Feds: Christian militia needed to be 'taken down'

Feds: Christian militia needed to be 'taken down'

www.mercurynews.com

Prosecutors believe that Stone, 44, of Clayton, Mich., is the ringleader of the Hutaree militia, a name the group's Web site says they created to mean "Christian warrior." He was among nine members arrested during a series of raids in three Midwestern states, which federal officials said they carried out after monitoring the group since last summer and learning they planned to launch their attack next month.
McQuade downplayed the role ideology played in the group's alleged plans, saying the "most troubling" finding of their investigation into the Hutaree were the details of their alleg

(visit the link for the full news article)

It started inside a trailer home in rural Michigan, where a small family gathered before bed for prayer. Years later, the private devotions had evolved into a small militia of "Christian warriors" preparing to fight the Antichrist.
The changes in David Brian Stone's personal theology destroyed his marriage, his former wife said, and prosecutors claim they later led him to hatch a plot to kill police officers — an act the militia hoped would touch off an uprising against the government.
"The time had come that we needed to arrest them and take them down," U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade said Tuesday in an interview with the Associated Press.


www.mercurynews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

New York Times article

[edit on 3/31/2010 by Hadrian]

[edit on 3/31/2010 by Hadrian]

[edit on 3/31/2010 by Hadrian]

I look at it like this:

If the Bible is real, and true, AND is accurate, then stuff in it will happen, with NO help from the nutballs who think they are 'called'.

Example: Let's say the AntiChrist IS supposed to be given a nasty headwound. I'll use myself for the 'someone does it' accidentally/ on purpose' part, since I can laugh at myself easily (and I wont sue, either!).

Now, at the right time, at the right place, I manage to somehow shoot, axe, or otherwise cause this injury. Was I 'told'? No. Was I simply an instrument, a tool, a pawn? Yah. We'll use shooting, since It's probably how this would happen- there's a better likelihood of this happening from a distance. If this person is someone famous, there's guards, ect. (Unless I manage to knock an entire shelf on the anti's head. Keep in mind- This is ALL hypothetical. I have no grand design or even any desire, nor am I planning anything). I have a rifle- and I am a) shooting at an animal b) Shooting at a cop, I'm a cop shooting at a perp, c)The gun misfires: At any rate, Anti gets hole in head- job is done, End of that part of the story. OR- I am some sort of deranged murderer who talks to his toenail clipping collection daily- I see the Anti, and I just decide to derail his train that day. The possibilities are literally endless, and like those 'choose your own adventure' books- There'd be an equal likelihood of someone examining a loaded crossbow and managing to spike the Anti in the head with that.

Heck- it may not even BE a 'someone'- it could be as simple as an icicle coming off a roof- a piece of errant construction, or walking somewhere and having something swing off a building and wallop the Anti! All it SAYS IS GRIEVOUS HEAD WOUND. That means, anything from an assassination to someone's cat knocking a clay flowerpot off a building ledge, to a meteor!


See- CHRISTIANS who think they are 'part of some plan' like this are more than likely having delusions of grandeur. "God told me" have gotta be the most poisonous, abusive, and just plain misguided words ever uttered by a person. Why? 100% of the time- no less, What was told is WRONG.

As for militias? Fine by me, just hope the feds dont wipe them out before they do what they're supposed to according to that piece of paper no one in the govt likes to read....



[edit on 31-3-2010 by wylekat]

Originally posted by Hadrian
prosecutors claim they later led him to hatch a plot to kill police officers

So could that mean they (the feds) infiltrated the group before it was even a threat and came up with the plan to kill police officers; then they convinced him to take part in the plot?


Sure sounds possible from them admitting they led him.

[edit on 31/3/10 by xstealth]

While I think "defending the country" is a noble goal,as a Christian myself I believe scripture that says we are not to wage war as the world does.

I don't think that means we can't defend ourselves personally if attacked on the street,for example,but I don't believe "war" is going to stave off the inevitable. It's only going to cause the clamps of government (U.N. government?) to come down that much faster.

I just wish they'd address those jihad training camps that are all over the United States as well.

Wishful thinking...?

P.S. Wylekat...A different interpretation of that "mortal wound" refers to the Catholic church regaining power. Let me know if you're curious about that,and I'll give you a link.

When they...infiltrate...a group like that...it makes me wonder...do they jump if someone is just joking around?



Like someone says hypothetically......, Hey man, this is how we can do blah blah if we really want to....

And they don't really MEAN it...they aren't really going to act on it. They're just fantasizing out loud and talking crap.

reply to post by On the Edge

P.S. Wylekat...A different interpretation of that "mortal wound" refers to the Catholic church regaining power.

Or... there's that! The possibilities are literally endless.

reply to post by On the Edge


appreciate that post, edge ... share the link?

reply to post by Hadrian


After the 1260 years, the beast will be mortally wounded.
Here is the link
www.remnantofgod.org...

Just a short excerpt:

Revelation 13:3, "And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death..."
Revelation 13:10, "He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword."

The prophecy is telling us that the beast would be destroyed with the sword (sword = military in this instance) at the end of its reign of exactly 1260 years of killing Christians. We just learned by the previous prophecy that this did in fact occur. But to further illustrate the fact that the prophecy also said the beast must go into captivity and die there, we find that history does tell us that the pope was removed from the Vatican, was placed in exile, and then died.

... Pope dies: August 1799:
Fact: Documented Roman Catholic source states -"Half Europe thought... that with the Pope the Papacy was dead." -Joseph Rickaby "The Modern Papacy" Lectures on the History of Religion, Lecture 24, (London Catholic Truth Society, 1910), p.1

Again, this happened Exactly 42 prophetic months, or 1260 years, or a time, and time, and dividing a time after the Papacy began its powerful reign as a "woman on a beast" that the Pope did finally "...go into captivity" by the military of that day, and later did in fact die because of the actions brought forth by the "sword" or military strength of Napoleon.

"Antichrist receives "deadly wound" that later heals."

Revelation 13:3, "And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast."

As we just saw, the "deadly wound" was given to the Papacy by Napoleon in 1798. The Vatican still continued as a church however. But she was completely stripped of her civil and political power just as the prophecy declared. Then, suddenly in 1929, we see the Italian government recognizing Vatican City once again as an independent state. This political move once again made the Pope a religio-political power! Just as prophecy said, the mortal wound that was administered in 1798 by Napoleon was supposed to be healed. Notice how the newspapers of that day actually used prophetic language without realizing it..

Pope Endorses "World Political Authority"
Written by Cliff Kincaid
Tuesday, 07 July 2009 17:18

Some in the media are calling it just a statement about "economic justice." But Pope Benedict XVI's "Charity in Truth" statement, also known as an encyclical, is a radical document that puts the Roman Catholic Church firmly on the side of an emerging world government.

In explicit and direct language, the Pope calls for a "true world political authority" to manage the affairs of the world. At the same time, however, the Pope also warns that such an international order could "produce a dangerous universal power of a tyrannical nature" and must be guarded against somehow.


The New York Times got it right this time, noting the Pope's call for a world political authority amounted to endorsement of a New World Economic Order, a long-time goal of the old Soviet-sponsored international communist movement. Bloomberg.com highlighted the Pope's call for a new world order with "teeth."

The Pope's shocking endorsement of a "World Political Authority," which has prophetic implications for some Christians who fear that a global dictatorship will take power in the "last days" of man's reign on earth, comes shortly after the United Nations Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis issued a call for global taxes and more powerful global institutions. U.N. General Assembly President, Miguel D'Escoto, a Communist Catholic Priest, gave a speech at the event calling on the nations of the world to revere "Mother Earth" but concluded with words from the Pope blessing the conference participants.

The controversial Papal statement comes just before a meeting of the G-8 nations and a scheduled meeting between the Pope and President Obama at the Vatican on July 10.

Sounding like Obama himself, Pope Benedict says this new international order can be accomplished through "reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth."

www.rightsidenews.com...


(I don't like the sound of that "family of nations acquiring real teeth"!)

reply to post by Hadrian


Well what are the options? At the moment neither side can say for sure that this group was innocent or not. Essentially we have the authorities bringing up information and supposed evidence that this group was planning a violent attack on law enforcement. Then we have other groups, mostly tea party protestors, conservatives, succession advocates, insist this group was unfairly targetted and singled out. At the end of the day its left up to the courts and we can only hope the right decision is made.

That being said even if this group is found guilty over conspiracy to kill this will change people insisting they are innocent, so what should we do then? If a group is planning to attack and kill, what should law enforcement do? Stop them? But if they stop them people will accuse them of unfairly arresting people who did not do anything? So should we wait for them to commit the crime then before we take action?

Its a dilemma and one that we can only hope the courts will figure out.

A little more on topic!...

They said the informant badgered the defendants until they got involved in the plot," NBC New York reported. "They said the informant chose the targets, supplied fake bombs for the synagogues and a fake missile to shoot down planes. The motion said he also offered to pay the defendants, who attorneys alleged weren't inclined toward any crime until the informant began recruiting them."

"This whole operation was a foolish waste of time and money," Terence Kindlon, a defense lawyer who represented a client in the New York synagogue case, told the Times Online. "It is almost as if the FBI cooked up the plot and found four idiots to install as defendants."

informationliberation.com...

reply to post by On the Edge


I'm all about using these tactics to find would be traitors...

Honestly, anyone who has the ideology to do what these folks were doing should be hunted down, infiltrated, and taken down.

And if that means having informants bring up the idea, then so be it... And if some "idiot" says "yeah, that's a good idea", then we are cleaning the streets when we put them behind bars.

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by On the Edge

 

I'm all about using these tactics to find would be traitors...

Honestly, anyone who has the ideology to do what these folks were doing should be hunted down, infiltrated, and taken down.

And if that means having informants bring up the idea, then so be it... And if some "idiot" says "yeah, that's a good idea", then we are cleaning the streets when we put them behind bars.

Thats not very American though.

The 1st Amendment protects the Freedom of Speech.

Until someone actually commits a crime, which includes planning to do something criminal, they can talk all of the trash they want.

Now I'm not against proactive measures like surveillance, infiltration and investigation.

I'm also not against the 1st Amendment either.

reply to post by MikeboydUS


Joining a plot to kill police officers, is a crime. It's called conspiracy to commit murder.

Folks don't realize that the freedom of speech does not give them the right to plan a murder. Simply planning to commit a murder is, in itself a crime.

And everyone just takes the word of the FBI and media that this is what they were doing. Folks close to this situation say it is complete BS. And Of course we do know the FBI and Feds will lie and demonize people to justify thier actions. Waco and Ruby ridge come to mind.

Originally posted by hawkiye
And everyone just takes the word of the FBI and media that this is what they were doing. Folks close to this situation say it is complete BS. And Of course we do know the FBI and Feds will lie and demonize people to justify thier actions. Waco and Ruby ridge come to mind.

sweet, hawkiye, do you have a link to that ("Folks close to this situation say it is complete BS")?

'cause i do find troubling this: "prosecutors claim they later led him to hatch a plot to kill police officers"

U.S. vs Stone

Interesting piece of reading.

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by MikeboydUS

 

Joining a plot to kill police officers, is a crime. It's called conspiracy to commit murder.

Folks don't realize that the freedom of speech does not give them the right to plan a murder. Simply planning to commit a murder is, in itself a crime.

I just said that. That planning a crime is a crime.

Read my post again, please.

No doubt we're getting close to thought crimes again here.

When does guys out drinking beer trying to be tough guys running their fantasy's by one another become an actual plot to commit a crime?

All it takes is one strong catalyst in a group of average people to push them in the wrong direction, especially if they are already borderline misfits - not criminals.

I would imagine the infiltrator would be far more educated & perhaps a higher IQ then these people, plus he has the support of his subversive coworkers who all contribute to the plan & plot their daily moves so that the infiltrator could push the targets behavior over the edge of becoming criminal, in order to make arrests and become media hero's.

Anyone or any group not having the ability or mental capacity to resist such subversives within their organization means they might be spending their lives in prison if they're seen as a possible future problem.

Thought crimes.

Perhaps the FBI believes that in order to protect the public they must push the weaker yet potentially lethal groups like this into crime in order to prevent someone else coming along and pushing them over the edge in the future. Sort of like take out the potential bullies before they bully anyone.

Curious, what the criteria would be for the FBI to decide that a group is worth infiltrating?

Guns seems to be pretty high on the list of criteria.

[edit on 31-3-2010 by verylowfrequency]

reply to post by Hadrian


I really hope I was meant to laugh at that video!

Showed it to a few mates here at work. Though it was quite funny and unfortunate at the same time, thinking this is what America is all about.

Shame a few nutjobs have to give normal people a bad name.