It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Coming Demise of American Militias

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 06:09 PM
What was, and what will be

The American militia is unique among civic groups in the Western world. The concept of a citizen-based soldiery is not new. Peasant levies provided the backbone of most armies long before the existence of standing professional forces. After the Renaissance, when standing militaries became normal State fixtures; most non-colonial governments forbade the existence of privately funded armed forces. This ban included militias.

During the age of Western colonization, provincial and territorial governments incorporated sanctioned militias in to their defense. Many volunteer units took part in the U.S. civil war (1861-1865) after they were upgraded in to larger formations. In the aftermath of the civil war, Federal and State officials clamped down on militia activity in an effort to cut down on post-war vigilantism.

The popularity of militias in the United States decreased during the first half of the 20th century. Cold War considerations caused many Americans to re-evaluate the need for small personally funded patriotic groups. A combination of MaCarthy-ism and fears of invasion by the Soviet Union convinced many that the time had come to re-invent the American-style militia concept. Events relating to the Vietnam conflict and the Watergate scandal that followed were seen as ‘proof’ by many that their woeld was changing for the worse, which could only mean that militias might once again be necessary.

Federal power continued to grow throughout the 1970’s, which reinforced the idea for some that the national government wasn’t to be trusted. During the 1980’s, many militia members had their patriotism questioned. Although patriotism ran high during the Reagan years, the mainstream media took a dim view of these groups. In most cases, they were characterized as hide-outs for the radical, or havens for the misguided.

The incident at Ruby Ridge on August 1992 caused many to question the patriotism of U.S. militias. Media pundits from across the spectrum suggested that these groups might be ideal fund-raisers and trainers for terrorists. Nobody could know it at that time, but this question was going to come up again less than ten years later. The Siege at Waco (1993) and the First World Trade Center bombing (also 1993) would serve to magnify the effects of theOklahoma City bombing (1995) would fuel fears of home-grown terrorism in the aftermath of the trans-national terror attacks on the World Trade center in 1996 and 2001.

It’s becoming more likely that trans-national terror groups will operate openly on U.S. soil by the middle of the next decade, American militias will at that time be under great suspicion. Some of that scrutiny might be justified. Even so, we’ve got to plan for the possibility that a power-hungry Federal bureaucracy may try to stamp out even the most patriotic and well-meaning of these groups.

It may sound odd to describe a militia as a civic group. They may not style themselves as debating clubs, but they do kick around the issues that matter to them. In the not-too-distant future, under the ‘guidance’ of a very potent unitary executive…we could see Federal investigations of any and all civic groups. Because they have a tradition of firearms ownership and militant opinions, it may not be unreasonable to suggest htat the militias will be among the first “dangerous groups” to be so closely examined and outlawed.

Whether you like them or not, these groups play an important role in our society. By existing, they preserve an idea that many feel has been enshrined in our national Constitution. Freedom of speech and the right to bear arms in defense of a hostile government may soon be mocked and pilloried as out-dated thinking as our leaders strive to justify gathering more power to fight the global war on terror. What do we lose of we are convinced to give up our militias?

The pattern of bureaucratic centralization which has been documented by many observers over the last one hundred years would suggest that the demise of our militias would herald the end of our true social freedom. As a population, we might not be capable of resisting any future tyrannical regime that sought power inside the borders of our country. With no traditional mechanism for resistence or reform to fall back on, we’d be just another captive population like those that we’ve occasionally liberated in the last century.

The defeat of our civil rights by legions of Federal attorneys who are driven by one President after the next should serve to tell us what’s coming…but…it doesn’t. It’s too easy to ignore something when it happens slowly. The wheel of our bureaucracy turn slowly, but they do turn. I can’t help feeling like the people who are making it happen know exactly what they’re doing...and why.

The Future of American Militias

You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to know that today's American militias will have to modernize and embrace new ideas if they want to survive. Recent changes in U.S. domestic law and military capability could spell trouble for existing militias if they don't make allowances for the threats that will come from within. This goes well beyond the Patriot Act, body armor, and wireless phones. It means a total reassessment of what they do, how they do it, and why.

Today's militias can trace their collective heritage back to the earliest uncertain days of the American Revolution. Even then, armed revolt was seen as the absolute last resort when faced with unchecked authority. Over the last two centuries, these militias have been alternately praised and denounced, depending on the mood of each decade. In spite of all that turmoil, they are still with us. Some militias are little more than social clubs. Others are quite radical. Like the conspirators in my novel, most hope they will never be needed.

We may never need to call on these patriots, but one thing is certain: today's militias need to take stock of their situation. Hard questions need to be asked. Washington is taking the anti-terrorist fight to our enemies overseas, but is also preparing our own military to be used against us at home. If it happens, it'll be done "for our own good." If and when transnational terrorists do become active on U.S. soil, our own government might not be able to resist the temptation to both fight back and "clean house" at the same time. If it comes to that, the militias may be our best hope for preserving the future of this country we hold so dear.

I don't make this charge lightly. Please let me explain my thinking. There's a trend in government today that we can all see. Turn on your t.v. or pick up a newspaper, and it's there. Federal authority is expanding. Since October 2001, Congress and the President have asked for, and been granted, more new authorities than FDR had at the height of World War Two. The dark side of this growth in power can be seen in the areas of civil rights, law enforcement, and surveillance.

It has never been so easy for the Federal government to spy on you, arrest you, or even hold you, as it is now. J. Edgar Hoover never had this much authority when he ran the FBI with an iron fist during the worst of the Red Scare. Add to this the fact that very few governments ever give back any of the power they take and you can see where I'm going with this. This is the modern threat our militias will face if this power-grabbing trend continues.

Under these conditions, the militias must fend for themselves. There is no one single mechanism to ensure their survival. Being aware of the Federal government's expansionist trend makes for a good start, but it also fosters a lot of worry. How do you beat THAT? With history as our guide, we can look at a few common-sense options.

In many respects, today's career politicians are doing what's in their best interests. If the Federal government has more power, so do they. The same holds true for the top civil servants who lead the bureaucracy. In both cases, each camp is inhabited by a vocal majority that really does think they're doing what's good for you. Senior politicians lead their parties. Senior supervisors lead their agencies. Both groups are misled by a cunning minority.

How do you overcome them? Run for office. Get out and vote. Militias, as organized groups, can organize this. Starting at the local level, vote for people you can trust or run for office as somebody who can be trusted. Do the same thing at the state level. Do your homework and send people to D.C. who have proven their honesty and integrity in your home state. If you must, be the person that gets sent to Washington. People who don't covet power are the best candidates to use it, as they can be trusted to give it back when the job is done.

21st century militias will need more political savvy. They'll need it to avoid being slandered by the media and also to recruit. If a militia can fund war games and keep its armory stocked, it should think about its public image and how to manage it. In those cases where the group doesn't want to be politically active, it might still need a good media image if its membership is large. By the end of this decade, it's quite likely the American media will once again focus its harsh limelight on the more well-known militias. Without more political skill and a better media image, they won't be able to defend themselves against the false charges that will surely come.

If transnational terror groups start their dirty work on U.S. soil, politicians and bureaucrats in Washington will see it as a dual opportunity: defend against the terrorists and neutralize dissent on the home front. Naturally, doing both will require greater levels of power and authority. You'll see this one coming, if things go that far. Why? Just one thing. The media still treats homegrown patriotic militias like they could be terrorist cells. The temptation to label them as such will be overpowering. Because militias are known opponents of big government and politicians with too much power, they will be seen as easy targets.

How do you overcome that? Voting for reform will only do so much. It will take decades for reform-minded politicians to have an impact on a trend that has lasted for 60 years. Even if a militia does have a good media image or stays well out of public view, it can still be misrepresented. Under these conditions, knowing your rights won't be enough.

The politically aware and media-sensitive militias of the near future won't be able to stop the government's legislative steamroller, nor will they be able to prevent the pasting they'll take by the media. Like the conspirators in my book, they'll have to plan for it and hope it doesn't happen. They can advocate for reform or revolution as they see fit, as long as they're aware of the facts. As one of my characters might say, "Our job is to know it might happen and be ready for it."

The Evolution of American Militias

You don't knave to be a conspiracy theorist to know that today's American militias will have to change the way they do business if they want to avoid the wrath of an increasingly hostile Federal government. U.S. foreign policy has always been a forecaster of things to come on the home front. Today's American foreign policy makes it quite clear that U.S. militias will be at risk by the end of this decade.

In the past, when our Federal government has pursued an agenda overseas, we've been able to see how that same bureaucracy will deal with us here at home. Before the trans-national terrorist threat emerged, our elected leaders were pre-occupied with matters of trade and human rights. In both cases, we saw a lot of activity on domestic soil aimed in the same directions. Some of it we agreed with, and some of it we didn't. NAFTA (North American Free-Trade Agreement) would be the best and most recent example.

As our government grapples with the threat of trans-national terror, we are faced with a growing number of disturbing indicators. Each time the government adopts a new anti-terrorist measure, it comes at the expense of just a few more of our civil liberties. Much of the new "protection" legislation that comes off Capitol Hill these days presumes that the next threat will come from hostile forces operating inside U.S. borders.

It's not really up for debate. In time, hostile forces will take action on U.S. soil. Anything these people do will be despicable and under-handed. If we're not careful, our own government might use that crisis as an excuse to clamp down on legitimate dissent. If certain officials in Washing feel the need to rally support, the good standing of our own militias might be the cost of that political power play.

It's already been said that today's militias should become more politically aware and media-savvy. As meaningful as that should be, it won't be enough to preserve one of our most fundamentally important Constitutional rights. Modern militias should assume that they'll be targeted at some point. This may not happen militarily, but it will certainly happen politically.

The actions at Ruby Ridge and Waco have long since demonstrated the need for modern militias to adapt their unconventional warfare tactics. De-centralized command and dispersion of money and supplies should now take on a whole new level of importance for group planners. No matter how much money and manpower they put in to their public images, the fact remains that they will be out-spent by Government and private-sector media conglomerates.

As dissenters of big government, militias will be natural targets for career politicians seeking to improve their own fortunes. There may come a time when U.S. militias are forced underground. This means they'll have to actively go in to hiding. Because American militias have such a strong tradition of reluctance to act, this will be the most logical step when the time comes.

As hard as they try, militia leaders in the next decade will have a hard time making the case that the groups they represent are not terrorist cells. Under these conditions as portrayed in my book, Politics & Patriotism: The Fisk Conspiracy, politicians at the Federal level may have too much to gain by making this false charge.

If they start now, most militias can take steps they feel will do them the most good. As complicated as the political side of this equation has become, militia planners should not ignore the military aspect of this problem. Recent advances in electronics now give Federal troops a big advantage. Emphasis on Urban-style tactics and house-to-house combat drill only serve to underscore this point.

Unconventional warfare remains the Patriot's best option to counter this new stance. As effective as civilian weapons may be, they no longer confer as many advantages as they once did. As today's militia members become more politically aware, they should also become more familiar with the capabilities of tomorrow's Federal forces. Like it or not, this is going to mean a re-thinking of traditional guerilla methods.

Knowing this, and knowing that there will always be a reluctance on the part of real Patriots to put these things in to practice, it isn't hard to see how today's militias can evolve in to the organizations they need to be in the world of tomorrow.


What we think of as a militia today needs to be something else tomorrow. Conspiracy theory or not, there is a real and verifiable drive underway to bring the States in to line with the pro-Federal agenda. The fact of the matter is that what we call civic virtue is about to be defined as an impairment to natinal security.

posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 07:30 PM
Look at Hezbollah, they adapted, and defeated Israël both on the propaganda side and on the ground, thanks to Russian anti-tank weapons.

I hope that every member of militias bring this article to their ``leader`` so they can understand where they are, what they need to do to stay alive and be efficient if the time comes... which clearly will if this trend continue in the next 3 to 5 years.

posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 10:33 PM
It bothers me to think that the "militias" that, in my opinion, need to be are disappearing very quickly. The fear instilled upon the majority of the American populous is very disheartening.

The founding fathers clearly intended "every American citizen" to enjoy the right to possess and bear arms, whether or not everyone acts on this right, against the oppressive government.

The second amendment, which has enable "us" to protect ourselves against such a true national threat has, in my opinion, been long forgotten by too many. Each and every day that goes by, somewhere, somehow there are steps being put forth, or even as miniscule as to say thought up, to take away the 2nd Amendment Right that we all share.

Every single United States citizen needs to understand and remember what the 2nd Amendment stands for, and why we have it. It's not for sporting clays, it's not for hunting, it's not for home defense (although those means are perfectly well accepted)... but it was initially intended to be used to protect us from that growing threat of oppression.

Without our right to bear arms, and without the American Militias, this great country we live in would have nothing. Without the means to protect ourselves, what would stop that "oppressive" government from taking away each and every other single right that we have, that has been given to us by the grace of God?

As far as adapting? That puts a whole new spin on the idea of "right to bear arms". Does anyone actually believe that the government would willingly allow their "states people" to grow with the current technologies of today? That would mean the American Militias would have all those cool toys, just like the Military. The 2nd Amendment has been infringed upon since it's inception. No one has been, nor will ever be, allowed to "adapt" or "grow" with the times. That would be an overbearing threat to the Neo-Cons. Their overbearing rule would abruptly come to an end.

Justin, you have provided a wonderful thread. Thanks for the read, and the chance to share my worthless two cents.

posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 11:05 AM
I bring issues like this one to light in the fiction that I publish. Issues like this are important ,but they don't get talked about by the averag person because most of the people making the presentations are not speaking to their audience in a way that's effective.

What you see here is a technical discussion that lays it all out in precise academic terms. Articles like this can and do speak t othe intelligencia, but they don't 'connect' with the average American. that's because the average man or woman doesn't have a lot of time for the esoteric stuff.

That's why I chose to make this case in my political fiction. talking about an issue is one thing. Showcasing the issue "in action" is something else. A friend of mine had a child with cancer. They talked with their child about it, but there was only so much that they could pass on through these heart-to-heart exchanges. When they bought books that told stories about kids with cancer, their child got the point because they could relate to it.

Today's law-abiding citizens don't see how this issue relates to them. When I talk about it, I do place it in the larger context of my deterioriating government hypothesis. I've learned a long time ago that my own concernes about our future were actually made up of a dozen or more smaller worries that combined to make The Big One. Talking about them one at a time--while I briefly relate them to each other--makes it possible to say what's on my mind.

It also means allowing the person I'm speaking with to get what they want out of the conversation. Even if it's just on paper like you see here, it is possible to make your point in different formats, which is necessary in today's multi-media world. The subject of militias isn't glamorous. It is certainly not popular. Even so, we must acknoweldge that our liberties are under attack on every front. It's not enough to write convincing essays. It's not enough to publish "too-real" fiction. More people have to know about it, and talk about it.

posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 08:34 AM

You raise some really good points here Justin! The idea behind the Post Revolution American Militia was as a check. In a Republic where the Government is expected to be repsonsible to thoes it serves, having a built in check on power serves an important role in keeping things stable.

However, as you also pointed out, Militias can easily be misused for the bad. Waco is a good example. I feel that a system of checks and balances needs to be there. The big problem is getting the balance right. Perhaps what is needed is a malitia that is assembled as needed but other wise inactive.

Good thread, You really got me thinking on this one!


posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 08:50 AM
Hello, and thanks for the kind words. I'm glad that I could give you something to think about. I find myself in rare company these days because there aren't many people talking about this issue. In as much as I see bad things coming, I also see some good things that could come from our militia community.

posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 09:08 AM
As always, excellent commentary Justin. One point that seemed to be overlooked is the militias themselves. And this is a sticky problem. There is little argument that militias can and do attract individuals whose personal politics lie well outside those of the militia itself. While the concept of militias is a very good and, in my opinion, critical component to the fabric of this country, how carefully are these militias managing themselves? Are they policing their membership? Are there controls in-place to prevent the more extreme members from seizing control and derailing what began as a patriotic group?

I agree with you that media-image is critical for the survival of these groups. However, media-image is created from within. Sure, the media can spin anything they choose but it only takes one member of a militia standing on his roof waving a gun and threatening to kill the president to make an otherwise patriotic militia look like a bunch of anarchists.

posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 09:26 AM

Originally posted by jtma508
Are they policing their membership? Are there controls in-place to prevent the more extreme members from seizing control and derailing what began as a patriotic group?

One of the many points tha I make in the posts you see here is that today's militias need to take a closer look at what they do, and how they do it. Militia leadership needs to be mindful of the perils faced by their organizaiton. They need to be aware of the threats that can come from inside and outside their sphere of influence.

Very few militias have a media presence. Those that do need to be awarethat they are in effect setting the standard by which all others will be judged by the mainstream media. If they exibit good citizenship and fewer of the traits associated with hate groups, it'll be harder for the press to characterize them as lunatics.

Today's militias have the potential to be civic groups that do more than pine for the good old days and worry about the future. They need to become civic groups that spawn debate and reasoned discourse. They must be able to answer their critics. Winning the PR battle means winning new recruits, which in turn ensures their future in a positive way.

If you look, you'll find an entry for me in the ATS TinWiki. You'll also find more examples of what I've done to make this point, and keep the topic alive so that others can do more with it than I have.

posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 10:32 AM
Excellent post there Justin.

Here is my personal take on the future of militias..

I believe groups will begin forming and operating much like the IRA did, and may still do. (I might anger some Brits here)

The IRA is considered the most adapted and deadly terror/political militia in history.. Hezbollah, Al Quada, Hammas.. they have all said they style their attacks on the tactics used by the IRA. The tactic they wished to copy, and so far in my opinion failed at .. is the ability to act as a normal person, then when given the call, pick up arms, bombs, shoot do what ever your job is to do and then disappear into society once again.

This kind of pick up and go militia, working as a network instead of a formal militia will be very hard to track down (as the IRA was and is)... this can assure that trans - national militias formed by say Mexicans or something will have armed resistance from this pick up networks if they intrude on their "protected area". As far as the government goes, if they wish to crack down on militias like this surveillance laws will have to be passed that would rival the UK or even China.. causing imo a new rise in militias themselves.

If it got bad enough that a militia forms into a separatist movement, the government will be nearly helpless... no government in the world that suffers the cancer of a separatist movement can rid their problem... just look at Russia in the south, China in the west, Spain in the east, Turkey and the Kurds in the south western areas.. those areas of these countries are hard to patrol and keep a sphere of influence.. and these are once super power industrialized and up and coming industrialized nations. guerrilla (literally means small war) wars are hard to fight with a standard army. A pick up militia network would be hell for our government, allowing the forming and operation of standard militias in my opinion is safer for the government in the long run.

posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 12:50 PM

The IRA is considered the most adapted and deadly terror/political militia in history.. Hezbollah, Al Quada, Hammas.. they have all said they style their attacks on the tactics used by the IRA. The tactic they wished to copy, and so far in my opinion failed at .. is the ability to act as a normal person, then when given the call, pick up arms, bombs, shoot do what ever your job is to do and then disappear into society once again.

That's why the government is setting up a police state. To identify and track everyone so when they decide to push too far, anyone not in place or missing in their system will be tracked and jailed. Face recognition, human chips, tracking chips in everything... the more the militias/people wait to stop this madness, the less likely this kind of resistance/any kind of resistance at all will be possible, it will be like minority report.

posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 01:03 PM
"You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to know that today's American militias will have to modernize and embrace new ideas if they want to survive. Recent changes in U.S. domestic law and military capability could spell trouble for existing militias if they don't make allowances for the threats that will come from within. This goes well beyond the Patriot Act, body armor, and wireless phones. It means a total reassessment of what they do, how they do it, and why. "

Actually if you look at the Iraqi's, they are about as primitive as can be and yet they are kicking our ass all over the sand because our government is to stupid to know how to let our military win. Same could be said here if the situation arose and a Militia wanted to survive. I am not for the activity, just saying that the level of incompetence within the U.S. government is at an all time high and because of that our way of life is failing. If the government can control it's populace like it wants to then why are gangs growing by the hundreds every day and why are they kicking our LEO's butts on all levels?

posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 01:04 PM
Well, with the rise of anti-gun sentiment in the more liberal parts of the country and the surge of white supremacist groups using millitia to cover their activities, there has been a significant down turn in the number of millitias.

However, if you are concerned about this, you can start your own millitia:

I have a question though, can the millitia supply its own ranks with arms?

posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 01:09 PM

Originally posted by Rockpuck
The IRA is considered the most adapted and deadly terror/political militia in history.. Hezbollah, Al Quada, Hammas.. they have all said they style their attacks on the tactics used by the IRA. The tactic they wished to copy, and so far in my opinion failed at .. is the ability to act as a normal person, then when given the call, pick up arms, bombs, shoot do what ever your job is to do and then disappear into society once again.


Your thinking is ok. However, you're going into Terrorist groups here. A militia is a citizen defense force. Generally, they are Not used to push extreemist politics. There are of course a few that cross the line.

Now you do mention a fighting strategy called Gurrillia Warfare (hope the spelling is right). That is the art of blending into the general population when your not directly engaged in fighting. To some degree this is key to the effectivness of a militia, as they are pitted against larger, (and usually) better armed forces. However, malitias don't always have to turn terrorist. Even a small force of 4 or five fighters knows there's a difference between setting a trap for enemy military forces, and targeting innocent people like kids.


posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 02:42 PM

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
How do you overcome them? Run for office. Get out and vote. Militias, as organized groups, can organize this. Starting at the local level, vote for people you can trust or run for office as somebody who can be trusted. Do the same thing at the state level. Do your homework and send people to D.C. who have proven their honesty and integrity in your home state. If you must, be the person that gets sent to Washington. People who don't covet power are the best candidates to use it, as they can be trusted to give it back when the job is done.

Good post Justin

Funny how you say them, how do you overcome "them"... lol

Come on now.....
Voting will not work or running for office!!!

1. If you are a known militia running for office "them" will start the propaganda, probably connect you to even more radical groups of which maybe supported by "them" just to make you look unsound, this alone will have a major effect on your creditability. Even if you attempt a militia covert operation vying for office, there is a 90% chance your cover will be blown as well as your reputation.

2. Look at the history of voting machine vendors, it speaks for itself. Corrupt government corporations bent on thwarting democracy will take the fight where it counts. Add that with voter suppression and manipulation... It's a no win situation, especially in modern times of *no* paper trail.

How you over come them? You fight them or as in XphilesPhan link... start your own militia:

Try to have a notable speaker or stage an event that will appeal to the media.
Publicize the muster.
Invite local officials and representatives of military and law enforcement organizations to attend.
Recruit officials and civic leaders.
"you really can only go - so far on this one, good luck getting to the top"
Enforce the law.

Eventually a chain of events will happen in the states as the world goes nuts. When it comes down, foreign powers will support the militia as they have something in common. If "them" try to take your weapons away, no worry there will be plenty more to come. If "them" try this and that.... no worry, you will have to choose sides on what's best...

Your right Justin,
The big issue of now is making the militia the GOOD GUYS, putting militia in public eyes.... When established there will be more support for militia when the sh%t hits the fan..... will it happen? Noooo, but when the truth becomes more viewable as the sh#* falls, only then the good guys will come out.

[edit on 14-3-2007 by XPhiles]

posted on Mar, 15 2007 @ 01:19 AM
I can appreciate your cynicism. Even so, am convinced that the militias themselves need to take certain steps whichare outlined herre, long before the fecal matter hits the fan. The people who start, run, and belong to militias, need to get used to the idea that their mission is to do more than hold maneuvers on the weekends.

The mainstream media will inevitably smear anyone who belongs to a militia...but...the members can minimize the damage. When reporters dig, they'll be looking for the easy stuff. When they don't find it, they'll be forced to go deep. If that yields nothing, they'll be forced to lie. Your best defense in the court of public opinion is the truth, because its easiest to defend.

If a militia hides behind the front of a legitimate gun club, They'll be discovered. It'll be too easy to smear them. Today's militias are going to have to be honest about what they are if they're going to stand up to future criticism. As they become the bastions of patriotism that they shoudl be, we might very well see their public image transform. Remember that the public can stil lhold some groups in high regard even though the prevailing media sources diss them.

This "change in behavior" isn't new tactics, and its not anything I just made up. All I'm asking for is good civics, and a little bit of professionalism. Those groups that push radical agendas will be the first targets of the media. hate groups and militias will be lumped together until the good conduct of the militias can force the media to make the destinction.

let me use myself as an example. If I lied to you about who I am, what I do, and what my motives are, I would runthe risk of being exposed. If what you see is what you get from me, all I have to do is worry about how to respond to anyone who disagrees. I am, technically speaking, a public figure because I put myself "out there" to be seen, heard, and responded to. Militias are not different.

If these organized groups are capable of choosing skilled spokesmen and legal representation (as needed), they can groom their image accordingly. They can also make it clear to potential members that they really are the good guys. To do this and make it stick, they've got to get busy now. They need to have more "proof" on the books that they mean well. With an improved track record in place NOW, they can be harder to villify later.

posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 01:41 PM

I have one question about the issue of malitias. In today's times, we've seen some groups hide behind the title "Malitia" and use the lable for sinister purposes. I rememer one group on TV that referred to itself as a malitia, who open spoke up in Supprt of a cowerdly act of terrorism perpertrated against innocent people. No patriotic, self-respecting American will support something if they think it's a front for Anti-American Terrorists.

How can true malitias desinguish themselves from cowardly domestic terrorists who hide behind the label "Malitia"?


posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 07:42 PM
You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to know that the time is fast approaching when it will be very hard to tell the difference between a real militia and a terrorist group. Mainstream media exaggerations and punditry distortions will make it very hard for people who are new to the debate to understand just what they are seeing. With this in mind, it may be wise for militia planners to begin taking certain steps in the here-and-now which will make their lives easier in the future.

As previously stated in my essay, “The Future of American Militias,” I am specifically referring to groups and clubs which are patriotic in nature. Some are very militant in their views. Others are quite mild in their ideologies and practices. Most were formed decades ago for the generic purposes of social interactivity. Most contemporary militias are loosely knit social groups comprised of like-minded people. A precious few are incorporated, with charters and board members who oversee matters of budget and policy.

The actual intent of a militia is what truly sets it apart from any terrorist group. In my essay, “The Coming Demise of American Militias,” I make my case for certain forms of long-range planning that all militias need to be aware of. As the American social scene deteriorates, it will become progressively more advantageous to Federal-level politicians and bureaucrats to advocate for the investigation and infiltration of any and all groups that call themselves “militias.” This move could very well make sense in the context of national security, but it will inevitably result in some incorrect charges being filed against legitimate groups and organizations that have purely patriotic motives.

Because a significant number of militias choose to operate in what they themselves regard as a covert fashion, they will unintentionally adopt group structures and chains of command which are known to be of a same or similar type used by criminal organizations. In my essay, “The Future Of American Miltias,” I suggest that honest militias should operate in the open where they can be easily seen and understood for what they are. In my essay, “The Next Step In Domestic Disarmament,” I demonstrate how government and media propaganda experts will use the tools at their disposal to discredit genuine militias as part of a larger strategy to win popular support for anti-terror legislation.

Transparent organizations won’t be enough for above-board militias. Government agencies of all sorts will investigate the backgrounds of members. Everything from traffic tickets to felonies will be known to the agents and civil servants tasked with infiltration and documentation of the many sins of members and leaders alike. No matter how reformed, militias and their participants will be made to look like terror threats when it suits the purposes of politicians or prosecutors.

As demonstrated in my published work (see ATS TinWiki), the proverb of “innocent until proven guilty” will not apply under these near-future circumstances. Militia planner need to operate under the presumption that they must prove their own forthrightness and patriotic intent. As presented in several essays, I’m suggesting that these groups will have to do their own internal policing which may call for some background checks that could limit membership.

These are the superficial points. There are many more considerations which relate to recruitment, record keeping, logistics, training, and a long list of infrastructure considerations.

posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 09:26 PM
Wow intersting post. I was just discussing this issue with my brother the other day. Of course not quite as detailed. I personally feel that if you look at the situation on the borders and how even the guards are being jailed for showing patriotism and protecting our borders, then how can we expect the government to do anything but punish the Militia when the time comes. Justin you remind me of a very dear old friend of mine long lost from az. He used to keep me in the know so long ago.He was saying exactly what you do now and I have not spoken with him since the first bush admin. Things are coming to fruition at a steady pace. One thing that he told me was that in the future we would see the helmets of the U.N. take over our country. Why I asked? He explained to me that this way they can send all of our troops to other places on the globe and in return place all of the other non english speaking troops here, that they could say " take out that neighborhood, they are all combatants" and there would be no chance to sway their intentions .That was just so far fetched, but I did trust him very much and have always been waiting and watching for the signs of this coming to pass. He told me many things way back then that I have watched and for the most part without the ability to discuss with others because they don't trust me and my info like I did his and therefore lack the ability to see the future. Yes you remind me of him and the first time I saw your picture online here I had to look for a very long time.The name is wrong and you are too young. But still there is something in your looks and eyes that takes me back. I have recently and often thought Damn, I wish so badly I could talk to him now. So, thats what I have to say to you. Thankyou for this post, I hope that others will read it and know the urgency that you are trying to share.

posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 06:16 AM
Hello antar, I'm glad to see you in this forum. The simple fact of the matter is that we need to be having this discussion while we still can. the political winds are changing, and it will soon be out of fashion to talk about second amendment related issues. When we speak, we must say what's on our minds clearly, and without hate, rage, or hesitation.

I'm not the only writer to publish on this subject, although I do seem to be one of the last. I'm not at all put off by my limited success to date. Anything worth doing is hard. that includes citizenship. In the same way that I don't make any bones about who I am or what I do, I don't hesitate to talk about this most real of real conspiracies. As the Federal government becoms more powerful, our civil rights will shrink. If we are not careful, our privilidge of firearms ownership will be taken away from us. If we lose that legal standing, we also lose our ability to resist any future oppression.

This subject is already unpopular with the big publishers. Unless you're pugged in to one of the big money special interests, it really is hard to make yourself heard. And I am. I point this out for just one reason. If I can do this, you can too. I've been at this for a few years now, and it's only been recently that I've started to get some traction. In time, as more people talk about what I say and write their own reviews of my work, I may be able to speak with a bigger voice.

That's why I say that you've got to use your voice now, while you've still got it. You can find my work on the net. You can also add your voice. Publish, post, and blog from your own point of view. Think of it as your very own conspiracy to spread what you see as the truth. You could, in effect, fight cosnpiracy with conspiracy. Don't believe me? Remember that op/ed pieces, book reviews, movie reviews, and anything that goes out through RSS feed can be seen by millions over a long period of time.

In as much as I want people to agree with me, I also want them to do their own homework. It takes me a while to generate material for this forum, which explains why you don't see that many threads. I write on subjects that people ask to me to look in to, but I also do my own research so that I can present YOU with enough material to do your own thinking. Justin's CM Rule #1 is, "Conspiracy theories aren't stable unless other people can reach same or similar conclusions without your help."

posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 06:22 PM
I think that Justin is on the right track with this theory. The sign of the decline are everywhere. For starter, look how it is constantly pushed on the American public that Owning a gun is "Bad", and "Dangerous". Gun ownership is essential to the creation of a militia. No army, large or small can fight without weapons. Also, watch your news and see how militias are portrayed. They are never talked about unless there is a connection to a shocking event, such as Waco.

Also, the media often focus on radical, domestic terrorist who try to hide behind the label Militia and use it to mislead people.


new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in