

==============================================================================

The RESISTER - The Official Publication of the Special Forces Underground

                     Volume I, Number 3. Winter 1995

==============================================================================

Post Office Box 2723, Hagerstown, Maryland, 21741     Copy 0365 of 1000 Copies

==============================================================================

        How the Second Amendment Will Be Abrogated By U.N. Treaty

                           by Robert Whitehill

                                    

          "The instability of laws is really an immense evil."

                           --Thomas Jefferson



     The persistent orgy of blatantly unconstitutional anti-gun legislation

rammed through Congress under the guise of "public safety" beginning with the

National Firearms Control Act of 1934 has, by our analysis of historical

precedent, only one aim; the disarmament of the American middle class.  The

reason for this is evident in the increasing irrationality of our laws. 

     When laws are undefined by virtue of being based on undefinable

abstractions they are rendered un-judicable and thus subject to capricious

enforcement. The purpose of laws based on whim rather than reason is to create

fear and uncertainty and lead everyone to believe that they are guilty of

"something." The creation, and automatic assumption, of guilt in the minds of

the citizens in the modus operandi of all evolving tyrannies.

     Those who refuse the premise of de facto guilt and whose actions are

based on reason and morality rather than legal whimsy are considered

reactionaries. When they armed they are considered dangerous subversive.

     Stripped of their sophist window-dressings of public safety, crime, and

most recently, "child safety" the philosophical frameworks of anti-gun

legislation are starkly obvious: undermining self-sufficiency by making

everyone dependent upon government for protection (which NECESSITATES the

abrogation of individual rights); and eliminating the threat of effective

resistance by those who refuse to submit.

     In December, 1993, the United Nations Disarmament Commission adopted a

working paper specifically designed to impose controls on the gun trade in the

United States as a way to combat "international arms trafficking." Although

the United States representative on the 184 member Disarmament Commission

initially opposed it, on May 9, 1994, the Clinton administration directed the

U.S. member to allow consensus adoption of the proposal. The U.N. Disarmament

Commission's draft proposal has already been scheduled for debate in the U.N.

General Council's spring 1995 meeting. Its adoption is a forgone conclusion.

     The working paper declares that governments individually "find

themselves impotent" to deal with global arms trafficking, and proposes the

"harmonization" of gun-control standards world-wide.

     For one thing, it says, "The arms permitted for civilian use...should be

subject to controls at all points in the chain, from production and/or

acquisition up to the time they are sold to an individual. From then on they

should remain subject to monitoring and control by the United Nations

controlling body". The working paper also proposes strengthening government

controls on the export and import of arms, stricter regulation of arms dealers

and establishment of a global computer firearms database.

     Note the specific use of the qualification: "The arms permitted for

civilian use..." PERMITTED. By whom? By the United Nations, and by default,

the federal government.

     Because the United States is a member of the United Nations, U.N.

General Assembly resolutions bind the laws of the United States by force of

treaty. When the regulatory provisions of a treaty conflict with the U.S.

Constitution the treaty, not the Constitution, is the law of the land.

     When adopted by resolution the U.N. Disarmament Commission's findings

will accomplish what the collectivists and statists of our illegitimate

federal

government have failed to do for the past 60 years: make null and void the

Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.



     In discussing the implied powers of Congress it is important to bear in

mind that they may be derived not merely from the specific grants of power to

Congress but also from the clause of the Constitution which authorizes

Congress "to make all laws that shall be necessary and proper for carrying

into execution the forgoing powers, and ALL OTHER POWERS VESTED BY THIS

CONSTITUTION IN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES, OR IN ANY DEPARTMENT

THEREOF."

     Among these "other powers" vested in the departments or officers of the

government is the treaty-making power, which resides in the President and the

Senate. Thus Congress may derive legislative authority from the power to carry

out the provisions of a treaty when it could not derive it from any of the

specific grants of legislative power enumerated in Article I. Article VI makes

clear such a provision:



     "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall

     be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which

     shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be

     the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall

     be bound thereby, ANY THING IN THE CONSTITUTION OR LAWS OF ANY

     STATE TO THE CONTRARY NOTWITHSTANDING." (Emphasis added).



     These points are clearly emphasized by the judicial history of the two

migratory-birds acts passed by Congress. In 1913 Congress an act forbidding,

save under strict regulations, the killing of migratory birds. The control of

bird life in not one of the powers which the Constitution grants to Congress,

and two lower federal courts held the law unconstitutional: United States v.

Shauver (1914) and United States v. McCullagh (1915). These cases have been

generally regarded as correct.

     In 1916 we entered into a treaty with Great Britain by the terms of

which United States and Canada agreed to protect migratory birds and to

propose legislation for that purpose. In 1918 Congress passed such a law, much

more elaborate than the act of 1913, forbidding the killing, capture, or

selling of birds included within the provisions of the treaty, except in

accordance with regulations set by the Secretary of Agriculture. The Secretary

of Agriculture promulgated suitable regulations; and the State of Missouri, on

the ground that her reserved powers were invaded by the act, brought action to

enjoin a game warden of the United States from enforcing the provisions of the

act and the rules established by the Secretary of Agriculture: Missouri v.

Holland (1920). The decision of the Supreme Court makes it clear that Congress

may regulate bird life as a means of carrying into effect the provisions of a

treaty when it could not regulate it as an independent exercise of legislative

power.



     This broad doctrine has been sharply attacked. In 1954 the Senate by only

a narrow margin defeated the so-called Bricker Amendment, one section of which

provided that "A treaty shall effective as internal law in the United States

only through legislation which would be valid in the absence of a treaty."

This would reverse Missouri v. Holland, and was so intended.

     An important problem raised by Missouri v. Holland is the extent to

which, if at all, Congress is free to make treaties which limited the

rights of citizens guaranteed them by the Constitution. If Congress is freed

from the restrictions of the Tenth Amendment, as the Supreme Court held, they

are also freed from the limitations of the Bill of Rights.

     It is significant that during the debates on ratification of the

Constitution (1787-1788) the anti-federalists vehemently opposed Article VI

and drafted an amendment prohibiting Congress from enforcing provisions of

treaties which contradicted the Constitution:



     That no treaty which shall be directly opposed to the existing

     laws of the United States in Congress assembled, shall be valid

     until such laws shall be repealed, or made conformable to such

     treaty; neither shall any treaties be valid which are in

     contradiction to the constitution of the United States, or the

     constitutions of the several states.



                    Pennsylvania Packet (Philadelphia), December 18, 1787



     The anti-federalist recognized the potential for tyranny in the

Constitution. It is they to whom we are indebted for the inclusion of the Bill

of Rights. Their arguments in opposition to federalism were, in light of

legislative, executive and judicial developments over the past 130 years,

prophetic.

     The legislative and special interest attacks on the Second Amendment over

the past 60 years pale in comparison to what will occur in 1995. When the

United Nations General Assembly approves the Disarmament Commission's report

and it is signed by the United States it will have the force of treaty and

become "the law of the land." The uncertain PRIVILEGE of firearms ownership

will depend on the range-of-the-moment whims of some Cambodian, Mexican or

Central African Republic bureaucrat.

     The inalienable right of every free man to keep and bear arms in defense

of his life, liberty and property against tyrannical government will evaporate

as quickly as the ink dries on the treaty paper abrogating it. The RESISTER

has only one comment on this: A piece of paper cannot stop a bullet.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              "Total Hogwash"



     November 14, 1994, ARMY TIMES published on official denial by the Naval

Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, stating that Lt. Cmdr. Ernest G.

Cunningham's Combat Arms Survey (the complete text of which was printed in The

RESISTER, Vol.I, No.2) issued to Marines at Twentynine Palms, CA, on May 10,

1994 "...was meant to test their opinion of possible nontraditional missions."

     School spokesman John Sanders said; "I personally feel (question 46) was

a bit abrupt. However, it is trying to get at a tough issue: unit

cohesiveness, and whether a member understands a lawful or unlawful order."

     What Mr. Sanders fails to mention is that the questionnaire (or a trial

balloon variant) had been in circulation since September 1993 and was

initially targeted toward Navy special operations units (SEAL teams, including

SEAL Team Six, the Navy's SFOD-D). He also fails to mention that rumors

concerning the questionnaire had been rampant in the Special Operations

community since October, 1993, and among the various civilian firearms

publications since February, 1994.

     The official position of the Naval Postgraduate School is that the

questionnaire was meant to test whether the Marines understood the principle

that U.S. law prohibits the federal military from becoming involved in

domestic law enforcement. Mr. Sanders said that reports about the

questionnaire reflecting an administration plan to disarm Americans are,

"Total hogwash."

     Margaret Roth, author of the Army Times article, quotes Mr. Sanders as

saying: "The now-infamous Question 46 purely was hypothetical, designed to see

if Marines understood the limits of their constitutional authority."

     This however is dissimulation. The Department of the Navy is fully aware

that they are exempt from Posse Comitatus (10 USC 375).

     In point of fact, between 1989 and 1993 SEAL Team Six conducted at least

four unilateral crack-house "take-downs" in the Los Angeles area and

participated in at least four others with LAPD and DEA tactical units.

     The Naval Postgraduate School is on record as stating they will "short

circuit" the normal release procedures for Lt. Cmdr. Cunningham's thesis on

"nontraditional" uses of the federal military. "It's certainly not our intent

to keep this from anyone," said Mr. Sanders. We are all waiting.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Due to the United States Army occupation of Haiti the article, _Why_NAFTA_

is_Anti-Capitalism_, was replaced by, _The_Truth_About_Haiti_. We are

expanding the orginal article about NAFTA to include the recent signing of the

GATT treaty and in will appear in Vol.I, No4. We reserve the right to make

abrupt changes in scheduled articles due to ongoing developments. 

                                                       --The Staff

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Canadian Dress Rehearsal for Brady II.



     November 30, 1994, the Canadian Government announced it will ban rifles

and handguns not used for hunting or sport and introduced universal

registration of firearms to crack down on "a rise in armed violence" (They did

not specify by whom).

     Gun owners will be forced to register their firearms on a computerized

system that will contain data on guns and their owners for the purpose of

police monitoring.

     Justice Minister Allan Rock announced; "Canadians do not want to live in

a society where they feel they need to own a gun to protect themselves.

Canadians do not want to follow the approach to firearms taken by the United

States." (In Canada, government speaks for individuals).

     Justice Rock said he will propose legislation in February that will ban

almost all handguns currently on sale in Canada, because they have no

legitimate "sporting purpose." Every five years owners will have to provide

proof to government officials that they have handguns for a legitimate reason.

Over 200 models of rifles and handguns will be banned January 1, 1995.

     Sound familiar? Try NAZI Germany, 1938.

==============================================================================

                       OPEN LETTER TO OUR READERS

                       --------------------------

Dear Patriots:

     Our open letter this quarter is in response to the many queries we have

received asking us to explain more fully our philosophy and our positions

derived therefrom. Ordinarily we are not prone to offer explanations for our

beliefs; you either agree with them or you do not and in the free market of

ideas you are free to read The RESISTER or not according to your values.

Notwithstanding, without exception these queries were honest, rational,

intelligently phrased and polite and therefore deserve a response in kind. Of

necessity our response in this forum must be generalized but we will cover the

major points in question.

     The Special Forces Underground is a description not a title. The

opposition loves titles. Their narrow clerk-minds thrive on trivia and they

must have something (preferably an acronym) to pigeonhole and categorize. Our

organization does have a name. We prefer to let the opposition work for it.

     Questions about tolerating disagreement within our ranks over one or

more philosophical positions seem to imply that force is an intrinsic element

holding our organization together. The underground in a voluntary association

of individuals of like mind working in cooperation for our own SELF INTEREST

against the forces of federal (and, when at work in this country,

international) tyranny threatening our unalienable rights of life, liberty,

and property. This will result in ancillary benefit to others but they do not

motivate our actions. Ours is a capitalist resistance; do better than us, join

us voluntarily, or get out of our way.

     Our philosophical framework is objectivism (the rational morality of

self interest--life). Our political philosophy is grounded in the works of

John Locke, the Founding Fathers of this nation and Auberon Herbert

(government as servant, not master--liberty). Our economic philosophy is

grounded in Carl Menger, Ludwig Von Mises, and Henry Hazlitt (the guarantor of

individual rights, laissez-faire capitalism--property).

     For a discussion of our opposition to democracy we refer you to the

editorial on page 3.

     Our belief in isolationism is not xenophobic, it is practical. The United

Nations and its underlying philosophy of one-world government and socialist

economics is an abominable evil. There is no compelling national interest

underlying the foreign policy of the federal government. The conditions of

treaties made with foreign governments force changes in our laws and override

the Constitution. Foreign aid is nothing less than forced redistribution of

this nation's wealth to impoverished socialist gangs and Third World savages.

The belief of the internationalists is that we "owe something" to the rest of

the world; most recently, food to starving irrelevancies in Somalia, political

stability to ex-French slaves in Haiti, and guns to religious hoodlums in

Bosnia: We deny this.

     Our opposition to altruism is that it is moral cannibalism. It may be

true that from a philosophical standpoint altruism cannot exist; that does not

prevent the cannibals from attempting to impose universally its premise of

self-sacrifice. Altruism permits no construct of a self-respecting self-

supporting man. Altruism permits no view of man except as sacrificial animal,

victim and parasite. Politically, altruists demand democracy knowing the

consequence is statism. Socially, altruists demand egalitarianism knowing the

consequence is tribalism. Economically, altruists demand collectivism knowing

the consequence is slavery. Altruism is anti-life, anti-liberty and anti-

property.

     Pull politics is the logical result of a mixed economy (part capitalist, 

part socialist). It is the politics of lobbies, special interests and

factions. It is political gangsterism. It is the defining characteristic of

the Democrat and Republican parties. 

     Statism is political gang rule. It is a system of institutionalized

force and perpetual "cold" civil war among rival gangs vying for favors,

subsidies, entitlements and legislation to extort their own advantages by

force from all other groups. The foundation of statism is fear resulting from

a deliberately frightening and demoralizing tangle of incomprehensible,

contradictory and therefore un-judicable laws. It abrogates individual rights

at the same time it empowers (here the word is used _correctly_) tribes and

gangs. The politics of statism is dictatorship. The economics of statism is

looting. Statism defines how the federal government works.

     We DO NOT advocate the violent overthrow of the United States

Government. (Although we believe there is cause, in theory, by virtue of the

government's cumulative improbity over the last 133 years, and sufficient

historical and philosophical precedent, by virtue of the Declaration of

Independence and the writings of the Founding Fathers, to justify it.) We do

advocate resisting 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 (self defense). Our goal is to see the federal government muzzled,

shackled and cast back into its constitutional prison."

     We do advocate active resistance against the United Nations.



     Life, Liberty, and Property;



     THE EDITOR

==============================================================================

                               EDITORIALS

                               ----------

                                    

                   Democracy: The Politics of Tyranny

                                    

     Rights are a moral principle, and each man has inalienable rights over

himself, his faculties and his possessions. This moral principle, this

objective reality, means that a man has a right to his own person, his mind

and body, and therefore his own labor. Furthermore, a man has a right to the

productive use of his labor and faculties. Because a man has these rights he

must respect these rights in all others. Since each man is sovereign over

himself, each individual must consent to any activity which directly affects

his person or property before such activity can assume moral legitimacy.

     In a rational society founded of the moral principle of rights there can

be no force or fraud in the relationship between sovereign individuals. When

rights are properly exercised they take nothing from anyone, nor do they

compel anyone to act in a manner detrimental to their own self-interest.

Notice that the rational exercise of each right enumerated in the Bill of

Rights to the Constitution by an individual takes nothing from, or compels,

other individuals in their rational exercise of these rights.

     Only individuals possess rights. Groups, being nothing more than a

number of individuals can, in themselves, possess no rights other than those

which are possessed and exercised individually by each member. Hence, a

faction has no rights; nor does a gang, a mob, a tribe, a state or a nation. 

A group may hove interests but those interests do not assume the moral

legitimacy of rights. To assert otherwise is to descend into abstract

subjectivism, an evasion of reality, where a society is ruled by the-range-of-

the-moment whims of its members, the majority gang of the moment, the current

demagogue or dictator.

     Government is force. No matter how benign or dictatorial, behind every

law or regulation or act there is a gun. The authors of the United States

Constitution were fully aware of this fact. They recognized that government in

a rational society must derive its delegated powers by the consent of the

governed and that these powers must be specifically defined by law--the

Constitution; delimited by a law higher than government--the inalienable

rights of man; and dispersed by permanent separation of powers. For these

reasons they specifically and intentionally REJECTED democracy as a system of

government. The system of government created by the Founding Fathers, men

devoted to the primacy of the source of all rights, man's faculties (which

means; reason), was the CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC.

     Democracy is the antithesis of the natural rights of man. The

philosophical premise of democracy is egalitarianism; not political

egalitarianism which holds all men equal before the law (justice), but

METAPHYSICAL egalitarianism, the belief that all men are equal in all things. 

This last construct is such an obvious falsehood that it can carry only one

meaning: the hatred of reason. Democracy, by its very definition - rule by

majority - is the notion that" might makes right." The exercise of democracy

reduces men to mere numbers, and the faction or gang which gathers the greater

number of men to its fleeting cause wields the government gun against the

minority.



          From this view of the subject, it may be concluded, that a

     pure Democracy, by which I mean a society, consisting of a small

     number of citizens, who assemble and administer the Government in

     person, can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common

     passion or interest will in almost every case, be felt by the

     majority of the whole; a communication and concert results from

     the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the

     inducements to sacrifice the weaker party, or an obnoxious

     individual. Hence it is, that such Democracies have ever been

     spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found

     incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property,

     and have in general been as short in their lives, as they have

     been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have

     patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed,

     that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political

     rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and

     assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their

     passions.



                    --Publius (James Madison), The Federalist X, 1787



     Indeed, specific safeguards were designed into the Constitution to

prevent the subversion of the constitutional republic and the natural rights

of man by political party gang warfare and special interest factionalism

inherent in a democracy: the Electoral College (Article II, Section 1) and the

election of senators by State Legislatures (Article I, Section 3).

     In the case of the former it was specifically intended that the head of

the Executive branch of the federal government be elected by Electors chosen

by each state legislature in equal proportion to its representation in

Congress; NOT by popular vote. This ensured : "No faction or combination can

bring about the election. It is probable, that the choice will always fall

upon a man of experienced abilities and fidelity. In all human probability, no

better method of election could have been devised." (James Iredell, North

Carolina Ratification Cttee., 1788)

     The latter provision ensured the logical effect of popular election of

members to the House of Representatives (whim based legislation) was offset by

representatives elected by state legislature to the Senate to guard against

Executive and House encroachment on state sovereignty: "The election of one

branch of the Federal, by the State Legislatures, secures an absolute

dependence of the former on the latter. The biennial exclusion of one-third,

will lesson the faculty of combination and may put a stop to intrigues."

(James Madison, Virginia Ratification Cttee., June, 1788)

     The United States has been descending into the sewer of democracy since

the ratification of the 17th Amendment on May 31, 1913. Before every

presidential election there are demands by special interest groups to void the

Electoral College and resort to popular election of the President. This

headlong rush into democracy is evident by the "value" placed on public

opinion polls by politicians of both parties (a practice begun by the crypto-

communist Franklin D. Roosevelt); as if the opinions and "feelings" of

factions, gangs and tribes were a counterweight to the inalienable rights of a

single rational man.

     The irrationality of democracy was stated most eloquently by Auberon

Herbert in his London address on March 9, 1880, before a meeting of the

Vigilance Association for the Defense of Personal Rights, entitled; CHOICES

BETWEEN FREEDOM AND PROTECTION: "How should it happen that the individual

should be without rights, but the combination of individuals should possess

unlimited rights?"                    

                                             --Alexander Davidson

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         Expropriation of an Ideal



     One of the hallmarks of second-handers is the expropriation of symbols

and ideals celebrating an excellence of character and originality of thought

they themselves no not possess and can never hope to emulate. Thus did "Bronze

Bruce" come to be moved to that temple of second-handness, the new USASOC

building.

     The mindless actions of second-handers always reveal their true goal, to

sacrifice excellence on their altar of mediocrity. Despite their abstract

rationalizations and unfocused rhetoric justifying the movement of "Bronze

Bruce" from JFK Plaza to the new USASOC building LTG Scott clearly validates

the old saying; "actions speak louder than words."

     "Bronze Bruce"used to be a symbol celebrating the professionalism,

idealism and heroism to those SPECIAL FORCES soldiers who died fighting the

ideological source of the New World Order, the egalitarian evil of communism.

He now sits in the breezeway of a building infested with internationalists

Quislings and politically-correct Milquetoasts who consider Civil Affairs and

Psychological Operations social workers, Ranger infantry, and aviation prima

donnas the equal Special Forces soldiers and their OSS progenitors.

     I remember standing before the recently erected "Bronze Bruce" following

my graduation form the "Q-course" in 197X silently reaffirming my oath to

defend the constitution and pledging myself to be the equal or better of every

fallen hero therein represented. I never passed "Bronze Bruce" from that day

froward with out pausing to read the names inscribed on the placards around

his base.

     Next time you pass the now empty JFK Plaza pause to take a look at what

was once a place of quiet honor and silent pride but is now a shrieking

testimony to the actions of second-handers who pretend among themselves they

lead us, yet who know in their hearts we despise them.

                                                       The Editor

==============================================================================

                           In The Next Issue:



*Joint Task Force-Six Subversion of Posse Comitatus



*Why NAFTA and GATT are Anti-Capitalism



*RESISTANCE: Clandestine Communications



                                 -plus-

                           Our Usual Features

        Ask for the Spring Issue in April; somebody will have it.

==============================================================================

                   FIELD REPORT: The Truth About Haiti

                           by Richard Crossman



                    Port-au-Prince, 15 December, 1994



     Sunday, 18 September, 1994, as Special Forces soldiers of Task Force

Raleigh (3rd SFGA) at the Intermediate Support Base in Guantanamo Cuba were

making their final equipment checks, charging their magazines and cross-

loading their excess team gear and ammunition among team members, GEN Wayne

Downing, CinC United States Special Operations Command, wandered through tent

city offering words of inspiration. His most prophetic statement was: "Special

Forces is going to make history in Haiti."

     True. On 19 September, 1994, for the first time in history, at the

behest of the racists of the Congressional Black Caucus, their communist

TransAfrica allies, and in the name of the United Nations, the executive

branch of the United States government willingly and knowingly, in violation

of the war making powers delegated to Congress by the Constitution, deployed

the United States Army to Haiti for the expressed purpose of installing a

COMMUNIST government and ensuring its success by force of arms.

     The Intelligence Estimates issued with pre-invasion Operations Plans and

the Intelligence Annexes issued with Operations Orders to units planning for

the 18 September, 1994, invasion were worse than useless. Summary descriptions

of various political factions were largely based on refugee debriefs, official

State Department political analyses and United Nations reports of alleged

"human rights" abuse rather than fact.

     An indicator of just how false the pre-occupation press coverage and

finished political intelligence had occurred in mid-August. United States

Ambassador to Haiti, William Swing invited expatriate Americans living in

Haiti to the embassy for a meeting to discuss their views on the impending

United States invasion to restore Aristide. Mr. Terry Anderson, an Independent

Baptist missionary who has lived in Haiti for over 10 years and who was

present

at Swing's meeting told one of our observers that the meeting was a farce.

     "Everybody present," recounted Anderson, "emphatically opposed both the

invasion and bringing back Aristide."  "For over an hour," he continued, "we

told him about Aristide's past, his lunatic ravings, his communist

connections, and the necklacing on his political opponents, on his orders, by

his followers. We told him that since the coup no American had been

threatened, but when Aristide was president it wasn't safe to walk the streets

at night. We told him of Aristide's hatred of the United States and even

showed him transcripts of his speeches where he calls the United States a

'demon' nation. Swing never responded to anything we tried to tell him. He

ended the meeting without comment."

     With rare exceptions whatever was printed, televised or broadcast about

conditions in Haiti prior to the occupation was a deliberate lie. The

hysterical anti-Cedras propaganda campaign waged by the American media

throughout the spring and summer of 1994 (and mirrored in intelligence

documentation issued to units deploying to Haiti) was carefully crafted to

portray the followers of Aristide's Lavalas movement as defenseless puppy-

huggers desperately trying to bring "democracy" to Haiti while enduring brutal

"right-wing" terror and oppression at the hands of the Forces Armee d'Haiti

(FAd'H), their Attaches, and the Front for the Advancement of the Haitian

People (FRAPH). The truth is exactly the opposite.

     In order to define what the Lavalas movement is, and who belongs to it,

it is helpful to place it in context with American society.

     If every street gang, vagrant, opportunistic criminal, welfare moocher,

labor union agitator and unemployed layabout, homosexual, drug addict, ethnic

tribalist, and other assorted street garbage formed a loose political

coalition; whose cadre consisted of high school and college "students" putting

into practice the collectivist lessons of their teachers and professors; the

leader of this organization was an insane TV evangelist; and this "movement"

was lent legitimacy by some foreign government and received sympathetic

coverage from the media; this, then, would define Aristide's Lavalas movement.

     These are "the people" upon whom the media, the Clinton administration

and communist special interest groups in the United States adore and lavish so

much attention on. Simply put, the Lavalas are the lazy, inept, stupid,

corrupt, opportunistic and incompetent of Haitian society. Predictably, their

understanding of democracy is nearly perfect: the biggest mob rules, therefore

the biggest mob makes the rules and grabs the loot.

     Whenever communists comprehend that their evil has been recognized for

what it is they simply change their lexicon. What was once called state

planning is now called "managed competition." What was once called world peace

is now called the New World Order, In like manner, what was called communism

is now called "democracy."



     The vilification of General Cedras and his political supporters is

descriptive of the ultimate goal of the United Nations directed occupation of

Haiti: destruction of the Haitian middle class in order to bring Haiti into

the collectivist "world community."

     the Front for the Advancement and Progress of Haiti (FRAPH) has been

universally reviled by the American media and the communist propaganda machine

as a paramilitary extremist organization. Because news reports leading up to

the occupation focused almost entirely on its alleged campaign of terror waged

against "the people" it is illustrative to define what FRAPH was and who made

up its membership.

     Although FRAPH was officially established as a political party in 1993,

it actually dated back to the mid 1980's. It was originally founded as an

anti-communist resistance movement coincident with the rise of the communist

"Little Church" liberation theology movement run by Aristide.

      The FRAPH leadership was largely ex-military. FRAPH membership was a

representative cross section of the Haitian middle class, consisting mainly of

property owners businessmen, farmers, tradesmen, craftsmen, and both blue and

white collar workers. The equivalent of FRAPH, in an American context, would

be the VFW and the American Legion forming a political party. The hated

Attaches were in fact nothing more than a community watch organization that

augmented FAd'H Casernes and Advanced Posts. In other words, FRAPH represented

the interests of those Haitians who were reasonably competent and intelligent

and who were, by Haitian standards, successful. Their unforgivable crime was

defending their success and livelihoods against the envious.

     Simply put, the FAd'H, FRAPH and Attaches represented the competent,

able and successful of Haitian society and they did hesitate to defend their

interests against the moochers, looters and parasites coalesced as the Lavalas

movement. Then the United States Army under the command of the United Nations

arrived and threw them to the jackals.



     In early October Special Forces ODAs fanned out to establish United

States presence in the outlying towns. They were greeted by hysterical mobs

jogging through the street singing in unison in typical African fashion. The

words to the most popular song were self explanatory to any with the ears to

listen; "When Titid (Aristide) gets back you're going to pay, we'll have our

revenge."

     The reason for the hysteria was quite simple. The Lavalas believed that

the Americans had arrived to allow them to do whatever they wanted; loot

businesses, expropriate and redistribute property, and murder the FAd'H, FRAPH

and Attaches. It was a belief grounded in their observation of American

actions.

     The communist and United Nations propaganda about Haiti defined the

operational parameters for Special Forces units occupying small towns and

cities in the hinterland.

     The first order of business was to disarm the FAd'H. Since this action

normally occurred in direct sight of a shrieking mob of "the people" this

would

incite them into a murderous frenzy and more often then not the disarmed

Haitian soldiers had to be physically protected from "people's justice." In

consequence many Haitian soldiers deserted at the first convenient opportunity

in justifiable fear of their lives, and those who remained at their casernes

played a quiet game of of passive resistance and feigned incompetence.

     The second order of business was to gain de facto control over the

political and judicial system. This was generally accomplished by holding a

"town meeting" where officials of the disposed government were seated before

"the people." Although ostensibly chaired by the detachment commander this

"town meeting" actually run by Lavalas gangsters who put forth an agenda fed

to them by priests and catholic lay workers of the "Little Church" movement.

Through threats and intimidation backed up by the presence of U.S. soldiers

the existing political and judicial structure was effectively demolished.

Without exception the theme of these meetings revolved around the "people's

demands" that the FAd'H, FRAPH and the Attaches be disarmed.

     the third order of business was the disarming of the Haitian middle

class. (Here, context is extremely important. Under Haitian law prior to the

occupation it was legal to virtually any weapon one desired short of crew

served served weapons so long as one kept it in one's home for personal

protection. This means, possession of a select fire Galil, or an Uzi. was

legal was legal so long as one had the necessary permit issued by the FAd'H.

In other words, if you could afford it you could own it. Attaches and police

auxiliaries were frequently issued (that means they signed for) M-1 rifles and

CS grenades in connection with their official duties. These weapons were kept

in their homes.)

     Weapons confiscation proceeded on the basis of lists of "enemies of the

people" (known or suspected FRAPH members, Attaches, businessmen and property

owners) supplied to the detachment by Lavalas "delegates," priests, State

Department USAID workers and, in more than one instance, American journalists.

Additional lists were supplied by Christian Peacemaking Teams, an organization

with close ties to the Communist Party United States of America (CPUSA) and

the Socialist Workers Party (SWP), and whom Special forces detachments were

ordered by Joint Special Operations Task Force (which took its orders from the

United Nations) to render every assistance and support.

     Warrantless searches of residences for weapons "caches" were generally

based on rumor and anonymous "tips." With rare exceptions these searches

turned up nothing. Subsequent to these searches the targeted residences would

be looted by "the people." The weapons buy-back program came to be referred to

as the "Snitch-off-a-Relative Program." Teen-age hoodlums would either rob the

houses of their relatives and sell the weapons to the Americans, or lead

detachment members to relative's houses, break into the house in their

presence, and sell the weapons on the spot.



     Current United Nations plans call for a continued presence of Special

Forces in Haiti for at least two years. 3rd Special Forces Group (Airborne)

will maintain a continuous presence in Haiti of one augmented Forward

Operations Base (FOB(+)). Both 1st SFGA and 5th SFGA will have an Advanced

Operations Base (AOB(+)) OPCON to 3rd SFG's FOB(+), alternating six month

rotations. In addition, both the 19th SFGA and 20th SFGA (National Guard) will

be federalized in early January, 1995; each providing an AOB(+) OPCON to 3rd

SFG's FOB(+) in Haiti.

     By the time the United Nations declares Haiti "a stable and secure

environment for democracy" a majority of United States Army Special Forces

soldiers will have had extensive training and experience in internal security

operations and maintaining "domestic order."

==============================================================================

                                [Sidebar]

                   Special Forces Underground in Haiti



     The following is an synthesis of several reports forwarded by our

     members currently deployed to Haiti.



     Immediately upon arrival in an operational area we met with senior non-

commissioned officers of the FAd'H and arranged a meeting with senior

representatives of FAd'H, Attaches and FRAPH. This was not as easy as it

sounds given the treatment these groups had received in Port-au-Prince and Cap

Haitien in late September. It called for a very blunt cold-pitch describing

our hatred of communism and our official mission. Dicey' but when we explained

how we could help them they almost always agreed.

     The first thing we did was identify the most active anti-communists in

the Attaches and FRAPH and told them to take long vacations and go visit

relatives on the other side of the island.

     Second, we informed them about the plans and timetables for weapons

confiscation and told them how to disappear their functional firearms while

keeping broken and otherwise useless available to sell during the weapons buy-

back program.

     Third, we identified the Lavalas leadership, their friends and

associates, and collected from the FAd'H any information they had on them

including criminal records.

     Fourth, we told FRAPH members to stay out of politics, mind their jobs

and businesses and let the communists expose their true agendas. This was

risky, but in the towns where this plan was implemented _every_ violent crime

involving politics was directly attributable to the Lavalas.

     Fifth, we waged a clandestine offensive against the Lavalas (details

omitted; ed) which in our operational areas managed to drive at least the

leadership back underground.

     Finally, we have established an escape line to help FAd'H, ex-Attaches

and ex-FRAPH members under threat of arrest from the communists reach relative

safety in the Dominican Republic.

==============================================================================



                             CORRESPONDENCE

                             --------------

                                    

     I read with great interest the philosophical position of The RESISTER.

While I find most of your positions compatible with my own, I get the sense

that you would not tolerate any disagreement from within your "ranks,"

even if such disagreement revolved around even one solitary position outlined

in your publication's philosophical statement.

     I am a patriotic American who has never served in the military. I was

too young for Viet Nam, and chose not to volunteer after the draft was

discontinued. However I would never have refused to serve if called upon by my

country.

     Returning to the synopsis of your philosophy, which recently appeared in

an issue of G. Gordon Liddy's Liddy Letter, which I subscribe to, I'd like to

ask you a few questions. I hope you'll be kind enough to respond to them.

     Unless I misunderstand your statement, how is it you can favor strict

constitutionalism while opposing democracy? Are you referring to "pure

democracy," the democratic process or the right of the people, provided for

the Constitution, to freely elect their representatives?

     Please explain what you mean when you say you oppose internationalism.

Pardon my ignorance if your intended meaning should be obvious to me.

     How is it that you oppose altruism, something which from a philosophical

standpoint cannot exist? If there is any motive for carrying out any good or

charitable action, one cannot claim to be altruistic; people do good or

"right" things because it makes them feel or look good. Even the sacrifice of

Christ could not be considered altruistic. That does not negate to value of

His profoundly beneficent act of self-sacrifice.

     What are "pull politics?"

     You cite your position as being in favor of isolationism. Under what

circumstances would it be in the interest of the United States or the Special

Forces Underground to take any kind of military action, particularly as

regards the issue of defending against "...all enemies, foreign and domestic?"

And please define your view of which person(s), Group(s) or government(s)

would be considered by you to be our enemies.

     Why do you stand in opposition to statism?

     Under what circumstances would the Special Forces Underground attempt an

overthrow of a _democratically_ elected _American_ government, presuming you

have the manpower and weaponry for undertaking such an operation?



                                             Frank D. Williams

                                               Tinley Park, IL



     We selected your letter to represent those that have asked essentially

the same questions. See: OPEN LETTER, and the editorial; DEMOCRACY: THE

POLITICS OF TYRANNY.



                                             EDITOR





     As soldiers of this great republic we have all taken an oath to defend

the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The reason for

this oath is so the military of this republic will be dedicated only to the

very thing that created, embodies and is the soul of this republic; the

Constitution. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and any law that

does not adhere to it is null and void upon enactment.

     At this time in our history we have elected representatives that are

attacking what we have sworn to defend. These representatives are ignoring the

very document that has allowed them to serve. They are creating laws that they

feel are correct and needful regardless of what the people want or ask for.

They do this with total disregard for the supreme law that they have sworn to

uphold and defend. The only way they can do this is to disregard the

Constitution and enact laws that give them power and control over the true

government of this republic; its citizens. Their disregard for the

Constitution shows them to be criminals and traitors who knowingly break their

oath to the supreme law of the land and to the people who elected them.

     If our politicians have committed treason would it also be treason if

soldiers adhered to their oath and defended the Constitution against them?

     It is time for every free citizen who knows and recognizes the true law

and government of this great republic to stand up and retake the reins of

power and put our nation back on a constitutional path.



                                   Jefe Sonrisa

                                   USAJFKSWCS







     I agree that we have arrived at a point in out history in which the

slide into tyranny has taken place. It is up to the patriots to rectify this

situation. Hopefully, there is still time to politically change the

government. If not, we must resist with the long term objective of victory.

     I read your FIELD REPORT on the Second Amendment Rally. I agree with the

majority of the article. However, there are a couple of corrections that need

to be made. There was media coverage, but apparently your observers had left.

I saw coverage on local TV in Washington, DC or a nearby Virginia station.

Several friends also saw a short excerpt from the rally on our local TV.

Apparently the media covered segments when G. Gordon Liddy spoke? I thought

the crowd was greater than 2,000. but your estimate could be correct. I admit

to being partisan and a little carried away.

     I hope you are real! If the next couple of years are as bad for gun

owners as 1993 and 1994 we will need each other. The socialists that control

the halls of government have a plan that does not include a majority of

Americans. I guess we will have to accept your word that when the time comes

you will find us. Rest assured that I intend to die standing with other

patriots and not as a "politically correct" stooge of the New World Order.



                                        "Sam"

                                   Mississippi



     Out observers arrived about 1100, scouted the ground, did a quick

     headcount, identified the goons (remember all those clean-cut

     young men circling the crowd on their mountain bicycles?) then

     went to verify the evasion route established by the advanced

     party. They returned about 1430 and stayed pretty much away from

     the main crowd, which is probably why they missed the media. We

     stand corrected.



                                   Associate Editor





     The Republican Party now controls both the House and the Senate, not

only at the Federal level but in several states as well. Now we are secure and

rights safeguarded, right? Think again.

     The battle to return to a system that recognizes our individual rights

as set forth in the Constitution and Bill of Rights  is far from over. Some of

the very Republicans we helped elect can be certain to turn a blind eye on

their responsibilities as representatives if given the opportunity. Consider a

recent past president, George Bush. He instrumental in the passage of the

first "assault rifle" ban which did nothing except drive up the prices of the

banned weapons. He vehemently stated "Watch my Lips: no new taxes!" He lied.

And he officially ushered in the New World Order.

     Bi-partisan politics are necessary as long as they befit the whole of

the people, not special interests. Entitlement programs help only special

interests while increasing the tax burden on the remainder. Anti-gun

legislation benefits only the criminal while hindering laws abiding citizens

desiring sport, recreation or defense of self and family. Deploying military

forces to hell holes like Haiti in order to reinstate and support an openly

communist regime serves only to shift the focus from important domestic

concerns to the nebulous realm of foreign policy. Each of the above mentioned

examples illustrates an area where constituents did not favor the action but

both Republican and Democrat politicians acted together to further special

interest groups or their own personal agendas.

     As the next year progresses remain constantly vigilant. Don't listen to

their words, observe their deeds. If your elected representatives stray from

the path you have set for them make them aware of their error. Write a letter

and be specific as to what you expect. If that fails to put them on notice and

vote them out at the first opportunity. 

     Only when politicians are fully cognizant that they are our servants,

not facilitators for special interests or self-serving power brokers, can we

expect real progress in returning to the framework our forefathers intended.



                                        "Lexington"

                                        USAJFKSWCS





     I just heard about your newsletter on the Tom Valentine show (short

wave). My son is in the Army in Macedonia under U.N. command in Operation ABLE

SENTRY II. I have been sending him the _Free_American_ newspaper, published

here in Albuquerque, and I sent him _Operation_Vampire_Killer_2000_.

     He wrote back and is very confused. Those kids in Macedonia think they

are on a mission from God. Their motto is; "Blessed are the Peacekeepers for

they are on a mission from God." (My son) says: "I feel weird. I'm working for

the U.N., the cause you and many (others) are regretting. I have no idea how

bad it will be by the time I get out of this army. Where will I have been?

Will I have to shoot somebody? An American? On _my_ side or _your_ side?"

Would it be wise to send him a newsletter? I think so. He needs to know that

he use his mind to be an independent thinker.

     I haven't seen your newsletter yet, but I heard enough about it to thank

you for having courage to risk your careers and lives by taking a stand. 

     God bless you all and your efforts. I pray He will protect you and give

you wisdom. Thank you very much.



                                   Beverly Metcalf

                                   Albuquerque, NM



P.S. I can't tell you how angry I am at what they are doing to the minds of

our young men. It is inconceivable to me that my son would placed in the

position of considering his own countrymen as enemies. The evilness of this

New World Order is incredible.



     We are sending your son a copy per your request. We suggest you

     send your son a copy of the Constitution with a note reminding him

     that he took an oath to defend _this_ document, and that

     everything the United Nations stands for is anathema to it.



                                   Associate Editor





     It was with considerable bemusement that I read my first copy of The

RESISTER. Ten years of the Marines, followed by ten years in the practice of

law, have left me a little confused and totally convinced that the most

dangerous criminals in the United States today are those that practice their

tradecraft under the authority and protection of the United States government.

Imagine my surprise to learn that at least a portion of the enemies of liberty

are truly awake and aware of the dichotomy among their leaders!

     At least three times in my tour as a Marine I swore on my sacred honor

to defend the constitution from all enemies, foreign and _domestic_. Is he not

an enemy of the Constitution who orders me to violate its guaranty of

liberties? The Second Amendment clearly contemplates assault weapons, even

though such things were unknown to the founding fathers. The preface of the

Second Amendment speaks of a well-regulated militia: CITIZEN SOLDIERS; to me

it is patently obvious that citizen soldiers should be armed with military

style weapons. We have already passed laws that breach the constitutiion and

the judiciary is allowing it in the name of law and order. Waco simply shows

that this country does not need and cannot tolerate BATF, or for that matter

any of the so-called specialty enforcement branches (BNDD, DEA, INS Customs

Patrol, etc.).

     Since this is political speech of the first order, and does not incite

riot, or even insurrection except to encourage you all to vote, I have no

qualms about signing my name and address. I feel even more strongly about the

First Amendment that I do about the Second. I recognize that your leaders are

not as enlightened as I am however, and (I) respect your decision to maintain

cover. After all, a pseudonym was good enough for Alexander Hamilton, James

Madison, and John Jay when they published THE FEDERALIST PAPERS using the name

"Publius."

                                   Douglas M. Johnson, esq. 

                                            Miami, FL



     On November 10, 1994, while most naive conservatives were celebrating

the victory of the 'quasi-socialists" over the socialists (I always call them

"blue-light special" socialists; they want full socialism, just twenty years

later and at half the price), I found my cause to celebrate. That is the day I

received a copy of The RESISTER. Your paper was really on target.

     We know our government is no longer constitutionally legitimate. It has

not been since it went from being a republic to a democracy by force in 1865.

I have doubts that any election can change that. A civil war created it, it

will probably take the same to remedy it.

     Over the past year, as I have awakened to this reality, I have heard

of large numbers of others reaching the same conclusion. Unfortunately, they

were all in the civilian sector. Ordinary people, like myself, who are willing

to fight for their country but have little or no military training. First and

foremost in mind has been the question of the U.S. military. Would they

blindly follow the orders of a tyrannical government, or would they stand with

the patriots and the Constitution?

     The RESISTER answered that question. That is why I found it so

encouraging. When the Day comes that we have to defend our unalienable rights

the military forces loyal to the Constitution will be the core around which

the unorganized militia can rally. The two combined "In the Holy cause of

Liberty" (Patrick Henry) will, by the grace of God, be unstoppable.



                                        Publius II

                                       Tyler, TX





     Great going! We heard from a Marine on our radio program this evening

(15 September). He told us of the good work you are doing to educate our

military through your publication the RESISTER. We are excited to hear about

your work! 

     I am enclosing a complimentary copy of our latest issue of

_Aid_&_Abet_Police_Newsletter_ and copies of our fliers which will give you an

idea of what we are trying to do in the police community. We are also to get

information to military personnel, but the primary thrust of our work is the

police officer...

     Again, thank you for your work, and we look forward to hearing from you.

God bless you!



                                          Jean H.

                                        _for_ Jack McLamb

                                             Phoenix, AZ



     We have read the copy you sent us and copies your subscribers and

     radio listeners have provided us. We are in agreement. We are

     publishing your address to make our military readers aware of your

     existence and your goals.



                                   The Editor



     AID & ABET Police Newsletter

     PO Box 8787

     Phoenix, AZ 85006



     (Cost: $20.00 per annum; cash or money orders only)



==============================================================================

                               RESISTANCE

                               ----------

                   Principles of Clandestine Behavior

                                  -by-

                             Michael Bateman

                                    

     Individual underground and resistance operatives, expected to cope with

sophisticated law enforcement practices or security organizations are often as

a singular disadvantage in their efforts to understand systematized techniques

and practices of clandestine behavior. The varieties of this behavior, known

collectively as "tradecraft," are a traditional province of secret

intelligence and special operations; fields reluctant to shed light on

operational methods and procedures. There is a dearth of reliable material in

the literature of underground and resistance intelligence and unless the

operative has an appropriate background, attempts to obtain useful extracts

from the broader open literature will prove difficult indeed.

     The purpose of this article is to provide the reader with an

introduction to elements of tradecraft important to evade enforcement

operations or security investigations by underground and resistance operators.

we have enclosed disiplines set a pattern of practitioners and this pattern is

liable to prediction or analysis. We disagree with this theory when it is

applied to clandestine behavior. The logic of tradecraft is the logic of fear.

Fear is an individual matter.

     The _Oxford_English_Dictionary_ defines tradecraft with eloquent

simplicity as, "skill or art in connextion with a trade or calling." The trade

or calling with which we are immediately concerned is that of the underground

operative. Definition  therefore becomes a practical matter of descibing

components expressed in the training literature of intelligence agencies and

federal paramilitary organizations. Allowing for purely stylistic variation,

or variation born of contextural circumstance, the study of tradecraft is

regarded as inclusive of six broad elements:

   1. AGENT HANDLING. What we refer to as agent handling includes target

group analysis; spotting; assessment; development; recruitment; operational

managment and termination.

   2. PROTECTION. Protection includes methods of establishing and

maintaining cover; countersurveillance; use of safe-houses, and technical

skills relating to disguise, document work and forgery.

   3. COLLECTION. Collection methods are primarily technical in nature and

include photography; audio surveilence; physical surveilence; suffeptitious

methods of entry; flaps and seals work; drawing and sketching, and

elicitation.

   4. COMMUNICATION. Communication studies include the use of drops and letter

boxes; clandestine meetings; secret writing; concealment devices; radios;

codes and ciphers, and numerous other forms.     

   5.INDIVIDUAL SKILLS. Individual skills include observation and memory;

evasion and escape; close combat; interviewing; elicitation, and report

writing, among others.

   6. SPECIALTY SKILLS. Specialty skills include methods of infiltration

(ingress and egress), expertise with certain weapons and explosives, and

technical specialties relating to any of the categories noted above.



     Our delimitation of each category is idiosyncratic. We do, however,

present an accurate portrait of the interdisciplines of tradecraft as

tradecraft is best regarded by underground operatives.

     A major task of the opposition intelligence specialist is developing

information concerning underground activity conducted in secrecy. To the

extent the activity in question is indeed secret, and presupposing secrecy's

role is to actively deny the opportunity for information collection, then the

underground operative must be conversant with the pure practices of

counterintelligence.

     A useful definition of counterintelligence for underground purposes is:

intelligence activity, with its resultant product, intended to detect,

counteract, and prevent opposition collection encompassing security measures

designed to:



1. Conceal the identify or origin of the participants

2. Conceal the activity during its incipient, or planning stage;

3. Conceal the support apparatus exploited by the participants;

4. Conceal the activity or activities during commission;

5. Protect the participants during withdrawal.



     Please note that our definition of counterintelligence relates to the

study of secrecy as an instrument of concealment. Concealment is the very aim

of secrecy. The two are intermeshed but not identical. Concealment apart from

being the aim of secrecy is a form of secrecy, while secrecy is a variable of

concealment. To study secrecy one therefore begins with the study of

concealment.

     The study of concealment begins with categorical notice of how

concealment is to be achieved. concealment is a three-fold process of

manipulation involving 1) the object of concealment, 2) the observation

process, inclusive of the observer, and 3) the environment. The manipulation

process itself involves a philosophical ground consisting of 1) an assumption

of knowledge, 2) a known category of perception, and 3) a time frame into

which are injected variables of disguise, deception, and secrecy. Each

variable serves an element of the process in consort with each other variable.

Disguise manipulates the object, deception manipulates the observation

process, and secrecy manipulates the environment.

     Proceeding forth from the above we reach the modalities of concealment.

These are the techniques employed to fit each variable to the corpus of

knowledge and category of perception. With references to disguise, for

example, we find cosmetic changes in appearance and substantive changes in

form. With reference to deception we find the technique of imbedding, which

redirects attention, and dispersal, which expands attention.

     By way of illustration we are reminded of an old story concerning a

famous smuggler who, for sake of narration, we shall call Pierre. One day

Pierre appears at the frontier pushing a red bicycle on which he balances a

basket filled with straw. The inspectors descend in force and for their

trouble produce a single brick from the bottom of the basket. Breaking the

brick, they are disappointed to find it quite genuine.

     Weeks pass and the scene repeats itself. Specialists are called in to no

avail and always with the same result. The inspectors know Pierre must be

smuggling something but they do now know what. Curiosity changes to anguish

when informants report Pierre has crossed the border for good and is living

comfortably on the other side. In desperation, the Chief Inspector decides to

pay the smuggler a call.

     "I have, as you know, no power here," he says, "and as it seems you now

reside here permanently we shall not meet again. I will ask you, no... I will

beg you as one man to another to please set my mind to rest. I know you were

smuggling something but I do not know what it was."



     Pierre thinks for a moment and then he answers: "Bicycles, your honor,

and we did it together."

     "Bicycles! We together? But how?" cries the Chief.

     "I painted them red," replies Pierre. "You hid them among the bricks."

     In the example given, the object or aim of concealment is to prevent

detection of criminal activity, id est, smuggling. Pierre's fame as a smuggler

and the reaction of the inspectors is the assumed corpus of knowledge. Visual

search of objects by inspectors is the category of perception. The element of

disguise is red paint, the element of deception a brick, and the time frame is

expanded to create the effect of dispersal. Note how all these elements work

together in secrecy; so closely that an error in one can contaminate all.

     To expand the shades of meaning for secrecy and concealment the

technical terms "clandestine" and "covert" evolved. Clandestine refers to

activity hidden but not disguised; covert to activity disguised but not

hidden. This distinction is important for us to grasp. Clandestine activity is

secret because it is concealed. Covert activity is concealed because it is

secret. Both are secret, both exist in a continuum of concealment and at the

point where one form passes into that of another the same principle of

tradecraft apply.

     In the traditional sense distinctions between covert and clandestine are

deemed necessary to permit denials; a matter of statecraft, not tradecraft.

The opposition finds these distinctions significant for other reasons.

Sophisticated underground activity from inception through the planning stage

is clandestine in character. Upon commission of the activity and thereafter it

is covert.

     Acknowledgment of the dual character of conspiracy brings us to the dual

character of counterintelligence. Counterintelligence is itself clandestine

activity expressed 1) defensively, or 2) offensively. The defensive aspect is

often referred to as the security function. The security function involves

physical and investigative measures designed to safeguard information,

installations, personnel and operations. The offensive aspect refers to

application of active countermeasures; counterespionage, countersabotage, or

counterreconnaissance as necessity or fashion may will.

     Offensively expressed counterintelligence activity is composed of two

elements; the control element (sometimes called "preventive"

counterintelligence), and operational element (sometimes called "defensive"

counterintelligence).

     Control measures are regulatory in character. Indeed, all federal, state

and local government regulatory agencies are "feeder services" of the

opposition's counterintelligence agency. Control measures involve the exercise

of influence in five areas:



1. CONTROL OF IDENTITY. The exploitation of identification systems such as

vital statistic certificates, driving and other licenses.



2. CONTROL OF MOVEMENT. Limitation or other regulation of internal and

external travel.



3. CONTROL OF ACTION. Use of regulations prohibiting certain activities such

as public meetings or possession of firearms.



4. CONTROL OF COMMUNICATION. Regulation or exploitation of broadcast

communications and telecommunications, whether public or private.



5. CONTROL OF PUBLICATIONS. Censorship, tacit or expressed, of newspapers or

private publishing.



Operational measures are uniformly based on the extensive use of informant

services. Operational measures are as follows.



1. SURVEILLANCE. Surveillance includes the selective use of static observation

posts located in the area of targets of continuing counterintelligence

interest. Examples are organization headquarters, airline terminals, bus

stations, hotels, and the homes of suspects. Also included is mobile

surveillance of counterintelligence targets and sub-targets.



2. INTERCEPTION. The techniques of interception are applied against

communications. Included are postal monitors, telephonic and telegraphic

monitors, detection and monitoring of clandestine transmitters and the direct

interdiction of secured information systems, carriers, or repositories.



3. PROVOCATION. Provocation involves offers of service or supply, the use of

false information, and incitement.



4. PENETRATION. Penetration of groups or conspiracies may be accomplished by

direct involvement, indirect enlistment, or the exploitation of double agents.



5. INTERROGATION. Interrogation is used against targets and sub-targets in

custody, and persons named in previous interrogations.



6. SEARCHES. Searches are conducted against persons, places, or conveyances.

Searches run the gamut from extensive cordon operations to snap searches.



     Brief notice must be made of the so-called human factors approach to

counterintelligence operations. Human factors operations involve the

production of estimative intelligence intended to portray the psychological

profile of a given counterintelligence target. Examples of techniques employed

are indirect personality assessment; analysis of written materials by means of

word count and frequency of use; indirect monitoring of certain biological

functions; observance of historical behavioral trends, and (in desperation)

mystical methods such as handwriting analysis and astrological charting.

Please note that what we here describe is not uniquely counterintelligence

methodology as assumes much of the character of the basic analytical function.

     Having developed a common ground of terminology and having offered

delimitation to the broad expanse of subterfuge and detection, we now propose

to justify the study of tradecraft as an end in itself. Our thesis is

fortunately rather simple and expressed as follows.

     Opposition counterintelligence officers engaged in the application of

control and operational measures will be faced with the task of observing and

reporting clandestine and covert activity. As discussed, such activity

bespeaks greater or lesser degrees of secrecy and concealment designed to foil

observation. The very processes of secrecy and concealment therefore become a

valid and in many cases the only target for observation. Understanding the

character of these processes (id est, understanding tradecraft) will sensitize

the counterintelligence officer to the manner in which observation is being

manipulated, and in consort with other methodology permit him to pierce the

veil of secrecy, uncovering that which is concealed.

     We again briefly note the functions of counterintelligence, this time in

terms of the corresponding means of secrecy and concealment used to cloak

underground activity.



1. CONTROL MEASURES. Control measures are foiled by the arrangements of cover,

the application of countersurveillance techniques, and the use of safe-houses.



2. OPERATIONAL MEASURES. In addition to cover, countersurveillance, and

safe-houses, operational measures are foiled by the techniques of clandestine

meetings, drops, and secret writing.



     Each opposition counterintelligence function has to contend with one or

more diametrically opposed protective or communicative elements. This is

because hidden activity is, after all, a normal process of interaction between

human beings; complicated by necessity for secrecy and concealment and the

assumption of active attempts at detection.

     Axiomatic in the counterintelligence profession is the idea that

individuals are most vulnerable when in communication or movement. Why is

this? One answer has to do with the quality of counterintelligence itself.

Another has to do with the exigencies of agency. Human beings, when used as

instruments for the performance of secret activity in lieu or on behalf of

others are known as agents. Extensive use of agents, as we know, is a hallmark

of conspiracy. Agency by its very definition includes measures of direction

and control and an altogether logical and safely assumed process of dialogue.

Detection of such communication is in many cases de facto evidence of

underground activity. The foiled equipment buy or the foiled passage of

documents are two ready examples.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                     Agents Provocateur and Informants



     The FBI is mounting a quiet but concerted effort in congress to revive

their domestic intelligence operations. Under current congressional over sight

mandates on domestic intelligence the FBI is limited to investigating only

suspected criminal acts by individuals who belong to "subversive

organizations" but they are not permitted to investigate the organization

itself. Since early 1992 the FBI has been cultivating informers within the

patriotic movement in anticipation of having congressional oversight

restrictions reversed.

     One method to reduce the risk of compromise is to require each member of

your militia or organization to swear or affirm an oath worded as follows:



"I (state name) have never been, am not now, do not contemplate nor intend to

be in the future, a local, state, federal or international law enforcement

official, nor have I ever been, am not now, nor contemplate or intend to be in

the future, an informant for any local, state, federal, or international law

enforcement agency."



     This must be done individually.

     A simpler method is to ask: "Are you a cop?" Then: "Are you an

informant?" These are yes or no questions and require a "yes" or "no"

response.

     We know it is ugly, but it is a necessary security procedure. If they

say "no" any evidence they collect is considered entrapment.

     For now, at least.

==============================================================================



 +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

 |                 MANUALS FOR THE UNORGANIZED MILITIA                       |

 |                                                                           |

 |    In these times of federal conspiracy to abrogate the Constitution,     |

 |    patriots must possess the knowledge of HOW to resist tyranny. The      |

 |    RESISTER is preparing 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.                                  |

 |                                                                           |

 |    Available in February:                                                 |

 |                                                                           |

 |    ..... How to Spot Informants         $10.00                            |

 |    ..... Principles of Tradecraft       $30.00                            |

 |                                                                           |

 |  Terms: Cash or BLANK money order. Send order to:                         |

 |  Militia Publications, c/o The RESISTER, POB 2723, Hagerstown, MD 21741   |

 |                                                                           |

 | [The Forthcoming Issue 4 will have a new PO Box. -- Chuck Prime, Sysop]   |

 +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+



==============================================================================



                                PERINTREP



                       Internal Security Conference



     From 6 through 8 December, 1994, XVIII Airborne Corps hosted a closed

conference and research symposium for Judge Advocate General (JAG) officers at

the USAJFKSWCS New Academic Facility on the missions, roles, and capabilities

of the United States Army and United States Air Force in support of the

suppression of domestic insurrection while under authority of the Federal

Emergency Management Agency.

     The predominant theme of the conference was the legality of using

federal armed forces in an internal security role WITHIN THE UNITED STATES in

concert with federal, state and local law enforcement agencies and the Rules

of Engagement (ROE) such assistance would entail.

     Conspicuously featured at the conference were After Action Reviews (AAR)

and Lessons Learned from 3d Battalion, 7th Special Forces Group and the 7th

Infantry Division during the invasion and occupation of Panama, 10th Special

Forces Group's involvement in Northern Iraq, 5th Special Forces Group and 10th

Mountain Division in Somalia, and Task Force Raleigh (4d SFGA) and 10th

Mountain Division currently in Haiti.

     The historical common denominator of the above named operations is the

disarming of indigenous populations through warrantless search and seizure,

outright confiscation, and buy-back programs. Joint Task Force Six AARs were

also discussed.

     A soldier from 7th SFGA who happened to overhear some of the JAG

officer's discussions in the library asked one of the JAG officers, "Doesn't

Posse Comitatus prevent that?" The Army lawyer responded; "Not any more it

doesn't."





                          Who's REALLY in Charge?



     Personnel Status Reports being faxed back to controlling headquarters

units in the United States from subordinate units deployed to Haiti bear the

United Nations flag to the left of the American flag; in other words, in the

position

of honor.



Also, Special Forces personnel redeploying to the United States on emergency

leave and official business have been delayed up to a week in Port au Prince

because of U.N. mandated theater troop strength levels. Soldiers can only

leave Haiti if they are replaced on a one-for-one basis from their home

station.





                  What Everyone Knows... But Dare Not Say



     The persistent shrieking of anti-gun proponents, their socialist

cheerleaders in the media and statist allies in the federal government would

lead you to believe that the United States is the most violent country in the

industrialized West. It is, but not for the package-deal reasons they state.

What is missing from the anti-gun faction's anti-crime argument for gun

control is context.

     The FBI's Uniform Crime Reports describe the murder rate in the United

States as 9.3 per 100,000 persons. England, France, Germany and Italy have

murder rates of 7.4, 4.6, 4.2 and 6.0 per 100,000 persons respectively.

European countries are almost exclusively white.

     In CONTEXT white Americans have a murder rate of 5.1 per 100,000. This

includes Hispanics whom the FBI classifies as white (and whom, as a separate

category, commit murder at a rate over four times that of whites). The murder

rate for blacks is 43.4 per 100,000. A simple statement of fact.

     Again, in CONTEXT, the overwhelming majority of violent crime is

committed by criminals against other criminals; yet all anti-gun laws impact

principally upon law-abiding middle class citizens regardless of race. Since

FBI UCR estimates that only approximately 1% of this nation's population is

committing violent crime (about 2.5 million parasites), and given the fact

there are about 70 million law abiding gun owners in the United States, your

Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is being sacrificed by special

interest groups and the federal government because only about .03% of those

possessing firearms think, live and act like animals.

                                  ---------

     Both the statists of HCI and their collectivist-chic allies in the

     media claim that 70% of the American people support some form of

     gun control. Our response is; "So what?" Frankly, we would not

     give a damn if 99% of "the people" supported gun control. What

     70%, or even 99.99999% of "the people" want is irrelevant so long

     as a single rational man cognizant of his inalienable natural

     rights of life, liberty, and property exists. When the last

     rational man dies defending (by retaliatory force) his right to

     live, "the people" are more than welcome to wallow in the sewer of

     democracy they now drink from.



                                        The Staff

                                  ---------





                          First Amendment Police



     On 1 December, 1994, a white mail, 35-40, approximately 5'9", 185 lbs,

wearing tan slacks with a white shirt and black tie presented himself at the

place of employment of a young gentleman who unwittingly provides a small

service for this publication. This man announced that he knew about PO Box

1403, Addison, TX 75001, that there was movement on it and what it was for. He

then demanded to know if The RESISTER was printed at the young gentleman's

place of employment (it is not). He presented no credentials.

     The employee (not our young gentleman) this man spoke to described him

as "extremely rude, push and coarse" and truthfully denied any knowledge of

the subject to which he referred.

     Although this obnoxious man has not repeated his unwelcome visit, our

observer in the area reports that intermittent surveillance has been placed on

both the post office in which our box resides and the young gentleman's place

of employment. The unwitting young gentleman was contacted by one of our

operatives, debriefed and retired without prejudice.

     A damage control assessment concludes that nothing the young gentleman

did for or speculates about The RESISTER will add to the opposition's corpus

of knowledge about the Special Forces Underground.



Please direct future correspondence to: PO Box 2723, Hagerstown, MD 21741.





                                BBS Police



     Between 2 and 4 December, 1994, fourteen BBSs in Pensacola, Florida,

were raided by the FBI and local police. Systems Operators (SYSOP) were

arrested, their property ransacked and left in shambles, their families

terrorized, and their computers, software and office equipment was

confiscated.

     One SYSOP, a paraplegic, was removed from his wheelchair by Reno's

finest, placed in a chair on his front lawn, and was forced to stay there for

two hours in 43 degree weather while his apartment was tossed and his property

was confiscated. Another SYSOP, Donnie Lee, was held at gunpoint during the

confiscation and was denied the opportunity to call his lawyer.

     The raids were carried out under a press black-out, although at least

one SYSOP (who was not being raided) managed to contact out-of-town press, who

arrived as the raids were ending. Coverage, however, was largely suppressed.

     Their crime? Posting sexually explicit BBS messages for consenting (and

subscribing) adults.



                                  ---------

     Frankly, we consider pornography a trivia issue. But understand

     this: official suppression of what you may disagree with today

     (for whatever reasons you choose) is only a trial balloon for

     suppressing you tomorrow.



                                        Associate Editor

                                  ---------





                              SGM Conference



     Command Sergeants Major William Rambo, United States Army John F.

Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School (USAJFKSWCS), recently hosted a

conference for USAJFKSWCS sergeants majors concerning discipline in the ranks.

     A central topic of CSM Rambo's discussion at the conference was The

RESISTER: "We need to put a stop to this," Rambo said; "We need to find out

who is putting this out and shut them down."

     According to reports the discussion about The RESISTER fizzled. Many of

the sergeants major at the meeting considered Rambo's desire to see us shut

down an exercise in futility, and largely a reflection of his having gone

through the "Q-Course" in 1981 as an SFC (you either know what that means or

you don't).



                                  ---------

     Give it up Bill: they stopped teaching what you need to know in

     order to shut down The RESISTER long before you got to SF.



                                             The Editor

                                  ---------





                           BATF Goes Mechanized



     In both May and August, 1994, 10th SFGA, working under the auspices of

JTF-Six, conducted Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle (BIFV) training for BATF.

     The training in May focused on both driver and crewman training.

Training conducted in August concentrated on BIFV weapons systems; primarily

25mm Chain Gun gunnery.

     According to one of our 10th SFGA observers the BATF After Action Review

of Waco (as related to him by a BATF agent) concluded that future "take-downs"

of civilians opposing the federal government must include the use of BIFV

equipped federal agents in order to prevent federal casualties.

     The request for this training was forwarded through Operation Alliance

to Joint Task Force-Six by BATF shortly following Waco. Justification by BATF

pointed out that if the initial assault force at Waco had BIFVs the situation

could have been resolved without (BATF) casualties.





                            "Agenda for Peace"



     On January 5, 1995, United Nations Secretary General Boutros Boutros

Ghali, issued a position paper and delivered a proposal to the United Nations

Security Council calling for the establishment of a "strategic reserve for the

Security Council's deployment," which would consist of battalions of soldiers

"specially trained for peacekeeping." These units would be stationed in their

home countries but remain available on permanent call to the United Nations.

     Boutros Ghali insisted that the United Nations retain sole command and

control over these units. He said there must not be "any attempt by

troop-contributing governments to provide guidance, let alone give orders, to

their contingents on operational matters."

     In the closed Security Council meeting, U.S. Ambassador Madeleine K.

Albright said she agreed with the proposal for units commanded solely by the

United Nations and reaffirmed the support of the Clinton Administration for

the proposal.

     Boutros Ghali stated, "This will be an expensive and complicated

arrangement," but stated it was necessary to counteract the "steadily more

serious" decline in offers by member nations of troops and equipment in

response to his appeals.

==============================================================================



                                 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) [Phone number omitted. -- Sysop Chuck Prime #1]



                            - - - - - - - - - -



The rose cannot be picked without some danger.



ZNSNS BBCME JQRST



                            - - - - - - - - - -



The King's Mountain Model Railroad Club will hold its quarterly meeting at the

Greensboro Address. Topic: The joys of timber trestle modeling.



                            - - - - - - - - - -



WANTED: voluntary donations or loans of Ham radio equipment. Pre-1990 ICOM IC-

R7000 and Kenwood R-5000 receivers, or equivalent: ICOM or Kenwood

transceivers, voice, CW and burst capable; simplex and duplex hand-helds.

Write: C&E, c/o The RESISTER, PO Box 2723, Hagerstown, MD, 21741.



                            - - - - - - - - - -



Mr. Westerland of Denver, Colorado, has a long mustache.



==============================================================================



                               BOOK REVIEWS



The Debate on the Constitution: Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches,

Articles, and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification. (Two Volumes.)

Bernard Bailyn, Editor. New York: Literary Classics of the United States,

Inc., 1977. ISBN 0-940450-42-9 (Part One); ISBN 0-940450-64-X (Vol. 2). xxii +

1214 pages (Vol. 1); xxi + 1175 pages (Part Two). $35.00 each.



     When the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia ended its secret

proceedings on September 17, 1787, few Americans were prepared for the

document that emerged. Instead of revising the Articles of Confederation, the

framers had created a fundamentally new national plan that placed over the

states a supreme government wit broad powers. They proposed to submit to

conventions in each state, elected "by the People thereof," for ratification.

     Immediately a fierce storm of argument broke. Federalist supporters,

Anti-federalist opponents, and seekers of a middle ground strove to balance

public order and personal liberty as they praised, condemned, challenged, and

analyzed the new Constitution. The Debate on the Constitution captures, on a

scale unmatched by any previous collection, the extraordinary energy and

eloquence of our first national political campaign.

     Here in chronological order are hundreds of newspaper articles,

pamphlets, speeches, and private letters written or delivered from September

1787 to August 1788. Along with familiar figures like Franklin, Madison,

Patrick Henry, Jefferson, and Washington, scores of less famous citizens are

represented, all speaking clearly and passionately about government. The most

famous writings of the ratification struggle--the Federalist essays of

Hamilton and Madison--are placed in their original context, alongside the

arguments of able Antifederalist antagonists, such as "Brutus" and the

"Federal Farmer".

     Part One of The Debate on the Constitution collects press polemics and

private commentaries from September 1787 to January 1788. That autumn,

powerful arguments were made against the new charter by Virginian George Mason

and the still-unidentified "Federal Farmer," while in New York newspapers, the

Federalist essays initiated a strident defense. Dozens of speeches from the

state ratifying conventions show how the "draft of a plan, nothing but a dead

letter," in Madison's words, had "life and validity... breathed into it by the

voice of the people." Included are the conventions in Pennsylvania, where

James Wilson confronted the democratic skepticism of those representing the

western frontier, and in Massachusetts, where John Hancock and Samuel Adams

forged a compromise that saved the country from years of political convulsion.

     Part two collects press polemics and private commentaries from January

to August 1788, and includes all the amendments proposed by state ratifying

conventions. It also prints dozens of speeches from the South Carolina,

Virginia, New York, and North Carolina conventions. Included are dramatic

confrontations from Virginia, where Patrick Henry pitted his legendary

oratorical skills against the persuasive logic of Madison, and from New York,

where Alexander Hamilton faced the brilliant Antifederalist Melancton Smith.





Citizens in Arms: The Army and Militia in American Society to the War of 1812.

Lawrence Delbert Cress. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press,

1982. xiv + 238 pages. ISBN 0-8078-1508-X. $20.00.



     Citizens in Arms discusses the important ideological role of the

military in the early political life of the nation. It provides a sustained

examination of the relationship between revolutionary doctrine and the

practical considerations of military planning before and after the American

Revolution.

     Lawrence Cress contends that the citizen-soldier occupied a central

place in the ideology of the Revolution. Changing military needs and economic

conditions, however, forced Americans to modify classical republican

perceptions of the citizen's responsibility to bear arms in common defense.

it was not the existence of an army that worried individuals, Cress argues,

but the dangers of centralized control. Americans wanted an effective army,

but realized that the military could destroy freedom as well as preserve it.

The charges that standing armies were a threat to liberty, leveled against

both British and American regular troops between the Seven Years' War and the

War of 1812, do not represent a fundamental antimilitaristic strain in

American culture. Nor can policies and attitudes toward the military be

understood simply as a belief that military power and civil liberty were

incompatible. Analyzed within the atmosphere of ministerial conspiracy, moral

corruption, and political oppression that permeated political thought before

1775, the American response to the British military presence becomes part of a

broader concern about constitutional balance, local political prerogatives,

and the moral quality of American society.

     Hence, the character and composition of the military became a political

controversy of major importance, informing the constitutional debates between

1768 and 1789. Not only was the security of the new nation in dispute, as

Cress shows, but also the nature and viability of republicanism itself.





                            Music Worth Hearing



     We recently had the opportunity to listen to two of Carl R. Klang's

latest releases; Watch out for Martial Law, and Warning: It's Dangerous to be

Right When the Government is Wrong. They are a collection of inspiring,

insightful and informative songs. Presented in folk-protest style they are a

sobering look into our current domestic situation. This issue of The RESISTER

was typeset to the accompaniment of Mr. Klang's music. (See ad [...])







+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

|                      +-------------------------------------+               |

|                      | 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                |

|                 (503) 824-3371                                             |

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

==============================================================================



                       BLIND TRAMSMISSION BROADCAST



UNCLAS

MSGID/BTB.RRM/RSFU ST-

AS/311700Z/DEC//

AMPN/SUBJ: OPEN NET

RESPONSE//

REF/CRRSPND/CIV/

B15SEP95/E15DEC95//

BT

RMKS/01. COYOTE: ACKNOWLEDGED. REQUIRE TOE.

02. BILL O.: 940915 ACKNOWLEDGED. 941114 NEED MORE INFORMATION.

03. TINA W.: ACKNOWLEDGED. ACCEPTED. DETAILS FOLLOW.

04. R. JOSHUA: ACKNOWLEDGED. REF: P5; DISAGREE. THAT IS WHAT THEY WANT. REF:

P6; ENSURED. AMPLIFY.

05. MIKE L.: REF: P2; WE KNOW. DISTRIBUTE. REF:PS; WE DO NOT.

06. J.R.K.: CONTACT US. AMPLIFY.

07. PAUL P., C/O VOL: WILL BE IN TOUCH.

08. ROBERT G.: REF: P1; IF WE WERE A MAJORITY THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR AN

UNDERGROUND PUBLICATION. REF: P3; WE KNOW.

09. NICK H.: 940920 DOCUMENTS IN HAND. 941207 RE: P6; AMPLIFY TECHNOLOGY

REQUIRED.

10. ROBERT W.: REF: P3; YES. FORWARD E-MAIL ADDRESS.

11. THOMAS J. AND NEW MINUTEMEN: REF: P1; WE WILL NOT DUMB-DOWN. REF: P10;

CONTACT US.

12. KYLE C.: OUR SPECIFIC REFERENCE WAS IN REGARD TO YOU ADVERTISING YOUR

CACHE METHODOLOGY. IF YOU WANT TO KEEP SOMETHING SECRET DO NOT TELL ANYONE.

YOUR PATRIOTISM WAS NOT IN QUESTION. CONTACT CIRCA 9505.

13. NATHAN T.: REF: P2; NOT ALL OF US; WE ARE WORKING ON IT. REF:P3; WE WILL

BE IN TOUCH.

14. CHARLES J.: COME IN FROM THE COLD. CONTACT BY LAND ROUTE.

15. DAVID H.: REF:P6; THAT IS WHAT WE ARE ALL ABOUT. SUPPLY REFERENCES.

CONTACT BY LAND ROUTE.

16. JOSEPH P.: 940829 ACKNOWLEDGED.

17. CLIFFORD O.: 940915 ACKNOWLEDGED. CONTACT DESIRED?

18. A FRIEND, PHILADELPHIA: REF: P2 (1-2); YOU ARE CORRECT. REF: P3; YOU ARE

RIGHT. NO EXCUSE.

19. FRED J.: DD-214.

20. JIM K.: REF: P2S3; THE CURE WOULD BE WORSE THAN THE DISEASE. YOU MAY BE IN

A POSITION TO BE OF ASSISTANCE. WILL BE IN TOUCH.

21. RANDY Y.: CONTACT US. AMPLIFY.

22. JOHN P.: 941031 ACKNOWLEDGED. WILL CONTACT.

23. DEAF SMITH, C/O DSH: 941031 ACKNOWLEDGED. REF: P2; ACCEPTED. WILL CONTACT

WITH DETAILS.

24. TULIP: ARE YOU AN AGENT PROVOCATEUR? WE WILL DO OUR OWN PLANNING. THANKS.

25. SUSAN H.: YOU ARE LIVING PROOF IT WAS POSSIBLE TO BE AN ACADEMIC AND MAKE

IT THROUGH THE 60'S AND 70'S WITH ONE'S MIND INTACT. YOUR ANALYSIS OF WORKING

FROM THE INSIDE (A.O., 7710, 12) WAS NOTHING LESS THAN GENIUS. LET'S DANCE. K

26. WILLIAM Z.: 940916 ACKNOWLEDGED. FOR THE TIME BEING WE ARE NOT ADVERTISING

YOUR LINE OF PRODUCT.

27. HOWARD MC.: ON A COLD WINDSWEPT FIELD, 'NEATH GREYING EASTERN SKY, OBJECT

DISTINCTIONS EVAPORATE LIKE THE EARLY MORNING FROST; A TRIGGER IS PRESSED, AND

TRUTH SPLITS THE AIR.

28. LUKE H.: PROVIDE FULL DETAILS AND OFFICIAL REPORTS.

29. HARRY D.: IF THE CHAIN OF COMMAND WERE RESISTING THEN OUR ORGANIZATION

WOULD BE, IN THEORY, UNNECESSARY.

30. ROBERT K.: NO DISAGREEMENT.

31. MOM: YOU HAVE AN FBI INFORMER. CONTACT US.

32. MICHAEL B.: REF: P4; IT IS NOT POLITE TO DISCUSS TRADECRAFT. YOUR IDEA,

HOWEVER, IS UNDER CONSIDERATION. WE WILL BE IN TOUCH.

33. RESIDENT, ORLANDO, FL: IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO BREAK-OUT THE CODE GROUP IT IS

NOT FOR YOU.

34. GEORGE S.: DD-214.

35. RICHARD K.: DD-214.

36. PREACHER: DD-214.

37. TERRY W.: WHAT YOU HEARD IS INDEED REAL.//

RPLY/ S:/ 950301//

POC/ MSGCEN, C/O RESISTER,

PO BOX 2723, HAGERSTOWN,

MD 21741//

AR

UNCLAS

==============================================================================



Dear Patriot:



     Your interest in The RESISTER is both heartening and disturbing. It is

heartening because we in the Special Forces Underground have long known that

there are patriots who recognize the federal government's slide into tyranny

for what it is, even if they cannot demonstrate how this is so, or express why

this is happening. It is disturbing because we did not expect so early or

widespread a disclosure of our publication and, by default, our organization.

That we have arrived at a point in the history of this nation where our

citizens fear their government and express interest in a pro-constitution

underground within the military is most disturbing of all.

     Any overt discussion of the history of an underground organization by

its members is an unpardonable breach of security. Doing so accomplishes

little more than focusing the minds of the opposition. What follows will add

little to the opposition's conceptual framework of knowledge about us but,

hopefully, will serve to allay our civilian readers concerns about our

"reality".





     The Special Forces Underground



     The philosophy of our organization is straightforward: strict

constitutionalism, isolationism, laissez-faire capitalism, individual rights,

limited government, and republicanism; in short, the principles upon which

this nation was founded. Our goal is to see government put back in its

original constitutional prison.

     We oppose: statism, liberalism, tribalism, socialism, collectivism,

internationalism, democracy, altruism, pull politics, and the New World Order;

in short, the philosophies of all tyrannies.

     The primary staff assembled on 23 August, 1992. We went operational on

28 February, 1993. Special Forces Underground is not a title, it is a

description.

Enough Said.





     The RESISTER



     The RESISTER, in its current form, was never intended to be an open

publication. Its original intent was threefold. First, to serve as the

internal organ of the underground and provide philosophical guidance for its

members. Second, to stimulate general political discussion among those not in

the underground thereby subverting the immoral notion that soldiers must

remain apolitical. Third, as a consequence of number two, expose the

contradictions between what we are ordered to do and our oath to the

Constitution.

     We expected some "leakage" of The RESISTER outside Special Forces. We

did not expect national exposure. Nor did we anticipate the swell of patriotic

support for our cause and the consequent demand for our quarterly publication.

Frankly, we were overwhelmed by the volume of requests for subscriptions,

information, advice and training.



     The dilemma of the Special Forces Underground is that it is not

organized to be a commercial enterprise and there is no mechanism in place

enabling it to act as one. Nor, for security reasons can there be one. Yet, as

unrepentant laissez-faire capitalists we rightfully expect par value for The

RESISTER, plus reasonable profit for our effort to invest in ongoing projects.

Originally, par value for The RESISTER was the pro-constitutional political

education of Special Forces soldiers and the profit was the expansion of the

underground. Now, given the magnitude of civilian support for our cause and

requests for our publication that is no longer practical.





     Reference: Subscriptions



     The RESISTER is produced voluntarily by selected members of the

underground primary staff. The time used to produce The RESISTER is their own.

All costs for producing The RESISTER are currently borne by staff members and

by the voluntary donations of the underground, our sympathizers and our

readership. By the time The RESISTER is published, targeted for distribution,

then passed down the rat line, the cost to deliver a single grey copy per

quarter to a civilian reader is $6.00. If our cause and The RESISTER are of

value to you we ask that you contribute $20.00 and we will send you four

issues beginning with the Winter 1995 issue. Due to demand exceeding our

budget per issue we can no longer offer gratis distribution outside the

underground.

     The inherent security risks of maintaining a mailing list and the

security requirements necessary to protect it and compartment access to it are

time consuming. Also, the current distribution scheme for The RESISTER was

neither designed nor structured to accommodate subscriptions for obvious

security reasons. We can do it but it will be slow. We will send distribution

down the rat line only twice per quarter. Be patient.

     There is an implied responsibility that goes with receipt of a grey

copy. Make as many WHITE copies as you desire and distribute them to trusted

friends. Don't put them into the hands of the unsympathetic or pass them to

the opposition (make "them" work for it).





     Reference: Information, Advice and Training



     Requests for information about the Special Forces Underground can not be

honored for obvious security reasons. The underground is not an organization

that can be joined. Assessment, vetting and selection are strictly an "old boy

net" operation. We are, however, preparing a series of articles for

publication in The RESISTER on the principles and mechanics of resistance and

underground operations which, in principle, should answer most of the

questions we are commonly asked by our civilian readership. Look for these to

begin in the Winter 1995 issue (Vol. I, No. 3).

     Many of you have sent books, magazines, newsletters, videos and audio

tapes with your letters. Please do not feel slighted if there is no response.

Everything sent to us is read, watched and listened to. If you desire an

acknowledgment of receipt of traffic enclose a self addressed stamped postcard

with your correspondence. Replies to correspondence will remain on a case-by-

case basis. Blind Transmission Broadcast (BTB) in The RESISTER will continue

to be acknowledged by tags.

     The first distribution of Volume I, Number 3 will start down the rat

line in early January. We in the staff thank you for your support and help.



Life, Liberty, and Property;

Editor



The RESISTER

    --

    AR





+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

|   The RESISTER                               "The instability of our laws  |

|   PO Box 2723                                 is really an immense evil."  |

|   Hagerstown, MD 21741                                   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.                |

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

==============================================================================

                   ISMFS EUUJB MSDSU BCOST XFHHQ DTDJS

                   MJLHP BIVHO EJUHY TQZFA NFSZB IVWIL

                   LFUUE AYSGM JOBYG WVXRP UIDAC XEUTA

                   YBNZA IBUTV ONWUK FJTPU CDPZZ NKBQG

                   APOUQ MCRSJ NFDEK JEECB VKDZC LAYCE

                   KCAUN VTSNG XOSQN JUICF UMVST ISMFS

==============================================================================







