George Orwell would be proud of how well today's far left has learned from his manual on how to govern.
Posted on 10/10/2012 1:02:11 PM PDT by marktwain
As discussed about a week and a half ago, this correspondent got into a bit of an argument, via Twitter, with the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV), in which they called me an "insurrectionist," and basically accused me of "treason." When I pointed out that I couldn't very well be an "insurrectionist," given the lack of, well . . . an insurrection, their bizarre reply seems to claim that insurrection can come in the form of thought:
There can be insurrection whenever individuals think their guns makes [sic] them above the law and the democratic process.
Leaving aside the fact that their attempts to read my thoughts fail pretty spectacularly to achieve any sort of useful accuracy, the point here is that they evidently believe that thoughts can be "insurrectionary," and therefore treasonous.
Yesterday was Part II, in which I--this time with a couple of co-"traitors"--was again accused, even more explicitly, of treason. For example:
If our Founding Fathers were still around, you'd be tried for treason and handled like Shays/Whiskey rebels.
Again, I asked, "What 'treason'?"
WHAT "treason"? When have I "levied war against" the U.S.? When have I given aid and comfort to its enemies?
The reply to that didn't bother with specific examples (for the very good reason that there aren't any)--it just said I had done so "repeatedly," in my "blogs and comments". The Constitution, of course, defines treason very narrowly, as it must in a free country:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Lol. We’re now building all-new tables for the twitter-tw*ts. Keep’em coming.
George Orwell would be proud of how well today's far left has learned from his manual on how to govern.
What about our politicians, congressmen, judges and bureaucrats who have led an “insurrection” within our government against the Constitution?????
I am growing very weary of the constant barrage of twisted, treasonous double-speak from Leftists who have assaulted our nation through our form of government.
Completely unlike the Left, by God OUR “insurrection” will come the way it is supposed to: AT THE BALLOT BOX in about a month. THEN it will be time to declare war on the REST of the treasonous Leftists who are buried up in our government.
Being called a “traitor” BY a traitor does not sit too well with me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do people in the cities REALLY agree with CGSV that there is no right to armed self-defense against a government that targets citizens merely for their beliefs? If this view is mainstream, we are no longer the America of our Founding.
On 2nd thought, I guess I have to admit we aren't.
My wife’s grandfather once said “There is never anything to be gained arguing with a crazy person.” that is certainly true when engaged in private conversations. When in the public domain its best to state your logical point and move along.
they just hate it thar we can correctly use the term treason against Obama and many liberals, but that they can’t use it correctly against us because we’re not engaged in treasonous activities.
words and definitions actually mean specific and real things to conservatives, it means whatever they want it to mean if you’re liberal.
in other words, grownups say what they mean and words have fixed and proper meanings, while little kids use language incorrectly and don’t care if words mean what they actually do, they are more than happy to use incorrect words on purpose in order to supposedly “win” a verbal point.
What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/2312894/posts
It's worse than Orwell.
Victor Klemperer wrote a book called, The Language of the Third Reich . In that book Kleperer (who lived through the Nazi horror) explains ways Nazis changed language. Like Homeland Security is doing with their fight against 'extremists'. A loosely defined term that can easily be switched from radical Muslims to United States citizens to disagree with liberals.
If you think Obama's going to be reelected you might want to get the book from Amazon before it's removed. That's the other thing totalitarians do - they take away the words and language of free thinking citizens.
My first thought was turning their own argument around on them. That is, “What if the government used armed force to suppress those who were opposed to gun freedom? Would you be willing to use guns to resist being put in detainment camps by your government for opposing gun rights?”
But then I realized that purged Soviet communist party officials did just that! When arrested and tried for not being ideologically correct, and facing execution if convicted, they still, with minimal coercion, condemned themselves as having failed the party and communism.
And, of course, they were then executed.
At the time, these fairly public kangaroo courts utterly puzzled non-communist observers who were amazed why anyone facing death for being politically incorrect would voluntarily condemn themselves by giving extended confessions, blaming themselves for anything and everything they were accused of, no matter how ludicrous.
But that is the mindset of such people. And it would likely be exactly the same with the modern gun controllers. For they are true believers in their leftist religion, an essential element of which is that the state must control all means of force.
So if the state wanted to round them up and execute them for opposing gun rights, they would confess they were in error, and insist on being arrested and punished, even executed, for failing the state.
If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance?
Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." - Thomas Jefferson
It’s their definition of the Democratic Process that we are worried about and what keeps most armed. Their disregard for others rights and our rights to be free of their options shows they do not understand Republic form of goverment. When they finally break past that 50%it then we will have to show them the true meaning of insurrection.
No need to fight marxist seditious treasonous thugs and islamist terrorists with only words, when the Nation and its constitution become subverted by a cabalistic putsch.
The economy will crater. Then their defense does not work. Fema cannot even deliver water. When the spool unwinds, there will be no functioning government on any level.
Logically, a government should have a legal monopoly on the use of force (ie, police and military) so as to put it under objective control, but that doesn’t negate a person’s right to self-defense, which is an extension of their right to life and property (makes no sense to have those rights if you can’t protect them).
http://capitalismmagazine.com/1998/06/gun-control-and-the-right-to-self-defense/
Just to clarify, the government’s monopoly on force refers to using that monopoly in reaction to the initiation of force (Ie, against a criminal or an attack on our nation); essentially, the government is a police officer who can only use force against a criminal for the commission of a crime. It does not translate into a right to initiate force against unarmed victims who have done no wrong.
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.