Milo Nickels, Contributor
On February 2, 2009 the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) released its now infamous report entitled “The Modern Militia Movement.” This report, commonly referred to as “The MIAC Report”, attempted to demonize a wide range of ordinary Americans as being potential “terrorist threats”.
Suddenly, the word terrorist was being redefined right before our eyes. Under the new definitions, law enforcement was supposed to be on the lookout for “conspiracy theorists”, “right wing extremists”, “militias”, gun owners, “constitutionalists”, people who fear economic collapse, Christians, “anti-abortionists”, “tax resisters”, “Libertarians”, supporters of third party candidates, or even people who cite the Constitution.
As the police began learning the new “warning signs”, the mainstream media began educating the public that the real threat in America was gun owners, returning veterans, and people who question the government. The term “radical Islam” was completely replaced in the mainstream media by the term “right wing extremist” seemingly overnight. It was a constant drum beat of fear and misinformation—propaganda at its finest.
And the propaganda hasn’t stopped. Since that time we’ve been virtually bombarded with an endless stream of similar publications. Now the TSA is molesting our children, Janet Napolitano is trying to convince us all to spy and tattle on each other, and it’s even considered “suspicious” if you pay for something in cash, try to use your cell phone privately, or wear blue jeans. (Source)
I learned the answer to that question in 2010. After using the scary word “revolution” on Facebook (in context of a revolution of political thought toward Libertarianism), and having two “anti-government” bumper stickers on his car (an anarchy symbol and a Ron Paul sticker), a friend of mine was essentially fired from a civil service job based on nothing but “concern” over his mental status.
Many people respond to news like this with the same reaction. They immediately and instinctively ask, “well, what did Brandon Raub’s Facebook posts say?” Although I will answer this question, and do recognize that Raub’s Facebook posts are relevant, I want to point something out to you. If your very first instinct was to question the content of Raub’s posts instead of questioning the government’s actions, what does that say about you? How effective has MIAC-style propaganda been in shaping your perception? To instantaneously question what Raub said is to instantaneously question his right to say it—an unconscious declaration that you blindly and instinctively trust the government and that their actions must be justified. A far better reaction would be “why was the government reading Raub’s Facebook posts in the first place?”
Wouldn’t it stand to reason that if Raub was really having a meltdown or there was really reason to be concerned about Raub’s mental health, his family and friends would have tried to intervene, tried to get him help, and perhaps contacted the authorities as a last resort?
From all available information on this case, Raub’s family and friends have no concern whatsoever about his mental status.
It appears that the government simply took it upon themselves to spy on his Facebook posts, pretend that his Facebook posts are evidence of mental illness (based on their own propaganda), and kidnap him.
August 13, 2012
Sharpen up my axe; I’m here to sever heads.
Not to make excuses for the guy, but these are song lyrics from the song “Bring Me Down” by Swollen Member. It’s very common for people to quote song lyrics on Facebook. Trust me, if I quote L.L. Cool J this does not mean that I actually want to “bomb a town…get down”. There are numerous song lyrics out there with violent content and some of them are quite quotable.
August 12, 2012
Do you know why the American people will win the civil war that is coming? Because we are Americans.
Apparently, this post is scary because Raub thinks there is a civil war of some sort looming in the future—which will pit the citizens against the government. But wait. Isn’t Janet Napolitano’s DHS buying millions of rounds of small arms ammo, training the military for domestic operations, purchasing all kinds of riot gear, training the military to operate “re-education centers”, putting drones in the skies, lining our streets with video cameras, encouraging citizens to spy on each other, and snooping on Facebook pages (like Raub’s) to be prepared for civil unrest? How is Raub’s concern that the government may fight the people in a “civil war” any different from Janet Napolitano’s concern that the government may fight the people because of “civil unrest”? I wonder if they will be knocking on the door of Big Sis anytime soon….
Download Your Free Copy of Counter Markets
August 10, 2012
I’m starting the revolution. I’m done waiting.
The word “revolution” terrifies these people in government. My friend used it before they went after him and Raub used it too. In fact, there is a whole list of words that DHS scans Facebook for, and I’m guessing “revolution” is right near the top. The implication is that Raub is going to do something violent, but he never says he’s going to be violent. Our nation was founded by a revolution; the Beatles sang about revolution; we’ve affectionately labeled positive eras in history as “revolutions” (such as the industrial revolution); and Ron Paul’s peaceful Campaign for Liberty is often called the “Ron Paul Revolution”. Sure, saying you want to start the revolution may be a bit controversial, but the first amendment wasn’t written to protect tame or mundane speech.
August 9, 2012
This is the part where I tell the Federal Government to go f*** itself. This is the part where I tell Generals, training our young men to fight Americans, I am coming for you. The Veterans will be with me.
As a former marine, he probably has some insight as to the training they receive. If our military is being trained to fight us—instead of defend our constitutional rights—he has every right to be angry. Raub is not a threat because he wants the military to play the proper constitutional role.
August 5, 2012
If you are unaware of the great amount of evil perpetrated by the American Government I suggest you take your head out of the sand. The day of reckoning is almost at hand.
So, Raub thinks our government is evil. Is that not his right? I personally think all governments are evil. Governments exist for the sole purpose of controlling, restricting, and manipulating people. It’s not “crazy”. It’s a valid opinion.
July 28, 2012
If you are my friend, you deserve to know the truth. This world is secretly run by a shadow organization of people who among other things enjoy raping children. Some of leaders were involved with the bombing of the twin towers. It was a sacrifice and a complete inside job. Also the Bush’s are very sick twisted problems. I believe they have a secret Castle in Colorado where they have been raping and sacrificing children for many years. Think I’m crazy? Think again.
This is by far the “kookiest” of Raub’s posts, but is it threatening? Is it cause for concern about his mental health? Is it cause to lock him up against his will? This post is nothing but an expression of Raub’s own beliefs. He’s entitled to his beliefs, and simply because they may sound a bit kooky to you doesn’t mean he has no right to hold them. Let’s be honest. Christians find the beliefs of Muslims to be “kooky”, Republicans find the beliefs of Democrats to be “kooky”, and the people who drink Bud Light because it “tastes great” think the people who drink Bud Light because it is “less filling” are a bit kooky. It’s not illegal to have kooky beliefs. My kids believe that a fat man lives at the North Pole with toy-making elves, flies all around the world stopping at every single house in one night, makes this journey in a magic sleigh pulled by magical flying reindeer, enters and exits everyone’s houses through the chimney, and gives them toys for simply being good—which he knows because he can see them at all times. This is far kookier than believing the Bushes own a secret castle and rape children, but I’m not quite ready for the FBI to round up my children and send them to the loony bin.
So there you have it: no direct threats, no suicidal talk, no loss of function, no inability to perform his daily routine, none of that pesky criteria that traditionally indicates mental illness. It would seem that the government is less concerned about real evidence of mental illness and more concerned with anti-government sentiment (which they consider to be one in the same). It’s important to pay attention to cases like this because it shows exactly what the government is trying to do, and how they plan to do it—and it all goes back to the MIAC Report.
The truth is that our government has wanted to erode our free speech for a long time. In particular, they absolutely do not want us questioning or speaking out against them. But this was a tricky situation because the people would never give up their first amendment rights. They were faced with a dilemma: how to punish speech they don’t like without it appearing to the general public that they are attacking our first amendment rights. The solution was to convince the people that anti-government speech is evidence of mental illness. So they rolled out the propaganda, and used the mainstream media to scare and condition us all. Now they shroud free speech in a cloak of mental illness, and pretend they are fighting a monster.
The decision to use “mental health concerns” as their straw man was no accident. There are several advantages to this approach. First, they can bypass the legal justice system where the burden of proof rests on them. Second, they can force you to take mind numbing drugs and subject you forced therapy (i.e. re-education) sessions in mental institutions that they can’t do in jail. Third, and most important, no label is more misunderstood, damaging, pervasive, stigmatizing, vague, or irrefutable than that of mental illness. It’s easy to convince the public that someone is crazy, all you have to do is make the accusation. The second someone is accused of being “mentally ill”, their right to be innocent until proven guilty goes right out the window. The mere accusation is enough to alter opinions, influence public perception, and spark excessive scrutiny.
You can support this information by voting on Reddit HERE
Milo Nickels began blogging and cartooning about politics in the year 2000. After achieving some notoriety at that time, Milo took a break. Now, Milo has launched a new website, Five Cent Revolution where he continues to write about political issues. In particular, Milo focuses on constitutionalism, critiques of modern liberalism and progressivism, and defends individual liberty above all else. Milo wants the government out of our wallets, out of our business, and out of our lives to the greatest extent possible.