Snitches and Provocateurs Find Easy Pickings in Low-Hanging Fruit
“I read your website and have a question about militias and targeting the leaders of a tyrannical government,” someone representing himself as a reader asked me many years ago. “Is there any organization of armed citizens? And if there is some loose organization, will people actually move to snipe a government leader gone awry?”
My guess is the person was one of those naive contradictions to the “there’s no such thing as a stupid question” maxim. Then again, I may have been dealing with someone who had incentives to go fishing, see what bites and reel it in.
Now’s as good a time as any to restate concerns and urge cautions in all our communications and activities, and to emphasize that as far as informants, undercover operatives and provocateurs are concerned, what you say and do not only can be used against you in a court of law, the person egging you on may be doing so specifically with entrapment in mind.
Examples are plentiful.
Kansas men charged in “The Crusaders” case alleging targeting of Muslims were “ultimately undone by an FBI confidential informant and [suspect Curtis] Allen’s girlfriend, who showed authorities Allen’s supply room after he allegedly hit her during a fight.”
The attorney for Malheur defendants is trying to get the prosecution to reveal the names of “15 Confidential Human Sources.”
Two FBI agents were embedded in William Keebler’s Patriots for Defense Force Militia “for about a year.” Per the charges against him, the reason he failed to blow up a BLM building in Arizona is because “The bomb never went off … because the person making them was an FBI undercover agent.”
We’ve also seen in recent years the totally overblown “Hutaree militia” case, the Waffle House /ricin “plot” and the leftist/anarchist morons who talked about blowing up a bridge (a few miles from where I live), all brought down using informants.
Common threads that appear to run throughout: Agencies exploit discipline vulnerabilities to score headline “victories” against individuals and groups that in some cases (but not all, as Malheur showed) are planning on initiating (or merely talking about) violence. Funding and career opportunities for triumphant enforcers follow. The meme that the real danger comes from “home grown extremists” is advanced. And ultimately, the Republic remains in grave danger from more serious threats — enabled and abetted by government policies that are making the next 9/11-magnitude (or worse) event inevitable.
Meanwhile, patriots joining together in defense of freedom, and in preparing and training to protect themselves and their communities against natural and directed catastrophes, are tarred with the “homegrown terror” brush.
Kit Perez of the Patrick Henry Society has written two timely essays offering essential considerations for those joining with others of like mind in defense of liberty:
- Thoughts on Infiltration and the Inner Circle Non-Negotiables — It’s crucial to set up filters and discriminators. We can do that by establishing criteria for association and collaboration that are important to the ends we seek and the means we employ, and by determining up-front disqualifying “show stopper” behaviors and conditions.
- How Your Group Loudmouth Can Get You FBI Attention – Bellicose tiger-talkers, even the conveniently anonymous ones (and even if they are embedded government assets) can subject the whole group to scrutiny. Think about that when you see such comments posted under articles like … perhaps this one?
So what do we do? With government agencies and media cheerleaders parroting SPLC talking points to smear Oath Keepers as “domestic terrorists,” why would anyone join anything?
There’s nothing the enemies of freedom would like more than to scare disenfranchised American patriots into giving up on joint efforts and steering clear of all information that does not first filter through approved channels. And nothing helps that more than spooking preemptive surrenders out of those who “don’t want to be on any lists.”
Guess what? You’re already on all kinds of lists. If you’ve ever expressed an opinion contrary to approved groupthink or visited an “extremist” website, you may just be deemed “worthy” of being on the radar.
Those of us committed to remaining engaged in what Samuel Adams called “the animating contest of freedom” need to use our heads, be mindful of what we say, who we say it to, who we interact with and most importantly, what we do, especially if it involves “I will not comply” civil disobedience and other acts of noncompliance. The object here is not to be crushed or otherwise martyred – it is to join with others, locally or nationally as appropriate, where it adds strength, resources and capabilities, and otherwise makes sense.
It’s appropriate to once more cite Oath Keepers Bylaws, and particularly the restrictions on membership against anyone who “advocates the overthrow of the government of the United States or the violation of the Constitution thereof,” and who “advocates discrimination, violence, or hatred toward any person based upon their race, nationality, creed, or color.” It’s also important that we hold ourselves to the Code of Conduct:
All members must understand that their actions not only reflect on Oath Keepers but on the entire military, law enforcement, fire fighters and first responder , former and current, community. We strive to maintain a positive image within our communities and states. All members are fully and solely accountable for their actions while members of Oath Keepers. All Oath Keepers Members and Associates shall possess and maintain high moral and ethical standards and uncompromised integrity for continued membership in Oath Keepers. All members are to conduct themselves in a courteous and lawful manner at all times. Members are expressly prohibited from fraternizing with known criminals, known or suspected criminal organizations and their members, associates or affiliates. Oath Keepers and its members are responsible to maintain the integrity and honor of this organization. Oath Keepers shall have a zero tolerance policy for actions that bring disrespect, dishonor or disrepute on Oath Keepers or the military, law enforcement, fire fighters and first responder community.
Before splitting hairs, think of “criminals” as those who use force or fraud to victimize others, and “lawful” as respecting “the supreme Law of the Land” over clearly unconstitutional, power-usurping diktats.
The bottom line: Maintain such a code of conduct in discreet dealings with individuals and networks within and outside of Oath Keepers, and personal vulnerability should be minimized – at least until the would-be totalitarians see no continued need for masks, and the advantages of strength in numbers become self-evident.