Wes wrote:

I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.

That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.

RBnDFW on Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:59:17 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote:

OTOH, the problem I have with Unintended Consequences is that it
is too optimistic. Or mayhaps the book ends too soon. Certainly
Henry Bowman's "war" is over. From here on, he will fight no more.
But ... what about others? Those opposed to the DEA (as the Vail
anecdotes relate), are they included? There isn;'t a TLA which hasn't
****ed someone off for what they considered capricious reasons. All
Henry Bowman did was provide a catalyst for the use of political
murder as a means of seeking redress of grievances. The precedent is
now established (in that world) where killing government workers is
accepted.
That is what concerns me, about the book, or a Great Cull.

In this world, our government authorizes the killing of U.S. citizens,
without trial.

"...the U.S. government has created a “hit list” of Americans abroad
marked for murder."

http://pubrecord.org/nation/6905/gov...s-secret-list/

So how far are we from Henry Bowman's world?

1) Hobbes wrote that in a "state of nature" life was brutish,
nasty and short. How is this different than life "in a state of war"?
War lets you do things which would be crimes otherwise: kill people
and take what stuff of theirs you do not break.

2) It is said that "anarchy" is the state of there being no
government. But is a situation where one cannot depend on the actions
of the government any less of an "anarchy" of a society "without
structure". If the rule of law is subject to exceptions based on
race, creed, or connections, then what restricts the in.
Or to put it another way, if Government employees consider
themselves unrestrained by the law, why should I consider myself so
constrained?

--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

RBnDFW on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Wes wrote:

I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.

That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.

The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name - said that when
he was a POW during WW2 he realized that he had a lot of time on his
hands, and didn't know how long the war would last, so any books he
got, would have to last. So, one page a day. One page. Do not turn
the page to finish the sentence, wait till tomorrow.
But first, he just enjoyed the book. Looked at the actual
physical book, how it felt, hefted, the colors of the binding ... his
fellow POWs figured he'd gone nuts. But it did give him an
appreciation for literature.

tschus
pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

Gunner Asch on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 05:12:30 -0700
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 17:30:04 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

cavelamb on Thu, 12 Aug 2010 13:09:26 -0500
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
snipped to get to the point

Uh-huh. Who is the first to sign the loyalty oaths? Traitors and
Superpatriots...

Who's first at the anti-government rally? Traitors and
Superpatriots. Only the later are often called "agents in place".

That's technically true, pytor.
But it's in good company.


These guys organized, created an army, and won the day.
But had they lost they would all been hung as traitors.


"Treason never prospers.
for if it prospers, why
None dare call it treason."

What concerns me is the history of "agents" of the security organs
who are the loudest proponents of violence, used to ferret out the
malcontents and get them all in one place, so the Chekii can pick them
up in one fell swoop.
But you cant bee too paranoid.

Which is why the all the white supremist groups and virtually every
black group has long ben infiltrated by government agents.

LOL, my Dad knew a young "airman" who was really a Lieutenant
doing undercover work. He almost blew his cover, because he had money
at the end of the month. (Dad kept a copy of the guys "official"
portrait, when his cover personal got promoted to E-2. "Only
promotion I ever earned.")

Any "revolutionary" who is current on his dues, possibly is a
government spy. (The cliche has it that had it not been for the
Government spys paying their dues, that most "revolutionary" groups
would have gone broke.)

Another reason "leaderless resistiance" works so well.

Just as long as you remember that we have no leader and start
trying to give directions. Now just hush up and do as I said. (Time
Bandits)

--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

pyotr filipivich wrote:
RBnDFW on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Wes wrote:

I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.

The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name - said that when
he was a POW during WW2 he realized that he had a lot of time on his
hands, and didn't know how long the war would last, so any books he
got, would have to last. So, one page a day. One page. Do not turn
the page to finish the sentence, wait till tomorrow.
But first, he just enjoyed the book. Looked at the actual
physical book, how it felt, hefted, the colors of the binding ... his
fellow POWs figured he'd gone nuts. But it did give him an
appreciation for literature.

I heard that, but I sure do like reading ebooks on my iPhone now

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Another reason "leaderless resistiance" works so well.


WHEN has leaderless resistance worked so well?



--

Richard Lamb

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:31:32 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Another reason "leaderless resistiance" works so well.


WHEN has leaderless resistance worked so well?

1776



"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:31:32 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Another reason "leaderless resistiance" works so well.


WHEN has leaderless resistance worked so well?

http://www.publiceye.org/liberty/ter...nce-right.html

http://131.193.153.231/www/issues/is...kel/index.html

"Leaderless Resistance was popularized by the anti-government activist
Louis Beam as a technique for white nationalists to continue their
struggle against the government of the United States in the face of
overwhelming odds. Since then, Leaderless Resistance has become the de
facto strategy of the violent fringe of the animal rights and
environmental activist movements.

After introducing the concept and history of Leaderless Resistance, this
paper explores the use of the technique by Stop Hunting and Animal
Cruelty (SHAC), the Earth Liberation Front, and individual Islamic
terrorists carrying out acts against U.S. interests. It argues that
Leaderless Resistance is resistant to counterterrorism based on network
analysis. Finally, this paper makes recommendations of ways that may be
used to fight causes that employ Leaderless Resistance."

..............



"The concept of Leaderless Resistance was proposed by Col. Ulius Louis
Amoss, who was the founder of International Service of Information
Incorporated, located in Baltimore, Maryland. Col. Amoss died more than
fifteen years ago, but during his life was a tireless opponent of
communism, as well as a skilled Intelligence Officer. Col. Amoss first
wrote of Leaderless Resistance on April 17, 1962. His theories of
organization were primarily directed against the threat of eventual
Communist take-over in the United States. The present writer, with the
benefit of having lived many years beyond Col. Amoss, has taken his
theories and expounded upon them. Col. Amoss feared the Communists. This
author fears the federal government. Communism now represents a threat
to no one in the United States, while federal tyranny represents a
threat to everyone . The writer has joyfully lived long enough to see
the dying breaths of communism, but may, unhappily, remain long enough
to see the last grasps of freedom in America.

In the hope that, somehow, America can still produce the brave sons and
daughters necessary to fight off ever increasing persecution and
oppression, this essay is offered. Frankly, it is too close to call at
this point. Those who love liberty, and believe in freedom enough to
fight for it are rare today, but within the bosom of every once great
nation, there remains secreted, the pearls of former greatness. They are
there. I have looked into their sparking eyes; sharing a brief moment in
time with them as I passed through this life. Relished their friendship,
endured their pain, and they mine. We are a band of brothers, native to
the soil gaining strength one from another as we have rushed head long
into a battle that all the weaker, timid men, say we can not win.
Perhaps…but then again, perhaps we can. It’s not over till the last
freedom fighter is buried or imprisoned, or the same happens to those
who would destroy their freedom.

Barring any cataclysmic events, the struggle will yet go on for years.
The passage of time will make it clear to even the more slow among us
that the government is the foremost threat to the life, and liberty of
the folk. The government will no doubt make today’s oppressiveness look
like grade school work compared to what they have planned in the future.
Meanwhile, there are those of us who continue to hope that somehow the
few can do what the many have not. We are cognizant that before things
get better they will certainly get worse as government shows a
willingness to use ever more severe police state measures against
dissidents. This changing situation makes it clear that those who oppose
state repression must be prepared to alter, adapt, and modify their
behavior, strategy, and tactics as circumstances warrant. Failure to
consider new methods and implement them as necessary will make the
government’s efforts at suppression uncomplicated. It is the duty of
every patriot to make the tyrant’s life miserable. When one fails to do
so he not only fails himself, but his people.

With this in mind, current methods of resistance to tyranny employed by
those who love our race, culture, and heritage must pass a litmus test
of soundness. Methods must be objectively measured as to their
effectiveness, as well as to whether they make the government’s
intention of repression more possible or more difficult. Those not
working to aid our objectives must be discarded or the government
benefits from our failure to do so.
As honest men who have banded together into groups or associations of a
political or religious nature are falsely labeled “domestic terrorists”
or “cultists” and suppressed, it will become necessary to consider other
methods of organization–or as the case may very well call for:
non-organization. One should keep in mind that it is not in the
government’s interest to eliminate all groups. Some few must remain in
order to perpetuate the smoke and mirrors vision for the masses that
America is a “free democratic country” where dissent is allowed. Most
organizations, however, that possess the potential for effective
resistance will not be allowed to continue. Anyone who is so naive as to
believe the most powerful government on earth will not crush any who
pose a real threat to that power, should not be active, but rather, at
home studying political history.

The question as to who is to be left alone and who is not, will be
answered by how groups and individuals deal with several factors such
as: avoidance of conspiracy plots, rejection of feeble minded
malcontents, insistence upon quality of the participants, avoidance of
all contact with the front men for the federals–the news media–and,
finally, camouflage (which can be defined as the ability to blend in the
public’s eye the more committed groups of resistance with mainstream
“kosher” associations that are generally seen as harmless.) Primarily
though, whether any organization is allowed to continue in the future
will be a matter of how big a threat a group represents. Not a threat in
terms of armed might or political ability, for there is none of either
for the present, but rather, threat in terms of potentiality. It is
potential the federals fear most. Whether that potential exists in an
individual or group is incidental. The federals measure potential threat
in terms of what might happen given a situation conducive to action on
the part of a restive organization or individual. Accurate intelligence
gathering allows them to assess the potential. Showing one’s hand before
the bets are made, is a sure way to loose.

The movement for freedom is rapidly approaching the point where for many
people, the option of belonging to a group will be nonexistent. For
others, group membership will be a viable option for only the immediate
future. Eventually, and perhaps much sooner than most believe possible,
the price paid for membership will exceed any perceived benefit. But for
now, some of the groups that do exist often serve a useful purpose
either for the newcomer who can be indoctrinated into the ideology of
the struggle, or for generating positive propaganda to reach potential
freedom fighters. It is sure that, for the most part, this struggle is
rapidly becoming a matter of individual action, each of its participants
making a private decision in the quietness of his heart to resist: to
resist by any means necessary. It is hard to know what others will do,
for no man truly knows another man’s heart. It is enough to know what
one himself will do. A great teacher once said “know thyself.” Few men
really do, but let each of us, promise ourselves, not to go quietly to
the fate our would-be masters have planned.

The concept of Leaderless Resistance is nothing less than a fundamental
departure in theories of organization. The orthodox scheme of
organization is diagrammatically represented by the pyramid, with the
mass at the bottom and the leader at the top. This fundamental of
organization is to be seen not only in armies, which are of course, the
best illustration of the pyramid structure, with the mass of soldiery,
the privates, at the bottom responsible to corporals who are in turn
responsible to sergeants, and so on up the entire chain of command to
the generals at the top. But the same structure is seen in corporations,
ladies’ garden clubs and in our political system itself. This orthodox
“pyramid” scheme of organization is to be seen basically in all existing
political, social and religious structures in the world today from the
Federal government to the Roman Catholic Church. The Constitution of the
United States, in the wisdom of the Founders, tried to sublimate the
essential dictatorial nature of pyramidal organization by dividing
authority into three: executive, legislative and judicial. But the
pyramid remains essentially untouched.

This scheme of organization, the pyramid, is however, not only useless,
but extremely dangerous for the participants when it is utilized in a
resistance movement against state tyranny. Especially is this so in
technologically advanced societies where electronic surveillance can
often penetrate the structure revealing its chain of command. Experience
has revealed over and over again that anti-state, political
organizations utilizing this method of command and control are easy prey
for government infiltration, entrapment, and destruction of the
personnel involved. This has been seen repeatedly in the United States
where pro-government infiltrators or agent provocateurs weasel their way
into patriotic groups and destroy them from within.
In the pyramid type of organization, an infiltrator can destroy anything
which is beneath his level of infiltration and often those above him as
well. If the traitor has infiltrated at the top, then the entire
organization from the top down is compromised and may be traduced at
will.

An alternative to the pyramid type of organization is the cell system.
In the past, many political groups (both right and left) have used the
cell system to further their objectives. Two examples will suffice.
During the American Revolution “committees of correspondence” were
formed throughout the Thirteen colonies.
Their purpose was to subvert the government and thereby aid the cause of
independence. The “Sons of Liberty”, who made a name for themselves
dumping government taxed tea into the harbor at Boston, were the action
arm of the committees of correspondence. Each committee was a secret
cell that operated totally independently of the other cells. Information
on the government was passed from committee to committee, from colony to
colony, and then acted upon on a local basis. Yet even in these bygone
days of poor communication, of weeks to months for a letter to be
delivered, the committees without any central direction whatsoever, were
remarkable similar in tactics employed to resist government tyranny. It
was, as the first American patriots knew, totally unnecessary for anyone
to give an order for anything. Information was made available to each
committee, and each committee acted as it saw fit

.. A recent example of the cell system taken from the left wing of
politics are the Communists. The Communist, in order to get around the
obvious problems involved in pyramidal organization, developed to an art
the cell system. They had numerous independent cells which operated
completely isolated from one another and particularly with no knowledge
of each other, but were orchestrated together by a central headquarters.
For instance, during World War II, in Washington, it is known that there
were at least six secret Communist cells operating at high levels in the
United States government (plus all the open Communists who were
protected and promoted by President Roosevelt), however, only one of the
cells was rooted out and destroyed. How many more actually were
operating no one can say for sure.

The Communist cells which operated in the U.S until late 1991 under
Soviet control could have at their command a leader, who held a social
position which appeared to be very lowly. He could be, for example, a
busboy in a restaurant, but in reality a colonel or a general in the
Soviet Secret Service, the KGB. Under him could be a number of cells and
a person active in one cell would almost never have knowledge of
individuals who are active in another cell. The value of this is that
while any one cell can be infiltrated, exposed or destroyed, such action
will have no effect on the other cells; in fact, the members of the
other cells will be supporting that cell which is under attack and
ordinarily would lend very strong support to it in many ways. This is at
least part of the reason, no doubt, that whenever in the past Communists
were attacked in this country, support for them sprang up in many
unexpected places.

The efficient and effective operation of a cell system after the
Communist model, is of course, dependent upon central direction, which
means impressive organization, funding from the top, and outside
support, all of which the Communists had. Obviously, American patriots
have none of these things at the top or anywhere else, and so an
effective cell organization based upon the Soviet system of operation is
impossible.

Two things become clear from the above discussion. First, that the
pyramid type of organization can be penetrated quite easily and it thus
is not a sound method of organization in situations where the government
has the resources and desire to penetrate the structure; which is the
situation in this country. Secondly, that the normal qualifications for
the cell structure based upon the Red model does not exist in the U.S.
for patriots. This understood, the question arises “What method is left
for those resisting state tyranny?” The answer comes from Col. Amoss who
proposed the “Phantom Cell” mode of organization. Which he described as
Leaderless Resistance. A system of organization that is based upon the
cell organization, but does not have any central control or direction,
that is in fact almost identical to the methods used by the Committees
of Correspondence during the American Revolution. Utilizing the
Leaderless Resistance concept, all individuals and groups operate
independently of each other, and never report to a central headquarters
or single leader for direction or instruction, as would those who belong
to a typical pyramid organization.

At first glance, such a type of organization seems unrealistic,
primarily because there appears to be no organization. The natural
question thus arises as to how are the “Phantom cells” and individuals
to cooperate with each other when there is no intercommunication or
central direction? The answer to this question is that participants in a
program of Leaderless Resistance through phantom cell or individual
action must know exactly what they are doing, and how to do it. It
becomes the responsibility of the individual to acquire the necessary
skills and information as to what is to be done. This is by no means as
impractical as it appears, because it is certainly true that in any
movement, all persons involved have the same general outlook, are
acquainted with the same philosophy, and generally react to given
situations in similar ways. The pervious history of the committees of
correspondence during the American Revolution show this to be true.
Since the entire purpose of Leaderless Resistance is to defeat state
tyranny (at least insofar as this essay is concerned), all members of
phantom cells or individuals will tend to react to objective events in
the same way through usual tactics of resistance. Organs of information
distribution such as newspapers, leaflets, computers, etc., which are
widely available to all, keep each person informed of events, allowing
for a planned response that will take many variations. No one need issue
an order to anyone. Those idealist truly committed to the cause of
freedom will act when they feel the time is ripe, or will take their cue
from others who precede them. While it is true that much could be said
against this type of structure as a method of resistance, it must be
kept in mind that Leaderless Resistance is a child of necessity. The
alternatives to it have been show to be unworkable or impractical.
Leaderless Resistance has worked before in the American Revolution, and
if the truly committed put it to use for themselves, it will work now.
It goes almost without saying that Leaderless Resistance leads to very
small or even one man cells of resistance. Those who join organizations
to play “let’s pretend” or who are “groupies” will quickly be weeded
out. While for those who are serious about their opposition to federal
despotism, this is exactly what is desired.

From the point of view of tyrants and would be potentates in the federal
bureaucracy and police agencies, nothing is more desirable than that
those who oppose them be UNIFIED in their command structure, and that
every person who opposes them belong to a pyramid type group. Such
groups and organizations are an easy kill. Especially in light of the
fact that the Justice (sic) Department promised in 1987 that there would
never be another group that opposed them that they did not have at least
one informer in. These federal “friends of government” are intelligence
agents. They gather information that can be used at the whim of a
federal D.A. to prosecute. The line of battle has been drawn. Patriots
are required therefore, to make a conscious decision to either aid the
government in its illegal spying, by continuing with old methods of
organization and resistance, or to make the enemie’s job more difficult
by implementing effective countermeasures.

Now there will, no doubt, be mentally handicapped people out there who,
while standing at a podium with an American flag draped in the
background, and a lone eagle soaring in the sky above, will state
emphatically in their best sounding red, white, and blue voice, “So what
if the government is spying? We are not violating any laws.” Such
crippled thinking by any serious person is the best example that there
is a need for special education classes. The person making such a
statement is totally out of contact with political reality in this
country, and unfit for leadership of any thing more than a dog sleigh in
the Alaskan wilderness. The old “Born on the fourth of July” mentality
that has influenced so much of the American patriot’s thinking in the
past will not save him from the government in the future. “Reeducation”
for non-thinkers of this type will take place in the federal prison
system where there are no flags or eagles, but abundance of men who were
“not violating any law.”

Most groups who “unify” their disparate associates into a single
structure have short political lives. Therefore, those movement leaders
constantly calling for unity of organization rather than the desirable
unity of purpose, usually fall into one of three categories.
They may not be sound political tacticians, but rather, just committed
men who feel unity would help their cause, while not realizing that the
government would greatly benefit from such efforts. The Federal
objective, to imprison or destroy all who oppose them, is made easier in
pyramid organizations. Or perhaps, they do not fully understand the
struggle they are involved in and that the government they oppose has
declared a state of war against those fighting for faith, folk, freedom
and constitutional liberty. Those in power will use any means to rid
themselves of opposition. The third class calling for unity and let us
hope this is the minority of the three, are men more desirous of the
supposed power that a large organization would bestow, than of actually
achieving their stated purpose.

Conversely, the last thing Federal snoops would have, if they had any
choice in the matter, is a thousand different small phantom cells
opposing them. It is easy to see why. Such a situation is an
intelligence nightmare for a government intent upon knowing everything
they possibly can about those who oppose them. The Federals, able to
amass overwhelming strength of numbers, manpower, resources,
intelligence gathering, and capability at any given time, need only a
focal point to direct their anger. A single penetration of a pyramid
type of organization can lead to the destruction of the whole. Whereas,
Leaderless Resistance presents no single opportunity for the Federals to
destroy a significant portion of the Resistance.

With the announcement by the Department of Justice (sic) that 300 FBI
agents formerly assigned to watching Soviet spies in the US (domestic
counter intelligence) are now to be used to “combat crime”, the federal
government is preparing the way for a major assault upon those persons
opposed to their policies. Many anti-government groups dedicated to the
preservation of the America of our forefathers can expect shortly to
feel the brunt of a new federal assault upon liberty.

It is clear, therefore, that it is time to rethink traditional strategy
and tactics when it comes to opposing a modern police state. America is
quickly moving into a long dark night of police state tyranny, where the
rights now accepted by most as being inalienable will disappear. Let the
coming night be filled with a thousand points of resistance. Like the
fog which forms when conditions are right and disappears when they are
not, so must the resistance to tyranny be. "

"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:31:32 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Another reason "leaderless resistiance" works so well.


WHEN has leaderless resistance worked so well?

http://mediamatrix.org/lr.htm

Leaderless Resistance
[original article: 2004/06/08; last updated 2006/09/14]

Leaderless Resistance is a way to organize a large number of individuals
struggling against an enemy, usually an entrenched power.

A leaderless resistance is organized as independent individual persons
or small groups called cells. A particular group might have a leader
within it, but there are no leaders directing more than one group.

Conventional organizations, such as most armies, governments, political
parties, and corporations, have a very different structure. It is a
hierarchical structure. Most of the people in it, the ones that do most
of the work, are at the bottom. The funding, instruction, and commands,
come from a few leaders near the top. Because of it's centralized
command and control, the conventional organization can be manipulated,
or destroyed, by controlling only a few resources near the top.

But in a leaderless resistance, it's individual groups are self funded,
self trained, and they decide for themselves how to help the resistance.
Their decisions are based on their well understood common goal of the
resistance, and whatever Intelligence that they can collect.

A lot of false information has been written about leaderless resistance.
From the results from a Google search (Live Web Page: here) that I did
on 2004 Jun 06, I saw only one page, an essay by Louis Beam (Live Web
Page: here Cached Web Page: here), that did not seem distorted. The
others falsely characterized leaderless resistance as being:

* Secretive;
* used by Evil groups doing acts of sabotage and violence;
* used mostly by terrorists;
* a last resort after failure as a conventional organization.

But NONE of this is true

Leaderless resistance is not necessarilly bad. Leaderless resistance can
be used for either good or Evil, as any other tool, such as cars,
knives, guns, or words.

A leaderless resistance might not be Secret at all.

* If it does unpopular things, such as the terrorist killing and
maiming of innocent people, then it needs to keep itself Secret from
most people.
* But if it does popular things, such as resisting an oppressive
government, then it does not need to be Secret, and in fact can gain
members and become stronger by acting openly.

And most terrorist acts are NOT committed by leaderless resistances.
Most terrorist acts are committed by conventional hierarchical
organizations. The funding, training, and commands, come from the top.
For example, if you believe the news reports and an FBI Live Web Page
here, "Bin Laden is the leader of a terrorist organization known as
Al-Qaeda", a conventional hierarchical organization. Though Al-Qaeda was
supposedly responsible for various terrorist acts, including the Attack
On America 2001 Sep 11, the Bin Laden page makes no specific mentin of
that attack.

[Note, terrorism changed in 2005, if you believed the "experts"
appearing in the mainstream media, or the Live Web Page here in the
increasingly political Wikipedia.

The new terrorists, such as the ones that were caught trying to use
liquid explosives to destroy airliners from Great Britain, did not get
orders from leaders. They were said to be "home-grown" terrorists, and
"self-starters". They sympathized with the causes of earlier terrorists,
and they decided to act on their own.

In fact, by the 5th anniversary of 9-11, Al-Qaeda itself had changed
from a hierarchical organization to a leaderless resistance. Bin Laden
was no longer its leader who gave specific orders, but only a figurehead
who made pronouncements and gave general guidance. That is, if you
believed the "experts". ]

And leaderless resistance is not necessarilly a strategy of last resort.
For example, the struggle of colonists against the British during
America's revolutionary era (Live Web Page: here) contained leaderless
resistance components from the beginning. When it started, that's all
that there was, when the resistance consisted of two types of groups:

* Committees of Correspondence (Live Web Pages here and here)
collected and distributed Intelligence by letter to other groups in the
resistance. This Intelligence consisted of information about British
activities, including laws passed in England that affected the colonies,
and ideas and news about resistance activities.

* Sons of Liberty groups (Live Web Page here) used this information
to plan and execute various acts of resistance, including protests and
sabotage. A well known example of this is the Boston Tea Party.

The resistance grew in size and strength. Eventually it was strong
enough to support conventional hierarchical components, including an
army with General George Washington as it's leader.


The main advantage of a leaderless resistance is that it is very
difficult for an enemy to use COINTELPRO-style methods to infiltrate and
control it. It can be orders of magnitude more expensive to stop a
leaderless resistance than to stop a conventional hierarchical
resistance with the same number of people. This is because:

* A conventional organization can be controlled by controlling only
a few people near the top who give the orders and distribute the
funding. Infiltration, assassination, bribery, blackmale, and other
methods of control, applied to a few key people, can neutralize most of
the organization.

* But in a leaderless resistance, it's individual groups are self
funded, self trained, and they decide for themselves how to help the
resistance. So stopping a leaderless resistance means stopping most of
the individuals or groups, of which there can be a very large number.

Leaderless resistance has vulnerabilities. The main one is
communication. The members of an effective leaderless resistance need to
communicate information about their activities and about enemy
activities. They need to communicate with each other and with
prospective new resistance members. A modern leaderless resistance might
try to do this with Internet Web sites, e-mail, telephones, postal mail,
and coverage by the news media.

But the opponent's Counterintelligence services can cause these
communication systems to fail, using Internet Censorship, tampering with
telephone calls and postal mail, and control of the news media. These
communication failures can easilly go unnoticed or be incorrectly
interpreted as bad luck, especially when combined with other
distractions.

Project Media Matrix's Truth Distribution Network (TDN) and Freenet are
some of the many attempts to provide communications methods that are
secure and effective for both leaderless resistances and conventional
hierarchical organiztions.


In 2003 a large quasi-leaderless resistance formed that became known
briefly as the "Second Superpower" It was united by the idea that plans
by the US and it's allies to start a War Against Iraq were wrong and had
to be stopped. It produced antiwar protests of hundreds of thousands of
people (Live Web Page: here), larger than the protests during the US war
in Vietnam.

But the media ignored the protests. Iraq was invaded. The "Second
Superpower" was Googlewashed from the Internet, divided in it's goal,
and eventually neutralized (Live Web Page: here).


The next big leaderless resistance might be the "9-11 truth movement"
(Live Web Page: here). 9-11, the Attack On America 2001 Sep 11, has been
shown to have been an inside job. It and other staged terrorist attacks
are being used to justify the so-called "war on terror".

Because this unnecessary "war on terror" is affecting so many people's
lives negatively, the 9-11 truth movement has the potential to draw
millions of people into its ranks. One of the components of this
movement, the rather successful group "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" (Live
Web Page: here), already operates as a leaderless resistance.




"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:31:32 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Another reason "leaderless resistiance" works so well.


WHEN has leaderless resistance worked so well?


Need more?

Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500, RBnDFW
wrote:

Wes wrote:

I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.

That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.
Even after the third or forth time.
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:15:28 -0500, RBnDFW
wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:
RBnDFW on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Wes wrote:

I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.

The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name - said that when
he was a POW during WW2 he realized that he had a lot of time on his
hands, and didn't know how long the war would last, so any books he
got, would have to last. So, one page a day. One page. Do not turn
the page to finish the sentence, wait till tomorrow.
But first, he just enjoyed the book. Looked at the actual
physical book, how it felt, hefted, the colors of the binding ... his
fellow POWs figured he'd gone nuts. But it did give him an
appreciation for literature.

I heard that, but I sure do like reading ebooks on my iPhone now
That's why I bought a web book.
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada

RBnDFW on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:15:28 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
RBnDFW on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Wes wrote:

I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.

The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name - said that when
he was a POW during WW2 he realized that he had a lot of time on his
hands, and didn't know how long the war would last, so any books he
got, would have to last. So, one page a day. One page. Do not turn
the page to finish the sentence, wait till tomorrow.
But first, he just enjoyed the book. Looked at the actual
physical book, how it felt, hefted, the colors of the binding ... his
fellow POWs figured he'd gone nuts. But it did give him an
appreciation for literature.

I heard that, but I sure do like reading ebooks on my iPhone now

I remember when they started not providing hard copy manuals.
Great idea, but you couldn't take the computer to the bathroom. And
that is sort of my criterion: can I take the "book" with me to the
can?
--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 21:05:52 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

RBnDFW on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:15:28 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
RBnDFW on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Wes wrote:

I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.

The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name -

James Clavell, also wrote King Rat.

Don Foreman on Mon, 16 Aug 2010
00:47:43 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 21:05:52 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

RBnDFW on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:15:28 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
RBnDFW on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Wes wrote:

I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.

The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name -

James Clavell, also wrote King Rat.

Right. That was about his experiences in the POW camps. Makes a
good point: People will get all mad at the wheeler dealer middle man,
but without him, there would be no "trade". The stuff they want they
would not get, nor would the stuff they have be available for others.
Don't knock the sales staff, without them the workers have no job
orders.
--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

pyotr filipivich wrote:

RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:15:28 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
?pyotr filipivich wrote:
?? RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
?? in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
??? Wes wrote:
???
???? I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
??? That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
??? I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.
??
?? The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name - said that when
?? he was a POW during WW2 he realized that he had a lot of time on his
?? hands, and didn't know how long the war would last, so any books he
?? got, would have to last. So, one page a day. One page. Do not turn
?? the page to finish the sentence, wait till tomorrow.
?? But first, he just enjoyed the book. Looked at the actual
?? physical book, how it felt, hefted, the colors of the binding ... his
?? fellow POWs figured he'd gone nuts. But it did give him an
?? appreciation for literature.
?
?I heard that, but I sure do like reading ebooks on my iPhone now

I remember when they started not providing hard copy manuals.
Great idea, but you couldn't take the computer to the bathroom. And
that is sort of my criterion: can I take the "book" with me to the
can?


Why do you think they invented laptops?

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:15:28 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
?pyotr filipivich wrote:
?? RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
?? in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
??? Wes wrote:
???
???? I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
??? That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
??? I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.
??
?? The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name - said that when
?? he was a POW during WW2 he realized that he had a lot of time on his
?? hands, and didn't know how long the war would last, so any books he
?? got, would have to last. So, one page a day. One page. Do not turn
?? the page to finish the sentence, wait till tomorrow.
?? But first, he just enjoyed the book. Looked at the actual
?? physical book, how it felt, hefted, the colors of the binding ... his
?? fellow POWs figured he'd gone nuts. But it did give him an
?? appreciation for literature.
?
?I heard that, but I sure do like reading ebooks on my iPhone now

I remember when they started not providing hard copy manuals.
Great idea, but you couldn't take the computer to the bathroom. And
that is sort of my criterion: can I take the "book" with me to the
can?


Why do you think they invented laptops?

Michael,

Haven't you noticed how people look at you kinda funny when
you take a laptop to the bathroom???

--

Richard Lamb

"Michael A. Terrell" on Mon, 16 Aug 2010
11:44:31 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:15:28 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
?pyotr filipivich wrote:
?? RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
?? in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
??? Wes wrote:
???
???? I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
??? That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
??? I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.
??
?? The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name - said that when
?? he was a POW during WW2 he realized that he had a lot of time on his
?? hands, and didn't know how long the war would last, so any books he
?? got, would have to last. So, one page a day. One page. Do not turn
?? the page to finish the sentence, wait till tomorrow.
?? But first, he just enjoyed the book. Looked at the actual
?? physical book, how it felt, hefted, the colors of the binding ... his
?? fellow POWs figured he'd gone nuts. But it did give him an
?? appreciation for literature.
?
?I heard that, but I sure do like reading ebooks on my iPhone now

I remember when they started not providing hard copy manuals.
Great idea, but you couldn't take the computer to the bathroom. And
that is sort of my criterion: can I take the "book" with me to the
can?

Why do you think they invented laptops?

Ah, but those came later. I'm dating myself, but I had one of
the New ATs (with the hot new Intel 286 chip) and the massive forty
megabyte hard drive! Yowzah, we were screaming!

Maybe I got the wrong size laptop, but this beastie is just not
convenient tot take to the can. "Live and learn".
--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

cavelamb on Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:04:29 -0500
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:15:28 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
?pyotr filipivich wrote:
?? RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
?? in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
??? Wes wrote:
???
???? I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
??? That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
??? I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.
??
?? The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name - said that when
?? he was a POW during WW2 he realized that he had a lot of time on his
?? hands, and didn't know how long the war would last, so any books he
?? got, would have to last. So, one page a day. One page. Do not turn
?? the page to finish the sentence, wait till tomorrow.
?? But first, he just enjoyed the book. Looked at the actual
?? physical book, how it felt, hefted, the colors of the binding ... his
?? fellow POWs figured he'd gone nuts. But it did give him an
?? appreciation for literature.
?
?I heard that, but I sure do like reading ebooks on my iPhone now

I remember when they started not providing hard copy manuals.
Great idea, but you couldn't take the computer to the bathroom. And
that is sort of my criterion: can I take the "book" with me to the
can?


Why do you think they invented laptops?

Michael,

Haven't you noticed how people look at you kinda funny when
you take a laptop to the bathroom???

I'm usually in too much off a hurry to notice other people.

But I do carry a spiral bound notebook at all times, and during
"the pause that refreshes" I have been known to jot down the
occasional sitzenwitz.

tschus
pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

pyotr filipivich wrote:
cavelamb on Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:04:29 -0500
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:15:28 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
?pyotr filipivich wrote:
?? RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
?? in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
??? Wes wrote:
???
???? I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
??? That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
??? I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.
??
?? The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name - said that when
?? he was a POW during WW2 he realized that he had a lot of time on his
?? hands, and didn't know how long the war would last, so any books he
?? got, would have to last. So, one page a day. One page. Do not turn
?? the page to finish the sentence, wait till tomorrow.
?? But first, he just enjoyed the book. Looked at the actual
?? physical book, how it felt, hefted, the colors of the binding ... his
?? fellow POWs figured he'd gone nuts. But it did give him an
?? appreciation for literature.
?
?I heard that, but I sure do like reading ebooks on my iPhone now

I remember when they started not providing hard copy manuals.
Great idea, but you couldn't take the computer to the bathroom. And
that is sort of my criterion: can I take the "book" with me to the
can?

Why do you think they invented laptops?
Michael,

Haven't you noticed how people look at you kinda funny when
you take a laptop to the bathroom???

I'm usually in too much off a hurry to notice other people.

But I do carry a spiral bound notebook at all times, and during
"the pause that refreshes" I have been known to jot down the
occasional sitzenwitz.

tschus
pyotr



Nope, that's not it... )


--

Richard Lamb

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 10:57:51 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

cavelamb on Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:04:29 -0500
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:15:28 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
?pyotr filipivich wrote:
?? RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
?? in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
??? Wes wrote:
???
???? I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
??? That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
??? I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.
??
?? The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name - said that when
?? he was a POW during WW2 he realized that he had a lot of time on his
?? hands, and didn't know how long the war would last, so any books he
?? got, would have to last. So, one page a day. One page. Do not turn
?? the page to finish the sentence, wait till tomorrow.
?? But first, he just enjoyed the book. Looked at the actual
?? physical book, how it felt, hefted, the colors of the binding ... his
?? fellow POWs figured he'd gone nuts. But it did give him an
?? appreciation for literature.
?
?I heard that, but I sure do like reading ebooks on my iPhone now

I remember when they started not providing hard copy manuals.
Great idea, but you couldn't take the computer to the bathroom. And
that is sort of my criterion: can I take the "book" with me to the
can?


Why do you think they invented laptops?

Michael,

Haven't you noticed how people look at you kinda funny when
you take a laptop to the bathroom???

I'm usually in too much off a hurry to notice other people.

But I do carry a spiral bound notebook at all times, and during
"the pause that refreshes" I have been known to jot down the
occasional sitzenwitz.

tschus
pyotr

Im a notorious "bathroom reader" and when PDAs were common...Id spend
far far too much time in the head when away from home trying to finish
some novel I was into.. At home of course...I have bookshelves in the
head.

Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

pyotr filipivich wrote:
RBnDFW on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:15:28 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
RBnDFW on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Wes wrote:

I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.
The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name - said that when
he was a POW during WW2 he realized that he had a lot of time on his
hands, and didn't know how long the war would last, so any books he
got, would have to last. So, one page a day. One page. Do not turn
the page to finish the sentence, wait till tomorrow.
But first, he just enjoyed the book. Looked at the actual
physical book, how it felt, hefted, the colors of the binding ... his
fellow POWs figured he'd gone nuts. But it did give him an
appreciation for literature.
I heard that, but I sure do like reading ebooks on my iPhone now

I remember when they started not providing hard copy manuals.
Great idea, but you couldn't take the computer to the bathroom. And
that is sort of my criterion: can I take the "book" with me to the
can?

uh, yes, I can, and do, read my phone in the can.
Don't tell my boss.

cavelamb wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:15:28 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
?pyotr filipivich wrote:
?? RBnDFW ? on Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:20:18 -0500 typed
?? in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
??? Wes wrote:
???
???? I read about 650 wpm and for the one time in my life, I envied those that read slow.
??? That's the single reason I'm glad I never learned to speed-read.
??? I do enjoy a good book, and regret when I get to the end.
??
?? The author of Shogun (et al) - I forget his name - said that when
?? he was a POW during WW2 he realized that he had a lot of time on his
?? hands, and didn't know how long the war would last, so any books he
?? got, would have to last. So, one page a day. One page. Do not turn
?? the page to finish the sentence, wait till tomorrow.
?? But first, he just enjoyed the book. Looked at the actual
?? physical book, how it felt, hefted, the colors of the binding ... his
?? fellow POWs figured he'd gone nuts. But it did give him an
?? appreciation for literature.
?
?I heard that, but I sure do like reading ebooks on my iPhone now

I remember when they started not providing hard copy manuals.
Great idea, but you couldn't take the computer to the bathroom. And
that is sort of my criterion: can I take the "book" with me to the
can?


Why do you think they invented laptops?

Michael,

Haven't you noticed how people look at you kinda funny when
you take a laptop to the bathroom???


When did they install the spy cameras?