1. Adam Kokesh – Hope he doesn’t have too hard a time of it, but, unfortunately, if you aren’t willing to have the Feds pounding down your door, don’t make rash statements about armed insurrections and egg people to march on DC.
2. Secession – theoretically, nothing wrong with it. In practice, a globalist strategy. Smaller states are more easily dominated by Israel/Rothschilds than a large state like the US. Who do you suppose is behind all those think-tanks/info-tech companies in Virginia?
3. Greenwald, Snowden, Assange, Wolf etc. etc. Need you ask? If you didn’t know before, you ought to know by now. No further comment.
4. Zimmerman-Martin trial.
A cop wannabe, who intimidated a stranger in the dark, wasn’t in shape, and then pulled out a gun when he couldn’t win mano-a-mano in a fist-fight, is a strange hero for libertarians.
The marijuana-smoking, public-school drop-out; the tough-talking, self-reliant teen, Trayvon, is closer to the libertarian model. Notice how dropping out of school is a plus point for libertarians when it’s alleged state operative Snowden, but not when it’s citizen Trayvon Martin.
Actually, from his own words, Snowden is a fan of the public school system and obviously he sucked the security state’s teat all his life.
And, Martin’s decision to fight back at the man who was intimidating him is pretty libertarian too. Stalking people is a crime in Florida, if that means anything. It should be. It’s an act of physical intimidation. That is aggression. Someone comes up to your teen daughter at night, waves a gun in her face, threatens her, would you punch them? I might, even though technically no one committed a literal physical aggression.
Maybe, even if it’s in a public space, I might be tempted to strike.
Consider it. You’re walking around on the street in the dark and someone starts following you, even running after you. Maybe he’s yelling threats. Aren’t you going to get pumped and reach for the mace or the pepper spray? If you got really afraid, wouldn’t you throw a punch, if YOU thought your life might be at risk?
I haven’t read too much about the case, because it annoys me that with so much going on about surveillance, all we hear in the media is this case.
But, from my cursory reading of a few pieces, Zimmerman seemed to be asking for trouble. Did he intend to murder anyone? Likely not. So, manslaughter sounds fair to me. If Zimmerman thought his life was in danger, you can’t call it murder.
Manslaughter for the little citizen-spy and pseudo-vigilante.
4. For people who want to run with the hares (pose are truth-tellers) and hunt with the hounds (be cozy enough with the liberal media/globalist mouthpieces so that they have a media presence) – a quote:
“What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses his own soul?”
5. Soul – that part of yourself that you don’t own (hint to Dr. Block).
Only two people can claim it, per Dr. Lewis in The Screwtape Letters. One by virtue of conquest (“Our Father Below”) and one by virtue of creation (“The Enemy”).
6. Liberty: Your decision to which of these two you want to belong.
Re secession, it is an extreme solution. Yet it’s always good to know you have the right to use it. Even to get a significant number of State citizens and servants to realize it is possible, would be an historic breakthrough. If you know you can leave, then certainly you also know you can stand up to unconstitutional encroachments. The very threat of the extreme solution, is a rallying cry that can wake people up to the possibility of solutions short of the extreme.
It’s kind of like when it became more acceptable for women to leave abusive marriages. It causes men to shape up.
I’m not so sure taht “Smaller states are more easily dominated …” One capitol is a lot easier to lobby and control than 51.
And practically speaking, secession would probably take the form of a bloc of States forming a new confederation (as in 1861).
3. Greenwald, Snowden, Assange, Wolf (yep) etc. etc. Need you ask? If you didn’t know before, you ought to know by now. No further comment.
I’m not sure what has changed since your last posting on Snowden/Greenwald?
I should add, while I’m skeptical (and I should also qualify that I don’t have much Internet access so I can’t read every single bit of info ), I don’t share your automatic condemnation of Snowden. I think the jury’s still out on what he’s up to. Could be he’s some kind of disinfo/limited hangout artist. Or could be he’s just a human being who got fed up and decided he was going to do whatever he could do to expose the surveillance state. Is the info that he brought out “new”? Not strictly speaking. To the majority of people who didn’t catch Binney, et al, it IS new. Perhaps he calculated his actions to create maximum drama so as to gain maximum exposure to the NSA spying.
AT the end of the day, I think it is whatever we decide to make of it.
4. Zimmerman-Martin trial. Testosterone was the real issue, not race.
A cop wannabe who intimidated a stranger in the dark, wasn’t in shape, and then pulled out a gun when he couldn’t win mano-a-mano in a fist-fight, is a strange hero for libertarians.
The marijuana-smoking, public-school drop-out; the tough-talking, self-reliant teen, Trayvon, is closer to the libertarian model. Notice how dropping out of school is a plus point for libertarians when it’s alleged state operative Snowden, but not when it’s citizen Trayvon Martin.
Actually, from his own words, Snowden is a fan of the public school system and obviously he sucked the security state’s teat all his life.
And, Martin’s decision to fight back at the man who was intimidating him is pretty libertarian too. Stalking people is a crime in Florida, if that means anything. It should be. It’s an act of physical intimidation. That is aggression. Someone comes up to your teen daughter at night, waves a gun in her face, threatens her, would you punch them? I might, even though technically no one committed a literal physical aggression.
Maybe, even if it’s in a public space, I might be tempted to strike.
Consider it. You’re walking around on the street in the dark and someone starts following you, even running after you. Maybe he’s yelling threats. Aren’t you going to get pumped and reach for the mace or the pepper spray? If you got really afraid, wouldn’t you throw a punch, if YOU thought your life might be at risk?
I haven’t read too much about the case, because it annoys me that with so much going on about surveillance, all we hear in the media is this case.
But, from my cursory reading of a few pieces, Zimmerman seemed to be asking for trouble. Did he intend to murder anyone? Likely not. So, manslaughter sounds fair to me. If Zimmerman thought his life was in danger, you can’t call it murder.
Manslaughter for the little citizen-spy and pseudo-vigilante.
4. For people who want to run with the hares (pose are truth-tellers) and hunt with the hounds (be cozy enough with the liberal media/globalist mouthpieces so that they have a media presence) – a quote:
“What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses his own soul?”
5. Soul – that part of yourself that you don’t own (hint to Dr. Block).
Only two people can claim it, per Dr. Lewis in The Screwtape Letters. One by virtue of conquest (”Our Father Below”) and one by virtue of creation (”The Enemy”).
6. Liberty: Your decision to which of these two you want to belong.
Nothing has changed. I always thought Snowden was intel.
I’m not willing to say that everyone on the net who believes in him is.
However, I think Greenwald and Wolf know better.
I don’t say they are stooges. I just say they aren’t what they say they are.
There’s more going on there.
If I see new evidence to the contrary I will change my mind. All I see is the usual suspects promoting this new “alternative” mouthpiece.
Why do you need a mouthpiece, tell me? What a bloody unlibertarian attitude?
Analyze news for yourself.
Why do you need Kokesh or Paul or some one else to think?
Why?
I have heroes, but I don’t substitute any of them for my own thinking.
Greenwald, Snowden and the rest represent the Rothschild internationalist civil society rule of global institutions.
They don’t mind deconstructing the nation-state because the globalists want to eliminate the nation state in favor of the global plantation.
Re small states, you can’t debate this on theory. You need to know how history has really played out.
Think of how Poland got divided and eaten up.
In any case, as an immigrant, I certainly don’t support the break up of the US. It’s a myth that the S Union broke up painlessly. There was plenty of pain.
By the way, not meaning to be rude, but I’ve wondered for a while now. Are you a troll?