Posted on 02/17/2017 4:58:07 PM PST by The_Harlequin
Thanks for the link.
“How can the liberals go to war against the people who own most of the guns?”
Liberals can get guns too.
Thing is, they’re more willing to just haul off and start killing political opponents than the Right is. Just plain out-of-the-blue assassinations. Their friends are more likely to facilitate such actions (funding, equipping, hiding, alibis).
Go read “Days Of Rage”. Documents exactly such behavior & support in the ‘70s.
People forget the aftermath of the “Korean shopkeeper” days.
AFAIK, many/most/all were rounded up and arrested. Weapons were confiscated and analyzed. Records were reviewed. Interrogations held.
They didn’t avoid conviction because they were in the right.
They avoided conviction by frequently swapping weapons so everyone’s fingerprints were on everything, and by everyone steadfastly refusing to say anything to authorities. As such, nobody could be tied to any particular shot, or even to shootings at all.
Defending their property was a _very_ risky move, doable via culture of tribal cooperation and coverage.
This may or may not be applicable to the subculture you’re hoping will mirror that behavior.
“They avoided conviction by frequently swapping weapons so everyone’s fingerprints were on everything, and by everyone steadfastly refusing to say anything to authorities. As such, nobody could be tied to any particular shot, or even to shootings at all.”
I did not know any of that. Fascinating.
The incident about which “In Broad Daylight” was written also intrigued me.
.
Link?
Flash point, or Arch Duke Ferdinand moment?
If there is a successful or unsuccessful attempt on the life of the president of the United States, then you will see preparation.
Militias will recruit, and drill, stores will be acquired by the population in greater numbers, and psyops will begin in increasing volume from the media and left wing (sorry to be redundant).
There will be other signs. Riots, stoppages of commerce,
and inflammatory rhetoric from the few democrats left in power.
You will also see nations taking sides.
When these and other things happen, know that you may be called upon to do difficult things.
Very difficult things...
5.56mm
Slavery was going to go inevitably anyways. Eventually plantation slavery would have become more costly than agricultural machinery and slavery would have then ended for reasons both economic and humanitarian.
But slavery wasn't the reason why the Union fought the civil war. The reason the Union fought the Civil war was because an Independent South posed a serious economic threat to those North Eastern industrialists which later came to be known as "Robber Barons." (And who's ideological descendants are still running things from New York/Washington D.C. today.)
The Civil War was fought for economic reasons, and "Slavery" was just the propaganda to rouse public ire. Lincoln was sending assurances that he would keep slavery for the first 18 months of the war. It wasn't until it was made clear to him that the South absolutely wanted independence that he threatened them with the Emancipation Proclamation.
Had the South given in prior to 1863, Lincoln would have restored everything to what it was prior to the war, including slavery. How do we know this? He said so.
Great link. Read the whole thing, much of it twice.
That shopowner’s view was that police were simply nonexistent. Cops rallied around higher-economic areas.
The staggering reality was the complete non-sequitur of the riots: allegedly sparked by white cops beating a black suspect (for debatable reasons) ... so why did the black community so violently assault _Korean_ areas? Sheer opportunism apparently, nearby stores to loot & burn, perceiving white cops were fearful of stopping black criminals in action en masse.
Interesting, like Waco in the same decade, nothing of the kind has happened again where the victims have a reputation of fighting back. Ferguson, DC inauguration, etc all happened where rioters were not likely to get shot.
I keep coming back to Kipling’s “The Beginnings”. Look it up.
And that’s also a great link. A critical bit of history few are aware of.
For most of my life, I never doubted the official narrative that the civil war was fought over the moral issue of slavery. I thought Lincoln fought the civil war because he had no choice.
Then several years ago, one of my black friends who is obsessive on issues of race and the civil war, and who was a history major, told me that Lincoln deliberately initiated the civil war with a clever trick. I thought he was kidding, but when I asked for his evidence, he made a pretty good case for his claim.
Then back in 2009 I went to Washington to be part of the Tea Party rally on April 15. Afterwards we went to the Lincoln Memorial and I saw that quote where he said he would not free any slaves if that was what it took to preserve the union. Only later did I discover this quote came from his letter to Horace Greely.
This is when I started doubting what they had told me all my life. If slavery was not the issue for which the civil war was being fought, (and clearly it wasn't based on Lincoln's letter) then why did Lincoln kill 750,000 people to bring the Southern States back into the Union?
What possible reason would justify this carnage if it wasn't the moral issue of slavery? About February of last year, I finally figured out what I believe the war was about.
Money. If you want to get the truth of anything, follow the money. Southern Independence represented a huge financial loss and a huge financial threat to North Eastern economic interests, and most especially to that class of people which came to be known as the "Robber Barons."
And their ideological descendants have been running things from New York and Washington D.C. ever since. They are the enemy we are currently fighting. They are the ones who want deficit spending, unfettered immigration, and open borders. They are wealthy internationalists who now have no allegiance to anything but their own wealth and power.
Thanks for the reply. It’s like our history is now on the Internet instead of the books. I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve crossed referenced someone from Podesta’s emails to www.alamo-girl.com.
Just read that poem. Wow. I felt it.
One of my favorite poems ever and also seems to apply is “God’s of the Copybook Headings.”
I heard Doug Phillips quote it once, before he went rouge. It’s always stuck with me.
Bump
Driver, stop. Gunner, 400 dismounts in the open, 500 meters, three rounds canister, left to right. Loader, load two rounds green can, then one round black can. After that, run the co-ax, you've got 6000 rounds, use 'em up. Driver, after the third shot, move out and run over any wounded, I'll take any vehicles or return fire with the fifty.
Loaded; UP! Fire! ON THE WAY!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.