This British article suggests danger from American Grassroots Patriots on the rise..

I read the following article on the Telegraph.co.uk.

Seems our statists fear US.

The sad thing is that they try to smear the label Libertarian, as if it’s a violent or wicked group of people. I don’t know if there is any organized group in this country that is more wicked than the group called our Federal Government, who has a world wide army war machine, and who attempts to have ever more control and enslavement of its citizens.

“When the pople fear their government, there is tyrrany. When the government fears the people, there is liberty”

- Thomas Jefferson


Article: America’s armed militia on the rise

America’s armed militia on the rise#### Extremist “patriot” groups and other armed militias have undergone a dramatic resurgence in America, their numbers more than doubling in the past year amid growing Right-wing fears over expanding federal power and gun control.

By Tom Leonard in New York
Published: 4:35PM GMT 31 Dec 2009

Such groups – a mix of libertarians, gun rights advocates and survivalists – appeared to be in terminal decline before the election of Barack Obama, according to monitoring bodies.

The Southern Poverty Law Centre, which tracks extremist organisations, says it has so far counted more than 300 patriot groups this year, at least double last year’s total of 150. The real total will be much higher as many groups do not go out of their way to publicise their existence.

A similar wave of anti-government groups, some of whose members dress in camouflage gear and conduct military training at weekends, sprung up during the Clinton administration.

However, SPLC researchers said there was a new race factor reflecting President Obama’s ethnicity and immigration fears.

The groups themselves reject accusations of racism but agree that many members are deeply worried about gun control, are angered by the federal economic rescue packages, and are dismayed by government interference in areas such as health care. They voice frustration at what they perceive as America’s international decline.

Tensions are running high and some fear major bloodshed springing from a minor event. A law enforcement official told the SPLC that “all that’s lacking is a spark”.

One of the new patriot groups is called Oath Keepers. Its members, like those in other groups, look for guidance from America’s Founding Fathers.

Formed last spring, Oath Keepers’ members – limited to current or former servicemen and police – swear to obey the US constitution rather than politicians.

Stewart Rhodes, the founder, told The Daily Telegraph that the situation was a “potential powder keg”.

He said: “The one thing that would probably lead [groups] to armed resistance is if the government did try to confiscate weapons, but that was what finally led to fighting in the American Revolution”.

Mike Vanderboegh, a former militia leader and founder of a vociferous gun rights group called the Three Percenters, pointed to a huge increase in sales of ammunition, many of it to new gun owners.

“This is far larger than Obama. It speaks to an existential fear of societal collapse,” he said.

He said group members were looking for “practical self-defence”, whether from “predatory government or street-level crime”.

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.

Heidi Beirich, a co-author of the SPLC’s militia research, said the groups were characterised by “a lot of conspiracy mongering, gun nuttery and fear of a new world order that they think is controlling the US”.

Conservatives have accused the SPLC and other monitoring groups of exaggerating the threat posed by such groups, although a Department of Homeland Security report in April voiced fears about rising extremism.

Mr Rhodes said his group’s internet forum had 11,000 members. Its 10-point oath includes pledges not to disarm fellow Americans or force citizens into “any form of detention camps”.

Mr Rhodes said: “I don’t want to take it for granted that the destruction of the republic can’t happen here.” He said he had also attacked encroaching federal power under the Bush administration, adding: “They’re refusing to acknowledge the fundamental American libertarian streak that says, ‘We don’t care who’s in power, we don’t like the expansion of executive power.’”

Jonathan White, a former police officer and academic who advises both the FBI and government on terrorism, said he was less worried by the threat from the organised patriot groups than from “lone wolf” individuals who would tend to dismiss militias as “a joke”.

Richard Poplawski, a Pittsburgh man who shot dead three police officers in April, complained to friends that the government was infringing gun rights.

Ah yes, the good ol’ bottom feeders of the SLPC. They rank up there with Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the ADL for crying “racism” or “antisemitism” when they hear anything not approved by them.

One wonders what this Pravda would be crying in the 1770’s. You could almost copy the article verbatim, replace the names and replace a few anachronistic concepts with contemporary issues of the time and you’d still not be able to tell the difference.

Kinda reminds me of this T-shirt:

What’s the difference between the "right wing " and the “Right wing”? Is it like the difference between a good thing and a Good Thing, or like the difference between a libertarian and a Libertarian?

Why are they using the American definition of libertarian? In Europe, the word means “left wing anarchist”. This article seems intended for Europeans, so it seems an odd choice of word. Granted, American-style libertarianism is pretty much nonexistant in Europe, so I suppose they have few words to go with.

The SPLC tracking extremist organizations.. takes one to know one?

They could be hunters, they could be military reenactors, they could be a friggin Vietnam veterans group for all I know. Context, please!

Ah, playing the race card are we. Clearly, anybody who criticises big government and/or Obama’s policies must be a racist, and there’s nothing more evil in PC land than a racist. Never mind the fact Obama isn’t even full black, and the fact some of his earlier associations had some rather questionable racial politics themselves.

“Federal economic rescue packages”. Now there’s a euphemism for pork barrel politics if I ever saw one. Clearly, anyone who cares about gun rights, corporatism or socialized medicine is an evil gun toting Nazi! They must be reeducated for the Greater Good!

That is quite possibly one of the vaguest sentences I’ve ever heard in journalistic history. What law enforcement official? They don’t even give the man’s agency, let alone his name.

Those damn bunch of rebellious traitors. They should’ve been hanged, I tell ye!

Those bastards! They dare think politicians should not be above the law! Don’t they know that “If the Fuhrer wants it, 2 and 2 make 5!”?

Bravo, Mr Rhodes, bravo. You might also want to point out the gun grabbing policies of Mao, Stalin and Hitler, those great visionaries of big government.

Because we at the Telegraph are Good Citizens who trust our wise and noble Dear Leaders. Only bad rebels carry guns, and only bad people think their government has anything but the best intentions for them.

You forgot to mention a good deal of these 76 occupants were women and children, and it was done to “These Boots are Made for Walkin”. Strange how the media can’t stop pointing out the Tienanmen Square massacre, yet this little tidbit gets swept under the carpet.

Because all these meetings with international organisations specifically claiming to be steps towards global governance are just coincidence. Really! No fooling!

Tell me even the Telegraph isn’t stupid enough to believe a Homeland Security report, or that it represents conservative opinion.

How terrible. All good citizens support the noble measures of the Dear Leaders to rid us of wicked dissidents and their guns.

Shock horror! Executive power is a Good Thing, dontchanow.

Tell me how on Earrth a single anecdotal remark from a nutter is representative of a group that, according to the article, is massive and far reaching?

We’re all just a bunch of dumb racist rednecks.

And we’re bitter, clinging to guns and religion.

Remember that European governments and their cronies have an unspeakable horror of firearms in the hands of “private citizens”. There isn’t a day when we aren’t reminded how bad are the USA precisely because it’s easier to purchase and own a gun than in Europe. Of course this doesn’t apply to government employees: last week we had great news. Traffic wardens in Rome will now carry a handgun. Of course this is hailed as yet another success in the “War on Terror” but how are armed traffic wardens in Rome supposed to help apprehend Osama bin-Laden we are not told.

Militias are the worst of all evils though: not only they have weapons and refuse to give them up but they do not even trust their own government. How is this possible? Again the compliant-decadent-hypocritical European mentality is busy at work: guns are bad, except when police or the military wield them to “help” you and those poor children in the Hindu Kush. Militias are dangerous “cults” of “gun nuts” plotting to murder children in their own schools and stop “Jesus” Obama (used to be Clinton back in the days) to save the world. Americans are “stupid” because they do not crush these dangerous groups and imitate European gun laws.

Or perhaps are Europeans stupid for having allowed their own government to disarm them completely and turn them into the perfect slave people?

Here http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=106

Go ctrl+F libertarian to find the mises synopsis.

The quote out of context HHHoppe from this article: http://mises.org/etexts/intellectuals.asp

Unfortunately, I live in texas. Because I have half a mind to go print a bunch of works by hoppe and rothbard and embarrass them on camera and post it on youtube.

This whole thing seems so 1776!?

This is the best news I’ve heard since the girl I was interested in said the feeling was mutual…

Bring on the next revolution. I would like nothing more than to bathe in the blood of some bureaucrats.

Folks,

There was much that did not make it into the article, whether by writer-bias, editor-bias, laziness or space considerations – and I have experienced all of these in the past 15 years or so. I did the interview as a sop to the Telegraph for whom I have fond memories of that paper’s Washington correspondent in the Clintonista period, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, who did a piece on the militia poster campaign to embarrass the FBI into finally arresting a member of the Aryan Republican Army bank robbery gang, Michael Brescia. He also made mention of our efforts to assist Glenn and Kathy Wilburn’s private investigation of the OKC bombing in his book, The Secret Life of Bill Clinton. (AEP hated that title, which was chosen by the publisher. He preferred “Blackwater.”)

Insofar as the quotes are concerned, they are accurate but stripped of context. Also, you cannot expect a 21st Century “mainstream journalist” to do a story on militias without reference to the conflation experts at the Southern Preposterous Lie Center. The Poplawski sentence thrown in at the end is a perfect example of this. Poplawski is a neoNazi terrorist, and whether or not he made reference to gun control laws is immaterial. He is not a constitutional militiaman any more than McVeigh, Richard Guthrie or Michael Brescia, all members of the Aryan Republican Army, were.

I suggest that folks whose knowledge is a bit scarce on the subject of militias consult To Shake Their Guns in the Tyrant’s Face: Libertarian Political Violence and the Origins of the Militia Movement by Professor Robert Churchill,University of Hartford (Connecticut), University of Michigan Press, 2009. As a careful historian, he very painstakingly differentiates between the constitutional militia movement (which the vast majority of folks belonged to then and belong to now) and folks he calls “the Millenarians” and the racists (who, thanks to the SPLC and the ADL, got most of the publicity). Richard Butler, then head of the Aryan Nations (now burning brightly in Hell), told journalist Jonathan Karl (Keep and Bear Arms, paperback, 1996) that constitutionalists like me were “White on the outside, black on the inside, with a Jewiswh brain.” Churchill also correctly reports the cold war that some constitutional militias waged, not only with the Clintonistas, but with their neoNazi and “Christian” Identity familiars. (Also see Churchill regarding “Operation White Rose,” page 206; also do a search on “The Alabama Declaration.”)

The premise of the article, that militias are growing, is absolutely true. What is different this time is that most organizations are small, quiet and could be best characterized as neighborhood defense units made up of friends, relatives and neighbors they can trust. They have learned the prime lesson of the 90s, which is thanks to the “Brown Scare” worked up by the SPLC and ADL with their “Narrative of 1995” (Again, see Churchill), not to have large, public units, hold press conferences and open yourself up to prime opportunities for federal “agents provocateur.”

Those who deny that this is taking place are not paying attention.

Insofar as my warning about the bloody consequences of another Waco (and remember, folks, the leading lights of this regime are mostly old Clintonistas who, if they were not decision makers on the ATF raid decision and subsequent FBI barbeque, certainly were involved in the coverup – see Eric Holder’s persecution of Texas federal prosecutor Johnson), I refer you to my two open letters of the past year to Holder himself on the topic, “No More Free Wacos.”

They had their first Waco without consequences to themselves. There will not be another. (Do a search on my name and “One Hundred Heads.”)

Anyone is welcome to come to the Three Percenter website, sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com, if they wish to know more.

Mike Vanderboegh
The alleged leader of a merry band of Three Percenters.
PO Box 926
Pinson, AL 35126
GeorgeMason1776@aol.com

Is this kind of language really useful?

So I’m not a racist right-wing redneck? Wow, that’s a relief!

Our problem is not the truth-content of the article, but rather the way libertarians are presented alongside racist groups. Vilification by association. It would have been one thing if the author had specifically differentiated between different libertarian movements. You address this when you say: “There was much that did not make it into the article, whether by writer-bias, editor-bias, laziness or space considerations”. But this apology does no justice, since it does not undue the harm created when people read this article and come away with a misinformed, negative stereotype of libertarians.

Wouldn’t it bother you if we wrote an article in this way? “There was a terrorist attack. Blacks stood by and did nothing while countless people were dieing. A Black commented that he did not care about the people harmed during the attack. Black politicians have voted down legislation that would lead to better national security.” etc etc.

It could all be true. Maybe a minority of African Americans behaved this way. But the reader of such an article would clearly come away with a negative and harmful view of all African Americans. Telegraph.co.uk would never run an article like that about an ethnic group, so why on libertarians?

From the article:

“Such groups – a mix of libertarians, gun rights advocates and survivalists – appeared to be in terminal decline before the election of Barack Obama, according to monitoring bodies. The Southern Poverty Law Centre, which tracks extremist organisations,” So libertarians are extremists who need to be monitored…

“A similar wave of anti-government groups, some of whose members dress in camouflage gear and conduct military training at weekends,” So anti government people walk around in camo and like to shoot guns like military rednecks.

“However, SPLC researchers said there was a new race factor reflecting President Obama’s ethnicity and immigration fears.” So these new militia groups are racist.

“The groups themselves reject accusations of racism” But they say they’re not racist.

Don’t you see how this makes us look???

The libertarian position is straw-manned so often by articles like this, that we seldom encounter anyone who has even heard of the non-aggression principle. This article propagates ignorance and hatred. We are legitimately trying to work for universal peace, prosperity, and justice. Even if you disagree with our ethical philosophy or economics, don’t our goals put us on the same team?

The obvious answer to your question is not just “NO!” but “HELL, NO!” Anyone who wishes war, especially civil war, is/has either:

a. No concept of its horror, therefore has never been in one.

b. No knowledge of history.

c. Never killed anyone (similar, but not the same as not being a combat veteran).

d. No family to risk.

e. No concept of morality.

f. A stupid, breast-thumping keyboard commando and always – ALWAYS – posts anonymously.

g. Any or all of the above.

No thinking person can want war. It is the sum total of all the worst of human sin and savagery. That does not mean we should prefer peace with slavery to war. But it must be forced upon us. No more free Wacos, but no Fort Sumters either.

Mike Vanderboegh

(my real name)

Three Percenter

We don’t advocate war here. Hence, why Snowflake brought up the non-agression principle.

Many people support libertarianism in different ways. Some don’t pay taxes. Some support Ron Paul. Some try to get into government. Some try to keep government out of their life as much as possible. Some start militias.

It’s funny that today people with a political ideology that isn’t the status quo gets spit on. We’re grouped up with racists and cop killers and bombers. In the past, people of different political ideologies weren’t picked on. It was people of different race, culture, or even for just being a female.

Strange that our political ideology is pretty much the opposite of fascism, but it’s villianized as such.

This is sensationalist journalism. It’s not an honest way to make a living.

Dude, we’re so anti-war that we debate practically every war in US history. We are highly suspect of any and all coercive use of violence… we’re the next closest thing to pacifists. While we support self defense, some of us even think preemptive strikes are morally wrong. If this is not anti-war enough for you idk what is.

You must have us confused with the war-hawk “libertarians”, who can’t name a single libertarian writer (Ayn Rand doesn’t count.). Think about it for 2 seconds, how could I say “We are legitimately trying to work for universal peace, prosperity, and justice” and then be a war-mongering racist “breast-thumping keyboard commando”?

Well… this is argumentum ad hominem, so it has no place in our discussion, but I’ll indulge you. Some of us do choose to post our real names. I personally choose not to because mises.org is flagged as a hate group. See my above posts for links. If state troopers are being told that libertarians are potential terrorists, I don’t really want to identify myself as one. Personally, I’m just paranoid that I would get stuck on a list somewhere. Maybe I already am anyway.

But I’m getting a radio show soon, so I won’t be anonymous anymore. And for the hundredth time, I will not be supporting war, racism, natural elitism, or the second amendment right to own a nuclear weapon.

And please re-read my previous post thoroughly before responding. So far you’re emulating those PC thugs who flame and troll, only harming their own position. If you continue, it will be frustrating for me personally, but a funny thread to link to people who think your position is tenable.

THIS was what I was replying to:

“Bathing in the blood of bureaucrats”

Prashanth Perumal replied on 01-02-2010 9:08 AM

Wanderer:
Bring on the next revolution. I would like nothing more than to bathe in the blood of some bureaucrats.

Is this kind of language really useful?

And since the article quoted me, I thought it would be useful to lay that out. Sheesh, y’all are touchy. My grandma always said, “I you ain’t guilty, don’t act like it.”

MBV

Make that clear next time. I know you’re new to the site, so when you click ‘reply’ you can highlight the person’s text and click “quote” and it will put what you highlighted in your response.

And actually, wanderer said that. He also said it before your first post, which leads me to believe that your second post wasn’t directed at wanderer at all, and you’re just trying to save face over the embarrassment of acknowledgment my points.

If you’re not responding to me, then why do you begin your second post with “Not just NO but HELL NO”? I’m the only one who asked you a question [;)]

You are guilty. I thought I did a pretty good job of laying that out, but I guess if you never admit to your mistakes you might save face. So typical of the mainstream media.

Again:

Prashanth Perumal replied on 01-02-2010 9:08 AM

Wanderer:
Bring on the next revolution. I would like nothing more than to bathe in the blood of some bureaucrats.

Is this kind of language really useful?

Thus, I ask,

Are you

Prashanth Perumal?

If not, why did you think my post was addressed to you?

You remind me why, although I have largely libertarian beliefs, I am not a self-identified “Libertarian” because most libertarians:

a. engage in “how many angels can dance on the head of an Austrian pin?” debates.

b. can’t organize their way out of a paper bag.

c. wouldn’t risk anything for their high-flown principles.

d. give me gas.

Thanks for the update. My mistake for crowding in on your circle-jerk. It won’t happen again.

Mike Vanderboegh

sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com

Need some clarification on this matter…what debates are angel-pin debates?

Organization is actually quite good at the Mises Institute.

Well that is the definition of principle. A firmly held belief that is usually uncompromisable.

Cut down on fatty foods.