Wednesday, March 5, 2014

On the proper response to Connecticut tyranny going operational. "Put your trust in God, my boys, and keep your powder dry!"

The night is gathering gloomily, the day is closing fast --
The tempest flaps his raven wing in loud and angry blast;
The thunder clouds are driving athwart the lurid sky --
But "put your trust in God, my boys, and keep your powder dry."
-- "Oliver's Advice," a poem by William Blacker, 1834.
I was taken to task by several readers for my violation of Godwin's Law in my letter to Darth Vance yesterday. My reply? "You know, if you don't ACT like a Nazi, you won't be mistaken for one." The Connecticut situation, and especially Vance's "un-American" and "I am the master" comments, have raised people's hackles like nothing I've seen in a while. Everyone is trying to figure out how they can help.
I have been overwhelmed by emails offering military help for Connecticut should it come to guns. These emails also ask for any contacts I have in that state so they can coordinate with them ahead of time. Aside from the OPSEC considerations this raises for those Three Percenters behind enemy lines, I am unconvinced that this is the proper course for folks living outside that state.
My thoughts on the subject are contained in the email response below to one such patriot petitioner.
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 4:31 am
Subject: Re: The Connecticut situation
While the dedication is admirable, I disagree with the OPLAN. I will be writing of this later today, but as my friend Bob Wright once told an FBI SAC in Albuquerque NM when he asked Bob if he would take his men out of state to the site of another potential Waco: "Why would I want to do that? There's plenty of you federal sonsabitches around here."
It is my belief that once initiated anywhere, including -- especially -- CT, the state trying to disarm its population would find itself in deep excrement instantly and would call for federal assistance. This would turn a nominally local beef (which actually it never was except in the same way that Lexington and Concord was a "local beef" in that it started in a locality first and immediately spread to other states) into a national one.
With the intervention of the feds in CT, the civil war becomes national and you -- and the citizens of CT -- are much better served by operating in your own AOs which you know and tying down federal resources there. Hypothetically, since the tyrants have taken the first shots they have relieved you of the moral responsibility for their deaths in legitimate self-defense, using 4th Generation Warfare tactics according to Three Percent rules -- targeting warmakers and decision takers only, no OKCs, no terroristic "collateral damage" of anyone other than legitimate targets. A successful appeal by CT state authorities to the Feds would actually DECREASE the federal resources available to them by starting trouble in all the states -- a national civil war. That is what is on the line in CT.
Bob's statement to the FBI was wise. Actually, traveling to the scene of conflict in another state would expose those who wish to help to defeat in detail by means of the tried-and-true LEO tactic of the traffic stop, one car or caravan at a time.
Stay strong, in your own AO, and get ready for the fight. If it comes to CT, it will come to you. Trust me. Be careful playing with hypotheticals and OPLANS that can be used against you by the inevitable informers and agents provocateurs, and simply increase your readiness to respond locally to a national fight for liberty initiated by the tyrants.
"Trust in the Lord, and keep your powder dry."
In addition to this, there has been much breast-beating on the discussion boards and blogs, similar to this comment (never accepted) on a post of mine regarding New York's tyranny.
"4GW means that not only the "only ones", but their families are at risk if cold should turn to hot."
No. No. NO. NO! How many times do I have to say it? From the 4GW link cited above:
However, a 4GW civil war waged by men and women who are loyal to the Founders’ concepts would not fight an unrestrained Al Qaeda campaign but one specifically targeted to spare civilians and to target the war decision makers. The next American civil war will either successfully break new ground in 4GW tactics and techniques or it will descend into a welter of blood and massacre. Governments have a tendency to do that when they’re losing. The 4GW warriors who claim to represent the Founders’ Republic will have to require of themselves far more discipline and intelligence -- no Fort Sumters and no Oklahoma City bombings.
Moral legitimacy is everything -- from refusal to fire the first shots to thoughtful rules of engagement tailored to American circumstances. If all you do is become the monster you claim to fight, you've lost before you've begun.
Be smart. Be prepared. Train harder. See to your logistics -- and to your own AO. Put your trust in God, my boys (and girls), and keep your powder dry. Keep your wits, and your restraint about you. It will pay off in the end, should this tyrannical power grab come to guns, Lord forbid.


Anonymous said...

I disagree with these tyrants families being off limits. You seem to be of the opinion that you can fight a "fair" war with these corrupt bastards. They have already proven they will distroy your family to gt their way. "If you find yourself in a fair fight your tactics suck!"

rexxhead said...

You object (rightly) to "4GW means that not only the "only ones", but their families are at risk if cold should turn to hot."

I appreciate your desire to spare otherwise-innocent life but there is reality to deal with here. Once you have opened the floodgates, you cannot tell the water where to go. In this case, it will have been the decision-takers who turned the wheel. They will have no grounds to complain.


Anonymous said...

I think it would be a serious mistake for you to pass names of any CT contacts to anyone you don't know very well. Those requests could be coming from our enemies. As such, revelation of that information could be harmful to your contacts there.

bubba said...

If the worst does happen, there will be enough bloodletting to sicken everyone.

Don’t be an obama; doing evil and calling it good. Don’t weaken yourself and your country instead strengthen yourselves and your families. Increase your stores, harden your homes, pray for guidance and deliverance but also prepare for the worst.

If this truly goes bad there will be plenty of tyrants and their enablers in your own backyards to keep everyone busy for a long, long time.

AJ said...

It's not like they take any extraordinary measures to protect our families from their thrill-seeking 'roid rage when they kick in our doors. They have established the ROE.

AJ said...

In addendum to my precious comment, lest it be misconstrued, indiscriminate killing, i.e., bombing malls, restaurants, etc., is an absolute no-go. That kind of shit will turn public sympathy sour in an instant.
Beware of false-flags.

Anonymous said...

I prefer the doctrine of Deuteronomy, Chapter 7. There are no "innocents".

THusar said...

Those IIIer's who are contemplating targeting the family members of our oppressors are exhibiting remarkable short-sightedness. They must remember that we do not own the propaganda machine to the general public. It's not likely we will own it at any time either. How many of us blindly went along with the Feds at Waco? How many of us later discovered that we were completely wrong? To late for the Branch Davidians though, isn't it?

If it comes to war, it will not be fought with just bullets, but also for the support of the populace.

Ahhhh, the populace. We're talking about the same populace that is blissfully unaware of what is taking place outside of their own little world. The same public who already believes that it is important to take drastic steps and willing give up some of their liberty and rights "for the children." The same public that refuses to engage in a modicum of logical thought on their own. Should we really expect them to remain unaffected and not immediately throw their support toward the Feds when they are told how reactionaries or are killing state legislators families in the middle of the night?

How fast will we lose credibility and support when they start hearing and seeing women and children being taken from their blood soaked homes in body bags? How fast would that whole neighborhood (and all of their families and acquaintances)turn on us just due to the sheer shock value of that happening to someone they know.

How hardened and more resolute will our "enemies," be towards us once their own or their friends families end up butchered?

Pretty darn quickly, I'd think.

Addittionally, would you expect the general populace to continue to turn a blind eye towards something suspicious within their AO or would they be extra alert from that point on? it. Target the policymakers and promotors. Target the people who never fathomed that they'd be in a spot of trouble. Target the cowards who always believed that violence and the violent enforcement of their edict was always for some other poor schmoe. Getting the message across to them should be quite effective in short order.

Understand, I've been in combat and there is such a thing as inadvertent collateral damage.

From a moral standpoint, we are not at the point where we need to engage in total warfare. From a moral standpoint, we have an obligation to minimize the killing of innocents who are guilty of nothing more than association (did their kids choose to be born?).

From a strategic standpoint, this does not further our aims and objectives. From a strategic standpoint, this hurts rather than helps. From a strategic standpoint, this adds unnecessary risk and unknowns to our plans.

Liberty or Death said...

We MUST maintain the moral high ground here. The only way we can do so is to target only the truly guilty and leave the innocents alone. Imagine the news showing the dead family of one of the guilty parties. What would this do for public perception? An innocent has no dog in this fight, even if they were a direct relative of a legitimate target. There is no moral equivocation that can somehow make this right. I have had this discussion several times in our group. We must, at ALL costs, avoid the taking of innocent life just as our RoEs in Iraq and Afghanistan prohibited this. I even go so far as to say should one of ours be accused of such actions, it will be heavily investigated. If credible evidence exists, they will be tried. If found guilty, they will be shot. That simple. What a huge waste of resources over an easy to avoid act, yes? And yes, this applies to ME as well.

Be smarter than them, be creative. They will seek to use their own families as shields. Don't let your frustrations get to you. Do not get lazy or complacent. Learn to control your own hot head as I have before counseling another about his.

Should this break out into another Civil War, those of us that survive will have new ghosts to deal with. Make sure they are ghosts we actually can deal with and not just ones we think we can at the time.

One more thought, what if they had the same RoE of not targeting our families until some jack ass on our side targeted one of their families? I could see that ending real fast.

Lets keep the sins we have to answer for to a bare minimum here people, God does not accept equivocations.

Anonymous said...

Godwin's so-called "law" is complete and utter bullshit. Just b/c comparisons to Nazi Germany are somewhat over used ON THE INTERNET, doesn't preclude the comparison from being completely valid when a government (or person/group) is acting in a way that is tyrannical, fascist/socialist, or otherwise oppressive.

Just b/c some asshole on the interwebz doesn't like the comparison or thinks it's overused, doesn't make it any less valid.

Anonymous said...

So are you guys who are advocating killing families of the guilty planning on doing it with bombs and other such munitions?

B/c if you're just planning on using your rifle as a scalpel to remove the cancer from our government....there's no reason to target innocents.

Just b/c they would do it "unto you"....doesn't mean you should do it to them or that it's morally defensible when you stand in front of your Creator.

Anonymous said...

It seems like one or two weeks ago that I read about some family traveling North (dad has a ccdw from home state) and the car got pulled over by the POPO. The cop wanted to know about a gun in the car (running the license plate will show that the car owner has a ccdw) and as I recall, a lot of hassle came from this. MY POINT is that I would assume that the Connecticut SP would rather jump an owner of "AN ILLEGAL ASSAULT RIFLE" out on the road versus coming to his house. I think we are all vulnerable while driving, whether it be a road block or a "regular" traffic stop. If they want to start a war, they can but I can only assume that they would rather go after the "soft" targets (drivers) rather than attempting to assault what might be a heavily fortified house.

Anonymous said...

Neal Jensen - Disqus ID

While I am loathe to support any action against "prohibited targets" and "collateral damages" the Establishment will not be so generous and has already proven to be so amoral as to include them, and that makes this conflict to be, FOOLHARDY to play with morals while your very lives are at stake. Survival doesnt have morals except to say they moral of doing whatever it takes to survive.

Anonymous said...

Mike, I refer you to a post you made years ago called "Armed Jesus." I think it should be mandatory that anyone who wants to participate in the upcoming dance be brought under a similar code of justice. Punishing infractions is part of every military's discipline regiment.

In fact, why stop at merely refraining to kill innocents? Use auxiliary units to give out relief packages during the holidays (it won't be over by Christmas, so you might as well make it as comfortable as you can for the neighborhood).

Kristophr said...

Kristophr's Law:

The more fascist a person is, the more likely he is to invoke Godwin's Law as a defense of his fascistic statements.

Kristophr said...

And if a future dictator wants to kill me and my family, then why should'nt I swiss cheese any car with a bumpersticker supporting that dictator?

Screw fair. The ram has touched the wall at that point.

J. Travis said...

If you think that the Enemy will be conducting a a war against you and NOT target your wife, and children, you are a fool. They do that now!

The corrupt media will either not show your family members who have been slaughtered, or they will present them in the same manner as the women and children at Waco: brainwashed, violent victims of a family insanity. (who deserved what they got, anyway)

Sorry, as soon as they do that trick any "constitutionalist" will be painted as an extremist lunatic who needs a quick bullet in the head, and no trial necessary.

We can pontificate to each other nobly and righteously all day long, the ROE will be established by the aggressor in the war to come, and victory will only come when potential enemy combatants understand that THEIR OWN FAMILIES are at the same risk as their intended victims.

I defy any righteous 4GW actor to see his family wiped out and not respond in kind.

Lincoln the tyrant encouraged his soldiers to take the war to the civilian population in the War of Northern aggression.

The british starved women and children in concentration camps in South Africa.

We rained ruination and death upon "innocent" civilian populations in WWII.

Until decades afterward, I seldom heard anybody express regret about the morality of those decisions.

I appreciate your cautions, but when my own family is considered a target, there are no longer ANY Rules of Engagement.

irishdutchuncle said...

leave the wives and kids out of it.
ollie gave good advice too: keep your powder dry, but he's still roasting in Hell.

Ed said...

Your letters are effective.
Completing and publishing your book "Absolved" will also be effective.

Anonymous said...

Mike, as you know I've written a lot on the Just War Doctrine, especially as related to revolution. For what it may be worth, I've started an occasional blog,, where I discuss current events from a JWD perspective. I don't write every day, only when some event strikes me as worth discussing. I do plan to say something about legitimate targets and innocents in a forthcoming post.

Anonymous said...

Greetings, and God bless.

As far as we're concerned, any "patriots" in our AO that start targeting peoples wives and children will immediately be treated as opfor assets. Because by their actions they will have become opfor assets, whether they realize it or not.

Anonymous said...

You should ask the Connecticut police how they like Obama's attempt to put the cop killers lawyer in the DOJ.

Unknown said...

Wow I see a lot of heart felt emotion but it think we should all try and remember that were talking about life . It's not just war it's a fight for freedom and those freedoms which you are fighting for must not be overlooked for the sake of the battle. In the end its not the gun that your fighting to keep, the gun is only a means to keep the true freedom that some want to threaten. The killing of innocent life surfing war is no different than killing of innocent life surfing a drug raid or any other violent attempt at restoring what should be. Every attempt must be made to avoid the loss of innocent life.

Anonymous said...

Let me understand this. You want to be free of tyranny but have no compunction in gunning down a kid? Has society alienated you that much that you really can justify pulling the trigger on a ficking minor? Really? You can justify this in your mind?

Un-fucking-believable how far down the road some people are. Take a knee. Get some jesus. Realign you moral compasses. If you can justify the rounding up women and kids for slaughter, you have officially become the collectvist you despise. Didn't take much did it.

Mike has been trying to steel your minds from this irrational ans sick behavior. It is truly disturbing that some amongst us have given in to this evil.

Shawn McEwen said...

My two cents on the issue. I see several posts here talking about how "our enemies will not show any mercy to our families, why should we"? Indeed, why? Or, "the rules of engagement have already been defined." Have they? My fellow non compliants, we are all wound up tighter than a clock spring here and I understand, but we can't lose sight of the goal which is to remain free from tyranny here, not to simply dish out punishment without restraint. Restraint is a must if we are to be successful in the event a conflict ensues. In our first revolution, our Militias and Regulars were successful because our cause was the noble cause, and that was true only because the public at large was in favor of our noble cause. Had our side descended into butchery on a large scale, we would all have funny accents and drink tea. History has said that the Revolutionary War was alive in the hearts and minds of the people before the first shot was ever fired. It will be this way again, if it comes to that. The facts remain that wanton killing (civilians) creates disgust, and the systematic targeting of the enemy maintains support. Then there's my opinion that wanton killing amounts to opportunistic murder. George Washington was a very pious man and in large part inspired his subordinates to believe that God favored their struggle. I doubt God would favor wanton killing.

The 2nd reason we must maintain an attitude of restraint is that once you cross that line you don't come back, and when you don't come back from that you are no longer fit for common society. Sometimes this is irrelevant, but consider what would happen if a man like that were to ever lead common society after conducting warfare in such a manner... having killed the wives and children of our enemies in cold blood. Do you think such a leader would then merely govern, or would that leader rule over a conquered land littered with swirling ravens, smoking ruins?

Now you can certainly conduct a ruthless war and win, but remember that winning is not the ultimate goal here. Remaining free is the ultimate goal, and to do that we must win righteously. If we as a nation kill for the sake of killing, we will lose our soul. If we lose our soul, we will all be slaves to a new master... one we will all have created.

I also believe that the reference to "if you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!" means it's ok to bring a JDAM to a gun fight, as long as your opponent is armed. Believe me, there is room to fight a just war and still take unfair advantage over an enemy. Just some thoughts.


Anonymous said...

It has been suggested that Second Amendment groups in MA host an 'underground railroad' to provide escape routes and safe houses for the families of III%'rs. This will provide safe haven if authorities seek to remove children from homes with unregistered firearms AND suggest that plans are being made to deal with 'issues' attendant to the enforcement of unconstitutional laws. Thoughts?

Anonymous said...

One of the coolest things about World War Z was the "10th Man" concept. It is the duty of the 10th man to disagree with the consensus, no matter how improbable or impossible his skeptical view may seem. This encourages deeper thinking.

If the Gestapo know that their families are safe from harm, they will only be that much more willing to "just follow orders." If they knew their own actions endangered their loved ones, they would think twice, maybe even question those orders.

I do not personally support collective punishment.

Anonymous said...

If and when the 'enforcers' come to the door we have seen around the country ...ALL inside are put to women and children and pets....tit for tat to the transgressors....imho

Jim Klein said...

"And if a future dictator wants to kill me and my family, then why should'nt I swiss cheese any car with a bumpersticker supporting that dictator?"

Simple...because your life will be less happy afterward, whether anyone sees it or not, and whether you admit it or not.

Anonymous said...

If you don't see that targeting the families of "4th Gen" targets is just plain wrong, may I offer biblical and constitutional reasons not to do so.

Ezekiel 18:19ff -

19 “Yet you say, ‘Why should the son not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity?’ When the son has practiced justice and righteousness and has observed all My statutes and done them, he shall surely live. 20 The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.

21 “But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 22 All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live. 23 Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked,” declares the Lord God, “rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?

The US Constitution Art. III, Sec 3:

...The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

I assume we care about the nature of justice and government because we believe in a higher law - if not - who cares what we or anyone else may do? If this is the case we must do our best to conform to it in all points. If we pick and choose, how are we different from those we oppose other than in that our interests are contrary to theirs. This is why the general leftists fears of a "Christian Right" takeover are generally unfounded, and why there remains a single abortion clinic standing anywhere in this country (though that is another conversation, I suppose).

I also assume many of us here have taken an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States. Would we defend it against those we see as having usurped and trampled it by violating its own principles?

And for some other practical reasons - some portion at least of the families of such men will be in disagreement with their policies, targeting them would remove potential allies immediately, and turn other potential allies and the populace at large against any sympathy toward your cause.
Consider the IRA in the seventies. Had they stuck to strict combatant against combatant roles, the world would now be a very different place [there are some very interesting statistics from The Troubles about who killed whom and how that somehow are all swept under the rug - almost no one thinks of terrorism when they consider the "Protestant" side of that conflict, a lesson we would do well to heed].

I have to agree with the previous commenter who regarded those who targeted families of the enemy as opfor assets. And this worries me, because the opposition is united in a common cause against liberty, and we are unable to agree on basic strategies and doctrines.

Unknown said...

The polarization of our country is nearly complete. The "city" versus
everyone else. This is where these idiotic laws and regulations come from and the "city" mentality is where the war will start. Hopefully this Connecticut thing will defuse
peacefully BUT with all the corruption in ALL government, from city hall to the white house, I sincerely doubt peace is viable without force of arms. Guilt or innocence is in their actions and for them NOT their family's. To target their family's is to adopt their twisted ideals and in doing that you become one of them. Stand strong and stand TOGETHER and we can win.