Black Crawling Systems Archive Release 1.0/Black Crawling Systems Archive Release 1.0 (L0pht Heavy Industries, Inc.)(1997).ISO/tezcat/Resister/Resister_1.4.txt

Text File | 1996-07-08 | 120KB | 1,866 lines

==============================================================================
The RESISTER ------ The Official Publication of the Special Forces Underground
                     Volume I, Number 4. Spring 1995
==============================================================================
Post Office Box 47095, Kansas City, Missouri, 64188   Copy xxxx of 1250 Copies
==============================================================================
(c) Copyright 1995 by The RESISTER. This publication is produced in compliance
with DA PAM 190-2, AR 210-10, AR 600-50, AR 360-5, 18 US Code s 2387, and
Uniform Code of Military Justice. Permission is granted for individuals to
make WHITE duplicates of this publication.
==============================================================================
                          JOINT TASK FORCE - 6
                    Subversion of the Third Amendment
                          -by- William Sheppard

     The Third Amendment to the Constitution is usually ignored during
constitutional debates about the federal government's unchecked abrogation of
the rights of individuals. The tendency to overlook the Third Amendment is
due, largely, to its wording. The Third Amendment states:

          No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any
     house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but
     in a manner to be prescribed by law.

     On the surface, the prohibition against quartering troops in houses
seems firmly anchored in the 18th century, and apparently involves none of the
fundamental issues of individual liberty inherent in the other amendments. In
fact, the philosophical premise of the Third Amendment was firmly grounded in
the founders' recognition that government is institutionalized force; that a
government's instrument of force is a standing army, and that unless
government is bound by strict, well defined constitutional constraints, a
standing army becomes an instrument of domestic tyranny, rather than one of
national defense.
     Patrick Henry affirmed antifederalist reservations about unchecked
federal control of both standing and militia forces under Article I, section
8, of the proposed constitution, when he stated:

     To me this appears a very alarming power, when unlimitted. They
     are not only to raise, but to support armies; and this support is
     to go to the utmost abilities of the United States. If Congress
     shall say, that the general welfare requires it, they may keep
     armies continually on foot. There is nocontroul on Congress in
     raising and stationing them. They may billet them on the people at
     pleasure. This unlimitted authority is a most dangerous power: Its
     principles are despotic. If it be unbounded, it must lead to
     despotism. For the power of the people in a free Government, is
     supposed to be paramount to the existing power.

                                   Virginia Convention, 1788

     Particularly significant is the fact that, during the constitution
ratification debates in the state legislatures, proposed bills of rights
universally juxtaposed the individual right to bear arms; the militia as the
armed forces of the state and posse comitatus; the prohibition of federal
quartering, and declarations that standing armies in time of peace are
dangerous to liberty. These declarations were not arbitrarily derived. They
were based on the fact that, at the time, standing armies were used
domestically to enforce unpopular laws and keep the population subjugated to
the dictates of the central government.
     In context, therefore, the premise underpinning  the Third Amendment
dealt with the unalienable right to be free from the exerise of arbitrary,
capricious and despotic compulsion by armed forces under the exclusive control
of the federal government. The quartering of troops was simply the expression
of that premise.
     The Reconstruction Acts imposed on the rebel states after the Civil War,
and their martial law enforcement, amply demonstrated earlier antifederalist
fears of unchecked federal use armed forces to enforce arbitrary law. Only the
passage of the Posse Comitatus Act in 1878 ended these outrages. The Posse
Comitatus Act stated, in part:

          From and after the passage of this act it shall not be
     lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States as a
     posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the
     laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such
     employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the
     Constitution or by an act of Congress...

     The Posse Comitatus Act was, in fact, a reflection of the intent of the
founders. It is noteworthy that, for over 100 years, this act served to
constrain federal government use of its armed forces in law enforcement. Also
noteworthy is that, as the forces of statism and socialism spread within the
federal government following the Civil War, so did the establishment,
multiplication and expansion of inherently unconstitutional federal law
enforcement, regulatory, and social agencies.
     Today, the increasing militarization of federal, state, and local law
enforcement agencies, aided by the duplicity of the Department of Defense, has
created the very beast feared by the founders generally, and the
antifederalists specifically; an armed force under the exclusive control of
the executive branch of the federal government. These federal agencies have no
purpose other than enforcement of arbitrary, undefined, whim-based federal
"laws." These militarized federal agencies now constitute the functional
equivalent of a standing army in time of peace the founders warned against as
dangerous to liberty, which the Second and Third Amendments were intended to
prevent.

     In the early 1980's, president Reagan announced the "War on Drugs." (How
war can be declared and waged on inanimate objects has yet to be determined;
but it is typical socialist rhetoric.) Debate on the use of federal armed
forces in this "war" and the assistance they could provide to law enforcement
began soon thereafter. Significantly, there was opposition in the Department
of Defense, particularly within the Army, to the obvious implications of using
active duty forces to enforce drug laws. The prevailing arguments were
twofold. First, the involvement of federal armed forces in law enforcement
violated the letter and intent of the Posse Comitatus Act. Second, placing
federal armed forces in close proximity to the drug trade, because of its
proposed enforcement duties, would ultimately lead to corruption within the
military. Both objections to military involvement in law enforcement have
since proven true.
     During the mid 1980's, while Operation Alliance was being organized, a
compromise was reached. If, during the execution of normal training, a member
of the armed forces witnessed activities that could be reasonably construed to
indicate activities involving drugs, or drug trafficking, it was his duty to
report it through his chain of command, for forwarding to the appropriate law
enforcement agencies. On face value, this compromise was neither unreasonable
nor onerous. The consequences of this compromise were.
     Operation Alliance was organized in 1986 under Vice President George
Bush as head of the National Narcotics Border Interdiction System and Attorney
General Edwin Meese III, the Chairman of the National Drug Policy Board. Joint
Task Force-6 was established by the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, on 15
September 1989, at Fort Bliss Texas.
     Operation Alliance responds to requests for operational support from all
law enforcement agencies in the Southwest border region. Its principal focus
is securing military support from its coordination center located on Fort
Bliss, Texas, adjacent to JTF-6 which is located on Biggs Army Airfield. A
significant development in the relationship between Operation Alliance and
JTF-6 is that, prior to 1993, the JTF-6 mission was to provide direct support
to only "Drug Law Enforcement Agencies." Since January 1993 the word "drug"
has been dropped from the "Law Enforcement Agencies" to be supported.
Operation Alliance's primary function is to bring together state and local law
enforcement agencies, and their supporting Active, Reserve, and National Guard
forces, with federal agencies to provide coordinated support to counterdrug
operations along the U.S. southwest border. Alliance operates under the policy
guidance of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). The ONDCP
manages both the international and domestic counterdrug functions of all
executive agencies. The Chairman of ONDCP answers to the National Security
Council.
     Operation Alliance operates under the policy guidance of the ONDCP
Southwest Border Committee and the Operation Alliance Joint Command Group
(OAJCG), which is under the directions of the Southwest Border High Intensity
Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) coordinator, who is also the Director of
Operation Alliance. The OAJCG functions under the Director, Operation Alliance
as a coordinating and planning group. Its members include over 20 federal.
state and local law enforcement agencies. Group meetings are chaired by the
Senior Tactical Coordinator, which is a position which rotates among
representatives of the DEA, the Border Patrol, and the Customs Service.

     JTF-6 serves as the planning, coordinating, and operational headquarters
providing Department of Defense support to federal, state and local law
enforcement agencies along the southwest border. The stated objective of this
support is to assist law enforcement agencies in their mission to detect,
deter, and disrupt drug trafficking. JTF-6 supports Operation Alliance by
planning and coordination all requested DOD (Title 10) support. National Guard
(Title 32) support to Operation Alliance is coordinated directly between
Operation Alliance and the respective state National Guard organizations.
     JTF-6 provides both operational and intelligence support to Operation
Alliance. Operational support is provided using "total force" support packages
drawn from a variety of military sources and guided by priorities established
by Operation Alliance. All military operations in the Operation Alliance area
of responsibility are conducted in support of a lead law enforcement agency.
This results in joint active duty military - law enforcement operations. For
the duration of the operation, active duty military forces are placed under
operational control (OPCON) of the supported law enforcement agency.
     JTF-6 routinely provides four types of operational support to Operation
Alliance. The first is reconnaissance support. Ground reconnaissance support
includes sensors, listening posts, observation posts, ground surveillance
radar, and ground patrols. Aerial reconnaissance support includes Forward
Looking Infrared (FLIR), Side-looking Airborne Radar (SLAR), photographic
imagery, and Remotely Piloted Vehicles (RPVs).
     The second type of operational support is training. Training support
includes patrolling, helicopter insertions and extractions, sniping,
operations and intelligence, and Advanced Military Operations on Urbanized
Terrain (AMOUT). (AMOUT cannot be functionally differentiated from Close
Quarter Combat (CQC) regardless of nit-picking official attempts to do so.
Officially, CQC deals with linear targets--planes, trains, busses. The
training and operational techniques of AMOUT and CQC are identical. BORTAC is
specifically authorized to receive CQC training.).
     The third type of operational support is logistics. Logistical support
includes engineer projects and air and ground transportation. Engineer
projects include barrier erection, road repair, and range construction. Air
transportation includes MH-60 and CH-47 helicopters, as well as the provision
for fire support from helicopter gun-ships. Ground transportation support
includes loans of military vehicles, and the use of tactical vehicles (such as
Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles--BIFVs), upon application. Logistical
support also includes loans of surveillance equipment; primarily passive and
thermal night observation devices, and day optics.
     The fourth type of operational support is Research. Development and
Acquisition (RDA). This involves identifying and demonstrating technologies
appropriate to combining military and law enforcement capabilities and
operations.
     JTF-6 also provides extensive intelligence support to Operation
Alliance.  JTF-6 provides fused and analyzed data from DOD and law enforcement
sources to DOD forces deployed in suort of law enforcement agencies
operating in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. Intelligence support
to law enforcement agencies consists of providing the techniques, systems and
procedures that facilitate the analysis, fusion, and sharing of drug related
intelligence in response to specific requests from law enforcement agencies.
Intelligence support is provided by seconding DOD intelligence personnel to
law enforcement agencies--specifically to the FBI and DEA, by aerial imagery,
intelligence instructors, and translators.
     This "fusion" of military intelligence support to law enforcement
agencies is reflected in the operations of the DEA established El Paso
Intelligence Center (EPIC). EPIC provides operational and tactical
intelligence to the law enforcement community. It has its own proprietary
database, as well as access to other proprietary intelligence databases. EPIC
provides information to authorized DOD, federal and state law enforcement
agencies. EPIC is a full service intelligence operations center, whose primary
mission is to provide tactical intelligence support to federal, state and
local law enforcement agencies with information related to weapons, drugs and
aliens. In addition to DEA, eleven other federal agencies are members of EPIC.

     In theory, Operation Alliance and JTF-6 were intended to exercise the
joint integration of the United States military and federal law enforcement to
fight the alleged "war on drugs." In practice, this integration has been
exploited by federal, state and local law enforcement agencies to militarize
the forces at their disposal. Indeed, given the natural proclivities of the
myriad unconstitutional federal law enforcement agencies, Operation Alliance,
and JTF-6 support of this integration, the armed, badge wielding thugs of the
statist Department of Justice have made themselves the de facto internal
security army of the United States.
     There is no single atrocity that illustrates this obscenity better than
the BATF assault on the Seventh Day Adventist, Branch Davidians, at Waco
Texas, on 28 FEB, 1993. This operation was directly supported by Company C, 3d
Battalion, 3d Special Forces Group (Airborne), then serving as the Rapid
Support Unit for JFT-6 at McGreggor Range Complex, Fort Bliss, Texas.
     Message traffic indicates that the operational parameters of this
assault were known to the Special Forces unit involved as early as December
1992. Operation Alliance, in an attempt to secure DOD support and training
prior to the raid, forwarded a completely fictitious report through military
channels that there was a suspected methamphetamine lab at the Waco compound.
This was enough for JTF-6 to secure the commitment of Special Forces ODA 381
(then attached to Co.C), to provide pre-mission training to BATF forces
dedicated to the attack. (See: Soldier of Fortune, May 1994, and May 1995, for
complete and accurate details).

     The single most noteworthy result of active duty military integration
into the so-called "war on drugs," has been the abject perversion of the once
honorable Judge Advocate General Corps (JAG). JTF-6 spared no expense to hire
civilian lawyers who specialize in law related to the Posse Comitatus Act. JAG
officers who object to specific missions parameters related to the employment
of federal troops in support of Operation Alliance and JTF-6 are given notice
by military liaison officers to OAJCG that their objections are "...not career
enhancing."
     Prior to October 1989, counterdrug enforcement belonged exclusively to
law enforcement agencies. The Department of Defense provided limited
assistance to involved agencies but did not become directly involved in police
functions. As part of the 1989 National Defense Authorization Act, DOD was
directed to fully integrate its command, control, communications, and
intelligence functions with those of federal law enforcement agencies.
     This integration was a deliberate, willful violation of the intent of
the Third Amendment to the Constitution. Since the establishment of Operation
Alliance and JTF-6,  law enforcement agencies at all levels have used the
increasingly insupportable pretext of "drugs" to secure increasing levels of
direct military training and support. The result has been the increasingly
authoritative, abusive, and arbitrary enforcement of so-called "laws" by an
increasingly militarized "police." Stripped of its window-dressing and
obfuscating rhetoric, the law enforcement agencies of today are no different
than the standing armies of the 18th century.
     If the federal government was serious about the "threat to national
security" posed by the drug trade; if the federal government was serious about
"interdicting" the drug trade into the United States; it would invaded,
reduced to rubble, and occupied as subject colonies, the drug trafficking
states of Mexico, Columbia, Peru, and Bolivia.
     It causes you wonder who is benefiting by not doing so. The abrogation
of individual rights resulting from the logarithmic expansion of arbitrary
legislation, and the integration of the Department of Defense with the
Department of Justice is justified in the name of the "war on drugs." Or is it
the War on the Constitution?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Actions DO Reflect Values

          As this issue was going to press we received the following
     report from a source close to BATF. The information contained in
     this report is raw data, and is for reporting purposes only. This
     information has not been analyzed, and is not finally evaluated
     intelligence. The content of the message is reproduced as
     received. This material is unedited. The source of this
     information is rated A2.

Reference: Cummins ((BEATTY)); subject was ATF SAC in Nashville, TN. He was
having child pornography delivered to his office. He also was having visitors
come to his office believed to be homosexual partners, although it is unclear
whether actual homosexual acts took place at the office or at another
location. What is clear is that ((BEATTY)) was watching kiddie porn movies in
his office with the door closed and his pants open, masturbating as he
watched. Apparently, a secretary unintentionally walked-in on him. When she
did so, ((BEATTY)) made no attempt to hide himself and , in fact, exposed
himself to her. She complained and the Office of Inspector General (OIG) got
involved. The OIG's surveillance report--much of which was omitted from the
IG's final report--stated that ((BEATTY)) was observed "...hanging around a
child's playground..." and other "unsavory" places.
     The upshot was; ((BEATTY)) was confronted and his Assistant Special
Agent in Charge (ASAC) Jerry ((RUDEN)) also got in trouble when it was
determined that he knew of ((BEATTY))'s proclivities and had not reported them
to Headquarters. John ((MCGAW)) commented on this semi-publicity, although not
mentioning any names, by saying that he had to appoint a female SAC for the
Nashville office because the females in the office had been "extremely
traumatized."
     PUNISHMENT:  ASAC ((RUDEN)) lost his supervisory status and was
transferred to an ATF office in Bowling Green, KY. But he was not forced to
move, so he commutes from his home in Nashville. ATF management felt they
could not punish ((RUDEN)) too harshly or he would "spill the beans" about
((BEATTY))'s exile to his home state of Alabama. ((MCGAW)) made a statement
that ((BEATTY)) had a tough life with a "history of mental problems and
related incidents spanning eight years." ATF responded by creating a job for
((BEATTY)) at Fort McLellan, AL, where ATF runs its academy for Special
Response Teams--the same SRT's responsible for Mt. Carmel. The position
((BEATTY)) holds at Ft. McClellan is unsupervised. [Source embellishes his
report at his point with references to unsupervised homosexual senior federal
law enforcement agents retaining their badges and guns while awaiting
retirement. Source's language was unprintable. Editor]. ((MCGAW)) told a
reporter after the 23 March Senate subcommittee hearing on Waco: "If I didn't
want ((BEATTY)) to have a badge and a gun, he wouldn't have a badge and a
gun."

Reference: William M. ((REECE)); former head of ATF's aviation operations, was
named as chief suspect in the alleged embezzlement of $1.5 million through
falsified travel vouchers. ((REECE)) was allowed to retire without punishment
as part of a deal  to protect supervisors who had allowed ((REECE))'s deeds to
go unpunished. These supervisors were subsequently promoted by Undersecretary
of the Treasury Ron ((NOBLE)). ((REECE))'s immediate supervisor at the time
was Margaret ((MOORE)).
     Reference: Margaret ((MOORE)); she is now SAC in Baltimore, MD.
((MOORE)) was recently investigated for pistol-whipping her live-in homosexual
lover at their Baltimore area apartment. A threat was communicated by
((MOORE)) to her victim, who is an area supervisor for ATF, over the victim's
casual affair with a female computer software contractor working for ATF. The
alleged motive for ((MOORE))'s threat was jealousy. ((MOORE)) is also under
scrutiny for taking a government car on a trip to Mexico. ((MOORE))'s
supervisor at the time of ((REECE))'s embezzlement was Dick ((GARNER)).
     Reference: Dick ((GARNER)); he is ATF liaison officer to the Pentagon.
In the hours immediately after the Waco raid, ((GARNER)) filed a request,
(which bypassed Operation Alliance and JTF-6) with the DOD, for 10 Bradley
Infantry Fighting Vehicles (BIFVs), supposedly to be used to set-up a
defensive perimeter to evacuate wounded, but with the ominous postscript that
"...if the vehicles are to be used in an assault role, U.S. Army markings are
to be obscured." After ((REECE))'s unpunished embezzlement, ((GARNER)) was
promoted to be SAC in Nashville, where he replaced Cummins ((BEATTY)).
     Reference: WACO. ATF management is not only unwilling to punish poor
management, it actually rewards poor management and, in the cases of
((BEATTY)) and ((REECE)), criminal behavior, among managers. Another example
of this would be the firing--and then rehiring--of Waco raid commanders
Phillip ((CHOJNACKI)) and Charles ((SARABYN)). Both deny altering the raid
plan to divert blame from themselves. The Treasury  Report on Waco said such
alterations were made. Now Treasury is withdrawing its claim of the
alterations, and even on the existence of a raid plan. The alleged absence of
such a plan for an operation of such scale constitutes criminal negligence.
Regardless, numerous Pentagon documents prove the claim there was no raid plan
is a lie. In fact, ((CHOJNACKI)) and ((SARABYN)) reclaimed their jobs because
they know--and promised not to tell--that final approval to go ahead with the
compromised raid was given only minutes before the shooting, which was started
by Ron ((NOBLE)). Cellular telephone records prove this.
==============================================================================
                        OPEN LETTER TO OUR READERS

On Militia

In May 1993, the Coordinating Staff of the Special Forces Underground met to
discuss our degree of cooperation with the various patriot and militia
organizations. The operations officer was directed to complete a staff study,
and to present his advise no later than 01 October 1993. On that date, during
the quarterly command and staff meeting, we made the decision to avoid any
unqualified direct contact with the patriot movement in general, and the
militias in particular.
     Our decision was grounded in part on my intelligence officer's
assessment that most of the various militia groups were riddled with both
recruited and opportunity informants, federal and state undercover operatives,
and agents provocateur; that any direct involvement with the militias would
ultimately contaminate the security of our own organization.
     This is not an indictment of the unorganized militias which, in our
view, are exercising their common law and constitutional rights of self
defense and voluntary association. It is a simple statement of fact. However,
the very openness of most militia groups--their careless recruitment methods
and inherent lack of rudimentary personnel screening and operational security
measures--leaves these groups open to infiltration, subversion and
manipulation. Should the federal government decide to act against the militia
groups, and the militia groups stand and fight, they will not, in their
current configuration, last one month. That is our assessment. Out of this
meeting, however, the idea of The RESISTER was born.
     The inherent weakness of any underground organization is its limited
ability to communicate its message in a non-permissive environment to a
potential support base and thereby generate  sympathizers, adherents, and
recruits. If the Special Forces Underground consisted of homosexuals,
Marxists, new age dirt-worshipers, and New World Order Quislings, and we had
simply let it be known that we were being repressed by so-called right-wing
"extremists" in the military establishment we could have generated no end of
support from the mainstream media and their Marxist support apparatus. It is
even possible we could have received the tacit blessing of our military chain
of command for our "progressive" stand on current issues.
     We are none of those things. We believe in the primacy of the
individual--as an end unto himself. We believe in the inalienable rights of
man--life, liberty and property. We believe in the incomparable expression of
man's rational faculties in action, the source of all true rights-- laissez
faire capitalism. We believe that the Constitution is the logical expression
of our beliefs. We believe that our current federal, state, and local
governments represent the antitheses of everything we hold true. The only
secure way to communicate our beliefs within the military is by the
historically proven means of clandestine publishing. Thus The RESISTER.
     One uncontrollable consequence of publishing The RESISTER was its spread
outside Special Forces into the patriot movement. This put the Special Forces
Underground in indirect contact with the militia movement which, by conscious
policy, we originally intended to avoid. (If this sounds contradictory you
need to re-examine your premises regarding clandestine organizations and
operations). Our support for the concept of the unorganized militia in general
is unqualified. Our support for particular militia groups is very much
qualified.
     Socialists argue that the necessity for an unorganized militia has been
negated by the de facto select militia, the National Guard. The establishment
of the National Guard in 1917 was a deliberate effort on the part of
socialists (then called "progressives") to subvert both the letter and intent
of the Uniform Militia Act of 1792, and the Second Amendment. The National
Guard is the very embodiment of the concept of a select militia in that it is
armed, equipped, organized, trained and paid for by--and therefore loyal
to--the federal government. Regardless of a state's nominal control over its
national guard, it is subject to federalization by presidential decree and
thus little more than an auxiliary of the standing army. The national guard is
a twisted socialist mockery of the principle stated in 1791 by Rep. James
Jackson, Georgia, that, "In a Republic every man ought to be a soldier, and be
prepared to resist tyranny and usurpation, as well as invasion, and to prevent
the greatest of all evils--a standing army .
     Today the militia concept exists within an irreconcilable paradox. In a
republic the militia is the armed citizenry. The unalienable natural and
common-law right of individuals to form, join, drill, and if necessary fight
as an organized body of armed citizens in defense of their common interests
(by voluntary association) against the forces of either foreign or domestic
tyranny is therefore unquestionable. This is, in fact, the true intent of the
Second Amendment. The paradox is that the natural right of self defense and
the common law right (indeed, obligation in your own self interest) to oppose
tyranny, by force of arms if necessary, has been rendered questionable, if not
in some cases illegal, by the slow but persistent forces of socialism and
Marxism within the federal and state governments.
     In 1917, the federal government assumed control over the various states'
organized militias by means of establishing the National Guard. The stated
reason was national security. The true intent was to eliminate resistance to
Woodrow Wilson's socialist design to cement this nation's descent into the
political gang warfare of democracy. The result was government security.
     In 1934, the National Firearms Act was passed without so much as a
whimper of protest from the unorganized militia. The stated purpose was public
safety. The true intent was to interdict potential resistance to the logical
results of  Roosevelt's Marxist economic and social policies. The result was
greater government security.
     The 1968 Gun Control Act and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets
Act passed without much notice or opposition from the unorganized militia.
Their stated purpose was, again, public safety. Their true purpose was
population control by means of prohibiting the undocumented transfer of
firearms, and they broadened the scope police powers. The end result was even
greater government security.
     During the 1980's the states passed laws prohibiting paramilitary
training without a whisper of dissent from the unorganized militia. The stated
purpose of these laws was, again, public safety. Their true purpose was to
prevent the militia from drilling. This means government security.
     In 1994 both the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection
Act and the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act passed. Their stated
purpose was, yet once again, public safety. Their true purpose was, again,
population control by limiting ready access to firearms, prohibiting military
style small arms without documentation, and federalizing most "crimes:" which
means; government security.
     Where was the unorganized militia when all these anti-militia laws were
being passed? Waiting for someone else to "do something?" Whom, exactly? The
NRA? The NRA has been compromising away your rights for over 60 years.
     Returning to the militia paradox mentioned previously, the formation and
exercising of a militia is now, for all intents and purposes, of dubious
legality. Not unconstitutional, given that rights antedating the Constitution
are "reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Merely
questionable. And the reason the formation and exercise of a militia today is
questionable, is because the unorganized militia of previous generations,
wishing they could have their cake and eat it, did nothing while their
so-called representatives appealed to their irrational whims and sold them
down the socialist river.
     Where was the militia when the Supreme Court usurped the power to
interpret the Constitution? Where was the militia when the Anti-Trust laws
were passed? Did the militia mobilize to oppose any of the following?
Democracy; the Federal Reserve Bank; direct taxation; popular election of
Senators; universal suffrage; compulsory education; prohibition; the formation
of federal law enforcement, regulatory, or social agencies; the War Powers
Act; labor laws; social security; the formation of the U.N.; the Marshal Plan;
so-called 'civil rights;' Lyndon Johnson's blatantly Marxist "Great Society"
programs; environmental laws; lowering the voting age; equal opportunity;
affirmative action; forfeiture laws; or any other statist, socialist, or
Marxist legislation? The answer is: NO.
     The recent federal crackdown on the unorganized militia and their
related activities was not only predictable, it was inevitable, because the
unorganized militia of past generations sanctioned their own--and by
default--your, victimization. If there is one ray of hope on the horizon it is
that Americans have begun to understand the logical consequence of their
ancestor's irrational compromise between liberty and democracy; tyrannical
government.
     What recourse is there when government--federal, state or
local--demonstrates its illegitimacy by the passage of socialist and Marxist
inspired legislation which, by definition, abrogates individual rights and
compels individuals to act against their rational self interest? There appear
to be only two choices: rebellion or slavery. But there is a third.
Resistance.
     The militias, such as they are, need to carefully consider their
position. You cannot reasonably expect to form a militia, voice your
opposition to the federal government and its rights abrogating domestic
policies and expect to remain untargeted by its internal security apparatus.
Any attempt to restore the Constitution, as written, threatens extinction to
the federal bureaucracy and the pull-politics beast it rides. The federal
government's eradication of the Seventh Day Adventists in Waco had nothing to
do with religion, alleged firearms laws violations, or alleged child abuse. It
was a message to the American people from our socialist federal government,
delivered by their errand boys in the BATF and FBI. It is the universal
message of all tyrannies; if you are defiant, we will kill you.
     We are raising this issue to point out that the patriot movement in
general, and militia groups in particular, need to get a firm grip on the
realities of resistance and underground operations. Most militia groups, as
they now exist (there are a very few exceptions), have all the clandestine
subtlety and operational sophistication of the Kenyan Mau Mau movement of the
early 1960's. In contrast, the federal government has, at its immediate
disposal--if it chooses to put it to full use--an internal security and
population control apparatus that would have made Hitler and Stalin weep with
envy. There is nothing preventing the federal government from exercising its
unlimited power since all they have to do when confronted with constitutional
constraints is redefine the parameters of those constraints, as the recent
passage of HR 666 demonstrates.
     During the debates on ratification of the Constitution, antifederalists
argued that the militia clause contained the seeds of tyranny by granting to
Congress control over the militia as to deprive the states effective control
over their militia.
     Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution delegates to Congress the
authority:

          To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the
     Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in
     the Service of the United States, reserving to the States
     respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority
     of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by
     Congress.

The obvious (to an antifederalist) flaw in this section is that if Congress
has the authority to arm the militia it also has the authority to disarm them.
Indeed, a militia thus armed by Congress (called a Select militia), would be
liable to serve as a force to disarm the rest of the populace. This was
corrected by the Uniform Militia Act of 8 May 1792, which required every "free
able bodied white male citizen" between the ages 18 to 45 to enroll in local
militia units and "provide himself with a good musket or firelock..." (which
means: a rifle suitable for military service), ammunition and accoutrements.
In passing this act Congress rejected federal control over arming and
exemptions, and specifically rejected presidential power to call out the
militia, thus reserving to the states questions of organization and
discipline. The very notion of the militia falling under federal authority
(Select militia) was considered a violation of  the intent of a militia (an
armed citizenry), organized, trained and disciplined by state legislatures.
     Objective reading of the Militia Act makes it clear that a legitimate
organized militia falls under control of the State government, which is
responsible for its organization, discipline and the appointment of its
officers. The unorganized militia is the armed citizenry at large. This
arrangement is not only rational, it is essential, for without legitimate
authority any demagogue could form a "militia," which in practice would be
little more than a local armed gang. Therein lies an inherent danger of the
militia movement and the reason the Special Forces Underground will not commit
its assets indiscriminately.
     We stated above that our support of the militia movement in general is
unqualified, but that our support of particular militias is very much
qualified. To put it bluntly, we judge. If the philosophy of your organization
rests upon any premise we find contradictory to the principles of unalienable
individual rights, laissez faire capitalism, and limited constitutional
republicanism, you are on your own.
     If your decision to join your state approved organized milita is based
upon a rational, objective belief that your state government has consistently
demonstrated it is the guarator of your liberties as a free man, then by all
means do so. If your state governemnt fails this objective test, you--as an
individual acting is your own rational self interest--as a member of the
unorganized militia by virtue of citizenship in a constitutional republic,
have the unalienable right to voluntarily associate with whomever you choose
for any moral, ethical, non-compulsory purpose.
     We have stated in the past that when the time comes, we will find you.
The RESISTER is the vehicle. Your voluntary association is the means. If you
do not know how this works, pay attention. We will teach you.

J.F.A.Davidson
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Reality

Clandestine publishing involves certain inescapable realities that some of our
less experienced readers fail to recognize and account for when requesting
information or publications from us. The majority of people who request
information about the Special Forces Underground, or desire to subscribe to
The RESISTER, are accustomed to prompt responses and services from the
businesses they deal with. This is a reasonable expectation when dealing with
a business.
     However, Special Forces Underground is not a business. It is a
resistance movement. The RESISTER is the official publication of that
resistance movement. True, by virtue of publishing The RESISTER, and the
occasional book, we are engaged in business-like activity.  But, what everyone
who desires to subscribe to The RESISTER, or obtain our other publications,
must understand, is that by virtue of being a clandestine organization, and by
virtue of publishing clandestinely, we cannot reasonably be held to
conventional standards of prompt service.
     When conducting business with us we ask you to take the following facts
into account:

1.   We do not have a business office with secretaries processing orders.
2.   We do not maintain stocks. When you order something from us it has to be
     reproduced from a master.
3.   We cannot adhere to rigid production schedules. We must assemble those
     personnel who have volunteered to assist in that quarter at one place,
     at one time, to commence production. This is not as easy, or secure, as
     it sounds.
4.   We cannot adhere to rigid distribution schedules. (The opposition would
     _love_ that).
5.   Incoming mail passes down a rat-line staffed by an auxiliary comprised
     of both witting volunteers and unwitting accomplices. It is now 29
     March, 1995. We are still receiving mail postmarked in February. Our
     security is more important than a direct mailing address.
6.   Outgoing distribution must be smuggled to an auxiliary volunteer.
     All this takes time. Six weeks on average.

Special Forces Underground and The RESISTER conducts its business honestly.
Those who have overpaid for requested publications have received cash refunds
with their order. Those who have underpaid have received what they asked for
along with an order blank. Almost without exception, compensation has been
returned (there is always that 1% who are thieves). On rare occasions
something "slips through the cracks." Sometimes that is due to mail-crossing,
sometimes to mistakes on our part. Have patience with our operational
constraints. If you have a complaint let us know, and we will make good on
your request.
     No underground organization or resistance movement can conduct its
activities without a reasonably secure source of income. Our firm belief,
based on our considerable experience, is that resistance movements which
resort to crime to support their activities (bank robberies, drug dealing,
etc.), were never anything other than criminal organizations to begin with.
The Special Forces Underground will not raise money for its activities by any
means other than honorable means, and the voluntary contributions of our
supporters.
     The blood that precipitated the first American Revolution was ink. The
Special Forces Underground pays homage to that tradition via The RESISTER and
its ancillary publications. Together we will wrest our constitutional republic
away from the democracy worshipping mob; and we will pry our lives, liberty,
and property from the death grip of Marxist usurpers.

                                        The Staff
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Hitch-hiker

     On 04 February 1995, Mr. Frank Elena, a member of the Freemen, and
alleged member of the Militia of Montana, spoke for 28 minutes 17 seconds
before the Arizona Breakfast Club. Mr. Elena's somewhat disorganized and
(apparently) hastily prepared presentation ranged across a number of topics,
including his personal life and the movement and disposition of ex-Warsaw Pact
military vehicles in the United States.
     13 minutes 55 seconds into his presentation, Mr Elena announced;

     Right now, The Resister, which is another group of...ahh...retired
     special forces, who have inside information all the time...we get
     information on faxes...on the intel hot-line, and...ahh...right
     now we have about 60% of our military 'gonna back us...we've got
     probably the same amount of national guard.

     Mr. Elena's liberal juxtaposition of "The Resister," with "we," in the
samesentence, in his capacity as spokesman for the Militia of Montana, is a
gross misrepresentation.
     Mr. Elena has no connection, direct or indirect, with  Special Forces
Underground or The RESISTER. We deny emphatically Mr. Elena's assertions that
he, or any organization he purports to represent, speaks knowledgeably about
Special Forces Underground, The RESISTER, our activities or our support base.
Mr. Elena's indiscretion appears to be an isolated incident.
     For the record, there are only four individuals outside the underground
who know how to contact us directly. Mr. Elena is not one of them.

                                        M.O. Warren
                                        PAO, SFU
==============================================================================
                                EDITORIALS
                                ----------
                         Anti-capitalist Treaties.

NAFTA and GATT have exactly nothing to do with "free trade." These treaties
are deliberate assaults on the last remaining vestiges of capitalism. The
degree to which the American public at large has, through its willful
indolence and ignorance, accepted the unconscionable socialist premise that
the purpose of government is to "promote the general Welfare," is reflected in
fact that, at no time during the debates on NAFTA and GATT, did a single
main-stream media "conservative," either in print, on television, or on radio,
point out two simple facts. First, that any government control, legislation,
regulation, or manipulation of an economy, is socialism. Second, that
government negotiated "free trade" treaties must, by definition, give
government control of that trade. The federal government has accomplished with
two scraps of paper what they could not accomplish in two centuries of
compromising away the ideal of capitalism; socialism by  international treaty.
The economy of the United States is now tied, by default, to the economies of
quasi-communist Mexico, socialist Canada, and the socialist economic block of
the EEC.
     The preamble to the Constitution provides for the federal government to
"...promote the general Welfare..." of the United States. In objective terms
specifically related to the economy the phrase "...promote the general
Welfare..." can mean nothing less than simply leaving the economy alone.
However, the meaning of this provision has been intentionally subverted by
altruists, socialists, and Marxists within the government, to enslave the
means of wealth creation in service to domestic and international parasites.
During the ratification debates antifederalists pointed out that this clause
must, as a logical consequence of its vagueness, must inevitably result in
despotism and tyranny. In 1787, Samuel Bryan remarked:

          ...and moreover, the absolute controul over the commerce of
     the United States and all objects of revenue, such as unlimited
     imposts upon imports, &c. --they (Congress) are to be vested with
     every species of internal taxation;--whatever taxes, duties and
     excises that they may deem requisite for the general welfare,
     ...distributed through every district in America; and the
     collection would be enforced by the standing army, however
     grievous or improper they may be. The Congress may construe every
     purpose for which the state legislatures now lay taxes, to be for
     the general welfare, and therefore seize upon every object of
     revenue.

                    "Centinel" I, Independent Gazetter, 5 Oct 1787

As mentioned elsewhere in this issue, the myriad unconstitutional federal law
enforcement and regulatory agencies have become the "standing army" the
antifederalists warned against. These agencies are now, by default of the
NAFTA and GATT treaties, organs of the World Trade Organization.
There is no such thing as a "world economy." The very notion of such is the
fabrication of one-world socialists. Since the end of World War II,
internationalists have been passing economic legislation which has no other
goal than the conversion the United States into a slave nation in the service
of the pathetic Third World irrelevancies that make up the body of the United
Nations.
     Better tens-of-millions of Third World savages live in abject poverty
and starve, as a logical result of their socialist government policies, than a
single American business be amalgamated into a "world economy" managed by
Mexican, Congolese, and French bureaucrats.

                                        John Smilie
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           The RESISTER Targeted

     We have been informed by a previously reliable source, that during a
recent officers call at Fort Devens, MA, Major General Harley Davis,
Commander, United States Army Special Forces Command (Airborne), remarked to
several senior officers present, including COL Lambert, Commander, 10th
SFG(A), that he considered The RESISTER "treasonous and disloyal." He, (or COL
Lambert, it is unclear which), further stated that he intended to, "find each
and every one of those disloyal (individuals) involved with 'that'
publication." Two questions come immediately to mind. "Treason," against what?
"Disloyal," to whom?
     Article III, section 3 of the Constitution defines treason thus:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against
them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." Is MG
Davis infering that defending the Constitution, and adhering to the philosophy
it represents--self-interest, limited republicanism, and
capitalism--constitutes treason? Is he also infering that publicly adhering to
our sacred oath to defend the Constitution "...against all enemies, foreign
and domestic,"--against the inherently evil forces of democracy, socialism,
and communism--constitutes disloyalty? Apparently, since he did not define his
terms, he is.
     The RESISTER does not advocate "overthrow of government" (18 USC s
2385); we advocate restoration of the Constitutional Republic. The RESISTER is
not engaged in activity that "advises, councils, urges, or in any manner
causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of
duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States," (18
USC s 2387(a)(1)); we are expressing our own beliefs, on our own time, and
with our own resources; nor does anybody associated with The RESISTER tolerate
discussion of "insubordination, mutiny, disloyalty, or refusal of duty," in
defense of the Constitution. The RESISTER is not "distributed" as defined in
AR 210-10; subscribers are free to do with it as they desire.
     Special Warfare, the Army's official publication of special operations
forces, is implicitly Marxist in political philosophy and explicitly pro
United Nations. The RESISTER is explicitly pro Constitution and vehemently
anti U.N.. Which of these publications, General Davis, do you imagine is most
popular within Special Forces? Which of these publications, General Davis, do
you imagine thousands of patriotic Americans--Americans who have come to fear
their own government and what it has come to stand for--subscribe to, or read
bootleg copies of?
     This incident, and its implications, raises an issue that is of deadly
importance to the future of this nation. Officers do not become senior
officers by adhering to principle and never compromising their personal
integrity. They will jump on each political bandwagon, regardless of which
direction it is headed, that will further their careers. Who, exactly, is
being treasonous and disloyal? The RESISTER, and its uncompromising support
and defense of the Constitution, or those adherents of socialism, Marxism and
one-world government who are shredding the Constitution?
     At least our words and our actions are consistent with our beliefs.

                                   J.F.A. Davidson

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Official Communist Policy Yields Expected Results

     As reports continue to filter in from our observers in Haiti it is
apparent that the official U.S. policy of disarming the Haitian middle and
upper class is beginning to pay off with the desired results. Middle and upper
class business people, former FAd'H officials, and current members of the
Interim Security Police Force (ISPF), are being targeted for murder by the
democracy loving, communist, Organization Populair Lavalas (OPL).
     The United States Army, under the direct control of the United Nations,
deliberately set about to disarm the very segment of Haitian society which
could have pulled that country back from the brink of African savagery. As a
result of this policy of population disarmament, the communists, deliberately
placed into power in Haiti by the federal government and the United States
Army, have begun a systematic campaign of terror and murder to cement their
hold on that country.
     As United States forces revert to the direct operational control of the
United Nations you can expect more of the same. The only people who are safe
and secure in Haiti are the communists. This is because the United States
Army, adhering to deliberate policy dictated by the United Nations, disarmed
everyone who would oppose communism.

                                        Samuel Nasson
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Statement of Policy

     The philosophy of the Special Force Underground and The RESISTER is
straightforward: individual rights, strict constitutionalism, limited
government, isolationism, laissez-faire capitalism, and republicanism; in
short, the principles upon which this nation was founded.
     We oppose: statism, socialism, collectivism, liberalism, altruism,
internationalism, tribalism, democracy, pull politics, and the New World
Order; in short, the ideologies of all tyrannies.
     Our philosophical framework is objectivism (the rational morality of
self interest--which means; Life). Our political philosophy is grounded in the
works of the Founding Fathers of this nation and Auberon Herbert (government
as servant, not master--which means; Liberty). Our economic philosophy is
grounded in the works of Carl Menger, Ludwig von Mises, and Henry Hazlitt (the
guarantor of individual rights, laissez-faire capitalism--which means;
Property).
     We do not advocate the violent overthrow of the U.S. government. We do
advocate resistance to government tyranny at all levels. We do not advocate
the initiation of force in doing so. We do advocate appropriate force-in-kind
in retaliation. We advocate active resistance against the United Nations.
Our goal is the restoration of the Constitutional Republic. Our aim is to see
the federal government defanged, muzzled, shackled and cast back into its
constitutional prison.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Correction

     In our VOL.I,No.3 (Winter 1995), side-bar "Agents Provocateur and
Informants," we stated that undercover operatives and informants, if directly
asked, must identify themselves as such.
     Council informs us this is not true. In his words:

     ...contrary to popular belief, if one asks an informant or
     undercover agent his official position, and he lies, information
     he gathers WILL BE admissible. An undercover agent CAN lie, and
     not only are they encouraged to do so, but they would get nowhere
     without deception.

     The error was ours solely, and we take responsibility for it.

                                             The Staff
==============================================================================
                              CORRESPONDENCE
                              --------------

     I thoroughly enjoyed your last issue (Winter, 1995, Vol.I, No.3). While
I wholeheartedly agree with your editorial "Expropriation of an Ideal," I find
I must disagree with your rhetoric about "Civil Affairs and Psychological
Operations social workers." First, your right. Bronze Bruce was dedicated to
Special Forces soldiers killed in the Republic of Viet Nam (and other
wars). He belongs in the plaza. LTG Scott displayed overweening hubris. No
argument.
      However, as you are well aware, Psychological Operations soldiers
aren't Civil Affairs or social workers. PSYOP (or PSYWAR as it was then) is a
primary progenitor of Army Special Forces and is closely woven into the
classic SF mission, guerilla warfare.
     Students of resistance movements and undergrounds recognize that these
are wars of ideas. The first phase of any resistance movement is psychological
operations to build the movement, create resistance potential and attract
recruits. Indeed, just killing resisters is ineffective in the long run (they
become martyrs), unless you discredit of subsume their idea.
     Any true patriot would be advised to find a copy of the current PSYOP
manuals (FM 33-1 & 33-1-1) and read them. The leftist "compassion fascist"
socialist media is already demonizing and trivializing the constitutionalist
resistance to their New World Order agenda. We need to employ effective,
truth-based, organized PYSOP to counter their propaganda and reach the
_thinking_ electorate and other key communicators.
     None of this even suggests that PSYOP soldiers are Special Forces of
Bronze Bruce represents anyone but Special Forces. rather, it is a reminder to
this community that the war of the flea is won through having a BETTER IDEA
than the opposition and by getting that idea across.
     The Framers produced that better idea in the Constitution.

                                   Tom Paine
                                   USAJFKSWCS

          You are correct. Guerilla warfare and psychological warfare
     are inseparable. Indeed, they are a continuum. However, when
     guerilla warfare and psychological warfare are divided by fiat
     into separate commands they are both rendered impotent. We have
     long held that the PSYOP course should be made Phase IV of the Q
     Course. Our reference to PSYOP and CA as "social workers" is
     grounded in our policy of judging actions. 19 year-old kids
     driving around a town in Haiti blurting such filth as "Rejoice,
     democracy is here," over a loudspeaker, is social work, not
     psychological warfare. The RESISTER is psychological warfare and
     our better idea is that of the Framers.

                                   The Editor


     Thank you for all your efforts and may God bless you and our country. We
are networking with the Council on Domestic Relations to get the 10th
Amendment resolution adopted in North Carolina. It will be a monumental task,
but a number of legislators are enthusiastic about it.
     Please keep The RESISTER coming. Just the fact that you exist encourages
those of us who are working across the country.

                              The Liberty Sentinel
                              PO Box 1188
                              Liberty, NC 27298


     I recently had a conversation with a 7th SFGA soldier who had just
returned from a JTF-Six mission. In the process of picking his brain I
elicited a response to the effect of, "Oh, I guess you're one of those nuts
who's worried about GARDEN PLOT and CABLESPLICE, aren't you?" In the course of
the conversation he informed me that the ATF personnel he had worked with had
told him about the plan for a general disarmament of the civil population, and
that they were sure they could pull it off. Further, he seemed to be in
agreement. He told me, "Civilians don't need 'those types' of guns anyway."
     It is a dirty shame that so many of our nation's young men are dead
asleep on their feet. Our enemy has already won a great battle in our public
education system. Hardly anyone I talk to has ever read the Declaration of
Independence or the Constitution. The common perception seems to be that we
can't really know what the Founders had in mind, because we weren't there, and
those old documents were written in another time and the words mean different
things now.
     Reference your article about Haiti: everyone I talk to says the same
thing first; "Man, that whole operation was f____d-up." I am encouraged that
at least some saw the reality of occupation and disarmament. Last summer I
attended a DCM clinic and ordered an M1 rifle. What I saw at the range was
heartening. Mom and Dad, Jr. and Sis, all showed-up with militia grade
weapons. There were M1's, M1 carbines, SKS', MIA's, AR15's, MAK90's, and just
about every suitable military firearm made during this century. The reality is
that the militia is well armed. The question is, can the population of this
country resist the immoral premise that registration and licensing is the way
to prevent crime?
     No man will convince me to trade my rights for permission. The last time
I looked license meant; "Permission to do that which would otherwise be
illegal." Nor will the validity of my rights be determined by the actions of
criminals. Gun control of any kind has nothing to do with crime--it is only
about power. HCI and their Marxist support apparatus are irrelevant idiots who
possess only the credibility we give them.
     Finally, we must claw our way out of the quagmire of perpetual
paternalism into which we have sold ourselves. The ancient Hebrews found
themselves in an identical situation and found moral courage in their faith.
We, on the other hand, while drawing moral courage from the same source, must
not wait for a savior. Our ancestors gave us an instrument with which we can
save ourselves. It is the Constitution. It is defended with a rifle.

                                   Bruce
                                   Ft. Jackson, SC


     I am writing you in regard to the article "First Amendment Police"
(Vol.1, No.3). The man that you wrote about is a sergeant on my staff. I sent
him to find out any information he could on your mail drop and personnel
picking up items at the post office, and to find out who was operating in our
back yard.
     We found that your operation was not as secure as we thought it might
be. It only took our man about an hour and we knew names and addresses of all
involved. I would have used a man with less of a criminal background to sign
for the box.
     As far as surveillance goes we never put any on the post office or the
young gentleman, no damage control was needed by your staff.
     The 1st Battalion, 1st Light Infantry Regiment--Texas Reserve Militia,
invited your young gentleman to our meeting in December and (we) would like to
work with your group if the need ever arises.
     Please accept our apology and (we) hope that you now feel secure in your
operation and keep up the good work.

                                   M. Smith
                                   Captain, 1st Texas Light Infantry
                                   Texas Reserve Militia


          How very curious. For the record: 1) Your sergeant found
     what he was supposed to find, which was exactly nothing; 2) none
     of our auxiliary had, or have, criminal records; 3) we will
     determine when damage control is needed and when it is not; 4) our
     cut-out was not invited by anybody to any meeting; 5) feeling
     secure has nothing to do with security; 6) we will keep up the
     good work.
          Do not bulls__t us. We do this for a living.

                                   E. Hinchley
                                   G2, Security


     President John Kennedy, in his 1961 inaugural address said, "In the long
history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of
defending freedom in the hour maximum danger... The energy, the faith, the
devotion, which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who
serve it, and the glow from that fire can truly light the world.
     Over two hundred years ago a generation of Americans successfully
defended freedom and created a system of government that was truly a light in
a darkened world. They proved that a nation can function most efficiently with
a severely limited government, and that only government of, by and for the
people can provide abundant life, liberty, happiness and security. Even in the
present "New World Order" darkness, tradition causes people of other nations
to look to America for leadership in restoring freedom. As they watch our
nation being taken over by enemies from within, they also see the rise of
ministers and patriot leades who are too honorable to do less than risk their
lives in opposing this evil world system. Perhaps it is our example that is
causing the people of Chechnya to take up arms and cast off Soviet slavery.
There was even a Russian general who refused to move his tanks against these
people who only desire freedom.
     One principle our enemies are using against us is "divide and conquer."
They forced integration upon us to get blacks and whites to hate each other.
We dare not hate each other because there are people of all races working
together to free our nation. They're trying to stir up hatred of Jews, but
there are Jews working just as hard as Christians, defending their right to
believe as they choose.
     All true Americans must get involved in this struggle. We must preserve
what our forefathers entrusted to us.

                                   Chuck A.
                                   Montana


     Please add me to the distribution list for The RESISTER. I served
proudly in various units of the 9th Infantry Division from 1977-1981 and then
in the MI Company, 10th SFGA from 1981-1983. While a member of the active duty
military I was just an ordinary American doing what I believed at the time was
an important job.
     Like you, I am deeply distressed at the direction taken by our
freedom-trashing government. The former Special Forces men involved in the
political process here in the Granite State are dedicated, resourceful and
resolute. We do not intend to lose. The Founding Fathers who built this
republic during the late 18th century worked diligently to craft a government
which would respect the rights of free men. No glib, slick liberals are going
to dismantle the freedom and liberty which so many Americans have surrendered
their lives to preserve.
     If you or yours should ever need help or assistance when in (CENSORED,
ed.), do not hesitate to call or write. Mention (CENSORED, ed.) to let me know
who the caller or writer might be. I will endeavor to offer a bed, a meal or a
rest stop, whatever is needed. Many citizens on the outside of the military
are scared that your organization has been set up by the Army and the
administration to smoke-out dissent. I think not, given what I have read i
your publication. I have never been afraid to stand firmly for what is moral,
right and just. I am completely and unequivocally unconcerned about how (the
government) regards me. If they fear free Americans that's their problem, not
mine.

                                   Christopher
                                   Vermont


          As long as The RESISTER remains a clandestine publication
     rumors are going to circulate that we are a false flag operation.
     These rumors are probably spread by the same people who believe
     the world is run by a wizened old man sitting in a windowless room
     devoid of furniture less a chair and table, whom, sitting beneath
     a bare light bulb hanging from the ceiling, chain smoking Lucky
     Strike cigarettes, instructs his minions, "Now, destabilize the
     Peso."


     I read about your publication in Soldier of Fortune magazine. I like
your synopsis and philosophy. It's something I truly believe in.
     Dilemma: How far can republicanism go with "G_d's Law." The Bible calls
for death for so many transgressions. The Supreme Court stated that, "Treason
is the ultimate crime and death is the ultimate punishment." Also, the
Founding Fathers were not wholly Christians. There were Deists, agnostics, as
well as atheists. Now, how is the Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution biblically inspired?
     What can I do to help the resistance? I want my republic restored.

                                   James
                                   Carmichael, CA

P.S. How many of these "militias" are an excuse for armed hooligans to conduct
race war? Is America that divided and disunited?


          The Founding Fathers kept their religious beliefs, or lack
     of them, pretty much to themselves. So do we. However, our
     extensive reading of the works of the Founding Fathers yields
     little literary evidence of biblical inspiration. Their prime
     mover was REASON, not religion. Reason is our prime mover also.
          Sadly, there are some so-called militias who use patriotism
     to camouflage their racism and other irrationalist filth. They are
     no different than our Marxist enemies.

                                   The Staff


     Is racism and sexual harassment as prevalent in our military today as
the sycophants at higher levels lead you to believe? I, for one, do not think
so. Soldiers, regardless of race or sex, can operate effectively and have the
opportunity of unlimited advancement as long as they meet or exceed the
promotion requisites. It isn't right for any one segment of the military to
have an advantage over anyone else based solely on race or sex. Advantages
come from hard work, dedication to one's occupational specialty and the desire
to excel. Anything less becomes a promotion system based on quotas, not merit.
     The latest fallacy that is circulating is that if women are not allowed
into the combat arms career fields then they will not be able to compete
effectively for the higher level promotions. Based on what the 'Spin Doctors'
at the five sided wind tunnel in Washington tell us, this cannot be true since
all MOS' or Branches compete against personnel in their same career field for
promotion and school slots. What are the women saying here? Are they saying
that they cannot compete in the career fields that they are presently in, so
they now want to be allowed to compete in more fields? Does that really make
any sense?
     The misconception about equal opportunity is that it is equal and that
it is opportunity. Maybe it's time to remind everyone concerned that there are
no protected classes in our military today other than Negroes and females. It
would be refreshing if these protected tribes would cease blaming their
personal inadequacy and incompetence in certain career fields on their race or
sex and face the music when they are behind the promotion power curve (just
like the rest of us do).
     The Hispanics and Asians in our military have, for the most part,
remained silent. Could it be that they believe that they are receiving fair
treatment in regard to promotions and assignments without the blanket coverage
of "equal opportunity?" These ridiculous rules and regulations have been
thrust upon us by politically motivated elected opportunists and endorsed
(read enforced) by packs of sycophants at the higher levels of our chain of
command. It would appear that this same group of senior leaders would rather
have a force that is balanced both racially and sexually through mandate by
some politically correct group that is unconcerned about the ability of our
armed forces to fight and win our in the defense of our nation.
     What these leaders fail or refuse to recognize is that politically
correct groups mandated by politicians and civilians do not win wars. Only
highly trained and highly motivated soldiers win wars. Being politically
correct doesn't mean anything when you're at the receiving end of the enemy's
weapons.

                                   Isaac Hull
                                   USASFCA

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Report to the Sergeants Major

     The recent controversy surrounding the Militia of Montana and the
Freemen in Roundup, Montana, has surfaced a disturbing, and growing, trend
within the both the patriot and militia movements. As the details of this
incident continue to unfold we cannot help but notice the increasing tendency
among the various patriot and militia organizations to engage in petty,
internecine squabbles. This is most apparent on World Wide Christian Radio
(WWCR), 5.065 SW.
     WWCR, for the present, is a laissez faire market of ideas. The editorial
format of each program is unique. All programs tend to specialize in one or
more related subjects. Some are more sensational than others. Some are more
objective than others. WWCR, for the present, is a laissez faire market of
ideas. The degree of one's rationality determines to which program (and its
related publication, if it has one), one chooses to subscribe. Eventually,
without outside interference, the more rational and objective programs will
predominate and the rest will dwindle in direct relation to their demonstrated
veracity. This is as it should be.
     Contrary to the established premise of deconstructionism, one's ideas
and actions are coincident, and they directly reflect one's values. If there
is contradiction between one's words and one's actions it will be exposed
immediately upon examination of the logical outcome of both. In a laissez
faire market of ideas one is free to question the philosophical and
ideological premises of one's competitors. However, when one carelessly
blubbers unproven accusations concerning the personal (and therefore private)
conduct of a competitor, this says nothing about the accused, but speaks
volumes about the accuser.
     The patriot movement is not a gym-floor rumble. We are engaged in an
ideological war to wrestle the minds of the American public from the deadly
grip of Marxism. Grow up.

                              Command Sergeants Major, SFU
==============================================================================
                                 PERINTREP
                                 ---------

                          From Russia, With Love

On 22 February 1995, Colonel Vladimir P. Malakhov, of the Russian army's
General Department of International Military Cooperation toured Fort Bragg,
North Carolina with Sen. Tony Rand, (D. NC). LTG Hugh Shelton, commander,
XVIII Airborne Corps, and MG Mike Steele, commander 82nd Airborne Division,
hosted Colonel Malakhov and 12 members of his staff.
     Colonel Malakhov's mission at Fort Bragg was to gather information
relating to the formation of a Russian Mobility Forces Command tailored after
the U.S. Army's Rapid Deployment Force, which is the XVIII Airborne Corps.
Malakhov and his staff also toured Pope Air Force Base in order to get an
appreciation for the airlift and air support necessary to support an RDF. The
Russian Mobility Forces Command will consist of approximately 100,000 soldiers
including paratroopers, naval infantry, SPETZNAZ, motorized infantry, as well
as an air transport division.
     Colonel Malakhov emphasized that the force mix of the Mobility Forces
Command would be similar to that used in the attack on Chechnya. Colonel
Malakhov emphasized the benefits of the joint U.S. Russian peace-enforcement
training conducted  in Totskoye Russia last September, by the U.S. 1st
Brigade, 3d Infantry Division and the Russian 27th Motorized Infantry Division
(which "enforced the peace" in secessionist Moldavia).
     Commenting on the recent joint U.S. Russian training and his visit to
Fort Bragg, Colonel Malakhov remarked; "Russian and American troops will work
together in peace-keeping, rescue and humanitarian missions. _Now_we're_
_looking_to_unite_." (Emphasis added).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Posture Statement

The 1994 edition of the United States Special Operations Force Posture
Statement, a glossy 100 page magazine published by the Department of Defense
which defines the roles, missions and capabilities of U.S. Special Operation
Forces, and which is the joint official policy statement of H. Allen Holmes,
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity
Conflict, and GEN Wayne A. Downing, Commander in Chief, U.S. Special
Operations Command, is dedicated to the "...commitment to peace." (For those
of you old enough to remember, being 'committed to peace' used to be the
bromide exchanged among those who were dedicated to one-world communism).
     Indeed, Chapter 1, entitled "A New World Order" begins: "From the ashes
of the cold war, a New World Order has emerged. National Boundaries and
political alliances have shifted apparently overnight, and former adversaries
have become partners in the quest for global security and stability."
     Deeper into this slick sales brochure Mr. Holmes and GEN Downing moan
about the "failure of democratic reforms" and that correcting this alleged
catastrophe commits special operations forces to, "greater emphasis...on
multinational and collective peace operations." Yet more chilling is the
official dedication of special oerations forces to "offer training and support
to other nations to preserve their biodiversity and ecology..." This is
intended to promote "global peace."
     Multinational; collective; global peace. Sounds familiar, doesn't it
comrades?

     We have one question, Wayne. How do the armed forces of a nation
     founded on the principles of constitutional republicanism come to
     be cheerleaders for democracy?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Et tu, Air Force?

The 13 February 1995, issue of Aviation Week and Space Technology, contained
an article entitled, "Weapons, Avionics Upgrades Expand B-1B Options." The
article discussed recent modifications to B-1B bomber weapons delivery
systems, enabling the aircraft to carry thirty 1,000-lb Tactical Munitions
Dispensers, each capable of holding about 722 individual bomblettes. (The
article claims "dozens" of bomblettes per Tactical Munitions Dispenser. We did
some homework and 722 is our best estimate. That's 21,660 anti-personnel
bomblettes per B-1B).
Brigadier General James M. Richards, director of long-range power projection
programs, who is assigned to the office of  the U.S. Air Force Assistant
Secretary for Acquisition, claimed the weapons upgrade was necessary to expand
the Air Force's capability, "(against ex-Soviet) systems as well as the
'Blue/Grey' threats we worry about today."


     Care to explain that remark, Jim?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Be Scared

After clearing the Department of Defense Police desk at the new combined
headquarters building for the United States Army Special Operations Command
and the United States Army Special Forces Command (Airborne), located at the
intersection of Reilly Road and Yadkin Extension on Fort Bragg, North
Carolina, proceed through the security stiles to the elevators for a lift to
the second floor.
     Upon exiting the elevator turn right, then left, and proceed down the
hallway until it ends. Turn right. You have now entered the waiting room of
Rudolph M. Jones, Jr., Colonel, General Staff, Deputy Commander, United States
Army Special Forces Command (Airborne). The first flag you see, the only flag
in the waiting room, is the United Nations flag.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Civilian Inmate Labor Program

A military memorandum concerning the use of civilian inmate labor and the
establishment of prison camps on Army installations has been circulating among
the various patriot and militia organizations. This memorandum is in fact the
transmittal letter for the draft of a new Army regulation. We have a copy of
the draft regulation.
     The draft regulation is entitled; AR 5-XX, Civilian Inmate Labor
Program. (5 means it is a management document, XX means the published
regulation will carry a two number designation). The transmittal letter is
dated 27 July 1994, with a suspense date of 29 August 1994, for reviewing
agencies to forward proposed changes, additions or deletions to the action
agency on the appropriate forms. The Summary paragraph on the regulation cover
letter states:
     "This regulation provides guidance for establishing and managing
civilian inmate labor programs on Army installations/activities. It provides
guidance on establishing prison camps on Army installations/activites. It
addresses recordkeeping (sic) and reporting incidents related to the civilian
inmate labor program and/or prison camp administration.
The Applicability paragraph states: "This regulation applies to the Active
Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, and the Army National Guard. This regulation
applies during full mobilization."
     Paragraph 1-1, Purpose, states:
     This regulation provides Army policy and guidance for establishing
civilian inmate labor programs and civilian prison camps on Army
installations. Sources of civilian inmate labor are limited to federal
corrections facilities and state/local corrections facilities operating from
on-post prison camps. State/local inmate labor from off-post corrections
facilities is currently excluded from this program...
     Although the Army cannot solicit the establishment of prison camps on
installations corrections officials may request the lease of land and
facilities. "However, the Army's primary purpose for allowing the
establishment of prison camps on Army installations is to utilize the resident
inmate labor pool to perform valid requirements." (Para. 3-1). The regulation
prohibits army personnel from becoming involved in any manner with prison camp
operations (Para. 3-5.e.).
     The draft regulation draws its authority from 18 USC 4125(a), governing
services federal civilian inmates can perform for DOD agencies. and Executive
Order 11755, governing use of non-federal civilian iates on federal
contracts.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        The Opposition Restructures

On 3 May 1994, President Clinton signed PDD/NSC-24 which created a new
national Counterintelligence (CI) structure and two new CI organizations. The
stated purpose was to, "improve national-level counterintelligence policy
development, coordination, and cooperation."
     The first of these new organizations is the National CI Policy Board
(NACIPB). Its mandate is to review and formulate counterintelligence policy.
It meets monthly and is chaired by Mr. Keith Hall, Deputy Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Intelligence and Security. The NACIPB reports to the president.
     The second new organization is the National Counterintelligence Center
(NACIC), established under the authority of the NACIPB. The NACIC "manages"
threats to national and economic security, monitors the effectiveness of the
national CI program, controls interagency CI programs, effects integration of
CI community data bases, and coordinates security countermeasures programs.
Mr. Michael Waguespack, a senior FBI counterintelligence executive, is the
director of NACIC. The NACIC is collocated with the CIA CI Center. The Army
has three billets in this organization. The Justice Department now controls
all counterintelligence.
     The significance of PDD/NSC-24 is two-fold. First, by consolidating all
counterintelligence functions into one organization (NACIPB is the
organization, NACIC is its tool),  which reports directly to the president, it
becomes, de facto, a political instrument. Second, the follow-up PDD-25, which
subordinated America's national defense command and control to the United
Nations, effectively gives the United Nations a direct conduit into the
combined counterintelligence services of this nation's intelligence community
via its military channels.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            The Garrison Factor

     Several well placed sources have reported that Major General William
Garrison, Commander, United States Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center
and School, intends to implement a new command policy designed to create a
"politically sterile" work environment.
     MG Garrison has stated to his Special Staff that his new policy will not
tolerate any political expression, opinion, dissent, satire, or discussion in
the workplace. Prohibited also will be the display of signs, posters, quotes,
cartoons, stickers, pins or badges carrying a political message. Specifically
prohibited from the workplace will be partisan political publications.
Political discussion of topical issues will be banned, as will discussion of
more broadly based political philosophy.
     Explicitly prohibited will be the possession, distribution, and
dissemination of The RESISTER, and discussion of its contents. (MG Garrison is
the individual responsible for the confiscation of The RESISTER from the
Marquat Memorial Library, and supporter of mandatory homosexual sensitivity
training in USAJFKSWCS, in August 1994).

        Bill, let's face it; you've learned nothing during your Special
     Forces career. We suggest you begin your study of
     counterinsurgency from scratch. On one hand, we could tell you
     where and how to begin, which might be fun. On the other hand, we
     would have to send you a bill.

                                        J.F.A. Davidson

==============================================================================
                                RESISTANCE
                                ----------
                 Principles of Clandestine Communications
                                   -by-
                              Michael Bateman

Face-to-face meetings, conducted secretly between operational personnel, are
known as clandestine meetings. Such meetings are employed frequently in the
field; chiefly with regard to management and administrative functions. In
general, the advantages of clandestine meetings are 1) they save time, 2) they
are used as a countermeasure against some forms of eavesdropping, 3) they
offer a measure of certainty, and 4) they provide a means of exercising
control. The stress and delicacy of secret work make human contact between an
agent and his handler imperative, if an operation or organization is to
survive and function effectively. The disadvantages of  clandestine meetings
reflect concerns of security. Participants may be under visual surveillance
and the link between them may be discovered by direct or indirect betrayal.
Accidental observation is also a consideration, as are snap searches. In cases
where something physical is being passed, apprehension of the participants
will provide direct evidence of clandestine activity.
     Clandestine meetings are, for our purposes, divided into four
categories: 1) meetings between unacquainted operatives; 2) meetings between
acquainted operatives; 3) meetings between operatives and outsiders; 4) silent
meetings, or brush contacts.
     Meetings between unacquainted operatives require secure prearranged
identification signals and special briefing. The general description and
distinguishing features of each operative must be established and according to
operational necessity known to one or both.  The security problems inherent in
the meeting must be analyzed. There may be risks in permitting certain
operatives the ability to extensively describe others they are to meet. There
may be liabilities in denying this knowledge. The description must preclude
the possibility of accidental recognition of legitimate parties who just
happen to be at the meeting site.
     One approach to the problem of providing descriptions is the use of
artificial description points, innocuous in themselves, which offer operatives
means of recognition. This technique is sometimes called "showing the flag."
Examples, which should not be confused with safety signals, described below,
include the time-worn flower in a buttonhole or uniquely folded newspaper,
familiar enough to readers of fiction. Artificial points are often given in
lieu of physical descriptions involving height, weight, color of hair and
color of eyes. They must be obvious enough to spur recognition yet common
enough not to attract unwarranted notice. These points may also be made to
mesh with prearranged dialogue.
     Unique objects, such as consecutively numbered currency or two halves of
the same bank-note, were once used as means of identification and this
practice was continued professionally as late as World War I. Experience
shows, however, that this technique should not be employed due to obvious
liability in case of search or arrest.
     Once initial recognition is achieved, the operatives must approach one
another. At this juncture identification is made and a method often employed
is that of a prearranged dialogue. This is sometimes known as use of paroles,
or "secret conversation." For example: assume that the artificial descriptive
point is a volume of Bronte. One operative offers, "I have never read Bronte."
The other replies, "Do you mean Charlotte or Emily?" This is the first
exchange. First exchanges are usually followed for safety's sake by a second
exchange unrelated to the first. Again, by way of example: "I did not know
there was a difference; as for me I am a gardener." The reply, "It is
difficult to keep a garden in this climate." Such harmless dialogue must be
structured to prevent accidental conversations with legitimate characters and
must leave no question marks.
     Meetings between acquainted operatives obviously do not require
prearranged identification signals. In every other respect they do not and
should not materially differ from other types.
     Meetings between operatives and outsiders are in practice avoided but
sometimes become necessary. In case where obvious risks are weighed and found
to be tolerable, such meetings will be attempted subject to extensive security
precautions. A classic example is the stranger who approaches a member of the
Resistance, asking to join. Is he sincere, or an agent provocateur? In
practice, if subsequent meetings are decided upon these will be handled by the
operative first approached. The ruling assumption in such cases is that if the
stranger is in fact an agent provocateur then the operative first approached
is already "blown."
     The manner by which federal agencies approach underground operatives
merits further attention, to serve the interests of those readers who are
faced with the task of identifying individuals who have been introduced into
their groups. Recent federal instructional material covering this topic reads:

        "...if the objective is a group of people, the agent will have
     to determine how he can join them. This can be done with the
     assistance of an informant who is in the group or, if it is a
     large group with formalized membership such as a club or "wing"
     organization, the direct approach of applying for membership may
     suffice. "...if the objective is to investigate a particular
     violation occurring at a specific location or to acquire general
     intelligence information, the approach could be accomplished
     merely by frequenting the area and establishing the assumed role."

               (U.S. Department of Treasury, Law Enforcement School)

The above, while suitable for investigations of limited scope, does not
acknowledge all-important questions of resistance countermeasures. Recruits
must not be fully accepted until their past and present records of family
life, jobs, political activities , and close associates have been investigated
and found satisfactory. The usual practice is to restrict the recruit's
contact to one member of the organization and to places other than the
organization's regular meeting place.
     Countermeasures include 1) loyalty tests, in which potential group
members are subject to mock capture and interrogation, 2) a sudden summons to
meet with security personnel under ominous circumstances designed to reveal
signs of nervousness, 3) "leaks" purporting to inform the recruit that he has
been blown and is marked for execution, and 4) a particularly effective
technique involving change of meeting places. In the latter instance,
potential members are kept unwitting of a change in site for a clandestine
meeting at which they are expected to attend. Countersurveillants are posted
to discover if the recruit is followed, or if surveillance personnel are in
place at the site prior to his arrival. Assuming the recruit passes this test,
he is approached and told that the meeting is off, or alternately, informed of
the new meeting site.

Silent meetings, normally called brush contacts, are arguably not meetings at
all. Orthodox silent meetings are conducted according to the rules of
clandestine meeting practice and are normally used solely to pass something
physical. Examples are exchanges of identical briefcases in a crowded airport,
or the exchange of folded newspapers during a momentary pause on a park bench.
     Clandestine meetings are further categorized in terms of their
frequency. There are 1) regular meetings, 2) special meetings, and 3) control
meetings.
     Regular meetings take place according to a prearranged schedule and
frequently involve the same site or sites. Such meetings will also be
supported by "fall-backs," or alternative meeting times and sites, in case the
regular meeting is missed for any reason.
     Special meetings take place in response to special signals or requests,
typically when the matter is of some urgency. Such meetings may or may not be
supported by fall-backs.
     Control meetings are functionally a combination of both regular and
special meetings and are used in instances where a communication link has been
broken or lost. In such cases, the operative must come to a prearranged site
at a prearranged time to re-establish contact. Another sort of control meeting
involves the use of "places of conspiracy." Places of conspiracy are utilized
in emergency circumstances when an operative has been isolated through the
capture or compromise of his immediate superior. In this case, the operative
knows to visit a predetermined site at a particular time of day, showing
certain recognition signals. A representative of the clandestine group takes
not of the time and recognition signals, and if these are correct makes the
approach. Because of the representative's vulnerable position as a contact for
persons in danger, he is limited to this one duty and knows little about other
aspects of the organization.
     Meetings are held in the open, in public places or conveyances, under
safe circumstances (safe-houses), and at a variety of other sites. Meeting
sites should be selected on the basis of the ease with which
countersurveillance may be practiced. They must be manageable. Deserted areas,
for example, are ideal from a countersurveillance point of view, but assuming
hostile surveillance the appearance of one operative in proximity to another
in such an area may be cause for contamination. Granting this, more public
places, such as parks, museums, parking lots, and a host of other locations
are often used. Such places, unless selected with considerable care, can be
unmanageable due to the volume of foot traffic and surrounding vantage points.
A worthwhile practice is the selection of pre-surveyed sites where ordinary
traffic and activity have been observed over a long period of time. Soe
practitioners have selected convoy operators (countersurveillants) on the
basis of their familiarity with the meeting site, acting on the principle that
the convoy's job will be easier if he knows the area's normal routine.
     Sites selected must actually exist, and must be accessible to both
parties at the time set for the meeting. If audio surveillance is a factor the
site should present participants with a measure of safety. Obviously the site
and the cover must be closely intertwined. An example of this is use of a
doctor's or dentist's office, or a motion picture theater. There must be
plausible cover for every meeting and each operative must be fully aware of
the details of this cover.

In the case of special meetings, requests are necessary. These are
accomplished in any one of several ways. Distinctive arrangements of objects,
chalk marks, and classified advertisements have all been used to signal
requests. A common method is the use of "wrong numbers" in telephonic
communication. The requester dials, and when the line is answered, asks for
"Joe," or someone else who is not at that number. This is the signal that a
meeting is being requested. Upon learning that, "There's nobody by that name
here," the requester asks, "Is this 555-1613?" The number is a code which
gives the date, time, and place. (In our example, 5 could refer to a place, 16
could refer to a day, and 13 could refer to 1300 hours). Following this the
requester is informed he has reached a wrong number and rings off.
     If an operative discovers or suspects he is being followed to a meeting
site it becomes incumbent upon him to inform his contact of impending danger.
To provide for this contingency safety signals evolved. Used in addition to
recognition signals, safety signals silently advise meeting participants 1) it
is it safe to approach for the secret conversation, 2) if surveillance is
suspected, and 3) if a fall-back meeting is feasible.
     To again follow our example of an operative with a volume of Bronte, let
us assume the meeting is to take place in a public library. The operative is
seated, and apart from serving as a recognition point, his book also becomes a
safety signal. If the book is placed on his right it is safe to approach; on
his left, there is danger. If the book lies open and face down this informs
that a fall-back will take place.
     Vigorous, often elaborate and time consuming countersurveillance is
practiced by both participants on the way to and from meeting sites. Convoys
or countersurveillants are often used to guard participants going to and from
meetings. Guards are also used in the vicinity of the site itself. Another
technique frequently employed is the staggered arrival. Participants arrive
separately at intervals, sometimes as long as thirty minutes or more, taking
special effort to observe signs of hostile activity.

Drops, known variously as "letter drops" are defined as a person, place,
conveyance, or object used to transmit messages, money, or equipment in
secrecy between operational personnel. Drops are used in both internal and
external clandestine communications.
     Drops are used in preference to clandestine meetings. In general, the
advantages of drops are 1) greater secrecy for communications, and 2) greater
security for personnel. Use of drops can reduce the number of clandestine
meetings and offer considerably more flexibility in time. There is no direct
contact between parties, and assuming the drop remains inviolate, only one
operative is exposed at any given moment. Drops may be established in depth to
facilitate increased isolation of either sender or receiver, or used to create
a reserve of operational necessities. They are also adaptable for use by
different types of personnel, such as low-level utility operatives (cut-outs)
or those with poor language skills.
     The principle disadvantage of drops is uncertainty. While loaded,
materials in drops are outside the operative's immediate control. Drops are
also liable to accidental or deliberate discovery with subsequent adverse
manipulation, and the ravages of fire, flood, or wild animals. Extensive use
of drops may also have a negative effect on management. Fewer meetings
decrease the opportunities to train and evaluate agents.
     Drops are used for both long and short term storage. Long term storage
is calculated in terms of days or weeks; short term in hours. When employed
for the purpose of communication, drops may hold original documents or full
sized copies; or , alternately, reduced reproductions on film. Film is usually
undeveloped, and placed in "trapped" containers. Documents may be in cipher or
clear text. As stated above, drops are also used to transmit money or
supplies. Examples of the latter include weapons, medical equipment, or other
technical apparatus. Drops are of two principle types: 1) "live" drops, and 2)
dead drops.
     Live drops may be witting or unwitting, id est, they may or may not
operate with knowledge of the clandestine purpose. Live drops are not
encumbered by any organizational forms and do not require a special cover or
camouflage. They are located in stores, restaurants, offices, or small shops
such as those maintained by news stands or tobacconists. These locations
provide ease of access for couriers and employ a high degree of normal,
transient foot traffic.
     Another form of live drop is the so-called underground mail station.
Such drops may be located in safe-houses especially developed for the purpose
with elaborate concealment chambers. As materials are received, housekeepers
send coded signals or messages to the next link of the courier line, advising
that service is necessary.

Dead drops are categorized variously by type or location. In the former
category we find 1) stationary drops, and 2) portable drops. In the later
category we find 1) urban drops, and 2) rural drops. Both categories admit of
the mobile, or "roving" drop.
     Stationary dead drops are selected or prepared in lamp-posts, fences,
behind mirrors in washrooms, and in a host of other places such as crevices in
rocks of clefts in trees. Portable dead drops, also known as "concealment
devices," are discarded or specially constructed objects that contain
messages, documents or equipment to be passed. Early U.S. practitioners
responsible for devising concealment devices soon discovered that the cardinal
principle in producing concealment devices was that the subject of disguise be
neither edible nor burnable. In such cases it is liable to be used by some
casual passer-by. Magnetic key-boxes, used to hide a duplicate key beneath an
automobile bumper, are often used as portable drops. Mobile drops are located
in conveyances, popularly the lavatories on trains, buses, or aircraft.
     Urban drops are those located in public or otherwise freely accessible
places and are typically used for extremely short term transmittals. Rural
drops, as the term implies, are located in rustic or rural places. Rural drops
are used for either short or long term transmittals.
     Advisory signals and indicators are used to express 1) what particular
drop is to be serviced, 2) safety or danger, 3) a drop is loaded, and 4) a
drop is unloaded.
     In common practice, operatives assigned to service drops will do so in
response to signaled requests. This signal will usually indicate which drop is
loaded, and be supported by a safety/danger signal. We note parenthetically
that absence of a safety signal is regarded as a danger signal. Proceeding to
the area of the drop, the operative will practice diligent
countersurveillance. If the operative is confident of security the drop will
be quickly unloaded. He will then make a signal to this effect supported by
another safety/danger signal. Safety/danger signals are always made on return
journeys, after countersurveillance has been practiced going to and coming
from the drop site.
     Generally, signals can be divided into five categories, as follows:
1.   Graphic. Chalk marks expressing numbers, letters, or designs; notices
     appearing in the classified section of a newspaper, postcards, or other
     forms of correspondence.
2.   Object. Any small object, such as a flower-pot, or arrangement of an
     object, such as a window shade. The object may be used independently or
     tangentially; that is, the object and its position may both hold
     significance.
3.   Light. Ordinary flashlights, automobile headlights, or infrared light.
4.   Sound. Radio transmissions, telephone calls, distinctive rings on door
     buzzers.
5.   Personal. Articles of clothing, or objects carried.
     Certain signals or combinations may be used solely in conjunction with
specific activities. Graphic and object signals, for example, may be used with
dead drops. Light and sound signals with some other activity.
==============================================================================
                               BOOK REVIEWS
                               ------------

     Revolutionary Outlaws: Ethan Allen and the Struggle for Independence on
the Early American Frontier.  Michael A. Bellesiles. Charlottesville:
University Press of Virginia, 1993. ISBN 0-8139-1419-1. xi+428 pages. $24.95.

        "A mob of land thieves and banditti--as the government called
     them--not content with breaking the law, desired to reject it
     entirely. According to the government of New York, the worst of
     the rioters was their leader, Ethan Allen: thug, a bully, a
     loudmouthed terrorist--and an athiest!-- with a $100 reward on his
     head. Allen had succeeded in uniting his neighbors--a motley and
     volatile collection of ethnic and religious groups who could
     agree only on hating New Yorkes--in the cause of extralegal
     resistance to proper authority. On these points every New Your
     government of the 1770s and 1780s agreed, as each was equally
     certain that it could defeat this mob with the force of law."

                                        --from the Introduction

     Revolutionary Outlaws is both a biography of Ethan Allen and a history
of the conflict between agrarian freeholders and their aristocratic
adversaries. Beginning his political career with a price on his head. Allen
was transformed by the American Revolution into a national hero. In the same
way he and his "outlaws," the Green Mountain Boys, became exemplars of
republican virtue. But in their own eyes, these frontier farmers never changed
their purpose; from 1764 until 1789 they battled those who sought to steal
their land and reduce them to tenancy. The farmers who settled the Green
Mountain frontier not only fought efforts to dispossess them, they worked to
create the state of Vermont.
     Although he is a major figure, Ethan Allen has been overlooked by other
biographers, but in Michael Bellesiles he has found a historian worth the
wait. Bellesiles shows how Allen's variegated careers as a republican
politician, local leader, military tactician, rationalist ideologue, and land
speculator intersect with many key themes of American development in the last
half of the eighteenth century. Allen's law of self-preservation linked life,
liberty, and land. Remove one, Allen argued, and the others would vanish.
     Revolutionary Outlaws explores the roots of popular political commitment
to the patriot cause, the significance of rural political activity, and the
origins of an emerging republican polity.


     Lethal Laws. Jay Simpkin, Aaron Zelman, and Alan M. Rice. Jews for the
Preservation of Firearms Ownership, Inc. Publishers. 2872 S. Wentworth Ave.,
Milwaukee, WI 53207. 1994. ISBN 0-9642304-0-2. vii+347 pages. $ 24.95.

Reviewed by Dr. Paul Gallant

     Jewish Law, the Talmud, commands, "He who comes to kill you, arise and
kill him first." The story of mankind cannot be told without a description of
the evolution of and use of weapons. Arms have meant the difference between
life and death, slavery and freedom. This country's Founding Fathers knew well
this fact of life, and they inscribed the protection of firearms ownership for
all individuals in the U.S. Constitution. Yet, even the Founding Fathers could
not have predicted the efficiency with which genocide has been committed
during the 20th Century.
     Lethal Laws is a landmark treatise which describes seven major genocides
perpetrated by governments in this century. It provides an chilling, fully
documented expose of the abuse of power by governments. It describes, in great
detail, the steps which have been routinely taken prior to each documented
genocide, steps which are now being repeated by American statists, steps which
can only serve to increase the vulnerability of a citizenry to genocide or
tyranny. Lethal Laws further examines the role of the media in promoting or
facilitating these "official" government programs of human extermination.
     Lethal Laws presents a compelling argument against restrictive firearms
laws by showing how genocide may be prevented ONLY if the concept of "gun-
control" is destroyed. That equates to a society in which individuals have
free access to firearms, and especially military-style firearms, the very
kind protected by our own Constitution (and banned in the U.S. in 1994).
Lethal Laws is a Major addition to the overwhelming body of evidence
demonstrating that "gun-control" is not about guns, but about government power
and population control.


     Defrauding America: a Pattern of Related Scandals. Rodney Stitch.
Published privately; Diablo Western Press, Inc. PO Box 5, Alamo, CA 94507.
ISBN 0-932438-05-9. 654 pages. $27.50.

     "This book is a thirty-year chronology of corruption inflicted upon the
American people, as seen and related through the eyes of government insiders."

                                   --from the Introduction


     The Emergence of North Carolina's Revolutionary State Government.
Robert L. Ganyard. Raleigh; North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources,
Division of Archives and History. 1978. No ISBN. vii + 104 pages. np.

     "After a discussion of the structure and problems of government under
the crown, the narrative concentrates on the emergence and activities of the
revolutionary congresses, committees, and council that seized control of the
colony between 1774 and 1776..."

                              --from the Preface
==============================================================================
                       BLIND TRANSMISSION BROADCAST
                       ----------------------------

UNCLAS
MSGID/RRI/GENCORR//AMPN/SUBJ: BTB//REF/MSG/CIVCORR/15 JAN 95/27 MAR 95//
RMKS/1.  RED BARCHETTA/A.
REF Q1: YES, TO BOTH CASES.
B. REF Q2: TRADECRAFT. AMPLIFICATION UPON REQUEST.
C. REF Q3: REF 3A: YES. REF 3B: THEY ARE PHILOSOPHY SCROUNGERS.
REF 3C: UNABLE TO ANSWER; NO CONTACT WITH THEM. REF 3D: QUALIFIER ANY REDUCES
Q3 TO A PACKAGE QUESTION.
D. REF Q4: REF 4A: NO. REF 4B: NO. REF 4C: NO. AMPLIFICATION ON REQUEST.
E. REF Q5: REF 5A: NO. REF 5B: NO.
F. REF Q6: BOTH ARE IMMORAL BECAUSE BOTH UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
G. REF Q7: GENERAL: A THOROUGH ANSWER WOULD REQUIRE YOU TO BE READ-IN.
IN SHORT: REF 7A: UNILATERALLY? NO, WITH QUALIFICATIONS. REF 7B: UNILATERALLY?
YES, WITH QUALIFICATIONS. REF 7C: WE WOULD KNOW THEM WITHOUT THEM, BUT YOU
WOULD NOT. REF 7AA: THIS IS, IN OUR ESTIMATION, NOT POSSIBLE IF OUR READING OF
YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF INITIATE...WITHIN IS CORRECT. WE HAVE, HOWEVER, BEGUN TO
EDUCATE IT. REF 7BB: SOME WILL GO. SOME WILL STAY. ALL WILL WORK IN CONCERT.
REF 7CC: YES. WE ARE NOT OMNISCIENT.
H. REF DEPARTMENT P: REF P1S4: YOU HAVE REVERSED HIS POSITION. REF P1S7; YOU
HAVE EXIBITED AN INCREASINGLY RARE QUALITY IN DOING SO. REF P1S8: WE ARE NOT.
REF P1S9: WE ALSO.
2.  KEITH W./ CONTACT MADE WTIH AUTHOR OF OFFENDING DOCUMENT. IF YOU HAVE
QUESTIONS FORWARD THEM TO POC NLT 302400ZAPR95.
3.  DAVID K./SEND. DO NOT EXPECT IMMEDIATE RESPONSE.
4.  WFA/ KNEW ABOUT OPN IN JAN. KEEP A LOW PROFILE.
5.  LCHC/ OFFER ACCEPTED PENDING DD-214. RE: PS(1) ENCLOSURE FYI. RE: PS(2) IF
WE HAD ACCESS TO THAT KIND OF INFORMATION YOU COULDN'T TRUST US.
6.  LJL/ GREATLY APPRECIATED.
7.  BRUCE C./ GIVE US SOME TIME TO SSEMBLE DATA. AVAILABLE BUT NOT ON HAND.
S:302300ZAPR95.
8.  MICHAEL H./ PATIENCE. HAVE BEEN STUDYING ISSUE RAISED. LOTS OF SMOKE. HAE
NOT YET FOUND THE FIRE. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THERE IS NO FIRE.
9.  SYLVIA P./ NICE ENVELOPE. NO ENCLOSURES.
10. GEORGE S./ NOT EVERYTHING THE ARMY DOES IS OMINOUS. THAT DOES NOT MEAN YOU
TAKE YOUR EYES OFF THEM.
11. 222/ CORRECT. SEE RETRACTION. NO EXCUSE.
12. LEO K./ NEED POC YOUR AO. VOLUNTARY.
13. MP/ RE: YOUR PREVIOUS EMPLOYMENT; AMPLIFY TERMS OF SEPARATION AND CURRENT
ACCESS, IN ANY. YOU ARE A NATURAL. TERMS A LITTLE STEEP BUT UNDER
CONSIDERATION.//
POC/MSGCEN POB47095 KCMO 64188/S: 15 MAY 95//
==============================================================================
                   Manuals for the Unorganized Militia.

     In these time of federal conspiracy to abrogate the Constitution
patriots must possess the knowledge of HOW to resist tyrrany. The RESISTER is
offering a series of manuals on the nuts-and-bolts of resistance. Topics
include: Organization, Security, Logistics, Intelligence and Operations.
Defend yourself against the New World Order with knowledge as well as arms.

                               Now Available
......How to Spot Informants                      $10.00
......Principles of Tradecraft                    $30.00

                             Available in June
......How to Launder Money                        $25.00


Terms: cash or BLANK money order.  Send order to:

Militia Free Press, c/o The RESISTER, POB 47095, Kansas City, MO 64188.
==============================================================================
                                 PERSONALS
                                 ---------

     SWF 34, 5'3", 110#, Busy consultant, Tae Kwon Do enthusiast, ISO SWM 28
- 40; Military, must be fit _and_ work out, no commitments, Long absences OK.
     (MSG) 202-310-1486

     WANTED: Voluntary donations or loans of ham radio equipment. Pre-1990
ICOM IC-R7000 or Kenwood R-5000 receivers, voice, CW and burst capable;
simplex and duplex hand helds.
     Write: C&E, c/o The RESISTER, PO Box 47095, Kansas City, MO 64188

     SNIPER/FIREARMS TRAINING: Former Special Forces Sniper instructor.
Selective. Expensive.
     Write: JFT, c/o this publication.

==============================================================================
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                      +-------------------------------------+               |
|                      | Warning: It's dangerous to be right |               |
|   W A T C H          | when the government is wrong.       |               |
|                      +-------------------------------------+               |
|                                                                            |
|               Watch Out for Martial Law, Carl Klang's second cassette      |
|               album is a worthy successor to his popular, hard-hitting     |
|     O U T     song collection, It's Dangerous to be Right When the         |
|               Government is Wrong.                                         |
|                                                                            |
|               The music of Oregon songwriter Carl Klang is inspired by this|
|               nation's modern-day life and death struggles for Liberty. The|
|               ballads and songs of Carl Klang are wonderfully entertaining.|
|     F O R     Serious, thought provoking and spiritual, they carry an      |
|               important message that you will want to share with others.   |
|                                                                            |
|                 Please send:                                               |
|                                                                            |
|                 ________ Watch Out for Martial Law             $10.00      |
| M A R T I A L   ________ It's Dangerous to be Right...         $ 8.00      |
|                 ________ America, America                      $10.00 (NEW)|
|                                                                            |
|                 Enclose your cash or check and mail to:                    |
|                                                                            |
|     L A W       Carl R. Klang, PO Box 217, Colton, OR 97017                |
|                 [phone]                                             |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   The RESISTER                               "The instability of our laws  |
|   PO Box 47095                                is really an immense evil."  |
|   Kansas City, MO 64188                                  Thomas Jefferson  |
|                                                                            |
|                        Single Issue...$6.00                                |
|                        Four Issues....$20.00 (One year)                    |
|                        Back Issues....$7.00 (each, Grey)                   |
|                                                                            |
|                                                                            |
|   NAME/PSEUDONYM ______________________________________________            |
|                                                                            |
|   ADDRESS _____________________________________________________            |
|                                                                            |
|   CITY ___________________________ STATE _____ ZIP ____________            |
|                                                                            |
|                                                                            |
| TERMS: For security reasons we prefer remittance by cash. If you are       |
| uncomfortable with that remit by money order. Please leave "Pay to the     |
| order of" BLANK. No checks (they are insecure). Your distribution will     |
| begin in the quarter in which we receive your contribution.                |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
==============================================================================
DGEPY CRHGN HOHCI CQBXT KZQMK
ZJBCN URJYA ZPOPL CKLOB VOSTZ
LVEGD NTVEV EFWOF LLEOI UYCEV
DNIPL TEZRT ROTZU KNTBQ LOFAR

NVCGE BXYIN DRTMR ZWRBO DGEPY
==============================================================================