Monthly Archives: February 2012

Bracken: Operation #EFAD – Final Communiqué

Communiqué #7: D-Day Minus One, Wednesday, February 29

(Older communiques are below in order.)

Okay, my loyal and stalwart troops, it is now D-Day Minus One. At around midnight tonight, Enemies Foreign And Domestic will become free on the Amazon Kindle Store HERE.

Since last night, I’ve been working on the major essay below. Please read it, and spread it as widely as you can over Facebook, Twitter, and freedom-oriented websites and blogs. It’s a barn-burner, I promise you.

Gangster Government, and Sakharov’s Immunity
Please use every means at your disposal to spread the word for everyone you know to download, for free, Enemies Foreign And Domestic beginning when the month rolls over to March. If you click the free order button and don’t have a Kindle, it will guide you through the free download of the Kindle app first.

And please review Communique #2, especially this part: “Please begin to collect the email addresses (personal, not corporate, when possible) for as many national and local talk radio hosts and their production assistants as possible. Also collect the email addresses for other national media figures and internet heavyweights. These email addresses are often hidden beneath layers of corporate claptrap, meant to keep the unruly peasants at bay, but you can often find them with a bit of digging.

“Easier, but just as important, begin to collect the Twitter @handles for the same local and national talk radio hosts, media figures, and assorted internet hotshots. These email addresses and Twitter handles should be held in ready reserve, preparing for our phased “Time-On-Target” media barrage, leading up to D-Day, March 1, when Operation EFAD will go thermonuclear.”

It’s not news until it’s news, and the media dislike being bothered with “press releases” about upcoming potential news. Tomorrow we will observe the upward surge of EFAD on the Kindle Free Library’s Hot 100 lists, and then we shall “alert the media,” and in a very big way!

We are walking our barrages onto the target, and tomorrow is D-Day!

Thank you all,

In Liberty,

Bracken–OUT!


Bracken: Operation #EFAD – Gangster Government And Sakharov’s Immunity


Read the latest installment in Operation #EFAD .

Spread it far and wide.

Andrei Sakharov and other dissenters are smiling.

Resist.

A Prayer For Health, Peace, Focus, And Courage

Bad news.

And possibly an opportunity for renewed reason and focus.

A suggestion:

1) Pray for Mike’s family and for Mike, for his health and their comfort.

2) Pray also for peace and deliverance from the demons that torment Mike as he interacts with those around him.

3) Check muzzles and fire direction. If the vitriol that has been expended recently on each other had actually been aimed at the Bad People who want FreeFor dead, the cause of freedom would have been better served. Interpersonal squabbles are far less important than a candid and intellectually honest exchange of views, especially on issues of the import discussed in these parts.

But remember also that those who live by the ad hominem cannot legitimately complain when that same tool is raised in opposition.

4) Pray for the intellectual courage to face the fact that those who oppose freedom have already committed genocide on multiple occasions in the past century. Ask the Russians kulaks, the Ukrainian people, the Poles, the Lithuanians, the Chinese, the Vietnamese, the Cambodians, and the property-holding South Africans, amongst scores of millions of others.

Those who shirk from that central fact – whether for lack of focus, ignorance, or whatever other excuse – are deluding themselves about what the struggle here in North America will entail.

When your opponent has demonstrated a willingness to engage in democide to further his goals, you’d best be coldly and soberly prepared to oppose that opponent by any means necessary.

The Bad People are playing, in the final analysis, a game of “Us or Them”.

Heinlein had it right.

Ball’s in your court, folks.

Let’s win.

Wretchard’s Three Rules of Insurrection

From this post at The Belmont Club:

Rule One, the most important thing in change is positioning yourself to be an attractor before the discontinuity comes.

Rule Two, if you have a dominant meme out there, people will cling to it when they are confused. So put the meme out there.

Rule Three, revolutions are as much about what is preserved as about what is changed.

Therefore forget about creating “ideal societies”.

You’ll be lucky to get a sane one.

Read it all, including comments.

Repost: The Guerrilla Sniper Rifle Project


Test vehicle for Guerrilla Sniper Rifle project


From reader AS:

The Case for the Guerrilla Sniper Rifle

My personal view is that in any coming maelstrom, most individual level “misbehavior” will very likely manifest itself in the form of small encounters, systems disruption, and “Clinton Rules” engagements. While small unit action is possible and may happen in some instances, I think that it will be the aberration and the rule will be the small, individual action. This is the territory of the guerrilla – individual, self supporting, and operating in their home AO.

For much of this type of activity, a reasonably accurate, potent, robust, and above all portable rifle is the most desired and efficient tool possible (especially for many of the “semi hard” targets that systems disruption activity must deal with).

Enter the Guerrilla Sniper Rifle.

While the concept is not new, the modern use of the term has recently been popularized on Gabe Suarez’s “Warrior Talk” forum. More specific references to this site are found in the “Sources For Further Study” section of this document. There is a large amount of good information on Warrior Talk and I strongly suggest any serious student go there and digest it. It should help you sharpen your thoughts on the concept, as should the other resources referenced. Additionally, I end this document with a “Sources For Acquisition” section that may help those interested in a similar project.

Through my own research and much supporting material gleaned from other sources (Warrior Talk being one of the primary ones), I decided on the components necessary to build a couple of rifles as proof of concept vehicles. I focus on one specific example here, but many other variations and implementations could be equal or better solutions. Experiment and find what works for you – just make sure that you test it so that you know it works and can prove it on demand.

There will be no dress rehearsals.

For my Guerrilla Sniper Rifle subject, I utilized a Savage bolt action 308 (short action length), a Choate Folding Sniper Stock, and a Nikon 3-9 x 40 BDC reticle scope. That and a minimal set of supporting accoutrements are really all one needs.

First, why a bolt action?

In the Guerrilla Sniper role, it is unlikely that multiple fast follow up shots will be needed, at least in the context of how I foresee such activity. We are generally talking about one or perhaps at most three well placed shots, and then scoot. A bolt action does this with a lighter, more accurate, less complicated, and usually much cheaper implementation than a semi-auto battle rifle. A solid bolt action is simple and offers several tactical advantages (brass retention, ease of scoping, superior suppressor platform, etc.). Keep it simple when you can and you will usually find that you have the best tool for the job. So I chose a bolt action.

Second, why the Savage 100/10/Stevens 200 action in particular?

From my analysis, I think there are three significant advantages that this action offers:

1) Accuracy/Economy ratio – they are the most affordable option and inherently accurate
2) Barrel changes – to be able to replace or exchange barrels yourself is unique and enabling
3) Accutrigger – to have an excellent trigger out of the box is a significant advantage

That all said, don’t get too hung up on requiring the gun to have an Accutrigger, as most of the standard triggers can easily be made quite serviceable (possible exception being the basic “two screw” variety that comes on the Stevens 200 and some older Savages). The three screw models I’ve played with are just fine. If this is not the case for you, several excellent aftermarket triggers exist.

I cannot overstress that the modularity of the rifle, in particular the ease of barrel replacement, is what really makes this the best choice, in my opinion. Never underestimate the utility of being able to replace or exchange your barrel in the field, with no need for precision, powered machinery or a trained gunsmith. It could be a life saver. Ponder the concept and I think you’ll agree.

As to barrels, while one can make do with the standard 22” factory sporter barrel, the Guerilla Sniper concept really shines when you utilize a shorter barrel, something in the 16” – 20” range. It may not seem like much, but shortening the barrel by just a few inches significantly improves the handiness of the rifle when in use and opens up whole new areas for transport and storage with the stock folded. I have played with barrels from 22” down to 18” so far, with a 16-1/2” barrel next in the queue for testing.

A worthwhile option is to thread the barrel for a flash hider (Smith Enterprise Vortex model 1009V is my recommendation) and potentially a suppressor. This is especially true if you have the barrel cut down to the 16” – 18” range. If going this route, just make sure you plan ahead and have the barrel threaded to a pattern that will support both the flash hider and suppressor – not always a simple task. Minimizing sound and flash can be critical in this role, so consider these options carefully.

The Choate Ultimate Sniper Folding Stock

The availability of this stock is really what made me decide to put together such a rifle. Were I limited to traditional full length stocks, I could easily ‘make do” with my Steyr Scout with FFP reticle Pride Fowler scope and angelic trigger. It’s an awesome package and still is my go-to “walking around” rifle. However, if you add the ability to shorten a rifle by 10 inches, you suddenly open up flexibilities normally associated with “hand rifles” such as the T/C Contender/Encore, Savage Striker, Remington XP-100, etc. With the Choate folder, a short action, and an 18” barrel, you have a potent and accurate rifle that can be reduced to a storable length of less than 30”. For a .308 rifle, that is excellent utility value.

Clearly this reduced form enables storing in some large packs and cases, but an aspect overlooked by most is the ability to sling the rifle over your back and yet be able to move much more freely than with a full length slung rifle. The barrel does not poke down so low as to make kneeling or sitting down as problematic as is often the case with African Carry. Similarly, nothing extends above the shoulder, as muzzle down is the obvious way to sling this setup. Not only can you thus move much more easily, but when moving you will not stand out nearly so much as “a man with a rifle slung over his back.” This lower profile is another huge advantage offered by a folding stock.

Originally, I was concerned about whether or not this stock would be rigid enough to provide a solid shooting platform for a .308 rifle. After a number of shooting sessions, I am convinced it is more than up to the task. Shooting it is comparatively comfortable and does not introduce any impediments to accurate field shooting. It plain works.

There are downsides, however. The stock is just a bit heavy for its size (but it’s cut down and thus manageable). It also has no sling swivels, although that is easily fixed. Given the abbreviated forearm, a traditional bipod location is not possible. You can mount one, though (and I did). That said, the Guerrilla Sniper role likely is best served by a rucksack or pack rest, keeping with clean lines and minimalist equipment. If you really want to put a bipod on it though, you have that option. A decent sling, however, is not negotiable.

A good sling is required for carry and should be of a type offering proper sling supported position use, preferably via some type of loop for the support arm. That is out of the scope of this paper, but is something that must be stressed – a Rifleman needs to be competent with the use of sling supported firing position in the field. I care not what you can do off the bench in the shade, but what you can do in the field from sitting or rice paddy prone might just save your life – or mine. Learn it, well. (If you have no idea of what I speak, seek out an Appleseed and then follow it up with more training, since you won’t learn things like rice paddy prone at an Appleseed, which is only a starting point.)

One further carry idea that makes a lot of sense is something I picked up from the Warrior Talk forum. Using one of the “sniper rifle” scope cover/muzzle cover combinations makes the folded rifle into a durable package, whether slung on your back or laying on the back seat floorboard. It protects the scope and muzzle as you would expect, but also retains the folded stock and covers the bolt handle. It’s not quite as protective as a traditional soft case, but leaps ahead of just the bare rifle. Such considerations are moot for the bench rest potato taking his rifle to the range, but of huge value to the lone rifleman in the field.

NOTE:
There is one significant caveat when buying this stock if you are working with a Savage Short action rifle. Currently, this stock is only available in the 4.3” action screw spacing length. Since some point in time around 2006, Savage switched over to the newer “center feed” action, which uses a 4.41” action screw separation. The older “staggered feed” actions are what fit the Choate Folder, while rifles manufactured recently do not fit.

If you have a 4.41” action, it is possible to buy the Choate Varmint Folder (as used in the factory Savage “Model 10 FP Folding Choate” package). However, as far as I can tell the stock is currently only available directly from Choate at full retail ($285 IIRC). Worse than that, it is HEAVY.

For Long Action Savage rifles, there is only one screw spacing length and you are OK. Similarly, those utilizing Winchester or Remington actions should also have no issues.

Thus if going this route, be careful with the parts you try to combine.



In summary: 

The Choate Sniper Folder stock weighs about 3.5lbs and is what I describe here. 
The Savage Choate FP folder stock weights about 5.25 lbs and:


- does not have its forearm abbreviated

- has a different butt section (like from the original Ultimate Sniper/Varmint Stocks)

- is thought to only be available from Savage with a complete rifle, but one may be able to purchase it directly from Choate, albeit at full retail
- has a heavier duty folding mechanism that is slightly more difficult to disengage

Nikon Team Primos 3-9 x 42 w/BDC

IMHO this is the way to go for scoping a Guerrilla Sniper role. Reticle wise, its BDC is a straightforward yet significant improvement over the Burris Ballistic Plex that I previously favored. Optically, this specific “Team Primos” labeled scope is a notch (or more) up from the Burris Fullfield or the other Nikon options (Prostaff and Buckmark lines), as it is essentially an old model Monarch UCC (Ultra Clear Coat) with its coatings and 95% light transmission specification. It also has nicer adjustments with decent miniature target style turrets and positive ¼” (IPHY) click adjustments. It’s a tremendous scope at a very attractive price, and comes with an outstanding reticle for our purposes.

On the reticle, where the Burris has small tick marks, the Nikon has little circles. It also has more of them (Burris has crosshairs, then three ticks, then the thick portion of the crosshair – Nikon has four little circles).

The Nikon’s circles offer several advantages over the Burris scope’s ticks:

- More aiming points (top, center, bottom of circle, plus sides for some windage)
– Easier to see in low light or against dark backgrounds
– Ability to see a small aiming point, as with the circles you surround rather than cover it
– Much better potential for ranging (1.5MOA inside, 2.0 MOA outside at 9X)


Nikon BDC reticle – graphic for 100m ranging example


In this Warrior Talk thread (also listed at the end of this summary), one can get several excellent graphic aids that illustrate a simple yet effective ranging method. The photo above is but one example. Do check it out closely.

This all said, were I armed with a rifle topped by a Burris with Ballistic Plex reticle, I would not feel unprepared at all – just not as prepared as I could be with the Nikon BDC. I still have a couple of Burris scopes, but they are now relegated to second line roles.

For now, the Team Primos scope is available from a variety of vendors from ~$200 up to ~$250. This is a Killer Deal – a No Brainer. Just buy it. Or buy two or three and get your buddies set up too (you do train with trusted friends with similar gear, don’t you?).

For me, I use Leupold QRW rings since they are robust, easily removable, pretty good at holding close to zero when remounted, and fairly affordable ($50 or so a pair for 1” rings). I have the EGW bases installed for ease of scope swapping, but the standard Weaver mounts that come with the rifles will work fine as well. Remember, keep it simple.

In summary, with a reasonable amount of effort and not much monetary outlay, nearly anyone can set up a compact, portable, powerful, and accurate rifle to fulfill a wide variety of roles. You can call it a Guerrilla Sniper rifle or whatever other pithy term you care to dream up, but the true measure of the rifle will be what you can do with it. So if you are so inclined, put one together and put it to the test. You may find that you have something that gives life to the old cliché “the whole being greater than the sum of its parts” – as I did.


Exercising at the gym…..or Exercising your Liberty?



Now you see it….



Now you don’t!


Sources For Further Study:

The Guerrilla Sniper – Anthony James and Gabe Suarez
A bit thin, but an important book nonetheless. A good starting place, especially if you are starting from square one. Likely only available from the Warrior Talk store, One Source Tactical. My take on it can be found in this thread.

Fry The Brain – John West
This book is essentially a historical catalog of all significant guerrilla sniper activity through history, up to and including present day struggles. West includes a lot of details and thus it’s a tremendous collection of examples of what works and what does not, with generally good explanation of the reasons for success or failure. Some cast it aside for the JFK assassination chapter and its heavily conspiracy dependent scenario, but even if pure fiction, the tactical considerations are worthwhile. Don’t let that chapter dissuade you. It’s an important resource.

The Art of The Rifle – Jeff Cooper
This concise book is the best summary of the handling, usage, and importance of competence with a rifle, period. There is little to quibble with when the good Colonel speaks about rifles. Every library needs one. (Two versions exist and either will do for these purposes.)

The Ultimate Sniper – John Plaster
The updated edition is also something that must be in your library. It’s not perfect and sometimes covers from too much of a LEO/military perspective, but it is invaluable nonetheless.

Warrior Talk forum:

There is a gentlemen going by the screen name of SUA SPONTE that has authored a number of excellent posts pushing this concept forward (not just on the rifle and gear, but more importantly the tactics and thought processes). I’m pretty sure that he’s using many of his posts on Warrior Talk to flesh out material for an upcoming book. He explains things well and comes up with good graphics to illustrate key concepts. I strongly encourage those interesting in this type of study to search out his writings and the constructive contributions others have added to his threads. Several of these threads are listed here.

This Warrior Talk thread has extensive discussions of Guerrilla Sniper Rifles as well as SUA SPONTE’s excellent BDC graphics (anyone can read the text, but you have to register to see most photos and graphic attachments).

Various Guerrilla Sniper “issues” and training ideas are in this thread.

This thread has some valuable training ideas plus discussion of the good old “Over the Head and Under the Balls” method of practical field holdover for two-legged varmints:


Here is a new and handy tool for calculating ballistic data for your Nikon BDC equipped scope. Until a few weeks ago it could be used by anyone, but now requires a simple one time registration for some reason. It’s worth it if you have a BDC, at least in my opinion.

Sources For Acquisition:

1. Team Primos Nikon 3-9×40 BDC: Likely the best cost/performance deal going in a ballistic reticle.

2. Choate Folder (Savage Short Action): So far, the best price I’ve found is here. In case you want to use another action, here are all of the similar Choate stocks.

3. Savage Factory Site: Here’s the word on all models from the Savage factory. Don’t forget, however, that you can very likely find an appropriate Savage or Stevens short-action rifle with a decent bore on the orphan rack at your local pawn shop or gun dealer; don’t forget Gunbroker or AuctionArms as well. The Stevens 200 is an especially good value (factory new rifles at ~ $290!), if you can live without the Accutrigger; see this article for background on the Stevens and this article for a recap of aftermarket triggers for the Stevens.

4. Brownells.com Article On Rebarreling Your Savage: You might want to know how, especially if you want to reduce the barrel length to the legal minimum.

5. Leupold QRW Rings and EGW 20 MOA Base: As referenced above; talk to the vendor to make sure the base you are ordering will fit on your particular flavor of Savage rifle action.

At the author’s request, please spread this article far and wide; use the hyperlink below so that all links and illustrations function properly:

http://westernrifleshooters.blogspot.com/2010/07/guerrilla-sniper-rifle-project_22.html

Thanks!

Useful Checklist


From a reader:

For those not familiar with the little reference cards that the Army issues out, here is a good one that has good reports on them that could be useful in a Post SHTF time period.

You will have to change some of them to fit your situation or needs.

GTA 7-1-38
INFANTRY LEADERS’ REFERENCE CARD

TROOP-LEADING PROCEDURES
1. Receive mission
2. Issue warning order
3. Make a tentative plan
4. Start Movement
5. Reconnoiter
6. Complete plan
7. Issue plan
8. Supervise

Operation Order
Task Organization
1. Situation
A. Enemy
B. Friendly
C. Attachments/Detachments
2. Mission
Who, what, where, when and why
Task and Purpose
3. Execution
A. Concept of operation
1. Maneuver
2. Fire Support
3.Engineer
B. Tasks to maneuver units
C. Tasks to combat support units
D. Coordination instructions
4. Service Support
A. General
B. Materiel and services
C. Casualty evacuation
5. Command and signal
A. Command
B. Signal

SPOT REPORT
1. Size
2. Activity
3. Location
4. Unit/uniform
5. Time
6. Equipment

MEDEVAC REQUEST
1. Requesting unit identification
2. Location
3. Number of patients by type (litter or ambulatory)
4. Type of injuries
5. Special equipment needed
6. Tactical situation

DELIBERATE ATTACK CONSIDERATIONS
1. Reconnoiter pinpoint objective/enemy positions
2. Determine weak points; designate supporting positions
3. Assign platoon/squad objectives-identify the decisive point
4. Determine main attack, supporting attack reserve
5. Assign breach support assault missions
6. Designate fire control/measures
7. Coordinate indirect/direct fires and CAS to time attack
8. Control measures during attack
9. Secure (ground and air)
10. Consolidate and reorganize

DEFENSIVE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
1. Establish security (OP/patrols)
2. Position key weapons
A. Coordinate with units on left and right
B. Establish FPF or PDF for machine gun
C. Ensure mutual support between machine guns
D. Cover armor approaches with anti-armor systems
E. Establish fire control measures
3. Prepare positions:
A. Check sectors of fire
B. Check overhead cover and view positions from enemy vantage
C. Position in depth and achieve mutual support between positions
D. Select/prepare alternate and supplementary positions
4. Integrate indirect fires CAS and obstacles with direct and indirect fire
5. Check communications and establish emergency signals
6. Designate ammunition, supply, PW, and casualty points

SHELL REPORT
1. Observer identification
2. Location (coded)
3. Azimuth to flash or sound
4. Time(from and to)
5. Area Shelled
6. Nature of fire
7. Type rounds received
8. Damage (coded)

Weapon (FM 7-8)
TYPE MAX EFF RANGE (m)
M16A2 580 (pt) 800 (area) 200 (moving)
M203 150 (pt) 350 (area)
M249 600 (pt) 800 (area)
M136 (AT4) 300
M47 (Dragon) 1000 (sta) 100 (mov)
MK19 1500 (pt) 2212 (area)
M60 MG 1 100 (600 grazing)
.50 Caliber MG 1 800 (1000 grazing)
TOW 3 00 (ping purposes)
TOW2 3 750
105 mm 11 500
105 mm Tank 2 to 2.5 km
120 mm Tank 2 to 2.5 km
25 mm BFV 2,200
155 mm M109A3 18,100
M198 24,000
8-in Howitzer 22,900

Steyn: “I leave it up to the government to make good decisions for Americans”


Mark Steyn marvels at the bleating American masses.

We have it coming.

And come it will.

Alea iacta est.

Bracken: Operation #EFAD – Communique #6

Communiqué #6: D-Day Minus Two, Tuesday, February 28

(Older communiques are below in order.)

I’m extremely happy that Operation #EFAD has achieved self-acceleration. Clearly, operators are grasping the potential for search engine and hyperlink log-rolling between Twitter, Facebook, Free Republic, this page, and many other forums and blogs, especially over at Western Rifle Shooters Association.

Another great place to mention Operation #EFAD is over on The Blaze. www.theblaze.com/ Thanks for that suggestion.

Use this link as the recruiting portal for Operation #EFAD. About Enemies Foreign And Domestic. http://www.enemiesforeignanddomestic.com/bookefad.htm

Please keep going on Twitter, a little here and there when you are able to. Remember, a Retweet (RT) or a reply is as good as a new message, in terms of throwing Operation #EFAD back out into the flowing Twitter-stream.

Here are some new Twitter #hashtag groups to include on new tweets and replies: #2A #GOA #CCW #guns #teaparty

Here is the old list, the more patriotic and conservative groups that are able to see Operation #EFAD tweets, the better.
#NRA #RKBA #SHTF #survival #redstate #biggovt #tcot #tlot #sgp #ocra

Remember to copy this link to “About Operation #EFAD” into new tweets and replies:

http://www.enemiesforeignanddomestic.com/EFADcomm.htm

Any Operation #EFAD potential operator recruit who reads that page, and then the Communiques, can get fully up to speed and become fully mission capable in short order. This will be true even more so on D-Day, Thursday March 1. Once Operation #EFAD kicks into high gear with the free Kindle downloads, and the elite MSM eventually takes notice, they will be able to read the history right here, and we’ll all have a good laugh at their expense, for a change.

Bracken–Out.

Repost: The .243 Urban Varmint Rifle

From the old place:

Lyudmila Pavlichenko sends:

The goal of this exercise is to find a commonly available but very effective caliber for use out to a maximum one thousand yards from a very compact and lightweight bolt-action rifle.

How compact? With a folding stock and a short barrel – perhaps even 16 inches – so that it meets the BATFE overall length regs and still fits into a gym bag or a back pack for urban and suburban toting convenience.

Let’s face it – some days you might not want to stroll around town with your Remington 700 slung over your shoulder.

You can select many fine calibers, from .223 to .338 or beyond, and everybody has their favorites. But the goal of this caliber is not to stop elk or moose or military APCs in their tracks or to bust through cinderblock walls, so smaller is better in terms of recoil and the weight of the rifle platform. At the upper end of modern varminting we’re talking about 200-pound feral hogs, wild dogs and in some places even whitetail deer, among other highly destructive pest species, so that is what the caliber must be made for. Nothing much bigger than that.

Now in the end, we want the projectile leaving the barrel at over 3,000 fps, or you’re just not in the league you need to be in for true long range excellence. We want all three sides of the ballistic triangle: high muzzle velocity, high ballistic coefficient, and great accuracy. For a high ballistic coefficient make the bullet (the part that flies through the air, not the entire cartridge) l-o-n-g. (Ballistic coefficient or BC: the difference between bowling balls and javelins of identical weight thrown at the same speed. If you can’t guess which will fly further, stop reading now.)

It’s been demonstrated conclusively that even relatively tiny but l-o-n-g bullets are effective against enemy soldiers in combat. A case in point is the .223 Black Hills M262 cartridges firing 77 grain bullets, especially when compared to the dismal 62gr “green tips.” Field reports from our snipers and designated marksmen say that the humble .223 Black Hills 77gr bullets are creating very serious wounds even out at 700+ yards, comparable to the .308 in their terminal effects. (This is primarily when fired from M-16 A4s and A5s with 4X Trijicon optical sights.) So 77 grains is enough mass in a long, skinny bullet to “put the hurt on,” even though this “heavy” .223 is only going out of the muzzle at about 2,800 fps.

But since we want to get the speed back up to over 3,000 fps and in a slightly larger bullet, we have to start with a bigger shell-case than the tiny .223 Remington / 5.56mm. The anemic .223 brass just doesn’t have the powder capacity we need. So look for a genuine high velocity round that has standard loadings in the 3,300 fps range while firing bullets exceeding the weight of the Black Hills 77 gr. The .243 Winchester, a necked-down .308, nicely fits this bill.

Then we find the longest bullet we can for it, and we have a super deadly l-o-n-g bullet still going out of the muzzle at over 3,000 fps. That’s the goal: a long, fast bullet at least 100 gr. in total mass. This would be superior to the deadly Black Hills 77 gr .223 caliber bullet, both in mass and velocity, but with a much higher BC for outstanding velocity retention at long range. Yet in terms of recoil, it would still be a lightweight, so it could be loaded into a lightweight six-pound folding-stock rifle and still be comfortable even for small folks and non-riflepersons to shoot.

For non-ballisticians a simple example of the aerodynamic principals involved in short versus long bullets is to compare the 30-06 to the .270 Winchester, which is a necked-down “thirty-ought-six.” Both have common factory loadings of 150gr, but the 30-06 projectile is shorter and thicker. Both start out of the muzzle at about 3,000 fps, but the longer and slimmer .270 helps it retain its velocity further. (Yes, I know the serious reloaders are already tearing my numbers to shreds, but I am trying to introduce general principles.)

(You can also get a nice l-o-n-g bullet with a slippery high BC in a .30 caliber and still achieve 3,000 fps, but then you have to step up to true magnums like the .300WinMag and many others, and most mortals consider them very punishing to fire, even from seriously big and heavy rifles. To say nothing of .338 Lapua and all the way up to fifty caliber Browning. Yes, you need these big guns to get out to 1,500 yards or further, but if you see all of your varminting inside of a thousand, why punish yourself with a heavy, awkward, hard-recoiling rifle? Even a .270 or a 7mm Remington Magnum might be at the far end of what is needed.)

My proposal: Get a .243 and load the heaviest bullets made for it, in a barrel with a twist that will stabilize it, such as 1 by 9. The heaviest standard factory loading for it is about 100gr at 3,100 fps coming out of the barrel. The necked-down .308 caliber known as the .243 was primarily made for “varmints” so folks were mainly loading little-bitty short bullets to hit tiny groundhogs out to about 500 yards, and not much further than that. If you want to “tack-drive” a tiny target at 200-500 yards, you want a lighter, shorter, ultra-high-velocity bullet, but they will quickly shed their velocity due to their low BC past much more than that range. For close to medium range work in .243, you might see 60 gr bullets stepping out at 3,700 fps. That’s fast, folks!

But for thousand yard match competition or long-range military or varmint use, the .243 solution would be to use a much heavier and longer bullet. Interestingly, the .243 can win thousand-yard matches against the latest exotics when launching a 115 grain slug with a very high BC. For reloaders, the necked-down .308 case of the .243 can pack enough powder to launch the 0.585 BC 115 gr DATP projectile at 3150 fps! You probably won’t find that in a factory loading, but the cartridge and the rifle can take it. But even the now-available factory 100gr hunting loads at 3,000 fps would be extremely effective against large varmints at all ranges.

Now, there are at least a dozen or two other calibers in the 6mm/.243 to 7mm/.270 range that could be considered for this same mission tasking, and no doubt every shooter has their own preferences. So why choose the .243 from among that cornucopia of calibers?

The .243 Winchester is made from a necked-down .308 case, so in a pinch finding brass for reloading would not be a problem. (Good projectiles might be scarce, so bullets should be bought in bulk for reloading.) Its overall cartridge length places it into “short” bolt actions. And unlike most in its class, the .243 is not an “exotic” or soon-to-be-orphaned caliber, nor is it a forgotten wildcat round from the gunny history books. It is also not a corporate “UltraSuperMag” flavor of the month, nor is it somebody’s great brainstorm from last year that he’s trying to sell to hunters, cops or the military. The .243 will not be a “here today, gone tomorrow” caliber, slipping below the surface without a ripple.

The .243 has been popular since its debut in 1955, almost as soon as its father the .308 was created. Almost every manufacturer with a rifle chambered for the .308 also sells rifles chambered in .243. That is to say, the .243 is chambered in almost every bolt-action rifle made in America in the past fifty years. That’s a lot of rifles, folks! It’s a mainstay caliber and ammo can be found almost everywhere you find standard rifle ammo like .270 Win and good old 30-06. But you can load the .243 into a six-pound folding-stock rifle that your little sister can shoot accurately, without flinching from the recoil. Who doesn’t want a six-pound, thousand-yard varmint rifle that you can throw into a hiking pack?

Your math may vary:

$400—-Used bolt-action rifle in .243Win

$200—-Choate folding stock for that rifle

$300—-Bushnell 4X12 scope or similar

$900—-Thousand Yard Varmint Rifle

A safety note about using any “necked-down” calibers that are derived from the shell casings of other calibers. Remember that seriously bad ka-booms can happen when (for only one example), a .270 is accidentally jacked into its brethren 30-06 chamber (or viceversa) and the trigger is pulled. Ditto the .260/.308 or I suppose even the .243/.308, though I don’t know if you can force a .308 into a .243 chamber, and I don’t plan to try. The point being, don’t mix up your cartridges if you have plenty of flavors at home, some of which could wind up being mistaken for one another while rolling around on your shooting table. If you are careless in this regard I suggest you do all of your shooting from behind a boron-carbide ceramic wall with a polycarbonate viewing slit, with just a string tied to the trigger. But we are human and mistakes happen, so in all seriousness, exercise caution.

(Personally, I’m guessing that the military was worried about this potential problem when the brass nixed the superb 6.8mm offering of a few years back. Yes, this Famous Specops Unit or that SWAT team swears by 6.8 it in their ARs, and I fully “get” that. But in the Big Army, it’s just too easy to see identical magazines with two different calibers being mixed up in the heat of battle. But if you do go the necked-down route to high velocity, at least maybe think about a much smaller caliber that won’t get mixed up with its bigger brother. You can’t mix up the battle-rifle .308 with the hot little .243, not even if they are the same from their rims right up to their shoulders. From the neck up they are nails to needles, and even a blind man could not mix them up…probably. End of the safety announcement about mixing up calibers and blowing up rifles.)

Muir: Day By Day


Forward.

Yup


AP gets it.

Forward.

Resist.

JohnGaltFLA: It’s Time To Accept Reality That It’s Too Late


JGF gives a cogent sitrep.

You ready?

Sauve qui peut.

To God with the rest.

Bracken: Operation #EFAD – Communique #5

Communiqué #5: D-Day Minus Three, Monday, February 27 

(Older communiques are below

Sorry to put this up so late (10pm eastern). Today was brutal, but I couldn’t share this Operation #EFAD task. But fortunately, this type of operation becomes self-sustaining, and does not need regular “command guidance” once set into motion.

All of the Facebook, Twitter, blog and forum activity will make its mark on Thursday, March 1, when the world at large first becomes aware of the “dangerous” novel from 2003 that foreshadowed current repulsive criminal abuses by federal law enforcement agencies, including Operation Fast And Furious. 

More tomorrow. 

Bracken out. 

Absolute Power


Get it?

You will.

Alea iacta est.

AmMerc: Obstacles


More good stuff from American Mercenary.

Read it and think about all aspects of OAKOC.

Tempus fugit.

#EFAD Tactical Tip

(Photo by Oleg Volk; for an explanation, read EFAD)

Commenter JSW sends:

Go to the Blaze dot com and scroll to the lower right of the page, “GOT A NEWS TIP” and ask “Why aren’t you covering #EFAD?” and hit enter.

Do the same with all the MSM news outlets you read. If no ‘news tipper’ button, use “CONTACT US” and ask why they’re not covering #EFAD.

Do the same with all the TV station sites you visit.

Like many, I’m not on FB or Twitter or any other social sites, but it’s easy to get the word out to MSM and private news outfits.

Word.

“Extend And Pretend” Is Coming To An End


Big ugliness en route.

Are you ready?

Alea iacta est.

Selco: Being In A City Under Siege


Read.

Prepare.

Tempus fugit.

Operation #EFAD: Communique #4

(Photo by Oleg Volk)

Communiqué #4: D-Day Minus Four, Sunday, February 26 (Older communiques are at link below)

Today’s communique will be short; nothing like yesterday’s Twitter tutorial. I’m excited to see that Twitter, the switch engine of the internet, is really heating up with Operation #EFAD tweets. Today let’s keep the momentum building. Keep posting new tweets, and re-tweeting (RT) any that you see. Be sure to include #EFAD, so we can find them all for easy re-tweeting.

But Twitter is just one cog in the internet engine.

Keep posting about Operation #EFAD on Facebook, and firearms, RKBA and other freedom-oriented blogs and forums. Then do Google searches for keywords and phrases such as “Enemies Foreign And Domestic and Fast And Furious”, to tie those two stories together at the hip. When you find a link to Operation #EFAD, click the link, and try to leave a reply which includes the searchable keywords again, then copy the link into Twitter or Facebook. You know the drill by now. “Round and round she goes…”

This phase is not exciting to perform nor dramatic in immediately visible results attained. We are just prepping the battlefield, so that on D-Day, March 1, anybody searching for any information on Enemies Foreign And Domestic will be overwhelmed by the massive avalanche of positive information. We are just teeing up the football and getting the team warmed up for the kickoff on March 1.

There is an active thread discussing Operation #EFAD over on Free Republic at this link. I am live-blogging the op from that thread, so if you have ideas or input that you want to contribute to the effort, plenty of other active #EFAD operators will see them and share them on down the line.

Please keep the snowball rolling, leading up to March 1. Remember, the goal is to drive the free downloads of EFAD to #1 in the Kindle free book library, so that the MSM will be forced to take notice this “dangerous and seditious anti-government novel.”

(I mean, pass the smelling salts, George–the book as a yellow Tea Party flag AND an assault rifle on the cover! Oh–my–Gaia!”)

Once that happens, we’ll use that new attention as a stick to beat the MSM about the head and shoulders, for their shameful and disgusting collusion in the ongoing cover-up of Operation Fast And Furious, and other grossly illegal and unconstitutional usurpations and abuses of our Free Republic.

Bracken–out!

http://www.enemiesforeignanddomestic.com/EFADcomm.htm

Operation #EFAD Observations


Those wishing to support Matt Bracken’s Operation #EFAD can do so, even without going down the black hole of Twitter, Facebook, and the rest of current-gen social media.

Simply run the following search through as many search engines as you can, a couple times a day:

Operation #EFAD

Then send an email such as the following to local and national media of your choice, at the time directed by Matt:

Why aren’t your reporters covering this Operation #EFAD?

Seems with the information at this link:

http://www.enemiesforeignanddomestic.com/EFADcomm.htm

you’d be wanting to spread the word about this domestic terrorism activity. Books like EFAD and that other one about the gun nuts in Wyoming - http://www.neitherpredatornorprey.com/ – have the potential to inflame violence and endanger all of the progress that has been made over the past four years.

Sincerely,

Alias First and Last

Do the same at your choice of liberal/comsymp sites and venues, including physical locations in your area.

Your imagination should be let free to wander, as long as you stay synched with the timing of Matt’s initiative.

;-)

Target Selection Advice From Bob Fosse And The Cast Of ‘Chicago’


In complement to the discussion in this post, watch the vid above and consider the lyrical advice given as you complete your range cards:

He had it coming
He had it coming
He only had
Himself
To blame.
If you’d have been there
If you’d have seen it
I betcha
You would have done the same!

Audentes fortuna iuvat.

Operation #EFAD: D Minus 5

Communiqué #3: D-Day Minus Five, February 25

Today’s mission is to crank up the RPMs on our internet “viralocity” engine. We’re going to feed raw ether into the carb, and really make that motor scream! This will be done using Twitter as our accelerant of choice. But to accomplish this, you need to know a few things about how Twitter works.

First, I need to get this out of the way. Yes, in many ways Twitter is pretty lame. And since you are already active on Facebook and other forums and blogs, you don’t want to join Twitter. I understand this completely. I felt this way for years.

That said, Twitter does some things extremely well, that other internet engines just don’t do. It is an indispensable “cross-linking” hub for the entire internet. In the “viralocity” kingdom, Twitter is King, Queen, and Duke. It’s free, and you can create an anonymous Twitter @handle in about one minute. After Operation #EFAD, you can retire your Twitter account, or dive deeper into it: it’s up to you. But to participate to the max in Operation #EFAD, a Twitter account is necessary.

But Twitter is not like Facebook or blogs or websites. Twitter is different, and you need learn a few simple things to understand it. I promise, this will be short, easy, and painless.

First: Twitter text messages, which are limited to only 140 characters, are NOT the point of Twitter. They exist only to point people to internet hyperlinks, or pictures. The “message” is just a brief description of the content at the hyperlink, and why you should click it and go there. The hyperlink addresses don’t count against your 140 characters. That, my friends, is the essence of Twitter. Now you know!

Second: Not many of your Twitter “Followers” (those that will see the tweet appear in their timeline) or anybody actively searching the stream for a given #Hashtag group (like #EFAD) are paying attention at that moment, and hence Tweets quickly disappears into the ether. It’s not like Facebook or emails, where you can easily go back days and days to see old messages. For the hours that you are not actively reading your timeline, all of the tweets that came in might as well not even exist! They are literally water over the dam. They don’t count anymore.

Twitter exists Here and Now. Then…it’s gone. This is simplified, but it’s the gist of Twitter. If you are a Twitter nube because of Operation #EFAD, you will not begin with any followers. Don’t worry about it. You can still be a great soldier in the Twitter portion of the Operation #EFAD campaign with zero followers, as I will explain in a moment.

There are three keys to getting a hashtag like #EFAD to “trend” upward at any significant level:

1. Having a massive group of people Tweeting about Operation #EFAD as close to 24×7 as possible is the goal. The more Followers that each person has, the more people will see #EFAD in their respective timelines. If I tweet a dozen tweets about anything in a 15 minute period, only those people that are following me and are actively reading their timelines during those 15 minutes will ever see the tweets. If I add some popular group hashtags like #tcot (top conservatives on Twitter) to the tweet, then I have the chance that anyone on Twitter (whether they follow me or not) that is actively reading the #tcot hashtag will see my tweets.

Here are some popular conservative #groups to start with: #NRA #RKBA #survival #preppers #SHTF #redstate #big govt #tcot #tlot (libertarians)

2. You can also Tweet directly at people (such as this sample Tweet: @MattBracken48 – did you hear about Operation #EFAD??) Including specific people’s Twitter handles in your tweet will cause those tweets to be collected in the person’s “@Connect – Interactions” space. This way when they click their “@Connect” at any time, your tweet will appear there, even if it is a few hours old.

Re-Tweeting

3. Now here is the real key, and where a complete nube with zero followers is as fully mission capable as any old Twitter hand: Please encourage as much Re-Tweeting (RT) as possible! This is how things really go viral! Send a new tweet or a retweet that says something like: “Please RT — Operation #EFAD is important!” or “RT if you know how important #EFAD is going to be!” But also include some @names or #groups to the retweet, so the circle of new folks learnig of Operation #EFAD will grow and grow.

Right now I have about 130 or so Twitter Followers. (I only joined a week ago, in order to conduct this national covert op.) If I tweet something out now, and half of my Followers are reading their timeline, then I get about 60 pairs of eyeballs on my tweet. This does not include folks who found my tweet due to a related #group inserted into the tweet. If just three of my Followers will RT the tweet, then it is seen by however many of those three folks’ Followers are reading. So if of those three that RT me, it could be something like this:
Susan, who lives to tweet, Retweeted your tweet to her 7,887 followers.
Peter Retweeted your tweet to his 125 followers.
John, another nube like you, Retweeted your tweet to his 17 followers. But one of them was the CEO of a famous corporation in the gun-making business, who hears of Operation #EFAD for the very first time after going to the Communiques link. And he likes the idea. A lot.

So now our reach is expanding by leaps and bounds, and the odds of getting millions of new “eyes” on our Operation #EFAD tweets will dramatically increase. Many of the Tweets and Retweets, besides containing #EFAD, should contain this link:

http://www.enemiesforeignanddomestic.com/EFADcomm.htm

This copied and pasted hyperlink will take new people to the Operation #EFAD Communique page, where they can get fully up to speed and come aboard for the culmination of the mission.

I will Tweet about #EFAD as often as I can, and we cam all try to solicit RTs. We need to get a LOT of folks doing this as often as possible. It’s log-rolling. It’s spinning. It’s sheer, crass mass-manipulation. It’s a great weapon in our armory!

Twitter is how “escape viralocity” is achieved, because the objective is to turn Operation #EFAD into a national phenomenon on D-Day, March 1.

In addition, all of us Twitter nubes who are tweeting and retweeting about Operation #EFAD will begin to gain like-minded Followers of our own, which will extend our reach organically.

So let’s play manipulate the mainstream media, for a change! Don’t you just love the idea of whip-sawing those elite liberal media bastards with a covert psyop organized right from the heart of the Bitter Clinger Nation? Just for once? Turn the tables, and make the MSM the patsies in Operation #EFAD?

Personally, I’m loving it!

Bracken–Out.

CPX Foxtrot


Command Post Exercise Foxtrot (CPX Foxtrot)
Discussion of the Hypothetical Use of an OpFor False Flag Attack as a FreeFor Line of Departure
Action Date: 9:00 PM EST on Friday, 24 Feb 2012
Execution Date: (Hypothetical)

IT IS AN IMPORTANT FACET OF THIS CPX THAT DISCUSSION OF THIS CPX AND ITS OBJECTIVES REMAIN PRIVATE, AS DEFINED BELOW, UNTIL THE ACTION DATE NOTED ABOVE.

Overview

Given the current escalating tensions with Iran, and the known history of enemies of liberty in escalating and prompting crises to the detriment of the American people, the possibility of a large-scale or widespread false-flag attack on Americans has become a subject of conversation in FreeFor. A growing theme among liberty oriented persons is as follows: Given that such a false-flag attack would represent a crime of unprecedented magnitude, perpetrated upon thousands of innocent people (perhaps millions if executed with a nuclear weapon of whatever scale), the various diverse and often opposing elements of FreeFor could agree that preventing such an event would be of the utmost importance. The conclusion, well-founded or not, of some informal discussions appears to be the use of such a false-flag event as a common trigger for further action.

The objective of this CPX, then, is to provide a context in which to discuss this approach to assist in disrupting any such false-flag attack which may already be in the planning stages, while simultaneously exercising the capability of the FreeFor to act in concert to execute a multi-phase distributed operation at varying levels of private and public visibility, and across boundaries of interest. In this CPX, the discussion of the merits of the use of such a false-flag attack as a hypothetical FreeFor line of departure for local action plans, without discussing those hypothetical action plans themselves, may accomplish these objectives in a nonviolent way which is non-actionable given the current legal environment.

Objectives

1. To explore the possibility, credibility and implications of a false-flag threat, including means by which an inadvertent self-sustaining chain reaction of hair-trigger events might be avoided in non-false-flag circumstances.

2. To act as a confidence-building exercise among all elements of FreeFor across areas of interest, including those remaining within the governmental establishment at all levels, by selecting objectives and implementation goals of the widest possible appeal and which pose the minimum element of risk to the FreeFor participants.

3. To assist the remaining elements of FreeFor within the governmental establishment at all levels to disrupt/expose a possible false-flag attack on Americans by causing the hostile (or rogue) planners to reorient to the implications of this CPX, thus causing increased internal chatter subject to traffic analysis or leakage, which, in turn, increases the risk of the false-flag operation to exposure and blowback if executed.

4. To preserve elements of FreeFor from prosecution by limiting discussion to non-actionable hypothetical discussions of the implications of this CPX.

5. To minimize the interpersonal conflict that often mars FreeFor exercises by using multiple veils of anonymity and a deliberate lack of central control or direction.

6. To demonstrate the capability of FreeFor for communications discipline by two communication phases, one prior to the action date, one after.

7. To preserve the anonymity of covert FreeFor participants by masking their activities and greater number within a larger volume of overt participation.

8. To thwart the desires and actions of OpFor hostiles to use the CPX for its own purposes.

9. To use the assets, desires and actions of OpFor hostiles to discover elements of their influence on and penetration of FreeFor.

10. To develop a model of FreeFor exercises which communicate information in a self-disciplined and self-propagating way using various media.

Definitions

Action Date: The date and time that a planned action is to be implemented. In particular, the action date of this CPX signals the transition of communications about this CPX from private to public means. See also Execution Date.

Covert Participants: FreeFor persons or elements which, for reasons of their own, wish to maintain anonymity.

Execution Date: The date and time at which an important event is to be executed. For the purposes of this CPX, the execution date is purely hypothetical. Within that hypothetical context, the execution date would be the date at which OpFor implements a false-flag attack, or such a false-flag attack is identified as such within a reasonable certainty.

FreeFor: Freedom Forces, which includes any person or group of persons, within or without government, interested in establishing, maintaining, or restoring the rightful place of government as the servant of natural persons along principles embodied in the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights, or other works which promote individual responsibility, liberty and freedom from coercive government, even if not those specific wordings.

Go Code: A pre-arranged signal or event which initiates action.

Hotline: An emergency communication path, whether secured or not, which remains covert prior to use, but which, once used, is likely to be suspect afterward.

Line of Departure: A pre-arranged location or set of circumstances from which operations transition from the preparation phase to the execution phase. Starting execution of a plan is known as “crossing the line of departure”.

OpFor: Opposition Forces, typically those hostile elements in domestic or foreign governmental positions opposed to the objectives of FreeFor.

Overt Participants: FreeFor persons or elements which are already well-known to the governmental establishment, and who are taking on little additional risk by participating in this CPX during both the private and public phases.

Private Communication: Any and all exchanges of this CPX and discussions about it which remain limited to peer-to-peer or peer-to-peers (blast) email, voice and personal conversations. Specifically excluded from private communication as defined here are postings on the Internet, blogs, social networking sites, etc.

Public Communication: Any and all exchanges of this CPX and discussions about it using an unrestricted variety of communication media and channels, including, but not limited to, blogs, posted articles, advertisements, flyers, posters, etc.

Specific Actions Requested of Participants

1. Participate in widely disseminating the text of this CPX using communication channels and networks normal and customary to a given participant during the private communication phase as defined below.

2. Participate in widely disseminating the text of this CPX using communication channels and networks normal and customary to a given participant during the public communication phase as defined below.

3. Monitor, to the extent of the individual participant’s capability, the emergence of the following, which may indicate potentially disruptive attempts by OpFor elements:

a. Any premature public dissemination of the text of this CPX prior to the action date, as defined below.
b. Any attempt by participants to generate interpersonal hostility or to act as provocateurs to goad creation, revelation or implementation of line of departure plans.
c. Any attempt by participants to transmit or encourage the transmission of the text of this CPX through hotline or other secure channels.

IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS CPX INVOLVES THE DISCUSSION OF THE IMPLICATION OF A FREEFOR CROSSING OF THE LINE OF DEPARTURE IN REACTION TO A FALSE FLAG ATTACK UPON AMERICANS, AND NOT THE PROMOTION OF SUCH A LINE OF DEPARTURE CROSSING.

Assumptions

1. That hostile elements within the governmental establishment, through various means of data collection and analysis, already have complete knowledge of this CPX. Accordingly, this CPX is structured in such a way that existing hostile knowledge is not only not harmful, but beneficial to the objectives of the CPX.

2. That these hostile elements desire to act in ways which will disrupt or discredit this CPX, including, but not limited to, provocateurs, misinformation, early triggering and initiation of interpersonal conflict.

3. That these hostile elements will seek to apply traffic analysis to the execution phases of this CPX to both discover previously unknown FreeFor linkages, or discover previously unknown covert participants or confirm suspected covert participants.

4. That FreeFor elements answer to no one, but instead apply their own judgment and discretion in taking or not taking any action. Accordingly, portions of this CPX written in the form of orders are merely suggested as recommendations for unified action.

Operational Principles

I. Phases

1. This CPX is divided into three phases:

a. A private communication phase prior to the action date and time.
b. A public communication phase after the action date and time.
c. A hypothetical execution phase which would commence after the implementation of a false-flag attack by OpFor upon Americans.

2. Although this CPX is assumed to be completely known to hostile forces from inception, division of the CPX into two communication phases allows FreeFor to demonstrate an understanding of communication discipline principles. This two-phase approach also provides multiple opportunities for hostiles to expose themselves through the initiation of early triggering in the private phase, or other disruptive activities in either phase, and in ways which can be detected and noted by FreeFor participants, overt and covert, through passive means and without centralized coordination.

3. The execution phase is purely hypothetical, and discussion of this phase by participants within the context of this CPX is restricted as detailed below for the protection of all FreeFor participants.

II. Private Communication Actions Prior to the Action Date.

1. During the private communication phase, overt participants are encouraged to communicate as widely as possible with other participants, overt or covert, about the content and implications of this CPX using only private communications. To deny hostiles additional information beyond that which they possess prior to this CPX, and for the protection of covert participants, these communications are to use only those linkages which are normal and customary for the participant. Hotline resources are to be specifically prohibited for this CPX in both phases.

2. The private communication phase is to be limited to communication means which lack permanence beyond the control of the individual participants, hostile recording, interception and storage excluded. Email, texting, handwritten notes, phone and personal conversations are examples of private communications. Blogging, tweeting, discussion with media, or posting of the CPX on social media sites, which have a public and stored nature, are specifically excluded during the private communication phase.

3. The sole exception to the use of public communications prior to the action date are teaser mentions of the CPX on public media, and then only by the single and complete phrase “CPX Foxtrot”, with no other detail about the CPX content or intentions provided. Those persons inquiring about these mentions of “CPX Foxtrot” should be provided its content during the private communication phase if those persons are within the normal and customary sphere of influence for a given participant.

An example of a public mention during the private communication phase is a blogger or commenter posting text similar to the following:

“And be sure to participate in CPX Foxtrot.”
“Remember, CPX Foxtrot is coming up.”
“Are you ready for CPX Foxtrot? I am.”

If a prospective participant then asks about details for the CPX, other participants should provide the prospect with the CPX using private communications if that prospect is within the normal and customary reach of the provider. If not, then an appropriate response would be:

“Thanks for asking about that. Ask someone you know about CPX Foxtrot. If they don’t know, ask them to ask. When you get CPX Foxtrot, you will know why it has to be this way.”

Examples of providing the text of this CPX to others within the normal or customary scope of FreeFor communications include:

“A friend sent this to me. It is an interesting concept that probably should be discussed further.”
“I am concerned that this idea might have unintended negative consequences. Worth a read.”

4. The lack of public storage of the CPX Foxtrot details during the private communication phase will assist in not only generating additional teaser interest in the CPX, but will also make it easier for specific covert FreeFor assets to identify potential hostile infiltrants during the private communication phase. If in doubt, don’t post. Also, do not assist hostile traffic analysis by providing details of the CPX beyond those prospective participants with which you normally and customarily communicate. Avoid being ensnared by hostile fishing expeditions.

5. Prospective participants are to be treated with respect and encouraged. An “us-versus-them”, or “clique” mentality is to be avoided at all times by all FreeFor participants. FreeFor participants are also encouraged to apply their own traffic analyses to identify potential hostile provocateurs attempting to disrupt the CPX through the incitement of interpersonal discord or discouragement of prospects.

6. During the private communication phase, the text of this CPX is to be distributed as text attachments (word-wrap off) where practical, or as inserted or printed text otherwise. Other file formats, such as PDFs or DOCs, contain tagging information which reveals personal information or transmits viruses.

7. Within these restrictions, then, during this phase the CPX should be distributed as widely as possible, encouraging the recipients to in turn widely distribute, in chain letter fashion, to ensure as large a participation as possible on the action date.

III. Public Communication Actions On or After the Action Date

1. All participants are encouraged to publicly post the CPX content simultaneously on the action date and time in as many media, blogs, etc. as possible. Original postings with the CPX content, or with the CPX text content attached where possible, are more desirable rather than chain-linking back to a single source blog.

2. During the public communication phase, exposure of the CPX content is encouraged on all communication forms without restriction, other than the hotlines as discussed previously, which are not to be used for the purposes of this CPX at any time. An intention is to create as wide a historical Internet footprint as possible, as well as expose means and personnel by which hostiles attempt to minimize this footprint over time.

3. During the public communication phase, this CPX can be distributed in any form or file format.

IV. Principles During Either Communication Phase

1. A critical component of this CPX is ongoing discussion by participants of the implications of this CPX during either communication phase. However, for the protection of the FreeFor participants, discussion of the execution phase is to be limited to hypothetical discussions of the political/other implications should FreeFor use an OpFor false-flag attack as a line of departure for other covert plans which may or may not be under development. Specifically prohibited as part of this CPX is the initiation, discussion or exploration of such plans. All participants should be alert for potential hostiles who may try to use this CPX to discover or incite specific planning for line of departure actions within the context of this CPX.

Examples of acceptable discussions within the context of this CPX include:

“Is OpFor planning a false-flag, and if so, would the possibility of that as a line of departure for FreeFor be likely to disrupt those plans?”
“How might OpFor use crossing of the line of departure to its own ends, and how might that be mitigated?”
“How might inadvertent triggering of the execution phase be avoided for legitimate emergencies?”
“What effect does the existence of CPX Foxtrot have on the police? On the military?”
“How might FreeFor identify a false-flag so that it can be used as a valid go-code? Would the rapid availability of “perfect knowledge” be a tipoff?”
“Does even the discussion of this CPX have a disruptive effect on OpFor?”
“What other CPXs might we develop to continue to disrupt OpFor?”
“What benefits does FreeFor derive from exercises like CPX Foxtrot and how can we amplify that effect?”
“Outside a false-flag attack by OpFor, what other signals might FreeFor pay attention to?”
“How can FreeFor overt participants use OpFor infiltration and disruption policies and procedures to assist hostiles in exposing themselves to covert FreeFor participants?”
“How can FreeFor use traffic analysis and other techniques to hamstring the actions of OpFor by making them depart from establish procedures and thus resort to error-prone improvised operations?”

Examples of unacceptable discussions within the context of this CPX include:

“What are you planning to do when crossing the line of departure?”
“What should I do when crossing the line of departure?”
“I know a guy/place where you can get X, Y, or Z illegal things to help implement this plan.”
“Who do you know who might cross the line of departure?”

There is a certain amount of subjectivity as to the dividing line between acceptable discussions within the context of this CPX, and discussions which are specifically outside the context of this CPX. It is expected that OpFor will use provocateurs to attempt to goad participants into unacceptable discussions. CPX participants who stray beyond this imaginary line should be gently and respectfully encouraged to review the CPX. FreeFor participants who have been so admonished should exercise diligence in withdrawing to a suitable degree to illustrate their intentions, again, with due respect to all participants. In this way, we create an environment in which hostile provocateurs have ample opportunity to expose themselves, by violating either side of respectful admonishment.

Remember at all times, the discussion of the implications and practicality of a line of departure crossing in response to a false-flag is the topic of this CPX, not those line of departure plans themselves.

2. Participants are encouraged to remember that the rules of interpersonal conduct are merely for the purposes of this CPX, and that normal interpersonal squabbles are to continue unabated outside of this CPX.

3. Within the CPX itself, all participants should be alert to potential hostiles who insist on remaining outside its rules. Detection of potential hostiles who have infiltrated FreeFor is a key objective of this CPX as it uses OpFor’s existing policies and personnel limitations to the benefit of FreeFor.

V. Ongoing Actions

1. Participants in CPX Foxtrot are encouraged to continue to promulgate this CPX and its discussions on an ongoing basis. There is no termination date.

2. Participants in CPX Foxtrot are encouraged to use the term “CPX Foxtrot” as a signal at any time in the future to crack through interpersonal squabbles when discussing the premise of this CPX, which is the hypothetical crossing of the FreeFor line of departure in response to a false-flag attack upon Americans by OpFor.

3. Participants in CPX Foxtrot are encouraged to use this template to generate their own CPXs in the future. An objective of this CPX is to improve upon the techniques employed here to inculcate and evolve, over time, a credible counterforce to unrestricted hostile action upon FreeFor.

Hypothetical Frequently Asked Questions About CPX Foxtrot

Q1. Why should this CPX be transmitted in text form?
A1. Simple text form is immune to transmission of viruses and other detrimental side-effects. In addition, simple text lacks any potential identifying information.

Q2. Why should this CPX not be transmitted using secure or hotline channels?
A2. Two reasons. First, to deny OpFor knowledge of the existence, nature or scope of such channels. Second, a common means to break encryption is to encourage the transmission of a known plaintext through a given secure channel, followed by comparison to the resulting ciphertext.

Q3. Why is the CPX divided into private and public communication phases?
A3. Several reasons. First, as a confidence builder and to generate a sense of esprit de corps among the participants. Second, to force OpFor to remain dormant during the private communication phase, or else risk exposing some of their covert assets. This alone requires that OpFor react to FreeFor initiative, causing elements of OpFor to recognize their lack of omnipotence which plants the seeds in their minds of the potential consequences of failure of false-flag missions. Finally, to assist in generating interest in this CPX by teaser mentions of “CPX Foxtrot” during the private communication phase without the text being publicly available until later in the private communication phase.

Q4. Why is it acceptable, or even desirable, to publicly mention “CPX Foxtrot” during the private communication phase?
A4. As mentioned above, to generate interest by teaser mentions.

Q5. Why is interpersonal conflict to be carefully monitored in the context of this CPX?
A5. A common OpFor disruptive tactic is to generate interpersonal conflict. However, to avoid exposing their assets, all participants, including OpFor elements, must maintain decorum, which once again forces OpFor to play by FreeFor rules.

Q6. Why was the false flag selected as the topic of this CPX?
A6. This topic was selected because of the timely current interest in potential false flag operations given the growing tensions with Iran.

Q7. Won’t I be exposing my network of contacts by sending this CPX?
A7. OpFor has likely already mapped the normal network of contacts by each potential CPX participant. This CPX specifically requests participants to only send this CPX to those already in that participant’s normal and customary FreeFor discussion paths, thus denying OpFor information about potential “emergency” communication paths.

Q8. Could this CPX be labeled as an anti-government conspiracy?
A8. Given the lack of attention to law, justice and ethics by elements of the government today, anything could be considered illegal. However, as long as the First Amendment is presumed to have any relevance, this CPX merely encourages participants to discuss the implications of a FreeFor crossing of the line of departure in response to a false flag, rather than encouraging participants to actually perform such actions. In fact, participants are specifically requested to forego the latter discussions in the context of this CPX as a means of detecting potential OpFor provocateurs.

Q9. Isn’t this CPX equivalent to yelling “fire” in a crowded theater? Could it not trigger crazies in response to any perceived false flag?
A9. This CPX doesn’t introduce the concept of crossing the line of departure in response to a false flag, it merely encourages the discussion of this concept, which already exists in the public space. One of the objectives of this CPX is to discuss potential unintended consequences of such a policy, and this is beneficial to reducing the possibility of such undesirable triggers. Stated differently, discussing the implications of yelling “fire” in a crowded theater is not the same thing as actually yelling “fire” in a crowded theater, nor is it encouraging anyone to do so.

Q10. During the private communication phase, is it acceptable to store this text on my website, and then link to that text in private emails?
A10. No. Storing this text on a web server makes it subject to being swept up by a search engine spider, and then appearing in search results. This would violate the intention of the private communication phase, which is to prevent search engines from reporting the full text of the CPX during this phase. Once the public communication phase begins, then this form of storage is an acceptable option.

Q11. If OpFor already has knowledge of this CPX and potential participants, what is to be gained by the private communication phase?
A11. As mentioned previously, to demonstrate, both to FreeFor and to OpFor, the capability to perform a decentralized operation as well as to provide an opportunity for interested covert elements of FreeFor to participate in uncovering OpFor moles.

Q12. If OpFor already has knowledge of the authors of this CPX, why keep their identities concealed?
A12. To minimize the negative effect of personality conflicts within FreeFor which might interfere with the success of this CPX.

Q13. Isn’t the use of “OpFor” creating deliberate conflict with the government?
A13. This CPX is not anti-government. This CPX is, however, intended to disrupt the actions of intra-governmental or extra-governemental actors who exceed, or who might conspire to exceed, their lawful authority, while supporting those remaining elements of FreeFor within government who perform their duties within lawful bounds.

Q14. What if this CPX itself is a probing attempt by OpFor?
A14. As mentioned previously, it is presumed that OpFor already has knowledge of FreeFor participants, particularly those who are active on the Internet. However, no prospective participant should feel, or be made to feel, any obligation to participate. Instead, such passive, or covert, participants also serve a role by assisting in watching the progress and actions of other particpants and forming their own conclusions.

Q15. This CPX has some errors and portions could be written better. Should I improve it?
A15. No. One of the roles of some covert FreeFor participants is to detect at which nodes the CPX has been altered. If a participant chooses to pass the CPX text along, it should be done with no modifications. If it must be pasted into email, please paste from the first character through to the last, with no intervening comments inserted.

Fusion Center Locations Revealed


Read and pass along.

License plate surveys and subsequent development would be nice, eh?

Resist.

Questions/Observations For PATCONs and Other ‘Continuity of Freedom’ Operations


As commented here:

Why dont we stop the circle jerk for a minute and ask some questions?

I had planned to talk about this at our PATCON but what the fuck now is as good a time as any.

Lets divide the terrain into three segments:
– Urban
– Suburban
– Rural

Now as have said in other posts where do most of us live?

Urban and Suburban. That’s most of the US not FREEFOR specifically.

Look at the voting for those terrain types and this will give you a good idea of the political ideology predominate in these areas.

We can condense this down simplistically into the following

Urban = progressive Free Shit Army and the top ruling elitist
Suburban = mix of all groups
Rural = conservative to libertarian small government types

Now this is not a scientific survey it’s a generalization.

If you look at this terrain and the inhabitants you can begin to formulate an assessment. The Urban inhabitants cannot be convinced that their positions are wrong. They do not put any weight into the immorality of government purposes and methods. The Rural inhabitants don’t need to be convinced because even though many of them do leech off of others via farm subsidies and such when those dry up they will be just fine getting along on their own. It is the suburban inhabitants that must be convinced that the current system is unsustainable. They must be convinced to get off the fence and make the changes that need to be made. When the battle lines are drawn they will fall right in the middle of that suburban metro area on a house to house basis.

So how do we address the fence sitters?

We must demonstrate to them that the government does not have their best interests in mind. We must demonstrate that government only has the power that we let it have over us. That is our strategic goal. To clearly define the illegitimacy of government. The second strategic goal is to replace that government with a system that more closely shelters the classic liberties of the citizens. A system founded on the values of the DoI.

Those are broad strategic goals and from here on out it has to be a little more specific to your AO.

The Operational constraints that you stay within are to focus activity to achieve the strategic goals. Currently those constraints should be limited to Sustainment and Shaping operations. They should prohibit the initiation of deadly force (combat operations). These constraints serve to guide the Operational goals since FREEFOR has no upper level leadership to establish intent and the constraints.

So we can make some general operational goals that do not pertain to a specific area:
– Gather intel on local areas.
– Build networks with other local groups.
– Establish supply chains.
– Establish safe houses and a network of escape.
– Conduct direct actions that shape the battle space and support the strategic goals.
– Control the message.

That’s as far down as we can go without getting more area specific. Those operational guidelines should be used to develop the tactics in your tool box.

Right now given these constraints none of what has been discussed in this thread would be a viable response.

As I have said however we may cross the line that makes those viable tactics.

For example, let us suppose that a suburban inhabitant is falsely raided by the OPFOR. Their current philosophy is not know but FREEFOR can utilize the incident to further its Strat and OP goals. FREEFOR can begin an escalating campaign of response to the incident. Beginning with low level tactics like flyers and graffiti. As the campaign builds feedback from the local inhabitants can be judged. If sufficient outraged is built then a direct action could be undertaken towards the OPFOR that initiated the raid. If the raid was particularly violent or resulted in a death then the action taken could be violent and destructive.

Right now efforts would be made to insure that no loss of life occurs but in the future the outrage may be sufficient that those efforts could be reduced.

Okay lets discuss….