Tab Content
  • osan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:05 AM
    Trump hasn't been all bad, and we should recall what life with Hillary would have been like. That said, Trump stands to pooch in BIG fashion if he invokes Insurrection. This would give Themme all the ammo they need to bury him. This move is a huge mistake. As I have written elsewhere, the right move would be to call up the unorganized militia - call them to arms and to defend our fellows with deadly force, if called for. He could do this with an EO. He should also memo the various states that anyone bringing false charges against any militiaman or other American defending against the looters, will themselves face the most stern punishments. All such cases should come up for federal review with an eye toward doling out life sentences with no parole to everyone not toeing the constitutional line on this one. Sadly, he will not do it. No idea whether it is because he just doesn't think that way or because he has to be in charge. Calling in the army will put a huge dent in my opinion of Trump. This is a situation where "government" should stay alert, but neutral until the people prove they are incapable of handling the issue. A few hundred looters shot and the rest will go home in short order.
    31 replies | 659 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:47 AM
    Au contraire, mon ami. I am not a conservative. I am neither a neocon. I care. I want Obama hung by his neck until he is very much dead. I seek the same fate for everyone connected to him, politically, Lynch, Jarret, Holder, Rice, and so on down the list of subhuman misery.
    31 replies | 659 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:44 AM
    I'm inclined to be with you on this one. The party of the Klan would as soon lynch the halfbreed president themselves. I'd not considered the trillions aspect - plausible, but is it likely? The only way those trillions are any good is if this economy DOESN'T collapse. Otherwise, the purchasing power falls to near-zero. No sir, Theye need this land and its economy to continue on its merry merry, if the money is what interests them as you suggest. This is far bigger than that, I suspect. I'm thinking end-game here. I see naught but weakness in the mean American as They screw him in his exit-vent time and again, no outrage apparently enough to drive him to sense and self-respect. It feels like we're being sized up for oomph, and when we prove to have none, Theye will strike with wild ferocity, perhaps through legal channels, that will come out of nowhere, especially if Trump is gone, and we will do absolutely nothing to stop them. We will be well-fucked, not having been afforded the courtesy of a kiss, or K-Y. We will then know how it feels every night to be Obama at the hands of that monster tranny, rearing up from behind.
    31 replies | 659 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:36 AM
    I can't speak for anyone but myself. I have not forgotten a damned thing. "What's wrong with this picture?" and "what are Theye up to behind our backs?" have escaped my keyboard more times in the past couple months and especially the past week than I can count. They are centrally significant queries. Most likely, yes, given Theye cleave to what we now commonly call the "Emmanuel doctrine", after that douchePig Rahm and his blathering slip about never letting a good crisis go to waste. This is certainly plausible - start burning cities and people will forget about this. But what about this: could it not be a test case by Themme to see whether we are sufficiently softened up such that they can then mount a full-scale assault on our rights or even our physical beings? Before scoffing, consider the current reality: masses of hoods from sea to shining sea are setting cities on fire as the rest sit idly. Do not make the mistake of believing that this has escaped Theire notice.
    31 replies | 659 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    06-02-2020, 09:23 PM
    osan started a thread Trump Pooches in U.S. Political News
    Trump has screwed the pooch in a big way. How? Glad you asked. His first impulse in response to the nationwide rioting is to call in the army. FAIL. His first call to arms should have been to the militia. WE are the actual authority here and not stooge "government" who presume to lord over us. Further exacerbating my irritation with this very stupid failure is the fact that calling in the army bumps against Posse Comitatus. The Insurrection Act has been pointed out to me as the basis for calling in the troops during rioting in LA back in the Rodney King incident. To that I say FEH! Comitatus is one of the few decent statutes on the books and was enacted with good reason. Furthermore, I say fuck the Insurrection Act. What we need are a million Americans on the streets, well armed and ready to shoot the ghosts from the carcasses of anyone and everyone who commits or visibly fixes to commit felonious acts. This should be done by US and not Themme.
    2 replies | 89 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-31-2020, 03:46 PM
    I'm thinking in this case Theye did in any event. But who can say for certain? We will likely never know, though torturing Soros just to make sure it wasn't him has its appeal. Perhaps Theye are now making good on their belief that the world population needs a heavy cull. Precisely what Theye want. No matter how it turns out, it would seem Theye will benefit at our expense. One has to hand it to Themme for careful planning in the architecture of it all.
    45 replies | 858 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-30-2020, 05:12 AM
    1991... 2020... some things never change... black folk burning each other down. The globalists, or whatever you wish to call Themme, did their jobs well; near-perfectly, it would appear.
    45 replies | 858 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-29-2020, 10:14 PM
    That is probably so, but I don't think it is true in this case. For one thing, it makes ZERO difference whether he was innocent or was caught raping a 10-year old white girl. They had him in cuffs, on his belly. Had he arisen as posed a threat, they could then have shot his black ass dead as last Wednesday. But they didn't. They had him down and posing no clear or present danger, yet kneeled on his neck, staunching the flow of blood to the carotid. They murdered him and they should all go to prison for life, genpop, no parole, no special protections. The prisoners would take good care of them... a little buttsex here, big bro'jobbu there, and finally they tragically fall down the stairs and die while on the way to the mess hall... but I digress. This one cannot be spun, and it seems clear to me that Theye want it that way because were it otherwise, this would have gotten no press. What is going on across Ameican is too perfect to be the organic confluence disparate populations, united in the noble cause of justice.
    45 replies | 858 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-27-2020, 07:03 PM
    Thanks. He was a good boy. OBTW, the cancer that killed him arose as the result of one of the vaccines he was given.
    21 replies | 332 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-27-2020, 04:39 PM
    Big time, it would appear. I buried a friend's cat this morning. I was very fond of Bill, so perhaps that explains the short-circuit.
    21 replies | 332 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-27-2020, 03:04 PM
    What WHAT? How is this draining the swamp? Illuminate me, please.
    21 replies | 332 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-20-2020, 04:23 PM
    I feel obliged to once again point out who the real culprits are in all this: you and me. I have fallen into a state of utter disgust as I have watched nearly 300 million Americans kowtow to the "state" with at least half of them hiding behind their locked doors, knees rattling together to raise the dead in midbrain flesh-terror. Vast hordes of Americans are now proven so timid and milquetoast a breed that the most ridiculously transparent foists succeed with silky smooth action, met with full compliance and no questions asked. They deserve the wretchedness of existence that is cast upon their soulless, gutless, wantonly ignorant selves by the Tyrant who, despite his felonious behavior nonetheless acquits himself orders of magnitude better than those upon whom he preys and presumes to lord; for at least he shows nerve, ambition, and the guts to go after that to which he probably feels entitled. Credit where due, I always say. But those who have been the targets of the Tyrant's predations merit no respect or fond regard whatsoever. The destruction they face is fully and utterly deserved and I relish the day it shall be made perfect, but for one fact: the few who are not cut of so cheap a cloth, what of them? Are the good, scarce as they seem to be, worth the effort required to save, dragging the unworthy to salvation on their coattails? I used to think so, and I still with to, but to be honest I find it hard to justify, especially if their salvation will not be secured into the unforeseeable future by the adoption of attitudes and attendant cultural shifts and policies that put would-be tyrants to flight or the sword in short order and without equivocation or hesitation, regardless of any presumed "good intentions". I don't want to bother trying to save the few if it means saving the petty timids, whose villainy lies in their corruption, just to have the next generation of wannabe lairds rise in another generation to once more beset humanity with their vile filth and felonious acts. The ONLY way I would ever agree to save the human dredge for the sake of the pearls would be in the event that the post upheaval nation took freedom seriously, intelligently, courageously, and they allowed me to write the Laws that dealt with the control and punishment of all "government" instruments who violate their oaths and/or the rights of those to whom they swear them. I would make political life such a terror for the corruptible man, he would not dare run for office, accept appointment, or seek employment of any form, nor volunteer to work in the capacity of such an instrument of the "state". Those bold enough to assume the mantle of the Public Trust would live on pins and needles, every mindful of their oaths and the obligations they carry. The plight of all "government" people would be frightful, but the righteous man would have no fear for so long as either he refrained from violation of his fellows or, having inadvertently committed violation immediately confesses his guilt and makes every required measure to amend, his cause for worry would be little to none. THAT is what is needed - consequences. Dire, fearful, terrifying consequences that take down not only the committer of the crime, but his entire family as well. The stakes have to be so great that only the absolutely worst of the psychopaths would even consider stepping out of line. Bringing one's family members into the committment of the sworn oath as collateral of good faith and duty brings a new dimension to accountability that IMO will give anyone considering ill-advised action abundant reason to rethink his notion and choose to decline in favor of righteousness.
    1 replies | 665 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-19-2020, 03:48 PM
    There have been other potential plagues afoot, yet when a comparatively innocuous common cold virus escapes China's butthole, the whole world flips out like a raft of sissies, prodded on by the governments. What else could this have been, other than ham-fisted diversion? And yet, it has worked like a charm. Stupid cow-people believing what they're told and meekly obeying. Sometimes I think Theye pull this shit just to see how far they can go.
    4 replies | 818 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-17-2020, 08:19 PM
    Narcissists and other psychopaths often have a need to rub their truth in the faces of others. It's a power thing, of course.
    5 replies | 1117 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-17-2020, 01:37 PM
    What if this is precisely what someone would like us to believe? Trust nobody.
    5 replies | 1117 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-16-2020, 05:01 PM
    Crumbling? I dare not even hope, far less assume. Two very important words to remember, strung together and in the correct order: POLITICAL THEATER Given the extent and nature of this beast, little can be assumed, no matter how compelling appearances may be. Theye are now being semi-portrayed as on the ropes... about to have the whip come down on them, and so on. I will not believe a whit of it until I see the dead bodies.
    5 replies | 1117 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-16-2020, 10:59 AM
    Fauci is up to nothing good. I don't know what his deal is, but I don't trust him to the door. My understanding is he would love to get Hillary's 13 inches into his mouth and that he hates and despises Trump. Based on that alone and assuming it's true, evrything issuing from his hole stands suspect in the extreme. This nonsense should be disregarded by all, and yet most kowtow as they shiver at the prospect of the nasty old virus. Talk about despicable.
    7 replies | 715 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-15-2020, 08:26 PM
    Tons of people used to agree that the earth was flat, once upon a time. In sé, consensus means nothing. As for redefinition, both you and Rothbard have attempted to redefine "aggression" to broaden the classes of acts that qualify. This is linguistic buggery of the first order. It is dangerous and a sign of either ignorance, malevolence, or at the very least misuse, intentional or otherwise. Rothbard is dead. That said, he was entitled to his opinion, which happens to be wrong. To wit, the definition of "aggression", courtesy of the Oxford etymological dictionary: aggression (n.)1610s, "unprovoked attack," from French aggression (16c., Modern French agression), from Latin aggressionem (nominative aggressio) "a going to, an attack," noun of action from past-participle stem of aggredi "to approach; to attempt; to attack," from ad "to" (see ad-) + gradi(past participle gressus) "to step," from gradus "a step," figuratively "a step toward something, an approach" (from PIE root *ghredh- "to walk, go"). Psychological sense of "hostile or destructive behavior" first recorded 1912 in A.A. Brill's translation of Freud.
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-15-2020, 10:59 AM
    Elected officials... sure... a statist response, I might point out. What makes such officials more qualified to make those determinations than, say, me? Sorry, but this dies on the vine. It flies in the face of individual freedom. Freedom entails risk. If risk frightens you to surrender, then you are not a Freeman, but a Weakman. What the Weakman refuses to accept is that life is rotten with risk. Weakmen don't want risk - they want guaRONtees and are willing to surrender "some" of their rights in exchange thereof. That is one of their many deep and fatal flaws. Your statement assumes facts not in evidence. "IF" is the operative term. What defines "carcinogen"? How do we assess a given substance as carcongenic? There are no objective standards that apply across the board. What are the minimum allowable exposures and how are my discharges to me measured? How is exposure to be determined? These questions represent large-n multivariate, stochastic problems the analysis of which are damned nearly impossible to conduct with any reasonable confidence. In principle, you are correct and in principle there are courts for judging culpabilities and remedies, where applicable. In positive reality, such determinations become nearly impossible to make. I burn my garbage that occasionally contains plastics, you come down with cancer and accuse me of poisoning you. Rotsa ruck with that.
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-14-2020, 07:06 PM
    OK, so who determines the standards of cost and benefit? By what authority do they do so to the exclusion of others? Let's start with that. Good luck. PS: "muh freedom"? Really? You fucking bet, muh freedom. You don't get to dictate to me what I may or may not do just because there is an "emergency". Fuck's sake man, by your reasoning the world becomes wild west in accord to the whim and caprice of whoever holds the title and effective power to impose their wills on the rest. Surely you have to see this. It's as if you're arguing against my position for argument's sake.
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-14-2020, 06:49 PM
    Not so. People damage others all the time and many make amends. If amends are made, then we're good. If you die from corona or what have you, it would have to be proved that I am the one who infected the decedent. Good luck with that. And what if I sneeze in your general direction, unaware than I am infected? Your take is simplistic. There's more to it than just that which you have listed, which isn't much. Your apparent position on such matters holds elements of the "what-if" approach. If we adopt that approach, then we are all in deep shit because we can what-if ourselves to death.
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-14-2020, 10:24 AM
    Pot shot; the very term implies something irrelevant, cheap, tawdry, invalid, untrue, or below the belt. I called Amash out for being just another low-rent politician. I also stated that I will amend my opinion when someone demonstrates that he has been misquoted. 'Nuff said. Good day.
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-14-2020, 10:19 AM
    Cost/benefit can be bullshitted every which way. Who determines the cost/benefit threshold? Who decides the costs and benefits? Who decides which costs and benefits are important and which are not? This is a weak-tea argument in favor of arbitrary tyranny just because what... you're afraid of getting sick? Life is rotten with risk. Freemen accept the risks and act to mitigate them WITHOUT VIOLATING THEIR FELLOWS. If the physical approach of another leaves you terrified that you will become terminally ill with the boogeyman's curse, then either flee the area of slay him and take your chances with the courts. But it seems far too many want all the benefits of "freedom" without having to bear any of the burdens of having it. My rights do not disappear magically because there is a plague afoot.
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-14-2020, 10:08 AM
    I've not shot anyone. I have called out a rat's ass. Prove me wrong and I will amend.
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-14-2020, 10:03 AM
    Unequivocal? Are you high? It was decidedly NOT unequivocal. It was very much conditional... Protest, but do not intimidate legislators, the implication being that you don't do such things even if what they do merits such a response. We must always respect and leave feeling safe our sage and sacred legislators. Sheesh. Irrelevant. Appearances are equally important, something most of our contemporary politicians have disregarded for the inconveniences they present. It seems you are on the side of the legislators. That's fine so long as you own it. I hold a decidedly different view.
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-14-2020, 09:54 AM
    You're welcome to hold that view, but I will point out that this is precisely the tepid attitude that has compromised away our rights over time. For me, there is no such thing as over-reacting where trespass upon the rights of men are concerned. L You keep writing that, yet have offered no argument in support of the assertion. HMMM...
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-14-2020, 09:43 AM
    The implication here is that in the given context, legislators et al are within their valid authorities as servants of the public trust; that they are authorized to shut down an entire economy and drive countless people into penury and restrict, disparage, and diminish their rights. The implications are clear and unequivocal. Reading anything else from Amash's words reveals gross linguistic incompetence. If this is not what Amash meant, then I reiterate his dire need of remedial English class. These are the facts: the legislators et al are doing wrong. Therefore, the people stand centrally within the circle of their rights and the concomitant authorities to act by "intimidating" the vermin and scum who threaten them. This isn't rocket surgery.
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-14-2020, 09:30 AM
    Why not? Those people NEED to be scared. Nothing else has worked, or it is your position that the past 20 years of ever growing opposition to the tyrant, having yielded no good result worth the mention, needs to be continued into the unknown future, lest we scare the legislators who pick your pockets and run roughshod over your rights? And how are these different? It seems to me you are drawing distinctions with no differences. It's OK to defend a business in armed fashion, but not to defend your very rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness from the people most directly responsible for their diminution unto extinction? Once again, my feeble and shriveled mind fails to see the reason here and stands in dire need of help in comprehending the correctitude of your position.
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-14-2020, 09:20 AM
    We see it daily by so-called "progressives". Freedom is my agenda. Anyone gets in the way of that is filth so far as I am concerned. Amash is apparently a traitor to freedom, or some sort of candyass... "oooo... people will think you're intimidating legislators..." That is the point. When ANYONE, legislator or otherwise, fixes to abridge my rights, they become an enemy. I don't give a rat's patootie the intentions behind it. You endeavor to damage me, I am damned right going to intimidate the hell out of you. The logic of the position would readily extend perfectly to the mugger in the process of mugging... well, you can't INTIMIDATE him... Legislators are muggers on the grandest scale of them all. You don't get all kissy-smoochy with a rabid dog; you put it down with rapid and non-equivocating dispatch.
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    05-14-2020, 08:59 AM
    OOOOoooo... it might be perceived as intimidation... Well, it should be because that is precisely what it is. This isn't intimidation of legislators because they shrank the welfare check or decided to fly the chromosexual flag over the capitol. It is because those legislators and all the other vile pricks in the business of INTIMIDATING US, are doing just that, to the disparagement of our rights and the freedoms that go with them. The implication of Amash's statement is that Theye have the authority to diminish us. Newsflash Justin, Theye don't. Are you one of these people that are in agreement of this abridgement of freedom for the horse shit reason of "the greater good"? Please say it ain't so - lie if you must.
    366 replies | 11407 view(s)
More Activity

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
15,157
Posts Per Day
3.98
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
10
Most Recent Message
08-04-2016 07:33 AM
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 04:28 PM
Join Date
12-26-2009
Referrals
2
View osan's Blog

Recent Entries

Global War On Terrorism: Are We Winning?

by osan on 03-25-2017 at 07:19 AM
Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
Short answer: If you are still fighting it you are losing it.
After 26 years, I'd have to agree.
Categories
Uncategorized

Global War On Terrorism: Are We Winning?

by osan on 03-25-2017 at 07:19 AM
Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
Short answer: If you are still fighting it you are losing it.
After 26 years, I'd have to agree.
Categories
Uncategorized

Guns and Marijuana in Missouri

by osan on 01-02-2017 at 08:51 AM
Quote Originally Posted by Mach View Post
"castle doctrine," which permits homeowners to use deadly force against intruders. The revised law will allow invited guests, such as babysitters, to use lethal force.
I find it amazing to consider just how hopelessly corrupt a land we are, and have been for so very long a time when I read things like this. To think not only that some people would dare usurp the authority to remove those which are the most obvious prerogatives of free men, but also that we as a people would

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

RP: Who Brought the World to the Brink of World War III?

by osan on 10-17-2016 at 11:14 PM
Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
We did.
and

Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
Uhm, no. Not all of us. Only most of the countries involved. We few radicals and rebels do what we can to prevent it. Whether that works or not still doesn't change whether it is our fault or not.
To which I responded thusly:


The number of people out there who are putting their asses on the line is vanishingly small. My statistical assessment therefore stands. To wit...

The fact is this: we failed from the earliest days.

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

How to defend liberty and property in a stateless social construct?

by osan on 04-15-2016 at 07:22 AM
Quote Originally Posted by Bryan View Post
How would you defend liberty and property in a stateless social construct? The use of private security firms is a stock answer, but let’s consider some more detail. Consider the following situations…
And it has its problems. It is a partial answer at best.


1) A band of thugs is going around robbing people, how do you defend your home from invasion?
By killing them to eliminate them from the book of immediate and potential future threats to others, including

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

05-14-2020


03-18-2020

  • 02:58 PM - Deleted Posts

02-24-2020


09-13-2019


09-02-2019


06-16-2019


10-10-2018


05-16-2018


04-06-2018


03-17-2018


03-14-2018


03-13-2018


03-07-2018


02-25-2018

  • 01:28 AM - Hidden

06-13-2017


05-08-2017


05-03-2017


04-13-2017


03-27-2017


03-04-2017



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 105 1231151101 ... LastLast

06-03-2020


05-30-2020


05-27-2020


05-17-2020


05-16-2020


05-15-2020


05-14-2020



Page 1 of 105 1231151101 ... LastLast