Suppose the US passes a gun law in 2000 that outlaws ownership of more than one assault rifle per household. Suppose also that ATF knows that Milne has 6 AK-47s and some other toys, and John Koskinen decides its payback time. Now say an arrmed confrontation takes place at the Milne compound in Virginia between Paul's y2k crew and agents serving a warrant to confiscate his guns. Will we see another Waco?

-- David (koresh@ATF.justice.gov), August 28, 1999

Answers

No, Paul is steady-minded. Mean SOB, but determined. And the ATF would have to decide amongst about 1/2 of csy2k as far as multiple guns per household.

-- csy2k (tough@alley.testosterone), August 28, 1999.

David:

I think that it is more likely that the world will be taken-over by a superior being. Who? I don't know, but it probably won't be the candidate for President on the Reform Party.

Best wishes,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 28, 1999.

If I were beseiged, I would hand over everything, and be completely cooperative. They would not find everything they are looking for so easily.

Then I would take back everything stolen from me, in my own way, and in my own good time. With interest.

Disarm them with a smile, while letting them think they are disarming you. But plan ahead for this. Maintain your determination. These utopian state-socialists are serious about destroying our Constitution and our Country, and you're going to need all the perseverance you can muster in the years ahead. Don't throw your life away if you don't have to.

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), August 28, 1999.

Liberty,

Yes, sound idea for self-preservation....but that's exactly the same attitude many had taken in 1936 Germnay, and many more in Stalinist Russia.

A line in the sand needs to be drawn. The more we allow our freedoms to be watered-down and diminished, the more the Government encroaches on our rights and privacy, The more they will be emboldened to commit even greater acts of treachery. Cattle cars and midnight dissapearances won't be far off we allow ourselves to be backed-up any further.

They say it's for our own good and safety...but we need to stand up and stop this nonsense.

We must draw the line and say "No More!" No retreat, no surrender.

The colonists did.

Why should we be any different?

Hell, the Colonists revolted over a 1/10 of 1% tax on tea!

Our current government is a thousand times more opressive than King George III was!

Have we already become slaves?

If not folks, wake up! We are about to!

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), August 28, 1999.

First of all, the government does not bestow upon me the right to bear arms. That is a God given right that is merely RECOGNIZED by the second ammendment to the constitution. The express purpose of the government is to PROTECT that right. If the government were to attempt to confiscate arms or unconstitutionally infringe upon my God given rights, they would then have ABROGATED their lawful responsibilities, usurped an undelegated authority, and made of themselves the very thing that they were to protect a citizen against, in the first place.

They would be mere criminals disguised as lawful authorities. They would be making war upon me. And I will respond to them them as I would to any criminal intent upon depriving me of my God given rights. I will defend myself.

Thee are not many left who would not knuckle under to criminals disguised as lawful authorities. Most are cowards. I would rather die in defense of my God given rights than to surrender them to criminals.

-- Paul Milne (fedinfo@halifax.com), August 28, 1999.

Again, I recommend as educational reading the novel "Unintended Consequences" by John Ross. (see Loompanics.com or Amazon.com for descriptions and reviews.)

Another recommendation is "The Art of War" by Sun Tzu.
Frontal attack doesn't do much good if you are outmanned and outgunned. Viet Kong vs. U.S. is one example of that. Afghan rebels vs. USSR is another. IRA vs Britain is another.
MANY translated editions of "The Art of War" are available. So for more insight you might get more than one.

(Sort of like the bible -- all the thumper Christians who know only of the King James version probably don't know of the many other versions before and since, the extra-biblical books, and the ancient Sumerian and Babylonian works, some of which were incorporated, edited, into the bible.)

-- A (A@AisA.com), August 28, 1999.

Best would be a neighborhood that had agreed amongst themselves to come to each other's aide.. whether that meant against spikey-haired mutants or NATO troops or anything in between. Unfortunately the ridicule heeped early and often on the whole subject of Y2K has made it very unlikely that many have prepared WITH their neighbors instead of AGAINST their neighbors. Even an agreement that everyone should have videocams at the ready would be helpful. If a well-prepared goup like the Branch Davidians fell, no single family should have any illusions about their power to withstand "jack-booted thugs". He who smiles and walks away, lives to fight another day. Liberty had it right. But keep those cameras loaded.

-- Linda (lwmb@psln.com), August 28, 1999.

Paul is NOT alone!

-- FLAME AWAY (BLehman202@aol.com), August 28, 1999.

Translation from Moron Milne:

"I can hardly wait to shoot someone..."

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), August 28, 1999.

Would you please volunteer, PRO?

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), August 28, 1999.

Translation of emptyheaded Y2K wannabe Pro's comment above:

"I support disarmament of all individuals, especially single women. Let them trust the law enforcement individuals for their protection. The law enforcement officials have everything under control. Proof of this is seen in the Rodney King riots and the Columbine shootings. After an extended period of time, law enforcement WAS able to gain control. The people who died before law enforcement gained control were unimportant, anyway. Society is a better place because of their deaths."

-- General Patton (GeneralPatton@warishell.com), August 28, 1999.

For all you idiots who don't GI. The day they come to collect all the guns is the day you will quickly discover you don't have any other rights either. They went door to door in Australia, collected all the guns and I heard (on the radio) that every category of crime has increased dramatically. Homicides soared into the stratosphere more than 300%. Does anyone have those stats?

If you think that your cities and states will be safer and more peacefull if they violate that which the Constitution has ordained to be God-Given, then your mind has been twisted and moulded by the architects of the socialist (nazi) liberal NWO. Therefore, you are a piece of garbage whose nation goes down on your watch and you not only did nothing but you cheered while the ship was sinking. Shame on you.

sdb

-- S. David Bays (SDBAYS@prodigy.net), August 29, 1999.

I won't surrender my guns. But they won't come for mine first, since I have so little. By the time they get to me, there will be somewhat fewer of them.

I live out in the country, prime deer country. The people here are referred to generally as "rednecks". They have vastly more weapons than I do and many of them are military veterans. They won't surrender their guns, either.

Any ATF or FBI jackboot that thinks they can disarm the American people must have a hole in their head, so to speak.

-- Forrest Covington (theforrest@mindspring.com), August 29, 1999.

"That is a God given right that is merely RECOGNIZED by the second ammendment to the constitution."

Gee....did I miss a passage in the Bible?

-- just wondering (rofl@lordy.com), August 29, 1999.

More recommended reading, "War, Politics, and Power" by Karl von Clausewitz, and also "A History of Warfare" by John Keegan.

Does "A" stand for Aryan, as in racist Nations?

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), August 29, 1999.

REPLY TO: Mumsie re: Clausewitz...

You would do well to read and understand CLausewitz and the implications for the United States. Everyone is familiar (I hope) with the famous quote, "War is nothing else than the continuation of state policy by other means." Next, please consider this quote, "It is waste, and worse than waste-of effort to ignore the element of brutality because of the repugnance it excites." Think about that for a moment. We all sit around whispering about how bad things are and are GOING TO BE. Yet I suspect we tend to get weak-knees because it is considered un-natural and unpleasant to discuss such things while living in this great nation. Before you drown in your guilt, I implore you to consider the EVIL residing in the White House. I strongly suspect, and fear, that the Clintons are playing another Clausewitz card..."There is only one decisive victory...the last."

Think about it.

Regards,

Irving

-- Irving (Irving@privacy.net), August 29, 1999.

Thanks Irving, my sixteen year old son turned me on to these books. I'm into them now. Making for some interesting dinner conversations. I printed your post to show him!

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), August 29, 1999.

To: "Just Wondering"

Re: the right to bear arms:

You got it correct sir when you said: "That is a God given right that is merely RECOGNIZED by the second ammendment to the constitution."

Then you asked: "Gee....did I miss a passage in the Bible?"

Well, perhaps you need to go back and read the bible and determine then if God has made room for people to defend themselves from crazy people and others who would do them harm including evil out of control government and it's thugs.

Then you might want to reread the thinking of the founders in that document dated July 4, 1776: "The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America" which reads in part:

"...and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and Nature's God entitles them, ..."

"...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

It was the understanding of the founders reading of the bible (in total) that certain Rights were "from God" that were, should be inviolate. The First 10 Amendments or "The BILL OF RIGHTS" was just an amplification of this priciple.

That we have a government that wants to disarm it's citizens is no surprise since the nation (as a whole) has rejected God and God's wisdom. This edge, of course, cuts both ways. A sovereign God would grant us the right to bear arms but if we have a fist in His face that Right might be rescinded by Him and maybe this is what we are dealing with here. I think Y2K will be a time for soul searching.

Blessings.

sdb

-- S. David Bays (SDBAYS@prodigy.net), August 29, 1999.

The better question for this thread would have been...

Subject: Will Paul Milne be the next Ted Kazynski?

-- CD (not@here.com), August 29, 1999.

I think one of Paul's kids will get ahold of an AK-47, shot a hole in one of the gas barrels, and burn the whole place down. I hope he's got contingency plans for that.

-- Amy Leone (leoneamy@aol.com), August 30, 1999.

Thanks for your words of encouragement.

It seems I should clairify my position: it does the Republic no good to "make a statement" by being overwhelmed. Far better to let them have a rusty shotgun and a hand full of shells, then, without prompting them to i.d. you as a resitor, retire to where your real armaments are kept, and meet them on your terms. If it ever comes to actual gun confiscation, this is what I'll do. Defending a fixed position, identified as an enemy, you are vulnerable. We've seen what they're capable of, at Waco. On the other hand, if they think you're not a problem, and you are striking where and when you please, you are an effective, long-term, continuous threat. The idea is not to go out in a blaze of glory; the idea is to make tyranny more trouble than it's worth, to the animals who would bring it about. If they trample the Constitution, if they take away our rights to free speech, assembly, property, and arrest, imprison and/or kill people for speaking out against them, our duty is to stay alive and kill as many of them as possible.

Some time ago on this BB, the point was made that the FBI (and presumably other agencies as well) utilize "moles" to join resistance organizations, even start them, as a way to gain control over dissenters. When these moles prompt organized violent acts that are doomed to failure, they are called "agents provocateurs." They might recommend all manner of violent acts, particularly those directed against civilians, which serves the purpose of turning the fearful masses toward the protective arms of the government. Study how the "Weather Underground" and the "Black Panthers" were destroyed in the sixties. This will provide some idea of the challenges presented to any organized resistance to the current globalist/socialist takeover.

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), August 30, 1999.

Liberty, you may enjoy this article:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_cwolfe/19990617_xccwo_how_to_be_. shtml

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), August 30, 1999.

Amy Leone,if responsible gun owners teach thier children how to RESPONSIBLY treat firearms as dangerous tools,instead of enticing forbiden toys as liberal gun hating parent's children are wont to do,said tradgedies will not happen.I was raised around guns and at age 5 I learned how to safely check that guns were unloaded.I was terrified of the automatics because my little fingers were too weak to rack the slides,I was terrified that they might be loaded.Children want to be like their parents,and if their parents embody safty and teach safty the kids will practice safty.You are most likly more of a threat with firearms than Milne's children.

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), August 30, 1999.

Will Paul Milne be the next Randy Weaver?

One can only hope

-- (aa@aa.aa), August 31, 1999.