Satire became reality Friday afternoon when half a dozen armed federal agents wearing body armor showed up at this author’s home and detained everyone in the house for nearly 90 minutes to determine who might pose a threat to the government.
Marshal John Bolen of the U.S. Marshals Office of Protective Intelligence traveled to Manchester, N.H., to investigate threats of violence allegedly made against Steven McAuliffe, a federal judge in the district court in Concord, and other federal officials in the area. He brought along with him other marshals and agents who would only say that they were with the Treasury Department.
Later in the afternoon the federal agents detained and interrogated another Manchester resident for nearly 30 minutes trying to locate yet another person of interest to them, and then after having set up a Saturday meeting with this person of interest, didn’t even bother to show up.
The threats allegedly originated with convicted tax protesters Ed and Elaine Brown, late of Plainfield, and supporters of their cause. Marshals took the Browns into custody Thursday night to begin serving 63-month prison terms after a nine-month standoff in which the couple remained in their home, supporters brought food, supplies and firearms, and staged concerts and press conferences on the property.
Reports Friday morning stated that a supporter of the Browns left a threat of retaliatory violence on a MySpace page Thursday night after the arrest, but this author was unable to find such a threatening message. Nevertheless, according to media reports, some militant supporters of the Browns have threatened violence against government officials in the past.
And the marshals, under fresh criticism for failing to protect federal judges properly, desperately needed to look like they were doing something. A report (PDF) released Wednesday by the Department of Justice Inspector General found that marshals’ efforts to protect federal judges had “languished,” with growing backlogs of threats to be assessed and investigated, and improper assessment of threats leading to misallocation of resources.
So, apparently unable or unwilling to face the people who have said they want to shoot government agents, they came to my house instead. And misallocation of resources certainly seems to describe Friday’s incidents.
Bolen’s investigation in Manchester seemed to center around members of the Free State Project, a group whose members pledge to move to New Hampshire in order to help reduce the size and scope of government. “Anyone who promotes violence, racial hatred, or bigotry is not welcome” in the Free State Project, according to a statement on its Web site.
As I have said repeatedly here, I do not believe that using violence against government officials is an appropriate method to effect positive change. For one, it would not have the desired effect. Those of you who have read Matthew Bracken’s Enemies Foreign and Domestic know that shooting government agents is a significant part of the plot in that novel. But to see what would happen, you should read the sequel, Domestic Enemies. This would be a significant step backward for a freedom movement.
In contrast to those espousing violence, Free State Project members spent the last three days trying to determine if Ed and Elaine Brown were truly unharmed, as Marshal Stephen Monier said, and seeking a loving home for the Browns’ presumably abandoned dog.
Hopefully the U.S. Marshals, and other law enforcement agencies, will learn something from this misallocation of resources, and start spending their time going after actual threats.
One final note. Bolen told everyone here that he was seeking our help in preventing acts of violence from being perpetrated. Yet he and the agents who came with him gave numerous conflicting statements to each of us. Normal people call this lying. I would suggest that it’s not a good idea to lie to people whose support you’re trying to enlist. It tends to foster resentment and distrust, and that is the last thing that an intelligence organization should be doing.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Ultimately, the war supporters in Congress prevailed in the vote on the resolution. Still, the vote was significant because it places every member of Congress on the record as supporting or not supporting the unconstitutional, costly, violent occupation of a country that never attacked us. This vote should serve as an important reminder to the American people of where their representatives really stand when it comes to policing the world, empire building, and war.
Gardner Goldsmith explains why claims by politicians that consumers can become "irrational" and why claims by the same politicians that government can help "fix" markets are both false and misleading. He also explains what the terms Praxeology and Epistemology mean, which is key in understanding how to place free markets in their proper place among human history.
Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works license.
Video published by this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Sampling+ license.
Facebook
Digg
del.icio.us
reddit.com
Newsvine
Jeff Hoyt
Oct 07, 2007
My sincerest congratulations, Michael! If there was any doubt as to your presence on the radar…
And my condolences and sympathy to the marshals. You would certainly know better than I, but I get the impression these guys hate having to bother with this kind of thing, or at least some of them do. It is unfortunate that those who do hate it won’t take a stand against it.
I hope you will pass along any information concerning the Browns that you are confident in.
Amadeus
Oct 07, 2007
Once again proving that the government is not only incompetent, but dangerous. Folks, this Ron Paul Revolution MUST succeed if we hope to preserve our freedom and our republic.
To the federal agents reading this: Please think of your oath of office, to preserve and protect the Constitution, as you go about your duties. If your superiors order you to do something that contradicts your oath, it is not only your right, but your DUTY, to refuse said orders. The Nuremberg trials established that “following orders” is not a valid excuse, so keep that in mind too.
God Bless America!
Anonymous
Oct 08, 2007
well gee whiz, if they weren’t wasting their time harassing these folks and you, and putting up these smear campaigns saying file sharing somehow supports terrorism they might have time to do their real jobs.
Dan
Oct 08, 2007
Well worth the wait to read. Thanks Michael.
Dan
Oct 08, 2007
The more government employees do, the better it looks to make them unemployed.
D
Elvin Diablo
Oct 08, 2007
You better believe the federal terrorists are shaking in their jack-boots. They are afraid to go home at night, to go to work every day, to go eat lunch at a local restaurant with their family. They are afraid to start their car. They know their time is very short. They have lost and repercussion is close at hand.
Chaos Motor
Oct 08, 2007
Michael, my sympathies for your having suffered governmental harassment. You seem to have handled it better than I might. We must be making our voices heard if they are frightened enough to come to your home to intimidate you into silence.
I commented on your story in a post about ongoing escalations of police brutality & intimidation at my site. Don’t Murder Me, Bro!
One of the commenters on Digg pointed something out that we should all be very suspicious about – the Bureau of Prisons doesn’t list Ed Brown as a prisoner. So where is he?
Jeff
Oct 09, 2007
Great..more wackos wanting upheaval. Good job getting the feds attention. Ron Paul can die in a fire and take you nutjobs with him.
Bob
Oct 09, 2007
It is unfortunate, that, only by studying history can one determine the exact point in time when the line in the sand should have been drawn. It is easy to look back at the rise of Hitler or the events leading up to the Great Depression and say with certainty that “they should have done this” or “they should have done that”, but when you are living it in present tense, you always have your doubts. Is it really bad enough to rise up against what is going on?
Somebody told me once that people will only revolt when they are actually physically hungry. Study history and you will see that there is some truth in that statement. My wife watches “The Biggest Loser”. Someday, history might tell us that now may have been the time to take up arms and make some changes, but I don’t think the movement will get much long term support if we try it. Good luck Ron Paul.
M.A. Hargett
Oct 09, 2007
To BOB:
“It is easy to look back at the rise of Hitler or the events leading up to the Great Depression and say with certainty that “they should have done this” or “they should have done that”, but when you are living it in present tense, you always have your doubts.”
Ludwig von Mises () stated plainly what the course of action was to be in BOTH cases early-on. He proposed a solution that would have prevented both the Great Depression and the rise of Hitler:
SOUND MONEY
–M.A. Hargett
Terry Melton
Oct 09, 2007
wow..sounds like something that happened to me…. The Camera guy for WTPRN, that was given a terroristic threat by the US Marshals to come up my ass. These guys are destroying America from with in, and dont understand the level of anger that the American people are feeling. Its ok though…..one day they will be on the stand for treason. And the people they worked for will not cover thier asses..
Terry Melton
Bob
Oct 09, 2007
Oh yeah, no argument there. Sound money, follow the 10 Commandments and take a shower once in a while. We wouldn’t have a problem in the world.
I’m just saying that when you are living history as it is being made, it looks a lot different than when you can look back on it, know all the facts and know exactly where things are heading.
Maybe 20 years from now we’ll look back on what happened to Michael Hampton and ask “why did they let it go on?” Maybe it will lead to something bigger or maybe it means nothing. People always think “it’s different this time, we’re not like that anymore, we’re more civilized and intelligent now, it can’t happen to us”.
Masked Phrogg
Oct 09, 2007
@Jeff
#
Jeff | October 9, 2007 1:58 am
Great..more wackos wanting upheaval. Good job getting the feds attention. Ron Paul can die in a fire and take you nutjobs with him.
#
Like the FDNY first responders to World Trade Center 1 on Tue 11Sep2001 ?
Don’t think for a moment history DOES NOT repeat itself.
That debacle started with a “fire.”
Ribbit
Rolf Lindgren
Oct 09, 2007
Mike;
I am sorry to hear about this. Glad to hear you are OK after being put in danger by armed thugs hiding behind their badges. Please keep up the great work.
Sincerely,
Rolf
Chaos Motor
Oct 09, 2007
“SOUND MONEY”
Yes, but sound money requires less economic and social inequity, and doesn’t afford the greedy their excesses. Not to mention an equitable and self-sufficient population are extremely difficult to manipulate and control.
None of those conditions are acceptable to a pathocracy.
Bob
Oct 10, 2007
I learned a new word today. Pathocracy. The definition pretty much describes any government in general from what I can see.
Just remember....
Oct 13, 2007
If they think they can make some money off of you they will. This harassment has made it worthwhile from other cases. Those victims are most likely in the grave. Do not give in.. If possible film them and get them fired.. WE need decent people to do the job not vampire bats out to steal from the hardworking people of America…Do not let them violate your civil rights. Stand up and get them fired. IF thier gang is too large avoid them, protect yourself and get a good lawyer to protect you. YOu can get big money for this.
George Warmonger
Oct 13, 2007
REVOLUTION IS THE SOLUTION!!!
Alan Cabal
Oct 13, 2007
First, try to get Ron Paul elected. Second, organize a consumer boycott, maybe three to five days of no purchases whatsoever. Third, a national strike on a Monday.
If none of that works, an extended national strike.
If that doesn’t work, violent revolution is the only way to go.
Chaos Motor
Oct 15, 2007
“violent revolution”
I was with you until you got to “violent”. Violent revolution would make us no better than the ones we oppose. Nothing requires violence as a matter of course.
If violence occurs, have it be brought forcibly to you, do not bring it forcibly to others, else you have already lost. If nothing else, Ghandi showed that revolution musn’t be violent.
That is not to say a person should not defend themselves. If violence is delivered to your door a person must respond in equal measure.
But consider which does more for our position: Them suffering violence upon us in our peaceful endeavors for change, or us suffering violence upon them in their ‘peaceful’ endeavor to remain the same?
Though I fear we may not have our sham elections, and then we will see the violence inherent in the system.
Bob
Oct 15, 2007
I don’t know about the “non-violent” revolution. It worked for Ghandi because he used it against the British at a time when they were worn down a little, and sensitive to world opinion. I’ve heard the argument that Ghandi wouldn’t have stood a chance against Stalin. Actually, it didn’t even work for Ghandi after the British pulled out. The Indians proceeded to tear each other apart.
In the 1770’s the British were a little tougher. I don’t think the colonies could have gained independence without violence.
I don’t think Hitler would have backed down to flower power.
Ghandi had some good ideas but I think he was just in the right place at the right time and fighting the right enemy.
“see the violence inherent in the system” Are you quoting Monty Python? Help! Help! I’m being repressed! Bloody peasants!
1176blues
Oct 17, 2007
First off and please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, our founders tried diplomacy first by opposing a mere stamp tax. The armed revolution was a last resort. This being said, it appears when representatives no longer listen to their constituents such as that Pelosi comment to anti-war groups, sure you all have read it, by the way when they pretty much tell you to buzz off what choice is left? Wait and vote someone else in 2 years or 4 years, then what?
It sure would be nice if possible that every attorney makes one huge class action suit for constitutional violations, I did read where some attorney’s were looking at some options, can’t remember where though.
However, we must tread carefully and it should only be as a last resort. Frankly, I think a national strike alone would not work unless it included the income tax, that is the blood line of the Federal Reserve. Then a national strike on many goods except for the essentials would be next, could Americans sustain such a scrafice?
Here is what Pelosi said;
“We have to make responsible decisions in the Congress that are not driven by the dissatisfaction of anybody who wants the war to end tomorrow,” Pelosi told the gathering at the Sofitel, arranged by the Christian Science Monitor. Though crediting activists for their “passion,” Pelosi called it “a waste of time” for them to target Democrats. “They are advocates,” she said. “We are leaders.”
The “They are Leaders” is something you would expect from a dictator! Ms. Pelosi, you are a servant not my leader!
Ron Paul for president and all the other office’s in 2008, vote Independent! Kick the bums out!
1776blues
Oct 17, 2007
Then there is the Congressman Olver comment in response to his constituents passing resolutions for impeachment how Bush will respond;
He would bomb Iran, declare a state of national emergency, implement martial law and the suspend the 2008 elections.
Sorry about the typo in my screename on the last post
bill jenkins
Oct 17, 2007
our country is gone.the pigs have won.enjoy what little life you have left.
xhtml
Oct 18, 2007
when martial law comes
is when they come for are
second amendment then
will disarmed us and
try to control us even more
this is just the begining
youll either submit or you wont
may god bless us all
and bless this country
for our childrens future
go RON PAUL 2008
“LIBERTY, when it begins to take root,
ia a plant of rapid growth. George Washington
“One man with courage is a majority” Thomas Jefferson
GEORGE W BUSH QUOTE ” We will bring the terrorist to justice;or we will bring justice to the terrorist. either way, justice will be done.”
BAD QUOTE SOUNDS LIKE JUSTICE IS COMING TO ALL
Dec 08, 2009
Misc. News Headlines - 7-OCT-2007 « 0DayNews.org