Field Guide to Domestic Terrorists: 3 Percenters

3 Percenter Logo: A symbol of domestic terrorism.

Several years ago, I wrote a series of posts with the collective title FGFD: A Field Guide to Flying Death. I wrote a half-dozen posts in the series. I have plans to write a half-dozen more.  One post was on ICBMs, InterContinental Ballistic Missiles, the kind would destroy cities and countries. If terrorists ever get weapons like these, the world is in deep and imminent danger. 

On January 6, the U.S. Capitol was attacked by terrorists who murdered a police office and hurt and maimed others.  The former President incited the riot, but various domestic terrorist groups attacked the Capitol at his direction.  

I wanted to know more about the groups that attack their own government inspired by the Liar-in-Chief.

I will begin with Three Percenters.  The Anti-Defamation League, ADL, has called them a terrorist group for a while which means they love Trump and Trump loves them.  

Here are some key points from the ADL:

• Three Percenters are part of the militia movement, which supports the idea of a small number of dedicated “patriots” protecting Americans from government tyranny, just as the patriots of the American Revolution protected early Americans from British tyranny. 
• The Three Percenter concept, created in 2008, is based on an inaccurate historical claim that only three percent of Americans fought in the Revolutionary War against the British. 
• Three Percenters may join or form traditional militia groups but often form non-paramilitary groups or online networks. Many are not associated with any particular groups. 
• The Three Percenter concept both contributed to and benefited from the resurgence of the militia movement that began in 2008. Because many adherents to the militia movement strongly support President Trump, in recent years, Three Percenters have not been as active in opposing the federal government, directing their ire at other perceived foes, including leftists/antifa, Muslims and immigrants. 
• Three Percenters have been active in 2019-2020 in reaction to a range of issues, including attempts to pass state level gun control measures, state-imposed restrictions and lockdowns to prevent spread of the coronavirus, and the protests that have taken place around the country over the May 2020 killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. 
• Three Percenters have a track record of criminal activity ranging from weapons violations to terrorist plots and attacks.

Their ideology according to Wikipedia:

The group's website states it is "not a militia" and "not anti-government".^[15][6] Three Percenters believe that ordinary citizens must take a stand against perceived abuses by the U.S. federal government, which they characterize as overstepping its Constitutional limits.^[1] Its stated goals include protecting the right to keep and bear arms, and to "push back against tyranny".^[7] The group opposes federal involvement in what they consider local affairs, and states in its bylaws that county sheriffs are "the supreme law of the land".^[15]

Like other American militia movements, Three Percenters believe in the ability of citizen volunteers with ordinary weapons to successfully resist the United States military. They support this belief by claiming that only around 3% of American colonists fought the British during the American Revolution, a claim which underestimates the number of people who resisted British rule,^[8] and which does not take into account the concentration of British forces in coastal cities, the similarity of weapons used by American and British forces, and French support for the colonists.^[8]

Racist, Right-Wing, Republican Fools with a lot of guns is one way to look at them.  They first organized in opposition to a Black President.  They should be treated as terrorists.  No definition of patriot describes what they do or believe.

The Worst President, Then One of the Greatest Presidents, Then Civil War

 

James Buchanan, worst President, until 2020

James Buchanan was widely regarded as the worst President in American history until January 6, 2020.  Buchanan presided over the slide to Civil War.  The last month of the Buchanan administration saw the rebellious states prepare for war.  On February 8, 1861, the first seven of the traitorous states formed the Confederate States of America.  Buchanan was President until Abraham Lincoln's inauguration on March 4. 

The war did not begin until the attack on Fort Sumter on April 12. For 39 days, President Lincoln, one of the greatest Presidents who ever lived, tried to re-unite the country and then defend the United States.  

In the 157-day period between election day November 6, 1860, and April 12, 1861, many families split, many friendships ended, many comrades took opposite sides in the coming war.  

The terrorist attack on the Capitol on January 6 began with an hour of incitement by Trump based on his endless lies about the election.  After the attack that left five dead, 139 members of Congress and 8 senators voted not to accept the election results: AFTER the Capitol was attacked.  They are still seated in Congress.  They should not be. 

Eight of those traitorous Republicans are Pennsylvania representatives including my former commander in Iraq, Scott Perry. President Joe Biden has been sworn into office, but Perry and the rest of the insurrection caucus stand by Trump's lies.  They have broken their oath to uphold the Constitution.  

Every day since January 6, I have wondered if this is what it felt like to live in 1861 and watch the country fall apart. For the first time in 240 years, the United States of America did not have a peaceful transfer of power. The President told his followers to attack the Capitol, then he refused to attend the inauguration of the new President.  

Buchanan went to Lincoln's inauguration. 

What Will We Do With the Sedition Caucus?

 

Helsinki 2018, selling out America to her enemies

Now that the President who sided with Vladimir Putin against our government is out of office, America will have to deal with the liars and traitors left who still hold office in our government.

Congressman Lloyd Smucker voted against me and everyone else in his district who cast legal votes in the election.  Smucker along with seven other Pennsylvania congressman voted not to certify the election in Pa. AFTER the a mob of white supremacist terrorists invaded the Capital.  

Another member of the Pennsylvania Sedition Caucus is Scott Perry. My commander in Iraq in 2009-10 repeated all of Trump's lies about the election and voted with the murderers who invaded the U.S. Capital.  

They joined more than 100 other seditious Republican members of congress and eight senators--led by Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz.  

None of the Republicans who voted for Trump's lies and against America should hold office, but they do. Now that the Traitor-in-Chief has returned to his Dacha (Дача) in Florida, I can focus on fighting the sedition caucus here in Pennsylvania.  Before his traitorous vote on January 6, I would not have believed Smucker could be defeated, but he can.  He will always be defined by his vile vote.

The same is true of Scott Perry. He won by several percentage points in 2020, but his unwavering support of Trump's unending lies will be his undoing.  

Despite Trump, Smucker and Perry, America is still a democracy.  One down, two to go in 2022.

  

Are We in 1861 America or in 1991 Yugoslavia?

 

Insurgent mob declares war on America at the direction of 

the President on January 6, 2021.

When the MAGA mob stormed the Capitol, were we watching the first battle of second American Civil War? Or were we watching an inevitable slide into tyranny?

In 1861, the second worst President in American history, James Buchanan, sent America into Civil War. But that war had a clear definition and boundaries, which meant the war could be fought and won and had an ending.  

In Yugoslavia the war is contained, for now. In Iraq or Yemen or Syria or Lybia the war is either intermittent or permanent, but essentially never ending.  One of the problem is borders.

In America, the borders of slave states formed the rebel nation.  Slaves were in these states. Slaves were not in the other states. (There were border states, but the rebel government had defined area.) So war could be fought and won or lost.  We utterly fucked up the peace, but the war itself and the rebel government ended.  

You could say the war ended in Yugoslavia, but the multi-ethnic society held together by Marshall Tito is gone and won't return. Hundreds of thousands were killed. Hundreds of thousands were displaced. Normal life has returned, but in ethnic enclaves with real borders.  

America is a complicated mess.  There are red states and blue states, but a half dozen states are more or less evenly split.  What side are they on?  And what about Austin, Texas, a hip enclave in amid millions of red state rednecks? Or Madison, Wisconsin? Or Denver and Boulder in Colorado? 

My own state of Pennsylvania can still be described as Philadelphia and Pittsburgh with Alabama in the middle.  I live in the city of Lancaster, a small, largely Democratic city in the middle of a county that is 80% Republican. Is Pennsylvania red or blue? It has a split congressional delegation--nine congress members from each party, one senator from each party. 

If America falls apart, the split can't happen along defined physical borders.  We are mixed thoroughly. We have to find a way to live with each other or face an ugly future.   

The Most Fun Book of 2020: "Tell Me Another One"

Judith Newman

At the end of 2019, before the pandemic, I was in the middle of a crowd of more than a thousand people in a big hall in Brooklyn. We came to hear Presidential Candidate Pete Buttigieg speak.  Halfway through the event, I met Judith Newman, author and New York Times columnist.  We talked about why we thought Mayor Pete was the best candidate for President, then talked about raising kids.

Newman has written several books. Her most well-known is To Siri with Love about raising her autistic son Gus.  Goodreads lists 22 editions of Siri including editions in Dutch, French and Spanish.  

But my favorite of her books is her first.  In 1994 she published Tell Me Another One: A Woman's Guide to Men's Classic Lines.  Before the first of my four daughters was born, I had a goal for all of their lives.  I wanted to convince each of my girls that women cannot change men.  To me, the saddest and most pervasive American myth for girls that kissing a frog would create a prince.  Or that loving a woman would lead a man to change.  

More specifically, I never wanted one of my daughters to say of a furtive, sneaky, loser with his uncombed hair in his eyes, "No one understands him but me."  The truth is, everyone understands that worthless little shit except the foolish girl who is smitten with him.  

All of my life I have known unhappy women who married that guy. They never changed him.  Decades of unhappiness followed.  

In the middle of Tell Me Another One is a brief taxonomy of guys by type. "I'm the Kinda Guy Who...." (How he describes himself)

• The Loner
• The Legend in His Own Mind
• The Rebel
• The Bum
• SNAGs (Sensitive New Age Guys)
• The Woefully Misunderstood

The last section has lovely quotes that describe the guy I warned my girls away from:

"Oh, I'm eternally right. But what good does it do me?" --Robert Sherwood, The Petrified Forest

"If I loved you less, I'd be happier now." --Man whose martyr complex is annoyingly larger than yours.

"This long disease, my life." --Alexander Pope, prologue to The Imitations of Horace 

This is a book of lines. The classic trio is on page 39:

• "You'd do it if you really love me." --Men, from the day they turn 14.
• "Nothing's going to happen that you really don't want to happen." --The same men after they turn 30.
• "Of course, I'll still respect you." --All men, all ages.

On page 35 is civilian version the go-to line of soldiers in every army ever:

"Who knows but the world may end to-night?" --Robert Browning, "The Last Ride Together"

Military version:  "I leave tomorrow. I might not be coming back." --Said any soldier or sailor in any army or navy who thought it would get him laid.  

--------

My daughters are in relationships with good men who are the opposite of the "misunderstood" guy I worried about.  I could take credit, but it turns out an important part of their education in what men are really like came from playing teams sports at a small school. For away games in middle and high school, they sometimes rode the same bus as the boys teams.  One or two seasons and all of their illusions about boys and men were gone.  

Book Report 2020: Best and Worst

My favorite book of 2020

This year I am breaking my book list into pieces. This piece is Best and Worst books of 2020.  Each book was recommended by a friend, even the bad book.

First, my favorite book: Nothing Ever Dies: Vietnam and the Memory of War by Viet Thanh Nguyen.  The author is a refugee. He and his family escaped Vietnam after the war was lost by America and by our ally South Vietnam.  

The thesis of the book: 

All wars are fought twice, the first time on the battlefield, the second time in memory.  

In America we call this war the Vietnam War.  In Vietnam, it is the American War.  In the wake of the victory of the North in 1975, the South was oppressed and the memory of its part in the war erased from the official records.

The stark differences in the views of the war between the two combatant countries are evident at the Vietnam War Memorial where every American soldier who died in the war is etched in the long black wall.  More than three million Vietnamese died in the war, a fact that is not part of any remembrance of the decade-long conflict. Many of the dead were our allies.  Nguyen also points out that the American wounded are not part of the memorial. 

So much of the book was new for me. Although the Vietnam War defined much of my life, the book made clear that I knew little about the war and its devastating effects on both countries.  Most of the senior officers and NCOs I served with on active duty between 1972 and 1979 were Vietnam War veterans. Their experience should have been the basis for fighting the wars in the Middle East in this century, but the lessons learned were quickly forgotten.

A decade ago, when I served in the Iraq War, it was clear that the failures of the Vietnam War would become the failures of the current wars. The big failures of the Iraq War are well known, but Nguyen reminded me of a lesson learned in the Vietnam War that had to be re-learned in Iraq with the loss of many lives and many limbs: armor for trucks. 

Another lesson of the Vietnam War forgotten in this century is the first line of Chapter 6--On Asymmetry: 

Killing is the weapon of the strong. Dying is the weapon of the weak.  

The book is beautifully written and painfully true. 

Next, three books that gave me a different view of Socrates and Plato. Forty years ago as an undergraduate I read Plato's Republic. What I could remember centered on the Allegory of the Cave and the Philosopher King.   I knew even then that every Utopia was really an authoritarian world--perfection can't allow the mess that is freedom.  

What I did not understand until this year was that Plato at the end of his life had a view of the ideal government that was nearly opposite of his mentor Socrates.  Plato spent his life presenting Socrates to the world. But after Socrates took his own life before Athens put him to death, Plato ceased believing in democracy and imagined a world led by a Philosopher King that is the opposite of the Socratic, democratic ideal.  

The anti-democratic, authoritarian tendency of Plato in late life is at the center of Karl Popper's The Open Society and Its Enemies.  

Popper's book and Republic were the third and fourth books we discussed in the World Conquest Book Club.  

Which brings up the delightful irony that I learned more about Plato by using the very Socratic method of discussing ideas among friends.  

And less than a month after discussing these books, I joined the Virtual Reading Group of the Hannah Arendt Center at Bard College.  The book they were discussing and will finish this month is Arendt's The Promise of Politics. The first essay is "Socrates." Arendt says Socrates used dialogue to bring each person to clarity and harmony:  It is better [for me] to be in disagreement with the whole world than' being one, to be in disagreement with myself.

Through dialogue, Socrates brought those he spoke with to see what they really believed so they could be in agreement within themselves.  In this context Socrates said one reason not to be murderer is that you must live the rest of your life with a murderer.  

Through reading these books and discussing them, I have become more aware I feel moments of real clarity in dialogue, clarity that I cannot find in thinking about a subject or idea by myself. 

At the same time I was learning more about Socrates and dialogue, I read a book by a man whose inner dialogue must be chaotic.  The book attempts to justify Evangelical Christians voting for Trump.  I can imagine the author's inner dialogue would have less harmony than a half-dozen metal trash cans rolling downhill. 

The worst book I read in 2020, I read at the request of a friend named Dmitri who lives part of each year in a monastery in Germany. My best friend, Cliff, has lived there since 1979, the year we both left active duty in the Army Cold War Germany.  I spent the day with Dmitri and Cliff visiting the Cold War border in 2017. He has a very interesting story. Dmitri sincerely believes Trump is good for the Church, for Israel and for America.  So he asked if I would read book Evangelicals at the Crossroads: Will the Church Pass the Trump Test? by Michael L. Brown.  I did.

Brown is a celebrity Christian with who publishes books and articles and is all over social media and does lives interviews and Q&As.  After I read the book, I wrote this on Goodreads: 

In Evangelicals at the Crossroads, Michael L. Brown reminds me of the guy who sat on his own hands and rocked from side to side: he was on the one hand then on the other hand.
Toward the end of the first chapter, Brown quotes Peter Wehner at length. Wehner is an unwavering public Christian who I have heard calmly say that a man with Trump's actions could not possibly represent the Gospel. On the next page he quotes Robert Jeffress who holds rallies for Trump in his Church with patriotic music and flags followed by fireworks displays. Brown quotes these two men as having an equally valid point of view.
Which to me felt like when CNN put an immunologist and Jenny McCarthy, an anti-vaxx celebrity, next to each other as if medical school and nude modeling gave each an equal voice on vaccination.
I looked at Brown's long list of books and it screamed "propaganda."
I deeply distrust his method of presenting opinions without context because his thesis is that there are good people on both sides of the debate. I find that sort of populist equivalency false and repellent.

In the middle of reading the book, I wrote this:

I am reading a book by a white Evangelical Christian justifying his support of the "chaos candidate." I am reading it with two friends who are Christians who live in German and are trying to understand the trumpian Church in America.

The author quotes Christian leaders who celebrate him as a "Chaos Candidate." These trumpians see the white Evangelical Church as embattled by dark forces of secularism who want to take away their freedom.

Imagine those who say they worship the Creator of the Universe celebrating chaos! Chapter 6 has extensive quotes of those celebrating the chaos candidate.

It reads like a librarian celebrating book burning.

The book is a strong confirmation in Church language that the trumpians in the Church, like all trumpians, love their orange idol because he hates who they hate.

Another chilling bit of clarity in the book is that in his reptilian instinct for power, trump has found a huge loyal group who really, deeply celebrates his authoritarian goals. The religious people who support him want rights reversed for everyone who is not them.

MAGA re-elected will reverse gay rights, abortion rights, women's rights, voting rights, the rights of the disabled, worker's rights and when the steamroller gets some momentum going, Trump will reverse civil rights.

========

Since the election Brown is less enthusiastic about Trump, while not quite admitting Trump lost. Brown's livelihood is based on stirring up fear among his followers, and he will keep doing that long after Trump is gone.  

Book Report 2020: Fiction

The year 2020 brought a plague on the world, but was a bonanza for my life in books. I am part of a half dozen book groups, so I read books I might never have read or known about otherwise. 

I group the books I read in broad categories: Faith, Fiction, History, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology and Science. The biggest category is fiction so I will start there. 

Nine of the 50 books I read in 2020 are volumes 13-21 of the Master and Commander Series by Patrick O’Brian. I read the first 12 in 2019. It is a wonderful series with many reflections on friendship and leadership and life. Here is a passage on leadership.

Here is last year's list which begins with my delight reading this series. Of course, men crowded on a wooden ship made me think about men crammed into a tank.

The movie is worth watching. The friendship at the center of books is portrayed very well in the movie and some of the good scenes in the book make it into the movie. 

The next two books on the fiction list are the first two of five, 1,000-page volumes in the Game of Thrones series.  This fantasy series was among the best and most popular series on HBO: 8 seasons of sex and slaughter and first-rate acting and political intrigue.  But the books are better. Even eight seasons comprising 80 hours of drama omits some of the depth and character development that can happen in 5,000 pages.  And there are still two volumes yet to be published.  The author is more than three score and ten years old and does not have a healthy lifestyle.  I hope he finishes the final volumes!!!

The next two fiction books I read with the book group that began as four friends who were ESL volunteers sharing books and then became a book club.  This year, two of the seven books of the ESL Friends and Others Book Club were plague books:  Love in the Time of Cholera and The Decameron.  

The best part of the discussion of Cholera was Sarah Reisert on a ten-minute rant about how the book is a beautifully written account of misogyny, child abuse, child molestation, pedophilia, and other misanthropies.  It is all of that and a wonderful story and since it is fiction, no actual humans were harmed and the discussion continued about the parts we liked and did not like.  

The Decameron was better than I remembered. We skipped some of the worst stories of anti-semitism although we did have a long discussion of the last tale which is a tale of terrible abuse of a spouse. Chelsea Pomponio guided us through the two discussions we had of Bocaccio's masterpiece. He PhD thesis is on Bocaccio along with his Florentine contemporaries Dante and Petrarch.  I keep returning to these stories. I am fascinated by the hundred-tale poetic form that I love so much in the cantos of the Divine Comedy.  

The Decameron is paired with The Divine Comedy as the "human comedy."  The New Yorker's Joan Acocella wrote a lovely article about a new translation of Decameron in 2013.

In the spring, I re-read Memoir from and Antproof Case by Mark Helprin.  I have loved his work since I first read one of his stories in the New Yorker almost forty years ago. This is a crazy tale of a coffee-obsessed American pilot living in Brazil who seems like an old crank--and that's all--but has a wonderful story that unfolds over 500 pages.  Winters Tale  and Paris in the Present Tense are my favorites by Helprin, but this one is good. Along with Kazuo Ishiguro, Helprin is my favorite living writer, but I hate is politics as much as I love the politics of Ishiguro. 

The only Russian novel I read this year was The Head of Professor Dowel a creepy tale of three people kept alive as disembodied heads.  I meant to read it for year's and finally got around to it.  It is clearly an antecedent of C.S. Lewis' That Hideous Strength in which the "head" of a conspiracy is a disembodied head.  

At the prompting of my friend and former co-worker and talented writer Michal Meyer, I finally read both Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett, and I read them both by reading Good Omens. It's a very funny book on the near end of the world averted at the last moment by an angel and a demon who each "love the world" too much to be good at their respective jobs.  

The last book on my fiction list for 2020 is The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy. I first read this almost forty years ago. This tale of looking for the meaning of the universe--and finding out that it's meaningless seemed just right for a year of pandemic made worse by incompetent, pathetic leadership. "Don't Panic" is a great motto for 2020.  

A couple of months ago, I wrote about book groups as a diversion for the pandemic year. Some things don't work so well on Zoom, but book discussions among small groups of interested participants work very well.