It wouldn’t surprise me, after over two decades of expressing the opinions that I hold, that I appear on one or more FBI lists of “potential” domestic terrorists.
On the other hand, they’ve also been proven to be utterly fucking incompetent. So to help matters along, and in view of their criteria for the above, allow me to post the following:
5 U.S. Code § 3331 – Oath of office
An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services, shall take the following oath: “I, ___ , do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” This section does not affect other oaths required by law.
Also:
At Ruby Ridge, Vicki Weaver was murdered by Lon Horiuchi, a federal agent.
Then there are my posts about guns… but really, just follow this link to get an idea — although this post in particular is quite representative.
And when it comes to gun pics… oh hell, let me offer up just one example:
Finally, for any FBI stalker:
…and: 
I trust that all this will help.
For the FIBBIES: I am not a domestic terrorist. The only way I’d ever become one is if you were to turn me into one.
As J.D. Tucille once wrote:
“If cops continue to play at being an army of occupation, they should expect the subjects to play their role in return. Vive la résistance.”
Yes.
The *American* flags like the Gadsden I’ve flown intermittently for 30 years aren’t the flags they need to worry about.
i really thought that people were pushed far enough after the Kelo City of New London opinion from SCOTUS. They ruled that a city can condemn and take your property solely for the increased tax revenue promised by a third party. That’s legalized theft and cronyism right there yet SCOTUS approved it.
JQ
SCOTUS has in general been a rather poor guarantor of our rights. Kind of like a layer of sandbags during a flood. IF it stops something its a pleasant surprise.
SCOTUS hasn’t proven to be a reliable defender of the people’s rights.
They haven’t even proven to be a reliable arbiter of what the damned thing even says, considering the document doesn’t sanction even half the stuff the government does.
I would settle for consistent and neutral interpretation of the Constitution as written and understood at the time of its passage, consulting the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers are needed (fun fact: currently in force interpretations were specifically forsworn in the Federalist papers! ) in preference to the current practice of going Alice in Wonderland Humpty Dumpty “words mean what I want them to mean”.
Fair warning, though:
“Constitutional”. It means: “In accordance with a constitution”. It doesn’t mean “free”, “fair”, “ethical”, “moral”, “aligned with my idea of what is good and right” or any of the happy things we all want it to mean. We hope that the constitution in question actually has something do to with all of that, but all bets are off, especially when the actual words in the thing are systematically and routinely ignored or tortured to enable someone’s vision of good.
Rule of law you say? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA