Members of Christian Militia Arrested

I think Chris Rock put it the best when he said "If you hear about a 16 year old kid throwing a 55 year old grandmother down the stairs to lift her welfare check, I'm sorry to say, but that was a black kid. But if you later hear that he carved out her eyes to keep in his freezer for a memento, THAT was a WHITE guy.".

sheared wrote:
LobsterMobster wrote:

An awful lot of people in Iraq and Afghanistan are arrested, detained indefinitely, or killed under suspicion of being terrorists, or for planning to commit acts of terrorism. On the one hand it's a war zone. On the other, it wasn't until we made it one.

Afghanistan became a war zone as soon as the folks they were hosting decided to attack the mainland of the US.

That's very hoorah go-US patriotic, but it's false. Even if you consider our attack on Afghanistan to be justified, it was not the case that the nation spontaneously erupted into a war zone around 9AM (Eastern) on 9/11/2001. I'm also pretty sure there was at least a few people in Afghanistan who had nothing to do with the attack and did not really appreciate it. I'm very sure there are people in Iraq right now who really, really wish Al Qaeda had kept their hands to themselves.

Either way, that has nothing to do with Michigan.

Seth wrote:
CannibalCrowley wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

I just hope the police department used up their flashbang and teargas budget on that raid. The least these asshats should get for their trouble is asthma and tinnitus.

Including the innocent members of their families?

To my knowledge, there were none. Hutaree's core was David Stone, his wife, and his two sons. Even one of the son's fiancee's is now on record saying she doesn't "think Hutaree is dangerous."

As more details come out, I'm actually less willing to compare Hutaree with right wing militias and more to Fred Phelps and his crazy cult of haters.

Wow, not even infants are innocent just because one of the parents may be a terrorist? So I guess you agree with the "sea of glass" people as well too?

LobsterMobster wrote:

Either way, that has nothing to do with Michigan.

Actually, I'm pretty sure he just advocated turning Michigan into a war zone.

CannibalCrowley wrote:
Seth wrote:
CannibalCrowley wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

I just hope the police department used up their flashbang and teargas budget on that raid. The least these asshats should get for their trouble is asthma and tinnitus.

Including the innocent members of their families?

To my knowledge, there were none. Hutaree's core was David Stone, his wife, and his two sons. Even one of the son's fiancee's is now on record saying she doesn't "think Hutaree is dangerous."

As more details come out, I'm actually less willing to compare Hutaree with right wing militias and more to Fred Phelps and his crazy cult of haters.

Wow, not even infants are innocent just because one of the parents may be a terrorist? So I guess you agree with the "sea of glass" people as well too?

I'm pretty sure they didn't do a full breach on a house with infants running around in it. Unless you know differently, I'm going to assume your infants comment was hyperbolic.

Paleocon wrote:

I'm pretty sure they didn't do a full breach on a house with infants running around in it. Unless you know differently, I'm going to assume your infants comment was hyperbolic.

There was an infant present during the one of the most recent arrests. You know, one of the raids where you stated, "I just hope the police department used up their flashbang and teargas budget". And in the same league Seth stated that none of the family members were innocent.

CannibalCrowley wrote:

Wow, not even infants are innocent just because one of the parents may be a terrorist? So I guess you agree with the "sea of glass" people as well too?

As long as we're being trollish, let's go ahead and assume I also intended guilt by association to extend to every member of the human species -- hell let's make it all primates.

Paleocon wrote:

I think Chris Rock put it the best when he said "If you hear about a 16 year old kid throwing a 55 year old grandmother down the stairs to lift her welfare check, I'm sorry to say, but that was a black kid. But if you later hear that he carved out her eyes to keep in his freezer for a memento, THAT was a WHITE guy.".

Its standard western thinking. White is default, therefore if a non-white screws up it must be the non-whiteness. If a white kid screws up it must be something else because he is already the 'default race'.

Militia member says Hutaree were "neither a militia or a Christian group"

Members of a militia charged with plotting to kill police were not Christian or a militia, a man acquainted with the group said Tuesday.

"This is a group that I would classify as neither a militia or a Christian group," said Michael Lackomar, a member of the Southeast Michigan Volunteer Militia. "They're really a fringe group outside of anything we do.

"They're more of a private army or a terrorist organization or really just a criminal organization."

Yeah there's been several examples of stories where local militias have continuously and steadfastly avoided any association or contact with Hutaree. There's a story somewhere of, when hutaree was being rounded up, they called a militia member for help, and he declined to assist them.

Hence me preferring to compare them more to Fred Phelps and other crazy cults than militia members.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

Militia member says Hutaree were "neither a militia or a Christian group"

Members of a militia charged with plotting to kill police were not Christian or a militia, a man acquainted with the group said Tuesday.

"This is a group that I would classify as neither a militia or a Christian group," said Michael Lackomar, a member of the Southeast Michigan Volunteer Militia. "They're really a fringe group outside of anything we do.

"They're more of a private army or a terrorist organization or really just a criminal organization."

That's funny.

It sort of reminds me of that that Futurama quote:

Oh everyone wants to save Hitler's brain, but put it in a great white shark and suddenly you've gone too far.
CannibalCrowley wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

I'm pretty sure they didn't do a full breach on a house with infants running around in it. Unless you know differently, I'm going to assume your infants comment was hyperbolic.

There was an infant present during the one of the most recent arrests. You know, one of the raids where you stated, "I just hope the police department used up their flashbang and teargas budget". And in the same league Seth stated that none of the family members were innocent.

I'd like to know what you'd propose they do instead. I'll take, "I don't know, but not that" as an answer.

Seth wrote:

Yeah there's been several examples of stories where local militias have continuously and steadfastly avoided any association or contact with Hutaree. There's a story somewhere of, when hutaree was being rounded up, they called a militia member for help, and he declined to assist them.

Hence me preferring to compare them more to Fred Phelps and other crazy cults than militia members.

How exactly is one crazy group of white people running around the woods in cammo with AR15s pretending to be special forces different than another group of crazy white people running around the woods in cammo with AR15s pretending to be special forces?

Can you imagine that?

Hillary Clinton: "It's clear that big Pharma is going against what the American people want. Maybe PETA used the wrong methods when they bombed that animal research center, but the anger of the People is justified."

"If we were to retcon, I'd base a new world order on PETA and Greenpeace upstanding conscripts of our species! We will assist our deity, Mother Earth, in delivering a combative comeuppance on the climate change deniers! It cannot be helped that their sole folly is to not conform to our perspective."

- had to use fancy, elitist, "so called expert" language with a pagan twist

Not to go a completely different way, but IMO the first mistake is calling these people Christian. Honestly, just because they say they believe in something, then go against everything they believe in by doing things like this, I think it's safe to say they are not "Christian".

Even Ghandi realized that when he said "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

Citizen86 wrote:

Not to go a completely different way, but IMO the first mistake is calling these people Christian. Honestly, just because they say they believe in something, then go against everything they believe in by doing things like this, I think it's safe to say they are not "Christian".

Even Ghandi realized that when he said "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

I'm sorry, but if we're OK with branding anyone who is Muslim as a terrorist, then we don't get to pick and choose whether a group of crazies should be considered Christian or not. They identified themselves as Christians, so we need to try and understand the reasons behind what they were thinking. Trying to wriggle out of the association just means that Christians get to duck responsibility for the darker side of their religion. It's uncomfortable, but that's life.

One of these days we will bring the war on terror to the real threats like evangelical Christian churches and Hutaree-esque militia groups.

It's interesting how "evangelical Christian churches" get lumped in with nutjobs like this...

One of these days we will bring the war on terror to the real threats like evangelical Christian churches and Hutaree-esque militia groups.

Yes, because they've run up such a high body count.

I don't get the race angle here. Basque-country ETA are spaniards citizens like the rest, white caucasian people, yet they are labelled Terrorists. IRA's members weren't muslims nor protestants, instead, white caucasian Catholics Northern-Irish people, yet they were labelled Terrorists.
If these so-called Christian militias are plotting to perform acts of violence against innocent people to prove a point, break free from the union or protest for whatever the heck they think they have the need to protest for, they're terrorists, period. The fact that they haven't been able to perform said actions doesn't diminish the label they deserve.

feeank wrote:

I don't get the race angle here. Basque-country ETA are spaniards citizens like the rest, white caucasian people, yet they are labelled Terrorists. IRA's members weren't muslims nor protestants, instead, white caucasian Catholics Northern-Irish people, yet they were labelled Terrorists.
If these so-called Christian militias are plotting to perform acts of violence against innocent people to prove a point, break free from the union or protest for whatever the heck they think they have the need to protest for, they're terrorists, period. The fact that they haven't been able to perform said actions doesn't diminish the label they deserve.

I think the origin of this attitude that white people couldn't be terrorists came from the conduct of the Bush Administration's propaganda regarding the so called War on Terror. The staging of it was as some sort of existential clash of cultures between white America and exotic, inscrutible, dark skinned Arabs. The existence of white terrorists that consider themselves "old fashioned Americans", that are nostalgic for a fictional history, and claim to ascribe to "traditional American values" undermines the premise behind that existential cultural conflict.

MaverickDago wrote:
One of these days we will bring the war on terror to the real threats like evangelical Christian churches and Hutaree-esque militia groups.

Yes, because they've run up such a high body count.

I want to agree with the sentiment here, but if the umbrella group doesn't make any kind of an effort to police themselves, then they lose the right to complain about stereotyping and being lumped in together.

For example, about a year ago RNC chair Michael Steele leveled some heavy criticism toward Rush Limbaugh and the radical fringe right-wing media. I think he lost that battle, but at least he made an effort to police the party. He made it clear that the GOP was not the party of radical nutjobs. So now, if someone were to try and tar the entire right with the hate-radio brush, there is clear evidence that there is separation between the fringe and the middle.

I see very little evidence of this kind of discipline inside the evangelical movement. So I'm less inclined to feel bad when radical members of the group smirch the reputation of the whole. I've seen public evangelical figures like Dobson and Robertson make incredibly hateful and divisive screed with narry a complaint from the evangelical congregation. These evangelical leaders have declared a culture war against main-stream Americans, and so when main-stream Americans equate evangelicals with the radical fringe, I think it is a case of "as you sow so shall you reap". Different actions would have brought about different consequences.

Nomad wrote:
One of these days we will bring the war on terror to the real threats like evangelical Christian churches and Hutaree-esque militia groups.

It's interesting how "evangelical Christian churches" get lumped in with nutjobs like this...

I agree that evangelicals are not any more violent by their nature and beliefs than other denominations.

How would you like us to phrase it, Nomad? How does "militant fundamentalist" sound?

fangblackbone wrote:
Can you imagine that?

Hillary Clinton: "It's clear that big Pharma is going against what the American people want. Maybe PETA used the wrong methods when they bombed that animal research center, but the anger of the People is justified."

"If we were to retcon, I'd base a new world order on PETA and Greenpeace upstanding conscripts of our species! We will assist our deity, Mother Earth, in delivering a combative comeuppance on the climate change deniers! It cannot be helped that their sole folly is to not conform to our perspective."

- had to use fancy, elitist, "so called expert" language with a pagan twist

...What?

OG_slinger wrote:
Seth wrote:

Yeah there's been several examples of stories where local militias have continuously and steadfastly avoided any association or contact with Hutaree. There's a story somewhere of, when hutaree was being rounded up, they called a militia member for help, and he declined to assist them.

Hence me preferring to compare them more to Fred Phelps and other crazy cults than militia members.

How exactly is one crazy group of white people running around the woods in cammo with AR15s pretending to be special forces different than another group of crazy white people running around the woods in cammo with AR15s pretending to be special forces?

I've been thinking about this since before lunch. I admit it's a fine line I'm drawing between "self styled anti government patriot" and "lunatic cult," but I think it's an important one. Clearly, local militias are often steeped in Biblical Christian mysticism, but I don't think they're as reliant on it as Hutaree or David Koresh was. They seem much more focused on personal freedoms than pursuing a religious agenda.

Nomad: I think you need to remember that the world has a significantly broader definition of evangelical Christianity than you do, and unfortunately that umbrella covers a lot of groups we *all* consider unsavory -- like Fred Phelps or Hutaree or Scott Roeder. Just remember that just because your church uses the same descriptive word doesn't mean we're lumping you in with them. I grew up Mennonite, which is an evangelical denomination (and much different than yours, I suspect), and also has absolutely nothing to do with the nutjobs mentioned previously.

Both Paleo and I were giving examples of how Rep Steve King's remarks from that link would sound like coming from the left.

Detroit -- A member of a radical militia group told others he killed his cat with a handgun as part of his training for a pending war against law enforcement, a federal prosecutor said today in U.S. District Court in Detroit.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Ronald Waterstreet said Hutaree defendant Kristopher Sickles made the claim in January to defendant Joshua Stone in the presence of a federal undercover agent who was posing as someone who could provide explosives to the group.

Sickles, 27, of Sandusky, Ohio, "said he did it to 'see if I could do it, to see if I could kill something I had a feeling for."

what the hell.

OG_slinger wrote:

I'm sorry, but if we're OK with branding anyone who is Muslim as a terrorist, then we don't get to pick and choose whether a group of crazies should be considered Christian or not. They identified themselves as Christians, so we need to try and understand the reasons behind what they were thinking. Trying to wriggle out of the association just means that Christians get to duck responsibility for the darker side of their religion. It's uncomfortable, but that's life.

This. Sorry Nomad...what's good for the goose...

FSeven wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:

I'm sorry, but if we're OK with branding anyone who is Muslim as a terrorist, then we don't get to pick and choose whether a group of crazies should be considered Christian or not. They identified themselves as Christians, so we need to try and understand the reasons behind what they were thinking. Trying to wriggle out of the association just means that Christians get to duck responsibility for the darker side of their religion. It's uncomfortable, but that's life.

This. Sorry Nomad...what's good for the goose...

Around here, we generally aren't OK with branding all Muslims as terrorists. I don't think it's fair to say "these aren't Christians," but only in the way it isn't fair to say "these aren't Americans." They are Christians. I don't think Christianity made them what they are, so much as provided a convenient excuse and maybe a tool to pressure others to join their cause.

If there are weeds in your garden, don't blame the soil.

LobsterMobster wrote:
FSeven wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:

I'm sorry, but if we're OK with branding anyone who is Muslim as a terrorist, then we don't get to pick and choose whether a group of crazies should be considered Christian or not. They identified themselves as Christians, so we need to try and understand the reasons behind what they were thinking. Trying to wriggle out of the association just means that Christians get to duck responsibility for the darker side of their religion. It's uncomfortable, but that's life.

This. Sorry Nomad...what's good for the goose...

Around here, we generally aren't OK with branding all Muslims as terrorists. I don't think it's fair to say "these aren't Christians," but only in the way it isn't fair to say "these aren't Americans." They are Christians. I don't think Christianity made them what they are, so much as provided a convenient excuse and maybe a tool to pressure others to join their cause.

If there are weeds in your garden, don't blame the soil.

I think the difference is that these folks didn't use their interpretation of American texts as philosophical justification for their terrorism. For that, we need to look at their crazy religion. I agree that it isn't entirely necessary to be a terrorist in order to be a Christian, but these folks found in their reading of Christian texts the seeds of their violence. We can argue about whether or not they were misreading it just as folks have debated whether suicide bombers are misinterpreting Islam, but the influence of both can not be discounted as simply incidental.

Paleocon wrote:

I agree that it isn't entirely necessary to be a terrorist in order to be a Christian, but these folks found in their reading of Christian texts the seeds of their violence. We can argue about whether or not they were misreading it just as folks have debated whether suicide bombers are misinterpreting Islam, but the influence of both can not be discounted as simply incidental.

I think it's more likely that if they weren't able to do the mental contortions to see terrorism as their holy duty, they'd find another reason to do it or restrain themselves (but still want to do it). Religion legitimizes a cause and unifies people in that cause. It does not necessarily create the cause.

Paleocon wrote:

I think the difference is that these folks didn't use their interpretation of American texts as philosophical justification for their terrorism. For that, we need to look at their crazy religion. I agree that it isn't entirely necessary to be a terrorist in order to be a Christian, but these folks found in their reading of Christian texts the seeds of their violence.

John Hinkley found the seeds of his violence in Taxi Driver and Jodi Foster. I don't see that as meaning that Taxi Driver needs to be criticized giving the wrong ideas to a nutjob.