Local NH press starting to get irritated

[Demosthenes]

No one thought the Branch Davidians or Randy Weaver would be a sympathetic victim. And yet...

Never underestimate the power of politically based decisions, and "don't make waves right now" seems to be the motto for the DOJ.

Whether you think the DOJ is right or wrong doesn't really matter. It's their decision and they think that inactivity is safer than potential violence and bombs.

[The Observer]

No one thought the Branch Davidians or Randy Weaver would be a sympathetic victim. And yet...

The problem with both of those cases is that the government acted first and bungled both of them. In the BD case, the government should have apprehended Koresh on the street prior to the standoff - even Koresh pointed out that ATF had a number of opportunites to do so. And in the Weaver case, the government got too aggressive and engendered the shootout; they could have simply blocked people from getting in and out and waited the Weavers out. At that point, if Weaver came out blasting his guns, there would have no been no sympathy for him. The sympathy that ensued was because a child and a woman got shot.

Never underestimate the power of politically based decisions, and "don't make waves right now" seems to be the motto for the DOJ.

Yes - taking counsel of their fears.

Whether you think the DOJ is right or wrong doesn't really matter. It's their decision and they think that inactivity is safer than potential violence and bombs.

I certainly don't think that what I think about DOJ matters - at least in terms of expecting it to influence DOJ. But you have been openly critical of the government's actions as well.

[Demosthenes]

And in the Weaver case, the government got too aggressive and engendered the shootout; they could have simply blocked people from getting in and out and waited the Weavers out.

The government waited 18 months trying to negotiate Randy's surrender before moving in and cutting off outsiders' access to the land. To successfully cut off the land, they had to effectively surround a huge amount of acreage and set up significant surveillance, which ended up costing the government more than a million dollars a day (in 1993 dollars no less). And Randy wasn't nearly as prepared as Ed. Realistically, Ed can go roughly 18 months without any input or supplies at all from outsiders.

You all seem to think that all one has to do in put up a gate or ditch, et voila no one can get to Ed's house. Didn't you ever walk or take a bike through the woods as kids? Blocking a road or driveway poses a minor inconvenience at best.

When it comes time to arrest Ed, it's all or none. There's no such thing as a semi seige. You can't cut off supporters unless you dedicate a huge amount of resources to enforcing it. At a couple of million dollars aday (conservatively) maintaining such a presence long term is just silly.

When the government decides to move in, they will own Ed's sorry ass. But until the deer in the headlights mentality from the AUSA and DC passes, there's not much the local marshals can do.

[webhick]

I specifically said that it wouldn't prevent foot traffic. The way I see it, this is going to take some time. Let's make them as uncomfortable as possible by making it harder and more inconvenient to do whatever the hell they want. And, the locals are upset. They may take measures themselves at some point.

I swear. Someone's pissing on our lollipops.

[Dezcad]

I swear. Someone's pissing on our lollipops.

Is that a good or bad thing?

[webhick]

I swear. Someone's pissing on our lollipops.

Is that a good or bad thing?

Depends on if you like that kind of thing. I personally wouldn't want anyone to piss on my lollipops.

[ASITStands]

Change the scenario a bit.

Let's say the young lady hit by the SUV had actually been injured and lay in the hospital. Or, let's consider what would have happened had someone at the recent concert fallen sick in a similar manner to the man with cancer and died.

Now, remember, the Marshals are not executing the warrant because Alberto Gonzales wants to keep his job? What sort of picture does that paint?

I think there's a bigger risk in not serving the warrant than serving it. However, I agree the best approach is one-step-at-a-time like stopping all entry to the property and detaining anyone leaving for possible charges of aiding and abetting.

[The Observer]

The government waited 18 months trying to negotiate Randy's surrender before moving in and cutting off outsiders' access to the land. To successfully cut off the land, they had to effectively surround a huge amount of acreage and set up significant surveillance, which ended up costing the government more than a million dollars a day (in 1993 dollars no less).

Which had more to do with the fact that Weaver's land was on a mountain and not easily accessible. And remember, that seige occurred only after the disaster happened. What would have happened if the government had blocked the only road up early on and not allowed conventional traffic or communications in? I daresay it would have made things a lot harder for the Weavers in terms of surviving. Yes, some individuals could have made it up without using the road, but after a while, hauling groceries up the side of a mountain, especially during the winter, is going to get old. At the point the pressure would have been on Randy to do something so that his family could eat or they would have left him.

You all seem to think that all one has to do in put up a gate or ditch, et voila no one can get to Ed's house. Didn't you ever walk or take a bike through the woods as kids? Blocking a road or driveway poses a minor inconvenience at best.

Which is at least more than what is being done now.

When it comes time to arrest Ed, it's all or none. There's no such thing as a semi seige. You can't cut off supporters unless you dedicate a huge amount of resources to enforcing it. At a couple of million dollars aday (conservatively) maintaining such a presence long term is just silly.

And as been pointed out, the seige isn't going to be perfect - there has never been a seige anywhere where there wasn't a hole. The point is to restrict as much as is possible the movement, communication and supplies of the people inside. Over time it will become more difficult. It doesn't have to be expensive. Electronic/video monitoring equipment can reveal who is moving in and out of the property and they can be arrested/detained at a later time and convenience. In time, the Browns will run out of supporters.

When the government decides to move in, they will own Ed's sorry ass. But until the deer in the headlights mentality from the AUSA and DC passes, there's not much the local marshals can do.

Again, there is that inference about DoJ taking counsel of their fears...

And a mea culpa on my part: I mistakenly said that a infant was shot in the Weaver fiasco. It was actually Weaver's older son who was killed. The infant was in his wife's arms when Ms. Weaver was killed, but was unharmed.

[Demosthenes]

The perfect scenario a la Demo would be to start pressing felony charges asap against any and all followers who have provided material relief to the Browns. I think it would be a far more effective deterrent than digging a ditch or installing a road block that someone could just fill or move.

Most, if not all, of the local flakey free state supporters have been easy to identify and have been openly bragging about their involvement. I'd start with them, Reno Gonzales, Anthony Sciarrone, and the handful of loyal constitution rangers.

[The Observer]

The perfect scenario a la Demo would be to start pressing felony charges asap against any and all followers who have provided material relief to the Browns. I think it would be a far more effective deterrent than digging a ditch or installing a road block that someone could just fill or move.

Most, if not all, of the local flakey free state supporters have been easy to identify and have been openly bragging about their involvement. I'd start with them, Reno Gonzales, Anthony Sciarrone, and the handful of loyal constitution rangers.

I wholeheartedly agree. If the wanna-bes start having to face the music themselves, I would wager they would start making excuses as to why they can't come up and help Ed Brown anymore.

[ErsatzAnatchist]

The perfect scenario a la Demo would be to start pressing felony charges asap against any and all followers who have provided material relief to the Browns. I think it would be a far more effective deterrent than digging a ditch or installing a road block that someone could just fill or move.

Most, if not all, of the local flakey free state supporters have been easy to identify and have been openly bragging about their involvement. I'd start with them, Reno Gonzales, Anthony Sciarrone, and the handful of loyal constitution rangers.

A big +1 from me. Start arresting people (and not letting them out on bail) for helping the Browns. Also, disabling he wind and solar power and well would be a good step as well.

[Demosthenes]

A big +1 from me.

No silly karma settings on this forum, EA.

[webhick]

A big +1 from me.

No silly karma settings on this forum, EA.

Would you prefer Demo++ ? It's not karma...it's experience.

[Demosthenes]

The New Hampshire freestate flakes released a video of their hardcord clown ... er ... protesting tactics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpAK3DbTsNY

Those wacky Ed Brown supporters...

[No_Name1]

The government waited 18 months trying to negotiate Randy's surrender before moving in and cutting off outsiders' access to the land. To successfully cut off the land, they had to effectively surround a huge amount of acreage and set up significant surveillance, which ended up costing the government more than a million dollars a day (in 1993 dollars no less). And Randy wasn't nearly as prepared as Ed. Realistically, Ed can go roughly 18 months without any input or supplies at all from outsiders.

Which had more to do with the fact that Weaver's land was on a mountain and not easily accessible. And remember, that seige occurred only after the disaster happened. What would have happened if the government had blocked the only road up early on and not allowed conventional traffic or communications in? I daresay it would have made things a lot harder for the Weavers in terms of surviving. Yes, some individuals could have made it up without using the road, but after a while, hauling groceries up the side of a mountain, especially during the winter, is going to get old. At the point the pressure would have been on Randy to do something so that his family could eat or they would have left him.

Also, from what I've read of Ruby Ridge, I think the government at the time was initially far more worried about Randy Weaver than they are about the Browns.

Weaver was a former US special forces soldier, (presumably with weapons) with known ties to a militia/white supremacist group, in the mid 90's when the anti-government "patriot" movement was in a frenzy over Clinton. Up the mountain in Idaho could have been any number of concealed booby traps, firing positions manned by supporters and the like. Snake eaters, (even old ones) can be dangerous if they want to be, (and mentally prepared to fight it out) and nobody in the LE side likely wanted to be the guinea pig. So there was alot of surveillance before the disaster, a prudent decision in my opinion.

They also may have felt he was a real and legitimate danger to the public, thus warranting the expense. What happened after the smoke cleared was tragic and a disgusting waste of life, but that's a topic for another discussion.

I would speculate that an expensive show of force was used in the hope of discouraging others from trying the same.

Cut to the present day - we have the memories of Ruby Ridge and Waco, and I don't think anyone is too willing to stick their neck out and start down a road of apprehension until someone at the top orders it.

Satisfying yes, and we'd all like to see it, but I think the kid gloves will be on for awhile until someone has the stones to do something about it.

[Cobalt Shiva]

In the BD case, the government should have apprehended Koresh on the street prior to the standoff - even Koresh pointed out that ATF had a number of opportunites to do so.

Problem is, the government didn't have an arrest warrant for Koresh--they only had a SEARCH warrant for the Branch Davidian compound. (Of course, they forgot to bring the damn thing with them, but that's another story.)

[Cobalt Shiva]

Weaver was a former US special forces soldier, (presumably with weapons) with known ties to a militia/white supremacist group, in the mid 90's when the anti-government "patriot" movement was in a frenzy over Clinton.

Actually, Ruby Ridge was in 1992, under Bush the Elder. There is solid evidence to believe that the US Attorney deliberately misinformed Weaver of his court date so that he could rack up a charge of "failure to appear." The entire intent of the Weaver operation--from having a "confidential informant" (read: criminal scumbag working off his own sentence) pressure/cajole Weaver to saw off a shotgun barrel 1/8th of an inch too short (BTW, there are chain-of-custody problems with the shotgun--the CI had more than enough time to short the barrel himself between the time he got the weapon from Weaver and turned it over to the BATF), to the endgame at Ruby Ridge--was to put pressure on Weaver to become a "confidential informant."

[No_Name1]

Actually, Ruby Ridge was in 1992, under Bush the Elder.

I stand corrected, the memory is hazy.

There is solid evidence to believe that the US Attorney deliberately misinformed Weaver of his court date so that he could rack up a charge of "failure to appear." The entire intent of the Weaver operation--from having a "confidential informant" (read: criminal scumbag working off his own sentence) pressure/cajole Weaver to saw off a shotgun barrel 1/8th of an inch too short (BTW, there are chain-of-custody problems with the shotgun--the CI had more than enough time to short the barrel himself between the time he got the weapon from Weaver and turned it over to the BATF), to the endgame at Ruby Ridge--was to put pressure on Weaver to become a "confidential informant."

Wouldn't law enforcement pressuring Weaver to do something illegal be considered entrapment? I'm assuming the US has laws against this?

Why was this not thrown out of court?

Ruby Ridge was a really good way to stir up every angry, paranoid survivalist in the US. Was shooting a kid in the back as he ran away the best way to handle the situation? I do realize he had fired upon the LE prior to this, but it seems like excessive force. That's what's done in a war, and shouldn't be by law enforcement. Not to mention shooting a woman holding a baby - a fantastic feat of marksmanship, but disgusting and unreasonably dangerous to the the child.

If I'd pulled that stunt overseas, I'd still be in military prison.

[Demosthenes]

Not to mention shooting a woman holding a baby - a fantastic feat of marksmanship, but disgusting and unreasonably dangerous to the the child.

Correct me if I am wrong people, but the marksman was aiming at someone other than the woman and baby and was just a tad off missed his intended targetand struck the woman instead. If memory serves......

And why was the marksman shooting at all?

[No_Name1]

Correct me if I am wrong people, but the marksman was aiming at someone other than the woman and baby and was just a tad off missed his intended targetand struck the woman instead. If memory serves......

My point was regardless of the intended target, you NEVER fire when when unarmed women are children are in the immediate vicinity, unless of course it's a hostage situation and the innocents are being held against their will. Law enforcement should have calmed down, acted professionally and waited for a better time to take out Weaver.

S*** happens, I've seen it, but you never knowingly put innocent lives at risk. It's unacceptable on a humanitarian and professional level.