From the carefully released snippets of his “note” and “literature” it would seem that Paul Ciancia, the LAX TSA shooter, is part of the Sovereign Citizen movement. The news media has not, so far, mentioned this phrase. Instead, they simply describe him over and over as “anti-government” — intending to evoke the Tea Party, also portrayed as “anti-government” (it is not, of course).
The hate group called the Southern Poverty Law Center (I do not say this lightly) has gone to some length to identify Ciancia as part of the “Patriot Movement” — an attempt to make “patriot” an unacceptable word. (The left has been working on this negative-association project for years.) One of the many groups under the Sovereign Citizens umbrella called itself “Christian Patriots” to try to put on a veneer of respectability, and leftists seized their chance to tar pro-American groups with this new brush. The left has, for years, used “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel” apparently ignorant of (or uncaring about) the fact that the Samuel Johnson quote is in favor of patriotism. People with an axe to grind against the Tea Party will refer to Sovereign Citizens as “Patriot movement” while others make no mention of this phrase.
The US government has moved from more or less neutral to a leftist position, from when they released a hurriedly cobbled-together “right wingers are extremists” report shortly after Barack Obama took office, sanitizing left-wing terrorists at the same time.
Eventually, we will learn more about Ciancia. The entire note might be released — after the news dies down — and it will be evident that this man has nothing to do with the Tea Party, but by then the media will have “moved on.” Still, all of the “he was anti-government” rhetoric annoyed me without surprising me, just like the inevitable “he was Tea Party” accusations.
But it occurred to me that not many people have been exposed to the Sovereign Citizens movement — and much of what they know of the Tea Party is through the filter of establishment media which despises them. Anarchists, Sovereign Citizens, and the Tea Party are often (intentionally) confused, such as when Harry Reid called Tea Party members “anarchists” just days ago. Perhaps a comparison chart would be useful:
Worth noting: Most in the Sovereign Citizen movement are not violence-inclined, just as most anarchists are not. But there have been enough incidents (especially on the anarchist side, which has a longer history) to make this aspect an issue.
Also worth noting: Ciancia was first and foremost a mentally disturbed man — and, from some reports, yet another incident of a person on psychotropic medication. These things are not “because of” the SC movement or political issues at all. There are many well-meaning people who are part of the SC movement and would not condone such an action — nevertheless, their claims and assertions (which I’ve spent a few dozen hours investigating) do not hold up to inspection. The best of them are fooled; the worst are dangerous.
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle