Monday, May 3, 2010

The Darren Huff case: Now this is going to piss some of you off.

Well, I guess I got what I asked for in several more or less complete and informed briefs of the Huff case. This is what I am told:

1. The FBI charge of "inciting to riot" is surely bullshit that will evaporate at the first serious examination in front of a judge with competent counsel at his side.

2. He was certainly pulled over by the "authorities" (although exactly what agencies were represented at the traffic stop is still a little vague) for driving a pickup with Oath Keepers emblazoned across it.

3. Darren Huff is equally certainly a "Christian" Identity "minister." I put those in quotes because, as a Christian, I do not concede that they ARE Christians as I understand the faith. In the 90s I referred to them as "Mistaken" Identities because to me there is little Christian about them.

Identity, also called British Israelism, claims that today's Jews are not the chosen people of God, but rather they are -- that is white people of European origin. In their universe, Jews are "spawn of the devil" and blacks are "mud people."

I was once quoted in a Slate magazine article that Christian Identity was for pantywaists who had to explain to their wives that it was OK that they hated blacks and Jews because God & Jesus told them it was OK, whereas Nazis were past that. I mean, if you've got Adolf Hitler, a demented nancy-boy, for a standard bearer, what else have you got to be embarrassed about?

I despise and distrust anti-Semites and Nazis because, for one thing, they just love The Turner Diaries, which explains what they think of the Constitution and gun owners who believe in free men and free markets -- when they win (with our "useful idiot" help, they believe) -- they will execute us all. They are dyed-in-the-wool collectivists, freely ranking themselves with the worst enemies of liberty. I urinate upon their "sacred" cows.

One other not-so-minor point: the Oklahoma City bomb that destroyed the Murrah Building and killed 167 people including innocent babies was built at Elohim City, an Identity compound in eastern Oklahoma that also gave succor to the Aryan Republican Army.

Here's the crux of the matter: Because Identity adherents believe that Jews and blacks are evil and subhuman, THEY DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE CONSTITUTION, OR EVEN THE NATURAL, GOD-GIVEN RIGHTS DELINEATED IN THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, EXTEND TO THEM. These "untermeschen" are eminently expendable in their universe.

Now, will someone explain to me how ANYBODY who believes that can be a true "oath keeper"? They are now, as they were in the 90s, attempting to infiltrate the liberty movement. They are certainly the most enterprising of opportunists, and they can pretend to be anybody's friend until challenged on their core beliefs. (Google my name and the Identity "minister" -- and convicted child molester -- Martin Lindstedt and see what pops up.)

Thus, looked at in that light, the decision of the Oath Keepers board, as much as it pains me to say it, is not so off base.

Even so, Identities have the right not to be railroaded by the FBI. For that reason, the Oath Keepers (and the rest of us) should insist that, like the Hutaree, Huff should be defended within the legal system with every tool. We can do this -- and should do this -- without compromising OUR principles, as long as we make it plain that he is NOT one of us.

Make no mistake: Identity adherents are not, CANNOT be, by definition, constitutionalists. Neither can they be oath keepers. If they tell you they are, they are lying through their teeth.

Mike
III

24 comments:

jeepers said...

Well, I don't think he should have been arrested before he did something to get arrested about.

But that Identity Christian BS has got to go. And whatever cop would pull someone over for having Oathkeepers on the door of their vehicle needs an ass whuppin' to go.

Nuff said...

348 said...

Very well said, Mike. Very well said.

Dan said...

Thanks for the info, Dutchman.
That's not something I've heard yet, the "Identity" business.

Anonymous said...

"christian identity" are worse than nazis. at least the nazis are honest. they don't try to cloak it in pseudo-christianity.

Dennis308 said...

If Huff is one of this group of Idiots then God will be his Judge.
But while here on Earth and in These United States he should have every available means to Defend Himself in a Court of Law and a Trial by a Jury of His Pears, As per the Constitution.(don´t know if that can happen in Monroe Co. hopefully the trial will be in Nashville).
But none of this in anyway clears up the B/S that is going on in the Grand Jury Debacle in Monroe Co.
And I do hope that I am NEVER accused/confused with having ANYTHING to do with or associated with this Bunch of Idiots in ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM. I am Christian and I could probably be considered Militant although not Militia (not yet any way). Not that this has anything to do with the subject matter,but I guess That I would be LABELD as a Militant Constitutionalists Christian. Dam´n I bet Obummer hates me.
BooHoo

Dennis
III
Texas

Allen said...

ahh yes Martin Lindstedt...

I think anyone with a pair of balls has had it out with that idiot in the last 10 years or so.

he started in on calling the constitution a "con job" on one and I lit into him. I wish I still had a copy of it. I understood he used to post it on some sites to show how "clueless" the militia people are LOL

Middle-aged nothing said...

Wow Mike, thank you so much. I am in the GA Militia, previously with Darren, and I really appreciate what you have said. We only talked, at length, once and I could not have disagreed with anyone more than I did Darren. It was what I considered to be a matter of theology; and yet, somehow it seemed to be more. You have put your finger on it totally. I am a Bible believer and Christ follower and was completely offended by his views of the Jewish people. Again, I considered this to be merely a matter of faith. He was; however, the groups Chaplin- very uncomfortable. I also do agree that he needs to be supported in this case because of the errancy of the government. I wish him well in his case. Thanks for what you do.

aughtsix said...

It's going to get more and more difficult to tell friend from foe, to know truth from "friction". This is all to the benefit of our Enemies, who care nothing either for fidelity or for truth.

We are being tribalized, not only by Leviathan, but by our own insistence on ideological agreement. Not that I would want Identifiers by my side and certainly not at my back. But the recent thread wherein the ideologically pure "anarchists" took us to task as "lacking in commitment" is illustrative of the problem.

We, the People, have been divided into warring camps by the Left. Are we now ripe to be conquered?

Jon

III

Anonymous said...

Killing babies is never justified. It has no rational, ever.

Anonymous said...

I really appreciate you folks backing Darren's right to be secure in his person and his belongings. It is imperative that we do so for everyone- even those we think we disagree with.
Darren and I have known each other for years, even went to the same high school. We have spoken of theological issues for hours on end, and I think I know his stance very well. While I do not agree with every idea of his, I know that he is VERY far from a "Radical Christian Identity Racist." While there is nothing I could say to convince some folks of it, please believe me when I tell you that it is merely an exaggeration by the FBI to erode Darren's credibility and support.
Please, support him, as you would anyone who's rights are trampled for political reasons. Do not let the FBI play you against standing against tyranny!

Daniel

Old Pablo said...

Re the "Turner Diaries": to me they are too similar to Charles Manson's crazy theory of a race war. Loony book, I agree.

Brutus said...

Actually, it does piss me off that this guy is trotting around with a OK'ers paint job on his truck... with his beliefs.

Just like it pisses me off that OK'ers organization itself trots around its insignia promoting the support and defense of the constitution ... while banning anyone who dares to support and defend it, and holding the rest unaccountable to the constitution and allowing them to retain their membership.

I have seen TO MANY good people whose hearts and minds are in the right place in OK'ers get kicked out.

It is neither hot or cold, but lukewarm ... and good for nothing but to be spit out.

Unfortunately, OK'ers will doom itself.

Anonymous said...

Correct me if I am wrong. I read some years ago(late 80's) that the Christian Identity movement was a front oganization for the FBI, to see who they could sting.

Anonymous said...

The main thing I've noticed about Socialists/Communists/Nazis is that they're pseudo-religious monarchistic gangsters who say essentially the same thing & use essentially the same methods to attain power over others & maintain control once they get it. Their rhetoric & imagery is imitatively replete w/ references to medievalism, as in Lenin/Stalin's "New Soviet Man" & Hitler's "Aryan Super Race/Teutonic Knights", & their attitudes reflect this mindset. The hyper-religious also tend to be this way as are adherents to atheism/scientism. As the Bible says, nothing new under the sun.

Comment?


Cassandra (of Troy)

Dedicated_Dad said...

From the info I could gather online, it seems to me that Huff - CLEARLY - was not stopped because he had the OK artwork on his truck.

He was stopped because he'd well-publicised his intent to go "arrest" an official. Clearly they already had his vehicle info from previous dealings...

DD

CorbinKale said...

Brutus,

What pisses ME off is that some people can't get past their own issues and see the big picture. Ever heard of a combined arms approach to a problem? Why must people choose a single tactic, to the exclusion of all others? Why must they insist that everyone get on line and hey-diddle-diddle. Why must they insist that everyone who doesn't subscribe to their personal vision of honoring the Oath isn't pure enough to be in the fight?

Oath Keepers, necessarily, has a limited focus. As an organization, they don't muster with arms, march down city streets or break windows. I am not saying that those tactics aren't effective, however, the mission of Oath Keepers requires that it remain open to active duty military and police.

Brutus, I don't know you, but the only thing that will doom Oath Keepers is following YOUR advice. For example, why aren't you on the Capitol steps marching around with a loaded rifle in support of the Constitution? Why not, Brutus? Don't you honor your Oath? You "trot around" as the arbiter of those worthy to call themselves supporters of the Constitution, but now your tail is tucked between your legs! You aren't fit to call yourself a supporter of the Constitution!

Now isn't that a ridiculous assertion? But it's no different than what you are saying about Oath Keepers. People who can't keep separate the simple, non-activist role of Oath Keepers, from other methods and groups, HAVE to be booted. Oath Keepers doesn't say that their way is the only way. Hell, they ENCOURAGE their members to support other Constitutional groups. They only insist that when representing Oath Keepers, they maintain it as a SAFE place for active duty military and police to congregate. Without Oath Keepers, there is NO PLACE for them that isn't proscribed.

Bitching that Oath Keepers isn't what you think it should be is playing into the hands of our enemies, as the Huff incident just demonstrated. Turn your guns around. You're spraying friendlies.

FSHB said...

He admitted in the video that he ran a stop sign. The troopers asked to search, he declined. The troopers asked to secure his open carry sidearm during the stop, he declined.

Mixed bag for me, the guy has issues, but I do believe in the 4th amendment, the supreme court has given a lot of extra 'powers' to law enforcement that seem to overstep the 4th.

My thoughts are he could have avoided a lot of this by not grandstanding about having his vehicle searched - but I do want someone to mount a successful challenge to the current procedures used in traffic stops and searches, I just want it to be someone who has a clear case and a legal leg to stand on.

Anonymous said...

so standing up for your rights is now grandstanding? interesting comment,we are not far from allowing the fedagoons into or home with out probible cause or a warrant.also what makes running a stop sign probible cause to search a vehical or even a person? this is why patriot movements are a joke they do not belive in rights unless it is the samething we belive in. is there a law that states he cannot have certin belifs? no, on the contrery there is a constitution that insures that he can. stand together or hang sepratly.

Anonymous said...

Wow, Mike. Looks like you've jumped on the bandwagon with OK and GA Militia, saying Darren is guilty of belonging to this radical group without even asking him. Just because someone has a certain belief and in this case, a religious belief, he's thrown under the bus as belonging to this group. I've had some healthy debates with Darren on his position of Caucasians being the chosen, however he has NEVER made any racists remarks about jews, blacks or any other race. While I don't agree with his religious belief, he's certainly entitled to it. Your a grown man, can make your own decisions and I respect you, however think you need to be careful in saying Darren is guilty of being connected to this group based upon one audio tape. Tell ya what, I'm going to outright ask him and I'll let ya know.

Frankly, I see OK and GA Militia succumbing to the relentless pressure from the left, making anyone who isn't a "lefty" out to be some kind of right wing extreme cook. Which by the way, I'll bet lefty's think the same thing about you and me! Where's OK and GA Militia's resolve? When you get pushed, do you just step back or push back? For too many decades, we on the right kept stepping back and I step back no more!

As for the charge levied against him, transporting a weapon across state lines to incite a riot (at least, that's what I've read on web posts), this is not even close to the truth. The Feds have been asking around, trying to build a case for Darren's state of mind before going to TN and they're way off base. I spoke to Darren before and after the 4/20 felony stop and he was not intent on inciting a riot, however was intent on serving justice. The Fed's case is all crap! I'm tired of the hypocrisy in this country where a law abiding citizen get's busted while illegal immigrants are allowed to walk free on the streets! How could we have come to this?

Brutus said...

CorbinKale,

I am reminded of the quote of the week over at WRSA.

You can compromise all you want. OK'ers can compromise all they want.

The time of the compromising was during the Constitutional Convention. While our constitution may not be perfect, it was settled after all the compromising was done. If you want to compromise on the constitution, then I suggest that you join the chorus in some quarters calling for a con-con.

I am not interested in compromising the constitution ... NOR ... am I interested in compromising DESPITE the constitution. AND ... to whit ... I am not interested in compromising in order to go along to get along.

There is plenty of compromising in both houses of congress.

I am sure anyone could find "common ground" with murderers. I am sure anyone could find "common ground" with pedophiles. In fact, I am sure anyone can find "common ground" somewhere in ... both houses of congress.

How do you feel about sharing "common ground" with that? Would you want to share "common ground" with that?

Are you willing to "compromise" for the sake of "common ground" with that?

I am not.

You ... and OK'ers are willing to compromise.

I am not. And to many good hearted moral constitutionalist are not.

I am not willing to be part of any organization that will compromise the oath to protect and defend the constitution.

I am not willing to be part of an organization that is willing to retain oath breakers while kicking, mocking, degenerating, and slapping in the face men who love the constitution more than they do compromising in order to go along to get along. Who did nothing more than quote the constitution. Who did nothing more than quote the Founding Fathers. Who did nothing more than quote the Federalist Papers. Who did nothing more than tell the truth. Who did nothing more than try to hold people accountable to the VERY OATH they took to the constitution.

Well, you go back to your Ok'ers and do some serious reading in the various State chapters and you will find out just how far OK'ers are willing to compromise in order to find common ground. Pay special attention those OK'er LEO's and see just how far they are willing to compromise the very oath they took to the constitution to enforce their common ground against that very constitution.

And ... heaven forbid if ANYONE tries to hold them accountable to their oath.

You want common ground? Here is a suggestion for you. Ask everyone you know and even ask strangers ... "Did America win the cold war?" I am sure you will find common ground with those people. Why? Because America DID NOT win the cold war. It is self evident if you have eyes to see and ears to hear.

Common ground with that. Common ground with compromiser's. Common ground with Khrushchev. Common ground with Lenin. Common ground with Clinton, Bush, Obama.

I'll common ground with people who take their oath to the constitution seriously and won't compromise on it in order to just find "common ground".

If that shakes anyone's reason and logic and cause them to piss their pants and call me and those like me extremists ... or ... "The Problem" ... so what. Our morals and character are intact ... not fragmented by appeasers and compromisers.

While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.

That is what happens when you "compromise" in order to find "common ground".

When OK'ers stops "compromising" the constitution amongst its various members in order to find "common ground" ... then OK'ers may earn my respect.

CorbinKale said...

Brutus,

Ok, let's test your No Compromise theory.

The RTC rally was a great demonstration of the exercise of our 1st and 2nd Amendment Rights,
correct? Well, you haven't criticized it, yet, as far as I know.

With that in mind, I challenge you, Brutus the Uncompromising, to do the same demonstration of your Constitutionally protected Rights on the steps of the Capitol Bldg, White House or Supreme Court. Your choice. I'll be watching the news for your arrest.

I don't really expect you to do it, but if you do, I'll concede that I am not worthy to stand with you in defense of the Constitution. Remember, NO COMPROMISE! Good luck, hero.

Meanwhile, I'll be right here, supporting the 3% and the Oath Keepers. Two different tactics
that work towards the same end in a combined arms strategy.

If we fail, we will ALL follow your lead,(should you dare to live up to your self-imposed no
compromise mantra) as that will be our only remaining option.

Until that day, you are not only a hypocrite for compromising your values, with which you castigate Oath Keepers, you are also undermining those of us who are in common cause with you.

That's a damned, pointless shame.

straightarrow said...

Sorry CorbinKale, you fail. Nobody asked Oathkeepers to commit suicide as you have challenged Brutus to do.

That is a sleazy attempt to defend people who ran from stating their "ideas", from declaring principles, nobody asked them to commit suicide by doing something monumentally tactically stupid. All they were asked to do was show up as they promised.

I won't speak to the Reasoned Discourse that others have addressed because I only endured one round of it before I wrote OK off. So, I don't know if they still do so, of my own personal knowledge, but were I forced to bet, I will believe Brutus. Because what he states confirms my experience early on.

Your challenge to him to do something so obviously deadly to him as some sort validation required before he is allowed to criticize the people who ran like rabbits from something far less dangerous is simply unconscionable. Sebastian at Snowflakes in Hell would use that sort of argument when he had nothing intelligent or of substance to say. I sincerely hesitate to relegate you to such low status as that drone.

Please reconsider your defense of that which is indefensible. Doesn't mean they beat their dogs, but it damn sure means I won't trust them with mine.

I will not compromise either. A little secret, several times in my life people thought I was running. I fostered that belief, but I was actually hunting. Habitual predators ofter forget they can become prey. However, that doesn't mean I will bare my throat to them to gain your acknowledgement of my viewpoint. Neither should Brutus, and you shouldn't be so immature as to have tried such a simple-minded ploy.

CorbinKale said...

Straightarrow,

You know very well that I wasn't trying to send Brutus to his death. I was illustrating how ridiculous his "no compromise" claim was. That is why I used the RTC open carry demonstration as the example. It was a compromise to do it at Gravelly Point, instead of DC, for obvious reasons.

I have no problem with people who don't want to support Oath Keepers. I only have a problem with the off-hand insults. Some of us support BOTH the 3% and OK. By not addressing those insults, I would be condoning them.

I'm relieved to hear that your only issue with my reply was the hyperbole.

straightarrow said...

Because it is the way of things, I assume there are good people who meant it and still do when they took their oaths. Much like I think there are good people in the NRA. But just as I do with the NRA I do not believe in the organizations' leadership.

When younger and more rash, I often rallied when it was determined "someone should do something", only to find myself way out there, not just in front, but all of the front and all by myself while those who talked the best game about "doing something" sold me for their personal gain or at the least their personal safety. No one gets more than one chance to do so now. OK had theirs, they muffed it.

support them if you wish, it isn't any more wasteful than doing nothing. I think I'll just do nothing, until C W time. Tired of the dance and all the obligatory posing and the constant introduction of new steps that do nothing to further our trip around the floor. I will just wait until the music stops, then the serious business can start. Or the thugs can leave the dance hall, but we know that isn't going to happen, don't we?