Posted on 01/04/2016 9:01:42 AM PST by rktman
Don’t confuse this as a defense of the Bundy family or their team of armed militia members who have occupied an abandoned building located on a federal wildlife preserve in Oregon. Any rational-thinking American should be horrified at the amount of land the federal government has confiscated, especially in the American West, but once you use or threaten violence to further a cause, you have lost me. Their cause is just. Their methods are appalling and un-American. Also un-American is Jonathan Chait of New York Magazine openly hoping these militia men end up dead.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
The general number given to me in my military classes is that about 2% is the MINIMUM number of deaths necessary to end a civil war. 10% being the upper number. With a population of about 350 million that would put the range between 6 million to just over 35 million.
In 1860, the population of the US was about 31.5 million. Total deaths attributed to to the civil war is an estimate 620 thousand - About 2%. Compared to other conflicts such as the Taiping Rebellion (20 to 30 million dead), it was a small civil war.
I believe that Civil War II is coming and will be far bloodier than the first. 5% to 10% deaths may very well be likely.
Read the book of the same name. It's online....
“Once you threaten violence... you’ve lost me..”
Really? Patrick Henry is rolling in his grave.
It’s Orwellian. “Your” means “our.” There is no such thing as people owning federal land, or being able to use it without restriction.
He thinks he should lie a-mouldering in the grave.
I remember well the chairman of the house committee Jack Brookes (D) saying after his unbiased committee took a recess, (open mike on C-Span)that he would have put a missile into that place the first day. So much for an honest investigation.
How about limiting it to what the Constitution currently says, no amendment required.
Heck. There is no such thing as people owning private land, or being able to use it without restriction.
You mean John Brown, the terrorist that liked to hack unarmed people to death with a broadsword? That John Brown?
Interesting these people weren’t calling for shooting to kill the blacks who burned up Baltimore and Ferguson, and blocked highways and commercial districts in numerous other areas.
Meanwhile, Mexican drug cartels control swaths of other national wildlife refuges, such as the Buenos Aires refuge in southern Arizona.
http://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc_21_4/tsc_21_4_walsh.shtml
Yeah. I posted a link. Kinda hard to miss.
You posted a link about his raid, which is generally regarded as less loathsome an act than the previous massacres he committed.
That is correct but it fits in with the current situation, i.e., a disgruntled group taking over a federal facility. Get it?
And, hopefully, you understand the message that I’m trying to convey by using John Brown who, at the time of the raid on Harper’s Ferry, many in the north considered to be a hero.
“many in the north considered to be a hero”
Not enough to save him from the noose.
One more time: The point of this post is a ‘journalist’ calling for the death of people who have taken over a federal facility in protest of an issue that they feel strongly about. I think that if this ‘journalist’ were asked about John Brown, who took over a federal facility in protest of an issue that he felt strongly about, he, Chait, would consider Brown a hero.
Holder....ROTC building
Angela Davis....complicity in murdering a judge
Bill Ayres...bombing and murder
Dohrn...complicit with Ayres
Farrakhan....perhaps knowledge of the murder of Malcolm X
Farrakhan...inciting Panthers to kill cops
Panthers...marching armed through streets in Baltimore, Ferguson, and Dallas (?)
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.