Does the Right Want a Civil War?

reply to post by grover


Hey ya' Grover. How's it going?

Please tell me that deep down you don't really believe all this stuff you post from all these radical liberal blogs and outlets. You know that 'the right' doesn't want a civil war, right? PLEASE tell me you really do understand that ....

Originally posted by grover
Who all but holds a monopoly on talk radio....

And the reason for that is because the FREE MARKET ECONOMY supports it whereas not enough people want to hear the radical left wing blathering of Al Gore and his ilk to be able to support a left wing radio venture.

reply to post by daddyroo45


I understand that. You understand that. But who else will understand this? When the government tells the liberals the fight for them and that a group of right wing terrorists are trying to overthrow the government you are going to get division in the populace like we saw in the civil war. However, this time it won't be along well defined state lines. This is what I am talking about. It's going to be a political issue instead of a boundary issue. And if you think that the majority of people will even understand what the war would be about you are probably in for a big let down.

These are the people I am talking about. The ones that won't have a clue and will listen to the MSM as the government brainwashes them into picking up arms against their neighbors.

Now, I'm not calling out the liberals or the conservatives in this post. I'm simply using the terms that will be flung about. So who will I have to fight? Because surely the government will have it's supporters among the general populace. A HUGE support I'm afraid. So do I go do in my neighbor who will support the government or do I do in the ones that are against it? Or will I go finish off the people that are on the fence and will do nothing?

What I am saying is that the 'enemy' will not be well defined like it was in the civil war.

It will NOT go off like you are hoping it will. Because the nation will not be united in overthrowing this government. Because MANY will still feel that they are doing a great job. That they have NOT taken anything away from us.

Originally posted by dariousg
What I am saying is that the 'enemy' will not be well defined like it was in the civil war.

Actually the "enemy" will be very defined. The enemy will be perceived as people of color. We all know they are liberals and voted for Obama.

This revolution may start as an attack on the PTB but it will rapidly morph into a race war. Much like what happened in Germany with the Jews being
branded as the enemy.

God help us!

I don't think it will be a race war, but I do think before it's all over, it will become a struggle between the "tax providers" and the "tax eaters."

Those who work, those who are productive, are sick and tired of the parasites that feed off their own efforts and labors.

I foresee an event that will shut down the basics in our current society, and once the banks and welfare checks dry up, once there is nothing to buy and everything has been looted, these former parasites will not be able to live off others, and thus, perish.

We saw in New Orleans a group of people who were too damned sorry, lazy, and dependent to get off their fat asses and evacuate, KNOWING that they lived below sea level, and a hurricane was coming.

But what the were seemingly able to get off their sorry asses and do was to break into stores and loot them, carrying off big screens and sneakers.

Never a thought of food or the means to sustain themselves.

We have created an entire group of people who cannot even feed themselves.

Just wait until they have it to do.

They can't.

Originally posted by dooper
I don't think it will be a race war, but I do think before it's all over, it will become a struggle between the "tax providers" and the "tax eaters."

And how will that distinction be made? In Germany the Jews had to wear a Star of David.

I honestly believe the Right wants a race war and deep down in their psyche they have determined who will live and who will die.

If you want to see the future of America read the new book by Jim Marrs.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
The future has been designed and there is no excape.

God Help US!

[edit on 25-6-2009 by whaaa]

reply to post by whaaa


You have got to be kidding.

Originally posted by whaaa
This revolution may start as an attack on the PTB but it will rapidly morph into a race war.

Exactly.

Radicals will always try to seize power in civil war if they possibly can, that is actually the best chance they will ever have.

In ex-Yugoslavian states same thing happened ...

War against PTB turned into big mess religion flavored genocide BS. I'm willing to bet that same would happen here in USA.

Religion and Race are 2 most distinguishing factors among humans and when SHTF they unfortunately tend to flock accordingly ...

For all of you who naively think that civil war is a straight forward, controllable and as easy as piece of cake like our invasion of Iraq, I have bad news for ya.

It's a biggest mess ever, and those who start it should not fool them self and expect that their ideals are going to win et the end

Because MANY will still feel that they are doing a great job. That they have NOT taken anything away from us.

But those that do NOT think that they are doing a good job and who feel that they HAVE taken our rights away are the ones who happen to control 90% of the firepower and the US military and law enforcement system via the Oathkeepers.

reply to post by whaaa


You can't possibly believe that ANYONE in their right mind wants a race war! This government over several administrations have methodicaly created a dependent class,that in dire circumstance would not be able to fend for themselves. That includes people of every race!

I agree with dooper that the tax eaters are a severe drain on the tax providers. It is human nature to help a person to get up when they have fallen. It is not human nature to prop someone up that is unwilling to do for themselves.

Originally posted by daddyroo45
reply to post by whaaa

 

You can't possibly believe that ANYONE in their right mind wants a race war!

Perhaps they aren't in their "right mind" but yes..........

www.youtube.com...

I like the music!

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...



See what I mean?

[edit on 25-6-2009 by whaaa]

reply to post by whaaa


Skinheads and Klan? That's your justification for a belief that the "right" wants a race war?

These guys are idiots. They are just haters. They also hate Jews, Catholics, Latinos, Wops, Chinks, Dinks, Klooches, and everyone who isn't a member of their (fortunately) small clan.

No, it's those who work hard and keep having more and more taken away to give someone else. Usually someone too damned sorry and lazy to work.

Here's the kicker.

When things are upset just enough that those tax dollars stop coming in - well - there goes the ballgame.

The Federal Government has nothing. NOTHING.

Everything they spend, they get from those who produce.

They love giving to the tax eaters, because there are now so many of them.

But the cow they've been milking is about to jump the fence and be gone.

I can truly see as much as half our population perishing during the Darwinian event. Maybe more.

And when it's done, there will be none left that can't feed and fend for themselves.

Thus the self-correcting mechanism - thus the elimination of parasites and liberals.

Almost makes one smile. Until you think of the enormous suffering and death to millions of innocents.

And that is troubling.

Originally posted by grover
reply to post by MysterE

 

And yet even when you talk to a lot of people who describe themselves as conservative about policy they are for the most part surprisingly liberal.

I am amused by the reactions to this thread... for the most part the posters have attacked the thread as opposed to answering it.

A cursatory scroll down the recent threads at any given time will bring up some pretty extreme right threads and there have been more than a few that do advocate revolution. So no this is not an attack or trolling thread.

I have said repeatedly I am opposed to extremists of all stripes, left and right. AND I have also said in regards to the original article that the writer was overreacting... still it is a pertinent question because among other things there are not left leaning individuals gunning down doctors or shooting up the Holocaust museum etc... such acts are consistently from the right.

Grover if You don't mind me asking how much do You make a year? How many hours a year do You work? Last but not least how much do You pay in taxes every month?

reply to post by jkm1864

Not only is that none of your business it has absolutely no bearing on my political views.

Tax providers/tax eaters?

What a crappy way to designate people... typical of the wrong wing though.

You guys are a joke and have absolutely no clue.

Everything a person does produces tax revenue one way or another even if they are unemployed or on welfare...

Besides that WE ALL "eat" up taxes in one way or another as well...

To hear you fools tell it, its a one way street and it never is nor ever has been.

Also military eats up far more taxes than welfare and food stamps ever have...

I can only say that I hope you guys are comfortable and never need a hand.

If ya wanna complain about those who mooch off of the government aka all of us complain about corporate welfare to companies who ship our jobs overseas and still expect tax cuts and bailouts...

But oh no that's scared to you guys... business matters... people don't.

[edit on 26-6-2009 by grover]

Originally posted by grover
reply to post by jkm1864

 

Not only is that none of your business it has absolutely no bearing on my political views.

Tax providers/tax eaters?

What a crappy way to designate people... typical of the wrong wing though.

You guys are a joke and have absolutely no clue.

Everything a person does produces tax revenue one way or another even if they are unemployed or on welfare...

Besides that WE ALL "eat" up taxes in one way or another as well...

To hear you fools tell it, its a one way street and it never is nor ever has been.

Also military eats up far more taxes than welfare and food stamps ever have...

I can only say that I hope you guys are comfortable and never need a hand.

If ya wanna complain about those who mooch off of the government aka all of us complain about corporate welfare to companies who ship our jobs overseas and still expect tax cuts and bailouts...

But oh no that's scared to you guys... business matters... people don't.

[edit on 26-6-2009 by grover]

What a fine point you make. "Everything a person does produces tax revenue" The old revolving dollar theory. Give the people enough money to float around to every facet of the economy,and they will never realize what the money is actually worth. Or what it actually cost you.
It is so easy to spend other peoples money. The government produces nothing,yet never lack sustinance. There are people in the country with the same mind set. They don't have to produce anything,fully dependent on the public dole. The consumate consumer,food,shelter,medical care and disposable income. All provided by the "great equalizer" our government.
It is a tough pill to swallow. When you have strived to create a better life for yourself,through hard work and sacrifice. Only to see the money you render to the government,given to people who are in every aspect as able bodied as you. They find it much easier to live off the efforts of others.
The old addage"Vote Democrat,It's easier than working" rings true.

What state would this country be in ,if every one had the mindset that they should let the Government provide their necessities?

I don't believe in corporate welfare! The Government needs to keep it's hands off private sector business. You stated that the military eats up more tax dollars than food stamps and welfare.True!!! There is a benifit that comes from the "feeding" of the military. We all have the peace of mind that our lives could be protected,should the need arise. I don't see an all encompassing benifit from welfare and food stamps,for the nation as a whole.

reply to post by grover

Grover, unless there is an unknown species among us, YES, there are two kinds of people.

TAX PROVIDERS:

Tax providers actually get up in the morning and go to work, work hard at their job, they make a paycheck, and that paycheck is taxed. Businesses and companies are also tax providers.

TAX EATERS:

Tax eaters don't do (fill in the blank.) Tax eaters are the non-productive members of our society - unless you consider selling crack or whoring a career. They live off the TAX PROVIDERS.

In biology, this is called a parasite. They live off the lives of others. The efforts of others. They can't or won't provide for their own needs, thus their parasitic existence.

You'll see in a grocery store that the TAX PROVIDER is often limited to hamburger and chicken while the TAX EATER is ringing up steaks and ribs, loading it all up in a new, pimped out car.

They play the system - getting subsidized housing, welfare, food stamps, utility assistance, and supplemental child assistance. It's really quite a racket.

Many of the women have multiple children by multiple fathers. The most confusing day of the year in these households is Father's Day. It's a largely ignored holiday as many don't have a clue who their father may be.

They in turn raise their little bastards with the same identical work ethic and moral value system, which, breeding like rats - creates an entirely new generation of parasites.

So when you suggest that I have no clue, I think I've seen quite enough with my own eyes.

This is the payoff of LBJ's Great Society. I hope that old bastard is burning in hell for this mess he enabled.

So what do these parasites do? Well, go to their neighborhoods and look around. Crack on every street corner, crime rampant. Ignorance is considered a virtue.

They have killings all the time for as little as $40. Zero moral values, and see nothing wrong will killing over the smallest slight.

They pay what - sales taxes? Had the TAX PROVIDERS been left their own money - they would have paid the same sales taxes.

Nothing is ever their fault - it's always someone else's fault. So they elect, ELECT to wallow in their own excrement.

Civil War?

The war will be to get the tax eaters off the backs of the tax providers, and that day is quickly approaching.

Working, decent folks are fed up.




[edit on 26-6-2009 by dooper]

There's an old saying: "Those who put out people's eyes, reproach them for their blindness."

The fact of the matter is that the poor subsidize the rich with cheap labor. If you're unemployed, you're more likely to do a job and get paid for it less than what it's really worth to the company.

One could argue that this is a tax, in the form of labor, on the poor by the rich.

reply to post by milesp

That, my friend, is an oft repeated lie.

I have a job open. I have invested in machinery, building, supplies, and raw materials to make a product.

There are fixed costs I can't control, and variable costs I have more control over.

I offer the job at $10 per hour.

I didn't hold a gun to the head and make anyone take that job, I didn't just pull that number out of my anterior region.

That's what the job pays.

Take it, or leave it.

But never, EVER, complain about what I'm making.

Your lie sounds like wealth envy and has been the mantra of unions for decades.

And we see what the unions did for American industry.

They wiped it out.

Originally posted by dooper
reply to post by milesp

 

That, my friend, is an oft repeated lie.

I have a job open. I have invested in machinery, building, supplies, and raw materials to make a product.

There are fixed costs I can't control, and variable costs I have more control over.

I offer the job at $10 per hour.

I didn't hold a gun to the head and make anyone take that job, I didn't just pull that number out of my anterior region.

That's what the job pays.

Take it, or leave it.

But never, EVER, complain about what I'm making.

Your lie sounds like wealth envy and has been the mantra of unions for decades.

And we see what the unions did for American industry.

They wiped it out.

Your points are well taken. It looks as though the rest have given up the arguement. It IS hard to win an arguement that is indefensable.

Originally posted by grover

Does the Right Want a Civil War?

www.alternet.org

Dear Conservatives:

Your fellow Americans demand an answer -- and we want it now. Just one simple question:

Are you deliberately trying to start a civil war?

Just answer the question. Yes or no. Don't insult us with elisions, evasions, dithering, qualifications, or conditional answers. We need to know what your intentions are -- and we need to know NOW. People are being shot dead in the streets of America at the rate of several per month now. You may not want responsibility for this -- but the whackadoodles pulling the triggers make no bones about who put them up to this.

You did.

(visit the link for the full news article)

I am not a conservative or liberal, I pick and chose my values and refuse to place myself into any camp although I do have more conservative values than liberal ones.

The answer to your question is no.
I think the government is trying to start a civil war; its desire to control us and take everything we hold dear is what leads to problems.

I don’t mind being taxed to help the disabled or elderly but not people who lounge around their homes eating free food all day while I have to struggle to buy food for my family.
I live in a neighborhood that has transitioned from middle class to lower class and while on weekday mornings the cars are all parked, on Fridays nights there is plenty of parking and I say that those people should be given two choices, work or starve to death.
We have genuinely disabled and elderly people starving because they have to split their benefits with millions of low life’s who sling crack and spend all day trying to rob peoples apartments.

Now you expect me to give my weapons up while they keep theirs?
Don’t you think only a fool would do such a thing?

My right to self defense is one of the things that is not negotiable no matter how you feel about it, I will never give up my guns because my experiences tell me that “bad guys” do not follow the law, they could care less about gun laws and shortly after the moment that guns are banned in this country crime is going to explode.
Bad economy and no opportunity = more crime and violence, it’s that simple.

I will not put my families life in jeopardy because some politicians and the media have brainwashed an entire segment of the US population into thinking a gun ban makes sense.
Don’t you think it’s strange that the people the people telling us to disarm are always surrounded by men with guns themselves?
If you trade liberty for security, you end up with neither.

I spent years working with criminals and the most hardened violent ones did not fear us, they feared vigilante justice and as such they preyed on “easy marks”.

Bill Ayers was involved in making bombs that killed Americans and he wanted civil war yet he is a big friend of Obama and this administration, I don’t see you posting anything about that.
Why haven’t you asked yourself if your desire and the desires of those you follow, which are to strip Americans of their rights and what little wealth they have left, will lead to civil war?

reply to post by grover


Gun Control: What is the Agenda?

By Paul Craig Roberts

June 26, 2009 "Information Clearing House" -- -Some years or decades ago I researched and reported on the Sullivan Act, one of America’s first gun control laws.

New York state senator Timothy Sullivan, a corrupt Tammany Hall politician, represented New York’s Red Hook district. Commercial travelers passing through the district would be relieved of their valuables by armed robbers. In order to protect themselves and their property, travelers armed themselves. This raised the risk of, and reduced the profit from, robbery. Sullivan’s outlaw constituents demanded that Sullivan introduce a law that would prohibit concealed carry of pistols, blackjacks, and daggers, thus reducing the risk to robbers from armed victims.

The criminals, of course, were already breaking the law and had no intention of being deterred by the Sullivan Act from their business activity of armed robbery. Thus, the effect of the Sullivan Act was precisely what the criminals intended. It made their life of crime easier.

As the first successful gun control advocates were criminals, I have often wondered what agenda lies behind the well-organized and propagandistic gun control organizations and their donors and sponsors in the US today. The propaganda issued by these organizations consists of transparent lies.

Consider the propagandistic term, “gun violence,” popularized by gun control advocates. This is a form of reification by which inanimate objects are imbued with the ability to act and to commit violence. Guns, of course, cannot be violent in themselves. Violence comes from people who use guns and a variety of other weapons, including fists, to commit violence.

Nevertheless, we hear incessantly the Orwellian Newspeak term, “gun violence.”

Very few children are killed by firearm accidents compared to other causes of child deaths. Yet, gun control advocates have created the false impression that there is a national epidemic in accidental firearm deaths of children. In fact, the National MCH Center for Child Death Review, an organization that monitors causes of child deaths, reports that seven times more children die from drowning and five times more from suffocation than from firearm accidents. www.childdeathreview.org... Yet we don’t hear of “drowning violence,” “swimming pool violence,” “bathtub violence,” or “suffocation violence.”

The National MCH Center for Child Death Review reports that 174 children eighteen years old and under died from firearm accidents in 2000. The National Center for Injury Prevention and Control reports that 125 children eighteen years old and under died from firearm accidents in 2006. webapp.cdc.gov... In 2006 there were 77,845,285 youths in that age bracket.

In 2006 violence-related firearm deaths of eighteen year olds and under totaled 2,191. A large percentage of these deaths appear to be teenagers fighting over drug turf.

According to the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, drugs are “one of the main factors leading to the total number of all homicides. . . . murders related to narcotics still rank as the fourth most documented murder circumstance out of 24 possible categories.” www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov...

According to the National Drug Control Policy, trafficking in illicit drugs is associated with the commission of violent crimes for the following reasons: “competition for drug markets and customers, disputes and rip-offs among individuals involved in the illegal drug market, [and] the tendency toward violence of individuals who participate in drug trafficking.” Another dimension of drug-related crime is “committing an offense to obtain money (or goods to sell to get money) to support drug use.”

Obviously, decriminalizing drugs would be the greatest single factor in reducing incarceration rates, the crime rate, and the homicide rate. Yet, gun control advocates do not support this obvious solution to “gun violence.”

Those who want to outlaw guns have not explained why it would be any more effective than outlawing drugs, alcohol, robbery, rape, and murder. All the crimes for which guns are used are already illegal, and they keep on occurring, just as they did before guns existed.

So what is the real agenda? Why do gun control advocates want to override the Second Amendment. Why do they not acknowledge that if the Second Amendment can be over-ridden, so can every other protection of civil liberty?

There are careful studies that conclude that armed citizens prevent one to two million crimes every year. Other studies show that in-home robberies, rapes, and assaults occur more frequently in jurisdictions that suffer from gun control ordinances. Other studies show that most states with right-to-carry laws have experienced a drop in crimes against persons.

Why do gun control advocates want to increase the crime rate in the US?

Why is the gun control agenda a propagandistic one draped in lies?

The NRA is the largest and best known organization among the defenders of the Second Amendment. Yet, a case might be made that manufacturers’ gun advertisements in the NRA’s magazines stoke the hysteria of gun control advocates.

Full page ads offering civilian versions of weapons used by “America’s elite warriors” in US Special Operations Command, SWAT, and by covert agents “who work in a dark world most of us can’t even understand,” are likely to scare the pants off people who are afraid of guns.

Many of the modern weapons are ugly as sin. Their appearance is threatening, unlike the beautiful lines of a Winchester lever action or single shot rifle, or a Colt single action revolver, or the WW II 45 caliber semi-automatic pistol, guns that do not have menacing appearances. Everyone knows that they are guns, but they are also works of art.

A little advertising discretion might go a long way in quieting fears that are manipulated by gun control advocates.

The same goes for hunters. Recent news reports of “hunters” slaughtering wolves from airplanes in Alaska and of a hunter, indeed, a poacher, who shot a protected rare wolf in the US Southwest and left the dead animal in the road, enrage people who have empathy with animals and wildlife. Many Americans have had such bad experiences with their fellow citizens that they regard their dogs and cats, and wildlife, as more intelligent and nobel life forms than humans. Wild animals can be dangerous, but they are not evil.

Americans with empathy for animals are horrified by the television program that depicts hunters killing beautiful animals and the joy hunters experience in “harvesting” their prey. Many believe that a person who enjoys killing a deer because he has a marvelous rack of antlers might enjoy killing a person.

This is not a screed against hunters. There are many families with the tradition of bringing in the venison once or twice a year. With the near extermination by man of deer predators, deer are so abundant in many localities as to have become a nuisance and a danger to motorists. Nevertheless, the defense of gun rights has little to gain from TV programs depicting the fun of killing Bambi’s mother.

In the US, shooting is a hand-eye coordination sport. It is likely that 99% of all ammunition is fired at paper targets, metal silhouettes, or clay and plastic discs. It is a sport for amateur physicists who are interested in ballistics and who experiment with different combinations of powder and bullet seeking the most accurate for their rifle or pistol. Few of these shooters hunt as their interest in shooting is unrelated to killing.

Shooting is a sport that offers comradeship and competition in which even old people can participate, people who do not or cannot play golf or tennis or bowl. There is a vast variety of events from black powder muskets to antique military and frontier weapons to distance shooting.

Sports shooters punching holes in paper targets comprise the vast majority of active gun owners. They are a threat to no one. Accidents are extremely rare at gun clubs. A large network of small businesses provide the parts and supplies necessary for shooting. There is no reason to strip gun owners of their hobby and possessions and family businesses of their livelihood, as has been done in Great Britain and as the gun control lobby intends to do in the US.

The NRA is correct to insist that “when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” We have known this since the Sullivan Act.