TT2 Expert Final: U.S. militia groups pose a greater threat to our national security than do FTOs

Thanks to whiteflame for the compliments and for this debate! Whiteflame is truly one of the best debaters, and also one of the best voters, on the site, and I truly look forward to having an intense and engaging discourse with him. I accept this debate, and I am eager to begin! As Round One is for acceptance and clarifications, there is one clarification I would like to make. The definition of U.S. militia groups (I may abbreviate these as USMG's) was given as "a group organized for the stated purpose of defending its rights and property against a tyrannical government." I would like to note that these groups "rights" need not actually be in jeopardy and the government need not be tyrannical for a group to be a militia group. It merely must perceive that its liberties are under threat, and state the protection thereof as its goal. I'd also like to quote some additional background regarding these groups (using Con's same source) that can be folded into our understanding of them within the confines of this debate. I think this is important, because many of us have a better grasp of FTOs and have some sense of the role they play in our lives--for 13 years now, Al-Qaeda and it's affiliates, for instance, have been in the news. Islamic State, FARC, etc. have all captured headlines, but we are often less aware of the militia groups back home. "Militia organizations in the United States are paramilitary out-growth of the independent survivalist, anti-tax and other causes in the patriot movement subculture in the United States. The formation of the militias was influenced by the historical precedent of existing paramilitary movements such as the Posse Comitatus and groups associated with protecting liberties of governed people. Although the far-right Patriot movement had long been marginalized, cultural factors paved the way for the wide-scale growth of the libertarian or ideological militia movement. This attitude corresponded with the perception that the federal government's powers and reach had increased greatly." [1] We can meld then, the tyranny-based definition listed earlier by Con with this background information to say that militia groups are, specifically, right-wing, anti-government, paramilitary organizations. Historian Mark Pitcavage summarize this idea nicely, noting: "The militia movement is a right-wing movement that arose following controversial standoffs in the 1990s. It inherited paramilitary traditions of earlier groups, especially the conspiratorial, anti government Posse Comitatus. The militia movement claims that militia groups are sanctioned by law but uncontrolled by government; in fact, they are designed to oppose a tyrannical government. Adherents believe that behind the 'tyranny' is a left-wing, globalist conspiracy known as the New World Order. The movement's ideology has led some adherents to commit criminal acts, including stockpiling illegal weapons and explosives and plotting to destroy buildings or assassinate public officials, as well as lesser confrontations." [1] These ideas are no better expressed than in this mission statement by the "Connecticut 51st Militia," "We are a constitutional militia. Our goal is to protect individual freedom and to insure that citizens constitutional rights are not infringed. People in todays society must realize that our 'freedom' is slipping away quite quickly and if 'We the people' don"t stop the erosion it will be too late. If we want to win 'we' must understand where the core of the problem truly lies." [2] With that clarified understanding of the militia groups in question and with a bit of their background sketched out as well, I now turn things over to Con. Once again, thanks to Whiteflame for this debate, and Congratulations on making it to the final round! [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://www.darkgovernment.com...