[LawDog]

The husband and mother of US Judge Joan Lefkow were slain in an execution style murder today.

This, in and of itself, is a bad thing, but I am interested in a sub-part of the investigation.

Judge Lefkow was the presiding judge in a trademark-infringment lawsuit involving the World Church of the Creator and it's founder, Matt Hale. For those of you not familiar with Matt Hale, he's a big proponent of what he calls "racial holy war".

During the whole thing, Matt Hale wound up in being found guilty of soliciting the murder of the judge.

Now here's the kicker, and where my interest piques: apparently at least one Internet Forum frequented by white supremacists wound up with a thread wanting pictures of the judge, her husband and their children. Such photos were posted, and further along in the course of the thread personal information of the judge and her family were discovered and posted to the thread.

Might be some interesting - scary - ramifications for Internet forum Administration and Staff coming out of this one. Probably one to keep an eye on.

LawDog

[kikilee]

The scum that did this need to be caught and executed. Pray for the Judge.

[beerslurpy]

I was hoping it was some sort serial killer that goes after liberal federal judges.

If it is some lame white supremacist thing, I will be disappointed.

Lefkow seems to have decided a billion cases, who knows which one of them might have wanted to kill her.

[hammer4nc]

Re: Implications for racist internet forums.

Likely some fed legislator will propose more privacy-robbing bills to address this threat. In reality, not really needed; most of the members of such anti-gov sites are already confidential informants, deep-cover agent provacateurs, ADL, SPLC, etc.

I never heard of this Hale guy before...seems he graduated law school, passed the bar exam, but was denied his law license for his openly racist views. His conviction on threatening the judge was engineered by a CI.

[Don Gwinn]

Other interesting facets of this case:

1. Matt Hale is also the guy who was accused of inciting Benjamin Smith to go on his multi-state shooting spree (he drove through Illinois and Indiana shooting anyone who "looked Jewish" or black. One of his victims was Ricky Birdsong, who was apparently a famous basketball coach.)

2. I'm not sure why Hale hated Lefkow so much, because she actually ruled in his favor when she heard the case (implausibly, I thought.)
It was the appeals court above her that reversed her decision and ruled against Hale. She was just the one who had to deal with enforcing their decision against Hale, who never had any intentions of "working within the law" no matter how many disclaimers he puts out.

3. Hale thought Lefkow was Jewish. When he found out she was an Episcopalian, he told people she'd married a jew and that was just as bad. Her husband's not Jewish either.
I don't know where the wacko got that one, except that Lefkow sounds Eastern-European so it MUST be a Jewish name.

4. As John Kass points out in the Chicago Tribune today, federal judges have no shortage of vicious enemies. Lefkow, for instance, once refused to grant bond to one Mr. Schweihs, known in Chicago as "The German." The German is a professional killer among other things and known for a certain professional zeal.

Still, the smart money is betting some lunatic who lives in his parents' basement thought his hero Matt Hale (another lunatic who lives in his parents' house) would finally respect him if he offed that Jew Judge who had the temerity force her Zionist principles on the World Church by obeying the mandate of a superior court.



We talk about Democrats and Republicans here a lot, but these are our enemies. They're the enemies of every civilized man, woman and child. People who would shoot an old man and an older woman for the crime of being the loved one of a woman who MIGHT disagree with their politics but certainly didn't agree strongly enough.

[Atticus]

Might be some interesting - scary - ramifications for Internet forum Administration and Staff coming out of this one. Probably one to keep an eye on.

Maybe. People in the public eye are always gonna face more risks from psychos, whether they are Federal Judges or Jon Bene Ramsey....or a CCW permit holder in Ohio exposed by the local newspaper.

There does seem to be a rush to blame this Hale guy and/or his followers (if he has any). I would guess there's no shortage of people in Chicago who would do something like this. IIRC from my yout in Illinois....a .22 to the back of the head was used quite often by South Side gangs to send a message....including associates of the illustrious Louis Farrakhan.

[Moondoggie]

According to news reports, Hale is in prison after being convicted of soliciting to have Judge Lefkow murdered.

(Thread drift ON) Seems kinda strange that yesterday I heard Geraldine Ferraro poo-poo'ing the advance of democracy in Iraq/Middle East, using the same-day asassination of an Iraqi Federal Judge as an example. (Thread drift OFF)

[Atticus]

According to news reports, Hale is in prison after being convicted of soliciting to have Judge Lefkow murdered.

Yes, his sentencing is coming up. Seems like a strange time for an associate of his to murder the judge's family. Seems like a good fall guy for someone else to use though. Maybe she's an honest judge. That in itself could be a death warrant in Chicago.

[beerslurpy]

I highly doubt it is white supremacists. Hale has been in solitary for a while now and only seen prison guards and his parents, neither of whom are likely to be murder conspirators. If it is whtie supremacists, I bet you it was a sponatenous act by a lone individual and not a contract killing.

It also seems way too easy to pin the blame on a a bunch of unpopular crazies just so they can say they caught someone.

[NMshooter]

That is the sort of thing I would expect to see happening in Colombia.

I thought the large groups had been broken in the 90's, but perhaps I am mistaken...

[fedlaw]

Please say a prayer for my dear friends Joan and Michael Lefkow; two of the finest people I have ever known.

I think Eric got it exactly right today:

chicagotribune.com

Eric Zorn
Political killings carry a threat for all society


Published March 2, 2005


Of all the forms of murder that rip the fabric of society, an organized assassination is by far the worst.

Obviously, this thought is prompted by Monday's slaying of U.S. District Judge Joan H. Lefkow's husband and mother in her family's North Side Chicago home. Yet just as obviously it's important to add that police haven't linked those slayings to followers of imprisoned white supremacist leader Matthew Hale, who was convicted last year of soliciting the judge's murder.

We don't yet know why attorney Michael F. Lefkow, 64, and Donna Grace Humphrey, 89, were shot in the family's basement. Among other possibilities, they may have been victims of a wandering sociopath, a startled or murderous home invader, or a killer with a grudge against the family unrelated to the judge's position.

What we do know is that the ability of judges and other public officials to make decisions without fearing for their lives or, worse, the lives of their loved ones is key to our way of life.

We know that fear is corrupting, corrosive, malignant, metastatic. It's toxic to freedom, the enemy of justice.

We see more than our share of mayhem in this country--random, predatory; purposeful, senseless. But what we don't see, or haven't seen in a long time, are orchestrated hits on key government, law enforcement and business officials of the sort we associate with third-world thugocracies and nations nearly paralyzed by terrorism.

American assassins and would-be assassins of the last several decades have tended to be lone nuts--your loopy John Hinckleys, pathetic Mark David Chapmans and deluded Squeaky Frommes--and not particularly threatening to others.

The few and isolated exceptions prove the rule: The November, 1973, assassination of Oakland's public schools superintendent Marcus Foster by the radical Symbionese Liberation Army and the June 1984 planned slaying of liberal talk-show host Alan Berg by three members of a white supremacist group are two that come to mind.

Even in a highly security-conscious age when gangs rule neighborhoods, graft greases the system and many people fear going out alone, we have lived under the fundamental presumption that our lawmakers, our police, our prosecutors and our judges are free from the threat of retaliatory murder.

This presumption is so strong that many of us have laughed at the inflated self-importance of mid-level politicians who travel with teams of bodyguards: Get over yourself, ya pompous bureaucrat. You're not that important, and we don't live in that kind of country.

In the United States, with very few exceptions, the mighty, the wealthy and the influential live in neighborhoods, walk down streets, dine in restaurants and shop in stores right alongside everybody else.

Even though our lives have felt constricted by metal detectors, gated communities, surveillance cameras and other forms of security, we still live in a remarkably open society.

Why here? It's just not how we've done things. I'll leave further explanations and analysis to the political scientists, sociologists and psychologists.

But the status quo is fragile. Here's why news of this crime feels so sickeningly ominous: Any organized, politically motivated attack on a judge or a judge's family is an attack on a core presumption that shapes our daily lives--that major decision-makers operate free from the fear of organized intimidation, extortion and bloody revenge.

If that precious presumption shatters, we risk turning into one of those nations where the powerful and famous live in cocoons protected by thick walls, deadbolts, bulletproof glass and armed guards. They scurry from place to place, an eye always out for killers and kidnappers.

Political courage is backed by blood and underwritten by terrible risk. Moral bravery is about more than words.

It's too early to conclude that the presumption suffered a serious crack Monday in Judge Joan Lefkow's home.

But it's not too early to hope that it didn't.

[beerslurpy]

Fedlaw, I'm fairly certain they could assassinate half the federal judiciary and I would still be in no danger, either from assasination or from side effects of not having enough judges.

Yeah yeah murder is bad, but lets not make too big a deal about it just because it was someone "important." If I was assassinated, it wouldnt even make the local news, yet is my life somehow less valuable than a federal judge's?

[TheEgg]

My understanding is that the husband of the judge was a practicing lawyer as well. I hope the investigators are looking into any potential enemies he had as well.

I just hope that the Chicago police don't get blinders on and do the tunnel vision thing. They need to keep an open mind to properly investigate.

[Silver Bullet]

Such photos were posted, and further along in the course of the thread personal information of the judge and her family were discovered and posted to the thread.Similar to the Ohio newspaper publishing the names of CCW holders.

[Waitone]

The symbology value of the judiciary is extremely high in a nation that prides itself on abiding by the rule of law. It is the judges and justices that are the visible manifestation of that rule. Those who occupy the bench are the physical representation of an abstract concept. An attack on these symbols is much more than an attack on a mortal. We may think some judges are baffoons, idiots, or fools. In some case they are. Regardless, they represent our system of law.

Illinois and / or the federales have no choice but go after the perps with hammer and tong. An unanswered attack will beg only that another attack takes place.

The fear I have is those who would control the internet will use this as an excuse to "crack down" on assault websites (you people know the lingo). In case you haven't noticed elements of the internet alternative media have conducted some very successful operations against the incumbent political structure. Sooner or later the empire will strike back with an attack on the internet. I fear this episode will be used as an excuse for some kind of restriction.

[Liberty Ship]

No one seems to be allowing for the possibility that the husband was actually the intended target, his mother just happened to be there, and the judge herself had nothing to do with it.

I don't want to post the link here, but if you find the web site for the husband's law practice, you will see that he specialized in employment law with further specializations in Postal Workers and issues surrounding mental incapacity as it relates to employment. I'm not kidding Postal employees and crazy people. That's a dangerous client mix! While his web site describes his successes for his clients, we can assume that he lost some cases as well. Maybe someone went Postal on him.

I'm thinking that the husband was the intended target and he just happened to be married to a judge who had issues with a white supremacist. But I'm only speculating.

[Rico567]

At first, I considered a reply to this thread, considering the fact that my attitude toward certain issues underwent a significant change on the selfsame streets of Chicago less than two months ago. But then I thought that my reply might be considered a bit tangential, so I posted it separately as a new thread, entitled "It's a tragedy, but..."

[HankB]

Those who occupy the bench are the physical representation of an abstract concept. An attack on these symbols is much more than an attack on a mortal. America ought not have a class of "nobles" perceived to have more highly valued lives or more right to exist than the rest of us, who are thus relegated to "peasant" status.

The lives of a government employee and his family are worth PRECISELY the same as the lives of John Q. Public and his family. Anything else is odious to the fundamental American principle that all men are created equal.

[p35]

While I agree that no one's life is more valuable than another's, I see a qualitative difference between a murder committed for personal reasons- as the vast majority are- and assasinating someone for doing their job in the justice system. It's already been said, but if we allow that sort of thing, we're well down the road to total chaos.

[Black Snowman]

I agree with P35 and others. A murder is a tradgedy either way, but the assasination of a political or judicial figure is also political engineering through violance. I'm suprised no one has called it terrorism yet. I guess people are getting sick of the term.

[p35]

Well, for all we know at this point, it could turn out to have been some mental case who picked the Lefkow's house at random. If it was aimed at the judge because of her work, I don't think anyone will hesitate to call it terrorism.

FWIW, the father of actor Woody Harrelson (the dumb blonde guy from "Cheers") is serving a life term for murdering a Federal judge. IIRC it had to do with a pot smuggling ring in Texas, but I don't recall the details beyond that. I don't think a killing like that qualifies as "terrorism", because it was done for business rather than political reasons. Not to say that he wasn't lucky to get off with a life sentence for that, of course.

[Group9]

This kind of lets people know what we would be in for if all of the crazies who talk about overthrowing the government ever actually started trying to do it. You don't think it could happen here until you go to a few other countries that at one time were pretty civilized ,like Yugoslavia or Lebanon, to see how much damage just a few wingnuts can do.

[buzz_knox]

Fedlaw, I'm fairly certain they could assassinate half the federal judiciary and I would still be in no danger, either from assasination or from side effects of not having enough judges.

Never studied the effects of targeting of the judiciary, have you? Spend some time researching Colombia and Italy and you'll see something interesting that'll show how false your statement is.

By the way, the '68 Gun Control Act was brought about in large part in response to the assassinations of JFK and MLK. What laws do you think would flow from the incredible numbers you're suggesting?

But hey, I'm biased. I know some federal judges who are actually very good folks. Something about the concept of seeing them murdered by scum (or having their families murdered) for doing their jobs bothers me.

[rdbrowning]

One of the reports that I saw on the boob tube quoted that threats against federal judges was up 7X since the early 90's.

Then we have statements like "A murder is a tradgedy either way, but the assasination of a political or judicial figure is also political engineering through violance."

Maybe someone got tired of the "political engineering thruogh the judicery" and decided that if those with black robes can change society w/o the law, maybe they could too. Maybe someone decided that federal judges had traveled so far beyond the line that it was time to put and end to it.

Who knows, maybe this isn't about her, maybe her mom was having an affair and her husband happened to be home when the score was settled. Maybe it was due to her husbands work. Maybe it was due to a case she had or was about to sit on. Or maybe she just happened to be a target of opportunity for those that would "feed the hogs" and thin the federal government a bit. I don't know.

[Group9]

Maybe someone got tired of the "political engineering thruogh the judicery" and decided that if those with black robes can change society w/o the law, maybe they could too. Maybe someone decided that federal judges had traveled so far beyond the line that it was time to put and end to it.

This is the kind of thinking, that you can start killing and destroying instruments of government that make decisions you don't agree with, and everyone else will just start to agree with you, and do what you want, out of fear of being killed.

That is terrorism, plain and simple. And, the sad and amazing thing is, that there are a lot of fruitcakes in this country who are stupid enough to do it.

[Silver Bullet]

The lives of a government employee and his family are worth PRECISELY the same as the lives of John Q. Public and his family. Anything else is odious to the fundamental American principle that all men are created equal.
Exactly right.

The point of my earlier post is that there are going to be leftys screaming for censorship of the internet while condoning the Ohio newspaper's publishing CCW holder names.

[Cosmoline]

Does anyone have more details on exactly how they pulled this off? I know the Marshals aren't the Secret Service, but surely the judge's family had at least some level of protection? The federal courts have turned into Ft. Knox since 9/11, but apparently nobody thought to lock the door of the judge's house.

[Cosmoline]

The lives of a government employee and his family are worth PRECISELY the same as the lives of John Q. Public and his family. Anything else is odious to the fundamental American principle that all men are created equal.

True, but anything violent attack that challenges the ability of a judge to do his or her job is far more serious than it would otherwise be. This isn't because the judge is a demigod, but because the office of the judge must be protected if we're to have anything like a fair judicial system. As soon as the bench is vulnerable, it's not too far before we become like so many other nations in Latin America, Africa and even southern Europe. I'll gladly suffer a hundred arrogant left-wing Article III life termers over even one lacky who cowtows to some threat. I always want my judges to be able to tell me and everyone else to go to hell and stay there, with no fear of physical violence as a result.

[rock jock]

Yes, yes. Your life is very valuable. In fact, you should have as much right to be protected by the Secret Service as the President. Afterall, your death and death of the President would have precisely the same effect on the world. :rolleyes:

[Jeff Timm]

Rock Jock commented, "Yes, yes. Your life is very valuable. In fact, you should have as much right to be protected by the Secret Service as the President. Afterall, your death and death of the President would have precisely the same effect on the world."

Actually, his demise would have less effect, he has a highly compentent and well developed back up in place, I don't.

Now, if any politician wants protection beyond a call to 911 they should pay for it out of their own pocket. Instead we get city council cretins with full time police bodyguards, and the people have no protection at all, and are largely forbidden to defend themselves.

Geoff
Who places an extreamely low value on professional politicians. :cool:

[buzz_knox]

While the President has people in place, his death would have effects far out of proportion to that of another citizen. He is the Constitutional and symbolic head of the United States, and should that head be injured, the body will necessarily be disrupted.

People who argue otherwise never studied history. The Reconstruction in the South was more severe and oppressive in large part because of Lincoln's assassination. Not only was there desire for revenge for his death, but his moderating influence was gone. He didn't want to beat down the South, he wanted to bring it back into the fold. Those who succeeded him had the opposite goals.

The aftermath of Kennedy's assassination brought Johnson into power (you said something about competent people, which I think Johnson disproves readily), helped keep us in Vietnam, and allowed passage of various laws in his honor (some good, some horrible).

[HankB]

Cold bloodedly murdering a judge or a judge's family is a heinous crime. It ought to be pursued vigorously and the perpetrators brought to justice. Capital punishment would be appropriate upon conviction.

Cold bloodedly murdering John Q. Public or John Q. Public's family is a heinous crime. It ought to be pursued just as vigorously and the perpetrators brought to justice. Capital punishment would be appropriate upon conviction.

Sadly, some peasants-at-heart seem to be comfortable with the idea of an American nobility (extending well beyond the head of state) which merits special protection and special privilege - an attitude that says "Government workers are more important than I am. Their families are more important than mine. And that's as it should be." (I hope they're honest enough to inform their own families of the "high" regard they hold them in.)

If we see this in a group like THR, one wonders about the concept of self-worth and self-image in the general population of sheeple. :(

[buzz_knox]

Great. Now those who understand why the system tends to be concerned about the intentional targetting of certain individuals are "peasants-at-heart."

By the way, I don't think anyone has argued that there is an American nobility. But when people decide to effect legal/political change via violent means, some of us are a wee bit concerned because history shows that such action invariable leads to consequences disproportionate to what would otherwise be the case for an "ordinary" crime.

Notice how I was able to deal with your argument without resorting to an insult?

[fedlaw]

Instead we get city council cretins with full time police bodyguards, and the people have no protection at all, and are largely forbidden to defend themselves.
At Saturday's funeral for Mike Lefkow, many of the federal judges walked by themselves the 4 or 5 blocks from where they parked their own cars and then waited in line like everyone else. Of course the Little King pulled up in front with his private army (paid for by his subjects). (The same Little Richie Daley who has proposed lots of "new" gun control legislation.)

[p35]

The one time I got to have lunch with a Federal judge, he showed up driving an old VW Bug! If a lawyer is talented and connected enough to make it to the Federal bench, he/she could be making a lot more money doing something else, without the political aggravation of getting through the Senate. They generally aren't pretentious and do it because they care about the job.

[Group9]

HankB

Sadly, some peasants-at-heart seem to be comfortable with the idea of an American nobility (extending well beyond the head of state) which merits special protection and special privilege - an attitude that says "Government workers are more important than I am. Their families are more important than mine. And that's as it should be." (I hope they're honest enough to inform their own families of the "high" regard they hold them in.)

If we see this in a group like THR, one wonders about the concept of self-worth and self-image in the general population of sheeple.

Maybe they don't see public employees as "nobility" so much as they see them as their employees and worry about someone being killed, or having their family killed, because they are doing a job for them.

You lists your job as an engineer. How concerned would you be if you found that one of your construction employees, or his family, was killed because someone wanted to stop a building you were working on? Would you feel some extra responsibility for the worker or would you just say, "that's his tough luck" and "better him or his family than mine"?

Go look at other countries, like Colombia, where the judiciary was not treated better because of the responsibilities they had agreed to take on. Almost everyone agrees that the most damaging thing done to turn Colombia into a narco-terrorist state, was slow reaction to the problem of judicial genocide resulting in a terrified judiciary.

Some people just don't realize how fragile civilization can be (along with romaticizing how great life would be with all unpleasant order gone). It may not be popular to say, but people willing to place their lives at risk to do important things may very well be more valuable to society than those who won't.

[HankB]

Group9,

To quote myself: Cold bloodedly murdering a judge or a judge's family is a heinous crime. It ought to be pursued vigorously and the perpetrators brought to justice. Capital punishment would be appropriate upon conviction. Did you actually read that first part of my post? If so, I just don't see where you figure from this I'd say "tough luck . . . " or shrug it off if an employee of mine were murdered. I'd expect the crime " . . . to be pursued vigorously and the perpetrators brought to justice. Capital punishment would be appropriate upon conviction."

Clear enough? Or do you have a problem with my desire to see the same effort to bring the perps to justice no matter who is murdered?

As for Columbia where you say judges were treated no better than anyone else - well, just exactly how did Columbian authorities react to murders of a "nobody" like Juan Q. Publico? It looks to me like Columbia has a LOT more trouble than failing to protect judges - they've pretty much failed to protect anybody for a long time.

Do you have a family? Have you discussed your apparent viewpoint that if a judge's family is murdered, you're comfortable with the system going after the perps in that case with more vigor than if one of your own family were to be the victim? What do they think about your view that a judge's family is more important than your own and merits a higher degree of protection than they do? This may be a topic for a frank discussion. Maybe you can convince them that they ought to regard you as being less than a government employee.

I guess some people are comfortable with the Orwellian concept that "All animals are equal . . . but some are more equal than others." :(

I'm not.

If you disagree with me, fine. If you don't understand my viewpoint, try harder. In either case, I'm through with this thread. :rolleyes:

[buzz_knox]

HankB, let's put a question to you. You suggest that Colombia has major problems outside of the assassinations of its judicial officials. Has it possibly dawned on you that the existing problem were aggravated to the current problem by the assassinations of law enforcement officials and judges? You're using the aftermath to minimize one of the causes of the aftermath.

If you want to ignore facts and history to support your position, that's your perogative. But much like your tendency to insult those who disagree with you, it's intellectually dishonest.

[TheOtherOne]

Police tie suicide to murders of judge's relatives
Man does not appear connected to white supremacists

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7137455/

I just saw a guy being interviewed on NBC and he said they found THREE HUNDRED .22 caliber shells in his minivan. Yes, he did emphasize three hundred! Stop the investigation, no need to read a suicide note, no need to do forensics -- anyone with 300 rounds of .22 caliber ammunition is obviously guilty!

[buzz_knox]

Actually, if you suggested to a founding father that he'd murder a judge for these activities, you'd find yourself on the field of honor facing that person. Those people created the impeachment process to deal with judges like that, rather than via murder.

If you have a problem with an out of line judge, have you requested your Congresscritter to initiate an impeachment process? No? Then perhaps you should, before suggesting that the people who created the process would resort to murder.

[Waitone]

<Clap, clap, clap>

Hear, Hear! Bellyachin' about judges is pointless. Each and every single judge in the federal courts below SCOTUS is a creature of the United States Legislature. You gotta a beef with judges? Call your congressional vermin. Congress created the problem and only congress can fix the problem.

We do the gun rights wars no good by advocating stupid actions as a solution to a problem. Congress just loves it when stupid sheep blame some one or some thing for a problem it created.

[rock jock]

Actually, if you suggested to a founding father that he'd murder a judge for these activities, you'd find yourself on the field of honor facing that person. Those people created the impeachment process to deal with judges like that, rather than via murder.
Finally, a voice of reason. This country is based on the rule of law, or maybe "cross" would rather we lived as one of the 3rd-world type cesspools where chaos and the rule of force prevails. Just in case you don't know, justice and liberty are far more suppressed in these type societies than in our own.

[p35]

FWIW, the guy apparently left a suicide note admitting he did the murders, and had a grudge against the judge because she ruled against him on some civil case. Still needs to be confirmed, but it sure looks good for a solution.

Not surprised that it wasn't white supremacists- they love to blow hot air but generally are either too dumb or too cowardly to pull something like this.

[cuchulainn]

I really wish that people would stop insulting the honor of the Founding Fathers by using them as justification for violent fantasies. As buzz has pointed out, although the FFs were obviously willing to use violence, they would not have approved of the modern calls to vigilante murder because of disagreements over court decisions.

And I also wish that those people would actually do something besides fantasize before they start considering themselves anywhere near -- much less in the same league -- as the FFs.

[Henry Bowman]

FWIW, the guy apparently left a suicide note admitting he did the murders, and had a grudge against the judge because she ruled against him on some civil case. Still needs to be confirmed, but it sure looks good for a solution. At the risk of sounding cliche, it looks too good for a solution. "Suicides" have been known to be faked with confession notes to deflect suspicion from the guilty. Wondering this does not require the use of tinfoil. :uhoh:

[buzz_knox]

I think the problem comes because too many people base their views of how this nation started and the Constitution itself not on their own study of the situation, but on what they pick up here and there. For example, too many times people say "well, Jefferson talked about refreshing the tree of liberty with blood" without understanding both the context of that statement, and the fact that it represents a break with Jefferson's prior thinking, indicative of something going on behind the scenes. Similarly, the knowledge that the founding fathers revolted against the British somehow obscures or eliminates the fact that many of those same individuals were loyal British subjects who only turned to violence when years of efforts at peaceful resolution within the system failed.

[cuchulainn]

Buzz,

Yeah, it's amazing how many of them forget Jefferson's warning in the DoI:

"Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

[Byron Quick]

Buzz,

Jefferson was one of a distinct minority of the Founding Fathers who supported the French Revolution to the hilt. I've read several Jefferson biographies. I've never gotten the sense that the quote about the tree of liberty requiring frequent fertiliization with the blood of patriots and tyrants was a departure from either his past viewpoint or from his future viewpoint. He was much more redical at heart than most of his colleagues. Consider his indictments against King George III in his original draft of the Declaration of Independence...the ones that were expurgated by Congress.

[buzz_knox]

Byron, you are correct. But his statements about America being overdue for a revolution came at a time when the only "negative" from his view was that his political opponents were in power. The government was still newly formed, and there weren't anything approaching the abuses that led to the initial revolution.

[Byron Quick]

there weren't anything approaching the abuses that led to the initial revolution.

Of course the level of abuse was nowhere near that level. Jefferson didin't think it should get anywhere near that level, either:D
"What are you rebelling against?"
"Whattya got?"

Jefferson seemed to believe in revolution as a prophylactic measure. Revolt early and often to keep them cut down to size.