Under pressure from Congress, and complaints from those on the pointy end of things, Natick Soldier Systems undertook a study to evaluate current camouflage patterns and the results have just been published. The results may shock a few of you.

The stunningly obvious comment, via Soldier Systems,  from a retired SF Warrant:

“Nothing earth shattering; desert shit works great in the desert and green shit works great in the green area.”

Practically speaking, and this report is sure to generate a lot of lathering in the preparedness and  gun-o-spheres, what does this mean to me? I would suggest the following salient points, from particular to camo to more general in nature:

  1. Universal camo is a jack of all trades and master of none. It does “well enough”, but it shouldn’t be shocking that it doesn’t lead the pack for a specific environment.
  2. Evaluate where you reside- If you live in a woodland environment, and your retreat, hunting cabin, etc is in a woodland environment, do you really need a universal pattern? Or would a surplus set of woodland BDUs (currently dirt cheap) suffice?
  3. Most importantly of all- evaluate potential kit based on your needs and not how well your purchase will go over on the gun boards. We’re human, most of us have a “status” need, whether you care to acknowledge it or not. Far too often one eschews practicality and what works for the “latest and greatest”. Develop a “needs assessment” and base the assessment on your required capabilities for the conditions you will most likely encounter.
  4. Start with your needs and required capabilities, then select your tools. It is far more expensive, and a waste of a finite resource (your time and money) to do the reverse.

Here is the other half of my interview with Ernie in Phoenix.  We discussed the Constitution, the Articles of Confederation and the sorry state of America.  This was the first time I was in an actual studio instead of on the phone.  It is hard to believe the amount of work that goes into producing just one of these shows like this.  Ernie is living the dream, he is a full-time liberty activist and seems to have a good time doing it. -BB

See:  https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Article/061053-2009-11-06-declare-your-independence-with-ernest-hancock-morning-november-6th-2009.htm

Mike V is headlining my unworthy scribblings for the third day and it just so happens that the points of instruction make it so.  I have just returned from a lovely weekend instructing a Rifle Clinic near Phoenix in 100+ degree weather but it produced better shooters so the means justifies the end.  While the country has always been rather intolerant of dissent, the times are becoming even more perilous with the mountains of laws blanketing the once fruitful and free united States.  Please read and heed.

The modus operandi for federal law enforcement is entrapment through the use of confidential informants (CI) for the majority of cases which send both the innocent and the guilty to jail.  Mike nicely instructs in his tidy primer yet another methodology employed by our “public servants” in their never-ending quest to act as polite and not so polite concierges to usher formerly free citizens in to various levels of the penal systems and political gulags in America.  What?  America does not have gulags.  Au contraire, all gun crimes in America which don’t involve violence in the commission of a crime are political crimes (see Olafson),  Per that line of reasoning, all drug offenses are…and we travel down that inconvenient logic path.  Students, pay attention… -BB

FedTroll 101: Gather round class and I will explain why I manage my own comments.

FedTroll in his natural habitat.

All we all comfortable? Everybody paying attention? Good. This is your critical thinking assignment for today. The subject was placed as a comment to one of my posts on my blog. Read it first in its entirety and then we will deconstruct it.

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post “”In re U.S. vs. Olofson”: A second Open Letter to …”:

I firmly believe in preparing for a first strike. I did a Google search on the name of my town and it somehow led me to the E-mail list for the entire police department. Using the search engine (REDACTED) I have been able to find the home address of almost all the officers. Most of the local cops have M-4 Carbines in the trunk of their cruisers so my friends know where to go to get some weapons (if needed). I would think that when the SHTF that a phone call from the spouse or child of an officer that there is someone holding them hostage just might demoralize the Gestapo who would be helping the BATF goons. Just my 2 cents worth to give hints such as finding where the BATF FBI & others live.

Now, class, if you haven’t figured it out by now, this is the work of a FedTroll. FedTrolls live under bridges and in other dark sewers and do not like the light.

Let us then deconstruct this piece of work.

“I firmly believe in preparing for a first strike.”

Now class, which of our Three Percent prime directives does this violate? Yes, Johnny? That is correct. “No Fort Sumters.” What else? Yes, Janey? That is certainly true. Our first requirement as Three Percenters is that we not be stupid and play into our opponent’s hands. Bobby? That is also correct. Anyone who was serious about his announced intention would keep it quiet out of operational security. Yes, Billy, your hand was up? Right, no one with half a brain would announce such an intention on the Internet where every key stroke and ISP can be mapped by the NSA. And, therefore? Anybody? Correct. He is either too stupid to fear the Feds or he is one. Well done, James. Now let’s move on to the next statement.

“I did a Google search on the name of my town and it somehow led me to the E-mail list for the entire police department.”

Comments? Yes, Martin. No Billy, Martin’s hand was up first. Uh, huh. Yes, this does defy logic. How many police departments put their rosters on the Internet? Yes, that’s right. It does defy logic and experience. And you conclude? Precisely. It IS a lie. OK, next statement.

“Using the search engine (REDACTED) I have been able to find the home address of almost all the officers.”

Now, who would this statement most disconcert? Yes, Billy, that’s right. Police officers. And are local police officers and sheriff’s deputies ipso facto the enemies of the Three Percent? Of course, they aren’t. Billy? Yes, well said. If they are Oathkeepers they ARE one of us. And what do you think Oathkeepers would think about this if it were true? Yes, they would view anybody who did this as a potential enemy. I would too. Now, next statement.

“Most of the local cops have M-4 Carbines in the trunk of their cruisers so my friends know where to go to get some weapons (if needed).”

OK, William, I haven’t heard from you yet. What is wrong with this statement? Yes. Certainly. The 7.62 NATO cartridge does outrange the 5.56. Give me more though. Yes, full auto weapons do waste ammo. And? More please. Yes I know you and your father have better weapons than “those POS” as you eloquently put it. And? (Sigh.) OK, anybody. Janey. Yes. Precisely. If the officer is an Oathkeeper whoever stole his weapon would be an enemy to all of us. OK, and what about this part of his comment?

“I would think that when the SHTF that a phone call from the spouse or child of an officer that there is someone holding them hostage just might demoralize the Gestapo who would be helping the BATF goons. Just my 2 cents worth to give hints such as finding where the BATF FBI & others live.”

OK, look, you can’t all answer at once. William. Critical thinking time, son. What’s wrong with this? Don’t look at Janey. THINK, son. Right! William is correct. Three Percenters and Oathkeepers do not target non-combatants or innocents of any kind. That is what our enemies do. Yes, William, thank you. It IS just like Waco and Ruby Ridge. And is this the conduct of a Threeper or an Oathkeeper? Yes, well, you seem to all be certain of that. The answer is NO. Anybody else? Yes, Janey? That is correct. If he has done what he claims to have done and posted it in public, he has violated a number of new federal laws. Yes, he could go to jail for a long time for doing so. So is he just stupid and wrong or is he a FedTroll? Let me see a show of hands. Who thinks he’s just stupid? OK, William. anybody else? No? The rest of you are correct, this IS the work of a FedTroll. And why would he try to post it as a comment on my blog?

That is right, Janey. To discredit me and the Threepers. And if I just let this comment post automatically without vetting it? Yes, Janey, again you are correct. It might pass unnoticed and people would think I agreed with such, uh, crap. Really Janey, I know you feel strongly about this, but try to use less, uh, scatalogical language. Yes, dear, I know your daddy is a truck driver.

OK, I guess that about wraps it up for today. William? See me after class for some extra reading, will you?

The internet is a wonderful tool but too many people noodle on it for hours and accomplish less than zero.  Here is the beginning of what I hope to be a long and exhaustive list of practicl sites on the web to get us better prepared for Ragnarok.  (Thanks to Gooch and Junker over at The Mental Militia). -BB

So …. Here goes ….

www.doityourself.com
Articles and videos on personal finance, legal issues, home and garden, car and truck repair, pets, and electronics.

www.diynetwork.com
How-to articles on home repair, gardening, landscaping and wood working.

www.monkeysee.com
Expert and user videos covering a wide variety of topics.

www.expertvillage.com
Short videos on how to do just about everything.

www.thisoldhouse.com
Articles on home-improvement projects, planning, tools and products, along with newsletters, videos and discussion boards.

www.autozone.com
Auto-repair guides for specific vehicles, troubleshooting and parts-locating guides.

eHow | How To Do Just About Everything!
Learn how to do just about everything at eHow, the world’s most popular place to find How To instructions. New on eHow: Publish your own articles and How To …
www.ehow.com

wikiHow – The How-to Manual That You Can Edit
wikiHow is a wiki based collaboration to build the world’s largest, highest quality how to manual. Our multilingual how to manual has free step-by-step …
www.wikihow.com

How To Do Things.com
Learn how to do almost anything! Find thousands of helpful how to articles. Or become a writer and publish your own articles. What do you want to learn how …
www.howtodothings.com

How To Videos on Wonder How To – Video Tutorials, DIY Lessons & Tips
Wonder How To is your guide to free how to videos on the Web. Search, Browse and Discover the best how to videos across the web using the largest how to …
www.wonderhowto.com

Study Skills – How to Study
More than 40 free practical articles about how to study and improve academic skills, plus hundreds of study tips submitted by users.
www.how-to-study.com

Instructables – Make, How To, and DIY
Instructables is the Biggest How To and DIY community where people make and share inspiring, entertaining, and useful projects, recipes, and hacks.
www.instructables.com

Knowledge Hound – The Web’s biggest how-to directory!
Knowledge Hound, is the Web’s biggest how-to directory. Discover DIY tutorials and tips covering thousands of subjects. Learn how now for free!
www.knowledgehound.com

How to Clean Anything
How to clean almost anything. From toilets to barbeques, this is the place for you. Need help we have thousands of tips to search through.
www.howtocleananything.com

Cyndi’s List – How To
David’s Genealogy Discussion Lists Homepage – How to Copy and Paste · Genealogy Articles, …. Cyndi’s List of Genealogy Sites on the Internet – How To …
www.cyndislist.com/howto.htm

From the Cochise Talk website:

The Constitution of the United States of America is “the” document upon which our ship-of-state navigates. We think of our “rights” as coming from “the Constitution”. But, do they really? Does the Constitution really give us protection, and if so, from what? And, what do we know about the process that eventually produced a ratified document? And how much do we really know about its authors’ mind sets at the time. And, has the “bible” of our legal and other systems held up over time? We think of a “scholar” as a person who’s study, knowledge and understanding of a subject runs deep. Such a person may not always be met with agreement, but no one can take away from the commitment such a so-called “expert” makes to research, and to digging “even deeper”. So, are you ready for a rare and captivating discussion of our Constitution? If you want to know something more than you do right now, if you are ready to have your own thought process challenged, and if you want to do it in less than an hour (that goes by like 20 minutes), listen to local retired military man and now government contractor Bill Buppert DOIN’ LUNCH with Dan Abrams on Cochise Talk. This discussion might well be censored were it held in some other countries. Not in the U.S. and not on CochiseTalk.com We especially appreciate your feedback on this exclusive and timely interview conducted just one week after Constitution Day on September 17th. Write us at: info@CochiseTalk.com Note: Mr. Buppert’s papers are frequently published on www.lewrockwell.com.

See:

https://cochisetalk.com/index.php?d1=Gov-Politics&p=206

Publisher’s Note: Attribution: I am indebted to my good friend Skip who has guided me through a FAL kit build and has patiently answered my numerous questions along the way. This article is as much his as mine. -BB

I would like to begin with stating that accurizing is in quotes. The FAL, unlike its contemporary, the M-14, was developed from a different philosophy regarding the inherent accuracy of the MBR. Whereas the M-14 is a “product improved” version of the M-1 Garand, the FAL was developed with the intent of putting an MBR in the hands of a European conscript with little to no prior shooting experience. In contrast, the M-14 and its predecessor the M-1 were built with the somewhat unique American tradition of highly accurate battle rifles. To back up this claim, please refer to the 1912 edition of the USMC marksmanship manual where a 600 yard shot is considered “medium range”. It is more than likely that a stock, as issued, M-14 will outshoot a stock, as issued, FAL every time. It is also worth noting that “accuracy” as a concept is a completely human construct and not an objective standard, and the gulf between measuring groups punched out on a paper target and using a rifle in a high stress environment where the targets are shooting back is a wide one indeed. The FAL was designed to be “minute of a man” at 500 meters and that should be enough for practical applications.

That being said, there are modifications that can be made to the FAL to improve its accuracy. We’ll examine options for three assemblies, which are the barrel, trigger group, front and rear sight and what can be done to improve them.

The Barrel: A good barrel, properly timed and head spaced will do more to improve accuracy than almost any other assembly on the rifle. Without getting into the inch (UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand) and metric (everyone else except the Israelis) variations, there are two basic types of barrels, chrome lined and non-chrome lined. Chrome offers outstanding corrosion resistance and longer life, but the plating process leaves microscopic variations in the thickness of the plating, affecting the overall diameter of the barrel, hence, affecting accuracy. Non-lined barrels have a more consistent diameter, but will wear faster and not offer as much resistance to corrosion. Surplus barrels that have reputations for accuracy are STG (Austrian made and found in the chrome and plain flavors), Imbel (Brazilian and chrome lined) and Argentine (chrome lined and plain).

If you are going to purchase a surplus barrel, I highly advise either you or the seller to check muzzle and throat erosion with the appropriate gauges.  If the seller is gauging the barrel, please ask for photos to confirm the readings. The barrel that is listed for sale that looks in great shape could be almost shot out and the Imbel with the finish worn off may be practically new in terms of muzzle and throat erosion (Imbels are often referred to as “carried much, shot little” rifles). Once you have a barrel that gauges acceptably, you will now have to properly time the barrel to the upper. If this is your first attempt at building a FAL, I recommend finding a gunsmith in your area who is knowledgeable about FAL construction or another homebuilder who has built a few. It takes an experienced eye to determine TDC and if the barrel is not timed correctly it will shoot left (too loose) or right (too tight) since the front sight will be canted. If you are working on an already built rifle, it may pay off to gauge the barrel and check the timing, especially if it is a home build or a build from a less than reputable manufacturer.

Another import aspect to examine is the barrel’s crown. This usually involves removing the flash hider but is well worth the time. If the crown is nicked or otherwise damaged, there are several methods to correct this problem. For minor imperfections and nicks, the use of a marble and 800 grit valve lapping compound can be used to remove the defects and polish the crown. Apply a thin coating of lapping compound to the marble, place the marble on the crown and use your palm to rotate and spin the marble in place with a somewhat random motion akin to a random orbital palm sander. This simple (and cheap!) method can go a long ways toward improving a slightly damaged crown. For more extensive damage that cannot be corrected by the above method, I recommend having a gunsmith re-crown the barrel.

Trigger Group: The FAL trigger assembly is a marvel of simplicity. It is also a perfect example of why military match shooters do not use stock trigger assemblies. Unlike the M1, M-14 and AR family, there really is no “match grade” trigger assembly for the FAL. There are several steps you can take to improve the trigger pull, but breaking the proverbial “glass rod” is out of reach. In keeping with my inherent tinkering philosophy of working on the cheapest part first, I would start with replacing the springs in the assembly. For around $20-$30 one can order a complete spring replacement set for the entire rifle (and if you are going to replace the trigger assembly springs, you might as well replace all the springs while the rifle is apart).

If this did not enhance your trigger experience, the next incremental step would be to replace the new “stock” springs with a set of “Trigger Pull Reduction Springs” from Falcon Arms. As a caveat, I have found no need to do this after installing new “stock” springs, however you may have your own preference.

If either of these methods does not improve things to your liking, a Google search on “FAL Trigger Job” is the ticket. I won’t talk about those methods here since I have not used them but you are free to try if you so care. Just remember that altering the geometry of how the hammer, trigger and sear connect and function can lead to malfunctions and an unsafe rifle. I may add that an alternative to a trigger job, a nice break-in compound for new or mismatched H/T/S sets is to use a pumice product such as Gogo mixed with some Lucas Oil Stabilizer to lap the trigger group. It is likely that lapping it with pumice really won’t wear the parts at a rapid rate, unlike sand paper or, God forbid, a belt sander. A simple washing with Powder Blast (degreaser) clears the pumice away from the lower after the individual is satisfied they have broken in the trigger group after repeated trigger pulls against the palm of their hand.

Front and Rear Sights: If there is one single improvement that can drastically improve your FAL it is definitely replacing the rear sight with a Hampton Lower from DSA. It replaces the somewhat inadequate stock rear sight with an M16A2 rear sight. If you plan on replacing your trigger springs, you can swap out the lowers at the same time. As a caveat, DSA is extremely slow to ship and the wait times for the Hampton seem to average about 4-6 months. You can try searching on the second hand market for used Hamptons and Kaiserworks (which also made the FAL lower with an M16A2 rear sight) although not many people seem to sell them after using them.

Front sight posts for the FAL come in multiple heights, usually identified by white dots on the base of the post (1 dot, 2 dot, etc). If after zeroing, your rifle is shooting high or low after maxing out the front sight’s elevation adjustments, replace the existing post with one of a higher or lower dot count. DSA is not the sole source for the front sight posts, but I have linked to their offering as an example.

“By rendering the labor of one, the property of the other, they cherish pride, luxury, and vanity on one side; on the other, vice and servility, or hatred and revolt.”

– James Madison

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.”

-Lysander Spooner

Today, 17 September 2009, is Constitution Day. There will be paeans, abundant commentary and church-like observances of the glories of this document in making us the most blessed nation on planet earth.  This essay suggests a contrarian thesis. The Constitution is an enabling document for big government.  Much like the Wizard of Oz, the man behind the curtain is a fraud.  In this case, for all the sanctimonious handwringing and the obsequious idolatry of the parchment, it sealed the fate of our liberties and freedoms and has operated for more than 200 years as a cover for massive expansion of the tools and infrastructure of statist expansion and oppression.  Among the many intellectual travels I have undertaken, this is one of the most heart-breaking I have ventured on.  I want to acknowledge the compass-bearers who sent me on this journey:  Kenneth W. Royce (aka Boston T. Party) and his seminal book, The Hologram of Liberty and and Kevin Gutzman’s Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution.  For most of the political spectrum in America, the document represents their interpretation of how to make the this mortal coil paradise.  Even in libertarian circles, it is taken as an article of faith the Constitution is a brilliant mechanism to enlarge liberty and keep government at bay.  That is a lie.

The document was drafted in the summer of 1787 behind closed doors in tremendous secrecy because if word leaked out of the actual contents and intent, the revolution that had just concluded would have been set ablaze again. They were in a race against time and did everything in their power to ensure that the adoption took place as quickly as possible to avoid reflection and contemplation in the public square that would kill the proposal once the consequences of its agenda became apparent.  They were insisting that the states ratify first and then propose amendments later. It was a political coup d’état.  It was nothing less than an oligarchal coup to ensure that the moneyed interests, banksters and aristocrats could cement their positions and mimic the United Kingdom from which they had been recently divorced.

The original charter of the drafters was to pen improvements to the existing Articles of Confederation.  Instead, they chose to hijack the process and create a document which enslaved the nation.  Federalist in the old parlance meant states rights and subsidiarity but the three authors of the fabled Federalist Papers supported everything but that.  Their intent and commitment was to create a National government with the ability to make war on its constituent parts if these states failed to submit themselves to the central government.

As Austrian economists have discovered, bigger is not necessarily better.  The brilliant and oft-dismissed Articles of Confederation (AoC) and Perpetual Union are a testament to voluntarism and cooperation through persuasion that the Constitution disposed of with its adoption.  Penned in 1776 and ratified in 1781, the spirit and context of the Articles live on in the Swiss canton system and are everywhere evident in the marketplace where confederationist sentiments are practiced daily.  The confederation’s design divines its mechanism from what an unfettered market does everyday:  voluntary cooperation, spontaneous information signals and the parts always being smarter than the sum   A confederation according to the Webster’s 1828 dictionary is:

  1. 1.      The act of confederating; a league; a compact for mutual support; alliance; particularly of princes, nations or states.

I would advise the readership to use the 1828 Webster’s dictionary to accompany any primary source research you may undertake to understand American (& British) letters in the eighteenth century.  It is the source for the contemporary lexicon.  It is even available online now.

Here is a simple comparison of the two organizing documents:

Articles of Confederation

Constitution

Levying taxes

Congress could request states to pay taxes

Congress has right to levy taxes on individuals

Federal courts

No system of federal courts

Court system created to deal with issues between citizens, states

Regulation of trade

No provision to regulate interstate trade

Congress has right to regulate trade between states

Executive

No executive with power. President of U.S. merely presided over Congress

Executive branch headed by President who chooses Cabinet and has checks on power of judiciary and legislature

Amending document

13/13 needed to amend Articles

2/3 of both houses of Congress plus 3/4 of state legislatures or national convention

Representation of states

Each state received 1 vote regardless of size

Upper house (Senate) with 2 votes; lower house (House of Representatives) based on population

Raising an army

Congress could not draft troops, dependent on states to contribute forces

Congress can raise an army to deal with military situations

Interstate commerce

No control of trade between states

Interstate commerce controlled by Congress

Disputes between states

Complicated system of arbitration

Federal court system to handle disputes

Sovereignty

Sovereignty resides in states

Constitution the supreme law of the land

Passing laws

9/13 needed to approve legislation

50%+1 of both houses plus signature of President

Note that the precept of individual taxation was an end-run against state sovereignty from the very beginning.  If the Congress does not wish to violate state sovereignty, then they will simply prey on the individuals in the states.  It should be obvious that the AoC was not a recipe for government employees from top to bottom to use the office to enrich themselves so a scheme was afoot to precipitate and manufacture dissent over the present configuration of the central government apparatus which for all intents and purposes barely existed.  The AoC was intolerable to a narrow panoply of interests and the Federalist Papers appeared between October 1787 and August 1788 to plead the case for a newer form of “Republic” authored by three individuals: James Madison, John Jay, and Alexander Hamilton. The British had sued for peace in 1783 and the AoC were still in effect until 1790.  Time was ticking to erect the new government apparatus that would strengthen the central government to eventually mimic the very tyranny which caused British North America to put the English Crown in the hazard.  The Anti-Federalists rose up in response and provided what I consider one of the most splendid and eloquent defenses of small government penned in our history.

When the Constitutional Convention convened on 1787, 55 delegates came but 14 later quit as the Convention eventually abused its mandate and scrapped the AoC instead of revising it.  The notes and proceedings of the cloistered meeting were to be secret as long as 53 years later when Madison’s edited notes were published in 1840.

The Anti-Federalist Brutus avers in Essay I in October 1787:

“But what is meant is, that the legislature of the United States are vested with the great and uncontroulable powers, of laying and collecting taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; of regulating trade, raising and supporting armies, organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, instituting courts, and other general powers. And are by this clause invested with the power of making all laws, proper and necessary, for carrying all these into execution; and they may so exercise this power as entirely to annihilate all the state governments, and reduce this country to one single government. And if they may do it, it is pretty certain they will; for it will be found that the power retained by individual states, small as it is, will be a clog upon the wheels of the government of the United States; the latter therefore will be naturally inclined to remove it out of the way. Besides, it is a truth confirmed by the unerring experience of ages, that every man, and every body of men, invested with power, are ever disposed to increase it, and to acquire a superiority over every thing that stands in their way.”

The conflict was brewing between the Jeffersonians among the individualists and the Hamiltonian collectivists.  The rhetorical lines were drawn and the fate of the nation eventually slid into the camp of the Nationalists.

George Washington wrote to John Jay on 1 August 1786:

“Many are of opinion that Congress have too frequently made use of the suppliant humble tone of requisition, in applications to the States, when they had a right to assume their imperial dignity and command obedience. Be that as it may, requisitions are a perfect nihility, where thirteen sovereign, independent[,] disunited States are in the habit of discussing & refusing compliance with them at their option. Requisitions are actually little better than a jest and a bye word through out the Land. If you tell the Legislatures they have violated the treaty of peace and invaded the prerogatives of the confederacy they will laugh in your face. What then is to be done? Things cannot go on in the same train forever. It is much to be feared, as you observe, that the better kind of people being disgusted with the circumstances will have their minds prepared for any revolution whatever. We are apt to run from one extreme into another. To anticipate & prevent disasterous contingencies would be the part of wisdom & patriotism.”

It appears even the much admired Washington was having none of the talk of independence and wanted a firm hand on the yoke of the states to make them obey their masters on high.  Washington’s behavior in the Whiskey Rebellion cast away any doubts of the imperious behavior of the central government a mere four year after the adoption of the Constitution.

Patrick Henry gave the firmest defense of the skeptical posture when he questioned the precarious position the Constitution put to the state’s sovereignty on 5 June 1788 at the Virginia Ratifying Convention (the savvy Founding Lawyers ensured that the process of ratification was sped along by bypassing the bicameral house requirements and simply asking the states to conduct ratifying conventions):

“How were the Congressional rights defined when the people of America united by a confederacy to defend their liberties and rights against the tyrannical attempts of Great-Britain? The States were not then contented with implied reservation. No, Mr. Chairman. It was expressly declared in our Confederation that every right was retained by the States respectively, which was not given up to the Government of the United States. But there is no such thing here. You therefore by a natural and unavoidable implication, give up your rights to the General Government. Your own example furnishes an argument against it. If you give up these powers, without a Bill of Rights, you will exhibit the most absurd thing to mankind that ever the world saw–A Government that has abandoned all its powers–The powers of direct taxation, the sword, and the purse. You have disposed of them to Congress, without a Bill of Rights–without check, limitation, or controul. And still you have checks and guards–still you keep barriers–pointed where? Pointed against your weakened, prostrated, enervated State Government! You have a Bill of Rights to defend you against the State Government, which is bereaved of all power; and yet you have none against Congress, though in full and exclusive possession of all power! You arm youselves against the weak and defenceless, and expose yourselves naked to the armed and powerful. Is not this a conduct of unexampled absurdity? What barriers have you to oppose to this most strong energetic Government? To that Government you have nothing to oppose. All your defence is given up. This is a real actual defect. . . “

The Bill of Rights as we know them today were first introduced by James Madison in 1789 in response to the fears the emerging Constitution caused among the free men in these united States.  They eventually came into effect on December 15, 1791.  The Federalists were desperately opposed to the adoption of the Bill of Rights being insisted upon by Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson and other skeptics of central governance. As Brutus again so cleverly pointed out in the Anti-Federalist papers #84:

“ This will appear the more necessary, when it is considered, that not only the Constitution and laws made in pursuance thereof, but alt treaties made, under the authority of the United States, are the supreme law of the land, and supersede the Constitutions of all the States. The power to make treaties, is vested in the president, by and with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the senate. I do not find any limitation or restriction to the exercise of this power. The most important article in any Constitution may therefore be repealed, even without a legislative act. Ought not a government, vested with such extensive and indefinite authority, to have been restricted by a declaration of rights? It certainly ought.

So clear a point is this, that I cannot help suspecting that persons who attempt to persuade people that such reservations were less necessary under this Constitution than under those of the States, are wilfully endeavoring to deceive, and to lead you into an absolute state of vassalage (emphasis mine).”

The Bill of Rights nominations from the respective sovereign states originally numbered near 200 and the Founding Lawyers saw fit to include twelve (the two concerning apportionment and Congressional pay failed to pass) after much bickering especially by the most monstrous worthy of the time, Alexander Hamilton.  A brilliant mind coupled with all the political knife-fighting skills needed to dominate the proceedings, Hamilton made sure that the tools of oppression and a financial yoke would be decorating our necks in perpetuity.  Small solace can be taken in the aftermath of the duel between Hamilton and Burr on 11 July 1804 in that it took him close to a day to die.

Alexander Hamilton tipped his intellectual hand in a speech to the Constitutional Convention concerning the United States Senate, 06/18/1787 (quoted in the notes of Judge Yates):

“All communities divide themselves into the few and the many. The first are the rich and the well-born; the other the mass of the people … turbulent and changing, they seldom judge or determine right.  Give therefore to the first class a distinct, permanent share in the Government … Nothing but a permanent body can check the imprudence of democracy.”

I am no fan of democracy as I see it as nothing more than a transformational accommodation to tyranny over time but one can infer from this quote that Hamilton fancied a class of people more equal than others who would have a disproportionate access to the levers of power over the great unwashed.  Again, I am suggesting that the Constitution was a document designed from the beginning as a means to rob constituent and subsidiary parts of sovereignty and subject these subordinate elements to a national framework which made their position subservient to the Federal government. The desire of the Federalists was to install a national framework and cement the structure through the machinations of national banking, franking of a currency and debt creation.  Keep in mind that all of the nattering on about the Federal Reserve today is a complaint against a Constitutional Frankenstein monster in its fourth iteration since the other attempts at national banks failed.  You can guess who picked up the tab.

The Bill of Rights was finally passed on 15 December 1791 but it was much diluted and purposefully weaker and more ambiguous about the central government’s implied and explicit powers.

The Constitution took effect on 4 March 1789 with 11 states under it and two states not submitting ratification.  North Carolina did ratify it when a promise of a future Bill of Rights was assured.  Rhode Island refused and was the only state to put the Constitution to a popular vote where it failed on 24 March 1788 by an 11-1 margin.  They eventually ratified it.

Hamilton now had the ways and means to make real his storied dream:  “A national debt, if it is not excessive, will be to us a national blessing.”  The moneyed interests saw the advantage of monetizing the debt. By assuming the state’s debts at the national government level, a means of controlling commerce and taxation became an implied task of the central government.  This may have been the first incident of the debtors from the Revolutionary War convincing their Hamiltonian allies that if they had the national government bear the debt and relieve them of responsibility, this could be used as the means to establish the coveted national bank to start the issuance of government currency not to mention the driver for increased taxation.

All the puzzle pieces had finally locked into place.  Royce eloquently explains what has transpired in Hologram of Liberty: “To put a “gun” in the hands of the new national government was the primary object, the great sine qua non, of the Constitution.  A comprehensive de jure authority of Congress backed with de facto guns.”  The Confederation is defeated and the long train of usurpation, centralization and tyranny leaves the station for what has become American history.

Hamilton’s machinations and influence probably single-handedly turned the product of this secret confab into one of the most successful instruments of political oppression before even the creation of the USSR.  What makes it even more sublime as a tool of big government is the sophisticated propaganda and hagiographic enterprise which has both spontaneously and through careful planning suborned the public’s skepticism of the nature of the machine erected to control their behavior which has resulted in an almost religious observance of all things Constitutional.  Carefully cultivated over two hundred years, this religious idolatry had certainly fogged the thinking of this writer for most of his adult life.  This sleeper has awakened.

Ask yourself this question:  have the robed government employees who read the Constitutional tea leaves for the most part defended individual liberty or have they rubber-stamped the exponential growth of power and control of the colossus that sits astride the Potomac?

“Our constitutions purport to be established by ‘the people,’ and, in theory, ‘all the people’ consent to such government as the constitutions authorize. But this consent of ‘the people’ exists only in theory. It has no existence in fact. Government is in reality  established by the few; and these few assume the consent of all the rest, without any such consent being actually given.”

-Lysander Spooner

Former Governor Lutrin was hard to find. Having served out his single term after shepherding Idaho from the corrupt and tyrannical claws of the rulers in DC and their agents throughout the land, he had quietly retired to his ranch near Sandpoint, ID in the northern panhandle in Year One of the Free State Alliance (FSA). The Alliance had expanded to embrace the former states of Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Eastern Washington, Nevada and British Columbia joined two years later by Saskatchewan, Alberta, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon. The Alaskan Republic maintained very close ties with the FSA. Utah had gone her own way and established a Mormon theocracy. The West Coast states formed Pacifica but the Green Coalition which maintained tight control on the economy caused a brain-drain and economic collapse that splintered the coalition.

Since the break-up of these united States, all of California south of San Francisco had become part of the pan-Mexican rump state in Atzlan along with most of the American Southwest. Mexico has splintered into approximately ten separate states with alliances between the various 31 states that comprised Mexico ebbing and flowing on a daily basis. The decriminalization of drug laws in Pacifica and the Free State Alliance significantly weakened the strength of the Mexican drug cartels to finance their activities and the pan-Mexican economy started to flourish after nearly a century of economic and monetary penury.

Pacifica remained in force in the major cities like Portland and Seattle but had lost total control of the countryside in what had formerly been Washington and Oregon. The Dakotas finally allied with the Midwestern Alliance.

The American South had settled into an uneasy alliance with the United States Socialist Republic (USSR) which maintained their capital in the District of Columbia. Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire eventually broke away from the USSR to establish a system of Swiss-style cantons which the USSR battered for the first two years but eventually exhausted their ability to fight once the USSR economy collapsed into a miserable shambles that made Cuba look like 1990s Hong Kong.

Premiere Obama conceded defeat in an indirect fashion after assumption of his lifelong appointment at the circus-like Constitutional Convention in the USSR in 2012. The massive government intervention and adoption of total central planning had predictable results: the world’s first 100% marginal tax rate on the top fifty percent of earners had only surprised the Premiere’s Economic Council but no one else with the results. Tax receipts were down by 80% in the first year and disappeared in the second. Paul Krugman, the chairman of the council, was quoted as saying “[that] greed would be eliminated and a new man would emerge from the bold experiment.” The only thing that emerged were the tens of miles of refugees attempting to flee the USSR in the first year after which the borders were sealed and all the government’s guns were trained inward to prevent the citizens from escaping the latest economic nostrum – permanent employment in a government job assigned to you whether you liked it or not.

It is difficult to gauge how bad conditions are in the USSR. Like the Soviet Union during the twentieth century and Cuba afterwards, rumors were rampant. Gulags, reeducation camps, mass disappearances, famine and disease outbreaks were apparently the order of the day. Some of the crueler pundits referred to the Premiere as Kim Jong Obama and Barak Mugabe. Like the former northern part of the Koreas, it remains a rather strong military power but an economic basket case.

Fears of meddling on the part of China, Russia and Middle Eastern states proved to be unfounded as those nations grapple with their own economic and social collapse difficulties. While all manner of economic nonsense like Keynes and Marx were the “wave of the future” in the twentieth century, the twenty-first century is seeing a veritable renaissance in the works of Hayek, von Mises, Rothbard and Bastiat.

“It is almost as if the entire human race has finally awakened from the fever dream of the government supremacists who have inoculated them against freedom for five millennia and opened their eyes to the new possibilities” Mr. Lutrin insists as we gaze out over the huge forested valley outside his home near Sandpoint. He is fit and tanned and still participates in what some would term adrenal sports. He remains a devout Senior Instructor on the Appleseed Trail for the Revolutionary War Veterans Association teaching weekend marksmanship clinics throughout the FSA when he is not globetrotting. We are comfortably seated in a veranda near his workshop. Since retirement he has found lucrative work as a consultant around the world “deprogramming and devolving state industries into private hands” with his new venture firm, The Spooner Group. Asked if he misses being the governor of a state, he merely smirks and claims he would rather work for a living.

“Mr. Lutrin (he insists he not be referred to as governor), five years have passed since the first crisis which set the nation asunder and broke up the most powerful nation on the globe. On reflection, would you have done anything different?”

“No, my only regret is that I was left with a task that should have been done ten or a hundred years before me. I was asked recently who my favorite President was during the twentieth century and the only one I could come up with was Coolidge and possibly Harding. No one else even came close. The rest of the rascals were simply well-dressed pirates. Barry, a close economist friend of mine, claimed there was no such thing as governments, only interests…there is plenty of truth to that.”

“…but the bloodshed and misery which followed the wholesale destruction of the former Union when secession spread like wildfire…”

“Hold on, I am not the author of the naked aggression and sheer lunacy that emanated from the Federal government for most of its history after the War Between the States in the 1860s. What happened five years ago was inevitability and just so happened to occur on my watch. I take umbrage at your comparison because you are quite literally insisting that if a man sees a serial killer discharging his duties, I have an obligation to cower instead of cowboy up and stop it. Look, I come from five generations of Westerners who not only earned their living the hard way but tended to be resentful of any authority outside of the family. You could almost surmise that my Celtic blood gave me a predisposition to anti-authoritarianism. There are lines in the sand…”

“So you are justifying the civil war which broke out across the country?”

“I am an old-school libertarian, not a pacifist. I believe in the non-aggression axiom. No man has the right to start a fight but the aggrieved party damn sure has the right to put a stop to any visited upon him. You see, that may be one of the worst pathogens or memes the political class and its apologists has convinced people to believe – that they are utterly incapable of helping themselves unless they surrender their rights to a violent elite. John Wayne said it best if I recall: ‘I won’t be wronged, I won’t be insulted, and I won’t be laid a hand on. I don’t do these things to other people and I expect the same from them.’”

“That is rather simple…”

“I would like you to consider something. Imagine a society in which everyone took that to be the way proper folks behave. But think that there may be people who would ask themselves how they could take advantage of that. I am not talking about the entrepreneur or small business owner, I’m talking about the natural cross-section of humanity in which you have a certain group of folks for whom criminality and even psychopathy is simply the way they are wired or nurtured. Now some of those men would ask themselves how can I minimize risk and maximize gain? Here’s a pop quiz: what is the only group of criminals who have consistently evaded responsibility for their misbehavior, garnered tremendous rewards in money and prestige and, excepting rare instances like Nicolae Ceausescu, die abed fat and happy?

“I don’t…”

“Politicians. Throughout history with rare exceptions, they have been the decadent and greedy agents of death and destruction on humanity. 262 million corpses outside of warfare alone in the twentieth century stacked up as a paean to the Cult of the Politician. Hundreds of millions of humans hoodwinked into thinking that if only they would remit their fates to enlightened strangers, all the roads would be paved with gold and manna from heaven would provide succor for eternity. I think you would have to be a sociopath in the first place to want to rule over others.”

“But you were a politician. You were the governor of a state. Isn’t that rather hypocritical?”

“To a certain extent you are right. I compromised with the system and thought the only way to change it would be to wreck it from the inside. I did not enter office with the intention of secession and starting the whole ball of wax. Frankly, once I was in office, I could almost feel the sickness creeping over me. The feeling that maybe I could make a positive difference by punishing my fellow citizens to influence their behavior or using carrots and sticks on them as if they lab rats, as if I had the right to do so in the first place. Shame on me.

I had a constituent come to me one day and he and I had coffee together. Old and weather-beaten rancher who had seen the hard side of seventy years who put salt in his coffee. He was quite articulate and related a story to me. He asked me if I had ever had a difficult family member: alcohol or drug abuse, mentally retarded or a Down’s syndrome child. We both agreed we had. He made a very simple point: he said he would move heaven and earth to help his blood kin but even then a solution may not be available. In the end, no cure for Down’s or the son is not willing to give up his drink. No solution. Yet the politician’s siren song is that a group of disinterested strangers in a far-off castle will cure all these ills if the rancher would simply surrender a sizable portion of his wealth at gunpoint and be sanctioned by tens of thousands of laws he would have to obey on pain of death ultimately. Yet in the end, the politicians always make you worse off.”

“Certainly food for thought…”

“Look, we may be entering a new age here hundreds of years before I envisioned it possible. Men and women all over the globe may be waking up to the simple observation that empowering others to engage in violence or the threat of violence over their family and neighbors may be a distinctly unhealthy way to live.”

“Thank you, Governor Lutrin…”

“Please, call me Mr. Lutrin.”

See:

https://www.lewrockwell.com/buppert/buppert28.1.html

A rather interesting study that actually underestimates the impact on government bungling and violence in defeating resisters or insurgents. The key point to be divined is that the moment an insurgency gains strength, the government(s) will eventually have to negotiate to totally eradicate the resistance. Witness the Muslim resurgence in the Philippine island of Mindanao after the supposed total eradication the beginning of the twentieth century. Pop quiz: how many Muslim insurgencies have been defeated since the end of WWII (I call it the War to Save Josef Stalin)? Answer: zero. BB

ScienceDaily (July 17, 2009) — Insurgent groups like the Taliban can only be effectively engaged with timely and accurate military intelligence, and even good intelligence may only succeed in containing the insurgency, not defeating it, according to a new study.

The study is one of the first to combine military intelligence, attrition and civilian population behavior in a unified model of counterinsurgency dynamics.

The authors stress the role of obtaining intelligence about the insurgency. Absent intelligence, they write, not only can the insurgents escape unharmed and continue their violent attacks; but resultant poor government targeting causes innocent civilian deaths, which increases popular support for the insurgents and thus generates more recruits to the insurgency.

Recent attacks on Taliban strongholds by U.S. drones have shown that deaths among civilians may end up hindering American lead efforts, Kress notes. Ill-targeted actions taken by Israel and Colombia, for example, also have shown that unintended deaths among civilians have led to increased support for insurgents.

In their paper, the authors model the dynamic relations among intelligence, collateral casualties in the population, attrition, recruitment to the insurgency, and reinforcement to the government force.

Even under best-case assumptions regarding the government actions, they show that the government cannot totally eradicate an insurgency by force. The best it can do is containing it at a certain fixed level. The containment or stalemate points may be either fragile or stable. If the violence level is low, the containment point is fragile, in which case the insurgents can “break away” and eventually win. If the government commits large forces and applies a heavy hand (for example, the “surge” of United States forces in Iraq) then the stalemate point is stable.

The model and analysis, they write, represent a best case situation from the government perspective under the parameters put forward where (a) government force is steadily reinforced by new units, (b) it has unlimited endurance (it surrenders to the insurgents only when it is totally annihilated) and (c) the only recruitment to the insurgency is due to collateral casualties in the general population that generate resentment to the government, and therefore more recruits to the insurgency.

“If a government does keep its intelligence gathering capabilities high,” says Szechtman, “it can keep a hold on the insurgency, and after a while, when the insurgents realize they can’t win, a political compromise may be reached.”

That may be the most a government can expect, Kress and Szechtman warn.

——————————————————————————–

Journal references:

Moshe Kress and Roberto Szechtman. Why Defeating Insurgencies is Hard: The Effect of Intelligence in Counterinsurgency Operations — A Best-Case Scenario. Operations Research, (in press)
Jonathan David Farley. Evolutionary Dynamics of the Insurgency in Iraq: A Mathematical Model of the Battle for Hearts and Minds. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, Volume 30 (November 2007) , pp. 947 – 962
Adapted from materials provided by Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences.
Email or share this story:| More Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats:
APA

MLA
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (2009, July 17). Mathematical Model Shows Why Defeating Insurgent Groups Like Taliban Is So Difficult. ScienceDaily. Retrieved August 3, 2009, from

https://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2009/07/090716123316.htm

This is the final installment in my fictional treatment of a state making a break from the union.  I think we are increasingly closer to this becoming a reality.  BB

Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right – a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit.

~ Abraham Lincoln, (speech in Congress January 1848)

Idaho started the ball rolling and seceded from these united States. A total dissolution of America quickly followed as schisms and fissures erupted across North America. The collapse of the Mexican government caused a tidal wave of immigration to wash in to the southwestern portions of the former country. The great financial collapse of the world economy centered on the fiscal and monetary mischief in DC and Wall Street added yet more fuel to the fire. To tarnish the American reputation even more, hundreds of thousands of American troops were left stranded and penniless around the globe as the economic meltdown in America reduced the dollar to Zimbabwean valuations. To make matters worse, the government in DC instituted blanket loyalty oaths as a precursor for repatriation of returning soldiers who had managed to get home. This in turn caused entire National Guard and reserve units to return to their homes and assist in the buildup of forces in those states to fight the various doomed attempts by the central government to bring the rebellious states to heel.

The US followed in the footsteps of every other empire; corruption, decay and imperial overreach both at home and abroad. The District of Columbia still maintains a tenuous rump government known as the United States Socialist Republic (USSR) in control of the New England/Virginia states but power brownouts/blackouts, food shortages and insurgent activity have caused ambitions to whither to reunite the nation. Rumors of gulags, reeducation camps, oppressive domestic population controls and blanket censorship remain a common narrative for refugees escaping from the USSR. Repeated military strikes and adventures to bring the nation back to its original 2009 configuration failed and consequently, managed to cause the divisibility to exponentially expand. Total combat losses for USSR forces are unofficially estimated at 156,000 killed and wounded and a half-million missing in action. Excepting attempts by USSR guerillas to form pockets of resistance and insurrection, the entire effort has failed. There is some speculation FSA and Alaskan acquisition of nuclear devices on former US bases within their respective borders caused the USSR to pause and retreat but this remains unconfirmed.

The country has fractured into both natural and uneasy alliances. The west coast states formed a tight Green Coalition alliance in what is now Pacifica. Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Montana and Nevada have formed the Free State Alliance (FSA) confederation with very close relations with the Alaska Republic. An immense brain-drain from Pacifica to the FSA has resulted from the ecotopian experiment. The Dakotas remain on the fence as to whether they will join them or sign on with the Midwestern Alliance. The Lakota Sioux will remain their own nation regardless. The American South and Southwest are still in the throes of a multi-sided civil war. Hawaii has reverted back to its roots with the inauguration of King Kamehameha VI and the annexation of all non-Hawaiian property back to the native islanders.

Quebec has broken away and fighting remains sporadic in the western Canadian provinces as the national government continues to press for its supremacy over the rebel Canadian states in the west. There are reports of insurgent materiel and support from the Free State Alliance to British Columbia but these reports remain unsubstantiated.

Mexico has splintered into approximately ten separate states with alliances between the various 31 states that comprised Mexico ebbing and flowing on a daily basis. While the USSR maintain strict drug prohibition, the decriminalization of drug laws in Pacifica and the Free State Alliance has significantly weakened the strength of the Mexican drug cartels to finance their activities.

Fears of meddling on the part of China, Russia and Middle Eastern states have appeared to be exaggerated as those nations grapple with their own economic and social collapse difficulties.

The rapid expansion of oil drilling unfettered by confiscatory taxation and regulatory nonsense from DC has caused an economic boom that may prove to leave both the Alaska Republic and the FSA as the North American “Tigers” economically.


The following interview was granted by Governor Lutrin of Idaho and broadcast on Voice of Liberty.

“Good morning, Governor.”

“Good morning, John.”

“Ten years ago, I suspect no one would have seen this transpire the way it has. No one would have suspected that the map of America would be this different. Do you think that this has been the outcome the Founders would have wanted?”

“Hamilton would be apoplectic but I suspect that Jefferson would be pleased and, of course, Tom Paine and Sam Adams would see this as inevitable. Why it took so long for the rotten structure to sunder itself, I will never know. Mind you, I did not come into office anticipating this chain of events.”

“Has it been a rough ride for Idaho and the FSA?”

“Quite frankly, we sensed that there was nothing easy about the fateful decision to get DC out of our state and out of our lives. I was embarking on a journey that my great-great-great grandfather witnessed in South Carolina in 1860 and we were praying for better results. To say that we were stepping into a void is an understatement. Not everyone in the state agreed with our course of action but I was convinced the people hired me not only to represent them but to exercise my own moral compass and judgment much like the Founders when they seceded from the United Kingdom.

The death and destruction we suffered was tremendous as a result of both insurgents and US [now USSR] armed forces employed against us. Possibly the only thing that kept us from getting overwhelmed was the disproportionate number of US troops deployed overseas and the concomitant crisis where the currency collapse caused many of them to be stranded in Indian country abroad. That, of course, led to some bitterness. Idaho had a reputation as a rather well-armed bastion but the ensuing guerilla conflict against the Federal forces was far more than they anticipated. There were even several assassination attempts against me…”

“One of which you thwarted by killing the assassin yourself…”

“Well, I have always considered it sociopathic to outsource my self-defense to others so carrying a weapon was a daily routine even before the conflict…

I have to tell you that we would not have prevailed if other states such as Montana and Wyoming among others had not joined the fray. I have to say that the number of murdered civilians by Federal forces tipped the war in our favor. I can never mend those families but the massive indiscriminate firepower and total disregard for civilian casualties turned the tide against the Federal forces. I would think that the failures of military effectiveness in Iraq and Afghanistan would have been a consideration but the war on Americans in their own country became a very bitter contest. Federal units may have owned the roadways but once they started to step into the wilderness or hinterlands even in large formations they were picked apart and annihilated.”

“There are rumors of Federal forces still in Idaho and the FSA…”

“Very true but those incidents are getting more and more scarce as time passes. Ironically, after the major hostilities ceased nearly six months ago, almost half the Federal forces in the region deserted and joined us once we had enjoined a treaty for repatriation of families and guarantees against reprisals with the DC government during secret talks.”

“Why were the talks secret?”

“Six months into the conflict, currency collapses and corruption in DC had so stymied and hampered the war effort both here and abroad, they had no choice but to negotiate but they dare not do so in public or they would have lost electoral support and you know where a politicians’ bread is buttered. We got plenty of concessions and I was able to look the President in the eye and tell him: ‘No, you can’t!’. We could have avoided the bloodshed if we had simply been granted a civil divorce per our request in the first place.”

“How would you characterize life in Idaho and the FSA now?”

“Life is difficult especially for those who have lost family, homes and fortunes. But we are rebuilding and we are free. We now have our own private banking system employing real gold & silver to back the specie. We have shut down and sold all Federal government property and are currently starting the second year cycle to bid out all Federal and State lands to private individuals and investors. There is zero government money going into the education system.

Each of the Confederation members in the FSA, and Alaska for that matter, are experimenting with different levels of state governance. In Idaho and Montana, for instance, all the timber interests subscribe to a private consortium for firefighting. Would you invest in a timber enterprise that did not seek to protect their own investment? So we think the incentives are more reality-based instead of the perverse and corrupting laws DC forced upon us.

We have left it up to the counties and subsidiary units to figure out what works best. The Federal Register has no weight here and all the courts are being privatized. The only gun law remaining on the books is if the gun is used in the commission of a crime. We have also imposed term limits on all politicians to one term in their lifetime.

Government is a nasty habit and it will take more than a year to kill the addiction but we feel that the competitive laboratories the states are creating will give us a running start to find the best path. This is the greatest failure of DC rule; it allowed no freedom of choice in so many areas of our lives. We are now free to choose, fail and prosper. We don’t have all the answers. For instance, we have eliminated all our drug laws on the books and have decriminalized possession, sale and production. Utah has not, so we will see how that works out.

The remaining part-time politicians in the statehouse are even offered personal bounties for reducing or eliminating budget items. I would much rather give a politician five percent of a one million dollar program than spend the money on the program in to perpetuity. We are also basing their salaries on an inverse ratio. In other words, the more money they vote to spend out of taxpayer’s pockets, the lower their salaries and compensation. Would I like to close the doors to the statehouse permanently? Sure, but we aren’t there yet.”

“Governor, one term means you are out next year. What are your plans?”

“To mind my own business.”

When all government, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the Center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.” ~ Thomas Jefferson