Americans are cowards

[Anti Federalist]

That's the underlying theme from these comments about banks and bailouts by Mike Rivero.



There was no denial among the Greek people. They, like Americans, have sounded the warning about the government's reckless spending habits for decades. Government did not want to listen. And the government, having spent itself into ruin, falls back on the old canard of "We spent that money and now we must pay it back."

Except that "we" didn't spend any of that money. The government spent it, and as illustrated by TARP did so without the permission of the American people, then laughed at the taxpayers' woes!

http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/bailoutgasm.jpg

What the Greek people are saying, what the Portuguese people are saying, what the Spanish people are saying, what the Icelanders are saying, what the American people should be saying is that the government borrowed itself into a hole without the permission of the people, so why should the people be in any was liable for those debts?

America prides itself on being a free society. If we truly are free then we have the freedom to say "no". There is no freedom without the freedom to say "no!"

No taxpayer alive now ever voted or otherwise agreed to allow the government to borrow money on their behalf and agreed to underwrite the resultant ruinous interest obligation. No citizen spent that money. The government spent it, to give to Israel, to spend on wars of conquest, to bail out Wall Street, to bail out Europe, and so forth.

The Federal Reserve Act (Otherwise known as the currency act) was voted into law December 23, 1913. The people who voted in that law are all dead. Those of us alive today are stuck with a monetary system not of our own choosing, and certainly not that with which this nation was founded.

No taxpayer alive today had anything to say about repaying any money the government borrowed. We did not have any choice in the matter. We did not choose to accept this obligation. It has been forced on us. It was manufactured for us.

Certainly the young people who are becoming voters and taxpayers this year have had no say at all about the multi-trillion dollar debt that our government hands to them and says, "This thou shalt pay". To so encumber our children without their permission is at best indentured servitude; at the worst outright slavery.

Is is time for the slaves to rebel.

[Linus]

Barney Frank's pig-face makes me sick to my stomach, and then a little hungry. For a ham sandwich or something. But mostly sick.

[therepublic]

In response to Anti Federalist: Could that be one reason they have sent so many of our young men to Iraq and Afganistan?

[ARealConservative]

we don't get to hide behind our representatives for convenience.

The American People wanted fiat. They wanted to play superman on the world stage. Should it actually matter that many of us didn't ever want those things, considering we could of always left but chose not to.

[therepublic]

In response to Anti Federalist: Could that be one reason they have sent so many of our young men to Iraq and Afganistan?

And could it also be the reasons we are hearing a repeat of the 60s where the colleges are proclaiming the rewards of marijuana and LSD?

Send away those who would be most likely to fight, and drug the rest.

[tremendoustie]

we don't get to hide behind our representatives for convenience.

The American People wanted fiat. They wanted to play superman on the world stage. Should it actually matter that many of us didn't ever want those things, considering we could of always left but chose not to.

B.S.

Neither the government nor the majority owns the country, and they have no right to kick us out of it just because we don't want to go along with their meglomaniacal plans -- nor does the fact that we stay obligate us to pay for or otherwise support these plans.

[tremendoustie]

That's the underlying theme from these comments about banks and bailouts by Mike Rivero.



There was no denial among the Greek people. They, like Americans, have sounded the warning about the government's reckless spending habits for decades. Government did not want to listen. And the government, having spent itself into ruin, falls back on the old canard of "We spent that money and now we must pay it back."

Except that "we" didn't spend any of that money. The government spent it, and as illustrated by TARP did so without the permission of the American people, then laughed at the taxpayers' woes!

http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/bailoutgasm.jpg

What the Greek people are saying, what the Portuguese people are saying, what the Spanish people are saying, what the Icelanders are saying, what the American people should be saying is that the government borrowed itself into a hole without the permission of the people, so why should the people be in any was liable for those debts?

America prides itself on being a free society. If we truly are free then we have the freedom to say "no". There is no freedom without the freedom to say "no!"

No taxpayer alive now ever voted or otherwise agreed to allow the government to borrow money on their behalf and agreed to underwrite the resultant ruinous interest obligation. No citizen spent that money. The government spent it, to give to Israel, to spend on wars of conquest, to bail out Wall Street, to bail out Europe, and so forth.

The Federal Reserve Act (Otherwise known as the currency act) was voted into law December 23, 1913. The people who voted in that law are all dead. Those of us alive today are stuck with a monetary system not of our own choosing, and certainly not that with which this nation was founded.

No taxpayer alive today had anything to say about repaying any money the government borrowed. We did not have any choice in the matter. We did not choose to accept this obligation. It has been forced on us. It was manufactured for us.

Certainly the young people who are becoming voters and taxpayers this year have had no say at all about the multi-trillion dollar debt that our government hands to them and says, "This thou shalt pay". To so encumber our children without their permission is at best indentured servitude; at the worst outright slavery.

Is is time for the slaves to rebel.

I agree 100% -- as long as it's a peaceful rebellion, of course.

It's not my debt. Barney Frank can work it off. Let's send him to China.

[pcosmar]

You all have selective hearing along with a heavy dose of cowardice.

Peaceful rebellion will be met with violence. (Kent State, G20 summit)
Limited armed resistance will be met with violence. (Waco, Ruby Ridge)
They are already trying to make that point in the face of much dissent. (The Hutaree)

But there are many that are neither fools nor cowards. There are by conservative estimates 500,000 armed militia men, waiting for the people to have had enough. (Not counting those that are in the "woodwork")
When the people support the militia,, They will answer the call. They are both willing and able, But are waiting for the rest of the country to have had enough.

[tremendoustie]

You all have selective hearing along with a heavy dose of cowardice.

Peaceful rebellion will be met with violence. (Kent State, G20 summit)


Neither of these events were peaceful. Demonstrators threw rocks, etc. Now, obviously, the response was absolutely unwarranted, but there was enough violence for them to spin it so it looked ok to the sheep.

We need people to peacefully say, "no, I will not comply". Every video that shows abuse of obviously peaceful people -- who have clear track records of nonviolence -- further destroys the perceived legitimacy of the abusers.

Once their illusion of legitimacy is destroyed, the game is up. A few men cannot rule 300 million with a naked gun.



Limited armed resistance will be met with violence. (Waco, Ruby Ridge)
They are already trying to make that point in the face of much dissent. (The Hutaree)

But there are many that are neither fools nor cowards. There are by conservative estimates 500,000 armed militia men, waiting for the people to have had enough. (Not counting those that are in the "woodwork")
When the people support the militia,, They will answer the call. They are both willing and able, But are waiting for the rest of the country to have had enough.

I do not want the amount of horror, destruction, and pain, this implies. It should be avoided at nearly all costs.

They are able to do what they do only because they have fooled 90+% of the people into believing that their actions are legitimate. This is what we need to fix.

[pcosmar]

Neither of these events were peaceful. Demonstrators threw rocks, etc. Now, obviously, the response was absolutely unwarranted, but there was enough violence for them to spin it so it looked ok to the sheep.
Wrong again. The police and provocateurs started the violence in both of those events.
Violence was used to keep the people in line, as it will with any "peaceful" rebellion.
Rebellion will simply not be allowed. The "state" will use violence, as long as they can get away aith it.



I do not want the amount of horror, destruction, and pain, this implies. It should be avoided at nearly all costs.



Nor do I. And that is exactly what keeps those that train and equip from initiating it.
It is however inevitable. The history of mankind proves this.

[tremendoustie]

Wrong again. The police and provocateurs started the violence in both of those events.

I agree that provocateurs often play a role. I'm just saying that the events were not entirely peaceful.

If a group has a demonstrated track record and stated position of nonviolence, it de-fangs provocateurs, because they will stick out like a sore thumb. Liberty groups need to be famous for their nonviolent principles.



Violence was used to keep the people in line, as it will with any "peaceful" rebellion.

I don't even like the term "rebellion". We need to peacefully, publicly, refuse to go along with their tyranny. I can give many examples of what this could like like, on any given issue.



Rebellion will simply not be allowed. The "state" will use violence, as long as they can get away aith it.


Absolutely. That's why I'm saying we shouldn't let them get away with it. Make it obvious, even to the willfully blind, that there is absolutely no violence or inclination to violence coming from the side of the activists. Dare them to demonstrate their violence on obviously peaceful people -- and broadcast it, for the world to see.

MLK accomplished this, in many cases, for example -- and we have technological advantages he never did.



Nor do I. And that is exactly what keeps those that train and equip from initiating it.
It is however inevitable. The history of mankind proves this.

I do not think it is inevitable. There has been peaceful reform many times in history.

[pcosmar]

I do not think it is inevitable. There has been peaceful reform many times in history.

Examples??
Don't even try Ghandi and India. That was horribly violent, and only world opinion turned the tide.
I have doubts that World opinion would be favorable to the widely hated US people.

[pacelli]

Peaceful rebellion will be met with violence. (Kent State, G20 summit)
Limited armed resistance will be met with violence. (Waco, Ruby Ridge)
They are already trying to make that point in the face of much dissent. (The Hutaree)

But there are many that are neither fools nor cowards. There are by conservative estimates 500,000 armed militia men, waiting for the people to have had enough. (Not counting those that are in the "woodwork")
When the people support the militia,, They will answer the call. They are both willing and able, But are waiting for the rest of the country to have had enough.

Wow, that is a REALLY conservative estimate of armed militia in the US. In the 90's, it was around 10 million.

[pcosmar]

Wow, that is a REALLY conservative estimate of armed militia in the US. In the 90's, it was around 10 million.

Shhh,

I believe that estimate is of those that belong to known militia groups and train regularly.

There are a whole lot more in the woodwork. ;)

[eOs]

I wonder what type of government would result out of the total chaos of a mass rebellion. It will be a clash of the titans. Communists vs. Anarchists. vs. Fascists vs. Libertarians vs. our military(hopefully on our side) vs foreign government provocateurs and so on. We must continue to try and change the system from the inside. There is still hope.

[tremendoustie]

Examples??
Don't even try Ghandi and India. That was horribly violent, and only world opinion turned the tide.


It was not nearly as violent as total war would have been. Thousands were killed -- but compare that to the 600,000+ killed in the american civil war -- and that was in a country with a far lower population than India. Full war in India would have been catastrophic.

Also, they did not have the technology we do now. Imagine if video of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre were immediately broadcast nationwide, let alone worldwide? The outrage would have been immediate and devastating to the British government.

Other examples include Prague Spring: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_Spring, as well as the general fall of the USSR, and of the Berlin wall. The end of Jim Crow in this country is another example, as is female sufferage. Although not entirely nonviolent, the Egyptian independence movement also relied mainly on civil disobedience: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_Revolution_of_1919


"For several weeks until April, demonstrations and strikes across Egypt by students, civil servants, merchants, peasants, workers, and religious leaders became such a daily occurrence that normal life was brought to a halt. This mass movement was characterised by the participation of both men and women, and by spanning the religious divide between Muslim and Christian Egyptians"


"In Czechoslovakia, popular opposition to the invasion was expressed in numerous spontaneous acts of nonviolent resistance. On 19 January 1969, student Jan Palach (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Palach) set himself on fire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-immolation) in Prague's Wenceslas Square (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenceslas_Square) to protest against the renewed suppression of free speech.[49] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_Spring#cite_note-48) The generalized resistance caused the Soviet Union to abandon its original plan to oust the First Secretary. Dubček, who had been arrested on the night of 20 August was taken to Moscow for negotiations. There, he and several other leaders signed, under heavy psychological pressure from Soviet politicians, the Moscow Protocol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Protocol) and it was agreed that Dubček would remain in office and a program of moderate reform would continue. On 25 August citizens of the Soviet Union who did not approve of the invasion protested in Red Square (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Red_Square_demonstration); eight protesters opened banners with anti-invasion slogans. The demonstrators were arrested and later punished; the protest was dubbed "anti-Soviet".[50] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_Spring#cite_note-49)

The Prague Spring deepened the disillusionment of many Western leftists with Marxist-Leninist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism-Leninism) views. It contributed to the growth of Eurocommunist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurocommunism) ideas in Western communist parties, which sought greater distance from the Soviet Union, and eventually led to the dissolution of many of these groups.[62] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_Spring#cite_note-61) A decade later, a period of Chinese political liberalization became known as the Beijing Spring (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing_Spring). It also partly influenced the Croatian Spring (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croatian_Spring) in Yugoslavia.[63] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_Spring#cite_note-62) In a 1993 Czech survey, 60% of those surveyed had a personal memory linked to the Prague Spring while another 30% were familiar with the events in some other form.[64] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_Spring#cite_note-63)"



I have doubts that World opinion would be favorable to the widely hated US people.

They hate the U.S. government far more than they hate the U.S. people. If there were a peaceful stand for liberty and independence, with widespread reporting of violent crackdowns by the federal government on obviously peaceful people, you can bank on near 100% opposition to the actions of the federal government, abroad -- as well as widespread opposition throughout the rest of the U.S.

[tremendoustie]

I wonder what type of government would result out of the total chaos of a mass rebellion. It will be a clash of the titans. Communists vs. Anarchists. vs. Fascists vs. Libertarians vs. our military-- hopefully on our side vs foreign government provocateurs and so on. We must continue to try and change the system from the inside. There is still hope.

I don't oppose inside the system activism, but always remember that the only two options are not politics or violence. There is a third way -- which I believe is the most effective, by far. Make tyranny intolerably expensive for them, both monetarily, and from a PR perspective.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Nor do I. And that is exactly what keeps those that train and equip from initiating it.
It is however inevitable. The history of mankind proves this.

I think it will inevitably happen. The only reservation I have is the context.

If principled people who advocate non-violence find the courage to rise up in large numbers and say no to government with the full knowledge government is going to hand them an ass beating I think there is hope. Short of a sales miracle occurring where principled beliefs of non-aggression are sold to millions of people, this is the price that must be paid for those who believe in liberty. Geographical organization obviously makes it a lot easier for principled people to find the courage in a close network of piers to do this. I don't think the sales miracle can occur until all of the non-believers have no choice but to witness and acknowledge the suffering of good people at the hand of government.

Should the principled people who advocate non-violence fail to find the courage to rise up in large numbers and say no to government, less principled violent people will. Not only will the get handed the same ass beating they will lose the moral high ground.

[pcosmar]

I don't oppose inside the system activism, but always remember that the only two options are not politics or violence. There is a third way -- which I believe is the most effective, by far. Make tyranny intolerably expensive for them, both monetarily, and from a PR perspective.

So you will welcome slavery, (or continued slavery) as long as you don't have to fight.

Your examples fail in the light of facts.
Prague Spring, for example. You fail to mention the Soviet invasion. And the fact that in the end it was nothing but a change in the form of socialism. And remains so to this day.

You also fail to take into account that the takeover of this government happened in the early 1900s, and will result in a total loss of sovereignty and control by that Globalists that are engineering it.

Apparently peaceful slavery is acceptable to you.
:(


"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure."

We have gone long past the 20 years.

[tremendoustie]

So you will welcome slavery, (or continued slavery) as long as you don't have to fight.


You're completely misrepresenting my views.

I believe the best, most effective way to oppose tyranny is using peaceful civil disobedience, non-cooperation, agorism, etc.

If you sit around and wait for a mass principled movement for liberty in this country, it will never come. If one were to use violence, especially aggressive violence, one would undermine the principled stand others are taking, and provide an excuse for violence by the tyrants, which they both love and are very good at.

Any man who knows strategy knows to attack the enemy at their weak point. Even if peace were not strongly preferable to violence -- which it absolutely is -- violence is the strong point of the state. It is their specialty. Their weakness is their tenuous illusion of legitimacy among the public.



Your examples fail in the light of facts.
Prague Spring, for example. You fail to mention the Soviet invasion.


Prague spring occurred after the invasion.



And the fact that in the end it was nothing but a change in the form of socialism. And remains so to this day.

They didn't want a libertarian society -- they wanted independence, and that's what they got. And, if we're comparing results, what was the result of the violent American revolution -- which was far more focused on liberty? The new rulers were violently subjugating people almost immediately (e.g. whiskey rebellion).

There are many additional examples of successful efforts for peaceful reform, if you'd like more.

If you want an early example of civil disobedience success in our own movement, even with very limited numbers -- pot is now effectively legal at 4:20 pm every day in the town squares of Keene and Manchester, permits are no longer required for events on Keene public property, unlicensed food vending is now tolerated, at least under certain circumstances, as is small scale gambling, and unlicensed hairdressing.



You also fail to take into account that the takeover of this government happened in the early 1900s, and will result in a total loss of sovereignty and control by that Globalists that are engineering it.


It sounds like you're accepting defeat before the effort has even begun in earnest. It is our job to ensure that it does not lead to total loss of control to tyrants, global, national, or otherwise.



Apparently peaceful slavery is acceptable to you.
:(


If you really think this, you've completely failed to comprehend anything I've said. I'm contesting the assumption that a bloody, catastrophic, total war, is somehow inevitable or necessary for liberty, and I'm proposing alternative means to stand against tyranny, which I believe will have far better results.



We have gone long past the 20 years.

What a sad assumption about human society -- that liberty cannot be maintained without bloody conflict every 20 years.

It is my goal to eliminate public support for the notion that might makes right -- that whoever wields the greatest number of votes or guns gets to decide how everyone else must live. Just as the idea of slavery has become anathema, so too must the idea of aggressive violence.

We are absolutely capable of such an evolution in society.

[Meatwasp]

Use only paper bullets not real ones. Remember the pen is mightier than the sword. What chance would you have with an armed tank and heavily armored swat teams. Non at all .
George Washington had no faith in the militia. They were incompetent. He used his own army.
I know some militia groups in Montana that are jolly well playing solders and wouldn't be worth their salt in battle. I will say not all are like that though.

[dannno]

And could it also be the reasons we are hearing a repeat of the 60s where the colleges are proclaiming the rewards of marijuana and LSD?

Send away those who would be most likely to fight, and drug the rest.

I proclaim the rewards of cannabis and LSD, I find that most people become much more anti-establishment after usage of said substances... not 'drugged' like cocaine/meth/heroin users..