"I suppose it wasn't really the content that set the feds off- it was what he was wanting to do"
So, why isn't he being charged with something else? Why did the Feds offer him a 1 month plea bargain, if they actually thought he was, say, an "enemy combatant?"
The Prof's page at
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/raisethefist/
Has lots of interesting links, such as to the availability of bomb-making books at Amazon. He makes the interesting point: "Public libraries are also much better sources of explosives information than the pathetic Reclaim Guide. This does not mean the above statute has no use, however. It can be used to pile additional charges on someone whom the government wants to prosecute for other reasons. Whether that is a legitimate purpose for a statute is, I think, worthy of public debate."
On the original web site, Austin complained about undercover cops coming to demonstrations and taking pictures of the participants. It sounded like they were after him for a long time, and just wanted to get him for something.
So, why isn't he being charged with something else? Hey, don't ask me. I'm just an average Joe. But I would postulate if Sherman had been carrying a passport from Yemen or Saudi Arabia and been up to the same thing, loads of people on this forum would have criticised the feds for not arresting him.
I don't think the guy was up to any good personally, but I also believe the feds are trumping up the charges to get him. He's not an easy person to have any sympathy for. In a nutshell, he picked an awfully bad time to be talking the "I'm a wannabe American Terrorist" line.