SPLC report: Bundy ranch standoff was highly coordinated, reflecting threat of larger far-right mili

[kickysnana]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by uppityperson (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: SPLC News

The standoff between federal agents and armed supporters of a Nevada rancher earlier this year was a highly coordinated effort by far-right militiamen that has since energized volatile extremists who are increasingly targeting law enforcement officers, according to a new SPLC report released today..

...“The Bundy ranch standoff wasn’t a spontaneous response to Cliven Bundy’s predicament but rather a well-organized, military-type action that reflects the potential for violence from a much larger and more dangerous movement,” said Mark Potok, senior fellow in the SPLC’s Intelligence Project. “This incident may have faded from public view, but if our government doesn’t pay attention, we will be caught off guard as much as the Bureau of Land Management was that day.”...

...The report also states that law enforcement officials need training to respond to a movement that increasingly targets them. But assisting law enforcement at all levels means the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) must put more resources into assessing the threat of domestic terrorism. The unit with the primary responsibility for that task was allowed to wither in the face of conservative criticism of a 2009 DHS report on the resurgent threat from the radical right.

Read more: http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/news/splc-report-bundy-ranch-standoff-was-highly-coordinated-reflecting-threat-of-large

[Psephos]

1. This quote caught my eye.

"...assisting law enforcement at all levels means the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) must put more resources into assessing the threat of domestic terrorism."

Which explains the recent requisitions of five bullets for every person in the US (1.6 billion rounds), and ongoing grants to local PDs to purchase tanks, APCs, and serious assault weaponry. Who again are they planning to use those bullets on? (The combined need of all DHS departments for training rounds is ~ 15 million rounds/year, btw. So the requisition is more than a hundred-year supply.)

We've all seen how easily the Constitution can be trampled and then used to wipe your ass as soon as the word "terrah" is invoked.

As much as I find Cliven Bundy a lunatic, I fear the firepower and non-accountability of the DHS and the amped-up local police far more.

[Hekate]

7. Take the militias seriously. They are a greater threat than Al Quaeda, and they are ours....

Our home grown all American terrorists. The quote that caught MY eye was the one about how the 2009 study pointed the finger at them, but then got dropped because of the outcry from the RW in Congress.

[Renew Deal]

26. Do you remember that?

If not, I'll get you some links. That report has been proven to be accurate.

[Hekate]

50. Yes I do remember. Also the Southern Poverty Law Center keeps an eye out, iirc.

Congress, though -- we have such a crop of pandering fools there, intermingled with wingnuts of very ill intent, that I wonder sometimes how we'll ever get through this.

[1StrongBlackMan]

41. Well ...

President Obama has re-activated the task-force looking at domestic terrorists.

[Hekate]

51. Good for him. They'll have a lot of muck to wade through. nt

[heaven05]

31. No

real threat? Possibly?

[bl968]

9. Training

"The Homeland Security Department wants to buy more than 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition in the next four or five years. It says it needs them – roughly the equivalent of five bullets for every person in the United States – for law enforcement agents in training and on duty."

Each law enforcement officer in that branch of government must fire so many rounds a year some shoot more, some shoot less. Most end up shooting around 1,500 to 2,000 bullets a year. Multiply that out 2,000 bullets a year x 240,000 employees x 4 years = 1,920,000,000 bullets.

Stop drinking the kool-aid.

[bl968]

10. second response

"ongoing grants to local PDs to purchase tanks, APCs, and serious assault weaponry."

Blame the Republican Party for that one they had full control of Congress in 1997 when the 1033 program was enacted by the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1997. They passed it, authorized it, and now they are using it to scare their base.

Is the program a good idea, no not really.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/07/militarization-local-police-america

[RKP5637]

16. This is the part that bothers me, "ongoing grants to local PDs to

purchase tanks, APCs, and serious assault weaponry." I don't trust all local cops to handle this in a responsible manner, and I know I'm certainly not alone in this. I've seen some parades with local cops proudly displaying their equipment, frankly, it was frightening looking more like a show of military power in some despotic country. Local cops should not have this firepower in their hands IMO.

[Kaleva]

18. Has any PD actually acquired a tank?

Tanks by definition are heavily armed and armored tracked vehicles. I have yet to see a single pic of a police department with such a vehicle.

[RKP5637]

20. The ones I saw I would definitely not call tanks, they were just huge and looked to be well armed,

but an actual tank, none that I know of, at least not here.

[Kaleva]

21. I've seen pics of wheeled APCs being used by PDs.

But have not seen any of an actual tank.

[RKP5637]

22. They are similar to what I saw. n/t

[enlightenment]

23. Google images

using the phrase "SWAT tanks".

Quite a few departments have them, apparently, including the one in my city. We saw it last year, on our street during a SWAT raid of a house down the block (not sure what was more alarming - the level of response or that there were people living down the street who were doing things that required that sort of response . . .)

[Kaleva]

24. I see pics of APCs.

Most of them are wheeled and some are tracked but I didn't see a pic of a tank.

This isn't a tank:

[Aerows]

39. What's the difference between that

and a tank? I honestly don't know.

[Kaleva]

42. Links to Wiki articles

Tank

"A tank is a large type of armoured fighting vehicle with tracks, designed for front-line combat. Modern tanks are strong mobile land weapons platforms, mounting a large-calibre cannon in a rotating gun turret. They combine this with heavy vehicle armour providing protection for the crew of the weapon and operational mobility, which allows them to position on the battlefield in advantageous locations."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank

APC

"An armoured personnel carrier (APC) is type of armoured fighting vehicle (AFV) designed to transport infantry to the battlefield. APCs are colloquially referred to as 'battle taxis' or 'battle buses', among other things."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_personnel_carrier

IFV

"An infantry fighting vehicle (IFV), also known as a mechanized infantry combat vehicle (MICV), is a type of armoured fighting vehicle used to carry infantry into battle and provide direct fire support.[1] The Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe defines infantry fighting vehicle as "an armoured combat vehicle which is designed and equipped primarily to transport a combat infantry squad, which is armed with an integral or organic cannon of at least 20 millimeters calibre and sometimes an antitank missile launcher.""

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infantry_fighting_vehicle

[Aerows]

44. Okay, so the difference is

one actually has a gun mounted on it, and the other doesn't, correct?

[Kaleva]

45. A tank has a large caliber cannon in a rotating turret.

Towards the end of WWII, the common tank cannon sizes were 75mm, 76mm, 85mm, 88mm, 90mm and 100mm. Today they are 105mm, 120mm and 125mm.

An APC can have a machine gun mounted on it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

43. LOL ... semantics ...

much like the gun folks make sport of drawing distinctions between Gun type A and Gun type B, both of which have the same (if not, similar) purpose and same (if not, similar) capacities.

[Kaleva]

46. Not really as the article does mention APCs

Nobody is arguing that some PDs are acquiring those vehicles but where are the tanks that article also claims to say PDs are getting?

The article itself is saying there is a distinction between the two types of vehicles. Otherwise, why mention both?

"Which explains the recent requisitions of five bullets for every person in the US (1.6 billion rounds), and ongoing grants to local PDs to purchase tanks, APCs, and serious assault weaponry. "

[1StrongBlackMan]

47. Okay ...

but I will continue to maintain that it is a distinction without a difference for any/every one, other than those attempting to distract from the larger conversation.

"No silly ... it wasn't an 'assault weapon' with a 4,000,000 bullet clip; it was an 'assault-style weapon' with a 3,999,970 bullet magazine!"

[Kaleva]

11. What is the source of your misleading info?

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/ssabullets.asp

A person should always fact check everything they may read on the internet. Lots of people out there with an agenda who have no qualms about presenting "facts" in a manner that advances their agenda.

A common theme I see see in pro-gun sites such as AR15.com is that people need to arm themselves with assault weapons fitted with high capacity mags and have on hand thousands of rounds of ammo in order to protect themselves from tyrannical federal government that's hell bent on taking away our freedoms and they'll cite the same info as you have posted as proof of the government's intent on subjecting the people.

Even here in the gungeon we have members who say they'll never give up their own semi-autos and high capacity magazines as long as the local PD is equipped with such. They think they need to be just as heavily armed even though history shows that shootouts with the police rarely ever turn out well.

[1StrongBlackMan]

48. Funny you should mention that ...

My sister has dated several cops ... the most recent one was a Deputy Sheriff and SWAT member. He and I had a lively dinner time discussion about the 2nd Amendment and President Obama's being an existential threat to the "right to bear arms." It was my first time meeting him; but he no longer speaks to me because of the discussion that followed my asking him two questions:

1) When is President Obama going to start taking your "right" to have guns? And,
2) Why is gun ownership so very important?

To the former, he answered "he already has (per rush, beck and Levine)." I asked him to research it and get back to me.

The dialogue following his answer to the second question stills provides me with hours of amusement (4 years later), as I recall watching his head explode. He, of course, answered we need the right to bear private arms to "protect us from the government!"

I asked him: "Your SWAT, right?"

RW Cop Guy: "That's right!"

Me: "When you're on a SWAT call, you deal with some pretty bad characters ... Huh?"

RW Cop Guy: "That's right!

Me: "And most of those bad guys are armed when you go after them, right?"

RW Cop Guy: "That's right!"

(At this point my Mom threw me that 'Don't do this' look that moms across the world are known for, when they know something bad is about to happen.)

Me: "Let me ask you ... When you and your guys go through that bad guy's door, is there ever a question in your mind that, no matter how many guns that bad guy has, no matter how many bad guys are with the bad guy you're going after ... at the end of the day, you and your guys are going to be the only ones with the guns and that bad guy, and everyone that gets in your way, is going to be in handcuffs, dead, or dying?

RW Cop Guy: "That's right ... we're good at what we do and we have no fear."

(Mom's head dipped a bit, knowing what was coming next, because this was why my Law and Order Dad wasn't big on the 2nd Amendment.)"

Me: "So, what makes you think YOUR having a gun is going to matter? When/if the government ever decides to get your guns, it's gun over!"

RW Cop Guy without saying another word ... Left the table and left the restaurant.

[mrdmk]

49. Wow, like wow! Talk about a, "legend in their own head"

Excuse me for saying this, does your sister's date (?) realize he is part of the government?

[heaven05]

30. right

yet bundyites want to trample the Constitution also and my right(s) as a citizen. What about that fact? How do we address that fact in addition to your concerns?

[1StrongBlackMan]

40. Been listening to infowars, again? eom.

[GReedDiamond]

2. Yes, that's what the malicious malitias do...

...I heard today on a talk radio news report that there are militias organizing to bring their gun nut wacko troops down to the Texas/Mexico border to "assist" the Fed Govt in stopping the "illegals."

That should work out great...

[Mr.Bill]

3. These idiots

are less organized than your local cub scout pack.

[heaven05]

29. says you

[Wolf Frankula]

4. Then This Has Gone Beyond Law Enforcement's Capabilities.

This is an insurgency against the United States, to be put down by the military and naval forces. The insurgents should be tried for treason, and if convicted executed.

Wolf

[Comrade Grumpy]

5. That seems a bit over the top. n/t

[heaven05]

28. I agree

[SamKnause]

6. United States new budget proposal;

57% military

43% law enforcement officials (homeland security)

That should just about cover it.

[Evar]

12. When Opposition Becomes Sedition

It's one thing to oppose a political party. Debate about politics is a tradition in America. It's another when that opposition, that irresponsible speech, promotes so much hatred of our president and our government that it ends in murder of law enforcement officers. Fox News got rid of Glen Beck when his hate speech was responsible for the attempted murder of a charity staff in California. They've kept Sean Hannity, who along with Ted Cruz, calls our president lawless and encourages rebellion against our government. That's not just opposition of one party to another. Let's call it what it is--sedition.

[RKP5637]

14. Well said, IMO. n/t

[LittleGirl]

19. +1 and

welcome to DU.

[heaven05]

32. +1000

[blm]

35. Exactly.

And, what's with some DUers posting RW's fevered charges as if they were true?

[onehandle]

13. Gun culture domestic terrorism is far more of a threat than international terrorism.

Last edited Fri Jul 11, 2014, 08:42 AM - Edit history (1)

[IMG][/IMG]

[RKP5637]

15. Agree so much. It's a very serious issue in this country and it seems it's not

well addressed, and, we allow hate radio and MSM/internet hate jocks to fan the flames of hatred, some for for pure hatred and others for that and significant profit. And, what astounds me, some call for tearing down the US while claiming to be patriots, and they seem to go along undeterred.

[heaven05]

33. give these idiots

their own state, homeland somewhere. Let them run that rather than the country they want to run after causing bloodshed and violence because of their inflated sense of white power nationalism. This POTUS has really caused an infestation of biblical proportions. Time to call out the bug exterminators.

[heaven05]

34. I am just

Last edited Fri Jul 11, 2014, 11:16 AM - Edit history (2)

amazed at how these idiots are handling their weapons in this photo. Safety on or not.

[Paladin]

37. Couldn't agree with you more. Terrorists in our back yards, spoiling for a fight. (nt)

And all that the restrained response at the Bundy Ranch did was encourage these thugs.

[lastlib]

17. Has anybody here read Kenneth Stern's book?

A Force Upon the Plain

http://www.amazon.com/Force-Upon-Plain-Kenneth-Stern/dp/B000UN2514

Written twenty years ago, but still highly pertinent today, esp. in the wake of Bundy's misadventures. Worth reading if you haven't. It will leave you in cold chills.

[1StrongBlackMan]

25. Posted to for later reading. eom.

[heaven05]

27. what!!!!

they're not terrorists, they're paytreeottts!!!!!! Better start 'marginalizing' them NOW or there is going to be hell to pay. Time to make an example. Put some in prison for treason.

[heaven05]

36. You know

I've been reading this site, the SPLC site, since 1981 when i had a run in with some racist fundamentalist 'christians'. The warning(s) on this site have been getting more dire and frequent in the last 6 years. HMMMM, I wonder why?????

[1StrongBlackMan]

38. Payne is, both, incredibly stupid and ...

I suspect a poser.

Regarding the stupidity thing ... Who gives an interview in which they brag about conspiring to commit a Felony?

Regarding the poser thing ...

“Not only did they take up the very best position to overwatch everything, they also had the high ground, they were fortified with concrete and pavement barriers,” Payne said. “They had great lines of fire and then, when I sent in that other team, for counter-sniper positions, [the BLM agents] were completely locked down. They had no choice but to retreat.”

Not having been a sniper, or schooled in the art, I had no idea what "counter-sniper position" are. So, like any good liberal, I did the google thing ... and from what I can gather, "counter-snipers" are used to engage the other side's snipers.

So this Payne guy appears to be yet another former military guy that picked up some cool lingo.

[uppityperson]

52. Locking.While a very interesting and scary article, LBNHosts consensus is this does not meet LBN SOP

as is analysis and would be better posted in GD. Thank you for understanding and please repost.

LBN SOP
Post the latest news from reputable mainstream news websites and blogs. Important news of national interest only. No analysis or opinion pieces.