Archive for April, 2010

Rapid Growth of Militias Feeds Off Politics

Wednesday, April 28th, 2010

The SMVM is one of 200 armed militias in the US, a number that has quadrupled since 2008, according to the Anti-Defamation League, a civil rights watchdog, which says they may have 6,000 members and many other adherents.

By James B. Kelleher and Ed Stoddard
Reuters

Three times a week, Mike Lackomar climbs into his truck and drives the same delivery route through the suburbs of Detroit.

Lackomar is an independent contractor for a private parcel company. If you live northwest of this battered city and you recently purchased something from a home shopping network, there’s a good chance the 36-year-old handled your package.

But there is one small item that never leaves his truck: a green nylon satchel Lackomar jokingly calls “the football,” a reference to the briefcase with codes for a nuclear strike kept close to the U.S. president. Inside, along with a pocket knife and a small first aid kit, is a sealed envelope containing codes, rallying points and detailed plans that Lackomar would use to mobilize his squad of armed citizen-soldiers in an emergency.

Lackomar is a team leader in the Southeast Michigan Volunteer Militia (SMVM), the largest and most visible of this state’s many small private armies. He is a husband, a father and a musician. But his favorite picture on his Facebook page shows him standing in front of a snowmobile trailer packed with rifles, clips and ammunition boxes, a picture he laughingly admits looks “like an evidence photo from the 6 O’clock News.”

The SMVM is one of 200 armed militias in the United States, a number that has quadrupled since 2008, according to the Anti-Defamation League, a civil rights watchdog, which says they may have 6,000 members and many other adherents.

MILITIAS: HARMLESS UNTIL THEY ARE NOT

The United States is one of the few Western democratic countries that permit independent militias.

Their rapid growth coincides with a sharp rise in partisan rhetoric as the November U.S. congressional elections draw nearer. Depending on your perspective, they are either patriots or paranoid. Experts in law enforcement and academia are divided as to how big an actual threat they may pose. But they all agree on one thing: the groups are very well armed.

“Most (militia groups) are merely in the rhetorical and defensive stage,” said Brian Levin, professor of criminal justice at California State University and an expert on militias and domestic terrorism. “But we don’t know which groups are going to be benign and which are going to be small incubators for radicalism.”

His point was underscored by the arrest in late March of nine members of anti-government extremist group called the Hutaree, whose website says its name means “Christian Warrior.” They were charged with planning a cop-killing spree intended to spark a broad insurrection.

And in February, a computer engineer angry with the government crashed a small aircraft into an office building in Austin, Texas, housing the federal Internal Revenue Service. In a rambling six-page statement, the man said he hoped his act would help make “American zombies wake up and revolt.”

Until their arrest, the Hutaree were considered brothers-in-arms by other Michigan militia groups, including the SMVM. At least two of the men indicted by the government in the case briefly trained with Lackomar’s group.

Before the group hatched its plot, the only rap against it in militia circles was that its training practices — like run-and-gun target shooting — were not the safest.

“I knew a couple of the guys that are sitting in jail right now. They were nice people,” said Lackomar.

That is not to say he condoned the group’s plan. One Hutaree member who evaded the police dragnet asked a member of Lackomar’s group for help retrieving weapons and other supplies he had hidden at the group’s safe house.

Instead, he got some unexpected advice: Turn yourself in. The suspect ignored the SMVM member, who went to the police.

Far from joining a rebellion, Lackomar’s group and other militia members denounced the alleged plot and applauded the way the FBI and state police handled the raids.

“Nobody got hurt,” Lackomar said. “There weren’t any shots fired. They got everyone needed. They stopped the plan.”

For that stance, Lackomar and other group members took some heat from what he calls “ultra-right ideologues” who consider the Hutaree victims of political persecution.

Continue reading…

Ron Paul: Socialism vs Corporatism

Tuesday, April 27th, 2010

Lately many have characterized this administration as socialist, or having strong socialist leanings.

By Ron Paul
Texas Straight Talk

I differ with this characterization. This is not to say Mr. Obama believes in free-markets by any means. On the contrary, he has done and said much that demonstrates his fundamental misunderstanding and hostility towards the truly free market. But a closer, honest examination of his policies and actions in office reveals that, much like the previous administration, he is very much a corporatist. This in many ways can be more insidious and worse than being an outright socialist.

Socialism is a system where the government directly owns and manages businesses. Corporatism is a system where businesses are nominally in private hands, but are in fact controlled by the government. In a corporatist state, government officials often act in collusion with their favored business interests to design polices that give those interests a monopoly position, to the detriment of both competitors and consumers.

A careful examination of the policies pursued by the Obama administration and his allies in Congress shows that their agenda is corporatist. For example, the health care bill that recently passed does not establish a Canadian-style government-run single payer health care system. Instead, it relies on mandates forcing every American to purchase private health insurance or pay a fine. It also includes subsidies for low-income Americans and government-run health care “exchanges”. Contrary to the claims of the proponents of the health care bill, large insurance and pharmaceutical companies were enthusiastic supporters of many provisions of this legislation because they knew in the end their bottom lines would be enriched by Obamacare.

Similarly, Obama’s “cap-and-trade” legislation provides subsidies and specials privileges to large businesses that engage in “carbon trading.” This is why large corporations, such as General Electric support cap-and-trade.

To call the President a corporatist is not to soft-pedal criticism of his administration. It is merely a more accurate description of the President’s agenda.

When he is a called a socialist, the President and his defenders can easily deflect that charge by pointing out that the historical meaning of socialism is government ownership of industry; under the President’s policies, industry remains in nominally private hands. Using the more accurate term – corporatism – forces the President to defend his policies that increase government control of private industries and expand de facto subsidies to big businesses. This also promotes the understanding that though the current system may not be pure socialism, neither is it free-market since government controls the private sector through taxes, regulations, and subsidies, and has done so for decades.

Using precise terms can prevent future statists from successfully blaming the inevitable failure of their programs on the remnants of the free market that are still allowed to exist. We must not allow the disastrous results of corporatism to be ascribed incorrectly to free market capitalism or used as a justification for more government expansion. Most importantly, we must learn what freedom really is and educate others on how infringements on our economic liberties caused our economic woes in the first place. Government is the problem; it cannot be the solution.

New Immigration Law Won’t Hurt Economy, Arizona Governor Says

Tuesday, April 27th, 2010

Arizona Gov Jan Brewer on Monday deflected concerns that the state’s new immigration law will hurt economic development, saying many businesses have long wanted tougher action.

CNN

The new law requires Arizona police to determine whether people are in the United States legally if there is a reason to suspect they aren’t. Brewer signed the controversial legislation into law on Friday.

“The bottom line is that when I go about meeting with businesses that come into Arizona … they want to know that we have a safe and secure environment into which to move their businesses here,” Brewer said at an Arizona Town Hall event in Tucson. “They want to know that their employees are going to have a quality of life that they’ve had in the places where they’re moving from to move here.”

“I believe it’s not going to have the kind of economic impact that some people think that it might,” Brewer, a Republican, said.

The law, scheduled to go into effect 90 days after the close of the state’s legislative session, would require immigrants to carry their alien registration documents at all times. Previously, officers could check someone’s immigration status only if that person was suspected in another crime.

Critics say the law could foster racial profiling and prompt businesses, conventions and tourists to stay away from the state. The bill has prompted rallies by opponents and supporters, and some prominent politicians in Washington and Arizona have criticized the measure, including Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, who has said he’ll file a lawsuit to block the law.

People have been protesting the bill outside the state Capitol since Friday, CNN affiliate KTVK reported.

Continue Reading…

Senators See Privacy Problem in Facebook Expansion

Tuesday, April 27th, 2010

Four US senators want Facebook to make it easier for its more than 400 million users to protect their privacy as the website develops new outlets to share personal information.

By Michael Liedtke
Bloomberg Business Week

Four U.S. senators want Facebook to make it easier for its more than 400 million users to protect their privacy as the website develops new outlets to share personal information.

The call for simpler privacy controls came in a letter that the senators planned to send Tuesday to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. The Associated Press obtained a draft of the letter signed by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.; Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo; Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska; and Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn.

It marked the second time in three days that Schumer has expressed his misgivings about a series of changes that Facebook announced last week. The new features are designed to unlock more of the data that the online hangout has accumulated about people during its six-year history.

Schumer sent a letter Sunday to the Federal Trade Commission calling for regulators to draw up clearer privacy guidelines for Facebook and other Internet social networks to follow.

In a written response to Schumer, Facebook vice president Elliot Schrage said Tuesday that the company welcomes “a continued dialogue with you and others because we agree that scrutiny over the handling of personal data is needed as Internet users seek a more social and interactive experience.”

He echoed earlier statements that Facebook’s aims to give users more control, not less. Privacy advocates have disagreed, saying the company now expects users to share things publicly that they previously could restrict to a select group of online friends.

Continue reading…

Ford Reports $2.08 Billion Profit

Tuesday, April 27th, 2010

Ford today said it earned $2.08 billion, or 50 cents per share, during the first quarter of the year and plans to increase production of new cars and trucks by 40%, providing fresh evidence that the Dearborn automaker’s turnaround plan is on track.

By Brent Snavely
Free Press

Ford today said it earned $2.08 billion, or 50 cents per share, during the first quarter of the year and plans to increase production of new cars and trucks by 40%, providing fresh evidence that the Dearborn automaker’s turnaround plan is on track.

Ford’s profit eclipsed its loss of $1.43 billion, or 60 cents per share, for the same January through March period last year and easily beat Wall Street’s expectations.

Before special charges, Ford earned $1.76 billion, or 46 cents per share. Analysts surveyed by Thomson One Analytics expected Ford to report income, excluding special charges, of 31 cents per share, or nearly $1 billion.

Ford’s sales gains in the U.S. and Europe, fueled by new product introductions as well as a reduced cost structure, all contributed to Ford’s performance, said CFO Lewis Booth.

“You can see the engine of the company kicking in with new products coming on stream,” Booth said early today.

In North America, the company’s largest division, Ford reported a pre-tax profit of $1.2 billion for the quarter, reversing its $665 million loss for the same period a year ago.

Ford also signaled that it is growing increasingly confident about a sales recovery in North America as it increased its second quarter production forecast by 30,000 vehicles, saying it now expects to build 625,000 cars and trucks between April and June.

That’s also a 40% increase over the same period last year when Ford built 451,000 cars and trucks.

Continue Reading…