tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post6481622658442991930..comments2023-09-16T03:06:44.703-07:00Comments on III Percent: Oughtsix: One Win, One FailUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger23125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-42217955604856135052014-05-13T21:38:49.941-07:002014-05-13T21:38:49.941-07:00"We're finding out what will get us to, &..."We're finding out what will get us to, 'only by consent' in the long run."<br /><br />Worthy words, but I'm always about that to which the words refer. Hopefully the two will correspond. On the second half of the comment, maybe you noticed that I used "yap" for myself as well, earlier. Polite ad homs are still ad homs.<br /><br />Maybe we can get there, OBC, in the short run too. If not, why not? That's the important question, but still outstanding is whether or not the broadest questions (or issues) should be handled privately by a small committee.<br /><br />I'm not sure how that could be, if OBC is the goal. <br /><br />"Trust me," works great in a tactical situation where the subordinate has already chosen to trust his superior's orders. We've beaten that horse to death. But prior to that, in choosing one's highest personal goals? Especially in this current environment? Hmm...color me skeptical.<br /><br />You know me...a simpleton. Either it's "only by consent" or it isn't. What am I missing, or which is it?Jim Kleinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-34766163410530800422014-05-13T16:52:27.555-07:002014-05-13T16:52:27.555-07:00Well, all you gotta do is give up.
This running f...Well, all you gotta do is give up.<br /><br />This running fire fight with you ain't impeding my work in the least. In fact, I find it most amusing and of some value.<br /><br />You were a topic of discussion last week-end ya know. How I pictured you was shattered as a result. But while that was the case, it also explained a lot.<br /><br />You keep sluggin' Jimmy. I'll be here for ya as long as your stamina holds out.Alan W. Mullenaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13084509138950656937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-54787095241468953612014-05-13T09:58:02.194-07:002014-05-13T09:58:02.194-07:00"Innate understanding," eh? That would ..."Innate understanding," eh? That would be some neat trick, but that's epistemology.<br /><br />Meanwhile...victorious is great. I'd say you diminish it a bit when you imply that it's caused by something other than individual choices and actions, but I don't suspect you're ready to see that. It's funny that you recognize how much you can accomplish, but don't relish that others can too. To me that's a great thing...more of something good, is better. You seem very tied up that they should be busy accomplishing what you want them to accomplish, and apparently believe that they shouldn't get what they want, if you don't approve of what they want. I think everyone should get what they want, as long as they earn it and don't loot it from others.<br /><br />Maybe if we resolved that particular disagreement, we could stop tying up blogs when there's so much work to be done.Jim Kleinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-62832130708561768392014-05-13T09:30:47.331-07:002014-05-13T09:30:47.331-07:00Well, maybe I was wrong in using the term, "q...Well, maybe I was wrong in using the term, "questions," when I should have said, "issues," so I apologize for that. <br /><br />The broad principles, every time I attend an event where they're being discussed, the nuances are worked out and I find that they <b>have</b> been figured out in consensus (meaning all involved can live with what is being determined even thought it might not be 100% their particular way). Take CA's 'alliance' post: http://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2014/05/13/the-conniefreekmilitianerdcincinnati-alliance/ Winning first and then setting up the framework to avoid it happening again is not a bad thing. Taking out the trash was done at the end of the first Revolution: Tory and Loyalist leaders were deported to Canada with their property confiscated. Some were hung after a trial.. Others were allowed to stay or leave if they so desired. CA's post, which puts words to what I've observed of late, is the most workable solution based upon the several principles of individuals and various groups. Perfect liberty? No. By consent? Absolutely. And that's what being FTF in the events does for us; provide a direct objective and a political end result. We're finding out what will get us to, "only by consent" in the long run.<br /><br />Hope that explains what I meant by FTF is better...<br /><br />Discussions in this medium is problematic in the lack of tone and inflection, and the natural courtesy one forwards when one is communicating to a live human, as you and I both know from our own FTF discussions. Example (and I'm not defending Alan; he's more than capable): Your insult to Alan's thoughts, ie, 'yapping' implies the mindless noise of a dog or coyote (at least in my mind), and, while really neither here nor there, as we're all adults and confident personalities to one degree or another, I'm pretty sure that if the conversation were taking place FTF, we'd all be somewhat reserved in how we described each other's points of view and wouldn't describe someone's thoughts as 'yapping' without thought to possible consequence, the least of which might be a disruption of productivity.<br /><br />My .02....<br /><br />DTG-IIIhttp://www.defensivetraininggroup.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-61270744417077954492014-05-13T08:19:28.725-07:002014-05-13T08:19:28.725-07:00It's not irrational dreaming there Jimmy. It&#...It's not irrational dreaming there Jimmy. It's called prayer. And the broadest principles have already been figured out by a tiny group. Well, not so much figured out. More like an innate understanding. As a result a circle has been drawn and that tiny group is beginning to step inside and face out. And if everything I learned in Sabbath school is true, God will make them victorious no matter the forces arrayed against them.Alan W. Mullenaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13084509138950656937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-12908497579947906492014-05-12T19:46:13.445-07:002014-05-12T19:46:13.445-07:00Which questions, DTG? Surely you're not sayin...Which questions, DTG? Surely you're not saying that the broadest principles involved, should be figured out privately by a tiny group of people. And we do know the value of tight cohesion, and even secrecy, in a tactical fashion. So I'm not sure of your point, especially since you're aware that I know the value of FTF.<br /><br />Alan's yapping about taking out the trash. Hell, I bet even he doesn't know if that's principle or tactics. While I do believe in dreaming big, I don't believe in dreaming irrationally. But that's me.Jim Kleinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-86739060096850192262014-05-12T18:25:31.776-07:002014-05-12T18:25:31.776-07:00I've found...through experience...that these q...I've found...through experience...that these questions are best resolved FTF...like in NC or other places these discussions occur. OP and SK are on the beam when it comes to "the Moral High Ground" and "Rightful Liberty" Jim. <br /><br />Don't "trust me" on this. One of these times, try to make it to one of the FTF events....lots of ground covered.....just sayin'Defensive Training Grouphttp://www.defensivetrainingroup.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-4056726706306364392014-05-12T17:56:25.057-07:002014-05-12T17:56:25.057-07:00Yeah, we can.
You take out the trash once.
Yeah, we can.<br /><br />You take out the trash once.<br /><br />Alan W. Mullenaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13084509138950656937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-44242456694538715672014-05-12T17:23:01.446-07:002014-05-12T17:23:01.446-07:00"Without an endgame we'd end in a quagmir..."Without an endgame we'd end in a quagmire of confusion and in-fighting."<br /><br />Strikes me that there's some confusion and in-fighting over the so-called "end game," as it is. Hearts and minds, and I'm not persuaded at all that FREEFOR can afford to sacrifice allied hearts and minds, especially on tactical matters.<br /><br />I'd suggest that the "end-game" is basically one of principle. To me, Jeffersons Rightful Liberty does nearly a perfect job of it, though of course I'd entertain any better ideas.<br /><br />There are few errors greater than inverting a hierarchy of values, or confusing means for ends.Jim Kleinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-35143134732154527612014-05-12T17:22:26.657-07:002014-05-12T17:22:26.657-07:00Like I told you in another place. It is you that d...Like I told you in another place. It is you that doesn't understand.Alan W. Mullenaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13084509138950656937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-2167192495384429092014-05-12T16:55:28.841-07:002014-05-12T16:55:28.841-07:00It is important now, JK. Without an endgame we...It is important now, JK. Without an endgame we'd end in a quagmire of confusion and in-fighting. If the mission is defined up front, everyone knows when the game is over.<br /><br />As to whether or not I or any other Patriot has the moral right to decide who stays and who doesn't - that is the same moral right I possess when deciding if the same people are enemy combatants to be engaged, or not. The "War" is about people claiming the moral Right to infringe the Liberty of others. The war isn't over until all those who would infringe, by whatever means, have stood down.<br /><br />To reduce the situation to the 7-year-old level: They started it. We'll finish it.Khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17465944474238091234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-26379960095900114622014-05-12T14:17:23.957-07:002014-05-12T14:17:23.957-07:00"We can not tolerate, and do not have any obl..."We can not tolerate, and do not have any obligation to tolerate, people who refuse to leave us alone."<br /><br />Maybe that's the end of it; maybe the rest is a distraction. Seems to me that's a tall enough challenge NOW. Surely there's enough work to be done presently, without bringing in problems that don't exist yet.<br /><br />Otherwise you're going to spend all the valuable time trying to defeat the age-old question...Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes. Juvenal: "But who will guard the guards themselves?" That's a fun question for statists to be sure, but I suspect most Free People will inevitably realize, "That responsibility is mine."<br /><br />Plus, lemmings have a natural tendency to walk off cliffs. There's no moral evil in letting them, though there might be one in believing that it's for another person to decide.Jim Kleinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-30175015127367881122014-05-12T09:30:00.019-07:002014-05-12T09:30:00.019-07:00singlestack, this has been my experience as well. ...singlestack, this has been my experience as well. Their indoctrination has warped the moral landscape of their conscience. I have tried unsuccessfully to explain to more than a few that this is exactly what happened under Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, and others. The concept of amicably disagreeing is beyond their grasp and comprehension.<br /><br />For me the question becomes: is it possible to re-educate these individuals to the point that the old indoctrination is broken beyond repair? The answer lays inside each individual with their willingness to be re-educated. CDPhttp://libertendanger.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-85957833442368332682014-05-12T08:22:53.230-07:002014-05-12T08:22:53.230-07:00This reminds me of a story about Benjamin Clevelan...This reminds me of a story about Benjamin Cleveland. He was a colonel in the North Carolina militia during the Revolution as well as a justice for his county. He was a massive man, over six feet tall and 300lbs plus. He was also a notorious Tory hater.<br /><br />Colonel Cleveland was once summoned to a town where two men from a Tory gang were held after being captured. One of the men was the leader of the gang. Immediately upon arrival Colonel Cleveland hung the leader and gave the other man a choice. He could either hang next to his commander or he could cut off his own ears and leave the territory never to return. The man thought about it for a moment then called for a knife and a whetstone. After sharpening the knife he proceeded to cut off his own ears. He then left the territory with blood streaming down his face never to be seen again.<br /><br /><br /><br />Alan W. Mullenaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13084509138950656937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-56663619916348314712014-05-12T08:17:50.893-07:002014-05-12T08:17:50.893-07:00The duped, mis-educated, sheeple have a chance to ...The duped, mis-educated, sheeple have a chance to stay - swear the oath and sin no more. Then they can stay. Violate the oath, and they go away immediately.<br /><br />As to "parting ways" I didn't mean "Go away, we are too far apart to ever be allies" ;) I simply meant that I do agree with you that any "organized slaughter" is unacceptable, but I DO believe an organized deportation mechanism is prudent for anyone/everyone who refuses to swear the oath and stop meddling in the affairs of others. ;)<br /><br />KKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17465944474238091234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-61929738076724450262014-05-12T08:05:46.488-07:002014-05-12T08:05:46.488-07:00And, DING we have a winner. Trials and rope for th...And, DING we have a winner. Trials and rope for the guilty. The rest, get some small relief and a ride to the border.Sandmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17135763144923309649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-38421271680782606032014-05-12T07:33:50.084-07:002014-05-12T07:33:50.084-07:00And then there was this as well, ion response to T...And then there was this as well, ion response to The very good and heartfelt remarks from LF Mayor (same comments thread):<br /><br />"Be assured that I am not in disagreement that “what to do” with the remnant of the dissolute masses is a Very Big Deal. I’m willing for them to sort themselves out and pass or fail, with a big assist from us insofar as we spell it out for them- become productive and self responsible or you’re on your own. Sink or swim.Try to game “the system?” It ain’t there any longer and such will not be rewarded. Try to be a predator on the productive? No longer any cover for that either. No system of wealth redistribution. Contribute to your own, and, therefor, the general well being of all or suffer the consequences of your own bad decisions… for a change. <br /><br />oughtsixnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-21815466798626138892014-05-12T07:28:19.733-07:002014-05-12T07:28:19.733-07:00This is "not relevant" here?
"Thos...This is "not relevant" here?<br /><br />"Those duped, mis-”educated,” ignorant “sheeple?” They are the victims, no less than we are. It’s our job, or at least it certainly behooves us to do so in our own self interest, to help them see that when our chance to do so is won. <b>Those that refuse and act according to the tyrannical paradigm are fair game, having self identified as the enemy."</b><br /><br />"Anything less and the legitimacy that we must have to justify our actions and to try to re-establish a just society is irretrievable and barbarism the result. That is not what most of us are willing to fight and die for, and it’s not worth having."<br /><br />While my remarks are less thorough and brief, I would think that we have not "parted ways" quite so abruptly as you indicated.oughtsixnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-63959031732457265592014-05-12T07:09:20.525-07:002014-05-12T07:09:20.525-07:00The oath you propose is worthless without signific...The oath you propose is worthless without significant education in the concepts of freedom, liberty, and rights. <br />Over the years I've come to realize that most leftists genuinely believe that they already abide by it.<br />Their indoctrination in collectivism has made them utterly incapable of comprehending them, even when the concepts are explained to them in simple language. They're sincere in their belief that forcing people to practice leftist doctrine is the morally superior position and they are unable to differentiate between voluntary action and government force.<br />Many times I've tried to explain the idea that initiation of the use of force and requiring people to practice beliefs that violate their conscience are immoral and I have always been met with confusion, hostility, and the utter inability to comprehend such "radical" ideas.<br /><br />singlestackAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-37091626144584459482014-05-12T07:08:42.441-07:002014-05-12T07:08:42.441-07:00I believe you are absolutely correct K. The percep...I believe you are absolutely correct K. The perception of people is skewed because that perception is that if someone isn't actively, physically trying to hurt you, they are not a "threat". This falls under the "perception is reality" mantra, and couldn't be further from the truth. A communist, exercising his "rights" (are they rights, if they help to subvert the rights of others?) in this country, and working to bring about the downfall of our system of government, is more dangerous than the street thug, intent on beating you to get your wallet. The street thug generally, doesn't want or plan on killing you, he just wants your money. The communist wants to remove any stumbling block from the road to "glorious communism", and they've been proven to be more than happy to remove your existence from that road if need be without a second thought. The argument of "Granny" who just wants what she can get, "Cuz she earned it." doesn't hold water in a free/liberty society. That mentality is why we're in the situation we're in (prior generations couldn't stand to take a hit, so they left it to the next one, and yes, I do blame them!). Free choice, doesn't mean, free of responsibility, and the only way to stop the femoral hemorrhage, will be to clamp off that artery. We're not saying the artery can't be repaired (Oath you spoke of), but it can't be allowed to bleed anymore after treatment. Whether it was from a knife fight (actively trying to bring the nation down), or an accidental cut (ignorance and selfishness, in who they support and vote for), it doesn't matter. It's still a "bleeder" and needs to be "treated". The way I see it, your "right" to be allowed to choose will cease when your actions or inaction (the afore mentioned generational mindset) cause someone else's rights and freedoms to be trampled out of existence. If you've been shown to have been a documented supporter of a politician or group that worked to subvert or destroy our nation and system of a "Constitutionally limited republic", you will not be allowed to make decisions for the rest of us. Whether your a "70 something Granny", or a "20 something yuppie", it makes no difference, you will be considered a threat through your own prior actions. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00671140850098921150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-37016122148788388352014-05-12T07:02:13.933-07:002014-05-12T07:02:13.933-07:00Well said,
The reset will provide a glaring spotl...Well said,<br /><br />The reset will provide a glaring spotlight to help separate those who have acted with willful malfeasance and malice, from those who simply participated in the fall out of ignorance.<br /><br />Do I have a passionate desire for payback? Absolutely. Am I willing to become that which I hate to do so? Not a chance. <br /><br />We have many people of conscience in the leadership of this movement, who I believe will guide us to a proper resolution.Sandmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17135763144923309649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-44280640228228626862014-05-11T23:29:31.028-07:002014-05-11T23:29:31.028-07:00Interesting thoughts, best reserved for additional...Interesting thoughts, best reserved for additional reflection. Your tack does somewhat resemble what was done during the post-Civil War era in terms of stripping the right to vote away from certain people. I get that no plan is a perfect plan, BUT it would seem you do not hold representative government a natural right (correct me if I'm wrong). While that seems ass-backwards, at this late hour I'm not as eloquent as I perhaps could be. If the government derives its power from the consent of the governed (hahaha, in an ideal world here), then it would seem a just government would be incapable of being so when certain classes of free men (incompetents and children aside) are disenfranchised. No taxation without representation comes to mind. While I am certainly in favor of some sort of voting requirements, to be intellectually honest, one would have to address that issue as well. Part of me rues the fact the words "no representation without taxation" were not written in the document as well. I digress. While I applaud your effort to formulate a workable solution, the cynic in me wonders how to codify the idea of respecting the liberty of another. You'd likely get ten different answers if you asked ten different people. God knows, we have seen what SCOTUS can do with ambiguous statements, even if they aren't so ambiguous.<br /><br /> The crux of the matter is a cultural/spiritual/_____ problem that is one of the heart and mind. The assurance of liberty for future generations is a fool's errand IMHO, simply because it seeks to control the uncontrollable. While one can make it easier or harder, it is no different than attempting to control the safety of a loved one driving to work. One may buy a safer car, take safer roads, or take them to defensive driving courses et. al., but at the end of the day a semi can still punch your ticket. You mitigate what variables you can and hedge your bets, it's all we've ever been able to do. The future of liberty is won or lost one child at a time, one family at a time...one mom...one dad at a time. It's why we are here to begin with. Civic virtue, America's cultural zeitgeist and love of liberty died long before the Idiot in Chief was elected. The cancer is not the symptoms. O, BLM, Conn. and Benghazi are just that...symptoms. I don't have the answer at this point, but I'm not ashamed to keep asking questions until I find it. I doubt very much I'll make it past the "Kill it with Fire" part, but it doesn't hurt to ponder what the lucky few will have to figure out for themselves...jessejames87noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-18140808562455366922014-05-11T20:43:12.426-07:002014-05-11T20:43:12.426-07:00Very well articulated, Sam.
I put a link to this ...Very well articulated, Sam.<br /><br />I put a link to this post in reply to .06's original remark.<br /><br />ca<br />wrsaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com