Now that CAP is part of the total force

[PHall]

Sir,

There are alot of key words in the last line of his post that scream anti-gov and sovereign citizen as those words are used consistently in their doctrine and philosophies. 

Sorry, but I'd rather say something that looks like a red flag and have it be nothing than vice versa.  The poster may very well have honest intentions by what they posted, but still it's a red flag.

Spam, I'm thinking pretty much the same thing.  And I would be very happy to be proven wrong.

[Spam]

OK, so you are following the "see something, say something" guidance. I get that and respect that position.  Yet, I am not so ready to rush to essentially publicly accuse someone of traitorous beliefs based on the simple use of words that seem "red flags" to you, coupled with some aspersions against a Southern heritage, in a first post here.

I need to point out to the both of y'all that the so called Sovereign Citizens are, with few exceptions, NOT JOINERS, being loosely organized anarchistic anti government types. Insofar as they have a common belief set stretching back to the Posse Comitatus movement in the '70s, it certainly does not include joining any organizations which require fingerprinting, background checks, and membership in a federally chartered nonprofit, nor occasional entry on to DoD installations and working closely with LE. Their one common enemy is the U.S. government and its agencies.

Since you want to cite "red flags", here's a commonly cited guide provided to law enforcement, which has a list of common terms peculiar to the movement: http://www.sog.unc.edu/sites/www.sog.unc.edu/files/Sov%20citizens%20quick%20guide%20Nov%2013.pdf. The use of terms such as "be a better American, promote liberty, fight tyranny and serve my fellow Americans" would seem to indict millions of patriotic Americans from Ben Franklin and the founding fathers, through Roosevelt (first presidential use of "fellow Americans") up through modern leaders and good Americans of all political parties and beliefs.

Plus freedom of speech is not entirely free or what people believe it is. 

Well, I see. Glad you gents are on duty here as the gate keepers and auditors. Again, you're jumping to judge on Post Number One from Spike. Lay off the guy already, and try giving the benefit of the doubt to new members, ok? I'd respectfully suggest you have a word of apology with Spike - quickly, to be polite? - and if he eventually turns out to go all Ruby Ridge on us, THEN, weapons free.

Holy cow, guys, "innocent until proven guilty"?


V/R,
Spam

[abdsp51]

Sir,

I am well aware of said indicators.  He used terms that are used by said personnel and organizations to promote their cause. 

SCOTUS has already ruled that there are limits on freedom of speech and those limits are constitutional. 

Sorry I see red flags based of it and have expressed what I see.  You do not have to agree with it or approve of it.

I see what I see and I am not changing my stance, nor apologising for raising the flag.  Sorry but it smells funny and is an indicator.  And those same gdoups twist what the founding fathers and true true patriots have stood for to twist and promote their agendas. 

[Spam]

OK, your call. Not that I'm trying to "squelch" your freedom of expression. I think you get my point too.

Sigh...

V/R,
Spam

[abdsp51]

It's not a 1st Amendment deal.  It's raising awareness of something that's sketch...

Could I be wrong?  You bet, but I'm gonna say something than sit quiet.

[Spam]

Well, yeah, I think it really is, actually, in terms of whether your assertions are libel versus your 1st Amendment free speech to assert a fact-based claim about seditious beliefs (based on one or two sentences). To just let this go without comment, in a site by and for CAP volunteers, could lower us to the lowest denominator of the web with schoolyard behavior and I think we're better than that.


You two have amply raised your points. Is there some action that you expect out of the rest of the world at this point by starting down this road of saying something?  Do you expect a guy to be banned for using "sketchy" phrases to your dissatisfaction? Care to share where these "sketchy" comments should logically lead from a ban from CT to NHQ/DP investigation? Referral to local law enforcement? Knocks on his door by a badge some night? Wiretap warrant? Come on, now...


Abdsp51, as you've said several times before on here, "the burden of proof is on you", which I've agreed with when you've challenged some claim or other that wasn't supported by CAP regs or via some other empirical means.  You've always been one of the guys on here who goes and looks stuff up - which I respect, as I respect you as an NCO, and former LE, if I remember correctly. So, here I see you making a claim with no substantiation to where the specific phrases used are defined as quote, "standard anti gov, sovereign citizen doctrine", and I want to hear more than just targeted claims.


Since true statements by definition can't be defamatory, you need to either establish with proof that he's one of the sovereign cit types, or at least make a positive case matching his statements to an objective standard.  Where then is this "standard" you speak of, if you want to be the gate keeper of patriotism and sedition?  I found one (cited in LE journals) which even lists common phrases, yet they're not in it. Where is yours?


V/R,
Spam


"Membership Code of Conduct
« on: February 09, 2005, 03:12:05 AM » 
Code of Conduct
•Members will not engage in libel, slander, name-calling, or personal attacks.  Members will not post any hateful material about any person, unit, or organization.  There is a line between leadership examples and scenarios, or having constructive discussions about problems without naming names, and attacking others outright.  Personal threats are also strictly prohibited".

[abdsp51]

Well, yeah, I think it really is, actually, in terms of whether your assertions are libel versus your 1st Amendment free speech to assert a fact-based claim about seditious beliefs (based on one or two sentences). To just let this go without comment, in a site by and for CAP volunteers, could lower us to the lowest denominator of the web with schoolyard behavior and I think we're better than that.


You two have amply raised your points. Is there some action that you expect out of the rest of the world at this point by starting down this road of saying something?  Do you expect a guy to be banned for using "sketchy" phrases to your dissatisfaction? Care to share where these "sketchy" comments should logically lead from a ban from CT to NHQ/DP investigation? Referral to local law enforcement? Knocks on his door by a badge some night? Wiretap warrant? Come on, now...


Abdsp51, as you've said several times before on here, "the burden of proof is on you", which I've agreed with when you've challenged some claim or other that wasn't supported by CAP regs or via some other empirical means.  You've always been one of the guys on here who goes and looks stuff up - which I respect, as I respect you as an NCO, and former LE, if I remember correctly. So, here I see you making a claim with no substantiation to where the specific phrases used are defined as quote, "standard anti gov, sovereign citizen doctrine", and I want to hear more than just targeted claims.


Since true statements by definition can't be defamatory, you need to either establish with proof that he's one of the sovereign cit types, or at least make a positive case matching his statements to an objective standard.  Where then is this "standard" you speak of, if you want to be the gate keeper of patriotism and sedition?  I found one (cited in LE journals) which even lists common phrases, yet they're not in it. Where is yours?


V/R,
Spam


"Membership Code of Conduct
« on: February 09, 2005, 03:12:05 AM » 
Code of Conduct
•Members will not engage in libel, slander, name-calling, or personal attacks.  Members will not post any hateful material about any person, unit, or organization.  There is a line between leadership examples and scenarios, or having constructive discussions about problems without naming names, and attacking others outright.  Personal threats are also strictly prohibited".

Spam,

1) We can go round and round on this one all day and night with neither giving ground. 

2) I am here to be a better American, promote liberty, fight tyranny and serve my fellow Americans. these are typical of most anti-govt organizations and sovereign citizens. 

    Promote liberty is usually used to force their own interpretation of what the Constitution says and there is no other interpretation.
   
    Fight tyranny in other words your laws and codes are unconstitutional and therefore do not apply to me or my family or friends and your attempts at enforcing them are harassing them and unjust and you are violating their common law rights.

3) Yes the burden of proof is always going to be on the one making a claim or allegation (neither of which I have done).  Yes I will look things up how else would I be able to know what I am talking about and have a leg to stand on?  Yes I am former LE and I have dealt with these types for 6 of the 12 years I was and when this first started becoming an issue comments such as the ones posted where briefed to keep an ear open for.

4) I have not in any shape or form claimed, presented as fact, or alleged that Spike whomever he/she is a member of an anti govt or a sovereign citizen type.  What I have said that line specifically those things are red flags to be based on my experience and training that are indicators that he or she may be.  I can tell had I heard him/her make that same comment in the course of any type of LE action it would be documented in my notebook, report narrative, and patrolman's statement. And 9 times out of 10 when I have a hunch I am right. 

Do I expect the mods to ban him/her from the forum no, do I expect the FBI, NSA, DHS or the local pd or so go knocking on his/her door based off of it no.  Do I feel NHQ needs to reexamine him/her no I don't. I do believe in saying something when something does not look or smell right and that's what I did. PHall concurred but we are two members here with the same opinion.  The email address like I have said maybe he/she flies for the restoration Confederate Air Force or maybe he/she flies and has some personal roots to folks who served in the Confederacy, does not bother me one bit and not the basis for my statement.

Plus it is not unheard of for these type of people to join the military or pd to receive training, intel and other items and take home with them to use against the govt.  Gangs have been practicing 4th gen urban warfare for a long time and there are members of anti govt groups serving in the military.

Could Spike be that honest to God, loves America apple pie baseball and a genuine patriot based upon upbringing and values?  You bet and if he/she is then I made a mistake and a bad call based off of my experience and training.  But if he/she isn't then I did my job in bringing the behavior to attention of the folks here and possibly the org.

I am not looking to be a gatekeeper or auditor for patriotism here I'm not clean cut enough for that. 

[whatevah]

Let's cut the losses... Lock.