FBI raids on Several militias.......arrests and siezures...

[GS78]

Btw a couple more questions for you:
1. What is Palin's position on the AF-PAK war
2. What is her strategy for handling Iran
3. What is her position on the Palestinian - Israeli issue
4. Did she agree or disagree with President Obama on the increase in end strength of the U.S. Armed Forces
5. What is her position on the use of Nuclear Weapons and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty



Jim

Jim you have become unhinged, while that will make you more comfortable with the leftwing kooks like code pink and The daily Koz, you are going to find it more difficult to relate to persons with a realistic outlook who have the ability to recognize, and face the facts of Obammies ineptitudes and what peril that presents for the entire nation, as well as our allies. The first step in recovery jimmy, is to admit you have a problem, we as Americans have a problem, and its name is OBAMA.


(I realize jim your handlers want you to continue to attack Gov.Palin. but you really should wait until someone brings her up in the conversation first, otherwise the opportunity for a smooth integration is lost, and it just doesn't have the desired effect on the conversation. Do you understand how that works?)

[zephyp]

@Jim,

Blah blah blah blah...blah blah blah.

I dont have time, inclination, or desire to read your baseless diatribe so this is the extent of response you will receive from me Jimbo...blah blah blah...

[zephyp]

Please can you give an unequivocal answer to the following question: As an American citizen what rights did you have on 1 Apr 2008 that you no longer had on 1 Apr 2010.

Gat6

Uh, the right not to buy health insurance?

Is that the correct answer? Did I win a prize...

Uh, ok, another one...the right to uh call someone a dirty name without committing a federal crime?

Is that the correct answer? Did I win a prize for that one...

Ok. One more...the uh right to uh redress grievances to the government without being called a Nazi or Racist or extremist?

Is that the correct answer? No prize yet huh? Ok...lemme think about this....hmmmm...

The fact that I'm a veteran and not an extremist or terrorist?

Is that the correct answer?

You getting the picture yet Jimbo...

Edit #1: Since you, of course, know that I match you wit for wit you wont respond....yet you might wait with "baited breath..."

Edit #2: or is it with "bated breathe..." sorry...

Edit #3: Jimbo, "your silence is deafening"...cant you answer a simple question? Did I win a prize for providing the right answer?

Well your reply is very illuminating so let's go down the list one by one:

1. Health insurance: Please cite where in the Constitution did you find a right not to buy health insurance? I find nothing in the Constitution that gave you such an enumerated or unenumerated right. Are you now a SCOTUS justice? Besides the preceding as of right now no one is required to buy health insurance, that comes later, so even in that sense you are incorrect. Finally when it does kick-in you still have the right not to purchase health insurance. Here's a little secret for you the penalty for failure to purchase health insurance is nothing. In that context would you care to tell us what gives you the right, if you do not have health insurance, to demand treatment?
2. You have every right to call a person any name you want. I do hope you realize from citizen to citizen from you to me and back there are no 1st Amendment rights. I can legally call you anything I want, and you can do the same. Neither one of us will have violated any law. Since you believe name calling, or certain name calling is a Federal crime please give us the Title of the US Code in which name calling is a crime. Pray tell what name might get you arrested? Also cite the arrest and court case of a person so charged with name calling.
3. You have every right under the 1st Amendment to seek redress of grievances with your government. I suggest you reread the 1st Amendment. If you understood it at all you would know that the government may not prevent you from saying what you want. It is not of course an unfettered right as SCOTUS has repeatedly held. Besides that in response to you other citizens can call you whatever they want. Surely you don't think they are legally restrained from doing so? Speech may be free, but it is not without consequences. Sarah Palin for example has called the President any name she wants. Has she been threatened with arrest? Of course not! If I were to say, mind you I'm not, you act like a Nazi, I have a perfectly legal right to do so and it has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment.
4. Are you saying that by some law veteran, extremist, and terrorist are mutually exclusive? They are not. Timothy McVey was a veteran, an extremist and a terrorist. Major Hassan was a soldier, an extremist and also a terrorist. If you go to Storm Front, unless they are lying, you will find numerous members of various domestic extremist organizations touting their military experience. You or I could be any and all of these things and more, so what was your point?

Sorry you did not win a prize would you care to try again? You have not cited a single right you have lost. The funny thing is the rights you did willingly give up came under the 8 years of the Bush Administration. Did you call for his impeachment? I'm betting you didn't.

Btw use baited breathe all you want, I prefer to stick with the traditional "bated breathe".

Gat6

Ok, Jimmy I had a few free moments and decided to respond and not particularly for you but my colleagues here on the board. They can see that my assertions above while somewhat presented in jest are indeed factual and not baseless as your usual diatribe would try to make them out to be. You liberals hate being wrong huh and you hate it even more when someone like me points it out. I'm sure you are a world traveler and maybe even work for our government. Surely you know what we're being sold down the river for...its not to late for you to come into the light. You seem to be a real intelligent individual. Why not consider it and join our side.

1. Please read the 9th and 10th amendments as both are applicable. Now the states can impose insurance as is the case with car insurance. This is a common misconstrued argument with health care presented by liberals. The federal government does not mandate auto insurance. This is mandated by sovereign states. Also please read Article I section 8 where specific powers of congress are enumerated. No where in there does it mention that congress can pass a law forcing citizens to buy anything. Might I also mention that our Constitution is very clear concerning these powers and congress cannot step outside them. That is specifically reserved for the states and/or the people. Regarding the penalty for not buying health insurance its quite clear - at tax time you must show proof of qualified coverage otherwise you must pay a fine. This of course will begin at a set not point in the not so distant future. The IRS is the enforcer and they get real nasty when you owe them money. Tell me, dear liberal socialist Jimmy, who doesnt have to worry about this, what is going to happen to all those poor people this health care bill is supposed to help when they cant afford to buy it...they will be forced to pay the fine...tell me little socialist liberal what will happen when they cant afford to pay the fine...you know and I know the answer to that question...they get a nice registered letter from the IRS telling them to pay immediately or all of their assets will be seized and frozen. You liberals really get me. The people who forced this health care abortion down our throats do not have to live with the results and the very people they think they are helping will be the ones hurt the most. That what you want Jimmy?

Am I a SCOTUS justice? Obviously not but I can read and understand the Constitution. I dont need to be a stinking lawyer to do that. And if you think that a normal citizen cannot read and understand our founding document without the help of a lawyer then you are a twit and a moron.

2. Oh, Jimmy. The law is very new and has yet to be tried in court as a matter of practical application. Please study Public Law No: 111-84, Section 4710(3). Now, if someone issues specific "hate" epithets to another all the aggrieved party has to do is show in court that it was a precursor or a "plan" to use force against them. That can get you time at the big house. You really need to get smart on these things.

3. Oh yes I do still have the right to redress grievance to the government but that wasnt my point. The point is I should be able to do it without being labeled as a racist, Nazi or some other extremist. If you have been paying attention during the last year you would certainly be aware that certain members of congress has done precisely that in response to protesters. Shame on them...since you will no doubt want an example heres a small one...there are more...and this one from the speaker. Where was she when they carried signs with Bush made up to look like hitler...

http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html ... =undefined

Lets face the facts - anyone disagreeing with the current administration is indeed being clearly labeled as a racist, extremist, and un-American...

Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer claimed such behavior is "simply un-American."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08 ... -american/

4. The point here is that I am a veteran of the United States Army and my government has labeled me as a potential extremist. Arent you aware of this...

http://video1.washingtontimes.com/video ... report.pdf

My point Jimmy is you ask a lot of questions with many big words, hand waving, and hoopla expecting no one to challenge you or come up with an intelligent response.

Just your luck that I happen to have a few minutes to respond - which isnt difficult BTW to tear down your weak presentations.

Do you liberals honestly think all conservatives are low brow idiots.

Have a nice day...oh, we're not talking about Bush. He is history. This discourse is about the current socialist administration or havent you been paying attention.

[Taggure]

Well Here is an update on the story

AAA Apr. 27, 2010 10:29 AM ET

9 charged with plotting against US seek release

ED WHITEED WHITE, Associated Press Writer

DETROIT (AP) — Lawyers for nine jailed members of a Michigan militia charged with trying to launch war against the United States can summon a federal agent as a witness at a hearing to determine if they should be released, a judge said.

The decision is significant because defense lawyers believe the agent has information that would weaken the government's claim that the nine are too dangerous to be released from jail while the case moves through court.

U.S. District Judge Victoria Roberts planned to hear appeals of another judge's detention order Tuesday.

The eight men and one woman have been in custody since their arrests about a month ago. They were indicted on weapons charges and conspiracy to commit sedition.

The indictment says the nine plotted violent acts against police officers as a steppingstone to a widespread uprising against the government. Defense lawyers, however, say their clients are being punished for being outspoken.

They were not allowed to call a federal agent as a witness during the initial detention hearing in late March. But Roberts ruled Monday night that the agent, whose name has not made public, can be compelled to testify.

An undercover agent infiltrated the group, called Hutaree, and secretly recorded the leader, David Stone, declaring "it's time to strike and take our nation back so that we may be free again from tyranny."

[Taggure]

Here is an update looks like they are allowed to go home till trial

Judge: Michigan Militia Members Can Leave Jail Until Trial
DETROIT (AP) - A judge ordered Monday that nine jailed members of a Michigan militia be released, saying there's no risk to the public if they go home while awaiting trial on charges of trying to plot war against the government.

U.S. District Judge Victoria Roberts overturned the April 2 decision of a federal magistrate judge and questioned the strength of the government's case. She said all nine can be released with electronic monitoring devices and other strict conditions.

The government says the members of a southern Michigan militia called Hutaree are radicals who planned to kill police officers and more. They were charged in March with conspiracy to commit sedition and attempted use of weapons of mass destruction.

Defense lawyers, however, say it's just a case of irrational, hateful speech.

The judge said prosecutors failed to show that jail was the only way to protect the public and ensure that the nine return for court hearings.

Roberts heard nearly 10 hours of testimony and argument over two days last week as militia members appealed the earlier detention order.

"Discussions about killing local law enforcement officers - and even discussions about killing members of the judicial branch of government - do not translate to conspiring to overthrow, or levy way against, the United States government," the judge said Monday.

Last week, Roberts had ordered the government to present an investigator who is familiar with the case, but FBI agent Leslie Larsen didn't reveal much from the witness stand.

Larsen, the lead agent, said weapons seized last month were still being examined. At other times, she couldn't answer questions because she hadn't lately reviewed investigative reports.

An undercover agent secretly recorded militia leader David Stone and others talking about killing police. But no specific names or dates were mentioned, and the conversations were sprinkled with laughs and a mix of subjects, such as strippers and drawing Hitler mustaches on photos of state troopers.

(Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) 5/3/10 1:49

[Taggure]

Well it looks as if the jury selection is completed and the trial will soon begin.
U.S. says militia group prepared for anti-government

http://news.yahoo.com/u-says-militia-gr ... 06682.html

[gunderwood]

They would shoot guns and often wore camouflage

I guess every hunter is militia now?