A Step CLoser to Civil War?

[poncho]

And are we really to believe that it took the Patriot Act and an executive order to authorize warrantless surveillance? Somebody needs to tell the CIA and FBI.

Hey, Poncho; we got one for ya.

We (as in anyone who dissents or protests) were under surveillance and being spied on long before the patriot act was written well in advance of 9/11/01 See Hart-Rudman Commissionand see this. No it wasn't written after 9/11/2001. It was written and waiting on a shelf somewhere for just the right moment and circumstances (crisis) for it to be rolled out.

9/11 was that right moment and circumstance. The shock and fear caused by 9/11 gave the government the opportunity to make something "legal" that it had been doing illegally for a long time. See "COINTELPRO".

The people of the United States would have never consented to the government having such powers before the "crisis" of 9/11.

First the government acts the way it wants behind the scenes and in secret as it did during the 1960's. Then when the right moment and crisis comes along the government uses these crisis to manufacture consent that allows it to "act legally" where before it was acting illegally.

During or right after a crisis the people run to the government for solutions and safety. More often than not the government has had the solution waiting in the wings for just such a time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs6TgitlNIA

I've been watching this happen a long time now and I have noticed there are four things these "solutions" always do. They always grant the government more power over the people. These "solutions" always grant the government more money to enforce these newly acquired powers over the people.. These "solutions" always grant the government more control over the people's personal and private lives. These "solutions" always make the people pay for the dismantling of our own constitutional republic.

The three things they never do is . . . make us safer, protect our liberties, or make us more prosperous.

Boiled down this is what we are talking about . . . Problem Reaction Solution.

Look at what's going on today. What's the problem or crisis? Mass shootings.

What's the reaction? Shock and fear. The people are looking to government for a solution and the media is working overtime to demonize all gun owners trying to manufacture consent among the people so we'll accept the "solution" government has wanted to "provide" for a long time but didn't think it could do until the right crisis and circumstances came along.

What's the solution? Disarm Americans and take away our means of protecting ourselves from criminal thugs both outside and inside the government.

The people in government aren't as stupid and inept as they act. They know that taking the guns away from law abiding citizens will increase violent crime. But they don't care.

They know once guns are taken away from law abiding citizens they are easier to manage and control. That's what they're after. They don't care how many have to suffer or die at the hands of criminals who will still have guns long after every law abiding person turn their guns in.

They know that'll give them more opportunities and more crisis to gain the four things they all lust after most.

More of the people's money, more power over the people, and more control over the people's personal and private lives. AND to make it all appear legal.

How'd I do Don?

 

[LadyEagle]

Good post, poncho. And excellent post by SN.

Please feel free to examine clergy behavior before and during the American Revolution, of which my forefathers were proud heroes. A thread along this line may be started in the History Forum.

Just a mod warning - this is nearing page 10, at which time, this thread will be closed, as per the forum rules.

Thanks.

LE :flower:

 

[carpro]

The people in government aren't as stupid and inept as they act. They know that taking the guns away from law abiding citizens will increase violent crime. But they don't care.

They know once guns are taken away from law abiding citizens they are easier to manage and control. That's what they're after. They don't care how many have to suffer or die at the hands of criminals who will still have guns long after every law abiding person turn their guns in.

They know that'll give them more opportunities and more crisis to gain the four things they all lust after most.

More of the people's money, more power over the people, and more control over the people's personal and private lives. AND to make it all appear legal.

How'd I do Don?

Dead on!! :applause:

 

[Don]

There was nothing cynical about my statement. Sorry you thought so.

Look up the definition of "cynical", and then re-read your post.

You're really stretching to make a point. Christians are citizens and you said there is a growing movement to disarm citizens. So I ASKED a question that I wanted an answer to. I did not say that you said anything.

No stretching at all. As I stated: I said exactly what I meant about two or three sentences prior. It also answered your question. "Let he who hath ears, hear."

So are you now hearing from God and He is saying start civil disoebedience over whatever it is yall are talking about that seems to go back to money at its core?

First, it's not about money, no matter how much you want to continue to spin it that way. It's about individual freedoms and liberties--including soul liberty. Second, you have the audacity to ask this after I provided you with biblical examples of those that defied the earthly rulers placed over them? And lastly, you're dang tootin' I'm hearing from God; it's called the Bible.

 

[kyredneck]

The silliness of this whole thread aside, I actually looked up guns per capita by state.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/06/28/states-with-the-most-guns.html

Kentucky was number one by a long shot, which surprised me. I also had expected Florida to be much higher on the list than it really is, at number 42.

Thanks for that link Paul, there were several surprises on there for me also, one being Illinois at #18, I'd thought it would be way on down the list.

 

[Don]

How'd I do Don?

:thumbs: :applause:

You paying attention, Zaac?

 

[saturneptune]

We (as in anyone who dissents or protests) were under surveillance and being spied on long before the patriot act was written well in advance of 9/11/01 See Hart-Rudman Commissionand see this. No it wasn't written after 9/11/2001. It was written and waiting on a shelf somewhere for just the right moment and circumstances (crisis) for it to be rolled out.

9/11 was that right moment and circumstance. The shock and fear caused by 9/11 gave the government the opportunity to make something "legal" that it had been doing illegally for a long time. See "COINTELPRO".

The people of the United States would have never consented to the government having such powers before the "crisis" of 9/11.

First the government acts the way it wants behind the scenes and in secret as it did during the 1960's. Then when the right moment and crisis comes along the government uses these crisis to manufacture consent that allows it to "act legally" where before it was acting illegally.

During or right after a crisis the people run to the government for solutions and safety. More often than not the government has had the solution waiting in the wings for just such a time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs6TgitlNIA

I've been watching this happen a long time now and I have noticed there are four things these "solutions" always do. They always grant the government more power over the people. These "solutions" always grant the government more money to enforce these newly acquired powers over the people.. These "solutions" always grant the government more control over the people's personal and private lives. These "solutions" always make the people pay for the dismantling of our own constitutional republic.

The three things they never do is . . . make us safer, protect our liberties, or make us more prosperous.

Boiled down this is what we are talking about . . . Problem Reaction Solution.

Look at what's going on today. What's the problem or crisis? Mass shootings.

What's the reaction? Shock and fear. The people are looking to government for a solution and the media is working overtime to demonize all gun owners trying to manufacture consent among the people so we'll accept the "solution" government has wanted to "provide" for a long time but didn't think it could do until the right crisis and circumstances came along.

What's the solution? Disarm Americans and take away our means of protecting ourselves from criminal thugs both outside and inside the government.

The people in government aren't as stupid and inept as they act. They know that taking the guns away from law abiding citizens will increase violent crime. But they don't care.

They know once guns are taken away from law abiding citizens they are easier to manage and control. That's what they're after. They don't care how many have to suffer or die at the hands of criminals who will still have guns long after every law abiding person turn their guns in.

They know that'll give them more opportunities and more crisis to gain the four things they all lust after most.

More of the people's money, more power over the people, and more control over the people's personal and private lives. AND to make it all appear legal.

How'd I do Don?

One of the best posts I have seen on this subject. Well thought out and reasoned. In an odd sort of way, it reminds me of the abortion debate. IMO, politicians who are for or against abortion neither care about the life of the unborn nor the rights of women. They care about what they can get in money and power out of the situation.

 

[Zaac]

Look up the definition of "cynical", and then re-read your post.

I'm already aware of what cynical means and I wrote my post so no need to re-read it.:laugh:

No stretching at all. As I stated: I said exactly what I meant about two or three sentences prior. It also answered your question. "Let he who hath ears, hear."

If it had answered my question, I wouldn't have asked it.:thumbs:

First, it's not about money, no matter how much you want to continue to spin it that way. It's about individual freedoms and liberties--including soul liberty. Second, you have the audacity to ask this after I provided you with biblical examples of those that defied the earthly rulers placed over them? And lastly, you're dang tootin' I'm hearing from God; it's called the Bible.

Yep money.

 

[poncho]

I'm already aware of what cynical means and I wrote my post so no need to re-read it.:laugh:

If it had answered my question, I wouldn't have asked it.:thumbs:

Yep money.

Guess he isn't listening Don. :tonofbricks:

 

[Arbo]

The price of posters telling you exactly what you are would be banishment. This is not allowed, but some comments not directed at any one person are in order.

There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with a point of view, whether it be spiritual doctrine or government, if the person know what he is talking about. The second point is that for someone to engage in an exchange of ideas, they have to be interested in learning, listening, and adjusting if necessary. This exchange breaks down when one of the parties sole purpose is to demean, irritate, and solicit a rise out of the other party. So when all this is combined, someone who has no idea what they are talking about mixed with a cheap thrill of being a troll, tempers flare.

This latest round is after a five month period of time where posters of solid Christian character were told they are either a tool of Satan or headed for the Lake of Fire, both directly and implied for supporting Romney. After the election their was a lull.

When something passes like an election, a troll must think up a new game. When an individual that obviously does not understand Scripture, never served this nation one day, probably has never had a job or any responsibility tells Christians that have risked their lives in battle they do not understand this in Scripture or that in government, it is enough to make one physically sick. All one can conclude is that an individual like this is totally devoid of character, understanding, morality, or dignity at any level.

SN- That was spot on. It's too bad he probably won't care.

 

[Don]

I'm already aware of what cynical means and I wrote my post so no need to re-read it.

There's no worse editor, than the original author....

If it had answered my question, I wouldn't have asked it.

I say again: "Let he who hath ears, hear."

Yep money.

If a definition of "freedom" is money, then I capitulate, and you're right. Except, I can't find a single dictionary that agrees with you. So if no dictionary agrees with you, and no one else agrees with you, but you still insist on spinning "freedom" as "money"...I suggest you get a job with MSNBC. You'll fit right in.

 

[Arbo]

Yep money.

No, principle. A foreign concept to you, I imagine.

 

[LadyEagle]

Sorry to close this but it has reached page 10 (per forum rules). If there is more to say, please start another thread, A Step Closer to Civil War #2. Thanks.

Lady Eagle,
Moderator