Thread: Big article in Time re: militias

Locked and Loaded: The Secret World of Extreme Militias - Yahoo! News

This long article examines some of the deepest issues, like how the militia movement tends to be identified by its most-radical members.

It's too easy to vilify whole groups by the actions of a few loonies who hide among their ranks (Can you say 'Muslim?').

Realistically, what could the Federal government do against our whole nation, except galvanize the resistance with a few high-profile acts of oppression? Think of how nuts the country went after Ruby Ridge!

Well, with the media's cooperation anything is possible. Witness calling every drawer with a .22 revolver, a 6" folding knife and 3 boxes of ammunition an 'arsenal. The public opinion is easily swayed, and soon forgets, and these folks know it.

OTOH, with everyone owning cell phone cameras and instant internet access these days, I'd be hard pressed to see anything like a Ruby or Waco style encounter. Imagine if either Randy Weaver or the Dividians had been able to broadcast live everything that was going on during their seiges, in real time, without the public having to decypher the media and government official spin.

Keith

Cute

I stopped reading at the "Islamic group...."

We as Americans will not tolerate the actions of the extremest Islamic people and will quell the threat early.

If what they post on their websites reflects the group's positions accurately then some of these militias are pretty darn wacky. (Hutaree militia was one of the crazier ones...) The ones that consider themselves "christian" militia groups and have religion as one of their main motivations should be avoided.

It is fun to dick around in the woods with guns but I dunno if I'd want to hang with one o' these militias. Probably most are not as crazy as the Hutaree group but still.

Originally Posted by trainsktg

OTOH, with everyone owning cell phone cameras and instant internet access these days, I'd be hard pressed to see anything like a Ruby or Waco style encounter. Imagine if either Randy Weaver or the Dividians had been able to broadcast live everything that was going on during their seiges, in real time, without the public having to decypher the media and government official spin.
Keith

Very good point. If they had the ability to broadcast there side of the story, then the fed's can't twist stuff around.

Originally Posted by spengo

The ones that consider themselves "christian" militia groups and have religion as one of their main motivations should be avoided.

In the history of mankind......religion has caused more death than anything.

Originally Posted by rdb241

In the history of mankind......religion has caused more death than anything.

Mark Twain was the last quote I saw.This has been stated by sooo many famous figures over the years.

Very true.

I still have to believe if the people involved in both instances hadn't made themselves well know to the FBI,these to incidents wouldn't have happened.

They seem to have brought it on themselves

I thought the Time article was very interesting.

The way I see it, both 9/11 and the Oklahoma City bombing were caused by religious militia groups. It's a pity they can't have their own planet to fight on, because they sure as **** aren't welcome on this one.

I am encouraged by the opinions posted here, which identify religious extremism as a root problem plaguing so many of the militias. When TSHTF, we as a nation will be sorely tempted by demagogues who will promise us salvation - or at least food - if we follow them and do their dirty work. It's worked in the past!

I like Dmitri Orlov's prescription for surviving the crash: apathy. Don't get too worked up about anything, and be wary of those who do. Guard your cucumber patch all night, wait in line for bread all day, and keep on plodding.

Shooting with the guys in the woods would be a blast, but spare me the drama.

I'd much rather find a non-religous militia of ex-military guys to keep my edge sharp with.

I saw this at work, and I cringed when I saw how the article was presented, just like many other slanted Time articles. eg; "Why Israel Doesn't Want Peace." Time loves their misleading headlines.

I'm surprised that most of you feel the way you do about religious groups, and I completely agree with you. There should be private state militias, but they should not be religiously motivated. Those types of motivations have a tendency to resemble what we usually classify as a cult.

Originally Posted by Buddhalux

I'd much rather find a non-religous militia of ex-military guys to keep my edge sharp with.

Isn't that one of the reasons why many of us are here?

If you broaden the definition of "religion" to mean anything prized above all else (Idolatry, to anyone who doesn't prize Jehovah above all else.) you can see that all people are religious. Somehow people don't equate their own passionate worship of things or ideas as being a religion. I've always figured there are as many religions in the world as there are people.

If your particular religion is your '55 Chevy no one else will see it as a religion, even though it is, and no one is gonna start saving up for guns and ammo to help you preserve it.

So, the only definitions of religion that people identify are what are the typical worlds religions, islam, Buddhism, Shinto, Christianity, Hinduism etc. But a strong belief in a philosophy can be a religion as well (In the sense of being a consuming passion), while the fact that it's not so identified means it will not be included in the stupid "Religions cause wars" B.S.

The causes of most wars are based on two things, power and money (The same things in different forms, like water and ice.) and "religion" is just an excuse. One could exempt islam from my broader basic reason for war, but that wouldn't be true, as islam is by far the most political (Power) religion of all. Even in islam the "religious" aspect is just an excuse for the acquisition of power.

We all band together with those who agree with us on what we prize above all else, and wars cannot happen without people banding together. By my broad definition even atheists are religious () and certainly that religion has resulted in more murders by far than any other. Estimates run higher than 50 million people killed by their own communist governments! (The 50 million figure is probably a minimum.) The "Black Book of Communism" puts the number at 100 million!

Then when you add wars directly or indirectly caused by communism the death toll rises precipitously.

But, of course, facts will never stop people from making silly statements to the effect that "religion has caused the most deaths".

Usually the people who make statements like that specify (In their own minds at least) Christianity, which is really off the mark statistically. Plus of course, the argument can be made that a "christian" who murders is not a true Christian at all, thus Christianity could only be used as an excuse for war to those who are not true Christians.

I find the rabid assertions of atheist's that religion causes the most wars to be amusing, since atheism is one of the tenants of communism.

I'm not hating on religion in general, but you know how there are regular muslims and muslim terrorists who blow up buildings? Well there are regular christians and christian wackos too. :/ Extremists are in every group.

Thanks for the opportunity spengo.

The source documents of Christianity say clearly that murder is wrong, and murder is not once commanded for those of that faith, so, if someone murders it is correct to assume that they are not true believers, at the very least, that they need to repent.

The source documents of islam command their faithful to murder! So, if a muslim does [I]not[I] murder infidels, or at least require them to pay the Jizyah, which is a tax that the Dhimmi (Infidels, basically slaves because they are not muslims) uniquely have to pay. A good muslim either kills or taxes infidels.

Do you see the difference? That difference is huge!

Originally Posted by Partsproduction

Thanks for the opportunity spengo.

The source documents of Christianity say clearly that murder is wrong, and murder is not once commanded for those of that faith, so, if someone murders it is correct to assume that they are not true believers, at the very least, that they need to repent.

The source documents of islam command their faithful to murder! So, if a muslim does [I]not[I] murder infidels, or at least require them to pay the Jizyah, which is a tax that the Dhimmi (Infidels, basically slaves because they are not muslims) uniquely have to pay. A good muslim either kills or taxes infidels.

Do you see the difference? That difference is huge!

Well, I'd like to hear what someone who follows islam has to say to that before passing judgment. It is true that most islamic nations are socially in the past compared to the first world. Regardless, there are still christian extremists who will kill in the name of god. I think everyone can agree they are grossly misinterpreting what their religion is really about and it would definitely be a bad idea to join up with a militia like the Hutaree group.

I stopped reading Time a longtime ago, pretty one sided and slanted stuff....Spad

Please read about the quranic principle of "Al-Takeyya" before putting too much weight on what muslims say about their religion while talking to infidels.

Originally Posted by Partsproduction

If you broaden the definition of "religion" to mean anything prized above all else (Idolatry, to anyone who doesn't prize Jehovah above all else.) you can see that all people are religious. Somehow people don't equate their own passionate worship of things or ideas as being a religion. I've always figured there are as many religions in the world as there are people.

If your particular religion is your '55 Chevy no one else will see it as a religion, even though it is, and no one is gonna start saving up for guns and ammo to help you preserve it.

So, the only definitions of religion that people identify are what are the typical worlds religions, islam, Buddhism, Shinto, Christianity, Hinduism etc. But a strong belief in a philosophy can be a religion as well (In the sense of being a consuming passion), while the fact that it's not so identified means it will not be included in the stupid "Religions cause wars" B.S.

The causes of most wars are based on two things, power and money (The same things in different forms, like water and ice.) and "religion" is just an excuse. One could exempt islam from my broader basic reason for war, but that wouldn't be true, as islam is by far the most political (Power) religion of all. Even in islam the "religious" aspect is just an excuse for the acquisition of power.

We all band together with those who agree with us on what we prize above all else, and wars cannot happen without people banding together. By my broad definition even atheists are religious () and certainly that religion has resulted in more murders by far than any other. Estimates run higher than 50 million people killed by their own communist governments! (The 50 million figure is probably a minimum.) The "Black Book of Communism" puts the number at 100 million!

Then when you add wars directly or indirectly caused by communism the death toll rises precipitously.

But, of course, facts will never stop people from making silly statements to the effect that "religion has caused the most deaths".

Usually the people who make statements like that specify (In their own minds at least) Christianity, which is really off the mark statistically. Plus of course, the argument can be made that a "christian" who murders is not a true Christian at all, thus Christianity could only be used as an excuse for war to those who are not true Christians.

I find the rabid assertions of atheist's that religion causes the most wars to be amusing, since atheism is one of the tenants of communism.

I find this logically challenged. The tenants of Communist ideology are irrelevant - much like if I were to point out that most of the people in US prisons purport to be Christian.

The essence of religion is faith, "... the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." You can love your '55 Chevy to the point that if anybody keys it you'll kill them on sight, but that's passion, not religion.

Speaking of non sequiturs and the US prison population, there's an interesting stat about the religious persuasions of the inmates: they mirror exactly the distribution of religions in the general population - almost. A large majority self-define as Christian, a minority is Muslim, there's a smattering of others - but virtually no atheists.

Atheists represent 2% of the US population, but only 0.2% of the prisoners in the US. It's the only case where the incarcerated do not mirror the religions of the gen pop.

I have a good idea, how about we don't have a discussion about religion right now?

Originally Posted by spengo

Well, I'd like to hear what someone who follows islam has to say to that before passing judgment. It is true that most islamic nations are socially in the past compared to the first world. Regardless, there are still christian extremists who will kill in the name of god. I think everyone can agree they are grossly misinterpreting what their religion is really about and it would definitely be a bad idea to join up with a militia like the Hutaree group.

I think that there are ways to interpret religion however one wants to, and these source texts are purposely open for interpretation. We're just at a point where Islam is more readily accepting these rash interpretations than Christianity, which has in the past. There are bad apples in every batch, but Islam is going through some kind of plague, just as Christianity has in the past, along with many other religions.

I feel that religion has so much to offer us, and still wonder at how this knowledge was gained at such an early time in history. This is just beginning to be uncovered, but I feel much of it will remain a mystery for a very, very long time, even as science(however biased it may be from time to time) may (reasonably)explain many things once thought to be divine. Heck, the same thing can be said about science. (EG: eugenics, euthaniasia, etc..)