Comment: Exactly

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: ... (see in situ)

Exactly

Thanks for this reply to this topic. I had a thought yesterday at lunch. What is this fixation with Martin Luther King Day?

Seriously, the man was in every way a "conspiracy theorist" but his version of action against the criminals running the government was effective so he is given a day of remembrance for effectively fighting against the people who give him an "official" day of remembrance?

So my thinking goes like this (as I try to figure out how the "authorities" want their subjects to think):

"Here you go, slaves, of any color, we at the Top of the Crime Food Chain, your Masters, we, we Legal Criminals want to send you a message and the message we want to send you is to let you slaves know that it is OK for you to grow restless, as in it is fine for the natives to grow restless, up to a point, and that is the point we want to get across to you slaves. You can go this far, exactly this far, and then if you cross that line you will be murdered, and not just you will be murdered, since there will be a need to murder any other slaves that grow restless concerning the murder of your leaders, as they too may cross the line that we, we meaning your masters, the line we may arbitrarily draw in the sand whenever we care to do so, at our pleasure, and at your expense. Have a nice holiday."

Does John and Bobby Kennedy get an official day of remembrance for doing basically the same thing, crossing the line, and paying the price?

Hey, folks, don't forget about these two too?

I want to add so much to this sentiment concerning fallen friends of liberty who push the line in the sand despite orders by our masters to obey without question.

The OP has an opinion, sure, and I read some of his opinion before finding inspiration to read the replies instead. How does the Original Poster fit Waco into his viewpoint?

Please consider watching Waco the Big Lie on Youtube. The videos were produced during the siege and soon after by a person named Linda Thomson. These videos were previously not available, as far as I knew, other than my own original copies, but now they are and here is a link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iCfvhl9NXw

If anyone has a question concerning possible editing out of any information from the original VCR tapes as those originals are now available on Youtube then I can check my own copies to find out if the information has been removed.

The Original Topic quoted:

"Many people on the left would like to abolish the 2nd amendment; but responsible gun owners, with logical debate have kept the 2nd amendment alive."

No, this is false, the supposed "left" (which is not left, they are criminal not left) AND the supposed "right" (which are not right, they are criminal not right) cooperate with each other to disarm their targeted victims, and they do so effectively with the tools that they must employ, and those tools are:

1.
Effective deception
2.
Effective threats of violence
3.
Effective violence

The quote:

"Many people on the left would like to abolish the 2nd amendment; but responsible gun owners, with logical debate have kept the 2nd amendment alive."

That is so absolutely false it is almost unbelievable for me to even begin to consider how someone arrives at such a false viewpoint.

Why call criminals "people on the left"?

Who benefits when criminals are called anything other than criminals?

Why single out "people on the left" and not name all the "people on the right" who are as criminal as anyone else, when someone uses crime to commit crime it is the fact that they are guilty of crimes that makes them criminals, and who does it serve to ignore roughly half of the criminals?

"Many people on the left would like to abolish the 2nd amendment; but responsible gun owners, with logical debate have kept the 2nd amendment alive."

The criminals do not want to "abolish the 2nd amendment" since they, the criminals, want their so called "gun rights" themselves, and what they want is to disarm their targeted victims, so the concept of some nebulous "left" (ignoring the other half of the actual group of criminals) wanting to "abolish the 2nd amendment" is about as false as saying that the Moon is made of Cheese.

Then the person writing the sentence for anyone to read and to understand, to agree with, or to contend with, chooses the words "responsible gun owners" as if such a phrase makes any sense outside of the narrow corridors of false "debate", which is more nonsense. Responsible people hold their own deeds to be accountable to their own hides, and that has nothing to do with the tools used by anyone at any time, other than any case where the individual person chooses to employ deception and in that case they are no longer holding themselves accountable for their own ability to respond or "be responsible".

Why does anyone connect an individual's choice to willfully avoid accurate accountability for crimes that an individual may commit, connect that crime, with the tool used in the crime?

Why is the crime no longer the focus of attention, and why is the tool used in the crime now the focus of attention?

"Many people on the left would like to abolish the 2nd amendment; but responsible gun owners, with logical debate have kept the 2nd amendment alive."

The focus of attention is no longer the crime done by the criminal, now the focus of attention is the nebulous "side" that the criminal is on, and the focus of attention is no longer the crime done by the criminal, now the focus of attention is on a nebulous "amendment", and no longer is the focus of attention the crime done by the criminal, now the focus of attention is the tool used in the crime instead of the crime and the criminal in question.

What is a crime?

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_tra...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Cut and pasted

You infringe you, you there, you with the counterfeit badge, you perpetrate a crime, says so right there, nanny, nanny, poo, poo, stick your head in do, do?

Seriously?

"Many people on the left would like to abolish the 2nd amendment; but responsible gun owners, with logical debate have kept the 2nd amendment alive."

Next is the word choice "logical debate".

Fraud is not "logical debate".

Fraud is fraud. Fraud is understood to be fraud when it is fraud.

When fraud is used to infringe upon the rights to defend liberty then that is a crime covered by that specific well documented measure of crime. Which measure of crime?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Liars lie.

Is that a new bulletin to someone? Speak up - please.

"Many people on the left would like to abolish the 2nd amendment; but responsible gun owners, with logical debate have kept the 2nd amendment alive."

You, anyone of you, can engage in a "debate" with a liar, see how far it gets you, and while you are at it, have a chat, or a debate, or whatever you want to call the exchange of words with one of the survivors of Waco, as I have, and see how far "debate" works when dealing with Frauds, Torturers, Experimenters of Torture Devices on Babies, Assassins, Serial Killers, Mass Murderers, Sociopaths, Psychopaths, on your payroll, as they work on you as they have worked on so many innocent people so far in what could be called American History on the factual account of crimes made legal by that group that does make their crimes legal for them to do, and not for you to do, because they say so.

"Many people on the left would like to abolish the 2nd amendment; but responsible gun owners, with logical debate have kept the 2nd amendment alive."

There is a group called Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership.

In the effort to defend efforts to discredit me I see an opportunity to link a web page that may help in my defense, and the link may also serve a good purpose in defense of the lies so often invented or merely parroted by so many people in our time of Crisis:

http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/bsbhm2.html

Two more links that may help someone someday:

http://www.amazon.com/Unintended-Consequences-John-Ross/dp/1...

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/34738-and-how-we-burned-in-t...

Ending quote (there is a relevant context if you dare to look):

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

One more link on Crisis:

http://www.ushistory.org/paine/crisis/index.htm

Joe