NationStates Jolt Archive


"The terrorist you've never heard of."

Unabashed Greed
19-12-2006, 09:05
"The terrorist you've never heard of." (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/12/18/tennessee_terrorist/?source=whitelist)

Demetrius "Van" Crocker was senteced to 30 years

Wonder why you've never heard of this one? Because he's not an arab, or even one of those other icky brownies. This one's a crakcer through and through. So much so, in fact, that the people he and his neo-nazi band were planning to kill with his bomb were blacks.

"Crocker told Adams he wanted to kill the black population of nearby Jackson, Tenn., with mustard gas"

To quote some one else on this one...

"Right wing terrorist who wants to kill blacks? Sorry, not news."

The funny part is that this guy was caught WITHOUT the use of the patriot act or any illegal wiretapping. His arrest was totally above board and legal police work. Funny how that actually works if used properly, no? Meanwhile, Jose Padilla was tortured under those ausipices, and then was NEVER charged with the crimes that righties keep accusing him of. That's right, no terrorism charge, no chages involving the "dirty bomb" they supposedly caught him trying to set off, etc.
Mentholyptus
19-12-2006, 09:16
I give you a gold star for this one. Nice work, and way to bring up an interesting topic.

That said...


*waits for inevitable trolls, including (pretty please) an MTAE reincarnation*
Wilgrove
19-12-2006, 09:17
Well it's kind of hard for police to go into Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq, or any other place in the Middle East, arrest the suspected terrorist over there and then bring them back here for them to stand trial. Of course there's also the whole jurisdiction nonsense. Some countries won't hand over criminals who's committed crimes in the United States.
Pepe Dominguez
19-12-2006, 09:20
Not too surprising that wire-taps weren't necessary to catch a guy without accomplices, who mouthed off about the plot in public. Doesn't mean it isn't necessary from time to time, especially when authorities are trying to locate co-conspirators and suppliers.
Unabashed Greed
19-12-2006, 09:22
Well it's kind of hard for police to go into Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq, or any other place in the Middle East, arrest the suspected terrorist over there and then bring them back here for them to stand trial. Of course there's also the whole jurisdiction nonsense. Some countries won't hand over criminals who's committed crimes in the United States.


The point is that he and his friends were arrested thus preventing their act of terrorism, and without the "assistance" of an unconstitutional law. You need to actually be in this country in order to be arrested during the commition of a terrorist act against it. So your point not only makes no sense, but is totally irrelevant.
Arthais101
19-12-2006, 09:23
Not too surprising that wire-taps weren't necessary to catch a guy without accomplices, who mouthed off about the plot in public. Doesn't mean it isn't necessary from time to time, especially when authorities are trying to locate co-conspirators and suppliers.

ok, and who said you could never get a wire tap?

Police use wire taps ALL THE TIME.
Pepe Dominguez
19-12-2006, 09:37
ok, and who said you could never get a wire tap?

Police use wire taps ALL THE TIME.

One of the reasons we've "never heard of" this potential terrorist is because nothing "controversial" was involved in his case. That's the idea. Wiretaps, interrogation, searches of homes and businesses, etc. are all protentially controversial methods of apprehending a terrorist. The fact that this guy was caught using low-profile methods doesn't mean those methods aren't needed in other cases.
Arthais101
19-12-2006, 09:39
One of the reasons we've "never heard of" this potential terrorist is because nothing "controversial" was involved in his case. That's the idea. Wiretaps, interrogation, searches of homes and businesses, etc. are all protentially controversial methods of apprehending a terrorist. The fact that this guy was caught using low-profile methods doesn't mean those methods aren't needed in other cases.

Controversial? Not at all. Wiretaps, searches of homes and businesses, all of them very common indeed, police can, and do, conduct them regularly.

All we good civil liberties loving people ask is that that the government please have a showing of probable cause, and get a god damned warrant first.