How to Stop the Current Jihad

[CarmelHP]

Wnen martial law is declared, or about to be declared, we'll talk about it.

 

[SavageEagle]

Wnen martial law is declared, or about to be declared, we'll talk about it.

That was just an example. Stop being hard headed here. And don't for one second act like you are the only one involved in the political process. Plenty of us here did our part. So don't preach to about how we can speak about such things when we do XY and Z because you don't know we haven't.

 

[CarmelHP]

That was just an example. Stop being hard headed here. And don't for one second act like you are the only one involved in the political process. Plenty of us here did our part. So don't preach to about how we can speak about such things when we do XY and Z because you don't know we haven't.

Sure, what have you done? I didn't say you or anyone here, but since you brought it up. I do see very many people who have never done any of those things acting like they'll be the new Patrick Henry or George Washington. I'm having a hard time swallowing it at this point.

 

[SavageEagle]

Sure, what have you done? I didn't say you or anyone here, but since you brought it up. I do see very many people who have never done any of those things acting like they'll be the new Patrick Henry or George Washington. I'm having a hard time swallowing it at this point.

LOL I'd love to see someone who's trying to be PH or GW! I just thought from the way you all were talking that you felt there would never be a need for the true purpose of the 2A. That time may not be upon us, but you never know.

As for what I did to deter the Obama campaign, I talked to MANY people on why they were for Obama and pointed out why they were wrong. I couldn't help out with money so I did what I could with what I had. I helped send out material for the McCain campaign. If I had kept my copy I would scan it for you. Most importantly, I voted. I wish I could say any of it helped. I did change a lot of minds on Obama, but apparently it didn't do any good.

That's only what I've done this election. Not including the town meetings I've been to, the sessions of state legislature I've attended, and the many useless letters and petitions I've written and signed. There's only so much one guy can do when he's got a large family to support when only one of us can find work. I'd loved to have helped out more than I did, but unlike a lot of people I at least did SOMETHING.

I talked to so many people who were like "Yea, Obama is gonna destroy this Country." "Did you vote?" "No, why?"

 

[Bill of Rights]

Presumably, this is the closing comment to which you refer.

The two seem contradictory to me. If that still seems "bizarre" to you, I must wonder as to your interpretation of our Founders' intentions both at the time of the Revolution and for their posterity.

I have nothing I need or needed to "save".

I misread one word which changed the meaning of the phrase on which I based my original question. I admitted that error, thanked you for pointing it out, and noted a further discrepancy.

Then your closing comment to me was merely ridiculous.

If the Founders did not consider it a right, why did they say twice explicitly in the Declaration of Independence (DoI) that it IS our right, and then add that it is not only our right but our duty to do so?

Did you even read the DoI? They said alter or abolish. They did not say that you had to go shoot the very people you had just elected. Did you read their reasons? All of them? No right to elected representation, no right to a jury in criminal trial, no habeus, soldiers quartered in private homes to keep people in line, loyalist mercenaries harassing suspected rebels, impressment of seamen, suborning the judiciary, etc. Are you really telling that the Founding Fathers in any of their writings said that you should overthrow elected governments just because you didn't like how they were running things? It is a complete misrepresentation of the DoI and if you don't understand that then you should not be spouting off about what honorable men advocated.

A bizarre reading of the word "propriety" in relation to what it referred to, which was violent overthrow of the government, not the propriety of government, as I noted. Now you're moving beyond ridiculous to dishonest.

There is nothing ridiculous about my closing comment. It is actually much more polite and less inflammatory than several I considered. As it stands, it merely questions your interpretation. Or do you consider the opinions of those who question you as worthy of ridicule?

Did I read the DoI? Kind of a silly question, considering I quoted from it, no? Very well, however. Yes, I did. They first said that for a people to choose to abandon their roots, there ought to be some damn good reasons. They set out to name some of their reasons, citing fundamental and, to borrow the term, irreconcileable differences in philosophies, then went on to define under what conditions such separation should occur, followed by specific reasons for which they separated from King George's England. After the listing of events in which they felt wronged, they explained how they had attempted to act in good faith, only to be further shat upon, and finally said, "We're done talking. England, fare thee well and good luck." and closed with their written pledge to each other.

The majority of the above synopsis was from memory.

What it comes down to is that they said that when a government becomes tyrannical and/or no longer responsive to, but rather aims to subjegate the people, the people have the right and the duty to see that government change. This is not a Republican vs. Democrat issue. This has been building for years as a matter of government as a whole showing and attempting to feed it's voracious appetite for control and power, mostly the latter. Proof? When have you seen government relinquish power once taken? If you can give examples, they will be few in number, certainly few in comparison to the number and magnitude of power grabs. Does our federal government qualify today as tyrannical? I think our Founders would likely say yes. My answer? They're sure headed that direction if not. We have agencies with practically unlimited power, arbitrary and inconsistant rules, fees and tariffs and taxes upon so many aspects of our society, and this is the free country and small central government they wanted? I don't think so. Was the Founders' intent that we should violently overthrow elected governments? I would respond that the answer is no, so long as those elected governments are responsive to the people who elected them. When such a government continues to take from the people and gives them no voice in their governance, that answer might change. In their day, they called it taxation without representation.

No, I don't think we should pile in the pickups and head to Washington to shoot the bastards, and I defy you to find somewhere that I have clearly and unequivocally suggested that action. What I have done is explain my reading of the quoted law and contrasted it with the written DoI. Up until this post, all you did was discount and belittle my post and my thoughts. In this post, you continue to do so, however, at least you finally explained somewhat what your thought process was behind your comments. Still belittling in tone, still talking down to me as if I'm not worthy in your eyes to speak on such matters, but at least you explained a little.

I never said that our government was improper. I quoted the DoI in which the Founders told us that when a government is not responsive to the people who created it, it is our right and duty to replace that form of government with a different form which seems better suited to performing that governing role, and contrasted it with 18 USC which specifies that advocating the above thought or carrying it out constitutes treason or sedition. Comparably, I could tell a teenager that when s/he acts maturely, s/he will be treated accordingly, given more leeway and freedom to go places and do things, but when s/he acts immaturely, more constraints will be placed upon his/her behavior. I've not said that s/he is behaving immaturely, only that if s/he does, that's what will happen.

Lastly, as I have not turned anything in my posts to a personal, ad hominem attack, I'll thank you not to jump to conclusions and call me either ridiculous or dishonest. When you called my comment ridiculous, I could accept that as your opinion of a point I made in this discussion. When you then applied the term to me personally, then followed it by maligning my honesty, I take offense. It's incorrect, it's impolite, it's insulting, and I don't deserve it.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[schwaky18]

Presumably, this is the closing comment to which you refer.




There is nothing ridiculous about my closing comment. It is actually much more polite and less inflammatory than several I considered. As it stands, it merely questions your interpretation. Or do you consider the opinions of those who question you as worthy of ridicule?

Did I read the DoI? Kind of a silly question, considering I quoted from it, no? Very well, however. Yes, I did. They first said that for a people to choose to abandon their roots, there ought to be some damn good reasons. They set out to name some of their reasons, citing fundamental and, to borrow the term, irreconcileable differences in philosophies, then went on to define under what conditions such separation should occur, followed by specific reasons for which they separated from King George's England. After the listing of events in which they felt wronged, they explained how they had attempted to act in good faith, only to be further shat upon, and finally said, "We're done talking. England, fare thee well and good luck." and closed with their written pledge to each other.

The majority of the above synopsis was from memory.

What it comes down to is that they said that when a government becomes tyrannical and/or no longer responsive to, but rather aims to subjegate the people, the people have the right and the duty to see that government change. This is not a Republican vs. Democrat issue. This has been building for years as a matter of government as a whole showing and attempting to feed it's voracious appetite for control and power, mostly the latter. Proof? When have you seen government relinquish power once taken? If you can give examples, they will be few in number, certainly few in comparison to the number and magnitude of power grabs. Does our federal government qualify today as tyrannical? I think our Founders would likely say yes. My answer? They're sure headed that direction if not. We have agencies with practically unlimited power, arbitrary and inconsistant rules, fees and tariffs and taxes upon so many aspects of our society, and this is the free country and small central government they wanted? I don't think so. Was the Founders' intent that we should violently overthrow elected governments? I would respond that the answer is no, so long as those elected governments are responsive to the people who elected them. When such a government continues to take from the people and gives them no voice in their governance, that answer might change. In their day, they called it taxation without representation.

No, I don't think we should pile in the pickups and head to Washington to shoot the bastards, and I defy you to find somewhere that I have clearly and unequivocally suggested that action. What I have done is explain my reading of the quoted law and contrasted it with the written DoI. Up until this post, all you did was discount and belittle my post and my thoughts. In this post, you continue to do so, however, at least you finally explained somewhat what your thought process was behind your comments. Still belittling in tone, still talking down to me as if I'm not worthy in your eyes to speak on such matters, but at least you explained a little.

I never said that our government was improper. I quoted the DoI in which the Founders told us that when a government is not responsive to the people who created it, it is our right and duty to replace that form of government with a different form which seems better suited to performing that governing role, and contrasted it with 18 USC which specifies that advocating the above thought or carrying it out constitutes treason or sedition. Comparably, I could tell a teenager that when s/he acts maturely, s/he will be treated accordingly, given more leeway and freedom to go places and do things, but when s/he acts immaturely, more constraints will be placed upon his/her behavior. I've not said that s/he is behaving immaturely, only that if s/he does, that's what will happen.

Lastly, as I have not turned anything in my posts to a personal, ad hominem attack, I'll thank you not to jump to conclusions and call me either ridiculous or dishonest. When you called my comment ridiculous, I could accept that as your opinion of a point I made in this discussion. When you then applied the term to me personally, then followed it by maligning my honesty, I take offense. It's incorrect, it's impolite, it's insulting, and I don't deserve it.

Blessings,
Bill

I agree 100% with you. However, I do find one flaw. We as a people in whole have created this governement. And I think you will find that the majority do not find the government "not responsive to the people who created it." We get the government we ask for and sadly this is what the people want. If it wasn't, wouldn't Ron Paul had won.

In today's time, people are too dumb to know any different. They want the gov. to be involved with everything and this is what is happening. Is it right? No. Are the Founder turning over in their graves? You bet ya. Can we fix it? Only if the people as a whole step up. Which will not happen because the are too complacent to care. To get back to what the Founders wanted we would have to violent overthrow this current government. However, even the founders I think would disagree with this course of action because our system allows us to change it through voting. However, as a whole we don't want to change and most of us (not us) just don't seem to care anymore to do anything.

 

[SavageEagle]

You must keep in mind, this isn't what the people want. Only what 1/4 or less want. Only like one third or less of this Country ACTUALLY voted.

 

[schwaky18]

Further along the same lines, wouldn't people as a whole be mad if their governement handouts were taken away (S.S. Welfare). Should the government have such programs? Not under the Founders way of thinking. But now by doing away with such programs the government would not be being responsive to the people who created it.

Look at the bail out. People were crying for the gov. to step in and do something. People want big gov. people don't care if big gov = less rights. The only real way to overthrow/change this gov. is to educate people. Because even if we were to violently overthrow this gov. and put into place one that we think the Founders wanted, the dumb a$$ average voter would just re-vote the people that screwed it up in the first place back into power.

Education is key. If we show enough people how screwed up the gov. really is we can change everthing over night. If not, we can try to fix the gov. by other means but the problem will just come back as people vote the liers back in. If they are educated they will fix it by voting and keep it fixed by voting.


That being said. People are too dumb and near sighted to ever educated enough to fix the problem. It is going to take something so horriable that it will destory this country for people to wake up. Sadly I think this is already happening. Our economy is failing (can we say massive inflation from printing money like we are at kinkos). After the dust settle and we are knocked down to 3rd world status only then will people wake up and see that big government fails.

 

[schwaky18]

You must keep in mind, this isn't what the people want. Only what 1/4 or less want. Only like one third or less of this Country ACTUALLY voted.

I disagree, obviously the ones that didn't vote wanted it or were indifferent or they would have got up off their ass and took time to vote.

If you didn't vote, you are pretty much worthless in my way of thinking. And you have no right to say what you want or didn't want.

If I want to be rich I must go out there and work for it. I can't just sit at home and wish for a million dollars. Even the Powerball requires me to get off my ass and drive to the store and risk $1.00 at a chance to be rich.

 

[SavageEagle]

Or they are like so many people out there, I used to be one, that think that no matter who they voted for it wouldn't matter. I voted and it still wouldn't have mattered. McCain, Obama, either one would have been just as bad. Obama much worse, ok. Either way, many people don't vote because no one is worth voting for and I think that's saying something. Obviously if no one is worth voting for, then maybe something should be done about that?

 

[schwaky18]

Or they are like so many people out there, I used to be one, that think that no matter who they voted for it wouldn't matter. I voted and it still wouldn't have mattered. McCain, Obama, either one would have been just as bad. Obama much worse, ok. Either way, many people don't vote because no one is worth voting for and I think that's saying something. Obviously if no one is worth voting for, then maybe something should be done about that?

I agree that is what people think. but in all honesty, they should do something. Run yourself. Support Ron Paul (IMA). Educate people. Write something along the lines of "common sense." Our Senators should be tripping over bags of mail everyday. But instead they get so very few that they think they don't have to answer to the people that voted for them because those people don't pay attention, which is true for the most part.

Remember that only 56 guys signed the Declaration of Independence and there are only 11 "founding fathers." Seems to me One man can do alot to spread the fire of "TRUE FREEDOM".

 

[SavageEagle]

I agree that is what people think. but in all honesty, they should do something. Run yourself. Support Ron Paul (IMA). Educate people. Write something along the lines of "common sense." Our Senators should be tripping over bags of mail everyday. But instead they get so very few that they think they don't have to answer to the people that voted for them because those people don't pay attention, which is true for the most part.

Remember that only 56 guys signed the Declaration of Independence and there are only 11 "founding fathers." Seems to me One man can do alot to spread the fire of "TRUE FREEDOM".

I'm currently trying to find a way to mobilize people into paying attention and giving a crap. My two biggest problems are 1) I don't know how to do that so I created a website to gather ideas, and 2) I'm apparently not a credible person as some people seem to think I'm a idiot and feel the need to express this. I agree sometimes I am wrong but I argue my point until I understand otherwise. That way if they are wrong about something, someone else jumps in and corrects them and debate ensues, or the subject just dies.

Either way, the website I started isn't much of a forum yet. It's a start but I won't publicise the website until I get some help with it first. There HAS to be a way to get EVERYONE in this Country stirred up to get involved. There HAS to be. That's what the forum is about but again, I wont give it out publiclly until I get some help on it.

 

[schwaky18]

I'm currently trying to find a way to mobilize people into paying attention and giving a crap. My two biggest problems are 1) I don't know how to do that so I created a website to gather ideas, and 2) I'm apparently not a credible person as some people seem to think I'm a idiot and feel the need to express this. I agree sometimes I am wrong but I argue my point until I understand otherwise. That way if they are wrong about something, someone else jumps in and corrects them and debate ensues, or the subject just dies.

Either way, the website I started isn't much of a forum yet. It's a start but I won't publicise the website until I get some help with it first. There HAS to be a way to get EVERYONE in this Country stirred up to get involved. There HAS to be. That's what the forum is about but again, I wont give it out publiclly until I get some help on it.

Thats exactly what is needed. More people like you mobilizing and educating people. If we are did this think how we could influence people and show them what liberty really is. I got to say you are a better man than I am. I educate people by talking to them. So I have really influenced probably 3 people all year. Your idea is on a big scale and that what is needed. If we all did something like that and joined in or things like that we would get far. Who cares if people think your dumb, they just don't like someone who is trying to lead and not a mindless follower.

I just wanted to argue with Bill of Rights because he is always fun to argue with and always knows what he is talking about. Its fun to play devils advocate with him. 99% of the time I agree with him but I just like hearing his arguments.

 

[SavageEagle]

Thats exactly what is needed. More people like you mobilizing and educating people. If we are did this think how we could influence people and show them what liberty really is. I got to say you are a better man than I am. I educate people by talking to them. So I have really influenced probably 3 people all year. Your idea is on a big scale and that what is needed. If we all did something like that and joined in or things like that we would get far. Who cares if people think your dumb, they just don't like someone who is trying to lead and not a mindless follower.

I talk to people all the time about it. Probably 6-7 a month. I might change 2-3 a month if I'm lucky. That's why I'm trying this website thing. There was another one that started up, 2AM, www.thrighttokeepandbeararms.com, but they aren't doing SHEET. They sent in 2x4's with placards on them to legislatures. WTF is that going to do? Meh, whatever. I suggest Nationwide Rallies in every state, people don't want to get up, get out, and try. I'm not sure what else to do.

I just wanted to argue with Bill of Rights because he is always fun to argue with and always knows what he is talking about. Its fun to play devils advocate with him. 99% of the time I agree with him but I just like hearing his arguments.

I hear you on that. I've learned a lot from that man and I think the INGO rep system is banning me from giving him more! LOL

 

[Bill of Rights]

I agree 100% with you. However, I do find one flaw. We as a people in whole have created this governement. And I think you will find that the majority do not find the government "not responsive to the people who created it." We get the government we ask for and sadly this is what the people want. If it wasn't, wouldn't Ron Paul had won.

In today's time, people are too dumb to know any different. They want the gov. to be involved with everything and this is what is happening. Is it right? No. Are the Founder turning over in their graves? You bet ya. Can we fix it? Only if the people as a whole step up. Which will not happen because the are too complacent to care. To get back to what the Founders wanted we would have to violent overthrow this current government. However, even the founders I think would disagree with this course of action because our system allows us to change it through voting. However, as a whole we don't want to change and most of us (not us) just don't seem to care anymore to do anything.

...
I just wanted to argue with Bill of Rights because he is always fun to argue with and always knows what he is talking about. Its fun to play devils advocate with him. 99% of the time I agree with him but I just like hearing his arguments.

...
I hear you on that. I've learned a lot from that man and I think the INGO rep system is banning me from giving him more! LOL

Schwaky,

Sorry to disappoint you... You make a good point with which there is no argument. Even if gov't responds to only FIVE percent of the electorate, if that five percent are the only ones who speak up and who GET up and out to vote, they ARE responding to the people. Education is the only way to turn it around, but reaching people and convincing them is slow going.. One conversation at a time, and sometimes multiple such to snap on that light bulb over their heads..

I'll also thank you for presenting your "argument" in a civil, polite tone; disagreeing without being disagreeable. You found a point to discuss and did so maturely and civilly (even when "baiting" me into a response ), and I respect that.

Thank you guys for the positive comments. I'm glad my expressed thoughts are helpful to you. Yours are pretty nice to read, too.

Blessings,
Bill