In anger's place I suggest a resolute commitment to freedom, truth, and God


By —— Bio and Archives February 26, 2013

Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

“It wasn’t just the United States in revolution. There were dozens of countries around the world in revolt against their ruling classes, and it was costing billions of dollars for the U.N. to finance all of the peacekeeping forces. Even in China—there was a growing insurgency against the communist regime. The world was on fire against their ruling classes.”—Jerry Oliver “The Diary”

“Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom. The cause of liberty, the cause of America, cannot succeed with any lesser effort.”—John F. Kennedy (1917-1963) 35th President of the United States

As faithful readers know, I have written in the past about the need for radical change in America—a revolution if you will—a peaceful revolution if at all possible, but a revolution in any event.

Despite daily attacks on the US Constitution, and the numerous affronts to our “unalienable rights” and freedoms, I have counseled against anger. I decided some time ago that our situation is much too grave, and freedom’s position too precarious, to allow ourselves the dubious luxury of righteous indignation—as justified as it may seem.

In anger’s place I suggest a resolute commitment to freedom, truth, and God. An attitude that is, in a word, “frosty.” An implacable but detached dedication to accomplishing that which is necessary to preserve the light of freedom.

It is still my fervent hope that, even at this late date, violent revolution and its attendant bloodshed and suffering can be avoided. In the past my stratagems for avoiding violence have run the gamut from the mundane (secession) to the esoteric (raising consciousness). But what if all efforts at resolving things peacefully fail and bloody revolution is thrust upon us—what then?

What then indeed. There have been a number of “what if” scenarios written about in the past, but the situation is always shifting, morphing, and in constant flux, so that ideas and plans which are useful and cutting edge one day, can be unhelpful and even harmful the next. Nonetheless, some “what if” scenarios or “guesstimates” have been written that form a reasonable prediction of what a future violent revolution might hold in store for us. One such “reasonable guesstimate” is Jerry Oliver’s book “The Diary,” and I will turn to it in a moment to discuss what “we the people” may well come to experience should violent revolution move from fiction into fact (from now on when I write “revolution” in this article I mean violent revolution, not peaceful ).

Before beginning a discussion on the possible form and direction a future revolution might take, it would behoove us to remind ourselves of a few facts. One fact worthy of consideration is that there are a number of veterans in America who, by virtue of costly lessons learned while fighting insurgents in foreign countries, have acquired a first-rate knowledge of how to conduct effective guerilla operations against a much larger and more powerful enemy force.

If you think that the fighting capabilities of Third World insurgents has been impressive, wait until you get a load of an American patriot fighting for his or her country on American soil—you ain’t seen nothing yet.

Also, it is wise to keep in mind that the trigger for the revolution could be any number of things, or combination of things, and such a trigger could arrive from any direction on any given day. I will not get into the whys and wherefores of the revolution in this article—those who have done their homework already have a pretty good idea of what’s what, who’s who, and why revolution may become unavoidable. Stay frosty, not fidgety. 

“The confluence of events we are witnessing (from gun control to our foreign policies) is not by accident, but is the result of much planning. To those with discernment, the collapse of the dollar is one part of a larger plan of global governance. The lives lost within America will be collateral damage welcomed by the evil and insidious. It’s not if, but when.”—Douglas Hagmann “America Over a Barrel

The first stage of the revolution will in all probability take the form of “we the people” practicing nonviolent resistance—in ever increasing intensity and scope. Gandhi and his followers were quite successful using this technique during India’s struggle for independence from Great Britain—but as radical icon and agent provocateur Saul Alinsky noted, “[Great Britain] not only made the effective use of passive resistance possible, but practically invited it.” 

“Gandhi’s passive resistance would never have had a chance against a totalitarian state such as that of the Nazis.” [Or the Communists, for that matter].—Saul Alinsky “Rules for Radicals” (p.41)

Alinsky is quite correct in his analysis (for a change)—nonviolent resistance will only take you so far when dealing with the Godless, amoral, bloated bureaucratic machine of totalitarianism, which will grind you up and spit you out without a moment’s thought or hesitation. As the man who coined the term “totalitarianism” (Benito Mussolini) might have put it: “Everything within the federal government, nothing outside the federal government, nothing against the federal government”—or as “Star Trek’s” Borg would put it: “Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.” 

Increased passive resistance by “we the people” will result in the passing of increasingly Draconian laws, which will feed increased resistance, resulting in harder and harsher laws, and so on in an ever-escalating Mexican standoff. Eventually, and inevitably, such a standoff will spill over into violence—and when TSHTF all bets are off. Martial law will sooner or later be declared by the feds, and then it’s “Katie bar the door.”   

At this point I will turn to “The Diary,” and take a look at some of the scenarios that Oliver posits. One of the more important probabilities that he writes about is the splitting of the US military along ideological lines. Many in our military (most, IMHO) will choose to honor the oaths they took to “protect and defend” the US Constitution, rather than act as attack dogs for tyranny. How that scenario plays out will have far-reaching effects.

According to Oliver (and a number of others, I might add), the reality of so many US troops refusing to fire upon their fellow citizens will “force” the feds to call upon the UN for assistance. I put the word “force” in quote marks, because far from being “forced” to call in the UN, many believe that the feds are counting on it, and have been planning on introducing UN troops onto American soil for some time. Stewart Rhodes of Oath Keepers has likened such a move to being “like bringing the Hessians [German mercenaries] in during the days of the Founders.”

In Oliver’s book the UN troops (the hated “blue hats”) are for the most part badly disciplined troops—led and strengthened by a core of professional ChiCom soldiers.  Opposing them are elements of the US military and patriotic militia groups of all shapes and sizes. The country, like the military, is split along ideological lines—liberal (pro-totalitarianism) versus conservative (pro-freedom).   

One interesting aspect of Oliver’s book is that he divides the liberals into those who favor the communist/fascist NWO agenda of big corporations, big banks, and big government—and those who favor being left alone to “do their thing.” Those liberals who value their individual rights and freedom end up joining the fight on the patriot’s side. During Ron Paul’s candidacy (which I supported) I was surprised at the number of liberals who found common cause with conservatives when it came to opposing the globalist NWO agenda—pleasantly surprised. Should TSHTF this is a point that should be remembered.         

“The Diary” is filled with details about what the revolution would entail—the minutia of war. Details such as the militia’s practice of using aliases instead of real names (to avoid retaliation against family members should a patriot be captured and interrogated), how to avoid heat detection by surveillance satellites during night operations, the hacker’s cyber-war running concurrent with the physical war, the hunger, the misery, and the physical, emotional, and spiritual pain—as well as the comradery, sense of purpose, and esprit de corps—experienced by the various patriots and patriotic fighting forces. Drone-dodging techniques and such aside, the revolution will in a large part be about heart and soul versus greed and narcissism.           

Without being “Pollyannaish,” Oliver’s book is hopeful and optimistic, in that at the end of the day the Patriots defeat the globalists, and are able to restore the American republic (at a high cost in “blood, sweat, and tears” it should be noted). “Happy ending” aside, I pray that America is spared the bloody horror of a chaotic civil war. 

No sane person wants to start a war, but I will never accuse the global elitists of being sane—power-hungry, arrogant, amoral, and duplicitous, yes…but sane; not so much. They may be quite clever, in a Machiavellian sort of way, but they are sorely lacking in any true wisdom. The global elitists have, with great success, implemented an agenda of “Luciferian Inversion,” where what’s good is bad and what’s bad is good, and everything is turned on its head (e.g. God is bad; Lucifer good). It is the antithesis of sanity; it is narcissistic insanity. (Alinsky did not dedicate “Rules for Radicals” to Lucifer just for grins).

“Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven.” —Lucifer—in John Milton’s “Paradise Lost” 1667 (Book I, line 263)

Which is by way of saying that like it or not, “we the people” may someday soon find ourselves with our backs against the wall; with no other option than to capitulate or fight. As I say, I pray it does not come to that—but if I were a betting man I’d lay odds that a violent revolution will soon be upon us. I would also bet big money that the über wealthy very powerful global elitists would not have it any other way.

It will be up to “we the people” to prove to them that they have made a very, very serious error. It will not be easy; it will be ugly, hard, and painful—but failure is simply not an option. No matter how long the struggle takes, “we the people” will prevail—because we must. God bless the USA.


Jim ONeill -- Bio and Archives | Click to view Comments

Born June 4, 1951 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Served in the U.S. Navy from 1970-1974 in both UDT-21 (Underwater Demolition Team) and SEAL Team Two.  Worked as a commercial diver in the waters off of Scotland, India, and the United States.  Worked overseas in the Merchant Marines.  While attending the University of South Florida as a journalism student in 1998 was presented with the “Carol Burnett/University of Hawaii AEJMC Research in Journalism Ethics Award,” 1st place undergraduate division.  (The annual contest was set up by Carol Burnett with money she won from successfully suing a national newspaper for libel).  Awarded US Army, US Navy, South African, and Russian jump wings.  Graduate of NOLS (National Outdoor Leadership School, 1970).  Member of Mensa, China Post #1, and lifetime member of the NRA and UDT/SEAL Association.


Jim can be reached at:
[email protected]