LBT Responds to MZBs: There Is a Surfeit of Grasshoppers

Linda was kind enough to respond to the MZB article two weeks ago in her inimitable and prodigious style. Where she finds the time to pen these insightful ripostes, I don’t know. I take minor issue with the readiness condition of “Erma” but Linda provides yet another mountain of food for thought. -BB

A great article, even though I think you were over-intellectualizing MNBZ. I saw that first in Lights Out, I think, and supposed it to be meant as an amusing quip of the sort people under stress come up with. I like your presentation better.

Yes, the hatred and the anger show more every day, but the ones who are going to be most riled up haven’t felt the pinch yet because they are living as they always have on food stamps, their families, and/or the proceeds of crime. At present we’re the focus of those who have finally exhausted all sorts of “unemployment compensation,” or didn’t qualify for it or any other sort of statist largess. Preppers turn away some of the anger by babbling cheerfully about family reunions, office picnics, bake sales, and anything else we can come up with to explain why our carts are full. It is demeaning, annoying, and the better part of wisdom.

We have times when we’d like to read the riot act about how we have worked and saved to be able to take care of ourselves and we refuse to feel guilty because the world is full of grasshoppers. We don’t like to think about the reaction of those great big famished grasshoppers, and can only determine to become fire ants. Try as we will, it is very difficult to keep family, friends, neighbors, and workmen from noticing that we seem to have ample supplies of many things, even when we unload after dark or at times when there are few around. My first project as soon as Spring settles in is the long-overdue task of preparing caches.

This will play out in phases, supposing we don’t get nuked in five cities or the dollar isn’t crashed suddenly (note the verb form I just used; this could be inadvertent or deliberate, and it will make a difference.) We can expect a build up in anger, frustration, and violence while the Statists claw desperately to stave off disintegration–and/or declare martial law. The better part of valor will be to stay tucked up safely where we are as long as we can, or take the plunge and get our families moved to our chosen locations. It will be no time to run to the grocery store casually even when there are still items on the shelves. This will definitely be a time for a low profile–at least until we see if some miracle will calm things down. My children are pledged to head home–my son, unfortunately, is in Seattle–the moment I tell them to leave or when the first city anywhere goes up in flames. Andrew has made reasonable preparations and worked out three routes and chosen his companion. Madre, as he calls me, has pitched in some lovely goodies.

Eventually the 18-wheelers which carry supplies will slow or cease, and the three-day supply of food in the cities will be exhausted. There is slightly more in small towns but only because delivery is expensive. At that point those of us who are unable to be as far away from “civilization” as we would like will have to flee, temporarily, taking as much of the dense preparations we have made but haven’t gotten cached with us as possible. I applaud your decision to take the back side of the mountain and have a well drilled. Moving your stores out there will be a dreadful task, and I’m sure it has occurred to you not to make a visible trail during your many trips. Remember to filter your smoke through trees or some other baffle, and pay attention always to which way the winds are blowing. Hungry people have very good sniffers.

I have an, um, “internal check” on how bad the situation is. It is very late, the hands are in their quarters, and MDC (sorry; “my darling Charles”) is slumbering peacefully. I can see two external doors from where my computer is located, but those aren’t locked because my ancient rescue dog likes to go out frequently. “Erma” is stashed out of sight but available quickly. The important part is that she is loaded but not on safe and there is not a round chambered. If invaders burst in suddenly I won’t get a shot off, and will feel extremely stupid as I die. However, the dogs and chickens are sleeping, as well, but they are very aware of sounds at all time. Mostly, it isn’t tense enough nationally; I don’t need to worry about rough, hairy strangers and Tuller Drill range. Yet. MY personal signal will be the day Erma is ready to fire instantly. If it gets to the point of anticipating unwelcome company, it will be time to get plans for the next phase implemented.

Like you, I have lots of “stuff,” but I also have ample preparations for BO/GOOD, including the ability to transport a great deal. My plan is to slide gently out of the way into deep cover and let the locusts flow out over the land. I can’t defend what I have against crowds that could number in the hundreds or even thousands. I dislike this intensely but it simply isn’t practical to attempt to sell on a bad market, lose a devastating chunk on 3/4 or more of what I get to capital gains, try to buy land farther out, and move everything. All we can do is weigh the risks and then accept what we have to work with. I know how many drivers I will have, and motor homes for all except the one who will be hauling cattle. Anyone who doesn’t think I’ll load goat girls and chickens into our 40 foot, forty-year-old Greyhound bus which was built as a motor home doesn’t know my determination! The girls will be fascinated. If there isn’t time for enough trips to move cow critters–and we must expect that there may well not be–all we will be able to do is haze them deep into the woods and hope the mighty hunter types don’t shoot at them. Hunters? Bah. I am very scathing about those who sit in blinds and shoot deer who come up to feeders they use year ’round.

There will be a scary, uncomfortable period involving privations such as no hot food (delicious odors travel far), no cigarettes (ditto), no noise (no generators for heat or air conditioning) and no light at night unless our blackout provisions are successful. Go to ground and wait out…oh, three weeks at a guess? How long will it take most to die from exposure, violence, disease, lack of water, and so forth? Six weeks until the prepared and the most ruthless are the preponderance of those left standing?

Eventually we will be able to return to the ranch…and all of us had better prepare mentally to find a lot of useless destruction. At the very least everything left in plain sight will have been stolen or battered or smashed in senseless rage, and we’ll be lucky if the mobs and gangs haven’t burned houses and crops. If it happens soon no crops will be sown, and our fields and gardens will be at risk constantly up until harvest is over. How naive city people can be! They don’t get it that there is only one corn crop a year and that it takes nine months for a cow to reproduce. True, she can be milked 300 of those days, but only if it is done regularly.

It may take as much as several years to subdue the stronger gangs, and there is always the possibility that the National Socialists will clamp down hard and strip us of everything under Executive Order 11921…or shoot us, or throw us into concentration camps.

It is going to be the South all over again after the march to the sea. With preparation, care, and luck, some of us will survive to start over. We will deal with a variety of evolving social orders on a local scale…there are myriad possibilities, all fraught with danger. Anthrax, suitcase bombs, the sort of behavior typical of Rita and Katrina, Kristal Nacht, a Reichstag fire, we can’t call at present which butterfly will cause our world to fall apart.

The best my analysis foresaw nearly four years ago was The Greater Depression. I expect something more on the lines of “civil unrest” or dictatorship. We all know we can’t fight armies (Well, all except James Wesley Comma etc.!) Depending upon the location, strength, determination, and alertness of our individual preparations we may come through fine. My “wild cat” back up plan is that once more things will stabilize, that this will be “just another bump in the road.” In that case, eventually the ranch will at least pay taxes, expenses, and for a live-in manager and his wife until my children want the place decades from now. They’re great young people, and while they think Mama is crazy, they recognize that I am happy puttering with goats, cows, horses, chickens, and greenhouses. They were happier before I sold the MacMansion (which didn’t have a mortgage on it, praise be to God) and turned it into livestock, farm machinery, and, uh, so on.

Anyone who doesn’t have food for at least three months is living a pretty, probably fatal, fairy tale. My definition of the new luxury is, “Sustainable supplies of food and energy and the ability to protect them.” Laughter…at this point luxury is knowing what will be for dinner tomorrow in the sense of we have made plans and don’t have to think of what we would like. The day is coming when luxury will be knowing what is for dinner tomorrow night. Call me a pampered elitist, but my idea of a good answer to that question is not “Whatever sort of MRE I can steal,” or “Dinner will be ready in six months when that chick you’re looking at is big enough to broil, plus half an hour for me to make smashed potatoes and cream gravy, supposing there are any potatoes ready to dig.”

I wish I thought your estimate that one in ten is preparing is accurate. If you can back that up with figures it would soothe some of my anxiety. My guess is probably less than two per cent. Probably much less than that. I know a lot of people who talk about it, and there are a lot of blowhards out there spouting, “They’ll take my gun when they pry it from my cold, dead fingers.” The problem is that there will be vast numbers of those who already think any excuse to riot is a good one, the newly desperate, and those working towards a depopulated world in chains who will be glad to take their guns on those terms.

Good luck to all of you, and keep on prepping.

Regards,

Linda Brady Traynham

The New Secessionists? by Linda Brady Traynham

Linda and I are friends and I love her writing. She subliminally channels the connection between slavery and the state; the confluence between abolition and the necessary move toward secession. This is a divorce from evil and tyranny, the very muse which caused me to start the site in the first place. Read and enjoy. -BB

Shooters, Ron Holland is the most reading fun I’ve had since discovering C. S. Stirling, and a couple of more articles like the last two may set that mark back to C. Northcote Parkinson. Dear glory, a man who writes elegant prose, has a brilliantly logical mind, and understands the true causes of the War of the Rebellion?! I wouldn’t be surprised to learn he keeps goats, smokes, and had served with the French Foreign Legion or with our guys in Viet Nam as a gunny, making him practically perfect if anything happens to my darling Charles. (I know…odd, the things ladies find attractive…)
Ron also introduced a subject I have been itching to discuss here for at least six months, bless him.
Strangely enough, given that paean, I’m going to begin by disagreeing with my new candidate for hero. He wrote, “We need to forget the causes of the earlier War Between the States, regional differences, slavery, tariffs and other related issues.”
No, no, dear man, we must not forget the causes of the First War of the Rebellion because we are still at odds over precisely the same issues. We still have very strong regional differences and an even larger one of city rats and illegals vs. country mice; slavery now comes in the form of wage and welfare plantation, tariffs are still a big issue (see my modest archived discussion of the nasty jump in the price of tires), and consider that now, as then, the root cause was a corrupt, big money-controlled Congress that had out-run what it could confiscate from the citizens easily. Two ways of solving the problem occurred to the in-crowd back then, the first being to declare that the western border of the US was the Mississippi River permanently and pluck those caged off at their leisure, while the second was to conquer and rape the Southern states which were the wealthy area at that time.
No contest.
A population-dense industrial nation expected to find the less-populated agrarian portion of the nation far easier pickings than they turned out to be, a mistake Washington continues to make in backwaters ranging from Viet Nam to Afghanistan.
Slavery was being phased out as quickly as was feasible primarily because slaves are the most expensive–and least productive–form of labor, and let us not forget that all of the slavers were Yankees, who not only had virtually all the shipping but a great many slaves themselves. Yankees are the ones who came up with a solution to King Cotton’s demand for employees; we didn’t like it, but we had no alternative; everybody down here was already working. Lincoln’s (in)famous “Emancipation Proclamation” didn’t free a single slave in Yankee-held territory and it didn’t free any in the South at the time, either. I am not a fan of the original Illinois politico (or any of his successors), and Lincoln used the slavery issue cynically for emotional effect and spin. READ his opinion of blacks; it is well documented. (Ronald and Donald Kennedy’s The South Was Right is meticulously documented and official correspondence between Lincoln and his generals will turn your stomachs. Their idea, carried out brilliantly in war efforts and “Reconstruction” was to beat the South so far into submission that it would never recover. They were quite successful.) Ah, yesss, the Rothschilds and similar friends have made out well for centuries by funding both sides of wars while Krupps et al. provided munitions to both combatants and both stirred up conflict. That’s why I suggested investing in “defense” stocks in “Juggling Act.”
There is, indeed, a large and growing feeling that fiscal and cultural sanity can be regained only by going our separate ways. North Carolina has a vigorous movement, as do other South’n states and the Montana-Idaho-Wyoming-Utah area, and even Hawaii wants Liliuokalani’s throne and Iolani Palace back. (Chuckle…I say give it to ‘em. An island kingdom 5,000 miles from anywhere that has been firmly under the control of Democrats and the Japanese for half a century is something we need to support about as much as we do southern California.)
There is a very easy, obvious solution to getting the ball rolling, and if there is anything we have an amplitude of at present it is snow, literally and figuratively.
We start with the Republic of Texas.
Pay close attention now, because the facts I am going to give you–and they are facts–are not in any of the history books the winners have written for 150 years. Gentle smile…sounds like a good anniversary to celebrate, to me. Quite a few states would like the simple no-fault divorce the South asked for last time, but Texas has an advantage. We’ve only been living in sin all these years. That’s right: we weren’t married, or, to stop being colorful, Texas has never been a legal part of “those United States.”

1. The Republic of Texas is not, has never been, and could never have been admitted legally to the USA. There is no provision in the Constitution for annexing or admitting another nation. True, there was an unconstitutional Bill drafted to do so, but it has been buried in committee for many a long decade and had a time clause in it. No one has ever dared bring it out for obvious political reasons.
2. Our flag does not fly at the same height as that of the US in recognition of the fact that we “were” once a sovereign nation or to advertise a failing amusement park, Six Flags Over Texas, but because we are still one, albeit under occupation since about six months after the rest of the South submitted. (I started to replace “one” with a more precise “sovereign nation,” but realized that our capitol, Austin, is also a failing amusement park. And we still went into the present deepening depression last and have felt the effects least.)
3. Our current Capitol building was constructed in 1939, and in the Great Rotunda is an enormous, splendid marble and brass mosaic that proclaims proudly “The Republic of Texas.” Once again, that wasn’t “history,” it is how a lot of us see the matter. Confederate General Albert Sydney Johnston reposes in the adjoining cemetery. That was when what you think of as the “Texas” flag was foisted upon us. The true Republic of Texas flag, the Burnett, a single golden star on a field of blue, flies in front of the ranch house and quite a few other places. I don’t tilt at windmills or I would prepare a brochure to hand yahoos who fly the US flag above the false flag on a single pole.
Hopeful look. Is anyone expostulating, “Now, Mrs. Traynham, all of that was long ago and isn’t relevant?”
How relevant are treaties–nations deal with each other by treaty, as you should have learned in Civics classes, if those are still taught–between the Republic of Texas and the US? How relevant is the decision of a Federal Judge? He takes himself pretty seriously and as far as I know he is still behind the bench over in West Texas. Is 2004 recent enough for you?! Yes, indeed, you may not have heard about it through the MSM, but in this century that splendid gentleman ordered the Feds “to cease and desist hostilities against the land and people of the Republic of Texas.” The Washington gang didn’t do it–regulations and taxes being very hostile, indeed, to say nothing of troops quartered on our soil–but they went back to D. C. a very unhappy bunch.
Some of you have read my remarks about the project I was engaged upon when I realized we had better shelve it because my analysis said that we were going to have either The Greater Depression or dictatorship before we completed the last two steps (three, if you count a wide-spread education effort) to free our nation. The RoT was it. I had reached the point of preparing a packet for volunteers covering the twenty top concerns of most citizens, and in every instance the answer is “Restore the Republic.” If it will amuse you, send me your question on how an independent Republic of Texas operating under a real, unsullied Constitution would improve the lives of all those who are honest, law-abiding, hard-working, and oppressed under current conditions.
Take heart, America, in how close we are. ALL that need be done is a Resolution from the Legislature calling for a public vote on the matter, and to conduct that vote. If we have a successful outcome Texas will cease to be a “for profit corporation” subsidiary to the for profit corporation known as the federal government. (Look them up in Dun & Bradstreet, along with the Federal Reserve.) We will revert instantly to the 1837 Constitution which has been updated very slightly and quite legally to allow suffrage for females and non-whites. Well over a hundred taxes and millions of pages of regulations will be rendered null and void immediately. (One slight problem is to keep the first Legislature elected and sworn in from restoring a bunch of in-crowd regulations wholesale and thoughtlessly. See Tex Norton’s upcoming article on how and why regulations are promulgated.)
The new President–who will not be the current governor unless he or she runs for that position and wins–will have a mansion and a salary of $10,000/year! The cream of the jest is that the new Legislature cannot raise salaries effective during their terms of office. We’ve got good stuff in our Constitution. For another example, it says simply that we have to come up with a plan to educate children, and it doesn’t say a thing about forbidding prayer or teaching fifth- graders the joys of sex. I’ve got a great plan for educating the children; I figure I can volunteer to be Secretary of Education and have all half dozen choices parents will have up and running in two weeks, at which point I will resign. No salary, no staff, set it up and let it work from home-schooling to on-line schooling to private schools to smiling sweetly and telling local neighborhoods that if they want traditional “free” neighborhood schools, by all means fund them out of their personal budgets no longer subject to income tax, sales tax, gasoline taxes, cigarette taxes, or property taxes. Nothing in life is free, people.
We have just a few possibilities for President that a lot of Texans (or “Texians,” in ancient parlance) might be excited about, including Dr. Ron Paul and a conservative writer who has a ranch not far from mine, a fellow named Chuck Norris. It could be that Ross Perot could make a comeback, I suppose…
If you look at the Red vs. Blue map you will discover–no surprise–that the Bluebellies hold the major cities and the area which has been invaded by Mexicans. The Red has everything else. Yes, we tend to vote Democrat but that is ancient rebellion against “the party of Lincoln.” In all save the big cities we’re a conservative, old-fashioned, pretty self-sufficient bunch. When I was a girl we called ourselves “conservative states-rights Democrats” rather than Republicans to differentiate ourselves from the “Progressives.”
We have a year before the next Legislature meets, and a useful pastime will be seeking candidates who are receptive to the notion of disentangling ourselves from an arrogant, oppressive government (two of them, actually), and starting over. Reclaiming our freedom is do-able. If I hadn’t thought so I wouldn’t have spent over a year working out details.
If we gain our independence again Texas will become, overnight, the ninth richest country in the world. Not only can we claim a 200-mile limit for oil exploration through international law, but we have a Supreme Court Decision that says the same thing–and the railroad commission controls such funds with schools having first call. There will be lots left over. We have deep water ports and nuclear facilities, tourism, wineries, and many miles of golden corn we won’t turn into Ethanol. We have plenty of gas and sweet, light crude left; the problem at present is Greenie legislation and transportation to refineries, which we also have. Texas has far more than our “fair share” of small farms and ranches, major universities, superb medical and vetinerary schools, and our own distinctive culture. There isn’t any good way for the US to pack up a few handy airbases when we toss their minions over our borders with jovial civility. We have the only independent power grid and several vast wind farms. We even have salt domes which hold “strategic reserves,” although my numerous oil friends tell me that it will be a miracle if 25% of the contents can be recovered, and Washington can try suing us in our courts if it wants first dibs on them.
Courts? Our Constitution calls for a series of common law courts. To simplify, all that is needed to try most cases is an elected Judge/Justice, half a dozen citizens gathered at random, no lawyers allowed, and the decision of the Jury is final. No lengthy waits, no incessant appeals…and one of my bright little ideas is that we outsource prisons for anything more complicated than sleeping it off over night in the drunk tank to Mexico. This would be extraordinarily cost-effective (not that the Republic of Texas Constitution calls for coddling criminals and terrorists, and it certainly does not mandate “Miranda” warnings), and most instructive. Mexican jails are exceptionally unpleasant places, that being the point of incarceration. Recidivism rates for the survivors should be very low; in addition being sentenced for crimes of violence will carry automatic revocation of citizenship if some of us persuade the rest. Let those who are inclined moan over lousy childhoods and evil companions elsewhere because real Texans believe we are responsible for our own actions. Golly…that would mean we didn’t need parole boards or parole officers, either, further reducing the payroll…and our stance will be that Social Security checks–but not taxes–will be enforceable contracts between the US and citizens of the Republic of Texas. Our Constitution calls specifically for minting our own gold and silver money–and the first serious country to revert to the gold standard will have a commanding role in world politics. Everything that needs doing can be funded handily by a 15% tax on non-resident corporations and a 10% tax for two years on those who apply for citizenship.
The breakup of any long-term relationship is at best painful and expensive. At worst it is messy and violent. The advantage the North held last time in terms of armaments was nothing compared to the current disparity between citizens and governments the Founding Fathers dreaded would come to be. Last time, until “we” had access to arms captured on the field of battle, fortunate Southerners used the accurate sniper rifles made by Whitworth, in England, while Lincoln had the precursor to the Winchester, went to the trials for the Spencer repeating rifle and got it into the field, as well as the Colt revolving rifle, Sharps made his sniper guns, and he had Dahlgreens and Parrot to cast canons. A descendant of Dahlgreens’ technology of exterior banding to strengthen barrels is in use currently. Texas is at the same apparent disadvantage multiplied many times.
Think long and well, fellow citizens, before deciding that we cannot, in conscience and in self-preservation, do other than echo Patrick Henry. IS life so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!
Those are the words which preceded “As for me, give me liberty or give me death.” It is highly unlikely that Pharoah will let the people go in peace this time, either. It is certain that should hostilities develop once again those who do not care one way or the other will be caught in the middle. Yes, I agree with Mr. Holland that secession is the most efficient way out of the fiat currency mess and many others, but I cannot see it as an “easy” way out. I must point out as calmly as one can say such a thing that a government which staged the tragedy at Waco under the code name “Operation Showboat” might well not eschew a homegrown version of Tienamen Square if it feels threatened.
Despite the strictures of Janet Napolitano and her ilk I do not regard myself as a Bible-thumping, gun-toting domestic terrorist. I love my country and I love our heritage. A primary reason I write is because those of us who can see most clearly what American can be do so from firm grounding in what America was. If left to my own devices I would raise cattle and goats, be happy, and do private charitable good works. All I have ever asked is laissez faire and common sense.
A diplomatic solution is at hand; all the Feds have to do is abide by the court order while we have our vote unsupervised and we will all see whether ending our version of apartheid could be a rousing success. There are at least face-saving legal grounds for acquiescing while Texas and Hawaii strike out on their own. Perhaps, given a fair vote, the preponderance of citizens will come down on the side of enormous, intrusive government. A lot of us have the nerve to put the issue to a test.
Still, I fear that the growing call for secession is on the order of nuclear deterrence, which thus far has deterred nothing but nuclear wars. Heavy sigh…we’re talking about a different sort of nuclear fission, the desire of the nucleus to throw off the useless atoms which have attached themselves to our core principles. I’m no Neville Chamberlain, but the wrath of those who hold the US Constitution prisoner must be taken seriously. That is a question for individuals, whether or not “we hold these truths to be self-evident.”
Sober regards,

Brady State Gun Law Scorecard for Arizona – 2 Out of 100

I am so proud of my state. I get the pathetic hoplophobe reports from the loathsome bottom-dwellers at the Brady Center so I can keep up on the machinations of the victim disarmament lobby. I am hoping that once we get Constitutional Carry like Vermont and Alaska in AZ, perhaps one of these government supremacist orcs will keel over from apoplexy. We are hoping that the Arizona Civilian Defense League will help us reach a perfect score this legislative session  Update:  we now have unrestricted concealed carry without a license in AZ.  -BB

Arizona has weak gun laws that help feed the illegal gun market and allows the sale of guns without background checks according to the Brady Campaign. In the organization’s 2009 state scorecards released for all 50 states, Arizona earns just 2 points out of a total of 100.

According to government figures, Arizona also has the sixth highest percentage of crime guns recovered that were originally purchased within the state. The Brady Campaign relates this “homegrown” gun violence to the lack of gun laws in the state and nationally.

See:

http://www.bradycampaign.org/stategunlaws/scorecard/AZ/

MZBs: Are You Prepared?

I thought this was exceptionally well crafted by the author. He poses in stark and rather alarming terms the framework the Doomsteaders will face in the comping collapse. We have existed in a society for so long informed by the creed of living on other people’s wealth without their consent for so long that any patina of self-determination and pride in self-provision has vanished for all but a few. This will be yet another rumination to put in your already full kit-bag as we prepare for the inevitable calamity known as the fall of these united Sates. -BB

MZB! Those three letters are enough to put a healthy dose of doom-enriched fear into any well prepped doomer right? It took me a while just to learn what those letters meant; when I did finally look them up in the acronym appendix of the doomer’s bible I was silent. Mutant-Zombie-Bikers? What kind of fantasy freak group was I associating myself with? I just disliked the term because I couldn’t get over the strange thoughts being conjured up in my head of a pack of deranged bikers on dirt bikes, old Harley’s, quads, you name it with bleeding flesh and hollowed eyes all coming to attack us after a collapse. We would be all snug and happy in our doomsteads and BOLs but these MZBs would seek us out to destroy us. So yeah, I just couldn’t deal with the term and didn’t care for it much because it was too abstract and unrealistic.

As time went on and my doomerish view of the world became more and more into focus I kept revisiting the MZB concept. What if the zombie in them didn’t refer to some ghoulish character but rather someone who had lost everything and gained the 100 yard stare? Someone who has lost all sense of purpose but still feels the need to move forward? What if the mutant part referred to the transformation some unprepared over-suburbanized schmuck goes through as they realize everything they had worked for, all their competing with the Jones’, all their mass consuming waste was all for naught and now had nowhere to go, nothing to live off of, and no knowledge of how to begin to survive? What if the biker part didn’t represent the biker gangs of today but rather the same misguided victim of suburbia taking their hobby bike with the last bit of gas and hitting the road in search of food for their overweight, weak, and defenseless family to never return? What if a MZB is simply a former misguided suburbia rat who is now discovering what it means to live and is angry at himself, angry at the world, and especially angry at those who are living a more comfortable post-collapse existence because they were prepared?

As we move closer to the point where a total societal breakdown occurs one way or another it will become very apparent who is prepared and who isn’t. My head has been filled with fantasies that when the day comes when anarchy dominates over civilized life that those who weren’t prepared would be begging for help, doing anything they could to survive, but for the most part not resorting to violence. I stand corrected.
A casual dinner visit with some close friends was my point of awakening to how ugly everything will be. We were having beers and discussing how we keep getting warning article after warning article but nothing ever happens. Something commonly discussed here. We are tired of the warnings; we are tired of prepping for something that will never come; we are starting to not believe that there will be a collapse. At this point the brother of my friends comes in. He had been a former employee of mine during a construction project five years ago. During that there had been a conflict whereas he thought he was owed more for his efforts than we had paid him (bonus pay). Over the years it had seemed this rift had healed. He joined the conversation and then boldly stated, “if there is a day like you guys describe then I’ll just hit the road and take whatever the f*** I want. I’ll finally get to get back all that the rich f***s like you have taken from me! F*** you rich bastards! You guys have only gotten ahead because of the sweat from people like me! The day you describe when payback will finally be here!”

We just sat there stunned! I had never considered myself rich. I had started my business with maxing out one credit card, buying used salvage equip and rehabbing it, and sold off all my furniture to buy opening inventory. I worked over 80 hours a week for the first several years while working another full time job. For all of the risk, hard work, and sacrifice for 10 years we make a nice comfortable living; my friends I was visiting had worked equally hard towards becoming a professor. All this time my friends brother was partying, in and out of jail, playing, playing, playing but now as he has nothing and we are comfortable there is an incredible anger and rage within him! Behold the birth of a MZB!

I don’t know why but that moment brought together a flood of memories over the past few years of isolated events that I put no thought into. Working in the garden while a pickup truck of loud and obviously drunk guys driving by along the irrigation ditch road, as I looked up they flipped us off yelling obscenities; being threatened by employees that were being fired; being flipped off and cussed at by the low rider crowd (Bienvendos a Nuevo Mexico). All of a sudden what I thought were isolated incidents of angry individuals not to be taken seriously transformed into everything I thought that MZBs could never be.

The day is coming when the collapse does occur and that day will represent freedom by all those who have not prepared and those who have not been fortunate to make it. That day will represent the day that they can begin exchanging their anger for all the pieces we prepared ones have carefully put away safe and sound. There will be no begging for help by those angry hordes; we will be the ones begging for mercy as we give up all we worked so hard for and thoughtfully put away. These people who you see now at the bar at 5, those people you see wasting their few dollars on the bread and circus shows like Nascar races, football games, strip clubs, malls; those people that have invested more money into their vehicles than their vehicles are worth with stereos, chromed rims, oversized exhausts, etc.; it is these people that are the ones who we will be fearing. They have been undergoing a professional training in instant gratification and the day of collapse will be the moment when the supermall of mass instant gratification opens its doors: That supermall will the homes of the prepared.

Are you ready for that day? I know I’m not. I have plenty of supplies, firearms and ammo, water, fuel, you name it but I am not ready to defend it from masses of the angry hordes staking claims on all we have worked for. The day I saw the rage in my friends face I realized I wasn’t ready. I had considered needing to defend myself from some abstract threat as foreign and vague as the term MutantZombieBiker; I hadn’t considered needing to defend myself from what I bet is 85% of the mass population.

What happens when collapse comes and total anarchy let’s go and you are one out of 10 families who is prepared and able to be comfortable. My 6+months of food, water, fuel, ammo will be taken by force and I will only be hoping that my family isn’t brutalized. Take a piece of paper; make a grid of 3 dots by 3 dots. The dot in the center is you; the dots surrounding you are your unprepared neighbors who have always waved hello but who now realize you have what they need and are pissed off that you unfairly sacrificed your wages and effort to be prepared while they partied and played. You will not hold these people off at bay whether you are surrounded by 10 acres or are smack in the middle of suburbia. The only way you stand a chance is to begin converting those surrounding dots into equally prepared families who will stand strong with you. The problem is that each one of those families will have friends or families who will ultimately not have any preps and will come to claim their share and consequently part of your stores.

In the past year I have moved from NM to a smaller CO town. I was on the verge of making a decision on buying a property. One is 40 acres right on the edge of town but with a running water source and good farmable land. The other is 5 acres and a nice house with greenhouses shops, a creek, and several outbuildings where a doomer could survive so easily but is right in town. The third is 40 acres on the backside of a mountain overlooking town and has no running water, is completely undeveloped, 4wd access, and surrounded by eight other 40 acre parcels. One realization I had, is that those unprepared masses , are inherently lazy; they are unprepared because they refused to put in the extra effort to become prepared. It is the ant vs. grasshopper fable in the classic sense except the grasshopper will be armed and will outnumber the ant 1:10. By being on either of the first two locations I will be easily accessible by all but the absolute laziest ones. The running water on those two properties will also attract people. I have decided on the remote 40 acres (:30 4wd drive but only a :15 mt bike ride from town).

It will be a lot harder to make an ideal doomstead but there won’t be any running water for people to follow, it will take a lot of physical effort, my preps will be hidden and the surrounding 40 acres properties are owned by similar doomer folks. Let the MZBs come because the advantage will be belonged to me. It is impractical to live there full time with kids in school and businesses to run but as part of the plan we will live in a plain, old small, non-fancy, house in town; I realize that by living in a home equal to what I can afford I make myself and family a target. By living in the smallest home we can fit in and having zero preps visible we can let our friends and family wonder why we live so insanely modest. On weekends and days when we have time we stay at the retreat home which will be 100% off grid and will contain everything needed to be self sufficient for a minimum of 6 months.

There is an unfathomable amount of anger and bitterness in all of our communities. Other terms thrown out that evening in the conversation were that people who were prepped are “elitists”, “better than others”, “you can only prep if you are a rich f***”, “we [bro & his buddies] can’t wait to show who will be the new boss in town”, “a new sheriff will be in town”; you all get the drift. The Mutant Zombie Bikers are alive and well and I know I have grossly underestimated their threat. Have you?

See:

http://www.doomers.us/forum2/index.php/topic,62074.0.html

Digital Doomsday: The End of Knowledge

It troubles me to think that a massive EMP event or a power outage could lead to the demolition and irrevocable destruction of human knowledge with one exception. I would shed no tears for the destruction of all federal tax records in these united States. I have posted several scribblings about the importance of books to our legacy and our capability to rise from the ashes that ALL political systems doom us to. I have made mention of the Dan Forrester Memorial Library and include Lindsey’s Technical Books in my links menu. Both invaluable resources. You have no idea how many orphaned books are making their way into landfills to make room for the video libraries the government libraries have become. Take the time to build your own private library of your favorite tomes and add some that may help you survive the coming cataclysm. Pennies on the dollars for encyclopedias on Craigslist or Ebay. -BB


 

“IN MONTH XI, 15th day, Venus in the west disappeared, 3 days in the sky it stayed away. In month XI, 18th day, Venus in the east became visible.”

What’s remarkable about these observations of Venus is that they were made about 3500 years ago, by Babylonian astrologers. We know about them because a clay tablet bearing a record of these ancient observations, called the Venus Tablet of Ammisaduqa, was made 1000 years later and has survived largely intact. Today, it can be viewed at the British Museum in London.

We, of course, have knowledge undreamt of by the Babylonians. We don’t just peek at Venus from afar, we have sent spacecraft there. Our astronomers now observe planets round alien suns and peer across vast chasms of space and time, back to the beginning of the universe itself. Our industrialists are transforming sand and oil into ever smaller and more intricate machines, a form of alchemy more wondrous than anything any alchemist ever dreamed of. Our biologists are tinkering with the very recipes for life itself, gaining powers once attributed to gods.

Yet even as we are acquiring ever more extraordinary knowledge, we are storing it in ever more fragile and ephemeral forms. If our civilisation runs into trouble, like all others before it, how much would survive?

Of course, in the event of a disaster big enough to wipe out all humans, such as a colossal asteroid strike, it would not really matter. Even if another intelligent species evolved on Earth, almost all traces of humanity would have vanished long before.

Let’s suppose, however, that something less cataclysmic occurs, that many buildings remain intact and enough people survive to rebuild civilisation after a few decades or centuries. Suppose, for instance, that the global financial system collapses, or a new virus kills most of the world’s population, or a solar storm destroys the power grid in North AmericaMovie Camera. Or suppose there is a slow decline as soaring energy costs and worsening environmental disasters take their toll. The increasing complexity and interdependency of society is making civilisation ever more vulnerable to such events (New Scientist, 5 April 2008, p 28 and p 32).

Whatever the cause, if the power was cut off to the banks of computers that now store much of humanity’s knowledge, and people stopped looking after them and the buildings housing them, and factories ceased to churn out new chips and drives, how long would all our knowledge survive? How much would the survivors of such a disaster be able to retrieve decades or centuries hence?

Read the rest:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20527451.300-digital-doomsday-the-end-of-knowledge.html

I don’t mean to say I told you so, but…

I have often thought that Michael Scheuer is right, most of our troubles in the Middle East are due to our lopsided and wrong-headed single focus support of Israel as a result of domestic support operations via AIPAC in these united Sates and the philosophical inclinations of the neoconservatives. What is a neoconservative? A collectivist political node which practices a form of national socialism domestically and makes war on the world with a first loyalty to a nation off American shores. If you have not read “The Israel Lobby” by Walt and Mearsheimer, it should be at the top of your list. -BB

By Stephen M. Walt

Probably the most controversial claim in my work with John Mearsheimer on the Israel lobby is our argument that it played a key role in the decision to invade Iraq in 2003. Even some readers who were generally sympathetic to our overall position found that claim hard to accept, and some left-wing critics accused us of letting Bush and Cheney off the hook or of ignoring the importance of other interests, especially oil. Of course, Israel’s defenders in the lobby took issue even more strenuously, usually by mischaracterizing our arguments and ignoring most (if not all) of the evidence we presented.

So I hope readers will forgive me if I indulge today in a bit of self-promotion, or more precisely, self-defense. This week, yet another piece of evidence surfaced that suggests we were right all along (HT to Mehdi Hasan at the New Statesman and J. Glatzer at Mondoweiss). In his testimony to the Iraq war commission in the U.K., former Prime Minister Tony Blair offered the following account of his discussions with Bush in Crawford, Texas in April 2002. Blair reveals that concerns about Israel were part of the equation and that Israel officials were involved in those discussions.

Take it away, Tony:

As I recall that discussion, it was less to do with specifics about what we were going to do on Iraq or, indeed, the Middle East, because the Israel issue was a big, big issue at the time. I think, in fact, I remember, actually, there may have been conversations that we had even with Israelis, the two of us, whilst we were there. So that was a major part of all this.”

Notice that Blair is not saying that Israel dreamed up the idea of attacking Iraq or that Bush was bent on war solely to benefit Israel or even to appease the Israel lobby here at home. But Blair is acknowledging that concerns about Israel were part of the equation, and that the Israeli government was being actively consulted in the planning for the war.

Blair’s comments fit neatly with the argument we make about the lobby and Iraq. Specifically, Professor Mearsheimer and I made it clear in our article and especially in our book that the idea of invading Iraq originated in the United States with the neoconservatives, and not with the Israeli government. But as the neoconservative pundit Max Boot once put it, steadfast support for Israel is “a key tenet of neoconservatism.” Prominent neo-conservatives occupied important positions in the Bush administration, and in the aftermath of 9/11, they played a major role in persuading Bush and Cheney to back a war against Iraq, which they had been advocating since the late 1990s. We also pointed out that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and other Israeli officials were initially skeptical of this scheme, because they wanted the U.S. to focus on Iran, not Iraq. However, they became enthusiastic supporters of the idea of invading Iraq once the Bush administration made it clear to them that Iraq was just the first step in a broader campaign of “regional transformation” that would eventually include Iran.

At that point top Israeli leaders from across the political spectrum became cheerleaders for the invasion, and they played a prominent role in helping to sell the war here in the United States. Benjamin Netanyahu visited Washington, DC in April 2002 and spoke in the U.S. Senate, telling his audience “the urgent need to topple Saddam is paramount,” and that the campaign “deserves the unconditional support of all sane governments.” (It sure sounds like he was well aware of the discussions in Crawford, doesn’t it?) In May, foreign minister Shimon Peres said on CNN that “Saddam Hussein is as dangerous as bin Laden,” and that the United States “cannot sit and wait.” A month later, former Prime Minister Ehud Barak wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post recommending that the Bush administration “should, first of all, focus on Iraq and the removal of Saddam Hussein.”

This chorus continued through the summer and fall, with Barak and Netanyahu writing additional op-eds in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal, each calling for military action to topple Saddam. Netanyahu’s piece was titled “The Case for Toppling Saddam” and said that “nothing less than dismantling his regime will do.” Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s official spokesman, Ra’anan Gissen, offered similar statements during this period as well, and Sharon himself told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee in August 2002 that Iraq was “the greatest danger facing Israel.” According to an Aug. 16 article by Aluf Benn in Ha’aretz, Sharon reportedly told the Bush administration that putting off an attack would “only give [Saddam] more of an opportunity to accelerate his program of WMD.” Foreign Minister Peres reiterated his own warnings as well, and told reporters in September 2002 that “the campaign against Saddam Hussein is a must.” (For sources, see pp. 233-38).

If that’s not enough evidence of where Israel’s leaders were in the run-up to the war, consider that former President Bill Clinton told an audience at an Aspen Institute meeting in 2006 that “every Israeli politician I knew” (and he knows a lot of them) believed that Saddam Hussein was so great a threat that he should be removed even if he did not have WMD. Nor is this testimony at all surprising, given that we are talking about the leader who had fired Scud missiles into Israel during the first Gulf War in 1991 and had been giving money to the families of suicide bombers. If the Bush administration was bent on taking him out and then turning its gun-sights on Syria and Iran, one can easily understand why Israelis would welcome it.

Now, what about key groups in the lobby itself? If the neoconservatives deserve the blame for dreaming up the idea of invading Iraq, key groups and individuals in the lobby played an important role in selling it on Capitol Hill and to the public at large. AIPAC head Howard Kohr told the New York Sun in January 2003 that one of the organization’s “success stories” over the previous year was “quietly lobbying Congress” to approve the resolution authorizing the use of force, a fact confirmed by journalists such as Nathan Guttman of the Forward, Michelle Goldberg of Salon.com, John B. Judis of the New Republic, and even Jeffrey Goldberg in The New Yorker (see p. 242). Pundits at pro-Israel think tanks like the Brookings Institutions’s Saban Center were openly backing war by the fall of 2002, with Martin Indyk, the head of the center, and Kenneth Pollack, its director of research, playing especially prominent roles.

Moreover, in this same period both the Jewish Council on Public Affairs and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations voted to endorse the use of force “as a last resort.” Mortimer Zuckerman, a well-connected businessman and publisher who was then the chairman of the Conference of Presidents, was especially convinced about the futility of U.N. inspections and the need to topple Saddam, and wrote several editorials making that case in his magazine (U.S. News and World Report).

Still skeptical? Consider the following passage from an article by Matthew Berger of the Jewish Telegraph Agency, published just after President Bush’s September 2002 appearance at the United Nations, where he threatened military action if Iraq did not comply with U.N. resolutions:

Despite their caution and without specifying a formal policy, Jewish leaders predominantly expressed support for Bush’s words at the United Nations.

They said he detailed a strong case that Saddam has consistently ignored U.N. resolutions, that he was seeking to obtain weapons of mass destruction and that Saddam has shown a propensity towards using them.

“Iraq is the single most important threat right now to world peace and to our safety,” said Dr. Mandell Ganchrow, executive vice president of the Orthodox Religious Zionists of America. He described Saddam as a “maniac” who “has proven that he will gas his own people.”

“The fanaticism that exists throughout the Middle East is best addressed by first dealing with Iraq,” agreed Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Reform movement’s Union of American Hebrew Congregations.

Many American Jewish leaders expressed the fear that Saddam has not been quiet for the past decade because of a loss of will, but because he has been using the time to garner weapons for an eventual attack on U.S. interests and allies.

“Do we have to wait until a target is hit, and the world says, ‘Ah, yes, he did have weapons of mass destruction,’” asked David Harris, executive director of the American Jewish Committee.”

Not to be outdone, the editor of Jewish Week, Gary Rosenblatt, wrote an editorial in mid-December 2002 saying that “Washington’s imminent war on Saddam Hussein is . . . an opportunity to rid the world of a dangerous tyrant who present a particularly horrific threat Israel.” He went on to say “the Torah instructs that when you enemy seeks to kill you kill him first. Self-defense is not permitted; it is commanded.” Even the relatively liberal Rabbi David Saperstein of the Union of Reform Judaism’s Religious Action Center told journalist Michelle Goldberg that “the Jewish community would want to see a forceful resolution to the threat that Saddam Hussein poses.” “Forceful resolution” means war, and Saperstein also offered comparisons to the Bosnian conflict and the Nazi era to reinforce his call for military action.

Finally, consider the following passage from an editorial in the Jewish newspaper Forward, published in 2004:

As President Bush attempted to sell the war .. in Iraq, America’s most important Jewish organizations rallied as one to his defense. In statement after statement community leaders stressed the need to rid the world of Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. Some groups went even further, arguing that that the removal of the Iraqi leaders would represent a significant step toward bringing peace to the Middle East and winning America’s war on terrorism”

The editorial also noted that “concern for Israel’s safety rightfully factored into the deliberations of the main Jewish groups.”

The Forward, it is worth noting, is well-connected and has a well-deserved reputation for probity in its reporting on the American Jewish community. It is hard to see how its editors could be mistaken about such an important issue or why they would lie about it. And they never issued a retraction. We can therefore assume that the writers of this editorial knew what they were talking about: key groups in the lobby supported the war. Reasonable people can disagree about how important their influence was, of course, but at a minimum these groups reinforced the Bush administration’s resolve and made it less likely that other politicians or commentators would conduct a serious debate about the wisdom of the invasion.

Finally, it bears reiterating that I am talking about key groups and individuals in the Israel lobby, and not about the American Jewish community in toto. Indeed, my co-author and I have repeatedly pointed to surveys showing that American Jews were less supportive of the decision to invade Iraq than the American population as a whole, and we have emphasized that it would be a cardinal error (as well as dangerous) to try to “blame the Jews” for the war. Rather, blame should be reserved for Bush and Cheney (who made the ultimate decision for war), for the neoconservatives who dreamed up this foolish idea, and for the various groups and individuals — including those in the lobby — who helped sell it.

Nor am I suggesting that these individuals advocated this course because they thought it would be good for Israel but bad for the United States. Rather, they unwisely believed it would be good for both countries. And as we all know, they were tragically wrong.

That misconception helps us understand why the Israelis and their American friends who promoted the Iraq war didn’t do a better job of covering their tracks and obscuring their enthusiasm for the endeavor. I suspect it is because they genuinely believed that the war would be easy and would bring great benefits for both Israel and the United States. If the war was a smashing success, then they would reap the credit and no one would spend that much time probing the war’s origins. And even if someone did, its proponents would be hailed as strategic geniuses who had conceived and planned a stunning victory. Once the war went south, however, and numerous people began to probe how this disaster came about, an extensive dust-kicking operation to veil the role of Israel and the lobby was set in motion.

This campaign won’t work, however, because too many people already know that Israel and the lobby were cheerleaders for the war and with the passage of time, more and more evidence of their influence on the decision for war will leak out. The situation is analogous to what happened with the events surrounding the infamous Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in August 1964. The Johnson administration could dissemble and cover its tracks for a few years, but eventually the real story got out, as will happen with Iraq. Indeed, Blair’s testimony is evidence of that process at work.

For sure, many Israelis and their friends in the United States will continue to maintain that the Sharon government actually tried to stop the march to war and that groups in the lobby – including AIPAC — stayed on the sideline and did not push for war. But these post hoc fairy tales will be increasingly hard to sell to the American people, not only because there is a growing body of evidence which directly contradicts them (see pp. 261-262) , but also because the internet and the blogosphere is allowing the word to spread. Thankfully, we no longer have to rely on the mainstream media to get the story straight.

Finally, let’s not forget that while the Iraq war has been a disaster for the United States, it has also been very bad for Israel, not just because its principal patron has been stuck in a quagmire in Iraq, but also because the biggest winner from the war was Iran, which is the country that Israel fears most. All of this shows that despite the lobby’s openly-stated commitment to promoting policies that it thinks will benefit Israel, it did not work out that way with the Iraq war. Nor is it working out that way with its unyielding support of Israel’s self-destructive drive to colonize the Occupied Territories, a process that is turning Israel into an apartheid state. And the same warning applies to its efforts to keep all options-including the use of force — “on the table” vis-à-vis Iran.

Given all the problems that the lobby’s prescriptions have produced in recent years, you’d think U.S. leaders would have learned to ignore its advice. But there’s little sign of that so far, which means that these past errors are likely to be repeated. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/display/ContentDetails/i/9174/pid/895

Director of National Intelligence Tells Congress: Americans Can Be Killed Overseas

I keep telling my readers that the Empire is dying and this kind of assertion by the “intelligence” community simply reinforces the notion. Imagine if Russia made the same proclamation and said they had a license to kill Russian citizens on American soil. You can imagine the uproar. This is monstrous but then again this is government. -BB

Dennis Blair Before Congress

In testimony before the House Intelligence Committee today, National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair told representatives that American citizens can be assassinated by the US government when they are oveseas.

Blair said the comments were intended to “reassure” Americans that there was a “set of defined policy and legal procedures” in place and that such assassinations are always carried out by the book.

Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R – MI) inquired about the procedures involved, asking what the legal framework was under which Americans could be killed by the intelligence community.

Blair insisted that under no circumstances would Americans be assassinated overseas for criticizing the government, adding “we don’t target people for free speech.” Rather they are subject to assassination when the government decides they are a threat and when they “get specific permission.” Exactly who was giving that permission was unclear.

The question has been increasingly important as the Obama Administration attempts to help the Yemeni government assassinate Anwar al-Awlaki, a US-born cleric who is not accused of any crimes by the US government. The administration maintains that secret evidence exists linking Awlaki to terrorism.

There seems to be a chilling lack of oversight in the procedure behind these killings, however, Blair’s assurances against politically motivated assassinations aside. The US has killed Americans in overseas attacks before, but only as “collateral damage.” It has never admitted to explicitly assassinating an American citizen before, though it seems that the policy is in place and such killings are only a matter of time.

See:

http://news.antiwar.com/2010/02/03/blair-us-govt-can-kill-citizens-overseas-as-part-of-defined-policy/