Not Whether, When.

[Hoosier Daddy]

It sounds like they have been there 30 years or so.

[Rex B]

"Aziz confirmed that the camps have stockpiles of illegal weapons."

Looks like the BATFE would be on this like a duck on a junebug.

"residents of the MOA believe that their top leader, Sheikh Gilani, is able to travel through space and time, and that he spies on them at all times. This fear helps keep them from disobeying the strict laws of MOA and the “town” leaders.

“They think Gilani will turn them into a monkey,” he said."

Is there a Zippered Lip icon?

[Jumping Frog]

So, I'm not sure that preaching for the overthrow of the government is a criminal offense any longer. And frankly, I don't think it should be. Many of us here, while not directly advocating for such overthrow, do feel that it is approaching time to begin restoring our government to its constitutional roots, and that because the left will actively resist any such effort, it may some day lead to violence (i.e. all of the "what would you do if they came for your guns" threads we have on this forum). Under the old laws, that might have been considered seditious speech, but not today.

There is also a fine line between 1st Amendment speech expressing an opinion regarding government overthrow, versus being charged with conspiracy to overthrow the government. And the initial judgment deciding where to draw that line is made by a prosecutor, perhaps one who is married to a like-minded IRS investigator.

[The Annoyed Man]

So, I'm not sure that preaching for the overthrow of the government is a criminal offense any longer. And frankly, I don't think it should be. Many of us here, while not directly advocating for such overthrow, do feel that it is approaching time to begin restoring our government to its constitutional roots, and that because the left will actively resist any such effort, it may some day lead to violence (i.e. all of the "what would you do if they came for your guns" threads we have on this forum). Under the old laws, that might have been considered seditious speech, but not today.

There is also a fine line between 1st Amendment speech expressing an opinion regarding government overthrow, versus being charged with conspiracy to overthrow the government. And the initial judgment deciding where to draw that line is made by a prosecutor, perhaps one who is married to a like-minded IRS investigator.

Dadgum IRS..... I had put that mess out of my mind momentarily when I posted my previous comments. But the IRS's actions toward conservatives and patriots since 2009 kind of puts all that into doubt, doesn't it? I'm still mindful of the IRS's illegal seizure, without warrant, of the medical records of 10,000 people, just because they could and did and got away with it, during the seizure of ONE person's records during a warrant execution. Have the IRS agents returned/destroyed the illegally seized records?

Nobody is saying.....