The following article just caught my eye.
Seven men including six Americans were arrested Monday in the US state of North Carolina on charges they conspired to "engage in violent jihad," the Justice Department said.
The defendants, who include a father and his two sons, were formally indicted by a grand jury last Wednesday and were arrested by federal police on Monday morning, according to a statement from the department.
http://rawstory.com/...
Okay, I know about murder, intention to murder, conspiracy to murder. I even know about statutes against buying illegal weaponry and supporting terrorism. But "conspiracy to commit Jihad?" That’s a new one on me.
More below the fold:
Now don’t get me wrong. The plaintiffs in this case are not exactly angelic in their demeanor, unless you consider stockpiling AK-47s and Bushmaster M4 A3 16 in. Patrolman carbines to be saintly pursuits. But the case brings to the fore a central dilemma for the justice system.
What is the difference between a survivalist wackjob running around in the woods with an AK-47 and a Islamist wackjob running around in the woods with an AK-47?
I find it curious that there is absolute silence from the NRA on this case despite the fact that many of the charges against the plaintiffs have to do with the purchase and transportation of assault rifles. But I digress.
The real kicker for me in this case lies in the actual set of charges brought against the men:
They face a complex set of charges, with all being accused of conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists and conspiracy to murder, kidnap, maim and injure persons abroad.
Okay now kids, here’s the sixty four thousand dollar question:
What is the difference between a group of crazies with Korans plotting to murder, kidnap, maim and injure persons abroad, and a bunch of crazies in the C.I.A. and the Vice-President’s office doing the same thing?
Answers ?
Anyone?
PS: Anyone intersted in a PDF of the actual indictment can look here:
(It's a doozy)
http://www.abcnews.go.com/...