Obama admits "All all assault on Liberty" gun ban!

Let's not get carried away and forget the intended topic here, the OP here wants help understanding a sentence:

Originally posted by Violater1

Thank-you Murgatroid for the transcript link.
www.washingtonpost.com... -605528f6b712_story_4.html
Here is Mr Obama's quote," This will be difficult. There will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists publicly warning of a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty, not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves. And behind the scenes, they’ll do everything they can to block any commonsense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever. "

I understand that to mean that it is true. There will be a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty.

"This will be difficult. There will be pundants and politicians, and special interest lobbyists.....publicly warning of a tyrannical all out assault on liberty...........not because that's true, but because they want to gen up fear, or higher ratings, or revenue for themselves, and behind the scenes they will do everything they can to block any common sense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever."

What Obama is saying is that people who oppose the changes will lie by claiming an all out assault on liberty to get their own way. They wont says these things because they are true (because they are not), but as a mean to their ends.

All Obama is admitting is that there are people in power who will distort the truth for their own gain.

Sorry OP, you are wrong. (no offence meant).

Originally posted by JAK
Let's not get carried away and forget the intended topic here, the OP here wants help understanding a sentence:

Originally posted by Violater1

Thank-you Murgatroid for the transcript link.
www.washingtonpost.com... -605528f6b712_story_4.html
Here is Mr Obama's quote," This will be difficult. There will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists publicly warning of a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty, not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves. And behind the scenes, they’ll do everything they can to block any commonsense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever. "

I understand that to mean that it is true. There will be a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty.

Why does there even need to be a thread on this? It is basic reading comprehension.

This will be difficult. There will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists publicly warning of a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty, not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves.

This is self explanitory. In no way of reading that should one come to the conclusion that Obama just admitted that he supports an all-out assault on liberty.

Let's break it down.

- Pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists publicaly warning of a tyrannical all-out assault on liberty.
- Not because that's true
- But because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves.

Here, let me put it in ATS terms for you.

"Some member will start threads warning of doomsday, not because that's true, but because they want to gin up fear and gain flags and stars".
- Some members will start threads warning of doomsday
- Not because that's true
- But because they want to gin up fear and gain flags and stars.

It is kind of sad we need any entire thread on basic reading comprehension.

Well I must admit that it was very difficult for me to stomach that "play" on the stage up to 17:30...

When the president made those remarks I wasn't really shocked or surprised honestly. He is dense but not so dense to think acting on the bill of rights won't be seen as tyrannical especially when trying to go the back-door rout using EO/EA.

The "PLAY" that I was initially referring to is what disgusted me the most...

The introduction by Biden was nothing more than a rehashing of the Sandy Hook events to stir emotions lobbing the ball over the plate at Obama while he hits a grand slam using those children to incite that emotional side of thinking before he starts listing off what the logical mind would reduce to nonsense...

You see there are several "ways" to solve a problem...there are logical ways, practical ways, and emotional ways (and mixtures there of). EMOTIONS were the problem solving mechanism focused on here.

They are appealing to the "emotional problem solving mind" because its focus is narrow, its sight is short and its resolve is passionate and furious. When your emotions are at work hormones kick into play that dramatize reality into a fight or flight perspective by WHICH knee jerk decisions are made and supported.

Adrenaline (hormone) reduces perception and brain function to black or white, tunnel vision sets in and awareness trickles away along with fine motor skills. People are known to black-out from these emotional states due to the degree these hormones effect their ability to function on a higher levels. Blood retreats to protect vital organs (hence the loss of fine motor skills and full vision and awareness) and THIS is the level at which people are choosing which side of the fence to be on....all I can say is they are being played like a finely tuned guitar.

This goes for the pro-gun crowd as well and I myself have partaken in the emotional thinking and only after removing myself from the situation could I see what it was doing. I'm still pro-gun but my jets have cooled and I'm approaching this from a much more AWARE playing field than most.

I just hope everyone can do this before we prematurely start a civil-war revolution OR ban guns > knives> sticks > rocks > arms > legs > oxygen...because those are decisions made from the reduced consciousness of emotional states...

I'm starting to think the agenda isn't to get our guns...its to kick off a civil-war that will dissolve the strongest nation on earth so they can rebuild their fabled NWO...

Originally posted by JAK
Let's not get carried away and forget the intended topic here, the OP here wants help understanding a sentence:

Originally posted by Violater1

Thank-you Murgatroid for the transcript link.
www.washingtonpost.com... -605528f6b712_story_4.html
Here is Mr Obama's quote," This will be difficult. There will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists publicly warning of a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty, not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves. And behind the scenes, they’ll do everything they can to block any commonsense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever. "

I understand that to mean that it is true. There will be a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty.

No thank you, I do not need your, or anyone else's help. I understand perfectly what Mr. Obama's stated intent was, as well as some the other poster's who share my opinion.

Originally posted by woogleuk
"This will be difficult. There will be pundants and politicians, and special interest lobbyists.....publicly warning of a tyrannical all out assault on liberty...........not because that's true, but because they want to gen up fear, or higher ratings, or revenue for themselves, and behind the scenes they will do everything they can to block any common sense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever."

What Obama is saying is that people who oppose the changes will lie by claiming an all out assault on liberty to get their own way. They wont says these things because they are true (because they are not), but as a mean to their ends.

All Obama is admitting is that there are people in power who will distort the truth for their own gain.

Sorry OP, you are wrong. (no offence meant).

I respect your opinion, even if it is wrong.
Let me roll it to you this way.
If I said, Bob dislikes all eggs, not because that's true, but because he's a real vegetarian.
Therefor, it is true, Bob is a real vegetarian, who doesn't like eggs.

Politicians are going to tell you that , not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves. Therefor, it is true, Politicians want to increase the fear, because there is a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty!

Originally posted by Violater1
Today at the White House, Mr Barack Hussein Obama, let's the cat out of the bag during a press conference. He states,"Politicians… publicly warning of a tyrannical all assault on Liberty, Not because that’s true..” He Doesn't say, "Not because that’s Not True." Therefore he admits that there IS an all assault on Liberty!!!
There you have it, straight from his mouth. Watch the video at 17:30!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh good grief.

It means exactly what he said when you read the whole quote. "Not because that’s Not True'' is a double negative.

'This will be difficult. There will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists publicly
warning of a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty, not because that's true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves. And behind the scenes, they'll do everything they can to block any commonsense reform and make sure nothing changes
whatsoever.'

So the assault on liberty, the that in question, isn't true! It's not complicated.

If he'd said what you want him to say he'd be saying the assualt on liberty is true.

Wow. Just wow.

Even funnier, people are starring your basic failure to understand English.

Where was all this worry about truthfulness in government when the news was all about how Bush was a good ol' boy that everybody wanted to have a beer with?

If your assault weapons are so good at protecting the Constitution, you're several decades late, as far as I can see.

Get on with it already, stop talking about it. I look forward to your plans for taking over the Pentagon, Congress and the White House. The people in all the countries that we have bases in will also be quite happy for you finally to do your duty and protect the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, but the rest of the world has been suffering greatly under American hegemony while you've been waving your flag and expounding about how 'Murka' is the greatest nation on the planet.

Free speech didn't kill Bin Laden either just saying for those who forget this nations history the only reason this nation exists this people exists hasn't been because of free speech it exists from the gun.

Any and all EO's and legislation only has but one out come sure some people mock the usage of the word tyranny, but it is stating a fact and the simple fact

The antithesis of liberty is tyranny.

OMgerd !!

when do the confiscations begin ???

reply to post by neo96


Kind of ironic (after looking at that pic then reading your post) how it was the British SBS that planned the Bin Laden raid and advised your seals

EDIT: Sorry, I wasn't trying to insinuate anything here, don't get the wrong idea, I genuinely found it funny.

reply to post by khimbar


He is in too deep now to admit he erred. That cat jumped the shark on the first page. Lol.

Several have tried, brick wall.

Originally posted by Sly1one
I'm starting to think the agenda isn't to get our guns...its to kick off a civil-war that will dissolve the strongest nation on earth so they can rebuild their fabled NWO...

I for one am glad that SOMEONE is starting to see whats really going on behind the 'Problem > Reaction > Solution' tactics that the Illuminati are using here.

What I DON"T understand is WHY so few can see this when it is so blatantly obvious?

"What happens in terms of creating wars is a mind-manipulation technique called "Problem-Reaction-Solution"... and it works like this: Let's say you want to centralize power into fewer and fewer hands through the UN or NATO. If you did that openly and said, "This is what we want to do", there'd be a reaction against that. People would say, "Hey, this is a fascist state you want to create. Were not having this." But through this technique of Problem-Reaction-Solution, you can actually manipulate people to demand you do what you want to do anyway.

So it works like this: First of all you create the problem, but you get someone else to be blamed for it. You then report that problem through the media in the way you want it reported - because the media is owned by the same people who own the banks, etc. You get the public to react to your problem by saying, "Something must be done; this can't go on; what are THEY going to do about it?". And at that point, THEY, who have covertly created the problem and blamed someone else, who gleaned that reaction of "Do Something", then offer the solution to the problems they have created."

Problem - Reaction - Solution Game

reply to post by alienreality


I didnt use the word assassinate in any part of my post, I said "assault" as in a good a** kicking.
Either way, I wouldnt lose a minutes sleep over it.

It's called reading comprehension.

I rarely see it around this site anymore.

reply to post by Murgatroid


Funded with bets against the victims ahead of the fall and for the saviors after.
H

reply to post by blupblup


Erm I don't think he was seriously advocating assassinating him, it was obviously just an angry statement. Why do people take every single thing so literally even when they obviously are not meant as such?!