Posted on 11/29/2009 11:45:33 AM PST by Man50D
This morning I posted a thread titled " Obama Orders 1 Million US Troops To Prepare For Civil War". My comment, " Fact or speculation? You decide", in the thread I posted clearly indicated no particular position for or against and with the assumption Freepers could openly debate the merits, or lack thereof, and provide input concerning the article located at another website as has occurred with many other dubious articles posted at FreeRepublic in the past.
The thread was pulled with the premise the article was based on the "trutherism" subjectively defined as a conspiracy. I then posted a subsequent vanity thread titled "Censorship At FreeRepublic? Aren't Freepers Smart Enough To make Their Own Decsions?" with the following sincere questions and remarks:
I was perplexed by these remarks since I never had heard such a word and don't recall it listed in the dictionary. Accept my apologies up front if I am wrong. Regardless of this point, isn't FreeRepublic all about revealing the truth that would otherwise be buried by the socialist media? Consequently I responded "What is trutherism? Can you confirm none of this article is true?"
It also begs the question: How is it known any or all of the article is a conspiracy?" It may very well be a conspiracy or none of it is a conspiracy or the truth lies somewhere in between. I don't know myself and that prompted me to call upon the collective intelligence of my fellow Freepers for their input. It is from this point of view I also have the following questions and remarks:
What are your sources to confirm all of what is written is mere conspiracy and that none of it is true? You have enough intelligent people at FR to discern the accuracy or inaccuracy of the article for themselves. Freepers will shoot it down in a New York minute with sources if it is not true. That was the premise of my comment fact or speculation?, you decide. Removing the article reflects a presumption they lack the necessary intelligence and a lack of confidence amongst your fellow freepers."
Such a response also leaves me wondering since when did FreeRepublic deny debate to determine the legitimacy of an article or website? We do it all the time with socialist websites and articles. Why not do the same with this article? How does open and honest debate harm FreeRepublic? If the source of the website I posted a link to the article consists of a bunch of conspirators then why not let the combined vast knowledge of Freepers call them out with specific and detailed information? Making a simple statement without credible evidence is tantamount to slander.
I apologize in advance if I'm wrong but It seems to me given Freepers have exposed disingenuous stories many times in the past, they could do so again with the article I posted and that FreeRepublic have the same confidence in its members. I'll know I'm wrong if I am suspended or banned from Freerepublic for posting this vanity on the sincere confidence of my fellow Freepers."
This thread was then locked with the comment "You were told what trutherism was via freepmail, but you pretend you dont know here. We dont cotton to liars on FR." A lie based on whose definition? Therein lies the problem. The socialists have been attempting to discredit those demanding BO abide by Article 1 Section 2 requiring any person seeking the office of President be a natural born citizen. He he has refused to do so by producing a birth certificate. The socialists have responded with their same old tired tactic of isolating and attacking a target by discrediting the object of their wrath. They have tried to implement this tactic by labeling people who believe in the Constitution as "birthers" implying if not out right claiming it is a conspiracy.
Many threads have been posted at FreeRepublic regarding the eligibility issue without being pulled nor reprimanding the poster on the assumption it is a conspiracy. There has been extensive open and honest discussion and debate on the subject. It is with this premise in mind I posted the original thread. Many Freepers agree BO has usurped the Constitution by occupying the White House. Clearly FreeRepublic doesn't consider questioning of BO's eligibility as a mere conspiracy. Given that fact, isn't it reasonable to at least consider the possibility he would commit another unconstitutional act of deploying U.S. troops against Americans?
It is incongruous to summarily dismiss the latter proposition outright since the former is considered plausible. Instead the mere debate of the issue concerning the deployment of troops is denounced. As I stated earlier I was not taking a position on the issue but was merely trying to start open and honest debate as indicated by initial "you decide" comment. Instead I am called a liar for merely questioning the term "trutherism". I sincerely hope FreeRepublic has not been reduced to attacking its own members for simply wanting to have an honest discussion.
Eventually, we all discover that freedom of the press is only for the guy that owns a printing press..or in this case, a popular message board on the innerwebz. You gotta pick your fights carefully.
Is this an Opus?
It is obvious that you have some very strong feelings over all of this, but you might want to consider taking a break on you own, or one will likely be given to you.
I moderators have given you some room over this, you might want to just move off of it, before it’s too late.
The Constitution is clear.
Oh, oh... too late... the cats are out.. you’re toast.
IBTZ
Sigh. This seems like an exercise in arguing logically, where outside an academic interest in philosophical reasoning, there is nothing to be gained.
I could post a thousand threads a day of completely made up stuff, but to what end? A post of absolute absurdity warrants no discussion.
You’re a longtime respected FReeper and the least I can do is give you the benefit of a doubt.
Personally I doubt the president is preparing our military for war against Americans. I think he would find widespread mutiny would leave him pretty short handed. I am however more concerned with the “Army” he’s creating in schools, youth groups, and unions etc.
In my opinion, it’s not about being a Birther or a Truther or a conspiracy monger or whatever. Barry Soetoro (aka B. Hussein Obama, Jr) has fully revealed that his birth father was not an American citizen, so on that alone, Barry is not a natural born American citizen and therefore totally ineligible to be POTUS. Both your parents need to be American citizens when you are born. Babies whose parents are American citizens are born all over the world during travel, military duty, missionary work, etc. As much as I like him, Bobby Jindal is not eligible to run for President because his parents were not American citizens when he was born in Louisiana. Tim Tebow was born in the Philippines to missionary parents who are American citizens, which makes him eligible to run for the POTUS when he is of age — now wouldn’t that be interesting...if there still is an America....
“It could very well be noting more than a conspiracy but at least to confirm your position as has been provided to prove BO is not a natural born citizen.”
Google Translation?
Your initial posts were not about the birth certificate —they were about Obama preparing the military for civil war.
Conspiracies are marked, and typically proven (in the mind of the theorist) by a distinct lack of evidence. It is the lack of evidence which proves the depth of the conspiracy.
When actual evidence emerges, there’s something to talk about. Until then — its all theoretical.
SnakeDoc
It isn’t surprising that under Commie Obammie people fear reprisal for anything questioning the administration. Don’t stop bringing up questions.
IMO, they’ll need every bit of a million man domestic army if the electrical grid were to go down in any dozen States.
Then...there’s the value of a dollar...if this guy continuous on his path.
The topic?
My understanding is that ‘birthers’ question where or ‘the citizenship’ of Obama.
Truthers question 9/11.
I was recently thinking about my duty as a citizen in the event of a disaster or war in America. I came to the conclusion that the best thing I and my little town could do is take care of ourselves and keep military resources as free as possible.
I think people often overlook how well small towns deal with emergencies.
I learned a lot from your posts and was shocked to learn that birthers (that would be me) and truthers (that would not) are lumped together as tinfoil hatters. For lazy journalist/agitators attempting a hat trick - I expect to soon see the labels *not earthers or hot earthers*.
We should probably drop any impulse to lump these nicknames together to avoid confusion.
kindly
sod
No doubt about it. His father was a British subject.
He is not Natural Born Citizen. Even if he wuz berfed in Kansas like his skanky momma, his daddy is a foreigner
He is not eligible for the presidency!
B4TZ...
Near as I have been able to track this “Million Man Army” story back to its point of origin, it seems to have been started on the American Resistance Radio:
http://freedomfighterradio.net/?p=12655#more-12655
No references have been provided for the supposed quote from Russian Military Analysts.
As for your posts getting the Zot, bring a direct link to the game; the quote from Putin or a Military Analyst in Russia.
Cheers
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.