Legal and Political

Status
Not open for further replies.

Al Norris

Moderator Emeritus
Forum: Legal and Political
Description: Round table discussions range from the Bill of Rights, to concealed carry, to general political issues.
Mission Statement: The Firing Line, a virtual community dedicated to the discussion and advancement of responsible firearms ownership.

When looking through many of the threads here, and keeping in mind the above two disclaimers, it is obvious to me, at least, that many of the topics we have seen lately do not belong here at The Firing Line.

While there are a great number of things that are happening in the world around us, The Firing Line is not a conspiracy board. Such discussions are not welcome here.

Our Founders knew that governments, not watched or checked by those who are governed, will always devolve into tyranny. But this doesn't mean that there is some vast conspiracy to take away our freedoms and liberties. It is as simple a people who experience power need more to sustain their power. It is a powerful narcotic and few individuals can withstand exposure such strong forces.

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." George Washington said this in a speech delivered January 7, 1790 as quoted in the Boston Independent Chronicle, January 14, 1790.

Others of the Founding Era said much the same thing. Benjamin Franklin Bache, in a Philadelphia Aurora editorial, 1794 wrote, "All governments are more or less combinations against the people. . .and as rulers have no more virtue than the ruled. . . the power of government can only be kept within its constituted bounds by the display of a power equal to itself, the collected sentiment of the people."

They warned us from the beginning to be on guard, always watchful. Never trusting for a moment the benevolence of the government. As a people however, we have failed to watch and guard our liberties with that same jealous eye toward the principles that our founders bequeathed us. While it is not entirely our fault, as we aren't the first Americans who have failed in this watchfulness, we share enough of the blame.

But...

People who go around panicked because of some alleged conspiracy, do us gunnies great harm. The image we leave behind after all the talk of Doom And Gloom, is not at all conducive to being viewed as a rational group of people.

It is my opinion, and my opinion alone, that there is no place on the Firing Line for such threads, let alone the L&P forum. I don't think I'm alone in my thinking.
 
So...

How about someone come up with some wording that actually UNIFIES those two seemingly disparate purpose descriptions?

Over the years I've seen more than a handful of topics that very nicely qualify as general political issues closed as being "off topic."

That said, my only fear is this...

If we ban discussion of conspiracy theories, what are we to do in the face of the U.S. Government's secret radiological experiments that were conducted against US citizens in the 1940s and 1950s?

Or the Government's long-term study of how syphillis destroys the minds of black men who otherwise could have been cured with a 40 cent jab of penicillin?

Both were, for the longest time, decried as being nothing more than fanciful conspiracies.

Until they were proven to be true happenings...

Generally I agree with you.... but... I don't think simply saying "OH THAT'S NOTHING MORE THAN AN ANTI GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY THEORY" is entirely beneficial, either.
 
Imagine this was 1939 and someone bought up the possibility that a certain foreign goverment might be carrying out a plan to intern and maybe even eliminate a certain religious group? I wonder if that guy got labled as the paranoid fringe crazy? Years later the comment being made if we had only known...

I think a certain amount of paranoia about a government by its citizens is healthy for all.

I know the frustration of the doom and gloom posts we have been seeing. Sometimes folks get excited about what is near and dear to them and forget to detach themselves from the argument emotionally and approach it from a logical viewpoint. Then we all do that once in a while.

What would probably have been better is keeping it limited to a thread or two instead of making 20-30 threads. I know I usually try to see if a subject has been posted but every once in a while I make a duplicate thread. Best bet would be for folks to check and see if they are duplicating a thread or find the one they agree with and then post in that thread.
 
Or imagine a law was passed, such as the Military Commissions Act, which allows for a United States Citizen to be prosecuted under it, and a President issued a letter stating that it can be used in the event a citizen "engaged in in conspiracy theories" which could be interpreted to "embolden" an unnamed enemy. Or an Act which allowed for martial law to be declared by a president for no reason other than he or she felt that "civil disobedience" could be an act such as protesting against the NAFTA summit meetings.

If you halt posting such threads, then you may not even ever be made aware of them.

Heck, you might not be able to even know about the spp.gov "north american partnership" agreement, which allows for "trilateral networks of law enforcment" between Mexico, Canada, and the United States, to protect the "judges and officers" of this new "partnership."

I would think not allowing such threads (especially when they consist of verbatim quotes off the very government web sites themselves) would not serve for the supposed purpose of this forum.

Granted, if someone posts a conspiracy theory, that is one thing. But if they are posting links to actual government web sites announcing things such as a "North American Partnership" to back up a challenge from someone to prove their statements, I would think that was the original purpose of the site itself. After all, how long will we have a right to keep and bear arms, when we are a "trilateral" government entity with Mexico and Canda?

I mean after all, look at your own quote line below your post. It says:
"Secrecy is the keystone of all tyranny. Not force, but secrecy ... censorship." Robert Heinlein in If This Goes On--
 
How about just setting up a Forum called "Conspiracy Theories" and let them run rampant? Then we would have a choice of going there or not.

Dean
 
What if there is sombody who doesn't has the best interest of America at heart? Do we just write it off as a "conspiracy theory"? Gunowners, I thought, had a little better understanding of history, the Constitution, and governments in general, than the average person.

From David Rockefeller's auto-biography "Memoirs" (Random House, 2002)
Rockefeller, if you remember is the Founder and Honorary Chairman of the Trilateral Commision in 1973. A group that, according to mainstream media just a few years ago, didn't exist.

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." - David Rockefeller
http://www.randomhouse.com/randomhouse/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9780812969733 (I think the people who praise this book is telling: Kissinger, Mandela and Kofi Annan.)
http://www.trilateral.org/nagp/regmtgs/98/1201tribs.htm

Things are happening, often in the background unobserved, that eventually
affect us all. Do we face it and discuss it, or do we just pretend it's not happening. Brzezinski's book "The Grand Chessboard" shows how these people think and plan.
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/zbig.html

badbob
 
Many years ago we might have accused those who said something was fishy about the USS Liberty attack as conspiracy nuts .... today we know better.

We're seeing unprecedented moves to inhibit/attack Liberty in America ... Maybe considering some of these arguments with an open mind is in order.

For some of us these things weigh heavily on our minds and in our hearts .... on many occasions those first ridiculed were found to be right.

nixweiss.gif


Our society has taught us to treat conspiracy theorists and theories with disdain but is it really what they deserve ?

conspiracy theory
n.
A theory seeking to explain a disputed case or matter as a plot by a secret group or alliance rather than an individual or isolated act

-------------------

As the moderator of another board , I find it's worth listening and giving some thought to these theories as I see my country changing.

When we stop questioning authority , we truly do become sheep.



.
 
Answer honestly: How much of partisan politics is composed of paranoia about the machinations of those evil "insert party here"? And how much is composed of undying support for the always-correct and honorable "insert other party here"?
I suspect that if you start weeding out all this stuff, the crickets will end up being the loudest things in the room.

Besides, even the paranoid have enemies ;)
 
Mike, I thought of those as I was writing. Then I thought of a couple more. I don't quite know how to reconcile real conspiracies with the many false ones. So I chose expediency, and bundled them all together.

And that's the real problem with those conspiracies that are real with the ones that are false. Until they are proven true....

I have intentionally raised this issue, as I believe it does need to be addressed. I do not make it a rule (I don't have that authority), simply a discussion where it may be fleshed out, so to speak.

I'm pressed for time at the moment. I have a city council meeting I must attend, shortly. I hope to be able to answer some of the other critiques when I get back.
 
I think the difference between a good conspiracy theory and a bad one is evidence. One could then say that completely fabricated conspiracy theories or those with no substantial cites don't deserve air time here and shouldn't absorb subscriber energy.
 
I guess this is were I could say negative things about the staff,you know something including the words trilateral commision, or tin foil hats . But that was not my intent in coming to this forum . My intent was to generate interest and make people aware of what is impending if left unchecked. I must say that I think the staff should look up the term '' eternal vigilance '' . Topics that concern even the slightest risk to our constitution should not be taken as a joke. I would also like to thank the members that see the grave risk arising. ''Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people . To destroy this invisable government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.'' ( april 1906 Theodore Roosevelt , 100 years ago) SO LONG
 
1AKpatriot said:
I must say that I think the staff should look up the term "eternal vigilance"
The phrase is incomplete without the first part, which every Marine learns as part of guard duty: Constant Suspicious, Eternal Vigilance.

In that, I am quite aware of its meaning.

It has nothing to do with casting aspersions upon the staff or members of this board.
I take that to mean you can't handle rational discussion?
Gary Conner said:
...such as the Military Commissions Act, which allows for a United States Citizen to be prosecuted under it...
No it doesn't. I, and others, have tried to explain exactly what the law entails. But you choose to read into the law something that simply isn't there. Why? I can only guess, and such a guess is only germane to this discussion because your version supports your contention of conspiracy.
a President issued a letter stating that it can be used in the event a citizen "engaged in in conspiracy theories" which could be interpreted to "embolden" an unnamed enemy.
Despite any contentions that Bush may have (or you, for that matter), signing statements on Bills enacted by Congress have no legal merit.

A president may state whatever he wants, but it will be the Courts that decide any issues, and they will not look to a "signing statement." Presidents have been doing this for years and no Court, to my knowledge, has ever paid the slightest attention to them.

As for my tagline, you're correct. It is aimed directly at Bush and his administration. I've never made any bones about the fact that I don't like Bush and I don't like where he's tried to take this country. Nor do I like some of the decisions made in the last few years by the SCOTUS.

But I also don't buy into every little conspiracy theory that comes down the pike. Can you tell? :D
 
"I don't quite know how to reconcile real conspiracies with the many false ones."

Every conspiracy is fake.

Until it's actually proven to be real.

Tread lightly.
 
I had a friend who was pretty radical

I remember him telling me when Ruby Ridge was going on that what the news was telling us wasn't the real story and something else was going on. I thought he was a nut.... till the 'true' story came out later.

This guy was not a right wing radical but just the opposite... a left wing peacnick if anything. So, he had no vested interest in supporting the folks involved in it. It started me to questioning what I'm told by both the media and the authorities even more.
 
I'm backing Antipitas on this. Granted, things are not always as they seem and sometimes conspiracies have some truth behind them, but the way some of you guys run around on here basically screaming the world is gonna end is just silly. It's not that I think the government is just dandy or that we aren't facing real problems, but the world is changing. It may not be changing for the better right now, but what is it that scares you? Is it that the world isn't what it was 20 or 30 years ago?

I used to know a guy who woke his son up on random days at odd hours of the night and made him run drills for different situations. I'm not talking about some of the drills we all do with home invasions either. I'm talking about making his 11 year old son get in camos, a heavy pack, grab weapons and ammo, and run to a "shelter" in the woods. His dad tried to rationalize this to us by saying the possibility of invasion was very real. He actually used the movie Red Dawn (yea the Patrick Swayze movie) as an example. I'm all for prepared, but come on.

The truth is the world is a crazy place right now, but it's been a crazy place before and it has still survived. I'm not saying don't be vigilant or don't be cautious. I'm saying, relax and enjoy the world for what it is and don't waste your life pounding the keys of an internet forum screaming into the wind about how the democrats are gonna slaughter us all in the night or something equally as goofy.

Just my 2 cents and in the words of Dennis Miller "That's just my opinion, I could be wrong."
 
Al, this is an interesting thread. I came to TFL a year ago because of my interest in firearms, no other reason. This is the first forum I ever spent any time in up until that time. I enjoyed the interaction with others and the off firearms topics on L&P. I completely understand that 'freedom of speech' is not germane in a place such as this, this is private property. I do feel that there is inconsistency in the evaluation of the merits of threads and individual posts here in L&P. This inconsistency lead to frustration on my part. I have continued to stop by and read regularly, I've just curtailed my posting and participation because I really don't need the frustration of trying to guess what is or isn't going to be tolerated. It seems to me if there are no personal attacks, just spirited debate whats the problem?

As for conspiracy theories I believe if the threads are allowed to continue, within the confines of civility, the nutty conspiracies will be exposed by the majority here who are rational thinkers, and the thread will die.

One thing I think would help TFL is an expanded feeling of community among the members. I believe the best way to achieve this would be a forum which allowed general discussion about anything tasteful. For instance I seldom agree with Marko's political assessments. From looking at Marko's website I can tell that I would probably like him personally. We probably have some common interests beyond guns, freelance writing is one of his interests IIRC, family is another. I enjoy photography, antique tools, etc. I am sure there are others here who share these interests too. I am not saying there should be forums devoted to photography or antiques but what would the harm be in an occasional thread in an appropriate general forum for those of us who enjoy these things to recognize this common interest thus creating more of a community atmosphere? My point is if we are limited to discussions about guns, which every participant here should be interested in, and politics which is highly divisive, it is easy to fail to realize that we each have families, jobs, other hobbies, tragedies and successes, other common interests which if allowed to discuss could reduce the venom in some of the threads here in L&P.

Just my $.02.
 
How about just setting up a Forum called "Conspiracy Theories" and let them run rampant? Then we would have a choice of going there or not.

Dean

Well Dean, suppose you had read from several news sources that the Democrat leadership in both Houses had met to discuss "gun safety" issues which would result in raising the cost of ammunition.

And it was only allowed to be posted in "conspiracy theories".

How many people who you initially intended to forewarn and help by bringing it to their attention would it reach, if it was inappropriately, and incorrectly, posted in a "conpiracy theory" site?

A legitimate concern about our Nation's sovereignty has been posited by several members about the "North American Partnership Agreement". Thus far, the only thing that anyone can counter regarding everything I have posted in it's regard, is MY PERSONAL contention that it is an unconstitutional and Illegal attempt at establishing a treaty with Mexico and Canada without being authorized by the U.S. Senate.

Anti and Rich both seem to believe that it is not a treaty. They think it is non-enforcable, and my contention is there is work being performed on the plan currently, and there are Identification Numbers being assigned to individual business owners in Texas already, for the right to "trade" or ship their wares on this supposedly nonexistant treaty's roadway.

Be that as it may, there are more people aware of the issue now.

Put off such statements onto a nut page, and see how long it is before not much of what you want to talk about is not on it.
 
I have to agree with Marlborough man....

yes the world is crazy.... it has been since ...forever. I find it strange that about once a year on the back page of the news section of my paper they have to report that the FBI has found that once again violent crime is down for how ever many years in a row.... this is always buried deep. When I point this out to folks they say I'm crazy...but I keep seeing it.

I think it was in 1912 that the biggest number of gun related deaths were reported. seems like this was in my handgun safety class.

Things change... the secret is to adapt.
 
A dozen or so years ago....

My dad called me with this crazy story.

Seems a man in the west somewhere was beseiged by our own govt. They had him surrounded, and Dad was concerned whether he would be killed alon with his family.

I told him he was nuts. That kind of stuff doesn't happen here. Conspiracy theory nut. :rolleyes: )

Several days later my mother told me that dad couldn't sleep at night. "It's that Randy fellow out west that he's all worked up over. He wants to go help that man."

I heard the "news" several weeks later.

Daddy hadn't exaggerated anything.

Sometimes today's conspiracy is tommorows fact.

I would rather dredge through the mire and drivel of the certifiable, than have the few Revere's muffled.
 
"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." - David Rockefeller

Yikes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top