Enemies of Liberty are ruthless. To own your Liberty, you'd better come harder than your enemies..

Monday, July 13, 2015

Consider

There is a considerable body of Liberty Forces who take the position of the author here.

I hold a different position.

The fact that he and I disagree as to what constitutes 'justifiable self-defense' is a fair disagreement.

What truly frightens me is the very, very large percentage of Liberty advocates who hue and cry about topics such as the Battle flag, green tips, gay marriage, yet are absent at scrimmages.  'Not one more inch' and 'No more free Wacos' and 'Will not comply' and 'Not on my watch' and 'That's an Oath I will not break', on, and on, and on... while the Enemies of Liberty march onward without impediment.

**Note** I use 'Hue & Cry' in the traditional, Common Law sense.  Look at how many people claim to see a crime against Liberty, call for something to be done, then - nothing...



11 comments:

  1. Maybe you should enlighten him on your 300 yard self defense doctrine. :)
    I agree that if someone has the motive and means to do me or my family harm, I'll strike first. I am a very nice guy, until I'm not. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Like a lot of people, this gentleman seems stuck in the previous war. Where you fight with honor against an honorable enemy. Boy is he in for a surprise!
    Commies don't fight that way. He doesn't seem to understand that when they do start shooting, folks commuting to work on the freeway will here ZIP about it.
    Were called the III percent. that's because everybody else was just going along to get along. And would to this day be eating the crumbs, licking the boots, and whining about the fucked up government. If not for a few brave men. No sirs, ask any good commie, history is made by determined minorities!
    The man quoted Jesus, we need look no further than that example. He stood fast on the right and wrong of god's law.(the law of nature). Unflinching, and unassailable by the gates of hell. he then told us of lesser faith to. "Sale your coat and buy a sword".(you do realize Jesus told you its better to be COLD, and armed than warm?) Holy shit!
    "All who take the sword will die by it", In a word, CONTEXT, Jesus is trying to keep his salty little troop from being wiped out. Everyone there that night new what Jesus was capable of. When he told everyone to, "calm the fuck down!" Everyone did. See, evil had to convict itself. And it did when it brutalized, then murdered the only thing that could save it.
    That argument is finished boys and girls. Feel free to kill evil wear you find it. Theirs only one judge we should fear.
    "when the south wind blows, you say, there will be heat. and if the sky is red and lowering, you say there will be rain. how is it you can discern the sky an not the times you live in? There will be wailing, and gnashing of teeth.........MTHead

    ReplyDelete
  3. In every generation there are many people who are captive to the idea that a "firmly worded warning" will change things. This is a delusion of self-comfort, a self-ratifying excuse not to act in a manner dangerous to their personal, short-term wellbeing.

    "I am holding the high ground, and while I might someday have to use my rifle, I'm not going to be the one to start a war.... that's not how its done".

    My rebuttal is always the same - how can you "start a war" which is now 98 years into its existence? Where is your line, at which "self defense" becomes legitimate in your mind? Is it at your front door? Beacuse at that point, whatever you do is utterly futile.

    Do you actually believe that God expects you to engage is an utterly futile stand? Because *that* is the only position by which you can justify such a limited rightful authority to exercise "self defense".

    ReplyDelete
  4. That man(Black) is a fool at best and and evil muther at worst...Some people seriously need to grab a few brain cells...His argument on whoever shoots first is in the wrong is fucking moronic...How about whoever infringes on your natural rights is in the wrong...Think about this way if you never resist is the person who is doing the aggressing ever in the wrong...Under his theory if someone was trying to take your guns and you shot them for doing that you would be in the wrong...You should of just let them take it since they are the law...I commented over there we will see if he responds...I was a little bit nicer over there when all I really wanted to do was whack him up side the head knocking some sense into him...How do people get to be that ignorant seriously...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its not ignorance. Its called 'rationalization'. That's when you have an irrational fear of something, but rather than face it you create a "rational" argument why its not wrong to shy away from that thing or situation. I.e. a person has an irrational fear of spiders. They rationalize it by saying, "well I'm not an expert on spiders, I don't know which ones are poisonous or otherwise dangerous, so it makes sense to be afraid of all of them".
      Or, in this case, "I'm afraid of violence, therefore I'm going to create a moral argument why I *must never engage* in violence, and stick to it as a matter of high principle".

      Delete
    2. Forgot to add, you will *never* argue a person out of an irrational fear. Period. The more you attempt to present a factual and rational argument, such as "you could learn to recognize all the spiders of the world which are dangerous to people in only a few hours, as there are so few of them", the more stubbornly they will refuse to listen. Its a well documented fact that irrational fears cannot be dispelled by any means, until the person who holds them makes a willful choice to overcome that fear of and for themselves.

      Delete
    3. You think that's the case...Maybe I attribute more courage to people than what they have...Why I say ignorance is that on one hand he talks that the winners write the history but acts like the British fired the first shot like in was truth from God and so that made the founders so righteous in what they did...It funny that the only reason we read that site was because K linked him and then he was so dismissive and arrogant to everyone that went over there like he had all the answers and no one should question him...I have to laugh at people like that especially when they think they know all about you and want to tell you how you think and that your wrong for thinking that...Reminded me of JK...;) Just a little;)...Poor soul history won't even remember guys like him and he tries so hard...

      Delete
  5. Not sure if my first comment came through. He stated in OP that North was aggressor that aggressor should die by sword. Well north won, meaning should still require death by sword. Have had comments ther posted as Suspect1, his argument on Natural Law is not all wrong, but does ignore the past 100 years of infringement. Where I do agree is it is time that ego be dropped and men clothed in soul state their line in the sand, and to stand. The has to be a green before the restoration can commence.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The north invaded the south, it was an aggressor. The south, however, fired the first shot at fort Sumter. Just as Lincoln hoped and intrigued.

    It is a propaganda weapon. Part of psyops. A CRUCIAL part. Appear to be on the defensive, but be ready to fight aggressively.

    It happened at Lex and Con. Egged 'em on and let them shoot first.

    Mex war. Egged 'em on. Mexicans shot first.

    Civil war. Lots of eggin on both sides for years. Machinations. Lincoln resupplied the troops at Sumter. South shot first.

    Spanish Am war. Who the fuck knows, but a suspicious bomb went off giving the appearance that "they" shot first.

    WW1. Lusitania. Need I say it?

    WW2 Need I fucking say it.

    Korea. Vietnam. Iraq.

    Every one of those was publicly justified because we goaded others to shoot first.


    I don't think the guy (black) is a pacifist. He's just pragmatic. When they start en masse to take guns. Yes, it is an overt aggression. Some dirtbag is selling cigs in a corrupt, socialist city and gets busted, fights back, then gets killed by the city's goons? That is new york's problem. And IT AINT NOTHIN new up there. That shit has been like that for decades.

    The reds are on foaming at the mouth. They want blood, and they have been propagandized for many years. Now whoever is calling the shots is ready to set them loose. Let THEM do something stupid. They will.

    Let them fire the first shot. Publicly.

    Doesn't mean you gotta stand there and let them shoot at you. Get behind cover. Just let them initiate, then commence fire.

    To ignore the propaganda game is pure foolishness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. HISTORY, tells of the first shot. You'll never hear of the first shot they take. not in this day and age.
      Even if you did, the winner will write how it all went down. thats why to this day, cw1 was all about slavery.......MTHead

      Delete
  7. "There is a considerable body of Liberty Forces who take the position of the author here."
    If that is true I need to buy a lot more ammo and mags tomorrow.
    Read his bio which explains it all, a philosophy and sociology major and law school the consummate trifecta of doom. He needs to rename his site to "Road to Victoria's Secret" [to buy new pink panties] and stop dissing the memory of Concord. ToneDeaf sparked my memory of your 300 yd self defense doctrine K, this would be a great time to re post that, I loved it so much I adopted it with a minor adjustment to 600yds. Liberty isn't rocket science it's as fundamental as, "In the absence of orders, find something Evil and kill it." The only prep need is put your big boy pants on....

    ReplyDelete

Please post anonymously and include your recognized online handle in the body of the comment.