Bob Owens

The saddest truth in politics is that people get the leaders they deserve

Shock the system

Written By: Bob - Jan• 15•13

Just one example of how the government could lose a civil conflict

I keep reading comments from arrogant progressives who delight in the assault on gun rights led by their elected and appointed allies in the recent weeks since a madman gunned down innocent children in a school in Newtown, CT.

They seem to think they can impose any indignity and infringment they want without repercussion, because the President of the United States is one of them, he’s the leader of the nation’s military, and he can therefore win any battle against America’s freedom fighters who might rise up to restore their constitutional rights currently under assault.

They don’t understand asymmetrical warfare in the slightest, much less how it would be waged here. Let me give you just one small example of how lone wolves or small teams can strike well beyond their size against a near defenseless leviathan.

After the Dot Com bubble burst in the early 2000s, I took a job in upstate New York for a subcontractor of Central Hudson Gas and Electric. I was part of a crew sent out to map electrical transmission line power poles and towers via GPS, check the tower footings for integrity, check the best routes for access, etc.

It meant I rode quads (ATVs) through mountains, swamps, forests, neighborhoods and farms all over southern New York, in winter’s icy chill and blowing snow, and in summer’s melting heat. It was exhausting work, often in beautiful scenery.

What a "day at the office" looked like. Grabbed from Google.

What a “day at the office” looked like. Grabbed from Google.

We probably averaged 20 miles of line a day, and that over the course of the contract I easily rode a thousand miles. I can tell you stories of flipping quads, sinking quads, going down a mountain without brakes, almost hitting deer at top speed, and parking on the remains of an electrocuted bear, but that isn’t really what I remember most about the job.

No, what I remember most about the job were the days we spent up near the Rondout Reservoir. What I remember in specific was discovering how powerless the government was to protect key utilities.

In a post-9/11 New York, where terrorism was foremost on the minds of many, you simply didn’t mess around near New York City’s water supply, and Roundout was part of that equation.

The thought that we could be viewed as a threat as we rode the hills around the reservoir for several days never crossed our minds, because we were focused on our jobs minding the electrical transmission lines, not the waters flowing nearby.

It wasn’t until late on the second day, where we parked right beside the dam’s offices, that law enforcement caught up to us. Apparently we’d been the on again, off again suspects in a low intensity chase for two days, with the law enforcement agency that was in charge of providing security for the reservoir (NYDNR, maybe?) trying to chase us down, without any luck. They didn’t catch us until we parked the truck beside their HQ on the afternoon of the second day and began unloading our gear right under their windows.

That it took them 14 hours of time “on the run” in the area (30 hours total time) to “catch” us was a little unsettling. Then I started thinking about the much more fragile structures we were working beside routinely.

You see, we’d ridden up to edge of the Danskammer and Roseton power generating stations, and a dozen or more unattended substations during the course of this contract, without being challenged at all.

A generic substation, culled from Wikipedia the structures with barrels mounted horizontally are transformers.

A generic substation, culled from Wikipedia.

Substations like the one above could be accessed not just from surface roads, but from access trails under the power lines by people with UTVs, ATVs, and motorcycles.

Just like the residential transformers in your neighborhood, the transformers in substations are cooled with a form of mineral oil. If someone decides to blast a transformer at its base as prepper Bryan Smith did, and the oil drains out, then the transformer either burns out catastrophically, or if the utility is lucky, a software routine notices the problem and shuts the substation (or at least the affected portion) down. The power must then be rerouted through the remaining grid until that transformer can be replaced and any other resulting damage can be repaired.

Were an angry group of disenfranchised citizens to target in a strategic manner the substations leading to a city or geographic area—say, Albany, for example—they could put the area in the dark for as long as it took to bring the substations back online. Were they committed enough, and spread their attacks out over a wide enough area, perhaps mixing in a few tens of dozens of the residential transformers found every few hundred yards along city streets, they could overwhelm the utility companies ability to repair the damage being caused or law enforcement’s ability to stop them. The government could perhaps assign a soldier or cop for every transformer, substation and switch, but they’d run out of men long before they ran out of things they need guarded. Not that the government could even guarantee to actually protect the transformers they were guarding; a residential transformer is a big, stationary target, and the substation transformers and switches and other equipment even bigger targets.  Residential transformers are easily “touched” by even a moderately competent deer hunter from hundreds of yards away, perhaps separated by roads, subdivisions, swamps or streams. Substations are a dense area target easily struck from a half-mile or more away.

Meanwhile, the lone wolves and small teams would simply shift to other targets of opportunity left unguarded by an overwhelmed and outmatched government force, of which there are many.

How many days with partial power or no power, how many nights in the dark, would it take before the local economy collapsed in the targeted area? Insurgents could cripple a city, region, or state, without ever firing a bullet at another human being.

Progressives seeking to undermine the Constitution seem to think they hold all the cards. I would warn them that they are not remotely prepared for what will happen if they attempt to cross Constitutional boundaries and natural rights.

It could be a cold, dark winter.

Tread carefully.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.


  1. Orion says:

    And a sizable portion of the military will uphold their oaths.

    As I and many others have pointed out – take out the power, take out the water pumps, drop a couple of key highway bridges with thermite and the cities become death traps within 72 hours.

    Do that to 50 major liberal cities and there is simply no way that the Federal government would be able to respond.

    Self-organizing groups would know this and would act without central direction. No rebel HVTs to take out.

    But on the other side of the scale, the elected officials are all HVTs for the rebels. And there are at least 30,000,000 potential snipers aiming for about 5,000 of them. That’s going to be challenging.

    I believe it’s going to get very, very ugly. And sooner than anyone expected, sadly enough.


    • thebronze says:


      They’ll be the underdog when this thing kicks off.

      • Treker says:

        You gotta love the Chinese when they wanted to get rid of the Po Pot they filled the main sewer line with concrete . No Shitty, no City.

  2. samspade says:

    !!!! Perhaps the age of creature comforts is coming to twilight sooner than I was thinking it would. So sad what has happened in NY, I was hoping to visit again – that is now out of the question.

  3. cloaked in mystery says:

    The lack of security and vulnerability of substations is a big problem, even worse, the lead times for rebuild/replacment of a melted transformer of that size is a year or more. Could a desperate utility buy ahead of the line, likely, but if more than a few such transformers were trashed, there would be no way to rush all of them.

    I doubt they even bother to armor the transformers, though they might due to vandal problems.

    Google had to bury a fiber line to a datacenter because miscreants kept shooting the overhead line in very inaccessable locations.

    • Rob Crawford says:

      I doubt they even bother to armor the transformers, though they might due to vandal problems.

      Armor would have to be very carefully designer so as to not obstruct air flow.

  4. Cole says:

    In 1992 workers in Chicago accidentally cracked an old railway tunnel under the river and flooded the basements downtown. The Loop and Financial districts were evacuated. The flood cost roughly 2 billion dollars. Big cities have big vulnerabilities.

  5. philbob says:

    the people who will be furious about gun laws are not the types to be pacified by video games and American idol. winter is coming.

  6. JP Kalishek says:

    this relates to a saying I tell those who sympathize or support (or are) anarchists … Just because we don’t like anarchy, doesn’t mean we aren’t better at it.
    Airports even post 9/11 are wide open. Infrastructure like you point out is as well. Cell towers, radio and tv antennae, etc. they are mostly “gun free zones” in that the protection comes down to a few signs saying keep out and a fence or two.

    • Rob Crawford says:

      Those who dislike “anarchy” do so because they know how nasty it would be, and how easily it could come about.

  7. bogbeagle says:

    What if?

    What if the likes of Smith & Wesson were to say to Obama, “We will sell you nothing which may not also be owned by the American people.” ?

    That would be a “People’s Prohibition”.

  8. WiscoDave says:

    @bogbeagle- That’s what Barrett did to California.

  9. JypseaRose says:

    Very interesting read, this. Kept me up last thinking about it and I started wondering about unintended consequences like Jihad Sleeper Cells taking advantage of the chaos. What about other groups such as Neo Nazi White Supremacists, La Raza, Black Panthers seeing an opening to further their hate. What if maximum security prisons are affected by a downed grid and hardened prisoners overwhelming the system and escape. Ugly, ugly, ugly.

    Obama is playing with more than fire.

    • Bill says:

      I was pondering if Obama’s the type to open the prisons if the country goes hot.

      What occurs if a power outage of lasting duration occurs? I know of generators, but if there’s no fuel forthcoming over time. What happens?

      • JypseaRose says:

        I think the only safe bet is that if the country goes hot…all bets are off. Get out of urban areas.

      • JypseaRose says:

        I used to say “Food doesn’t really come from grocery store shelves.” I’m changing it to “Food doesn’t really come from EBT cards.”

      • Breathial says:

        I work for a utility company, specializing in “mission critical” infrastructure; data centers, grid-control and telephone call centers. Basically, the support systems that keep their grid operations on-line.

        If there’s no fuel resupply, than almost everyone with a generator will be sitting in the dark within 72 hours, since that’s the maximum amount usually held on-site.

        Some of the bigger facilities (that also happen to support line and boom-trucks) have their own fuel depots on-site, so that could be stretched out to several weeks. But if the fuel has to be divided between repair trucks versus the data centers, the supply will be rapidly consumed.

        As to substation weaknesses, his observations are accurate. Most are remotely operated, and rarely require human interfacing.

        To take down an entire substation (speaking hypothetically of course), would merely require burning down the control shack that is at a substation location. The batteries inside control the switching operations for the sub, and all the computer interfaces to the grid-control centers are there as well. Such an action would require *manual* operation of switchgear until repairs are complete (making simple rerouting very difficult), complete rebuilding of network interfaces, testing and recommissioning. It’s a huge amount of work. Should this action be done in conjunction with the physical assault of transformers, it could easily be weeks before full operation was restored.

  10. Survival Skvez says:

    In all the years of terrorism in Northern Ireland the republicans never targeted the electricity or water as they knew to do so would be a huge PR disaster.
    Imaging the press showing children crying in the dark, rest homes with OAPs not being fed and all because of “those crazy gun nuts”.
    Also remember that even the most Democratic city still has many republicans in it. Are you willing to cut the power and water (and potentially kill) tens of thousands of your own?

    • Steven says:

      1) Who would be broadcasting?

      2) Who would have power to watch TV?

      3) I TOTALLY agree that those “fighting for the people” should not cause collateral damage in the name of “fighting for our Constitution” – we would be in danger of becoming the catalyst and excuse that statists would use.

      Taking out selected transformers near gov’t offices to prevent them from having electricity might work. Yes, they have generators, but those require gas or diesel, and those trucks are juicy targets. (experience in the sanbox)

      I urge we do not cause harm and pain to innocents, even sheep who support nanny-gov’t – we would facilitate putting into power thugs who are no better than African warlords.

      All that said – there are tons of vulnerabilities. Many OIF and OER veterans got a graduate level course on infrastucture protection and saw first hand how easy it was to shut down gov’t infrastructure while overseas.

      My own theory is economic meltdown, (a post for another time) and the hue and cry from those unprepared ushering in a statist’s dream come true.

      Those that pledge allegience to the state and play their game will get food and heat, those that do not will get strangled and starved. History shows it happens over and over.

      • Steven says:

        *that’s OIF and OEF (not OER)


      • Survival Skvez says:

        I specifically didn’t say broadcast. In a poor-power scenario newspapers become a much more important means of distributing news (or propaganda). Newspapers can be printed and distributed from a secure location or even from an off-shore location.
        You also have to consider the international press and the importance of international support for any conflict.
        Americans supported terrorists In Northern Ireland (with funds and arms) in their fight against the democratic will of the people to remain part of the UK. It doesn’t take very much misinformation to get a lot of foreign support for the ‘wrong side’ of a conflict. (Americans generally thought they were supporting democracy when in fact they were doing just the opposite).

    • Hank says:

      The general public should not be harmed, their support is needed. Beware of false flag operations doing the kind of damage Bob describes. Whichever side has the first news to place blame will be the side that is generally believed. Statements should be distributed before any event describing why patriots would not take such action. Hearts and minds. Prepare accordingly.

  11. Phelps says:

    That oil burns spectacularly, as well. The heat from the flames will cause catastrophic damage to the xformer even if put out in minutes, and possibly damage or ignite the surrounding xformers if it burns longer.

    I was thinking about this subject this morning. “Amateurs talk tactics — professionals talk logistics.” America has won every war since WW2 largely on its incredible supply chain. After all, the Russian army just switched to SOCKS — that’s not an acronym, I’m talking about what goes on your feet — because before now it was just too much of a logistical nightmare.

    America enjoys this robust supply system because 1) we are industrious people who Get Things Done, and Getting Things Delivered is a condition of Done, and 2) because our rear area — CONUS — has historically been one of the most secure places on earth. It’s not secure because it is a fortress or because of outstanding security forces. It’s secure because it is full of Americans.

    When Americans are no longer on the side of protecting that supply train, then Bad Things happen. When a small percentage of Americans are on the side of disrupting that supply train, it will derail.

    Thank God Texas is on ERCOT.

  12. NYPatriot says:


    • Phelps says:

      Don’t worry, this is the lowest hanging of fruit. There are much more subtle things that come to mind after a bit of thought that are much harder to repair.

    • Bill says:

      You’re posting on an open forum with a man hypothesizing resistance if the government goes to confiscation mode.

      I’m pretty sure OPSEC is out the window.

      Not trying to be a damp towel, but c’mon. This is speech and it’s protected, and nothing is advocated, merely hypothesized.

      And dissent is the highest form of patriotism. That’s been hammered home for 8 years.

  13. Atticus Dogsbody says:

    Great thread! I love how you guys advocate terrorism. Brilliant! Patriotism at it’s best!

  14. jim the heretical anti-cliff lemming says:

    Sure sounds like good wholesome Al-Qaeda-style fun, boys!

    Of course, if some self-appointed hero-wannabe Champions Of Freedom unliaterally opt to maliciously ruin public infrastructure over laughably watered-down gun regs, it’s OBAMA who played with fire: airtight logic, that.

    A pity that “Wolverines” is already taken, but maybe you can revive “Werewolves” since the originals didn’t amount to much?

  15. creeper says:

    You left out bridges.

  16. Harold says:

    Wrote a paper in HS for military history in 1972 that described just such actions. The teacher remarked my paper should be classified. (Yes, my HS had military history as an elective.)

    We discussed in class how the U.S. got to where it is on trust. We don’t need every mile of track guarded against vandalism. The engineer simply assumes that no one has torn the rails up ahead of him for scrap- or sabotage- and proceeds full tilt down the track. Not so in most of the world.

    9/11 got our attention- bit it didn’t disable NYC. With far less effort, NYC could have been rendered unviable. Our enemies really aren’t all that intelligent, or else they really don’t want to destroy us.

    There have been arguments that the IRA, Rd Army Brigade, and other European revolutionaries never bombed the U.S. because they needed a safe place to run to should they be successful.

  17. John Bowman says:

    Bob, you should check out the book “Unintended Consequences” by John Ross. It’s out of print, so you can’t buy it, but if you google “john ross unintended consequences PDF”, there are many links.

    It’s a story about a man who accidentally kills several BATF agents who were trying to break into the house of his friend, which he was guarding while the friend (a gun dealer and Class III Manufacturer) was away. He thought the black-clad figures in the middle of the night were burglars, after all, what law enforcement comes in the middle of the night?

    Having killed all but 2 of them, and capturing the last 2, he realizes he’s crossed the line, and they would never stop hunting him. So, he turns the tables… … and ends up forcing the government to repeal a lot of the gun laws.

    It’s a great read, and an excellent primer for anyone who takes “I WILL NOT COMPLY” and “MOLON LABE” seriously.

  18. Mr. Tambourine Man says:

    Your post offers an opportunity for me to ask a few Second Amendment questions that have been on my mind.

    First, the “well regulated” portion of the Second Amendment. Having the government pass laws that regulate who can own what time of gun, and what the restrictions, or regulations are, seems entirely consistent and constitutional. I get that people are upset, either because they own, or want to own, guns that may soon be illegal, or because they don’t like the government passing new regulations, but calling this unconstitutional is not accurate.

    Your concern about the government become too powerful due to average citizens facing tighter gun laws brings me to the other question that’s been on my mind. I agree, that the spirit of the Second Amendment is to protect US citizens from a government and it’s military who grow too powerful. But, isn’t this already the case? The US government already has the worlds largest military budget, and most powerful military. Even if no changes are made in regards to “assault weapons” or the capacity of magazine clips, it seems to me that US citizens would be hard pressed to defend themselves in the unlikely event of the US government turning against them, due to the lopsided balance of civilian vs. military weapons.

    Why not use the Second Amendment to argue for greater access to more powerful weapons. If the concern is about going up against the armed forces, why not try to own a tank, or a rocket launcher, or smart bombs? Is a semi automatic rifle with a 30 round clips really going to help more than a single shot rifle when the military comes rolling down your street with tanks?

    • S.Lynn says:

      OK, Piers. Using an alternative name?

    • R says:

      Viet Nam, from Viet Minh to Viet Cong. Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. American Revolutionary war. Current (and withdrawing to a stalemate/loss) US occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq. Grozny. Current civil war in Syria. Libyans overthrowing Khadaffi. Russian invasion of Finland. Ten examples off-the-cuff of rag-tag fighters handing the “tank-driving” forces their asses and sending ’em home losers. There are around 2.8 million active and reserve US armed forces, and 600 thousand police in the US, for a combined total of 3.4 million. The Number of gun owners in the US is at least 77 million. Where does that simple math lead us? A 22:1 ratio of citizen to oppressor. Gunowners have the overwhelming superior numerical advantage. And that is without considering the military defections, failure to follow orders, refusal of orders, and outright assisting the people should the military come “rolling down the stret with tanks”.

      • Sgt. Rock says:

        We completely annihilated the VC where ever we fought them. The NVA and VC took 7 years to recover from the drubbing we gave them during the Tet offensive. They only won because we left the country and didn’t fight to win any way. We beat the British during the Revolution because of their logistical problems created by having to transport an army across an ocean by sail, while fighting another war on the continent, and only then by the skin of our teeth and with French support.The insurgencies in the middle east have been slightly problematic, but like Vietnam our only defeat there has been because we are leaving. To date we have more suicides than casualties. The Finn’s lost. Were occupied. Were a commie puppet until the fall of the USSR. I could go on…your rag tag bullsh*t could not stand in any determined way against the full might of our armed forces even if all 77 million took up arms and half the army deserted. To suppose so is ludicrous. Besides, when was the last time any law abiding citizen had a gun confiscated? *crickets* That would never happen here and you know it. So and whack your artificial penis extension to all the wolverine fantasies you want but then come back to the really real world.

      • loach says:

        Sgt Rock, you haven’t thought this through much, have you? I’m just gonna throw some thought points back at you for you to digest.

        For every example you give, you also give an excuse why it didn’t work. Sorry, that straw man fell apart.

        Asymmetric warfare is always a force leveler. Any patriot in this hypothetical scenario has additional advantages. Home court advantage in terms of terrain. Much of the military will walk away for several reasons. One is they are oath keepers. Another is that since these hypothetical patriots have home court advantage, they are also in the backyards of the families of the military fighting them. When your loved ones are not safe, that takes the fight out of you.

        There is a posted letter that over 1100 SOF have signed in support of 2A. That is a huge, in-country, asymmetric force to consider with very applicable skills.

        And let’s run your math when you say that 1/2 of the military would walk away and not support the orders. You think they are going to not fight for the patriot side? You think they’ll just crawl out of their M1 Abrams instead of bringing it to the patriots? This thing goes even-odds real quick.

        And on the gun confiscation, it happens all the time. There are two cases right now in the news (NY and NJ) on magazine arrests. It even has a name. It is called a “manufactured felony”.

        Think through this before you find yourself saying “those MF’rs were right”.

    • Another Anon says:

      It was common in the time of the founding fathers for the monied to own private artillery, have a private armed navy and to have grenades and such.

      Its almost certaintly the original intent, no standing army, heavily armed militia.

      Limiting heavy weapons was the compromise since we had stopped trusting one another enough by than.

    • JJ Swiontek says:

      In colonial times, the militia had two designations: regulars and irregulars. The Virginia Regulars were just citizens who ‘regularly’ practiced drilling and shooting together (usually weekly). The other group, the Virginia Irregulars practiced less often (monthly). The phrase ‘well regulated’ refers to the militiamen who regularly drilled and shot together. The idea of laws/rules/regulations referring to the militia weapons was unknown at that time. Heck, some of the militia regulars had canons and ships-of-war.

      In regard to your second point… yes, the military has nukes, nerve gas, aircraft, fleets, cruise missiles, drones, fully-automatic weapons, grenades, explosives, weapons of mass destruction, and lots of volunteers. But imagine what would happen if they used them. What would The People say if the President ordered the dropping of a 20 Megaton nuke on, say, Cheyenne, WY, because the city refuses to give up their guns? First, would the military actually do it? (I doubt it.) Second, would you keep a president that ordered such a strike? (Maybe you would, but a lot of others would be looking for a straight-jacket with a presidential logo on it.)

      What if the president just ordered the military to establish martial law in Cheyenne? What if The People just say, “No.” Would the military just start shooting men, women, and children until the blood ran in the street? Public opinion would be strongly against such a military action.

      As to your third point, maybe you are not aware but the “plan” is to outlaw/register one weapon at a time until they are all gone. If you are saying, “No it’s not!”, then either you are uninformed or a bald-faced liar. “The Plan” has been for total civilian disarmament for YEARS!

      The Marxists/socialists/communists in power mean to subdue those who believe in liberty. Those that resist, they mean to kill.

      Weapon Registration invariably leads to confiscation which invariably leads to democide.

    • A Stranger in a Strange Land says:

      “Regulated” in the days of Thomas Jefferson does not mean “regulated” in the days of omniscient dot-gov.

      Thus saith the O.E.D:
      †2. Of troops, an army, etc.: properly organized; formally constituted into a professional body. Also fig. and in figurative contexts. Obs. Cf. regular adj. 7.

  19. jim the heretical anti-cliff lemming says:

    Who would this idiocy hurt & terrorize the most?
    Seniors. Children. The chronically ill who are homebound.

    Who thinks the USG has no contingency strategy for staying powered up while they deal with exactly this sort of trolling?

    Mess with the government & they may or may not ignore you. Mess with ConEd, Microsoft & GE, & you’ll find out in short order what “asymmetrical warfare” really means.

    • Jefferson Davis says:

      It is obvious that you do not understand the difference between terrorism and patriotism.

  20. Vincent Abeyta says:

    All well and good and many have made these observations. However, I caution OPSEC. Remember everything posted online is visible to all.

  21. bubba says:

    There is a finite source of supplies available for repairs in the U.S. for anything. Whenever a natural catastrophe occurs – Katrina for example, resources from all over the country are rushed to the affected area for rebuild. Just how many utility poles, transformers, rolls of wire, etc. are available at any one time? The answer is just enough for expected demand. If demand is greater than anticipated then time passes while manufacturing catches up.

  22. anfo says:

    @sgt rock:
    Yes, in a toe-to-toe fight the VC lost every time, but guess what? The commies are still in power in that shit hole. They won the US lost. The hajji lose every time they fight us over there but they will eventually win because they can outlast us and overwhelm the locals desire for freedom.
    US rev war is a bad example, no air force back then. Same with Lybia; NATO was the anti kahdaffi air force.
    Yes the Finns lost some territory, but exacted terrible losses on the “superior” red army. They retained sovereignty and were nato allies throughout the cold war.
    Bottom line is that if the insurgents outlast the occupiers, they win. The question is are American deer hunters willing to endure for as long as it takes? (think cave dwelling Afghanis).

    • Mark Matis says:

      Without electrical power, how long do you think New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and DC would remain viable?

      With merely those four cities uninhabitable, just who would “American deer hunters” have to “endure” against?

  23. Roger Graham says:

    Wagner Technical? I knew Gerry Wagner. I used to work in that building.

  24. Treker says:

    The real conundrum is the people . If the power were out or even the notion the power may go out the people would panic . This generation has no stiff upper lip . In fact it has nothing stiff , hence the need for the little blue pill . City folks are not country folks . Bred to have a hive mentality once one panics they panic . Modern cities are a defenders nightmare . Lots of people only two days of fuel and food . Almost nobody is armed or trained or willing . No belief in God, no strong families. Since all food and fuel arrives by truckers if they refuse,they starve.
    Adding to the panic is the instant communications. No longer will people sit at home and wait for authorities. The now now now generation will make any city unlivable.

  25. Henry Bowman says:

    G. Gordon Liddy described this very scenario in the mid nineties on his radio show. He said then that transformers were mostly made in France and that it took six months to get one here. Present inventories are small. This just goes to prove how honorable and peace-loving Americans are that nothing of the sort has yet happened. IMO a massive grid-down situation would be the ultimate “false flag” for the use of the criminal sociopaths that have risen, like scum rises, to the top of what we still refer to as our Federal Government.

  26. Old Gringo says:

    In all of this discussion attention has been inwardly directed: that is what happens down the street or in a local AO. The US is not a solo actor on the world stage. There are several state and non-state actors that wish the US ill, and would capitalize on any seeming weakness to further their interests in other parts of the world. Specifically, would the PRC sit idly by while the US government fought a domestic insurrection? Or would they move decisively in the Western Pacific region to permanently alter the geopolitical landscape? Fill in the blanks as you wish: Taiwan, Japan,So.Korea, Phillipines, Australia, So.China Sea? Any or all?
    Russia?…Well you get the idea…the Baltics,Ukraine…etc.
    This addresses nothing relative to the financial stability of an already shaky dollar and all that that implies.
    If I can see these possibilities, I’m sure TPTB are also aware of them.
    “He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing.” ,Our bargaining position is far stronger than has been thus far posited.

  27. Breathial says:

    I do have a more fundamental question about the article, which is, “why would anyone want to go after the utilities?” No guerrilla war will succeed without the assistance of the local population. If you want them on your side, the goal should be to NOT piss them off, and make the bad guys squeeze the population- which would make them more accepting of your movement.

    It seems to me, that cutting power to those who might support you is counterproductive.

    Am I missing something, here???

    • Mark Matis says:

      Just how much support do you think the Constitution can possibly get in the Big Crapple? Chicago? Los Angeles? DC?

  28. JJ Swiontek says:

    The infrastructure supports innocent people who have no control of the degrading of our civil rights. NO. We need to be seen as the guardians of the infrastructure.

    The Marxists/socialists/communists mean to subdue us to their will. Those that resist, they mean to kill. Do not doubt it.

    ‘Harm no innocent’ is our motto. Theirs is ‘Kill ’em all!’

    Remember rule 4: Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

  29. PapaSmurf says:

    It should be pointed out that the grid’s high-tension lines are uninsulated. While they can be shot down, imagine the havoc if parties were to short phase-to-phase or phase-to-ground… They can’t ban chains. Just sayin’.

    • loach says:

      I heard that during the first Iraq war, one of the first things we did was airdrop conductive filaments on substations and power lines to plunge the country into darkness.