Sunday, January 3, 2010

Another, albeit anonymous, country heard from . . . "'Waco Jim' Cavanaugh, is that you?"


Folks,

I get at least one of these reactions a day from just about anything I write:

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Reaction to the Telegraph article in the blogosper...":

If the government carried out "another Waco" – the 1993 storming of a cult's Texas ranch, in which 76 occupants died – "you'd see a reaction bloody beyond belief", he added.

no, you won't. you'll see a bunch of redneck blow-hards sitting on the couch complaining to one another with their thumbs up their asses just like last time. dream on, rambo. you won't do shit next time just as you didn't do shit last time.


Now, this, uh, gentleman, denigrates us while not having the gonads to use his own name. So, a coward denounces us as cowards. What shall we make of that? And who, then, does he serve? This is perhaps merely wishful thinking on the subject by somebody on the other side, don't you think?

I would also enter the factual objection, were this a court of law, that actually people did get off their couches following Waco and prevented another one by organizing into militias and carrying out a cold war with the Clintonistas. Insofar as "Rambo" goes, I offer this snippet from Churchill's To Shake Their Guns in the Tyrant's Face.

The impulse toward proactive violence was present in the millennial wing of the movement. It did not, however, characterize the movement as a whole. Most militia members recognized that proactive violence would undermine the twin goals of rebuilding civil society and establishing a credible deterrent against state violence. Moreover, few in the movement looked upon violence as a desirable outcome.

Violence lay at the core of militia identity, but there was very little celebration of violence when militiamen imagined performing the martial functions of citizenship. The significant presence of combat veterans within the movement lent a sober tone to most militia discussions of violence. Necessary Force, the newsletter of the Missouri 51st, reprinted an essay called "Rambo Wasn't There" in 1995. The author, who identified himself as "Danang, 1968," wrote of "lying on my face in a rice paddy, bullets tearing at my clothes, my pectoral muscles trying to dig me in deeper, thinking I was going to vomit and defecate at the same time." . . .

In rejecting the glorification of violence for its own sake that lay at the core of the new war fantasy, militiamen forged a masculine identity in which adherents of the warrior dream served as a powerful NEGATIVE referent (emphasis supplied, MBV). The hostility between constitutional militiamen and the white supremacist Right stemmed largely from the militia movement's disgust at the genocidal fantasies in white supremacist discourse. . .

Mike Vanderboegh also denounced Linstedt's incessant calls for a genocidal civil war: "Fires in the night, screams in the dark, bloated bodies of children on the road -- there is no reluctance here. No sense of horror at what is about to be unleashed upon the innocents of his own nation. No 'Don't fire unless fired upon' of the Founders. Impatience to strike, impatience to kill."

Revulsion at the warrior dream on display at Waco was a powerful stimulant to militia organization. When Harold Sheil (51st Missouri) ridiculed paramilitary police officers for wanting to "play Rambo," he spoke from an identity for which Rambo was a negative referent." -- pp. 261-265.


So, in summation, in the 90s we did not sit on our couches, organized as credible deterrent as we could to government violence and, far from being Rambo-wannabes -- which we viewed the militarization of the police as an example of -- we were the anti-Rambos in promoting citizenship and a collective, measured response to that state violence.

So, our anonymous critic is merely engaging in the same behavior he accuses us of. "Waco Jim" Cavanaugh, is that you?

Mike
III

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Mike,
Thank you for your measured response. Hopefully, a calming influence on any hot-headed young lone wolves out there. As you've said before, no Fort Sumters (and that post was an education in itself to me).

When I read the "Anon's" posting, I wondered if this was a provocateur, trying a "I double-dog-dare you to do something, anything", in order to get a violent response that would discredit the conservative / militia / TEA Party / etc movement.

Sorry, Anon bully. No bites here. We'll wait, preparing, biding our time, until YOU throw the first punch, the first verifiable strike against what's left of our liberties and freedoms. Then we will be the ones seen as defenders, not attackers.

Meanwhile, I'm going to prepare myself for tomorrow & another day of returning to productive work. I will not let you ruin my night's sleep.

B Woodman
III-per

WV - "smalisp". An African with a speech impediment.

Anonymous said...

I turn this question/scenario around in my head over and over...I'm in the next New Orleans scenario where the government is obviously unconstitutionally taking law-abiding citizens firearms at gunpoint. I know it's wrong, on many levels, and I haven't had more than a speeding ticket (18 years ago) and I consider myself a good guy. What would I do? It's easy to be a "tough guy" and spew lame "fight to the end" rhetoric, but really? It seems nuts to take on a dozen armed "peace officers" during an unlawful traffic stop. I'd probably look for a way to get organized (may have some guys around who think the same already!) but that's a long, bloody step from taking action. Anybody have some sane thoughts? It's my biggest conundrum.

Anonymous said...

Methinks the gentleman is only regurgitating what is in his soul......the soul of a coward who knows what he, as evidenced by his lack of "gonads" to post his name, would do. I have met these "men" and they cannot even stand up to an employer who tells them that they will work for nothing by attending an unpaid meeting. They make man noises, puff out their chests, but in the end, they do it, then they call those with a spine names. I have a name for such men: Capon's
Wayne B

Walter said...

Having spent 35 or so years in law enforcement as well as 5 in the US Army -including Vietnam, I'm fairly well qualified to have at least an opinion, if not authority to speak to the issue of military matters, law enforcement matters and militia matters. Along with others, I watched with disbelief as ATF agents conducted their raid on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco. Was again dismayed and alarmed at the ineptitude of the federal agents in the post battle stand-off and horrified as I watched the FBI burn the place down knowing that there were women and children inside.

Certainly David Koresh gets a fair share of the blame but the onus is on the federal government, on all law enforcement, to use the least amount of force necessary to accomplish the task at hand.

After Waco, I had the opportunity to speak with one of the ATF guys who was there in the initial raid. He told me that the whole reason for the raid was the fact that the ATF function was about to be sucked up into the FBI and ATF dissolved. The first rule of bureaucracy is that the bureaucracy must survive at all cost. So a plan was devised to make a spectacular raid to prove that the ATF was a necessary agency. When the Deputy Director of the ATF was told that Koresh could be apprehended almost any day when he went to town, the Deputy Director informed the agent that he had already made his travel arrangements and there would be a raid as planned.

Well, the rest is history as they say.

What will be different the next time events take such a turn? Men and women will come to the scene of the next one and impose their will on the law enforcement agents there. They will demand that the rule of law be followed. They will overwhelm the agents with numbers and force of will. They will interpose themselves between the agents and the people they seek to attack. and if force is used against them force will be returned.

Anonymous said...

Well ... all I gotta say to anon, if you are a government flunky and think you are going to pull a Waco, or a gun confiscation on me like New Orleans ... whether I die or not ... whether anyone comes to my rescue or not ... I am going to shoot you.

Personally, I'd rather live in peace with the liberties I have left. But sure enough, there are stupid people who after 200 plus years of legislation ... STILL FIND THINGS TO LEGISLATE ... and there are still no shortage of stupid people who keep on enforcing with threats, violence and state sponsored homicide all these dumb-ass stupid laws.

And one day, some dumb-ass is going to say "go do this" just because he/she thinks they can and some dumb-asses are going to do it ...

Well, don't do it to me! My back may be slightly bent, but if you think I am going to get on my knee's ... look in the eyes of your wives and children before you walk out the door ... it may be YOU that they never see again breathing.

I am not the one out there picking someones pocket or breaking someone's leg ... and in fact, I am sure most of the people here are not either ... so my advice would be to just leave me (and them) the hell alone.

You government bureaucrat flunkies with guns just can not understand this:

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

And you BATFE assholes should be able to appreciate this one:

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution and unacknowledged by our laws, giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation.

You just can not get it through your pea sized brains that most of us are not out picking anyone's pocket or breaking anyone's legs ... unlike most of you government bureaucrat flunkies with guns...

Shouldn't you all be going about and arresting each other instead of harassing and threatening and jailing and killing ... US?

Yep ... sure enough as it is the nature of governments to grow, some government DF's are going to do it again at behest of some other government DF's.

I pity you people that you are so willing to kill men, woman AND CHILDREN at behest of your pimps.

Don't do it. Just don't do it.

David Koresh may have been ... "weird" ... but he had every right to kill everyone he did in self defense.

straightarrow said...

I'm not so sure he's one of "them". Nor am I sure he is a coward. He could be just disgusted with what happened and what didn't.

Happy D said...

In 93 I was a high school student. I didn't understand the significance of what was going on at Waco.
To my shame I thought the spectacular end was quite the show. I was just young enough not to realize that the people inside were trapped. Not that the so called main stream media were inclined to tell the truth about them or why they were there.
I was only beginning to understand what happened at Ruby Ridge.

Then I began to learn the rest of the story. Thanks to the work of Soldier of Fortune magazine. Thank you Colonel Robert K. Brown.

I trusted what Rush Limbaugh so accurately labels the 'drive by media'. I did not know how biased they were. I did know that they were not always honest but did not even suspect why.

The primary thing these events had in common is gun control. As we all know it's all about the control part.

I doubt I am the only one that learned in the years since Waco. As for what I might do next time. I just want to do better than I did last time.

I want to be on the right side.

kenlowder said...

I could be wrong, but I seem to recall the raid in Waco was a initial success for the second amendment. The ATF conducted a raid on a peaceful but freedom loving and protecting group and got their butts shot off. It took weeks and tanks for the defenders of their rights to die for their rights. The fall out from this illegal act by the atf and the clinton administration set the left back years in their efforts and energized the militia movement, just as obuma does today.

Ken Lowder

Phelps said...

These clowns are going to have to get their story straight. Either the Murrah Building was a "milita nutjob retaliating for Waco" or it wasn't. I wish they would just pick a story and stick with it.

As far as Waco goes, every so often I thank what powers be that we have the Texas Rangers here. They tried to prevent Waco before it started, and if they had known how bad it would have gotten, I think that they would have done more than "legally permissible". As it is, it's an open secret in Texas that the Texas Rangers have the BATF under constant surveillance.

Anonymous said...

I doubt I am the only one that learned in the years since Waco. As for what I might do next time. I just want to do better than I did last time.

I want to be on the right side.--Happy D

Welcome home.

MALTHUS

Howlsatmoon said...

"What will be different the next time events take such a turn? Men and women will come to the scene of the next one and impose their will on the law enforcement agents there. They will demand that the rule of law be followed."......

Would that there are enough Sheep dogs out there to do just that Walter.

We, who might profess to be those Sheep dogs, will have to nut up and do it.

Quite the conundrum. Stand up and be counted....or sit on the couch and watch it on TeeVee.....

*Sent to your site by my Friend Leonidas*

Dave R. said...

Just as a matter of record, some citizens had begun to wake up and move out to Waco to protest before the final raid. So Anon. is wrong on the facts to begin with. And those protestors came before anyone truly understood the stakes, how far the FBI under Reno was willing to go.

There's even a case to be made that fear of confrontation from armed sympathizers on the outside was one driver of the timing for the final raid. In other words, it seems likely the feds themselves took the possibility seriously, and again, that was before we knew the stakes.

sofa said...

"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking..."

Just because we wish it weren't so, doesn't make anon wrong.

The pot has been boiling furiously of late; and still, the frog sits.

"At what point, then, should one resist? When one's belt is taken away? When one is ordered to face into a corner? When one crosses the threshold of one's home? An arrest consists of a series of incidental irrelevancies, of a multitude of things that do not matter, and there seems no point in arguing about one of them individually...and yet all these incidental irrelevancies taken together implacably constitute the arrest. "
— Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn (The Gulag Archipelago: 1918-1956)

"If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?"
— Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn (The Gulag Archipelago: 1918-1956)

The folks turning up the heat are devious enough to have gained control of every branch of the government, education, and the media. Their methods are working. The Coup progresses. They are evil and devious, not stupid. They do not plan on providing a causis belli.

A thousand paper-cuts later, another generation or two, and our heritage is long gone along with our liberties. Face facts: What we've been doing has brought us to this place. Losing ground at a slower pace, has been the only tactic thus far; and as the last several years show, we're failing at that.

The enemy is conducting a deliberate and effective 4GW campaign. A million hands corrupted by schools and led by media are doing their will. Our schwerpunkts were (1) a centralized pot of money and controls, (2) education, media, and traditions to perpetuate the "core idea" of America, and (3) a Constitution. Through infiltration and by ignoring law and traditions, and by inventing myths, they attacked those points and look to have succeeded.

We need our own thoughtful analysis of enemy schwerpunkt, strategies to defeat that, and effective methods to fix and disassemble enemy capabilities. Save the bravado for the victory celebrations and historic re-telling to your grandchildren.

sofa said...

Not analysis, but suggestions for thought:

One schwerpunkt is centralized authority, so agressive re-empowerment of state and local gov't is obvious goal. And as long as money flows to the beast, the beast easily dictates to the states and localities. More than starving the beast, the end of federal income tax is a key strategic objective. Trillions in one big pot inevitably attracts the worst leeches and sychophants. When localities collect and give to states, and states give to Fed, then people and localities can provide the checks and balances. The 16th Amendment eventually needs to go.
Short term, there is much that can be done to correct the flow of monies, which in turn corrects the flow of control.

Another strategic force used by the enemy: Courts and agencies creating legislation by calling it a decision, regulation, or policy. Article 1 says only Congress may legislate. Violating that is anti-Constitutional and against oaths of office. If the courts are working, prosecute judges and agencies and individuals who commit treason (but the enemy controls most of those courts). Otherwise, protect and defend the Constitution against domestic enemies through more vigorous means, as required by oath.

Media are a strategic weapon: Sponsors fund it. Work on that. And find sponsors that will help our media broadcast our message.

Schools are a strategic weapon. Get control. Money is the control. Federal standards pushing communism and relativism are a symptom. Syllabus for Teaching degrees are a symptom. (Have you looked at those?!) Work on that.

The Constitution&BOR are a key strategic asset for Liberty, which is why it is targetted by the enemy. (Living documents, or distilled knowledge?) Our interests are served when the Constitution&BOR are discussed and made the measure. Defending and weilding our strategic asset is important in this fight.

My own thoughts are muddled and not yet clear. But I know complaining is not analysis. We need to identify strategic targets, and then effective methods. As strategic targets and desired-outcomes are identified, multi-disciplinary methods by many hands can probe and tear until the desired effect is realized. Or we will surely keep sitting in this pot and stew.

sofa said...

Wars are won by destroying the enemy, not by playing defense.