I originally posted this near the end of 2013. Read it and see how consistent this blog has been over the years. I've chosen to repost it now because it fits with the post below.
RevWarIII is well underway. Bad People are going to begin shooting. Then, Liberty will prevail or perish. As LT reminded us of our Churchill - let us not go quietly or meekly. Since posting originally we have kept all our promises, despite the attempts of the Vichy Patriots who suckle .Gov teet, zip-line on your tax dollars and play Army Man near Conococheague Creek. We are in Idaho with Tribe. III Arms is putting product in the hands of Patriots. The III Society continues to add new members every quarter. Our networking efforts - online and offline - advance monthly.
Winners win.
Remember boys and girls - not all losers in life suck .Gov teet - but ALL .Gov teet-sucklers are Losers. You can quote me. Work that reality into your targeting matrix and RevWarIII will go just fine for Liberty.
Note: You'll notice Soapy from Huachuca in the comments. That's little Sammy Culper, if you are keeping score. You'll note this took place about a 10 months after he advised me he was trying to return to .Gov employment in the Intel world and about 2 months before his latest honey pot went live. But you all already knew you were swimming among .Gov sharks with chum in your pants, right?
IFF, baby. Do it, or you're what's for dinner...
Here's the piece:
~~
Folks, the time for counting angels on the heads of pins, as should be self-evident, is long over.
No more philosophical debates.
We move the ball, or we do not bother.
Operations undertaken by Citizen Guerrillas should have begun years ago.
The Enemies of Liberty have every advantage, except conviction.
The "Liberty Movement" is up to its arse in fresh meat still smelling like the soap from Huachuca and elsewhere, pushing and guiding and directing what, how, when, where and why FreeFor (III in particular) operate, with even more efficiency than Pinson.
I just don't see the point in continued debate. I'm not saying let's meet on the Green at 0500 - I'm saying: Stop talking, start putting assets in place to start doing.
You want to win America back for those who believe in the DoI and BoR?
Have you been challenged to offer a "Plan" to accomplish the task? How about a Plan that does NOT include proactive violence? It's easy...
Let me break it down into just a few simple steps:
Sine qua non: Balls. Without the mettle and grit for direct contact, just stop reading now and go away. Once RevWarIII goes Hot for you:
1: Issue fair warning to everyone who thinks it is morally acceptable to take the property of one person for the benefit of another that they must stop taking action to achieve those goals. It must end. Period. Full stop.
2: Anyone who doesn't stop has 30 days to liquidate or take their assets and leave America. They can take everything they own with them. No harm, no foul. But American soil was paid for in blood - blood of my relatives and yours (I know, and the Indians as well, but I can't fix that problem)
3: Anyone from number 2 who insists on staying and continuing to take steps toward wealth redistribution, having been given ample time to leave, shall be put on a bus, plane, ship or walking path outside the country. They can carry a single bag. They need to leave now.
4: Anyone from number 3 who decides to test our sincerity on the matter of keeping the fruits of our labors will leave America at the point of a bayonet or they will answer to their peers (with the bayonets) about their intent to continue their thievery.
All of this should take fewer than 60 days, including the initial 30 day grace period to leave.
Anyone who says such mass migrations under duress are unfeasible would do well to go back to remedial World History and look up a few guys like Genghis Khan, Alexander, Attila the Hun, Ashoka, et cetera.
Bad guys gone. Parasites gone. Republic with DoI and BoR values re-instated inside a few months.
This simply isn't that complicated, folks.
Will you go first?
ReplyDeleteWhy, need someone to hold your hand?
DeleteI've already said - and proven - that I lead from the front. And when I think it is time, I will do so again. You won't mind if I don't ask for your help, for obvious reasons.
What I see is an angry, frustrated man willing to form a suicide pact with those around him in order to prove his point that something should be done. Even if you have popular support that something should be done, without popular support of your tactics, you'll be hounded, run down, and murdered in your own bed or vehicle by law enforcement and, likely, military assets. Targeting against you will make the Shock and Awe campaign of Iraq look like a preschool sandbox slap fight. The people who don't support your tactics will turn you in -- go out of their way to tell police where you are in order to fulfill their obligations to their opposing ideology or for the bounty offered on your head -- and your campaign won't last another month. What I see is a movement bound to fail because of a failure of proper prior strategic planning, too many targets with too few resources and support, and, most importantly, the people will not agree with your tactics even though they may support your goal. These are my two cents as someone who's paid his bills with his skills.
DeleteWow, soapy - you sure do give quite the fuck about me and how I choose to live or die. Why so invested in my "suicide plan" if it is so absurd that it'll collapse under its own weight within a month? You'll notice in the first month not one single person has had, under my proposal, a single weapon pointed at them. But you'll also notice I am not trying to sell my plan, right now I'm just getting out of the way of the idiots who are intent on fighting in the first wave of mob wars unleashed by DC.
DeleteIn case you haven't noticed, I'm already marked for death. Think my odds improve if I play hide with the secessionists? That's just not logical.
Your agenda here, on this blog, is a waste of your time and mine, because your plan is a Fail. It is appeasement. It is unworkable because, lad, Marxists all over the world, for the entire history of Marxism, have proven time and again, THEY WILL NEVER LET YOU GO. And before the Marxists lived that way, tyrants of every flavor lived that way.
Folks, this is why I leave the debates at WRSA - I have zero tolerance for stupidity being advocated when it has proved time and again to be a FAIL. If this was 1780 - MAYBE secession is an idea that would work with the King (but we know how HE decided to respond.) But now it is 2013 - there is no place for Liberty to go, except into smaller pockets, then caves, then graves. That's a sound strategic and tactical plan if ever I've seen one.
Lie to yourself all you want, Soapy - your strategy is a Fail. Mine may be a Fail as well - but I will die for it, facing my enemies - I won't leave my kids and grandkids to die in a generation or two when the Bolshie's return. They always return. Somehow you think you'll be stronger than the combined strength of the rest of the entire f'n world (because that is how the ENTIRE f'n world self-identifies - "Marxist/Commie/Leftists/Your shit belongs to me") by making yourself smaller?
Wow, that's sound fighting logic. You aren't the only one who paid his bills with his skills, so please take that "credential" and cash it elsewhere for what it is worth. It buys you nothing here, with such demonstrated "thinking".
Please don't return here with any more attempts at debate on this topic - take it elsewhere. Tom Baugh and Justin the ass-puppet he keeps on his wrist are all for your plan, as are many others. Sell it elsewhere. You don't need me to endorse it, so stop trying. Go - secede and prosper.
Win first.
Yep, it's time to finalize what side you're on. The thing that most of the bastards have in common is that the economy has to collapse before their plans can come to fruition. I find that repugnant. Obviously they think they think they can achieve their goals without a fight. Cowards in my opinion. They are unwilling to engage preferring to espouse "no Fort Sumters" or perpetuate psuedo-intellectual debate ad nauseum.
ReplyDeleteFuck them. We're gettin' down to it. It's gonna be a party.
"The thing that most of the bastards have in common is that the economy has to collapse before their plans can come to fruition. I find that repugnant."
DeleteWhat a coincidence...so do I! I figure the other guys are about destruction; why wait for them in order to live? "Rebuild now."
"Fuck them. We're gettin' down to it. It's gonna be a party."
And a big one at that. Glad I finally got internet access---I wouldn't want you facing down the dragon all alone.
Glad to see you back Jimmy. I was beginning to feel rather neglected.
ReplyDeleteI've always told you that if I were king you wouldn't have a problem.
"I've always told you that if I were king you wouldn't have a problem."
DeleteNo doubt. K has given similar assurances, and I believe you both. Pretty funny really, since it puts me closer to the Founders than either of you...I recognize that having a king IS the problem.
No shit. Fk the collapse strategy, it's a loser. If it all collapses we are left with nothing. Then we will be enslaved by our enemies. No thanks.
ReplyDeleteNDV III
Ahh.. Cootchie and the Kleinster. Memories. ;-)
ReplyDeleteI had to go through some old posts today for - well, that's another topic. ;)
DeleteBut it was sad to see how many people are treading the same water they were treading 3, 4 and more years ago without any tangible movement toward preparing for contact.
I think the percentage of online revolutionaries who will die without making contact with the Enemies of Liberty will be in the high 99+ range.
"Yep, it's time to finalize what side you're on."
DeleteYou never did get around to that, did you? Oh, maybe it was a different Alan W. Mullenax who posts here.
Hey, we made it this long; that's something. And better late than never, right? There's always now if you wish.
OTOH "better" can be a funny thing with you; often goes that way with sacrificers. Me, I always try to go to the better. But that only works if you think the self is good, since your self is the first thing you own and control. Someone could make a helluva move out of that, huh---"You don't own yourself, so you don't own anything."
But yeah no duh brah dude, we have different visions of whom we wish to control. I'm the simpleton, so I only got one. You...you got funny dreams, so you imagine zillions. Think of poor Bugs; how'd you like to live like that? Oh sorry, that might strike a nerve.
Why doesn't your own life keep you busy enough anyway? You got something against busi-ness? Business is the greatest thing on Earth, wholly consensual. M-Y-O-what?
The rational man would just choose a side and give all he's got to the goal... a decision, a choice. Here are the two sides, bud---"I wish to physically control exactly one person, myself," or "I wish to physically control more than one person."
I don't see a lot of ambiguity there and I don't see a lot of choices, but maybe 3 years isn't enough. So you keep finalizing...but don't forget to choose a side.
Funny, five years later, and we're still arguing over the wishbone, before the bird is even in the dsmned oven.
ReplyDeleteJK, I have said it before and I stand by it - I don't have to agree with every point of your ideology, nor you mine... but we can have peace between us on the same soil because *your ideology* doesn't involve stealing from or coercing me, nor does mine involve stealing from or coercing you.
Therefore, any and all secondary disagreements aside, I consider us on the same "side" for that simple and irrefutable reason.
I contemplate the secessionists the same way - they don't want to steal from me or engage in first-use of force against me for any other reasons, and thus I'm good with them.
There's not enough of us to begin with... we don't deserve to be pared down to onesies and twosies over minutiae - we need to stand together to dispose of those who want the state to use force against us... whatever their reason, *willingness to engage in first-use of force against me (or any one else)* is my definition of "enemy".
Anyone who agrees with me to that extent, I'm pretty willing to stand shoulder to shoulder with in this fight. Because, once the thugs, thieves, and freaks are disposed of, there's gonna be a hell of a lot of free space for the remainder of us to re-engage in what our founders intended: each community it's own separate experiment in the exercise of liberty... we'll form communities based upon those second-tier aspects of our thinking, and we'll all have a respectable chance to be happy about what we build... AFTER we get rid of the thieves, thugs, and freaks who want to apply force against us to make us their BORG drones.
AFTER.
BUT RIGHT NOW, we all need to be preparing for contact. Because it's close.
Very close...
/LT
Ok. He's yours. :-)
Delete"because *your ideology* doesn't involve stealing from or coercing me...
DeleteIt's true, but you haven't a clue why. Take my word for it...it's got nothing to do with you.
"those second-tier aspects of our thinking"
Backwards. It's why you're gonna lose.
It's not backwards. Anyone can *think* whatever they want. It's their actions which I am compelled to either accept or resist.
Delete"By their fruits shall ye know them." The fruit of thought, is action. Thought without action is a purely spiritual matter.
And, "Woe to the world because of scandals. For it must needs be that scandals [shall] come: but nevertheless woe to that man by whom the scandal cometh." ~Matt 18:7
Scandal doesn't happen because someone 'thought incorrectly'... it happens because someone acted incorrectly.
So, yes, thoughts which are not rendered into actions are secondary... even when those thoughts justify (at least to ourselves) why we *did not act*.
I keep saying it, because it remains valid and focal - we don't have to agree on everything; I'm satisfied that we agree not to act against others with force. Because *that* is the actual objective known as "peace" - to live in the absence of violence, and without coercion by threat of violence.
Thus I can honestly say, "Peace be with you."
/LT
Like I said, he's yours. :-)
DeleteKlein is not feeling the love this morning. ;)
DeleteJK loves to explore the philosophical and quite often tries to explain to readers here how they have it all wrong.
DeleteMost readers here have already noodled through the philosophical, and are more focused on action.
I have had many interactions with Klein and have the hangovers to prove it. ;)
DeleteLike I told him before, he needs to stop and smell the roses once in a while. He has explored every nuance of the 'individual vs collective' debate ad nauseum.
But at least he is consistent.
Philosophy is a tool in the hands of a wise man, which enhances his ability to separate truth from fancy.
DeleteAnd in the hands of a fool, philosophy is a double edged sword, as likely to injure him who wields it, as to draw the blood of another.
But in the hands of a proud man, philosophy is a cudgel for its own wielding; and the mincing of words ceases to be about the Truth, but becomes as a child's game with all inhibitions cast out by adulthood without maturity; suddenly serious unto death to obtain some scrap of meaning, when all meaning has been lost in the dirt beneath their scuffling feet...
~
But where is wisdom to be found, and where is the place of understanding? Man knoweth not the price thereof, neither is it found in the land of them that live in delights.
The depth saith: It is not in me;
and the sea saith: It is not with me.
The finest gold shall not purchase it, neither shall silver be weighed in exchange for it. It shall not be compared with the dyed colours of India, nor with the most precious stone sardonyx, or the sapphire. Gold or crystal cannot equal it, neither shall any vessels of gold be changed for it. High and eminent things shall not be mentioned in comparison of it: but wisdom is drawn out of secret places.
The topaz of Ethiopia shall not be equal to it, neither shall it be compared to the cleanest dyeing.
Whence then cometh wisdom? and where is the place of understanding? It is hid from the eyes of all living. and the fowls of the air know it not.
Destruction and death have said: With our ears we have heard the fame thereof, but they know it not.
God understandeth the way of it, and He knoweth the place thereof. For He beholdeth the ends of the world: and looketh upon all things that are under heaven.
[He] who made a weight for the winds and weighed the waters by measure; when he gave a law for the rain, and a way for the sounding storms. Then He countenanced it, and declared, and prepared, and searched it. And He said to man: Behold the fear of the Lord, that is [the source of] wisdom: and to depart from evil, is [proof of] understanding." Book of Job, Ch. 28
Selah, selah.
Amen
Departing from Evil - an action - is proof of understanding. And fearing God is the beginning of wisdom (as in Job, above; and also in Psalm 111:10). Fear, as in, *that which we think*, which causes us **not to act** in a certain way.
Sorry JK, but as I have maintained, it's the actions that count first and foremost, the thoughts behind the actions are secondary -
I don't require my allies to believe as I do - I just require them not to **DO** those things I find abhorrent, like lying, initiating force, or employing coercion.
You know, The Golden Rule; Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.
/LT
"it's the actions that count first and foremost"
DeleteNice, we can end on a note of agreement. You probably don't know, but I'm the guy who says the focus should be on the referents and not the concepts.
So yep, it's the actions that count first and foremost. I wouldn't think this is a fact that escaped the notice of anyone here.
JK, you think too much.
DeleteNot that I am without sympathy, for I have suffered similar bouts of ponderance, myself.
But it does define in your countenance, a blind spot - in which resides the fact that most folks suffer from the opposite of such ponderance - they tend not to think things through thoroughly enough.
And if you imagine that 'patriots' are immune to such a malady, let me plainly assure you, that they are as likely to act before thinking things through as any other segment of the population.
So, no - I do not presume that any such fact has not "escaped the notice of anyone here."
I make it a point, not to presume upon the intellect or countenance of anyone; rather I let them show me who they are, and I respond accordingly.
What I see in you is that you are both very intelligent, and very well read.
But what also presents itself in the sum of my interaction with you is that you use those assets mostly to engage in intellectual games, rather than accomplishing the objective of making a point and moving on.
This tells me that you value the intellectual gamesmanship, above the actual point you are trying to make. And if this is so, it reveals two rather pertinent facts about you -
1. You are very proud of your intellect; quite possibly to the point of arrogance, and certainly to the point where your confidence conceals some of your own weaknesses from you; and the same blind spot which conceals you your own weaknesses, will also conceal the same weaknesses from you as manifest in other people.
2. Those who are proud of their intellect for it's own sake (or any other such 'gift' which they may have received from God) tend to run shy on accomplishments. Thus, much of their apparent confidence is actually a beard for a lack of confidence and/or accomplishment on their part.
Certainly, I may be wrong about some or all of this - our interaction has been minimal, and never face to face - but it does fit a particular pattern, which I have encountered many times in my life - particularly in the context of my professional background - and in those instances, I have used such character attributes against my opponents with a high rate of success...
But since we are neither in battle against each other, nor playing Chess or Poker for profit, let me rather encourage you to see my point for what it is worth; and as I have previously suggested on a number of occasions, let us agree to disagree about some minutiae, such that we can remain focused upon the singular valid objective - which is the neutralization of state-initiated violence and coercion (at all levels whereupon it currently exists), and seeing to the permanent disposition of those who insist upon making our society fit into that model.
Shall we?
/LT
There you go again, guessing and more guessing. About half right, about half wrong. Big deal...it's only in your mind anyway.
DeleteIt's the hypocrisy that's so unnerving. "Opera non verba" and then verba, verba, verba.
"All that matters is what a person does," and then endless team-making based on what they believe.
I'm no threat to you, you say, but then I'm an "Enemy of Liberty" in a context where enemies of liberty must die.
It doesn't matter what anarchists believe on the one hand, but then they're targets in waiting when speaking with the fool Mullenax.
None of this is rocket science. There's consent and there's thuggery. That's it; that's an exhaustive list of ALL human interaction. The genius Alan can't manage to pick one for himself, so he brings in all these lies about history, as if that'll somehow justify his extraordinary dissonance and evasion.
Hey, at least you have the guts to SAY which side you pick. I'll give you that much, and you even pick the right side. That's nice...beats picking the wrong side and especially beats refusing to pick.
But then there's always that "Trust but verify" thing. "We are what we do, not what we say we do"...another fact that I'm sure hasn't escaped the notice of anyone here.
Look, I'm not here to argue. I understand that this is all about the, "There's always more fish in the sea" theory. I see it all the time in business. That's alright; K's blog is K's blog and you can preach to your heart's content. It's none of my business and I don't pretend that it is. But listen to yourself...
"I don't require my allies to believe as I do - I just require them not to **DO** those things I find abhorrent, like lying, initiating force, or employing coercion."
You don't require shit of your allies, nor your enemies. THAT'S what this is really all about...that there's only one person you control. That's the way it is, that's the way it's always been and that's the way it's gonna stay. Nature.
You either stop those who would require of you, or you don't. That's all; there's nothing else there, at least not socially, and you should stop pretending that there is.
Besides, Alan does enough dreaming about dicks, asses and controlling others for all three of us and plenty more.
Excellent analysis LT. You took way more time than anybody should expend trying to figure out this guy. You hit it on the head with the arrogance. This guy, Buppy, Daffy, T-Fat and more than a few others possess this trait in spades. You don't believe like they do, you're mentally deficient.
DeleteArrogance is a trait you want in your enemies, not your allies. It matters not what they profess. ;-)
Lol, says the guy who brags about his groupings at 300 yards, and how far and fast he rucked under so much weight.
DeleteAlright already, 'nuff said. You persuaded me. You're not just foolish and a bullshitter about history; you're a hypocrite to boot. "Just don't forget to pick a side."
Heh. JK hates authority. Thus he says I'm "on the right side" when I declare the present "authorities" to be invalid.
DeleteBut then he has to piss and moan about how I don't have the 'right' to require anything of my allies, which is utter ridiculousness.
"Allies", by definition, have pledged something to one another. And by entering a pledge, comes the legitimate authority to be bound to your pledge, else it is meaningless. And that's where JK's argument falls apart.
Because he can't really sort out the whole Consensualist /Anarchist/ Atheist thought matrix - there's always that one little bit that doesn't quite fit; the one screw that he cant remember where it came from, or figure out where it goes.
Because as his thinking has "evolved", he's gone and denied a few of the underpinning axioms which make his (or *any*) ideology whole, valid, and complete. In this case, he's gone and denied that there are things known as "natural consequences" over which you have no control... you do something (or fail to do something) and the consequence comes to you... period. Your choice was to not do the thing that causes the consequence.
In the particular situation under discussion, he can't align the ideas of countrymen, allies, and those acts which constitute Treason.
He can't align these things because he won't accept the fact that living in a society - that is, being a countrymen to those with whom you live - does create a certain amount of legitimate obligation amongst those that partake in said society. IOW, there is a certain amount of 'give and take' involved in any arrangement of people living in community, to which you simply can't say "no" and remain a member of said society; even down to the level of a single family.
I.E. if you're going to live in the house with us, then you're going to be required to do a certain portion of the household chores.
Oh, and by the way, you're prohibited from crapping on the floor. It's not up for discussion. Crap on the floor, and we throw you out. Period.
Kline's ideology fails the "don't crap on the floor" sanity check... his ideology says that, unless and until he agrees to such an ordinance, it's not binding upon him.
That's not egalitarianism, that's a philosophical construct of pure selfishness, which is the antithesis of true equality amongst men.
As I said earlier, "in the hands of a fool, philosophy is a double edged sword, as likely to injure him who wields it, as to draw the blood of another." and also, "in the hands of a proud man, philosophy is a cudgel for its own wielding".
Well, I never said that someone couldn't be both a fool and a proud man. In fact, those two traits are often found together...
Some things are unfixable. The biggest problem atheists have is that, since they don't believe in a legitimate authority above themselves - they have a really hard time accepting that there are certain things in life which simply *are*, regardless of whether they consent to them being so, or not.
Klein has lipstick in one hand, and a pig in the other... and yet he wonders why people respond to him the way they do.
/LT
Better cover your goodies. ;-)
DeleteKlein is a fucking nut. Harmless, but a fucking nut. :-)
ReplyDelete