Either way, the concept is valid when we are talking about whether or not someone is "selling out" to a foreign power, but I guess gets muddy when they are selling goods or services to a foreign power.

Getting back to the "Lexzington and Concorde" discussion, there were numerous incidents of abuse leading up to it, primarily during the French/Indian wars when the colonists who had become accustomed to living in freedom due to their isolation from British authorities chafed under British supervision. That "chafing" is eventually what led to the revolution, but also a big part of it was the diplomatic work done by the freemasons leading up to the war and their recruitment of international assistance on behalf of the revolutionaries.

Likewise, the Texas revolution was directly tied to gun control against whites and free blacks (although there were few at that point). The Mexican authorities, in keeping with their nature, authorized summary execution of any white Texan caught with a firearm. Now in theory, it was not race based, as it was an anti-immigrant law against northern Europeans who went to Texas from the US, but oddly enough, the Irish who went further down into Mexico were welcomed (I think due to Catholic sympathies).

I would guess that the Texans of that revolution would not have much desire to join the USA of today, but then again, by default that issue was made clear in the Civil war.

Which gets me back to the issue of establishing enclaves, then free zones within a state or group of states, then eventually some sort of diplomatically recognized autonomy. The idea being an autonomous region which would later then have the option of signing or rejecting UN arms control and trade regulations.

Manipulation of those regulations is what can make a small country quite wealthy like Belgium, or Switzerland or some of the other new republics in the former Soviet states.

The Colonists in the early fights of the revolution were in fact fighting to defend their own established local government, up to the state level, and in reality, at the several state level. Shortly after the war, there were fights like the Whiskey rebellion where some regions were in rebellion for a while until the bill of rights was ratified. What we need to be wary of is drawing our historical reference to that time period between National Independence and the Bill of Rights. I cannot say that early republic was really all that much of a beacon for freedom, just an example of how a new nation could prosper.

One the Bill of Rights was ratified, we then began an ongoing 200 year struggle to enforce it, with what I think historians will say the peak of American freedom coinciding with the Reagan years and then going down from there due to technological and political changes. It is my lifetime struggle to preserve those rights for myself and future generations as long as possible, to the detriment of aspiring dictators.

Lets not lose sight of that when arguing the minutiae of the placement of a comma somewhere in the original Constitution document or number of delegates who voted a particular version of it.

Enclaves are a horrible idea IMO.

They isolate us from the rest of the population and make it far easier to get at us.

Give up nothing. Not a square inch of this nation. Otherwise, this will end with 3 of us on a mountaintop in Idaho and the Apaches coming in to end it.

Waco
Ruby Ridge
Freemen
That sovereign bunch in TX
That christian group in MT

That's how seiges almost always end and how do you escape?

Mobility
Guerilla Insurgency

Now if you are a militant islamic enclave like Islamberg, then the govt seeks to protect you. They won't protect us, they want us all dead.

Fight or Die

I have one thing to say about enclaves or turning your home into a fort. Masada

Shall not fall again.

If the enclaves are large enough and economically viable enough, they will work. Especially if you move in quietly and only threaten to make a stand once you are fairly well established in local politics.

The other issue with those other places is that the feds had to be progressively lighter on them after Waco as they rightfully began to fear retaliation after the fact.

That's where things get dicey. You can only defend the enclave so much from a frontal conventional attack, but options for revenge later on, well, that's another matter.

I think it is the retaliation issue that is keeping the feds from moving on any of the several Muslim enclaves that according to some leaked intelligence reports have included paramilitary training in weapons and IEDs, and the people are even posting some of their own terrorism training around the net. Why are they not getting hit? I think it is because someone somewhere has done some levels of diplomacy which has included the options I have previously discussed.

Fact of the matter is, we need some of our own enclaves too. It is absurd to try and present it as us fighting for everyone else who refuses to support us and would just as well shoot us in the back and collect a reward from the JBTs when push comes to shove. We need to find out and establish who are own people are, and then run with that, protecting our people and getting support through them, and in turn supporting our own internal economy.

That's what goes on in Ireland, for better or for worse, but they consider the establishment of the enclaves of the significant factions to be the primary step toward diplomatic recognition of those factions.

At first, most of the enclaves are semi-secret and don't need heavy publicity. Then as time goes on, exchange support and business with other like minded communities and grow it from there.

Another issue is that possibility of a mobile population, like the "snowbirds" who run the RV circuit between the Northwest and Southwest as the seasons change, and in effect, their enclaves move with them except that most don't have viable mobile businesses. What they have are pension and disability checks, maybe investment dividends, but that's something.

The economic strength of the enclave is in turning the money over within the enclave instead of exporting cash all of the time. Wealthbuilding as a group means more economic stability as time goes on. That economic security helps you handle the little conflicts, and the infrastructure you develop will help you handle the big ones.

Here's some news on that Oak Park vegetable garden insanity .

The moral here is, if someone in government wants to make your life a living hell, he can.

Onward and upward,
airforce

True, but people need to wake up and realize that it works both ways. You can make the tyrants life a living hell too if you're willing to be creative.

The key word is "creative." I've accomplished quite a bit just by talking to members of the city council in private and, when that didn't work, talking to them in public. But in some places--as you pointed out--that can get you thrown in jail.

I've posted these before, but here is 198 methods of nonviolent action . Whatever the situation is, if you can't find two or three that work, you're not really trying.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Breacher,

First you have to sell the concept of enclaving to enough patriots who CAN and WOULD move. YES there are people who have gravitated to Arizona to the Free State project but they're convinced making symbolic resistance is better than actual results-so they're seen by a lot of folks as wackos and targets by the local regimes.

Second you have to find a desirable town in a area that could be locally self-sufficient as possible. Meaning water, resources, local industry, etc.

Third there is the matter of displacing the local power structure. The best way to do that would be an emergency recall election generated by a scandal. Quartzsite Arizona would be a great one to pull that off politically given their recent notoriety... not so hot on the ideal of taking over desert real estate so close to the US gunowner armed drug cartels...

The key is to go in there with a winning attitude, a realistic outlook as to how universally corrupt local gov. is, and a workable plan. The GIs of Athens TN. had the right ideal.

This would be best accomplished in a smaller town. You get into even a mid-sized city you're dealing with different voting bases that are welfare-dependent, hostile to Americans in general, or God forbid a enclave of .gov drones.

The biggest problem of course is finding enough Patriots with the wherewithal to move that would be willing. You're pretty persuasive with your writings I think you could make a go at it.

They'll make Julie Bass pay one way or another for defying them. Massa don't like their tax slaves getting uppity. Maybe some hero cops will do a 'welfare check' and have to shoot the dogs in self defense...

Not me. Stupidity has never been one of my shortcomings.

We should be looking at maximal dispersion, maximum mobility.

Now if we had some plan to buy all the munitions factories around the country, and set up around those, then it might be interesting.

I think the kids are awakening!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jyIbhUDIaE&feature=player_embedded#at=11

Out-friggin-standing.

ANONYMOUS - Yeah, they are worth watching. I have a very strong impression that their core leadership is actually made up of disillusioned intelligence service personnel from former allied countries.

People are partially right in saying that they are connected with CIA, Mossad, MI6 ect, but not in ways folks would normally think. They are in reality their own underground organization for their own purposes. Just a couple years ago they decided to face off against the Scientologists and have mauled the whole L Ron Hubbard crowd pretty hard.

Well, maximum mobility has a price to be paid in you're relying on attracting kindred souls who will not or cannot do actual fighting to provide food, shelter, intel, arms and other support.

Do you have that kind of pull? I don't.

Besides politics is a more polite brand of warfare. The enemy knows it and can relax in the knowledge that the militias haven't played it smart politically as a group.

Hint: local offices are the achilles heel of the beast, they wield most of the day-to-day power over us and are vulnerable to recall elections as most folks don't vote period and of those that vote, most don't vote in local elections. Which is why we got so many cops tasering grannies and such. Good job minding your own business there.

You leave political office to the enemy they will use it to restrict and ban your arms and other 'perceived rights'. Not a formula for victory.

Buy munitions factories? With WHAT? And say you did-what municipality in America is going to tolerate some 'redneck militia types' making their own weaponry? What you get for not having interjected yourselves into the political process.

No: you want to win you need weapons, food, fuel, shelter. That comes from owning territory. You gain territory as a Freedom Fighter by having the hearts and minds of the People. You win those hearts and minds by interjecting in the local political process and booting out the boss hogs and tin badge gods.

Get it?

I see where you are coming from.

However, I think I have some differences of opinion with that whole plan.

But you're right, if you want to grow crops, raise animals, and have a friendly area of operations, you need territory.

However, you will not survive long if the enemy knows there are hostiles (i.e. you) in a fixed area, year-round, year by year.

Own the "territory" but keep the active resistance elements of that territory static. Keep it moving. Set up many safehouses in an area and keep the "operating" members of your group moving around.

Each of these safehouses has to be good to go on their own, with enough resources to defend themselves and get out if they have to.

But do not spend all of your resources protecting all of your resources in one location.

Keep the leadership of your group unknown even to operators of your safehouses. Only the rifle-toting hand-saluting bona fides that you're fighting alongside should know who the top dogs are and where they are.

If we cannot get aid from the populace, at least some portion - roughly 10-15% - then we are screwed anyhow. However, I see no need for these folks to be concentrated. Again, it only makes it easier to monitor, find and destroy both us and them.

Of course not.
Nor can you claim to have any kind of authority when you prepare to fight and constantly run away.
The Militia has ZERO credibility at this point.
Not to mention huge leadership problems.

Now, I'm not saying that is deserved as we may actually stand up and fight one of these days... :rolleyes:

Who knows.....


You are correct in your initial statement and then go astray.

You cannot just fight the head, it is the tail that provides it with power.

As stated, it was the clerks and bookeepers that gave Hitler his power. We'd do well to remember this.

It was a tongue in cheek statement. I was being sarcastic.

However, if you own the joint, you just never know where shit is going to wind up.

Get it?
No.
LMAO

You ain't got near the time you think you do. None of you do.

You'll still be trying to break a thoroughly corrupted political process in 20 years while the last of your freedom is slipping through your fingers and your children can enjoy the thrills of their weakened nation being conquered by a foreign power. One that has no intention of treating the US like it has treated those whom it has defeated.

And don't fucking patronize me.

One more thing:

There is nothing easier to infiltrate than a pyramid organization.

A loose cell structure at the outset is VITAL. Only when we ahve superiority should we consider adopting conventional tactics.

I find it laughable how many think that we will retake our political system and our nation the way the Left has done so.

We don't have 40-50 years.

That is the plain and simple truth of the matter.