Election, economy spark explosive growth of militias

[TronPaul]

From MSNBC

Election, economy spark explosive growth of militias
The election of President Barack Obama in 2008 triggered an explosion in the number of militias and so-called patriot groups in the United States, the Southern Poverty Law Center reported in its annual tally of such anti-government organizations.

There were 149 militias and patriot groups when Obama took office, compared to more than 1,200 today — an increase of 755 percent, the nonprofit civil rights organization reported.

"The increase has just been astounding," said Mark Potok, editor-in-chief of the SPLC report. "The reality is that many of these groups are becoming more and more fearful that Barack Obama will win the re-election. You can see the anger rising along with that fear."

The SPLC defines the "patriot" movement as made up of conspiracy-minded individuals who see the federal government as their primary enemy. The movement includes paramilitary militias as well as groups of "sovereign citizens," who believe they are not subject to federal or state laws, nor obligated to pay federal taxes, according to SPLC.

The center also reports a steady rise in the number of hate groups in America — from 604 in 2000, to more than 1,000 last year. Those include anti-gay groups, anti-Muslim groups, black separatists and "Christian Identity" groups, which hold racist and anti-Semitic views that overlap with neo-Nazi beliefs.

The spike in these groups can be attributed to a combination of factors, including the sluggish economy, radical propaganda and anxiety over the election of a black president, Potok said.

Potok said although many individuals involved in patriot militias are not criminals, a handful of these groups have been responsible for a significant amount of violence in recent years.

Government employees targeted
SPLC provides one of the few annual reports on militia or anti-government groups. The Federal Bureau of Investigation does not track militia groups unless they are alerted to violent or extremist activity, according to an agency spokesman.

"Some of these groups veer into violent extremism," said Frank Harrill, special agent in charge of the FBI’s office in Spokane, Wash., and spokesman for the Inland Northwest Joint Terrorism Task Force. "Where hate and ignorance and violence collide, that is where our interests lie."

Two militia groups have made headlines in recent years for allegedly hatching violent plots to target government employees.

Seven people from the Michigan-based Hutaree Christian militia are on trial for allegedly conspiring to ambush and kill a police officer. They allegedly plotted to follow up the ambush with an attack on the officer’s funeral procession in the hope of killing more officers, and thus sparking a revolt against the U.S. government. Recent evidence presented in trial included a recording made by an undercover FBI agent in which the militia’s leader, David Stone, 47, says he is going to "start huntin'" police soon. The seven have pleaded innocent, and argue that the "plot" was nothing but talk, protected by the First Amendment.

And in November four members of a Georgia-based militia, all in their 60s and 70s, were charged with plotting to buy explosives and the ingredients to make a deadly toxin to attack government officials. They are in custody awaiting trial.

But members of other militias say that exercising their constitutional right to bear arms does not mean they are committed to revolution.

Spokane-based militia member Ed LeStage, 59, denied that his group, the 63rd Battalion of Lightfoot Militia, which was listed on as an active militia group in the SPLC’s report, was a danger — unless, he said, "you're a communist or socialist who attacks us."

LeStage, a veteran to the patriot movement, said he believes the increased number of militias comes from U.S. citizens’ desire to restore the country to its constitutional roots. He also said that what he called President Obama’s intrusion on personal liberties also has driven growth in the movement.

"He’s been after our guns," LeStage said. "Obama’s been the best gun salesman there ever was."

From his home in eastern Washington, LeStage broadcasts weekly training videos to militia members across the country. Those videos — which include instruction on such things as drinking one’s own urine and scavenging for food — are meant to help members survive anarchy or economic collapse.

LeStage said he has been involved in militias and related groups for more than 20 years, including the Idaho Mountain Boys, a member of which was arrested in September 2002 for plotting to kill a federal judge and a police officer.

That member, Larry Raugust, served 77 months for possession and production of pipe bombs. Today, Raugust has a member profile on LeStage’s militia website, which has added more than 1,000 members since its launch last fall.

"(Raugust) is just a friend," LeStage said. "He doesn’t belong to our unit. He is a convicted felon."

LeStage explained that his militia requires each member to obtain a concealed weapons permit. As a felon, Raugust is not allowed to carry weapons, LeStage said.

The patriot movement first peaked in 1994, said Potok, the author of the SPLC report, in the aftermath of deadly confrontations at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992 and Waco, Texas in 1993, where anti-government groups came under siege by federal authorities.

Membership then dropped sharply during President George W. Bush’s two terms before rebounding in late 2008 after the election of Obama, which created a backlash that included "several plots to murder Obama," according to SPLC.

The numbers of those groups have continued to grow, jumping from 824 in 2010 to 1274 this year, the SPLC said.

'Sovereign citizen' movement
The ailing economy also helped fuel a huge expansion in a subset of the larger Patriot movement — the so-called "sovereign citizens" movement. Followers generally believe they do not have to pay federal taxes or follow most laws. The SPLC estimates some 300,000 Americans are involved in the movement.

In September, the FBI issued a bulletin to law enforcement officials that called "sovereign citizens" a growing domestic threat due to some members’ belief that they can use armed force to resist police.

The bulletin noted that sovereigns have killed six law officers since 2000. In one of the more deadly clashes, a shootout in West Memphis, Ark., in 2010 left four people dead including two officers. Terry Nichols, convicted as a conspirator in the Oklahoma City bombing, was a sovereign citizen.

In 2010, a shootout with a member of the group in West Memphis, Arkansas ended with four people dead, including two policemen.

Last month, a Texas man who said he was a sovereign citizen was sentenced to 35 years in prison for repeatedly firing at a police officer trying to arrest him.

A Washington state man, David R. Myrland, was sentenced in December to 40 months in prison for threatening to "arrest" the mayor of Kirkland and other local officials "with deadly force."

Investigators said Myrland sent an e-mail to the mayor warning that "50 or more concerned Citizens will enter your home and arrest you. Do not resist, as these Citizens will be heavily armed."

"As sovereign citizens' numbers grow, so do the chances of contact with law enforcement and, thus, the risks that incidents will end in violence," the FBI said at the time.

From LeStage’s point of view, though, the risk comes from the top of government.

If Obama is re-elected this year, "we will probably lose our republic," he said. "We will probably turn into another socialist country."

On his website http://www.modernmilitiamovement.com, some forum members have raised even more dire concerns about the fall's elections.

"Nov. the 8th should be the start of the next civil war," a member with the username "Thunder" wrote in January. "May GOD guide us safely."

Searching to make sure I wasn't reposting I came across this old thread (from '09) on a similar article.

[someone_else]

Are these guys really a threat?

I mean, apart from playing tough guy with some random low-level government representative and getting nuked shortly afterwards what can they really do?

[CJvR]

Remarakble how many traitors there seems to be in these patriotic militias.

[CJvR]

Are these guys really a threat?

I mean, apart from playing tough guy with some random low-level government representative and getting nuked shortly afterwards what can they really do?

Depends on what you consider a threat...
Nation wide armed insurrection and revolution - No.
Oklahoma bombings & Utöya massacres - Certainly!

[Simon_Jester]

They can murder policemen. They can encourage and hearten the 5-10% of Americans most sympathetic to them, causing American politics to shift further toward the lunatic-paranoid side of the right wing. They can intimidate some of the people immediately around them (I know, personally, someone who was adversely affected by growing up with survivalist loony-parents).

So yes, they're actually a problem. Not necessarily an existential threat to the nation, but then, Al Qaeda wasn't either, and arguably Imperial Japan wasn't if you don't count "lose some rocks in the Pacific and trade with China" as an existential threat.

[Sea Skimmer]

The number of militia groups is just returning to the kind of level it held before the Oklahoma City bombing and resulting fallout made people leave them in droves, because in fact most militia group members are harmless and wanted nothing to do with such things. Is this all that rational? No not really, but in fact we are safer in many respects if the crazy people band together because a decent sized group of people in the US has low odds of keeping a terrorist plot secret. Its one or two nuts at work, as at Oklahoma City, that you've really got to worry about. And yeah, McVeigh did have help from a few other people, but as far as we know they didn't know the details of what was going on and had no hand in making or placing the bomb.

Best countermeasure would be to form proper state militias in the ~80% or so of states which have no formal state defense force at all, providing a place for the harmless people to join in with, thus helping curb the number of informal militias that need to be watched out on. If we took counter terrorism and disaster preparedness seriously we'd do this anyway, bu of course such topics are purely about appearances and Obama sure hasn't done a damn thing to change that.

[Kanastrous]

"He’s been after our guns," LeStage said. "Obama’s been the best gun salesman there ever was."

Really? I wonder exactly what the Obama administration has done with regard to firearms, that has this guy's jock in such a twist.

[Rogue 9]

"He’s been after our guns," LeStage said. "Obama’s been the best gun salesman there ever was."

Really? I wonder exactly what the Obama administration has done with regard to firearms, that has this guy's jock in such a twist.

They've been Democrats. Which is to say, they fit the profile that the scaremongers have painted re: "people who want to take your guns." They've actually done nothing.

[Scottish Ninja]

"He’s been after our guns," LeStage said. "Obama’s been the best gun salesman there ever was."

Really? I wonder exactly what the Obama administration has done with regard to firearms, that has this guy's jock in such a twist.

They've been Democrats. Which is to say, they fit the profile that the scaremongers have painted re: "people who want to take your guns." They've actually done nothing.

It's not without precedent, either. The secession of the South certainly wasn't in response to specific acts by the Lincoln administration against slavery - they started before he was even in office, on the threat that he might.

[Sea Skimmer]

Really? I wonder exactly what the Obama administration has done with regard to firearms, that has this guy's jock in such a twist.

Couple things. The biggest issue would be the murderously incompetent Operation Fast And Furious turning into the ATF arming Mexican cartels, with the ATF and Obama adminstration then turning around and claiming that since my god US guns are reaching Mexico, because we let them, we need to create a long arm gun registry by regulation, and not an act of congress, in southern US states. People really really don't like bullshit like that. Trying to appoint Andrew Traver, who openly speaks about trying to ban all kinds of guns and loves to try to make people think all assault rifles are machine guns, to head of the ATF sure doesn't help the Obama 2nd Amendment credentials either. Of course, Bush couldn't find someone acceptable either, but Bush never really tried or cared, while Obama simply refuses to suggest any other appointee except Traver who also happens to be from Chicago, which happens to be a city that already forced all its gun stores out of business and banned all handguns until the supreme court stuck it down. This isn't just fear out of nowhere.

[Kanastrous]

<deleted post to read the above ^ >

[Kanastrous]

This isn't just fear out of nowhere.

Well...from here...

* Opposed bill okaying illegal gun use in home invasions. (Aug 2008)

Well, if you are holding a gun in violation of local laws, having your home invaded doesn't mean you're breaking those laws any less. Call this neutral.

* Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)

Isn't this the Conservative Gun Owner's wet dream? Let the cities and states decide the rules! Should be a win with gun owners.

* FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban. (Apr 2008)

Okay, gun enthusiasts understandably don't like this one.

* April 2008: "Bittergate" labeled Obama elitist. (Apr 2008)

Don't believe this is relevant...

* Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)

Again, local citizens getting what they want - local solutions without interference by nasty Washington politicians. Should be a 'win' for Obama with gun owners, too.

* Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)

Since we all have our own ideas as to what constitutes 'common sense' I guess this starts out neutral. But, since the NRA's spokespersons' favorite refrain is "enforce what's on the books" in all fairness this looks like it ought to be a minor 'win,' too.

* 2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)

Sure, gun enthusiasts can be expected to hate this. Just because.

* Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)

Letting our honorable retired law-enforcement friends equip themselves to intervene effectively, should their training and expertise be called for. Another 'win.'

* Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)

"Enforce the laws we already have," again. Win.

* Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)

Neutral, I suppose, depending upon how one goes about it.

* Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)

Gun enthusiasts probably hate this.

* Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)

This too.

* Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)

Seems ambiguous. Any product may be poorly or un-safely designed or marketed. Why provide gun manufacturers more protections, than manufacturers of other potentially injurious or deadly products?

Taken together this looks to me as though gun enthusiasts - of which I count myself one, being quite well-armed - have more to like, or at least take for neutral, than complain about where Obama is concerned. Sure, he's -said- some things. Which don't seem to connect terribly well, with much of what he's -done-. Maybe a second term would see a sudden radical change in direction, and ATF agents kicking in everybody's doors. If I were in the militia-type camp, I guess that's the theory I'd be pimping.

[Beowulf]

I wouldn't necessarily call operation fast and furious murderously incompetent. That implies that they actually had a plan behind it that's other than funneling guns to Mexican drug cartels. If you assume that the point was to funnel guns into a Mexican civil war, it was murderously competent.

Kanastrous: it's useful to determine the actual position, not just the short blurb given. clicking further into that website indicates the prohibition on lawsuits isn't against filing one for it not working as designed, but rather for it working as designed, but in an illegal manner, like suing a car manufacturer for their car being used in a hit and run.

Similarly, the quote dealers dumping guns is extraordinarily misleading, in that it implies that gun dealers are just selling guns out of the back of a van to whoever wants one, regardless of ability to legal possess.

[Zaune]

Are these guys really a threat?

I mean, apart from playing tough guy with some random low-level government representative and getting nuked shortly afterwards what can they really do?

I'll start taking them seriously when they start coming up with the equipment and competence to take on the National Guard without getting their heads handed to them.

[Kanastrous]

They can fall well short of that degree of competence, and still do damned grievous damage to other citizens who aren't expecting to be attacked. Like most any terrorist organization.

[Sea Skimmer]

I wouldn't necessarily call operation fast and furious murderously incompetent. That implies that they actually had a plan behind it that's other than funneling guns to Mexican drug cartels. If you assume that the point was to funnel guns into a Mexican civil war, it was murderously competent.

Well yeah that's a fair point. But to be clear, many of the people joining these militia groups 100% believe that the plan behind operation fast and furious was specifically to make sure they could trace guns to killings in Mexico to justify a gun registry. True or not, the fact also is we wouldn't know about any of the nonsense going had it not been for low ranking ATF whistle blowers, one of whom was then fired. We also now know a similar operation was run back in the Bush administration, but it was shutdown precisely because it didn't work, however far fewer guns were 'lost' in the process.

[Questor]

Are these guys really a threat?

I mean, apart from playing tough guy with some random low-level government representative and getting nuked shortly afterwards what can they really do?

Ask Timothy McVeigh...

[Sea Skimmer]

And in all reality the US was dead lucky with McVeigh, because he was truly motivated by ideology. He killed 168 people with a two and a half ton bomb because he choose his target to attack federal government agencies, and not to kill the maximum number of people possible with such raw power. This is not to say he cared about killing people, by his own words he did not, but he had an agenda with his murder that effectively reduced what he did. Had he simply wanted to kill people, well better not to give people ideas, but far far worse was possible with that big a bomb. In the process he also woke the nation up to the dangers that home made bombs didn't have to limited to something crammed inside a piece of drain pipe, and its now far harder to pull that kind of thing off. It remains difficult for me to grasp why a similar crackdown on nitrates didn't take place after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing which was also a quite large but ill placed device, but I suppose the very low death toll and international aspect made it easier to dismiss.

[Grumman]

"He’s been after our guns," LeStage said. "Obama’s been the best gun salesman there ever was."

Really? I wonder exactly what the Obama administration has done with regard to firearms, that has this guy's jock in such a twist.

I don't know if it's still there, but around the election both Obama and Biden were expressing support for the old Federal Assault Weapons Ban on their website. This was the law that targeted scary-looking guns on the basis of things like bayonet mounts (because criminals are so well known for performing bayonet charges?), the ability to fire rifle grenades (despite the difficulty in actually getting said grenades) and high capacity magazines (read: small boxes with springs in them).

[Broomstick]

Are these guys really a threat?

I mean, apart from playing tough guy with some random low-level government representative and getting nuked shortly afterwards what can they really do?

Since I don't feel like typing 1,000 words this morning:

[loomer]

The interesting thing is, a lot of the more outspoken online militia rings have drawn in tighter and started screening membership and readers to avoid feds. Some of them are convinced all these new recruits are secretly government agents. It's proving to be a fascinating study in paranoia.

Frankly, while it may be a return to pre-Oklahoma levels, the militiamen I'm in contact with say that the feeling of rapidly approaching civil war is higher than it was then. It's no longer considered to be 'next year' or even 'next month', but now, 'tomorrow' - at least by a lot of them.

[Broomstick]

It also ties in/overlaps with the "end of the world as we know it" survivalists. Many such folks have looked at natural disasters and so forth and decided it makes sense to be ready for anything, but others buy into the apocalypse/race war/civil breakdown paranoia.