XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns   
   XPost: alt.politics.org.fbi   
   From: d@ray   
      
   It’s been 31 years since the beginning of the FBI’s murderous siege on the   
   home of the Weaver family. The deadly incident prompted enough outrage to   
   spur Congressional hearings, protests from across the political spectrum,   
   several dramatized TV portrayals and a promise from the FBI and Department   
   of Justice that they would revise the reckless tactics used at Ruby Ridge   
   to avoid future tragedies (this was six months before the Waco massacre).   
      
   Fast forward to 2023, and the only difference in relation to federal law   
   enforcement behavior is the disappearance of journalists and politicians   
   willing to demand accountability from the FBI.   
      
   As Republicans and Democrats waste time and political capital focusing on   
   how the FBI treats Donald Trump or Hunter Biden,  four men in the last   
   three weeks have been shot to death by the FBI, three of them in   
   questionable pre-dawn raids. Two of the men were white and right-wing, one   
   was an Arab, and another was a black suspected for a string of robberies.   
      
   In a typical FBI related raid leading up to a shooting, federal agents make   
   painstaking efforts to destroy any visible cameras on a targeted property,   
   seldom wear body cameras, and refuse to inform family members why they felt   
   they had to shoot their loved one or what they were suspected of. In some   
   cases, the FBI will even refuse to confirm their involvement in a killing.   
   In these controversial shoots, the Bureau has the laughable ability to   
   investigate itself, which predictably, means that they rule every killing   
   as justified. The FBI then cordons off the scene and bans the family from   
   entering their own residence for days as staff is dispatched to collect   
   evidence, providing them ample opportunity to tamper with or eliminate any   
   evidence of malfeasance or error.   
      
   In virtually every case, an agent who shoots a suspect in a contentious   
   encounter is granted the informal right to forever remain anonymous by both   
   the media and government officials — a perk not extended to local police   
   officers in similar circumstances. If public outrage begins to grow,   
   unrelated videos and information intended to characterize the person who   
   was shot as a dangerous menace suddenly leaks to the press even as the FBI   
   publicly keeps its lips sealed. The way these incidents unfold is akin to   
   how death squads or assassins operate rather than a legitimate law   
   enforcement agency subject to civilian oversight.   
      
   In the most controversial of the recent shootings, that of a severely   
   disabled 75-year-old Vietnam Veteran and National Rifle Association member   
   in Utah named Craig Robertson, federal agents have asserted that the   
   beloved church-going man with no notable criminal record who served as sole   
   caretaker for his blind son was a dangerous white domestic terrorist who,   
   upon being informed that he was under arrest, pointed his .357 Magnum at   
   agents during an early morning raid.   
      
   Robertson was put under investigation in April for a series of threats made   
   on his Truth Social account against Democratic politicians. He was   
   obviously not physically capable of executing his threats, and despite   
   being known to always answer the door armed, was approached by FBI agents   
   and questioned about his threats prior to the raid on his home. He told the   
   agents who arrived at his residence to question him that he had no plans to   
   harm anyone and to come back with a warrant. The agents left without   
   incident.   
      
   Days later, the FBI decided to mobilize their SWAT team to serve their   
   warrant on the man in his humble Provo residence, using his collection of   
   legally owned firearms and enthusiasm for the 2nd Amendment as   
   justification for why a Navy SEALs type breach was necessary to apprehend   
   the immobile senior citizen.   
      
   Video footage taken by a neighbor as the assault began shows federal agents   
   tossing flash bombs and wrecking Robertson’s home in the lead up to the   
   shooting. Images from the aftermath capture Robertson bleeding to death   
   under a blanket on the street like an animal as agents casually chat over   
   his body.   
      
   What is missing from the equation is what happened in between. We will   
   never know if the claim that Robertson, a man described by all who knew him   
   as being incapable of hurting a fly, actually did point his firearm at the   
   arresting agents because they don’t wear body cameras.   
      
   Local police departments scrutinized in controversial shootings regularly   
   host press conferences where they publicly release an officer’s body camera   
   footage of the exchange in question, but despite a 2022 White House   
   Executive Order instructing FBI agents to visually document their   
   activities while engaging in arrests and search warrants, federal agents   
   have decided to simply ignore the new regulation. Compliance remains low.   
      
   Provo Police Department body camera video from a 2018 encounter with   
   Robertson shows that he typically displayed his firearms when answering the   
   door as a form of 2nd Amendment activism. In this encounter with local   
   cops, he was not charged with any crime as Utah law protects the right of   
   citizens to carry their guns, including in the presence of police officers.   
   Even if Robertson had firearms on his person at the time his home was being   
   besieged, unless he pointed one at arresting agents, the legality of   
   killing him would be at least dubious. Judging from his well-documented   
   pattern of behavior, as well as the FBI’s own pattern of systematically   
   lying about almost everything, there is no reason to believe the FBI and   
   Department of Justice when they say Robertson pointed his gun at their   
   agents.   
      
   Several other open questions remain. Generally, threats to the president   
   are handled by the Secret Service, who will investigate the offending   
   individual and, if there is no sign of a plan to make good on the threat,   
   warn the person to stop and occasionally park a car in front of their homes   
   if the politician on the receiving end of their threats is in town. This   
   was the norm when Donald Trump was elected in 2016 and a wave of violent   
   threats aimed at his person and family engulfed social media and kept the   
   Secret Service busy. Some former FBI agents have suggested that the   
   Department of Justice possibly decided to internally mark Robertson as a   
   white domestic terrorist in order to fill politically expedient arrest   
   quotas, which takes the investigative duty out of the hands of the Secret   
   Service and can be used to rationalize the disproportionate response   
   federal agents have in recent years gotten into the habit of deploying   
   against political opponents.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)