Liberty’s cost

Somebody on Facebook the other day was telling me that nobody needs an AR-15 or an AK-47 to fight criminals.  I say that that proposition is false because the truth of it depends on a falsehood.  It assumes that in the absence of the individual right to self defense the citizen will either be defended by a superior outside force, government in this case, or that the level of criminality will always require less force than a semi automatic rifle provides to defend against it.

If there was any doubt before Parkland, and for anybody even semi-conscious there should not have been, there is no doubt now that government will not defend We the People.  It is now clear that well beyond Broward’s Cowards, armed sheriff deputies who not only did not even attempt to confront the killer but actively prevented emergency medical teams from entering the building to save lives for 45 minutes, the entire edifice of government from local school officials to the regional FBI offices to the Department of Education in DC and to Congress itself, failed catastrophically.  Whatever else they were about it was not the protection of those kids and their teachers.  Government is not about and has no perceived, legal or actual responsibility to protect you, me or any of the “Little People.”  The only things they will protect is their own positions, perks and reputations.

Nor is it clear that semi automatic weapons are overkill for defense against crime.  Tell that to the Korean shop owners during the Rodney King riots.  The odd home invader can be handled with a 9mm pistol, but as Los Angeles witnessed during the 1992 riots, burglaries are not the only kind of crime that householders and business owners are likely to face.  Circumstances change, therefore the means of confronting those changes needs to change.  Best not to wait until the criminals are my government coming to take my rights, my liberty and my life to realize that you need a semi automatic rifle. The odd home invader I can handle with a pistol or revolver, but those other assholes need stronger medicine.


The image links to a really great article by Taxi Hack, recommended for your attention.

But fundamentally, in a free society a citizen doesn’t have to show need to exercise a right. This whole propaganda push to disarm citizens only serves to demonstrate that the time when the government at whatever level is the primary threat to my rights, liberty and life is fast approaching if it is not already here. The question is fast becoming, “Shall the American citizen allow his cherished Republic to end with a bang or a whimper?”  This is a false choice, of course, because it does not admit of other solutions.  But to answer: worst case, whimper; bad case, bang, best case, stop the devolution into a police state before it gets to that point.

Following the Parkland shooting the Socialists kicked off a really slick and well prepared, astroturfed agitprop operation aimed, as it always is, against the private citizen’s right to possess the means of effective self defense against the government; you will note that no real mention is made of handguns, that will come later.  You doubt me?

Saturday, Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL) discussed the bill Florida Gov. Rick Scott signed Friday to raise the purchase of long firearms from the age of 18 to 21, calling it “merely the beginning” of the response to last month’s Parkland, FL, shooting.

Interestingly, the focus of the Left’s attack this time shifted more heavily to the NRA.  Do you remember the nationally televised neo-Stalinist show trial set up by CNN? (Incidently, kudos to Marco Rubio and Dana Loesch for having the stones to take them on.)  Still, weeks later, the anti-NRA drumbeat goes on.  The reason is because the NRA rather generously supports politicians that share a regard, not to say reverence, for the 2nd Amendment.  What they are trying to do is delegitimize the NRA so that accepting campaign contributions from them will be political poison.

Will Americans have the moral courage to stop that with a political consensus or must we end with the awful, and false, choice, bang or whimper? Clearly those orchestrating the decline and fall of Western civilization want us to choose whimper. I’ve read history, I know where this goes. My first choice is a political solution; if and when that fails, I choose bang.


When the light comes on

You MUST watch this interview [with Donald Dix at the California Republican Conference]… GREAT story live from the CRA convention. Bear through the first minute as I figure out how to flip the view. Thoughts?

You MUST watch this… GREAT story live from the CRA convention. Bear through the first minute as I figure out how to flip the view. Thoughts?

Posted by Donald A. Dix on Saturday, March 3, 2018

Oh, yes, I have thoughts!

There is NO doubt that when people get serious about life the ONLY way to turn is Republican.  The Democratic Party has been entirely co-opted by evil, power mad fanatics from the Dark Temple of Marxism.  Ultimately their game is seizing power, holding power and exercising power, planting their boot in our faces forever.  If people like Facepalm Feinstein are any indication, they aren’t going to relinquish that power until We the People pry it from their cold, dead hands; she will be 85 in June and is running for another term as Senator.  Be sure to send her a bottle of Geritol and an expended .223 casing, well, OK, maybe other calibers would be good too.

Mr. Dix is associated with Unite Inland Empire, and is a regular on Unite IE Radio #AM590TheAnswer

“The radio show for the most important political office, that of the private citizen.”

Click on the image to check it out.

#UniteIE is a coalition of more than 20 patriotic groups in the Inland Empire of California turning isolated pockets of resistance into a united front for freedom and keeping our Republic.



Test of a new video system – do not attempt to adjust your set

Just testing out a new video channel for the RCOTF.  So here’s Blonde in the Belly of the Beast as our test subject, one of the right wing video stars on the inter tubes.  The reason for this is that the biggest video channel, YouTube, is run by Google and have been systematically shutting down anybody who’s a teensy wee bit on the right.

Hah!   Clumsy to set up but it seems to work.
Sorry, Joanie, no dancing boys.  I tried, and this is what showed up:

More experiments later.

Chipping away at liberty

Thanks to Instapundit who linked to Ace of Spades who summarized a series of tweets by David Hines.  Ace can be pretty profane, though not in the link immediately above, so let the clicker beware.

We have all once again witnessed the Left’s full court press for gun control in the wake of the Parkdale shooting.  We all know that this is a standard feature after every such tragedy, and we know that the Left’s response is instant, total and overwhelming.  These ghouls leverage these kids’ deaths to advance their gun control agenda in the same way every time; every time the push to ban AR-15 style semi automatic firearms fails.  But still the push the same thing.  Why?

Because it works.  David Hines , who writes over at The Federalist, explains the method.  From Ace of Spades HQ:

So, let me explain what’s going on with this and the NRA benefits thing: none of this came together on the fly; this is a carefully researched strategy that’s being executed now because the moment is favorable.

The way spectrum of allies analysis works is: you categorize people and groups by where they stand in relation to you and your target on whatever issue you’re working on.

Active opponents are against you, and fighting you.
Passive opponents are against you, but they’re not fighting you.
Neutrals are neither against or for you.
Passive allies are with you, but they’re not fighting for you.
Active allies are with you and are fighting for you.

The point of spectrum of allies analysis is figuring out who you can move one notch. Who can you move toward you? Who can you move away from your enemy? And how do you make sure you don’t push people away from you?

Active allies: engage them.
Passive allies: make them active.
Neutrals: inform or educate them to make them passive allies.
Passive opponents: make them move to neutral by worrying their position may cost them — BUT CAREFULLY, so they don’t become active opponents.

Active opponents: make it clear that anything they do against you will cost them, so they retreat to being passive opponents. Failing that, isolate them.

You are now thinking, “Holy crap, yeah, I’ve seen this technique used everywhere.”

So under this system, companies giving the NRA discounts are passive opponents to gun control activists. Get them to drop this discount. Make them neutral. And it’s not like NRA members really *use* discounts much, so the companies will see no strong material argument against.

But if this works: look, now you’ve got precedent.

(Turns out it cost Delta a $40 million tax break. But most companies with NRA discounts are not vulnerable like that, in large part bc *the NRA does not have comparable research to know what their weaknesses to pressure are.*)

Activists have been researching firearms companies, finding ones vulnerable to pressure or whose parent companies are. That’s where the REI thing comes in. This has not been done in a few weeks. It is careful preparation and it takes months. Groundwork was done months ago.

That’s how this stuff is done: preparation, preparation, PREPARATION, then carefully staged release, usually on a calendar, but in this case probably at the most favorable moment that presented itself.

What you’re seeing is activist pressure to turn NRA’s passive allies neutral.

The Lyft thing? Free rides to the march? Lyft didn’t just decide to do that. They were asked, and asked carefully, and the people asking knew the people they asked were passive allies needing a push.

It pays to be familiar with activists’ analytical tools (this isn’t the only one, of course). Turn them against yourself or your organization; that way, if you’re subject of an activist attack, you’ll get an idea of where the attack is likely to come from. Don’t get caught blind.

oh, and a PS. If all this stuff sounds military to you? *That’s because it is.* Don’t think of activism as bullshit the other guys do. Think of it as a non-violent army. That’s what it is. And it’s hard work. Respect it.

Respect it.  That doesn’t mean honor it or applaud it, it means be wary, be careful. They can do this sort of thing because they are very well funded so they can afford to play a long game with professional analysts and strategists guiding professional activists.  It means looking behind the curtain that the media show us.  It means understanding what is being done and devising effective counters.  It means taking what works for them and making it work for us.

Hines has an excellent article detailing this at The Federalist, Why Did It Take Two Weeks To Discover Parkland Students’ Astroturfing?  From the article, which is well worth any serious patriot’s time:

In other words, the response was professionalized. That’s not surprising, because this is what organization that gets results actually looks like. It’s not a bunch of magical kids in somebody’s living room. Nor is it surprising that the professionalization happened right off the bat. Broward County’s teacher’s union is militant, and Rep. Ted Lieu stated on Twitter that his family knows Parkland student activist David Hogg’s family, so there were plenty of opportunities for grown-ups with resources and skills to connect the kids.

What’s striking about all this isn’t the organization. If you start reading books about organizing, it’s clear how it all works. But no journalist covering the story wrote about this stuff for two weeks. Instead, every story was about the Parkland kids being magically effective.

But it’s not just a mainstream media problem. None of the righty outlets writing about Parkland picked up on the clear evidence that professional organizers were backing the Parkland kids, either. Instead, they objected to the front-and-centering of minor kids as unseemly, which does no good: Lefties aren’t going to listen, and it doesn’t educate the Right to counter.

There’s just hard work, and our press and politicos do everyone a disservice when they pretend otherwise. Here’s an example of how to turn out people, cribbed from “Organizing for Social Change,” the activist manual published by the Midwest Academy, which has been around since 1973 and has trained over 30,000 activists, some of whom went on to found their own training schools.

And that’s organizing. It’s not magical kids, and it’s not George Soros sprinkling money around. It’s hard work by people who’ve trained to do it.

In his excellent book “Hegemony How-To,” leftist organizer Jonathan Smucker wrote, “Power tends to appear magical to those who have less of it, and mechanical to those who are accustomed to wielding it instrumentally.” Or, for that matter, to even seeing it instrumentally.

For two weeks, journalists treated power as if it were magical. It’s not. It’s mechanical. The people organizing the response to Parkland, and a host of other causes, know that. So should you.

This makes the Left sound unbeatable because we simply don’t have those kinds of resources on the right.  We have other resources, and we outnumber them.  They can be beat and we will beat them – if we work hard and smart.  This will NOT happen here!


Parkland anomalies

I have some questions.  Unfortunately I can’t find where I found some of this info, sorry.

Just askin’.

Immigration and war

Or, more aptly, if the Donks have their way, immigration and surrender.  The following presentation was first published on YouTube yesterday and was flagged by the Lefties that run that outfit within 25 minutes.  These are thoughts you, we, are not allowed to have.  I think it is a logical follow up to yesterday’s post on immigration.  Click on the link to watch.

Immigration and War – Voxivercity by Vox Day

Sojourners and strangers – the USCCB attacks

This Friday the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops called on all Catholics in the US to call their Congress Critters and put in a good word for the so-called Dreamers.  We Catholics, for your humble correspondent is of that tribe, were told that it was a matter of Christian charity to

“contact their Members of Congress and urge them to:

  • Protect Dreamers from deportation

  • To provide them a path to citizenship

  • And, to avoid any damage to existing protections for families and unaccompanied minors in the process”

I was busy today, so I will call my Congress Critters tomorrow and urge them to send them on a one way trip back to wherever they came from.

Buddy, can you spare a paradigm?

Although sorely tempted I cannot in good conscience judge these men’s intentions.  I am sure that they mean well and many devoutly serve the LORD.  I can judge the effects of their actions, which is to be a useful tool for the Democratic Party’s drive to increase the pool of Democratic voters.  By doing so they have weakened their moral authority, already in decline, shown themselves to gullible, easily manipulated fools and exacerbated the political divisions in our Republic.

Worse, they foolishly abet the drive to destroy the American character by importing huge numbers of people whose culture is alien to our nation, and often inimical to it.  By their support of an ethic which has the effect of turning the US into the world’s welfare hotel they abet a form of cultural genocide, for such a policy can result in nothing other than the ultimate destruction of our nation.  Were immigration policy such that people were admitted in limited numbers with the expectation that they would assimilate and become self reliant Americans it would be a different story.

about this, which I recommend to your attention.  She comes at it from the perspective of someone who knew that it was her business to integrate herself into America, make herself an American, which is no easy task.

The Left is very good at manipulating the Scriptures to advance their ends, and it is often difficult to resist moral power in their misuse of the Bible.  But there is plenty of support for a restrictive immigration policy in the Good Book.  Professor James K. Hoffmeier has an excellent discussion of the Old Testament texts so often misused by liberals.  I here summarize some of his points.

Borders existed in Old Testament times.  The Hebrews asked to enter the land Egypt when they were beset by famine, and were permitted to sojourn in Egypt with Pharaoh’s permission.  When they were ready to leave Sinai, a land unclaimed by any nation, they asked permission to enter and transit the land of Edom they were refused permission, and did not enter.  Later, when they had conquered the various peoples in the Promised Land, they controlled their borders.

People who entered the land with permission were called ‘sojourners’.  These peoples were basically accorded the rights of native Israelites and, let it be noted, the duty to conduct themselves as Israelites while living in the land.  Sojourners were distinct from ‘Strangers’ and ‘Aliens’.  Strangers and Aliens were in the land without permission and not protected.  Because of modern linguistic imprecision these three terms have often become synonymous when they should be distinct.  Sojourners were the legal residents with work permits and green cards, Strangers and Aliens were the illegal aliens and were to be expelled from the land.

Finally, a brief word on the biblical practice of sanctuary. This had its origin in the wilderness period in Sinai after the exodus from Egypt. There, the entire community lived with the Tabernacle, Israel’s sanctuary, in the middle of the camp. Exodus 21:12-14 establishes the practice: “Anyone who strikes a person with a fatal blow is to be put to death. However, if it is not done intentionally … they are to flee to a place I will designate. But if anyone schemes and kills someone deliberately, that person is to be taken from my altar (in the sanctuary) and put to death.” Cases of involuntary manslaughter or negligent homicide (Exodus 21:33-36) were not capital offenses. So to keep the lex talionis (law of retribution), “eye for eye, tooth for tooth … life for life” (Exodus 21:23-25) from being carried out by family members, the offender was to run to the sanctuary where he would be safe and his case heard. Once the populace spread throughout their new homeland, it was impractical to have just one place of sanctuary. Consequently six cities of refuge were designated, three on either side of the Jordan River (Numbers 35:11-30; Joshua 20:1-6). Once again the conditions for sanctuary protection are plainly stated, “these six towns will be a place of refuge … so that anyone who has killed another accidentally can flee there” (Numbers 35:15 – NIV). Sanctuary, then, is explicitly a place to get a fair hearing in the case of accidental death, but for no other crime. The cities of refuge were not a place to avoid trial or punishment. American cities that use their communities to circumvent the law to help the illegal alien in the name of justice are doing a gross injustice to the letter and spirit of the biblical law.

The Bible clearly recognizes the difference between a welcome guest and an invader, and we should too.  One wishes the American Catholic Bishops could.


Update – Who the hell do you think you are?

UPDATE 2: Also went and joined the Second Amendment Foundation.

UPDATE: I told you I would and so I did. Hope I am not the only one.

Touched a nerve, did we?

This morning your humble [sic] correspondent is in high dudgeon, having just made reply to a facebook friend and former colleague who is a total leftard and who was once again advocating for gun control while inveighing against the NRA.  My comments to him:

Damned right I support the NRA, they defend my 2nd Amendment right to protect myself and my family in the best way I can.

A good friend of mine’s grandparents were killed by Richard Ramirez, the police later determined that it took three days for him to complete the murders. Needless to say it was a closed coffin funeral. Ramirez, by the way, is on your side, as he didn’t use guns in commission of his crimes.

Before I was married I did not own a gun. I figured that if I was ever confronted by such a person I would fight as best I was able and take my chances, let the chips fall where they may. After I was married I could not risk that anymore, as my defeat would mean horrors for my wife I could too well imagine.

I am a gun owner, and fully intend to remain a gun owner. What you gun grabbers are doing is stripping me and millions of others of the ability to adequately defend my life and the lives of my family and community, essentially sacrificing us on the altar of your self proclaimed moral superiority. I will not have it. Who the hell do you think you are?

There is more to be said, of course.  I have, after all, read Solzhenitsyn‘s Gulag Archipelago (recommended reading), and I can see where this is all going.  I will not have it.  Who the hell do these people think they are?

I had not planned to but today I will make a contribution to the NRA.  I will also begin planning to acquire a so-called ‘battle rifle’.  I’ve been giving the Ruger SR-762 serious consideration.  I don’t know if it is on California’s list of proscribed guns, and I really don’t care.

Kindred spirits

Most of us who lived in the West, what we called the Free World, during the cold war, were at least marginally aware that those nations and peoples under the sway of Communism suffered unbelievable agonies at the nands of those brutal regimes.  Those living in those places were more than ‘aware’ of the inhuman cruelty of life in a society ruled by terror.  What we, and they, largely missed is that these Terror States didn’t exist to much to advance the Communist ideology as to secure the supply of victims for the high priests of the theology of power, the Socialism was window dressing for the Dark Temple of Theft, Terror, Torture and Death.

Over at the Gatestone Institute Dr. Majid Rafizadeh has an important article about his experience growing up in Iran which clarifies in my mind the affinity that Marxism and Islamism have for each other in the West. He lays out the methods by which Islamism insinuates itself into societies and takes them over, and points out how that has been an ongoing project in America for decades.

  • My father’s generation in Iran lived in an environment in which the Islamist party of the country’s clergy cunningly depicted themselves as intending no harm, supportive of the people, and not interested in power. So, before the revolution, many Iranians did not think that Khomeini’s party would be committing the atrocities that they are committing now or that they would have such an unrelenting hunger for power. Instead, during this time, the country thought it was on a smooth path towards democracy, with no expectation of ever returning to a barbaric era. Even the then-US President Jimmy Carter viewed Khomeini as a good religious holy man.
  • Iranians did not just submit to these new laws; they rose up in protest. This uprising was met with torture, rape, and death. With the regime eager to wipe any who dared to resist, the people had no choice but to surrender. Everyone’s daily activities were now under the scrutiny of the Islamists.
  • Many will still think it is impossible for something like this to happen in their country. What they fail to understand is that Iran is an example of exactly how successful this meticulous grab for power can be. Islamists in other countries including the West are pursuing the same techniques on the path to seizing power. It is a quiet, and subtle process, until the moment you wake up with no rights, a culture of fear, and no promise that you will live in freedom or even to see the next day.

Both Islam and Socialist Progressivism seek the destruction of Western Civilization, especially America, in order to build a terror society on the rubble.  Once America and the West are down each believes they can then defeat the other and win positions of power exclusively for themselves and their adherents.

It has been said that Islam is a political philosophy masquerading as a religion and Communism is a religion masquerading as a political philosophy.  Both are tyrannies far worse than was England in 1776 (King George was plenty bad enough, thank you!) against which the founders would have revolted.  Americans are being led to believe that both of these evils are equivalent goods.  It is our job to disabuse our fellow citizens and prevent America from being chained by either, for the sake of our own lives and the lives of our descendants. .