Monthly Archives: November 2011

Effing Lovely

Green Mountain Homesteading links to this ACLU alert re Senate Bill 1867.

Read it all.

Make the call.

Ready to go?

UPDATE 2315 EST 26 NOV 2011: Here’s a .pdf for those who want to actually read the current language in question.

It will be important to read what actually gets enacted by both the Senate and the House, as with all legislation.

Three From AmMerc

Thanks to American Mercenary, who walks us through the thought processes of a Jewish freedom fighter in an alternative universe defiantly resisting Nazis:

Coordinated Defense/Use The Terrain

Urban Warfare/Use The Terrain

An Army Moves On Its Stomach

Robb: A Thanksgiving Weekend Meditation

The Parable Of The Happy Turkey

What Are You Thankful For?

Et tu?


The Tricorder Lives

UK Telegraph: Banned From The Web

You know the question, right?

Vanderboegh: More On PATCON

Mike provides more detail on another ongoing and very succesful FedGov cover-up.

Ruby Ridge, Waco, OKC, PATCON, Gunwalker/Fast & Furious…not to mention DHS, TSA, Total Information Awareness, Echelon, and many more.

Advocates of continued electoral and judicial engagement with the current system should think hard, and then honestly account for the actual results of pro-freedom efforts over the past 20 years.

Are you more free than you were in 1992?


And for those who respond “yes”, is it because of steps you took, or steps that the FedGov and its subsidiary minions in the states took?

Be candid with yourself, at least.

Tempus fugit.

Power To The People

Consider what you could do with this equipment.

Life’s better with motive power.


SK: The Impossible Numbers

More on the coming excitement, courtesy of Sultan Knish.

I’m sure it will be fine.

After all, the American Dollar has always been King.

Just like the British pound.

And the Roman denarius.

Best to have your neighbors and friends sorted into two categories.


And not.

Do what you must to protect your family when it is time.

A Reply To Spooner From A Reader

In reply to this post:

I originally wrote this in response the request for opinions was made after a friend, and fellow patriot, read a couple of quotes from Spooner’s No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority.

Having never read the book where the quotations were found, nor heard of the man quoted in the book, I limited my response to the isolated quotes:

“But whether the Constitution really be one big thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or it has been powerless to prevent it.”

“In either case, it is unfit to exist.”

Having now read both works, my position is the same now as it was then. What follows is my response to a friend asking people to think…

Spooner puts forth two possible options regarding the Constitution, and for the sake of this discussion, let’s initially pretend that those are the only two possibilities: either it essentially gave us the government we now have, or it was unable to prevent it. And in narrowing our focus to these two possibilities he leads us to a conclusion being the Constitution is unfit to exist. I would disagree.

Originally, I had planned to take a different tack. I propose we begin by looking at the second premise, as I believe this provides a surer footing when approaching the first. That being said, could the Constitution ever have prevented the government we have today? Nope.

If you will allow, let’s start with another quote:

“A law cannot restrain anyone from doing anything. It is like a book, written on paper, meaningless, except that it conveys an idea. The restraint is self imposed, from either fear of punishment or a sense and alignment of morality.”

In order for the author of this statement to believe what he wrote here, I suggest to you that he, too, would agree with my simple answer. When has a law, edict, dictate, mandate, legislation, regulation, et al, ever been able to prevent, let alone stop, the immorality of man? Never.

Paul, in his letter to the Romans speaks of this basic idea (Romans 7). Though chapter 7 does not stand alone, in it Paul makes the case that the Law was not meant to save mankind. Rather it was meant to show man his sinfulness and need of a Savior (he continues this thought through chapter 8).

Consider the history of God’s Law as it relates to man. First, there was only one law (and consequence): don’t eat this fruit – you do and you die! Some have argued over whether God made such a silly law. To spend time here is to waste a lot of energy and miss an important point in that there was only one restriction placed on mankind – and we blew it! The law did not prevent man from sinning against God, it merely defined sin.

[One point worthy of contemplation here is man’s ability to choose. As it pertains to God’s Law, though God gave man the ability to choose, He never gave man the right to choose. Had he done the latter, He would be unjust, and therefore not God, in punishing those who chose to rebel against God by violating His law(s).]

We move forward in history, and God has now given man ten laws to abide by. Oh, my! What would we do if congress ever tried to make us abide by ten laws? (Sorry, the sarcasm slipped out.) Ten laws which did not have any more ability to prevent man from sinning against God, nor committing offenses toward others. Does that mean that the Ten Commandments are unfit to exist? (If you believe that, you can argue that one out with God on your own.) Certainly not. The Ten Commandments point out a number of things that are both offensive to God and hurtful of others. Regardless of where one is at in his faith, who can argue that murder is wrong? That one should not steal from another? That adultery destroys lives?

Well, just a few steps farther on our journey through history, and we find a group of individuals who decided that it was necessary to add to God’s Law. Hundreds upon hundreds of [religious] laws were made which affected every manner of an Israelite’s life. Imagine our government… (Oops, sarcasm again). None of these laws made a man more holy in God’s eyes. Instead, these additional laws became a burden to those on whom they were placed and benefited those imposing them. (filter, filter, filter)

Now for the real fun. Jump all the way to Revelations (chapter 20). Here we are told that Satan will be bound in a bottomless pit for 1000 years and mankind will be free from his temptations during this time (vv.2-3). And at the end of the 1000 years, Satan will be let loose (v.7) and he will go about the earth to gather as many followers as he can muster in one last rebellion against God (vv.8-9).

My intent here is not to preach but rather make a point. Not only did God’s Law not make man holy, let alone a morally upstanding and law abiding citizen of earth, but even after living in what will be the most just and peaceful time the earth has ever seen, man (generally speaking) chooses a path of self-damnation. So my question to Spooner is: what makes him think that man-made laws will be of any greater effect than those of God? Spooner sees the Constitution as something it is not: something that could stop man’s propensity for evil. In the physical sense, the Constitution is but thoughts penned on parchment. But the idea, the spirit of those thoughts is where the power is. It was never meant to be rolled up to beat an offender over the head with. Rather, it was intended to empower the individual to stand on his God given freedoms. It was intended to be the measure by which the people held those in government accountable. It was intended to warn our government that it was only to operate within prescribed boundaries, and that it should fear the people if it did not.

I believe our Constitution is second only to God’s written word in its beauty and content. But again, man still has the ability to choose whether or not to adhere to the Constitution – be it the man elected to office who usurps authority, or the man who sits idly by watching his neighbor’s life being stripped from him by the elected official. As it relates to power, the issue isn’t with the Constitution, the issue is with mankind: both the governor and the governed.

Suggesting that the issue is, as it always has been, with mankind, we naturally come to a place where we can discuss Spooner’s first premise: that the Constitution authorized the government we have now have.

The handling of this premise could easily lead into much debate. To put it simply, I believe that the Constitution was intended to set the boundaries within which government was allowed to act. I also believe that, like today, there were many who wanted more power in the hands of the government. But why would a person, or people, who had just escaped tyranny, want to set up a government which could/would ultimately become more tyrannical than the one they just escaped? I suggest to you it comes back to mankind’s natural bent toward evil. Though he may resist [on his own] for a time, he eventually succumbs to it – much like he does to gravity. So it isn’t really an issue of what kind of government the ink and parchment of the Constitution wanted for our country: left to our (generally speaking) own volition, we have brought this upon ourselves.

Finally, Spooner’s asserts the Constitution should no longer exist. He is wrong. I propose to you that Spooner, and those who hold this tenet, are themselves incapable of solving the problems we face today that stem from our government.

Let me explain.

The minute one either fails or refuses to accept responsibility for a situation he forfeits any ability to solve it. I did not say blame, I said responsibility. By transferring the responsibility to the Constitution, Spooner, and those of similar mind, are attempting to transfer the ability to authorize and/or the power to prevent in the proverbial hands of an inanimate object; thereby emptying himself of the ability and/or power necessary to solve the problems we face. And the solutions we must find today to the problems within government are our responsibility. No amount of Viagra can cure the impotence of Spooner’s conclusion here.

Consider what would happen if an armed resistance came against the Feds – and won. Would that guarantee we would instantly return to the Republic we were intended to be? Nope, and I will tell you why. First, our culture has degenerated so much over these past two hundred years. It isn’t that they were perfect then, but when stood next to men and women of generations past, we pale in comparison. Second, without the cultural integrity of years past, what will fill the void left by an overthrown government? It is the latter question that scares me more than an armed conflict.

Now consider what would happen if we threw out the Constitution. What kind of government would fill the void? What would be the character of the men/women ruling in this new government?

Spooner is wrong. The Constitution should stay.

What IS unfit to exist? The person within government who is unwilling to discipline himself to live within the bounds of the Constitution for the United States of America; who would rather destroy the life of free men and women for financial gain. And what about the person who allows him to get away with it? The person who does not resist the tyrant; who sees his own life more precious than his prodigy.

We have gone to great lengths to preserve the written record of the idea, and yet, generally speaking, we have done little to fan the flames of that idea that once burned bright in the hearts and minds of the men and women who safeguarded our freedoms – often at the price of their lives.

Before the smoldering embers are extinguished, we need to stoke the fire.

Laugh, Or Cry?

Or both.

You make the call.

Thoughtful Analysis

Kevin Baker posts these links from MikeIstan:

Concord Bridge or Fort Sumter: Part I

Part II

Part III


Let me repeat from yesterday:

[But] that would mean every single one of us is on our own in the coming showdown, except for what we can do at arm’s-length in forming mutual-defense arrangements with tough, trustworthy friends and relatives.

Forge links.

Build tribe.

Harden hearts.




We’re fooked.

Finish your work, boys and girls.

We are at crush depth, and the boat is still diving.

Now taking bets on when the bolts blow out….

Presence Of Malice

Read all of this Vanderleun piece.

Then consider the consequences of the Mighty Kenyan’s re-election.

‘Cuz that’s what’s coming.

Pray that I am wrong.

SHTF School: Survival With A Guitar


Are you ready for what is coming?

Tempus fugit.

PATCON: Say It Ain’t So, Bob

The intrepid Vanderboegh/Codrea team pries the lid off PATCON, another rotting coffin in the Federal law enforcement world.

Related docs here.

You mean the system has been hopelessly corrupt for twenty or more years?

You aren’t saying that the Federal (and much of the state and local) law enforcement apparatus is nothing more than a gigantic organized-crime syndicate with tentacles reaching to the highest levels of government?

You couldn’t be suggesting that such a system is, by definition, utterly incapable of reform?

And that its nominal overseers in the legislative and judicial branches are part and parcel of the same problem?





That would mean every single one of us is on our own in the coming showdown, except for what we can do at arm’s-length in forming mutual-defense arrangements with tough, trustworthy friends and relatives.

Holy crap.

Hey look! There’s a new episode of “Dancing With The Stars” on tonight!


Good Times Ahead

Funny thing.

When people talk about using these in the Z axis, they seem to forget about all of their points of vulnerability in the X and Y axes – for both their organizations and all of their associates.

It is to laugh.


Support Your Local Police (State)

UC Davis, November, 2011

Will Grigg reminds us:

…Anytime a police officer commits an act of aggressive violence he is engaged in a criminal assault. If his fellow officers won’t intervene to stop him, law-abiding citizens have the moral authority to do so.

But this simply won’t do, tut-tuts the program manual for the national Support Your Local Police campaign:

“The local police are not your enemy. Your committee is not here to attack them, blame them for violating the Constitution or your civil liberties because they are enforcing a measure of the Patriot Act or conducting a joint Federal and State anti-terror drill. Those are federal issues, which the local police in some cases may have already have little to no say if they are to continue receiving their additional Homeland Security funds, new equipment and weaponry…. We urge all responsible citizens in this community to work with us to …[s]upport our local police in the performance of their duties [and] oppose all harassment or interference with law enforcement personnel as they carry out their assigned tasks…. [We must accept] our responsibilities to our local police, to defend them against unjust attacks, make them proud and secure in their vital profession, and to offer them our support in word and deed wherever possible”

Read the whole thing.

The best part?

You are paying for this evil.





Do, as/when you see fit.

If everybody swept his own doorstep, the whole world would be clean.

— Goethe

Do You Understand Yet?

True believers in constitutional restoration should read this post and consider all of its implications.


I’ll just ponder old Mr. Spooner:

But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain — that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.

Res Ipsa Loquitur

A comment here:

Anonymous said…

So what do we do then? Much like OWS, we have no consensus.

The Christians want the second coming and would raise God’s Army to kill off anyone who hasn’t seen their light. The Muslims aren’t much different with their Jihads.

Any discussion of “direct action” on a public forums is quickly shut down due to “opsec”.

We will have to learn to fight and most of us are aging rapidly. The largest population of the “youth bulge” is in the middle east. War is always fought by the young and started by the old.

So what to do?

If I wrote things like- Take our guns and we will build bombs.If I posted techniques on improvised munitions, sabotage, subversion, espionage, assassination, poison or other unpleasant skills, you’d pull it for fear of repression of your soap box.

We live in fear of the police. The FreeFor lost it’s teeth a long time ago.They are tired old men castrated by Waco, Ruby Ridge and other incidents. They had their chance and they wet themselves with fear of losing their beloved 2nd amendment.

The Government has infiltrated us and knows we pose no threat. Most militias will join the oppressors if they put momma in jail.

They ran to the hills to hunker in a bunker waiting for the end. Any one who stood up now and fired the shot that would be heard around the world would be disowned by the freefor like a red headed step child.

Reform will not change a thing only revolution.

We will be fighting brother against brother, father against son until the fight is over.

You ready for that?

To break the chains of oppression, we will have to kill and be killed, jailed and be jailed, defamed,tortured,murdered and executed for our crimes and be prepared do the same to our enemies.

We will become outcasts, criminals,rebels in the eyes of our people who will gladly betray us to save their own skins or for a profit.

What to do? You know what to do. Do you have the balls to do it? Do you?

We must destroy infrastructure, deny the enemy any asset, target the leadership for execution and post their heads on the gates of the city, tear up the tracks, blow the fuses, shut down the system ,hold them hostage, burn the banks, fight the police and the military.

Small groups of true believers or go it alone. Develop a security culture,Trust no one.
Deeds not words.

Be prepared to die or live under oppression.

America will not survive but the ideals of freedom and liberty will never die.


The final word is from the UK site noted the other day:

Vanderboegh: More On The Crisis Of Legitimacy, Civil War, And Resistance

Mike takes a break from his and David Codrea’s ongoing Gunwalker crusade to pen another big-picture piece on the Growing Crisis.

Read it all, then come back for some additional reflections.

As another student of history, I agree with Mike that the political, social, and cultural divide in 2011 America is as bad or even greater than it has ever been in our lifetimes. I’d even suggest that it is as bad or worse than in the run-up to the Unpleasantness of 1861-1865.

In fact, upon further consideration, I cannot see how rational analysis leads to any conclusions other than:

We’re screwed,


There’s gonna be a fight.

That fight – between the forces of omnipresent control and those lonely few who are willing to kill and die over the issue of individual freedom – has actually been ongoing for more than 200 years in this country, and for millennia across the globe.

It is, as Robert Heinlein stated, part of man’s essential nature:

Political tags — such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.


A honest assessment of the individual freedom movement in this country over the past 20 years must reluctantly come to the conclusion that those lights are guttering and, one by one, going out.

Not that there haven’t been tactical victories along the way.

But for every Vermont-carry bill passed in the statehouses, there have been major strides forward for Team Tyranny, be they to expand domestic law enforcement capacity, to increase Americans’ clamoring dependence on the FedGov’s teat, or to tie America’s fate inextricably to the corrupt European elites from whom the Founders escaped temporarily in 1781.

Worse still than OpFor’s sustained momentum is the terribly disproportionate force ratios mustering for the coming storm.

Team Tyranny?

Several hundred thousand personnel (including many recently-trained-and-blooded young military veterans), with unlimited beans, unlimited bullets, First World evac/trauma/rehabilitation care, surveillance and kinetic toys all across the X, Y, and Z axes, the stupefied support of at least half of the American population, and the financial resources of the entire Western elite – shot through with malignancy as that may be.


A few thousand old men (many of whom unable to quick-march for five miles with a light pack and rifle) carrying semiautomatic light weapons and sidearms, with barely enough beans/bullets/bandaids to sustain a fire team or two for a week or two, very little technology of any kind, no external foreign support, no financial resources, and zero air/space assets.

Worst of all?

No coherent plan whatsoever to engage, defeat, and destroy the statists, their minions, and their beneficiaries.

And make no mistake:

To be sustained, victory for FreeFor must be defined as the complete destruction of the enemy military/political/financial/cultural apparatus wherever possible, along with permanent expulsion of any survivors.

Sadly, other than to counsel repeatedly against taking any kinetic action whatsoever until some indeterminate time in the future, most public intellectuals in the American freedom movement seem unwilling to confront the real situation on the ground.

For all of the bravado expressed on the intertubes (and this shop is as guilty as any other site), the hard facts are that:

– Every ATF, DEA, TSA, and DHS employee (be they agents, supervisors, analysts, or other staff) goes to work and otherwise moves in the community as they please every day,
– Ditto for every other Federal law enforcement employee,
– Ditto for every collectivist legislator and staff, every collectivist LEO or other agency employee, and every collectivist judge and judicial employee in governments at the township/county/state/Federal levels, and
– Ditto for every one of the non-governmental collectivists in every aspect of American life.

Face the truth, people.

As a deterrent to bad governmental/majoritarian behavior, FreeFor simply has no credibility whatsoever.


If there is any hope for a restoration of individual freedom in this country, that path must begin with an acknowledgment that what FreeFor has done to date has utterly failed, notwithstanding any harrumphing, pseudo-moralizing, caterwauling, and chest-thumping to the contrary.

“Stop, or I’ll yell ‘stop!’ again!” neither cowes the tyrants nor inspires our friends.

Elvis had it right, back in 1968:

Less talking.

More doing.

Or at least try, for heaven’s sake.

Something is always better than nothing.

Let’s win.