More "Three Percenters" on the border. "Dangerous foolish children playing dangerous foolish games."

The LA Times now reports breathlessly in a belated and under-researched article: Militias patrolling Texas border draw scrutiny, concern.

The article refers to this: Photos Emerge Of 10 "Active Militia Teams" Securing The US-Mexico Border.

A few days ago I forwarded the above Zero Hedge article with photos to my friend Bob Wright. Bob, you may recall, is a guy who has been a leader in the constitutional militia movement for 20 years and and was operations officer for the Minutemen in 2005-2006. A resident of Lea County NM, Bob is intimately aware of the situation on the border. Bob reacted:

"Just the fact that these pictures were made and posted clearly displays the childish nature of those in the photos. They are dangerous assholes who will do nothing to secure the border and everything to help the invaders' cause while damaging our own. They are not Three Percenters in any way. They are dangerous foolish children playing dangerous foolish games."

This was one of the photos he was talking about:

If anonymity is required, then a balaclava is sufficient to the need, I would think. Painting oneself up as the boogeyman is certainly foolish and childish. It is also stupid from a purely optical point of view. It is eerily reminiscent of this image:

Helping the enemy make his propaganda points is the personification of "dangerous foolish children playing dangerous foolish games." On Tuesday I received this email from Maxwell Barna of VICE News, which read in part:

We've picked up on a story on a heightened presence at U.S.-Mexico borders between Texas and California, and we've heard that The Three Percenters are one of the militia groups associated with the current drive. I was hoping you might be able to give me a call to answer a few questions about the three percenters, the ideology behind it, your views on immigration reforms, and what you plan to do at the borders.

I'm not mounting a bull shit smear campaign against you and your organization -- I'm just trying to play a straight hand and tell this story for what it is. Any help you could give me would greatly be appreciated. As I am on a strict deadline for this story, a call at your earliest convenience would be greatly appreciated.

I responded to his email as follows:

The Three Percent movement is just that. It is a movement, an idea, it is not an organization or a militia, although there are obviously militia groups that embrace the philosophy. See "A Brief Three Percent Catechism -- A discipline not for the faint-hearted."

Responding to his line asking "what you plan to do at the borders," I wrote:

What I plan to do at the border is, at present, nothing. Indeed, the folks who are playing silly but dangerous games on the border represent a tiny fraction of the movement. See "Proposed cluster coitus on the border" and this from 7 July, "So-called 'Three Percenters' on the Border. 'This video is no longer available because the uploader has closed their YouTube account.'"

I added:

There are many folks who embrace the name of Three Percenters. Fewer of that number seem to have internalized what actually being a "three percenter" means. As I said, it is not an organization, it is a movement, so I cannot expel such folks, nor drum them out, nor court martial them from an organization that does not exist. I can counsel them on their philosophic error but have no way of making them listen. It seems that I have been successful at weaponizing an idea, but I have discovered that it is almost impossible to keep some folks from misunderstanding it.

Barna responded:

So, what you're saying is that the Three Percenter militia groups on the border are not at all affiliated with you, personally. And that this is a movement -- perhaps an ideology -- and not a single organization?

To which I replied, "Yes." He then asked:

Also, how then, do YOU feel, about the heightened presence of militias and other volunteers at the border? I understand that you feel that many of them misunderstand the message you've been trying to send, but could you perhaps highlight to me some of the ways in which your philosophy and rhetoric has been misinterpreted?

I responded:

Obviously you haven't had time to read the linked posts, so let me excerpt this from my first reaction:

"Is the proposed COA (course of action) consistent with the principles and mission statement of the organization or movement mission statement and principles? What is accomplished by a picket line of armed volunteers threatening to shoot unarmed, half-starved and thirsty children? I agree that the invasion is devilish in its conception, carried out by collectivists who could give a shit less about how many kids die along the way, but will the proposed COA do ANYTHING about it other than to help make the other side's propaganda points?. . . As for my advice to Three Percenters, based on what I know now, stay as far away from this incipient exercise in cluster coitus as you can."

Mr. Barna has not, to my knowledge, done anything with that interview nor with another that he had with Bob Wright.

If I may repeat my position. I do not view the "operations" along the border to date as anything but ill-thought, ill-considered, ill-planned and self-defeating. There was an interesting meeting held in Texas recently between a retired general officer of the US Army, a former commander of the Texas National Guard, and members of responsible Texas militia units, including Three Percenters and Oath Keepers. This meeting showed some promise of working out an operations plan that made sense to deal with the border crisis that proposed to integrate the armed citizenry with established Texas state defense forces. To date I have heard of no significant follow-up. When someone comes up with a sensible plan and COA I will support it. In the meantime, the threats of state and federal tyranny in Nevada, Colorado, New York and especially Connecticut are absorbing my entire attention. It is in one of those arenas that the immediate future will be determined, for good or ill.

And if I cannot convince you that the border situation is not the immediate threat that you have to worry about -- if you think I am, as some have called me, a "traitor" because I refuse to endorse a precipitate rush to the border -- then, okay, fine. But please, do us all a favor and lose the boogeyman face paint. Because Bob is correct, you do look like "dangerous foolish children playing dangerous foolish games."