Byron Quick
Staff In Memoriam
Sorry. Couldn't wait for solo to post part 2 
Would you fight the UN Part 2
- Thread starter Byron Quick
- Start date
A few months ago, someone on CHB posted essentially the same scenario.
I replied then, and I reply now, "Bring 'em on. Trap shooting is too easy; I need small blue targets that shoot back. More of a challenge."
So much for my promise to myself to bring the rhetorical flames down to "Roast"...
------------------
"Taking a long view of history, we may say that
anyone who lays down his arms deserves whatever he gets."
--Jeff Cooper
I replied then, and I reply now, "Bring 'em on. Trap shooting is too easy; I need small blue targets that shoot back. More of a challenge."
So much for my promise to myself to bring the rhetorical flames down to "Roast"...
------------------
"Taking a long view of history, we may say that
anyone who lays down his arms deserves whatever he gets."
--Jeff Cooper
Byron Quick
Staff In Memoriam
Yeah, Rich, there's room up here.
First, I would fight, but it would not be middle aged dudes with AK 47's.
I think large parts of the US military would rebel if the US government were stupid enough to allow this.
I would contact local Reserve and Guard personnel and try to get them to rebel. Just in my backyard that would add an artillery battery with self propelled howitzers. I would contact local combat veterans such as the Green Beret A team master sergeant-veteran of covert operations in Laos and the Ranger qualified retired Army Reserve brigadier general who spent 4 tours in Vietnam as a liason with the Vietnamese Army. I'd get them to contact their buddies still in the active military and reserves. I would contact the chemistry and biology Phd's at the nearby university. See if any wanted to cook something up. I would talk with my friends at the Plant Vogtle nuclear plant. My thoughts and activities in this scenario would be much broader than AK 47's. Hell, I'd go to Augusta and try to talk prostitutes into learning the art of killing UN johns while they're getting their jollies. If the Air Force units at Warner Robins AFB came over to our side we could probably have them glowing in the dark for real.
I believe that the majority of the officers and enlisted men in the military are of the caliber of Mike Spight. I do not believe they would allow the UN to occupy the US. I'd give them all the help they needed. Then after we ran the UN forces out we could proceed to find the people who brought them in and nail them to telephone poles.
First, I would fight, but it would not be middle aged dudes with AK 47's.
I think large parts of the US military would rebel if the US government were stupid enough to allow this.
I would contact local Reserve and Guard personnel and try to get them to rebel. Just in my backyard that would add an artillery battery with self propelled howitzers. I would contact local combat veterans such as the Green Beret A team master sergeant-veteran of covert operations in Laos and the Ranger qualified retired Army Reserve brigadier general who spent 4 tours in Vietnam as a liason with the Vietnamese Army. I'd get them to contact their buddies still in the active military and reserves. I would contact the chemistry and biology Phd's at the nearby university. See if any wanted to cook something up. I would talk with my friends at the Plant Vogtle nuclear plant. My thoughts and activities in this scenario would be much broader than AK 47's. Hell, I'd go to Augusta and try to talk prostitutes into learning the art of killing UN johns while they're getting their jollies. If the Air Force units at Warner Robins AFB came over to our side we could probably have them glowing in the dark for real.
I believe that the majority of the officers and enlisted men in the military are of the caliber of Mike Spight. I do not believe they would allow the UN to occupy the US. I'd give them all the help they needed. Then after we ran the UN forces out we could proceed to find the people who brought them in and nail them to telephone poles.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Somebody in Part 1 commented about "politically unacceptable" consequences of whatever actions might go on. A particular problem in this country is protecting the electrical and communications infrastructure.
If any significant number of people were really teed off, I submit that with no shots fired by any "just folks" with guns, or by any "militias", there would be a lot of folks wondering when the lights would stay on long enough to finish a nightly TV program, or when they could telephone Aunt Minnie. It can quickly get real thirsty out, also...
I've seen a few hours of power outage from a nutzoid teeny-bopper throwing a light chain over a power line...
There are no deadly weapons, only deadly people. The issue is the courage of one's beliefs, the strength of one's convictions. Didn't GG Liddy sum it up in one word? "Will"?
, Art
If any significant number of people were really teed off, I submit that with no shots fired by any "just folks" with guns, or by any "militias", there would be a lot of folks wondering when the lights would stay on long enough to finish a nightly TV program, or when they could telephone Aunt Minnie. It can quickly get real thirsty out, also...
I've seen a few hours of power outage from a nutzoid teeny-bopper throwing a light chain over a power line...
There are no deadly weapons, only deadly people. The issue is the courage of one's beliefs, the strength of one's convictions. Didn't GG Liddy sum it up in one word? "Will"?
, ArtFirst of all the media would welcome the invasion. Then they would start bitching about being repressed. Then they would start doing reports on the poor lonely French soldier that was shot by gun extremists. Oh it would go on and on.
I think a large group of people would fight, but an even larger group would just watch it on tv.
I think a large group of people would fight, but an even larger group would just watch it on tv.
Nah, bitte, bitte, lassen Wir alle hier auf English schreiben, oder?
Pozhalujstsa, davaj napishem vse po-anglijskij.
Veh to american hai! Kya aap Hindi bol sakte hain?
CR,
Nadeyus' chto ya ne postavil khui v chaj! Ya slishkom mnogo let tomu nazad zanimalsya s russkim yazykom.
All,
NOW can we all get back to English?
(aside: God only knows how many mistakes I made here...)
Pozhalujstsa, davaj napishem vse po-anglijskij.
Veh to american hai! Kya aap Hindi bol sakte hain?
CR,
Nadeyus' chto ya ne postavil khui v chaj! Ya slishkom mnogo let tomu nazad zanimalsya s russkim yazykom.
All,
NOW can we all get back to English?
(aside: God only knows how many mistakes I made here...)
Spartacus,
You're right about are military rebeling. Some of my freinds in the Army have discussed such scenarios, such as the banning of all guns and the UN comming over.
Banning all guns--
My friend said that if guns were banned and they told to cofiscate them they would play along at first, up to the point M-16 and other military weapons were handed out, and then would turn around and rebel, "now take em away from us".
The Un---
WW-III, nuff said.
The fact is, from my understanding that 90%+ of our military feels this way. The only reason no one has spoken out about some of our most recent events is for fear of losing their job or dishonorable discharge, which means you won't be allowed to own a gun under current law. If the crap hits the fan, our military will be behind us.
[This message has been edited by solo (edited September 11, 1999).]
You're right about are military rebeling. Some of my freinds in the Army have discussed such scenarios, such as the banning of all guns and the UN comming over.
Banning all guns--
My friend said that if guns were banned and they told to cofiscate them they would play along at first, up to the point M-16 and other military weapons were handed out, and then would turn around and rebel, "now take em away from us".
The Un---
WW-III, nuff said.
The fact is, from my understanding that 90%+ of our military feels this way. The only reason no one has spoken out about some of our most recent events is for fear of losing their job or dishonorable discharge, which means you won't be allowed to own a gun under current law. If the crap hits the fan, our military will be behind us.
[This message has been edited by solo (edited September 11, 1999).]
The comments about the infrastructure (Electic distribution, Telephone, etc..) are very thought provoking. You are correct, I think, in viewing these as targets of opportunity in such a scenario. Big Brother need power to operate. Yes, he does have a lot of backup generators, but generators break ... a lot easier than power plants.
And power lines wouldn't be all that difficult to take down.
Remember, this is all just a discussion ... I trust none of us would actually promote the violent overthrow of our government!
[This message has been edited by TR (edited September 11, 1999).]
And power lines wouldn't be all that difficult to take down.
Remember, this is all just a discussion ... I trust none of us would actually promote the violent overthrow of our government!
[This message has been edited by TR (edited September 11, 1999).]
Why not TR? Don't we have historical backing, Supreme Court cases saying this type of speech is protected? Do we not have papers written by the drafters of the constitution(Federalist papers) saying that if the government becomes a tyrant we have a duty to fix-it? Did we not ask for a War in 1776, with the "Declaration of Independance"? Is revolution not the proper word for restoring a government to it's just role? If you rebel, are you a patriot, or a treasonist?
Just a few questions.
On the point of the military, had a buddy down his cousin came along, we discussed Waco, and a few other things, gun control being one. He told me flat out, "If I recieve an order to go out and confiscate guns, I will follow it." Me-"What about your oath to the constitution?" Him"If I recieve a an order to confiscate guns, I will follow it" If my buddy hadn't jumped his case and called him a "mindless sheep" i'm afraid my brain might have ordered me to deck this guy. They aren't all on our side, to many generations of the public school restricting free thinking. To many hours of military brainwashing.
------------------
Live Free or Die Trying,
Steve
Just a few questions.
On the point of the military, had a buddy down his cousin came along, we discussed Waco, and a few other things, gun control being one. He told me flat out, "If I recieve an order to go out and confiscate guns, I will follow it." Me-"What about your oath to the constitution?" Him"If I recieve a an order to confiscate guns, I will follow it" If my buddy hadn't jumped his case and called him a "mindless sheep" i'm afraid my brain might have ordered me to deck this guy. They aren't all on our side, to many generations of the public school restricting free thinking. To many hours of military brainwashing.
------------------
Live Free or Die Trying,
Steve
Initial thread question--- Would you fight the UN?
I would fight the local SHERRIF's department if they came to take my guns and some of them are hunting buddies. I don't want to be driven to this length and do NOT advocate violence EXCEPT as a response BUT would not hesitate to use ANY means necessary to drive out occupying forces.
Subthread item 1--- RagTag band of ak-47 totin old guys versus top notch modern military force.
I have heard this sentiment reiterated over and over and on the surface it does seem ludicrous that civilians with a mishmash of personal arms can fight a modern army but, as has been stated, history gives us voluminous evidence that a dedicated guerilla force is impossible to root out and only becomes better and better equipped, manned and trained as conflict drags out.
sub thread 2-- effective bio attack.
Major problem with this scenario is most effective use of bio weapons is in built up urban area with population already constricted into hotbox level of density. And the urban population (excepting street gangs who can become very effective shock troops) is ALREADY pacified to point of virtual slavery
sub thread 3--- military rank and file response to real RAPE of constitution.
Not sure just how majority would act but suspect the current power grabbing statist elite are try to work around this by combination of militarization and federalization of domestic police forces and deliberate destruction of old school military way of life based upon honor and duty to constitution.
I don't doubt a general uprising would quickly ensue if the statists were to try something raw and overwhelming today, but fear we will loose in end because they are using the "being nibbled to death by ducks" technique of little baby steps and divide and conquor.
------------------
If they come for my guns and I stand up and fight...What about my kids???
if I don't fight...What about my kids???
I would fight the local SHERRIF's department if they came to take my guns and some of them are hunting buddies. I don't want to be driven to this length and do NOT advocate violence EXCEPT as a response BUT would not hesitate to use ANY means necessary to drive out occupying forces.
Subthread item 1--- RagTag band of ak-47 totin old guys versus top notch modern military force.
I have heard this sentiment reiterated over and over and on the surface it does seem ludicrous that civilians with a mishmash of personal arms can fight a modern army but, as has been stated, history gives us voluminous evidence that a dedicated guerilla force is impossible to root out and only becomes better and better equipped, manned and trained as conflict drags out.
sub thread 2-- effective bio attack.
Major problem with this scenario is most effective use of bio weapons is in built up urban area with population already constricted into hotbox level of density. And the urban population (excepting street gangs who can become very effective shock troops) is ALREADY pacified to point of virtual slavery
sub thread 3--- military rank and file response to real RAPE of constitution.
Not sure just how majority would act but suspect the current power grabbing statist elite are try to work around this by combination of militarization and federalization of domestic police forces and deliberate destruction of old school military way of life based upon honor and duty to constitution.
I don't doubt a general uprising would quickly ensue if the statists were to try something raw and overwhelming today, but fear we will loose in end because they are using the "being nibbled to death by ducks" technique of little baby steps and divide and conquor.
------------------
If they come for my guns and I stand up and fight...What about my kids???
if I don't fight...What about my kids???
Ruger, Why not? Why not what? Promote the violent overthrow of the government? Well, for mone thing, if I did so, in a public forum such as this, I most likely would be "interviewed" by some very serious people. That would involve being detained. I don't think I'd have a snowballs chance at participating myself at that point ... Secondly, I don't think it has quite come to that ... yet.
Yes, we ahve the precedent of the Founders. And I will say that should it come to that ... fighting the UN or others that come to enslave the people of the United States, I will be glad to be among those that do.
By the same token, I could have put it
as "I trust none of us would actually promote the violent overthrow of our government! (read with a bit or sarcasm ... or feign shock) Claude Rhaines (sp?) line from Casa Blanca comes to mind: "Gambling? Well, I'm shocked! Simply SHOCKED!" As he was approached by the dealer saying "Your winnings sir"
Yes, we ahve the precedent of the Founders. And I will say that should it come to that ... fighting the UN or others that come to enslave the people of the United States, I will be glad to be among those that do.
By the same token, I could have put it
as "I trust none of us would actually promote the violent overthrow of our government! (read with a bit or sarcasm ... or feign shock) Claude Rhaines (sp?) line from Casa Blanca comes to mind: "Gambling? Well, I'm shocked! Simply SHOCKED!" As he was approached by the dealer saying "Your winnings sir"
TR,
Why should you?
Why, because talk of overthrowing the government is not only protected under the 1st amendment it's been promoted by the like sof Abe Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, and a whole slew of others. I'm going to ask a question of you and want your honest answer.
If you are approached by a thug on the street, you feel your life and that of your family threatened, how will you react? Why?
I will swell up, puff my chest out and make eye contact, I will try to use body language to convey to said individual I am not to be messed with. If you back down to a predator or a bully, what happens? If you appear weak what happens?
It's time we look at the government we live under(by the way it should be the government we run, but when is the last time that happened?)as a bully. The claim to know what's in our best intrest, when the fact is, we are supposed to be the government. They push us, use overt threats, like a massacre in Waco, a sniping in the case of the Weavers, several rough tough raids near where I live. By making examples of others they in turn cause some people to take a meek attitude. Who would imagine a time in America when a man would admit he's scared to use protected free speech because of fear of the government. TR, is that your vision of America? To be cowered by a government you are supposed to have a say in? I'm not knocking you, I don't want you to think that, just trying to get your attention, to see that like millions of others, you have been affected by overt threats and propaganda. The fact remains that the men we elect to office are supposed to fear the people, not the other way around. How do we turn the tables back to the side of right? We tell the sorry bunch of dogs if they don't fix-it, We The People will! Is it treasonist? NO, if I help in the overthrow of this current government, I would expect the government to be replaced and run according to the constitution. So TR, is it treasonist, or patriotic? I contend folks like me are patriots, why the folks legislating our rights away are not. They aren't well wishers, safety experts, lovers of freedom, caring individuals, they are TRAITORS. If they don't begin to restore the constitution I will take part in a revolution, and believe me, it won't be just about guns.
------------------
Live Free or Die Trying,
Steve
Why should you?
Why, because talk of overthrowing the government is not only protected under the 1st amendment it's been promoted by the like sof Abe Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, and a whole slew of others. I'm going to ask a question of you and want your honest answer.
If you are approached by a thug on the street, you feel your life and that of your family threatened, how will you react? Why?
I will swell up, puff my chest out and make eye contact, I will try to use body language to convey to said individual I am not to be messed with. If you back down to a predator or a bully, what happens? If you appear weak what happens?
It's time we look at the government we live under(by the way it should be the government we run, but when is the last time that happened?)as a bully. The claim to know what's in our best intrest, when the fact is, we are supposed to be the government. They push us, use overt threats, like a massacre in Waco, a sniping in the case of the Weavers, several rough tough raids near where I live. By making examples of others they in turn cause some people to take a meek attitude. Who would imagine a time in America when a man would admit he's scared to use protected free speech because of fear of the government. TR, is that your vision of America? To be cowered by a government you are supposed to have a say in? I'm not knocking you, I don't want you to think that, just trying to get your attention, to see that like millions of others, you have been affected by overt threats and propaganda. The fact remains that the men we elect to office are supposed to fear the people, not the other way around. How do we turn the tables back to the side of right? We tell the sorry bunch of dogs if they don't fix-it, We The People will! Is it treasonist? NO, if I help in the overthrow of this current government, I would expect the government to be replaced and run according to the constitution. So TR, is it treasonist, or patriotic? I contend folks like me are patriots, why the folks legislating our rights away are not. They aren't well wishers, safety experts, lovers of freedom, caring individuals, they are TRAITORS. If they don't begin to restore the constitution I will take part in a revolution, and believe me, it won't be just about guns.
------------------
Live Free or Die Trying,
Steve
I believe the proper term should be "to throw off", not over throw. This is the langu
age of Declaration of Independence.
"But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
If you read through the "Facts- submitted to a candid world",[the reasons given as justification to throw off one's government] you find modern day equivalents to almost every "abuse" aluded to by the author of the "Declaration" Our focus should be on what form our declaration is to take. We may have to rely on the individual, sacrificial resistance to disarmament by "authority" in the beginning. Hopefully the uncomitted will come around in time to make the difference. We either have GOD-given rights or we have the wrong government.
No King but KING JESUS.
age of Declaration of Independence.
"But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
If you read through the "Facts- submitted to a candid world",[the reasons given as justification to throw off one's government] you find modern day equivalents to almost every "abuse" aluded to by the author of the "Declaration" Our focus should be on what form our declaration is to take. We may have to rely on the individual, sacrificial resistance to disarmament by "authority" in the beginning. Hopefully the uncomitted will come around in time to make the difference. We either have GOD-given rights or we have the wrong government.
No King but KING JESUS.
Ruger, Tsk, tsk, tsk ... Did you actually read my last post? Of course you've never met me, and as this is not a visual forum, you can't see my "body language" when I say things like above, but To answer your first question... I would do my d*mndest to appear to have overwhelming "force" putting the other person in the situation of fearing for teh consequences of his action, should he take any.
AS for the rest, well, I take umbrage, sir, at the mere thought that I might be one of those that prefer safety over liberty. No, rather, I prefer to remain at large to take my risks in defense of the constitution and our republican form of government. If you have read my last remarks, you would have understood this. As someone great once said "The purpose of war is not to die for your country; but rather to make the other poor bastard die for his!" I would extend Gen Pattons remarks to include capture, etc...
I would put the premise to you, sir, that we are already at war. It is not entirely a cold war, as you have illustrated, however, it isn't exactly a hot war yet either. And until it becomes a hot war, my best course of action is to remain out of prison, for crimes, real or contrived, so that when it does become hot - and I believe that unfortunately, it will - I am available to answer the call.
In the meantime, I will fight this "lukewarm war" on my terms, not the gov'ts, nor yours, by tossing the occasional monkey wrench into the works of the "enemy" be they HCI or some TLA Gov't agency.
I have taken the oath that many here have, so many years ago. I will admit to not being in the physical shape I should be, but that does not diminish the ardor which I feel for this country and it's constitution. I, too, will still honor that oath to defend the constitution from enemies, both foreign and domestic.
As for treason, if this be treason, so be it. I am not saying that I advocate that we become sheeple and lay down and do whatever the gov't tells us we must. but I am saying that we must pick and choose our battles, and sometimes the very manner in which we outline our views may provide the spark, the impetus to some Gov't official with an overinflated image of himself to take "premature" action against someone.
I know I have no desire to have my daughter chased down the hall of my home by an armed JBT with a laser site, simply because her father made some remarks on a public forum that is known to have among it's members agents of the Gov't (be they freindly or no) - who knows who else is listening.
WOuld you in the middle of a battle, get on the airwaves and in the clear, unencrypted transmissions, inform others of your unit that you intend to take any action?
Ruger, you sound like a logical, patriotic person, and I am not trying to tell you how to post here at all. Far from it. But sometimes, you must read a bit more into the messages here (and sometimes a bit less). Go back, I implore you, to my previous post and read my closing remarks. If you haven't seen Casa Blanca, I suggest you rent it... look for that particular scene...
To the rest ... simply put, to the answer of the question (I think I've answered this now 3 times...) Yes, I would fight them.
FNG, I believe you are correct, throw off, as opposed to overthrow. But I think in this discussion we are talking about basically the same thing. I believe the Founders, if alive today as observers, would be standing on the sidelines, wondering why the H**L we are putting up with all this SH*T. So, yes, I guess we are a bit slow to "throw off" this oppressive gov't.
---
I know not what course others may take, as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
[This message has been edited by TR (edited September 12, 1999).]
AS for the rest, well, I take umbrage, sir, at the mere thought that I might be one of those that prefer safety over liberty. No, rather, I prefer to remain at large to take my risks in defense of the constitution and our republican form of government. If you have read my last remarks, you would have understood this. As someone great once said "The purpose of war is not to die for your country; but rather to make the other poor bastard die for his!" I would extend Gen Pattons remarks to include capture, etc...
I would put the premise to you, sir, that we are already at war. It is not entirely a cold war, as you have illustrated, however, it isn't exactly a hot war yet either. And until it becomes a hot war, my best course of action is to remain out of prison, for crimes, real or contrived, so that when it does become hot - and I believe that unfortunately, it will - I am available to answer the call.
In the meantime, I will fight this "lukewarm war" on my terms, not the gov'ts, nor yours, by tossing the occasional monkey wrench into the works of the "enemy" be they HCI or some TLA Gov't agency.
I have taken the oath that many here have, so many years ago. I will admit to not being in the physical shape I should be, but that does not diminish the ardor which I feel for this country and it's constitution. I, too, will still honor that oath to defend the constitution from enemies, both foreign and domestic.
As for treason, if this be treason, so be it. I am not saying that I advocate that we become sheeple and lay down and do whatever the gov't tells us we must. but I am saying that we must pick and choose our battles, and sometimes the very manner in which we outline our views may provide the spark, the impetus to some Gov't official with an overinflated image of himself to take "premature" action against someone.
I know I have no desire to have my daughter chased down the hall of my home by an armed JBT with a laser site, simply because her father made some remarks on a public forum that is known to have among it's members agents of the Gov't (be they freindly or no) - who knows who else is listening.
WOuld you in the middle of a battle, get on the airwaves and in the clear, unencrypted transmissions, inform others of your unit that you intend to take any action?
Ruger, you sound like a logical, patriotic person, and I am not trying to tell you how to post here at all. Far from it. But sometimes, you must read a bit more into the messages here (and sometimes a bit less). Go back, I implore you, to my previous post and read my closing remarks. If you haven't seen Casa Blanca, I suggest you rent it... look for that particular scene...
To the rest ... simply put, to the answer of the question (I think I've answered this now 3 times...) Yes, I would fight them.
FNG, I believe you are correct, throw off, as opposed to overthrow. But I think in this discussion we are talking about basically the same thing. I believe the Founders, if alive today as observers, would be standing on the sidelines, wondering why the H**L we are putting up with all this SH*T. So, yes, I guess we are a bit slow to "throw off" this oppressive gov't.
---
I know not what course others may take, as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
[This message has been edited by TR (edited September 12, 1999).]
TR, great post, and I have to agree that the Founders would certainly be wondering what happened to the wonderful experiment in liberty they initiated. Then again, I imagine many of them would have been wondering the same thing if they had been here in 1860, 1912, 1934, 1968, 1986, etc.
On thread: Any army of occupation has to be fought, no matter what insignia they wear, no matter to what authority they give their allegiance.
If a bunch of Afghanis can kick the USSR out of their country with handmade weapons, then we American gun owners can certainly give any army in the world a very bad time. Why else would the PTB, especially the UN, be so interested in disarming us? Because they're worried about crime? {long break for sardonic laughter}
Look at what happened to Michael New and tell me that the military is not being prepared to be placed under UN command.
------------------
"...the probability of the people in power being individuals who would dislike the possession and exercise of power is on a level with the probability that an extremely tender-hearted person would get the job of whipping-master in a slave plantation." Prof. Frank H. Knight
On thread: Any army of occupation has to be fought, no matter what insignia they wear, no matter to what authority they give their allegiance.
If a bunch of Afghanis can kick the USSR out of their country with handmade weapons, then we American gun owners can certainly give any army in the world a very bad time. Why else would the PTB, especially the UN, be so interested in disarming us? Because they're worried about crime? {long break for sardonic laughter}
Look at what happened to Michael New and tell me that the military is not being prepared to be placed under UN command.
------------------
"...the probability of the people in power being individuals who would dislike the possession and exercise of power is on a level with the probability that an extremely tender-hearted person would get the job of whipping-master in a slave plantation." Prof. Frank H. Knight
TR,
I think we pretty much agree in principle, what I am trying to get across not just to you but a bunch of others, was stated in the post about the thug on the street. If we would all stand up, bear our teeth so to speak, we might be able to stop short of a shooting war. Sometimes the mere threat of force is enough to stop aggresion and even roll it backwards. That's all I advocate, now if push comes to shove, which it might, I've got a few rounds stored up. Think of my idea as the threat of air strikes by the UN. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but I'd rather save a few bucks in ammo by scaring the gov. into doing right than have to shoot it out with them. If next week Clinton walked into his office and every member of congress and in their mail pile was 3 million letters all TELLING them to fix it or else, what then? Will they arrest us all?
------------------
Live Free or Die Trying,
Steve
I think we pretty much agree in principle, what I am trying to get across not just to you but a bunch of others, was stated in the post about the thug on the street. If we would all stand up, bear our teeth so to speak, we might be able to stop short of a shooting war. Sometimes the mere threat of force is enough to stop aggresion and even roll it backwards. That's all I advocate, now if push comes to shove, which it might, I've got a few rounds stored up. Think of my idea as the threat of air strikes by the UN. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but I'd rather save a few bucks in ammo by scaring the gov. into doing right than have to shoot it out with them. If next week Clinton walked into his office and every member of congress and in their mail pile was 3 million letters all TELLING them to fix it or else, what then? Will they arrest us all?
------------------
Live Free or Die Trying,
Steve
This corporate government unfortunately is legal,but ,ofcoarse , NOT Constitutional. Even Federal judges would tell you that their courts follow corporate law, not constitutional law. The big problem is that we all for generations back at least three have bought into this LEGAL corporate system with our inclusion into their Federal Reserve System, Income tax, social security, draft and huge standing military forces,etc. Unless our elected politicos have a great change of heart and put the Federal System back in DC and the territories like the Founders INTENDED, we will be branded as enemies of the state and will not fare well against the might of the beast system who will have most of the masses screaming for patriot blood. Dont get me wrong. I surely wont live in a future dictatorship,but the problem is simply the huge MONster we and our previous generations created. It wont matter if our future rulers are UN or US dictators. What is the difference? Is what i said making any sense? Hope so. But,unfortunately, our politicos are loving living off the public's sweat and toil(Taxes and Fed. reserve control of our wealth) I dont think the Founding Fathers would have much sympathy for us today.