Quite the little country we’re becoming.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=dumbrenter][quote=FlyerInHi]Car, if I understand you well, you’re saying that citizens need guns and assault weapons because there comes a time when citizens need to kill the agents of the government.

That’s a very subjective call depending on who you are.[/quote]

I think you just summarized the 2nd amendment.[/quote]

DR: Apparently, more than a few posters were out sick the day they taught Civics/American Government at their schools.

The government derives its legitimacy from the consent of the People. This fact is obviously lost on those amongst us who seem to believe the government is in charge.

As anyone who has worn the uniform of an American soldier, sailor, airman or Marine can attest, you swear an oath to “defend the Constitution against ALL enemies, foreign AND domestic”.

The language is key. You don’t swear to defend your country, you swear to defend the Constitution.

Or, as my dad, a Marine veteran of WWII and the Korean War, put it: “Love your country. Fear your government”.

[FlyerInHi]

Allan, your dad would be more right if military service members did not swear to uphold the Constitution.

The argument in the gun community goes like this: Citizens need guns, including assault weapons as CAR asserted, to defend freedom and the Constitution in case a tyrant takes over. When and if that happens, ordinary citizens can take up arms and kill agents of the government. Citizens will then restore freedoom.

Many gun advocates claim that military members (who have sworn to “defend the Constitution against ALL enemies, foreign AND domestic”) are training for urban warfare, perhaps in preparation to confiscate the guns of Americans.

Do we really need to “fear” our government since everyone who works in government swears to defend the Constitution? Would they take orders from a dictator?

Maybe we should do away with “In God we trust” and go with “In the people with guns we trust”.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

FIH: When I was in the Army, I spent time in the 82d Airborne. The 82d, when I was in, was responsible for training for scenarios involving widespread civil unrest, rioting, etc, and one of the questions you were asked, was if you were able to fire on American citizens, if so ordered.

The US Army and Marines have “zombie invasion” training scenarios, so named because it’s far more palatable than telling those young soldiers and Marines that what they’re really training for is what happens if the shit hits the fan domestically and there is widespread civil unrest, including rioting.

If you watched Boston PD, the Staties and the FBI conducting house-to-house searches in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings and then juxtaposed that with videos of US soldiers and Marines conducting clearing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, you’d be hard-pressed to tell the difference, given that the weapons and tactics are nearly identical. Thanks to the billions that DHS has pumped into local and state law enforcement, we’ve now effectively militarized our police, with predictable results, including officers in Boston toting fully automatic M-4 rifles and screaming at residents to get out of their houses without showing any due cause for such an order.

I’m sure you’ve been paying attention to the news this week, as revelation after revelation has spilled forth about government eavesdropping and spying programs. This reportage isn’t coming from the tinfoil hat brigade, but, rather, the Washington Post, the NYT and The Guardian.

Now, I’m sure all of this falls under the rubric of “Keeping America Safe”, as Miz Feinstein gravely intoned, but you’ll forgive me if I view this with just a bit of skepticism and not fall all over myself in my haste to be a “Good German”.

Do I worry about approaching tyranny? No. It’s already here.

[CA renter]

In addition to what Allan has said, the government has also enlisted the assistance of utility workers, cable/satellite repair people, emergency responders, etc. (people who regularly go into the homes of citizens) in their quest to root out “terrorists.” They’ve been asked to report “suspicious findings” when entering people’s homes, and this includes things like “Tea Party” and “Occupy Wall Street” signs, paperwork, etc., as well as any kind of “anti-government” posters, pictures, etc. They are also supposed to report the existence of visible weapons, or the suspicion of weapons possession. In addition to this, some have received very specific training in what to look for and how to handle occupants if they show any kind of resistance to their inquiries and “informal” searches. They have been preparing for revolutionary actions for some time now. Much of this has NOTHING AT ALL to do with “foreign terrorists.”

[Zeitgeist]

Allan and CAR, you are both 100% right. 1984 was just late.

[CA renter]

Oh, and just to silence the fools who think that using “peaceful means” to voice opposition to tyranny will work:

Only one month into the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations last year, plans were formulated to identify key figures in the movement and execute them with a coordinated assault using sniper rifles, new documents reveal.

The revelation — discussed in a heavily redacted FBI memo unearthed late last month through a Freedom of Information Act request — reveals that the Federal Bureau of Investigation was aware of plans for a violent assault on the peaceful protest movement but stayed silent on rumors of an assassination attempt only until now.

Information on the alleged plot to kill off protesters appears on page 61 of the trove of documents obtained recently by a FOIA request filed by the Partnership For Civil Justice Fund. On the page in question, marked “SECRET,” the FBI acknowledges:

An identified [redacted] of October planned to engage in sniper attacks against protesters in Houston, Texas, if deemed necessary. An identified [redacted] had received intelligence that indicated the protesters in New York and Seattle planned similar protests in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Austin, Texas. [Redacted] planned to gather intelligence against the leaders of the protest groups and obtain photographs then formulate a plan to kill the leadership via suppressed sniper rifles.

In the rest of the material obtained by the PFCJF, the FBI declines to mention any follow-up attempts to investigate the rumored assassination plot. Page 61, where the plot is discussed, was redacted heavily before it was handed over to the PFCJF.

“This correlation between the FBI, the Department of Homeland security and corporations in the New York stock exchange really showed who they are serving. It’s not the government in this case, it’s these corporations and a financial sector, and it’s certainly not the people,” independent journalist and activist Anna Lekas Miller told RT.

“The FBI is really just targeting ordinary people going about their daily lives as potential terrorists, and now people, who are participating in peaceful protests, are also characterized as domestic terrorists. So, I think the FBI is really picking and choosing who it categorizes as the type of civilians it wants to protect,” added Miller.

http://rt.com/usa/fbi-assassination-ows-sniper-227/
————

I bolded both of those parts because it’s important that everyone understand who the “enemy of the people” really is. It’s not “union workers,” nor is it “welfare queens.” Just look at whose wealth and power has been growing over the past few decades as our liberties and wealth have been stripped away, and you will have your answer. They are making sure that once the sheeple wake up, they will be positively defenseless.

Another anecdote: During the OWS protests, there was one particular occasion where **multiple** police officers were armed with all kinds of cameras and video equipment. They were making a point of getting a picture of everyone’s face, even the faces of children. Whenever people would try to hide their (or their children’s) faces, the cops would angle around specifically to get a pic/video of them. I have no doubt that these photos/videos are stored in databases and facial recognition software was used to identify as many people as possible.

This same thing was also happening during the original Tea Party protests (when it was challenging the financial/corporate oligarchy…before the movement was co-opted by the Republican Party with the help of Obama — healthcare reform in the middle of a major economic crisis??? Any fool should have been able to see through that one.)

We do not live in a “free society,” and haven’t for a number of years. But feel free to keep buying the story that they want to disarm us “for our own good.”

[SK in CV]

[quote=CA renter]
We do not live in a “free society,” and haven’t for a number of years. But feel free to keep buying the story that they want to disarm us “for our own good.”[/quote]

Who exactly is “they” who want to disarm us and what is their connection to the FBI, the DHS and Wall Street?

[CA renter]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=CA renter]
We do not live in a “free society,” and haven’t for a number of years. But feel free to keep buying the story that they want to disarm us “for our own good.”[/quote]

Who exactly is “they” who want to disarm us and what is their connection to the FBI, the DHS and Wall Street?[/quote]

Revealed: how the FBI coordinated the crackdown on Occupy

New documents prove what was once dismissed as paranoid fantasy: totally integrated corporate-state repression of dissent…

It was more sophisticated than we had imagined: new documents show that the violent crackdown on Occupy last fall – so mystifying at the time – was not just coordinated at the level of the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and local police. The crackdown, which involved, as you may recall, violent arrests, group disruption, canister missiles to the skulls of protesters, people held in handcuffs so tight they were injured, people held in bondage till they were forced to wet or soil themselves –was coordinated with the big banks themselves.

The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, in a groundbreaking scoop that should once more shame major US media outlets (why are nonprofits now some of the only entities in America left breaking major civil liberties news?), filed this request. The document – reproduced here in an easily searchable format – shows a terrifying network of coordinated DHS, FBI, police, regional fusion center, and private-sector activity so completely merged into one another that the monstrous whole is, in fact, one entity: in some cases, bearing a single name, the Domestic Security Alliance Council. And it reveals this merged entity to have one centrally planned, locally executed mission. The documents, in short, show the cops and DHS working for and with banks to target, arrest, and politically disable peaceful American citizens.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy

——–

In other words, as has been the case throughout history, those who would want to oppress the masses are the ones who already hold most of the wealth and power, and who want to ensure that they stay in power, usually by continually claiming an ever-greater share of the world’s wealth, natural resources, and power over governments/military forces.

[SK in CV]

I get that CAR. Everything you’ve pasted, copied and commented on is disturbing to say the least, I’m just not seeing any connection between those with power and wealth (the government, and big business) and the anti-gun movement. If anything, they are on opposite ends of the spectrum, and unlike on some issues, they’re not meeting at the other end of the circle.

[dumbrenter]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Do we really need to “fear” our government since everyone who works in government swears to defend the Constitution? Would they take orders from a dictator? [/quote]

Since when is just “swearing” to defend the constitution just enough? You need arms in case those who swore did not really mean it.
For example, like the presidents (past and current) did not really have your and my privacy needs in mind when they ordered a wide ranging snooping program against who they get their paycheck from.

[dumbrenter]

[quote=SK in CV]I get that CAR. Everything you’ve pasted, copied and commented on is disturbing to say the least, I’m just not seeing any connection between those with power and wealth (the government, and big business) and the anti-gun movement. If anything, they are on opposite ends of the spectrum, and unlike on some issues, they’re not meeting at the other end of the circle.[/quote]

SK, in near future the country will face an either/or choice: (a) inflate massively to get out of this hole
(b) raise taxes and at the same time cut welfare across the board.

If option (a) is chosen, it is the wealthy who get hurt since they hold most dollars, so it is unlikely they will let it happen.
If option (b) is chosen, things will come to head with middle income folks (right or left) and unlike other countries, these fellows have guns which makes things a little bit harder for the “power & wealth” class.
Hence their interest in making sure the bulk of population is emasculated before proceeding.
I am not claiming this is a fact, but just a conjecture of the connection you are looking for.

[SK in CV]

[quote=dumbrenter][quote=SK in CV]I get that CAR. Everything you’ve pasted, copied and commented on is disturbing to say the least, I’m just not seeing any connection between those with power and wealth (the government, and big business) and the anti-gun movement. If anything, they are on opposite ends of the spectrum, and unlike on some issues, they’re not meeting at the other end of the circle.[/quote]

SK, in near future the country will face an either/or choice: (a) inflate massively to get out of this hole
(b) raise taxes and at the same time cut welfare across the board.

If option (a) is chosen, it is the wealthy who get hurt since they hold most dollars, so it is unlikely they will let it happen.
If option (b) is chosen, things will come to head with middle income folks (right or left) and unlike other countries, these fellows have guns which makes things a little bit harder for the “power & wealth” class.
Hence their interest in making sure the bulk of population is emasculated before proceeding.
I am not claiming this is a fact, but just a conjecture of the connection you are looking for.[/quote]

Your options are begging the question. I’m not sure there is any conclusive evidence that the US economy faces the limited options you propose.

Irrespective of that, I would think that if there is a connection between the monied crowd and gun control, it could be identified. Is Monsanto funding gun control advocacy? JP Morgan? Goldman Sachs?

[dumbrenter]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=dumbrenter][quote=SK in CV]I get that CAR. Everything you’ve pasted, copied and commented on is disturbing to say the least, I’m just not seeing any connection between those with power and wealth (the government, and big business) and the anti-gun movement. If anything, they are on opposite ends of the spectrum, and unlike on some issues, they’re not meeting at the other end of the circle.[/quote]

SK, in near future the country will face an either/or choice: (a) inflate massively to get out of this hole
(b) raise taxes and at the same time cut welfare across the board.

If option (a) is chosen, it is the wealthy who get hurt since they hold most dollars, so it is unlikely they will let it happen.
If option (b) is chosen, things will come to head with middle income folks (right or left) and unlike other countries, these fellows have guns which makes things a little bit harder for the “power & wealth” class.
Hence their interest in making sure the bulk of population is emasculated before proceeding.
I am not claiming this is a fact, but just a conjecture of the connection you are looking for.[/quote]

Your options are begging the question. I’m not sure there is any conclusive evidence that the US economy faces the limited options you propose.

Irrespective of that, I would think that if there is a connection between the monied crowd and gun control, it could be identified. Is Monsanto funding gun control advocacy? JP Morgan? Goldman Sachs?[/quote]

Looking for conclusive evidence is both idealistic and immature. If you see a third or 4th option, please add to it.
By the time the conclusive evidence presents itself to you it will be too late. Obviously it is in the interest of the “monied crowd” to make sure such an evidence does not exist.

That said, to be clear, I have no “conclusive evidence” other than a set of correlations.

[SK in CV]

[quote=dumbrenter]
Looking for conclusive evidence is both idealistic and immature. [/quote]

And the Flying Spaghetti Monster is real. And it would be both idealistic and immature to question its authority. Facts and evidence aren’t necessary when the “truth” is so obvious.

[FlyerInHi]

Dumbrenter, I just expanded the “swear to defend the constitution” point that Allen made. He said his dad swore to defend the constitution, not the government.

Just saying we can rest a little easier because people swore to defend the constitution so help them god.

[Author]

Posts