Passed to me by a friend... Interesting - to say the least.. (If posted earlier, sorry, I didn't see it).

http://www.infowars.com/civil-war-and-the-litmus-test-will-you-shoot-americans/

For all of us that remembered Kent State, some will.

War breaks out and free America is under attack I don't give a chit where the enemy combatants are from.

You better by God believe, I'll kill 'em.
Call it public service and do it with a smile, too.

Very very alarming

I work daily with several high ranking Military Personnel. None of them have ever heard of this "litmus test" or have been asked about their loyalty to Obama.

As a matter of fact, most in the military detest him and if an order to attack American's were to come down, they'd see HIM as the enemy and a coup would be more likely than blind obedience.

The film in the link is nothing but inflammatory, propagandist crap...

When I was overseas I actually had to call out a whole table of soldiers who were talking openly about the need to "get rid of Obama". It's illegal for the military to openly speak negatively of their Chain of Command. They can think it all they want, they just cannot say it.

Before anyone questions my motive for calling them out and telling them to STFU, it was because I think that it's healthy to have soldiers that focus on the job and value American values such as liberty in the ranks. If they were to be overheard by anyone else, it could be their career...

All of that to say, the overwhelming majority of our military take their oath to defend the Constitution very seriously. The idea that the military could be turned against American's full scale is laughable. The officers, all the way up to the President would be captured and removed from their positions.

Alex Jones is a nut bag...

Hush your mouth

If you've seen who is President my question is......What Americans?

I have always felt that the military would never go after Americans who are revolting against an unjust government if it was nationwide.

The LEO's on the other hand, would take pleasure in doing so.

Not military, per se... But the other alphabet departments - no one can guarantee..especially with this Emperor.

Oath of office? The a-holes in power have demonstrated time and time again that they view an oath as mere words - never to be taken seriously and sure as hell never to be used with integrity..

Seeing the mass opposition to the attack on the 2nd Amendment, by Sheriffs leads me to doubt that even LEO's would participate in that.

Some, in some uber Liberal regions and jurisdictions might.

Sorry...

Alphabet agencies are no match for the American public or the Military. Combine them and what do you get? Checks and balances. There will be no full scale armed assault on American citizens by the Government.

Rank and file military members are not politicians, they do take that oath seriously...

Now, you can take some of the things that have been going on and when you ask why without a conspiracy theory mindset, then you can see that what's happening is evil, but it's not war.

It's my opinion that the buying up of all that ammo is market manipulation. They do want to get rid of guns and since they cannot, so why not make the ammo overly expensive and unaffordable for the average Joe by drying up the supply? It's market manipulation to reduce the number of guns and ammo available to the public.

Hey! There is the propagandist craptastic video I mentioned! Thanks TRH!

Reynolds Alex Jones Wrap:

AMEN BUDDY, and most cops fell the same way.

I just said it 'was interesting'..


Y'all take it any way you want...

Hahahahaha

Stupidity, over-blown gov't and waste.. Policed by whom? "full scale"? No, they'll do it in other ways.. Refuse a mental exam? Guns are GONE (example in threads a day+ ago) And that's just ONE..

Yes they do. But they're also trained to follow orders.. Who's the top dog in the chain of command? The Azzhole-in-Chief.. IIRC, a general who did not follow an order in Benghazi lost his command within minutes..

No question - the odds on this whole thing is slim, slim, slim.. But so is winning the Lotto.. And somebody does - once in a while - don't they?

All I'm sayin' is - keep yer eyes/ears open...

Its all about spin, some where in the process a LEO will try to take a gun from someone and the LEO will get shot. After that the folks with guns won't be revolutionaries or patriots they will be cop killing criminals and the vast majority of LEO and military will have no trouble shooting on sight.

Combining the Military and the American Public gives you stupidity and over-blown Government and waste? No, you get the checks and balance on the idea of the Government alphabet agencies conducting an assault on the people.

Yes, of course the military is trained to follow orders, LAWFUL ORDERS! It was hammered into our heads over and over and over again that in no uncertain terms that we are, by law, NOT to follow any unlawful orders. What's lawful and unlawful is laid out very clearly for us. It's explained in great detail that to follow an unlawful order is your ASS. You will be held accountable. What Alex Jones and his ilk are suggesting would very well fall within the lines of unlawful.

The Military isn't coming to your door if you refuse a mental exam...

The odds on this whole thing isn't slim, it's zilch.

I cant imagine any LEO in the country will not start thinking twice about that $30,000-$40,000 salary when the incoming bullets are coming from many different directions. Its easy for them to target ONE house with a rat pack of officers as opposed to entering neighborhoods of armed American homes that are of like mind regarding the 2nd amendment. The cops I know have already expressed the irrationality of such thought. I do think it all depends on where you live in the United States and the demographics of said area of the country.

How many cops get shot everyday? The media has tried this tactic repeatedly and it has failed overwhelmingly every time.

obama's brown shirts.

2 weeks he'd have his army, all from chicago, detroit, etc, all TreyThug Martin sons of his, all well accustomed to violence and holding human life in low regard.

Americans who believe they are Africans, and got themselves a mad on carefully programmed into them since birth.

Given a badge, a gun, the promise of regular meals and the ultimate opportunity to lash back at whitey that's kept him down all his life while building a "better America" and they'll gun you down by the thousands.

2 weeks.
Add blue helmets to the mix, all from muslim nations.
Little o would get his war on gun owners, his war on the constitution, his race war, and his "hope and change" all in one tidy package.

dingleBarry and all his pals in and out of gov would start it this afternoon if they could.
muslim brotherhood would have half a million soldiers en route in a helluva hurry, "the great satan" is already their ultimate goal.

I followed some links when this question was posed on a thread some time ago, and found that Marines in 29 Palms were asked if they would fire on American citizens, and over 70% checked "yes". I think the question was just one of many on a questionnaire and it took place in the 'nineties.

No info was given as to the reason for the questions, or how the question was framed.

Exactly.

I replied incorrectly above - I meant if you combine the alphabet agencies, you get stupidity overblown gov't and waste.



I never SAID the military - can't you READ??? A guy a few days ago refused to take a mental exam at his doctor and a few hours later the cops came, got him out of the house and confiscated his firearms.. He had no record, was in no trouble, and was a former permit-holder.. This was all in a post a couple days ago.. Geez...

I pray daily you're absolutely correct... But you go ahead and trust everything in gov't..

I'll pass, thank you...


And I know full well that A. Jones is a bit far out - but he can also make one think a little..

I haven't heard of too many folks that the cops decided were justified when they killed a cop.

Aint gonna happen with the Military Bro Redneck, I've spoke with to many, active and retired as well, if anything they'll mount a coup.

Gunner

trying not to wrap my tinfoil too tightly


I want to believe what HAJ and others have to say about this


but based upon how I've seen our gov't behave and at least half of our elected gov'ts wanton disregard for our Constitution, I find myself more in Redneck's camp.


I believe the greatest danger is incrementalism, they won't make a full out assault on gun owners by any stretch, but think about how the pieces have been moved upon the board?

they've got a large part of the public conditioned to believe anyone with more than 3 firearms and 1000 rds of ammo is a kook just waiting to shoot up some unsuspecting civilians


all they have to do is target those houses they know to have a good supply of firearms and ammo, odds are even most of your neighbors will say "he seemed so nice and so quiet, I'm shocked he had such an arsenal and the things that were on his computer, thank goodness LE got him before he went on a murderous rampage"


they won't come all at once, they'll just pick their shots, and leave the rest of us wondering when they smear their intended target, what if he really is a ______ ?(fill in the blank, terroist, molester, pornographer, communist)


I try never to underestimate my enemy, and unfortunately, it seems more and more certain factions of the gov't have become the enemy to freedom and our Constitution.

Ah, yes, that I absolutely agree upon.





Yes, I can read, and there is no need to get insulting, Lee. I didn't say that you said the military would. I was agreeing that if anyone was coming to your door it would be the alphabet soup agencies. I was also saying that the military and the American public won't stand for that.



You know full well that I don't trust everything in Government. What kind of comment is that!? The fact that I don't trust everything in Government is WHY I told those soldiers that they needed to keep their mouths shut. We need those types to STAY in the Military.




No, Alex Jones requires that you leave your brain at the door. I will give him credit though, he did break the story of the 1.6 billion ammo buy out. He boards the crazy train when he suggests that it's to conduct a war on American's. It's market manipulation.

How many National Guardsmen refused to participate in disarming Louisiana residents after Katrina?

HAJ: I thoroughly recommend you take heed of the old proberb: pissing up a rope and move on..

Now this is more reasonable...

Incrementalism is what has brought us to where we are now. I don't see the scenario you propose as remotely likely, but I do agree with the threat of incrementalism. That's very real and nothing new.

Good post, Randy.


One thing to consider though is that even incrimentalism has an end game. There is a tipping point. When that happens, the failsafes I mentioned will come into play. What happens after that is anybody's guess...

I was there. Lots. That was squelched in a hurry. Nice try...

After it was squelched the disarming was targeted. Like if you shot at my aircraft (which DID happen) then I'm going to request that the guys on the ground take your gun away.

You're probably right, sir...

Did their refusal to participate prevent the National Guard operation from being carried out?

The war is already here for true Americans who believe in the Constitution.

Yes. It stopped it. Soldiers stood up and said that this was an unlawful order and pushed the fact. It wasn't a mass operation, TRH.

I don't think it would be that black and white. Would probably start with a lot of different groups. The populace would have to pick sides. Everything would be confusing in my opinion.

But it happened. I saw the news footage.

I would shoot any American traitor that ordered me to shoot citizens. However, I am not in that position any longer but would still be happy to shoot a traitor.

Think about your statement a bit, bud.

The news just told me that Adam Lanza had a shotgun stuffed in his glove compartment that held 35 rounds...

EXACTLY!

And the vast majority of our military share that same sentiment.

So you're saying that the deployed National Guardsmen interviewed by the news team were actors?

Gentlemen;
Flapping your jaws in this topic is a great way to paint a cross hair on your forehead. On this sort of topic keep in mind the ancient Scottish wisdom "Never pass up a chance to shut up!'

Jim

LOL, they tell me there not gonna come after us and I tell them I believe them, so who's the wiser?

Gunner

Wish I had volume, I'd like to hear that video.

Gunner

Bingo!!!!

There will never be a direct assault on citizens in general as such where they aren't painted as extremists.Remember Waco,were not the Dividians American citizens.The objective will be to wage against one of the survivalists groups or similar where the outcome will be so frightening as to change public opinion and change the constitution.

Just imagine the outcome if the Dividians had set off a small WMD.The outcry would be enough to send military into any target deemed necessary.Then proving the threat of these gun holding groups,severe background checks and limitations would be placed on all gun owners thus eliminating any threat to government power.Don't think our government won't sacrifice some of it's own to achieve goals.

Wonder if anyone here remembers Mai Lai? That was illegal too..

Historically US troops have fired on US civilians, there are many examples of this.

Federal troops have been used to break up strikers. US Army troops opened fire on rioters in NY during the draft riots of the Civil War.

Douglas MacArthur ordered infantry and cavalry to break up the Veterans March on Washington in 1932 - troops rousted WWI veterans and burned their camps, this is a case of troops firing on former troops.

National Guard troops have fired on looters in riots.

The War Between the States is an extreme example but technically that counts as troops firing on Americans. In this case Southern troops fired on Northern troops first, troops they considered "invaders" - but still it was Americans shooting at Americans.

I don't think US soldiers would start shooting indiscriminately at people (although Kent State could count as an instance of that) and I would guess that there were always some who balked at the idea, but history has shown that US soldiers will readily open fire on American citizens if given cause such as being told that the people they are shooting are criminals or traitors of some sort.

Not according to HAJ... Can't happen..


'Course, most of us know better..


As to 'crosshairs' on our foreheads? Heck, I've had one of those for years and wear it with pride..



Good post Jim.. Thanks..

Guys, calm down, the alphabet agencies are not going to wage war on the majority of the American people until AFTER they disarm us.

Lee, stop being so disingenuous...

Every instance that Jim discussed was under conditions that I already established as within the realm of a lawful order. Local riots and Looting is well within the confines of using the military. That's Constitutional. Furthermore, each of the situations mentioned were prior to the military really being training in, or having the technology for, nonlethal crowd control.

The lone exception is the Kent State incident and look at the public, political, and military fall out that happened as a result.

What Alex Jones and his ilk are suggesting is a prolonged full scale war on American Citizens by the Military and the Agencies. I don't know how many times I have to say it for it to sink in, but THAT won't ever happen. With the exception of secession.

Even with secession, my point is made clear. How many members of the military defected and used their equipment and training to support the cause?

Could another Civil War happen in America? Yes, without question, but I assure you, the military will handle the military. Soldiers will using their training and equipment to fight soldiers who seek to subjugate American's.

The military isn't brain dead zombies waiting to follow any order given. There is example after example of the military refusing to follow unlawful orders in Iraq, Afghanistan and here at home.

I haven't argued most of the points that you have brought up. I have argued Alex Jone's points. Why you want to make this personal with insults and underhanded comments is beyond me, and frankly beneath you.

finally, some calm, rational thinking. When we no longer have guns, we won't be able to fight back, saving countless lives. Right?

Don't be ridiculous.

I would expect UN troops shooting at me long before American troops.

look at every other Country in the world. When Citizens protest, or take action EVERY army and police force starts shooting their own.
At that point, it becomes survival. Nothing is more vicious than Civil war.

........so yes, American troops and police will join right in, and slaughter as many as they can.

in very small numbers, and will be crushed by the overwhelming number of patriots in those same organizations...

That was very obviously and easily determined to be an illegal order. How many were prosecuted? How many of those who gave the orders were prosecuted?

My intention was to bring into sharp focus the ridiculous nature of your comment.

Good luck getting an answer to those questions.

The fact that the media cannot be trusted is a ridiculous comment?

Guess I'm right proud to be ridiculous then!

Huh, I missed his question and am glad that you caught it. Thank you.


I don't think enough was done, but I do know of at least one officer relieved and a few enlisted article 15's...

Son...you're young.

Why thank you, sir!

That doesn't mean that I'm naive though...

Your suggestion can be summarized as follows: If the source is the MSM, it is therefore false. That's an absurd suggestion, especially in a case where the MSM report included on-site interviews of deployed National Guardsmen.

No, my suggestion is that just because you saw something on the MSM doesn't mean you got the full picture or the whole truth.

Like I said, I was there and in the military at the time. The situational awareness of what was happening around us, and who had what missions was no big secret.

Where some guns illegally confiscated by members of the military? Yes.

My point, and this has been my point the entire thread, is that it was the military (those ordered to, and others who bore witness HINT HINT) were the one's to put an end to it. The overwhelming number of patriots in the military defended American citizens against from the small number willing to follow the Government.

We are trained to not obey unlawful orders and to call them out when we see them. If we don't, it's made clear that it will be our individual butts in the grinder when the smoke settles.

Sadly, the few people involved in this whole thing only got a slap on the wrist, IMO. Getting relieved of Command or losing rank was not enough for that injustice. But they didn't get away with it scott free...

It broke out already... I see no fight taking place now. What more will it take? Is the US Constitution not being shredded by the left?

HAJ: the above is the reason as to why I suggested you were pissing up a rope. He'll take the obvious and inject some of his delusional reverse-kook notation and come up with that jewel.

It's getting to be a really long rope and I didn't drink that much....

Time to tap out.

Your post from your first week on the Campfire...

How is that any different than anything I've said here? I would defend the Constitution and ALL that it represents with my life. So would they.


And that wasn't my first post. My first post was me putting my foot in my mouth by asking about Mountain Lion hunting in California. Something I learned right then had been outlawed back in 1984

HAJ: the train to Kook-A-Manga left a long time for some of these people..

They just have no concept of what it means to defend the Constitution and you can't make them understand when they don't want to.

You would shoot Americans and protect your President with your life.... while watching him rip The Constitution to pieces?

Something just don't add up.

jorge... tell me a bit more about these people and if you did not arrive on that train from Kook-A-Manga then where from?

Damn! Thanks for posting that. Answers some questions.

Damn. Thanks for posting that too. You're certainly correct in your post...and probably correct in your last sentence too.

It is not my intention to be an ass to anyone.

The point I am making is that there is no place for a weasel between the US citizen and The US Constitution.

But today, that weasel is there and he is Barack Husein Obama.

HAJ, do reconsider the "protect my President with my life" thing, unless you are Secret Service, and consider protecting the Constitution with your life.

GeoW

Sure does.

If I was still active I'd volunteer for a gig in N. Florida.

People are people and organizations such as the .mil and LEO crowd are drawn from the general population. For state/local LEO, they're drawn from the "local" general population (with a % of imports, obviously).

To argue that "they" will or won't shoot at "civilians" (LEO qualify) is as ridiculous as arguing about who has the balls to stand up and fight back.

As far back at the Revolution there were those willing to make themselves criminals in order to "fight the good fight" and there were those willing to walk the party line for the "rightful" (at the time) government. There was a tremendous percentage of folks willing to just sit on the sidelines and, likely, cry/whine about how it should be done while men of action spilled blood. There are examples of all categories as close as the 'Fire.

I can't/won't speak for all LEOs. I know where my guys and many in my AO stand. Likewise, I know where a great number of my local NG/Reservists stand. The rest will be what it will be.

George

Oh I don't know, like taking HAJ's comments completely out of context and insinuating the armed forces would side with the present marxist occupant of the White House and turn on the American public. Correlating Black people with [bleep], I could go on for hours. As for me arriving, I can't quite remember, but it was on a Pan American flight on the 21st of August, 1960... Now let me ask you this simple question, if the Armed Forces were to turn on the current president based on the fact he was (and I agree) destroying the Constitution would you be for that and would that be a lawful action?

I'm not sure why this is even a question.

First, the US military is already killing Americans. Not just Americans, but American children. That right there should put paid to the whole shocked theatrical "Why, they would never!" drama.

Second, when it comes time for the US military to start wholesale killings of regular Americans like you and me, and like your kids and my kids, why do people insist upon thinking that the people now in the military--even if we were to believe their appalled protestations--would be in the military then?

There are plenty of people out there--millions upon millions--in the inner cities who would eagerly leap at the chance to kill Americans for the government--especially white Americans. Most of them have been practicing with video games like MWCOD for years. When the time comes for the US military to start killing large numbers of white Americans, it will by that time obviously consist mostly of those people.

Third, there are already companies out there making more-or-less autonomous armed robots--early-model Terminators, so to speak--as prototypes. I don't know of any that are actually in production yet, but I imagine that as the time approaches for the US military to exterminate large groups of Americans, these companies will start to receive lots of big military contracts. Machines don't tend to have any annoying problems with their loyalties.

So, to sum up:

1. Never believe a soldier when he claims to be a defender of the Constitution if he has willingly deployed into an undeclared war--that is, any war since WWII.

2. What soldiers say today about how eager they are to be ordered to kill Americans may be true or it may be lies, but that doesn't matter because it's completely irrelevant since those soldiers won't be the ones who get those orders.

Great post, Barak.

I don't think it will happen, here is why. Nancy Pelosi , or Barbare Boxer said, all veterans are mentally disabled,,, they should not have guns. This tells me they are trying to keep veterans from having guns. Most are very conservative from the ones I met. They are soldiers and can see a threat and will most likely fight and will be good at it. I believe this is why the government is very robust in getting as many on post depression status,,, so they can't have guns.. So, they know they most likely will be a problem.

jorge, as you well know, this is not a banana republic and I do not foresee nor do I hope to see any revolt of the armed forces. I do see impeachment as a solution however the Congress is proving to be about as worthless as Obama. A case of a crafty weasel leading the blind and ignorant. Checks and balances aren't working any more.

When the people we chose to represent us are failing miserably, we are in deep [bleep]!

As a former member of the Armed Forces, what would you do?

I call BS. The administrations not asking the military that.

To directly answer your question, hell yes I'd shoot Americans to preserve America. I doubt they'd be leftists in that case, but you never know, and I don't care anyway. Anyone actively, literally, violently, physically attempting to destroy America is a dog deserving put down. Regardless of political stripe.

I've been watching this thread and thinking about the implications of the original question. My first reaction was no. HELL NO!. But I've thought about it some before posting a response. Forty-five years go, I made the following oath:

� 502. Enlistment Oath.� Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath:
"I, XXXXXXXXXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

So I swore to "protect and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." And there's not enough information in the original question to determine wether or not I would fire upon an American citizen. I would have to determine in my own mind if that person is an enemy of the constitution. If they are then wether or not they are foreign or domestic makes no difference.

Here's my question: What happens if the enemy of the constitution is the President of the United States? My answer; I would "bear true faith and alegiance to the same" and I would fire upon any enemy of the constitution.

Now if we follow that line of reasoning to its' logical end, we have to ask the question "why have the current POTUS, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid not been assassinated already? Maybe we have all just decided that as of yet, they have not provided sufficient evidence that they are enemies of the constitution. Or maybe we're not willing to make the sacrifice to live up to our commitment.

KC

P.S. What about Hickenlooper and the Colorado Dems? Have they given us sufficient proof?

+1

It is as simple as that.

lol, $40K?! thats 4 months salary, not a year!

Maybe in Jersey......

George

yep

These threads used to amuse me, now they just make me want to puke. The number of posters on here that say LEO's are just chomping at the bit to shoot Joe six pack and take his guns/ammo/precious metals disappoints me. But I also wonder how many of them are basement living puzzy ass [bleep] who got a speeding ticket in their mom's car yesterday, and how many are honest to God grown ass men who have formed an opinion based on personal experience. (i.e. not watching youtube clips and reading internet blogs by other random losers)

That's not the scenario that was presented in that thread. My duty was to the Constitution. Period.

Take it out of context all you want but it doesn't make your above comment true.

If the President violates the Constitution then he is to be considered an enemy of the State. The Constitution provides a means by which to handle such situation and it isn't via a coup. By mounting one under the circumstances given in that thread YOU would be in violation of the Constitution. That would make you the one ripping it apart.

It would be my job to arrest the President and bring him to trial. NOT stand by while vigilante justice destroy the Constitution and rip the Nation apart.

Attempt to bypass the Constitution and you become a domestic enemy of the Constitution who I was sworn to defend against.

What does that post taken completely out of context answer for you two?

Anyone that desires to bypass the Constitution becomes the enemy. Be it American citizen or the President. If you read the rest of my comments in that thread you'd see that I repeatedly stated that the Constitution provides a way to address a tyrannical President and what was proposed in that thread was bypassing the Constitution completely.

THIS is what I said in that thread. GeoW took one post completely out of context.

The freak show kook meter is running pretty high today, huh?

That's how you characterize Americans being SWAT teamed because they won't surrender their God given rights??

Very.

On overdrive even... sheesh.

Enemies of the Constitution are enemies of the Constitution, what they call themselves is irrelevant to me.

My very next post in that same thread...



And another one from the same thread...




Context matters...

Yep!

And here is the post that resulted in my response...



This is not the manner that the Constitution has laid out for a regime change. To do this would be violating the Constitution.

Why do you hate America?

Are you stupid TRH? What kind of question is that.

Either your joking or you are being disingenuous. I hope it's the former.

Loving and defending the Constitution is the exact opposite of hating America. Maybe I should ask you why you hate the Constitution and thus America? But then I'd be behaving like you...

He and I have been pretty civil recently. I'm hoping he's joking...

I think part of the confusion here is that people are conflating "America" with "the United States federal government." That's a distinction that it's in the interest of the government to prevent people from making, but it's a real one.

For example, take the statement as typed: "Anyone actively, literally, violently, physically attempting to destroy America is a dog deserving put down." Do I agree with that? Well, I've never actually seen or heard of anyone like that, so without context it's difficult to be rigorous; but on the surface, sure, probably I do.

Now modify the statement: "Anyone actively, literally, violently, physically attempting to destroy the US government is a dog deserving put down." Do I agree with that? Certainly not, not even close. At this point in history, given what it's done and is doing domestically and around the world, somebody attempting to destroy the US government may have a good chance of being saner and more clear-headed than those of us who are still making excuses for it.

When you hear politicians or the mouthpieces of politicians claim that this group or that group (terrorists, money launderers, drug traffickers, Wall Street tycoons, gun owners, Jews, Christians, whatever) is a threat to "national security," you might try replacing "national" with "government" and see if it makes a little more sense to you.

Civil or not,HAJ that kind of question is uncalled for and I think a slap to you and every person who served this WONDERFUL country.

Didn't think I needed the emoticon for that one.

I admit, ya got me, but I held out hope that you had more character than thinking that I hate America after the entirety of my discourse here. Thank you for proving me right.

Well, now, I wouldn't say that.

For example, I love America, but I don't have much that's good to say about the Constitution, which has turned out in over two centuries of real-world experience to be pretty anti-freedom in practice.

Perhaps we can agree that one's love for the Constitution and one's love for America are unrelated to one another and should be measured on different axes.

See, I believe that the Constitution is the most liberating document ever penned. The bastardization of it over time has been anti-freedom.

If you hold the premise that the people is America and given the direction that the people are calling for us to go, where does that leave liberty?

For me, the Constitution defines America. It's possible that the people and/or the Government can be anti-American.

I thought it was obvious because you had just gone to such great lengths to persuade us of the opposite. Just goes to show, if you're joking on the internet, you can never get away without the emoticon.

This is the thread.. Link

This is your first post in this thread:



How in Hell could this be taken out of context? Put your posts in order and then say it was taken out of context..

I did put them in order and even posted the thread that elicited that response.

I don't know why you are trying so hard to defame my character but it's a pretty underhanded thing to do.

You are attempting to suggest that I do not support the Constitution by twisting my words. That's simply not the truth.

Are you suggesting that a Kyrzygstan style storming of the Capital is Constitutional?

1. Americans have fought Americans and spilled their blood ever since the founding of the Republic.

2. There is no such thing as a bloodless civil war. In fact civil wars tend to be bloodier than foreign wars.

3. All states worth their salt ultimately resort to violence against grave threats foreign or domestic.

Many guys here have palpable fixations for azzhat schemes like seccession, clericalist rule, gangsta mores, mixed with pre-adolescent fixations on blood-spilling. Video games and zomby movies are more real to them than the lsssons of history.

1B

Normally you can. I'm a bit defensive right now. I tend to get that way when somebody suggests that I would defend a tyrant against the American people by engaging in murder. Not your fault, but tone and inflection are lost in text and after your comment that the post taken out of context "explains a lot" made me question your angle. My apologies.

I guess I'll apologize for that. I just felt like taking a jab at you, and the opportunity presented itself.

I can't fault you for that and can't say that I wouldn't have done the same.

I wasn't talking about a revolt, but a refusal to execute unlawful orders. Realistically, nothing I can do except go to the ballot box. The Congress has done about all in can do as they are only 1/3 of the equation. I just don't believe for one second the bulk of the armed forces would obey a president turned despot to shoot civilians.

Here's another data point to consider; when you find yourself on the same side of the equation with the likes of TRH and Barak, I'd rethink my position.

Well said/

It's your words straight from the thread. Don't blame me for what you posted. Have you changed your mind?
I see where you [bleep] up and that is when you said that you would kill US Citizens for the president... Obama. That should have been for the Constitution.
You need to bite the bullet on this as your character was not impuned by me, but was self inflicted.

It's funny to me how those who have never served chant the mantra of "they're trained to follow orders" like they are mindless robots. Although it's true that we are trained to follow orders, we are also trained to question their legalities.

If we participate in an unlawful order, it's our butts on the line as individuals when the smoke settles. We will be the one's to face criminal charges. Rightfully so.

It's just one of many things that makes our Military stand apart from military's across the globe.

Go reread what I posted and save yourself from being such a fool.

You continue to misconstrue the facts intentionally. What I can't figure out is why...

"The temper of soldiers, habituated at once to violence and to slavery, renders them very unfit guardians of a legal, or even a civil, constitution."

Edward Gibbon

Fact.

Now you're just being mean!

I'd respond to Mr. Gibbon that the same must be true for a man defending his home from invaders.

Well, if it can't or won't prevent that bastardization, then it's not very liberating. I'm talking practice here, not theory--but even in theory it carries within itself the seeds of its own failure.


For me, America includes the people but is more than the people. It's also a set of ideas about individual liberty and personal responsibility that stand largely betrayed by politicians, the Constitution, and in significant part the people themselves. And of course there's the land, the history, the achievements, and the failures.


But reality has now been so far divorced from the Constitution that such a definition must necessarily define a number of things that simply aren't so anymore, if they ever really were.

Your words, not mine. Put them in context and they still say the same.

Man when you step in [bleep] there ain't much to do as you can't un-step [bleep].. you got to clean your foot and keep on stepin, watching where you step a bit closer in the future..

Won't spend much time on arguing with you.. as most every thread you participate in winds up in some sort of rhubarb.. and you are always in the right.

Happy Easter to ya HAJ!

Any and every document can be bastardized. There is no preventing that. Just look what people have done with the Bible...

I like your second paragraph above. I think that's a good summation of America, minus the Constitution having betrayed America.

I don't feel that we are at where you feel we are at in your last paragraph, but I do feel that we have been heading in that direction for some time.

Post the very next sentence of that quote...

If you were being sincere you'd include that. You'd also include what was being discussed in that thread. Since you won't it's clear to see that your objective is to defame me. Sadly the only way that you can do so is to twist and take things out of context. Do you seriously have so little honor?

I'll be praying for you this Easter.

I guess we know how you view the Aurora Colorado murderer and his conversion to Islam



Taken from this thread.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthread..._Numb_Nut_Alert_Aurora_Kille#Post7577783

If the context doesn't matter then we should conclude that you're a Muslim and see him as a fellow Holy Warrior. I mean these are your words and the entirety of your post.

This is the equivalent of what you are doing with my post except you intentionally chose to neglect the sentence that puts my comment all in context. You know, the sentence that says that I will defend the Constitution and ALL that it represents.

I'm not saying I have a Constitution that's better; I'm just saying the one we have has not proven to be particularly liberating.

Documents don't liberate people anyway, no matter how expertly they're conceived and written: documents sit on a shelf and get dusty. People liberate themselves, if they're of a mind to, documents notwithstanding.


Obviously we disagree about the Constitution, but it's good that we can agree on something, anyway.


So maybe you'd go with Claire Wolfe? "America is at that awkward stage where it's too late to work through the system, but still too early to start shooting the bastards."

I think that Claire is pretty close to right. THIS system is dysfunctional. It's not the same system laid out in the Constitution.

I agree that people take ownership of their own liberty. However, I contend that one way that they do this is through Laws that help safeguard that Liberty like a Constitution.

I've got no problem with having differences and agreeing to disagree. I wish it would happen more often than the pissing matches that so often frequent these discussions.

You're a known parser and twister yourself, why would somebody not quote you "out of context", as you say?

Think about this...

"34But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: 35Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 36Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil."

Matthew 5:34-37, King James Bible

Amen George.

Try telling that to a woman today.

[shakes head sadly]

Please, show me one instance where I have done anything like this. If it's so well known then it should be easy to find. Show me and not only will I apologize publicly but I will also buy them a box of bullets of their own choosing.

You're a good guy, HAJ.

EthanAllen is the jackass

Why? Because he's not one of your admirers?

Revisit Kent State, Ruby Ridge, Waco--- draw your own conclusions