Click here to read the entire story.
WASHINGTON — Nine members of a Michigan-based Christian militia group have been indicted on sedition and weapons charges in connection with an alleged plot to murder law enforcement officers in hopes of setting off an anti-government uprising.
In court filings unsealed Monday, the Justice Department accused the nine people of planning to kill an unidentified law enforcement officer, then plant improvised explosive devices of a type used by insurgents in Iraq to attack the funeral procession.
Eight of the defendants were arrested over the weekend in raids in Michigan, Ohio and Indiana. A ninth remained at large, the Justice Department said. The indictments against them were returned last Tuesday. The defendants were identified as members of Hutaree, described by federal prosecutors as an anti-government extremist organization based in Lenawee County, Michigan, and which advocates violence against local, state and federal law enforcement. The group saw local and state police as “foot soldiers” for the federal government, which it viewed as its enemy, along with participants in what they deemed to be a “New World Order,” according to the indictment.
Good work.
I really hate the fact, though, that my first thought was, “let’s see the evidence.”, because the timing is suspect; that my first thoughts were, “God, I hope this is a real bust, and not a political hatchet job.”
What makes them say this is a Christian militia group?
What else would we call them?
Who are these people and why are they against the United States of America?
I seem to remember a report by DHS….
@Posting As Pinko
If you read the article in full, these people are talking about “end of times” and being “Christian soldiers”. Something about their name being about soldiers of Christ, I didn’t get it, I”ll be honest. Not being my forte and all, but apparently “hutaree” is some reference of some kind to “christian soldiers”.
From the LA times:
How dare these people claim to be Christian? Christians aren’t suppose to behave like this.
They are Christian jihadis, like their soulmates in Afghanistan and Iraq. They think God tells them to commit violent acts against innocent men, women and children. They are dedicated to the violent overthrow of our duly and democratically elected government. They should be treated as terrorists.
I would say they are terrorists. I don’t know what else I would call them. This is where the ‘both foreign and domestic’ fits in.
I believe I cautioned once before about using the term “terrorist” too loosely and too easily. However, in a case in which an armed group intentionally targets law enforcement officers, they should be considered “terrorists” plain and simple, sometimes just domestic terrorists and sometimes international terrorists, depending on the scope of their targets. God knows I had to help others abroad fight against this very thing; and, sadly, a lot of cops lost their lives before we could bring down the killers. I remember an instance in which the terrorist just pulled up beside a cop directing traffic at a busy intersection and shot the guy down where he stood. Easy kill and big message. For a terrorist, a cop is very much a preferred target of choice. Success demonstrates to the populace that, if the defenders cannot defend themselves, what chance have you unless you decide to bend your knee to us. Look at how often in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, the suicide bombers are targeted against police stations, security checkpoints, inrtelligence centers, and even raw police recruits. Success sends a very strong message to the the rest of the people. Somehow I think somebody in this whacked out group did some reading on terrorism.
They don’t appear the kind who can read, but what do I know. I am glad they puffed up and exposed themselves. They probably have big dumb mouths. Glad they were caught before harming others.
What’s the difference between a cult and terrorist? I heard on a talk show this morning someone saying it reminded them more of a cult. I guess there is a fine line?
Red Dawn, I personally cannot find a cut and dried answer to your question. Most terrorist groups in my experience were ideologically and politically vice religiously driven. Even where you might expect to find some element of religion coming into play, it usually turned out that the political was the real driving force.
That’s why, in my opinion, the al-Qaeda problem is so different from virtually anything we have faced before. The common wisdom seems to be that al-Qaeda is composed of religious fanatics who have used certain aspects of their religion to justify their deeds, forcing peaceful Muslims to spend endless time trying to persuade outsiders that they are the “mainstream” of people who believe in a peace drawn from the very same religious context. If you accept the arguments of the latter, then you would have to say that al-Qaeda is a radical offshoot of a legitimate religion, meaning, I would guess, a “cult.” Maybe we could come up with a new term like “terrorist cult”? They, of course, claim that they are the True Believers and the other guys are the apostates.
As for this home-grown bunch under current scrutiny, my own take is that it started off as some kind of cult, a self-generated offshoot from religion as most of us know it. Under most circumstances, a cult might simply divorce itself from the rest of society and try to expand via seduction and conversions. That Jones thing in Guyana comes immediately to mind. In this case, however, it looks like the political got interwoven into the cult thinking in a really sick kind of way. Now you have a “cult” moving into a planning stage which clearly entails attacks on law enforcement, i.e. “terrorism” pure and simple, ostensibly as some fool way of thinking that this would be the means to expand support and membership. They, of course, would probably call it “revolution.” In fact, that sort of matches the philosophy of many a secular terrorist group. Attack; demonstrate thereby that the “revolution” can and is happening; and use that as a recruiting tool, maybe based on likemindedness and maybe also on fear — as in: “Who’s with us and who is not?”
In the end, however, I view this as semantics. You really cannot put a cult in jail unless that cult breaks the law — the guiding principle, as I recall, in the takedown of the Branch Davidian compound. You CAN put people in jail for planning and/or conducting terrorist actions. So, my personal reaction is to just call them a bunch of “terrorists” or maybe “terrorist wannabe’s” and throw the jail key away. I just have no idea how long they will get because it looks like the planning stage had not yet been transformed into concrete action. The trial should show us whether they were seriously enroute to terrorist action or just a bunch of big talkers whose knees would fail them at the critical moment.
Cults don’t always resort to violence. Terrorists always rely on violence to manipulate their politics.
WHEW!!! Moon, I can stop my mouse cage from turning now, LOL 🙂 That sound’s just about right. Thanks, Wolverine, you had my cage turning and opened up my mind, more than it is, lol 🙂