Besides the Hutaree, what other groups did those indicted belong?

I had only read about the Hutaree members …

I wish everyone would stop using the word terrorist for all sides. It’s overused to the point of meaninglessness. Just call them the criminals they are.

Oh, wow. I got caught in the middle of a cops funeral procession the other day on the Long Island Expressway. It was VERY long and folks had to cut through it to make it the exit.

Cop and Firefighter funerals are usally huge affairs. That plan could have done quite alot of damage.

OT because I must share some good news.

A poetry book about the Iraq war, which has the painting by an Iraqi artist that I own (thanks to siun) as cover art, is coming out 4/1.

Yes, criminals…a criminal conspiracy…
if they could try the Chicago Eight, these guys should qualify as a criminal conspiracy with actual arms

Members of the Hutaree Christian militia are no different from many commissioned officers from the US military and most hired guns at Blackwater USA in that they all pride themselves of being terrorists for Christ. But these Christian militants from Michigan could’ve gotten off the hook for their terrorist activities if they had simply joined the US armed forces or secured billions of dollars worth of contracts from the Pentagon and the State Department:

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/lopate/episodes/2009/05/04/segments/130897

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/05/0082488

Agreed. The previous administration overused the word… however, there needs to be some word besides just “criminals” to describe these fools. I’m down with “criminally violent anarchists”.

It is a very telling thing about our mass media and right wing, that the mass media describes “terrorists” attacking Moscow on the same day that “extremists” plotting to “fight the US government” starting with bomb and gun attacks on law enforcement “foot soldiers” were arrested. I guess we don’t have “terrorists” in the US unless they are setting SUVs on fire as an environmentalist “message”. The Christian fundamentalist crazies with assault rifles trying to start a war on the government don’t count …

I heard on a recent antiwar.com interview that the current use of ‘terrorism’ originated with, you guessed it, Israel, which didn’t like the asymmetric nature of the conflict with Palestine. So they started calling them terrorists to discredit them and institutionalize and internationalize Israel’s victimhood. Many can play at that game. It’s really nothing more that name-calling anymore, on the side whose grievances you don’t like.

Oh great, when the law enforcement community finds out they were targets they’re going to stop tasing,old people, students, the mentally ill, children, pregnant women, handcuffed suspects, and strictly just[Edited by Moderator. No advocating violence in any fashion, please] of Right Wing Religious Whack Jobs. And that’s a good thing.

They are criminals, and among the crimes they have likely committed is conspiracy to commit terrorism. We must recognize that it is a federal crime in the US to use violence to change public policy or intimidate the public. It is a very specific statute – two actually, one for foreign terrorists and one for domestic. Which is why terrorists should be arrested, tried and convicted in civilian courts. It’s the right word, we just need to make sure the actual definition is understood.

The indictment said those explosive devices, commonly called IEDs, constitute weapons of mass destruction.

Um, no.

Weapons of mass destruction are nuclear, biological and chemical.
Bush’s excuse for invading Iraq was to look for WMDs, are we to believe he was looking for IEDs?
Not sure why they are trying to redefine WMD.

The use of the word “terrorist” assuredly predates Israel and goes back to at least the French Revolution.

Funny the timing on how Michael Steele went to sex themed hotel were women did Lesbian Acts which considering the GOP’s stand on Gay Marriage means Steele should be resigning soon.
Thee Politico is loosing reporters is all over the news today no word yet on if their fat cat GOP advertisers and funders are having cash problems
Plus Hannity’s Charity for the Vets is in the news again for not giving away the money they raised to help vets.
Its almost like the GOP is trying to drown out a news story but which one?

But the attacks in Moscow were “apparently” done by Chechens (i.e., “Muslims”), so of course it was terrorism. /s

Good point unless they had some Radioactive, Biological or Poison Gas type stuff in the IED’s?
In which case the FBI will be looking at everyone on the Right side of things.

“Mass destruction” in the civilian law enforcement sense is probably a very differently-intended term than the one used in geopolitical and national defense issues. Certainly, for example, McVeigh’s use of a massive truck bomb in any civilian law enforcement sense was “mass destruction”. Bombs in general destroy and kill indiscriminately.

I’m comfortable enough with the prosecutors having a heavy-duty term to throw at people who make bombs.

I said current usage. Of course the word terrorism goes back for all of human history.

Well I guess it depends how big the bomb is Timothy McVie’s bomb was a regular bomb but I would certainly call that a WMD.

Oy, WMD. More debased language. New rule: every word that comes out of a prez mouth should ever after be regarded as debased language, especially the word “is.”

The invention of WMD, as you say was about being able to attack, via missiles, the US using either of the three options. As an excuse to invade another country, if one buys into the validity of the idea of preemption of a serious threat, the idea was to eliminate said WMDs. If our government says that WMDs are the same as pipe bombs then of course we can invade any country in the world as a potential threat. IEDs are not WMDs.

Just found this

For the purposes of US Criminal law concerning terrorism, weapons of mass destruction are defined as:

* “any destructive device as defined in section 921 of this title;
…

As far as law enforcement goes, if it blows up it is a WMD.
The term has been made so inclusive it is meaningless now.
(except for fear mongering, I guess.)

TALKING POINTS MEMO is also calling them something other than terrorists. I emailed Josh Marshall to ask him why.

Personally, I think it’s the skin color of these home-grown terrorists that is the reason the press isnt’ calling them by the correct name.

I read somewhere that it was the U.S. that insisted that poison gas be included in the WMD category because it’s pretty effective and very cheap. Can’t have those red, brown, black & yellow people able to fight against the Big Bully, now can we.

As I said in 20, more debased language. Perhaps we should regard every word in every law as overused to the point of meaninglessness. It would be a start.

Might be a vest/shoe/underwear thing. Only those that are willing to self-destruct are terrorists.

Xians can’t be terrorists because, well they just can’t. I wonder how many of these rejects are X military?

I recall the huge funeral for four Oakland policemen within the past two years — my two thoughts were that it was an opportune time to commit a crime elsewhere and that tremendous damage could be done at the funeral itself. I’m sure our responders take that into consideration, but there were police officers from all over the country, it was a massive event.

“criminally violent anarchists”.

has my vote

JOFish, the whole anarchist thing is one that’s bandied about too loosely defined anymore, as much as the terrorist word is, IMHO.

As eCahn has a point regarding ‘terrorist’, the anarchist word is abused as well.

MY contention would be these are criminally violent ‘separatists’ . . . .

They see government as being overbearing on their ‘rights’ and thus want to REMOVE government. They want to attack, destroy, and violently remove government, to establish their OWN from of self existence/government.

That’s not anarchy, by any means.

The militia movement is mostly full of racists, bigots, anti-semites, homophobes and misogynists who seek to establish their OWN order or rule based on THEIR beliefs.

That’s not anarchy. Not how I understand it, anyways.

But let me COMPLETELY agree with you and all others when you write ‘criminally violent’ regarding these militias and their members.

And no, I just can’t get behind the fact some folk(s) continue to posit that I’m misunderstanding it all and these folks are Patriots defending their Constitutional Freedoms and our government has drummed up action against them thru infiltration and subtrafuge. I just can’t buy that one.

Don’t mean to single you out, just saw the anarchist comment and thought I’d respond to that one.

Always have enjoyed your comments, found them thoughtful and well grounded . . . it’s just that one word I’m responding to, not your position(s). And thank you for all you HAVE commented on thru the past . .

Yeah, I somehow don’t get that shit either, SF . . . . yet another manifestation of the entrenched neoliberal messaging and the CONTROL of that messaging, I think.

Agree with you completely.

Well said and thanks for introducing the clarity and simplicity of it all.

These groups have been in the US for decades. Why is everyone afraid of them now?

These are, without question, terrorists. But “weapons of mass destruction”? Please. IEDs are not WMDs! Nor are guns, machine guns, RPGs, or any number of other things. What actually ARE “weapons of mass destruction” (linguistically, at least, if not technically according to international arms agreements) are the huge bombs employed by the U.S., e.g., the “MOAB.” So don’t get carried away.

The distinction some are making above between “terrorism” and “criminal” is silly. Terrorist acts are criminal acts. They are rarely, in the history of the world, acts of war, as the U.S. has treated them. But they are almost always criminal. So saying you should label them “criminal” does NOT change the fact that you should ALSO label them “terrorist.”

And, to play with language a bit, there’s “being against the law” and “criminal.” Something done with “criminal intent” might be construed as being done for the benefit of the criminal, e.g., rape, robbery. Something done with completely different intent, political intent, is what is typically called terrorism. It’s still against the law, making it a crime, but perhaps it could be argued the world “criminal” is misleading in the sense I’ve described here.

Washington Examiner is calling them terrorists

link

Are they terrorists, or enemy combatants? Can they be subject to “enhanced” interrogation, and indefinite detention? Who gets to decide how they are classified? The unitary executive?

Yes!

It devoid of meaning at this point.

And, no one ever called Tim McVeigh a terrorist. Or did they?

I belong to PETA which is now a terrorist organization!

“It is time for us to stop talking about right and left,” McKinney told me. “The old political paradigm that serves the interests of the people who put us in this predicament will not be the paradigm that gets us out of this. I am a child of the South. Janet Napolitano tells me I need to be afraid of people who are labeled white supremacists but I was raised around white supremacists. I am not afraid of white supremacists. I am concerned about my own government. The Patriot Act did not come from the white supremacists, it came from the White House and Congress. Citizens United did not come from white supremacists, it came from the Supreme Court. Our problem is a problem of governance. I am willing to reach across traditional barriers that have been skillfully constructed by people who benefit from the way the system is organized.”

Lynching came from white supremacists. Oklahoma City came from white supremacists. It’s true that there are other things to worry about; that does not mean we should NOT worry about white supremacists, or oppose them.

Iraqi artist that I own (thanks to siun)

Siun got you a good deal on an Iraqi artist? :-D

Excuse me. The Chicago Ten. The Eight were charged with “Crossing state lines thinking bad thoughts” (Abbie Hoffman). The two lawyers, William Kunstler and Leonard Weinglass were charged with saying bad things to the judge. One last item: Conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor is a felony.

Would you call an aircraft carrier a “weapon of mass destruction”? How about a B-1 bomber, or a Predator missile? Would you characterize these instruments of war as “weapons of conventional destruction”? What would we call a crop duster filled with Agent Orange? We certainly wouldn’t call it “Health Care.” Whatever you call them, we know what they are. We see the blood-filled craters all over the world.

“Fear the Dreadnought”. Oh I’ll feel so much safer when Ronny Raygunzaps Star Wars Defense is in place. Gun Boat Terrorism, er, I mean Diplomacy is alive and well, just ask Central, or South Americans, or any of many south-east, south-west, and/or central asian countrys. Iran getting a bomb is just a talking point. What’d we finally do to India in the 60′s when they got their Holy Weapon of Mass Destruction? Power, Control, Empire, that’s what’s all that’s being maintained. Even Obama thinks he has to keep a war going to stay in office, even if it bankrupts us like Vietnam did. ‘can’t keep the people reasonably informed with morons like Coulter, Palin, Cheney, etc at the helm of capital producing political news machines for shareholders in a nation that doesn’t produce anything for sain people.