Enemies of Liberty are ruthless. To own your Liberty, you'd better come harder than your enemies..

Saturday, March 7, 2015

Patriot Events 101

Take no action that does not degrade the capability or the will of the enemy to wage war. - K

If you are thinking about hosting any Patriot Event, or attending any event, please consider my counsel above.  Think about it.  Heed it.  Apply it.

If you are considering the investment of any precious resources into an event (and credibility IS A RESOURCE YOU CAN LOSE!), especially an event that confronts and/or challenges OpFor, there are a few fundamentals that you MUST ensure.

First Rule: If you do not have a simple, easily articulated and attainable goal that will define "Victory" for the event, either find one or do not move forward.

When you set out to take Vienna - TAKE VIENNA!

Taking no action is better than a defeat at this stage of the fight for Liberty.  Make certain that no matter what happens, you can claim a victory - or DO NOT move forward.

If you look at the first two engagements of RevWarIII you will see the First Rule on full display.  On the National Mall when FedGov closed the Memorials, Patriots went into town with a simple goal: Open the Memorials.  It was clear.  It was easily articulated.  It was attainable.   It would be easy for all to see if it was a win or a loss.  Not only was it attainable, Patriots positioned themselves prior to D-Day (Sun Tzu called it 'Laying the Ground') in such a manner that they could not lose. If Patriots opened the Memorials, they won. If Patriots were shot by FedGov for attempting to open Memorials, the tyranny would be on full display for every single American, looped 24/7 on every news outlet in the country.  At the end of the day, FedGov would either look weak, or they would be murderers.

Patriots won the day.  Not only did they open the Memorials, a blogger you know well and is linked on this page, raised the call "To the White House!" - and Patriots (including iconic images of young girls and disabled vets on Segways carrying Barry-cades) responded by picking up those Barry-cades and walked the several blocks to the White House and they were "Returned to Sender."  That blogger took what was a win and turned it into an EPIC win - an un-spinnable humiliation for OpFor.

The second engagement of RevWarIII was Bundy. Despite the ClusterFoxtrot that followed-on, the first waves of Patriots arrived with a single goal - prevent the Bundy family from being murdered or arrested by FedGov.  Patriots on overwatch are images we all remember.  Patriots achieved their primary mission.  Then, like taking fence sections to the White House, Patriots at Bundy saw another attainable win, and went for it.  They demanded something that wounded FedGov deeply - they demanded that the man get his cattle released.  We all remember that wash under the bridge, with Patriots on horseback (and overwatch) when OpFor endured the humiliation of turning the cattle loose, back to the owner.

Epic, undeniable win.  Patriots with rifles owned the high-ground, not OpFor snipers.

But in both cases, "Victory" was clearly defined and attainable.  Without a mission goal, how can you measure success?  How can you claim even a propaganda win if nobody explains what a win looks like?  How can you stop OpFor spin-masters from claiming you were defeated, if you have not defined a win?

Rule Two: Do No Harm to the Liberty Movement.  I am going to use the State Capitol event in Washington last month to articulate this Rule - because the failure was one of Leadership, not the troops.  Try to read this as critical analysis - not bashing.  If you were there, stay out of your emotions and objectively consider the words that follow.  I don't care if you don't "like" me.  But I will not be remembered as a Patriot who failed to do Hard Things or tell Hard Truths.  I'm not that guy.

If you have an event with the stated goal of entering an OpFor stronghold - such as a state capitol building - and the stated mission is to enter the Legislature Viewing Gallery while armed, and you let two old, wooden, locked doors stop you - you did NOT achieve a win as defined in the First Rule and your own mission parameters.  WTF - not one person in the group could pick a flippin' old lock on an old wooden door?  Not one person in the group knows how to do a fireman's kick to get into a room?

The "Leader" of the event did not take responsibility for moving the mission to success - and it is that simple.  Fail.  The Commander's Intent was not realized because the Commander lacked the courage to direct a young, strong lad to kick the doors open or to tell a crafty ally to pick the lock, or to do it himself.  Refer back to Rule One - set a goal you can obtain, and are willing to obtain - or DO NOT MOVE FORWARD.

Most of you know of the raging debate between advocates of Open-Carry tactics of protest and those who think Open Carry is too "in-your-face".  I believe in Open Carry because I believe in the Constitution.  But if you are being intellectually honest, when you see a failure like the one displayed when 50+ armed Patriots were thwarted by an unguarded set of old wooden doors, you have to admit the folks cautioning against Open Carry protests are not entirely wrong.  Those optics were just bad for us.

While your allies will help you spin a win in AARs, our enemies understand the reality - not one person, armed and with 50 or so allies - would break a rule and open an unguarded, old wooden door to reach their stated goal.  That is a Fail of will, of determination, of courage of Leadership.  The real damage to the Liberty Movement is much deeper than the perceived benefit of a smoke and mirrors "Spin-Win".  Talk is cheap.  Opera non verba.

Next time, if you are one of the Patriots in the mix, take point when you see "Leadership" faltering. Take responsibility.  Step up.  Get those doors open and take a picture with the gavel in your hand. "Leaderless Resistance" means something - it means you have as much right to take point and get the mission accomplished as anyone else. And sometimes, if you don't do it, it won't get done.  Do not let the mission fail if you have what it takes to get it done.

Rule Three: As suggested by an ally, I will simply direct you to Rodger's Rules: Tell the truth about what you see and what you do. There is an army depending on us for correct information. You can lie all you please when you tell other folks about the rangers, but don’t never lie to a ranger or officer.

Rule Four: Keep your Ego out of the mix.  This ain't no fuckin' game.  Say what you've got to say, to whoever the fuck needs to hear it, then move on.  If they get lost in their emotions, you need to decide if that person is worthy of your continued trust.  This is an Adults-Only caper.  If you intend to participate in rallies and protests in this phase of the counter-revolution, when SUT will not decide a win from a loss, you must play smart.

When you move, the eyes of a nation are upon you.  The eyes of like-minded people are on you, judging your mettle, your intellect, your veracity, your commitment.  Some people will get off the fence - or stay on it - based on what they watch you do.  The eyes of the Enemies of Liberty are on you, and WILL BE EXAMINED in training classes across LEO shops from sea to shining sea.

Battles are usually won or lost long before first contact.



  1. Uh-oh. Detonation in 3... 2... 1. ;-)

    1. Time to sell your cloak...
      Well past time, in fact.

    2. I doubt if Team Stupid will respond. Facts, Reason, Strategy, Tactics, Common Sense, and true Leadership are out of his wheelhouse.

  2. You make an interesting point about those doors. While I'm inclined to agree for myself, I also don't think it's my business to make those decisions for others, nor judge them for their decisions...especially in the case of openly courageous folk like those who are handling Washington. By THEIR standards, it has been total victory and it's their standards that are the measure of their actions. Just as yours are for you, or anyone else.

    It also would be nice if there were an understanding of what the Ego is. It just means "Self"---strongs ones are better and weak ones are worse, in all contexts. It does NOT mean "megalomaniac," which is applicable to the other mouth.

    One can't help but notice that those screaching loudest for sacrifice are inevitably talking about everyone else. And isn't that the way it always is? When good people stop focusing on the actions of others and instead focus on their own, then the job will get done. Otherwise, it won't.

    1. Sorry - by "their" standards, posted publicly and prior to the event, listing as the sine qua non that they enter X gallery - and they did not enter X gallery, because of 2 old, wooden doors.

      I'm not imposing my standards on them - I am merely pointing out to every Patriot in America who chooses to read here that failing to take Vienna is failing to take Vienna. Then calling it a "win" as if the prior definition was never stated? Please. If Patriots across America accepted those standards. we'd still be drinking the King's Tea.

      If Patriot "Leaders" fold when they hit the first locked door (INSIDE the flippin' building, I will add) I don't see why DHS is even needed. Just install antique skeleton key locks on all doors in places of Tyranny, and the Tyranny will endure for a thousand years.

      And no - I am not merely sniping from 600 yards. I have been in situations where I was about to break Rule Two- and I cancelled my own events. For whatever reason, X event did not reach critical mass, and I was not about to embarrass the Liberty Movement with a failure of stated goals - not on my watch. So I pulled the plug - to the angst and ire of many people who still intended to attend. I'll take the heat of some disappointment - but I'll never take heat for being a hypocrite.

      And while "You" won't judge people for their judgments - good on you. I'm not that evolved. Bad decisions that affect me are decisions I have a right to judge - and hopefully prevent in the future.

    2. "that they enter X gallery - and they did not enter X gallery"

      It's a fair point on that score, which is why I'm inclined to agree. But still that's just us putting that particular value on that particular instance, and socially speaking it's not us to choose those values, for them I mean. End of story...from THEIR persepctive it's been total victory and that's the perspective that counts. That's why it would be nice to understand what the Ego is really all about. And if you look at the perspectives of those who care, they've been all good and none bad on stuff that counts.

      "I'm not that evolved."

      It's all just a choice.

  3. Wow, just Wow!

    I have never seen Klein make excuses before, yet even after conceding that K has a valid point, he disqualifies this statement by claiming that "from THEIR perspective it's been total victory". Of course from their perspective it was a victory. But that is all just spin. If their stated intent was to enter gallery X but were unable to due to a locked door, how can they claim they achieved their objective? In real life "close but no cigar" just doesn't cut it.

    Obama's "Red line in Syria" is the same train of thought and look how weak that one statement made the US appear. Of course the Gov spun that to make it look like a win but the rest of the worlds perspective was affected forever.

    Make no mistake, this was a total failure of the self appointed leadership. They were there to purposefully subvert an unconstitutional law, knowing full well they could be arrested yet were stopped dead in their tracks because they were worried about possibly being arrested for vandalism/breaking and entering?

    All events should be viewed solely by the facts and leave emotions out of it.

  4. OH MY FUCKING GOD!!! I can’t believe this, Is Klien using subjective reasoning to validate his argument?!?!? and/or the actions/non-actions at the State Legislature, Wa. “It’s all just a choice” ???WTF?? So, from my perspective and my standards if someone in the movement is a fucking liar, giving false and misleading intel while focusing the spotlight on themselves and at the same time shrinking from any responsibility for their words and actions, and as long as they claim it’s a "total victory" “and if you look at the perspectives of those who care, they’ve been all good and none bad on stuff that counts” It’s all good? AW FUCK!! If there is not a standard that we live by, not just aspire to, and fall short of, but hey I feel like I’m a winner, and it’s the thoght that counts, right? and as long as I participated I did my part, and they did it first so that makes it OK for me to do it too, and the ends justify the means.........BULL SHIT! If the cause of Liberty is superior to collectivism, then resorting to their tactics is not in our play-book, that includes their psychology as well, If you are such a special snowflake that your definition of reality is the measure of your actions, and my reality is the measure of mine, there is gonna be one helluva collision when those two come together, Ayn Rand said,”You can deny reality, but you can’t deny the consequences of denying reality.”

    Richard R Deaver

    1. Every little darlin' wins a trophy, because they won...

      ...from their perspective. Screw the scoreboard - that's for all us haters.

    2. Wow, tough critics. TD, I get the point but I'm not sure why you're using battlefield standards for judging non-battlefield actions. The very best you can get IMO is that the objectives weren't perfectly stated. But to pull "enter the chambers" completely out of context, on its own as if it were the only objective, is a little narrow-focused IMO. But I'm not here to rationalize for others, and I've already agreed to the technical point...twice, and three times now.

      Mr. Deaver, MY point is not subjectivism nor moral relativism. It's the fact that values are created by choosers of values, and so should be judged as success or failure by those standards. Whether they're good or bad values is a rather separate question. I'd like to think that most sane people think these folk have good values and goals, irrespective of success or failure. Do I have THAT wrong too IYO?

      In the case at hand, it strikes me that the participants have indeed achieved essentially all of their goals, at least so far. That they didn't enter the chambers is a valid point as I've repeatedly noted, but I think it's quite a stretch to imply that this was an action with the exclusive tactical goal of entering those chambers. A fairly strong case can be made that the complete disappearance of anyone willing to take responsibility for those doors being locked, was itself a victory as strong as the failure being griped about.

      But that's nothing to argue about anyway. I've acknowledged the point all three of you are making from the beginning, and frankly I'm beginning to suspect that there are other motivations for the vehemence about it. FWIW I don't consider Mike to have hardly anything to do with Washington, except that he's shown up and supports them---I've seen Kit Lange, Comrade X and the Patrick Henry Society. Spit it out, you three---are THEY on the side of the angels IYO or not?

      That last was cute, K...so how do you score the whole Washington State thing overall? According to this thread, it looks like 0-1. Is that it? Me, I score it 3-0-1 at worst. I'd think you'd be at least as generous as me on scoring such matters, but maybe I'm wrong about that.

    3. He is a master of the circular argument. You will notice that it always comes back to the same thing after going through a well scripted list of talking points no matter the topic. Very polished. He does have it down. But you have to ask yourself one question. If I had to go into combat today, would I take him with me?

    4. "But you have to ask yourself one question. If I had to go into combat today, would I take him with me?"

      Lucky break it doesn't always come back to one thing for you, eh?

      And then, of course, I didn't offer that to you in the first place.

    5. Hey Klein, just holding you to the same standard you hold all of us too.

      What K describes is the Deming wheel or PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, Adjust). Without goals, how do you measure? Without measuring, how do you analyze? Without analysis, how do you improve? Without continual improvement, how do you win? Just basic management tools.

      My comments about the failure are meant strictly as constructive criticism, nothing more. If we can't be honest with ourselves, what do we have? I also do not want to diminish their victories.

      " I've acknowledged the point all three of you are making from the beginning, and frankly I'm beginning to suspect that there are other motivations for the vehemence about it. FWIW I don't consider Mike to have hardly anything to do with Washington, except that he's shown up and supports them---I've seen Kit Lange, Comrade X and the Patrick Henry Society. Spit it out, you three---are THEY on the side of the angels IYO or not?"

      I only became familiar with Kit and the PHS blog recently so I have not yet formed an opinion either way.

    6. "Hey Klein, just holding you to the same standard you hold all of us too."

      Now THAT'S a great line and I'm all in favor; happens to be what I'm personally looking for anyway.

      The real trick is holding ourselves to a high standard, and that's the only thing we control anyway. Each person does that, and this all becomes history.

    7. Klein,

      So what is your opinion of Kit, PHS and the Bosworths/Washington Patriots? You asked us, so it is only fair to reciprocate.


    8. Sure, but understand I don't make it a big deal in my life to analyze and over-analyze what other people choose. All I care about is that they ARE free to choose---those who choose thuggery, gotta be stopped. To me, it's all that simple.

      Everything I've read has struck me as wholly genuine and sincere. They seem (to me) to know what they're doing, and they seem to be doing good. There is no single right more fundamental than the right to self-defense IMO, however one chooses to accomplish it. That firearms happen to be constitutionally protected in this country--in unambiguous wording--is a mere side-benefit to me, one which I give the Founders full credit for the foresight. But still it's no legal matter to me...I'm defending myself and mine as I see fit and I can't imagine any rational adult taking any other POV. But that's me...those who want to register or turn in, that's their business and I suppose we'll be better off if those sorts do.

      From what I can tell, the Washington folk believe the same and so I am 100% behind what they choose and do, until something leads me to change my opinion. While bashing through those doors would've been an interesting tactic, choosing not to do that, at least in this case, doesn't change my overall judgment at all.

      As long as we're having a bull session, maybe K will explain why he chose to join with a group who in his eyes had already failed so utterly. That's not a charge, argument or gripe...I'm just wondering.

    9. As long as we're having a bull session, maybe K will explain why he chose to join with a group who in his eyes had already failed so utterly. That's not a charge, argument or gripe...I'm just wondering.

      I didn't join anyone. I was there so I could report to the people who read this blog, to recon FedGov's posture, and to recon the Patriots in attendance - the latter two points being directly relevant to my Tribe and my AO, since Spokane is part of my AoI.

      And to clarify: "Leadership" failed at the Gallery, particularly the Pinson Pantywaste who refuses to be present when the stakes are for real. The average Patriot is doing most of this for the first time. The learning curve is steep and unforgiving. I've got no beef with the average Patriots I encountered and witnessed - they deserve a "Leader" worthy of the title - I suggest they all begin looking in the mirror, because only a Washingtonian can lead Washingtonians.

    10. Okay, I didn't know that was your main goal. Not that it matters so much, but I didn't take the earlier mission as a tactical entrance to the chambers. To me, it was more to the open chambers where their so-called representatives sit. I guess that's why I don't see it as a fail...if the unambiguous goal were to enter those chambers no matter what, then I'd agree.

      Both are strong arguments for declaring public goals clearly and precisely.

  5. "All us haters" need to buck up and start doing deeds... the scoreboard is not our friend right now. Tyranny is racking up points by the bushel basket, *every day*, and we are letting them run the court without interference in most AOs. As I have stated elsewhere - we don't necessarily need to be putting uniforms in pine boxes quite yet, but every patriot should be doing some small, direct action against the enemies of Liberty on a very regular basis - we should be dishing out interference, inconvenience, and the creation/enhancement of work-hazards, and we should be doing so with a downright religious zeal!

  6. The one important thing that you are failing to recognize about the event on Feb. 7th, is that it was also largely a public image mission (due to the previous event mishap). The mission was accomplished whole handily. I understand the thoughts otherwise, since you guys weren't there, but think about what you are saying should have happened, and what actually did, and then you tell me which one would have more success in that regard. Did you see the beautiful little girl knocking on the door?

  7. With all due respect, Og, we lost the "PR war" a long time ago, as demonstrated by GCA'68, and reproven by every single piece of legislation which has expanded it's scope and intrusiveness since.

    Ladies and young'uns ought to stay home for such events, or at a minimum, should be in the rear and prepared to tend to the wounded and evac them.

    As for the primary contingent, how many of those present had a full battle load of mags and a blowout kit (at a minimum)? Shame on those who didn't go ready to USE what they carried, because that was just plain bad PR. OPFOR saw the casual posture and endemic weakness amongst those assembled, and laughed. There is no spinning that into a victory, even a moral one.

    So it is with my sincerest apologies that I chalk this one in OPFOR's favor, and admonish every patriot to learn from the mishap - we will not likely be given many such mulligans by Tyranny Inc.

    At this point we are all on the stormy channel approaching Normandy. Those whose boats aren't blow out of the water before the door even drops are about to face a vast and grave milieu of preemptively hostile uniforms operating under color of authority, and with full cover provided by the "authorities" of FED.GOV and their MSM apparatchiks.

    I would strongly advise all planners of future patriot events to plainly advise participants to have their Will freshened up prior to departure, and to make a full load out of ammo and a blowout kit mandatory to participation. If you're going to lead such an event, the for God's sakes, LEAD IT - take care of your troops. Firmly.
    The life you save, may be your own.


    1. First, if it were such a victory for OPFOR, they would've manned the doors. I don't think they scattered because they were too busy laughing, but that's my take.

      I happen to think like you on this stuff, LT. In business, it's all about implementation too. Either someone buys or they don't. Either you do it profitably or you don't. Point being, I'm "old school"...you don't carry a weapon unless you're prepared to use it, and you don't use a gun except to kill another person. So I get all that.

      Where you're very wrong IMO is attributing our values to them. They weren't there in a combat scenario, nor did they intend to be. We can discuss it till the cows come home--I already told you how I think--but it's THEIR lives and THEIR decisions and THEIR tactics.

      I agree with you for the reasons you suggested---one of these times, OPFOR is going to say "No" and it'll be nice if someone says "No!" right back. Presumably each of us is prepared to do exactly that, but something like that has to be done on one's own judgment and one's picking the situation where it applies. NOBODY else can do that for a person. Soldiering or not, that's fundamental.

      I can second-guess those who have or will turn themselves into thugs to gain what they wish--hell, I reckon I'll likely die doing just that--but I sure can't see second-guessing those who don't.

      Rightful Liberty. Also in Jefferson's words, not a single one of those folk picked your pocket or broke your leg...nor intended to. For me personally, that's what counts. But you may score it however you wish, duh, and so may everyone else.


Please post anonymously. III Society members, please use your Call Sign.