Glenn Beck just isn't buying it

[JamesVincent]

Yet. I don't want to be standing nearby if someone tries to get himself some "street cred" in the sovrun movement.

Crime is not terrorism. Sorry, it's not.

Crime is not terrorism but terrorism is a crime. The commission of a crime in the act of terrorism is still terrorism, so does it matter what you define it as, or does it matter that someone is dead? Seriously, what crawled into your knickers over this? Youve been around here longer then me, youve seen as much of the reports as I have and you fail to see that there is an issue here that needs resolved? There have been waaaaaay more then two shootings involving sov'runs, hell, there were two in one day if you count the two involving the Kanes as separate incidents since they happened at separate times and places, there have been way more then 18 arrests for white collar crimes and hundreds if not thousands of liens filed for harassment purposes by these people against citizens, court officials and LEOs as their way of terrorizing people into doing what they want or else. Thats right, that word again, by its own definition. Terrorism without bloodshed. Cyber-terrorism is still terrorism, has its own department in the department of Homeland Defense, FBI, CIA, NSA and a bunch of other alphabet soup agencies, some of which you havent heard of yet. IRS employees being terrorized, that word again, by intimidating and threatening letters and legal actions. Ordinary citizens having their lives disrupted by others just because, no real good reason, just because someone else wanted what they had and didnt want to pay for it and do what was necessary legally to get it so they took it. Lets not forget Stark flying a plane into the Fed building, killing himself and an IRS employee and wounding 13? others, McVeigh and others blowing up Fed building and killing and wounding how many? No threat there though, nope.

[ashlynne39]

After the FBI announcement, several friends of mine laughed at the "threat". I tried to explain how they are not, but after a while I think we here at Quatloos are exaggerating the threat. The impression this action is giving to the public is "we the government are going after yet another vaguely right wing group who doesn't like us."

Yes, there are lots of violent incidents with sov'runs. But overall they're just wackos who want to be left alone. They're dangerous to themselves financially, and frequently cause headaches with their shenanigans, but the movement hardly warrants the panic the administration is trying to foster.

I think this is what Beck was getting at. I heard part of his radio show the day this came up as I was driving to work. He was very dismissive of sovereign citizens, not necessarily because he hadn't heard of them (at least from what I got) but based on the statistics the FBI gave for the number of incidents which he then compared to other threats to security. His point was just as Brandy put it - it seems like just another opportunity to go after a right wing group that doesn't like the government when there are other bigger threats so what the heck is the FBI wasting their time on this for?

Not that I agree with him, in fact I thought he really understated the situation and should have done more research if he was going to comment on it. But it seems to me that in large part the violent incidents of sovereigns do not make up the biggest part of their antics. That does not make the non-violent acts any less terroristic in nature in my opinion though. Personally, I think these people are nut jobs of the highest order and their antics, whereever they are on the spectrum of sovereign activities is at best mildy illegal and at worst violent but almost all of their antics seem to have some element of terrorism involved where their victims are concerned. I sent Beck an e-mail, not that I think he'll pay any attention to it, telling him that I thought he needed to research this group significantly more because his dismissive attitude is not helpful to his listeners who need to be aware of this growing movement.

[Demosthenes]

Pundits like Glenn Beck thrive on painting themselves as the victim of the evil government, and every time he lumps his followers in with the violent extremist end of the conservative
spectrum in order to claim victimhood, he does serious damage to the credibility of the mainstream conservative image.

When the FBI did a similar press conference on the dangerous left-wing anarchist groups re-emerging in the US, mainstream liberals didn't pound their chests and cry, "They're targeting us. Waaahhhh!" As a result, the public doesn't associate the typical liberal voice with violent extremist movements such as the anarchists or eco-terrorists.

Mainstream conservative leaders desperately need to distance themselves from their violent and extreme cousins.

[Quixote]

Demo can speak to this, as I am sure she, like me, has had a client or two that even when you showed them in black and white that by investing in X and paying the taxes they would be real money ahead, than investing in Y (which has no taxes paid), they would still invest in Y because in their minds they were absolutely sure that it was superior to X only because they would not have to pay any taxes. That's right they were willing to forgo more money, a greater return, because they were so hung up on taxes.

In an old movie, the title of which I have long forgotten, a minor character is delighted when his accountant comes up with a way to completely avoid the estate tax: donate his entire estate to the federal government.

[Quixote]

I get the feeling that in some instances it is more polite and genteel to say "paper terrorism" rather than what it should more rightly be called. "paper sh*t blizzard."

It doesn't take anything close to a paper sh!t blizzard to create considerable problems for the victims. I am working to expedite the federal tax refund of a victim of ID theft. There is no indication that a sov'run is involved, but whoever is doing it is targeting LEOs in Florida. My client is behind on her rent and utility bills and her ex hasn't paid child support for more than a year, so she could really use her refund. Unfortunately, the ID thief filed a return under her number and it's gumming up the works.

[Brandybuck]

Crime is not terrorism but terrorism is a crime. The commission of a crime in the act of terrorism is still terrorism, so does it matter what you define it as, or does it matter that someone is dead?

In some sense every crime is equal to every other crime. Every murder is as serious as every other murder. But in another sense they are different, and law enforcement must attach different priorities to them. Shooting a cop during a routine traffic stop is not the same as setting off a bomb in a marketplace. Harassing with liens and false documents is not the same as flying a plane into a building.

By calling this terrorism, you are suggesting that it be given the highest level of attention by law enforcement. You are suggesting that the DHS get involved. You are even suggesting suspected sovereigns be indefinitely incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay without trial. Our society does not take the word "terrorism" lightly.

Seriously, what crawled into your knickers over this?

What crawled into my knickers? This story is painting sovruns with a very wide brush. Not only that, the brush is splashing paint onto libertarians and Ron Paul supporters. Since I and many of my friends are libertarians and Ron Paul supporters, this worries me greatly. We are already suspect in society's mind because we are different. That is human nature. But the story exacerbates this.

We want to go onto a gold standard of some kind. This may place us outside of the mainstream, but it does not make us terrorists! We think much of what the Federal Government is doing is illegal and contrary to the Constitution. This may place us outside of the mainstream, but it does not make us terrorists! Some of my friends (but not myself) are anarchists and desire a state-less society. This definitely places them on the distant horizon, but they are still not terrorists!

As a frequenter of Quatloos, I understand better than the general public what a "sovereign citizen" is. But step outside of Quatloos for a moment and imagine you are ignorant of this topic, and imagine reading the AP or Reuters story. "Whoa!" you think to yourself, "that sounds just like Bob down the street with the Ron Paul sign in his yard!"

That's why my knickers are in a twist.

[Prof]

Domestic terrorism is a real threat. One of your examples was flying a plane into a building (an obvious reference to 9/11). Are you forgetting that a "sovereign" flew a plane into an IRS building in Austin? Admittedly not with 9/11 results, but still a wake up call.

Let's look at anti-abortion terrorists -- medical personnel murdered by "lone wolves."

What about the Atlanta bomber? The Unibomber? The Order. The Montana Freemen. Don't forget Oklahoma City. West Memphis, Ark.

While I am not forgetting 9/11 or Ft. Hood, the number of domestic (non-Muslim) terrorist incidents from all-American fruitcakes cannot be ignored and is disturbing. What you also cannot ignore is the large number of quasi organized groups, from the Klan on down the food chain. There are lots of good ol' 'Merican boys who like to go out in the woods and play Rambo; sometimes, like the Huteree, they begin to believe their own BS.

Most of these folks are right wing anti-government nuts. However, the FBI has not ignored the left wing of anarchists. Although by definition poorly organized, the fringe of the Occupy movement and the true anarchists who show up at anti-big government, anti-Wall Street, anti-international banker rallies are probably equally dangerous, if they could only organize and get some discipline. I'll bet the Stormfront could whip those kids into shape.

Finally, what liberterian group has ever advocated the violent overthrow of so much as a hot dog wagon? While liberterians may oppose big government, they don't generally organize militias designed to repel the "ebil gov't" and so forth. If you've got your panties in a wad over the latests domestic terror advisories, you're involved in more than Liberterian politics, I think.

[Mr. Mephistopheles]

As a frequenter of Quatloos, I understand better than the general public what a "sovereign citizen" is. But step outside of Quatloos for a moment and imagine you are ignorant of this topic, and imagine reading the AP or Reuters story. "Whoa!" you think to yourself, "that sounds just like Bob down the street with the Ron Paul sign in his yard!"

That's why my knickers are in a twist.

I just re-read both the Reuters and AP story from the 6th and can't see why anyone would make an automatic association between Ron Paul and sovereign citizens. The connection isn't there.

[JamesVincent]

As a frequenter of Quatloos, I understand better than the general public what a "sovereign citizen" is. But step outside of Quatloos for a moment and imagine you are ignorant of this topic, and imagine reading the AP or Reuters story. "Whoa!" you think to yourself, "that sounds just like Bob down the street with the Ron Paul sign in his yard!"

That's why my knickers are in a twist.

I just re-read both the Reuters and AP story from the 6th and can't see why anyone would make an automatic association between Ron Paul and sovereign citizens. The connection isn't there.

The only association Ive seen between Ron Paul and the sovereign movement is the one he himself made by pandering to their ideals or, if not pandering, agreeing to hear them and/ or agreeing to them. Weve had two threads involving Ron Pauls involvement in fringe groups either directly or indirectly, by name only or by direct association.

[Mr. Mephistopheles]

As a frequenter of Quatloos, I understand better than the general public what a "sovereign citizen" is. But step outside of Quatloos for a moment and imagine you are ignorant of this topic, and imagine reading the AP or Reuters story. "Whoa!" you think to yourself, "that sounds just like Bob down the street with the Ron Paul sign in his yard!"

That's why my knickers are in a twist.

I just re-read both the Reuters and AP story from the 6th and can't see why anyone would make an automatic association between Ron Paul and sovereign citizens. The connection isn't there.

The only association Ive seen between Ron Paul and the sovereign movement is the one he himself made by pandering to their ideals or, if not pandering, agreeing to hear them and/ or agreeing to them. Weve had two threads involving Ron Pauls involvement in fringe groups either directly or indirectly, by name only or by direct association.

Agreed, but I still don't see how anyone could make that connection solely from reading the AP or Reuter's pieces from the 6th.

[Brandybuck]

Finally, what liberterian group has ever advocated the violent overthrow of so much as a hot dog wagon? While liberterians may oppose big government, they don't generally organize militias designed to repel the "ebil gov't" and so forth. If you've got your panties in a wad over the latests domestic terror advisories, you're involved in more than Liberterian politics, I think.

Let's take a look at the actual FBI bulletin:

"They may refer to themselves as “constitutionalists” or “freemen”" - Applies to many libertarians. And the overwhelming majority of Ron Paul supporters refer to themselves as constitutionalists.

"...their core beliefs are the same: The government operates outside of its jurisdiction." - again, quite common among libertarians. One libertarian hero was the abolitionist Lysander Spooner, who argued adamantly that the Constitution had no authority.

"Sovereign citizens believe that when the U.S. government removed itself from the gold standard, it rendered U.S. currency as a valueless credit note" - Again, quite common belief among many libertarians.

"Several indicators can help identify these individuals... References to the Bible, The Constitution of the United States, U.S. Supreme Court decisions, or treaties with foreign governments" - Holy Crap! Forget about libertarians, you've just indicated the entire Republican Party!

To be fair, the bulletin did clarify the difference between libertarians and sovruns. What makes sovruns different from other groups, is that they believe that the law does not apply to them, that they are outside of the law, and base this on various legal crankery.

Here is my problem: The press did not emphasize the core characteristics of sovruns. Instead they emphasized the indicators listed above, implying that those who held those beliefs were a rising threat. They may not have meant to do it, but they managed to portray many libertarians as dangerous others.

p.s. Look at the stock photo they used in this story. 'Nuff said. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/07/f ... -movement/

[Demosthenes]

You can whine about the FBI and press describing sovereigns in a way you think combines sovs with Paul supporters, or you can persuade Ron Paul and his followers to distance themselves from sovs. Paul's repeated pandering to the sov movement isn't helping your case that the two are completely separate groups...

http://freedomlawconference.org/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1RQkhjV85M

[Demosthenes]

Today's press release from the Ron Paul Presidential Campaign:

2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul was endorsed today by Idaho State Representative Phil Hart (R-Hayden). Representing the 3rd District, Rep. Hart serves an area comprising Hayden and the northern part of Kootenai County including parts of Coeur d’Alene.

For the second presidential election in a row, State Representative Phil Hart has endorsed 12- term Texas Congressman Ron Paul for president.

According to Rep. Hart, “Ron Paul is the only candidate who understands our economic problems. He is also the only frontrunner candidate who is not propped up by those who have caused our economic demise.”

With regard to Dr. Paul’s foreign policy, Rep. Hart said, “Those Americans who understand our foreign policy the best, our active military men and women, support Ron Paul overwhelmingly. America needs a paradigm shift, and Ron Paul is the only candidate for President who can deliver on that.”

Mr. Hart is owner of an engineering company licensed to perform structural engineering in 14 states and two Canadian provinces. He graduated with a degree in civil engineering from the University of Utah and an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. Mr. Hart is a proud member of Gun Owners of America and the National Rifle Association, and is active in the chamber of commerce.

Rep. Hart is currently serving his fourth term in the Idaho House of Representatives.

Providing a strong boost to Ron Paul’s Idaho organization, such endorsements present Ron Paul as the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney. They also demonstrate that the 12-term Congressman from Texas has the only campaign organization capable of maintaining a 50-state competition with the moderate-establishment Romney.

Read more here: http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2012/0 ... rylink=cpy

[JamesVincent]

Today's press release from the Ron Paul Presidential Campaign:

With regard to Dr. Paul’s foreign policy, Rep. Hart said, “Those Americans who understand our foreign policy the best, our active military men and women, support Ron Paul overwhelmingly. America needs a paradigm shift, and Ron Paul is the only candidate for President who can deliver on that.”

Read more here: http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2012/0 ... rylink=cpy

Thats funny, I dont personally know of a single serviceman, or woman, active or former, who thinks Ron Paul should be President. As a matter of fact most of the ones Ive talked to feel about the same way I do, none of the ones running should be President. And I dont think having Wild Man Hart as a backer is going to get you out of trouble with the press, but he might get you cheap lumber.

[ashlynne39]

Today's press release from the Ron Paul Presidential Campaign:

With regard to Dr. Paul’s foreign policy, Rep. Hart said, “Those Americans who understand our foreign policy the best, our active military men and women, support Ron Paul overwhelmingly. America needs a paradigm shift, and Ron Paul is the only candidate for President who can deliver on that.”

Read more here: http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2012/0 ... rylink=cpy

Thats funny, I dont personally know of a single serviceman, or woman, active or former, who thinks Ron Paul should be President. As a matter of fact most of the ones Ive talked to feel about the same way I do, none of the ones running should be President. And I dont think having Wild Man Hart as a backer is going to get you out of trouble with the press, but he might get you cheap lumber.

A friend was trying to convince me yesterday that Ron Paul is the one. She wasn't too thrilled when I called him a nut. Her "selling point" was how polling shows that military men and women support Paul more than any other candidates combined. I haven't seen that poll but I suspect what she was talking about was the one about they give Paul more money than any other candidate combined and as I recall that has been debunked.

[wserra]

What crawled into my knickers? This story is painting sovruns with a very wide brush. Not only that, the brush is splashing paint onto libertarians and Ron Paul supporters. Since I and many of my friends are libertarians and Ron Paul supporters, this worries me greatly.

Paul needs to recall the old adage: "If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas."

[Demosthenes]

Her "selling point" was how polling shows that military men and women support Paul more than any other candidates combined. I haven't seen that poll but I suspect what she was talking about was the one about they give Paul more money than any other candidate combined and as I recall that has been debunked.

Military people do donate more to Paul than the other candidates.

http://progress.montgomeryadvertiser.co ... -donations

[Brandybuck]

Today's press release from the Ron Paul Presidential Campaign:

I'm not sure what a State Representative endorsing a candidate has to do with the FBI declaring sovruns to be an expanding threat. Yes I know he's a tax denier, but it's still the case of a state representative endorsing a candidate.

On a related note, what the f*ck does the amount of money military personnel contribute to candidates have to do with the FBI declaring sovruns to be an expanding threat?

You guys are indeed confirming my fears that this bulletin will cause terrorism will be linked with Ron Paul. That is what exactly what you are doing. You call call sovruns terrorists and then link Ron Paul with sovruns.

Sorry, I am out of here. You have gone too far. I cannot find an "delete account" button, so admins, remove me from this forum.

[Demosthenes]

You guys are indeed confirming my fears that this bulletin will cause terrorism will be linked with Ron Paul. That is what exactly what you are doing. You call call sovruns terrorists and then link Ron Paul with sovruns.

And yet, you're the one who brought Ron Paul up in context with the FBI announcement.

If you read my article in Forbes, you'll see I do the opposite.

Ron Paul is the one doing his damnedest to link himself to terrorists.

[webhick]

You guys are indeed confirming my fears that this bulletin will cause terrorism will be linked with Ron Paul. That is what exactly what you are doing. You call call sovruns terrorists and then link Ron Paul with sovruns.

Actually, it seems you were the first one in this thread to mention Ron Paul.

Sorry, I am out of here. You have gone too far. I cannot find an "delete account" button, so admins, remove me from this forum.

I'm sorry to hear that, but I don't advocate deleting non-spam accounts. If you never come back then the account will just sit unused and if you one day change your mind then it'll still be there when you're ready.