Rudolph Subject: Re: Negotiating
Dot, I agree with you.
No one should be NEGOTIATING for Shirley Allens freedom. If the MILITIAMEN
had the balls, they would take up arms, and go set Shirley Allen free.
That is the function of the militia, to stand against tyranny, not to try
and talk them out of it. That is not what the militia is for. The militia
is for military type actions, thusly they have the name, MILITIA.
What Shirley Allen allegedly wants more than anything else right now is simply to live out the rest of her life in peace quietly enjoying the estate that was left to her when her husband passed away. Given that she is in her early fifties and in good health then she could be expected to have at least another two and a half decades or more worth of life left to her.
In the current situation she is currently besieged by Illinois State goons who will not relent until she is either deceased or has been dragged off somewhere and subjected to some sort of "psychiatric evaluation" by people who can by this point in time be expected to have already made their determination. Thus, the desire to mount up on one's charger, summon the rest of the cavalry unit and go riding off to her rescue is understandable. Unfortunately, the result of this is almost sure to be a failure, at least from Shirley's point of view.
First of all, we have been led to believe that there are anywhere between 12 to 15 police types keeping a round the clock vigil on her trailer. What that implies is that the actual size of the force that is besieging Shirley is probably three times that number. This is easily deduced from a simple consideration of the sort of watch rotations that one would need to set up in order to ensure that the people who are doing the besieging aren't falling asleep on the job and are staying relatively alert. So, one can expect that the actual force that would be have to neutralized in order to free Shirley is actually somewhere in the neighborhood of 36 to 45 people. This is so because those who are not currently "on watch" can be expected to remain nearby and potentially able to respond to any serious problem.
One of the standard rules of thumb used to estimate the amount of troops needed to perform an offensive task is that the attacker must have at least a 3 to 1 advantage in terms of numbers/firepower in order to be able to secure a victory. Thus, the force that gets sent in to rescue Shirley should arguably have at least 135 people in it if they expect to be able to defeat the besieiging force in a straight military confrontation. At this point in time a variety of other considerations also come into play. Unfortunately they tend to favor the police. The terrain is flat with few obstacles, so it would be hard to sneak up on them. Especially for a force the size that would be needed. Given the small size of the surrounding communities, it could prove difficult to stage a force that big nearby, thus almost guaranteeing the police get wind of it and forfeiting the element of surprise. Furthermore, I don't know of any militia units that actually have serious support weaponry (artillery, air strike capability, armor, etc.). However, these are all things which in an extreme situation might be available in limited quantities to the police. And their appearance on the battlefield might be enough in and of itself to ensure a defeat for the attacking force.
But enough of such possibilities. For the rest of the discussion we will assume that the militia attack was successful. The Illinois idiots have been killed/captured/driven off in disarray. By the way, as a result of all that odds are you now have approximately 20% casualties on the militia side, for roughly 30 people killed/injured.
Now look at this from Shirley's point of view. All she wants to do is live out the rest of her life on her property. If she goes off with the militia forces who "freed" her, then she will be free indeed. She will be free of her CDs, she will be free of her 47 acre farm, she will be free of her producing oil well, she will be free of just about anything else she can't carry with her and finally she will be free to live the rest of her natural existence as a hunted fugitive. It is quite possible that sort of rescue might not appeal to her at all. I could easily see her refusing to leave her property even after she has been given an "all clear" by her neighbors (who might not be all that thrilled with the militia given the collateral damage their property may very well sustain).
So then what? The militia forces can not stay and hold Shirley's property against the forces that the State of Illinois, by that time doubtless backed up by the federal government, could turn out. They perforce must either leave or be destroyed. And whichever the case, by that time it should go without saying that the government forces would probably kill Shirley out of simple spite if for no other reason. Also, it should be obvious that the militia cannot compel Shirley to come with them. For if they do, then there would be no effective difference between them and the government goons. Shirley would be forced to give up everything that she holds dear because she would have been permitted no other option.
So, given that there is no available information that indicates Shirley finds life on the lam and in poverty an atrractive alternative to her current situation, then the use of force to "rescue" her does not seem to be a good idea. From her point of view it could very well be a lose/lose situation.
It is my opinion that at this time we should be concentrating our efforts on figuring out some way to get Shirley what she wants. Left alone by the government idiots. The most effective way to do that does not seem to be through the use of force. Therefore, one is left with a variety of peaceful, "working through the system" type options.
I have seen the idea of some sort of boycott being touted. That seems to me to have as good a chance of helping as anything. Given that the judge who issued the original court order for Shirley's involuntary pyschiatric exam doesn't want to rescind it, other means of dealing with that problem will have to be found. However, it should be noted that judges and courts do not exist in isolation. They are responsible to superior judges and superior courts all the way to the state supreme court. It might prove useful to see about getting some sort of injunction issued by a judge who is superior to the one who issued the original order.
All of this is especially heartbeaking because all of this takes time, and Shirley may not have much left. However, the use of force does not seem to be a reasonable solution to this problem. And even then, it would not be an option to be entered into lightly, without thorough planning and preparation. Which would also take time.
However, it is also important to realize that even if the government idiots do kill Shirley, they will not do so with impunity. The price that they are paying for such stupidities is the legitimacy of the government that they represent. This will indicate to thousands of people that the "crazy militia wackos" were right. The government is not to be trusted. The government is in fact a ravenous wild beast that will potentially prey on anybody it feels it can nail. Even the mainstream media types woun't be able to discuss the problem without inadvertently drawing attention to it. First there was Ruby Ridge. Then there was Waco. Then there was the case of Donald Scott out in California. Then there was the case of the gentleman in Brunswick, Ohio. Then there was Shirley Allen in Roby, Illinois. And dozens of others that may be known of in a given area. And by the time they are finished even mentioning the incidents, it will be obvious to all that the term "isolated" is not an applicable description of them. Nope, what we are talking about is in fact a standard operating procedure. And as the truth of that sinks into the soul of the American people, it will be the most effective militia recruitment tool possible.
|These are the personal views of Mike Johnson. He is the elected spokesman of the North Central Florida Regional Militia. They are neither endorsed nor supported by Citizens For Better Government. They are presented for informational purposes only.|