BS: Tyranny?

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Jan 03 - 06:42 PM

And now we get another State of the Union speech from the lead terrorist. In the last one he said something about 'evil-doers' wanting to take away our rights. That was right after the USA PATRIOT Act passed. Then, after the speech, we got the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Bill and the Homeland Security Act. The PATRIOT Act attacks virtually all the Amendments to the Bill of Rights, particularly the First, Fourth and Fifth; the McCain-Feingold Bill attacks the First; the Homeland Security Act attacks the whole enchilada.

I mean, this is THROWING IT IN YOUR FACE SO OBVIOUSLY...the guy says the 'evil-doers' will take your rights, then HE takes your rights. Do y'all need a roadmap? You are being TAUNTED. And now he wants to pile your kids up in sacrificial bonfires in Iraq rather than ship them home for burial.

I don't think the world crime syndicate really cares HOW the Bush crime family destroys America, as long as U.N. troops have a REASON to move in and will be met with relatively little resistance. So...and this is where I move from the world of hard evidence to speculation...the Bushes are indulging in their satanic fetishes. The Bushes belong to Bohemian Grove, where an annual sacrifice to the ancient Babylonian owl god Moloch takes place, so tonight just picture GW in his hooded robe chanting to Satan while a kid is burned alive. Bohemian Grove ritual, northern California. I think the film is still posted on the net if any of you want me to dig it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Don Firth
Date: 25 Jan 03 - 02:32 PM

Never is a helluva long time. I can hear some Roman citizen saying, "Rome will never etc., etc." And where is the Roman Empire now? Yet, the world goes on, which would probably have been inconceivable to many Romans.

Sense of history, man, sense of history.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jan 03 - 12:07 PM

As for the U.S. never forfeiting it's sovereignty, watch GWBush. Everything he does internationally empowers the U.N. Sure, he said we were about to descend on Iraq, but then he pulled back and let the U.N. 'inspectors' go in. That just legitimizes the murderous U.N. And it's all planned that way. Reagan pulled us out of UNESCO because it was a 'commie outfit' according to him, but Bush signed us back on...no debate and hardly any media mention. But if you look at the UNESCO charter and it's other statements, it provides penalties for those member countries that don't follow it's educational curricula. Actual economic penalties if a country doesn't teach that forced population reduction, etc., is good. And GWBush signed us on to that once again. He is giving away American sovereignty, just like his daddy and Clinton did.

The primary way the globalists are destroying sovereignty is through 'trade agreements'. NAFTA, GATT, etc. The globalists know the people around the world won't vote to give their jobs to other countries, so politicians are circumventing the democratic process and pushing trade agreements. No voting required. Polls show 70% of Europeans are against the European Union, but that doesn't stop the EU from moving forward. Americans are against NAFTA, but that didn't stop Reagan, Clingon and both Bushes from ramming it down our throats.

What steams me most is how the Bushes have created a chaotic world through their armaments selling. There used to be 7 nuclear powers, and Mutually Assured Destruction made some kind of terrible sense. But then the Bush family and the Baker family and others began selling nukes to North Korea and Iran and lots of others, so now there are 50+ nuclear powers, and a Bush is leading us to the brink of WW3. OF COURSE people are going to fill their pants when India and Pakistan or a couple of other countries exchange nukes. Then we'll turn to the pigs who CREATED THE SITUATION and beg to be rescued. The solution?...world government on the TERRORISTS terms.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jan 03 - 08:23 PM

Sure. I'm in favor of world government if it's benign and people have rights. But that's not an alternative here. The world government being formed in front of our eyes is murderous and tyrannical.

In his 1996 book, 'The Grand Chessboard', Zbigniev Brezinski describes the world government which the CFR and Tri-Lateral Commission and U.N. are now implementing. He talks about the New World Order using 'maintainence wars' in the future:

"...The current Central Asian war is not a response to terrorism, nor is it a reaction to Islamic fundamentalism. It is in fact, in the words of one of the most powerful men on the planet, the beginning of a final conflict before total world domination by the United States leads to the dissolution of all national governments. This, says Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member and former Carter National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, will lead to nation states being incorporated into a new world order, controlled solely by economic interests as dictated by banks, corporations and ruling elites concerned with the maintenance (by manipulation and war) of their power. As a means of intimidation for the unenlightened reader who happens upon this frightening plan - the plan of the CFR - Brzezinski offers the alternative of a world in chaos unless the U.S. controls the planet by whatever means are necessary and likely to succeed...."

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/zbig.html

THIS IS THE PLAN WE ARE SEEING IMPLEMENTED NOW. These guys don't 'predict'...they present blueprints. And Brezinski talks about 'maintainance wars'...so WHY IS THAT? If they are BUILDING WARS INTO THE PLAN FOR THE FUTURE, then why abandon the crummy nationalism we have now? I mean, if there will be wars no matter what, and we're going to have to sacrifice all our rights in the transition to an elitist 'world government', I prefer nationalism with the U.S. Constitution in place.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: DougR
Date: 24 Jan 03 - 03:26 PM

The United States will NEVER forfiet it's autonomy to a "World Government." Even the Democrats aren't that dumb.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Jan 03 - 03:14 PM

That's the way I see it, Little Hawk. Well expressed.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Jan 03 - 02:21 PM

Actually, spArrownoid, "World Government" is an inevitable stage of any intelligent race of beings on any one planet, given enough time, and that is not necessarily a bad thing...although it COULD be a very bad thing, depending entirely on the nature and the intentions of that world government, and how it is set up, and how it is maintained and who leads it.

Here's the normal progression of any intelligent species on a planet:

Families > extended family groups > tribes > tribal confederacies > cities > city-states > nation-states > conquering empires > alliances of free nations > cooperative federations of those alliances > a peaceful world federation of all nations, allowing trade, cultural exchange, travel, and mutual freedom to be exactly who you wish to be.

1. primitive stage ("caveman", hunter-gatherer)...people live in small family or tribal groups not too different from a band of gorillas or chimpanzees, and survive off the fruits of nature.

2. organized tribal stage: people form small local tribes and live either by hunting and gathering, or by simple agriculture, or by both. There's still plenty of land available, so tribal warfare may happen, but is probably fairly limited and not too destructive.

3. bigger tribes form: Things are getting more competitive now, and you will probably see the rise of fairly complex religious and political structures within tribes, as well as more organized forms of war. On the positive side, there will also be some trading between different tribes and there will be the developement of some new skills in manufacturing various items and improving agriculture.

4. city-states: The need for increased security, and the growing population will result in the formation of permanent centers which will become walled cities. This is good for the development of culture in all its complexity, bad in the sense that people get crowded together in a congested and increasingly unhealthy manner. The safest place to live (in case of attack) will be behind the city walls.

5. nation-states: Cities will govern large surrounding areas, and join with or conquer other cities, forming multi-city states supported by rural agriculture. Trade will flourish, as will ever larger and more destructive wars between the nation-states.

6. great empires: The most highly organized and militarily elite nation-states will conquer most of their near neighbours, forming great empires which jockey for power across whole continents (Egypt, Assyria, Persia, Greece, Rome, the Czars of Russia, the British Empire, Austria-Hungary, etc...) Those great empires will fight terrible wars, resulting in the deaths of millions.

7. movements of social enlightenment - Now much of the forgoing has been about raw power...the ability to conquer and dominate...based on a few very powerful people at the top manipulating masses of warriors, workers, and slaves...BUT...sooner or later as an intelligent race develops its philosophers and theologians will propose radical ideas, such as: EQUALITY, BROTHERHOOD, SHARE AND SHARE ALIKE, DEMOCRACY, etc... Those ideas will come forth at various times throughout the stages mentioned above, and they will become more and more widely understood and accepted as humanity advances and the lot of the common man improves...

8. And that will lead to the possibility of: the establishment of genuine human rights as a norm in society...the idea that everyone everywhere has the same right to a decent start in life, to freedom of speech, thought, and action, to equality before the law, to education, etc....

9. And that will lead to worldwide movements to secure those rights. One of those movements was launched in 1776 by American revolutionaries, and it profoundly affected Europe, and indirectly the whole world. Another such movement was launched in France shortly after, but it partially foundered on its own internal corruption and brutality, another such movement began in Russia in the late 1800's, culminated in the Communist revolution, and foundered on ITS own internal corruption (eventually), another such movement arose in Cuba and succeeded in 1959 but has been partially hamstrung ever since by being surrounded and half-starved by a hostile superpower. Another such movement made an attempt (a feeble one) to form the League of Nations after World War One. Another such movement made an attempt to form the United Nations (which has become merely a tool of very powerful multinational forces which are subverting it from within).

So, the problem isn't whether or not one shall have a world government. A world government is desirable providing it is a government in FAVOUR of human rights and equality and democracy.

Good governments protect and assist all the people while allowing them a maximum of freedom.

Bad governments protect a small elite at the top and actively harm the rest of the people, while practicing a maximum of control over the population and allowing them a minimum of freedom.

World government is inevitable, given any intelligent race of beings on one world, BUT...will it be an enlightened government based on freedom and equality of opportunity for all people? Or will it be an oppressive oligarchy of a few wealthy despots over a population of serfs?

That's the question to concern yourself with.

The US Constition and the individual nation-state (American or otherwise) are NOT the final word in the development of genuine democracy on this or any other planet. In fact, they are still at a somewhat primitive stage of human development...but showing good possibilities for further progress.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jan 03 - 11:39 AM

http://www.drudgereport.com/matt.htm

Look at the above, Ebbie, since you seem to believe everything the politicians spew out. Look at the photo. GWBush, at a photo-op scripted stop ABOUT American industry, had to pose in front of phony boxes. All the cardboard cartons at the business where he spoke had been made in China, so they HUNG A SCREEN with cartons stamped 'Made in USA' behind him. A subsequent story revealed that the White House did indeed order this done, even after they initially denied it.

So, since you believe politicians, do you have a problem with this story? How do you rationalize the fact that GWBush lied to you. He knowingly stood in front of this bogus screen to give a pep talk on the non-existent American economy. Tissue of lies...illusion printed on a screen.

And if he would lie about something as petty and obvious as this, would he lie when the stakes were REALLY big? Like knowledge of Sept. 11? And is Hart any different? The global crime syndicate controlling both politicians is counting on your continued support, but you will die at their hands if you don't start thinking for yourself.

--------

(The piece below...Hart is advocating unified world government. Communism. And the only way to effectively rally people behind a political cause is to convince them they are in danger if they don't back the cause. If you read pieces like this twice...once thinking of Hart as a supporter of America, then again with Hart working against the interests of America...the second reading ALWAYS reveals the true motive. Hart can quote Jefferson all he wants and say he's working in America's interest, but the financial controls he advocates here = tyrannical world government and the return to the feudal society he claims to be working to prevent. Hart's Communistic tyranny is no more appealing than the Bush family's Fascistic tyranny. Just like Dems vs Reps, you're being offered a choice of two types of tyranny. And Hart knows this and is doing his bit as a team player):

Yale Bulletin and Calendar

December 13, 1999-January 17, 2000Volume 28,

Number 16

Gary Hart warns of impending
attack on U.S. mainland

HOW DID HE KNOW IN 2000..MECH'S EMPHASIS

Sometime in the next 25 years, the United States will be attacked, most likely by a small group of foreign terrorists using weapons of mass destruction, predicted former Colorado Senator Gary Hart in a speech at the Yale Center for International and Area Studies on Dec. 6.

The attack, he warned, could result in the loss of many American lives on their own soil and would be the first foreign attack of the U.S. homeland since the War of 1812, Hart said in his talk, the annual Coca-Cola World Fund at Yale Lecture.

This likelihood of a foreign attack is the consensus of a group he cochairs, the U.S. National Security Commission for the 21st Century, whose members were appointed by Secretary of Defense William Cohen to make recommendations on national security in the new millennium. The commission warned of such an attack in a recent government report.

In his lecture, titled "The Search for a New Definition of Security in a New Fragmented Century," Hart said that the danger of an attack on the U.S. homeland is one of a number of future threats to stability the world faces.

The United States, he urged, must lead a global initiative aimed at developing multinational agencies to regulate international commerce and ensure global peace. If it fails to take these measures, Hart said, the world may witness the re-emergence of neo-feudalism, a despotic form of rule akin to that common in the 17th century.

The increasingly global economy and revolutionary advances in technology, particularly information technology, have resulted in the "erosion" of the "nation-state" -- or the "shattering" of artificial national boundaries, Hart said. In Europe, for example, once divisive nations now share a unified currency and rely on such coalitions as the European Union and NATO for their economic and political security, he noted.

The "vacuum" created by the disintegration of the nation-state leaves the world in a precarious situation that demands a new infrastructure, Hart stated. In addition to the formation of an international coalition to regulate all aspects of the international financial market, Hart proposed the creation of a permanent multinational peace-making force that would be "rapidly deployed, highly maneuverable and specially trained in quick intervention and conflict suppression."

While he acknowledged that these new measures conflict with current concepts of national sovereignty, Hart pointed to the United Nations, NATO and the International Monetary Fund, which were created to deal with political and economic realities during the Cold War, as evidence of the important roles that longstanding global coalitions can play. However, those organizations, he said, are not sufficient to deal with current global realities.

"[They] were created to deal with the Cold War world, but that world is gone," Hart said.

An international peace-making force will be essential in the 21st century because the United States will be "increasingly reluctant to intervene unilaterally, as it did in Somalia or Haiti," Hart said. Likewise, the United States will not always be able to form international ad hoc coalitions, such as the one that dealt with the crisis in Kosovo, nor will it always have enough advance time to do so, Hart said.

To achieve stricter control of global financial markets, Hart proposed creating an international regulatory authority that would oversee trade, tariffs, finance and banks, and serve as a watchdog for "abuses, riggings, monopolies -- in short, human greed," he said. This new union would be in addition to the World Trade Organization, which cannot "stand there alone."

Under Hart's proposed new international infrastructure, the role of national governments would be to defend their own borders, ensure domestic prosperity, and raise and distribute revenues to meet local needs in the areas of education, health, safety, transportation and the environment.

The national government would also "establish and enforce standards for all social undertakings with sufficient guarantees that no student, no elderly person or worker is less well off than their fellow citizens throughout the nation," Hart proposed. "It would also ensure citizens of the great republic have equality of access to its protections and benefits."

An essential ingredient of this new framework, said Hart, would be "the notion of civic virtue," part of Thomas Jefferson's model for the new republic, which calls for all citizens to participate in the public life and in public affairs.

"The great danger in the now relentless corrosion of [national] power is the re-emergence of the neo-feudal era in which loyalties and allegiances are commanded by powerful individuals and private interests. ... It is this danger that causes me to urge you the reconsideration -- indeed the resurrection -- of the classic Republican ideal, a modern, radically democratic republic that restores the common good, the common wealth, and most of all, the deep and real sense of civic virtue," Hart told his audience.

This new form of governance, he added, would put "the political initiative back in the hands of citizens, where it belongs."

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Jan 03 - 10:55 PM

tch, tch, tch...

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jan 03 - 10:21 PM

"We predicted it," former Senator Gary Hart said on Sept. 12, 2001. "We SAID Americans will likely die on American soil, possibly in large numbers -- that's a quote from the fall of 1999."

They didn't predict it...they PROMISED IT! Just like Cheney promised we would be attacked if there was more than one congressional investigation into 9-11. These are PROMISES, not predictions. Hart SHAPES policy in America, and America needed a 'Pearl Harbor-like' event, in Brezinski's words (another CFR member), to bring about the next phase of social engineering (destruction of the Constitution). Defend that mafia whore Hart all you want, but the day after Sept 11 he was on TV gloating about how 'now is the time to initiate a new world order'. They engineered their event and then capitalized on it immediately, and the pig even boasted beforehand that it would happen.

America has had the most porous border in the world for decades. If the Arabs hate the U.S. so much, why hasn't Hollywood (where the Jews make decadent movies, according to the Ayotollahs), been bombed? Just one simple dynamite-vest bombing? Or why hasn't NYC seen dynamite bombing? The diamond exchange...run by Jews. And why haven't we seen attacks SINCE Sept. 11? Bush has made the Mexican border even weaker and thousands per day are pouring across. The reason is, the attacks are being controlled by people like Hart. Hart said there would be a big attack if we didn't do certain things, then on Sept. 11 there was an attack just like he 'predicted', and the changes his CFR advocated were then put into place. And now he's making noises about another attack. And after the next attack you'll turn to him again and give up all your rights...STOP IT ALREADY! YOU'RE BEING PLAYED! YOU ARE TURNING TO THE TERRORISTS FOR PROTECTION FROM THE TERRORISTS!

And the FBI stopped the terrorist attacks of 9-11, in case you haven't been keeping up with the news. The field agents knew exactly what was going on and reported to their supervisors, who stopped all further investigations and re-assigned the agents who had uncovered the plot. Of course Hart and Bush want the FBI gone. It is TOO efficient. And they can't count on the good-principled people within the agency to go along with the destruction of American Sovereignty.

NOTHING has been done to secure America since Sept. 11. The only thing that happened is that airports are now under military control like in a banana republic, and local cops are getting riot gear. And troops have been sent out of country. We have been prepared for the next terrorist attack, where airports will be locked down, local cops will have enough new equipment to seal off roads, and Bush can turn to the U.N. for troops. That is ALL that has been done as a result of 911, and Hart is in the the thick of it and chuckling about what he's going to do next. Quit reading his press releases and start thinking about WHAT he said.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Jan 03 - 06:22 PM

Gary Hart:
If the United States is prepared to go it alone, if we expect serious casualties, if we have a plan for a prolonged occupation and if the cost of the entire operation is considerable and continuing, the American people deserve to be told.

That is why the Constitution leaves to Congress -- the collective representatives of the people -- the sole authority to declare war. The U.S. armed forces belong to the people, not the president. For the people to support the deployment of their Army, they must understand what is at stake and why. Otherwise, vague polling data about "supporting the president" can disappear overnight with the sight of body bags returning home.

Gary Hart:
A second set of urgent questions has received even less attention. They can be stated simply: Are we ready for the virtually certain retaliatory terrorist attacks on our homeland if we invade Iraq? The evidence suggests that we are not. Those attacks would not necessarily come from Iraq or Iraqi interests; they could come from elsewhere in the fundamentalist Islamic world, or even from outside it. But a major U.S. invasion of a Muslim country would almost certainly trigger serious attempts to kill Americans. (emphasis mine. Eb)

And also Gary Hart:
Prudent leadership would say to the American people, "We will go to war in a dangerous part of the world only when we know what we are doing and what our plans are, only when we are prepared for the consequences here at home and only when our nation is united -- public and private sectors -- to conduct this war to a successful conclusion."

"We predicted it," former Senator Gary Hart said on Sept. 12, 2001. "We said Americans will likely die on American soil, possibly in large numbers -- that's a quote from the fall of 1999." (Actually, December 6, 1999. Ebbie) The quote comes from the Phase One Report of the U.S. Commission on National Security for the 21st Century, which was co-chaired by Hart and former Sen. Warren Rudman, R-NH,. But, before 9/11, no one seemed to much care about their conclusions. During our Sept. 12 conversation, Hart said he was "tearing (his) hair out" in frustration.

He still has criticisms and strong ideas as to how he would handle things differently. "Within a week after 9/11," Hart said Wednesday. "I would have begun a search for a new CIA director... It's important to say, if you're running a big institution -- and that institution suffers a serious deficiency -- that you will be held accountable. But if nobody is sacrificed for a failure then nobody is accountable. "

He also has harsh comments about the FBI's anachronistic worldview. "The ghost of J. Edgar Hoover is still in that damn [FBI] building!" Hart says. "They need to clean it out and start all over again."

Hardly the words of a traitorous conspirator. I don't know where you got your opinions, GUEST, but they don't seem backed up by facts.

And keep in mind, - Denver is Hart's hometown.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jan 03 - 05:41 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,76298,00.html

COLMES: And you firmly believe that what happened on September 11 will happen again in the United States?

(Former Senator) GARY HART: Yes, well, not that. What will happen sooner rather than later is probably a biological attack on multiple targets in the center of this country. Probably smallpox in Denver, Cleveland, and Dallas.

(Gary Hart is a member of the CFR...Council on Foreign Relations...one of the globalist groups which is orchestrating the end of American sovereignty...so we can be absorbed into a world government. Ten years ago, people were denying the CFR even existed...anyone who mentioned it was a 'conspiracy theorist'. And now, every time there is a terrorist attack on America, Hart makes an appearance and outlines what new repressive legislation is going to be passed, what rights Americans will be expected to give up, etc. The CFR makes these pronouncements as suggestions or predictions, but they're in actuality a peek ahead at what is to come. The CFR GUIDES U.S. policy...it doesn't advise. But Hart tore his pants in this interview. He named the cities the globalists plan to attack next. The globalists NEED a war with Iraq so the CIA can release smallpox in Denver, Cincinnatti and Dallas, and blame it on Saddam Hussein. If this really does happen as Hart said, all cities in the U.S. will be cordoned off in a matter of hours once smallpox appears, and no one will be allowed to leave. Within 4 days there will be massive food riots in the cities, and the police will be ordered to stand down, like they were during the L.A. riots. Rioters are expected to kill any 'resistance movement' within the cities...people who have guns, water, food, Bibles, etc, (thus saving the military that task). Outside the cities, fleeing city-dwellers will pillage and kill, and after a couple weeks the Bush Company will bring in 'foreign assets'...U.N. troops...peons from third-world countries who will shoot you for your gold fillings. Gary Hart is a terrorist, folks, and he just arrogantly told us what is going to happen next. He also said 'sooner rather than later', and the fascist Hannity praised him for being 'ahead of the game' when it comes to calling terrorist attacks.)

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: DougR
Date: 23 Jan 03 - 02:46 PM

I really think you should get help Guest.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jan 03 - 10:56 AM

The people setting this tyrannical world government up are pushing all the 'insecurity' buttons. And one of the chief ones is female insecurity (they push male insecurity buttons too, ladies). But the government tells women that it...government...will protect them, if they just go along with mandatory sentencing, disarmament, etc. And the guys picking up trash on the side of the road are just walking billboards for the government's slavery system. But the government cannot protect you from random violence, and cops cannot protect you. You know that, and the cops and military, and the criminals know that. So don't support an illegitimate penal system. And this one...I mean, would YOU want to be considered a 'cost avoidance' device? Come on.

I know kids who talk about getting an 'early release day' from school. They get out at noon and when I ask, they say it's an 'early release day'. That's prison terminology. I talked to a kid the other day who mentioned her 'community service', and when I asked how a CHILD could have to do community service, she said she had too many absences in school. And now she has a criminal record. I mean, have you folks who support this stuff gone nuts?

I'll go over this once again. Bush # 1 killed millions in order to set up his cocaine cartel and cocaine importation business. While he got Reagan to launch a 'war on drugs'. Cops were given incentive to enforce drug laws over all others because they get 10% of the property seized in drug cases. Mandatory sentences were established for drug convictions. Our prisons are full of harmless dope smokers as a result, while the VIOLENT people are released so they can go back into society and generate revenue in the only way they know how...kill others so lawyers can be employed and state money can be spent on trials (and citizens will get more insecure and support more imprisonment). 8 million Americans in prison, and the number is about to explode because NOW they are connecting 'drugs and guns'. Watch cops on TV and read articles about car searches, etc. They always mention 'looking for guns and drugs'. So that link has been made in the cops' minds and in ours. And now they're equating drugs with terrorism and with SUV's.

Law students at Northwestern cleared ten men on death row in Illinois...just as a CLASS PROJECT. And the nation is all steamed because the exiting Governor commuted all death sentences in that state. Our 'justice' system is so corrupt, don't support by backing slave labor.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Jan 03 - 08:31 PM

I don't necessarily have a problem with using inmate labor if the prisons are a part of a government owned and operated penal system, if the object is rehabilitation, and if any revenues coming from the inmates' labor is used only for the operating costs of the prison.

But I do have a problem with prisons being operated for profit and using the labor of the inmates as a part of the profit making apparatus. This sort of thing is ripe for abuse, and smacks of slave labor.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jan 03 - 06:14 PM

You see, the thing about laws is that a well-intentioned government will generally use them in the fashion in which they were orginally intended, while a government with dictatorial intentions will not. The written law alone is not sufficient to protect people. The crucial matter then is, what are the actual intentions of those in charge at the top in any given system?

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Kim C
Date: 22 Jan 03 - 02:33 PM

Around here it is quite common to see people in the custody of the Corrections Department picking up trash alongside the road. Sometimes it is part of the "community service" people have to do for their first DUI arrest.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Jan 03 - 01:54 PM

Services provided by inmates are defined by 18 USC 4125(a) and include preservation and maintenance of grounds and facilities; construction, repair and demolition of buildings; road repair; custodial services; and transportation of debris to recycling centers. Only minimum security inmates are available under the Army's civilian inmate labor program. Army personnel do not provide security supervision of inmate work details, but do monitor and account for inmate presence or absence in an assigned work area. from the link given by GUEST above

I'm of two minds about this. Obviously it takes away jobs from the people, but at the same time, it saves money and teaches skills and work habits and it makes sense to me if rehabilitation, not punishment, is the main rationale for incarceration.

At the Oregon Correctional School outside Salem, there are vast fields where the inmates used to plant and harvest many of their own food. All of it in-house, none of it sold on the market. The practice was discontinued when the local unions raised the issue. The fields now lie empty.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jan 03 - 01:10 PM

Wow, Kim...that's quite an amendment! Seems to me that Stalin and Hitler were able to find literally millions of "duly convicted" persons with very little trouble at all, and I daresay it can be done in the good ol' USA too. Imagine that...carte blanche for establishing the institution of slavery in a nice legal fashion. All that's necessary is to decide that someone has committed a "crime", and that all depends on how you define "crime", doesn't it?

Interestingly enough, a good many Latin American countries have excellent constitutions, modelled pretty closely on the American Constitution, but that has not stopped various dictators in those countries from abrogating every human right and committing every atrocity whenever they wanted to. It's easy when you control the courts, the military, the media, and the law enforcment agencies. And how do you control them? By guns and money.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Kim C
Date: 22 Jan 03 - 12:55 PM

Amendment XIII

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jan 03 - 12:45 PM

(The things you turn up while doing searches. This page from one of the Army's own sites seems to be from 1995. 'Cost avoidance' = slave labor):

http://www.hqda.army.mil/acsim/ops/inmatebg.htm

The Army has established civilian inmate labor programs on twelve installations since FY 89. Four resident programs (prison camps) are at Fort Bliss, Fort Dix, and Camp Atterbury. Eight non-resident (off-post) programs are at Parks Reserve Forces Training Area, Red River Army Depot, Fort Lee, Fort McClellan, Fort Stewart, Fort McPherson, Fort Indian Town Gap, and Anniston Army Depot. Fort Dix has two resident programs (prison camps) using civilian inmates from both federal and state penal systems. Camp Atterbury's resident program uses state civilian inmates. These ten programs average an annual net cost avoidance ranging from $263,000 to $3,500,000....

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Kim C
Date: 22 Jan 03 - 10:22 AM

Well, I don't think I'm that important either, LH, but if we're all being watched.... well, you know.

And GUEST, you're right that we really don't know what awaits us. We never do. But still we must endeavor to persevere. Sometimes it means planning ahead, and sometimes it means thinking on the spur of the moment. That's why we're still here on this planet.

I don't know about anyone else, but I still have faith in humanity.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 09:42 PM

No, no...it's people with good thoughts that worry them. :-) People with bad thoughts are easily recruited to do the nastier work. Like I say, best thing is to go somewhere that's not all that modern if you can, with a minimum of automation and a maximum of real natural life. I can't tell you what to do if you want to live in downtown Dallas or Detroit, however.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 07:33 PM

But...but...what if the government found out I had a BAD THOUGHT?! Oh me oh my!

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 07:29 PM

This thing has a PM system? I'll look into the registration process and think about it.

Meanwhile, I'll do some research on Hi-Tech Tyranny. Need to find some URLs like at the beginning of this one.

My point would be that people DON'T REALLY KNOW what is awaiting us, but based on past experience, it won't be good. For example, cameras at intersections. Lots of cities now use them and mail tickets to people who are photographed entering the intersection on a red light. And some cities want more revenue, so the yellow-light time has been shortened...to catch more people. Problem is, more people are now dying in collisions at intersections.

So if you folks think all this technology is benign (for the kids, to save lives, etc.), it's not. It depends on who controls it. And some of the technology is MIND BOGGLING. And if a simple camera can be abused by local authorities at intersections, what will they do with the microchips when they're injected into us? Or nanotechnology...molecule-sized machines which could be sprinkled on food and then activated if you're bad...eat their way through your system and rupture the nearest artery. That stuff is available RIGHT NOW. And that is how we will be controlled in the future...monitor us through microphones in telephones, computers, TVs, cable boxes...track the chips embedded in everything we buy....construct psych profiles based on how many minutes of Tom Brokaw we watch before switching channels...push masturbatory video games on the kids...subliminally advertise the government's propaganda...

That last...governmental propaganda...that's what I'll look for tonight. I've heard on talk shows about the FEMA system which is being finished up...tied into the bogus 'Amber Alert' system. Soon, FEMA will seize control of all media on a daily basis. TV, car radio, etc. Your phone will ring with important government information. And if you hang up, a note of that will be made. The technology for that is almost in place, from the interview I heard.

Anyway, I'll think about that PM thing, Little Hawk. I'll check into it.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 06:37 PM

I doubt you're important enough to warrant that kind of attention at this point, Kim. :-) I know I'm not. I enjoy being relatively unimportant...

spArrownoid - There are one or two things I would like to PM you about (private message), but I can't because you're not a member of the forum. Would you consider registering as a member so I can PM you? It's simple enough...you just register yourself as "spArrownoid" in the Membership section, and you'll need a secret code of course to log in.

It's up to you.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Kim C
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 05:25 PM

Throwin' a Robert Burns party. Gotta have it. :-) I'm fixin neeps & tatties too, and homemade shortbread. All of which I still have the right, and the ability, to do. And after supper, we're going to engage in the playing of live music in the living room, which, I believe, is also still entirely legal. Although one of the parties to the party is a best-selling author who was in the military back in the 60s, so he's probably on the FBI's hit list somewhere, or got a chip in his head, or something. So I guess we'll be busted when the black helicopters land in the back yard. But it's okay, because at least I'll die in the company of friends. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: DougR
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 05:13 PM

Kim C: you LIKE haggis?

(I can't believe you folks are still feeding this guest)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 03:28 PM

Y'know, all of this is an excellent argument for living in a much simpler place, like Trinidad, Guiana, or some such place, with a warm climate and people in the country living the old style village life, and actually growing a lot of their own food, and helping each other out. Things like debit cards, credit cards, and all the other regulated stuff are FAR less vital in such a society, and you can get by entirely without them, and no one can keep track of who you are or where you are because the electronic means to do it simply isn't there.

I am keeping this well in mind.

Interestingly enough, WalMart gives me the creeps, and I have never ever bought one single thing from them. I went to look at the store twice, and that was it. I avoid that place.

I received a letter today from my Canadian bank advising that in order to keep track of "money laundering", FINTRAC, a government agency, now requires that the Bank report all cash transactions on behalf of a single customer that aggregate to C$10,000 equivalent or greater within a 24 hour period. FINTRAC means the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada.

It's brand new legislation effective January 31st, 2003. The public was not consulted beforehand, naturally, but they are being so informed after the fact.

It's well known already that there is not nearly enough actual cash in the sytem to match the supposed deposits in people's accounts (probably not even 5% of it). If there should be a panic for cash, the banks will all have to shut their doors and freeze deposits. If that happens and you are in debt, you're screwed. Most people ARE in debt, as that is the norm in this society. I hope you are not.

All cross border transfers of C$10,000 or more will now be monitored as well. That amounts to about US$6,600 a day. That's effective Mar 31/03.

People are very vulnerable in western society, because they do not live a real "community" life (as I experienced recently in the Ashram in Trinidad), but are on their own, protected only by their money, their credit card, and their debit card. The system can simply shut them down overnight if it wants to and render them helpless. They don't have cows, chickens, vegetable gardens, or any way of surviving without money.

People are far less vulnerable in a traditional simple village lifestyle in a warm climate with an extended family around them, as is the case in the rural areas of the 3rd World, unless, of course, the big fat machine decides to turn their country into a bombing range or start a civil war there.

If the banks close their doors, you won't be able to get into your safety deposit box either. Keep it in mind.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 03:21 PM

You're a big one for 'naming your sources' Ebbie, so why don't you look at the government's own releases? Go LOOK at the PATRIOT Act.

In the past two years, the 'conservative', 'smaller-government' Republican / Conservatives have:

Federalized education by tying fed money to national testing. You don't perform, your school doesn't get paid. And the curriculum (we saw this in Texas under Bush) will be simple-minded. The purpose is to dumb down the kids. The world government pulling our government's strings doesn't CARE about us. We've been bought off with material possessions and comfort. But the KIDS are being dumbed-down and brainwashed.

Federalized religion. In America. Against the Constitution. But the Bush junta has tied federal money to certain 'rules' for churches. And the churches are grabbing for all they can. With the money comes Federal control, though. The wall between church and state is now GONE.

Federalized cops. The Feds are giving local cops cars, guns, humvees, radar, and money for extra officers. And that was BEFORE the Homeland Security Act created a national police force...a Gestapo.

The McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform bill outlaws any organization which makes political contributions from mentioning in ads or interviews an incumbent's voting record 60 days before a general election or 30 days before a primary. Absolute violation of the First Amendment. This begins in 2004. But, so you won't know about it, the congress gave David Letterman and Jay Leno dispensation. THEY can continue with the jokes, but before the next election, hundreds of talk show hosts are going to disappear. Literally. For exercising freedom of speech.

And the PATRIOT Act...redefines domestic terrorism to mean anyone who commits a crime. Allows cops to go into your house and steal anything and plant surveillance devices whenever they want and never have to tell you or get a warrant.

And recent Executive Orders....you can be named an enemy combatant by the President (Lenin once accidentally initialled a piece of paper that was an execution order for 10,000). And once you are an enemy combatant, you can be tortured and executed without ever seeing a lawyer. The CIA already killed one American to test this, and they got away with it (killed an American in Yemen, and a court ruled it was legal)

Go back and look at JFK's Executive Orders after the Cuban Missile Crisis...those orders alone created a dictatorial Presidency, under times of 'national emergency'

A Federal court recently ruled you can be drugged at any level of the imprisonment system, before trial. So, if you are taken in for speeding, they can shoot you full of Thorazine. In America.

Federal courts have ruled the government can now take your property without compensation

The Homeland Security Act mandates the quarantine of all U.S. cities for the 'threat' of a bioattack.

The Germans got tagged at Nuhremburg for not crossing their Ts and dotting their I's. They tried to claim everything they did was according to German law, but it wasn't. The American Reich won't make the same mistake. There are Multiple layers of legal coverage on every heinous crime you can imagine...just waiting there to present to the world court after the culling process is over in America.

I mean, what does it TAKE to spook you folks? LOOK at the legislation. It's not imagined and it's not nonsense. I gather most of you Americans are Democrats...liberals...well, I guess that's why you're supporting this stuff. It's Communism in action. But did you factor in the concentration camps? Do you think they're not for YOU?

The gun stuff above...the new bill...they're just now implementing the horrific details of the 1968 Gun Control Act, which technically disarmed Americans, but it took them 35 years to grow teeth enough to enforce it. And now they are. So all the stuff I just outlined may seem impossible to enforce, but it's not. U.N. troops pouring into America will see to that. And it could happen overnight.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 02:04 PM

GUEST, I don't need to explain myself to you nor do you have a right or reason to be 'ashamed' of me but my point (way up there) was how far we have fallen from the eloquence of a Patrick Henry.

But do stop and think. If the administration and the Congress are as far along in conspiracy as you say, why are YOU still alive and talking?

Nah. We've never been that efficient. You present just enough credible information and premises mixed with absolute nonsense to be unsettling.

Reminds me of something I wrote back in 1973 or so, when the "oil/gas shortage" (bogus)kept us all in long lines at the gas stations. I did what you are doing: Went from A to Z in a logical progression of planned collapse of the system, without considering the fact that by H, another road had been charted.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Kim C
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 01:47 PM

Have a Coke and a Smile. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 01:45 PM

No. The Human Will will NOT prevail. Not unless it asserts itself NOW. You can't trivialize your way out of this.

You have lost INCREDIBLE rights just with H.R. 3162, the USA PATRIOT Act. Warrantless secret searches. Destroy the Fourth Amendment. Sections 213, 214, 215, I believe. Cops can come into your house when you're gone and take anything they want, and if they get pressed to cover their asses, they can fall back on 'delayed' warrants. They can get 'permission' to search your house after they've invaded. They can take your sterling silverware if they think you got it by 'terrorism', they can take anything as 'evidence'. Your computer, your love letters, anything. And they never have to let you know they were there. And since it's a matter of 'national security', if you ever tell anyone, you are an enemy combatant and will be 'disappeared'.

Do you truly not KNOW this? Amazing.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Kim C
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 12:49 PM

Last time I checked, I could still do everything that I personally wanted to do, except import haggis from Scotland. The USDA doesn't want us eating sheep organs. But that's okay, because there's plenty of other animal organs available. And, there's a place in the US that makes USDA-approved haggis from beef parts.

Happy Robert Burns Day, y'all. That's this Saturday. :-)

When there's no cash, we'll just go back to using things like shells and beads. And I've got plenty of beads!

GUEST, when the crisis occurs, the Human Will will prevail. It always does.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 12:31 PM

All that WILL be declared illegal. It was in Argentina. The banks closed. You couldn't get your assets. But they still have their debts and are being threatened with eviction. So....the government says the way out is a 'cashless society'. That way, everything can be regulated to insure 'security'. They got the people in debt, then they told them that, to keep what they had, they had to switch to the new system.

That is happening in the U.S. Cash is going to undergo a change this year. Fewer twenties in circulation. You won't have cash, so you'll use some other form of card or check. In a couple of years the politicians will say they need to do something to help us out, and we'll be given national accounts. Just like in Argentina.

I don't see how that is so hard to understand. As far as why it's not done NOW, it's too soon. The global banking cartel doesn't want to blow up the planet...they just want 80-90% of us to die. And then, they'll control the population growth in the future. To crash the world economy now would mean chaos, and they can't be sure they'd survive the wars and plagues. They want to lower the world into a depression slowly, and then offer us a way out with hi-tech banking. Complete control over whether you eat or die. If you're bad this month, no food next month.

And as far as handguns, no one has the right to restrict them. They are ideal home defense. Small, can be locked up, deadly. And as you point out, small guns are no threat to the military, so why target them? And that 'for the children' argument has no validity. This bill is an assault against your ability to defend your home. The govt. wants you defenseless and tied to a debit card. THEN you have to do community service at 80 years of age or not earn your gruel.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 11:57 AM

With all of this ranting about how government is going to drive us all into debt, eliminate cash, etc., you seem to have lost track of the fact that the entire economy and everything dependent on it is a construct of government. If the U.S. government wanted to make such overt attempts to indebt the society, they could simply declare printed money, checks, and credit cards not legal tender. That would be as effctive as any measures you have described and far faster. Obviously, people would continue to use the money, but they will in any event. Either rebellion will be effective, in which case none of your prophesies is a danger, or it will not be, in which cae it's already too late.

The restriction of hadguns is neither a violation of the Second Amendment nor a threat to citizens' ability to defend themselves. If you think that any pistol will scratch the paint on an APC, or be anything but a gesture against troops with assault rifles and LAWs, you are sady mistaken. If you are truly convinced that you must defend yourself against the Feds, get a deer rifle.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 11:35 AM

Oh, and get rid of your credit cards, folks. I can't find the legislation, but congress is considering something that, according to the radio report, will make identity-theft easier. The U.S. govt. wants ALL citizens in debt. And soon, your credit cards will be considered 'assets' to be seized. You owe the govt?...they'll just charge it to your card the way they now 'attach wages'. It's coming, but what's more worrisome is news that 'identity theft' will be made easier. What if someone maxed out all your credit cards today and the government insisted you were responsible for the debt? Y'all might want to look into that.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 11:31 AM

ARGENTINA...

That is EXACTLY the situation we are facing. The U.S. will be the last on the block to experience this (the World Bank said they would foreclose on Japan if the Nikkei Exchange ever dipped to 8100), but that would create a global collapse...collecting on Japan's debts. I expect Japan and the U.S. will fall at the same time.

In the U.S., we are going to see new twenty dollar bills at the end of this year. And far fewer of them. Then other denominations will be restricted. When there is less money in wallets, we will be urged to use credit and debit cards. Thumbscanners will be installed in all stores and will be mandatory (going on now all over Texas, but only for 'check cashers' and 'credit and debit cards'). This is exactly what happened in Argentina, and then, three years after the thumbscanners went in, the economy collapsed. The World Bank strong-armed the government into abolishing cash. Cashless society. People with tens of thousands in the bank were told they would get an 'allotment' of two hundred bucks a month.

I haven't done a search of the Argentinian situation in a while, but the last I heard, one of their revolving Presidents had the GUTS to say they would never pay off the World Bank debt.

And then, a couple weeks ago, the World Bank came out with a plan to let countries declare bankruptcy.

The middle class in Argentina was destroyed and are eating dogs. That's the last I specifically read on it.

http://news.google.com/

The above is an INCREDIBLE search engine that sorts headlines constantly. You might try using it just like google...type in 'Argentina bankruptcy'...something like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 11:21 AM

Lurker and Little Hawk, y'all might want to start a thread about George W. Bush vs George III. There seem to be a lot of Brits on this forum, and I'd be interested to hear what they have to say about the Moron who lost America. Didn't George III lose America before he lost his mind? I always suspected they just poisoned him so they could blame their military incompetence on 'forces beyond their control'. But then I see the Morons in the Windsor family and have to reconsider. Aren't they the same insane bloodline?

But then there's OUR George, and he's certainly a study in contradictions. Crazy or stupid? Who knows. But he DOES seem to have power (though I'd like to think someone with some sense will do another 'pretzel' on him if he ever reaches for the nukes). So that might be an interesting thread.

I think I should start one on our hi-tech tyranny. That's where we're headed...a world of surveillance and monitoring beyond even the wildest paranoid dream...and people don't even seem aware of it.

BY THE END OF THIS YEAR, PEOPLE, WAL-MART HAS SAID HALF THE ITEMS IT SELLS WILL HAVE TRACKING CHIPS IN THEM. SEWN INTO HEMS, MELTED INTO PLASTIC BOTTLES, ETC. 3 CENT CHIPS MADE HERE, SHIPPED TO CHINA TO BE ADDED TO ITEMS, THEN TRACKED FROM THE FACTORY TO YOUR STORE SHELF. IN A YEAR'S TIME YOU WILL HAVE HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS OF ITEMS IN YOUR HOUSE WITH CHIPS IN THEM...AND THE 'COP ON THE BEAT' WILL BE ABLE TO COME TO YOUR DOOR WITH A SCANNER AND MAKE SURE ALL YOUR BELONGINGS ARE 'REGISTERED' TO YOU.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: CarolC
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 11:18 AM

The scenario you describe with regard to money in bank accounts reminds me a lot of what Escamillo was saying about what was going on in Argentina a few months ago.

Does anyone know how the situation in Argentina has resolved itself if, indeed, it has?

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 11:09 AM

Tell that to the Pakistani mercenaries when they're having their way with you. Or with you husband.

You are the slave of a million federal, state and local laws. Absurd laws. You can't do what you want. You've been TOLD you can, and you pay your taxes and don't peep and buy into the lie.

All you folks with IRA's and savings...when the war comes (oh, that's right...the perpetual war is already here), well, the Republicans are just itching to freeze all privately-held bank accounts. As a 'reserve cash supply' to support the war effort. It's coming. They just changed the rules on 401K's so your employer no longer has to gurantee you'll receive anything when you retire (that in itself is a larger rip off than the S&L's, but Americans don't know or care about their history...Kim C. as an example...or they're too mesmerized by the Sopranos and the playoffs to hear the single little blurb on the news about 'congressional concern over retirement'.) Well, the governmental concern over retirement is that you might actually demand what you paid for. So they're just going to make it impossible for you to retire.

The day CNN ran the story about the change in 401K rules, they immediately followed it with a 'feel good' story about older Americans returning to the workplace in droves. Showed old-timers bagging groceries, etc., and the story said it was partly a sign of the times, but it sure beat boredom. I heard about the story, described it that way to a retired relative who said that was EXACTLY the way CNN (run by Army psy-ops) had aired the pieces.

And the bad thing about our situation now is that congress gave GWBush the authority to launch a war against ANY nation, at ANY time. I hope Iraq is just a diversion, but if it is, there's still GWBush with the power to launch any war he wants. That's unconstitutional. But if he DID launch a war, anywhere, your bank accounts would probably be frozen. Your IRAs would DEFINITELY be frozen.

The globalist-controlled government of the U.S. has taken us from record surpluses to deficits, and we have no manufacturing ability which can be used to pull us out of this slump. The stock market is being artificially propped up by the U.S. govt., and 401K money is now being stolen, and your life's savings are next. And once we are all in debt up to our ears, the money supply will be restricted. You won't be able to even get your hands on money. And, well, we will be told the only alternative is a 'cashless society'. That's why surveillance is such a big deal right now. The government plans to track and tax your every move and get you in debt 110% to the Company Store. That's why Wal-Mart has said by the end of the year, half of their products will contain tracking chips. Sand-sized chips that will be registered to you on check-out and which cops, satellites, etc. will be able to pinpoint thereafter. The hi-tech tyranny being set up is mind-boggling. And it will be used to control and tax. It will ultimately be used to determine whether you can breed...aggressiveness will be bred out of the human race.

Kim C....you are more of a slave than you could ever imagine.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Kim C
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 10:22 AM

DougR, my daddy was only a teeny tiny toddler in 1933! And his parents were in the wilds of West Virginia, scraping out a living, and probably didn't even know what was going on in the rest of the world.

Sorry, GUEST, I ain't nobody's slave. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 12:56 AM

"Whether this is a similarity or difference between the two Georges is a debate best left to rabidly paranoid conspiracy theorists."

AWRIGHT! Let's get to it, fellow rabid and paranoid conspiracy theorists! Bwa! Ha! Ha! Ha! (suitably maniacal laughter, a la Doctor Evil) What say, people? Does George Bush, like George IIIrd, have no real power? Is he just a puppet? Is he more or less in command of his faculties than the "idiot king", and does it matter? These are burning questions which MUST be answered, and quickly!

Hee! Hee!

When I was a kid I never even thought about this kind of shit...but on the other hand, I was being constantly harassed by bullying schoolmates, so maybe things have actually improved in some respects.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST,sparrownoid
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 12:44 AM

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

(We are the well regulated militia. You and me. All American adults. That's why we don't need troops on the streets. Police can depend on the citizen army. And no law can supercede this. H.R.124 is null and void upon it's face. Waste of time and money to pass more unconstitutional gun laws.)

Subject: RE: BS: House Resolution 124
From: GUEST,Sparrownoid
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 12:35 AM

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.124:

GWBush has already said he'll sign this. Notice Patick Henry talked about the need to rush to stop the foreign menace before disarmament occurred. Comparing GWBush to Patrick Henry is as close as you can come to sacriledge in America. I'm ashamed of you, Ebbie.

---------

108th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 124
To provide for the mandatory licensing and registration of handguns.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 7, 2003
Mr. HOLT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

-----------------

A BILL
To provide for the mandatory licensing and registration of handguns.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Handgun Licensing and Registration Act of 2003'.

SEC. 2. FEDERAL HANDGUN LICENSING AND REGISTRATION SYSTEM TO APPLY IN ANY STATE THAT DOES NOT HAVE A HANDGUN LICENSING AND REGISTRATION SYSTEM THAT MEETS CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS.

(a) IN GENERAL- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`Sec. 931. Licensing and registration of handguns

`(a)(1) The Attorney General shall establish a Federal system for the licensing and registration of all handguns owned, possessed, or controlled in the United States, which shall include a method for easily retrieving information sufficient to identify--

`(A) each resident of a State to which this subsection applies who owns, possesses, or controls a handgun; and

`(B) the handgun.

`(2) It shall be unlawful for a person to own, possess, or control a handgun in a State to which this subsection applies unless the person--

`(A) is licensed to do so by the system established pursuant to paragraph (1); and

`(B) has registered the handgun with a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency.

`(b) Subsection (a) shall not apply in a State if there is in effect a certification by the Attorney General that the State has in effect a system for the licensing and registration of handguns owned, possessed, or controlled in the State that--

`(1) includes a method for easily retrieving information sufficient to identify--

`(A) each resident of the State who owns, possesses, or controls a handgun in the State; and

`(B) the handgun; and

`(2) at a minimum, imposes criminal penalties on any person who owns, possesses, or controls a handgun in the State, and who--

`(i) has not completed training in firearms safety;

`(ii) is not licensed by the State to possess a handgun; or

`(iii) has not registered the handgun with a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency.

`(c) A certification under subsection (b) with respect to a State shall have no force or effect on or after the date the Attorney General finds, after an opportunity for a hearing on the record, that the State does not have in effect the system described in subsection (b).

`(d) The Attorney General shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out this section.'.

(b) PENALTIES- Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(7) Whoever knowingly violates section 931(a)(2) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not less than 15 years, or both. The court shall not suspend a sentence of imprisonment imposed under this paragraph or impose a probationary sentence under this paragraph.'.

(c) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The table of sections for such chapter is amended by adding at the end the following:

`931. Licensing and registration of handguns.'.

(d) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendments made by this section shall apply to conduct engaged in after the 2-year period that begins with the date of the enactment of this Act.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 21 Jan 03 - 12:10 AM

George III had no real power whatsoever. He was utterly incapable of actually contravening Parliament's will. Whether this is a similarity or difference between the two Georges is a debate best left to rabidly paranoid conspiracy theorists.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Jan 03 - 11:59 PM

Answer: G. "Dubya" Bush & no real connection whatsoever. For connections, look to Bush and King George IIIrd of England for more obvious comparisons. They both ruled the greatest political & military power of their day in an almost completely irresponsible manner.

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jan 03 - 10:30 PM

Who is Gdubya? And what connection does Gdubya have to Patrick Henry?

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Jan 03 - 01:19 PM

Stirring words, indeed. (I see now where Gdubya got his eloquence!)

Subject: RE: BS: Tyranny?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jan 03 - 10:37 AM

March 23, 1775

Patrick Henry was a marked man. Just a matter of time until he was hanged, and he knew it...

"...They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"