Saturday, December 12, 2015

"Armed 'Three Percenters' Movement Now Confronting Muslim Americans."

Sigh. I don't believe this guy has internalized the Three Percent Catechism. "We will interfere with every move they (Muslims) make towards taking over our country."
The reporter is accredited to the Associated Press out of Dallas. The link above was picked up by HuffPo. It also made The Washington Times.
Now, I received a demand late Thursday afternoon from the reporter for an interview, citing "deadline" pressures. I am quite familiar with the tactic and in any case was on my way out the door for the lecture. This is the email I received, with my reply:
From: Dunklin, Reese
To: GeorgeMason1776

 Sent: Thu, Dec 10, 2015 2:46 pm
Subject: Trying to reach Mike Vanderboegh

Dear Mike,

I’m a reporter at the Associated Press here in Dallas. There is a group led by a guy named David Wright, who tells us he’s a Three Percenter in leadership of the Texas chapter. He’s been organizing the armed protests of mosques in Irving and Richardson, in suburban Dallas.

I’m preparing a story that takes a look at him and the Three Percenter movement. It’s not an exhaustive, historical look at the movement. But it’s meant to give people unfamiliar with it a basic sense of its ideology, its actions, what it’s protested and so on.

--I was curious whether you’ve known him, how long you’ve known him and how much contact you’ve had with him.

--I’d be curious to know your thoughts on the anti-Muslim protests led by some Three Percenters, including Jon Ritzheimer in Phoenix.

--I’m also curious to get your response to those who believe, with your roots in the militia, the Three Percenters are extremists. As I’m sure you know, you’ve been described as a fiery speaker whose rhetoric and provocative acts (mailing the state police in Connecticut to warn them not to enforce new gun-control measures) has been blamed for vandalism and threats against government.

You said a lot in the past and on video, so I’ll do my best to capture some of what you’ve already put into the public record for this piece. I tried your home phone, but the voice mail was so full I couldn’t leave a message.

I’m on a deadline for today.  If we can’t connect, perhaps we can later. Thanks in advance,

To which I replied: 

Sent: Thu, Dec 10, 2015 3:31 pm
Subject: Re: Trying to reach Mike Vanderboegh

I am on the way to a lecture this evening and will not be available for interview until tomorrow.  Some general observations: All folks claiming to be "Three Percenters" are not.  To the extent that their words and actions differ from The Three Percent catechism, they must be looked at critically and evaluated accordingly.  The Three Percent Catechism can be found on my website and I reproduce it below.

Yesterday, after I felt well enough to talk to him, I offered:

Sent: Fri, Dec 11, 2015 1:40 pm
Subject: Re: Trying to reach Mike Vanderboegh

Now, if you still want to interview me, reply to this email.  If you have already written the story, please forward a link.
To which he replied: "My deadline has passed. When I get a link, I’ll send along."

To which I replied: First the story, then the facts, eh?  No doubt your editor is the red queen?  Oh well, "off with their heads."

I will have a detailed critique of the article later today. In the meantime, feel free to weigh in on whether, or not, these fellows are in line with the Three Percent Catechism.


Anonymous said...

Why is armed peaceful resistance to a proven cult of war and rape and slavery a bad thing?

Anonymous said...

Sounds to me that his article wouldn't have been any different had he been able to interview you, Mike. And even after being lead to the true Three Percent Catechism, there was not even a glancing reference to it.

Anonymous said...

I haven't read what Wright is saying but if he is not adhering the catechism then he should not claim to be a 3'per. However he is an American and apparently understands the threat of Islam better than you do. Now I know, you are concerned about "innocents" in Islam who may be harmed by a bunch of "racist, bigoted, xenophobic hillbillies" totin' guns and screaming 'Murica! Yes, that would be sad, but all things considered, this is an imminent reality for all of us unless we address the scourge, the utter PLAGUE of Islam. It's easy to speak of tolerance and virtues now, before Islam totally destroys this country, but for people who think like that, by the time they realize they were wrong, it will be too late. The reality is that there are no "moderate" Muslims. I'm not sure you understand that. They are either practicing Muslims or they are apostate. However, even apostate Muslims still will not speak-out about Jihad - because tacitly they support it. Muslims reject everything about western civilization and American life. Whether actively practicing or not, they are the enemy of America. It is my opinion that they ALL need to go. All of them. Islam is NOT a religion and therefore not subject to the protections of the first amendment. It is a political ideology of violence and oppression. Islam must be purged from the United States and wiped off the face of the earth. And it will be. Until then, I remain armed and vigilant. These 7th century savages will not bring harm to me or those whom I love. No matter how badly Obama wants it. End of story.

Anonymous said...

Typical, as you said...
Write and Print the story, Get the Facts later.
And as far as AP goes... Forget Retractions or Corrections.
Better you didn't speak to him.
It would have been edited to fullfill there Agenda.

Anonymous said...

Would have been another "hit piece" anyway Mike. Sounds like he was giving you the bums rush, which a lesser man than yourself may have fallen for. Goebbels wanna-bees have a nasty habit of editing things to suit the outcome they want people to hear, which I believe a majority of Americans have finally woken up to and why lamestream media outlets are losing viewership/readership faster than a fat person loses weight after gastric bypass surgery. They think everyone is so in love with the idea of being interviewed for this or that, that they will drop everything just to run to their shit-hole of a media outlet. But they're finding out that once someone has been made a monkey out of through clever editing, no one wants any part of being made a monkey out of a second time..

Anonymous said...

Cool. They want to do a story on Islam? Contact Dr. Bill Warner, Center for the Study of Political Islam (CSPI);l, and gather the FACTS. He is easily accessible.

After they are done with him, one onto former FBI agent and author John Guandolo. Then, if they are really courageous, and want to do a real story contact Don Richardson, author of "Secrets of the Koran."

Anonymous said...

It would be interesting to know when the reporter got the assignment -compared to when he mailed you with the deadline heat tactic. Oh course, we all know how they love to wrote their caveats "so and so had not responded to contact attempts at the time of this writing" but some honest writers actually show their work ahem ahem like you just did there Mike. I love it. Lead by ACTION, not dictation. That Always Pathetic writer got schooled by the three percent teacher and never even saw it coming.

One opportunity kinda missed there regarding "the militia"...I like to point out to folks who write so sloppy that they themselves are part of "the militua" too. A slice could have been dealt there like ummm... your inactivity in "the militia" doesn't terminate your membership. The realization there would be funny, though a denial would be even more so. Those fools don't even know the definition of words they attempt to use as destructive devices. It's always nice to see that blow up in their face.

What's better than an attempted bomber detonating prematurely and harming only himself?

FedUp said...

Here's Reese and Emily's professional work of journalistic excellence.

jon said...

inhabitant of garland and/or dallas. two facebook profiles. garland is the only city in the DFW area that has actually been subject to jihadi attack, so, that hits home.

former member of 'overpasses for america', which he determined -- correctly -- to be a vehicle for fraud.

apparently now a spokesman of BAIR, "Bureau of American Islamic Relations." info on precise leadership not available. no website, just a facebook group.

seems to misunderstand the III concept, yes, but does not seem like an AP; just aggressively patriotic, like any other texan.

may or may not have done extensive research on the mosque that his clique protested -- but he certainly believes he has.

memes/photos on his profiles and BAIR's profile are overwhelmingly not III-related, the logo appears only once or twice. highly suspect the reporter of conflating and confusing the issue.

he shows a great deal of support for ted cruz.

BAIR is holding a rally today, 15 minutes from now, in richardson at the IANT again; looks like a repeat performance of the last protest.

well shucks. if i wasn't scheduled with my realtor to go make an offer on a house, i could have had some real humint. as is overheard at the POW camp, "c'est la vie."

PO'd American said...

Mike, correct me if I'm wrong; but doesn't AP stand for "always progressive, or is it almost positive?"

Anonymous said...

It's really a shame that the most destructive force this Nation has ever endured (DC politicians) never get confronted the way "muslims" are. ISIS/al Qaeda/etc. etc. etc. could only dream of causing the destruction Washington DC has caused over the past 5 decades.

Wake up people the TRUE worst enemy Americans face is our own stinking GOVERNMENT.

Anonymous said...


Since when is peaceful armed resistance against the three percent catechism? Maybe I misunderstand?
What's the difference between what I've observed in WA state, etc. and even the Bundy situation where no shots were fired?

Islam is NOT a religion but a cult started in the desert by a pedophile totalitarian (the original kind of collectivist). One need only read their 'manual' and observe their actions to see this. They bring nothing to the world today but negativism, sexual deviancy, misc. torture and death. Is it any wonder the socialists and death cultists here (abortionists) identify so readily with them and are loathe to do or say anything that would go against them?

As will the socialists, (i)slam will have to be confronted with more than a harsh word and mere show of force if we hope to survive. THEY have openly declared war on us from their leadership on down. As far as they are concerned, it's game on.

No, this is not an argument for personal level attack. But I certainly do reserve the right to defend myself and my family.

These people must be confronted at every possible turn. This is nothing new, as it has been going on for centuries (i.e. the reason for the Crusades). The Marine Hymn directly references the action taken at Tripoli against barbarous, pirate action in the Mediterranean. It's well documented throughout history that utter force is all these EVIL scumbags recognize.

We must be prepared to deal them a crushing blow or be trod underfoot. An adroit and well informed Congress would carefully identify strongholds, officially declare war and finish it per Sun Tzu tactics and principles. Done right, that would hopefully get us several generations worth of time before a repeat performance is necessary.

Bob Cat

Uncle Elmo said...

I agree with Anonymous 9:51 AM's comment. After reading Mike's post and glancing at the article, my thought was that accommodating this reported would be a complete waste of time. He was going to print the story that he (and his editor) wanted to print.

Mainstream media sucks, and the Associated Press blows. Back in the middle of the Bush administration, I read an article written by an AP sorority girl, the subject of which I can't remember. Two thirds of the way through the article the writer brought up Halliburton, which had absolutely no connection to what the article was about. As soon as I got to the Halliburton line, I said "Huh?".

Since that day, I only read AP articles to catch the underlying bias in everything they write. They've never let me down.

Anonymous said...

The true catechism wasn't what the propagandist wanted it to be......

Otto Didact said...

Two observations:
1. Depending on the alleged "journalist's" age, I doubt he got the "Red Queen" reference. According to a video from Prager U on YouTube, even lit majors don't actually stud literature any more so I doubt if the culturally illiterate twit ever even so much as HEARD of Mr. Dobson, much less having actually STUDIED his work.

2. In answer to richard1j's question, it's not so much the peaceful resistance part that bugs them (although not only disagreeing with the government but daring to express such sentiments is a significant but lesser offense) it's the {horrors, shudders, getting the vapors} ARMED expression of such disagreement that statists find especially offensive. No Moe was ever half so incensed by ridicule of their pederast/prophet as a leftist upon witnessing public demonstration of dissent from the edicts of their secular god.

Chiu ChunLing said...

The only thing I spotted which would be inconsistent with the III% Catechism was, "But some of their leaders have been blamed for threats and vandalism against lawmakers, police and Muslims."

That's just an accusation, and not substantiated even with a definite first-hand source. And only a violation of principle if the lawmakers, police, and Muslims in question were actually innocent, which seems a bit of a stretch.

It seems to me that peaceful demonstrations of moral and physical readiness to resist Jihad aren't a first use of force and don't target anyone who is actually innocent. Wright is quoted saying of jihadists, "We should be setting traps for them and exterminating them." I fully agree with both sentiments, and neither is targeted at innocents nor implies first use of force. I trust that part of physical readiness is laying groundwork to ensure a first use of force by the other side will have limited effect. Drawing out Jihadis with bait like the Garland Mo-toon exhibit and killing them when they show their lethal intentions doesn't strike me as a bad idea at all...I only wish I had the kind of pull to put that sort of thing together myself.

Anonymous said...

Any comments?
Conn. to ban gun sales to 'no fly' listers
John Bacon, USA TODAY 5:11 p.m. CST December 10, 2015

Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy said Thursday he will sign an executive order banning people on federal terrorism watch lists from buying guns in the state.

Anonymous said...

During our two minutes of hate, we can ratchet up the surveillance and databases for those scary mooslims. I agree they are a problem, but be careful of what traps we step into. If they are not citizens, by all means, database and surveille to your hearts content. But if they are citizens, remember, any noose created for them, can later be used on you.

Anonymous said...

Sad to read you've bought into the government-media's myth that mohammedans can be productive members of a free state. The islamization of this country is the political equivalent of a metastasizing cancer.

Anonymous said...

Just a validation for your work and why you are taking the time and effort to produce this blog.

"A lie told often enough becomes the truth." ~Vladamir Lenin

Anonymous said...

Not exactly my idea of a note worthy website....
But the Captured tweets say it all and Note it.
Searching the MSM on the web verifies , AGAIN, why they are Untrustworthy and Complicit in Mass Muder.

Anonymous said...

Mike, I've ben reading your comments and reading your posts for a some time now, and I agree with most of your posts and also a lot of the comments that are left. the one idea that I just don't understand some times, the idea that we will not fire the first shot. In my experience the one who dose fire the first shot is usually around to fire the second. peaceful resistance is good so long as what your resisting pays attention, otherwise its pointless.

Anonymous said...

Hey commie hiw is that cancer working for you? Please do tell.

Anonymous said...

To all the idiots claiming Islam is "NOT A RELIGION"....please use a dictionary and look up what words mean before posting your drivel.

While I may wholeheartedly agree that Islam is more than *just* a religion; religion is still a primary component of its make-up.

No, you're not fooling anyone by "cleverly" (:rolleyes:) crafting a narrative that allows you to dismiss the 1st Amendment and its protections for religions other than your own.

The laws and tenets of Judaism, upon which Christianity is founded, are very much more than merely a "religion"....they are a prescription for societal and political structure as well as religion. To deny that fact is to completely misunderstand your own professed religions as well.

In short, grow the fuck either support ALL of the 1st 10 of the Bill of Rights....or none of them.

Anonymous said...

NY Follows CT hope you're all paying attention. This tyranny is in full gear and ready to mow down CT and NY III. Where is the phone tree for raids in NY or CT? Where is the open post on all 3 websites to allow for someone to "report suspicous state activity". Yeah I know that would open things up for honeypot folks and FF's but it should be done nonetheless. Giddyup damnit.

Chiu ChunLing said...

Well, here it is. And you know what? If you ever want extra prayers for your health, or just to vent about the challenges, we're always willing to hear about it, Mike.

But of course your alert commentary on the threats to our country as a whole are also much appreciated.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 9:20 -
Pretty bold words from someone who clearly has no fucking idea of that which they speak. You are exactly why this country is in the predicament it is in - you haven't got an ounce of discernment. So instead of virtue signaling and pretending you have some better understanding of Islam or the Bill of Rights, maybe you could do some actual research on the subject? Better yet, maybe you could try living among these 7th century savages to get a true understanding of what we are dealing with? No, I doubt you'll do either. You're too busy pounding your chest pretending to be superior - all while ALL Muslims are plotting your demise. Your ignorance is only outweighed by you arrogance - and both are going to get you killed. Go ahead and keep living with your head in the sand - or up your ass. I'll continue to stay armed and vigilant and to educate those who will listen and have the sense and intelligence to understand.

Paul Bonneau said...

The War on Terror sure has been good for the rest of us non-terrorists, right?


I don't have problems with demonstrations; I've gone to a few myself. But it's a good idea to avoid acting as a pawn of the "Divide and Conquer" ruling class, while one is going about it...

The first thing is to understand who the real enemy is.

Anonymous said...

To Anon at 10:30...this is 9:20.

I COMPLETELY understand the evil of the Satanically inspired religion known as Islam. I've read the entire Qur'an and I know full well that a "good" Muslim seeks real jihad (not the BS "spiritual" jihad claimed by lying Muslims trying to hide the real agenda of Islam) to murder or force into submission anyone who does not recognize Allah as supreme.

However, what you seemingly miss is that if we Americans allow other groups with which we do not agree to be persecuted for their religious beliefs, then there is nothing stopping our government from using those same loopholes against us at a later date.

Ask yourself an honest question: At this point in time, which group has most negatively impacted your life? Radical jihadists *in America* or our own government?

This is not to dismiss the threat of jihadists in America in the slightest. I fully support closing immigration from countries that are predominantly Islamic in faith. I fully support actually securing our border. I fully support *following* the constitution's 4A and getting proper warrants (and following due process) for surveillance of domestic Islamic radicals. And I fully support an Amendment to the BoR that would preclude Sharia law from being practiced within the US b/c it is completely incongruent with the national charter.

What I do NOT support is claiming that Islam is not really a religion so the US government can then flex its muscle against that particular group, b/c eventually, they'll make the correct observation that most religions also contain a societal and political therefore the 1st Amendment offers no protection whatsoever to anyone.

Do you at least somewhat see the conundrum caused by such a stance?