Monday, April 29, 2013

( Gunmakers and the NRA ) Patcnews April 29, 2013 The Patriot Conservative News Tea Party Network Reorts Gunmakers and the NRA © All copyrights reserved By Patcnews

U.S. files new suit on Ariz. immigration issue

By Jerry Markon
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
The Justice Department filed another lawsuit against immigration practices by Arizona authorities, saying Monday that a network of community colleges acted illegally in requiring noncitizens to provide their green cards before they could be hired for jobs.
The suit against the Phoenix area Maricopa Community Colleges was filed less than two months after the Justice Department sued Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer (R) over the state's new immigration law. It also comes as the department is investigating Joe Arpaio, the sheriff in Maricopa County, who is known for tough immigration enforcement.
In Monday's lawsuit, Justice officials said the colleges discriminated against nearly 250 noncitizen job applicants by mandating that they fill out more documents than required by law to prove their eligibility to work. That violated the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, the department said.
The law's anti-discrimination provision "makes it unlawful to treat authorized workers differently during the hiring process based on their citizenship status," said Thomas E. Perez, assistant attorney general for Justice's Civil Rights Division. He said the government "is acting now to remedy this pattern or practice of discrimination."

Tom Gariepy, a spokesman for Maricopa Community Colleges - which operates 10 colleges and two vocational training centers in and around Phoenix - declined to comment.
Justice Department officials said the lawsuit is unrelated to the case against Brewer and the probe of Arpaio and stems from a different investigation that began in January 2009 - the month the Obama administration took office.
It is the latest example of stepped-up enforcement by the department's Civil Rights Division, which has been reshaping itself after an exodus of lawyers during the Bush administration. It filed a similiar lawsuit in April against John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.
The lawsuit was filed Tuesday before the Executive Office for Immigration Review, a Justice Department unit that adjudicates immigration cases. It was filed on behalf of Zainul Singaporewalla, a U.S. permanent resident who was offered a math teaching position at Glendale Community College, part of the Maricopa network.
After filling out a federal form attesting to his immigration status and producing a driver's license and Social Security card, he was told to complete another form with more immigration-related information, the lawsuit said.
That form required other documents and his green card. When he couldn't present his green card, the suit said, the college would not process his paperwork and would not let him work.
The government is asking a judge within the Justice Department unit to order the Maricopa colleges to pay a civil penalty of $1,100 for each of the 247 non-U.S.-citizen job applicants it says were required to produce the additional documents. It says the colleges ended the practice in January.


BREAKING: New Law – Guns Bought in Arizona Buybacks CANNOT Be Destroyed, Will be Sold to Public

April 30 2013
from → Blog

submit to reddit        
Photo: Wikimedia Commons (Public Domain)
Photo: Wikimedia Commons (Public Domain)
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed into law yesterday a bill that would make the destruction of guns bought through government organizaed buybacks illegal.
The wording of the new law requires that whenever a government sponsored gun buyback takes place the guns acquired must be publicly auctioned off, just like every other piece of non-evidence property.
Proponents of the NRA backed law say that the buybacks were costing taxpayers a large sum of money by using government funds to purchase and destroy weapons.
According to the, the law is not meant to completely remove the ability to destroy a gun in the state, but only to limit the use of government resources to do so.

Proponents of the legislation said none of this keeps the owner of a firearm from having it destroyed. The only difference, they said, is that this would have to be done privately, without involvement of municipal employees.
Any guns bought will be sold at public auction, but only federally licensed firearms dealers will be permitted to purchase the firearms. Those dealers can then sell the firearms to the general public following the same laws and regulations for normal gun sales.
Obviously, anti gun Democrats were not happy about the measure.

“This action by the governor is not only outrageous, but it is insensitive for us now to be putting these guns back on the streets,” said state Senator Steve Gallardo, a Democrat and a leading opponent of the measure. “That’s just plain wrong.”
The bill was passed by the state House back in March, the Senate earlier this month, and was signed by Brewer yesterday.

Gunmakers aim for greener pastures as states pass new firearms laws

CT gun industry.jpg

Arms manufacturers in at least two states with strict new gun laws are making good on their promise to move their operations -- along with thousands of jobs and millions in tax revenues  -- to locales they deem friendlier to the industry.
In Connecticut, where venerable gunmakers like Colt and Sturm, Ruger & Co. have been joined in the last decade or so by upstarts like Stag Arms and PTR, reform of gun laws in the wake of the Sandy Hook school shootings has left the industry feeling unwelcome. Bristol-based high-end rifle manufacturer PTR Industries announced this month via Facebook that it would be taking its 40 jobs and $50,000 weekly payroll to an unspecified new state, widely believed to be Texas.

“With a heavy heart but a clear mind, we have been forced to decide that our business can no longer survive in Connecticut – the former Constitution state.”
- Gunmaker PTR INdustries, in Facebook statement
“With a heavy heart but a clear mind, we have been forced to decide that our business can no longer survive in Connecticut – the former Constitution State,” PTR said in a statement earlier this month.
AR-15 manufacturer Stag Arms could soon follow suit, along with Colt's Manufacturing and Mossberg & Sons. The moves could cost the Nutmeg State 3,000 jobs as well as the estimated $1.75 billion in annual taxable revenues.
Texas is making no secret of its desire to lure the gunmakers. This month, Gov. Rick Perry turned to Twitter to welcome PTR to move to the Lone Star state.
“Hey, PTR," Perry posted on Twitter. "Texas is still wide open for business!! Come on down!"
This month, Connecticut lawmakers approved a wide-ranging bill that includes new restriction on weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines. The 139-page bipartisan bill passed 26-10 in the Senate and 105-44 in the House. The new law adds more than 100 firearms to the state’s assault weapons ban and creates what officials have called the nation’s first dangerous weapon offender registry as well as eligibility rules for buying ammunition.
The push to reform gun control laws accelerated after the Dec. 14 massacre of 20 children and six adults at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn. Although proposals for strict new federal laws have not gained traction, states have taken it upon themselves to crack down on arms. Connecticut joins California, New York and Massachusetts in having some of the country’s strongest gun-control laws on the books.
Like Connecticut, the fight over tighter restrictions prompted several gun manufacturers in Colorado to threaten to leave.
In March, Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper signed bills that would require background checks for private and online gun sales and ban ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds
Magpul Industries, which manufactures firearms accessories and ammunition magazines, said on its Facebook page that it would have "no choice" but to leave if the magazine bill was signed, causing an opening for states eager to prove they're more gun-friendly.
Magpul employs more than 200 people and generates about $85 million in annual taxable revenues.
Grassroots Facebook pages have popped up -- some, before the Colorado bills were even signed -- encouraging Magpul to settle in places like Alabama, West Virginia or Alaska.
Alaska state Rep. Tammie Wilson's staff created a Facebook page, too, called "Magpul Industries -- Alaska Wants You."
But no one has worked harder than Texas to make gun companies feel welcome. Lawmakers there have green-lighted a measure that would free up money to local and regional economic development agencies to offer incentives to gun manufacturers to relocate in the state. Perry says it's all about bringing jobs to his state, "whether you’re a weapons manufacturer or whether you’re a tubular steel manufacturer.”
"There is still a place for freedom that is very much alive and well," Perry said. "That place is called Texas."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Read more:

Let your golden years be the most precious of your life, full of freedom and choice. A time to pursue your hobbies, travel and enjoy the good life. You will never miss your salary cheque or be constrained by rising inflation. Even as you work hard to make a better today, it is up to you to create a superior tomorrow. If you want to sustain your current lifestyle even after you stop working, make that money work for you.
A Pension Plan is a plan for setting aside money to be spent after retirement.
Pension Plans which will make sure that we are there to support you in every stage of your life and your savings today become your wealth and support for your future years to come.

Key Features
• A Guaranteed Monthly from the Selected Retirement Age and continued during the lifetime of the policyholder
• A Guaranteed Life Assurance amount from inception until age 75 or 90
• There is no upper limit to the amount of premium that can be paid into the Personal Pension Plan • 100% of your contribution will be credited to Personal Pension Fund Account (PPFA).


The Family Limited Partnership (FLP) is probably the most beneficial structure available for wealth preservation via asset protection, estate planning and tax minimization. Although you "can't take it with you," by placing your assets into FLPs you can legally and successfully protect everything you own from attack by creditors and from erosion by exorbitant taxes.
In order to illustrate the efficacy of Family Limited Partnerships from an asset protection, estate planning and tax minimization point of view, consider the case of "Dr. Jones," a fictitious character derived from actual client situations. [Although, for illustration purposes, we have created a hypothetical physician, the principles discussed herein apply equally to all professionals and, indeed, to all individuals who have accumulated significant wealth.]
Dr. Jones is a successful physician in Long Island, New York. He is approximately 50 years old, is married with three teen-aged children, and is chief of surgery at a major hospital. Dr. Jones' estate is worth approximately five million dollars.
In addition to his surgery practice, Dr. Jones owns his home, as well as several investment properties including an apartment building and a shopping center. Dr. Jones also sits on the board of directors of his hospital and his country club.
Dr. Jones wanted to establish a wealth preservation strategy for three specific reasons:
  1. Dr. Jones was very concerned by the proliferation of medical malpractice lawsuits and wanted to protect his significant assets in the event that he was sued by a patient. In addition, Dr. Jones knew that as a landlord, he was prone to litigation from tenants and other persons who might be injured on one of his properties. He was sensitive to the fact that as a physician and a property owner, he was perceived as a "deep pocket target" by aggressive negligence lawyers.
  2. Dr. Jones wanted to reduce his estate tax liability so that upon his and his wife's deaths, their children would inherit as much as legally possible, with as little as possible (or nothing) paid to the I.R.S. in the form of inheritance taxes.
  3. Dr. Jones hoped to minimize his current income tax liability on the income received from his rental properties.


Asset protection is defined as the safeguarding of personal wealth from attack by future creditors. "Assets" are broadly defined and include homes, cars, boats, jewelry, business interests, cash, bank accounts, brokerage accounts, stocks, bonds, art and other collections, real estate, etc.
"Creditors" are also broadly defined and include actual creditors as well as identifiable probable creditors, such as litigants, soon-to-be ex-spouses, disgruntled business partners, or anyone who you know that has a claim against you, even if they do not yet know it. Creditors may even include government agencies, such as the I.R.S.
The effectiveness of an FLP in providing asset protection is statutory, meaning that it has been codified as law. The Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act (RULPA), which has been adopted in all fifty states, provides that the assets owned by a limited partnership are not owned by the individual partners.
Therefore, those assets cannot be attached by the personal creditors of a partner. If a person contributes assets to an FLP, those assets are no longer owned by that person (although, as explained below, the person may still control those assets), and creditors of that person may not attach those assets merely because they have a judgment against a partner of the FLP.

The Essence of Asset Protection Planning: Control Everything But Own Nothing

A family limited partnership is, by definition, a joint venture between family members. The partnership is comprised of both general and limited partners. Dr. and Mrs. Jones are each the general partners. [Because Mrs. Jones is not a licensed physician, Dr. Jones is the sole general partner of the FLP that owns the stock in his medical practice.]
Dr. and Mrs. Jones also own limited partnership interests, as do their children. The general partners manage and control the partnership. The general partners decide and implement all decisions of the partnership, such as whether to buy or sell an asset in the partnership, what investments the partnership should make, and whether to make a distribution of profits from the partnership. The general partners may even determine to dissolve the FLP. It should be apparent that the general partners control the operation of the partnership, in their absolute discretion. Dr. and Mrs. Jones thus control the assets and make the decisions regarding those assets just as they did before the FLP. Although they transferred legal ownership or "title" to those assets to the FLP, they retained control.
Unlike corporations, FLP's are not democracies -- there is no 51% majority control. Even if they own 99% of the FLP, the limited partners do not outvote the general partners. The limited partners in the FLP are similar to "silent" partners or passive investors.
They have equity interests in the partnership, but have no decision making authority over the partnership or the assets therein. Limited partners, for example, are not entitled to demand distributions or other payments from the FLP. In addition, limited partners may not sell or assign their partnership interests without the consent of the general partners, nor force the liquidation of the FLP. The general partners are thus in complete control of the FLP, although they do not own the assets in the FLP.

The Structure of the Asset Protection Plan: Segregation of High Risk Assets

Dr. Jones and his advisors set up a complete FLP plan in order to achieve his first goal, asset protection. Early in the process, they took inventory of Dr. Jones' assets. They examined each asset individually and evaluated its likelihood of being attacked, based on the chances it would generate a liability. They placed each of Dr. Jones' properties into a separate FLP.
Thus, the shopping center that he owned was placed in one FLP, and his apartment building was placed in another FLP. The reason for treating each real estate asset individually and placing each one in its own FLP is to minimize the litigation exposure of each asset.
If an FLP would be sued as owner of a property by someone hurt on that property, assets in a different FLP would not be in danger. In general, high risk assets or those prone to litigation, such as rental property, should be kept separate from low risk assets, like Dr. Jones' personal bank and brokerage accounts, which were all placed into one FLP. Dr. Jones' home was also placed into a separate FLP. Dr. Jones' private medical practice was registered as a professional corporation.
Dr. Jones owned one hundred percent of the stock of that corporation and he placed that stock into a separate FLP. If Dr. Jones were to get sued, the professional corporation would cease paying him a salary. Instead, it would distribute profits (and management fees) directly to its shareholder, the FLP, where the money would be protected.
Thus, Dr. Jones' assets were protected from each other and, as explained below, they were all protected from any future personal attack against him.

Keeping The Wolves Out: A Few Examples

During one snowy winter day, a tenant in Dr. Jones' apartment building stepped outside, took a few steps and promptly slipped on the icy sidewalk. An aggressive personal injury attorney convinced the tenant to sue her landlord for injuries sustained in the fall, including pain and suffering, loss of income and post-traumatic stress. The tenant's spouse also sued for "loss of consortium".
The attorney, expecting to reap a windfall from a "deep pocket" doctor, took the case on a 33% contingency. When the attorney investigated who the landlord was, to his chagrin he learned that it was the "Dr. Jones Apartments Family Limited Partnership," not Dr. Jones himself.
A little more research revealed that the partnership owned no assets other than the apartment building, and a local bank held a large mortgage on the building. All of Dr. Jones' other assets were owned by other FLPs which had nothing to do with this accident and could therefore not be included in this lawsuit.
To their great disappointment, the tenants and their attorney quickly understood that there was no "deep pocket" and there would be no windfall. The attorney realized that, even if he won the case, the judgment would be uncollectible. Since 33% of zero equals zero, he quickly settled for whatever Dr. Jones' insurance company offered and went away.
The very next month, an auto accident occurred in the parking lot of Dr. Jones' shopping center. A smarter, more aggressive negligence lawyer, realizing that a lawsuit against the "Dr. Jones Shopping Center Family Limited Partnership" would not yield very much, also sued Dr. and Mrs. Jones personally as general partners of the FLP.
He claimed that, as general partners, they were personally liable for the FLP's negligence in maintaining the shopping center. Dr. and Mrs. Jones' attorney promptly informed the plaintiff's negligence lawyer that Dr. and Mrs. Jones had no attachable assets.
They owned nothing -- not even Dr. Jones' medical practice (although they controlled a great deal). A judgment against Dr. and Mrs. Jones would therefore be uncollectable. Once again, there was no "deep pocket" and no windfall. Rather than wasting his time on a case with little or no potential reward, this lawyer also quickly settled for Dr. Jones' insurance company's offer.
The following summer, when a guest was hurt in the swimming pool at Dr. Jones' country club, the injured guest sued not only the country club, but also each of the members of the club's board of directors, including of course, Dr. Jones. The plaintiff claimed negligent supervision of the club by its directors. Unfortunately, the country club did not carry errors and omissions insurance for its directors.
Again, Dr. Jones' attorney promptly explained to the plaintiff's attorney that Dr. Jones had no attachable assets. In order to avoid a lengthy litigation and its attendant legal expenses, Dr. Jones offered to settle the lawsuit against him for a nominal amount -- less than the expected cost of legal fees to defend it.
Dr. Jones made his settlement offer to the plaintiff on a "take it or leave it" basis. Since the settlement offer was better than an uncollectible judgment, the plaintiff reluctantly took it. The plaintiff pursued his litigation against the country club and the other unprotected directors, while Dr. Jones watched from the golf course.
Finally, one of Dr. Jones' patients developed a post-surgical infection with complications. The patient sued Dr. Jones, the hospital and every doctor and nurse who had any contact with the patient during and after the surgery. The lawsuit demanded $5,000,000 in damages from each defendant, jointly and severally. Unfortunately, last year Dr. Jones' malpractice insurance company had reduced the liability limits of all policies across the board to $1,000,000 maximum per occurrence.
If the plaintiff were to win his lawsuit, Dr. Jones would be personally liable for $4,000,000. Once again, Dr. Jones' attorney uttered the magic words, no attachable assets. The plaintiff accepted the insurance company's payment of $1,000,000 in full settlement of his claim against Dr. Jones and dropped the doctor from the lawsuit.
In each of the above cases, the fact that Dr. Jones had no attachable assets served to effectively discourage the lawsuit. Once the plaintiff realized that, even if it wins the lawsuit, it would be almost impossible to collect a judgment, the plaintiff was forced to accept a settlement on Dr. Jones' terms. This, indeed, is the real value of asset protection via FLPs.

Recourse of A Judgment Creditor: K.O. With A K-1

But what if a plaintiff refuses to settle, prosecutes its lawsuit and wins a humongous judgment against Dr. Jones? The successful plaintiff in this scenario (who is now known as a judgment creditor) is limited to a "charging order."
A charging order entitles the judgment creditor to receive Dr. Jones' share of any distribution of profits or assets made by the FLP. The judgment creditor is still not entitled to reach the assets owned by the FLP. Distributions are, however, made in the sole and absolute discretion of the general partners, Dr. and Mrs. Jones.
As general partners, they may determine never to make a distribution. The FLP may still pay salary to Mrs. Jones, who is not a judgment debtor, and it may make loans to Dr. Jones' children, who also are not judgment debtors. Neither of these payments are "distributions" to Dr. Jones. They are therefore not subject to the charging order and beyond the reach of the judgment creditor.
The judgment creditor's charging order is, however, a poisonous piece of paper, one that will cause the creditor great harm. Although the FLP might never make a distribution, the judgment creditor's right to such distribution makes him liable for the tax on the income he never receives. This is known as the "phantom income doctrine."
The FLP issues a tax form known as a Schedule K-1 to each partner once a year. This Schedule K-1 sets forth that partner's share of FLP income, whether distributed or not. Each partner attaches the Schedule K-1 to his or her income tax return and includes his or her share of FLP income on the tax return, whether distributed or not.
If a creditor obtains a charging order entitling him to Dr. Jones' share of the FLP's distributions, the FLP will issue the Schedule K-1 to that creditor instead of to Dr. Jones.
Pursuant to Revenue Ruling 77-137, the IRS will require the judgment creditor in possession of a charging order to pay tax on Dr. Jones' share of FLP income, even though that income is never distributed!
This has a profound effect in deterring litigants and creditors from bringing lawsuits against defendants like Dr. Jones, whose assets are owned by FLPs.
Dr. Jones' asset protection plan provided him and his family with complete protection from lawsuits, not only by protecting their assets from attack by judgment creditors but, more importantly, by discouraging the lawsuits in the first place.
Injured parties did receive reasonable compensation from Dr. Jones' insurers and left Dr. Jones alone.

A Word About Fraudulent Conveyances

It should be noted that the establishment of an asset protection plan solely to protect assets from existing creditors may be construed as an improper attempt to thwart such creditors. In this regard, a creditor may attack an FLP plan as having been established fraudulently, for the specific purpose of evading debts due to that creditor.
For this reason, clients should establish their asset protection plan before any claims arise against them. If it is too late to do this, clients should at least have another valid purpose, apart from asset protection, as the reason behind their FLP plan. Estate planning and income tax minimization (both of which are discussed below) are such valid purposes.
Thus, it is important to implement an FLP plan in the context of complete estate and tax planning, including the execution of a valid will and the establishment of appropriate trusts. If the FLP plan is included as part of a comprehensive estate and tax plan, creditors will have far less likelihood of successfully arguing that the FLPs were established solely to avoid creditors.
As noted earlier, when Dr. and Mrs. Jones pass away, assuming no change in the value of their assets, their estate would be worth five million dollars. The "unified credit" that is currently allowed by law exempts estate assets valued at $1,000,000 per person.
Dr. and Mrs. Jones' combined unified credits of $2,000,000 would reduce the value of their taxable estate to $3,000,000, which would be subject to estate tax at a current rate of approximately 50%. Thus, if Dr. and Mrs. Jones did not set up an FLP plan, $2,000,000 would pass to their heirs free of taxes (via the unified credits), and their heirs would split the remaining $3,000,000 with the government, 50% to the Jones' children ($1,500,000), and 50% to the IRS ($1,500,000).
Clearly, Dr. and Mrs. Jones would like to redirect (legally, of course), as much as possible of the IRS' $1,500,000 to their children.
At this point, it is important to digress from Dr. Jones and his family and consider an important issue: the propriety of tax minimization. There is absolutely nothing immoral, illegal, unethical or even unpatriotic about minimizing your tax obligation.
It is a criminal act to engage in tax evasion or tax fraud. However, the structuring of your assets, through legal means, to pay as little as possible to the IRS and preserve as much as possible for yourself and your family is completely valid and legal.
Consider the comments of Judge Learned Hand, one of the most important federal judges of the last century:
"Over and over again, courts have said that there is nothing sinister in arranging one's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich and poor; and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands: taxes are enforced exactions, not voluntary contributions."
[Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Newman, 159 F.2d 848 (2d Cir. 1947) (dissenting opinion). See also, Gregory v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465 (1935)("[T]he legal right of a taxpayer to decrease the amount of what otherwise would be his taxes, or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits cannot be avoided.")]
Family limited partnerships legally save estate taxes by the combined operation of discounting the value of limited partnership interests, and gifting the discounted limited interests. The two principals work together.
First, the value of a limited interest in the FLP is discounted. Once discounted, more FLP interests can be gifted tax-free to the next generation, which results in more assets passing out of an individual's taxable estate. It is important to remember that, as explained above, a limited interest has no right to control the FLP. That right is reserved to the general partners (Dr. and Mrs. Jones), and is never given away.
The principal of discounting recognizes two inherent reductions in the value of a limited interest in a family limited partnership. One reduction in value is due to the fact that a limited interest in an FLP is a non-controlling interest in a family enterprise. A purchaser of such a limited interest would be an outsider and would have no right to expect any distributions from the FLP unless the general partner decided to make one or unless all general partners died and the FLP liquidated.
A second reduction in value is due to the fact that there is no ready market for the purchase and sale of FLP limited interests and therefore no liquidity. The courts have forced the IRS to recognize the validity of these two discounts and such recognition has been codified by the IRS in Revenue Ruling 93-12.
The IRS routinely accepts discounts in values of limited interests in FLPs varying from thirty percent to as high as fifty percent, depending, among other things, on the liquidity of the FLP's assets, the likelihood of a distribution or liquidation and the profitability of the FLP.
It is important to understand that the discount applies to the value of the interest in the FLP; the value of the asset held in the FLP remains the same.
Thus, for example, the Jones family home was worth $1,000,000 before Dr. Jones began his estate planning, and the value of the home remained $1,000,000 after it was contributed to the FLP. If the home was sold, it would command a sale price of $1,000,000 whether or not it was contained within the FLP.
Although the value of the home is preserved, the FLP can accomplish significant estate tax savings via gifting of discounted limited interests in the "Jones Residence Family Limited Partnership." The IRS would recognize a 50% discount in the value of a limited interest in an FLP containing non-liquid assets such as a home.
Thus, although the FLP containing the Jones family home is worth $1,000,000, the value of all the limited interests of the FLP, discounted at a rate of 50% equals $500,000. Assume that Dr. Jones wished to gift as much as possible to his children during his lifetime in order to minimize the value of his estate at death.
Using $500,000 of their combined $2,000,000 unified credit, Dr. Jones and his wife would make a tax-free gift of $500,000 worth of limited partnership interests to their three children. [The unified credit is not exclusively reserved for death; it may instead be used to exempt a gift made during one's life from gift taxes.]
Because of the discounting, this gift would effectively transfer all the limited interests in that FLP out of their estate to their children.
In effect, by making a $500,000 tax-free gift of discounted interests, Dr. and Mrs. Jones transferred 98% of a $1,000,000 partnership, with an actual value of $980,000.
Upon their deaths, Dr. and Mrs. Jones, as 1% general partners, would each own $10,000 worth of partnership interests, but they would have controlled the entire $1,000,000 FLP until the very end. In addition, future appreciation on the value of the limited partnership interests given to the children will be excluded from Dr. and Mrs. Jones' taxable estate.
Dr. and Mrs. Jones used their total combined unified credits ($2,000,000) to make four sets of tax-free gifts of $500,000 worth of discounted limited interests in the following FLPs :
  1. Jones Residence Family Limited Partnership
          - Actual FLP value: $1,000,000
          - Discounted value of limited interests: $500,000
  2. Dr. Jones Apartments Family Limited Partnership
          - Actual FLP value: $1,000,000
          - Discounted value of limited interests: $500,000
  3. Dr. Jones Shopping Center Family Limited Partnership
          - Actual FLP value: $1,000,000
          - Discounted value of limited interests: $500,000
  4. Dr. Jones, M.D., P.C. Family Limited Partnership
          - Actual FLP value: $1,000,000
          - Discounted value of limited interests: $500,000
[In addition to unified credit gifts of limited partnership interests as described above, Dr. and Mrs. Jones may also take advantage of tax-free "exclusionary gifts" of $11,000 worth of limited partnership interests that may be conveyed each year by each parent to as many people as the parent chooses. Thus, Dr. Jones is able to make an annual gift of $11,000 worth of limited partnership interests to each of the three Jones children, and Mrs. Jones may make an identical $11,000 gift each year to each of the three Jones children. These exclusionary gifts of limited partnership interests may take advantage of the same discounting as above. Again, these tax-free gifts of discounted interests totaling $66,000 would effectively remove assets with an actual value of $132,000 from Dr. and Mrs. Jones' taxable estate.]
After these gifts, Dr. and Mrs. Jones each owned 1% of the above-mentioned FLPs as general partner and their children together owned 98% of each FLP as limited partners. In addition, Dr. and Mrs. Jones each still owned 47% (1% general partner interest and 46% limited partner interest) in the Jones Liquid Asset Family Limited Partnership (total FLP value: $1,000,000).
[Dr. Jones owned 1% of the Dr. Jones, M.D., P.C. Family Limited Partnership as general partner and the Jones children together owned 99% of that FLP as limited partners. Mrs. Jones was not a general partner of the Dr. Jones, M.D., P.C. Family Limited Partnership. See footnote 2, supra.]
If they were to die at that time, the total value of their combined taxable estate would be approximately $1,000,000. The estate tax would be approximately $490,000, instead of $1,500,000. [The current estate tax rate on $1,000,000 is approximately 49%.]
Dr. and Mrs. Jones would benefit from an immediate tax savings of more than $1,000,000. In 2004, the unified credit will increase to $1,500,000 per person.
In one more year, Dr. and Mrs. Jones may utilize the increased credit to gift limited interests in the Jones Liquid Asset Family Limited Partnership, again at discounted values, to their children. Thus, in approximately one year, Dr. and Mrs. Jones will each own only 1% of a $5,000,000 estate but control that estate in its entirety and their estate tax liability will be essentially reduced to zero.
In summary, Dr. Jones' second goal -- minimization of estate taxes and preservation of family wealth for his heirs -- is efficiently and completely accomplished by the use of FLPs. Through the principle of discounting, coupled with tax-free gifting of the discounted limited partnership interests, the value of Dr. and Mrs. Jones' taxable estate will be reduced to zero, although they will retain complete control over their assets, as general partners of the FLPs.
Through the implementation of the FLP plan, the Jones children will be able to enjoy all of their parents' wealth, with nothing paid to the IRS.


FLP's accomplish income tax minimization via the principle of "income spreading". The principle of income spreading essentially allows for income to be spread among various partners of the FLP, including children, who are usually in lower tax brackets [income earned by children under 14 years of age is taxed at their parents' income tax bracket; income earned by children over 14 years of age is taxed at the children's own income tax bracket], rather than taxing all of the income at the highest tax bracket of the wealthy parents. ["Income spreading" is available to partnerships actually engaged in business (e.g., owning or managing rental property or owning a controlling interest in a business.)]
Consider, once again, Dr. Jones and his family. Dr. Jones, with income as chief of surgery at the hospital, his private medical practice, his ownership of a shopping center and an apartment building, is taxed at the highest income tax bracket possible. On the other hand, Dr. Jones' teen-aged children are all students and each is in the lowest tax bracket.
When Dr. and Mrs. Jones transferred their assets into FLPs, the FLPs became the owners of the assets. Any income earned on these assets, for example, rental income received from the shopping center and rental income from the apartment building, is no longer directly taxable as Dr. Jones' income, but instead is treated as income of the appropriate FLP. Partnerships, including FLPs, are treated as "flow through" entities for tax purposes.
Income earned by an FLP "flows through" to the general and limited partners of that FLP, and is taxed according to the tax bracket of each respective partner.
As noted above, Dr. and Mrs. Jones gave each of their children a 32.67% interest in each realty FLP. Thus, when the partnership's income "flows through" to each partner, each child will pay income tax at his or her lower bracket on 32.67% of the income earned by that FLP. [The FLP may distribute or lend enough money to each partner to pay the income taxes.]
Dr. and Mrs. Jones will pay income tax at their higher bracket on only 2% of the FLP's income. As a result, there is an overall lower tax on the family's income.
FLP's also allow for another level of income tax minimization, similar to the income tax deduction granted to an individual for contributing to a qualified retirement plan. Since the realty FLPs are engaged in the business of owning and managing rental properties, these FLP's may employ Dr. Jones, Mrs. Jones and each of their children to provide services to the FLP (e.g., management, bookkeeping, rent collection, etc.)
The FLPs can therefore contribute pre-tax dollars to qualified pension plans on behalf of the FLPs' employees. Contributions made by the FLPs to such pension plans would be tax-deductible expenses of the FLPs, reducing the gross income of the FLPs prior to the "flow through" of net income to the individual partners.


Family Limited Partnerships allowed Dr. Jones to achieve three very important wealth preservation goals. First, he protected his assets from litigants and creditors and discouraged a variety of potentially severe lawsuits. Second, he eliminated the estate taxes that would be due upon his and Mrs. Jones' deaths, thus preserving the family's entire wealth for their children, rather than paying exorbitant estate taxes to the IRS. Third, he reduced his income tax liability on the income received from his real estate investments.
These goals were achieved expeditiously, professionally and legally by taking advantage of the provisions of the Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act and the favorable tax treatment of Family Limited Partnerships.


Content and Programming Copyright 2014 By Patcnews The Patriot Conservative News Tea Party Network © LLC UCC 1-308.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE All copyrights reserved By Patcnews The Patriot Conservative News Tea Party Network Copyright 2014 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.  © All Copyrights reserved By Patcnews The Patriot Conservative News Tea Party Network

Thursday, April 18, 2013

( John Carlson topic What percentage of tuition ) Patcnews April 18, 2013 The Patriot Conservative News Tea Party Network Reports John Carlson topic What percentage of tuition ??? © All copyrights reserved By Patcnews

CNN Reports Barack Obama Has Resigned

Apr. 18, 2013


CNN reported that President Barack Obama resigned today.
Correspondent John King took to the airwaves this morning to explain an email from White House press secretary Jay Carney saying Barack Obama had quit over "budget issues."
The network was forced to retract its claim  five minutes later, however, when it realized that King had taken the email out of context. The embarrassing gaffe comes just one day after CNN falsely reported that an arrest had been made in the Boston Marathon bombing case
"We're following a major news story here at CNN," King told his live audience. "According to an email from a very high level source within the White House, President Barack Obama has resigned effective immediately over some sort of budget problem.
"Again we don't have all the details, and nothing has been confirmed. But we're going to repeat this anyway - it appears that U.S. President Barack Obama has resigned this morning due to a nonspecific issue surrounding the budget."

Most Trusted
After leading a brief discussion panel speculating as to exactly why Obama chose to be the first president since Richard Nixon to quit, CNN producers forced King to apologize on-air for the report.
"I am just getting word that our producers have reviewed the email in question," a chastised King declared, "and they have found no evidence of Obama's resignation. It appears that the email only concerns budget negotiations, and the word 'resigned' was taken out of context.
"We'd like to sincerely apologize to our viewers for this bit of misinformation. Again for those just joining us, President Barack Obama had not resigned today as previously reported on this network."
Indeed examination of the email shows it was nothing more than a routine press release sent to thousands of journalists. The sentence causing the confusion read:
"'Barack Obama is resigned to a smaller budget bill which does not include any new stimulus spending."
In a statement CNN explained that King's misreporting is simply par for the course in the news business.
"In today's 24-hour news cycle fast moving events can often throw even the best networks off guard. CNN deeply regrets this latest error, but we in no way feel it jeopardizes our hard-earned reputation for credibility."

Letter from KVI Talk Radio 570 Seattle WA 

Dear Mark Eberle,

Yesterday, 45 senators chose to ignore their constituents and stand with the gun lobby.

And because of Senate rules, this minority was able to stand in the way of a bipartisan measure to expand background checks for gun sales.

A lot of people are reading the headlines today and wondering how these senators had the nerve to get up there -- right in front of victims' families from Newtown -- and cast that vote against something that more than 90 percent of Americans support. I'm one of them.

Those senators made a cynical calculation that, at the end of the day, the gun lobby would be louder and stronger than we are.

Yesterday was just round one. We will keep fighting.

If you're one of the millions of Americans who care deeply about preventing gun violence, you need to show it today.

Add your name -- tell Congress you're not going to back down now until they pass a common-sense gun violence prevention bill.

Here's where we go from here:

The senators on both sides of the aisle who stood up to the pressure and cast tough votes to do the right thing -- they're going to know that OFA supporters are going to get their backs.

And those senators who decided that not crossing the gun lobby was more important than making our kids and communities safer -- OFA supporters will call them out and hold them accountable to their constituents.

The special interests have been at this longer, and they can do a real good job at scaring people by distorting the facts -- they think we'll go away quietly.

But there are so many more of us than there are of them. And as long as you don't give up, we're going to keep fighting, and someday soon, we will win.

Add your name right now to say you're going to keep fighting -- for the families of Newtown, Aurora, Tucson, Chicago, and the thousands of other communities that have been torn apart by gun violence:

Thank you for what you're doing.

Jon Carson


Content and Programming Copyright 2014 By Patcnews The Patriot Conservative News Tea Party Network © LLC UCC 1-308.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE All copyrights reserved By Patcnews The Patriot Conservative News Tea Party Network Copyright 2014 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content. 
© All Copyrights reserved By Patcnews The Patriot Conservative News Tea Party Network 

Monday, April 15, 2013

( Terrorism Attack at the Boston Marathon ) Patcnews The Patriot Conservative News Tea Party Network Reports A Terrorism Attack at the Boston Marathon Run April 15, 2013 © All copyrights reserved By Patcnews


Terrorism will only cease to be a threat when extremist ideology is marginalised.

Article’s tags: DoubleStandards, Dhimmitude, Media imbalance, Terrorism
'A terror attack is intended to send a message that civilians are not safe in public places.'
'A terror attack is intended to send a message
 that civilians are not safe in public 

places.' Photo: Reuters

The horrific bombing of the Boston Marathon, 

killing three and injuring 282, demonstrated 

that the ''age'' of Islamist terrorism against 

Western civilian targets - heralded by the 

September 11, 2001 attacks - is not over.

 The terrorist threat has neither been 

neutralised nor relegated to the past.

The first step to combating terrorism is to 

accurately identify the motivations behind 

attacks. Therefore, in the immediate

 aftermath of Boston, when little was known,

 blind speculation about the perpetrators or 

motives was indeed counterproductive.

However, this changed once evidence 

mounted that Tamerlan and Dzhokhar 

Tsarnaev were the perpetrators, and that lead

 plotter Tamerlan, at least, was a disciple of 

radical Islamism

What is now counterproductive is to refuse to 

acknowledge that the attack was part of a

 wider reality of terror motivated by the spread

of transnational, violent and radical Islamist 


Today, thanks largely to the internet, violent,

 radical Islamism can be propagated not only

 in Islamic countries, but also in Western 

societies - even without any direct recruitment

 by operatives from organised groups such as

 al-Qaeda (although a face-to-face 

''radicaliser'' is usually involved).

The fact that Tamerlan Tsarnaev apparently 

left a social media trail that included a link to 

provocative videos by Australian cleric 


Feiz Mohammad only underlines the global 

reach of the radical Islamist movement. It also

 demonstrates that Australia continues to 


an important role in countering this global 

problem, despite (or perhaps, conversely, 

especially because of) the success, to date, 

of Australian authorities in preventing 

anything similar happening domestically.

Meanwhile, some are now arguing that 

terrorism should be accepted as a normal 

hazard of modern life, like traffic accidents.

 Others draw false comparisons between 

terrorist acts and the rampages of mentally ill 

 gunmen tragically endemic in the US. These 

sentiments fail to acknowledge the unique 

characteristics and goals of terrorism. Terror 

attacks are perpetrated by immoral 

ideologues, not the mentally ill. This is true 

whether the terrorist is acting alone or as an 

operative in an organised network.

As the instigator for terrorism, radical 

Islamism is not the only global actor, but it is a

 major player, and to deny this is to deny 


A terror attack is intended to send a message 

that civilians are not safe in public places. The

 fear that is created by terrorism is leveraged 

by the indiscriminate nature of the attacks. 

More than an atrocity, it is an assault on the 

social contract underpinning society. 

Moreover, successful terrorist attacks tend to

 encourage others and touch off a savage 

game of one-upmanship in a drive to capture

 global media attention.

Escalating terror can lead to significant 

economic and social costs to society, as 

security concerns disrupt normal life. And 

escalation could lead to truly horrific 

outcomes involving WMDs.

Terrorism thus involves costs far beyond the 

immediate damage caused. For instance, 

terrorism has required airport security 

measures impacting air travel convenience 

and costs. But the alternative would be much 

worse - frequent hijackings or downing of 

airliners that could decimate international 


Those who insist that responding to terrorism 

can only breed more terror as a counter-

reaction ignore the evidence of history.

While it is certainly true that, for example, 

Osama bin Laden's demise did not mean the 

end of al-Qaeda, it is beyond dispute that 

al-Qaeda is far weaker today than a decade 

ago. There is no evidence to support the 

notion that easing off on measures against 

Islamist jihadists will lead terrorists to 

reciprocate. Rather, past hints of such a 

relaxation has been viewed by extremists as 

a ''victory'' to be used as a recruitment tool.

Opposing terrorism - particularly radical 

Islamist terrorism which we witnessed in 

Boston - remains a moral duty and an 

overwhelming national interest, but it requires

 long-term vigilance.

It involves not ignoring state-sponsored 

terrorism - there is no more egregious case of

 this today than that of Iran - and taking every 

necessary step to isolate and pressure such 

states. It also means preventing the 

development of new terror safe havens - in 

Mali or Yemen or Syria, for instance.

Here in Australia, it requires careful 

processing of immigrants, overseas visitors 

and, yes, asylum seekers, to prevent the 

exploitation of a compassionate system by 

those who would plot or recruit for terror 


Vigilance also means significantly assisting 

mainstream Muslims in their responsibility to 

not only disassociate themselves and 


extremism, but actually expunge it from in 

their communities and to develop a ''counter-


At the end of the day, Muslims are best 

placed to lead effort to combat intellectually 

the ideas of the Islamist extremists who claim 

to act in the name of ''true Islam'', and thus 

finally unravel this threat.

For just as communism ceased to be a threat 

only when that ideology lost its appeal, it is 

only when radical Islamist ideology is

 marginalised and discredited globally that 


conflict with Islamist extremist terrorism will 



BBB Accredited Business since 5/19/2005

Phone: (480) 682-5100

“Contractors” at Boston Marathon Stood Near Bomb, Left Before Detonation

(Photos) Seen across street after blasts talking with FBI bomb squad. Who were they? What were they and the FBI doing?


 26  16
 What appear to be private contractors, wearing unmarked, matching uniforms and operating an unmarked SUV affixed with communication equipment near the finish line of the Boston Marathon shortly after the bomb blasts – can be seen beforehand, standing and waiting just meters away from where the first bomb was detonated.

The contractor-types had moved away from the bomb’s location before it detonated, and could be seen just across the street using communication equipment and waiting for similar dressed and equipped individuals to show up after the blasts.
Image: An already widely distributed photo showing the contractor-types on the bottom left, just left of where the bomb was placed and detonated. The men are wearing matching, unmarked uniforms, large black bags, and appear to be waiting, separately, and “behind” the rest of the crowd. In the upper left corner, a wooden structure forming one half of a temporary photography “bridge” over the finish line can be seen and serves as a useful reference when establishing the contractor-types’ position in other photos.

Image: After the explosion, two of the contractors seen by the wall next to the bomb, appear across the street, both using communication equipment. This photo too has been distributed and enlarged many times across the Internet. (click to enlarge)

Image: An unmarked SUV with a considerable amount of communication gear on the roof appears, surrounded by identically dressed men. The vehicle parks near the bleachers. (click to enlarge)

Image: Event staff and contractors both above and below the bleachers begin tearing up the skirting and appear to be looking for something or retrieving something while casualties are still being treated and evacuated across the street. (click to enlarge)
The men, numbering between 6-8 then begin tearing up the skirting around temporary bleachers erected for the event, opposite the explosion, before taping it off. Then, what appears to be an FBI bomb squad truck pulls up directly behind the contractor-types’ SUV, with a woman clearly wearing the letters F.B.I. on her tactical vest emerging and speaking with the contractor-types. Together they disappear from the scene, leaving their vehicles behind.
Image: What appears to be an FBI bomb squad truck pulls in, with a woman wearing what is clearly the letters F.B.I. on her vest. She talks with two contractors while it appears a third is partially in the truck’s right-hand side. Also note that the area contractors and event staff tore up, is now taped off. (click to enlarge)

Image: The FBI truck and contractor SUV sit seemingly abandoned – neither the FBI agent, nor the contractors can be seen. What they did, or where they went remains so far, unknown. (click to enlarge)


It should be noted, that with the exception of the contractor-types, all other responders at the scene, including the FBI agent, can be clearly identified, from police to the fire department, to medics and even individuals wearing vests with “B.A.A. Physician” written on them. It should also be noted that no other uniformed individuals can be seen standing near the bomb site aside from the contractor-types.
These men were unidentified, professional contractors apparently augmenting public servants at the Boston Marathon, present before and after the bomb blasts in the direct vicinity of the incident. After the blasts, whether it was their intended function or not, they appeared to be searching for something under the bleachers before being joined by what appears to be the FBI bomb squad. The FBI and the city of Boston has so far categorically failed to provide any information on these highly suspicious individuals.
Questions That Must be Answered 
Several questions must be answered by the FBI, leading the investigation on behalf of we, the American people. The first question is who these men were, with large, black bags in the direct vicinity of where a bomb would detonate, moving away before the blast, and appearing directly across the road afterward. Who hired them and what was their function? Why were they moving amongst the crowd in a semi-covert fashion when all other public servants present were wearing proper uniforms and clearly identified? Did police, firefighters, event organizers, and medics know these men were present and what they were doing?
Why did it appear that the FBI was fully aware of their presence, and in fact working with them, specifically with what looks like a bomb squad unit? Were these contractors specialists in explosives, and if so, what is the significance that at least two of them were spotted just meters from where the blast occurred?
Why These Questions Demand Answers
The checkered, frightening history (see: FBI’s History of Handing “Terror Suspects” Live Explosives) of the FBI’s involvement in fomenting false terror attacks, and even presiding over attacks that succeeded in maiming and killing innocent people, should call into question their presence or involvement at any public event, especially when seen associating with unidentified, semi-clandestine organizations that appear to be private contractors.
Private contractors as well, do not answer or work for the public, but rather the highest bidder. Private contractors, most notably Blackwater and its various incarnations have operated both domestically and abroad, committing obscene crimes and atrocities with seemingly absolute impunity. The term “defense contractor” is in fact a euphemism for mercenary, and has no place in a civilized, democratic world, no matter what their alleged mission statement may claim.
That both of these nefarious entities were present and cooperating in the direct vicinity of the Boston bombings, with at least two contractors standing just meters away from where the bomb actually went off, raises a number of possibilities and concerns. A drill may have been being conducted, though the FBI and city officials have denied this. Or, a threat may have been communicated to event organizers ahead of time, which prompted the inclusion of “auxiliary” security, though again, both the FBI and the city of Boston deny receiving any information prior to the bombings. Whichever contracting firm this may have been, may just have wanted to swindle Boston’s taxpayers for an easy payday, and coincidentally found itself in the middle of extraordinary circumstances.
However, alarming suspicion is raised when the FBI makes no mention of an organization it was clearly coordinating with, particularly in terms of bombs and explosives before and after the incident, considering the nature of the attack. When an already dubious organization attempts to obfuscate the facts of any given event, it is the right and responsibility of legitimate law enforcement, public representatives and the citizenry itself to demand and get answers. If we are not persistent, with the FBI’s bizarre behavior over the past few days, including inexplicably cancelled and suspiciously rushed press conferences, and now what appears to be a Hollywood ending for the case, we may never get those answers.


Terrorists Acts Jihadi  is Terrorism

Last Updated (Tuesday, 16 April 2013 15:26)

Amidst ongoing media reports of two explosions in the American city of Boston, Massachusetts, near the finish line of the marathon race on April 15, 2013, jihadists expressed their joy and hoped the blasts are acts of jihadi terrorism.
One forum member noted that over a week ago, a jihadist announced his desire to plan bombings in the United States, but was chastised by others for revealing such a plot publicly. He is referring to a posting on the Ansar al-Mujahideen forum on April 1 in which a jihadist tried to recruit members for an attack similar in impact to al-Qaeda's 9/11 strikes, but seemed focused on the attack being a suicide bombing. In other posts responding to the explosions, on the Ansar al-Mujahideen, al-Fida' and Shumukh al-Islam forums, jihadists gave pictures circulated in the media of the aftermath, showing injured people and a bloody sidewalk, and some hoped more bombings will follow.
Administrators of Shumukh al-Islam, a top-tier jihadist forum and primary source for official messages from al-Qaeda, placed a two scrolling messages atop the forum, the first stating: "Urgent // Casualties and Injuries in an Explosion that Shook the US State of Boston, and a State of Panic and Chaos Spreads Across America in General," and the second giving an oft-repeated statement from former al-Qaeda leader Usama bin Laden: "I swear by Allah the Great, who raised the sky without pillars, that America and those who live in America will not dream of security until we live it as a reality in Palestine and until all the disbelieving armies are expelled from the land of Muhammad, Allah's peace and prayer be upon him."
Following is a translation of a sampling of the postings:

Medford Native Killed In Boston Marathon Bombings

Krystle Campbell was killed in the Boston Marathon bombings. (Credit: Facebook)
Krystle Campbell was killed in the Boston Marathon bombings. (Credit: Facebook)

BOSTON (AP) — A 29-year-old restaurant manager has been identified as one of three people killed in the bombing at the Boston Marathon.
Her father says Krystle Campbell, of Medford, Mass., had gone with her best friend to take a picture of the friend’s boyfriend crossing the finish line on Monday afternoon.
(Credit: Facebook)
(Credit: Facebook)
William Campbell says his daughter, who worked at a restaurant in nearby Arlington, was “very caring, very loving person, and was daddy’s little girl.” He says the loss has devastated the family.
He says the friend was seriously injured in the explosion.
An 8-year-old, Martin Richard of Boston, also died. He was at the finish line watching the race with his family.

At least two dead, 23 injured after explosions at Boston Marathon

By | The Lookout – 2 hrs 11 mins ago
At least 23 people are injured and two dead after two explosions near the finish line of the Boston Marathon Monday afternoon. The Boston Globe reported 64 were injured. The injuries include dismemberment, witnesses said.
Authorities are telling Boston residents to stay home and avoid crowds as they try to "stabilize" the situation.
Boston Police Commissioner Edward Davis said that a third "incident"--an explosion at the John F Kennedy Presidential Library--may be related to the first two explosions. No injuries have been reported in that incident. "We recommend to people that they stay home," Davis said at a brief press conference Monday afternoon. "We want to make sure that we completely stabilize the situation."
"We are asking that people ... calmly make their way home," Gov Deval Patrick said.
Two large explosions, just 50 yards apart, went off shortly before 3pm ET, more than four hours into the race. One of the explosions happened near the entrance of the Fairmont Copley Hotel, in Copley Square. Local news reporter Jackie Bruno wrote that she saw some people with their limbs blown off. The Boston Globe has a video showing the moment of the explosion. The Boston Police said it is looking for video footage taken from the finish line as part of its investigation.
NBC News, citing anonymous law enforcement sources, reported Monday that a "small homemade bomb" is believed to be responsible for the explosion. The AP reported that at least two more explosive devices were found by authorities, who are dismantling them. The FAA has created a no fly zone around the area, and the Boston subway was shut down. Cell phone service has been shut down in the area, the AP reported, to prevent any remote detonations. Family and friends of marathon runners or spectators can call 617 635 4500 for information.
Police are evacuating the area on Boylston street to continue sweeping for more devices. Runners who had not yet finished the race were stopped at mile 25 and directed to Boston Common. The Boston Police Department is calling in all off duty officers in the city. This New York Times map shows where on the route the explosions took place.
Patrick called it a "horrific day in Boston" in a statement. President Barack Obama called Patrick and Boston Mayor Tom Menino to offer his support. Obama also met with Homeland Security adviser Lisa Manaco, according to a White House offiical.
The New York Police Department is stepping up security around the city in response to the explosion. At the White House, yellow police tape was used to block off the street from pedestrians in front of the White House's north gates and secret service were positioned along the perimeter. Credentialed pass holders continued to be permitted entry and exit from both the White House and the Executive Office Building.

Police: 2 Dead, 23 Hurt by Boston Marathon Bombs

5:43 PM, Apr 15, 2013   |   0 comments
  • Share
  • Email
  • Print
  • - A A A +
Photo Gallery: PHOTOS | Two Explosions at Boston Marathon
Video: Boston Marathon explosions caught on video
Video: Explosions at Finish Line of Boston Marathon
Video: Explosions rock Boston Marathon
Video: Two Explosions at Boston Marathon Finish Line
Video: Boston Marathon runner Michael Anderson
Video: Explosions at Boston Marathon Finish Line
Video: Several killed in Boston Marathon explosions
A man is loaded into an ambulance after he was injured by one of two bombs exploded during the 117th Boston Marathon near Copley Square on April 15, 2013 in Boston, Massachusetts. Two people are confirmed dead and at least 23 injured after two explosions went off near the finish line to the marathon. (Photo by Jim Rogash/Getty Images)

by Michael Winter, USA Today

  • Police say two devices detonated near the finish line at the Boston Marathon.
  • An hour later, a third explosion hit the JFK Library but it is not known whether it was related to the marathon explosions.
  • A suspicious package was also detonated by police but it was not a bomb.

At least two people died and 23 others were injured Monday after two blasts ripped through the crowd near the finish line of the Boston Marathon.
Police said an hour later, a third explosion hit the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library, about eight miles from the race finish. No injuries were reported, but nearby universities were being evacuated.

Police found a suspicious package and detonated in a controlled explosion, but it was not a bomb.
RELATED | At Least 8 Central Ga Runners at Boston Marathon
RELATED | Google's 'People Finder' for Boston Marathon Runners
A federal law enforcement source told CNN the other devices had been found in other locations and were being disarmed. They were described as "low flashpoint," and did not appear to have shrapnel inside.
Police Commissioner Ed Davis said the explosions occurred in quick succession, 50 to 100 yards apart, about 2:50 p.m. on Boylston Street near the intersection of Exeter Street, three hours after the winner had crossed the finish line.

Bloodied spectators were carried to medical tent intended for runners. Several of the injured had lost limbs, and at least one police officer was hurt.

"Somebody's leg flew by my head. I gave my belt to stop the blood," spectator John Ross told The Boston Herald.

Police reported at least 23 were injured, but hospitals reported receiving more patients.

Massachusetts General Hospital was treating 19 victims, spokeswoman Susan McGreevey said. Tufts New England Medical Center had nine patients "and we're expecting more," said spokeswoman Julie Jette. Brigham and Women's Hospital reporting they have 18 to 20 injured from the explosions, two critical.

That would put the injured total at 46 to 48. The Boston Globe reported 64 people wounded.

Organizers immediately stopped the race and locked down the marathon headquarters.

The Federal Aviation Administration announced a temporary flight restriction over Boston.

The elite women runners started the race at 9:30 a.m. and the elite men followed about 30 minutes later. About 27,000 runners were in the field for the Patriots Day race.

Smoke hung over the neighborhood as police cleared the thousands of spectators who had jammed the route.

Joe Difazio, of Wakefield, Mass., was working on communications at the race and was near the explosion. He says there was one explosion and five seconds later there was another of the same intensity. It was at a barricaded area near the finish line.

"There were so many people in that area that they couldn't get ambulances in there. They were wheeling people out in wheelchairs," he said. "One guy had no legs. The bones was just sticking out... It was horrible."

Nancy Costa, a medical student from Reading, Pa., was running with her friend Jill Edmonds of Salem, N.H., when the explosions erupted.

"It was insane here. Everyone was running. I was right next to the explosion. It threw me," she said. "I never sprinted so fast after a marathon.

"The first (blast) threw me onto the ground. And everything went silent and then the second went off and I just covered my head and got up and started sprinting. Everyone was screaming and people were getting trampled. We finally found an open T (subway train) that just arrived in Wellington (station). We had to walk a few miles to find one open."

Kimberly DelGuzzi of Pittsburgh was waiting on Boylston Street for her friend to cross the finish line when she found herself pressed against a building, ducking for cover from the blasts.

"At first, I thought it was fireworks, but then I saw the smoke go up in the air," she DelGuzzi, who was standing between the two explosions. "Then, not even a minute later, the second one went off."

She described the scene as "mass chaos" and said, "Oh my God, it was loud."

"The explosions shook everything," she said, her voice still shaking 40 minutes after the bombs went off. "I saw runners down in the street. I saw people down on the sidewalk."

DelGuzzi, 41, has run numerous marathons but was not running in Boston. Her friend reported she was OK.

Tom Beusse, president of the USA TODAY Sports Media Group, had just finished the race and was about 150 yards away from the explosion.

"I finished the race and began to walk through the corrals," he said. "All of a sudden there was this giant explosion. All of us turned around, the runners, and had these looks on their faces like 'Oh my god.' ... Immediately, it turned into mayhem. People were screaming. Cops told us to keep moving away from the finish line in the direction we were going. No one knew what was coming next -- and thankfully, nothing was next."

The final 100 meters of the race is lined with bleacher seating, reserved for race officials and invited guests. The area on Charles River, on the north side Boylston Street is open to the general public. At the corner of Hereford and Boylston Streets, there is a Boston EMS Medical Tent and a fire station.

The Mandarin Oriental hotel on Huntington has been evacuated. A hotel employee who did not provide his name said all businesses on the block had been evacuated as a precautionary measure.

There is relative calm in the streets, no signs of panic. A volunteer EMT said all resources public and private have been called in for response.

President Obama has been notified of the incident in Boston. His administration is in contact with state and local authorities. He directed his administration to provide whatever assistance is necessary in the investigation and response.

The New York Police Department has stepped up security around landmarks in Manhattan, including near prominent hotels, in response to at least one explosion near the finish line of the Boston marathon on Monday, said Paul Browne, deputy commissioner of the NYPD.

Browne told Reuters that New York police were re-deploying counter-terrorism vehicles around the city.
Contributing: Susan Davis, Oren Dorell, Roxanna Scott, Donna Leinwand Leger, Aamer Madhani, Linda Dono, Elizabeth Weise, USA TODAY.

Leadership, Media Struggle with Boston   Terrorism Attack at the Marathon Run

Print Article Send a Tip

Officials from Boston to Washington seemed overwhelmed by the task of managing the aftermath of the shocking terror attack at the finish line of the Boston Marathon Monday. 

Though the White House called the two bombings acts of “terror,” President Barack Obama declined to do so in his remarks to the nation--and the Department of Homeland Security had not issued any terror alerts as of Tuesday morning, as might be expected.
Meanwhile, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick referred to the site of the terror attacks in downtown Boston as a “crime scene,” and could not answer reporters’ questions about whether and how people would be able to commute to the area as usual the following morning. 
“We are very much going to depend on you,” he told journalists during a press conference stuffed with politicians and law enforcement officials--but very few answers.
All day long, media confusion reigned as conflicting reports emerged about whether a third explosion, at the JFK library on the city’s South Side, was related to the marathon attacks. News alerts flashed that as many as five additional bombs had been found, then that the devices may not have been bombs. A Saudi student injured in the blasts was said to be a suspect, then a “person of interest,” then perhaps not involved at all
Without much meaningful information to provide the public, local law enforcement was reduced asking members of the public to look out for a “darker-skinned” and possibly “foreign” suspect. 
Absent was the clarity Americans had come to expect after the 9/11 attacks, when terror alerts were color-coded, when attacks were more than “man-caused disasters,” and when the country was self-consciously on a war footing.
What we are witnessing may be the result of the War on Terror being addressed as a law enforcement problem rather than as an urgent national security challenge. 
In addressing the nation, President Obama insisted on admonishing the public not to jump to conclusions. He had a similar reaction after the Fort Hood shootings in 2009--which, four years later, the administration still prefers not to describe as a terror attack.
He also emphasized that Democrats and Republicans were united in their horror at the bombings--as if the point needed making, as if his primary concern was political blame, not whether the country had been attacked by an enemy. 
He assured Americans that the government would find out who had carried out the attack, and why--again treating the bombings as a crime that hinged on motive, rather than as a self-evident evil.
In the original 9/11 attack that inaugurated an era the Obama administration has been keen to forget, there was plenty of confusion: the President airborne, the Vice President in an “undisclosed location.” 
Yet leadership emerged. Even as his emergency command center lay in the wreckage of the World Trade Center, New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani rose to the task. The country and its leaders soon rallied--calmly, solemnly, resolutely.
On Monday, the heroism of first responders, medical personnel, and bystanders shone through, even as the nation’s political and security echelon struggled to adapt once again to an old problem that had never really gone away. 
If “What difference does it make?” sums up the Benghazi debacle of 2012, “We are very much going to depend on you” could live on--in a positive way--as the epigram of the Boston Marathon attacks.

By Lt. Col Dave Grossman
Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident.†This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another.
We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep.
Then there are the wolves and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy. Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.
Then there are sheepdogs and I’m a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf. Or, as a sign in one California law enforcement agency put it, We intimidate those who intimidate others.
If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen: a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath–a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? Then you are a sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero’s path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed.
We know that the sheep live in denial, that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids’ schools. But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid’s school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep’s only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their child is just too hard, and so they chose the path of denial.
The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The
difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, cannot and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.
Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn’t tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports, in camouflage fatigues, holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, “Baa.” Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.
The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the little lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door.
Look at what happened after September 11, 2001 when the wolf pounded hard on the door. Remember how America, more than ever before, felt differently about their law enforcement officers and military personnel? Remember how many times you heard the word hero?
Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed, right along with the young ones.
Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, “Thank God I wasn’t on one of those planes.” The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, “Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference.” When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.
There is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, but he does have one real advantage. Only one. And that is that he is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population.
There was research conducted a few years ago with individuals convicted of violent crimes. These cons were in prison for serious,
predatory crimes of violence: assaults, murders and killing law enforcement officers. The vast majority said that they specifically targeted victims by body language: Slumped walk, passive behavior and lack of awareness. They chose their victims like big cats do in Africa, when they select one out of the herd that is least able to protect itself.
Some people may be destined to be sheep and others might be genetically primed to be wolves or sheepdogs. But I believe that
most people can choose which one they want to be, and I’m proud to say that more and more Americans are choosing to become sheepdogs.
Seven months after the attack on September 11, 2001, Todd Beamer was honored in his hometown of Cranbury, New Jersey. Todd, as you recall, was the man on Flight 93 over Pennsylvania who called on his cell phone to alert an operator from United Airlines about the hijacking. When he learned of the other three passenger planes that had been used as weapons, Todd dropped his phone and uttered the words, “Let’s roll,” which authorities believe was a signal to the other passengers to confront the terrorist hijackers. In one hour, a transformation occurred among the passengers – athletes, business people and parents. — from sheep to sheepdogs and together they fought the wolves, ultimately saving an unknown number of lives on the ground.
There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men. – Edmund Burke
Here is the point I like to emphasize, especially to the thousands of police officers and soldiers I speak to each year. In nature the
sheep, real sheep, are born as sheep. Sheepdogs are born that way, and so are wolves. They didn’t have a choice. But you are not a critter. As a human being, you can be whatever you want to be. It is a conscious, moral decision.
If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going to hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior’s path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.
This business of being a sheep or a sheep dog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a
matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-sand-sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between.
Since 9-11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors, and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. It’s okay to be a sheep, but do not kick the sheepdog. Indeed, the sheep dog may just run a little harder, strive to protect a little beter and be fully prepared to pay an ultimate price in battle and spirit with the sheep moving from “baa” to “thanks”. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from sheephood and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive, physically and psychologically at your moment of truth.
We do not call for gifts or freedoms beyond our lot. We just need a small pat on the head, a smile and a thank you to fill the emotional tank which is drained protecting the sheep. And when our number is called by the Almighty, and day retreats into night, a small prayer before the heavens just may be in order to say thanks for letting you continue to be a sheep. And be grateful for the thousands, millions of American sheepdogs who permit you the freedom to express even bad ideas.

Boston Marathon bomber manhunt: City on lockdown as authorities hunt for bomb suspect

[Updated at 3:51 p.m. ET]
BOSTON—Thousands of law enforcement officers are entering the 15th hour of a massive, door-to-door manhunt for a suspect in Monday's Boston Marathon bombings that wounded more than 170 people and left three dead.
A late-night police chase and shootout left one marathon bombing suspect—26-year-old Tamerlan Tsarnaev—dead and the other, his younger brother, on the run, police here said. One police officer was killed and another seriously wounded during the violent spree. The city of Boston and its surrounding areas have ground to a standstill as the manhunt continues in a 20-block radius of Watertown, with local leaders warning residents to stay indoors. Police also announced there will be a "controlled explosion" in a building in Cambridge on Friday afternoon.
"It is important that folks remain indoors, keep the doors locked and not open the door unless there is a uniformed law enforcement officer on the other side of it," Gov Deval Patrick said at a 12:30 p.m. press conference.
The suspect on the lam is Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, 19, of Cambridge, Mass., a student at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. He and his brother's family is originally from Chechnya, a volatile and once war-torn southern Russian republic. The family fled to Kyrgyzstan and eventually immigrated to the United States as refugees about 10 years ago.
His older brother studied at a local community college and was a Golden Gloves boxer. Tamerlan Tsarnaev also reportedly had a wife and young child. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was remembered by former classmates as bright and personable, posted links to pro-Chechnyan independence sites on his social media page, and listed his world view as "Islam." It's unclear if either the separatist politics of Chechnya or their religion had anything to do with the suspects' crime. Tsarnaev appeared to be posting to his Twitter account even after the attacks, writing in his last post on Wednesday, "I'm a stress free kind of guy." His posts covered everything from cute photos of his cat to rap lyrics.
The suspects' uncle told the local CBS News station that the pair had lived in the country since 2002. The uncle, when told that one of his nephews was killed, replied that he deserved it. “He deserved his. He absolutely deserved his,” Ruslan Tsarni said. “They do not deserve to live
Marathon bombing suspect Tsarnaev (FBI)on this earth.”
In an emotional press conference, Tsarni said his nephews had brought shame upon his family, and called them "losers." He said they were not "able to settle themselves" and were "angry at everyone who was able to." He said he did not believe they were motivated by the radical politics in Chechnya or their Muslim religion.
"Dzhokhar, If you're alive, turn yourself in and ask for forgiveness from the victims [and] the injured," he said. "He put a shame on our family. He put a shame on the entire Chechnyan ethnicity. Turn yourself in."
He added that he hadn't been in touch with the family for several years but would not say why.
"I'm ready to kneel in front of them and ask their forgiveness," Tsarni said of the victims of his nephews' crime. "I respect this country; I love this country ... this country that gives everybody chance to be treated like human being."
The Wall Street Journal, citing unnamed law enforcement sources, said that one or both of the brothers traveled back to the Caucasus region of Russia for a year or more before returning to America again.
Tsarnaev's father, reached by the AP in Russia by phone, said his son was a "true angel" and wonderful student. He later told ABC's "Good Morning America" that he wanted his son to surrender peacefully.
The University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth announced shortly after 10:30 a.m. on Friday that they were evacuating the entire campus after learning Tsarnaev is a registered student there.
Earlier, at sunrise, Gov. Patrick ordered a shutdown of all public transit and for residents in the city of Boston and on its edges to stay indoors as a massive manhunt for the second suspect was underway. The Boston Globe reported that police are focusing on a 20-block area of Watertown and fear the suspect may be wearing explosives. Amtrak has also shut down all trains between Boston and New York.
“This situation is grave and we are trying to protect the public safety,” said Massachusetts State Police Col. Timothy Alben, who ordered a lockdown of Watertown, Waltham, Belmont, Cambridge, Newton, Allston and Brighton. Brookline was later ordered to be on lockdown as well. A no-fly zone has been declared over Watertown. The city of Boston was eerily quiet during Friday's rush hour, the city's busy intersections totally abandoned.
The mayhem began at approximately 10:20 p.m. Thursday when police said the bombing suspects robbed a 7-Eleven store in Cambridge. Minutes later, police said, the men shot and killed an MIT campus officer, Sean Collier, 26, responding to the robbery call. The terror suspects then carjacked a Mercedes-Benz SUV with the driver inside and fled, eventually letting the driver go.
(Shortly before 2 a.m. Friday, MIT issued a statement on its website saying that the suspect "in this evening's shooting is no longer on campus. It is now safe to resume normal activities. Please remain vigilant in the coming hours." MIT, Harvard, Boston University and other local colleges have canceled classes.)
The suspects were then spotted in Watertown, where Federal agents swarmed in. At approximately 3:30 a.m., Massachusetts State Police issued a plea on Twitter for residents of Watertown to lock their doors and not open them for anyone, as dozens of police officers, many of them off duty, searched backyards and exteriors of houses there, and a police perimeter of several blocks was established.
Worried residents were also told to turn off their cell phones out of fear that they could trigger improvised explosive devices.
K9 units and SWAT teams searched homes on Spruce Street as officers with a police robot searched an SUV that the suspects had abandoned. Multiple devices were left in the road and two handguns were recovered, according to police scanners.
Slain MIT police officer Sean Collier. (Middlesex DA)
The suspects exchanged dozens of rounds of gunfire with patrol officers. According to the Washington Post, they also lobbed improvised explosive devices (IEDs) at officers.
Tamerlan Tsarnaev was shot by police and brought to Beth Israel Medical Center. He arrived at the hospital under cardiac arrest with multiple gunshot wounds and blast-like injuries to his chest. The second suspect fled on foot, leading to the tense manhunt that is still underway at this hour.
A transit police officer, Richard H. Donohue, was seriously wounded during the exchange of gunfire, officials said.
"We believe this to be a terrorist," said Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis, of Tsarnaev. "We believe this to be a man who has come here to kill people. We need to get him into custody."
[Related: FBI releases photos of suspects in Boston Marathon bombings]
In a radio alert issued issued to fellow officers, the suspect was described as a "white male with dark complexion ... with thick curly hair wearing a charcoal gray hooded sweatshirt ... possibly with an assault rifle and explosives."
Police in Watertown, Newton, Brighton and Cambridge were put on high alert. "Units use caution," an officer said. "He might have an explosive object on his person."
"Suspect 2" seen in 7-Eleven surveillance footage; police in Watertown (BPD/Getty)
President Barack Obama, who attended an interfaith service for the bombing victims in Boston on Thursday, was briefed on the overnight developments, the White House said early Friday. He received an updated briefing later in the day.
Police were able to track down images of the suspects after a victim of the attacks, Jeff Bauman, came to them with a description, Bloomberg reported Thursday. Bauman's legs were torn apart by the bomb.
--Yahoo News reporter Dylan Stableford contributed to this report from Connecticut. Liz Goodwin is reporting from New York.

FBI: Minn. raid disrupts 'localized terror attack'

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — The FBI believes authorities disrupted "a localized terror attack" in its planning stages when they arrested a man after converging on a western Minnesota mobile home that contained Molotov cocktails, suspected pipe bombs and firearms, the agency said Monday.
Buford Rogers, 24, of Montevideo, was arrested Friday and charged with one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm. He remained in federal custody Monday and it was not clear if he had an attorney.
"The FBI believed there was a terror attack in its planning stages, and we believe there would have been a localized terror attack, and that's why law enforcement moved quickly to execute the search warrant on Friday to arrest Mr. Rogers," FBI spokesman Kyle Loven said Monday.
Loven declined to elaborate about the location of the alleged target, other than to say it was believed to be in Montevideo, a city of about 5,000 people about 130 miles west of Minneapolis. He also declined to say whether Rogers was believed to be acting alone or as part of a group, or if other arrests were expected.
"This is a very active investigation," he said.
In a news release Monday, the FBI said it believed "the lives of several local residents were potentially saved" by the search and arrest, and said "several guns and explosive devices were discovered." The agency said the alleged terror plot was discovered through analysis of intelligence gathered by local, state and federal authorities.
"Cooperation between the FBI and its federal, state, and local partners enabled law enforcement to prevent a potential tragedy in Montevideo," Christopher Warrener, the special agent in charge of the FBI office in Minneapolis, said in the release.
According to a federal affidavit obtained by The Associated Press on Friday, FBI agents from the domestic terrorism squad searched the property at the mobile home park in Montevideo and discovered the Molotov cocktails, suspected pipe bombs and firearms. The affidavit said Buford was there at the time of the search, and one firearm recovered from Buford's residence was a Romanian AKM assault rifle.
In an interview with authorities, Rogers admitted firing the weapon on two separate occasions at a gun range in Granite Falls, the affidavit said. Rogers has a past conviction for felony burglary and is not allowed to have a firearm.
Rogers is expected to make his initial appearance in federal court this week.
Rogers' 2011 felony burglary conviction stems from an incident in Lac qui Parle County. He also has a 2009 misdemeanor conviction for dangerous handling of a weapon in Hennepin County, as well as other criminal violations, according to online court records.
Follow Amy Forliti on Twitter:


Content and Programming Copyright 2015 By Patcnews The Patriot Conservative News Tea Party Network © LLC UCC 1-308.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE All copyrights reserved By Patcnews The Patriot Conservative News Tea Party Network Copyright 2015 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.  © All Copyrights reserved By Patcnews The Patriot Conservative News Tea Party Network