Yes, I should have started a new topic on the Federal reserve System. My mistake,but i get the feeling that people either dont understand this system or are afraid to admit what it has done to our economic freedom for the last 86 years. For some strange reason i detect a fear of discussing FRS.
The future part II
- Thread starter Ruger
- Start date
- Status
Jedi Oomodo
New member
So start a thread on the Federal Reserve. Those who would like to talk about it with you can, without steering other threads off topic. Those of us who don't wish to engage in such debate can discuss other topics undiluted by non-germane comments.
I for one would love to hear whatever info you have regarding FRS and how it's putting nails into the US coffin. So far, I haven't seen any such info beyond vague references to "banksters" and that they are REALLY who's running our country. I wait for the opening of this topic with baited breath...
On another note, I've seen far too much whining about how we should be free to talk about whatever we want here without any controls or restraint, and attempts to maintain civility are "PC policing", and an assertion that the "it's my living room- and you're free to leave" argument isn't valid because this is the Internet. I say "whining" because that's what it is. This is a privately owned site, on a private server. Rich, and anyone else whom he appoints to help him out, are well within their rights to establish and enforce rules of conduct that govern our debate here, and to edit or remove posts or posters that violate those rules.
Just as the US was founded with the ideal that it be a free society, but with standards of conduct to be adhered to, TFL is a place where we can come to discuss ANY firearms and related issues without being limited to a small scope ala "AR15.com" or "Glocktalk.com", provided that we do so by Rich's rules. That, more than anything else, makes TFL "The finest firearms site on the Web", and is why TFL is the only forum I participate in. Behaving in a civilized manner is the mark of an Adult, not a "PC thinker".
My $0.01
------------------
Lady Justice has been raped, truth assassin;
Rolls of red tape seal your lips, now you're done in;
Their money tips her scales again, make your deal;
Just what is truth? I cannot tell, cannot feel.
The ultimate in vanity
Exploiting their supremacy
I can't believe the things you say
I can't believe, I can't believe the price we pay- nothing can save us
Justice is lost, Justice is raped, Justice is gone
Pulling your strings,Justice is done...
Seeking no truth, winning is all,
Find it so grim, so true, so real....
If it isn't Scottish, it's CRAP! RKBA!
[This message has been edited by Jedi Oomodo (edited September 24, 1999).]
I for one would love to hear whatever info you have regarding FRS and how it's putting nails into the US coffin. So far, I haven't seen any such info beyond vague references to "banksters" and that they are REALLY who's running our country. I wait for the opening of this topic with baited breath...
On another note, I've seen far too much whining about how we should be free to talk about whatever we want here without any controls or restraint, and attempts to maintain civility are "PC policing", and an assertion that the "it's my living room- and you're free to leave" argument isn't valid because this is the Internet. I say "whining" because that's what it is. This is a privately owned site, on a private server. Rich, and anyone else whom he appoints to help him out, are well within their rights to establish and enforce rules of conduct that govern our debate here, and to edit or remove posts or posters that violate those rules.
Just as the US was founded with the ideal that it be a free society, but with standards of conduct to be adhered to, TFL is a place where we can come to discuss ANY firearms and related issues without being limited to a small scope ala "AR15.com" or "Glocktalk.com", provided that we do so by Rich's rules. That, more than anything else, makes TFL "The finest firearms site on the Web", and is why TFL is the only forum I participate in. Behaving in a civilized manner is the mark of an Adult, not a "PC thinker".
My $0.01
------------------
Lady Justice has been raped, truth assassin;
Rolls of red tape seal your lips, now you're done in;
Their money tips her scales again, make your deal;
Just what is truth? I cannot tell, cannot feel.
The ultimate in vanity
Exploiting their supremacy
I can't believe the things you say
I can't believe, I can't believe the price we pay- nothing can save us
Justice is lost, Justice is raped, Justice is gone
Pulling your strings,Justice is done...
Seeking no truth, winning is all,
Find it so grim, so true, so real....
If it isn't Scottish, it's CRAP! RKBA!
[This message has been edited by Jedi Oomodo (edited September 24, 1999).]
Brett Bellmore
New member
Ruger: Of COURSE a great many law enforcement people would refuse to help confiscate guns. At first.
Some of them would be fired in favor of people who WOULD confiscate guns.
Some of them would be moved to other jobs; Somebody still has to hand out traffic tickets.
Some of them would change their minds as soon as the first few targets of confiscation handed over their guns, one bullet at a time; Innocent civilians would have morphed into "cop killers" in their minds.
But mainly, our foes do NOT envision sending the police door to door collecting guns. Not as the main way of getting them our of our hands, anyway. No, you'll just go to the bank to get a home loan one day, and be told that they can't legally loan you money because you didn't turn in the guns you registered back in '03. Your employment applications will be turned back, because you didn't pass the manditory government check. (Originally implemented to stop illegal aliens, they told us.)
It won't be the police confiscating guns, mostly, it will be people compelled to turn them in in order to do anything which requires some form of government approval. Our foes have MUCH more subtle ways of achieving their ends than door to door confiscation squads, provided only that they know who owns the guns.
Some of them would be fired in favor of people who WOULD confiscate guns.
Some of them would be moved to other jobs; Somebody still has to hand out traffic tickets.
Some of them would change their minds as soon as the first few targets of confiscation handed over their guns, one bullet at a time; Innocent civilians would have morphed into "cop killers" in their minds.
But mainly, our foes do NOT envision sending the police door to door collecting guns. Not as the main way of getting them our of our hands, anyway. No, you'll just go to the bank to get a home loan one day, and be told that they can't legally loan you money because you didn't turn in the guns you registered back in '03. Your employment applications will be turned back, because you didn't pass the manditory government check. (Originally implemented to stop illegal aliens, they told us.)
It won't be the police confiscating guns, mostly, it will be people compelled to turn them in in order to do anything which requires some form of government approval. Our foes have MUCH more subtle ways of achieving their ends than door to door confiscation squads, provided only that they know who owns the guns.
A few gun owners will resist - providing SWAT with "terrorists" to protect society from.
Most gun owners will do nothing effective because, "It's not MY guns they want."
And we will fall one by one as the government schools teach our children how anti-social gun ownership is.
Makes an ugly scenario, eh? Sort of a prelude to Sunset at Coffin Rock.
Most gun owners will do nothing effective because, "It's not MY guns they want."
And we will fall one by one as the government schools teach our children how anti-social gun ownership is.
Makes an ugly scenario, eh? Sort of a prelude to Sunset at Coffin Rock.
Gale McMillan
Member In Memoriam
I normally skip the political forums because of the radical rhetoric on most of them and the other reason being that these forums are continually monitored by big brother. I feel I can actively work for our cause without drawing attention to myself by preaching to the choir.
I was in England a few weeks ago and in the home of my host was the monthly publication of the St Hubors club .This is the biggest and most prestigious club in England. On the fly was a letter from the President that went like this " I just returned from a meeting of the House of Lords where the subject was the total disarmament of the world! The subject discussed was that with the current world situation made the time ripe for the next step in reducing the number of guns in the hands of the general public world wide. This is being pushed by of all people the Japanese! The point is this is not a movement of the liberal politicians of this country but a movement of the New World Order! How can we fight it . Only one way ! Know the records of every politician on the ballot and work tirelessly for the defeat of every anti gun supporter. There are a few million votes that can sway the actions of those politicians if they know we are dedicated to their defeat. Their political future is the most important thing in their lives. The rhetoric of "They will have to pry my dead fingers off my guns" sound good but all you have to remember is Waco to realize that their can be no successful armed resistance . You may label me a conspiracy monger but I will say that if you don't Believe that it is a New World Order just look at the countries which have led the way banning guns .It is not the third world! I some times hear the NRA demonized by gun enthusiasts and It brings back memories of how they took away the effectiveness of the John Burch Society. By continually running them down as radical rt wing fanatics. If we don't get rid of every politician who ever uttered the Phrase New World Order we are doomed
You have had my Sunday sermon on this Saturday morning.
I was in England a few weeks ago and in the home of my host was the monthly publication of the St Hubors club .This is the biggest and most prestigious club in England. On the fly was a letter from the President that went like this " I just returned from a meeting of the House of Lords where the subject was the total disarmament of the world! The subject discussed was that with the current world situation made the time ripe for the next step in reducing the number of guns in the hands of the general public world wide. This is being pushed by of all people the Japanese! The point is this is not a movement of the liberal politicians of this country but a movement of the New World Order! How can we fight it . Only one way ! Know the records of every politician on the ballot and work tirelessly for the defeat of every anti gun supporter. There are a few million votes that can sway the actions of those politicians if they know we are dedicated to their defeat. Their political future is the most important thing in their lives. The rhetoric of "They will have to pry my dead fingers off my guns" sound good but all you have to remember is Waco to realize that their can be no successful armed resistance . You may label me a conspiracy monger but I will say that if you don't Believe that it is a New World Order just look at the countries which have led the way banning guns .It is not the third world! I some times hear the NRA demonized by gun enthusiasts and It brings back memories of how they took away the effectiveness of the John Burch Society. By continually running them down as radical rt wing fanatics. If we don't get rid of every politician who ever uttered the Phrase New World Order we are doomed
You have had my Sunday sermon on this Saturday morning.
Byron Quick
Staff In Memoriam
There is a Canadian woman who is working on the UN level to monitor the UN's work on global gun control and to lobby against it. She is looking for help. I'll find her URL and email and post it in the next few days.(I'm in the middle of a stretch of twelve hour night shifts right now)
Mr. McMillan, there is more to armed resistance than what was attempted at Waco. Read Sun Tzu's "Art of War." If I ever decide that active resistance is called for the last thing I would do is go open my gun safe. However, I also believe in giving fair warning to my possible opponents. In 45 years of an often contentious and frequently foolhardy life...giving fair warning has stood me in good stead.
To go back much further than the quotations usually found on these boards: In the pass of Thermopylae two thousand, four hundred and seventy nine years ago, three hundred Spartans held the hot gates against at least a hundred thousand Persians. The Persian king demanded that the Spartans lay down their arms. The Spartan king, Leonidas, said,"Molon labe!" (Come and take them)
This was one of the critical cusps for both what became Western civilization and for the concept of liberty... for while the Three Hundred died to the last man-in doing so they gained the time (seven days) to make the victories of Salamis and Plataea possible. They lost the battle but won the war.
I will do everything in my power to sway the hearts and minds of my countrymen, both private citizens and politicians to avert the downward spiral into despotism. If those actions are to no avail, in the final extreme, my answer to tyranny will be "Come and take them."
------------------
Byron Quick
Mr. McMillan, there is more to armed resistance than what was attempted at Waco. Read Sun Tzu's "Art of War." If I ever decide that active resistance is called for the last thing I would do is go open my gun safe. However, I also believe in giving fair warning to my possible opponents. In 45 years of an often contentious and frequently foolhardy life...giving fair warning has stood me in good stead.
To go back much further than the quotations usually found on these boards: In the pass of Thermopylae two thousand, four hundred and seventy nine years ago, three hundred Spartans held the hot gates against at least a hundred thousand Persians. The Persian king demanded that the Spartans lay down their arms. The Spartan king, Leonidas, said,"Molon labe!" (Come and take them)
This was one of the critical cusps for both what became Western civilization and for the concept of liberty... for while the Three Hundred died to the last man-in doing so they gained the time (seven days) to make the victories of Salamis and Plataea possible. They lost the battle but won the war.
I will do everything in my power to sway the hearts and minds of my countrymen, both private citizens and politicians to avert the downward spiral into despotism. If those actions are to no avail, in the final extreme, my answer to tyranny will be "Come and take them."
------------------
Byron Quick
Dennis and Rich, I sure hate to start off this way but i see that although we share some of the same beliefs we are separated by one major difference. You seem to be worried about the image that people have of us as gun owners. In case you havent noticed were already being blamed for our countrys descent into the proverbial toilet. What difference does it make if we sound educated and professional? I dont want to offend you guys but why throw a fit if someone places a post that you dont necessarily agree with? Isnt that the point of a discussion? Enlighten me please on why the mention of sacrificing ones life for freedom,or those who would take it from us is so terrible that it cant be mentioned? In my opinion you people are part of the problem. I thought we were all here for the same reason , but it seems that the unpleasant part of freedom is off limits. Remove me from here if you must but at least i got my two cents worth in.
------------------
Luke Swenson
GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH!!!!!!!!
------------------
Luke Swenson
GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH!!!!!!!!
Watcher,
First of all, relax with the removal theme, ok? You ask a good
question that I thought had been answered. I appreciate the opportunity
to try again.
Nobody here denies the need to be strong, to voice our opinions
completely, or to yell at the top of our lung, “Enough!”
But there are many, many places to scream and shout. Rich intended
TFL to be a haven for those who wanted to discuss rather than rant. To
explore firearms-related opinions rather than browbeat. To unite people
rather than divide.
That last part is the key.
At the moment (at least) you disagree with Rich’s goals (as I understand
them). No problem. Many TFLers go to other Bulletin Boards to rant and
rave. But we “reserve” TFL for rational discussion.
Here on TFL, you can forward your thoughts knowing nobody is going to
talk about your ancestors (grin). If you can defend your logic and
thoughts against the questions of other TFLers, you probably win
converts. If you forward some whacko idea about UFO’s landing and
taking over Sarah Brady’s mind (oh, boy, is THAT a loaded one!), you will
be asked to provide proof or put a lid on it.
So there are many other BBSs where we can forget about our “image”.
Personally, I think that is playing directly into HCI’s program - but many
people disagree. We ask them to “vent” elsewhere. Here we discuss.
Discuss as you did. You asked a very lucid and valid question. Hopefully
my reply is up to the same standards. If not, I’m sure one of the
Administrators will set my post straight.
Post away, Watcher. The style of your question shows you have a lot to
contribute.
First of all, relax with the removal theme, ok?
You ask a goodquestion that I thought had been answered. I appreciate the opportunity
to try again.
Nobody here denies the need to be strong, to voice our opinions
completely, or to yell at the top of our lung, “Enough!”
But there are many, many places to scream and shout. Rich intended
TFL to be a haven for those who wanted to discuss rather than rant. To
explore firearms-related opinions rather than browbeat. To unite people
rather than divide.
That last part is the key.
At the moment (at least) you disagree with Rich’s goals (as I understand
them). No problem. Many TFLers go to other Bulletin Boards to rant and
rave. But we “reserve” TFL for rational discussion.
Here on TFL, you can forward your thoughts knowing nobody is going to
talk about your ancestors (grin). If you can defend your logic and
thoughts against the questions of other TFLers, you probably win
converts. If you forward some whacko idea about UFO’s landing and
taking over Sarah Brady’s mind (oh, boy, is THAT a loaded one!), you will
be asked to provide proof or put a lid on it.
So there are many other BBSs where we can forget about our “image”.
Personally, I think that is playing directly into HCI’s program - but many
people disagree. We ask them to “vent” elsewhere. Here we discuss.
Discuss as you did. You asked a very lucid and valid question. Hopefully
my reply is up to the same standards. If not, I’m sure one of the
Administrators will set my post straight.
Post away, Watcher. The style of your question shows you have a lot to
contribute.
Watcher:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>You seem to be worried about the image that people have of us as gun owners...What difference does it make if we sound educated and professional?[/quote]
Sir, we currently fight a war of words. We are fighting to win hearts and minds. Personally, I would like to win. Those who advance ludicrous and deranged theories are at least as much our enemies as those who actively attempt to "free" us of our arms, for both serve the same purpose- taking our liberty. Hell, some of the conspiracy "facts" I have heard bandied about are stupid enough that I can only consider them the result of mental illness or actual subversive attempts. How's that for a conspiracy theory?
Mr. McMillan:
It is a pleasure to speak to you, sir. Your reputation for an exemplary product is widespread. Where should the end-quote marks have been in your prior post?
Thanks,
John
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>You seem to be worried about the image that people have of us as gun owners...What difference does it make if we sound educated and professional?[/quote]
Sir, we currently fight a war of words. We are fighting to win hearts and minds. Personally, I would like to win. Those who advance ludicrous and deranged theories are at least as much our enemies as those who actively attempt to "free" us of our arms, for both serve the same purpose- taking our liberty. Hell, some of the conspiracy "facts" I have heard bandied about are stupid enough that I can only consider them the result of mental illness or actual subversive attempts. How's that for a conspiracy theory?
Mr. McMillan:
It is a pleasure to speak to you, sir. Your reputation for an exemplary product is widespread. Where should the end-quote marks have been in your prior post?
Thanks,
John
rabbit assassin
Moderator
Regarding the UN. As I understand it the NRA and The Sporting Shooters Association have Non Government Organisation recognition at the UN or something like it anyway. They are both well aware of what the UN is doing.
Gale McMillan
Member In Memoriam
The quote marks are after Japanese. I had a long ongoing off the forum discussion about resistance to the disarmament drive. It seams that some of the members of this forum or at least one thinks there is a chance to fight it outside the law. My comment to him was that had their been 10,000 at Waco the results would have been the same. There would have just been more to mourn! The US military is at the disposal of the President and I can speak with some authority that they will follow orders. The only chance we have of succeeding is within the frame work of the law. And to the poster thinking it doesn't matter what his appearance is I say that our largest battle is for the hearts and mind of the general public. We must inlist the aid of those citizens to whom our constitution is dear and in most cases believe we are a bunch of hot headed red necks. And why shouldn't they? They have been led to believe that by the press and our liberal politicians. We will never win their support if we come across the way we have been portrayed.
Mr. McMillan,
I agree with most of your post. I do have one "quibble", which I would not mention, except that we are fighting a battle of words, where feelings and statements are contested and resounding.
I would suggest that enforcing an illegal order- i.e., one infringing on the ability to own, possess, utilize, and carry firearms- is, by definition, illegal. It must then follow that resisting an illegal act must be legal. I do agree that words should remain our primary armament, for now.
John
I agree with most of your post. I do have one "quibble", which I would not mention, except that we are fighting a battle of words, where feelings and statements are contested and resounding.
I would suggest that enforcing an illegal order- i.e., one infringing on the ability to own, possess, utilize, and carry firearms- is, by definition, illegal. It must then follow that resisting an illegal act must be legal. I do agree that words should remain our primary armament, for now.
John
Mr. McMillan,
You state we must stay within the framework of the law. That's well and good, but the quotes below range over a period of 195yrs, all have the same theme. The first written roughly 212 years ago, the last less than 17 years ago. When in the Last 17yrs did we outlaw one of the founding principles of this country? That particular point was misleading, like we can't legally protect our freedoms through the use of guns.
"What the Subcommittee on the Constitution uncovered was clear--and long-lost--proof that the second amendment to our Constitution was intended as an individual right of the American citizen to keep and carry arms in a peaceful manner, for protection of himself, his family, and his freedoms." Senator Orrin Hatch, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution, 97th Cong., 2d Sess., The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Committee Print I-IX, 1-23 (1982
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their 'constitutional' right of amending it or their 'revolutionary' right to dismember or overthrow it." Abraham Lincoln, First inaugural address, March 4, 1861. (sometimes incorrectly cited as an April 4th speech)
"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, & as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical." Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787.
I've explained to you why I disagree with your use of Waco as an example, if you wish to use Saddam Hussein as an example of the might of the US go ahead, but the fact remains, if Koresh and his followers had not allowed ATF to withdrawl, they could have changed the outlook of that stand-off. The biggest point made to me by that incident, was the US Government does not tolerate being embarrased. They where whipped and instead of conceding the point and backing away, the burned the place down. It goes to show that a little goodwill like allowing the agents to retreat, doesn't garner a man many points with the Federal Government. Yes it's true if 10,000 had been there and stayed they would have been wiped out. But what if a 1,000 had been there, whipped ATF and simply vanished into the great expanse of America? We all seem to ignore the fact that the Davidians tried for firing on Agents where aquitted, seems that here in my State if an arrest starts out as excessive force, you have the option of resisting that arrest.
Our Founding Father set the constitution up in such a way that we would not have a standing Army. Maybe so incidents like Delta at Waco wouldn't happen. Want proof, it's been under the noise of every soul to ever read the constitution. In Bold the line I use to defend this stance.
Article I
Section. 8.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
More fuel for the arguement:
"…but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens... who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.'' Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers # 29.
I realize many of you served this country with honor and dignity, upheld the constitution, kept it free for people like me to pose arguements like this very one. But perhaps the time has come for the people to take back the duty of defense. Waco is only one example, along the border a young man was gunned down by marines, It has begun to unfold as our founders envisioned it. Perhaps it's time we re-examine how troops are deployed and who controls those troops.
------------------
Live Free or Die Trying,
Steve Moody
Just once wouldn't it be nice to hear a politician say,"I don't believe this way, but the people do."
You state we must stay within the framework of the law. That's well and good, but the quotes below range over a period of 195yrs, all have the same theme. The first written roughly 212 years ago, the last less than 17 years ago. When in the Last 17yrs did we outlaw one of the founding principles of this country? That particular point was misleading, like we can't legally protect our freedoms through the use of guns.
"What the Subcommittee on the Constitution uncovered was clear--and long-lost--proof that the second amendment to our Constitution was intended as an individual right of the American citizen to keep and carry arms in a peaceful manner, for protection of himself, his family, and his freedoms." Senator Orrin Hatch, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution, 97th Cong., 2d Sess., The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Committee Print I-IX, 1-23 (1982
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their 'constitutional' right of amending it or their 'revolutionary' right to dismember or overthrow it." Abraham Lincoln, First inaugural address, March 4, 1861. (sometimes incorrectly cited as an April 4th speech)
"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, & as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical." Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787.
I've explained to you why I disagree with your use of Waco as an example, if you wish to use Saddam Hussein as an example of the might of the US go ahead, but the fact remains, if Koresh and his followers had not allowed ATF to withdrawl, they could have changed the outlook of that stand-off. The biggest point made to me by that incident, was the US Government does not tolerate being embarrased. They where whipped and instead of conceding the point and backing away, the burned the place down. It goes to show that a little goodwill like allowing the agents to retreat, doesn't garner a man many points with the Federal Government. Yes it's true if 10,000 had been there and stayed they would have been wiped out. But what if a 1,000 had been there, whipped ATF and simply vanished into the great expanse of America? We all seem to ignore the fact that the Davidians tried for firing on Agents where aquitted, seems that here in my State if an arrest starts out as excessive force, you have the option of resisting that arrest.
Our Founding Father set the constitution up in such a way that we would not have a standing Army. Maybe so incidents like Delta at Waco wouldn't happen. Want proof, it's been under the noise of every soul to ever read the constitution. In Bold the line I use to defend this stance.
Article I
Section. 8.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
More fuel for the arguement:
"…but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens... who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.'' Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers # 29.
I realize many of you served this country with honor and dignity, upheld the constitution, kept it free for people like me to pose arguements like this very one. But perhaps the time has come for the people to take back the duty of defense. Waco is only one example, along the border a young man was gunned down by marines, It has begun to unfold as our founders envisioned it. Perhaps it's time we re-examine how troops are deployed and who controls those troops.
------------------
Live Free or Die Trying,
Steve Moody
Just once wouldn't it be nice to hear a politician say,"I don't believe this way, but the people do."
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Ruger-
This thread is way off topic. Rambling and disjointed quotes from the past, obliquely arguing for armed insurrection are not welcome here. Gale made a simple observation that telegraphing your intentions is certain to doom your efforts to failure.
I'll go a step further. You wanna take arms against a sea of troubles? I've no quarrel with you. You wanna posture on this Board? I don't think so! You fight your war, we'll fight ours.
What part of "No" is not understood?
Rich Lucibella
[This message has been edited by Rich Lucibella (edited September 27, 1999).]
This thread is way off topic. Rambling and disjointed quotes from the past, obliquely arguing for armed insurrection are not welcome here. Gale made a simple observation that telegraphing your intentions is certain to doom your efforts to failure.
I'll go a step further. You wanna take arms against a sea of troubles? I've no quarrel with you. You wanna posture on this Board? I don't think so! You fight your war, we'll fight ours.
What part of "No" is not understood?
Rich Lucibella
[This message has been edited by Rich Lucibella (edited September 27, 1999).]
Spartacus:
Correct me if I'm wrong here please. Those 300 Spartans held the pass as long as the fight was on their terms, ie: a direct frontal assualt right? They lost the battle only after being betrayed and attacked from a blind side, if I remember correctly. Had they watched their a$$,,,,,,
Ruger:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>but the fact remains, if Koresh and his followers had not allowed ATF to withdrawl, they could have changed the outlook of that stand-off. [/quote]
Janet Reno justified her use of Army property(tanks) by comparing them to rental cars. You are correct. The outlook could have been different. One of those "rental cars" would have reduced the compound to a parking lot. Nothing could have stopped that fact. At least nothing inside the compound. Waco is over. Nothing can change what happened there. Hopefully what really happened will come out. That is the only thing that can stop one of those "rental cars" from rolling over your house or mine. How do we stop it? Get the scum out of office that was part and party to it. Vote them out
------------------
CCW for Ohio action site.
http://www.ofcc.net
[This message has been edited by Hal (edited September 27, 1999).]
Correct me if I'm wrong here please. Those 300 Spartans held the pass as long as the fight was on their terms, ie: a direct frontal assualt right? They lost the battle only after being betrayed and attacked from a blind side, if I remember correctly. Had they watched their a$$,,,,,,
Ruger:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>but the fact remains, if Koresh and his followers had not allowed ATF to withdrawl, they could have changed the outlook of that stand-off. [/quote]
Janet Reno justified her use of Army property(tanks) by comparing them to rental cars. You are correct. The outlook could have been different. One of those "rental cars" would have reduced the compound to a parking lot. Nothing could have stopped that fact. At least nothing inside the compound. Waco is over. Nothing can change what happened there. Hopefully what really happened will come out. That is the only thing that can stop one of those "rental cars" from rolling over your house or mine. How do we stop it? Get the scum out of office that was part and party to it. Vote them out
------------------
CCW for Ohio action site.
http://www.ofcc.net
[This message has been edited by Hal (edited September 27, 1999).]
All--
Read this thread from the first post of Rich's in "The Future of TFL" [the first thread], and then note the topic changes. I think that Rich's point has been very well demonstrated in these two threads.
To paraphrase George: "Let's get back to shooting!"
Warmest regards,
L.P.
------------------
Will you, too, be one who stands in the gap?
Matt
Read this thread from the first post of Rich's in "The Future of TFL" [the first thread], and then note the topic changes. I think that Rich's point has been very well demonstrated in these two threads.
To paraphrase George: "Let's get back to shooting!"
Warmest regards,
L.P.
------------------
Will you, too, be one who stands in the gap?
Matt
Since this topic is about the future I guess i can mentioned General Smedley Butler, a two time Medal Of Honor receipient before WWII and great American patriot. He was quoted more than once that he felt like he was nothing more than a hired gun for United fruit in Central america in the twenties when he was a Marine fighting against the locals who were feed up with economic imperialism of the Us. General Butler couragrously saw the future our nation was taking from the end of WWI and the threat of monopoly capitalism (industrial military complex as pointedout by President Eisenhower as he left office) taking over the direction of our nation. Big business has profited big time from all our wars and this so called Cold War was a scam between the elites of both east and west against all the peoples. I guess i played my very tiny part as a young dumbed down GI. We now see the proof that both MONopoly Capitalist Elites and so called EX Commie elites are uniting the western world into one large camp .Kosovo showed how the Bankster crushed a small country and will make huge profits from the gold and timber resources of Kosovo. Especially the huge gold resources of Kosovo. Is the future another ma`jor war
erhaps WWIII? Gorbie and his crowd are waltzing down the aisle with the Corporate Boys of the West to the detriment of working peoples everywhere in the world. General Smedley Butler,who tried to help the Bonus Army in their grievances, saw the future of this nation back in the thirties. He refused,however to join in the formation of a large veterans army or militia which backers wanted to form to fight FDR and his nefarious ideas for the NEW America. Was a opportunity lost to save what was left of the Republic in the thirties before FDR forever changed our once free nation? Lets face it. We are a huge Imperial power with many satraps and so called allies to feed and protect. Without wars, Imperial powers cannot expand but with wars they sow the seeds of their destruction.
erhaps WWIII? Gorbie and his crowd are waltzing down the aisle with the Corporate Boys of the West to the detriment of working peoples everywhere in the world. General Smedley Butler,who tried to help the Bonus Army in their grievances, saw the future of this nation back in the thirties. He refused,however to join in the formation of a large veterans army or militia which backers wanted to form to fight FDR and his nefarious ideas for the NEW America. Was a opportunity lost to save what was left of the Republic in the thirties before FDR forever changed our once free nation? Lets face it. We are a huge Imperial power with many satraps and so called allies to feed and protect. Without wars, Imperial powers cannot expand but with wars they sow the seeds of their destruction.We've come to the see a growing use of TFL for discussion of armed conflict...and as a soapbox for broad conspiracy theories. I'm sorry, but these types of threads and posts do nothing to advance "responsible firearms ownership".
...Similarly, New World Order discussions have real value; but not in the context of the stated mission of this site, unless specifically backed by logic and fact.(emphasis mine)
I am quoting a gentleman by the name of Rich Lucibella. It seems you are going back to EXACTLY what he is saying we need to get rid of! You are not helping our cause, sir. Please refer to my next-to-last post in this thread.
...Similarly, New World Order discussions have real value; but not in the context of the stated mission of this site, unless specifically backed by logic and fact.(emphasis mine)
I am quoting a gentleman by the name of Rich Lucibella. It seems you are going back to EXACTLY what he is saying we need to get rid of! You are not helping our cause, sir. Please refer to my next-to-last post in this thread.
- Status