Uncategorized

There is a company offering 1,000 round cans of XM855 Lake City green tip,on stripper clips for $440. This ammo is particularly hard to find right now.

Other than being a purchaser, I have absolutely no relationship with this company.

One of the things that an attempted insurgency must do is drown out any message that is contrary to their own. The signs that this is happening are becoming more and more evident. People’s jobs are being destroyed over perceived racism. We have been seeing that for at least a year with the stints in FB jail. The insurgents have been doxxing people and destroying their businesses and careers for any possible statements they may have made, even if the statement was made years ago and wasn’t out of the mainstream at the time it was made.

For that reason, I have deleted my social media presence. This blog is all that remains, and if things get much worse, that will be deleted as well. I know this may seem like an overreaction, but let me quote the Guide to Analysis of Insurgency, and you can tell me where you think we are right now. First, there is the:

Preinsurgency Stage
A conflict in the preinsurgency stage is difficult to detect because most
activities are underground and the insurgency has yet to make its presence
felt through the use of violence. Moreover, actions conducted in the open
can easily be dismissed as nonviolent political activity. During this stage,
an insurgent movement is beginning to organize: leadership is emerging,
and the insurgents are establishing a grievance and a group identity,
beginning to recruit and train members, and stockpiling arms and supplies.

Then the insurgency advances to:

Incipient Conflict Stage
A struggle enters the incipient conflict stage when the insurgents begin to
use violence. Often these initial attacks provide analysts the first alert to
the potential for an insurgency. The target government, however, frequently
dismisses insurgent actions as the work of bandits, criminals, or terrorists,
which increases the risk that the government will employ counterproductive
measures.

As the violence increases, the insurgency enters:

Open Insurgency Stage
At this stage, no doubt exists that the government is facing an insurgency.
Politically, the insurgents are overtly challenging state authority and
attempting to exert control over territory. Militarily, the insurgents are
staging more frequent attacks, which have probably become more
aggressive, violent, and sophisticated and involve larger numbers of
fighters. As the insurgency becomes more active, external support for the
belligerents probably becomes more apparent, if it exists..

An insurgency at this stage often progresses from undermining state authority to displacing and replacing it. Insurgents may develop a “shadow government” that mirrors state administrative structures and may establish “no-go” areas where government representatives have been driven out and where only large formations of security forces can operate.

It is my feeling that the insurgency entered the Incipient conflict stage during the 2016 elections, when Antifa began using violence as a means to influence the political arena. I also believe that now we are beginning to enter the open insurgency stage, with the insurgency beginning to declare “police free” zones.

At any rate, the doxxing and economic/personal destruction of anyone deemed to be an outspoken opponent to the insurgency will, in my opinion accelerate as the election approaches. This will eventually increase to the point of physical attacks. The economic, reputation, and legal attacks upon people will continue. Anyone deemed to be an enemy of the BLM movement will be destroyed financially, legally, and in the community. They will have their careers, reputation, and finances destroyed for any perceived weakness or wrongthink.

Of course, there is always the possibility that I am wrong and the violence will disappear after the election, but I believe it is enough of a possibility that I am beginning to take steps to secure my position.

I believe that, since hostilities have already been initiated in the large cities, that further hostilities are probable, and they will occur with little to no warning.

We keep seeing things in the news about something called “restorative justice.” The theory of restorative justice is that, instead of focusing on the behavior of the offender, it focuses on the effect of the offender’s behavior. I like to call it, “no harm, no foul.” This is a brand of discipline that has become quite popular in schools.

Let me explain: Suppose we have a person that is caught stealing $500. Under traditional systems, the offender would be punished with some sort of punitive measure like probation or prison. Critics of this system point to recidivism rates and rightly point out that the punishment is obviously not enough to deter repeat offenses. In these cases, the victim is out $500, the offender is not rehabilitated, and the public is out the cost of investigating the crime, conducting a trial, and administering the punishment.

Proponents of restorative justice propose to make the offender and victim sit down to discuss the issue, the offense, and why that offense is hurtful. Then the victim is reimbursed for any loss, and since there is now restitution, that’s essentially the end of it.

Since many people have insurance, the proponents of restorative justice claim that the victim has been made whole, so all they have to do is explain to the offender why his behavior was wrong, and all is well.

This is codswallop. The victim hasn’t been made whole. The fact that he, and the rest of society, must maintain insurance against the poor behavior of offenders makes all of society into the victim. This entire theory of justice was born out of the “broken window” fallacy.

The broken window fallacy was first expressed by the 19th-century French economist Frederic Bastiat.

In Bastiat’s tale, a boy breaks a window. The townspeople looking on decide that the boy has actually done the community a service because his father will have to pay the town’s glazier to replace the broken pane. The glazier will then spend the extra money on something else, jump-starting the local economy. The onlookers come to believe that breaking windows stimulates the economy. Of course that is incorrect, because even though the owner of the broken window is now whole, the entire community is now poorer by the value of the window.

This particular type of discipline, if one were to call it that, has been popular in education for some time now. Schools are out of control as a result. Student tells a teacher to Fu@k off? He gets a stern talking to, and a time out. Two students get in a fistfight in the classroom? Again, time out and a lecture on why fighting is wrong.

As a result, there is no real deterrent effect on bad behavior. The offenders are operating in a nearly risk free environment: If they don’t get caught, they keep their ill gotten profits. If they DO get caught, they endure a brief lecture on why their behavior harmed others, then are free to try again. The schools are out of control with fights, drugs, weapons, and theft. We teachers are by state law asked if we feel safe on campus. The answer is, no I do not.

This is insanity, and can have only one result: the collapse of society.

THAT is what the people advocating restorative justice are missing: They do not recognize that some people simply don’t care about hurting others. They are projecting their own feelings of loving humanity onto criminals who simply view other humans as things to be exploited.

I have been sitting here watching the crowds rioting and thinking how, if you are in the path of such an attack, how useful it would be to have a belt fed AR (essentially a SAW).

Then I watch the recent activities in Seattle and think how useful a bolt action rifle in .50 BMG would be if directed at the leader of a bunch of revolutionaries that have decided to liberate your neighborhood.

The problem is that the cost for them is the same, and I can only afford one in the short term, and even that means having to forego some other purchases I was planning.

Let’s be honest, I am likely to not buy either.

We left Friday afternoon and made it as far as Mobile. We camped for the night in a relative’s driveway. We left the next day around noon, and were able to set up camp before dark on Saturday.

My brother went in for his COVID test on Sunday and was admitted to the hospital once the test came back negative on Monday. Since no one but patients are allowed in, my wife and I will remain here in camp until he is discharged, hopefully by Monday the 15th.

It is a 15 hour drive back, and I plan on doing it in two days. Until then, not much to do beyond housekeeping and surfing the web. Every day, we cook, clean, and I dump wastewater. My wife is still attending virtual meetings for school, but mine ended yesterday. I don’t have anything scheduled for the next two weeks.

We are here for my brother and his cancer treatments. My brother is the first friend that I had in my life, and I did not hesitate to agree to help him on this trip, once he asked.

The press is busy trying to explain to us that “defunding” the police doesn’t mean eliminating them, it means budget cuts. This is pure media spin. If you look up the group “8 to abolition” you will see exactly what they mean (highlights are mine):

Reject any proposed expansion to police budgets.
Reduce the power of police unions.
Until the police are fully defunded, make police union contract negotiations public.
Pressure the AFL-CIO to denounce police unions.
Withhold pensions and don’t rehire cops involved in use of excessive force.
Demand the highest budget cuts per year, until they slash police budget to zero.
Slash police salaries across the board until they are zeroed out.
Immediately fire police officers who have any excessive force complaints.
No hiring of new officers or replacement of fired or resigned officers.
Fully cut funding for public relations.
Suspend the use of paid administrative leave for cops under investigation.
Require police, not cities, to be liable for misconduct and violence settlements.
Deplatform white supremacist public officials.
Abolish asset forfeiture programs and laws.

Many of these requirements are unconstitutional, but I am not sure they even know or care.

If you want to understand what is happening right now, simply read three publications from the US Government. The first is called “Guide to the Analysis of Insurgency” (pdf warning) and was written by the CIA. The second is called FM- 7-98 OPERATIONS IN A LOW-INTENSITY CONFLICT (also a pdf). The third is Annex 3-22, Foreign Internal Defense (pdf warning), specifically APPENDIX A: INSURGENCY AND COUNTERINSURGENCY. 

We are currently just beginning Phase 2 of the Insurgency of Socialists who are attempting to overthrow the government of the US. There are those who have criticized me for saying it, but the Socialists themselves are telling us that is exactly what they are trying to do, and I am going to take them at their word. Here is the definition of Phase I and II:

Phase I (pre-hostility or incipient phase) corresponds to infrastructure development
plus initial recruiting, organizing, training, and equipping of combat elements.
During this phase, insurgents may engage the government in open political
confrontations like public demonstrations, labor strikes, and boycotts. Insurgents
often establish secure base areas for military command elements and guerrilla
operations during this phase. Political-ideological cadres focus on indoctrination of
civilians and armed revolutionaries.
Phase II (guerrilla warfare phase) is the first level of armed violence. Irregular
forces engage in sabotage, interdiction of communication and logistics links,
assassination, and selective attacks against government forces. Insurgents expand
their secure base areas and, where possible, link them to form strategic enclaves
of political autonomy.

Now that the riots and violence have begun, things will continue to get sporty from here.

So we have been told for the past thirty years that we don’t need guns, because the police are there to protect us. Now that the new Democrat platform is “get rid of cops,” does that mean that gun control is now a dead issue? If not, then how are they going to enforce it?

The basic purpose of government is that it protect the citizens from attack. If a government cannot protect its citizens from crime, then they will turn to whomever will provide that protection. In this case, BLM is claiming that they will be the ones protecting the public. Nice little protection racket.

This is directly from the insurgency guide: Replace the government as the protector of the people, and it is much easier to overthrow that government.

Southpark predicted this five years ago.