Turning America into a Battlefield: A Blueprint for Locking Down the Nation

PoliceWalking_0 The latest from Whitehead and the Rutherford Institute.


Assistant Undersecretary for Violent Urban Expression And Acting-Out Lee Greenwood could not be reached for comment.


105 responses to “Turning America into a Battlefield: A Blueprint for Locking Down the Nation

  1. north Carolina has one of the largest military posts of any state.we also have one hundred countys with maybe sixty thousand federal troops they would have a hard time controlling the state not that I don’t think they wont try it I think things have gone to far for a peaceful resolution the left is in its end game and there is no stopping them I don’t think they will ultimately prevail but we will have to go thru 15 to 20 years of hard times and that is what I dread not for myself but for my kids and grandkids.your friend truckwilkins

    • second. today’s children are going to go thru heel on wheels during their lives(currency and debt defaults, global competition and robots probably making job growth obsolete, govt controlling the population thru technology and a completely different country thanks to 50 years of an open border). some would happen eventually, but the govt of the usa has betrayed its citizens.

      • Jimmy the Saint

        “the govt of the usa has betrayed its citizens.”

        Comrade, comrade, please. What you say simply is not true; rather, the peasantry has failed its government. We are just doing what is necessary and proper since you lot apparently are not smart enough to do so on your own. Let us boldly go forward into the modern age together! You work, we guide; and if you fail, we replace.
        – The Elite

        • By the way, tovarisch, if you look amongst your peers, you will see and hear confirmation that the American governmental system was indeed failed by the peasant citizenry, who failed to defend the so-called ‘rights’ your documents purported to protect.

          • outlawpatriot

            Mmm… I gotta say that that is a fair statement.


            I think Bundy proves that the government can be backed down. Even at this late date.

            If Shay’s or the Whiskey Rebellion had just been followed through on, it just might be a different world right now. If Marbury vs Madison would have been stood up to, it just might be a different world as well.

            Power really does reside with the people. If not, where else does it reside? On parchment? Hardly. In the good nature of man? That’s a joke the fucking anarchists continue to perpetuate.

            I’m gonna continue to dance with who brung me. I’ve never heard a realistic alternative yet. I’m open. But so far, zero, zip, nada, bumpkiss, nix, nein, no and nuh-uh.

            • Jimmy the Saint

              “Power really does reside with the people. If not, where else does it reside?”

              Power resides with those with the will to use it. No more, no less.

  2. Another site with live comms of Baltimore police, ems:

  3. Whats with the Lee Greenwood obsession?
    Just curious.

    • Have to agree. There is obviously an inside joke in there. Care to enlighten some of us plebes?

    • Mark Matis

      Mr. Greenwood seems to believe that we still live free in a Constitutional republic. Just like some people whose names I won’t bother to mention believe that most “Law Enforcement” in this country are “good cops”, and that there are only a few “bad apples” in that barrel…

    • Greenwood sings that ridiculous syrupy song about Murika, containing lyrics like “Proud to be an American, where at least I know I’m free,” without the slightest hint of irony.

      I’ve only been visiting WRSA for about a year, but I got the joke immediately. Greenwood is a stand-in for what I call the “law and order conservatives.” These are the people who have no trouble seeing the threat of statism from the Left, but remain utterly blind to it when it cloaks itself in a flag or wears a badge.

      • Mark Matis

        Rove Republicans. Nothing more. Nothing less.

      • SemperFi, 0321

        Most are too naive and never get it. Almost daily I still get smarmy emails from my friends about supporting the troops and be sure to help the NRA with some more free flowing cash.
        Foxtard Copsuckers.

        • The Boss mentioned the Girondins in the French revolution in something I read yesterday, I looked that up. They remind me a lot of the people you’re describing. All paperwork, order, “doing things fair” but not enough action, they’d rather let some one else worry about the sweaty, sticky things and not be bothered. The Girondins seemed to be a decent lot, they knew if control slid all the way down into the hands of the foaming mobs (read sub 80 IQ?) that wholesale slaughter would start. They just didn’t have enough “doers” to prevent it, their own love of order and process tripped them up.

  4. Prepping Preacher

    observe… note… adjust – regarding both sides of the frakas… meatspace is getting beefier… shades of the riots back in the 60’s but these are more intense… lines drawn back then have never been erased – by any of the players… they have, in fact, become more distinct, more defined and certainly more mutually restrictive… coexistence has never been on the agenda of any involved… in addition, this mayor’s initial non-committal approach screams volumes from the rooftop of Baltimore’s highest building – and well beyond

    • ” shades of the riots back in the 60’s but these are more intense…”

      Ugh. Not quite. Watts, some of which was put to the torch was far more intense. Case in point — http://cdn5.freedomoutpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/58852252.jpg Baltimore is not even close to that level. Fact most of the rioters are kids just getting out of school. When you see PoPo on horseback literally cracking heads with nightsticks ala the ’68 Dem convention, lets talk.

      • Prepping Preacher

        Watts wasn’t in the 60’s and Watts was pretty much confined to that area… few sympathy-type riots…

      • Prepping Preacher

        ignore my first response to your post… brain fart… I had other localized rioting in mind… Watts comment was in error

      • Chicago in 68, 68, and 72 was sporty.
        Po-Po abandoned city. Community organizers decided to burn and loot their way from the South side up into other neighborhoods. Each time, determined men protected their families with well placed teams firing M1 Garands. Men back from Korea and WW2, protecting the neighborhood from an invasion.
        Wikipedia cites thousands injured, but less than 100 dead. However, I saw more dead than that at just a few intersections. And each subsequent riot, they came back stronger, specifically targeting the neighborhood to seek vengeance; but were convinced to leave their dead. Won the battles. Lost the war…
        Darwin won. They have captured all the cities and fed.gov.

        Darwin established a criteria to measure success.

      • LFMayor, 09January2015:
        “You know what happens when incompatible humans get together?
        The same thing that happens when incompatible dogs get together, except on a greater and more efficient scale, as befits our opposable thumbs.
        Joshua, anyone?
        Same damn thing that’s happened throughout history. Your ability to tweet and survive strep throat with a few pills doesn’t make you any more human than the ancients. Cry about your claws and spots all you want, but it doesn’t make you any less the leopard, oh my apex predators.
        The answer is win, so that you know the better people are in charge.”

        Darwin sets historical criteria.
        Choose to win.

    • you and I evidently are not scoping the same events. Ferguson I, Ferguson II (The Sequel), and now Baltimore, are little more than Leftist media productions. Look at the crowd scenes: half those milling about consist of White/Jewish media flacks with hats on backwards and camera-on-shoulder, literally directing: “D’Marcus, throw brick thataway, Latwana, break window, steal toilet paper…”Lights, camera, Action!” Pathetic. I remember the 1960’s very clearly. There were Black Men in those days: running street gunfights with Marines/Army for days on end, dead bodies all over the place, whiole cities on fire. Apparently I’m going to have to go over to some BlackSites and do some agitating

  5. Good article. Many good articles outline the problem. Not so many offer a solution, based on reality.

    Given the world as it exists, I maintain the only realistic chance for any geographic region on CONUS to exist in any semblance of Liberty remains:

    1) LGoPs (and individuals, if you are alone) operate in their respective AOs in pursuit of the Commander’s Intent of Rightful Liberty. These are operations of extirpation and/or eviction of those who propose, implement, support and enforce infringements of Liberty.

    2) All Patriots must go at the same time to prevent OpFor consolidation of resources. None may honorably quit before Liberty or Death.

    3) AOs that are more successful in their operations should expand their operations geographically until they reach fellow Liberty Fighters, securing an ever-increasing area that has secured the Commander’s Intent.

    Problem solved. Once Bad People have been sent packing – whether to the Old Country or to face their respective Creators, the honorable Remnant may decide their respective political paths forward.

    • outlawpatriot

      Item number two is the fly in the ointment. The discussion about whether it’s the right time or not would probably go on ad infinitum as it has to date. Real important also to make sure that possible allies have the same concept of Liberty. The latter would also bleed over into how item number three would be conducted.

      Sorry, but I find Jefferson’s rightful liberty too vague for a commander’s intent.

      Still, a noble plan. 🙂

      • If we are looking to build most commentors on the blogs into our respective teams, your point is accurate. Most are typers, not doers. In fact, when a few of us step off the porch, they’ll be the loudest in the sea of voices as to how stupid we are for doing so.

        The future of Liberty, fortunately, doesn’t rely on those people. They are background noise to the real discussions and actions.

        The upside: There are, I am betting my arse, many real Patriots who will stand up once they see people moving to the Green. 70 or so were at Lexington – and 24 hours later, 15,000+ surrounded Boston. I don’t mind being among the 70 – I just hope the 15,000 show up when they see it is real. (If I am wrong, I’ll be dead, and it won’t matter any more to me.)

        Rightful Liberty is the end state. My chosen path to get there is Restoration to Founder’s Intent in the DoI/USC/BoR. Rightful Liberty can be found in the USC, and the USC can be properly amended to fix a few things once we’ve gotten rid of the parasites. Restoration is the Battle Cry. Rightful Liberty is the desired outcome – the same outcome folks like Franklin were striving to reach. That’s good enough for me.

        • outlawpatriot

          Make no mistake. I’m with ya. Joined at the hip we are. Always have been.

          Just sayin’ that Jefferson’s quote is broad enough to allow even a fucking anarchist in. You do understand that, yes? And that fucking anarchist has absolutely no respect for the USC and trashes everything related to it and our Founders every chance they get. Common bastards they are.

          The Hitler Youth could also sign on under that broad Jeffersonian “rightful liberty”. You’re married to a woman of color. Do want to give those morons legitimacy of any sort? Do ya wanna share a foxhole or walk an assault line with them?

          Just pointing out that you can’t ally yourself with certain fucks no matter their belief in “rightful liberty”. Target transition times between them and the general enemy communists should be exactly the same. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. That’s all I’m sayin’.

          It will truly be a polygonal battlefield. It will also be an opportunity to take all the trash out in one trip.

          Just sayin’. 😉

          • “The Hitler Youth could also sign on under that broad Jeffersonian ‘rightful liberty’.”

            How so?

            It’s no sin to be against the ropes, but it is to be blowin’ bullshit out your ass. So how was the Hitler Youth consistent with Jefferson’s Rightful Liberty?

          • Absolutely agree. I stand with no man who is not aboard the “Restore the Constitution (1791 Original Intent) – then Secede if that is your choice” strategy. I told one fat little fucker who visits here on occasion we could never be allies (not just because he’s a douche) but because his end goal and mine were incompatible, and ultimately, one of us would have to stick a knife in the other’s neck.

            Anarchists & such don’t truly seek Rightful Liberty, certainly not as Jefferson defined the phrase, so they can’t slip-in under the wire – at least not your wire or mine. Most are racists and simpletons and cowards and wannabe Tyrants who don’t have the mental or physical abilities to realize their ambitions and type on keyboards because they don’t like what is on television and no self-respecting woman will pay attention to them.

            Anyone can abuse words like Rightful Liberty and “General Welfare” and “Necessary & Proper” – that doesn’t mean they fool real men as to their true character. Personally, I see them as Grade A maggot, worm & carrion food, just like the Liberals and other Red fucks surrounding us.

            All the trash in one trip, whatever they like to call themselves, whatever skirts they like to hide behind. 😉

          • ghostsniper

            Give an example of an anarchist trashing everything related to the constitution.

            • outlawpatriot

              Oh, pleeease! I won’t even dignify that with an answer.

              • You just did—“I don’t have one.”

                • outlawpatriot

                  ghostsniper, that little bitch Jim Klein is an anarchist.

                  There, is that better?

                  • ghostsniper

                    You made a claim, I asked for an example.
                    Why won’t you dignify your claim?

                  • Alan,

                    As much as you label Klein, right or wrong, as one of those dirty, despicable folks you call “anarchist”, who wants other people we call government, out of his life, does not make Klein a “little bitch”. However, your undying support for folks who serve as “government” labels you a statist. There is no greater evil for me than having other folks, using the unlimited power and resources of government, telling me how to live my life.

                    If there are scoundrels it seems to me they are those who rule over others in the guise of government. Those folks, such as yourself, are the enemies of Freedom & Liberty. Not folks such as Klein. Klein who simply wants to live his life without intrusion by others.

                    Here’s some advice for you…try making an argument for your beliefs without using the profanities. Doing so may lend a little credibility to you.

      • Mark Matis

        As far as I am concerned, when the FedSwill start anywhere, I will start in Central Florida with any employee of any agency or any unit that participates. And I will be using their Ruby Ridge and their Waco rules.

      • “Sorry, but I find Jefferson’s rightful liberty too vague for a commander’s intent.”

        That’s because you switch the means for the end. Happens to be a huge threat to K, his biggest enemy by far. You should be his brah instead. Bad boy.

        A Commander’s Intent is for a given tactical context, whether a tiny op to the store or an entire war, in which case the goal is to obliterate the enemy. Force, including battle, is a tool; Rightful Liberty is the end for which the tool is used, and then only if it’s necessary as a matter of defense…not “reactive,” but “defensive.”

        Switching ends and means is one of the reasons Pragmatism can often be so evil. Commie-libs built their whole world on it. Ask the Federal Reserve, among a zillion others.

        • outlawpatriot

          You and I just disagree.

          Which is why I would never have you inside my wire.

          I could never trust you.

          You’re a fucking anarchist glomming on to a broad concept.

          • If you’re done with your catharsis, could you take just a moment to point out what I’ve got wrong there? No? Didn’t think so.

            You got a grandkid or something, to teach you how threads go?

            • “You got a grandkid or something, to teach you how threads go?”

              Sorry…MY ERROR; it presented funny when I responded. It was MY ERROR. I promise you, nothing bad happened when I admitted that—try it sometime.

          • Alan,

            you call Klein and others “anarchist” like it is a bad thing. Anarchy is, in it’s most simplistic terms, the absence of government. And what is government ? A group of people who believe they know better than those they rule over with a myriad of inane laws and thievery through encroaching and ever progressive taxation ! So the reality is you’re a damn statist, a collectivist. An evil if there ever was one.

            Those you claim you could never trust most likely feel the same about you. Seems to me you believe the world spins around Alan Mullenaux. Well it doesn’t. One would think at your advanced age you’d have awakened by now and smell the coffee. But evidently you can’t smell the coffee for the overpowering amount of dung you spew on a regular basis.

            And that Constitution you like to defend. It is D-E-A-D. Dead. Gone. No longer applicable. It’s been dead for years, decades. But you’re too stubborn or dense to acknowledge that truth. Just look at the criminal Barry Soetoro, a criminal who usurped your beloved Constitution while the other two branches of your Constitutional government looked upon his criminality with nary a whimper. In many cases cheered him on !

            So while you whine and cry and snivel and threaten folks with your keyboard muscles and your imbecilic profanities, it is obvious to anyone reading your drivel, you live in a land of Constitutional OZ and you fancy youself to be the Wizard. The ultimate make-believe.

            Some may consider your continuing defense of the defunct United States Constitutional to be admirable. Others may consider your refusal to acknowledge the demise of that document, a refusal to acknowledge reality. But your continuing use of threats to those you don’t know tells me you live in a land of child-like make-believe. I almost pity you.

            As you continue to spew your “tough guy” keyboard antics laced with your signature profanities, understand THIS reality: Never, ever forget that when the Shit DOES Hit the proverbial fan….tracers work BOTH ways !

            • FrozenPatriot

              Can you provide any evidence that a successful anarchist utopia is any less a myth than a successful communist utopia?

            • outlawpatriot

              Yeah, I know. 😉

              • Klein and his friends can present their Ideal Type of anarchy all they want. The fact remains: in Russia 1917-22, and Spain 1936-39, the anarchists wound up fighting alongside the Communists. This was not accidental. The ultimate State is the phony “anti-State”

                • Stuka/Not-So Wise Cave Owl/Haxo,

                  Sieg Heil !

                • Jim Klein

                  “Klein and his friends can present their Ideal Type of anarchy all they want.”

                  I missed it—when was this? Or are you bullshitting again?

                  I don’t present nuthin’ for other people’s lives. THAT’S THE WHOLE POINT!! Really…all this time and you haven’t even figured THAT out yet? You ain’t giving Dispatchers a good name.

                  Oh, maybe this was from the Newspeak Book of Oratory—my rejection of you, or anyone else, forcing me to do anything, is somehow me presenting some Ideal way for you to live? Why is that…was it some part of your life goal to force me to do something, and I’m spoiling it because I won’t allow it? Did your Ideal Life somehow include me?

                  Or are you saying you haven’t the wherewithal to live your life without the imposed management of others? That’s cool; there are plenty of people very willing to do that for you. But leave me out of it…I have no desire to rule you and you won’t rule me. How tough is that?

                • Anonymous

                  Those “anarchists” were idiots, and they had a lousy idea what anarchy meant.

        • JK: I really don’t know how I have survived all these years without you there to point out the dangers in my life. Thank you.

          Ends: Rightful Liberty.

          Means: Restore the Constitution based on Original Intent and 1791 status.

          Under that paradigm, any state that seeks to secede is entirely justified in doing so – for the USC is a compact among sovereign states, not a superior entity. Any party to the compact can and may quit whensoever they choose, and should not be molested for it. I would personally stand against anyone, at that time, seeking to molest any state seeking secession. And if any portion of any state wants to secede from their state, I think that is quite soundly rooted in precedent as well, under our DoI.

          There are, potentially, many end states that have the potential for hosting Rightful Liberty. Anarchy ain’t one of them. And I have not seen one system anywhere, even here among the “FreeFor Intelligentsia”, that is even in the same league as the combination of USC/BoR for creating such an environment.

          Instead of all these experts who like to point out what and why USC can’t get it done, I’d still like to see one yeoman’s effort at an alternative.

          Haven’t seen it yet.

          Not holding my breath for it, either.

          **Note** I have counted three people who visit this blog who I think have the intellect and life experience to give such a new document a serious run. If I ever read it and decide it is preferable to the USC/BoR, I will become an advocate for it. But my above-stated ‘Means’ remains in place. Bringing a new paradigm into play is only open for consideration after Restoration, when such deliberations have legitimacy. From a practical and strategic perspective, anything ‘other’ than a state declaring secession doesn’t carry the legitimacy required for realistic success,

          The practical reality is that the USC is an embedded touchstone in the American psyche, even for the muddled masses and Red subversives seeking to destroy all notions of Liberty. Every battling group must be able to claim stewardship of the USC/BoR to reach victory.

          After that fight is over, change is possible.

          • >>> Ends: Rightful Liberty.

            Means: Restore the Constitution based on Original Intent and 1791 status. <<<

            Well, there you go. I can't make it any clearer than you make it here. If you allow the Means to hold sway (greater value) over the Ends, then you are doing just as I charged of Al. If you don't, then you aren't. I don't know how much easier it could be; it's just a choice after all.

            So if faced with a choice where it's Rightful Liberty or the Constitution, but not both, which do you choose? There's not some trick here; it's a straightforward question about a reasonably likely scenario…as likely as any other scenario, anyway.

            • JK: Your ‘either/or’ choice is is built upon a flawed premise.

              Your contention that you can’t have Rightful Liberty and the Constitution is erroneous. There are several ways one can reach a state of Rightful Liberty – none I have explored are a better path than restoration.

              As written, the USC has no mechanism to lay hands upon individuals who remain within the bounds of Natural Law. In reality it is your State that has all such power over you. .Gov haters need to learn where their anger is rightly focused – not upon any parchment, or “Government”, but upon the men and women who abuse those things.

              Men abuse the Bible all the time. That does not make it responsible for the Evils that men choose to do.

              Bad People are the problem. Full Stop.

              • “Your contention that you can’t have Rightful Liberty and the Constitution is erroneous.”

                That’s not my contention; that’s why you won’t find any such cite. The question put to you was, “So if faced with a choice where it’s Rightful Liberty or the Constitution, but not both, which do you choose?”

                That’s not a contention that it has to be that way. It’s a question about where YOUR values lie. It COULD be that way and if it is, which way do YOU go? Simple question, no reason there’s shouldn’t be a simple answer.

                • I dismiss, once again, your premise that one must choose either/or.

                  • ghostsniper

                    You can’t have people ruling you, and not ruling you, at the same time.
                    A gov’t constitution establishes a ruling body.

                    • Jim Klein

                      Details, details. Can’t you just accept?

                    • No, it does not. You are either sincerely mistaken, or deliberately so.

                      Doesn’t matter which – wrong is wrong.

                      Bad Men make themselves Rulers instead of administrators – I’ve never voted for a Ruler in my life. Bad Men, per Colonel Cooper, can be corrected by good men with rifles – thus reminded they are there to do the few tasks we delegated to them, and no more.

                    • Jim Klein

                      “Bad Men make themselves Rulers instead of administrators”

                      A class of administrators is what you seek? And you stand with no man who doesn’t seek the same? Do tell…what exactly are they going to administrate?

                      More importantly, who’s paying for them and how?

                  • Jim Klein

                    “I dismiss, once again, your premise that one must choose either/or.”

                    How can you dismiss that which doesn’t exist? I offered no such premise and even clarified that I didn’t.

                    But meanwhile, you have failed to answer the question. Are you saying it’s unintelligible? Do you deny that values have a hierarchy?

                    So don’t answer; big deal. That only brings to mind(s) why you wouldn’t wish to answer. I say again, there’s no trick here. If you have the values you do, then why in the world wouldn’t you want to declare them?

          • The practical reality is that the USC is an embedded touchstone in the American psyche

            How did that happen? I suspect you have such a strong commitment to believing some arrangements legitimate because a government agency — the public schools — programmed you with that belief when you were too young to intellectually resist. This is like hearing a German Jew saying we must obey the fuhrer and go into the camps, because the fuhrer told us we must obey the fuhrer.

            Remember all the fuss over 2A because the legal definition of “regulated” changed over time? The definition of “rights” in Jefferson’s ‘rightful liberty’ quote is missing, and may be redefined into anything government wants: You have a right to free health care. You have a right to not hearing scary ideas. You have a right to support the elites who are protecting you from the monster. It limits nothing.

            • Anon: It happened because a great number of people alive in the decade following RevWarI deliberated it, ratified it, agreed to respect it, and taught their children to do the same. Bad People have abused the Original Intent, but they always – always – find that their abuse is ‘permitted’ by the Constitution, either by torturing the language or finding implied powers. Good People have failed to defend the compact and themselves – but every argument for political power in America is based upon USC. Every law passed in Congress is argued to have legitimacy found in the USC. This fact is simply too self-evident to explain further.

              As to “Jefferson forgot to include a definition of what “rights” are” in his Rightful Liberty quote is just plain lazy intellect or deliberate obfuscation. The entire flippin’ quote is the definition.

              Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.

              Unless you think it is somehow incumbent on us all to add asterisks, footnotes and disclaimers to every sentence we utter, referring back to our previous statements on the topic at hand. In Jefferson’s case, perhaps the Rightful Liberty quote only needs to be footnoted to the DoI?

              You know what your Rights are – defend them from the people who infringe them. You don’t need Jefferson or me or anyone else to validate them. The world will spin properly.

              • Suppose you leave “rights” to be defined by the internal voice of peoples’ consciences. The majority headcount of people are statists who want to rearrange other peoples’ lives. Their conscience tells them the proper natural law includes a right to healthcarei, etc. We got here by following exactly the plan you still champion.

                • Anon – no. Functional Human Beings have a relatively accurate moral compass, from birth, in my experience. Good people know right from wrong. Most Bad People also know right from wrong, they simply choose ‘wrong’.

                  I have not the time or inclination to list Natural Rights for you. You’ll have to do that research on your own. But the Founders were in the same position you are attempting to put me into – and their solution was elegant and simple.

                  They did not attempt to list all the Rights they possessed. They articulated and enumerated the Rights that they would cede, on a temporary basis with full right of recovery, in a document they called the Constitution. They reserved all other Rights to themselves.

                  Our ‘Rights’ are too many to list. And anything one forgets to put on the list is assumed (by most bad people) to be surrendered. So the Founders chose simply to list the Rights they’d license to FedGov.

                  Here’s a clue for you, though: I have no ‘Right’ to anything that would force you to do anything. And I have every right to be free of anything you may wish to do to me. Simple.

                  • Jim Klein

                    ” They articulated and enumerated the Rights that they would cede, on a temporary basis with full right of recovery”

                    Nice comment and a basically accurate take on rights IMO.

                    So why is it suddenly so important to you that everyone today cede exactly those same rights, and why do you believe it’s wrong if someone wishes to engage their “full right of recovery” now? Did you mean what you wrote or not?

                    Look, I understand that Al could be a great bud and he would’ve made a terrific soldier IMO. That doesn’t imply that you have to wear the same underwear, nor spout the same bullshit.

                    • JK: If you want to go ad hominem we can do that. If you would prefer to remain productive, then cut the underwear-esque shit.

                      Under the compact it was the People, through their States, who ceded a few Rights to the new FedGov. The proper method of recovery is through your respective States – Secession. Anything less brings serious matters of legitimacy (that whole Hearts & Minds argument so many are fond of spewing) into play. Lots of people talk about secession around here, haven’t seen much productive action toward those ends.

                      The next option is that people could choose to secede from not only FedGov, but also their StateGov. That means legitimacy is front and center in the PR wars that will flow from OpFor, and those PR arguments will win in the great muddled masses.

                      The simple reality is that we are not in the same relationship with our political entities today as were the Founders with the King. When the people of a continent choose to tell a King across an ocean to ESAD, that’s one thing. Yet trying to form an “America” on the King’s Island would have required an entirely different methodology.

                      The reality here and now is what it is. If you can’t get Michigan to secede, you can try to secede from Michigan. You can raise a flag over your home and declare a free and independent JK-istan. Good luck with that.

                  • Anonymous

                    Functional Human Beings have a relatively accurate moral compass, from birth

                    I believe that is factually incorrect. The busybody church ladies and the moderate liberals really do believe they are doing good by forcing others to live according to their rules.

                    I have no ‘Right’ to anything that would force you to do anything.

                    Including to pay the taxes to pay the salaries of the enforcers of your preferred set of laws? It’s your extended self-defense system, you pay for it.

                    • Uh, no – again. You have never, once, seen me write or heard me speak of taxing for “law enforcers” (or anything else, for that matter). If you are going to try and debate me, debate from facts, please. Without intellectual honesty, you’ve got nuthin’.

                  • Anonymous

                    Careful, you’re sounding dangerously anarchistic there. When I have gay sex on the front lawn with my lovers tied to a crucifix to celebrate the launch of my nuclear missile submarine, you can write a blistering editorial telling me I will go to Hell. I’ll always wave to you over the back fence, neighbor, because any man who will respect my life, liberty, and property is more good and moral than 99% of all human beings.

          • K,

            “Restore the Constitution….” To what ?

            It is unenforceable in it’s current deceased iteration. Restoring it would only continue the charade it has fostered since it’s ratification.

            • Thanks for that, Dan.; it’ll help me clarify my belief. Al’s got me as an anarchist, even though I’m not. Most people figure I’m anti-Constitutional in principle, even though I’m not.

              You hit the nail on the head—I’m anti-CHARADE, anti-FALSEHOOD. The whole thing has been a charade, start to finish. And now we’ve got otherwise reasonable folk planning to kill others if they don’t go along with the charade.

              That’s sick, sick shit and not a drop different in principle than what the commie-libs or fascists or any other crazed group of thugs–including the damn “socialist-anarchists,” whatever the hell that means–seek to make of this world.

              I’ll have no part of it. Putting “Constitutionalist” next to your name doesn’t make you an American in principle any more than calling yourself a “freedom fighter” does. Americans are Americans and they’re out there working their asses off, taking care of their families, and hoping they can hang on to their last grips of Liberty so that they may live as happily as possible.

              The whole thing is only too simple. You either believe in the sanctity of the Individual and the Rightful Liberty that attends, or you believe in the sanctity of the Collective and the “justice” (only too funny) of forcing individuals to go along, or killing them.

              That’s it; there’s nothing else there in principle. The rest is how you achieve whichever principle you choose. Ends, means.

              Yep, this sure is going to be a War like no other. Every person chooses, no exceptions.

              • outlawpatriot

                I’m pretty sure that if I told Obama he was a communist he would fervently deny it.

                But if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.

                Ergo, if it talks like an anarchist, condemns like an anarchist, pontificates like an anarchist, has but one train of thought like an anarchist, you’re an anarchist. 🙂

                • I already told you that’s an understandable conclusion; that’s as much leeway as you’ll get from me. It’s still false and I’ve told you that if I simply MUST take a label–childish IMO because I’ve already got a name–then I’ll take “Consensualist” or “Voluntarist,” though “Abolitionist” has a lot to recommend it.

                  Get it? In my world you can have your Constitution or whatever else you need to live as a rational human. That’s your business. Go for it and I hope you get whatever you seek, just like racists or gays or whomever.

                  Have a great life; enjoy yourselves. But what you WON’T do is get it from me, or anyone else who wishes to live freely. THAT’S America and THAT’S what the Revolution was about. You’re just like the commie-libs—you got a great dream alright (as you charge everyone else as utopian), but you can’t manage it on your own. You, like them, NEED producers to support it and pay for it. That’s why you’re dreaming of some wild Occupational Force to make it all happen. A statist is a statist is a statist, and a thug is a thug is a thug. You can call me “anarchist” till you’re blue in the face, but it will NEVER make me other than what I am.

                • Alan,

                  Why would your fellow socialist barry soetoro, deny what he is ? I’ve called you a statist, a collectivist and a Marxist, as that is what you are, and you’ve never denied it. If there are enemies to Freedom and Liberty it is folks like you and those we call government.

                  Hey, the fedgov Eagle shits tomorrow Alan. You’ll be able to take your 30 ounces of silver and buy you some bullets to use on us anarchists. But nevet forget Alan….tracers work BOTH ways.

              • I have a constitution. It’s simple.

                It goes something like this: “leave me alone”, the second verse is ” leave me the fuck alone”, and the third verse is “open ended”.

                Funny thing is I’ve never felt the need to write it down though.

              • James….there are things we agree on.

                This “anarchist” mantra that your pal Alan spews is the same tactic used by anti-gun folks to vilify Americans who own firearms. He attempts to make anarchy and those who believe in anarchy villians. In the meantime Alan wants big government. He supports taxation until one drops. He enjoys government bureacrats telling us how to live our lives. He believes in the slavery of government. He uses ridicule to attack those he disagrees with, right out of Alinsky’s book.

                Mullenaux is not a friend of Freedom and Liberty. He has some intelligent folks who should know better, believing he would fight for Freedom. He would not. He believes in subjugation to the state. It is that simple.

                While folks like Mullenaux and other Constitutionists bash those who want government out of our face, those same folks say nothing about the constitutional violations by soetoro, Bush II, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, LBJ, and every member of every Congress who supported the constitutional violations of the aforementioned.

                In the long run, one can only live their life for themselves and fheir loved ones, as best as possible. The Alan Mullenaux’ of the world mean nothing in the scheme of one’s life.

            • Dan: Unenforceable?

              No, it isn’t. You have a rifle, yes?

              It is only unenforceable so long as we refuse to enforce it and defend ourselves.

              • Sam K,

                This really is not the venue to discuss this issue intelligently and reasonably. However….

                Barry soetoro is constitutionally illegitimate. Actually by birth he’s a bastard. He has usurped the Constitution along with 535 members of Congress and 9 SCOTUS scum.

                Are you ready to march on D.C. and put rounds downrange ? Or are you going to tell me you believe the bastard meets the requirements of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 and thus does not deserve your implied justice ?

                I really expect better of you than the cop out answer to my question I asked of you.

                • A cop out? Really? I answered you directly, articulately and pointedly. The matters before us have almost ZERO to do with the current politicians in office. The matters before us are matters of the rifle. Every American is in a state warranting self defense.

                  Why bring the topic to the specific when the general is what matters? The current administration, and every administration back to Lincoln, and most before him, have abused the compact.

                  The Founding generation defended themselves with rifles. They won Liberty with their rifles.

                  That is what it all comes down to, in the end, because we are dealing with Bad Men who believe Mao’s mantra about all power coming from the barrel of a gun. That is how this will be decided – not by constantly talking about how bad you think Barry may be, especially when the stark truth is put before you. Talk will not solve on single issue being put before us by the Bad People. Yet when I speak of 2A remedies, you retreat to talking about Barry.

                  Marching on DC and putting rounds downrange is bad strategy, bad tactics, and suicide. If that is your measure of one’s commitment, I encourage you to think on it a while. CV. CF is for fools, in this fight.

                  There are Evil men, and correction will come only from good men with rifles.

                  • Jim Klein

                    “The Founding generation defended themselves with rifles.”

                    Right. Just for emphasis, it might be valuable to reiterate again exactly what they were defending with those rifles.

                    I mean, you got it right so I don’t understand why you think it’s so different for folk today.

          • Jim Klein

            “I really don’t know how I have survived all these years without you there to point out the dangers in my life. Thank you.”

            Snark doesn’t usually stick in my craw (I get a lot of it), but this one did.

            So lemme ‘splain something to you. If you were to advise me, with good intent and accurate information, that I was threatened by something–oh, maybe some statist assholes about to attack my homestead–then I would be genuinely grateful that you did that. I’d think it was beneficial to you (potential future value from me, not to mention the general principle) and it would obviously be very beneficial to me…it might even save my life.

            So get this through your skull—THIS IS NO DIFFERENT.

            You think Pragmatisim isn’t your “biggest enemy, by far”? Then ignore what I write, just as I could ignore your tip. And just as you would then watch me go down the tubes because I ignored your advice, so we’re all watching you do exactly that. And I’m here to tell you that it doesn’t have to be that way…it’s YOUR choice.

            So you’ve publicly declared that you won’t stand with Kent McManigal for one, let alone the roughly 50% of so-called Patriots who want no part of your statist, imposed, “Restoration.” I choose Kent because he’s so obviously a decent chap and I’m confident you have nothing against him.

            But you won’t stand with him. Okay. And you won’t stand with all those other defenders of Rightful Liberty. That’s okay too…your choice, after all.

            Thing is, I’m not yet persuaded that such is your genuine choice, that it’s what you really believe or intend to do. But after some period of time of refusing to relent on the bullshit, then others simply have to say, “Well, I guess that’s what he means.”

            That’s why it might be helpful–for YOU–to directly answer some of the simple questions put to you. Failure to do that is more evidence for the rest of us that you really do mean what you say, and you do truly intend to stand armed against other defenders of Rightful Liberty if they don’t agree with your means to the end. Courageous Al has already made this clear over several years, so nobody has to wonder about him…UNLESS he changes his mind. And so it will be for you and my pointing this out to you is not some sin on my part. Truth be told, all things considered, I think it’s rather benevolent.

            Get it?

            • Wow. I am going to have to take ‘Good Faith’ off the table.

              When does “I will not stand with” translate to “I will bear arms against”?

              JK, I mean this sincerely: Your rhetoric and twisting of plain language into what you want it to mean is nearing Sipsian levels.

              What part of “Restoration, then secession” is hard for you to comprehend? I know it isn’t hard for you to understand – you are choosing to turn that practical plan into my “Statist imposition” of undue burden and hardship. Explain to me how I am imposing Statism on any man who has my blessing (and whom I will defend) if he chooses to walk away?

              You state your end goal is Rightful Liberty, as is mine. I have never seen one logical, practical, realistic means of reaching that end from you, or from most others here. ‘Restoration, then secession if you wish’, is a practical battle cry and has a realistic chance of resonating with the muddled masses. Show me something better that has a chance of working – not one more word about why my path is wrong. Show your work.

              Fuck me, I’m in a circle jerk.

    • To quote perhaps the greatest thinkers of our time. “DREAM ON”


    • Yep – well spoken. I like your blog as well K. When stuff gets sporty and chaotic that’s the perfect time to use your list. Hide in the chaos – hit them where they ain’t.
      In theory of course. What Would Michael Collins Do?

  6. its funny and sad at the same time to watch people on live tv be used to promote an agenda that will be used against them.

    • SemperFi, 0321

      Every regime has had it’s useful idiots, and as always, they refuse to read or learn. They like to think they’re the spearhead of new innovation.
      And they may all die in a whole new way never used before.

  7. KISS it!

    Keep it simple stupid or IMHO Keep it small stupid too.

    Worry about were you live and that’s starts with your immediate neighbors, will they be with you, against you or indifferent. Act accordingly as needed when needed.

    There are groups that have a bad rap with many, red necks, hippies, minorities, the successful, etc.

    Having once been a red neck hippie, I’m telling you, don’t believe everything you hear or think you see, many hippies love freedom and are capitalist’s, it’s the dishonest & Marxist (those who know what is best for the rest and don’t mind their own business) one’s IMHO that are a problem. Same goes for red necks, many love freedom and free enterprise, it’s the dishonest & Fascist (those who know what is best for the rest and don’t mind their own business) one’s IMHO that are a problem.

    Mainly it’s Fascist and Marxist who are a problem in general if they want to impose their will on others, that spell’s TRYANNY to me.

    I also know minority families who are tight, honest, GOD fearing who mind their own business that I would stand beside with no hesitation .

    Minding you own business & being honest to me are the best traits a person can have, as Jefferson once said “It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” it ain’t my business.

    There are many other groups too coming around, like this for example;


    Everyday those who believe in individual freedom and taking care of one self & their own is growing in numbers, because they are all seeing the writing on our walls & where it is leading. We are getting stronger but in many ways many of us are blinded by our own prejudices so much we can’t recognize it.

    And with a nod to JM & Max; But don’t forget doing the PT for sure.

    Death before slavery!

    • Thank you for that. Someone’s gotta shovel the shit and I don’t mind doing that either. But some people keep piling it on higher and deeper, so that it becomes nearly impossible to get rid of it.

      Now we’ve got “Constitutionalists” arguing AGAINST Patrick Henry and Thomas Jefferson; that should be a tipoff right there.

  8. The corporotechnocracy is pleased with how fast this “crisis” was spun up and spun down. Bells, Pavlovian dogs, and saliva all on cue. Brilliant.

  9. Typo alerts;

    Where not were

    Your not you

    Damn spell check!

  10. Arlington House to Washington City P.O.
    20 APRIL 1861

    Lt. Gen. Winfield Scott
    Commd the Army


    Since my interview with you on the 18th instant I have felt that I ought not longer to retain my commission in the Army. I therefore tender my resignation, which I request you will recommend for acceptance.

    It would have been presented at once, but for the struggle it has cost me to separate myself from a service to which I have devoted all the best years of my life & all the ability I possessed.

    During the whole of that time, more than 30 years, I have experienced nothing but kindness from my superiors, & the most cordial friendship from my companions. To no one Genl have I been as much indebted as to yourself for uniform kindness & consideration, & it has always been my ardent desire to merit your approbation.

    I shall carry with me to the grave the most grateful recollections of your kind consideration, & your name & fame will always be dear to me. Save in the defence of my native State, I never desire again to draw my sword.

    Be pleased to accept my most earnest wishes for the continuance of your happiness & prosperity & believe me most truly yours

    R. E. Lee

    • Meh, he lost.
      Now before you all get the fuses on your tampons lit… think on that.

      And don’t freaking lose.

  11. Camacho2016

    Apply CW2 cube to what Beck says.

    They create the situation for one gang to attack you, create the conditions to disarm you and leave you defenseless so that your only option is to beg them to send their gang in to “protect” you from the other gang that they sent in to rape, pillage, loot, and plunder in the first place.

    If you’d like a more concrete example, Gulag Archipelago. AlSol talks about the role that the thieves play in maintaining order in the camps in concert with the camp administration and guards themselves.

    There is nothing new under the sun. But there are liable to be some new things sent below the earth in the near future.

  12. From what I have seen so far, the powerful really aren’t. Oh I think the various “police” departments; Local, county, state-would be more than willing to shoot you or me. God knows, they will take a Pomeranian out on a seconds notice. But-all of their firepower is always tamped down by the Elites desire to be loved. In the end, these asshats want to hear how good they are at something, how benevolent they are, how hard they try, how “fair and moral” they are, how they willingly give everyone their “space”-ad nauseum. It really is the achilles heel of the Elites. Thugs and gang members were getting a good start on mayhem and torch lighting. Yet, the $$$$ spent in overtime for the cops was about giving space, letting them destroy, and being sympathetic to a thug’s life. Oh now, we’ve got all sorts of Boys & Girls in Blue, Cami, etc. on the streets of Baltimore saying they won’t tolerate any more trouble. Bet me. The festivites are gonna light up when Shabazz gets his team song going on Saturday. I say it bodes well for our side.

  13. Greenwood is singing about an America that is gone, long gone. I was only five years old when Kate Smith sang about the America that used to be. I remember that, and have endured the decline and degradation of a once worth-while nation.

    Listen and weep…


  14. this just in, via Zerohedge: Gov. Abbott (apparently he doesn’t read Weaponsman) is going to call out the Texas National Guard to “monitor” Jade Helm “invaders”. Nice, very nice. Rock rolling downhill, faster and faster

  15. I’m nothing if not stupid enough to toss my two cents in on the anarchist vs constitutionalist debate.

    Seems to me like two guys stranded on a desert island arguing over whether coke is better than pepsi.

    That said, any anarchist who lives through the festivities ahead is not particularly like to pick up his gun and fight against minarchism.

    If we live long enough to see small government, then seriously, fucks can be given by the next set of scmucks who find themselves in our position in 200 years.

    Or… whatever

    • My point exactly – though I haven’t re-stated it on these recent threads. I contend that the USC, kept within the bounds of Original Intent, will create a state of existence that most Anarchists will never even notice.

    • Anonymous

      any anarchist who lives through the festivities ahead is not particularly like to pick up his gun and fight against minarchism

      They certainly didn’t fight against the Whiskey Rebellion last time. Their mistake. Vigilance is eternal, because some humans will always try to be predators.

      • A man will suffer all but the insufferable, by definition.

        And once you’ve tossed the best of a generation into the meat grinder then a few generations are going to go by where taxes are preferable to death.

  16. Alfred E. Neuman

    Reblogged this on The Lynler Report.

  17. Alfred E. Neuman

    Reblogged this on The Lynler Report.