Home > Uncategorized > New DoJ Dictionary: Investigating Terrorism and Criminal Extremism – Terms and Concepts

New DoJ Dictionary: Investigating Terrorism and Criminal Extremism – Terms and Concepts

Monday, August 30, 2010 Leave a comment Go to comments

Any unrepresented individual who files a civil suit in federal court against the United States, its agencies, or officials for violations of constitutional rights or who attempts to hold the United States, its agencies, or officials to the constraints of the Constitution are now considered to be an extremist! 

For What It’s Worth, Buffalo Springfield, 1967

Example: Rep. Stark insulting minutemen. 

Example: Rep. Stark “Federal government can do most anything in this country.” 

From the Official Justice Department Dictionary the following defined terms are the least criminally offensive terms. But when viewed in the collective nature one gets the impression that the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI are using the State and Local Anti-Terrorism Training Program (SLATT) to indoctrinate state and local law enforcement agencies to treat innocent individuals standing up for their rights as suspected terrorist or criminal extremists. So, are we now guilty until proven innocent? 
 
Gun Owners of America (GOA): An extremely radical gun-owning group with close ties to the militia movement. It reputedly has about 100,000 members (as opposed to the millions of NRA members). GOA is headed by Larry Pratt, a strong militia supporter who also has close ties to the white-supremacist movement.  

Constitutionalists: A generic term for members of the “patriot” movement. It is now often used to refer to members of the sovereign citizen or common law court movement. Sometimes the word “constitutionist” is also used.  

Oath of Office: An oath public officials take that “patriots” claim binds them to the patriots’ view of duty. Perhaps the most common charge leveled by antigovernment extremists is that their public officials are violating oaths of office if they enforce an unpopular law, rule, or regulation. 

Patriot Movement: The “patriot” movement is a general term used by its members to describe the collective movements and individuals on the extreme right wing. In one form or another, this practice dates back many decades; in the 1930s, many on the far right referred to themselves as “superpatriots.” In the 1960s and 1970s, it was common to refer to the “Christian Patriot” movement, but this term is less common now than then. Among the types of individuals that can be found within the “patriot” movement are white supremacists, sovereign citizens, tax protesters, militia members, and sometimes antiabortion or anti-environmental groups. 

Pro Se Litigation: Litigation in which one represents oneself. 

Restoring the Government/Constitution: One of the prime goals of many members of the “patriot” movement, who claim they are not trying to overthrow the government but rather want to “restore” the government to its status before it started “ignoring” the Constitution. Patriots claim that most actions of the U.S. government are unconstitutional and illegal. 

Sui Juris: A term used to mean possessing full civil rights, competent to manage one’s affairs. It is often used by sovereign citizens after their names in legal documents, as in “John Randy; Doe, sui juris.” 

Unorganized Militia: A phrase commonly used to designate groups in the militia movement; for instance, “The Ohio Unorganized Militia.” The term comes from a relic in the U.S. Code dealing with the militia and National Guard. The original militia law, passed in 1792, mandated universal compulsory militia service for all able-bodied white males ages 18 to 45. By the 1830s, however, a mass opposition movement to compulsory militia service arose, largely on socioeconomic grounds. State governments realized that they could not maintain compulsory militia systems but were constrained by the overarching federal law. To get around the 1792 law, states one by one gradually introduced systems that provided for two militias. One militia would be voluntary, small, compensated, and reasonably well-armed and trained. The other militia, for the majority of people who did not want to serve in the militia, would be a nominal manpower pool only, almost like draft eligibility, with no units, organization, officers, arms, training, musters, equipment, or other requirements. By the 1870s, the former type of militia had become known as the National Guard of the various states, while the latter type still operated under a variety of names but was coming to be known as the “unorganized militia.” Eventually, the federal government formally recognized this pattern and, in 1903, acknowledged the National Guard and the unorganized militia. In the 1980s, Posse Comitatus leader William Potter Gale came across the obscure passage in U.S. Code that mentioned the unorganized militia and decided, incorrectly, that the “unorganized militia” was a legal armed force which was not controllable by the government and indeed was designed to protect the citizenry from a tyrannical government. 

  

  

  

   

  

 
 
 
 
 
 

  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Advertisements
Categories: Uncategorized
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: