Brothers and Sisters, we are headed for an internal war in this country. We can play games; we can theorize; we can disbelieve. But, the reality is, we are headed for a war.
And be that as it may, you and I may be caught right in the middle as victims rather than people who can make a difference. Before I go into my little rant, I'd like to share a link with you. Please click on it and read it carefully:
There are a finite number of options that you and I can employ before we use extraordinary remedies. We can vote, write our congresscritters, write letters to the editors of newspapers, etc. and then, when all is said and done, we can accept the outcome by the legislatures OR we can take the matter to court.
If we lose in the judicial arena (the courts) we can then choose to accept the outcome OR we can employ still more remedies. Then, when all nonviolent / "legal" remedies have been exhausted, we can choose to submit to the final decision by the authorities or begin utilizing whatever options are left. In a nutshell, it's always been that simple.
In my opinion, each of us needs to go through the motions, doing the basic things BEFORE employing the next level of options as we go along. For instance, you should look into any issues that concern you and see where that issue stands. Example: if your local jurisdiction does not allow you to carry a weapon - and in some cases own one, you've got to do your research. Has the issue been taken up at the legislative level? Has it been taken up in the courts (your judicial remedy)? Are groups still trying to sway the legislators or the courts?
In another posting to follow, we can look more specifically as to what procedures you have to take in order to effect change, but before we consider some options, the nonviolent / "legal" options must be exercised AND the door must always be left open for a nonviolent and peaceful resolution.
At the same time, we cannot continue to sit on our hind quarters and hope for divine intervention when we don't take the required steps to defend our position (s) through legal channels.
Finally, there is an issue that is about to emerge and all of us need to be ready to articulate a position on it: The enemies of freedom and liberty will try to convince us that we cannot act because we are not a "duly constituted authority." Duly constituted by whom? That will become the focus of some of this discussion IF we find a few people who want to engage in this thread. More to follow. Please read the link in the opening paragraphs of this posting.
There is a basic procedure you take to effect change. Claire Wolfe entertained us with the book, 101 Things to do 'Til the Revolution and with some hesitancy, I would suggest you read the book if you are more geared toward entertainment as opposed to achieving any lasting results.
According to Wolfe: "America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
Basically, I disagree with Wolfe's premise. And that's my personal opinion. In my opinion, even when the door is closed to you, it is better to walk by now and then, leaving the opportunity for the system to open that door to negotiations. HOWEVER, that does NOT mean that you sit idly by and do nothing while longing for freedom and liberty. BTW, Wolfe's book is over a decade old... the "awkward" stage is history for the majority of us. And shooting means war - a war that most so - called ""patriots" will not fight in.
In all fairness, we can at least give Wolfe the benefit of the doubt and read that list - even if you never read the book. Here is a link to that list:
For the record I disagree with numbers 1, 4, 6, 23, 24 and 34. And we should take number 15 with a grain of salt. Of course, Claire contemplates that we will disagree on the numbers listed... read the list and you'll understand what I'm talking about.
I want to give you just a bit of retrospection here:
All the time people are coming to meetings, joining the boards / posting, sending me e mails or calling me on the phone. They want to know what can be done. What can we do that will make a difference? Well, the stark reality is - most, if not all of those people, had their minds made up before they contacted me. And since we are all on different levels of understanding, there is no "RIGHT" answer. However, people judge you on the answer you give them (as what they think constitutes their understanding of truth at that given moment.)
Most of the time we will have to be moving forward, while leaving the door to negotiation open. So, while I may be at a different level in understanding than you, I can support your efforts until you reach the same level I'm on. Conversely, if someone seems to be at a more intense level than you or I, we should take the time to hear them out and make sure that they have exhausted their other remedies, while leaving the system with an open door policy, should they decide to negotiate in the future.
It's a long journey from ballot box to bullet box. And I've seen people who have spent the last twenty years trying to educate people by handing out copies of the Citizen's Rule Book while not one person in fifty who is in a leadership position (within the "movement") has ever actually READ that book. You can though:
I keep abandoning threads for a lack of input by posters. Since some new posters are on the horizon, it may be time to add some stuff to this thread in the hopes that the newer posters will read this and give some feedback.
As we near the election ... excuse me, the coronation of Buttcrack Obama, we should look at the issue of voting and letting the politicians hear from us.
I'm going to vote and I'm going to support Bob Barr. And the reasoning is simple:
The Libertarian Party comes closer to representing the philosophies of a broad range of patriots than any of the other third parties. The Libertarian Party platform has a greater viability for getting people elected because it is so inclusive of a broad range of voters. We won't have to compromise our basic principles when supporting Libertarians. And you can't make the same claim about Mr. McCain.
Can the Libertarians "win?" It is on this point that I and a lot of other patriots part company. If by winning, you associate it with getting elected, the response would be a resounding NO. Let's face reality. This is a militia board. Most reasonable people know that the militias in this country could not take on the government in a head to head battle and stand any chance of "winning." The average person who joins and / or supports the militia fantasizes about such scenarios like guerrilla warfare; going underground while the New World Order, foreign interests, etc. beat each other silly (and we, of course, rise from the ashes to defeat what is left of the corrupt powers that be); surviving because the masses will be killing each other in the inevitable chaos.
These same people cannot comprehend that when you are the underdog in the political realm, you have to fight with a political guerrilla warfare mindset. If, as any major election is concluding, both candidates see they are in a close race, they may be forced to co - opt a third party's platform on an issue or two in order to get elected.
The candidate you support may not get elected. They place a DISTANT third place in a three way race. But, let's pontificate about the possibilities here:
If we decided today that we would not support a candidate who refuses to stand up and say "I will not sign any bill into law which jeopardizes the citizen's Right to keep and bear arms," then we must have a strategy to get that pledge made public. Now, let me show you how this could work out:
The last poll I saw had the numbers really close between Obama and McCain. One of those reports stated in part:
"In the libertarian-leaning West, where Paul's message of distrust of the federal government and ardent individualism played particularly well, there is talk of Republicans straying from McCain. Libertarian candidate Bob Barr has emerged as a favorite alternative for Paul activists, followed by Constitutional Party candidate Chuck Baldwin.
Even if the numbers of such dissenters are small, in tight contests in key Western states they could spoil McCain's chances, experts say."
If McCain feels the pressure on some identifiable issue where we could eke out a concession on the issue, then would we not have "won" if McCain is forced to make a firm campaign pledge which would garner him the votes necessary to win? And if McCain refuses, we may get the worse of two evils, but we will not have endorsed evil. AND we will have shown that the rush to socialism will not be accepted by a certain percentage of Americans. Furthermore, as the sentiment grows against an all powerful federal bureacracy, those who are fed up can see the poll numbers rise - which in turn, will encourage them to keep resisting.
If you think I'm crazy, think about Ralph Nader. Nader's campaign gave George Bush the presidency in 2000. And today, the politicians are all trying to bend over backwards to support the phony need to address "global warming." So, Nader won't be president. His party will only play the part of "spoiler." But he got his message across AND his issue is taken seriously on Capitol Hill. Would you not say he "won?"
It's a long journey from ballot box to bullet box. And I've seen people who have spent the last twenty years trying to educate people by handing out copies of the Citizen's Rule Book while not one person in fifty who is in a leadership position (within the "movement") has ever actually READ that book. You can though:
I used to think that we had done enough to promote the Citizens Rule Book and the contents therein, but honestly after conversations with most of the people in the militia units throughout Georgia, very few people knew anything at all about it. And embarrassingly, we've been distrubuting that book for two decades and when we used to have monthly meetings, at least twice a year someone would do a small speech on that book... usually a guest who had actually USED the information.
In keeping with the promise to be more specific as this thread progresses, we need to be better citizens in the respect that we understand how our system works. BEFORE jumping onto anyone's political bandwagon, you've got to ask yourself not only what the current situation is, but what is being done right now AND what is the cost of what your guy is proposing. You would even benefit from knowing what the law is. And we're not talking dollars and cents all the time. We need to know what needs to be done relative to our freedoms and liberties. Supporting a great sounding idea may cost more in freedoms and liberties than it can deliever if implemented as per the way you initially supported it... and bear in mind, most laws are sliced, diced and chopped all to bits before they actually make it to a final vote.
Unfortunately, we have to be part survivalist, part citizen soldier, part psychologist, part politician and even part historian / part lawyer. It's a lot of hats to have to wear in order to be effective. In any case, if you want to be good at knowing the legal and political aspects of what you're getting involved in, the places where you start learning is most likely through personal home study.
The first lesson I can offer you will take you some time to digest. Here is a link to How Our Laws Are Made:
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
