I am a terrorist

1 June 2008 by Mike Gogulski
Posted in diary, guns, mind control | 22 Comments »

From: Mike Gogulski
Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2008 5:17 AM
Subject: I am a terrorist

Dear Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency in partnership with the Pennsylvania Department of Health as a Crime Prevention & Safety Initiative,

Per your illuminating explication entitled “Who are Terrorists?“, I, Michael Jude Gogulski, now have the great pleasure of declaring myself a terrorist under several of your criteria.


Anti-Government Issues and Beliefs

  • Gun Control is a conspiracy to enslave us starting with the removal of our ability to either defend ourselves or forcefully change our government.
  • All judicial authority resides with the people. The jury, not the Judge, directs trials and can nullify laws they do not approve of.
  • U.S. sovereignty is being surrendered to the U.N., World Court, and World Bank, with the U.S. becoming an economic region of this New World Order.
  • Anti-Government activists often believe they have never accepted U.S. citizenship or can renounce it.
  • Federal and State governments do not have the legal authority to levy taxes or interfere with travel or private enterprise by requiring licenses or regulating activity or conduct.

I hereby declare myself to be anti-government under these criteria, specifically but not exclusively anti-US-government, and an affirmative, active supporter and proponent of the aforementioned beliefs and issues.


  • believe every […] government will eventually be corrupted by power
  • focus on specific issues that represent corruption of power

Though your treatment of the subject of anarchism is dismally vague and insufficient, I hereby declare myself an anarchist under these criteria.

Further, I hereby request my immediate and permanent registration and enrollment as a terrorist, anarchist and anti-government person in all lists, rosters, databases and blacksheets pertinent to the matters contained herein, and the immediate promulgation of such to all interested parties.

Yours, etc.,

Michael Jude Gogulski

Born free at Phoenix, Arizona, 8 August 1972

  1. 22 Responses to “I am a terrorist”

  2. By Bert McDert on 4 June 2008

    What is the purpose of alerting the government not only to your being all of the above as far as they’re concerned but also to your desire to be known as such? Just curious.

  3. By Mike Gogulski on 4 June 2008

    The purpose is to alert readers of this site just how ridiculous the anti-“terror” jihad in America has become.

  4. By Bert McDert on 4 June 2008

    Well that makes sense. I guess if we’re going to be on all of these lists anyway, we might as well own it. I was looking for a way to send a link your way for possible inclusion among renunciant resources. I had been following the Republic of Lakotah movement, wherein a group of elders was trying to get an unassailable mandate behind unilaterally pulling out of all their treaties with the US, asserting their sovereignty, and filing liens on all property in the affected areas that was bought in violation of their historic ownership. Anyway, one of the details I remember from that time but which I haven’t been able to track down again today was that anyone could request and obtain citizenship as a Lakota provided they first renounced their US citizenship. If that ever went anywhere it might be an offer worth looking into: “citizenship” in an actual tribal nation. Would be kind of like the equivalent of being “ordained” by the Universal Life Church: would grant access to all the “privileges” of that status without requiring all the bullshit that typically accompanies it. Don’t know if that’s a direction you would consider or an idea you would want your readers to get through you, but…it does seem like it would count as a resource for renunciants so…here ya go. I’ll try to find the specific offer in one of my archived emails from when they were putting out a regular newsletter, but for now, is the closest I can find. Do with it what you will.

  5. By Mike Gogulski on 4 June 2008

    Hey again Bert. Yeah, that’s another part of the motivation, actually. If there are going to be all these lists, let’s jam them as much as possible to reduce their utility.

    Interesting though the Lakotah secession thing is, it ain’t goin’ nowhere. The international standard for statehood is diplomatic recognition as a State, and none has been (or is likely to be) forthcoming for Lakotah. Assuming they’re issuing “citizenships” now already, any travel or identity documents based upon them would be effectively worthless. Those interested in such things would probably be better served by signing up for the World Passport, which has shown limited utility.

    And yes, I say all of this in my official capacity as a Minister ordained by the ULC 🙂

  6. By Alex on 25 April 2009

    This was a very stupid idea.

  7. By Mike Gogulski on 25 April 2009

    @Alex: Would you like to expand upon that?

  8. By Ashley on 12 June 2009

    Is the “Who are terrorist” site supposed to be legitimate? Please, tell me that it is just satirical.

  9. By Mike Gogulski on 13 June 2009

    @Ashley: No, it’s not satirical. Unfortunately.

  10. By Antonio on 27 August 2009

    I think we see eye to eye on many issues that are proving detrimental to our freedom in the future. Government is a result of the evolution of our societies, and therefore essential. The world government may very well be planning to de-populize the Earth.

    think of this: it is a matter of simple arithmetic to arive at the conclusion that by 2400, the world would be populated to the extent that every person would occupy a square meter.

    you may be anti-government, but the government may be pro-Earth. there is little that can be done about overpopulation, except of course, living on mars.

    the battle of our time may not be about our liberties of the future, but our very freedom to live on the planet. one of the reasons that our population is dumbed down, is to justify the arguement that our life(common- people) is not worth living.

    you better have a lot of guns, because you may be up against:
    the army (s)
    the media
    brainwashed population

    my question to you is:

    What is it that bothers you more, depopulation may be neccesary. or Is it that its being decided that your life is not worth living.

  11. By Mike Gogulski on 27 August 2009

    What bothers me is the unproven, fallacious statement right up front, that “government is essential”.

  12. By Antonio on 27 August 2009

    well then i suppose that you would have 6 billion people in a lawless society. so basically I have the right to shoot you if you piss me off and you have the right to die.

    Its nice that you have so much faith in society. but anarchy is basically just that: chaos.

  13. By Mike Gogulski on 27 August 2009

    Ah, thanks for pointing that out, I’ve never heard it before. I guess I’ll just delete my website then, and maybe try to get my citizenship back so that I can start voting. Cheers!

  14. By Antonio on 28 August 2009


  15. By b-psycho on 28 August 2009

    Isn’t it funny how the same people that say anarchy requires unrealistic faith in society always work in a “well then I can shoot you and you can’t do anything about it!” line, without realizing that claiming such power is what defines a state?

  16. By Antonio on 4 September 2009

    yea, you know, I didnt see it that way. Why cant we have anarchy with a very select few rules, you know, set in stone. What do you think mike?

  17. By Mike Gogulski on 4 September 2009

    Well there is one rule for anarchy: Nobody rules.

  18. By Antonio on 5 September 2009

    well that would require a new generation of children that can be taught that power leads to corruption. Yet in our society, it is so obvious that there are those that consider themselves above the rest of us. I think in this paradoxial way, many people search for power all of their life, caused by their powerlessness.

    I do want to apologize since there is a big difference between chaos and a no class system. Are you aware though that anarchy is being hijacked by the federal government to cause damage during peaceful protests.

    you can youtube the seatle protests of 99.

  19. By Martin Fick on 7 July 2010

    @Antonio: Simple arithmetic applied incorrectly to any problem can incorrectly prove anything. 🙂 Ask yourself why this same arithmetic applied to every other species of animal or plant has not come to fruition? Humans are not immune to nature’s laws. Like any other species, we can only grow as a population to the size that our resources permit. We expand our population when our resources expand. If our resources can expand infinitely (not likely), than we will likely expand infinitely. But either way, there can never be long term over population.

    Over population is short term problem only since it is by definition not sustainable (or else it would not be over population). And, naturally, the problems with short term population are the resource management problems. The better resources are managed, the less painful it will be, and the shorter the time span this temporary over population will take. Either way, it cannot last long, not ever more than a generation (true overpopulation causes death and prevents births). So no need to look way ahead to the future to predict eminent doom.

    Do not make the fallacy of thinking that humans have only reached the current population because of exponential growth over time. Yes, our growth is exponential, but only during its growth! Our growth is stunted constantly, during these time periods our growth may even be negative (when we experience short term overpopulation). It is evolution and more recently innovation that enables our expansion to be exponential at times because we increase the resources available to our species.

    Of course, it is possible to have conditions that are similar to over population for many people, and for this to continue for a long period of time because of irrational mismanagement of resources. When the state takes from those who manage their resources well enough to give to those who don’t, it encourages breeding and consumption beyond the level of sustainability of the people who mismanage resources. This makes it seem like there is overpopulation to many since the state will constantly be interfering to support this model.

  20. By magiclife on 28 July 2010

    Governments and other organizations are NOT corrupted by power. They are corrupted by certain individuals who seek power within those entities. If you eliminate those people from membership, you would have no problems, except from the government who would say you are discriminating. Anti-discrimination laws make it possible for minions to infiltrate and destroy the fiber of any organization. Those laws are also the same as anti-murder laws. If a person or persons consistently threaten me and my people with imposing their way of life and beliefs, laws and propaganda have made it a “crime” to do the right thing. So called indigenous peoples have been seen as criminals for protecting their families land and cultures with so called violent acts. This is a deep spread belief. You realize when you watch James Bond and root for him, you are rooting for evil to prevail in the world. He is a representative minion of the most murderous plunderers the world has known. Watch a Brit film where some Brit shoots some Ethiopian sniper and everyone breathes a sigh of relief because the Brits will not be shot at any more. BUT they should be shot at in Ethiopia. They have no right to make violent acts on those people…yet that is what they did. So, what do you believe?

  21. By Doug Barbieri on 8 July 2011

    Martin: I have never thought of it this way! Overpopulation conditions being simulated by the state’s mismanagement of resources! Thanks for that well written post!

    “Governments and other organizations are NOT corrupted by power.” Other organizations being…say, the mafia?

    They are not corrupted by power because they ARE corrupt.

  22. By Mark on 22 August 2012

    The Canadian neocon govt. has just started to declare environmental groups ‘terrorist’ organizations now. Purely because our govt has a big business, money oriented agenda that serves a small minority for a short time. Sad.

  1. 1 Trackback(s)

  2. 13 June 2008: France pushing nationwide internet censorship |

    comments rss Comments RSS

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Core Dogma