CDZ The Tree of Liberty

[Gdjjr]

Who will you shoot first - the soldiers or the cops?

Whoever pulls a gun on me to try to force me to do anything.

 

[Gdjjr]

... because, whenever there's a problem, shooting dead some people is the simple, straightforward, and fail-safe "solution".

Of course, that always comes with an equally simple, straightforward, and universally applicable "justification", that is, some sort of nebulous, never really detailed "victim status" - most ominously, some ominously "feel", "they" are trampling on "our" "rights". Doesn't get any more "specific" than that.

Gotta stop here, since I ran out of scare quotes.

It has something to do with "feel"- for a fact. However, intellectual honesty must, at some point prvail (try it you might like it) and intellectual honesty must look at ALL evidence, not emotion. Emotion is reaction to and from the heart- hence, the saying, choose your battle with your heart fight it with your mind-
Olde Europe, look at what has happened since 9/11, especially the evisceration of the 4th amendment and the militarization of local police- if not, try flying commercially and tell us how your right to pursue Happiness at your discretion isn't trampled on by an authoritarian doctrine.
Try starting a business and tell us about all the red tape you had to navigate. Tell us how your desire to trade with whom you desire isn't hampered in some way by "legal" means. Tell us about your last traffic violation for which you were cited.
Tell us, I, at least, can't wait for your emotional reaction; do you or do you not believe in unalienable rights?

 

[Gdjjr]

Cite? That's interesting. I'd like to know who wrote it.

Do you know how to use the internet? No? Imagine that-

The tree of liberty... (Quotation) | Thomas Jefferson's Monticello

www.monticello.org

 

[Gdjjr]

It is unthinkable with today's destructive potential in combination with population density.

Indeed- but, who is pushing it? Citizens or flippant politicians believing themselves omnipotent?

 

[freyasman]

View attachment 323758

How much longer do you think the "rulers" can continue to trample our Rights?

Who will you shoot first - the soldiers or the cops?

I was thinking judges, prosecutors, and politicians first.....

 

[Olde Europe]

It has something to do with "feel"- for a fact. However, intellectual honesty must, at some point prvail (try it you might like it) and intellectual honesty must look at ALL evidence, not emotion. Emotion is reaction to and from the heart- hence, the saying, choose your battle with your heart fight it with your mind-
Olde Europe, look at what has happened since 9/11, especially the evisceration of the 4th amendment and the militarization of local police- if not, try flying commercially and tell us how your right to pursue Happiness at your discretion isn't trampled on by an authoritarian doctrine.
Try starting a business and tell us about all the red tape you had to navigate. Tell us how your desire to trade with whom you desire isn't hampered in some way by "legal" means. Tell us about your last traffic violation for which you were cited.
Tell us, I, at least, can't wait for your emotional reaction; do you or do you not believe in unalienable rights?

Ah, you are calling for an armed insurrection because you got a traffic citation, and are supposed to follow laws.

No, there is no such thing as "unalienable rights". That's just a construct. It may still be better if many believe in them as if they existed. You, however, have yet to understand that no right is absolute, and the pursuit of happiness by one has to be compatible with same by everybody else. Laws and regulations seek to ensure that's the case, at least in a well-regulated society. Usually, that insight is part of growing up, entering adulthood. In case you find a regulation that is unjust, and a widely recognized outrage, muster your courage, and become 21 century's Rosa Parks. That might change something, while ridiculously fantasizing about shooting... someone sure does not.

 

[freyasman]

It has something to do with "feel"- for a fact. However, intellectual honesty must, at some point prvail (try it you might like it) and intellectual honesty must look at ALL evidence, not emotion. Emotion is reaction to and from the heart- hence, the saying, choose your battle with your heart fight it with your mind-
Olde Europe, look at what has happened since 9/11, especially the evisceration of the 4th amendment and the militarization of local police- if not, try flying commercially and tell us how your right to pursue Happiness at your discretion isn't trampled on by an authoritarian doctrine.
Try starting a business and tell us about all the red tape you had to navigate. Tell us how your desire to trade with whom you desire isn't hampered in some way by "legal" means. Tell us about your last traffic violation for which you were cited.
Tell us, I, at least, can't wait for your emotional reaction; do you or do you not believe in unalienable rights?

Ah, you are calling for an armed insurrection because you got a traffic citation, and are supposed to follow laws.

No, there is no such thing as "unalienable rights". That's just a construct. It may still be better if many believe in them as if they existed. You, however, have yet to understand that no right is absolute, and the pursuit of happiness by one has to be compatible with same by everybody else. Laws and regulations seek to ensure that's the case, at least in a well-regulated society. Usually, that insight is part of growing up, entering adulthood. In case you find a regulation that is unjust, and a widely recognized outrage, muster your courage, and become 21 century's Rosa Parks. That might change something, while ridiculously fantasizing about shooting... someone sure does not.

Nothing ever changes until a bunch of guys who are willing and able to shoot someone shows up and changes it. Sometimes there's shooting and sometimes there ain't, but there damn sure ain't anything changing until people get the message that they might have to get bloody over it.

 

[Gdjjr]

Ah, you are calling for an armed insurrection because you got a traffic citation, and are supposed to follow laws.

Straw man argument.
Laws are "constructs" to allow an entity to punish criminals- not make criminals, yet they do. How weird is that?

No, there is no such thing as "unalienable rights".

Why do you say that? What proof do you have? You were born. Either you have the Right to pursue Happiness according to your wants and desires or you don't. If not, why bother with living? To appease an empty suits lust for a "granted" authority so he can acquire, tangible, riches at your expense?

You, however, have yet to understand that no right is absolute, and the pursuit of happiness by one has to be compatible with same by everybody else.

You fail to recognize the pursuit of Happiness is basic to living life. Compatible to everyone else is secondary- Individuals have Rights. Everybody connotates a group. Groups are "granted" authority and power. Grants are privileges and can be rescinded or taken, as they are tangibles. What you're suggesting is; your livelihood and your life and living and what makes you happy requires someone else's approval- I think not.

Laws and regulations seek to ensure that's the case, at least in a well-regulated society.

Laws, as I have said previously are meant to punish criminals. Not make criminals.
Well-regulated is highly subjective used in may cases to obfuscate the real intent in order to hide intentional obtuseness.

Usually, that insight is part of growing up, entering adulthood.

I've been an adult for a number of years. I only recently, within the last 15 or so years, opened my eyes to what control freaks have been doing, almost since before the ink on the constitution was dry- it occurred to me that ALL men are created equal and have certain unalienable Rights- I've read the Declaration of Independence many times and I can't find any caveats- can you point them out for me?

In case you find a regulation that is unjust, and a widely recognized outrage, muster your courage, and become 21 century's Rosa Parks. That might change something, while ridiculously fantasizing about shooting... someone sure does not.

"A" regulation unjust? There are so many "regulations" how would one know where to start?
As for fantasizing- I'd like to suggest you live in a fantasy world where you want someone else to tell you what you can do when, where and how- and your fantasy is becoming reality for those who don't "feel" as you do- careful what you wish for.

I can tell by this post you're pretty full of yourself by ignoring what was asked of you.
That, my man, puts you in a category, a group, if you will, that deserve neither Liberty nor security- and strive to see everyone else suffer your ignorance. Yes, I said "deserve" and neither in the same sentence- Liberty is a natural Right- deserve is to earn and security is to protect and defend from whatever the defender determines is his through honest acquisition, or, what is his just by being. Neither you, with your nose in the clouds, or your masters, called public servants, were "granted" much of the authority they presume or assume- it is the self righteous, such as yourself, who will suffer the most.

 

[joaquinmiller]

View attachment 323758

How much longer do you think the "rulers" can continue to trample our Rights?

Who will you shoot first - the soldiers or the cops?

I was thinking judges, prosecutors, and politicians first.....

The point of the spear with which "rulers" apply force is law enforcement/military. Unless you're willing to go to war against them, you're talking about a public relations campaign, not a revolution.

 

[Gdjjr]

The point of the spear with which "rulers" apply force is law enforcement/military. Unless you're willing to go to war against them, you're talking about a public relations campaign, not a revolution.

Actually, I'm a little deeper than that-
1) servants are not rulers
2) using force, except in self defense, is immoral- therefore, if the initiation of FORCE is perpetrated by a servant, I have a natural right to defend myself, and the constitution explicitly makes that known- shall not be infringed comes to mind. Of course not many believe the constitution is anything more than a "goddamn piece of paper" (ala bush jr), or as nancy the elder says: it's a living document- though I have yet to see paper breathe or reproduce or enact any other substance of living- matter of fact that pertains to ALL inert objects.

Public relations are a precursor- check out Thomas Paine's "public relations" writings.

There are a number of quotes I like- one being; The Past is Prelude- which, as fate would have it, goes to the heart of; ignoring the past means you are doomed to repeat it-

See, I don't make the rules- that doesn't mean I'm unaware of them. I also have 71 years (working in my 72nd) of observation, so, to be conservative, I'll say 50 cognitive years to observe, read, educate myself, and draw conclusions- my conclusion is; I'm glad my time is short because there are too many shallow, narrow minded idiots running free who believe themselves morally superior to others- which, BTW, reduces the field of virtuous men to be elected to officialdom as the founders believed (I'm pretty sure through observation and studying the past) were necessary for the gov't to function as intended.

 

[joaquinmiller]

The point of the spear with which "rulers" apply force is law enforcement/military. Unless you're willing to go to war against them, you're talking about a public relations campaign, not a revolution.

Actually, I'm a little deeper than that-
1) servants are not rulers
2) using force, except in self defense, is immoral- therefore, if the initiation of FORCE is perpetrated by a servant, I have a natural right to defend myself, and the constitution explicitly makes that known- shall not be infringed comes to mind. Of course not many believe the constitution is anything more than a "goddamn piece of paper" (ala bush jr), or as nancy the elder says: it's a living document- though I have yet to see paper breathe or reproduce or enact any other substance of living- matter of fact that pertains to ALL inert objects.

Public relations are a precursor- check out Thomas Paine's "public relations" writings.

There are a number of quotes I like- one being; The Past is Prelude- which, as fate would have it, goes to the heart of; ignoring the past means you are doomed to repeat it-

See, I don't make the rules- that doesn't mean I'm unaware of them. I also have 71 years (working in my 72nd) of observation, so, to be conservative, I'll say 50 cognitive years to observe, read, educate myself, and draw conclusions- my conclusion is; I'm glad my time is short because there are too many shallow, narrow minded idiots running free who believe themselves morally superior to others- which, BTW, reduces the field of virtuous men to be elected to officialdom as the founders believed (I'm pretty sure through observation and studying the past) were necessary for the gov't to function as intended.

"Rulers" was your choice of words. I'm 70, and a long-ago Army veteran who has twice taken an oath to the Constitution, and honored it both times.

I find conservative or right wing talk of "revolution" ridiculous. Aristotle said some revolt in order to become equal, and others to become more than equal. "More than equal"describes those who think authority (military) will come down on their side.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

View attachment 323758

How much longer do you think the "rulers" can continue to trample our Rights?

Another "revolution!" Thread from the conservatives.

How original.

You missed the point.

.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Disney did Johnny Tremain?

How did they handle what happened to his fingers?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

or as nancy the elder says: it's a living document- though I have yet to see paper breathe or reproduce or enact any other substance of living

I give you, Frodrick Fronkensteeen:

It's alive! IT'S ALIVE! IT'S ALIVE!!!

 

[joaquinmiller]

Dead can't be changed. Living can be - and has been 27 times to date.

 

[freyasman]

View attachment 323758

How much longer do you think the "rulers" can continue to trample our Rights?

Who will you shoot first - the soldiers or the cops?

I was thinking judges, prosecutors, and politicians first.....

The point of the spear with which "rulers" apply force is law enforcement/military. Unless you're willing to go to war against them, you're talking about a public relations campaign, not a revolution.

Okay.
You think we haven't already done that math?
I used to hunt down HVTs for a living, and I didn't hesitate to shoot down anyone with an AK who got between me and my objective.
You think this is any different?
You think there aren't a few million more just like me out there?

 

[Gdjjr]

"Rulers" was your choice of words.

Where?

"More than equal"describes those who think authority (military) will come down on their side.

I'm pretty sure they won't and I am absolutely positive I don't care.

I'm 72. I served in the Navy (USS Yorktown CVS 10 MM3rd class e4 pay grade when seperated in Dec 1968) - are you better or smarter or more equal than me?

As for defending the constitution the oath is "against all enemies foreign and domestic"-

So, let's clarify enemies. Is it who the authorities "granted" tell us it is, or the ones they antagonize and try to buy off with spending the fruits of your labor, or those not adhering to the "rules" written for controlling their legitimacy?
Legally, I'd say the latter, since they are making criminals of ordinary citizens in their lust (read perversion) for power- which they intentionally misrepresent because- why?
It used to be called oppressive and/or tyrannical. Now it's called being benevolent.
Yeah, it is benevolent. creating obstacles so only the "more equal" can have more by hook and crook-and making enemies of foreign countries so our most precious resource, young people, are put in harms way under false pretense and telling the public other countries, who have absolutely not a care in the world about who "we the people" are are our enemy- then, when some citizens see the absolute immoral, and qustionably legal actions these dunder heads act out, they are ridiculed-
SMH-

 

[joaquinmiller]

View attachment 323758

How much longer do you think the "rulers" can continue to trample our Rights?

Who will you shoot first - the soldiers or the cops?

I was thinking judges, prosecutors, and politicians first.....

The point of the spear with which "rulers" apply force is law enforcement/military. Unless you're willing to go to war against them, you're talking about a public relations campaign, not a revolution.

Okay.
You think we haven't already done that math?
I used to hunt down HVTs for a living, and I didn't hesitate to shoot down anyone with an AK who got between me and my objective.
You think this is any different?
You think there aren't a few million more just like me out there?

Oh, well. That's different, then.

A few million more that hunted high-value targets for a living? No, I don't think there are a few million like that.

Internet tough guys? No shortage of those.

 

[joaquinmiller]

"Rulers" was your choice of words.

Where?

"More than equal"describes those who think authority (military) will come down on their side.

I'm pretty sure they won't and I am absolutely positive I don't care.

I'm 72. I served in the Navy (USS Yorktown CVS 10 MM3rd class e4 pay grade when seperated in Dec 1968) - are you better or smarter or more equal than me?

As for defending the constitution the oath is "against all enemies foreign and domestic"-

So, let's clarify enemies. Is it who the authorities "granted" tell us it is, or the ones they antagonize and try to buy off with spending the fruits of your labor, or those not adhering to the "rules" written for controlling their legitimacy?
Legally, I'd say the latter, since they are making criminals of ordinary citizens in their lust (read perversion) for power- which they intentionally misrepresent because- why?
It used to be called oppressive and/or tyrannical. Now it's called being benevolent.
Yeah, it is benevolent. creating obstacles so only the "more equal" can have more by hook and crook-and making enemies of foreign countries so our most precious resource, young people, are put in harms way under false pretense and telling the public other countries, who have absolutely not a care in the world about who "we the people" are are our enemy- then, when some citizens see the absolute immoral, and qustionably legal actions these dunder heads act out, they are ridiculed-
SMH-

In the OP:

"How much longer do you think the "rulers" can continue to trample our Rights?"

I don't think I'm better or worse than you. You offered some personal details as to age and experience, and I replied in kind. The past is prologue.

 

[sparky]

Dead can't be changed. Living can be - and has been 27 times to date.

i wouldn't mind that 28th they keep talking about......~S~