![]() |
|
![]()
March 28, 2010
Local news that's not local news yet?
Glenn Reynolds wonders about the timing of a series of federal raids in the general area of Southeast Michigan. Southeast Michigan happens to be where I live, and I'm wondering about more than just the timing. The focus of what has been repeatedly described as a "massive federal raid" is Adrian, Michigan, which is about an hour away from here. There's been speculation about precisely whom the feds were targeting and why, and Fox News reports that arrests were made for selling pipe bombs. Seven people have been arrested for allegedly selling pipe bombs in Michigan, Ohio and Indiana, Fox News has learned.A command post was set up last night right here in Ann Arbor, and residents of the Adrian area told Detroit's Action News station that it looked "like a small army had descended on the area": Helicopters were spotted in the sky for much of the night, and agents set up checkpoints throughout the area, including in Sand Creek and Clayton in Lenawee County. Witnesses tell Action News that it was like a small army had descended on the area.I don't find it surprising that news of the raids have been reported in Detroit (including Click on Detroit and the Detroit News) and by the Ann Arbor News (which has a lengthy background piece about Hutaree, said to be one of the targeted groups). What I do find a bit peculiar is that the town of Adrian (repeatedly described as looking like a small army had descended there) has a local newspaper, which has said next to nothing, except a vague article which says they're looking into it: ADRIAN, Mich. --This prompted a couple of angry comments at their web site: Daily Telegram is ALL over this story.....yeah right!!! Big local news like this and we find out FIRST from Detroit?!?!?!?!!!!!And, For a story in your backyard, I mean, come on, CLAYTON and SAND CREEK, it's rather pathetic the Telegram is 12 hours or more late on the story.If the place was looking like a small army had descended there, the lack of reporting seems strange. Get on it, guys. People might think there's a local news blackout or something. MORE: My thanks to Memeorandum for the link! Memeorandum also links some interesting background on the targeted "Hutaree" group from the Sipsey Street Irregulars, who say the Hutaree was shunned by Michigan militia groups: The Hutaree have indicated in the past that, much like John Brown, they WANTED to start a civil war, which is why no responsible militia group in Michigan was willing to ally with them.Last time I looked, wanting to start a civil war (insane as it is) was not a crime. Assuming they are crackpots, they still have the same constitutional rights as everyone else, and I hope for the sake of the rest of us that they are being respected. The last thing the country needs right now is another Waco. UPDATE (3/29/10): Now that there's been a press conference and indictments have been announced, there's a lot more news than when I wrote this post. From the Detroit News. The five-count indictment alleges that between August 2008 and the present, the defendants were trying to use bombs and other weapons to oppose the U.S. government.They sound like wacked out maniacs, and if they are found guilty, I hope they go to prison. Incredibly, some commenters below seem to think I was defending them when I expressed the hope that their constitutional rights would be respected. The latest one says, So now terrorists should have their rights respected?As to what double standard that is, I don't know. Again, these people are United States citizens, and until they are convicted, they have the same constitutional rights as any other citizen. AND MORE: The Daily Telegram (the local newspaper that was criticized yesterday) has a very comprehensive story today, with names and pictures of the suspects. According to the indictment, Hutaree members view local, state, and federal law enforcement as the "brotherhood," their enemy, and have been preparing to engage them in armed conflict.It appears that the law enforcement agents successfully defused a very dangerous situation, and much to their credit, avoided a repeat of what happened at Waco, where innocent people were killed. posted by Eric on 03.28.10 at 03:21 PM
Comments
Last time I looked, wanting to start a civil war (insane as it is) was not a crime. Look again, Eric: Levying war against the United States of America is the basic constitutional definition of treason. Crawford Kilian · March 28, 2010 11:02 PM "...they still have the same constitutional rights as everyone else" To sell pipe bombs? JoeCitizen · March 29, 2010 12:24 AM Talk about trying to put words in my mouth! CK, levying war against the United States of America is treason. But wanting to is no more of a crime than wanting to murder someone. JC I said they have the same constitutional rights as you or I. The Constitution does not include a right to sell pipe bombs. Did I imply in any way that it did? Eric Scheie · March 29, 2010 12:48 AM They were plotting to kill a police officer, then kill other officers at his funeral. Loat I checked, that's a whole friggin' boatload of crimes. MrBarrel · March 29, 2010 03:10 PM And by the way, plotting a civil was is a crime. It's called "sedition." Look it up, Einstein. * - Also, re: previous comment, that's "Last time I checked..." MrBarrel · March 29, 2010 03:14 PM Plotting civil war is very different than advocating it. As I tried to point out, they look like crazy people, but here's what they're accused of: ***QUOTE*** TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2384 If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both. ***QUOTE*** Violation of that statute involves more than "wanting to start a civil war." But regardless of what they're accused of, they still have their constitutional rights, and for the sake of innocent people, I am glad this didn't turn into a Waco siege. Eric Scheie · March 29, 2010 03:42 PM If by that, you mean you're glad the militia didn't open fire on Federal agents executing a warrant, then, yeah, I'm glad it didn't turn into a Waco siege, too. Bosola · March 29, 2010 05:27 PM No shit. No one said that they were only accused of "advocating" civil war. Do you really believe that they were arrested because they were only "advocating"? They were arrested because they were actively planning it. Look at what lengths you'll go to defend these homegrown terrorists. TRB · March 29, 2010 05:35 PM And oh yeah...way to defend potential cop killers. They're terrorists and should be treated that way. TRB · March 29, 2010 05:38 PM I'm not sure of what the issues are here. It appears a group of extremists were arrested for blatently illegal activities (selling pipe bombs) and for planning even more blatently illegal activities (murdering one police officer to set up a mass murder of police officers.) They were arrested in a way that demonstrated a lot of lessons learned from Waco, Ruby Ridge, and even Iraq. Overwhelming force and suprise, rather than a drawn out siege or a limited number of Federal agents. Law enforcement prepared and protected enough that they would be able to handle the situation, rather than get taken by surprise and potentially react badly. All told, I haven't heard of anyone dying yet, which in taking in for arrest multiple highly armed and prepared individuals is to me an indicator of success. Even though these folks are nominally on "the right", I would get hung up in neither the spectrum nor the "Christian" label. "Christian" is used by a lot of folks, and misused by many IMHO. The only reason to ally yourself with them or show ideological sympathy is political optics, which seems foolish to me. They are alleged to be very bad people; if they were anything close to as alleged it will boot conservatives little to do anything but condemn their activities in the strongest terms. That said, of course they should have the full constitutional protections we afford to citizens, and IMHO should apply to everyone. Innocent until proven guilty is a basic lesson I remember from my elementary school civics lessons, and it should be applied here, and in all cases. Society needs to protect itself, but not at the expense of the values that have made the U.S.A. a great nation. Fides · March 29, 2010 05:58 PM Read what I said. I didn't defend them at all. Nor did I say they were only advocating civil war; I commented on a post I read yesterday, and said (after reading the town looked like an army had descended on it) that I hoped their constitutional rights were being respected and there wouldn't be another Waco. (Which I am glad there wasn't/) "way to defend potential cop killers"? Are you kidding? These comments are getting a bit ridiculous. If they're guilty as charged they should go to prison. You'd think I was saying "Free Mumia" or something. I have zero sympathy for the crackpot group, and I thought I made that clear.
Eric Scheie · March 29, 2010 06:43 PM Planning Civil War is not a crime, but planning the murder of a policemen is a crime that you will do time, and forever have the attention of the US criminal justice system. Joe · March 29, 2010 06:49 PM (after reading the town looked like an army had descended on it) that I hoped their constitutional rights were being respected So now terrorists should have their rights respected? I guess if having standards is good, having double standards is twice as good! Davebo · March 29, 2010 07:18 PM Let's just say, incitement against the government wasn't illegal (but it is), plotting murder--no matter how profoundly it may supposedly serve Jesus--IS ILLEGAL. These people want to kill someone because of some misguided notion they're the foot soldiers of the supposed Anti-Christ. No, these people are their own collective of Anti-Christ. They're sick people. The scribe · March 29, 2010 11:03 PM They should have let police officers be murdered happen so nutty RW bloggers wouldn't whine about "timing"? Do you people realize how paranoid and un-American sounds? At the best, how small and petty? TruePatriot · March 30, 2010 08:03 AM They should have let police officers be murdered happen so nutty RW bloggers wouldn't whine about "timing"? I never made that argument, nor did anyone else I know of. By putting words in people's mouths you're simply debating yourself. Eric Scheie · March 30, 2010 09:41 AM Now that things have been clarified (I can see why folks might have been confused, especially if biased against the author), I really see only one major issue. The "double standard" that I believe was referred to is our treatment of non-U.S. citizen terrorists, who apparently have very little in the way of legal rights under the Bush or Obama admistrations. From the update: From the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..." One of the things about the declaration is that it is a broad statement of values. (which falls short on the discussion of slavery side, but gets it right on other issues.) IMHO, our values are what made us a great nation, not just the abundent natural resources and energy of our populace. From even before the constitution was adopted, the values we chose to represent were of the highest caliber (with some notable exceptions, see above.) Washingtons treatment of British and Hessian mercenary POWs was far kinder, at a time far more desperate than anything we are experiencing today, with the most powerful empire in the world at the time as our enemy and us a tiny state on the edge of the world. This was in an atmosphere where on occasion, orders had been given to not take American prisoners, and the conditions for those who were captured as atrocious. A large number of the British and Hessian POWs chose to stay in the new United States after the war, and their descendents no doubt fought in 1812, in the trenches in France, at Iwo Jima, and in Iraq. The double standard is that in our current was, we are doing our best to circumvent international agreements, not to exceed them. We've tortured some of our prisoners, which is far below the standards and values I value in my country. Personally, I've never held that there was any magical value in U.S. citizenship. The rights U.S. citizens have and should have are the rights I would like everyone to have. Lately, in dramatic examples, that hasn't been the case. Anonymous · March 30, 2010 12:40 PM I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that, compared to some of the others mentioned in the more leftward leaning blog posts-- Ex: In the Wake of Arrests in Three States, Right-Wingers Rush to Defend Terror Suspects, Criticize FBI | Firedoglake, or my favorite bigoted bloggers, who saw the word "Christian" and immediately jumped to speculating as to why why they weren't arresting the "muzzies," instead... Actual facts/charges be damned... Donald Douglas and Pam Geller spring to mind...) --you got a raw deal on this one... As you (along with we "commies" who support the ACLU) have learned, it ain't easy speaking up for the right to express dangerous, bigoted, hurtful, hateful thoughts... You're right... It isn't a crime to want to start a civil war, or even to say so... That isn't to say that we citizens, and law enforcement too, ought not pay close attention to the crackpots who express views like this, so that expressing that opinion never reaches the stage that these asses got to (with rights come responsibilities), but no, there is no crime in thinkin' it, or even saying it... Except for the last lines--I do think there's something special about US citizenship, and I do think it ought to afford those who have it special privileges not offered to non-citizens--I agree with the anonymous fellow above (3/30/10, 12:40 PM, just in case). The way I read the Constitution, it's "all men, not all citizens," and I do believe that because our legal system is the best in the world, we ought to use it whenever we detain or put anyone, citizen or otherwise, on trial... I'm not opposed to military trials, but I don't believe in this "not enemy soldiers subject to Geneva, not citizens subject to US protections" limbo we put them in at the start of this conflict... We're America, and we should abide by the ideals for which we fight, or amend them so that we once again can... (It's like civil commitment for pedophiles... Increase the legal penalties for the crime, but don't create some kind of civil fiction to continue detaining people who've served their prison time...) We're a nation ruled by laws and ideals, not by the things we want, short term... No one said it was supposed to be easy living up to our values... YMMV... repsac3 · March 31, 2010 04:43 AM Then I suppose you'll have no trouble with these terrorism suspects being treated like American citizen Jose Padilla? Anonymous · March 31, 2010 12:24 PM The Fibbies raid on the Hutaree was nothing more than an attempt to try to scare the real militias into disbanding. It won't work, in fact it will probably recruit more folks to militias. One wonders why the FBI can't/won't go after the Islamist "training camps" in the US, where future "martyrs" are learning how to kill Americans. One also wonders why the Feds can't stop the Zetas and other murderous Mexican gangs from coming into the US and killing American citizens. Why? Because the cowardly Fibbies know that the jihadis and Zetas will shoot back, whereas it was pretty obvious that the Hutaree were all bark and no bite. chicopanther chicopanther · April 1, 2010 12:22 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
April 2010
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
April 2010
March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
metaphorical imbalance makes island capsize!
ramping up the war against your toxic thought processes Victorian Sex Enough is enough! cognitive dissing to a Golden Oldie A Palin lie becomes a Krugman truth Everything finally explained! With proof! Huh? From insurance mandate to beer mandate An esteemed emblem of vigilance
Links
Site Credits
|
|
They don't seem to like Jews much.
And just to make sure the FBI keeps an eye on me I left a note on their message board approximately:
If you want pipes may I suggest a bong store. I hear they have pipes that are da bomb.