Recently, the Missouri State Police put out a report warning police officers in the state about militia and terrorist threats coming from people who like the Constitution, may have supported Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin, or who doubt that the Federal Reserve is a valuable institution.

This, however, is not a Missouri specific issue. The Missouri outfit is part of a network of DHS "Fusion Centers" around the country. One of their primary "deliverables" is to share their work with each other. It is quite possible that this same report, ones based off it, or similar ones are being distributed in other states.

Individuals in any state with a fusion center should be working up a formal request to their state police or other appropriate office to seek equal time for a professional presentation of a patriotic, pro-freedom, pro-Constitution position on this to the same law enforcement professionals who got this report or any one like it. The thrust of such a presentation should be that patriotic citizens are on the side of the rule of law and those who defend it.   A person who demands an audit of the FED or displays concern about our country following the path of the EU should not be profiled by law enforcement officers as a potential terrorist. 

In 2007, USA Today provided a partial list of Department of Homeland Security Fusion Centers by state and organization name. This list is a good starting point for those at the local level who wish to begin working with law enforcement in their states to emphasize to them that we are working on the same side regarding defense of the rule of law.

One state not in the USA Today list was North Carolina. However, valuable contact information for that state can be found in a 2006 press release on NC's fusion center from the Attorney General's office. Similar public information likely exists for the more than two dozen fusion centers across the country.

Please work with the JBS staff coordinator for your state to pursue contacts with fusion centers. We need to work in a concerted fashsion to emphasize the professional approach we are taking to the issue of fusion center profiling of potential terrorist threats.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (9)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

Charles_Byrd said:

	Whoa I just had a Janet Reno flashback after reading this.
	report abuse vote down vote up

March 19, 2009
Votes: +3

William N. Grigg said:

Should We Petition for "Equal Time" With the Politburo, As Well? "Individuals in any state with a fusion center should be working up a formal request to their state police or other appropriate office to seek equal time for a professional presentation of a patriotic, pro-freedom, pro-Constitution position on this to the same law enforcement professionals who got this report or any one like it." No, no, no -- a thousand times, no! What you are describing is not a "professional approach"; it's a form of capitulation. We shouldn't be seeking "equal time" to curry the favor of the people running the local homeland security soviets, which is a more appropriate name for these so-called "fusion centers"; we should be demanding their abolition. They have no constitutional rationale for existence and serve no purpose constitutionalists should support.

report abuse vote down vote up

March 19, 2009 | url
Votes: +11

capo said:

No Capitulation Perhaps the sarcastic comparison to the old JBS "Support Your Local Police" program was a bit strained there Having already visited and talked to a low level staffer at the DHS Fusion Center in North Carolina, it appears that these fusion centers are more about passing on statist propaganda to local law enforcement than they are about being the epicenter of any future martial law operation. If you read the MIAC report closely, you will recognize if for what it really is --- a compilation and repackaging of Southern Poverty Law Center Reports that the SPLC has been sending for free to police departments and sheriffs' departments around the country - for years. Some MIAC "intelligence" officer has justified probably a year's worth of salary in his sinecure by simply cutting and pasting SPLC material onto a masthead with the Missouri governor's name on it. We (recognized community organizations like the JBS) should think ahead a few moves in this contest. First move is to claim "stakeholder" status and demand that our read of the "domestic terrorism" situation be provided to local law enforcement officers. If we are rebuffed in such an equal time attempt with the SPLC, as I expect we will be, then we will have hard evidence to go back and argue for the abolition of these centers - not just on the grounds of their unconstitutionality, which most members of Congress could care less about, but also because they are a huge waste of money by a bankrupt government. (The SPLC reports were mostly free to the taxpayer. The plagiarized MIAC report was not.) At a minimum, making contact with the Fusion Centers is just good SA (situation awareness) on our part.

report abuse vote down vote up

March 20, 2009 | url
Votes: -2

William N. Grigg said:

The Old Dialectical Trap "Stakeholder status" is a desirable thing? Since when does the JBS consider it worthwhile, or even defensible, to start playing communitarian/dialectical games with the enemy? I sincerely doubt that the same Congress that authorized creation of these unconstitutional "fusion centers" would be scandalized by a refusal to give the JBS "equal time," much less consider this "hard evidence" of bad faith. So there's nothing to be gained by pursuing a course that would legitimize those institutions.

report abuse vote down vote up

March 20, 2009 | url
Votes: +7

William N. Grigg said:

	The Old Dialectical Trap, Pt. II While there's nothing to be gained, however, there is much that could be lost if you ARE given "equal time," since you'd be conceding the legitimate role of fusion centers in creating a binding "consensus" regarding "domestic extremism." There's no point in "thinking a few moves ahead" if the enemy has already rigged the game and claims home field advantage.
	report abuse vote down vote up

March 20, 2009 | url
Votes: +8

capo said:

Getting people on our side You and I may realize the game is rigged, but still too few of our neighbors do. To bring these neighbors on board, which is going to be more persuasive, Will Grigg reacting to a report apparently leaked by a concerned law enforcement officer in Missouri, or Will Grigg quoting from the formal discussion he had with the Fusion Center director in his home state or home town? For my own self, I am shooting for the latter. If DHS officials decide to pay you an unfriendly visit, how you react will be inconsequential. How your neighbors and local law enforcement officers react will determine the outcome.

report abuse vote down vote up

March 20, 2009 | url
Votes: -4

William N. Grigg said:

Getting the RIGHT people on our side Jim, in the circumstances you describe the most important consideration is that your neighbors know and appreciate the character of the individual targeted by the Homeland Security apparat. That's a relationship far worthier of our time and attention than any effort to ingratiate ourselves with the enemy. For the local affiliates of the Homeland Security State, federal subsidies offer far more eloquent arguments than anything we can offer; this is particularly true now amid the ongoing economic collapse. The line from "Ghostbusters" applies here: "As long as there's a paycheck in it, I'll believe anything you want." Until and unless those funds are cut off and the HomeSec infrastructure is rolled up, outreach of the sort you're describing is pointless at best.

report abuse vote down vote up

March 21, 2009 | url
Votes: +7

capo said:

Calling Their Bluff OK. That might have been the better title to use. The sarcastic riff on the old JBS "Support Your Local Sheriff" program has gotten us off track here. What I am suggesting is that we will have a more persuasive argument for the many people we still need to get on our side if we can say: "Look, we took our great leader up on his call for national service and went down to our local DHS fusion center. We volunteered to provide training to local law enforcement to help them discern between Americans who support the rule of law and terrorists. The DHS staff told us that they were not interested in our offer and in fact gave indications that they viewed our community education efforts as an impediment to their mission." The clear intent of the MIAC/SPLC report is to marginalize us. Calling DHS "the enemy" and worse is likely the exact kind of reaction they are hoping to incite. (This could be why the report was first "leaked" to loudest compatriot in our camp.) The Ghostbusters script is insightful, but I think World Series of Poker trumps on this one.

report abuse vote down vote up

March 21, 2009 | url
Votes: -4

Anthony Powell said:

	Will Grigg is Coreect Will Grigg is 100% correct! We freedom-lovers should follow the course of action recommended by Solzhenitsyn: "Don't believe them, don't fear them, don't ask anything of them." I ask NOTHING of the unconstitutional DHS; I simply DEMAND they leave me and my family alone.
	report abuse vote down vote up

April 01, 2009 | url
Votes: +6