Jump to content

Danite

Members
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Danite

  • Groups I Belong To

    Navy
    Navy
  • Rank
    Constitutionalist
  • Location Grayson, GA, USA

Personal Information

  • Area Code
    404

Recent Profile Visitors

47 profile views
  1. We are the militia. Mom and Dad, the Constitution, hot apple pie, the American flag... What is it we really believe in? What is the ultimate goal? IMO we are too vague, too flippant and too easily led by snake oil salesmen. One of my concerns is that the militia, even the American people as a whole no longer have think tanks, organizations with well defined goals and objectives, and people willing to actually sit down and put some thought into what it is they really believe in and how they are going to get from tyranny to Liberty. I'd like to start with a well thought out sermon given by John Winthrop back in 1630 aboard the Arbella as it sailed toward the New World, loaded with colonists. This sermon has been cited by many leaders including, but not limited to JFK and Ronald Reagan. I'd like to leave a link to it so that you will know what I'm talking about the next time I post: https://www.casa-arts.org/cms/lib/PA01925203/Centricity/Domain/50/A Model of Christian Charity.pdf This is one of the major points of where it all began for our Republic
  2. The listed website is from circa late 1990s. After the Militia of Georgia organized units across Georgia, the Republic of Georgia Defense Force became the Militia of Georgia and unified with U.S. Militias. The leader of U.S. Militias,Dan Shoemaker, got into trouble with the system and landed in prison. U.S. Militias gravitated toward the Militia of Georgia for their new de facto leadership. States, however, failed to establish statewide units and the Militia of Georgia became both the Militia of Georgia and U.S. Militias by default. Ironically, the Militia of Georgia still exists, still operates and while the phone number above (In Fixer's post) is no longer connected to the militia, the P.O. Box is. Republic of Georgia Defense Forces is a unit of the Militia of Georgia. The Militia of Georgia is the official state headquarters and, while there is no official U.S. Militias, the Militia of Georgia does provide assistance to those in other states under the umbrella of U.S. Militias. In addition, the Militia of Georgia used to be part of the AWRM organization that developed the National Militia Standards. But, most militias are always in a state of flux where Internet leaders are always coming and going and legitimate organizations get smeared by the power of the Internet. Once AWRM came to power, they declared a war on some other militia groups; the militia was split into many factions; today AWRM is gone. To my knowledge, the Militia of Georgia is the only organization left from that era.
  3. Where I live, every city and every surrounding county has declared a mandatory quarantine. It's really strange that we're sitting on a powder keg and we are not discussing this stuff this week. Makes me feel like I'm preaching to the choir and the seats are empty in the church. Our stock has been checked, the security protocols addressed, and a dry run of evacuating the house has been done. All we need now is some conversation and some semblance of a plan while we address who the militia is.
  4. I watched this video twice. The narrator did give it a good try; he even impressed me with the part of about computers and the First Amendment. It is an analogy I will incorporate into my own spiel. Now, I'd like to do a critique of what this man said and maybe someone here will rewrite that script, correct the errors and update the information. First, and foremost, George Mason was not the Father of the Constitution or the Second Amendment OR the Bill of Rights. That honor goes to James Madison. Madison made some pro-gun statements followed up by action. For example, Madison stated: "Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of." - James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788 “…the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone…”– James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788 Let us go one further. In order to make it unequivocally clear what Madison meant, he nominated Justice Joseph Story to the United States Supreme Court. This is how Story felt relative to the Right to keep and bear Arms: The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”– Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833 "One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms." -- Constitutional scholar and Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, 1840 Finally, I agree with that man that when it comes to understanding the terminology "well regulated," we must carry ourselves back to that time and understand the language. Likewise, he said something that was a product of being inadequately trained here. In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson used the word unalienable. Consequently, when the United States Supreme Court ruled and interpreted the Second Amendment, they used and interpreted the word unalienable. After the illegal ratification of the 14th Amendment, the Courts began using what was then a synonym and the guy in the video used it. That word is inalienable. The courts, (including the United States Supreme Court) then reinterpreted the meaning of the Second Amendment by ascribing a different meaning to the word, inalienable. Without a long dissertation, unalienable Rights were (according to the Declaration of Independence) preexisting Rights bestowed upon you by a Creator and not subject to the laws of man since unalienable Rights are above the government. Under original intent, the government does not grant you unalienable Rights. After the 14th Amendment the courts began using the word inalienable and today, inalienable rights are mere revocable privileges given by government. And, as long as we speak the language of liberals, the government can take your firearms IF you make an argument about inalienable rights BECAUSE inalienable rights can be limited via Due Process. The Right to keep and bear Arms cannot be infringed when presented as an unalienable Right since a different body of case law governs unalienable Rights. The government is the grantor of inalienable rights; UNALIENABLE Rights are preexisting, God given Rights. And that is my rant of the day. God Bless
  5. He loads my rifle and, reluctantly, I shoot twice at the target - the first shots I've ever fired in my life. When I see I've scored highly with a very accurate shot, I feel an electric frisson of excitement go through my body. I wonder how children manage that sense of thrill, and suggest that perhaps gun clubs glorify weapons and encourage an unhealthy fascination with guns? A murmur of protest is heard around the rifle club. "It teaches people to respect guns," Michael tells me. "A lot of hyperactive children come to rifle club. They learn to stand still, to concentrate for much longer, and it helps them get better results in school, and in life." Swiss citizens - for example hunters, or those who shoot as a sport - can get a permit to buy guns and ammunition, unless they have a criminal record, or police deem them unsuitable on psychiatric or security grounds. But hunters and sportsmen are greatly outnumbered by those keeping army guns - which again illustrates the difference between Switzerland and the US. "We have guns at home, but they are kept for peaceful purposes. There is no point taking the gun out of your home in Switzerland because it is illegal to carry a gun in the street. To shoot someone who just looks at you in a funny way - this is not Swiss culture!" Street violence has gone up in recent years in Switzerland but there hasn't been an increase in gun-related incidents. I feel like this could work if properly executed. Maybe make it "military-like" for the USA. This could work in the USA. I feel that most of our teens are responsible enough to take it on. The military would definitely straighten out some that needed it. In my father's generation, it was very common to send a teen to military school to teach them and help them to grow into a responsible young man part of something larger than themselves. President Trump attended Military School. I have a coworker that was going down the wrong path in his teen years and a judge sent him to the Navy for four years. It straightened him out and paid for his college. He works along side me in a hospital and is an excellent employee. He tells me all of the time that he was grateful to that judge for sending him in. It changed the trajectory of his life. It would be some way to introduce our youth to responsibility. They would have to put down the I-phones and I-Pads and actually hold something that would teach them respect,diligence and responsibility. It would also un-teach them the untruth's that the universities are teaching them about capitalism and socialism. They would see that in the real world, self-preservation is the way to go. Not depending on the government (they would see first hand how the govt really works with the military) or other people is the way to be and actually being supportive for your fellow man is the way to fulfillment and happiness. A true lesson in life with no bull ...! Also, instead of giving our young people medicine for ADD, maybe a dose of reality would be longer lasting and beneficial to their well-being. Not being dependent on medication for their lives, that they probably do not need. The only question in my mind is what happens when Congress is not acting in the preferences of the people? Do we really want them to be in charge of changing our Constitution? What happens when they feel comfortable enough to start changing other things in the Constitution, in their favor and not ours? We would have to wait until there is a majority in the House and Senate. Who knows when that will be? I was listening to a professor in one of the Ivy League schools (he is a patriot) on You Tube recently and he was speaking about how the Stanford law school students were about to introduce a way to circumvent the Constitution with a certain bill. The professor was horrified and saying that this bill would pave the way for Congress to run away with the Government and do whatever they wanted without oversight and approval. I wish I could remember the name of the professor. I think that he may have been part of the John Birch Society. Anyway, here is a video from the John Birch Society.https://youtu.be/lecAy-3Qtxk This is a great video. https://youtu.be/lecAy-3Qtxk https://youtu.be/lecAy-3Qtxk So, you had rather have the government in charge of your Rights and Liberties?
  6. I think you may have opened a door for a very important conversation. Today's militia, IMO, begins to sound like canned liberalism with that mantra of we don't discriminate against... and then we start telling the truth. The MAGA supporters want to lock out the Muslims (and rightfully so.) Then some people advocate tossing out Sovereign Citizens - and most likely, because some young hood rats tried to use Sovereign Citizen arguments to take peoples homes while they were out of town. To condemn the Sovereign Citizens for that is much like condemning Christianity for the 900 + people killed by Jim Jones when he conned them into drinking cyanide laced Kool aid. I support Sovereign Citizens and am well aware of my status as a Preamble Citizen. So, the mainstream can have people chanting a mantra about not discriminating against anyone based on race, color, creed, etc. and then locking out the Posterity of the Constitution (of which the Constitution was written to secure the blessings of Liberty for) and remain oblivious to what the Constitution is about. I want you to know I support you on your position. Next, discussions about Christian Identity lead the militia to declare a war against the people most responsible for the creation of modern militias. Christian Identity is a movement, not a specific religion and the SPLC along with Establishment types like to lump a lot of people into one big pot. There are nazis, malcontents, and people I cannot begin to describe who support and even join churches that are condemned by the left as being hate groups (sic.) Some of the tenets of faith shared by what the SPLC (and related groups) call Christian Identity were tenets of faith believed by Herbert W. Armstrong who, at the time had some 8 million subscribers to his Plain Truth Magazine and his book "The United States and Britain in Prophecy" sold over 6 million copies. I once bought into that media malarkey and thought that anyone who was Christian Identity was the good guys. Turns out, the term is a scare word and the lists kept by the SPLC and similar groups lump churches together that are 180 degrees opposite of each other in their tenets of faith. Knowing that even Christian Identity has some churches with really good people in them, I'm working to establish a separate denomination so that there exists something concrete as opposed to a movement where some groups try to validate themselves through churches that have separated from organized religion and the modern churchianity that tries to integrate social liberalism into their ideology. In Christian Identity there are seed-line Christians, anti-seed line Christians, and doctrinal differences too numerous to mention. There are those in Christian Identity that would love to put a bullet in me; there are others who take the time to call me on the phone and have real conversations. BTW, Even Bo Gritz has fellow - shipped with churches the SPLC calls Christian Identity. If you know anything about your racial culture, you are Christian Identity. The militia would be well served not to discriminate against them and judge each person according to their character. Insofar as the law and constitutional interpretations go, if you tie your activities to being an unorganized militia, you end up having to allow almost anyone in and you would not like many of them. Some of the most conservative people where I live are Hispanic. Some of them came here without papers before Bush was elected. When George W. became president, he had those people pay $1000 in fines, pay any back taxes and they were given citizenship. Do you care if you recruit antifa members? Would you allow black people into the militia only to discover their version of constitutional interpretation includes reparations? If so, would you help them lobby - maybe even enforce the collection of money from your fellow citizens? I have to ask uncomfortable questions because we have to stand for something. If we're going to reject the Republic our forefathers envisioned and accept the de facto system we have today, we will have to devise new documents to replace the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
  7. Hi, I'm just the FNG and am late to the conversation, but this thread was one of the real reasons I wanted to sign on here and discuss the topic. This is just my opinion and that along with a couple of bucks will buy you a cup of coffee in most restaurants in America. Keep that in mind. IMO, we do not need Congress to expand the militia statutes. There is a two-fold reason: Civil rights legislation did away with age discrimination, so the militia cannot discriminate based on age The Heller decision of 2008 ruled that individuals have a Right to keep and bear Arms for individual self defense Alexander Hamilton began to realize the near impossibility of getting the militia to muster a mere two times a year so I think that is what compelled him to say: "Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year" (Federalist Papers) In all reality we cannot assemble the people to muster, so we must do what we can to make sure that society is properly armed. I defer to Patrick Henry on this: "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined...The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.: -Patrick Henry. The people are the militia. We are the unorganized militia, not the organized militia. That does not mean that we should be disorganized. If we seek our validation and existence on the basis of statutes, we remain under the control of the government. Unfortunately, there are at least two separate governments in the United States: 1) The de jure, lawful, constitutional Republic as envisioned by the founders and framers and 2) The de facto, unlawful, illegal, and unconstitutional government emanating out of Washington Wonderland, District of Corruption The challenge before us is to retain Liberty and enforce the guarantee of those Rights that pre-existed before the government was formed and avoid becoming subject to an illegal government that would outlaw your weapons and jail anyone that opposes an outlaw government that has perverted the Constitution. A man cannot serve two masters. How we approach this dilemma requires a lot of discussion and thought.
  8. I responded to that in what I thought was a PM. Forgive me, but I play around on the computer, but am still a Luddite. I attend so many functions and talk to so many people, I don't know with any specificity how I found the site. Thought I'd been here before, but if so that would have been a long time back. I try to keep a notebook of sites, contacts, etc. but a lot of them have gone south over the last few years. To my knowledge, I don't know of a militia that predates when I got involved. The late Jack McLamb, the Militia of Montana, Mark from Michigan, the Militia of Georgia / U.S. Militias, AWRM, Bo Gritz, CCOPS, etc. were the top people and organizations back then. Civilian militias got co-opted by the Tea Party and single issue political organizations. The militia has been in a state of flux ever since. So, hoping to make new contacts, share ideas and get caught up into the 21st century with respect to equipment, etc.
  9. I will be checking those links out. Thanks guys.
  10. Greetings  and welcome! Interesting times in which we live! And they will probably get even more so.
    May I ask how you found our website?

    1. Danite

      Danite

      I have numerous contacts in the militia and from survival and prepper outlets (meetings, shows, etc.) and collect as many contacts as possible to network with.  Don't recall with specificity how I first found this particular site, but thought I had seen it before.  Some of the older ones have gone belly up over the past five or six years.  

  11. Source Tactical has hydration bladders where the straps are slid into side pockets and it allows you to strap the bladder pouch onto MOLLE webbing. My problem is most bladders on the market are roughly 18 inches tall. My condor chest rig only has 11" x 9" of space on the back. I don't even know if they make a bladder pouch that small. My 5.11 vest will barely hold a Camelback and I've been reluctant to use that as the net inside the vest (where you could put a bladder) is far wider than the Camelback. Maybe they don't slide once filled with water?
  12. This is my first post so bear with me on this. I'm making the transition from ALICE gear to MOLLE. What I don't see on most of these sites is a discussion of hydration. I have a Molle chest rig right now and the only way to carry a bladder with it means I have straps for the hydration bladder and straps for the chest rig (that has nothing on the back except straps.) I think my 5.11 vest with a zipper front will accommodate a bladder that utilizes the MOLLE system. Then I got a cheap Condor chest rig that is big enough to hold 3 AR mags and a small first aid kid on the front of those. It has MOLLE webbing on the back but, not much space for a water bladder. So, I use it in the trunk of the car along with a carbine just in case of civil disorder on my way home. Finding smaller water bladders has been impossible and the only way I see is getting bladders and only filling them half way on lot of this equipment. I'm exploring Source Tactical for rugged water bladders. Just a suggestion, but if anyone has info or insights on this subject, it is all but ignored most of the time.
  13. Just stopping in to introduce myself. Danite here. Militia member since 1987

×
×
  • Create New...