Posted on 11/26/2014 6:57:34 AM PST by Jacquerie
If we stop defending her, we lose!
The Roman Empire didn’t “fall,” it dissipated. The Roman Civilisation declined rather more precipitously 3 centuries later when the Moslems severed the trade links with the Levant and ended the supply of papyrus. Literacy declined rapidly and with it everything else.
It’s worth defending to continue to stand against BO and any other BO like that comes along.
Except they are not removed at all from our wealth, but your bigger point is 100% correct. THUS this: www.iCongressnow.com
hmm. Interesting parallel.
This entire “administration” has been a series of mini Reischstag Fires.
Am I the only guy who believes this current turmoil has been orchestrated to serve as another diversion to the ongoing Obama scandals, the recent immigration mess and the building crisis in the Middle East. Obama is well on the way to marginalizing the white population here with millions of new minority citizens who will soon become the new majority (and predominately welfare “beneficiaries” and DEMOCRAT VOTERS).
Jefferson – and other founders – greatly feared what that would do to America!
Just like the capitol city in The Hunger Games.
I wasn’t clear. The thought that sparked my comment was census data which showed something like five of the seven wealthiest counties by income in the US surround DC.
Not exactly true. Italy was not taxed for a considerable time, but simple Roman citizenship did not exclude one from taxation. In fact, the main reason given, even at the time, for Caracalla's Edict giving citizenship to all free men of the Empire was to expose them to taxes non-Romans had previously not been liable to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutio_Antoniniana
He was exempt from the possibility of torture, and could under certain circumstances appeal judicial rulings to the Emperor.
True, but always in theory. Under the Empire, anybody the Emperor wanted tortured was tortured.
Citizenship was given to all in 212. Even if we take the author's 410, that 200 years. A causing B doesn't seem particularly likely.
That's the best way to describe this regime I've heard in awhile. Sounds like you have a new tagline my friend.
No, I believe Obama wanted these riots to remove focus from his illegal executive amnesty.
Good post. Very chilling to see it all laid out there.
Read City of God by Augustine.
oh yes, your bigger point was right on the money.
Check out www.iCongressNow.com - seriously. It is inspired by exactly this dynamic.
Your point is not missed by me, the timing is highly suspect ie. the grand jury decision etc....
Everything with this administration is planned and has a purpose. I mean every single detail!
I am disgusted to a degree that IS IMPOSSIBLE TO VERBALIZE!!
It can also serve as a justification for the nationalizing of a police force. Some in the Grievance Industry are already calling for it. Or for the establishment of national policing standards that over-represent the subhumans at the expense of the white middle class. Or for the creation of a Whitey Always Loses board to review racial issues and enforce “justice” as defined by the Holder Standard.
Or similar Hitlerian schemes.
Yep
200 years cause and effect is believable to me. Our current governmental problems stem from chaged to our Constitution 100 years ago
I actually believe that Obama is the one who held back the Grand Jury timing and had Nixon hold back the national guard for that exact reason Kansas Girl! It’s all “look over here!” What illegals? And the media sycophants slavishly follow.
As soon as the holiday is over we should burn down the lines to DC and force them to shut the Govt down til the new Congress is seated in January. It is the only way to stop this chaos and lawlessness.
Obama hates white people.
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.