crossed the line," he said.
Some say the partisan polarization of the country's news media, typified by Rupert Murdoch's Fox News and MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, has also contributed to the militia's resurgence.
Robert Churchill, author of "To Shake Their Guns in the Tyrant's Face", a book about militias in U.S. politics, credits popular Fox News presenter Glenn Beck with bringing some ideas espoused by militias to a wider audience.
"You are beginning to get a spillover from far right discourse into main stream Republican discourse," he said.
SEND MONEY, GUNS AND TEA
In the early 1990s the militias were politically isolated. Today, they appear to be an armed point along a much bigger popular continuum that includes the Tea Party and the Oath Keepers, both gaining momentum fast.
Lackomar and other militia members, while certainly sympathetic to the Tea Party's goals, insist the two groups are unconnected -- even informally. "What we've tried to do is to make it so our group does not take political positions, except for constitutional versus unconstitutional, and the necessary focus on the Second Amendment," Lackomar said.
Still, in conversations with Reuters, SMVM members expressed admiration for the Tea Party's rapid growth in the past year and its ability to draw big crowds and mainstream politicians like Sarah Palin.
The online invitation to the SMVM's picnic this year encouraged guests to "show, shoot, shout then sip some tea with us." Lackomar says the reference was designed to appeal "to people who might be put off by the pure militia aspect."
The picnic culminated with a shooting competition. Among the promised targets: Copies of the U.S. tax form known as the 1040.
The Tea Party movement has sought to distance itself from the militia phenomenon, but the Oath Keeper movement seems closer to it in many ways while also sharing some common ground with the Tea Party.
Founded just a year ago by a Yale-educated lawyer and former paratrooper named Stewart Rhodes, it actively recruits serving and former military personal and law enforcement and asks them to pledge to defend the constitution -- even if it means disobeying orders. One of their slogans is "Not on Our Watch. At the top of its home page -- oathkeepers.org -- is a painting showing a rag-tag group of colonial militia men fighting British regulars.
On a recent warm, windy evening, a new central Texas branch of the Oath Keepers had its first official meeting at a community center annex in a residential housing complex at Fort Hood military base -- site of last November's mass shooting by a Muslim officer who killed 13 people.
Children rode bikes in the parking lot while Erik McKinster, a 39-year-old sergeant in the 1st Cavalry Division, introduced the Oath Keepers and their mission to four acting and former soldiers aged from their mid-20s to around 40.
"We don't care if an unlawful order comes from a Republican or a Democrat or is bipartisan," he said. "We don't need to follow orders from the president if they are unlawful, the oath is to the constitution."
The Oath Keepers are not a militia, but they share some Constitutional militia values and echo their call to action under certain circumstances.
Among orders they pledge to ignore are "any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps" and any order to "support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people."
The Anti-Defamation League sees them as prey to far right conspiracies. "They are not any orders that anyone (in government) would actually give," said Pitcavage. "They're only orders that you think someone might give if you believe in incredibly elaborate conspiracy theories."
McKinster, who was raised Catholic and is now an evangelical Christian and father of four, said he doesn't "believe for a second that there are currently secret plans to impose martial law ... but there are cases from the recent past where this has happened."
The central Texas group has over 30 members, he said, but none among law enforcement yet.
LONE WOLF
Few people have spent as much time tracking militia groups and domestic terrorism as James Cavanaugh, who spent 36 years as a lead investigator with the U.S. bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Cavanaugh was a senior commander on investigations into the "Unabomber" case, the bombing by Eric Rudolph of the 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games, the 2002 Washington, D.C. sniper case and a rash of racially-motivated church fires in Alabama.
To cap it all, he led negotiations during the 1993 Waco siege at which around 80 people died. He talked by telephone with Branch Davidian leader David Koresh throughout the group's gun battle with federal agents in an attempt to secure the release and rescue of wounded agents and children.
He is concerned that even if most militia members are law-abiding, web-fueled paranoia and wild theories can tip an individual or a splinter group toward criminality.
"They (militias) all sit around the campfires, rattling sabers and looking into the woods believing that somebody's coming. To make sure they come, they plan an attack," he said.
"The reason they are dangerous is they live on the edge of the abyss," he said. "Sure, there are groups who dress in camouflage, stockpile guns legally, talk incessantly about crackpot conspiracy theories, that don't fall into the abyss.
"The problem is there is always ... (someone) who attaches themselves, and if the group doesn't go over the rails the individual does," he said.
While security authorities say the majority of militia groups operate within the law, law enforcement is watching. Quietly.
Lackomar says that on the eve of the 2008 presidential election, four SMVM leaders were simultaneously visited by the FBI agents, who wanted to know if the group had heard any chatter about possible violence if Obama was elected.
And the swiftness with which the Hutaree were infiltrated and brought down shows the Feds are not asleep at the wheel.
That is in part because digital tools work both ways, allowing authorities to infiltrate the groups more easily.
IT'S A FAMILY AFFAIR
Back at the Michigan picnic near Detroit, Lee Miracle would do anything for a taste of baklava.
To the extent that the SMVM has a leader, it is Miracle, a 43-year-old, pony-tailed postal worker who has been a member of the movement for two decades.
For Miracle, as for a handful of other SMVM members, the militia is a family affair and all eight of his children, who are aged 6 to 18, have either trained with it or received weapons instruction. At the picnic in early April, Miracle's wife Katrina, a gracious Greek-American, came too, bearing not a weapon, but an enormous tray of baklava.
One of the group's more ominous looking pamphlets features Lee Miracle on the cover, standing on the front steps of a house, decked out in camouflage battle gear with a machine pistol resting on his hip. In the bottom left, a small child looks up at the armed, defiant figure in awe. "Defending your home is homeland defense," it reads.
In person, Miracle turns out to be a self-deprecating man with a fondness for jokes. What he seemed most frustrated about at the picnic was Katrina's refusal to give him any baklava.
"He has diabetes," she explained to a reporter.
Lackomar is also a family man. His sun visor has a kid's playing card attached depicting Loudred, a Rumplestiltskin-like Pokemon character, who spends much of his time stamping his feet on the ground and shouting. "My daughter says it fits me because I'm always yelling at other drivers," Lackomar said with a chuckle.
Yet he turns serious as he imagines scenarios under which the militia might mobilize, such as the day "it comes crashing down and the world ends" or the day "the communist Chinese or the Venezuelans or whoever come marching across the border."
His unit has been busy learning survival skills, such as making a bow from a sapling or fashioning a rock into a razor sharp knife.
"I carry, as part of my battle gear, a rifle and 290 rounds of ammo," Lackomar said. "If I can use a knife, and fashion a bow, and use that to feed my family, I can save the ammo for dropping bad guys."
(Reporting by James Kelleher, Ed Stoddard, Tim Gaynor and Matthew Bigg, editing by Jim Impoco and Claudia Parsons)
