Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Primed to fight the government. WaPo. Long. Denigrates Oath Keepers

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,152

    Primed to fight the government. WaPo. Long. Denigrates Oath Keepers

    Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors extremism, said there were about 150 such groups in 2008 and about 1,000 now. Potok and other analysts, including law enforcement officials who track the groups, said their supporters number in the hundreds of thousands, counting people who signal their support in more passive ways, such as following the groups on social media. The Facebook page of the Oath Keepers, a group of former members of police forces and the military, for example, has more than 525,000 “likes.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/nat...-under-threat/
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  2. #2
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,792

    A few thoughts no the subject of "fighting"

    A few thoughts on the subject of "fighting" the federal government:

    1-The most useful tool to fight federal over-reach is probably not firearms, but actually something beloved by liberals and hated by conservatives: The United Nations. The United States government has spent the last 40 years or more arguing quite forcefully on the world stage for self-determination.

    If the Poles and Ukrainians don't want to be part of the USSR or Soviet Bloc, they have a right to control their own destinies as independent nations. If the Slovs and Chechs don't get along, they have a right to form two different nations. The Jews are entitled to a homeland under their own control. And so on and so forth.

    If a bunch of red States no longer care to be micro-managed or have foreign values imposed by the liberal elites in the Bos-Wash corridor and LA/Hollyweird media centers, why are those States any less entitled to self-determination than various peoples of Europe, Asia, Africa, or the Middle East? How does the DC establishment argue for forced union in the face of decades of arguments and wars for self-determination?


    2-If it ever does come to violence, I doubt a repeat of the War Between the States. The Vietnamese, Afghans, Taliban, and others have made clear that true guerrilla war is the way to go. Is the federal government really going to burn Georgia (again), Cheyenne, Houston or Dallas, Provo, or a hundred small towns scattered throughout rural America in order to fight a few hundred thousand guerilla fighters who strike and then hide?


    3-I'm not at all convinced but what Obama and his ilk would be thrilled to see secession. There can be little doubt that we would be far weaker as two (or three or more) nations than we are as one. What more complete way to destroy our ability to be a major world power (militarily or economically) than to drive the nation to dis-union.

    Look at the recent edict on transgender bathroom use. These rare kids have been using public toilets for decades. Incidence of violence against them or other problems seem to be rare. One way or another, the issue seems to be being handled. I expect it is handled differently in a rural conservative area than it might be in the heart of Hollywood. But why do we need a one-size-fits-all "solution"? There was no problem to solve. And it isn't like transgenders make up much of a voting bloc. I think maybe Obama is just looking to create discontent. And if so, to what end?

    In like manner, I can assure you that there is no great crisis with western land management. The nation is NOT at any risk of losing irreplaceable vistas or archeological treasures. Ranchers, miners, drillers, and lumber men are not raping the land. Indeed, federal policies involving introduction of non-native wolf species, preventing management of feral horses (romantically referred to as "wild mustangs"), preventing management of forest killing beetles, and gross mismanagement of wild fire risks, along with federal agencies releasing toxins into rivers for which private interests would be bankrupted and jailed, pose far more risk to public lands than anything Western residents would do. So why the push to clamp down on multi-use? Maybe the eco-nuts have just reached the point to flex their muscles and get what they always wanted. Or maybe it is an effort to create discontent, to make certain segments of the population unhappy?

    Similarly, why the push to eradicate Southern history and culture with the attacks on all things touching on the Confederacy or the War Between the States. Political Correctness run amok? Or deliberate efforts to incite certain segments toward secession, or violence?

    Pushing us into a civil war would certainly damage our nation.

    Secession would likely destroy our power on the world stage, even before enemies moved in to make sure we didn't get back together.

    I don't much care for the Yankee, urban, atheistic, controlling, deviant, Caligula's bedroom morals, Bos-Wash-Hollyweird culture. It is obvious that those in that culture really dislike rural, God-fearing, sexually uptight conservatives. But if we could manage a little federalism such that they get their culture, and we get ours, and the libertarians in Nevada get theirs, we're a lot stronger together than we would be apart.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  3. #3
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    WashPo (dinosaur media, liberal rag) cites SPLC (hate group) as a credible source?

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...un-and-profit/

    http://www.thesocialcontract.com/ans...splc_info.html

    Ironic that a "organization" that hates Nazis also hates Jews.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,152
    Haters gotta hate.

    Beware that one does not become what you hate.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  5. #5
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,726
    Southern Poverty Law Center is a racist origination. They have been caught in many lies over the years. They are government propaganda peddlers.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,152
    SPLC pedaled hateful propaganda back when the government was not so alien as it is now - or alienated.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  7. #7
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,866
    say the big lie long and loud enough...it becomes "T"

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Well they should be happy that the technology to build an A-bomb is 70 yrs young then .. errr ahhh

    POOF

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •