Freedom Discussions

"You Can No Longer Think of Yourselves as Peace Officers": Militarizing "Lockdown High"

What this means, of course, is that although the disguised deputy playing the role of assailant was firing blanks, the schoolkids were, quite literally, being held hostage.

If a bank robber bluffs his way through a heist with a toy gun, he’s committed a real crime. The same is true of the people who terrorized the inmates of Orangeville Jr.-Sr. High on May 13. School District Superintendent Randy Otto has submitted his resignation, and some parents have discussed the possibility of a lawsuit — but the appropriate criminal charges against those responsible aren’t forthcoming. News

Like every other “security” measure inflicted on Americans since 9/11, the “lockdown” scenario treats schoolchildren as a tactical impediment — or perhaps even a threat — to be dealt with, rather than as innocent people to be protected. That model was actually put in place before 9/11 — even before Columbine – as part of the federal “Safe Schools” dogma that grew out of the Regime’s narcotics price support program (sometimes dishonestly called the “War on Drugs”). 

Today it is typical for police agencies to deploy “Resource Officers” to prowl the halls of schools in search of misbehavior that can be treated as criminal offenses, rather than disciplinary problems. 

 In his keynote address to the 2007 National Association of School Resources Conference, held against the rugged and forbidding backdrop of Orlando’s Disney World, self-styled tactical and counter-terrorism John Giduck offered a telling glimpse into the mindset of the armed strangers who haunt local government schools:

“You’ve got to be a one-man fighting force…. You’ve got to have enough guns, and ammunition and body armor to stay alive…. You should be walking around in schools every day in complete tactical equipment, with semi-automatic weapons…. You can no longer afford to think of yourselves as peace officers…. You must think of yourself [sic] as soldiers in a war because we’re going to ask you to act like soldiers.” (Emphasis added.)

In her immensely informative and tirelessly infuriating new book Lockdown High: When The Schoolhouse becomes a Jailhouse, investigative reporter Annette Fuentes  describes Giduck’s audience as ” a sea of khaki uniforms, some [of whom in the crowd] were waring holstered handguns…. [M]ore than a few had shaved heads and bulging bellies or biceps. Some had both. If drug tests had been required for registration, odds are that a few steroid-positives could have resulted among the more muscular attendees.”

Giduck himself has appointed himself an authority on the tactics and training of special forces despite a resume untainted by actual experience in the same. In similar fashion Giduck advertises himself as a world-caliber authority on radical Islam and counter-terrorism: He claims to have been tutored in counter-terrorism by “Putin’s boss,” the former head of the KGB, and to have trained with Soviet-era special forces, during a visit to Russia in the late Gorbachev era. Assuming that Giduck is telling the truth, that line on his vita should summarily disqualify him from having anything to do with children anywhere.

Whatever proves to be the truth about Giduck’s claims, he is a prominent figure among the cohort Fuentes calls the “Profiteers of Lockdown High” — an interlocking collection of governmental and quasi-private bureaucracies committed to eradicating the few substantive distinctions separating schools from prisons.

“Every day in communities across the United States, children and adolescents spend the majority of their waking hours in schools that increasingly have come to resemble places of detention more than places of learning,” observes Fuentes.  Federally subsidized “zero tolerance” policies have created what Fuentes and other critics of the system call the “school-to-prison pipeline”: “If yesterday’s prank got a slap on the wrist, today those wrists could be slapped with handcuffs.”

The danger here is not merely that schools have been largely transformed into short-term prison facilities; it’s that the SROs deployed therein take seriously Giduck’s catechism about being combat-ready “warriors,” rather than peace officers. Their operational credo is not “protect and serve,” but rather “control and dominate” — and, with increasing frequency, “close and kill.”

Those options are compellingly displayed in two entirely unnecessary police assaults on young teenagers: The case  of 17-year-old Derby, Kansas resident Jonathan Villareal, who was beaten, tasered, and handcuffed by police “resource officers” who took offense over the way the high school student was wearing his pants; and the murder of 14-year-old San Antonio reform school student Derek Lopez. Significantly, both of those incidents occurred after school hours.

Relieved by the end of his daily sentence in the government mind-laundry, Jonthan passed a brace of officially licensed bullies on the way to the bus. One of them told Jonathan to pull up his pants; the youngster replied — hopefully with the appropriate measure of controlled contempt — that school was over and he was thus free to dress any way he chose.

One of the thugs — his tax-fattened bulk making him much larger than the scrawny adolescent —  threw Jonathan to the ground while bellowing the familiar rapist’s refrain: “Stop resisting!” The other thug immediately joined in, both of them striking and kneeing the prone, helpless teenager in the back, legs, and neck. Jonathan also suffered a black eye.

When Jonathan struggled to his feet, he was thrown down forcefully; he felt his arm snap as he hit the ground. He struggled to his feet again, thereby giving one of the costumed enforcers an excuse to report that the victim had assumed an “aggressive stance.” This supposedly justified a potentially lethal taser attack.

The Derby High School newspaper, appropriately called the Informer, explained that students can be subjected to “administrative” discipline for wearing their pants “inappropriately.” Derby Police Chief Robert Lee described the incident as “a flagrant violation of school policy that could have been handled administratively, if he had not resisted the SRO.”

Once again, we see the logic of the rapist at work: If the victim is severely injured or killed for fighting back, it’s her own fault; she shouldn’t have resisted. This comparison, of course, is unfair: Rapists and other aggressors not swaddled in government-issued costumes aren’t generally permitted to file criminal charges against victims who fight back. The Derby Police Department “will take the incident to the district attorney for possible criminal charges against Villareal,” observes the Informer. 

Through an interpreter, Villareal’s mother said that she “understands if they need to arrest him for being disrespectful,” but that she doesn’t understand why “they need to beat him up for whatever reason.”

The short answer, of course, is this: They do it because they can.

Derby High’s dress code is described as part of an effort to beat back the insidious “gang culture” considered to be a besetting scourge of society. Doubtless the school also participates in the Regime’s “anti-bullying campaign,” in which students are encouraged to rat out each other whenever they hear inappropriate comments, or see what they believe to be inappropriate conduct.

None of this applies to the sanctified bullies in military attire, of course. Since they belong to the State’s punitive priesthood, those skeevy armed adults can loiter around schools, leering like Aqualung at underage girls and taunting smaller young males in an attempt to provoke them into doing something to justify a righteous beating — followed by prosecution for “resisting arrest.”

With troubling frequency, this State-authorized bullying involves the use of consistently lethal weapons, such as the ubiquitous portable electro-shock torture device. On occasion, it involves unambiguous criminal homicide. Witness the November 12, 2010 killing of Derek Lopez by Officer Daniel Alvarado of San Antonio’s Northside Independent School District Police.

Alvarado was an exceptionally unqualified officer even by the dismal standards that prevail among the ranks of tax-subsidized gun thugs. Between March 2006 and November 2010, Alvarado was suspended four times. Four times he was informed by supervisorsthat he faced “immediate termination.”

For some reason — most likely one rooted in police union politics — when it came time to fire Alvarado, his superiors just couldn’t bring themselves to pull the trigger. Alvarado displayed no similar scruples on November 12, 2010, when he murdered 14-year-old Derek Lopez, who had just taken part in a brief scuffle with another student.

Rather than doing as he was ordered, Alvarado bundled the “victim” — who was probably more terrified of the armed functionary than of his obnoxious classmate — into the patrol car and went in pursuit of Lopez.

Lopez vaulted a nearby fence and hid in a backyard shed containing Christmas decorations. The homeowner saw the intrusion, and a neighbor flagged down Alvarado’s patrol car. The officer drew his gun “when he came up the driveway,” recalled the homeowner.

Within a minute or so, a single gunshot resonated through the neighborhood. When asked by the horrified homeowner what had happened, Alvarado — who reportedly looked “dazed or distant” — replied that Lopez “came at me.”

Although he’s been removed from patrol duty, Alvarado remains on the force, albeit in a tax-underwritten sinecure. Although he had repeatedly been threatened with termination for sloppiness or defiance in carrying out administrative duties, Alvarado faces neither criminal prosecution nor professional censure for murdering a 14-year-old boy.

Apparently, insubordination in carrying out office functions is a much graver matter than insubordination that results in the needless death of an adolescent Mundane.
Despite the fact that this incident involved two teenage boys who attended a special school for troubled juveniles, parents should understand that students in practically any government-run “educational” institution can fall prey to sudden — and potentially lethal — police violence.

The purpose of “active shooter drills” is not to refine protocols intended to protect inmates of government schools; instead, it is to habituate children to the presence of paramilitary operators in their midst. Parents should ponder that reality as millions of young Americans begin their welcome Summer parole from the government’s hybrid school/prison system — and they should likewise consider the wisdom of making that parole an unconditional pardon.


Thanks again, and God Bless!



Be sure to check out my weekly Pro Libertate Radio podcast at the Liberty News Radio network!
Dum spiro, pugno!

Article source:


Militant Libertarian

Site owner, philosopher, certified genius, and general pain in the establishment's ass.


Ron Howard

I am a member of the U.S. Special Operations Website known as SOCNET.COM. It is, since 1996, a place for military, law enforcement and special operations personnel to “hang out” and commiserate. It is open to the public at large and often serves as a sounding board to verify someone’s bonafides in the aforementioned careers; as well as discuss various other topics.

In 2007, a member asked about an individual named John Giduck who made claims, in writing, that he was a former US Army Special Forces Soldier, Ranger, tactical parachute instructor, etc. Mr. Giduck specializes in lectures and seminars given to law enforcement and military organizations about active shooters in schools. He based his work on a book he published (Mar 2005) about the Beslan School Siege in Russia (1 Sep 2004). As usual, several of us contacted former associates to establish Mr Giduck’s credentials. Within a few days we learned that Mr. Giduck had never served in the Army nor ever been a sworn police officer. Needless to say, it put a severe ‘dent’ in his credibility and ability to critique tactics, techniques and procedures. Several of us reported our findings on SOCNET and let it go. Lots of posers, but not a lot of time to deal with them..

His company, Archangel, immediately went on the offensive and posted very long diatribes about his expertise, duty, loyalty, etc. The usual fluff one expects from individuals with direct financial ties to posers: Attack the people who question them, but not directly address facts associated with their fraudulent background. One Archangel employee, Anderson, went as far as to physically threaten a SOCNET member. The post was archived so as not to inflame the situation any further. Anderson owns a gun store in Colorado, so the threat had some degree of credibility.

After three months of harangue, Archangel and Mr. Giduck’s proxies gave up and SOCNET ignored them as well. In November 2011, another associate of Archangel and Mr. Giduck re-opened the controversy by resurrecting the old thread from 2007. This associate, Mason, is former SEAL who defrauded the Navy of $110,000 and turned on his commander Richard Marcinko (“Rougue Warrior”) in exchange for a lighter sentence. The irony of a known poser using a convicted felon to defend his ‘honor’ was not lost on us…

Mason essentially warned SOCNET as a whole that if we did not apologize to Mr. Giduck, there would be trouble ahead. We did some research and discovered three things: Whenever someone used Google and searched used “John Giduck”, SOCNET was the number one search result. Second, fewer law enforcement organizations were contacting him for speaking engagements. Many of us believe they didn’t call him back because he really didn’t provide any real value-added to their policies or training. Third, he just published another book on how a person can “Bring Out the Green Beret in You”. He co-wrote the book with Anderson. The free publicity on SOCNET apparently harmed his book sales.

Mr. Giduck stepped up his campaign along two lines: First, he promised to reveal Personal Identifying Information (PII) of every member of SOCNET he could find. Many of the members of SOCNET are on active duty or serve in sensitive duty positions. His first revelation was of an active-duty Army Special Forces Soldier. We later found out that Mr. Giduck used the Special Operations Association and the Special Forces Association to find the Soldier and publicly release his information. This Soldier is a Silver Star recipient (from Afghanistan) and serves as a Team Sergeant in a Special Forces Group.

Ron McCan, a former president of the Special Forces Association and an employee working at the Special Forces School, used his access to sensitive records and Army Knowledge Online to provide Mr. Giduck everything he needed to place the Soldier’s life in danger as well as his family. Ironically, this Soldier was the first to back away from the controversy surrounding Mr. Giduck when the President of the Special Operations Association, ‘Tilt’ Meyer, informed the Soldier that Mr. Giduck was in fact an ‘Honorary’ Lifetime Member of the SOA as well as legal counsel for the SOA. In other words, this Soldier had nothing to do with challenging the credibility of Mr. Giduck.

You can view the results of his efforts to reveal the PII of SOCNET membership at his web site [Editor Note: I removed the link to protect TAH readers from a dangerous script at the website mentioned]:

Second, Mr. Giduck mailed a ‘pseudo’ lawsuit (early 2012) directly to the Soldier demanding $200,000 from him; as well as contacting the Army directly to investigate the Soldier. The US Army cleared him of all wrong-doing.

Since March 2012 several of us on our own time began open-source research into Mr. Giduck’s past and post our findings. Among the things we discovered:

Mr. Giduck was a practicing attorney in Colorado. One of his last clients was Donna Yaklich, a woman accused (later convicted) of murdering her husband, a Pueblo PD Police Officer. He had an public affair with her after the husband’s death and flew to the Caribbean with her when the Pueblo PD issued a warrant for her arrest. She later returned, turned herself in and retained better counsel…

Mr. Giduck said he never served in the military. We found he enlisted in the Army and failed out of basic training after 58 days.

Mr. Giduck went to Russia and publicly claimed he trained with the Russian SOF, Spetsnaz, as well as consorting with the FSB. The FSB is the successor to the KGB from the Soviet era. This item set off alarm bells with those still in government service. The reason being is we are duty, morally and ethically bound to report these instances to our security and counter-intelligence. There is no “wiggle room” on that process either.

Mr. Giduck consistently provided background information to various organizations throughout the USA alluding to his military experience in SOF. This information is on the internet in cached files or the actual web sites.

Mr. Giduck used the ‘legend’ he created to segue himself into sensitive facilities as well as a national-level Tier One Counter-Terrorism organization. Mr. Giduck does not have a security clearance granted by the DoD or the US Government in general.

There are several other instances of his claims not matching actual experience. SOCNET has a compendium at these URLs:

–Timeline of Claims

–Outline of Activities by functional area.

Mr. Giduck has a ‘spot’ on the Poser’s “Wall of Shame” at the POW Network web site.

Other people also questioned his credibility:

This article was written in March/April 2011, but the seminar Mr Giduck spoke at was January 2010; almost two years BEFORE the Giduck Issue was resurrected by Giduck’s employees on SOCNET.

The second URL above is especially damning because it’s written by a retired Intelligence Analyst from the CIA. Mr Cariens, the analyst, started reporting on John Giduck’s so-called research on the VA-Tech Shooting in 2008 (three years before Giduck’s employees resurrected issue):


Mr. Giduck finally revealed two weeks ago what his real intention with collecting and publishing PII: He filed a civil lawsuit against 21 members of SOCNET and 30 unnamed “John Does”. Case Number 12CV128, Park County Courthouse, Colorado. Rather than elaborating on the lawsuit, I’ll summarize: It’s childish, very poorly written and is a textbook example of SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation). Coincidentally, Colorado does not have anti-SLAPP regulations as do many other states. It also comes on the heels of the SCOTUS overturning the “Stolen Valor” Act as an infringement of First Amendment rights. Mr. Giduck’s lawsuit will be the first of many more suits filed by posers to defend their ‘legends’; particularly on the internet.

No doubt you’re asking why I’m writing to you regarding this situation. In short, I’m asking for your web site’s help in publicizing this vendetta Mr. Giduck has against anyone who challenges his credibility.

Militant Libertarian

Thanks for the information, Ron.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.