Oleg,

I CC'd Nicki in on this because you asked for her counsel in regards 
to banishing me "for life" from THR. (You didn't take her advice, but 
you did invite her in to a 3-way dialog -- one for which you haven't 
had the time, mind you.) She knows I've struggled with how to resolve 
this situation, and I want her to know its conclusion and to hear it 
from me in my own words. She thought I was "too hard on you" in 
previous communications, so she needs to understand where I'm coming 
from anyway; she's my friend and ally and partner.

You've done excellent work in support of KABA over the years, and I 
am grateful for it all. I sincerely hope you find a way to make a 
good living using your mighty talents doing something you thoroughly 
enjoy. You're truly gifted. Your passion/talent match is rare indeed.

Unfortunately, your choice to banish me "for life" from THR has been 
gnawing on me more than I care to admit, and I've had to do some real 
soul searching to find out what is really true at my core. Your 
meaning of "Brother" may be different than mine; my only blood 
brother passed away, so I don't take that word as lightly as some 
people do.

Being in my thoughts and in my heart about various facets of this 
situation -- your banishment of me "for life" for "offending" someone 
-- has troubled me into sleeplessness these last two nights. Here it 
is nearly 3AM, and I'm still being with it. 

I'm fighting for freedom because I consider our nation's liberties 
more important than people's notions of what is "civil", and, quite 
honestly, I believe one of the major problems with this country is 
that everyone's being too damned nice -- to the point that direct, 
challenging, aggressive communication is thwarted under the banner of 
an encroaching subjective, pretense-rich "morality" that bleeds this 
nation dry. The presuppositions inherent in what's been passed off on 
me -- by you, and by Don -- are embarrassingly shallow.

You said that what I said to Jim March wasn't grounds for being 
banned from your website. You said I was banned for offending your 
volunteers for how I responded to Don's "moderation". If you think 
what I said to Don was worthy of banishment, you'd have banned most 
of the Founders; they were vicious toward one another PUBLICLY during 
the Constitutional Convention. They questioned each other's honor 
back when that could lead, literally, to a deadly duel. They called 
each other "liar" and "traitor" and much worse -- and they did it 
with raised voice in front of crowds of peers while demanding that 
the person so accused meet the challenge and have it out verbally 
until the truth surfaced and people were moved to choose sides and 
find out what was real and what was not. That was back when men were 
forced to back up their words because they HAD honor to defend. Jim 
March is a sniveling weasel whose honor is for sale. He called me to 
invite coaching when CCRKBA was about to offer him a position, I 
warned him of the deepest integrity challenges he'd face, and he's 
succumbed to them summarily, EXACTLY as predicted. The fact that he's 
been hired by Alan Gottlieb is proof enough, but he has proven it to 
me time and time again in no uncertain terms over a protracted period 
of time. If it were 1776, he'd by a loyalist, and he'd be dealt with 
like one. But it's 2003, so I simply chose to challenge his audacious 
absurdities with verbal conviction, in a way that was indeed intended 
to offend and to out him. On purpose, with purpose. And it worked in 
spades, revealing that what he was saying to me and everyone else was 
not true.

Do you think Sam Adams telling British sympathizers to "Crouch down 
and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye 
were our countrymen." was intended to be "civil", Oleg? Oscar Wilde 
said, "A gentleman is someone who never gives offense 
unintentionally." Being "civil" to loyalists who were serving King 
George got people literally KILLED at one time. (Unfortunately, they 
let too many loyalists LIVE after the war was over, and the vampires 
bred the Northeast into the cesspool that it is to this day.) That 
was FREE SPEECH. What you believe in -- what you banish a "Brother" 
for -- is far, far inferior. Would Thomas Jefferson ban me from THR 
for the reasons you've cited? Ben Franklin? I dare you to challenge 
yourself to answer that question, deep within your heart where your 
love of liberty resides.

The fact that I even have to explain that truly amazes me. I 
genuinely expected better from you, largely because I projected my 
own moral compass upon you, as you are now doing in the other 
direction.

I put my life and my family's life on the line for the cause of 
liberty. My wife has lived in fear for over three years that 
government jackboots are going to literally blow the door off the 
hinges and kill me. She's seen the death threats from people who hate 
my guts because of what I stand for -- I learned not to show her the 
emails where people tell me they want to "beat me and my offspring to 
death". Seeing all I've seen and knowing what I know, her fears are 
understandable. I "get by" each month thanks to two outside jobs, 
have no health insurance, am screamed at from every corner of the 
globe by "friends" and "enemies" alike, and it's taken its toll on my 
health to the point that it would take me a year's vacation to 
recover from what I've put myself through FOR FREEDOM. I invest way 
too much life, fortune and sacred honor to be ousted "for life" by a 
"Brother" for challenging a weasel to put up or shut up and 
successfully outing him as a liar. That you'd oust me for upsetting a 
volunteer is just too bizarre for words. Even if I called him a 
deceitful scoundrel more committed to protecting traitors than to 
restoring our nation -- something you'd expect to hear at the first 
Constitutional Convention -- that STILL wouldn't be grounds to banish 
me from THR. Period.

To be honest, I feel betrayed by you (but more betrayed by myself for 
putting too much faith IN you). Your "offended" volunteers might call 
their reason for being offended a defense of "civility". But I call 
it an excuse to make sure nobody gets their feathers ruffled -- 
keeping a flatline -- and specifically a justification for a "be kind 
to deceivers" policy that I find genuinely deplorable. 

To put it bluntly, I doubt I offended THR readers remotely as much as 
you have offended me, Oleg. None of your "moderators" have been 
sleepless over giving me the boot. "Wednesday" came and went without 
a peep from you. We just see the world -- and brotherhood, and this 
movement -- very differently.

Waiting until the project you were working on for KABA fits back into 
your schedule isn't something that feels good or right to me. And 
knowing you've got personal stuff going on in your life, I do not 
wish to pressure any kind of immediacy to such work. I hope and pray 
you heal deeply and completely and find love ten times more 
magnificent than anything Betty could ever provide.

And yet something about how you behave -- and think, and prioritize --
 does not and will not set well with me, or between us. Amazingly, 
you clearly believe that the appropriate way to teach your "Brother" 
lessons you believe he needs to learn is by banishing him for life. 
Simple deductive reasoning concludes that this is how you want to be 
treated when you offend someone, too. Sobeit. You're banned from me.

You are relieved of any and all duty or obligation regarding the 
graphic work for ShallNotBeInfringed.net and the other various sister 
domains. Keep the money KABA paid you as additional remuneration for 
past services rendered. That project could be a helpful support 
system for educating people, but I've got bigger fish to fry. The 
Supreme Court just gave us another sign that they are very likely to 
hear the Silveira case. My attention needs to be there, and elsewhere 
making a living in the real world so I can take care of my family.

Your choice was yours to make, and it made mine very clear. It's sad, 
but it's also elementary, once I remove my emotions from the 
equation. I've been extremely loyal to you. And I've held a genuine 
love for you in the best part of my heart. NOBODY could have swayed 
me from taking up your defense, under any circumstances, or to any 
extent. You blew that over a weasel who's been covering for NRA 
treachery for years, because a guy who enforces a morally bankrupt, 
weakness-enabling policy was "offended" Boo hoo. What a trip. Get a 
grip.

This isn't about any need or desire to post my thoughts on 
TheHighRoad.org. If you think what I said to Jim deserved having Don 
call me names -- he belittled me for going into the fire few have the 
guts to go and coming out with proof that it was worth going into -- 
THR isn't good enough or strong enough for me anyway. Your rules are 
enforced to enable the weak. Your rules protect liars who deceive 
people to the detriment of Liberty. I've broken much larger "rules" 
than the ones Don said I broke in defense of gun rights. There's a 
"rule" not to attack the NRA. There's a "rule" not to openly discuss 
civil war if all else fails. There's a "rule" to be "civil" toward 
politicians who literally deserve, have earned and should be hanged 
by the neck until they are dead. I break all those with a smile and 
enjoy it -- because it wakes people up. If you say Don was right in 
how he enforced your rules by belittling me for doing what needed 
doing, I say your rules are a joke the likes of what I'd expect from 
Democrats.

My banning you is about a Principle that eludes you enough to have 
you banish a "Brother" "for life". Since that's a principle I've 
already staked my life on for over four years, I'm not about to 
sacrifice it to keep you around.  Farewell, dude. I hope it was worth 
it. For what it's worth, I'll miss you.

--AS