See other Pious Perverts Articles
Title: NO SUCH THING AS CONSPIRACY? here's "honest shecky" LINCOLN!
Source:
Frank Conner via "El Puppy Poquito"
URL Source: http://www.iahushua.com/hist/lincoln.html
Published: Aug 1, 2012
Author: Rebbe HOUNDDAWG Q. Schwartz, DIAMONDS UN
Post Date: 2012-08-01 09:21:54 by HOUNDDAWG
Keywords: None
Views: 2981
Comments: 56
If you read Lincoln's first inaugural address with any care at all, you'll see that it was simply a declaration of war against the South. It was also filled with lies and specious reasoning. In 1861, the official government-charter for the U.S. was the U.S. Constitution. In writing it, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 (some of the most-canny politicians in the country) had pointedly omitted from it the "perpetual union" clause which had been a main feature of the unworkable Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union--the U.S.-government charter which had preceded the Constitution. Under the Articles, no state could secede lawfully unless all states seceded simultaneously. But the Constitution--which Lincoln had just taken an oath to uphold--did not contain that clause (or any other like it); so any state could secede lawfully at any time. And the Southern states did secede lawfully. Honest Abe flat-out lied when he said that was not so in his inaugural address; and he subsequently used his blatant lie to slaughter 623,000 Americans and Confederates--primarily in order to perpetuate himself in political office. Lincoln had said he would go to war to "preserve the Union." But in order to start the war, he would somehow have to maneuver the South into firing the first shots, because Congress did not want war and would not declare war of its own volition. The most-likely hot-spot in which Lincoln could start his war was Charleston Harbor, where shots had already been fired in anger under the Buchanan administration. But the newly-elected governor of South Carolina, Francis Pickens, saw the danger--that Lincoln might, as an excuse, send a force of U.S. Navy warships to Charleston Harbor supposedly to bring food to Maj Anderson's Union force holed up in Fort Sumter. So Gov Pickens opened negotiations with Maj Anderson, and concluded a deal permitting Anderson to send boats safely to the market in Charleston once a week, where Anderson's men would be allowed to buy whatever victuals they wished. (This arrangement remained in effect until a day or so before the U.S. Navy warships arrived at Charleston). Maj Anderson wrote privately to friends, saying that he hoped Lincoln would not use Fort Sumter as the excuse to start a war, by sending the U.S. Navy to resupply it. Before his inauguration, Lincoln sent a secret message to Gen Winfield Scott, the U.S. general-in-chief, asking him to make preparations to relieve the Union forts in the South soon after Lincoln took office. Lincoln knew all along what he was going to do. President Jefferson Davis sent peace commissioners to Washington to negotiate a treaty with the Lincoln administration. Lincoln refused to meet with them; and he refused to permit Secretary of State Seward to meet with them. After Lincoln assumed the presidency, his principal generals recommended the immediate evacuation of Maj Anderson's men from Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor--which was now located on foreign soil. To resupply it by force at this point would be a deliberate act-of-war against the C.S.A. It turned out that Lincoln's postmaster general, Montgomery Blair, had a brother-in law, Gustavus V. Fox, who was a retired Navy-captain and wanted to get back into action. Fox had come up with a plan for resupplying Fort Sumter which would force the Confederates to fire the first shots--under circumstances which would make them take the blame for the war. Lincoln sent Fox down to Fort Sumter to talk with Maj Anderson about the plan; but Anderson wanted no part of it. Lincoln had Fox pitch the plan to his Cabinet twice. The first time, the majority said that Fox's plan would start a war and were unenthusiastic about it. But the second time, the Cabinet members got Lincoln's pointed message, and capitulated. Meanwhile, Congress got wind of the plan. Horrified, they called Gen Scott and others to testify about it; Scott and the other witnesses said they wanted no part of the move against the Confederacy in Charleston; and nor did Congress. Congress demanded from Lincoln--as was Congress's right--Fox's report on Maj Anderson's reaction to the plan. Lincoln flatly and unconstitutionally refused to hand it over to them. Lincoln sent to Secretary Cameron (for transmittal to Secretary Welles) orders in his own handwriting (!) to make the warships Pocahantas and Pawnee and the armed-cutter Harriet Lane ready for sailing, along with the passenger ship Baltic--which would be used as a troop ship, and two ocean-going tugboats to aid the ships in traversing the tricky shallow harbor-entrance at Charleston. This naval force was to transport 500 extra Union-soldiers to reinforce Maj Anderson's approximately-86-man force at Fort Sumter--along with huge quantities of munitions, food, and other supplies. The Confederacy would, of course, resist this invasion--in the process firing upon the U.S. flag. The unarmed tugs would, of necessity, enter the harbor first, whereupon they would likely be fired upon by the C.S.A., giving Lincoln the best-possible propaganda to feed to the Northern newspapers, which would then rally the North to his "cause." Lincoln sent orders for the Union naval-force to time its sailing so as to enter Charleston Harbor on 11 or 12 April. Next, Lincoln sent a courier to deliver an ultimatum to Gov Pickens on 8 April, saying that Lincoln intended to resupply Fort Sumter peaceably or by force. There was no mistaking the intent of that message. Lincoln had set the perfect trap. He had given President Davis just enough time to amass his forces and fire upon the U.S. Navy. But if Davis acquiesced instead, Lincoln need merely begin sending expeditionary forces to recapture all of the former Union-forts in the South now occupied by Confederate forces; sooner or later Davis would have to fight; and the more forts he allowed Lincoln to recapture in the interim, the weaker would be the military position of the C.S.A. As a practical matter, Davis was left with no choice. Accordingly, the C.S.A., when informed that the U.S. Navy was en route, demanded that Maj Anderson surrender the fort forthwith. Anderson refused; Beauregard's artillery bombarded Fort Sumter into junk (miraculously without loss of life during the bombardment); and Anderson then surrendered with honor intact. The U.S. Navy arrived during the bombardment--but because elements of the force had been delayed for various reasons, did not join in the fight. The Navy was allowed to transport Anderson's men back to the U.S. Thereafter Lincoln wrote to Fox, pronouncing the mission a great success. Lincoln ended his letter by saying, "You and I both anticipated that the cause of the country would be advanced by making the attempt to provision Fort Sumter, even if it should fail; and it is no small consolation now to feel that our anticipation is justified by the result." Folks, that ought to be plain enough for anybody to understand. Poster Comment: Now, if we're to accept the childish assertion that "conspiracies don't exist" we must decide at which point after "honest shecky" Lincoln's "suicide" the govt metamorphosed into an unflaggingly honest and ethical entity and so many Americans became unnaturally evil, trying to smear govt with false accusations of involvement in many horrible acts against the rights of people. Either way Mary Surratt, the first woman executed by NewFedGov Bank, Inc. was wrongfully hanged by a military tribunal that conspired to wrench jurisdiction over her and other civilians away during peace time, constitutionally guaranteed rights notwithstanding. And if real conspiracies don't exist (although the tribunal believed they did, at least in the death of the president) she could not have planned with others the assassinations of Lincoln, Johnson, and Seward. In my opinion: The "pious perverts" here at 4 have made such ridiculous assertions that the possibility of the members simply being politically naive "does not exist". When honest but uninformed people are confronted with the truth they either stop being uninformed or they stop being honest. I personally believe that those to whom I'm alluding were neither honest or uninformed before they were confronted with truths that directly refute their Pollyanna propaganda about "The Honest US Government-Clean Hands And Clean Drawers Just Like Mom Always Insisted On For Those Sudden Unexpected Hospital Visits!". (FROM THE MR. ROGERS BOOK ON ETHICAL GOVERNMENT IN PRACTICE) The fact that congress has compelling proof of conspiracies within and without the govt is evidenced by the laws they passed, e.g. those to bind the CIA from murdering civilians and foreign heads of state. Any who believe or, who expect us to believe that "conspiracies don't exist" when congress knows damned well that they do cannot explain how congress could pass criminal statutes and penalties proscribing conspiracies, unless congress is engaging in an ongoing conspiracy to punish acts that simply do not take place, just as the aforementioned military tribunal did. Either way, the proof of existence of conspiracies, specifically govt conspiracies is manifest and indisputable. And, even the most absurd posts we've seen here inadvertently support the existence of conspiracies by govt. Hollywood regularly treats the viewing public to films about govt conspiracies, such as Executive Action, Three Days of the Condor, Enemy Of The State and The Hunt For Red October. If we're expected to believe that the films (in which known details are amazingly accurate) simply manufacture the criminal misdeeds of govt then it would seem unlikely that that the US Armed Forces would ever cooperate in the making of such films (no more submarines, flattops or specialized weapons on loan) and no honorable vet would ever lend his name to the credits as "technical adviser" any more than they'd assist with a film by The Communist Party USA. And, if Hollywood was so vile as to criminally misrepresent the govt in virtually every such film would Hollywood have the special permits required to possess working machine guns, rocket launchers and state of the art weapons and electronics that only the military may legally possess? If commies or militant Muslims decide to start a film company to undermine the US Govt with vicious lies (and no Tom Clancy-type authors upon whom to rely) would they be issued such permits? Former Navy SEALs "Dick" Marcinko and Jesse Ventura would bust guts "laffing" at our silly little girl dilettantes' assertions that all conspiracies should be dismissed until the entire govt confesses and demands to be executed, and then only after their supporters here at 4 have had a chance to float a trial balloon about "massive psychosis" afflicting every self confessed conspirator. HAH! "I'd let the govt wrongfully prosecute my Mommy and send her to Gitmo before admitting that I'm wrong!"_Turdle Limpet. _____________________________________________ "ARE THOSE DIAMONDS IN YOUR POCKET OR ARE YOU HAPPY TO SEE ME?" Rebbe HOUNDDAWG Q. Schwartz, DIAMONDS UNLIMITED, LLC
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-15) not displayed.
.
.
.
#16. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt, christine (#9)
Outstanding contribution! Thank you from the bottom of my shrunken black Grinch heart!
Oh that was none of that.... For the one in question to be immune to the words accused...well... They would have to be a retarded, cowardly, or lying about the affront. ____________________________________________________________ . . . The US government has declared civil war on itself. Its lust for war grew so great... Liberty before death. We run , we live, We fight again, till we win. We did not start this fight. We damn sure did not willingly pay our taxes to buy the bullets and drones that shall be used to kill us. We will correct the violations of this rogue nation....our rogue nation. We will fix this because nobody else can. You will work to help me help us all to fix this failure. After you're done educating yourself, Action!!!
That's what he said. But, I think he misspoke, from what he has written elsewhere recently. I'll let him handle this if he wants to. Such wild eyed assertions that dismiss any suspicion of a govt that has amply demonstrated its capacity for evil are a religious belief. It's LIKE a religious belief. Now, I ask you, just what kind of stupids see that and then pronounce Oswald guilty and the rest of us crazy? Why not embrace the craziness? Do you want to be accepted by the people you inherently disagree with? I don't. The thing is, it's one thing to say the government is "evil", that they lie when the truth will save them, etc. But given that they lie constantly, what then is the truth? That's where the bad blood comes from, arguing over truth. That's how I see it. I remember something about that demonstration with a nice new modern smooth action rifle. A kid can get off 3 shots in 6 seconds, and the bullet will definitely hit the ground, somewhere. There have been all sorts of phony demonstrations in what they laughingly refer to as being "documentaries". They did it with 9/11 too. ------------------------------------------ Whenever there's resistance, examine your motivation. Whenever there's flow, consider taking action.
Thanks for posting this, the Thomas J. DiLorenzo archives at Lew Rockwell are priceless info on the real "Honest Abe" Lincoln.
#17. To: Turtle (#6)
ad hominem" means. Or post hoc, ergo propter hoc, for that matter.
#18. To: HOUNDDAWG (#11)
Well then, you've separated yourself from Turdle, who most certainly did say that in post #36.
#19. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#9)
-Alex Kurtagic
#20. To: HOUNDDAWG (#14) (Edited)
Point. Jewaholics can be annoying too; I confess I've struggled myself there. Jews are enemies but are not the problem. --- I think Oswald probably wasn't the only shooter; I think Israel probably had something to do with 911. But so what? Neither probability is important. I know that he never disputed any assertion that joos were behind it all.
Our white sons are sent to war against non-whites who have done us no harm, and this is not called crime;
at home, non-white criminals prey upon our wives and daughters and this is not called war.
#21. To: HOUNDDAWG (#12)
Ask most of today's propagandized politicians who learned everything they know in a government school who their "heroes" are and the answers you will hear most often would be that damned tyrant, Abe Lincoln, and that commie bastard FDR. And it doesn't matter which ones you ask either, ALMOST ALL of them will cite those two.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken
"..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance
Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
#22. To: HOUNDDAWG, GreyLmist (#10)
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it.” ~ Patrick Henry
#23. To: James Deffenbach (#21)
How true. Lincoln and FDR demonstrated how the govt can be used to further any ideological (read: Rothschild, Rockefeller, and other banker/industrialist/philanthropist planned) changes to the nation and the lives of the people who can be made to suffer if they resist. Of course Bush and Obama have also resolved not to be "guided by the dead hand" of the founders. Ask most of today's propagandized politicians who learned everything they know in a government school who their "heroes" are and the answers you will hear most often would be that damned tyrant, Abe Lincoln, and that commie bastard FDR. And it doesn't matter which ones you ask either, ALMOST ALL of them will cite those two.
#24. To: HOUNDDAWG (#23)
Those two dumb efs couldn't be guided by hurricane force winds. The two dumbest members of the founders would be 100 times as smart as Bush and Obama and that after they've been dead all this time. Of course Bush and Obama have also resolved not to be "guided by the dead hand" of the founders.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken
"..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance
Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
#25. To: wudidiz, HOUNDDAWG (#22)
Watched it and thanks for the present. :) The 1974 James Grady book is called "Six Days of the Condor." Brown & Root was one of the companies that it made brief mention of, iirc, and I think also the Committee of 300. The movie is reportedly the first time one was filmed inside a WTC tower. Three Days Of The Condor
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#26. To: HOUNDDAWG, All (#10)
You're welcome, pal. Since there's discussion of the "Civil" War here, I discovered recently while researching the Slavery issue that what's also extremely scarce is info on the exact dates it was ended in each State -- likely suppressed because it would expose the brainwashing lie that only the South had slavery when the war began and during it. Several Northern states had slavery during the war years -- Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, Delaware. -- and D.C. too. As a matter of fact, there was slavery among the tribes in Alaska when we bought it from Russia circa 1868, so America had to abolish it here again then. Thank you my friend.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#27. To: GreyLmist (#25)
Great post. It's these flabbergasting little factoids that excite my conspiracy glands. Those and FDR's admonition that "Nuthin in politics be happen by accidents mah nigga!" Some deep digging Illuminati investigators also insist that the insiders are big on numerology, symbology and cryptic reference/use of places, etc.,. I also believe that they use Biblical references to 666 and such to aggravate Christian fears and/or faith in mystical, sublime and omnipotent evil. I ask myself, "Why else would some Fundies seemingly accept and welcome as inevitable The Apocalypse and the promised (where?) gas and propane tanker truck explosions as their drivers are beamed up?" Watched it and thanks for the present. :) The 1974 James Grady book is called "Six Days of the Condor." Brown & Root was one of the companies that it made brief mention of, iirc, and I think also the Committee of 300. The movie is reportedly the first time one was filmed inside a WTC tower.
#28. To: GreyLmist (#26)
Where were you when I was debating with Kool Aid drinking Lincolnites? Excellent facts about slavery in general and AK in particular. Since there's discussion of the "Civil" War here, I discovered recently while researching the Slavery issue that what's also extremely scarce is info on the exact dates it was ended in each State -- likely suppressed because it would expose the brainwashing lie that only the South had slavery when the war began and during it. Several Northern states had slavery during the war years -- Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, Delaware. -- and D.C. too. As a matter of fact, there was slavery among the tribes in Alaska when we bought it from Russia circa 1868, so America had to abolish it here again then.
#29. To: HOUNDDAWG (#27)
A nail being symbolic of the number 6 in Hebrew, I suspect the number 666 is symbolic of the three nails of the Crucifixion. Because they don't have to pay high-risk auto insurance or have their license revoked as endangering others if that's what they expect? Just a thought. I also believe that they use Biblical references to 666 and such to aggravate Christian fears and/or faith in mystical, sublime and omnipotent evil.
I ask myself, "Why else would some Fundies seemingly accept and welcome as inevitable The Apocalypse and the promised (where?) gas and propane tanker truck explosions as their drivers are beamed up?"
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#30. To: PSUSA2, christine, Jethro Tull, James Deffenbach, Turtle (#18)
I intended to reply to this and it slipped away in the chaos. To answer your question, I won't allow others to frame the debate or characterize me or mine in ill fitting roles for their convenience. Picture a Sunday morning roundtable discussion that begins with the moderator introducing the participants thus: "One the left we have wild-eyed crazy conspiracy theorist HOUNDDAWG Q. SCHWARTZ, and on the clean living right we have the very sane, rational, logical and patriotic Alan Dershowitz, whose distinguished C.V. is too lengthy to detail. Good Morning, gentlemen. Let's begin with Mr. HOUNDDAWG. DAWG, is it true that you've stopped beating your wife and that you've never actually been CONVICTED of child molestation?" "....embrace the craziness" indeed. You're correct to assume that I have a choice, but I'm not sure that some others do. Why not embrace the craziness? Do you want to be accepted by the people you inherently disagree with? I don't.
#31. To: GreyLmist (#29)
A nail being symbolic of the number 6 in Hebrew, I suspect the number 666 is symbolic of the three nails of the Crucifixion. I'd find that easier to accept if you could cite two joos who support that belief with all three of their opinions. I also believe that they use Biblical references to 666 and such to aggravate Christian fears and/or faith in mystical, sublime and omnipotent evil.
#32. To: HOUNDDAWG (#28)
I don't know. Ping me the next time you're having a discussion on that era. Lincoln -- he copied the British manuever of offering freedom to slaves who chose to fight on their side during the Revolutionary War. Effectively, those who did were still enslaved but with the added peril of risking their lives daily. This site says: When a State moved to abolish Slavery, that didn't necessarily mean immediate abolishment of all Slavery there. I'd have to check to be sure but I think Pennsylvania is one example of gradual abolition: children freed when they reached adulthood but older slaves would not be freed. The Cherokee were the last to free their Slaves after Lincoln's War. Here's a Wikipedia reference on the Alaska Slavery issue after it was purchased from Russia: Where were you when I was debating with Kool Aid drinking Lincolnites?
With the end of the Revolutionary War and the defeat of the British, many black loyalists found themselves in a dangerous predicament. Fearing punishment and death if captured by American militiamen, many fled to New York and sought refuge with the British forces gathered there. The British partially kept their reward to many of these blacks, allowing at least 3,000 to leave with them and be resettled in Nova Scotia. The unfortunate blacks that escaped to Savannah and Charleston were allowed to evacuate with their British allies as well, who promptly resold many of them back into bondage in the Caribbean. Most of the escaped slaves however were returned as "stolen property" to their colonial American owners.
1870: U.S. abolishes slavery among Indians in Alaska after purchasing it from Russia in 1867
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#33. To: HOUNDDAWG (#31)
lol :) I'll put that on my to-do list. I'd find that easier to accept if you could cite two joos who support that belief with all three of their opinions.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#34. To: HOUNDDAWG (#30)
Let me ask you this: How would SMART people react to that introduction? I mean those that are watching on the boob tube. You don't think they'll see thru the crap? IMO it shouldn't matter what the idiots think. YOu're just not going to convince them of anything, so why try? To them, you're a nut, and will always be a nut. And I personally don't want nuts for allies. The other side can have the nuts, because they are worthless. By doing what they have done in your example, they are trying to 1) frame the conversation by 2) putting you on the defensive. I don't let anyone get away with that. ANyone tries that shit with me and they will regret the day they were born. And once they were down, I'd attack even harder. But I'd be so very nice and reasonable about it, and that drives them nuts. Here's what I'd do. I'd say something like "Hmmm, so so building 7 dropped because of a little fire, like the official story claimed, and I'm the crazy one? HAHAHAHAHA!" Throw it right back in their fucking faces. But that's just me. I literally couldn't care less what they thought of me. I don't want them to like me. That is why I endorse embracing the craziness. "One the left we have wild-eyed crazy conspiracy theorist HOUNDDAWG Q. SCHWARTZ, and on the clean living right we have the very sane, rational, logical and patriotic Alan Dershowitz, whose distinguished C.V. is too lengthy to detail. Good Morning, gentlemen. Let's begin with Mr. HOUNDDAWG. DAWG, is it true that you've stopped beating your wife and that you've never actually been CONVICTED of child molestation?"
------------------------------------------
Whenever there's resistance, examine your motivation. Whenever there's flow, consider taking action.
#35. To: GreyLmist (#32)
Not surprising. "The White Man's Burden" had its limits after all. It certainly didn't include taking blacks back home as equals and fellow "brothers" in arms, I'm sure. The unfortunate blacks that escaped to Savannah and Charleston were allowed to evacuate with their British allies as well, who promptly resold many of them back into bondage in the Caribbean.
#36. To: PSUSA2 (#34) (Edited)
How would SMART people react to that introduction? I mean those that are watching on the boob tube. You don't think they'll see thru the crap? IMO it shouldn't matter what the idiots think. You're just not going to convince them of anything, so why try? To them, you're a nut, and will always be a nut. And I personally don't want nuts for allies. The other side can have the nuts, because they are worthless. Smart people would know that you have displeased the same people who can and will also cheerfully destroy them. And even the less gifted among us intuitively sense that if you cannot control your own reputation and good name then they too can expect ridicule if they publicly side with you. And, you may laugh off a first attempt to stereotype you. Whether or not you're put on the defensive you may never get another chance to use the mass media they control to undermine them. You simply cannot discount the incredible power of the One Eyed Non Christian and few if any that do will ever accomplish much. And your reply about bldg 7 dropping "because of a little fire" would be rebutted by a moderator who lies with something like "The govt experts said that bldg 7 was a raging inferno loaded with diesel fuel and flammable fixtures, so I ask you folks, who do you believe? This is Schmuely Guapo, Good Night." And a great idea's time will likely never come without somehow reaching the masses. Ezra Pound went from famous poet and radio broadcaster to a 13 yr mental institution inmate after trying to use the radio to awaken the masses about The Wiley Mr. Yehudi. And his life is now an object lesson for the few "smart people" who know his name. Many good men and women have tried to swim against the tide but the stress is cumulative and their missions often end badly. And those who don't crack or quit may end up like Danny Casolaro, Hunter Thompson, Gary Webb and others who allegedly committed suicide. Govt assassins just don't care if such "suicides" are even plausible. And, local authorities never give the feds any trouble lest they invite investigations into their own questionable shootings, jail hangings, assaults, custody rapes, financial mismanagement, etc.,. (Watch what happens to Sheriff Joe. He's "running around stacks o' dynamite with a blow torch") The good news is, there is no historical precedent on conquering a free people as well armed as we. The bad news is, there is no precedent on how to defeat the power of mass media and modern weaponry in the hands of the most evil creatures to ever evolve from our slimy, primordial ancestors. I don't mean to suggest that we can't ever restore freedoms lost, but we must first be worthy of it and I'm not sure that most Americans are. And, I'm just not interested in cocksure approaches from those who have never been close enough to danger to smell the dragon's breath on their necks. Let me ask you this:
#37. To: HOUNDDAWG (#36)
I didn't say there wasn't a price to be paid. This is a war, after all. So you're right about that. It's past time for people to think of this as a war, and not "social media" where we only gather around the cyber campfire and chew the cyberfat. The good news is, there is no historical precedent on conquering a free people as well armed as we. The bad news is, there is no precedent on how to defeat the power of mass media and modern weaponry in the hands of the most evil creatures to ever evolve from our slimy, primordial ancestors. They cant park a Abrams on every street corner. You're a musician, right? So, you've done some traveling, I guess. It's a big country. Restoring freedom does NOT have to involve a shooting war. It can be won with noncooperation. I don't mean to suggest that we can't ever restore freedoms lost, but we must first be worthy of it and I'm not sure that most Americans are. I used to think about that a lot, going down the road with nothing good on the radio. We just don't know how many people are with us. We dont know what they're thinking. Most people dont even get to know their neighbors. All we know are the illusions of the MSM. According to them (MSM), there is no reality outside of their illusions. If people can't handle the "dragons breath" now, they wont he able to handle it when things really get rough. We're ALL in danger. It could all end today, or tomorrow, or 50 years from now. There is a difference between "inevitable" and "imminent" that I had to learn.
------------------------------------------
Whenever there's resistance, examine your motivation. Whenever there's flow, consider taking action.
#38. To: HOUNDDAWG (#0)
you're being overly generous by even acknowledging silly fruitcakes who claim that evil (a synonym for conspiracists) doesnt exist. But in the end, it doesnt matter what whoever thinks. The truth is the truth, let em disagree to their hearts content.
"Even to the death fight for truth, and the LORD your God will battle for you". Sirach 4:28
#39. To: PSUSA2 (#37)
Don't I know it. My bare fear (as in, "the absence of all reason" like plunging out a WTC window to escape immolation) is that Americans will dutifully line up and take a micro chip for Enfamil (two cans per day) Budweiser (two cans per day) or fuel ration cards (2 gallons per week) Not until they're up against the wall and nothing's left (or offered) will we know if the unorganized militia will fight (too little too late) or report with sunscreen, work gloves and shovels, ready to stack their iron into surrender trophies. ("Oh, yeah, the 2nd amendment bars us govt folks from banning your firearms. But there's no constitutional bar to inviting citizens to join the so very Pop, progressive, New Fabian Fan Club") Restoring freedom does NOT have to involve a shooting war. It can be won with noncooperation.
#40. To: HOUNDDAWG (#36)
Terry Yeakey could attest to that (if he hadn't "committed suicide"). "It is important to note how, exactly, Yeakey is supposed to have killed himself. He was said to have slit his wrists and neck, causing him to nearly bleed to death in his car, and then miraculously climbed over a barbed wire fence. He then was purported to have walked over a miles distance, through a nearby field, eventually shooting himself in the side of the head at an unusual angle. Startlingly, no weapon was found at the scene of the body, no investigation was conducted, no fingerprints taken, and no interviews with family members or friends were had to try and determine why Yeakey would have been suicidal, or if he had, in fact, been suicidal at all. Instead, the conclusion that Yeakey’s death was a suicide was reached immediately, without an autopsy. Yeakey had witnessed things during his response to the bombing* which did not agree with the ‘official version’ of events touted by the national media and law enforcement at that time. Yeakey was in the process of collecting evidence which supported and documented the inconsistencies he witnessed the morning of the bombing at the scene itself." *The Oklahoma City bombing. Officer Yeakey had personally and at great risk to himself rescued four people from the building. Govt assassins just don't care if such "suicides" are even plausible.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken
"..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance
Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
#41. To: Artisan (#38)
I'll take that hit. (thanks for being kind about it) It seems that the sole "fruitcake" is out of supporters at the moment. Even those who reflexively oppose me have fronted but a single smarmy wisecrack each on this. So, You're correct. I invested entirely too much energy extending a debate invitation to a mushroom. you're being overly generous by even acknowledging silly fruitcakes who claim that evil (a synonym for conspiracists) doesnt exist. But in the end, it doesnt matter what whoever thinks. The truth is the truth, let em disagree to their hearts content.
#42. To: James Deffenbach (#40)
I was truly saddened by Officer Yeakey's death. A black cop with many commendations and the guts to stand up to the Morlocks, even as his superiors cringed and soiled their Class A funeral trousers.
#43. To: HOUNDDAWG (#42)
Yeah, Terry Yeakey was certainly a credit to his profession, a profession that has lost the respect of most people due to clowns like Grand Island the mall cop or the wannabe or whatever he is.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken
"..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance
Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
#44. To: HOUNDDAWG (#39)
What would happen if, say, 90% of the population went along with that. 10% then told the .gov to go engage in self-fornication. I'm using the 90/10 as plausible percentages (IMO). That 10% removed all money from banks, came down with the "blue flu", and did business only with other 10%ers. They refuse to make a mortgage payment, or for that matter, refused to pay any bills except for maybe the light bill. And if the pigs started getting even more uppity, that 10% would take care of things. Freelancers would be free to engage in some underhanded and sneaky things, if the mood hit. Doing those simple and very doable things, what would happen? IMO it would crash the system in a month. Maybe sooner. My bare fear (as in, "the absence of all reason" like plunging out a WTC window to escape immolation) is that Americans will dutifully line up and take a micro chip for Enfamil (two cans per day) Budweiser (two cans per day) or fuel ration cards (2 gallons per week)
------------------------------------------
Whenever there's resistance, examine your motivation. Whenever there's flow, consider taking action.
#45. To: HOUNDDAWG (#41) (Edited)
Ha. no problem, it's relevant in the sense that there are still a lot of americans who scoff at so-called 'conspiracy theories'. we probably all have had to deal with them. I learned quite a poignant lesson over 10 years ago when i was protesting pederast perv priests at the LA CAthedral. There was a man named manny vega who was a cop up in oxnard and was awarded "officer of the year", etc. he was one of the very few people who remained Catholic after being molested by a priest when he was a boy. So, he, a 'credible' victim (as a state servant) was on a hunger strike outside Our Lady of Angeles cathedral for several days- 24 hours a day. I was out there on the sidewalk with him and a few others. (I'm of the view, as a practicing catholic, that it's imperitive that WE call out this evil for what it is. that does not mean, as some claimed, i'm "against the church"- quite the opposite, it's that we need to have the integrity to rout the evil out.) So anyway, vega told me about how when the media hit his story, he was teased and was the recipient of snide comments by fellow officers. I asked how he dealt with that, how he replied, and he was silent and said basically, what someone else says, they will say. That does not negate the truth of whats right. someone says something, so what. Vega's response is the opposite of my inclination, so i had to sit with that for a while. yet I found it very interesting. So the point is, it doesnt matter if anyone scoffs, or disagrees with conspiracies, or worships the state, or is enamoured by pervs. who gives a shit what some loon says. that is their freedom of consience to say or believe whjat thyey want. (this doesnt mean i cant mock them back though ;-) I invested entirely too much energy extending a debate invitation to a mushroom.
"Even to the death fight for truth, and the LORD your God will battle for you". Sirach 4:28
#46. To: PSUSA2 (#44) (Edited)
What would happen if, say, 90% of the population went along with that. 10% then told the .gov to go engage in self-fornication. I'm using the 90/10 as plausible percentages (IMO). That 10% removed all money from banks, came down with the "blue flu", and did business only with other 10%ers. They refuse to make a mortgage payment, or for that matter, refused to pay any bills except for maybe the light bill. And if the pigs started getting even more uppity, that 10% would take care of things. Freelancers would be free to engage in some underhanded and sneaky things, if the mood hit. Doing those simple and very doable things, what would happen? IMO it would crash the system in a month. Maybe sooner. What I wouldn't give to be in the distinguished company of that ten percentile. Imagine if you will, a well armed and a fiercely independent 36 million man army who would rather die with their L.L. BEAN "Vasque Wasatch Gore Tex Backpacking Boots" on than spend their lives on their knees in economic, micro chip and experimental vaccination slavery. I'd be proud to introduce any one of those brave men to my kid sister. (If I had one) And I wouldn't care if it crashed the system because the system would no longer run my life. If the govt wants to support the slackers (and vice versa) then more power to them. Any producer who remains behind would soon realize that he or she is bearing the cost of generations of folks who "wouldn't work in a pie shop", and unless he was dependent on govt contracts (don't expect any Halliburton/KBR stock holders or Blackwater-Xe mercs to join) he'd be a dummy not to come on over and breathe the air of a free person. My bare fear (as in, "the absence of all reason" like plunging out a WTC window to escape immolation) is that Americans will dutifully line up and take a micro chip for Enfamil (two cans per day) Budweiser (two cans per day) or fuel ration cards (2 gallons per week)
#47. To: Artisan (#45)
Excellent point, I agree: let the church minister to the parishioners and boot out the scum. (I'm of the view, as a practicing catholic, that it's imperitive that WE call out this evil for what it is. that does not mean, as some claimed, i'm "against the church"- quite the opposite, it's that we need to have the integrity to rout the evil out.)
-Alex Kurtagic
#48. To: X-15 (#47)
Thanks. Somewhere, i have an old list I compiled of saints, popes etc through history that make that very point. Years ago, I printed the list out & carried it in my wallet. Here are just some of them that were on the list which I remember offhand: "Who is going to save our Church? Not our Bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to the people. You have the minds, the eyes, the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops like bishops and your religious act like religious. ~Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen http://www.thecatholictreasurechest.com/quotes.htm St. Gregory the Great, sixth-century pope and doctor of the Church, said: “It is better that scandals arise than that truth be silenced.” St. Thomas Aquinas also stated: Where there is a proximate danger to the faith, prelates must be rebuked, even publicly, by subjects. Thus, St. Paul who was subject to St. Peter, rebuked him publicly (Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians 2:14). http://prosario-2000.0catch.com/Theology/my_personal_catholic_conviction.htm Pope Leo XIII stated: And there is no reason why those who obey God rather than men should be accused of refusing obedience; for if the will of rulers is opposed to the will and the laws of God, these rulers exceed the bounds of their own power and pevert justice, nor can their authority then be valid, which, when there is no justice, is null (Diuturnum Illud.) Reprimand and rebuke should be accepted as healing remedies for vice and as conducive to good health. From this it is clear that those who pretend to be tolerant because they wish to flatter-----those who thus fail to correct sinners-----actually cause them to suffer supreme loss and plot the destruction of that life which is their true life. St. Basil the Great http://www.catholicbible101.com/quotesfromthesaints.htm And here is an excellent page I just found which best summarizes the whole concept which I am referring to: (much more at link). Keep in mind I was taught this type stuff because my dad, who before I was born, was basically a pagan before he met my mom, was converted and taught in a seminary by an traditional (pre V2) priest, who among other things, gave my dad a masonic book & instructed him all about satan's war against the church (from both without & within). ----------------------------------------- http://www.romancatholicism.org/duty-resist.htm The Fathers of the Church explained that the incident shows us the correctness of resisting wayward ecclesiastics, even popes. The great Scripture commentator Cornelius a Lapide († 1637) wrote as follows: “Superiors may be admonished by their subordinates in all humility and charity so that truth may be defended: this is the basis (Galatians 2, 11) on which St. Augustine, St. Cyprian, St. Gregory, St. Thomas and many others who are quoted support this opinion. They teach quite unequivocally that St. Peter, although superior in authority to St. Paul, was admonished by him. St. Gregory rightly states that, “Peter remained silent so that, being first in the hierarchy of the Apostles, he might equally be first in humility.” St. Augustine writes, “By showing that superiors admit that they may be rebuked by their subordinates, St. Peter gave posterity an example of saintliness more noteworthy than that given by St. Paul, although the latter showed, nonetheless, that it is possible for subordinates to have the boldness to resist their superiors without fear, when in all charity they speak out in the defence of truth.”“ (Commentary Ad Gal., II, 11.) So, the Doctor St. Augustine told us that we should “boldly” resist superiors, including the Pope, “without fear”, when we are defending the Faith. St. Thomas Aquinas wrote that the Scripture passage shows that a pope who errs from the Faith must be resisted openly and publicly because of the danger which exists for the Faithful to be corrupted and led into error. "There being an imminent danger for the Faith, prelates must be questioned, even publicly, by their subjects. Thus, St. Paul, who was a subject of St. Peter, questioned him publicly on account of an imminent danger of scandal in a matter of Faith. And, as the Glossa of St. Augustine puts it (Ad Galatas 2.14), 'St. Peter himself gave the example to those who govern so that if sometimes they stray from the right way, they will not reject a correction as unworthy even if it comes from their subjects.” (Summa Theologiae, IIa IIae, Q. 33, A. 4) Excellent point, I agree: let the church minister to the parishioners and boot out the scum.
"Even to the death fight for truth, and the LORD your God will battle for you". Sirach 4:28
#49. To: Artisan (#45)
OK. So the point is, it doesn't matter if anyone scoffs, or disagrees with conspiracies, or worships the state, or is enamoured by pervs. who gives a shit what some loon says. that is their freedom of conscience to say or believe what they want. (this doesn't mean I cant mock them back though ;-)
#50. To: James Deffenbach (#21)
And before the collapse of the former Soviet Union their programmed students would cite heroes of the revolution, too. Asking students in any nation that won't risk the danger of independent thought will produce similarly predictable answers. And that is why you are correct and American student essays can have no more moral authority than Hail Marys recited by a parrot. Ask most of today's propagandized politicians who learned everything they know in a government school who their "heroes" are and the answers you will hear most often would be that damned tyrant, Abe Lincoln, and that commie bastard FDR. And it doesn't matter which ones you ask either, ALMOST ALL of them will cite those two.
#51. To: wudidiz (#22)
I love that film and thanks for the link! I'm gonna watch now. I remember when Cliff Robertson explained the way things work to low level CIA functionary-genius Robert Redford. I was already disturbed by the murder of Tina Chen's character who I loved from Alice's Restaurant. (1969) And I was anxious to learn why anyone would waste such a sweet, warm and flirtatious Asian-American chick. So, a political thriller from 1975 turned out to be a prophetic mapping of future intrigue with startling accuracy. Cliff Robertson's cold hearted explanation back in The Year Of Our Lord Nineteen Seventy Five made me despise him the same way I despise the guy that hosed a Texas lawyer and Republican party hack with a 28 gauge quail load back in Twenty Ought Six. Three Days Of The Condor
#52. To: HOUNDDAWG (#51) (Edited)
If you get the chance, watch the movie Charly [1968] sometime. Robertson plays a retarded man that is given a cure for his malady with unexpected results. I think you'll enjoy the film. Sad ending. Based on the novel "Flowers for Algernon" by Daniel Keyes. Charly Gordon: Are there any questions? Did you enjoy the film? Cliff Robertson's cold hearted explanation... made me despise him...
Convention speaker #1: Mr. Gordon... how do you feel at the present moment, about your development?
Charly Gordon: Grateful, sir.
Convention speaker #1: You are happy about it?
Charly Gordon: Yes.
Convention speaker #2: Why?
Charly Gordon: Because it has allowed me to... see.
Convention speaker #3: To see what?
Charly Gordon: The world.
Convention speaker #4: And what do you see in that world?
Charly Gordon: Well... my eyes are new, doctor, I...
Convention speaker #4: And what do they *see*, Mr. Gordon?
Charly Gordon: Things as they are.
Convention speaker #4: And?
Charly Gordon: And what they are becoming.
Convention speaker #5: Can you give me an example Mr. Gordon?
Charly Gordon: [quickly] No sir, you give me one.
Convention speaker #5: Very well...
Charly Gordon: Very well.
Convention speaker #5: Modern science.
Charly Gordon: Rampant technology, conscience by computer.
Convention speaker #1: Modern art.
Charly Gordon: Dispassionate draftsmen.
Convention speaker #4: Foreign policy.
Charly Gordon: Brave new weapons. [laughter]
Convention speaker #1: Today's youth.
Charly Gordon: Joyless, guideless.
Convention speaker #6: Today's religion.
Charly Gordon: Preachment by popularity polls.
Convention speaker #3: Standard of living.
Charly Gordon: A TV in every room. [laughter]
Convention speaker #4: Education.
Charly Gordon: [agitated] A TV in every room. [more laughter]
Convention speaker #1: The world's future, Mr. Gordon.
Charly Gordon: Brave new hates, brave new bombs, brave new wars.
Convention speaker #7: The coming generation.
Charly Gordon: Test-tube conception, laboratory birth, TV education, brave new dreams, brave new hates, brave new wars; a beautifully purposeless process of society suicide. [silence]
Charly Gordon: Any more questions?
Mike Flaherty: Yeah, it's been there a long time. I wish I knew which corner.
My Man Godfrey (1936)
#53. To: *9-11* (#51)
Excerpts from: Who Is Harry Kellerman and Why Is He Saying Those Terrible Things About Me - Wikipedia The film still holds the current (as of 2007) record in Academy Awards history as having the longest title of any Oscar-nominated film. It portrays a single day in the life of Georgie Soloway, played by [Dustin] Hoffman. Georgie goes for a ride over New York City in his private plane At the end, Georgie is shown crashing his private plane into the buildings of Manhattan, Filming of the movie was done on location in New York City in 1970. [sic] At the Fillmore East, Soloway performs onstage with Shel Silverstein and Dr. Hook & The Medicine Show. This scene was filmed on September 18, 1970 prior to an actual Grateful Dead concert. The actual concert attendees were used as extras for the scene. Although the film has been released on VHS, Who Is Harry Kellerman has not been released on DVD and is not carried by any major film rental service.Release date(s): June 15, 1971
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#54. To: PSUSA2, 4 (#37)
A most important difference to remember. As creatures of this culture, we tend to think of everything happening tomorrow, with little capability of taking the long view... There is a difference between "inevitable" and "imminent" that I had to learn.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
#55. To: HOUNDDAWG (#50)
The truth of the matter is that most parrots I have ever had the pleasure to spend some time with are smarter than most politicians.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken
"..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance
Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
#56. To: HOUNDDAWG (#51)
Excellent, Dawg :)
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it.” ~ Patrick Henry
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest