Nothing left now but . . .

Or to Arms.


The Modern Militiaman's Internet Gazette

June 1, 1997, Issue #4-97


Purpose: Our purpose is to serve the Resistance/Patriot Movement as a weekly gazette providing news and commentary favorable to our cause in a format accessible to the general public.

The news from e-mail listings is shown in preformatted text. This news will be attributed to its authors/editors and is entirely the opinion of that particular author/editor.
One of the reasons for this is to cut down on the spamming and foolishness inherent in raw e-mail in order to provide a forum for discussion of Resistance Movement issues.

Commentary is in regular format and is solely the opinions of the Editor and Staff of Modern Militiaman Internet Gazette.

Editor Martin Lindstedt

Fable of Contents

1. This Issue's Editorial Commentary
2. PIML -- Patriot Informer's Mailing List
3. Common Sense? Collaboration? You Decide.
4. The Price of Stupidity
5. The Manchurian Oswald's Left Buttock
6. Unregenerate Commentary Concerning The Manchurian Oswald's Show Trial
7. Return Fire: Letters to the Editor


This Issue's Commentary:

After the ROT fiasco and the rounding up of such militiamen who thought that loud talk and stockiling of weapons and explosives were compatible, there has not been much of anything worthwhile to pick up on the Internet. Even the black helicopter sightings are down, now that the summer heat has arrived and people go back to watching the television set.

So with this lull before the coming storm, in this issue I shall pick apart foolishness posted by various militia generals who have no sense of purpose or vision beyond their own aggrandisement.

The German General Staff (between the years they won every 19th Century war they engaged in under Bismark and then losing every war they started in the 20th Century) had a saying regarding the qualifications of officer applicants to the General Staff:

Or of any organization for that matter.

The problem with a lot of these militia generals is the same one that plagues most "educated" people. In most situations they cannot go beyond their initial indoctrination. Hence when things change, they have no other internal guide other than themselves. Like a watch with a defective quartz crystal unable to keep true time, they will never be able to be in synch with changing situations, as their prior programming has left them mentally crippled.

Somehow they think they are replaying 1776 with a slightly different cast of characters. They think that if they bellyache enough about how the gubbnmint is violating their paper idol -- the Constitution -- that the government will say how sorry they are and punish its own wicked. How the NWO/ZOG/Illuminati/Freemasons are just waiting for an excuse to impose martial law and send us all to a concentration camp or kill us, and therefore you oughtn't give these murderous tyrants an excuse.

Just try talking good sense to these idiots! If you remind them that God's signature isn't on their precious Constitution, then you will be called a heathen. If you point out that for every hero who wanted a constitution there were others, like Patrick Henry, George Mason or Thomas Jefferson who never were reconciled to a centralized government which could fall into the hands of tyrants and degenerates, then you will be called a revisionist. If you point out that intelligent freedom-fighters WANT to provoke a cowardly decaying government into cracking heads and imposing a reign of terror sufficient to bring aggrieved gifted elements from out of the sheeple majority to our side, then chances are you will be turned in as 'a terrorist' by those very self-same idiots.

The only cure for muddled thinking is to start figuring out what you want and the shortest way to get there. Since the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, then the cure for muddled thinking is straight thinking.

So is the militia movement doomed because of its large collection of fools and idiots desperately trying to gain their freedom by using outmoded, unrealistic thinking? Not when you consider that the gubbnmint forces are even bigger fools. Somehow they have the notion that the more welfare checks they send out the more gratitude they will get from the recepients. Or that political indoctrination at the expense of teaching their young victims how to read, write, or reason will ensure that these mental castrates will in turn be able to produce enough to pay for the retirements of these mattoid publik skrule indoctrinators. Or that thuggish law-enforcers, judges and lawyers will be judged under the protections of a Constitution they destroyed by a vengeful population they previously victimized under color of "law." Or that their central bank can continue to print up fiat paper money without fear of financial collapse once everybody figures out that their banknotes are worthless. Or that anyone will continue to listen to their media spokesmen of proven mendacity.

Even the most stupid militia general can learn something, like King Manasseh, once they have been thrown in jail for a couple of years by a corrupt government using swarms of lying informers. The smarter ones will learn from the example set by the more foolish militia generals rotting away in jail because they ran their mouths off too much or thought they could negotiate in good faith with highly placed criminals.

Experience is NOT the best teacher. It is the hardest, most unforgiving teacher because it costs so much in pain and suffering. As Benjamin Franklin wrote: "Dame Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other." But learn you will -- if you survive. The gubbnmint has been keeping a dear school herself, teaching the militia movement about survival of the fittest. The gubbnmint has been teaching the Resistance not to negotiate, not to threaten, not to run their mouths, not to form open organizations suceptible to infiltration.

The Modern Militiaman and Modern Militiaman's Internet Gazette is also keeping a school. We intend to teach the Resistance to grow up without the need for learning from Dame Experience or undergoing destructive testing. Only intelligent people saying intelligent things shall prevail on these pages. The debate might well end up being hot and heavy. While public humiliation of fools and criminals will take place, still, it is far better to have a red face rather than a 20 year prison sentence.

Once the Resistance movement learns to shake off the indoctrination provided by our common enemy, figures out what it wants, and proceeds to implement its planning at every available opportunity, then the Modern Militia Movement will truly be a force upon the plain that no corrupt government can withstand.

Let us hasten that day.

--Editor Martin Lindstedt




Patriot Informers Mailing List?

Forwarded message:
From: (Bill Utterback)
Reply-to: (The pdml mailing list)
Date: 97-03-22 12:02:06 EST


Robert Kesterson is about to be arrested on a 'Writ of Attachment' 
and held without charge, without trial, and without bail - possibly 
forever.  This is a gross violation of his constitutionally 
protected rights and is a situation in which ACLU needs to become 

Bill Utterback

Commentary:Can't you just see it now? The Amerikan Criminal Liberties Union is going to line up behind some character who is an officeholder in the Republic of Texas, a group whose avowed purpose is to secede from the prison state which the ACLU has helped create.

Highly doubtful, even if a so-called writ of attachment made up by the Texican General of Lawyer-Thugs treats a human being as a piece of state property to be seized with as much respect for the civilized niceties as an unattached suitcase of gubbnmint drug money. So much for "rule of law" painstakingly woven into Western Civilization over the course of centuries whenever obeying that law is inconvenient for our decaying elites.

So the ACLU won't show up. But Mr. Utterback will be running safely to the rear for re-inforcements, squalling for "civil disobediance"and for the cavalry (militia) to for heaven's sake not shoot none of them noble RED-men.

Even Custer had better help back then.

Poor revolting Texicans. . . Mr. Utterback is no Davy Crockett, much less a Sam Houston. Read further and see how the worm turned after you got Alamoed.


Please repost widely.



My heart is torn that you find yourself in your present situation; 
you have indeed become a victim of unconstitutional actions by 
officials in the government of the state of Texas. I have nothing 
but admiration and respect for your courage to take a stand for 

As I told you a year ago, I feel that your efforts have been 
directed on a road to nowhere - but that does not lessen the 
criminal actions of government.  I have run out of comments and 
suggestions; I know of nothing to suggest to help you.  I can not
come to your defense because that would mean for me to defend the 
claims of what you and a few others believe to be the only lawful 
government of Texas: the so-called 'Provisional Government of the 
Republic of Texas'.

It is my clear understanding that the 'Republic of Texas' and the 
'government' of which you are an 'officer' has no foundation in 
either fact or law.  I am sworn to support and defend the current 
(1876) Texas Constitution against all enemies, foreign and 
domestic.  This includes defending the Texas Constitution against 
misguided groups of patriots who act in insurrection against the 
Constitution and people of Texas by attempting to establish 
governments for all of Texas with no authority whatsoever granted 
to them by the people of Texas.

I have always supported the right of the people of Texas to alter, 
reform, or abolish their government at any time as they see fit.  
This has nothing to do with some group, led by a false prophet, 
which attempts to impose their own idea of government upon the 
people of Texas without first gaining the approval and delegated 
authority of the people of Texas.

I have done my best for the last year to attempt to convince 
Texans that the 'Republic of Texas' movement was a road to nowhere 
because it was based on a false foundation.  I have offered my 
suggestions elsewhere on what can be done to begin to restore 
limited, Constitutional government.  I lack the words to fully 
express my contempt at what is being done to you; but I can not 
act in your defense, nor in McLaren's defense, nor in the defense 
of anyone who is practicing insurrection against the Texas 
Constitution which I am sworn to defend.

I do not know a way out for you.  I pray that God will cause the 
situation to be resolved in a fair and just manner.  And I salute 
you for your willingness to take a stand for Liberty, as you 
understand it.

All that I can do is forward your letter below as widely as 
possible on the internet and call for MASS NON-VIOLENT PUBLIC 
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF TEXAS.  I do this in response to
unconstitutional action by the government to Robert Kesterson as
an individual, separate and apart from his 'Republic of Texas'
activities.  This is a clear case where all patriots can protest
unconstitutional action.

for Liberty,
Bill Utterback

At 11:39 AM 3/21/97 -0600, Robert Kesterson wrote:
>From: "Robert Kesterson" 
>To: "Republic of Texas Updates" 
>Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 10:46:37 +0000
>Subject: RTX:  Open Letter
>                                Open Letter
>                              March 20, 1997
>     Texas Law Enforcement Agencies
>     US Federal Law Enforcement Agencies
>     People of Texas
>     All Patriots Everywhere
>It is with a heavy heart that I take pen (or keyboard) in hand to
>write this letter. I am faced with a bleak situation and few
>alternatives, and I now write this letter so that my cause and stand
>shall be known.
>All of us in the Republic of Texas came into this with the same
>pledge as our forefathers in the original thirteen American colonies
>-- that we pledged our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor to
>this task of restoring our freedom. We all knew that it would cost us
>a lot, and might cost us everything.
>We also came into it with a love for freedom, for truth, and for
>justice. We came not because we were lawbreakers, but because we love
>the law of our land, and would restore our nation and remove those men
>who sit in high places and pervert the Constitution.
>Our struggle has been a hard one, for the enemies of freedom are all
>around us. We have sustained attacks from without and within, and
>sometimes the road seems so rocky that we doubt we can ever push
>forward. Yet we draw on a strength that is greater than our own, and
>we continue, knowing that our goal is too precious to allow it to slip
>from our grasp.
>There are millions of people throughout Texas, America, and the
>world who face the same valiant struggle that we do. These are trying
>times for men with hearts for liberty, as the world has grown up and
>overpowered the individual, building a commercial empire that
>strangles freedom and chokes the very life from every human being on
>the planet. Some see it happening and some, sadly, do not. Some eyes
>are blinded to the chains that bind them, some ears are deaf to hear
>the cries of their countrymen. But it is for all men that we fight.
>Like many in the Republic of Texas, I have resolved within myself
>never to give up, never to bow before the corporate government empire
>again. My course is set, my purpose clear. I will have liberty, not
>I have been backed into a corner that I had hoped would not be so soon
>in coming. As some of you may already be aware, an officer of the
>corporation that calls itself "The State of Texas", Mr. Dan Morales,
>their Attorney General, has now taken a very strong position and
>forged a plan of attack against me, even though I have committed no
>wrong. The corporate government appears to be in collusion with him,
>as his orders flow through the court system quickly, and the de facto
>Governor declares "emergency legislation" at his request.
>This most recent attack by the corporate State comes as the capstone
>on a series of actions they have taken in an effort to break the back
>of the Republic of Texas. They would have us be intimidated and
>frightened back into submission. They would destroy our ability to
>continue the struggle by stealing our property and confining us to
>At the request of Mr. Morales, the corporate State now has
>unbelievable fines against the Republic of Texas and its officials.
>There is a running fine for contempt of court that now totals many
>times more money than has ever existed in all of history, and it
>continues to double every day. What is the act which was so
>contemptible as to warrant this fine? Mr. Morales has demanded that
>officials of the Republic of Texas rescind certain documents by
>signing letters of recission *in their official capacities.*  Mr.
>Morales knows that the Republic of Texas is real, that it is right,
>and that it is lawful. He knows that we have not been convicted of any
>crime. Yet he uses contempt of court, the tool of tyrants, as a tool
>to give the State license to steal our property. He now seeks to have
>the judgment severed, allowing him to send armed men to throw us out
>of our own homes, take our cars, take our property, and leave us
>homeless and destitute.
>Now, Mr. Morales has taken his vendetta against the Republic to a new
>level, and this is the one which has my back to the wall. He has
>requested, and apparently been granted, a Writ of Attachment against
>my person. This is just a lawyer's fancy word for an arrest warrant
>(only it's even worse -- it treats a person like a piece of property,
>and is completely unconstitutional). Mr. Morales now states plainly,
>in writing and on the record, that he intends to throw me in jail
>forever unless I hand over to him the names and contact info for all
>Citizens and everyone else I have ever talked to about the Republic of
>Texas. He is even so brazen as to state, again in writing and on the
>record, that he intends to do so even if I am never convicted of any
>crime -- that he will continue to hold me in prison without bond
>indefinitely unless I hand over the information.
>I have already informed Mr. Morales of the fact which should be
>self-evident -- that no matter which Constitution you choose to
>follow, his request is completely unconstitutional and unlawful, and I
>simply will not comply. I take my oath and position with the Republic
>of Texas very seriously, and I cannot and will not betray the trust of
>my countrymen, and will not deliver anyone into the hands of a petty
>tyrant who seeks to devour them.
>This situation has not changed my resolve or my determination, but it
>does change my outlook. I have long hoped for a completely peaceful
>resolution to the Texas independence question. However, Mr. Morales
>has forced me into a position which leaves very few alternatives. As I
>see it, there are only three options -- either I can go to prison for
>life, I can live as a fugitive for life, or I can defend myself
>against this unlawful attack. None of these options is particularly
>It has been with much soul-searching that I have come to my
>conclusion. I will stay my course, and stand my ground. I have
>committed to freedom, and I will not turn back. I have committed no
>crime, and will not be sent to prison for standing on my rights and
>refusing an unlawful and unconstitutional order. Mr. Morales would
>lock me up without bond, regardless of whether or not I am convicted
>of anything, clearly showing that there is no remedy at law.
>Therefore, his statements (and prior experience) tell me that any
>attempt at self-defense in their court system will be futile. I also
>find it unreasonable that a man who has done nothing other than seek
>his freedom should be forced to live like a criminal, hiding from the
>agents who would destroy him.
>The only option I see that Mr. Morales has left me with is physical
>self-defense. He has removed any remedy at law, and clearly states
>that he will act unlawfully to keep me in prison. As such, there
>appears to be no other option but to resort to that last inherent
>right of all human beings -- the right to survival and to defend one's
>self and one's property.
>It was 221 years ago, in March of 1775, when Patrick Henry observed a
>man being savagely beaten in Culpeper, Virginia. Then man had been
>tied to a post and beaten savagely with a leather scourge laced with
>metal barbs. His back had been ripped and torn, and his ribs laid bare
>through the bloody wounds. Mr. Henry asked someone what horrible crime
>the man had done to cause him to be so severely punished. The reply?
>The man had refused to accept a license to be a minister, standing
>instead on his inalienable right to worship and to speak as he saw
>fit. Three days later, this freedom-loving minister was scourged to
>death. This incident was what prompted Patrick Henry to later give his
>stirring speech in Williamsburg wherein he stated
>      "What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have?
>      Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at
>      the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!
>      I know not what course others may take, but as for me,
>      *give me liberty or give me death!*"
>These words became the rallying cry for the American Revolution.
>Now, two centuries later, we have innocent people thrown in prison
>every day for refusal to take a license (whether it be for driving,
>operating a business, building a house, or any of a thousand other
>things). Perhaps they aren't scourged, but they are treated with
>contempt by a corporate government which has no regard for the dignity
>of man. Their property is taken and their lives disrupted, often
>ruined, because they desired liberty.
>The corporate State will soon make its move against me, and they
>have left me no choice but self-defense. Even under de facto State of
>Texas law, every person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest, to
>the point of reacting with violent and deadly force if necessary. Is
>that the only thing left? Rest assured, once they come for me, they'll
>shortly come for others. Maybe for your neighbor. Maybe for your
>brother. Maybe for you.
>I have always maintained a position of peace and non-violence. And I
>still do. However, the corporate State has left me with no viable
>course of action but to assert my final rights, and hope that it does
>not become necessary to actually use them.
>It is clear to me that the time is upon us when the people of Texas
>and of America must make their choice. The line is already drawn in
>the sand; now it is up to all of us to decide on which side we will
>stand. I for one choose to side with Patrick Henry and choose liberty,
>even if that choice leads to death. If I die, it will be with a clear
>heart and a clean conscience. I love freedom, I love Texas, and I love
>America. And I am unconditionally committed to the ideals which made
>both countries great.
>In closing, I urge all of you reading this to make up your mind
>where you stand, and make your mental preparations to support your
>choice. I will remind you of words spoken two centuries ago by another
>of America's founding fathers, Mr. Samuel Adams. He said
>     "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of
>     servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home
>     from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch
>     down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set
>     lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our
>     countrymen."
>Ladies and gentlemen, I pray every day for peace. But I know what is
>right, and I will not allow my property or my person to be stolen by
>the de facto State. I have worked hard for my meager belongings, and
>have every right to keep them and live a quiet, peaceable life. If I
>am forced to defend that right, then so be it. If conflict comes, it
>is neither by my choice nor my hand. We can't always choose our
>battles, but we can't always run from them, either.
>We in Texas and America are sitting on a powder keg called
>"Revolution", and the corporate State is throwing matches at it. If
>that powder keg ignites, may God help us all.
>With hopes of peace,
>Robert William Kesterson
>Secretary of State of and for the Republic of Texas
>free and sovereign human being
>Robert Kesterson                 Republic of Texas Information
>                by web:
>EMail me for my PGP public key
>Republic of Texas EMail list:  Send a message with the subject

Bill Utterback                  (backup:
"It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from 
falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the 
Government from falling into error."
U.S. Supreme Court in American Communications Association v. Douds,
339 U.S. 382,442



Uttercrock's 'Admiration, Respect and Salute' to the Insurrectionist Kesterton

Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 17:26:36 -0500
From: Bill Utterback 
Subject: Latest News From RT

Latest News From RT

It seems as if the Texas Call to Arms may be calming down 
somewhat.  Could it be that "secretary of defense" Roger Erickson 
has had an opportunity to evaluate the military strength of all 
six of the one-man-regiments who responded to his call?  Not all 
is lost, Roger; maybe you could attack a "de facto" post office.  
The problem there would be to avoid being mistaken for post office 
employees who had "gone postal", as the employees say.

Robert Kesterson will reportedly be talking to the judge tomorrow. 
The reason Kesterson is in jail is because he refused multiple 
calls to talk to the judge before.

This leaves us with Archie Lowe, "president" of the so-called 
"Republic of Texas government" #2 (of 3), a fugitive from the law 
and with the "RT Defense Forces" still on Orange 3 alert.  Tune in 
tomorrow for the next chapter in this continuing soap opera.  If 
would be funny if it didn't have such great potential for harming 
the patriot cause.

The latest message from the RT is below.

for Liberty,
Bill Utterback



The Professional Militia General Critiques ROT Communications

Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 12:13:29 -0500
From: Bill Utterback 
Subject: RT Update May 13, 1997

RT Update May 13, 1997
Robert Kesterson, "secretary of state" of RT #2, has been released 
on bond.  Archie Lowe, "president" of RT #2, remains a fugitive.  RT
"defense forces" are still on lemon 3 alert (or was that orange 3?).

Here is a message from Kesterson:

>Greetings! I am relieved to report that I am no longer being held 
>will probably take me a couple of days to get my feet back on the 
>ground, so EMail responses will be slow (and I still have a big 
>backlog from *before* this happened, so now it's even worse! :-)  
>Have patience with me -- I'll get to all of them in time. -- 
>Robert Kesterson

Yesterday the following message was sent by Roger Erickson, 
"secretary of defense" of RT #2:

>Subj:	Message
>Date:	97-05-12 19:32:45 EDT
>From: (roger erickson)
>1300 hours 12 May 1997
>Urgent!  From the Man.
>Italy Italy, hold Roman Candle with Orange 3.
>Operation Peacock stage 2.
>Recon commence run, 1 dozen no jellies, 24 push-ups.
>Gums drop is to await for 1400 hours for further instruction, prepare and
>Prepare for Ralph Penzer 24125997.
>Good Luck.
>Roger Erickson
>Secretary of Defense
>Republic of Texas

There has been some criticism of Erickson on the net for 
previously publicly posting telephone numbers to contact for 
information on RT "defense forces" staging areas.  Now this 
message would seem to be in code, but there is a severe shortage 
of secret decoder rings in the RT forces.  I suspect that it a 
message that nobody can read and was sent in an attempt to upgrade 
the somewhat tarnished image of the RT "defense forces".

Hopefully, this latest mini-crisis created by the RT is now over
and done with.  This temporary mailing list will now go back into

for Liberty,

Bill Utterback                  (backup:
Comment: When the SWAT thugs are pounding in his door, perhaps Militia General Uddercrock will be sending encrypted "Help" messages to certain select individuals like himself.



Couldn't Believe It Any More If 20 Reporters and 20 Gubbnmint Judges Said So


Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 13:33:45 -0500
From: Bill Utterback 
Subject: Positive Responses to Texas News

Until now I have been able to keep up by sending short replies to 
all those who have responded positively to the Texas news I have 
been posting.  This morning I received an avalanche of positive 
responses (and a couple negative responses) and I will have to 
resort to this one reply in answer to them all.

Rick McLaren has been the architect and the driving force behind 
the "Republic of Texas" movement since the very beginning.  The 
following information from an article by Cary Cardwell in the San 
Antonio Express-News, May 11, 1997, page 1J, gives some insight 
into McLaren's character:


	"Rick McLaren got what he wanted," says Presidio County
Judge Jake Brisbin, in whose jail the "ambassador" sits, referring 
to all the international media attention McLaren received.
	Brisbin, a lifelong West Texan, diehard individualist and
an ex-Marine who was seriously wounded in Vietnam, finds 
nothing to admire about the man.
	"I saw him Monday, when he received word of his man being
shot to death.  It wasn't three minutes later that he was grinning 
and smiling with one of the attorneys.  He had no remorse.  It 
disgusted me and I turned away.  He never did intend to give up 
his life for this cause.  It was all a game to him."




Thirty Pieces of Silver Used to be the Standard Rate

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 13:46:40 -0500
From: Bill Utterback 
Subject: Radio Interview

To all you short wave listeners:

I just completed, by telephone, a one-hour taped interview with 
Paul Hall, host of Jubilee On-The-Air radio program.  It will be 
broadcast at 5:00 pm CDT on WWCR, frequency 5.070 on the radio 

The subject is the so-called "Republic of Texas governments".  The 
show airs every other Saturday and, interestingly enough, the 
guest last time was White Eagle Otto who called from McLaren's 

I will be involved in an activity at the time of the broadcast and 
will not be able to listen.  If anyone happens to hear the 
program, I would appreciate an e-mail note telling me how it came 

Jubilee has a web page and a printed newspaper.  They have been 
labeled as racist by Morris Dees and the ADL - just as I, as a 
militia leader, was lumped with other so-called racists in Morris 
Dees' book "False Patriots".  After talking to Paul Hall, Jubilee 
editor, and taking a very close look at his web page, I think it
would be accurate to call Jubilee a separatist publication but I
could find no overt racism in either the web page or Paul's 
comments to me.  People have the right to hold whatever beliefs 
they choose so long as they do not infringe on the rights of 
another.  Incidently, it is my observation that many religious 
organizations tend to foster some kind of "we are better than 
them" philosophy.

Just for the record:  Personally, I try to lead my life in 
accordance with the teachings of Jesus.  I consider all people on 
this planet to be members of the same race, the human race.  I 
consider all people to be children of God and to be equally 
endowed with unalienable rights by their Creator.  I honor the 
right of all people to serve God in the manner in which they 
understand to be most appropriate - so long as they respect the 
rights of all others.

for Liberty,

Bill Utterback                  (backup:

Comments: It is a point of civility to call The Jubilee a White Nationalist publication. I have myself called for the 'Constitutional militias' to recognize the legitimacy of the Christian Identity, White/Black Nationalist, and even Neo-Nazi militias against the common enemy -- the criminal regime that Mr. Utterback considers legitimate and that I consider profoundly illegitimate.

But still, it is amusing to see one of them 'constitutional' militia generals like Utterback turn a blind eye to political correctness whenever there is something in it for himself.

I suspect that The Jubilee took a close look at Mr. Utterback and his utterances and activities into account before it did the intelligent thing and put him on their radio program anyway. White Nationalists usually know exactly what they want and how they are going to go about getting a separate nation of white people. Since the Republic of Texas wanted to form a separate nation of Texicans of all colors and Mr. Utterback shit all over the pacifists of the ROT, just exactly how much support will the politically correct Utterback grant White Nationalists in their planned insurrections for the sole benefit of White Israel? Want to hazard a guess?

Let me admit something. Of all the militia generals, I despise Utterback the most. While I despise him for other reasons, mainly having to do with how he acts as a "Libertarian" politician, it is because of his so-called militia activities that I am bringing up this matter. I have read his bullshit patriot postings for the past year or so, and knowing his character have judged anyone who thinks highly of him as an idiot, because a common-sense literal reading of his messages should have long ago unmasked him as a phony.

There is absolutely no way to peacefully withdraw from any government on the planet. Especially the current regime, happy-talk about the "consent of the governed" notwithstanding. The only exception, as when Russia turned loose of the Baltic Republics in the early '90s, is when a particular regime has no choice other than to let their minorities go free. It took at least 10 plagues before the Egyptians turned loose of their slaves of a different color. Throughout history, the prerequisite of freedom has been the ability and the willingness to use as much violence and then some as what it takes to gain that freedom. Anyone who refuses to cold-bloodedly calculate such considerations is an idiot. Anyone who professes anything other than such a reality is a liar. Anyone who receives anything of value from the credulous for promising freedom without struggle is a thief.

The vast majority of the so-called Constitutional militias are composed of idiots, liars, and thieves. It is against the law to revolt against the government and steal its slaves by running away. The Constitution is what the government says it is. The law is what the judge says it is. Under the scrap of paper known as the Constitution, the federal government is in charge of "organizing, arming, and disciplining" legitimate militia units. (See Art. 1, Section 9). So if you come across anyone who says he is a "Constitutional militiaman" ask to see the Act of Congress which established his unit and under whose discipline he is supposed to be under. Ninety percent of the time you are dealing with a mere idiot. Nine percent of the time you are dealing with an idiot and a liar. One percent of the time you are dealing with a militia general like Wild Bill Uddercrock, who is all three.

The Republic of Texas got some of it right. They had enough sense to quote the so-called Father of the Constitution James Madison.

"If there be a principle that ought not to be questioned within the United States, it is that every man has a right to abolish an old government and establish a new one. This principle is not only recorded in every public archive, written in every American heart, and sealed with the blood of a host of American martyrs, but is the only lawful tenure by which the United States hold their existence as a nation."
-- James Madison, 1751-1836

But in the main they were a bunch of old coots trying to use fragments of an imperfectly understood common-law to write up massive quantities of bogus liens against another regime which had no intention of obeying its own law. They never chose to understand that every person in every new generation has the inherent right to choose their form of government -- and the responsibility for making it stick against the will of those who would use their form of government as a license to rule. By refusing to act upon the reality of "what is" as opposed to "what ought to be" they were punished by the consequences of their own irrationality. One of them, Mike Matson, was murdered by Mr. Utterback's 'legitimate' government. Mr. Keyes is probably lying unburied or in an unmarked grave where the gubbnmintgungoons killed him. The majority of them are on the edge of financial ruin, having wasted their financial resources on preaching to the cowardly or foolish and in direct confrontation with a corrupt government. If their money had been spent in providing for their own survival first, with only the surplus cast before swine, then they would not be destitute sacrifices for the ungrateful.

Intelligent action is the measure of a man. Some of you so-called militiamen do not measure up.

--Editor Martin Lindstedt



Common-sense or Collaboration? You Decide.

From: Kenneth Adams (

The credibility of the Militia has been a concern to many of us for a 
long time and to many in the main stream as well.  As many of you know, 
the National Confederation of Citizen Militias (NCCM), for the past 
2 years, has been part of the  Critical Incident Analysis Group at 
Michigan State University.  For those not familiar with this group, 
the following article will explain the purpose of the group in some 
detail. At our last meeting, in March of this year, Roger Nisley, of 
the FBI, felt it was most important that the credibility of the 
Militia be improved.  He commented that the media and others paint 
the Militia with a very wide and misinforming brush.  He stated that 
the Constitutional Militias were law abiding citizens that loved their 
country and were not terrorists.  Roger Nisley made a commitment to 
help in the area of credibility with law enforcement-nationally and 
else where.

The following article is the first step in that direction. As you 
will read, the main stream law enforcement and others speak well of 
all our efforts instead of trashing us.  I hope you all see this as 
a small step in the right direction.

Kenneth Adams
Fax 616-536-0500
Web Site -

This is a new web site still under construction, but we do have 
several good software downloads.


U.S. News and World Report - 5-5-97

The secret FBI-militia alliance

How onetime adversaries have joined to defuse some crises


On the surface, the negotiations last week in Southwest Texas between      
secessionist Richard McLaren, a self-proclaimed leader of the Republic 
of Texas, and state authorities were alternately promising and 
foreboding.  A feud between McLaren and neighbors had escalated when 
Republic advocates kidnapped a married couple and the area was 
surrounded by some 100 state and federal officers.  After that, the 
public saw only the dealings involving McLaren and the Texas Department 
of Public Safety.  But behind the scenes, a potentially pathbreaking 
alliance between some militia leaders and the FBI was also trying to 
influence the bargaining process.

Throughout the week, members of the National Confederation of Citizen 
Militias were in touch with various factions of the Republic of Texas, 
and both FBI and NCCM officials conferred with Texas state authorities 
as well.  By week's end, the situation was uncertain and uneasy because 
FBI officials did not have any authority to act and their militia 
partners were being treated warily by state authorities.  The bigger, 
unreported story is that this was the fourth time the FBI and segments 
of America's militia movement had acted together to try to defuse a 
crisis.  The record of these efforts is varied, but the alliance 
represents a vast change in the way these once fierce antagonists are 
dealing with each other.  Not long ago, their mutual suspicion had been 
inflamed by the incidents in Waco, Texas, in which more than 80 people 
died after a long standoff between the FBI and the Branch Davidian cult 
of David Koresh, and Ruby Ridge, Idaho, where an FBI sharpshooter 
killed the wife of white separatist Randy Weaver.  Yet last week, NCCM 
Director Ken Adams said communications between militias and the FBI 
were "working superbly, beyond what I ever imagined."

The new relationship grew out of the government's post-mortems on Waco, 
which urged officials to expand the pool of behavioral scientists who 
could be consulted about confrontations with potentially dangerous 
political or religious groups. In 1995, the FBI began working with an 
academic group based at Michigan State University called the Critical 
Incident Analysis Group -- a body that hopes to be a resource and 
clearinghouse for such consultations.  By then, the FBI had changed its 
preparation for crises by joining in a single office the bureau's 
tactically oriented Hostage Rescue Team and its specialists in 
negotiation and behavioral science.  The move was designed to increase 
the authority of negotiators in high-tension episodes, rather than 
relying so heavily on armed rescue operations.  A 25-year bureau 
veteran named Robin Montgomery was put in charge of the office.

Some of the academics in CIAG had developed good relations with militia 
members and began meeting with them in the aftermath of the Oklahoma 
City bombing.  Montgomery wanted to join in the discussions, and so did 
Adams and Doug Hall of the NCCM.  "My service in Vietnam impressed on 
me that you have to look at things with an open mind," said Montgomery. 
"I felt it critical that the FBI talk to somebody in the militia 
movement and let them know what we were and weren't doing, in order to 
quell the paranoia."  On Sept. 7, 1995, he called Hall at the 
Stafford's Bay View Inn in Petoskey, Mich., where Hall was meeting 
with officials from CIAG.  They chatted for 15 minutes.  And not much 
later Montgomery called Adams and gave Adams his beeper number.  With 
coaxing from some of the scholars, Montgomery and Hall agreed to work 
with CIAG in establishing an informal hot line they all could use to 
try to control rumors and head off violent confrontations.

In a few months, the first crisis arose. A doctor in Coushatta, La., 
who was wanted for failure to pay child support, holed up in his 
mother's house in late February 1996 after an initial skirmish with 
FBI agents and sheriff's deputies.  He then called for militia support 
to avoid "another Ruby Ridge," and a dozen militia members from several 
states came to his aid.  Adams alerted CIAG member Don Bassett--a 
former FBI crisis manager himself.  That triggered a round of phone 
calls among the academics, Montgomery, Adams, militia members, and 
on-scene FBI executives.  Bureau officials ultimately pulled back a 
SWAT team and allowed a militia member to negotiate the doctor's 

Last spring, during the FBI's ultimately peaceful face-off with the 
Freemen in Jordan, Mont., Adams, Montgomery, and CIAG members talked 
dozens of times, in part so Adams could get accurate information to 
militia members nationwide about the FBI's intentions and tactics. "I 
wanted Ken to know what we were doing, so we didn't provide a spark for 
some hue and cry," said Montgomery. "It was crucial that we have that 
information," says Adams, "because this was the first major FBI action 
since Waco."

Memphis showdown.

In late January, the network was activated after Adams picked up 
information about a confrontation in Southaven, Miss. About 15 militia 
members from six states arrived to defend a residence that had been 
slated for destruction as part of a noise abatement zone for the nearby 
Memphis International Airport.  The city halted plans to raze the 
house, and the eviction order is now being appealed.  But militia 
members felt the hot line essentially had failed because they were 
unable to influence the actions of local officials in the case.

By March, efforts to keep communication flowing had other problems. 
Montgomery announced his intention to retire, and militia members were 
angered by what they considered unfair comments from FBI officials 
alleging militia links to last summer's bombing at the Atlanta 

Some CIAG members tried to repair relations by arranging a session on 
March 27 where Adams and Hall met with FBI Academy Dean John Henry 
Campbell and Montgomery's acting replacement, Roger Nisley.  The 
90-minute meeting apparently changed minds, especially when Nisley 
handed out his home phone number.  "I think it was historic in terms 
of relationships and understandings," said Adams. "I've probably 
talked to Nisley once a week since the meeting, and Roger has 
broadened our contacts so we can reach out to more people in his 

Still, each side has internal worries.  Adams concedes that some 
militia members "think I've joined the FBI."  At the same time, CIAG 
member Bassett notes that there are law enforcement skeptics who 
believe he has succumbed to a form of Stockholm syndrome by 
identifying too much with alleged foes of the FBI.

Yet no one is turning back.  "If we don't communicate with our 
government, then we're defying what we ourselves have called out for," 
says Adams.  "We've asked the government to communicate with its 
people.  Now we're all doing it."

Kenneth Adams

---------------End of Original Message-----------------




No Credibility

There are no shortage of people in the militia movement who sell out their fighting brothers for a moment of praise from the enemy. And such is their stupidity, blinded by egotism, that they have nothing to say other than a defensive yammering when called upon this matter. Some of them even boast about it!

These people have no credibility with the FBI. The FBI is always happy to cultivate a new set of government informants. And since nobody trusts a rat, these quislings won't have any true regard from their handlers other than what is necessary for the upkeep of informants -- to keep them talking.

Since they have eschewed retaliatory force, then these NCCM militia generals won't be feared by the police forces upholding the current regime as anything other than BDU-wearing wusses, whining about how their rights were violated.

The NCCM militia generals won't have any influence with the fighting forces of the Resistance -- the opposite in fact. Why talk to them when you can talk -- if so inclined -- to the FBI directly?

The above article reminds me of the time I met "Colonel" John Parsons of Tri-States Militia in Kansas City, Missouri the second weekend of Nov. 1995. There was a Texas militia general there as well. I listened to Parsons rant and rave for about 45 minutes concerning all manner of stupidity -- including how the FBI was a legitimate Constitutional agency and how the agents were good people. Parson's biggest rant was that he didn't get enough media coverage for turning in Willie Ray Lampley to the FBI!

While the friend who had gotten me up there protested that while Crazy Willie was going to bomb buildings owned by such as the Southern Povertypimps and Liars Center, abortion mills and government buildings, a respect for human life, no matter how degraded, impelled informing the government about such conduct. I responded that no such thing had been proven and how would he like it if somebody made up a story about him and turned him into the police?

Five months later Parsons admitted that he had been a paid government stooge some time before I met him. I was not surprised when I heard the news. As far as I was concerned, Parsons and the FBI deserved one another.

Until the Apache Indians had been split apart socially to where being an Indian policemen or Army scout was acceptable social behavior, the Army and the Bureau of Indian Affairs were not able to find, much less catch and send to a reservation the Apache tribe as a whole.

If anyone thinks that such conduct as admittedly displayed by the NCCM in working with government agents is acceptable, then please send me your name, militia organization, and police agency you work for so everyone can know not to speak anything of consequence before you in the future. Thank you.



The Price for Stupidity

Militia Watch: How far should government's anti-terrorism efforts go?

12.29 p.m. EDT (1629 GMT) May 31, 1997

PHOENIX (AP) -- They'd come to hate him soon enough. But for six
months last year, members of the Viper Team regarded the
newcomer they called "Doc'' as a welcome addition to their
secretive militia group.
   Tattooed, quietly confident and well-versed in weaponry, Doc so
impressed his fellow Vipers that they made him their chief of
security just six weeks after he joined.
   He helped organize camp-outs in the desert, where Vipers fired
machine guns and blew up cactuses with homemade bombs. During
Viper meetings, Doc could be counted on to steer rambling
discussions back to business, suggesting that the group set goals,
form a plan or even start a second team.
   Last July, when federal officials rounded up the Vipers on weapons
and explosives charges, Doc was there, too -- but not in handcuffs.
The model militiaman was actually an infiltrator of the sort he had
vowed to kill, an undercover agent in the government's campaign to
prevent domestic terrorism.
   Since the Oklahoma City bombing in April 1995, the federal
government has stepped up surveillance of right-wing militia and
patriot groups that share the anti-government leanings attributed to
Timothy McVeigh.
   The goal is to uncover the next terrorist plot before it is carried out.
But now some say that such efforts, however nobly intended, have
gone too far.
   While the militia set's fiery rhetoric and penchant for guns is a
frightening combination for many Americans, neither wild speech
nor gun ownership is illegal, and civil libertarians worry that the
government is targeting fringe groups not for what they do but for
what they say.
   Defense attorneys claim the militia threat is overblown, saying their
clients are just big talkers until pushed into committing crimes by
undercover "agent provocateurs'' sent by the government.
   Of course, defense attorneys are paid to say that, but judges and
juries appear to be finding at least some merit in such arguments.
In four major raids on militias during the past year -- in Georgia,
Washington, West Virginia and Arizona -- the government's initial
portrayals of terrorist cabals plotting violent rebellion have been
clouded later in court by mistrials, mixed verdicts and skeptical
   Three members of the 112th Georgia Militia were indicted in May
1996 on charges that they conspired to stockpile pipe bombs and
assassinate federal officials "starting at the highest level." But
authorities later conceded there were no concrete assassination
plans, and the militia members claimed entrapment by an informant
who boasted of being a "master chef'' in bomb-making.
   A jury last November convicted the three of possessing pipe bombs
and conspiring to use them in a violent crime. But they were
acquitted on the charge pointing most directly to terrorism:
conspiracy to use explosives against federal employees or property.
   A Seattle jury was similarly torn in the February trial of Washington
State Militia founder John Pitner and six others. They were accused
of plotting to make pipe bombs in a conspiracy to harm federal
agents and foil the invasion of United Nations troops they allegedly
expected across the Canadian border.
   At trial, however, a key informant was portrayed by the defense as
convicted bad-check artist who lied to his FBI handlers. The jury
convicted four defendants on charges of possessing illegal weapons,
but deadlocked on the conspiracy charge against all seven. A retrial
is set for this summer.
   In West Virginia, Mountaineer Militia leader Floyd Ray Looker and
six others were arrested in October after an undercover FBI agent
claiming to represent a Mideastern terrorist group gave Looker
$50,000 for photographed blueprints of an FBI fingerprint center in
Clarksburg, W.Va.
   One of the federal charges Looker will face at trial in August
invokes a 1994 anti-terrorism law that prohibits providing "material
support" to terrorists. But a federal magistrate expressed
reservations about the way prosecutors are using the previously
untested law, and defense attorneys already are preparing for an
appeal. They argue the statute is so broad that someone could be
charged for giving a would-be terrorist a newspaper photo of the
U.S. Capitol.
   In Phoenix, federal officials held a triumphant news conference
after the Vipers were arrested to announce they'd foiled a plot to
blow up government buildings. While investigators seized truckloads
of guns and bomb-making ingredients from the Vipers' suburban
homes, President Clinton thanked federal agents who had averted
"a terrible terrorist attack.''
   The actual indictment, however, cited the Vipers on lesser
conspiracy, weapons and explosives charges. Investigators
conceded the group neither posed an imminent threat nor had a
specific plot, and a federal judge released half the Vipers on bail,
saying they posed no danger to society.
    Ten Viper Team members, offering guilty pleas in hopes of
leniency, were sentenced in March to prison terms ranging from
one to nine years. Two others, Charles Knight and Christopher
Floyd, chose to fight the single charge facing them: conspiracy to
manufacture and possess illegal explosives.
    Knight's trial, scheduled to resume Tuesday following a two-month
delay, offers a rare glimpse into the clandestine world of undercover
operations, where government agents walk a fine line between
revealing criminal activity and encouraging it.
    The man the Vipers knew as Doc was actually John Schultz, a state
game warden working under the direction of the federal Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
    Schultz took the Viper Team oath in December 1995 and quickly
became a respected team member -- all the while secretly
recording or videotaping nearly every meeting.
   Transcripts of those tapes show he was more than a passive
observer.  In a group that could spend most of an evening debating
the design and cost of Viper Team patches, he repeatedly steered
members into discussions that could be used to bolster conspiracy
charges against them.
   "Did anybody ever sit down and just come up with a plan on where
you were when you started, where you want to be at a certain point
in time?" Schultz asked at one meeting. "Is there a big picture that's
been formulated at all?''
   Others said there was no plan.
   "Maybe we ought to do that,'' he said.
   Another time, he pressed for details about crimes the Vipers might
commit following a national disaster of the sort they feared -- a
U.N. invasion, perhaps, or widespread race riots.
   "You're talking (about stealing) food, gasoline, you're talking a
crime, yes?'' he said. "Why not a bank? Why draw a line?''
   Schultz's supervisor, ATF agent Steve Ott, has testified that Schultz
brought up the bank-robbery idea only "to ascertain what their
mind-set was.''



The Manchurian Oswald's Left Buttock

A person aware of my reporting on the Manchurian Oswald's 
Right Buttock -- a purported Phineas Priesthood CI counter-conspiracy 
to negate the left chip in the left buttock through the use of a right 
chip in the right buttock -- sent me the following message:


Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 16:44:43 -0400 (EDT)
To: (martinlindstedt)
Subject: Fwd: McVeigh

Forwarded message:
Subj:    McVeigh
Date:    97-05-21 15:11:55 EDT

The article below was sent to me by an associate of the author.  Note the
paragraph which refers to "Calspan Advanced Technology Center in Buffalo, New
York (Calspan ATC)" where Timothy McVeigh worked.  This company, according to
the article, is engaged in microscopic electronic engineering.  Calspan was
originally founded in 1946 as "Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory," the facility
which housed The Fund for the Study of Human Ecology," a CIA financing
conduit for mind control experiments headed by SIDNEY GOTTLIEB.  

The book, "The Search for the Manchurian Candidate," by John Marks, details
Gottlieb's  mind control experiments (and bacteriological experiments) at
this very same facility.  Gottlieb was the director of the MK-Ultra program
for the CIA.  (MK-Ultra = Manchurian Candidate).   

Isn't it interesting that Timothy McVeigh worked at this facility (with a
micro-chip in his hip)???  See story below:

> >To:
> >From:
> >Subject:Dave Hoffman, McVeigh Story
> >
> >
> >                 Was Timothy McVeigh
> >        an unwitting mind-
> >        controlled patsy?
> >
> >        McVeigh: The Manchurian Candidate
> >
> >        by David Hoffman
> >        Special to ParaScope
> >
> >
> >        [Editor's Note: The following is a special preview of David
> >        Hoffman's forthcoming book The Oklahoma City Bombing and
> >        the Politics of Terror, due out from Feral House later this
> >        year. Hoffman is the publisher of the Haight Ashbury Free
> >        Press.]
> >
> >        on with the Army National Guard in Buffalo, where he landed
> >        a job as a security guard with Burns International
> >        Security. McVeigh was assigned to the night shift, guarding
> >        the grounds of Calspan Research, a defense contractor that
> >        conducts classified research in advanced aerospace rocketry
> >        and electronic warfare.
> >
> >        In a manner mirroring his conduct in the service, McVeigh
> >        became the consummate security guard. Calspan spokesman Al
> >        Salandra told reporters that McVeigh was "a model
> >        employee." Yet according to media accounts, McVeigh had
> >        lost his confidence, and his cool.
> >
> >        "Timmy was a good guard," said former Burns supervisor
> >        Linda Haner-Mele. He was "always there prompt, clean and
> >        neat. His only quirk," according to Mele, "was that he
> >        couldn't deal with people. If someone didn't cooperate with
> >        him, he would start yelling at them, become verbally
> >        aggressive. He could be set off easily."
> >
> >        According to an article in the Washington Post, co-workers
> >        at a Niagara Falls convention center where he was assigned
> >        described him as "emotionally spent, veering from passivity
> >        to volcanic anger." An old friend said he looked "like
> >        things were really weighing on him."
> >
> >        "Timmy just wasn't the type of person who could initiate
> >        action," said Lynda Haner-Mele formerly of Burns Security,
> >        where McVeigh worked in early 1992. "He was very good if
> >        you said, 'Tim watch this door -- don't let anyone
> >        through.' The Tim I knew couldn't have masterminded
> >        something like this and carried it out himself. It would
> >        have had to have been someone who said: 'Tim, this is what
> >        you do. You drive the truck...'"
> >
> >        Mele's account directly contradicts the testimony of
> >        Sergeant Chris Barner and former Private Ray Jimboy, both
> >        of whom served with McVeigh at Fort Riley, and claimed that
> >        McVeigh was a natural leader. This also contradicts
> >        McVeigh's service record, which rated him "among the best"
> >        in leadership potential and an "inspiration to young
> >        soldiers." "He had a lot of leadership ability inside
> >        himself," said Barner. "He had a lot of self confidence."
> >
> >        Apparently, "Something happened to Tim McVeigh between the
> >        time he left the Army and now," said Captain Terry Guild.
> >
> >        "He didn't really carry himself like he came out of the
> >        military," said Mele. "He didn't stand tall with his
> >        shoulders back. He kind of slumped over." She recalled him
> >        as silent, expressionless, with lightless eyes, but subject
> >        to explosive fits of temper. "That guy didn't have an
> >        expression 99 percent of the time," added Mele. "He was
> >        cold."
> >
> >        Colonel David Hackworth, an Army veteran who interviewed
> >        McVeigh for Newsweek, concluded that McVeigh was suffering
> >        from a "postwar hangover." "I've seen countless veterans,
> >        including myself, stumble home after the high-noon
> >        excitement of the killing fields, missing their battle
> >        buddies and the unique dangers and sense of purpose," wrote
> >        Hackworth in the July 3rd edition of Newsweek. "Many lose
> >        themselves forever."
> >
> >        Although such symptoms may be seen as a delayed reaction
> >        syndrome resulting from the stress of battle, they are also
> >        common symptoms of mind control.
> >
> >        While visiting friends in Decker, Michigan, McVeigh
> >        complained that the Army had implanted him with a
> >        microchip, a miniature subcutaneous transponder, so that
> >        they could keep track of him. He complained that it left an
> >        unexplained scar on his buttocks and was painful to sit on.
> >
> >        -----------------------------------
> >
> >        "Among the many telemetry instruments being used today, are
> >
> >        miniature radio transmitters that can be swallowed, carried
> >
> >        externally, or surgically implanted.... They permit the
> >        simultaneous study of behavior and physiological
> >        functioning."
> >
> >        --Dr. Stuart Mackay, Bio-Medical Telemetry (textbook), 1968
> >
> >        -----------------------------------
> >
> >        To the public, unfamiliar with the bewildering lexicon of
> >        government mind control research, such a claim may appear
> >        as the obvious rantings of a paranoiac. But is it?
> >
> >        Miniaturized telemetrics have been part of an ongoing
> >        project by the military and the various intelligence
> >        agencies to test the effectiveness of tracking soldiers on
> >        the battlefield. The miniature implantable telemetric
> >        device was declassified long ago. As far back as 1968, Dr.
> >        Stuart Mackay, in his textbook entitled Bio-Medical
> >        Telemetry, reported, "Among the many telemetry instruments
> >        being used today, are miniature radio transmitters that can
> >        be swallowed, carried externally, or surgically implanted
> >        in man or animal. They permit the simultaneous study of
> >        behavior and physiological functioning."
> >
> >        It is interesting to note that McVeigh claimed that the
> >        Army implanted him with a microchip. According to Dr. Carl
> >        Sanders, the developer of the Intelligence Manned Interface
> >        (IMI) biochip, "We used this with military personnel in the
> >        Iraq War where they were actually tracked using this
> >        particular type of device."
> >
> >        It is also interesting to note that the Calspan Advanced
> >        Technology Center in Buffalo, NY (Calspan ATC), where
> >        McVeigh worked, is engaged in microscopic electronic
> >        engineering of the kind applicable to telemetrics. Calspan
> >        was founded in 1946 as Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory,
> >        which included the "Fund for the Study of Human Ecology," a
> >        CIA financing conduit for mind control experiments by
> >        emigre Nazi scientists and others under the direction of
> >        CIA doctors Sidney Gottlieb, Ewen Cameron, and Louis Jolyn
> >        West.
> >
> >        According to mind control researcher Alex Constantine,
> >        "Calspan places much research emphasis on bioengineering
> >        and artificial intelligence (Calspan pioneered in the field
> >        in the 1950s)." In his article, "The Good Soldier,"
> >        Constantine states:
> >
> >        "Human tracking and monitoring technology are well within
> >        Calspan's sphere of pursuits. The company is instrumental
> >        in REDCAP, an Air Force electronic warfare system that
> >        winds through every Department of Defense facility in the
> >        country. A Pentagon release explains that REDCAP "is used
> >        to evaluate the effectiveness of electronic-combat
> >        hardware, techniques, tactics and concepts." The system
> >        "includes closed-loop radar and data links at RF manned
> >        data fusion and weapons control posts." One Patriot
> >        computer news board reported that a disembodied, rumbling,
> >        low-frequency hum had been heard across the country the
> >        week of the bombing. Past hums in Taos, New Mexico, Eugene
> >        and Medford, Oregon, Timmons, Ontario and Bristol, England
> >        were most definitely (despite specious official denials)
> >        attuned to the brain's auditory pathways.
> >
> >        "The Air Force is among Calspan's leading clients, and
> >        Eglin AFB has farmed key personnel to the company. The
> >        grating irony -- recalling McVeigh's contention he'd been
> >        implanted with a telemetry chip -- is that the
> >        Instrumentation Technology Branch of Eglin Air Force Base
> >        is currently engaged in the tracking of mammals with
> >        subminiature telemetry devices. According to an Air Force
> >        press release, the biotelemetry chip transmits on the upper
> >        S-band (2318 to 2398 MHz), with up to 120 digital
> >        channels."
> >
> >        There is nothing secret about the biotelemetry chip. Ads
> >        for commercial versions of the device have appeared in
> >        national publications. Time magazine ran an ad for an
> >        implantable pet transponder in its June 26, 1995 issue --
> >        ironically enough -- opposite an article about a militia
> >        leader who was warning about the coming New World Order.
> >        While monitoring animals has been an unclassified
> >        scientific pursuit for decades, the monitoring of humans
> >        has been a highly classified project which is but a subset
> >        of the Pentagon's "nonlethal" arsenal. As Constantine
> >        notes, "the dystopian implications were explored by Defense
> >        News for March 20, 1995:
> >
> >        "Naval Research Lab Attempts To Meld Neurons And Chips:
> >        Studies May Produce Army of 'Zombies.'
> >
> >        "Future battles could be waged with genetically engineered
> >        organisms, such as rodents, whose minds are controlled by
> >        computer chips engineered with living brain cells.... The
> >        research, called Hippo-campal Neuron Patterning, grows live
> >        neurons on computer chips. 'This technology that alters
> >        neurons could potentially be used on people to create
> >        zombie armies,' Lawrence Korb, a senior fellow at the
> >        Brookings Institution, said."
> >
> >        "It's conceivable," according to Constantine, "given the
> >        current state of the electronic mind control art, a
> >        biocybernetic Oz over the black budget rainbow, that
> >        McVeigh had been drawn into an experimental project, that
> >        the device was the real McCoy."
> >
> >        What this defense department newsletter may have been
> >        discussing is the successor to the "Stimoceiver," developed
> >        in the late 1950s by Dr. Joseph Delgado and funded by the
> >        CIA and the Office of Naval Research. The stimoceiver is a
> >        tiny transponder, implanted in the head of a control
> >        subject, which can then be used to modify emotions and
> >        control behavior. According to Delgado, "Radio Stimulation
> >        of different points in the amygdala and hippocampus [areas
> >        of the brain] in the four patients produced a variety of
> >        effects, including pleasant sensations, elation, deep,
> >        thoughtful concentration, odd feelings, super relaxation,
> >        colored visions, and other responses."
> >
> >        According to Delgado, "One of the possibilities with brain
> >        transmitters is to influence people so that they conform
> >        with the political system. Autonomic and somatic functions,
> >        individual and social behavior, emotional and mental
> >        reactions may be invoked, maintained, modified, or
> >        inhibited, both in animals and in man, by stimulation of
> >        specific cerebral structures. Physical control of many
> >        brain functions is a demonstrated fact. It is even possible
> >        to follow intentions, the development of thought and visual
> >        experiences."
> >
> >        As Constantine points out, the military has a long and
> >        sordid history of using enlisted men and unwitting
> >        civilians for its nefarious experiments, ranging from
> >        radiation, poison gas, drugs and mind control, to spraying
> >        entire U.S. cities with bacteriological viruses to test
> >        their effectiveness, as was done in San Francisco in the
> >        late 1950s. The most recent example involves the use of
> >        experimental vaccines tested on Gulf War veterans who are
> >        currently experiencing bizarre symptoms, not the least of
> >        which is death. When attorneys representing the former
> >        soldiers requested their military medical files, they
> >        discovered there was no record of the vaccines ever being
> >        administered.
> >
> >        Timothy McVeigh may have unknowningly been an Army/CIA
> >        guinea pig involved in a classified telemetric/mind-control
> >        project -- a "Manchurian Candidate."
> >
> >         [ImTwisted Justice at the Denver Dog & Pony Show
> >         [ImMore on the Oklahoma City Bombing
> >         [ImMore Than One Bomb: Gen. Partin's OKC Bomb Report
> >         [ImWhat do you think? Tell us in the message boards!
> >
> >                              [Navigation Bar]



Unregenerate Commentary Concerning The Manchurian Oswald's Show Trial

It is early Monday morning and I would like to make my predictions now, before the jurors come in and prove/disprove my predictions on what will be known as the show trial of the century -- the Dred Scott v Sanford decision which historians will later say was the harbinger of a Great Civil War which will make the unpleasantness of 1860-1865 look like the playground scuffling of two kindergarten bullies.

My prediction: That the jurors will probably convene on this June 2d or 3rd, 1997 and make the momentous decision to find Timothy McVeigh guilty of being the sole perpetrator of the Oklahoma City bombing. Their decision will destroy the last vestiges of any faith that people have in the 'justice system' [sic], as all, regardless of which side they presently are on, will instinctively know that there is no justice to be found in the government court system and that a recourse to arms is inevitable.

. . .

The reason that this matter has taken so long is because the decision is so momentous: The jurors will be pronouncing a death sentence upon both Timothy McVeigh and the social order which made him inevitable. The jurors, in the historical eye of the tiger, did not want to be accused of lightly performing their accounted duties.

For all the sanctimonious eunuchoid whimperings of the government and media whores concerning "Can Timothy McVeigh Get a Fair Trial?" anyone who has a bit of sense and/or has ever been through the judicial wringer knows the answer to that. OF COURSE NOT.

This is a government trial before a government judge (who probably used to be a government prosecutor before he became a government judge) using government rules of evidence before a government jury packed by government prosecutors demanding that the government jury answer government questions to determine whether the government jurors will follow their government oaths to do whatever the government tells them to do. All this to put an odor of legal sanctity to what is essentially a government justice apparatus acting as a government apparatus acts. Nobody intelligent should be fooled.

Doubtless there is a judas juror or two packed into the pile. The rest are probably some of the offal that in any well-run monarchy or military dictatorship would never rise above being mere hewers of wood and drawers of water. Getting on the jury is the same as winning the lottery, because there will assuredly be book deals and movie-of-the-week offers enough to try filling the Amerikan rabbletariates' bottomless appetite for blood and carcasses.

This matter will not be settled here and forever, regardless of what the government or media says. Everyone, even the modern-day Sons of Belial, will be timid, because questions of government involvement in this matter will never be settled, not even if justice was done and all those guilty co-conspirators, along with their families, are placed in government towers and those towers set afire. Even Neptune's great ocean cannot wash away this blood trail.

. . .

Every civilization on the wane puts its great men on trial. The Jews railroaded Jesus, and less than 40 years later they were enslaved and scattered without a homeland. The Greeks condemned Socrates, a guilty scapegoat, after they had lost their empire in the Peloppennisian war -- which they had also lost. And our corrupt government will crucify a similar noble soul, the publicly unyielding Timothy McVeigh, who dared give back a tithe of a tithe of red justice. Even if McVeigh is quickly put to death at the soonest available opportunity, still, he will live forever as a man who put into practice that which he believed.

Of course, the show trial had its moments. Like when the gubbnmint judge threw out any evidence as "irrelevant" when the defense forgot their place and dared to make quivering noises as to a wider conspiracy. Carol Howe was not allowed to tell what she knew about the BATF knowing that federal buildings in either Tulsa or Oklahoma City would be targeted for destruction on April 19, 1995. Ms. Howe was a paid government informant sent to keep her masters knowing what the loud-mouthed and lunatic Neo-/Non-Neo Nazi fringe elements were up to. Now she is under indictment on some trumped-up nonsense so that she can't squeal aloud what she knows about government involvement.

Another great moment was dulled when somebody said that McVeigh considered himself a suicide warrior out to get the gubbnmint. In vain I wondered when McVeigh would carry through on that promise, get up on the stand, and admit to bombing the government building as part of large plot with government agents in an effort to destroy the right-wing element and as an excuse to impose martial law. I was wondering how McVeigh would get such an admission out, and how it could be stopped. If McVeigh really was a "suicide warrior" out to destroy the government, all he had to do was to tell the truth.

Of course he still can, after the jury finds him guilty. During allocution, before sentencing, when McVeigh is asked if he has anything to say before the kkkourt pronounces sentence, all McVeigh has to do is say: "The jury has indeed rightfully found me guilty. However, I did not do this on my own. I was informed that the United States government would back me up and approved of this activity I performed. Also, as a combatant waging a civil war of national liberation, under the Geneva Convention I am entitled to be treated as a Prisoner of War."

Thus McVeigh would both destroy the evil empire and save himself -- if he has a mind to do so. Paradoxically, before McVeigh was assigned a government lawyer teo years ago, he claimed exactly this defense, which was a better one by far than any these overblown public pretenders have ever advanced.

And this 'defense' is exactly what the government fears. Timothy McVeigh can utterly destroy them and the basis for their rule if he opens his mouth and tells the truth. But who knows what forms of mind control the government has performed over the past two years on the previously defiant McVeigh? Probably no different in its permutations than Bukharin saying he was a British counter-revolutionary during one of Stalin's show trials in the thirties. Or, even more apt, Hitler using a lone Dutch half-wit's supposed setting of a Reichstag Fire to blame the Jews and Communists, and set the stage for enabling legislation to declare himself Reichfuhrer and set up a military dictatorship of the baser elements of society. Does anyone in their right mind really think that a mattoid self-righteous moral degenerate like Klinton and her husband will hesitate to do exactly the same thing?

. . .

When it comes down to it, there is absolutely nothing which can stay a remorseless justice. Sooner or later, we shall all get what we deserve. Supposedly we are "the gubbnmint" and we have let evil deeds and evil doers shelter under our lumpy bosums. Seventy-one percent of us (according to some indubitably lying poll) want Timothy McVeigh executed, at once, although how that is going to motivate McVeigh to run his mouth selectively has yet to be determined. Today we will hear the justification for running a lynch mobocracy. Tomorrow we may well receive a message from a different terrorist group: "Pile up the heads of your lawyers, politicians, police and their families on every courthouse lawn or we shall unleash biological warfare on a third American metropolis. Just so you know we aren't fooling, we have already toxified Washington D.C. and New York City. Don't thank us now."

We are not the first civilization on this earth which lost its way and collapsed due to self-engendered barbarians running wild at the top, bottom, and middle elements of the social order. We may well be the last such civilization. I sometimes idly wonder who or what archeologist will dig up our bones or uncover our ruins.



Return Fire -- Letters to the Editor

Continuing the Quarrel with Mr. Hoffman

To: Michael Hoffman II (
From: Martin Lindstedt (
Subject: Re: Cannot Win the Lottery Unless You Buy a Ticket

At 08:20 AM 5/17/97 -0800, you wrote:
>Dear Mr. Lindstedt
>In terms of your rejoinder to my critique, as I stated before, you
>failed to address my main points:

   I disagree. I did address all your points. But if you want to 
raise them again, I shall be exacting in the details this time.

>1. My analysis of your approval for the "Aryan Republican" government
>front group at a time when one of its members, Mr. Michael Brescia, is
>being sued by relatives of victims of the O.K. City bombing as "John 
>Doe II;" and moreover, when several of its other members are either
>government snitches and provocateurs (Aryan Nations East Coast head 
>Mark Thomas) or transvestite Manchurian candidates (Peter Langan) who 
>has links to the U.S. Secret Service. 

   I did of course indeed address this matter by agreeing with you 
in the facts 100 percent.  The federal government sponsored all of 
these organizations, and are thus ultimately responsible for the OKC 
deaths and the bank robberies.

   We agree on the facts.  We have different analyses arising from 
the same facts, however.  You say you are a revisionist historian. 
OK. Your job is to either add to or take away from the propaganda 
tarnishing the factual record from times past.
   I however, am a propagandist on behalf of armed rebellion for 
the future. So as a propagandist, let me show you how you and the 
rest of the patriot movement's 'common knowledge' is losing us the 
present war.
    You take the easy way out and say how what happened at OKC was 
awful and you want all those responsible punished. Hang McVeigh and 
all those behind him!
   This of course concedes too much to the opposing propagandists. 
You are on the defensive and people expect you to say no less.

   Far better to say:
     1. That OKC was a legitimate act of civil warfare. It was indeed 
a government building and thus fair game for retaliation in kind for 
Waco.  If you want the violence to end, Amerikan people, then it is 
up to you to first try, then execute every government employee or 
public official responsible for Waco and Ruby Ridge before the matter 
at OKC comes up. If the American people are the basis of government, 
then they are responsible for the conduct of their government 
officials. If they choose to disclaim such responsibility, then they
choose to become combatants in this civil war.
     2. That even if McVeigh is found partly responsible for the 
bombing at OKC, he is a prisoner of war under the Geneva Convention, 
of which the U.S. is a signatory.  Execution of POWs is an act which 
signifies total warfare.
    3. That anyone with a brain in his head knows that OKC was not a 
ANFO explosion.  That there was doubtless complicity of U.S. government 
agencies, and that this matter is to be brought out and exposed, 
letting the chips fall where they may. 
   Personally, I have no problem with government agencies blowing up 
a lot of government buildings.  The problem I have is with foolish 
patriots who have been indoctrinated so badly they can no longer think 
straight -- saying some politically correct nonsense that is meant to 
be defensive in nature, but which denotes the fact that they cannot 
be trusted to fight until they are cornered.

>2. Mark Thomas was instrumental in instigating the murder of white
>parents in Pennsylvania by their crazed skinhead children. Your approval
>in your essay for hatred of one's parents and contempt for the elderly
>does not breed a restoration of America but an Orwellian Animal Farm
>along lines of Brave New World Order sociology.
   In my reply of May 13, 1997 I said:
       "Why cry over parental idiots who raised a pair of dangerous 
        criminals who put them to death?"

   First of all, I don't know as a fact whether "Mark Thomas was 
instrumental in instigating the murder of white"/black/green 
"parents in Pennsylvania"/Spotsylvania/Timbucktoo "by their crazed 
skinhead"/Bolshevik/Social Democrat "children."
   I am not a federal prosecutor.  I have no reason to speculate on 
Mr. Thomas's innocence or guilt in this matter.  Knowing how 
government prosecutors lie as a result of a few legal skirmishes of
my own, I tend myself to tend to believe in the innocence of the 
accused far more than others who profess such a civic virtue. So 
much police and prosecutor misconduct nowadays that "presumption 
of innocence" should hold up no matter how much probably manufactured 
evidence is brought up at trial.

   Even if true, I can understand why the prosecutor is saying 
Mr. Thomas did something or another. Why exactly are you repeating 
this?  What purpose does it serve?

      I wasn't thinking of Mr. Thomas so much as I was thinking of 
the Menendez brothers who killed their parents.  As I look at it, 
what changes a set of kids so much that they want to kill their
own biological parents so much that they actually do it?  Are the 
parents altogether blameless in breeding, then creating their own 
assassins? I do not think so.  Perhaps you think such conduct 
originated in a vaccuum?

   As far as the older generations go, I think that future competent 
historians will indeed write how those justly despised generations 
were given freedom and all manner of material things and they 
consumed and wasted as much of both as they could upon themselves, 
leaving nothing but slavery, despair, want and warfare for their 
children and grandchildren unto the 7th generation. 
   I'll be honest and admit that that I despise the WWII generation, 
but not as much as I despise the Silent Generation, and them not as 
much as I despise the Baby Boom Generation.  I feel somewhat sorry 
for the GenXers and despair for the children because of the world we
left them.
   I have read Animal Farm and Brave New World. I deny that I endorse 
such lines of sociology. Was it really necessary for you to impute to 
me such motivation?

>3. Patrick J. Buchanan--had he not endorsed Bob Dole--had an opportunity
>to lead a mass movement of Americans--which the establishment fears
>most--against the New World Order. I do not see how the potential for
>that movement could have vanished in merely one year. It is a fallacy to
>claim that those who do not advocate armed revolution at this time are
>either faint-hearted or blind.

   I have been involved in quite a bit of political activity in the state
of Missouri.  It was the state of Missouri which gave Patrick Buchanan 
the biggest set of delegates that he ever got. I know personally 2 out 
of nine congressional district heads who worked hard for Pat Buchanan. 
I was in touch with others via e-mail from Texas and Pennsylvania. 
Based upon what I saw, the 'potential for that movement' vanished one 
night in San Diego.  An e-mail from the Texas delegation compared 
Patrick Buchanan to Neville Chamberlin "waving a piece of paper and 
proclaiming 'peace in our time'" to quote the title of the e-mail. 
One of the Missouri congressional chairs was screaming and yelling 
about it for several weeks. The other one quietly said that he would 
never again work for Pat Buchanan.  They both went USTP and voted 
for Howard Phillips in the general election.
   I got two federal election lawsuits going right now. Why don't 
you go look at the Timmons v. New Party of Minnesota U.S. Supreme 
Court decision of April 28, 1997?  Then perhaps you might understand 
that there is no way for minor third parties or breakaway elements 
of the major parties to form political coalitions. Thus, for all 
practical purposes there is no political solution possible. The 
Dems and Reps will ride the system into the ground before they 
give up power.

   I do not advocate armed revolution "right now."  The government 
is much too strong -- right now.  The vast majority of Americans 
want the goodies to keep on flowing until the system collapses. 
I certainly do not want to be blamed for causing this "Disneyland 
for Dummies" (a Kurt Saxon phrase) to collapse as it eventually 
will. 50 million on Social Security, 25 million on food stamps, 
government workers on pensions, a real national debt around 40 
trillion.  It is unnecessary to talk about "overthrowing" a government 
which is working so hard and efficiently on its own collapse.
   Secondly, no revolutionist knows exactly what spark will ignite 
the powderkeg. It could be anything, and a wise revolutionist doesn't
commit limited forces until destruction of the ancien regime is a 
sure thing. In its death throes, the regime can still pack 
a substantial wallop. No need to get kicked unnecessarily.

  However, there has to be the willingness to do whatever is 
necessary in order to be a successful revolutionary. Hence the 
title of this e-mail.   A revolutionist must know what he wants, 
must think clearly, be prepared to take calculated risks, and have 
a ruthless, cold-blooded nature. 

   I do not know if I have what it takes to be a successful 
revolutionist. Time will tell. However, I do know I am not 
going to hold my breath or stand on one foot waiting for you 
to figure out when it is safe to get off the fence, Mr. Hoffman.

>If you are in error in the preceding, then your credibility can be
>maintained by retracting those errors. If you insist on upholding your
>version of events, I do not see how you can maintain your credibility. I
>wish to enjoy good relations with everyone and engage in "dialog" and so
>forth but the basis for that must be the truth and fidelity to the
>documentary record, as in any scientific or historical discipline.

   As one who puts out a lot of calculated documentary records 
and having seen what goes on in transcribing court records, I do 
not have too much faith as to the accuracy of paper records. Any 
scientific or historical discipline which insists on relying on 
what is written down on pieces of paper, without independent thought
involved, is undertaking a discipline as sterile as the migration 
of lemmings in formation over the cliff into the sea.

   I admit that I come to different conclusions given the same set 
of facts than you and probably 95% of the population, Mr. Hoffman.
Still, I do not believe I have any credibility problem whatsoever. 
Nobody has ever accused me of hiding what I really think on
any subject whatsoever. 

>To endorse the Aryan Republican Army to a new audience of neophyte
>affiliates of the patriot movement at a time when the "ARA" is so
>egregiously linked to the hidden hand of the U.S. government, is a
>significant failure of judgment, to put it charitably.

   No need to be charitable.  Knowing how to rob a bank skillfully
and thoroughly with minimal bloodshed and how to stage a clean getaway 
might turn out to be a useful skill someday. Unlike the misfits of ARA, 
which was a government operation, it is best to not rely on government 
   I just don't care for banks all that much. It's a good thing that 
I only have forty bucks in one of them banks so I can get all my 
pauper's lawsuits notorized for free. Plus if the IRS and Mo. Dept.
of Revenue decide to move a tax case against me out of the limbo 
they placed it in after some initial legal skirmishing, then the 
40 bucks will act as a early warning device.
   I have a $5 checking account in another bank which I maintain 
solely for the reason that it costs them money to maintain it, 
and they dare not close it out unilaterally.

>It is long past the time for us to recognize and penentrate government
>fronts and government-fomented snares. We have already made enough
>blunders to last us a lifetime. There is no substitute for good judgment
>in this holy war of ours. If we are to win there can be no shades of
>gray concerning demonstrable error. Let's recognize it, repudiate it and
>move on. The person who does so exhibits leadership qualities in spite
>of his errors. The person who refuses to do so in order to defend
>personal turf or ego, is simply not worthy to lead. These are iron laws
>of real politik and military science. 

   Sounds good to me.  Remember, I'm the guy who is all for "leaderless 
resistance" -- forming cells of kin and long-term friends. I don't 
think much of trying to penetrate gubbnmint fronts or snares because 
that is how Bob Starr and friends got set up and put in jail.
   Since perhaps Mr. Hoffman is talking about me, maybe, let me again 
deny being a gubbnmint spy. Of course if I am a gubbnmint spy, I 
would deny it anyway. So we are back again to square one.
   Tell you what.  Mr. Hoffman won't be extended an invitation to 
join my cell and neither will any of you other suspicious people. 
Just for that, you will have to form your own local resistance cells,
like you ought to have done already, you suspicious people you.

   I am beginning to get the notion that Mr. Hoffman and I are not on
the same wavelength at all.  Mr. Hoffman is beginning to sound like 
all them gubbnmint lawyers wanting to dismiss one of my Title 42 
civil rights lawsuits for 'failure to state a cause of action' when 
I have indeed stated how, when, or where I got falsely arrested for 
some misdeameanor of saying something mean designed to humiliate 
some police or gubbnmint apparatchik. I don't know whether this 
density is intentional or inherent. Does it matter?

   I said I'd pull in my horns, Mr. Hoffman. When I said that, I 
meant I wouldn't charge. I didn't say anything about pulling my 
horns in so far that if you insist on running up and hitting 
my horns with your chest that you wouldn't get stuck a little.

   Do we really need to fight over this matter anymore?
   I'll stop if you will.

Sincerely yours,

Martin Lindstedt,
Editor & Publisher, Modern Militiaman's Internet Gazette  

>Yours sincerely,
>Michael A. Hoffman II
>News Bureau, Archives & Bookstore at:



Perhaps There Is Really Nothing to Argue About

To: Michael Hoffman II (
From: Martin Lindstedt (
Subject: Re: Cannot Win the Lottery Unless You Buy a Ticket

At 09:15 PM 5/21/97 -0800, you wrote:
>Dear Mr. Lindstedt
>Thank you for your latest letter. I will let your statements stand in
>the main; I don't think they require a great deal of commentary. 


>You believe that all political action is dead etc. We have just elected
>3 patriot commissioners in Kootenai and Bonner counties Idaho. Helen
>Chenoweth was re-elected. We are virtually shutting down the public
>schools for lack of public funding in N. Idaho.

   In localized areas where you are strong, yes, there is no need 
to abandon political action.  This does not negate the realization 
that most areas and America as a whole are a lost cause, politically.

>I concur with you concerning the blunder (or worse) which Buchanan
>committed when he endorsed Dole, but the mass movement he was building
>did not vanish in a year's time.

   But the particular mass movement he built is eroded.  The feeling 
of despair among the masses has intensified, but as a result of 
Buchanan's "compromise" many of them have no use for political 
leadership, hence the anger cannot be easily harnessed politically.

>You wrote:
>" I do not know if I have what it takes to be a successful 
>revolutionist. Time will tell. However, I do know I am not 
>going to hold my breath or stand on one foot waiting for you 
>to figure out when it is safe to get off the fence, Mr. Hoffman."
>The implication that only "revolutionists" have taken a stand or made a
>committment and that others are fence-sitters is an imprudent remark.
>Even Pat Buchanan's life was seriously threatened during his primary
>run. The organizers of my forthcoming summer speech in Seattle are
>currently scrambling to obtain adequate security against the inevitable
>raid by the anarchist and Troskyite stooges of the establishment. Your
>suggestion that I am playing "safe" is ludicrous.

   Let's see. You live in the Northwest, and even in Seattle you 
have to expect violence from the left. Hence there are large pockets
of social rot even in your own area. And yet you insist there is 
a political solution?

   I have tried to avoid criticising your motives. I think you are
honorable. But to my view your analysis is either schidzoid or it 
refuses to recognize certain realities. 
   A desire for freedom arises from the mind. A willingness to do 
whatever is necessary to gain that freedom arises from the mind. 
It seems to me that it would be foolish to rely upon you to 
clear those mental blockages that impede purposeful action on 
your part anytime soon.

>The greatest threat to the system *at this time* are non-violent
>political organizers, revisionist historians and others who challenge
>the status quo.

   I agree, you have your part to play -- as do those of us who 
argue eventual action.

>I would certainly never endorse attacks on occupied Federal buildings on
>the basis that we are in a war. This is exactly the "logic" the system
>loves. If you can't see it, I leave you to your notions.

   A system based upon nothing more than violence fears the retalitory 
counter-violence it engenders because the counter-violence must have 
the goal of utterly destroying the system.

>I also note that while you disavow them now, in your original essay to
>which I replied, you had no criticism of the Aryan Republican Army, in
>spite of your subsequent admission that they were government-controlled.

    I never disavowed the ARA because they were never mine to avow. 
The ARA were Nazi idiots propped up by the government. What does it 
matter to any patriot if government-sponsored bank robbers rob 
government banks and the truth comes out?  Let the government destroy 
itself. Why build up another suicidal government action into a 
threat to the patriotic element? If the government wants to open 
another vein and bleed itself of further legitimacy, why should I 
care? Why should you? 


   Still rhetorically curious? No need to be. It should be obvious 
that we see the same events and same facts and yet draw radically 
different conclusions.
   I have never questioned or implied criticism of your patriotism 
or honor. I have and still do question your ability to draw and 
reach realistic conclusions concerning the world you live in today.
Since you do not understand the present, you cannot understand the 
past and thus are utterly blind concerning the future.

   But there is no need for us to quarrel. Time will tell which one 
of us was indeed correct and to what measure.

--Martin Lindstedt

>M. Hoffman II 
>News Bureau, Archives & Bookstore at:


Copyright 1997. Modern Militiaman Internet Gazette



Back to The Patriot Coalition?
Back to Patrick Henry On-Line