-11 votes

Louis Farrakhan: The Liberty Movement's Missing Speaker?

Louis Farrakhan endorsed Ron Paul

http://youtu.be/X5QAbVcFojE

Farrakhan is a speaker of Liberty, and he's got much more to say than Alex Jones IMO. http://www.youtube.com/wa...

I'd like to invite a Louis Farrakhan thread and how we can achieve Liberty together.

http://youtu.be/GSazUpgBuuQ

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Thank you

The link would not open for me. I will check out the gun control, though what I have heard so far is he is not against guns or defense.

Collectively Owning Land??? Gun Control??? I think I need to l

listen to that 3 hour speech!

"Farrakhan said collectively owning land is a way for black people in America to prosper economically. The calls were part of a speech that lasted more than three hours and touched on topics including Libya's Moammar Gadhafi, U.S. Defense Secretary nominee Chuck Hagel and a national push for gun control."

Read more: http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130225/chicago/louis-farrak...

Copied and Pasted in case it will not open:

This is what he is being quoted as saying:

http://stevescomments.wordpress.com/tag/louis-farrakhan-gun-...

January 29, 2013

"Farrakhan: Right To Bear Arms An Outdated Concept

Good! Then he’ll willingly give up his small army of armed guards that surround him 24/7? A Nation of Islam “leader” talking about something being “outdated”.

On Sunday, the Minister Louis Farrakhan continued his 52-week sermon series entitled, “The Time and What Must Be Done.” In his third installment, the Nation of Islam leader tackled gun control and his views on a “volatile” U.S. populace. He claimed that the American people are increasingly unhappy with their government and that they are simultaneously arming for war. In addition to making these observations and accusations, Farrakhan dismissed the modern-day application of the Second Amendment as well as the need — and right — for Americans to arm themselves.

“Look at the American peoples’ thoughts about Congress. What is the percentage of the American people that feel that the U.S. Congress is doing a good job. Eleven percent,” he said. “Then 89 percent of the American people are angry, disaffected, dissatisfied with their government — and you’re selling them weapons of war and the militias are multiplying.”

Considering Farrakhan’s recent comments about the American people — that they are “savage,” “brutal” and “uncivilized” — it’s no surprise that he is skeptical about guns and the notion that “angry” citizens could use them to wage “war.” After making these curious comments, the fiery faith leader delved into his intriguing views about gun control. Of particular note, he gave a “history” lesson that some gun enthusiasts will certainly take issue with.

“See, the right to bear arms was given at a time when there was no regulated militia to protect America,” he said. “But now you have police well-armed, you have state troopers well armed, you have the National Guard and you have federal troops.” (Yes and the founders were against standing armies)

Farrakhan continued from there, claiming that “there is no need for the American people to be armed to the teeth if you have a responsible militia to protect the society of the United States.” He also noted his dismay over the number of weapons owned (his figure: 350 million) versus the number of Americans (nearly 314 million).

While one would assume that the gun control touting would continue from there, Farrakhan next attempted to tie together his discussion about firearms with a defense of leaders from nations like Libya and Syria — countries he believes the U.S. shouldn’t have “meddled” in. The rest of his diatribe, while somewhat confounding, can be read, below:

“Over 350 million guns are in the possession of the American people with a population that has not reached 350 million. And as anger toward the U.S. government increases, do you think that you too will do exactly what you accused Ghaddafi of Libya of doing? You said he killed his own people he’s unfit to rule. You say Assad is killing his own people — he’s unfit to rule.

But what was done by your meddling in the affairs of these nations? Well nobody has to meddle in the affairs of America, because the people are dissatisfied with their government.”

...

What he is saying isn't irrational

However, I think the Liberty Movement has something to terach him about government's role in rights.

He is blind. If he doesn't know that much

then how can he possibly be the missing speaker of the Liberty Movement?

Here is a list off the top my head regarding my concerns:

He misquotes Ron Paul
He blames incest on the mother
He announces taking care of the Malcolm X problem
He doesn't understand the constitution
His handlers say that God speaks directly thru him and then when he speaks he changes the scriptures

I may be able to go back and find more. But no, I do not think he is the missing speaker. The question mark is removed in my mind. And the question mark has been moved from Farrakhan to Granger.

Is Granger dragging Dr. Paul thru the mud as she sits on the GOP and holds people to the constitution when she cannot recognize whether Farrakhan upholds the constitution.

He certainly does not uphold trial by jury or the right to bear arms. Where is the free society? Liberty? No that is tyranny. IMO, he has a group of followers that will follow him right into tyranny.

Jesus:
Matthew 15:14 KJV
Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

...

We're going to have to agree to disagree

I'm not here to defend him, but learn, and so far what I've learned and is that some people here have issues, real, imagined or fabrications that they insult and accuse me for starting a thread to LEARN about Farrakhan. You are now accusing me of "dragging Ron Paul thru the mud.

I'm not going to back off. I think LIBERTY is WAY WAY WAY bigger than Ron Paul, and I think the second amendment against LF is a red herring. All I have to do is look at a vid and see those consealed weapons on the armed staff he has around him HERE IN AMERICA to see he's not against the second amendment.

I don't appreciate the way he speaks, but then, I have not worn his shoes or those who appear to agree with him at his ourrage for being oppressed and born in the land of the free.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPH4LRASWbo

There should be MANY speakers for Liberty.

Granger, I am going to repeat

Here is a list off the top my head regarding my concerns:

He misquotes Ron Paul
He blames incest on the mother
He announces taking care of the Malcolm X problem
He doesn't understand the constitution
His handlers say that God speaks directly thru him and then when he speaks he changes the scriptures

The question mark is removed in my mind. And the question mark has been moved from Farrakhan to Granger.

Your song "Let there be Peace" was beautiful. Mr. Farrakhan does not speak those words: http://www.firstpost.com/topic/organization/federal-reserve-...

I agree, "There should be MANY speakers for Liberty."

However, Let us be sure the message is Liberty, not hate and fear mongering. I hope that you can listen to the complete link. At time 6 minutes Farrakhan prophecies “by the grace of God:” “It is written that America is going to suffer the worse famine that has ever been seen.” And then proceeds to say that this is what Jesus prophesied in Matthew 24:7. And then proceeds to say that we will become cannibals.

If you hear Liberty in the voice of Mr. Farrakhan, then I will vehemently disagree with you. He is a murderer and can barely keep the smile off of his face as he speaks of the evil to befall America.

Here Farrakhan asks the gangbangers to teach his followers the science of war: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ap34DoTxjwU

That does not sound like peace or liberty to me.

I am seriously questioning your motives, Granger.

...

Then we will agree to vehemently disagree

Could you explain what motives you assume I have to seriously question bear?

What's my motive behind asking is LK is a missing speaker from the LM? We sll don't agree here on many issues or perspective of events. I asked because I had no clue who LF was and what I've learned, I've seen myself attacked and threatened. Your question my motives? PEACE.

UNDERSTANDING, and I remain agreeing to vehemntly dissagree with you, and LOVE you anyways. (((((((bear))))))))) Do what YOU want.

psalm 23
The Lord is my shepherd,
I shall not want;
He makes me lie down in green pastures.
He leads me beside still waters;
He restores my soul.
He leads me in paths of righteousness
for His name's sake.

Even though I walk through the valley
of the shadow of death,
I fear no evil;
for You are with me;
Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me.

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me
all the days of my life;
and I shall dwell in the house of the
Lord forever.

Granger, I have no idea what your motives are.

That is why I am seriouly questioning them. You have Friends in Liberty here in this post that have addressed the concerns with Mr. Farrakhan and it seems that you refuse to accept the words offered. I have no idea why. I am actually bewildered by it, and I also feel greived that I am unable to reach you.

He hates the white man: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiyN8VO-1x8
We are the devil and the white man's world is coming down. How is that a message of liberty?

What if the shoe was on another foot and a white man was talking aboutt a black man and his world that way? I would be sickened just like I am now to see people hating each other because of color or race.

How much love does a black person have in their heart for a white person after sitting thru hours of hate speech? As far as I can tell we are all supposed to be one in Jesus Christ.

This is the message of liberty:
Romans 10:12 KJV
For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

Colossians 3:11 KJV
Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

The Bible teaces that we are one in Christ. Mr. Farrakhan teaches that the white man is the devil.

...

I accept the words as their perception and I don't agree

We do not share perceptions on this. I have Friend in Liberty here on DP that have addressed their concerns with the GOP, refuse to get involved with the GOP, and I accept what they say, as their perception, that I don't agree with from my own perception, and why I joined the GOP anyways. I'm going to make up my mind, not have it made up for me by other's perception, which may or may not be correct. I will find out to my own satisfaction, which is not reached on either LF or the GOP.

When you say LF "hates the white man". I'd have to say that is not correct. He has said it's NOT about skin color, it's about brain color and white person can have a black brain and visa versa.. back in the 70's it was refered to soul, not brain. The black resistance felt that their oppressors had no soul, unable to FEEL compassion for the black person why the constitution never applied to them. Obama, for example is a black skin with a white brain (white brain could mean cluless to the black oppression).

Not since the Kennedy's, have we had a political move from the white population reach out to the black communities and shine the light of the constitution. It's all about GIVING unconstitutional RIGHTS, which the LM is NOT offering.

And what if the shoe is on the other foot?

One night I dreamed I was walking along the beach with the Lord. Many scenes from my life flashed across the sky. In each scene I noticed footprints in the sand. Sometimes there were two sets of footprints, other times there were one set of footprints.

This bothered me because I noticed that during the low periods of my life, when I was suffering from anguish, sorrow or defeat,I could see only one set of footprints.

So I said to the Lord,"You promised me Lord, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I have noticed that during the most trying periods of my life there have only been one set of footprints in the sand. Why, when I needed you most, you have not been there for me?"

The Lord replied, "The times when you have seen only one set of footprints, is when I carried you."
Mary Stevenson

Question

I do not understand this:

"Not since the Kennedy's, have we had a political move from the white population reach out to the black communities and shine the light of the constitution. It's all about GIVING unconstitutional RIGHTS, which the LM is NOT offering."

What unconstitutional rights are you talking about giving?

Did you listen to Mr. Farrakhan in the link I gave you? He was not talking about brains. He was talking about people and that having to do with the color of skin.

As far as I am concerned there is no skin or brain color. People are people.

What unconstitutional rights?

Risghts to women
Rights to Blacks
Rights to Minorities
Rights to groups..

The constitution does does divide men from women, blacks from whites, unconstitutional laws do.

I hear LF different than you do. I understand he is talking to people who are seeking reluef from oppression in the USA where ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL.. and have a constitution that does not see ALL men, but rather, puts them in groups and gives that groups rights, and money to hold them down in the name of lufting them up above poverty. And what's furthmore, I see much of the same here on DP, with peorpl who are frustrated and finding the government unfair and oppressive.

People are people, and why LF does not bother me.

Peace be with you.

Granger, I am not understanding

"and have a constitution that does not see ALL men, but rather, puts them in groups and gives that groups rights, and money to hold them down in the name of lufting them up above poverty"

Does our constitution put people in groups and provide money to those groups? I am open for education. Where in the constitution does that occur?

Cyril's picture

Thank you... May I contribute with something in the same vein

Thank you... May I contribute with something in the same vein as what you're pointing out?

I'm interested in bouncing on this:

Farrakhan continued from there, claiming that “there is no need for the American people to be armed to the teeth if you have a responsible militia to protect the society of the United States.”

... emphasis mine.

Good:

So, HERE I COME. Now I have something TO POINT OUT, my turn - let us use some numbering:

1. "there is no need for the American people" - Question #1: WHO IS to decide about that, Mr. Farrakhan?

2. "armed to the teeth" - really? Question #2: WHO IS able to afford this by the hundreds of thousands - IN GOOD PROPORTION relative to their number of holders:

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/09/21/xm25-punisher-...

(item UNIT price: $ 25,000)

Answer: an over bloating FEDERAL Government, that's WHO - but this is certainly NOT the People - OR SHOW ME THE STATISTICS THAT SAY OTHERWISE, Thank You very much in advance!

3. "responsible militia to protect the society" - so, this by logical implication OF WHAT YOU SAID earlier, Mr. Farrakhan - is NOT the People, but, again, the government instead - last question, #3: again, WHO IS to decide that such militia is "responsible to protect the society" - would that be ... ITSELF - and thus, NOT the People?

...

BAM !

...

Mr. Farrakhan's point's fallacy...

... B U S T E D .

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Yes, thank you for bringing emphasis!

Farrakhan: “there is no need for the American people to be armed to the teeth if you have a responsible militia to protect the society of the United States.”

And important to note is that it is now those well armed government entities that are supposedly to protect the people when the people were to bear arms to protect themselves...and even with well armed governmental entities the people may end up having to protect themselves... just not from enemies abroad, but also the possibility of enemies at home.

I appreciate the time you took to add emphasis when all I did was throw out the quoted material from the website.

I need to learn html so I can had emphasis :)

You're welcome

the privatelee search engine ought to work, hmmmmm. I like it because it sidesteps the google trackers.

www.privatelee.com for privacy! :)

Cyril's picture

Granger, I didn't know about it

Granger, I didn't know about it before Lt496 provides the link below, but:

you'll see that Farrakhan actually has a very poor and very hazardous understanding about the 2nd Amendment.

Please, just watch and judge for yourself.

It is no good at all. And the 2nd Amendment is not to be messed up with.

Ever.

Peace.

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

It Goes Beyond That

He wants to restrict my ability to have military pattern arms which is a crystal-clear advocacy for violation of not only my fundamental liberty, but for a direct violation of Amendment II itself, both textually and in its purpose.

His stated belief is that since the fed-gov military, fed/state national guard, state police, local police and sheriffs are well armed, this constitutes the envisioned 'well-regulated militia', thus making Amendment II non-relevant and negating the need for armed individuals.

Anti-liberty...anti-constitution...a dirt-simple assessment

I think he makes good points and askes good questions

whatever you've got you can't beat a drone.

He sees the government arming people for a civil war, and he points out, those with the guns will be the targets.

I don't see it as interfering with the second amendment, least we forget the third amendment http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F584p5kJL-U&feature=youtu.be

I can beat a drone.

Just show me the operator.

Farrakhan and his hordes of "true soldier" gangsters (check out the latest articles on Drudge) are one of the many reasons I'm glad I have my AR-15.

By the way...

A drone can't beat a few million angry Americans, either, so piss off.

Right, just show you the operator

Good luck with that.

So you agree with LF about the millions of angry Americans?

As it happens,

yes, millions of Americans are angry.

Turns out, getting royally screwed over does that to you. I agree with the premise, but not the conclusion. Anger is usually necessary to get anything done. 1776 ring any bells?

And yes, believe it or not, a drone operator dies exactly the same as any other human being.

Once again, you, Farrakhan, and his reverse-racist band of militant statist thugs and ex-gangsters can piss off.

Thank goodness those morons can't shoot worth a crap; they do their crimes at point-blank range most of the time. My area's filled with actual marksmen - and actual, freedom-loving Americans - that would put Farrakhan's racist goons to shame in both lethality and principles. Most of my friends voted Ron Paul, and nobody around here likes Romney OR Obama. I guarantee you that most of Farrakhan's collection of idiots and dropouts voted on color and nothing else.

Anger is like fuel

If you hold it in, a spark can ignite it. If you pump it into an engine (a constructive means) it can become the guts it takes to achieve a goal, and that is passion.

I can't say "nobody around here likes Obama". I have not met a Romney fan, but I know Obama fans.

It could be that LF's supporters voted on color, although I don't get the feeling that he is an Obama fan. I think he might dicribe Obama as a "white man in a black man's body", and why he says it's not about skin, but about the brain, and some brains are geared for corruptio (the white brain).

We talk about vaccinations, GMOs, floride, geoengineering, many issues that LF also talks about and has apparently by his vast and long winded vid collection (just reading titles is a book) for decades. Seems on some issues he's decades ahead of the LM. People say they are waking up.. well LF has been awake and screaming to the point of rage.

Now, some say that he is paid by the government to lead the NOI.

There's an issue I have a problem with, if that is true.

"those with the guns will be

"those with the guns will be the targets."

Those without guns will be lead to slaughter. Look at history Granger. Look here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSxxVtuS2Pw It is less than 10 minutes and the information is in the first minute.

He's speaking to and of a black community

Farrakhan is not a communist. He's not a politician. Maybe none of his followers vote?

I don't know enough about him to defend him, so suffice it to say, I don't see the Liberty Movement reaching out to the nation of Islam any time soon.

Granger

You are defending him in almost every comment. I didn't say Farrakhan was a communistc. I am saying that those who wish to disarm a populace do so to have total control over the people who are then defeneless.

Who is the Nation of Islam?

It appears that I am

However, because I do not KNOW Farrakhan, do not KNOW amyone personally from the Nation of Islam, have never read on of his books, and only watched a few videos of him, I'm in no possition to defend him, but I am defending his right to exist, be angry, say what he wants, practice the religion he wants, and hopes he appreciates freedom within constitutional government that allows us to co-exist.

His message to black people about guns does not really apply to white people, since I don't know many white people who think of their gun as something the police target and lock people up for.

It appears what's happening in the black communities is much different and has longed for freedom far longer than since before any of us were born.

I actually feel like I am defending Farrakhan's rights, not him.

The Nation of Islam, I have read less about than Farrakhan, nothing, not even a wikipedia version, However, listening to the little of Farrakhan I have this past weekend, it seems to me to be the same as a Church of Islam, universal like the Catholic Church, where the opporessed and suppressed have a communion, to worship Allah and talk about history and how to beat tptb.

Granger, hold his feet to the fire with the Constitution and see

Granger, hold his feet to the fire with the Constitution and see if he stands - figuratively.

Read this quote from the large text I copied for you in another comment:

“Look at the American peoples’ thoughts about Congress. What is the percentage of the American people that feel that the U.S. Congress is doing a good job. Eleven percent,” he said. “Then 89 percent of the American people are angry, disaffected, dissatisfied with their government — and you’re selling them weapons of war and the militias are multiplying.”

He is not talking about black people as a subset of American people. He is speaking of American people as a whole.

Of course he has rights under the constitution, but does he follow and up-hold the constitution? Negros were not even allowed to bear arms. They were left defenseless. Being a target because you have a gun is no reason to give up your gun. I listened to a video a couple of weeks ago. It was someone speaking about WWII. I think the person was Jewish. Their firearms were confiscated, and when they had no fire arms they were beaten because they did not turn over the fire arms they did not have so they would buy them off the black market just so they would have something to give to the police when they came so they wouldn't be beaten for not having something.

The 2nd Amendment is not to be messed with for any reasoning at all. Farrakhan should understand that and protect his people's right to bear arms. And I do not think he is speaking about just black folks anyways. He is saying that because we have a government militia that people don’t need to bear arms because the government militia is bearing arms for them.

You said it "appears that I am" defending him. You might want to consider what is appearing upon Granger then. It also appears that your computer does not want you to see anything that sheds the light on Mr. Farrakhan. You might want to see if something is wrong with your computer because it appears that the information you can see is censored.

...

I haven;'t seen where he's saying dump the second amendment

I see hom talking about the black condititon in a white world, where guns seems to be the right of whites only?

He's telling black people that a gun makes you a target for the many layers of armed government.