UN's "One World Government" or "New World Order"

[tombogan03884]

Tom, its not ruthlessness that I lack, I don't carry a gun for decoration. What I do lack is romanticism. I really don't see why the concept of having a solid committed minority of supporters who are willing to assist, if not fight is a problem. I also fail to see why you see no need to convince the "sheeple" (easy to convince by definintion, right) that at the very least passive acceptance of a revolutionary government is necessary, lest those same sheep grow fangs. Remember most Americans were pretty on board with FDR are and that didn't end well for Hitler or the Japs. Building a revolutionary movement is like building anything. You do all the planning and all the steps in order. Otherwise you just grab a hammer and FUBAR it. What part of that do you not get?
FQ13

Yet again you get it wrong, most Americans, including Oliver Wendell Holmes, either agreed with what Hitler seemed to be doing in Germany, or were indifferent, (google American Bund ) As with 9-11 most Americans didn't give a sh!t what happened "over there" until the Japs attacked US, and Hitler declared war on us. The truth is, we had no dog in the European war, we only participated because FDR committed us to supporting England when our true national self interest was confined to the Pacific.

[tombogan03884]

Path
Washington didn't become President through the revolution. The Articles of Confederation didn't provide for an independent President. He became President after the Constitution was written. That was a quasi-illegal operation. He and the rest of the Founders, were charged with revising the articles, not tearing them up and starting over. Guess what? The people accepted this second American Revolution without a shot being fired. Why? Persuasion, read the Federalist Papers for the reasons why. Gee, guess what, reason and persuasion. I guess Washington, Franklin, Madison and Hamilton are Quislings and Chamberlins as well. Look Path, you need to step outside of your own private Alamo and realize a fewhome truths. Truth the first. If you are pissed off, odds are good some of your neighbors are, organize them. Truth the second, folks are pissed for different reasons, find a broad and inclusive (but narrow enough to be coherent agenda) and rally folks behind it. Third truth, don't pull a gun, when an election campain will work. You may call me Chamberlin, but you my friend are more akin to the unibomber, or John Brown on your best day. Me, I'll follow Franklin's example. You know, that crazy little thing called a printing press. To each their own.
FQ13

I'm not sure about Washington, But Franklin, Madison, and Hamilton, while maybe not "traitors" in the sense of Quisling, were most certainly traitors to the revolutionary principles in the mold of Daniel Ortega. Prior to the revolution Franklin took the job of Stamp tax collector, but was forced to resign, the reason he went to France to work for the Revolution was because his elitist positions left him with no credibility among common Americans. Madison, Adams, and Hancock diligently stirred up the disenfranchised working classes who fell below the property requirement to vote when they wanted to oppose the Crown, but once they got their snouts in the trough they not only reintroduced the property requirement, but in several states (Ma. being one of them) RAISED it, taking the vote away from many who had previously held that privilege. And then there was Hamilton, Tool of the NY speculators and who's financial scheming with Govenour Morris and the European financial interests was the spark that led to both the Whiskey rebellion AND Shay's rebellion. Aaron Burr did the nation a great favor by killing that SOB. We should bring back dueling.
Franklin did not serve the revolution with his press, he made himself a wealthy slave owner with it, he served the revolution by screwing and drinking his way through French high society. (admittedly not a bad job if you can get it ). And do you a grave disservice to us, as well as underlining your total lack of both understanding, and l
"libertarian" values by comparing unorganized Patriots to a mental case Professor from Berkley.
 Ted Kozinski used random violence because he was disturbed but did not know WHO to lash out at. We on the other hand know exactly who needs to leave, die, or go to prison, but we hold back because we realize that to target the guilty would mean going over the bodies of those who are NOT at fault, who in fact often AGREE with us.

[tombogan03884]

From FQ,
"Pick a state that is reasonably prosperous, sparsely populated and generally sympathetic. Utah, Idaho, Texas (less sparcely populated than sympathetic), Montana take your pick. Move there and persuade like minded folks to join you. It worked for the Mormons, it can work again.

Did you sleep the ENTIRE time you were pissing away your College money ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_War

he Utah War, also known as the Utah Expedition, Buchanan's Blunder,[1] the Mormon War,[2] or the Mormon Rebellion[3] was an armed dispute between Latter-day Saint ("Mormon") settlers in Utah Territory and the United States federal government. The confrontation lasted from May 1857 until July 1858. While it had mainly non-Mormon civilian casualties, the "war" had no pitched battles and was ultimately resolved through negotiation. Nevertheless, according to historian William P. MacKinnon, the Utah War was America's "most extensive and expensive military undertaking during the period between the Mexican and Civil Wars, one that ultimately pitted nearly one-third of the US Army against what was arguably the nation's largest, most experienced militia."[4]

From FQ
 "Actually JC
We are a democratic republic."

We are a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC Our nation was MEANT to be ruled by laws. Not the screams of an uninformed mob owing allegiance only to the plutocrat that gave them free sh!t, currently known as "entitlements". Another meaningless word like "assault weapon" , the only things you are "entitled to" are Life, Liberty, and Property, and then ONLY if you abide by the common law by not killing, raping, robbing, or committing treason. But the Dems, keep using OUR tax dollars to buy them vote cattle ( cattle derives from the word chattel which refereed to all animals in the household, goats, sheep, slaves and women. )
From FQ,
"They will be the boys in blue, and we will be the "unlawfull combatants" if it ever comes to your worst case scenario. You WILL be shooting at the US flag, they won't change it for your peace of mind. It is something that I am highly reluctant to do and I will wait until the Constitution is suspended or other outrages occur."

The Constitution is being readily IGNORED, it doesn't need to be suspended any more than the Soviet Constitution was. And what could you possibly mean by "other out rages" at Waco government agents barbecued children, will you get of your ass if they actually sit down and start eating them ?

[twyacht]

We should bring back dueling.

At least boxing gloves, (the really thin one's).

"The price of freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle anywhere, anytime, and with utter recklessness."
Robert Heinlein

"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms."
Col. Jeff Cooper

"If someone is so fearful that, that they're going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have these weapons at all."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA)

To Waxman:

Never forget that...

"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom."
John F. Kennedy

To Obama:

Read More Kennedy.

[tombogan03884]

 From TW's Post
"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms."

Cooper may have said that but if he did he stole it word for word from Heinlein's "Starship Troopers"
I don't have a copy to reference the page number but The hero's "Moral Philosophy" instructor says it while he is in high school in the first part of the book.

Actually, "dueling" is NOT illegal ( Military forbade it under the articles of war but they have been replaced by the UCMJ, Senate rules may forbid members from engaging in them, I'm not sure ) What is illegal is causing an injury.
You could have a contract that stipulated the first one hit resigns or publicly renounces the offensive act then fight with T/C Contenders loaded with Simunitions, (using eye and ear protection of course )

[Sponsor]

[ericire12]

Actually, causing an injury is perfectly legal..... Its all about consent. Take boxing for example..... If one fighter dies or is injured in the ring, the other fighter is in no way responsible because of consent. The boxer who died in the ring consented to getting in there undergoing great personal injury or death.

[fightingquaker13]

From TW's Post
"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms."

Cooper may have said that but if he did he stole it word for word from Heinlein's "Starship Troopers"
I don't have a copy to reference the page number but The hero's "Moral Philosophy" instructor says it while he is in high school in the first part of the book.

Actually, "dueling" is NOT illegal ( Military forbade it under the articles of war but they have been replaced by the UCMJ, Senate rules may forbid members from engaging in them, I'm not sure ) What is illegal is causing an injury.
You could have a contract that stipulated the first one hit resigns or publicly renounces the offensive act then fight with T/C Contenders loaded with Simunitions, (using eye and ear protection of course )

Hell, I'd settle for paint balls, just for the entertainment value alone, as long as regular citizens got to challenge their "representatives".
FQ13

[tombogan03884]

Hell, I'd settle for paint balls, just for the entertainment value alone, as long as regular citizens got to challenge their "representatives".
FQ13

That's the thought that inspired me. How could I put a bullet in"Abscam Jack" Murtha's head and not go to jail for it.  
I visualized him making his resignation speech with a big red welt in the middle of his fore head

Actually, causing an injury is perfectly legal..... Its all about consent. Take boxing for example..... If one fighter dies or is injured in the ring, the other fighter is in no way responsible because of consent. The boxer who died in the ring consented to getting in there undergoing great personal injury or death.

 I don't know about that Eric, I have seen guys in the Court report charged with "Assault (fight by consent)".
Also, there is a big difference between punching each other and shooting at each other that might be more than the legal system could swallow.

[ericire12]

Manslaughter at best

[fullautovalmet76]

My goodness! The rhetoric is hot! In the spirit of the season, I thought y'all might like this video:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsKO_r76kfQ