Archive for the ‘2011’ Category

The Top 8 Deadly Myths About Survivalism

Posted: 03/12/2013 by Lynn Dartez in 2011

(Before It’s News)


For the last several years, our family – Dan, our son Jesse and I – have been living what some may call the “survivalist” lifestyle. Actually, we live the off-grid (so far off the grid that there is no land line and no cell phone service available), self-sufficient life.

We’re not here to get away from the world for a few days while chaos happens and calms down – we don’t think that’s the way it will go, anyway. We’re here because we have chosen to separate ourselves from the rate race, the system, and not be swept away in the tide of what we see as society running amok.

This is not a temporary lifestyle to us, it’s a wonderfully peaceful, sometimes difficult and always rewarding life. Regardless of what does or doesn’t happen “out there”, this is how we choose to live.

We were basically “city folk”. But over the past 20-plus years, we formulated, clarified and realized our vision to make the transformation to our current life. We understand the fear and panic many are now feeling in contemplating making a lifestyle change in a short time because world events require that it be done. That is why we wrote our book,Surviving Survivalism – How to Avoid Survivalism Culture Shock.

At one point we chose to lease parts of our land to form a small community of “like-minded” people (I would rather call it “like-spirited”) to help each other make it through what we know is coming down the pike soon – geo-politically, earth-chages-wise, etc. In that search for the right people (who we eventually did find) we met many types of self-proclaimed “survivalists”, most of whom were in reality “survival tourists”, a phrase our son coined for those who only wanted to investigate survivalism just deeply enough to find the reason they couldn’t/shouldn’t do it (“Phew, I almost had to wash my dishes by hand!”).

We met people who spent lots of money on land, a shelter and storage foods, only to forget the prepare the most important thing – their minds! It’s going to take so much more than a gross of toilet paper to save your ass. You’re going to have to put on your “big boy pants” and deal with things like going out in the cold to get firewood, learning to make pancakes with just flour you’ve ground, an egg and water and wearing the same clothes for years without falling apart (neither the clothes nor you!).

The things you might think are important now will seem silly to you when you’re more concerned with the dailiness of your chores that simply keep you alive through a cold winter. We met people who didn’t think they could live without their 62” plasma screen TV. We’ve been watching the same 1200 piece library of DVDs on our laptop for our evening’s entertainment for several years. We know the scripts backwards and forwards, but it takes our minds off the day’s work when we need it.

Before we were able to have our well drilled, we were depending on a local water delivery service (2500 gallons at a time, not a 5 gallon visit from the “Culligan Man”) who suddenly decided that he didn’t want to make the rough trip to our ranch any longer. We had to make our last 500 gallons last throughout a brutally cold winter, washing dishes with 2 gallons a day, washing our hair about once very 2 weeks. But you find that you make it through.


Here are The Top 8 Deadly Myths about Survivalism:

  1. It’s just like camping. It’s nothing like camping. When you go camping, if you can’t take a shower for a couple of days, no problem, you’ll take one when you get home. This will be your home, and you’ll have to figure out how to keep your body (and clothing) clean all year long, in the cold, snow or wind. You can do without anything for a couple of days, even weeks, on a camping trip or you can jump back in the car and go to the nearest grocery store to pick up what you need. What if there were no grocery store available? How will you feel when your daily habits are interrupted, not just for a few days trip, but for the foreseeable future?


  1. You can buy enough food and supplies for forever. No, someday what you have will run out. You’ll have to learn to grow and/or gather new food supplies and to learn to use what you have, even if that means pancakes without baking powder. Someday you will have to wipe your butt with a washable rag instead of disposable toilet paper. Someday there will be no gas to get to the store and the store won’t have anything on the shelves anyway.


  1. Your neighbors will gather around and help each other. Think about your neighbors who haven’t got a clue – or can’t bear the thought – about their comfy suburban lives changing when the reality of where society is going hits them “upside the head”. What if your neighbors can’t get their daily supply of cigarettes, beer, Prozac, soda pop, etc., etc., etc.? Are they going to be the kind of people you can depend on? For how long?


  1. If I buy enough gadgets (mini washing machine, generator, solar tracker, ) I’ll be OK. If you truly believe that society is in for a big shake up, you’ll realize that this is not a time to spend money unnecessarily, but to put every penny you can into what is practical. Gadgets are going to break down and then you will have to learn to live without them anyway. Why not learn now?


  1. I can get to my survival location when TSHTF. This is the most flawed – and perhaps the most popular – plan: thinking that when all hell breaks loose you will know in advance enough to travel the hundreds of miles to your survival location. When the door slams shut the highways will be blocked, the urban and suburban streets will be blocked and patrolled and no one will be going anywhere!
    Even if your survival location is only a few miles away, you probably won’t be able to get there. If you truly understand the need for being “survival-minded”, why not begin living the self-sufficient lifestyle NOW? Learn what it really means to live off-the-grid NOW, not when there is chaos all around you. You may find that it’s a much better lifestyle than the one you are living now.


  1. I can convince my “significant other” that this is the right move. No, you can’t – and you shouldn’t. All you can do is give them information and allow them to do with it what they do. People either get this or they don’t. It’s not for everyone. This goes for all family members. I’m not saying go or don’t go without them. That’s an individual, circumstantial decision and action. If all members of your family are not on the same page, you’ll have to determine
  2. I don’t need to prepare a place. I’ll just grab my Bug-Out-Bag and find a cave somewhere. How many others do you think have that same plan? Especially those who live near caves, already know where they are and already expect to be occupying them? And can your bug out bag hold what you really need for an extended period of time?
  3. My kids will be bored. Your kids will be learning so many new ways of living, so many daily activities and chores, connecting with nature in so many new ways, they won’t have time to be bored. Allow them the freedom to discover things like what bugs are in the grass around your home, what plants grow, what wildlife is still abundant on this beautiful land…if your attitude is one of wonder, not worry, so will theirs be. Help them look at this as an adventure, not a burden.

 If you do not yet understand why it might be time to make a move from your comfy, familiar, suburban lifestyle, you’re not watching the news. Or maybe you are only watching mainstream news, who tell you “everything is as it should be.” It’s not.Friedrich Nietzsche was right… “That which does not kill us makes us stronger.” It’s amazing to see just what we are capable of living through, of accomplishing when we depend only on ourselves. When there is no safety net, sometimes you just learn to fly.


Delivered by The Daily Sheeple



Posted: 11/19/2012 by Lynn Dartez in 2011, 2012, Christian, Feds, FEMA CAMPS

By Attorney Jonathan Emord
Author of “The Rise of Tyranny” and
Global Censorship of Health Information” and
Restore The Republic
November 19, 2012

Regulation, like the work of a boa constrictor, wraps itself around the American economy and restricts freedom of action, imposing costly burdens which threaten the survival of the American market. Federal bureaucracy coerces and cajoles every market player, diminishing freedom to invent, produce, and market, reducing consumer choice, and creating governmentally planned economies. In the Obama Administration, the federal agencies are headed by individuals predisposed to exercise control over markets and regulate them with a vengeance. Those individuals harbor grave suspicions about the private sector and think it prone to failure and abuse unless kept firmly under federal control. The economies produced as a result of regulatory enforcement are inefficient, failing to meet the best and highest uses. Those economies carry with them ever higher levels of unemployment and loss of private revenue. The bureaucratization of everything private is enslaving and progressively destroying all productive enterprise, particularly small and mid-sized businesses and new market entrants. The bureaucratization of everything is rapidly transforming previously vibrant markets into dull and dysfunctional ones that can neither innovate nor employ those with talent.

The squeeze is on with the federal government aiming to increase taxes on the most productive elements of society while simultaneously imposing economic burdens and limitations on free choice through thousands of federal rules and a new emphasis on enforcement against the non-compliant, including asset forfeitures, seizure actions, and civil and criminal prosecutions. While taxes take the wealth that would otherwise be saved, invested, or spent; regulations limit freedom of choice, increasing the cost of production, goods, and services, diminishing the profitability of every enterprise, and limiting consumer choice in the market. Regulations also impose significant barriers to market entry and force many firms out of existence, depleting wealth, eliminating opportunity, and adding to unemployment.

Since the start of the Obama Administration, there has been an 18% increase in the number of federal regulatory agencies; there has been a 13% increase in employment at the agencies. According to a Policy Backgrounder by Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow James L. Gattuso entitled “Red Tape Rising,” since 2009 the federal agencies have adopted 106 new “major” or “significant” regulations (i.e., those with an estimated economic impact of $100 million or more each) at an implementation cost of $11 billion and a combined added economic impact of $46 billion. The estimated annual cost to industry of regulations imposed by federal agencies is in excess of $1.8 trillion per year (an amount higher than the annual pre-tax corporate profits of American industry and a significant chunk of the nation’s $15 trillion annual GDP). Some 4,000 new regulations are wending their way through the federal agencies. Of those, some 224 are “major” or “significant” regulations, each imposing an economic impact in excess of $100 million.

It is remarkable to note that few, if any, of the new regulations will produce a measureable improvement in the health or welfare of Americans or in the environment. Ironically, the costliest regulations (those that do most to destroy jobs and businesses) are often ones that by reasonable standards of measure do little, if anything, to achieve the alleged government objective. There is no statutory requirement that the agencies prove the efficacy of their regulations as a condition precedent to their adoption and implementation. There is no statutory requirement that agencies eliminate regulations that increase unemployment or that contribute to the very harm they were allegedly designed to eliminate. There is no limit to the number or cost of regulations.

Since the Kennedy Administration, when Congress doled out $533 million to support the federal agencies, there has been a consistent growth in the number, size, and scope of regulatory power. Congress now expends in excess of $60 billion annually to keep the agencies running. There are over 250 of them regulating everything from tongue depressors to credit cards to power plants, refrigerators, and automobiles. There is no economic liberty right to be free of federal regulation regardless of how costly it is unless the regulation is so arbitrary and capricious as to be entirely irrational.

The regulatory agencies are headed by unelected officials who within their respective agency’s jurisdiction possess vastly more power, individually, than any single elected official. Those unelected agency heads promulgate regulations without a meaningful check on their discretion by the Courts, the Congress, or the American people. Fully nine-tenths of all federal laws now implemented are not the product of those we elect but are the products of the unelected heads of the federal agencies. That is rule by oligarchy. Consequently, the United States is in fact no longer a limited federal republic. It has become an unlimited bureaucratic oligarchy, a transformation I explain in detail in The Rise of Tyranny.

Federal regulations embrace virtually every aspect of the economy. Gattuso’s “Red Tape Rising” report for Heritage documents several recent costly regulations. For example, new Department of Labor “Wage Methodology for the Temporary Non-agricultural Employment H-2B Program” increases the minimum wage rate for foreign workers employed under an H-2B visa and will impose an estimated $847.4 million annually on the economy. New Environmental Protection Agency standards require adherence to more stringent power plant emission standards and will impose an estimated $846.3 million annually. Environmental Protection Agency regulations set new fuel efficiency and emissions standards for combination tractors, heavy-duty pickups and vans, and vocational vehicles and will impose an estimated $606.9 million annually.

Environmental Protection Agency regulations require adherence to more stringent standards on the performance and emission limits of solid waste incinerators and will cost $721.7 million to implement and $286.2 million annually. Other Environmental Protection Agency regulations require adherence to emission standards on commercial, institutional, and industrial broilers and will cost $5.2 billion to implement and $1.8 billion annually. Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy regulations establish more stringent standards for home heating and cooling appliances and will cost an estimated $657.5 million annually. HHS Obamacare regulations requiring the establishment of new electronic transaction infrastructures will cost an estimated $547.5 million annually. The list goes on and on, adding hundreds of millions of dollars of burden each year to a beleaguered market with no limits imposed by Congress.

Environmental regulations are the costliest and most prolific followed by those coming from the Department of Health and Human Services and the Food and Drug Administration. Remarkably no serious effort has been made to repeal federal regulations by force of law or to prevent adoption of any that cause unemployment or force the closure of businesses. As with so many things in the world of politics, politicians deceive. The elected representatives mouth platitudes and issue promises about reducing overall spending, while the federal agencies left unregulated adopt regulation after regulation without regard to the resulting job and business losses.

At a time when the economy can least afford restrictions on freedom of choice and costly burdens, the regulatory agencies proceed as if affordability is entirely irrelevant. They proceed without regard to the foreseeable impact costly regulations have on job and business losses. Every work day somewhere in the United States a business or a person’s job ends due to the inability of a company to cope with regulatory burdens. Every work day some hapless business man or woman is forced to kow tow to the often unreasonable demands of a federal regulator, even if that means destroying huge amounts of inventory, relabeling all products, recalling perfectly safe products from the market, or reconstructing parts of a plant that have operated without incident for decades. As an attorney who has practiced administrative law for two and a half decades, I know well the enormously deleterious consequences that flow from unlimited regulatory power. That growth is destined to accelerate rapidly over the next four years. Many hundreds of businesses and many thousands of jobs will be lost. Given the persistent, decades long and pervasive lack of political stomach, selfless dedication to country, and brain power required to champion a reversal of the movement toward the bureaucratization of everything, we are worse off now than we were four years ago, and we will be worse off still four years hence.

© 2012 Jonathan W. Emord – All Rights Reserved

Jonathan W. Emord is an attorney who practices constitutional and administrative law before the federal courts and agencies. Congressman Ron Paul calls Jonathan “a hero of the health freedom revolution” and says “all freedom-loving Americans are in [his] debt . . . for his courtroom [victories] on behalf of health freedom.” He has defeated the FDA in federal court a remarkable eight times, six on First Amendment grounds, and is the author of Amazon bestsellers The Rise of Tyranny, Global Censorship of Health Information, and Restore the Republic. He is also the American Justice columnist for U.S.A. Today Magazine. For more info visit



The Truth in Time by Robert Welch

Posted: 11/19/2012 by Lynn Dartez in 2011

There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights.”- Marine General Smedley Butler.

Oath Keepers has launched a national effort to recall (or remove by any other lawful means) all of the oath breaking members of Congress, in both the House and Senate, who voted for the National Defense Appropriations Act of 2012 (NDAA), which contains provisions that authorize indefinite military detention and trial by military commission of “any person” – including U.S. citizens and lawful residents – upon the mere say-so of the President or one of his subordinates in the Executive Branch, such as within the Department of Defense or CIA.

Number three on the Oath Keepers list of Orders We Will Not Obey states:

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.

That is near the top of our list for very good reason – this claimed power will kill our Bill of Rights unless it is stopped.  To be blunt, we consider the NDAA of 2012 to be a declaration of war on the American people, and an act of treason.   But even if you disagree with that view, and merely consider those who voted for it to be oath breakers, please work hard to remove them all from office.  Oath Keepers members across the nation will lead or assist efforts in their states to remove any member of Congress, regardless of party, who voted for this monstrosity.

We encourage all Americans of whatever political party to set aside their differences and come together in defense of our Bill of Rights by rooting out this den of vipers in Washington D.C. who are either knowingly killing our Bill of Rights, were too concerned with their careers to take a principled stand by voting against the NDAA, or are useful idiots who don’t understand what they swore an oath to defend.  Whatever their excuse, they have violated their oaths to defend the Constitution and must be sent packing.  This is not about politics.  This is about defending the Constitution.  As Oath Keepers Founder Stewart Rhodes put it:

These politicians from both parties betrayed our trust, and violated the oath they took to defend the Constitution.  It’s not about the left or right, it’s about our Bill of Rights. Without the Bill of Rights, there is no America.  It is the Crown Jewel of our Constitution, and the high-water mark of Western Civilization.


As two time Medal of Honor winner Marine General Smedley Butler once said “There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights.”   Time to fight.

This is a bi-partisan assault on the Bill of Rights that will require a bi-partisan defense.  We the People must adopt a scorched-earth policy against all who voted for the NDAA of 2012, regardless of party, using any and all lawful means available to remove them from office.  If you can remove them by means of recall, then do so.  If that option is not available in your state, consider working to make it an option in your state.  If attempts to recall are stopped by the courts, then root the oath breakers out in the next primary of whatever party they are in, making this issue the litmus test and supporting a challenger who will pledge to repeal this dangerous law.   Make this desecration of our Bill of Rights campaign issue number one.

And if you don’t manage to root them out in the primary, then defeat them in the general election, again supporting a challenger who pledges to repeal the detention provisions of the NDAA.   Use whatever lawful means or combination of strategies available to get the job done.   And even when any particular method “fails,” it still succeeds in keeping the focus on this act of betrayal, and it serves to educate the American people, waking them up to the ongoing bipartisan assault on our Bill of Rights.  Even if we lose a battle we can still win the war.

We must keep this issue in the public eye, and keep the pressure on.  Just as Jefferson and Madison were successful in rallying opposition to the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, which clearly violated the Constitution, and used that opposition to sweep the Federalists from Congress in what was known as “the revolution of 1800,” we must rally opposition to this clearly unconstitutional act and use it to sweep all of the Bill of Rights killing career politicians, of both major parties, out of Congress.   Clean them all out!
Continue reading and comment at Oath Keepers:

Adherence to the Oath (Veterans for Ron Paul)

Posted: 12/28/2011 by Lynn Dartez in 2011, 2012, military

Published: 27 December, 2011, 21:11

The US Capitol (AFP Photo / Karen BLEIER)

The US Capitol (AFP Photo / Karen BLEIER)

If you feel like Congress fat cats can’t relate to their fellow Americans anymore, the truth behind the matter might just be that they can’t.

While Americans have seen a recession ravage savings accounts, lawmakers on Capitol Hill have only gotten richer.

Between the US Senate and House of Representatives, the median net worth for a member of Congress is around $913,000, reports The New York Times. That man in the middle is Ed Pastor (Dem-AZ), and although he makes a pretty penny nowadays, his income today is gigantic when gauged with what he was worth when he first came to Washington. Twenty years earlier, Pastor pulled in enough to have only $100,000 saved up, a figure he has magnified nearly tenfold in the two decades since.

Comparing the mean in 2009 with the mean for lawmakers’ assets in 1984, the figure has tripled.

Off of the Hill, however, others aren’t so lucky. Taking into account all of America, the median net worth today is roughly $100,000 — what Congressman Pastor pulled in 20 years earlier. And while lawmakers have seen their wallets only fatted in recent times, the incomes of average Americans have dwindled as a recession and depression downturned the American economy.

Somehow, those effects managed to largely miss Washington.

While the US Census Bureau reports half of America as either impoverished or otherwise living in low-income conditions, 250 members of Congress — nearly half of the Hill — can say that they are legit millionaires. In Washington DC, one-in-ten residents live below half of the poverty line — but if you can track down Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas) in his Capitol Hill chamber, you might be able to borrow a few bucks from the richest man in Congress — who holds onto $294.21 million in assets.

Rep. McCaul wasn’t always as lucky. Back in 2005, his worth was only at around $12 million. But with dozens of lawmakers worth more than just one or two millions, those that they represent think that perhaps their vote isn’t being cast by a voice that really represents the people.

“There’s always a concern that they can’t truly understand or relate to the hardships that their constituents feel — that rich people just don’t get it,” Representative Laura Richardson tells The New York Times. While Rep. Richardson might have an office on Capitol Hill, the Democrat from California is also in debt to the tune of $464,000. She is among the poorest members of Congress, but that group isn’t exactly a big one. Regardless, with 200-plus lawmakers pulling in the multi-millions, it’s easy to see why the so-called 99 percenters feel poorly represented in America today.

The National Defense Authorization Act that recently cleared Congress has become a hot topic for debate among average Americans who fear the provisions in the bill that will allow for the US to detain and torture citizens indefinitely. Despite petitions and pleas from coast-to-coast, the legislation passed overwhelmingly. As it turns out, many politicians may be representatives of the people, but their voices are ones bought by corporations. Senator Robert Portman (R-Ohio) not only voted in favor of the NDAA, he also received $272,853 from the special interest groups that backed the bill.

For others, incomes are subsidized in other ways. Rep. Pastor from Arizona, his income is also subsidized by Social Security. If that makes you angry tough, don’t worry — you’re not alone. A study conducted by CBS News in conjunction with The New York Times this October revealed that Americas’ job approval rating of Congress was at an all time low. A similar poll this summer courtesy of the Washington Post revealed that Americans were more into human cloning than Congress, too.