[HN Gopher] A mole infiltrated the highest ranks of American mil...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A mole infiltrated the highest ranks of American militias
        
       Author : colinprince
       Score  : 332 points
       Date   : 2025-01-04 14:13 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.propublica.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.propublica.org)
        
       | oldpersonintx wrote:
       | After years of research, our mole discovered that "militia"
       | members liked to dress in plus-sized camo and shoot legally-owned
       | ARs on private property...
        
         | declan_roberts wrote:
         | One of the biggest threats to the country according to the FBI!
        
           | laidoffamazon wrote:
           | Yes, by the instruction of our incoming president they
           | attempted an insurrection.
        
             | nailer wrote:
             | This is provably false -Donald Trump stated that there
             | should be no violence multiple times on January 6. If you
             | have evidence, otherwise please state it here.
        
               | thefaux wrote:
               | He sat in the White House watching the violence unfold on
               | fox news for hours egging the protestors on on twitter
               | while leaving Mike Pence to be hung while he very likely
               | could have stopped the violence with a few tweets.
               | Instead, he waited until it was clear that they already
               | failed. We all saw it live on tv and Jack Smith's
               | investigation brought out the details. Unfortunately, he
               | was not permitted by the supreme court to provide his
               | evidence.
        
               | laidoffamazon wrote:
               | He also said "let's all march to the capitol" and wanted
               | to walk with them until the secret service stopped him
        
               | blackeyeblitzar wrote:
               | You are spreading misinformation, as did most of the news
               | media and politicians that manufactured outrageous claims
               | about J6. That's not the quote. Trump literally used the
               | word "peacefully" in the same sentence when he called for
               | the (planned) march. He did not call for illegal actions
               | or violence at any point. This is well known now, so your
               | made up false quote is a lie.
        
               | michaelcampbell wrote:
               | > very likely could have stopped the violence with a few
               | tweets.
               | 
               | That he didn't was repugnant and a dereliction of duty,
               | but even if he had, do you honestly think that mob would
               | have done anything different? People in groups don't
               | think normally, that's pretty well studied and
               | established; I don't think it would have made one whit of
               | difference.
               | 
               | But he should have tried; I'm surprised someone didn't
               | even tell him to just for the optics of it.
        
               | alamortsubite wrote:
               | > I'm surprised someone didn't even tell him to just for
               | the optics of it.
               | 
               | White house staff and Trump's family members were urging
               | him to do something while he was enjoying watching the
               | show unfold on TV. I'm unsure of where you live but the
               | truly surprising thing is many people in the US aren't
               | aware of this.
               | 
               | https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-capitol-probes-
               | season-fi...
        
               | laidoffamazon wrote:
               | One of the more disturbing parts of seeing him back in
               | office is going to be knowing that a lot of this
               | malfeasance is just not known by the general public.
        
               | laidoffamazon wrote:
               | People in the white house did tell him, we know this from
               | testimony under oath. He refused to do anything until it
               | failed.
        
               | nailer wrote:
               | > Egging the protesters on on Twitter
               | 
               | No. This is false. Trump specifically called for law and
               | order at the protests twice on Jan 6th.
        
               | pstuart wrote:
               | Trump says many things and not all of them are true.
        
               | mindslight wrote:
               | Words are not always confined to their literal meaning.
               | You need to read about the concepts of powertalk and the
               | big lie.
        
           | y33t wrote:
           | There's a credible organization.
        
         | kylebenzle wrote:
         | What an oddly long and pointless "investigation".
         | 
         | The majority of "militia members" are just like me, middle age
         | ex-military guys who lost their kids to an unfair, biased and
         | broken "family court" system.
         | 
         | These idiots think they are going undercover with the mob
         | apparently, the author and subject of this article seem to been
         | uninformed and scared of everyone around them. Two pathetic
         | losers.
         | 
         | Don't be like the author, instead be a man, use Linux and join
         | your local militia.
        
           | timkpaine wrote:
           | The military->domestic abuse->divorce->family
           | court->terrorism pipeline is quite strong, as evidenced in LV
           | and NOLA this week. Rather than larping in your "local
           | militia" while being slowly but surely radicalized, consider
           | professional help. Everyone can benefit from some therapy.
        
             | mmooss wrote:
             | People need to socialize with other humans that understand
             | them. Therapy can be great and necessary, but it's not
             | sufficient.
        
           | aliasxneo wrote:
           | Unfortunately the spin cycle has anyone, including a lot of
           | HN, believing that all militia members are the most violent
           | and evil people living in the world.
           | 
           | Ironic given I reserve that title for ISIS who seems to have
           | just recently radicalized another person to run over a bunch
           | of people in New Orleans.
           | 
           | I have no particular love for these militias, but I'm not
           | ignorant enough to believe the stuff media goes about
           | parroting.
        
             | HeatrayEnjoyer wrote:
             | ISIS _is_ a militia, you 're not making any sense.
        
               | aliasxneo wrote:
               | Since when was ISIS an American militia? It seems you
               | didn't read the post. My comment makes perfect sense in
               | the context of the article.
        
               | michaelcampbell wrote:
               | > Since when was ISIS an American militia?
               | 
               | Luckily that was never asserted.
        
             | mmooss wrote:
             | > all militia members are the most violent and evil people
             | living in the world.
             | 
             | That's a strawperson. It doesn't have to be all. Groups
             | that call themselves 'militias', arm and train themselves,
             | plan violence, and sometimes perpetuate it. It's reasonable
             | for the public to be concerned about them.
        
           | mmooss wrote:
           | Thanks for sharing your perspective; HN really needs it; I
           | could really benefit from it.
           | 
           | > The majority of "militia members" are just like me, middle
           | age ex-military guys who lost their kids to an unfair, biased
           | and broken "family court" system.
           | 
           | I can believe that and really I expect it. The majority of
           | any movement aren't really true believers trying to burn
           | things down.
           | 
           | How do you reconcile that with the militia group members that
           | are planning and plotting and acting to burn things down? The
           | most visible example was the January 6 attack, but of course
           | there are plenty more.
           | 
           | Are they just segregated into different groups? Are there a
           | few around but you think of them as ineffectual cranks? Do
           | the groups, in this way, have different circles: the hard
           | core, maybe another layer, and the people who like to hang
           | out?
           | 
           | The majority of any movement aren't really true believers
           | trying to burn things down, but some movements do try to burn
           | things down. People just there to socialize sometimes find
           | they supported something awful and turned a blind eye, when
           | they should have done something or at least walked away. A
           | genuine question: With everything happening, doesn't that
           | cross your mind?
        
           | michaelcampbell wrote:
           | > The majority of "militia members" are ... middle age ex-
           | military guys who lost their kids to an unfair, biased and
           | broken "family court" system.
           | 
           | Cite? I mean, really, what?
        
           | Barracoon wrote:
           | As a vet, get some help bro and stop hanging around the
           | militia losers.
        
           | JumpCrisscross wrote:
           | > _majority of "militia members" are just like me, middle age
           | ex-military guys who lost their kids to an unfair, biased and
           | broken "family court" system_
           | 
           | Are you discussing assassinating politicians with your
           | militia members? Did any of them march on the Capitol? If
           | not, you're not comparable to AP3. (If so, um, call a lawyer
           | and a psychiatrist.)
        
         | bagels wrote:
         | That and sedition and terrorism plots.
        
         | pama wrote:
         | "It was a world where a man would propose assassinating
         | politicians, only to spark a debate about logistics."
        
           | ashoeafoot wrote:
           | Completely new motion, eh, that, ah-- that there be, ah,
           | immediate action--
           | 
           | FRANCIS: Ah, once the vote has been taken.
           | 
           | REG: Well, obviously once the vote's been taken. You can't
           | act another resolution till you've voted on it...
        
         | brookst wrote:
         | I mean Ted Kaczynski liked a nice glass of water, maybe he
         | wasn't a bad guy?
        
         | wat10000 wrote:
         | That description could fit a group of friends having wholesome
         | fun, or a private army being raised with the goal of taking
         | territory. These groups are somewhere in between, but closer to
         | the latter. The main mitigating factor is that they're usually
         | pretty incompetent.
        
       | BadHumans wrote:
       | > Unless otherwise noted, none of the militia members mentioned
       | in this story responded to requests for comment
       | 
       | This is a serious story but this made me burst out laughing.
       | Sorry, the PR agent for these heavily armed militias was unable
       | to return my request for comments.
        
         | 9dev wrote:
         | It's just good journalism to give everyone in a story a chance
         | to defend their position, even if those opportunities are often
         | not taken up.
        
           | mensetmanusman wrote:
           | I have seen journalists give 24 hr to defend your position.
           | Many times it's zero time.
        
             | nullstyle wrote:
             | I think that's bad journalism
        
               | Magi604 wrote:
               | It is. Sometimes the writer will add "didn't respond
               | before press time" to give a little more context, but
               | most readers won't grasp what that could really mean
               | (like the reporter might have contacted them 15 mins
               | before press time)
        
               | sp0rk wrote:
               | Do you have any examples of stories where one of the
               | subjects was contacted, wanted to respond, but didn't
               | have enough time?
        
             | 9dev wrote:
             | Well they have to strike _some_ compromise between readers
             | expecting timely news and story subjects responding to
             | accusations, especially when they're competing against the
             | Joe Rogans of the world with no professional ethics
             | whatsoever.
        
             | brookst wrote:
             | 24 hours is reasonable. At the very least you can say "I
             | will provide a response but it will take 7 days" and they
             | can note that in the article and update later.
             | 
             | No time is usually reserved for breaking news. No outlet is
             | going to hold a story on today's building fire because the
             | fireworks factory owner deserves 24 hours to respond.
        
             | nailer wrote:
             | In the recent case between the actress and the film
             | director for ' it ends with us' one of the sides gave the
             | other a few hours to respond on the last working day of the
             | year.
        
               | rufus_foreman wrote:
               | Assuming the email released is genuine, ProPublica itself
               | recently sent a request for comment to someone by email
               | with the line "Our deadline is in one hour".
        
         | kylebenzle wrote:
         | The confusion comes from thinking these are organized groups
         | with a solid chain of command, author seems wildly uninformed.
         | 
         | Most are loose gatherings of people who like shooting guns
         | where people come and go week to week.
        
           | totallynothoney wrote:
           | The one who seems confused is you, the section in the article
           | talks about members themselves not some imaginary PR person.
        
       | a9i wrote:
       | The first paragraph seems to be an invitation to create your own
       | emergency procedure (mine would actually be less "wild"...).
        
         | CalChris wrote:
         | Yeah, I wouldn't include vitamins in lieu of more cash or
         | calories.
        
           | andrewflnr wrote:
           | You might if you were already in the habit of taking them. Or
           | if you were more worried about the quality of your future
           | food than having any. They don't take much space or weight,
           | so it's not that hard to include them.
        
         | dole wrote:
         | A "Bug Out Bag" is a pretty standard notion in the prepper and
         | survival communities, also handy for fleeing disasters and
         | power outages.
        
           | throwup238 wrote:
           | It's also recommended by CALFIRE in California:
           | https://readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-
           | wildfire/emergency-...
        
             | bee_rider wrote:
             | It seems like a good thing to have in general. A few days
             | of food? Good if society collapses... or also if you have a
             | real bad storm. Having it in a bag, eh, well why not,
             | right?
        
               | leptons wrote:
               | Earthquakes are a thing in California too, a very real
               | threat. Flooding in Southern California is something that
               | could happen too especially with climate change, and we
               | live right next to a major waterway. We have our
               | emergency kit in a very large thick rubber waterproof
               | bag. We also have water filtration devices in there.
               | Nobody I know is prepared as well as we are, not even a
               | little bit prepared.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | If society collapses, a few days of food is not going to
               | do too much for you except maybe delay the suffering by a
               | few days. If that's your intent for the bug out bag, you
               | might want to reconsider. If it's for getting out to
               | allow a natural disaster to subside, it's more than
               | probably a good idea
        
               | Loughla wrote:
               | We have prepared for disasters. 3 to 6 months of food
               | fuel and water for every member of the house and
               | livestock.
               | 
               | Everyone should have a week or two of supplies just in
               | case. Look at what happens during large scale natural
               | disasters. Prices go way up and supply goes way down. Why
               | bother with that?
               | 
               | But in a real society collapse situation, our plan is
               | much, much shorter term and much darker. That's just the
               | reality of the situation. Why starve and suffer when you
               | can just happily exit as a family in a way if your own
               | choosing?
        
               | bryanrasmussen wrote:
               | there are all sorts of levels of society collapsing,
               | probably the only ones where surviving the collapse means
               | delaying the inevitable by a few days are fictional
               | collapses, like Zombie apocalypse or similar.
        
               | bee_rider wrote:
               | That's true. I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek, but based
               | on multiple responses it didn't really go through. So,
               | unclear communication on my part.
               | 
               | Society collapsing was supposed to be the unlikely and
               | somewhat comical (in that it is a bit over-the-top)
               | motivator for people to do something prep that we should
               | do anyway.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _Good if society collapses_
               | 
               | If society actually collapses, you really don't want to
               | be the person with lots of highly-demanded resources.
        
               | mcsniff wrote:
               | You'd prefer to be one with none of the resources?
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _You 'd prefer to be one with none of the resources?_
               | 
               | Look at actual societal collapses. The starting position
               | of the resources within the map is almost irrelevant.
        
               | mcsniff wrote:
               | You do you, but I will keep my X months of food, water,
               | and warm shelter even it makes me a "target".
               | 
               | Besides, the first rule of being prepared, is you don't
               | talk about being prepared.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _I will keep my X months of food, water, and warm
               | shelter even it makes me a "target"_
               | 
               | As you should. For all of the things that can happen
               | between normal life and full societal collapse. The point
               | is, X months of anything is useless in that last case.
               | The only precedented way of evading death or poverty in
               | the wake of societal collapse is to get out.
               | 
               | > _you don 't talk about being prepared_
               | 
               | You're thinking of a zombie apocalypse film. Picture,
               | instead, the warlords and their armies in Sudan or
               | Ethiopia. Whether you talk about it is irrelevant. Your
               | home will be torn apart, and your body pressed into
               | service, irrespectively.
        
               | j-bos wrote:
               | Have you personally been through a major disaster?
               | Talking federal state of emergency declared, electrical
               | grid is down for weeks, data networks overcrowded,
               | shipments bottlenecked?
               | 
               | I ask because I see so much resistence to good prep
               | online but never from people who've been through
               | disasters.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | That's disaster prep. It's rational. Preparing for
               | society's collapse is not. (If you want to prepare for
               | society's collapse, what this article's protagonist
               | trains for is closer to what you want to master than
               | kitting out a glorified man cave.)
        
               | ben_w wrote:
               | A few days food is a normal kitchen cupboard -- singular
               | cupboard, not the whole kitchen.
               | 
               | A few weeks was what I kept ready during the pandemic,
               | just in case I got ill and didn't want to go shopping for
               | a fortnight. Plenty of natural disasters are in that kind
               | of range, even outside the pandemic.
               | 
               | Civilisation collapsing needs a stockpile of about
               | however many months it would take for you to turn your
               | garden into a residential farm and get to harvest season,
               | plus a bit for if that doesn't work... or if raccoons
               | steal in the night everything the ravens didn't steal in
               | the day.
        
               | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
               | > Civilisation collapsing needs a stockpile of about
               | however many months it would take for you to turn your
               | garden into a residential farm and get to harvest season,
               | plus a bit for if that doesn't work
               | 
               | So, to coin a phrase:                  how about never?
               | Does never work for you?
        
           | ocschwar wrote:
           | I don't want to stoke panic about violence, but the fact is
           | anything that you do that's prepper-adjacent is something you
           | should do anyway:
           | 
           | 1. prep your residence in can't you can't leave for days on
           | end - something you should do to prepare for h5n1.
           | 
           | 2. stock a bug out bag: most of you are in range of wild
           | fires. So you need to do it.
        
         | eagleinparadise wrote:
         | My family had to evacuate a few times due to fires. One of
         | them, the National Guard was outside my neighborhood helping to
         | coordinate the chaos. I'll never forget seeing Humvees right
         | outside _my_ neighborhood while the sky was blood red and full
         | of smoke. It was like a disaster scene out of a movie, except
         | real life. Not fun as a kid...
         | 
         | We barely were able to find a hotel to go to.
         | 
         | Afterwards, my dad kept 4-6 duffel bags full of water, first
         | aid, clothes, MREs/dry meals, and other gear so if we ever need
         | to get out of the place, we'd be ready.
         | 
         | So yes, it's a good idea to have some supplies ready because
         | you never know.
        
       | sitkack wrote:
       | > He moved to Las Vegas and, at the age of 25, became an officer
       | in the metro police. Kinch came to serve in elite detective units
       | over 23 years in the force, hunting fugitives and helping take
       | down gangs like the Playboy Bloods. Eventually he was assigned to
       | what he called the "Black squad," according to court records,
       | tasked with investigating violent crimes where the suspect was
       | African American. (A Las Vegas police spokesperson told me they
       | stopped "dividing squads by a suspect's race" a year before Kinch
       | retired.)
       | 
       | That is crazy, you'd think that would be illegal under the Civil
       | Rights Act. White criminals had a separate police force from
       | black ones.
        
         | chrsig wrote:
         | nah, not crazy. it's pretty crazy to think that sort of shit
         | _doesn 't_ happen.
        
         | whimsicalism wrote:
         | i can see why in highly segregated communities it might be more
         | effective to have detectives who know xyz about a certain
         | community, especially since criminal gangs tend to self-
         | associate by race/ethnicity
         | 
         | would a police group dedicated to investigating the mafia be a
         | violation of the civil rights act?
        
           | oivey wrote:
           | No, that would be ridiculous. An "Italian squad" might be,
           | though.
        
             | whimsicalism wrote:
             | any mafia squad back in the day was effectively an italian
             | squad
        
               | BadHumans wrote:
               | The details matter when talking about legalities. A group
               | of cops investigating a gang that happens to have a lot
               | of italian members is different than having a group of
               | cops that investigates italians.
        
               | oivey wrote:
               | And yet, it was never called that, right? It would have
               | been a Mafia task force, a task force against a
               | particular family, or a task force against organized
               | crime. You wouldn't call it an Italian task force because
               | you're probably hoping for help from the Italian-American
               | community to help catch the Mafiosos, and that naming
               | convention is pretty insulting to law abiding Italians-
               | Americans.
        
               | whimsicalism wrote:
               | i believe the nypd (before the civil rights era)
               | historically had an italian squad named precisely that
               | comprised mostly of italian-american officers
               | investigating italians in NYC
        
         | oceanplexian wrote:
         | It's a bona fide occupational qualification, it's completely
         | legal under the Civil Rights Act and works the same way if for
         | example Hollywood wants to hire a black actor or a Las Vegas
         | club wants to hire female dancers. If said discrimination is
         | necessary for a legitimate business function (And meets a
         | couple of tests) it's completely legal.
        
           | andyjohnson0 wrote:
           | > It's a bona fide occupational qualification, it's
           | completely legal under the Civil Rights Act and works the
           | same way if for example Hollywood wants to hire a black actor
           | or a Las Vegas club wants to hire female dancers.
           | 
           | I think you've misunderstood. It's clear from the article
           | that the "Black squad" was so named because it specialised in
           | investigating suspects who were Black, not because the
           | officers in it were themselves Black.
        
             | nailer wrote:
             | I imagine the officers best at investigating black crime
             | would either be black or have good contacts within that
             | community.
        
               | andyjohnson0 wrote:
               | In this case the article says that the former member of
               | the squad, Kinch, described himself in a Facebook post as
               | being White.
        
               | g-b-r wrote:
               | Or be racist
        
               | daseiner1 wrote:
               | That doesn't follow at all, unless you're following the
               | standard "assume racism from whites" line.
               | 
               | Black cops have similar brutality rates to white cops
               | even against minority populations, for the record.
               | 
               | Some will point to some amorphous internalized systemic
               | racism, others will point to population traits like black
               | folk wondering "why they have to be more polite to cops",
               | while white folk know that "i should be polite to cops".
               | Victimhood narrative wins elections in cities, though.
        
               | mindslight wrote:
               | A lack of "being polite" does not justify state
               | sanctioned extrajudicial punishment, as your victimhood
               | narrative implies. Sure, be polite to cops because you
               | should be polite in general until someone gives you a
               | reason not to be. And from a social engineering
               | standpoint you get better results by being friendly. But
               | as a rule one should be able to be rude to police
               | officers in any way one can be rude to any other citizen,
               | and if they attack you for it they should be the ones
               | going to jail, like any other citizen. Public employees
               | tasked with upholding law and order need to be shining
               | examples of it, not hypocritically exempt from it.
        
               | michaelcampbell wrote:
               | > Uh, a lack of "being polite" does not justify state
               | sanctioned extrajudicial punishment.
               | 
               | In theory, but we're dealing with humans here.
        
               | atmavatar wrote:
               | The existence of black cops and their similar treatment
               | of minorities does not eliminate the possibility of there
               | being racism.
               | 
               | For example, there are documented cases of emancipated
               | black slaves becoming slave owners themselves prior to
               | the Civil War, some of whom were known to be at least as
               | brutal with their slaves as their white peers.
               | 
               | I suspect it comes down to individuals identifying
               | themselves as being part of a new tribe (e.g., cops),
               | allowing them to treat members of their former tribe (by
               | race) as "others". The degree to which they mistreat
               | their former tribe likely stems from how their new tribe
               | perceives the old one (i.e. many cops believe they are
               | above "civilians" and especially minorities).
               | 
               | That is ultimately the core of racism.
               | 
               | This has been demonstrated repeatedly in simple classroom
               | experiments where children are divided into two groups
               | based upon some arbitrary characteristic (e.g., eye
               | color, clothing, or even some new identifier passed out
               | to them) and quickly displaying camaraderie within their
               | own group while antagonizing members of the other group.
        
           | dragonwriter wrote:
           | > It's a bona fide occupational qualification
           | 
           | A BFOQ can only apply to private hiring discrimination, not
           | "having a separate police force when you are suspected of a
           | crime based on race" discrimination. It's not employment
           | rights at issue, so occupational qualifications are not
           | relevant.
           | 
           | OTOH, the issue here is probably more 14th Amendment equal
           | protection than statutory rights.
           | 
           | On the gripping hand, American police departments having
           | racist practices that are internally well-known, and not
           | being held accountable for them is..not at all surprising.
        
           | sitkack wrote:
           | Black Squad refers to who they are investigating, not the
           | officers themselves.
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | Is Williams black? I can see the argument for having black
         | officers investigate black criminals, particularly if they're
         | enterprises requiring infiltration.
        
           | g-b-r wrote:
           | The black squad member was Bobby Kinch, "American, Christian,
           | White, Heterosexual"
        
         | cperciva wrote:
         | It's unfortunate, certainly, but it's probably very useful for
         | police to have knowledge of and experience with the communities
         | they're policing. In Canada police officers who are expected to
         | work with indigenous communities often get special training to
         | familiarize them with those cultures.
        
           | UncleEntity wrote:
           | Sure, you (presumably) want the police to be sensitive to
           | cultural issues -- the problem is you can't use skin color as
           | an indicator of inclusion in a cultural group.
           | 
           | I was watching an interview the other day from one of the
           | Tuskegee Airmen and just going by his physical appearance he
           | looked as "European" as I do.
        
         | mmooss wrote:
         | From the OP:
         | 
         | > A Las Vegas police spokesperson told me they stopped
         | "dividing squads by a suspect's race" a year before Kinch
         | retired.
         | 
         | and later:
         | 
         | > In 2016, he turned in his badge, a year after the saga broke
         | in the local press.
         | 
         | If all those facts are consistent, they had a 'Black squad'
         | until 2015.
         | 
         | Edit: An aside in an article and piecing together facts that
         | were not necessarily intended to be consistent can result in
         | bad misunderstandings. We need more information to understand
         | it.
         | 
         | But at the same time, let's be careful about proceeding like
         | scientists and making the null hypothesis 'it wasn't racist' or
         | even 'there isn't racism', requiring 99.9% certainty. That's
         | one way members of the status quo perpetuate bad things, even
         | without meaning to. It's a rationalization ('I'm thinking about
         | this scientifically!') for plain old self-serving bias - I'm
         | innocent of anything until there are scientific levels of
         | proof, and then I'll still keep questioning it and probably
         | just refuse to believe it. It's an impossible mountain to
         | climb; in those discussions, the status quo will never agree.
         | 
         | There are other approaches, such as a preponderance of
         | evidence, to borrow the legal term.
        
         | Applejinx wrote:
         | I'm white as heck but I wouldn't think that for a single
         | moment. I know enough black Americans and enough about policing
         | that I'm unsurprised. Also, I would categorize the
         | spokesperson's response as 'PR' and an expected claim, which is
         | not the same thing as an accurate claim.
         | 
         | As near as I can tell Black Lives Matter did not arise out of
         | some sort of spite or radicalism, but out of the conditions
         | Kinch's stated experience suggests. This pretty well
         | contradicts the Civil Rights Act, something Kinch's stated
         | experience also suggests.
        
       | vlovich123 wrote:
       | > Sowing that distrust is why Williams is going on the record,
       | albeit without his original name
       | 
       | I don't understand this. There's an insane level of detail here
       | that if true immediately reveals his identity to those involved.
       | How does withholding his name change anything?
       | 
       | > On March 20... He'd helped persuade Seddon and his lieutenants
       | to fire the head of AP3's Utah chapter and to install Williams in
       | his place.
        
         | vasco wrote:
         | Do you know his name after reading the article?
        
           | vlovich123 wrote:
           | I am not the one that would be a threat to his life or have
           | context to reverse engineer his identity.
        
             | alamortsubite wrote:
             | You aren't the only one who may read the article.
        
         | giraffe_lady wrote:
         | I am guessing that his threat model includes people involved in
         | these militias (or others) but who he didn't interact with
         | directly. It probably also includes action by people merely
         | _sympathetic_ to them, for example maybe local law enforcement.
         | 
         | There can be a difference between revealing identity to some
         | and revealing it to all. I'm not sure how much difference there
         | is in this case specifically but it's not my life, not my call.
        
         | bee_rider wrote:
         | I wonder if he also infiltrated under a fake name (possibly the
         | same fake name).
         | 
         | I think the "albeit" is just an aside. It isn't necessarily
         | enhancing his ability to create distrust. It is slightly
         | confusing though because one could of course imagine a way of
         | writing the report anonymously that would add additional
         | distrust; if he was vague enough it could be hard for anybody
         | to know that he wasn't talking about their organization. But
         | he'd have to be pretty vague.
        
         | not_alexb wrote:
         | Those details are not necessarily _his_ firsthand account of
         | things. I mean, in your own comment you quote something where
         | Williams is posing as something else in order to take someone
         | else down, why should it be any different in the case of
         | providing these details?
        
           | vlovich123 wrote:
           | Because the journalist is claiming to have validated the
           | elements of the story. If the journalist is also lying about
           | that or intentionally helping their source in lying that's a
           | huge breach of public trust and should be immediately
           | blacklisted from working as such in the future. There are
           | other ways the source could be protected without actually
           | lying about things they're claiming are true.
        
             | Applejinx wrote:
             | I don't think that source can really be protected, nor does
             | he expect to be. He's pretty clear on 'I want the militias
             | to know what I did and to live in fear that anybody they
             | trust could be another me, ready to betray them'.
             | 
             | To some extent, the FBI has at least sometimes done just
             | this. It's possible that some new leader like Kash Patel
             | can remove the threat of the FBI infiltrating and betraying
             | militias, but then what about moles infiltrating the FBI
             | once they become effectively the same thing as the
             | militias?
             | 
             | There's a fundamental difference between acting as a law
             | enforcement agency, and acting as a militia seeking to wage
             | secret war on a class of citizens, where if your intent is
             | to STOP various humans from planting bombs etc. you're
             | acting like law enforcement, and if your intent is to plant
             | the bombs you are the militia even if you're wearing a law
             | enforcement name.
             | 
             | This is shown in the struggles of the mole: would've been
             | morally easier for him if he was just looking to rack up a
             | body count. He wanted to protect what he saw as innocents,
             | and so he had to calculate to what extent his infiltration
             | was causing collateral damage, and when he acted on that he
             | fled, cover blown as far as he knew. If he was more
             | interested in just body count he might have been more blase
             | about how things were going.
        
       | MontagFTB wrote:
       | I don't understand the lack of interest by journalists. What more
       | did Williams need to do the first time he reached out to garner
       | interest? Does ProPublica overestimate the seriousness of the
       | militia movement? I'd think based on J6 the journalists ignoring
       | Williams' communications should have paid attention.
        
         | zzzeek wrote:
         | I dont think journalists really find J6 to be important at all.
         | Even left leaning journalists pay lip service to it but shrugs,
         | buncha white dudes blowing off steam I think is how "everyone"
         | sees this. As evidence, look at the election we just had.
         | 
         | It reminds me of how the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993.
         | Oh, that was scary, well, whatever, the dudes in jail, shrugs.
         | Because it failed to bring the building down. For me, I was
         | like, holy crap people are trying to blow up the WTC arent they
         | going to.... _keep trying_? but that 's just not how people
         | think. Super scary thing that failed == ho hum.
        
           | wat10000 wrote:
           | Or, pertinent to the subject at hand, how the Oklahoma City
           | bombing was tied to the right wing militia movement and
           | they're still mostly seen as, well, a bunch of white dudes
           | blowing off steam like you said. In that case, it seems like
           | people saw that they got the perpetrators and that's that,
           | not considering what sort of circumstances produced them and
           | where it might go in the future.
           | 
           | And WTC and OKC were (at least somewhat) successful attacks!
           | J6 caused damage but failed. We're _really_ bad at taking
           | failed attempts seriously.
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | A big factor in the OKC, J6, and militia movement and White
             | nationalist violence more generally is that the law
             | enforcement community in the US has very significant
             | overlap with the militia and White nationalist movements,
             | impacting how seriously they are treated by law
             | enforcement, and how seriously they are treated by
             | journalists who rely on experts from within the law
             | enforcement community (both current officers and private
             | experts that are the same people relied on as outside
             | experts by law enforcement and are usually ex-law
             | enforcement) for their understanding of the issues.
        
               | josh_frome wrote:
               | "Some of those that work forces..." indeed.
        
               | sitkack wrote:
               | If BLM had attempted what J6 actually did, it would have
               | made Kent State look like a Simpson's episode.
        
               | LudwigNagasena wrote:
               | Seattle allowed BLM protesters to establish their own
               | "autonomous zone" and ignored it until enough kids were
               | killed.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _ignored it until enough kids were killed_
               | 
               | From overdoses, right? Sort of different from terrorism
               | in many meaningful ways.
        
               | lazyasciiart wrote:
               | No, shooting. I don't think it was a meaningfully
               | different rate than other weeks in Capitol Hill, but
               | firefighters failing to render first aid certainly didn't
               | help that one kid who was dying a couple hundred yards
               | from a fire station. (The crowd wouldn't let a police car
               | through, and it turns out the firefighters wouldn't
               | approach until the police were there and said it was
               | safe).
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _firefighters failing to render first aid certainly
               | didn't help that one kid who was dying a couple hundred
               | yards from a fire station_
               | 
               | Still not terrorism. Left-wing militias are certainly a
               | problem in some parts of the world. They aren't in
               | America. Our domestic terrorism comes almost exclusively
               | from radical Islam and right-wing nutjobs. (Who, somewhat
               | hilariously, see eye to eye on more than they realise.)
        
               | roenxi wrote:
               | I suspect you're classifying the Trump assassins as
               | right-wing nutjobs though (they weren't Islamists), which
               | dilutes the position somewhat. What does right-wing even
               | mean to you if it covers people trying to gun Trump down?
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _suspect you 're classifying the Trump assassins as
               | right-wing nutjobs_
               | 
               | No. Of course we've had left-wing terrorism. It's just
               | not been as prevalent, organised or present as the right-
               | wing form. (And I'm aware of zero currently-operating
               | left-wing militias anyone considers a threat in America.)
        
               | derektank wrote:
               | There were 5 shootings resulting in 3 deaths over a
               | period of 9 days (20-29 June). CHAZ/CHOP existed for a
               | period of 23 days (8 June - 1 July). There were 33
               | homicides in the entire city of Seattle in 2019. No
               | matter how you slice it, there was definitely an increase
               | in the murder rate around the protests, potentially much
               | higher.
               | 
               | And a piece with the increase in homicides, Mayor Durkan
               | reported that SPD had received a 525% increase in
               | reported crimes in the area when compared to the previous
               | June. Obviously not all of the crime was committed by
               | protestors, but the protestors were the ones that drove
               | out the police presence and the city tolerated the
               | situation created by the protestors for nearly a month.
               | Regardless of whether the situation is best described as
               | domestic terrorism or not, it's clear that public
               | officials were willing to tolerate violence enabled by
               | left wing protestors "letting off steam" too.
        
               | roenxi wrote:
               | You should have included a link to be unambiguous: https:
               | //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Hill_Occupied_Protest
               | 
               | It was quite a spectacle.
        
             | mnky9800n wrote:
             | didn't timothy mcveigh also say that it was specifically a
             | retaliation for waco?
        
             | treis wrote:
             | I don't think these right wing militias are that much of a
             | threat. They're mostly LARPers and have enough attachment
             | to their groups to not do the radical violence.
             | Historically the right wingers that have actually committed
             | violence are the ones that can't even find belonging in the
             | right wing militias.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | They're essentially the US' guerilla forces that we see
               | in other countries that cause foreign forces operating in
               | their land to get stuck in a quagmire. They may not be
               | undefeatable, but they'll be able to put up a helluva
               | show enough to make the opfor to question their
               | commitment. Probably long enough to sway public opinion
               | as well.
               | 
               | Dismiss them at your own peril. The FBI did
        
             | SoftTalker wrote:
             | They were also well planned and intentional. J6 seemed much
             | more like spur-of-the-moment mob action, at least from my
             | armchair.
        
               | x86_64Ubuntu wrote:
               | But it wasn't, I remember seeing people on Facebook
               | talking about J6 before it happened. It's kind of weird
               | to see the minimization of J6 in real time.
        
               | ericjmorey wrote:
               | I think your comment is a direct reflection of the lack
               | of popular coverage and discussion of January 6th. It was
               | planned for prior to the election as a contingency.
               | There's clear and direct evidence of that fact and
               | there's very little awareness of that fact.
        
               | LPisGood wrote:
               | There were groups with guns and boats ready to resupply
               | an insurgency.
        
               | dotancohen wrote:
               | Do you have a credible source that I could read about
               | that? Thank you.
        
               | thinkcontext wrote:
               | https://apnews.com/article/capitol-siege-florida-
               | virginia-co...
        
               | djeastm wrote:
               | There were several organized groups of people among the
               | mob who went prepared for it to go much differently and
               | stoked the flames. I shudder to think what would have
               | happened if they made it to the chamber before the
               | Representatives and Senators got out.
        
               | zzzeek wrote:
               | that's what they wanted it to look like. plenty of
               | evidence aired at the congressional hearings showing this
               | was a highly planned act
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | After OKC, the FBI turned the eye of sauron upon the
             | militias. Then 9/11 happened, and white guys in the woods
             | were suddenly less scary than non-white guy and the eye of
             | sauron was no longer looking at the white guys in the
             | woods.
             | 
             | > We're really bad at taking failed attempts seriously.
             | 
             | To that point, Osama bin Laden had multiple attempts
             | attacking the WTC. They realized that it was going to take
             | a lot more than a car bomb to take down those buildings and
             | made improved plans from a car bomb. Which is just some of
             | the data pointed to by those that are unbelieving that a
             | truck bomb was the sole cause of OKC.
        
         | lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote:
         | It's sort of alluded to but I suspect journalists get a whole
         | lot of false tips from various mentally unhealthy folk, which
         | perhaps appear much like Williams' in this story.
        
           | wat10000 wrote:
           | Yeah, being contacted by someone who's on a bespoke
           | undercover mission in right-wing militias is huge. Being
           | contacted by someone who's _says_ they are is another matter.
        
             | sitkack wrote:
             | We don't know how the initial attempts at contact were
             | presented. I can see it being extremely difficult to get
             | someones attention. If how seemingly technical people ask
             | for assistance on net forums is any indication, unless has
             | someone has the skill of a reporter in presenting
             | information, a string of signal messages with, "contact me,
             | I have important information on XYZ" isn't going to cut it.
        
             | SilasX wrote:
             | Exactly. That's precisely the angle someone would use if
             | they were trying to hoax or embarrass your publication.
        
         | Applejinx wrote:
         | He might have been reaching out to journalists working for
         | outlets that run cover for this militia movement. Based on J6
         | and subsequent developments in the justice system, there are
         | media outlets cooperating with those authorities that
         | downplay/join the militia movement.
         | 
         | This is an important side-light on the concept that media
         | sources are 'grifting' and only interested in what will make
         | them money. It's surprisingly common for media sources to turn
         | away from stories that could be sensational and give them
         | money, but at the expense of a cause (such as these
         | paramilitaries) which someone at the media source supports.
         | 
         | In that case, the person at the media source making decisions
         | will understand that the story is sensational and attention-
         | getting, but will quash it because to run the story would be
         | hurting the paramilitaries...
        
         | cavisne wrote:
         | Reading the article he found nothing right?
        
           | dole wrote:
           | He found and could verify militia connections between various
           | law enforcement, local and state government officials.
        
             | cavisne wrote:
             | The report identified (but didn't directly) name 1 sheriff.
             | Assuming its the current sheriff, a quick google of his
             | background + the fact that he "facilitated" the militia
             | members FBI interview gives a pretty strong hint why
             | mainstream media would not pick up this story.
        
         | ADeerAppeared wrote:
         | Besides the things other comments mentioned: There is a
         | longstanding sentiment that "It can't happen here".
         | 
         | The wider public in America more or less blocks out the risks
         | involved. "They're not _actually_ going to blow up the power
         | grid. "
         | 
         | Hell, just look at the tech industry. Endless whining about not
         | needing to be regulated, and what have they done? Built an
         | enormous surveilance machine, lead by executives who
         | preemptively kowtow to any authoritarian leader. Europe's
         | attempt to regulate this is still angrily opposed by heaps,
         | even on this very site.
        
           | toss1 wrote:
           | Yup
           | 
           | Normalcy bias -- it's an absolute killer. The same cognitive
           | failure that has people in a fire thinking it's "just part of
           | the show", or "just something in the kitchen", until it is
           | too late, and panic overtakes everyone. I've never seen a
           | story of a fire where someone in the situation said "I wasn't
           | sure what was going on, but it didn't seem good so I left
           | early, I'm alive because I did!".
           | 
           | Normalcy bias can kill us all if we aren't careful.
        
           | refulgentis wrote:
           | Thanks for writing this: things are quite askew right now for
           | various reasons, and it was unexpectedly affirming to hear
           | someone say it loud.
           | 
           | Until now I would have said this is an extreme minority view,
           | even though it's quite obvious and aligns with the core
           | values I've seen on this site over the last 15 years, and
           | thus presumed were tech in general's view.
           | 
           | Maybe I just need to get off X, the Everything App(tm), 90%
           | of my news consumption and commentary is through there.
        
             | rcruzeiro wrote:
             | Come to Bluesky. It's not perfect, but neither was twitter
             | 10 year ago. Bluesky feels a bit like that.
        
               | jajko wrote:
               | As somebody who successfully avoided twitter stuff my
               | whole life - whats the lure of this? Following some folks
               | reading some random brainfarts is not how I imagine
               | spending my time, and that's all I can see on this. Maybe
               | I have just different type of personality than target
               | audience.
               | 
               | Or is it so addictive like social networks seem to be?
        
             | daveguy wrote:
             | Yes, you should definitely leave X. It is a cesspool of
             | rage bait.
        
         | jibe wrote:
         | Because as low as most journalist's standard are, Williams is
         | below that low standard. Though good enough for Pro Publica. He
         | is an erratic, ex-con, who seems to be mentally unstable. Did
         | you believe the puppy story?
        
           | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
           | If the journalist really verified the audio recordings I
           | believe it. Faking so many hours of audio from multiple
           | people is still difficult. I mean, you could do it with AI
           | voices, but I doubt that's the case
        
         | timewizard wrote:
         | > the journalists ignoring Williams' communications
         | 
         | It's because just accepting a prepackaged story like this from
         | a single source would completely fail to meet the standards of
         | journalism.
        
         | nostromo wrote:
         | Because his story barely passes the sniff test.
         | 
         | He just up and joined a bunch of radical militias that he
         | strongly disagrees with? I mean... maybe. But you'd of course
         | be very suspicious of everything he says and his motives for
         | coming forward.
        
         | Animats wrote:
         | > Does ProPublica overestimate the seriousness of the militia
         | movement?
         | 
         | Unclear. Depends on how supportive of it Trump is. He might
         | legitimize it by pardoning the Jan. 6 attackers. Many of them
         | thought they were acting on Trump's orders, after all. There
         | was one platoon-sized Proud Boys unit on Jan. 6th that showed
         | military organization and discipline. The rest were just a mob.
         | 
         | Having a private army of goons can be useful. That's what the
         | SA was in the Nazi era. The SA was a big organization, 20x the
         | size of the German army at peak. Eventually, it was put down
         | once Hitler was firmly in power. See "Night of the Long
         | Knives".[1] Other countries have been through this. Sometimes
         | the goons ended up in charge, or at least as a large faction to
         | be kept happy.
         | 
         | This is often seen after internal unrest that yields a large,
         | restless, armed group. Germany got there by losing WWI, but not
         | being crushed. Haiti is a classic example. Afghanistan seems to
         | have gone down this road - all those former "fighters" have to
         | be fed and kept busy.
         | 
         | The closest the US came was the "Bonus Army" camped out on the
         | Mall after WWI, demanding a bonus for veterans.[2] The Bonus
         | Army had 17,000 veteran soldiers, and some political and police
         | support. Eventually they were forcibly dispersed.
         | 
         | US militias don't match any of those classic situations.
         | They're mostly wannabees. If you encounter militia types, ask
         | them if all their members use the same ammo. If not, they're a
         | rabble, not an army.
         | 
         | Do we get to see the actual documents the original author talks
         | about?
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Long_Knives
         | 
         | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army
        
       | mjfl wrote:
       | The moles are leading the militias, what are you talking about -
       | 'infiltrated'? Enirque Tarrio was an FBI informant the entire
       | time before he was arrested.
        
       | jamestimmins wrote:
       | This post makes me wonder why videos of militias training always
       | look so farcical.
       | 
       | Practically, why are there not militia groups with Navy
       | SEAL/Delta-level tactical abilities? Or at least near to that? Is
       | it personnel selection effects or bc that level of training
       | requires time/money investments that are out of the reach of non-
       | professional organizations?
        
         | AnimalMuppet wrote:
         | In think it's personnel selection.
         | 
         | I think the militias don't get the top-of-the-line retired
         | military people. They get the wannabes, the people who love the
         | _trappings_ of being tough and deadly, without the actual
         | skills or training. Putting on my amateur psychologist 's hat,
         | I'd guess that the militia types mostly washed out in the
         | military, but are still looking for what they went into the
         | military to try to find - a sense of belonging and identity.
         | 
         | The real SEAL/Delta level people don't go into a militia to try
         | to find that - they found it for real in the real military.
        
           | mmooss wrote:
           | The love of military-style vests (and of the word 'tactical')
           | seems like a signal.
        
             | ckcheng wrote:
             | > seems like a signal
             | 
             | Also "mil-spec", and in a totally different context i.e.
             | big box retail, "contractor grade".
             | 
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_grade
        
             | dole wrote:
             | More often plate carriers and body armor, mag holders and
             | other "operator" gear than just military syyle vests.
             | "tacticool" is the ironic label given to overtly "tactical"
             | gear.
        
             | ben_w wrote:
             | During the pandemic, I was wondering why I never saw
             | "military grade" or "tactical" masks.
             | 
             | I guess not enough of an overlap between anyone anti-mask
             | and any convenient promotional memes.
        
           | jamestimmins wrote:
           | This is a good point, and the emphasis on belonging aligns
           | with the article.
           | 
           | A trope of many action/thriller movies is groups of top-notch
           | professionals becoming disenchanted with democracy and
           | forming terrorist organizations. While movies aren't reality,
           | it's striking that even watered-down versions almost never
           | seem to happen. Maybe the military is just that good at
           | filtering out those types during psychological testing, or
           | maybe belonging is far more important than ideology.
        
             | otoburb wrote:
             | >> _Maybe the military is just that good at filtering out
             | those types during psychological testing, or maybe
             | belonging is far more important than ideology._
             | 
             | The more mundane reason is probably because it's more
             | appealing to use those skills to enter law enforcement or
             | become a private military contractor than knowingly and
             | overtly breaking away from society to form and maintain an
             | organization that uses violence to achieve specific
             | political aims.
        
           | ylk wrote:
           | What you write sounds plausible at first, but then there's
           | this example from the German KSK:
           | 
           | ,,In 2018, the German Federal Criminal Police Office
           | uncovered a plot involving unknown KSK soldiers to murder
           | prominent German politicians such as Claudia Roth, Heiko Maas
           | and Joachim Gauck among others, and carry out attacks against
           | immigrants living in Germany.[7] Also, earlier that same year
           | in a separate investigation, the State prosecutors in the
           | city of Tubingen investigated whether neo-Nazi symbols were
           | used at a "farewell" event involving members of KSK.[8][9]
           | 
           | In June 2020, German defence minister Annegret Kramp-
           | Karrenbauer announced that the unit would be partially
           | disbanded due to growing far-right extremism within the
           | ranks.[10] The KSK had become partially independent from the
           | chain of command, with a toxic leadership culture. One of the
           | force's four companies where extremism is said to be the most
           | rife was to be dissolved and not replaced.[11]"
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kommando_Spezialkr%C3%A4fte
        
         | ocschwar wrote:
         | > Practically, why are there not militia groups with Navy
         | SEAL/Delta-level tactical abilities?
         | 
         | Because SEAL/Delta units are made up of statistical outliers
         | who can keep their cortisol levels low under conditions that
         | 99% of us absolutely cannot.
        
         | mmooss wrote:
         | Possibly those with real abilities have the discipline to not
         | publicise it in videos.
         | 
         | Also, in experience with self-organized volunteer organizations
         | in different fields (not militias, etc.), the lack of
         | discipline, organization, motivation, just basic thought is
         | often shocking. The dysfunction can be overwhelming. I'm not
         | surprised that very few have developed real capabilities.
         | 
         | > Navy SEAL/Delta-level
         | 
         | Maybe you didn't mean it literally, but that is a pretty high
         | standard. It's like asking why you don't see local basketball
         | players with NBA-level ability. 99.x% of military personnel,
         | with years of training and experience, don't reach those
         | levels.
        
           | jamestimmins wrote:
           | You bring up some interesting points. The publicizing side of
           | things makes sense. Although given how often you hear about
           | ex-military, police, etc, members in groups like these, I'd
           | still expect that we'd see a handful of criminal/terrorist
           | activities taken out by highly competent groups, even if it's
           | unclear who it is.
           | 
           | But that may get back to your point about discipline,
           | motivation, intelligence, etc.
           | 
           | Re SEAL/Delta-level: I guess I'm asking two distinct
           | questions.
           | 
           | 1) To use your basketball analogy: while NBA-level skills may
           | be an unreasonable expectation, why do the videos seem to
           | show middle school or JV-level competence? I'd expect that D3
           | college-level competence wouldn't be super difficult, but
           | evidently that isn't a correct assumption.
           | 
           | 2) What is the practical requirement for a world-class
           | tactical unit (or near that level, e.g. D1 basketball or a
           | bad pro team)? I wouldn't expect current militias to be at
           | that level, but what about less developed nation-states?
        
             | cj wrote:
             | The simplest explanation is that it's possible, but there
             | isn't an obvious ROI for having a highly trained tactical
             | team.
             | 
             | Highly trained tactical teams are useful for precision
             | strikes. Most goals of a militia don't require that much
             | precision, if I had to guess.
        
               | abracadaniel wrote:
               | Also, having that level of skill makes you valuable. You
               | could probably earn a decent wage and therefore have more
               | to lose and be less likely to use or want to pass on
               | those skills for free. If you have the skill, you're
               | probably not desperate enough to use it. If you're
               | desperate enough to use those skills, you probably can't
               | afford to learn them.
        
               | mmooss wrote:
               | A very good point. Also, if you are a professional, few
               | things are more frustrating that working with amateurs.
               | Mostly you are wasting time, trying to prevent
               | fundamental mistakes, and failing.
        
             | mcmcmc wrote:
             | 1) Opsec is synonymous with survival to elite warfighters,
             | so again you will rarely if ever see them in PR videos.
             | Then think about the video production resources available
             | to actual militaries versus homegrown militia. Appearing
             | competent on video is a different matter from actually
             | being competent.
             | 
             | 2) World class units require world class funding. Training
             | and equipment are not cheap. The amount of money spent on
             | the military by the US government is a big factor in
             | tactical superiority, not just for the front-line units
             | themselves, but also the massive amount of logistics it
             | takes for them to operate at that elite level anywhere on
             | the planet at the drop of a hat.
        
             | mmooss wrote:
             | > What is the practical requirement for a world-class
             | tactical unit (or near that level, e.g. D1 basketball or a
             | bad pro team)? I wouldn't expect current militias to be at
             | that level, but what about less developed nation-states?
             | 
             | One common form of US military aid is training elite units
             | in partner militaries, often in less developed countries.
             | This has an evil history, training death squads and other
             | war criminals, knowingly or unknowingly. It also has a
             | cost-effective and good history, training Ukraine's elite
             | units, for example.
             | 
             | (My impression is that it's a cost-effective compromise
             | solution to a very difficult, expensive problem: The
             | institutions of militaries are sometimes highly corrupt and
             | incompetent; the Afghan military is an example. Fixing that
             | problem would require building a new military, which could
             | take 20 years at great cost and may be impossible: The
             | corruption usually comes from the government, whose
             | corruption comes from elites and from society-wide
             | political problems.)
             | 
             | You can find some competent people and create a small,
             | isolated organization, and train and equip them, and do it
             | cost-effectively. The Afghan military was hopeless; their
             | elite units were reportedly very good.
        
         | otoburb wrote:
         | In addition to the prohibitive cost and effort to setup and
         | maintain such a program, I believe all 50 states have laws on
         | the books that make it illegal to organize and train in
         | military tactics without prior authorization from the state.[1]
         | 
         | [1] https://www.law.georgetown.edu/icap/wp-
         | content/uploads/sites...
        
           | michaelcampbell wrote:
           | Perhaps, but do you think these groups would NOT train just
           | because of some state law?
           | 
           | It feels like the "no scammers" thing you see on Craigslist
           | ads; as if some scammer would say, "Darn, and I was really
           | hoping to cash in on THIS one; I guess I'm out."
        
             | otoburb wrote:
             | >> _[...]but do you think these groups would NOT train just
             | because of some state law?_
             | 
             | To your point, the groups will likely continue to train
             | (seemingly illegally), but the _quality_ of the groups will
             | definitely be degraded due to the more limited pool of
             | qualified trainers driven by the presumably high-deterrence
             | of state laws. The original comment above asked why we don
             | 't see high(er) performing militia groups, and these types
             | of state laws seem like a strong contributing factor.
        
           | rekttrader wrote:
           | Ah yes, the law... sworn enemy of the militia.
        
           | timewizard wrote:
           | The law doesn't say that at all. They're not allowed to
           | perform law enforcement _functions_. There's nothing that
           | prevents them from /training/ to do so.
        
         | rtpg wrote:
         | My two bit understanding is that militias are mostly LARPing
         | (in a very open sense)? And it's not like they have a giant
         | candidate pool
         | 
         | Probably important to consider that everything you know about
         | SEALs etc are filtered through a massive PR system anyways. So
         | you might not be comparing the same level of quality of video
         | either. Good editing can do wonders.
        
           | hylaride wrote:
           | > everything you know about SEALs etc are filtered through a
           | massive PR system anyways.
           | 
           | I saw a joke about Navy Seals awhile ago that went something
           | like:
           | 
           | A Navy Seal and a Delta Force operator are chatting in a bar.
           | The Navy Seal immediately starts talking and bragging for
           | hours about all the amazing things he and other Seals have
           | done. The entire time the Delta Force operator smiles and
           | nods.
        
         | basementcat wrote:
         | The cost of training "special forces" personnel is likely
         | beyond the financial capabilities of militia type
         | organizations.
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy_SEAL_sele...
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Boat_Service#Recruit...
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranger_School
        
           | nobodywillobsrv wrote:
           | Exactly. And defense against tyranny is a legitimate thing.
           | Militia's are not really special. It's unclear what it even
           | means given many things are legal in the US.
        
         | Simon_O_Rourke wrote:
         | > This post makes me wonder why videos of militias training
         | always look so farcical.
         | 
         | This exactly - a few 300-pound dudes taking a break from their
         | McDonalds to look like they really mean it by firing long
         | barrelled weapons at some cardboard target. All this escape and
         | evasion training, with all the wilderness stuff too - it's
         | nonsense, little guys playing soldier is all.
        
           | VeejayRampay wrote:
           | this is that guy bringing his tactical knife to the forest
           | and putting wax in a can to light a fire for a
           | "bushcraft/survivalist" YouTube video, but in group
        
         | timewizard wrote:
         | It's a volunteer organization. They all have the exact same
         | problem because they don't actively select their members.
        
         | AzzyHN wrote:
         | A large part of the FBI's job is to shut these militias down.
         | You can't grow a resistance movement without making some noise,
         | and the US government is obviously very keen on maintaining the
         | status quo.
         | 
         | Examples from the past are easy to come by (COINTELPRO), but a
         | recent example would be the failed 2020 kidnapping plot of
         | Gretchen Whitmer, the Governor of Michigan at the time.
         | 
         | Thirteen arrests were announced, and the FBI has admitted to
         | using three informants and two special agents. The defense
         | argued that there were at least twelve.
         | 
         | Using the official number as a conservative guess, that's still
         | 5 feds for 13 arrests (a 38% ratio!)
         | 
         | Now imagine if instead of 13 dudes trying to kidnap a governor,
         | it was a local militia trying to arm and train hundreds or
         | thousands of people. The full power of the US government to
         | crush opposition is terrifying.
        
         | indymike wrote:
         | > why are there not militia groups with Navy SEAL/Delta-level
         | tactical abilities?
         | 
         | Let's set aside talent, access to experience trainers,
         | facilities and equipment and just look at time on task: real
         | special forces operators spend 30-60 hours per week, 48 weeks a
         | year (assuming 4 weeks of leave) working on their craft.
         | Finding people that can put that kind of time in would be rare.
         | 
         | When you look at the other factors, the gap widens.
         | 
         | So if the militia doesn't hold a candle to the SEALs the why do
         | they matter? Because of modern point and shoot repeating and
         | guided weapons. We're seeing that in how the Russians are
         | taking people off the streets and out of prisons, giving 1-3
         | week of training and throwing them at the Ukrainians. We saw
         | that with the Ukrainians when they stopped huge Russian armored
         | columns with man-portable anti-tank missiles. Bullets,
         | grenades, ATGMs and drones really don't care about the
         | experience level of their target. Artillery, even portable
         | stuff like a pack mortar or repeating grenade launcher takes
         | out any Spetznaz or Rangers in the general area you aim at just
         | like it does any other soldier. The age of the super-proficient
         | ended with the US Civil war: the revolver, repeating rifle and
         | machine gun level skill gaps pretty quickly..
        
         | VeejayRampay wrote:
         | because if you have the mentality and resolve to produce SEAL-
         | levels of ability, you don't end up in loser militias, you
         | become a SEAL
        
       | lifeisstillgood wrote:
       | I remember re-watching "three days of the condor" recently - and
       | apart from a few "wow the 70s was a different time" moments the
       | biggest takeaway was the hero just hands a dossier to the
       | Washington Post, no _drops off a dossier to the post room!_ , and
       | the film, the audience, everyone just assumes the job is done -
       | the bad guys are exposed and they will be punished
       | 
       | I think we have a different view now. In the UK we are looking at
       | a Post Office scandal where the upper management literally
       | prosecuted its own employees for theft instead of admit a billion
       | dollar computer system was buggy. And this started in 1990s, was
       | printed in newspapers by the mid-2000s and only got serious last
       | year and prosecutions will probably go through to the 2030s
       | 
       | I mean if the punishment for your misdeeds is thirty years
       | delayed, and basically consists of retiring and being embarrassed
       | in front of friends it's hardly a punishment.
       | 
       | And it rather makes this "moles" efforts ... well it's not much
       | of a deal for him is it really.
        
         | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
         | That's kinda the trouble with fighting these memes, it's legal
         | to own guns, it's legal to hang out with your buddies and shoot
         | guns and talk about overthrowing the government, it's legal to
         | be friends with the sheriff, it's legal for the sheriff to be a
         | white supremacist...
         | 
         | But all that shit's a powder keg, they're hoping for some
         | nonsense like "race war" to set them off, and until then they
         | have a lot of deniability.
        
       | victorbjorklund wrote:
       | Good read. For a similar story I can recommend:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mole:_Undercover_in_North_...
        
       | hackandthink wrote:
       | Reminds me of a story in Germany:
       | 
       | Verfassungsschutz moles have procured weapons for Nazi
       | terrorists(1999-2011).
       | 
       | https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalsozialistischer_Unterg...
        
       | nobodywillobsrv wrote:
       | Frustrating article. They didn't discuss the goals of the
       | militia's or their concerns at all. The spy was basically a one
       | man militia.
       | 
       | Whole thing smells.
        
       | jondwillis wrote:
       | Infinite Luigis Theory:
       | 
       | I get a sense that we are beginning to see a resurgence in lone-
       | wolf style operator activism and crime (or terrorism, etc.,
       | depending on your view of things), sort of like was more common
       | 30+ years ago, a la the Unibomber, Skyjacker, all of the serial
       | killers in the 60-80s.
       | 
       | The reasons of "why now" and "why lone wolf" are complicated but
       | mostly boil down to high availability of information (awareness
       | of opsec) and relatively low trust amongst social groups and of
       | institutions, coupled with a more online and more destabilized
       | male demographic the younger you go.
        
         | ldjkfkdsjnv wrote:
         | Luigi was the first educated one we've seen in a while, not
         | sure if its a trend yet. the rest are young with not much going
         | for them, or homeless and have mental problems
        
       | nobodywillobsrv wrote:
       | What does it even mean "militia" in the US? Is any group with
       | weapons a militia? Is it a militia to gather and train and only
       | worry about tyranny?
        
         | xboxnolifes wrote:
         | An organized group of people arming themselves and training to
         | fight against some present or future threat. Also not
         | recognized as an official armed force of a country.
        
       | pyuser583 wrote:
       | Nobody is actually afraid of the militia movement. Nobody says,
       | sorry I can't criticize the "militia movement it would hurt my
       | career." Nobody says "I can't criticize the militia movement, my
       | children need me."
       | 
       | It makes a very good folk-demon, especially since it's real.
       | 
       | But there's only one ideology able to scare Americans into
       | silence . It's the one that makes ChatGPT avoid making an image
       | of anyone named Muhammad.
       | 
       | Imagine a lone American infiltrating Al-Qaeda or the Taliban or
       | Isis. Not likely, right? Because they're actually scary
       | organizations.
        
         | lovasoa wrote:
         | I have never heard of anyone in the developed world who would
         | be afraid to criticize Al-Qaeda or the Taliban or Isis.
         | Actually I have never heard anyone NOT criticize them when
         | talking about them.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-01-04 23:01 UTC)