01 July 2010

1st and 2nd amendments duking it out on my blog

[click image, audio, twenty minutes]


Here we have a couple wild-eyed libertarians talking about the Supreme Court decision in favor of the 2nd Amendment. I have felt relief over this decision and that is rare enough with this miserable excuse for a third branch of government. I am gobsmacked to learn that it may well be that I am in the most agreement with Justice Thomas... just keep reminding myself that even a broken clock is right twice a day.... It all adds up to a sliver of a chance we can wrest the Constitution back and overthrow, or walk back, this tyranny. Not an inconsiderable blessing these days, you might agree, even if you don't agree with the decision itself... or what I make of it.

My dear, possibly former, friend Blue! took issue with my approval of this decision. He does, or did, not seem able to see how insulting his opening remarks were... to me... to his fellow citizens... to people who would die for him... would use their guns to defend him. I was immediately angered by this because I have been wailing my head off, with all the stops pulled out, about this stuff for at least a year, and arguing with the stops left in for years before that, and he knows at least the last six months of it. He has mattered to me so much because for this time he has always seemed to be able to see my points in this general matter of ceasing the stupid, stupid, stupid wedge issue wars, the Hatfield and McCoy action, the "planeticidally" beside the point raging back and forth between Blue-Fascists-in-Denial and Red-Fascists-in-Denial. He ended up proclaiming that people aren't allowed to disagree with me.


You ARE allowed to disagree with me, AND to tell me what you think of me. You just can't expect that I'm going to amiably respond to positions I can see are DANGEROUS to living things. I love to be shown where I am wrong and if you ever really think I am wrong, you go into my bag full of good people if you bother to tell me so, and you get put atop my Everest of heroes if you open up some corner of my brain in the process. You get these glorious and coveted honors for being courageous enough to interact honestly and in good faith. It isn't so usual that people will risk amity to advance each other's insight and understanding, and that is a constant sorrow to me. I, as you have seen, do it all the time, because it's the path to enlightenment, to meaningful discourse.

So, anyway, while the 1st Amendment is in fact disregarded here when trolls pop in to be assholes and other types of offensive expression, you most certainly ARE allowed to disagree with me all you want. If yer disagreeable about it, the chances are high that I will mirror that in my response, but very low that you will be censored or unwelcome if you are honestly and in good faith taking issue with me.

If I can't take it, I say so. If I don't want to be agonized by a subject here, I say so, and why. That seems completely fair to me. Since I put so much work into my blog, I really DO expect to be able to cut off harassment with subjects that threaten to send me screaming naked off a cliff—AGAIN—so, no, the 1st Amendment is not respected here any more than it is respected in my house when someone's driving me mad, but you ARE most emphatically allowed and encouraged to disagree with me here or anywhere at any time.

After the jump you will find evidence of the full exchange with Blue! on this matter. It's looooong....


I posted my approval of the Supremes' gun control decision the other day, and I took a lot of flak for it in comments. Here those comments are again, only edited for format and to take out the most egregious typos. I will be closing comments on that thread so as to cease needing to update this post if more comments would have gotten posted to that thread.
☛ Old Uncle Dave said... Can we now have AKs?

☛ 99 said... I'm furiously reading to find out about my hand-held rocket launcher....

☛ Blue! said... 99... Weapons won't save us.

Sorry but the key to liberty and freedom won't we won by firearms... the only thing a firearm will protect you against is your neighbor... the murderating fucks know that. That's why they want the streets saturated with guns.

☛ Blue! said... What that SCOTUS decision did was nullify the right of local and state government's to regulate firearms... and centralized that power to the Feds.

That's not a good thing....

☛ Blue! said... I mean we are supposed to be a civilized people (don't laugh)... any society that celebrates owning a piece of hardware whose sole purpose is to kill his fellow man is doomed to fail.

And if you think a Smith and Wesson will protect you against government troops then you're dreaming. The gubment has the people outgunned and outmaneuvered technologically... they can shut down a city or state even without a boot on the ground.

We need to be thinking higher....

☛ 99 said... I want them to be more reluctant to just pluck me from my business. I want to take some out before they take me out. I WANT THE CONSTITUTION. I don't care WHAT people do with their guns, including blow my ass out of the water. We need arms to fight tyranny.


No excuses.

All the bullcrap people use to excuse gun control is better dealt with by making a better society. If people don't have the balls to make that happen, they can't be taking away the means for the courageous, Blue. They CANNOT. There is no excuse.

And, dear, I so AM thinking higher. I'm looking for my rocket launcher.

☛ Blue! said... 99, the last time the people could even come close to matching the gubment with weapons was about 1976... since then technology has exploded and they have ALL the really good stuff. Rocket launchers and uzis are child's play to gubment-new world order forces. And don't tell me about what Afghanies and Iraqis did with IEDs and shit... those wars were meant to be sustained, not won.

Yours is a going out in a blaze of glory stuff...I'm thinking of beating these bastards. You can't beat 'em playing their game.

☛ Blue! said... And yes I'm for local and state gun regulation, not Federal government (SCOTUS) mandated gun proliferation.

If someone doesn't like their city or state's gun laws then they should move.

☛ 99 said... You can beat them. PHYSICALLY beat them. You can shoot them. You can get our country back or go out trying.

The "going out in a blaze of glory" language is JUST designed to make people who want America back feel like nut jobs. People who fear armed neighbors forget that they are selling their liberty for security and deserve neither.

I only mentioned "rocket launcher" as code for "nuke".

☛ 99 said... Listen to the story about the bird club guy being harassed by a cop at BP's direction. Do you suppose if the birder had been wearing a gun that the cop would have come over to "strongly advise" him to stop doing what is PERFECTLY legal and actually righteous? Maybe he would have set his taser on stun before he came to strongly advise the man then to stop doing what was 100% within his rights. If he can wear his uniform and his gun and use his cop car off duty, which he supposedly can because he is sworn to uphold the law, HE HAS TO UPHOLD THE LAW AND RESPECT OUR RIGHTS as well.

If cops can come into a house and kill a man who is exhibiting anger... because he was a big guy and they felt threatened... WHAT do you suppose is going to beat them?

If they can throw a grenade into your living room before you even know they're there, before THEY even know they have the right house, and even if it HAD BEEN the right house, IF THEY CAN THROW FUCKING GRENADES INTO YOUR HOUSE, what, what, what, what do you propose is going to beat them?

I'm on the phone to my friends in China....

Failing that, we better be able to AT LEAST worry them. The Constitution was written to make sure we did not have to be afraid of our government. Guess what? We're afraid. We're terrified. IT WON'T CHANGE UNTIL WE MAKE IT CHANGE.... as in FORCE... they do NOT heed petitions.

☛ 99 said... Or votes.

Don't you EVEN start with the votes thing.

☛ Blue! said... Apples and Oranges 99

What the SCOTUS did today was dis-empower local and state gubment as far as gun control goes... a city like Chicago should have the right to regulate guns... No one is disputing a person having a weapon or weapons at home to protect themselves and family. But these laws allowing someone to carry a concealed weapon in a crowded city are fuckin' crazy...

Dead grandmother watching tv....

The shooter in the above link was lawfully carrying a concealed weapon. Cities are not places for allowing anyone to carry a concealed weapon. You're being kneejerk here 99.

☛ Blue! said... And 99...the gubment and NWO are not worried about your lead hurlers...

☛ 99 said... And, Blue!, the lead hurlers of Chicago were not fazed by the gun control laws.

If enough lead hurlers start hurling in the right places the gubmint and the NWO will be pissing their pants.

☛ 99 said... And you are COMPLETELY avoiding my points about there not being lead flying when there is an equitable and decent society. The American People are ASKING for granny to get caught by a stray bullet FOR AS LONG AS WE WON'T DO WHAT IS NECESSARY TO FIX THE IMMISERATION OF MILLIONS FOR THE BENEFIT OF A VERY FEW.

It's up to us. We need the guns. And pitchforks.

☛ Blue! said... No 99... you're completely avoiding my point that when the gubment-NWO really decide to clamp down, your lead hurlers will be of no effect... you won't see a target to hurl lead at.

We're under their thumb 99... they want us to do each other in with our beloved lead hurlers... they'll come in and mop up the mess. They're fomenting a civil war as we speak... My point is that guns won't save us... and probably will be our doom. It's how the murderating fucks will win, the people will shoot each other up.

Technology trumps lead... all they have all the good stuff.

Keep praying at the altar of Colt...

☛ 99 said... They have already won if you don't think we can stop them from clamping down. If you don't like the idea of people taking them out before they can do that to us... or do... and persist in saying denigrating/snide things to people who'd get themselves killed to save you, then you are IN FACT doing your part to start the civil war you wish to cheat them of. Lead hurlers and Colt worshippers are your brothers and sisters... NOT idiots trying to get everyone killed. They could say you're the idiot trying to get everyone killed. We're talking everyone who will not be content to be a slave, here... and anti-American as you sound here, I don't think you can hang with that any better than most of the rest of us.

☛ Blue! said... I didn't say they couldn't be stopped... I'm saying our guns won't do it. Guns are only playing in their domain... it's what they would love. Some freedom fighting mook to rise up with with a rifle. They'll giggle as they zap him or her.

99 I'm surprised that your vision of this is so myopic.

☛ 99 said... Should I have been posting more about people getting thrown in the slammer for failing to pay their Visa bill? Do you not grok the implications of Obama throwing up his hands and leaving BP to kill people and sea creatures and point guns at them and shoot them AND JUST KEEP POISONING THE GULF TO HIDE THE MESS INSTEAD OF CLEAN IT UP? It means, yes, that people who have lost their jobs and suddenly can't pay their bills are going to be going to jail for it. And people are being dumped into the streets because the government bailed out Wall Street and not Main Street. I guess they're just being rounded up and sent somewhere on the QT or maybe more gun control nuts would be a little slower to give up what recourse they might yet have.

And what about all the grandmas in front of their tvs getting offed by UNARMED hungry young men for the contents of their pantries?

☛ 99 said...MYOPIC?

You're fucking kidding me, right?


You just keep coming in with insults to people who would die for you.


☛ Blue! said... 99... I'm gonna turn in... suffice it to say we'll agree to disagree.

People will die, they die everyday... I'm not for conceding our strength because we worship they same power they do. Violence is their domain... we shouldn't stoop to their low life.

And before I get called a coward or something... it's the non-violent man who possesses courage in the face of weapons... it's the short-sighted that try to match weapon for weapon and play a game they can't win.

Haven't we learned anything? I mean world history is fraught with guns ablazin'. I think the universe is calling for a new script.

I'm thinking it's little man in the loin cloth time... and I'll step up to be that as soon as I'm strong enough. I'm perfectly willing to be that change I want to see in the world.

Good night 99... Peace and Love

☛ 99 said... ALL we have against them is numbers. Or the Chinese. Preferably with guns.

☛ 99 said... I'm not agreeing to disagree with you! I WILL NOT AGREE TO THAT.

☛ 99 said... We do NOT have a Gandhi. People are NOT occupying the banks. There are no mobs in gas masks cleaning up the Gulf despite the bullets.

So fuck your cowardly nonviolence.

Killing in defense of life is not killing. It's defense of life.

Find me a Gandhi and I'll get with him. Failing that, VIOLENCE will HAVE to do.

☛ Blue! said... 99, there's anger and there's resolve... Anger is vulnerable to all kinds of emotional mistakes... Resolve doesn't concede until it wins.

Resolve is the answer... Gandhi threw off the Brits without a shot fired... people got hurt yes. But India kept it's spiritual integrity.

Bigger picture 99... bigger picture.

If you free yourself with a gun... you're gonna constantly need a gun to be free. Not the kind of life I would want anyway.


☛ 99 said... That is a platitude UNLESS you have a Gandhi. In case you haven't noticed, they've assassinated and suicided everyone with the power to move masses on that scale. In order to beat them without a shot, they have to be unwilling to keep being this shitty. THEY HAVE SHOWN THEY ARE GOING TO KEEP IT UP NO MATTER HOW FILTHY IT LOOKS. They don't give a rat's ass WHO reviles them. Quoth Fudd: "So?" Quoth Obama: "I don't have a crystal ball."

Quoth RFK Jr.: "I'll meet you on the barricades!"

Good morning.

☛ 99 said... Besides, that nonviolent resistance is for AFTER they've clamped down... not much good for stopping them before it's complete... and, lacking a Gandhi as we do, it will have to be individuals dying in open defiance and many, many, many, many of them before the masses rise up.

In ANY event, rising up is the ONLY way. If you channel Gandhi, I bet he would tell you: "No, no. THESE guys won't be stopped until you stop them." Gandhi was throwing off foreign occupiers, not standing down his own government and the global corporations who run it. It is remotely feasible we could accomplish more resignations of demoralized legislators Gandhi's way, but they have been at pains to show us over the last nearly ten years that upholding their oaths is the very last thing, literally, they would ever do.

Get real. We do NOT have a spiritual leader the entire country, or the entire world, reveres and will follow. The Pope is reviled as a Nazi and child molester. The Dalai Lama is just a funny guy in a dress. Russell Crowe is about as close to a leader of the masses as we have.

Shall we petition him to start the nonviolent global resistance?

The ancient masters cautioned that one must NEVER mistake what worked in one time, in one set of circumstances, for what will work in a new time and a new set of circumstances. And we've let them win the war before the battle has begun... unless the battle gets radically more massive than they expected. Surprise is ALL we have. I don't think we have a surprise Gandhi up our sleeve.... I don't think it would work if we did. An awful lot of nonviolent protest has been mowed down exactly as though it were rioters, too. They have that action pegged.

The burning cop cars and broken windows all over the world aren't fazing them either. They have their meetings behind huge physical barricades twenty blocks away nowadays. What would Gandhi do about that?

He'd send wave after wave of people to scale the barricades until they finally stopped shooting them... except they wouldn't stop shooting them even after the bodies were piled so high against the wall people could run up the pile to get over them.

The cops probably would stop after the first fifty or so, but the drone pilots probably would take a lot longer, and the private contractors would not stop at all.

As long as there are people as determined to harm others for profit as this, violence can NEVER be ruled out, even for lofty-sounding ends. If your loincloth idea would ever have worked in these straits, and I don't think it would, it would have to have begun for real in the spring of 2003 at the very latest.

If they can be ripped from their positions without violence, so much the better, but, I guarantee, they will not go peacefully. RESOLVE is making them go no matter what it takes.

It's stupid to keep fighting about it here because that's not the kind of resolve that cuts it. It's even stupid to talk about resolve. America, except the tea partiers, hasn't got it.

☛ Blue! said... Or we could be sane and find an alternative to violent resistance.

I don't know what that would be... all I know is that it exists and I'm mentally open to see it when it appears... maybe we don't need one Gandhi... we probably need millions of them.

Gandhi's and King's work shouldn't be in vain...

99 you're too committed to violent struggle, we can't win a violent struggle; we don't possess the neccesary hardware.

It's no lie that violence only begets more violence. I ask again... how many millennia does it take to learn that lesson. Blowing the bastards away only begets more bastards that have to be blown away, until some bastard blows you away.

New day... new tactic is all I'm sayin'.

☛ Blue! said... 99... why do you think local communities deciding about their gun issues is a bad thing ?

Let's look at urban America... when the bastards turn off the revenue stream, ship jobs overseas and generally debase the lifestyle of a city and it's inhabitants economic survivability and then the Feds allow guns to become as common as cell phones. What do you think the outcome will be?

The murderating bastards know that 99... That's how the operate... economically starve an area, then allow an influx of lead hurlers, let the ensuing mayhem work for a while... then and only then do they move in for the coup de' grace... when the population is totally fractured and unable to know up from down. The murderating bastards come in as 'saviors'...

Checkmate for us....

☛ 99 said...

[1] I hate guns and murderation, but I realize they are far kinder than other forms of violence in practice every day, i.e. the economic starvation, the kleptocracy, the vampiric suck of people's whole lives’ work, so they can buy yachts.

[2] I am a devoted meat eater, but thank the buddhas of the ten directions every bite that there are those out there not too squeamish to do the icky parts so I can eat.

[3] You don't seem to have any idea of just how much it took to be Gandhi. Martin studied him. One part you probably never heard of is the part where he insists that nonviolence is not nonaggression, where he says that you have to be willing to walk SMILINGLY into a hail of bullets to pull it off, AND, crucially, he says that if you are not able to do that, then you better fight and fight HARD. There's NO such thing as millions of Gandhis. We have ONLY what we have, and they're not Gandhis.

[4] And violence does not always beget violence, though it does in many instances. My father was beaten by his father, regularly and for drill. He took up boxing when young, but other than that he never hurt anyone. He never hit my mother, he hardly ever even argued with her. He never beat us, he didn't drink or swear or be harsh about anything.

BB2's father beat him. BB2 is a sweet old hippie who cries when his hamster dies and never stops being in the cause of peace.

I know all kinds of people with guns who wouldn't dream of using them offensively... all kinds of hunters who do it for food, not for trophies.

I can think of a thousand times when violence ENDED a completely insupportable situation where nothing else would. It didn't beget more violence. It ended it.

[5] It's like the determination not to spank kids, "because violence always begets violence," and little sociopaths are born of it, many not maturing out of it.

[6] Violence in defense of life is sometimes MANDATORY. Sociopathically-greedy people make that 100%. There is no end to violence without sweeping and impossible reforms, complete overhauls of our cultures, and THOSE are impossible without completely eradicating the current power structure.

[7] The thing that fixes urban America is that equitable and just society I keep mentioning. Nothing short of that will fix it. Gun violence hasn't even slowed in most places where gun control has been in effect.

[8] The Constitution should have MANDATED arms, because the provision is in there for the sole purpose of insuring the People can overthrow tyranny. It doesn't say "guns". It says "arms". I WANT MY HEAT-SEEKING MISSILES AND MY ACTIVE DENIAL SYSTEMS!

[9] Every cell in my body is about saving all sentient beings. For real, not just in the abstract. I assure you, you have to work with what you've got. You have to be able to SEE actuality and work with what you've got.

☛ 99 said... Too, there were some very famous studies of rats living in overcrowded conditions, emulating cities, back in the late sixties or early seventies. The rats became violent, cannibalistic, and HOMOSEXUAL in response to it.

It is well known that cities are supremely unsustainable environments, that too many resources have to be brought in from elsewhere to sustain them and it is wiping out the planet. People should be making new towns and tearing down or scaling back the cities. People should live where they can make a balance with their environment. Indian tribes lived in one place for thousands of years without depleting the resources. WE have to do that, or murderation IN FACT turns into THE mercy to all living things.

☛ 99 said... NATURE is violent! There are places and times and situations where violence is the ONLY alternative.

Gandhi did the nonviolence because he could see that it would MITIGATE the death toll of throwing off the Brits. The situation in Palestine would work best with a Gandhian approach for the same reason. The ONLY reason it would work is because of the huge public opinion AGAINST the evil Israeli oppression.

It isn't the same situation AT ALL with the NWO guys. They don't give a fuck and only pockets of people around the world who can't be hypnotized know to resist them, to fight them. There IS no group of nations whose disapproval is of the smallest part of a concern to the NWO guys. Gandhi's whole plan falls FLAT in the face of that.


☛ 99 said... And as for the people killing each other in the cities, it is a great deal like the workers going postal over the illegal immigrants. People tend to direct their ire at something more their own size. The government is oceanic and they don't feel they can FIGHT that. So they fight each other or they fight the poor starving saps being lured by the plutocrats to drive wages down into the slave zone.

There isn't anything FOR this, Blue!, short of all out war... against the RIGHT enemy.


☛ 99 said... We need Crazy Horse and Spotted Eagle and Sitting Bull and Chief Joseph DESPERATELY.

☛ 99 said... Nobody seems to GET why I keep posting images of heroes.

☛ Blue! said... 99, those heroes were great for their time. Malcolm in 1962 was very different from Malcolm in 1965. Crazy Horse, Spotted Eagle, Sitting Bull etc. were great men... but ultimately their efforts failed.

I haven't read all of your replies yet, I'm sort of working from the bottom up. I need to say though that I'm speaking of a new paradigm... something that hasn't been tried before. Peace and Love as a tactic... and no I'm not talking about giving a plutocrat a hug.

I'm speaking of melding with others of like mind, others pursuing peace and love and becoming an irresistible force a new thought force... There have never ever been times such as these for us, desperate times call for desperate measures, not measures that have been used for centuries. Violent struggle isn't the only way to true freedom and liberty... it's all I'm saying. You can give me hundreds of examples of violent struggle, but that doesn't mean that's what called for today.

new thought = new results

I enjoy reading your site 99... you put outstanding information out there. But our exchange here has done nothing but demonstrate to me that action with anger as its basis is doomed to fail. We need well thought out, cool as the other side of the pillow, calculated ways to express peaceful revolution. There is more than one way to be in this world, more than one way to win.

The violent struggles you reference were dramatic and mythical... but guess what... they still led us to this present moment. Maybe a revolution of peace will make the present circumstances unthinkable for human beings ever again. It's about breaking our mental chains 99 as much as it's about breaking the physical chains.

I have seen the enemy and he is us... (Pogo comic strip circa mid-60s)

Let's break the reciprocal nature of violent struggle... and start reciprocating some love... for ourselves and our enemies.

Call me crazy if you want... but I'm that desperate to live another way. Sorry I won't be joining a rifle toting freedom movements, I won't because succeed or fail my son, nephews and those of my friends will have to do the same at some time or another. I'd rather leave a new of struggle... overcoming the inner fears and standing strong in peace and love.

I'll be here as long as you will have me 99... and I'll be talking peace and love principles. I believe wholeheartedly in them... and soon when I'm stronger I will trust them implicitly.

"To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." —Sun Tzu, the Art of War

Peace 99... and I mean that....

☛ 99 said... You are welcome here, always.

You do NOT seem to be able to get to that higher thought level you keep mentioning. You do NOT seem to realize that I want what you want, that I want to make a world where this is not necessary. You do NOT seem to grok that you're just talking pie in the sky, UNLESS you mean you are fully willing to have most of the world population ground to pulp under the plutocratic boot heel while you are developing this mystical victory of love over fear and greed. And I keep TRYING to tell you that the fascists HAVE ALREADY CONQUERED OUR RESISTANCE WITHOUT FIGHTING! It's somewhere hereinabove. Which MEANS that OUR only choice is to massively overcome their supreme excellence.

I'm well conversant with the Art of War... PRECISELY because I revile it and want it to stop forever. Why do you think I held out so long trying to turn the sick mentalities of so many putzes yonder?

You don't seem to grok that I am radically well-versed in nonviolence and can tell at a glance when it is true nonviolence and when it is pusillanimity CALLING itself nonviolence. TRUE nonviolence does not avoid violence, and it does not sit back an pontificate about it while the planet burns down around its ears!



Nobody wants instability and blood in the streets, but HOW MANY WILL RUE THE LACK OF THEM while being cut down by storm troopers for being homeless, or trying to escape a natural disaster, or TRYING TO EAT?


There isn't any doubt about that anymore. Everything I've been saying and linking should be telling you that.



They would have won if it were JUST wasichu, but there were hundreds of thousands of invading settlers, all under the sway of the death cult wasichu, which gave wasichu the unbeatable advantage.

Those chiefs knew all this and they knew the odds and they fought for LIFE and LIVING THINGS anyway.


The Lakotah Nation is LITERALLY starving RIGHT NOW and YET they do not cede it to wasichu. Drunk and demoralized as they have become, the indians are STILL the paragons of true humanity in America.

You need to drop yer brainwashing!

☛ Blue! said... 99, in a nutshell all I'm saying is why fight a battle we can't win? Isn't that insane?

Using a different mindset with a different focus maybe, just maybe we'll have a different outcome. Focus on each other... take care of each other and it matters not what plutocrats do.

Disengage from the plutocrats by not needing what they offer and we'll begin to starve them. Plutocrats will transform out of need. How could that happen? ...well I read that only 11% need to disengage from the present system to bring it to it's knees...
But again I say... going out in a blaze of glory serves what purpose if it ultimately changes nothing?

While confounding the present system with actions they're unprepared for or can't intellectually understand will be our strength... They think we need them, let's show them that we don't need them... that we're perfectly willing to care for and feed each other outside of their fascist system.

11% is our critical mass... if 11% isn't enough then we'll go for 15%... then 20%. Whatever it takes to bring this system to its knees.

New thoughts open up new vistas...

Grabbing a rifle and taking to the streets is so 20th century...

☛ 99 said... You must have been making this comment while I was posting my last one.

Do you realize how many platitudes you are using in your comments? How many prefab excuses?

I don't think you realize that we can't get the system to its knees by starving them. They have starved us. They have control of every means we might have used to keep them from starving us. Even the wealthy can be immediately stripped to nothing and thrown out if they cross them. People are SO desperate for work, for any kind of paycheck, any way to keep themselves and their families happening, the NWO can work them like marionettes.

If people don't stand up and fight, EVEN IF WE LOSE, there won't be any stopping these fucks for centuries, maybe millennia, maybe not until humans are extinct.

☛ 99 said... I know you THINK you are advocating for peace and love, but I'm telling you that you need to open yer mind wider to see REAL peace and love, or you are only fiddling while Rome burns.

☛ Blue! said... 99... this is where I spent last weekend.


...I do presentations and workshops regularly exposing the thieving banking cartels and military industrial complex to people who otherwise wouldn't have been exposed to such information.

I'm hardly fiddling 99... Actually you know very little about me or what I'm doing... and I find it highly presumptuous of you to believe that unless one is rifle ready cannon fodder then it's meaningless.

Seems you're the one stuck in a box 99...let's lay off the value judgements and talk ideas...

K ?

☛ 99 said... I'm heavily in favor of taking care of each other, and we better be catching the ones dropping before they get cleared from the face of the earth. No way to starve the plutocrats unless people are willing to abandon their cars and homes and internet and cell phones and go out and make their own hunter/gatherer and farming communities... RIGHT NOW. Eight by ten color glossy of that action, oh yeah. I wish.

And, I'm glad to learn you go out into the world and spread the word! That is WAY hip. But not very effective thus far, whot? I should better have put it that it AMOUNTS to fiddling while Rome burns... and especially now you've told me you actually get OUT there with this stuff. That is great.... just not enough to save the world from this.

Yer a fine one to talk about keeping to ideas when you do shit like call me "myopic" and a worshipper at the alter of guns, etc. Are you using all these slogans in your talks?

And where do I elevate "rifle ready cannon fodder"?

Have you ever read Dōgen's Do Not Do Anything Evil essay? You can find it in Rational Zen, translated by Thomas Cleary. If you read this carefully enough, often enough, deeply enough, you come to realize the true meaning of the command:

Stop doing and perform!

Blogging and speaking tours fall under the category of "doing"... at least except insofar as some illumination of fundamental reality or essential performance may be occurring. I don't flatter myself that my blogging is a drop in that ocean, but it's definitely half of one.

And no. Not K. If you're going to continue to use all these low debate tricks on me—maybe on yourself too, and probably on your audiences as well—I'm not going to stop beating you over the head to try to crack open your skull. My only purpose here is that.

The old Zen dudes called it lopping off the head, but I feel like calling it cracking open skulls in this instance.

☛ Blue! said... 99, I'm what we call in the African community an elder; which means I should be teaching. Your seeming maniacal focus on armed resistance and terming anything else as impotent and trivial does suggests myopia... at my age picking up a rifle and taking to the streets is screwball insanity, for one I know better than that now and secondly it's suicidal.

I don't know or care about 'debating tricks' you need to knock off the ad hominem stuff (okay that trick I'm aware of).

The glory and drama of armed struggle against unwinnable odds is Hollywood shit; this isn't 300... it's real life... real life where the conscious among us can effect real change. What you're speaking of isn't change at all... it's same old, same old human endeavor that's centuries old.

At the risk of being numbingly repetitive... new ideas and new actions bring about new results. The old ways led us to this present moment.

I'm done 99... we've danced around this maypole too long... I'm committed to my way and you yours...

☛ 99 said... I guess the "anger" is on the other foot and the "resolve" has also traded places.

The indian wars were not Hollywood. I have been at pains to present that.

And, while they indeed lost those wars, they won many battles by hacking at wasichu's hubris.

The bottom line does NOT change. Your new thinking is PERFECT for a society that wishes to support it, to train it into their children and enforce it over the mass media.

The mass media belongs to wasichu. They will halt this effort before it gets out of the church basements and school gyms. And the people committed to this effort—barring leadership by a Gandhi or a King WHO CAN STAY ALIVE—won't stop having to drive their cars, won't stop wanting to live in their houses with heat in the winter and air conditioning in the summer. They won't stop buying clothes. They won't stop eating corporate food. THEY WON'T DO IT!

THEY CAN'T. There's no support system for it. No feasible alternative for most of them. They CAN'T starve the NWO. What shards of what used to be known as "middle class" there are left are too terrified of losing their jobs to help starve the beast.

And I'm not advocating shootouts in the streets unless masses can be gotten to do it... ALL over the world. But I think intelligent targeting could work quite nicely, especially if armed. I'm not EVEN advocating that so much as I am advocating for the Constitution and for everyone's right to make their government as afraid of them as possible. PLUS, screaming my head off for the JUDGMENTAL peaceniks—in direct contrast with real peaceniks—to STFU about their gun and misspelled sign toting brothers and sisters. THEY HAVE NO RIGHT AND NO GROUNDS.

There's a freight train bearing down on you and you're acting as though we have generations to turn this around. We could have only weeks. Once the clamp is all the way down, you are a productive corporate slave or you are in a camp or dead. They aren't going to let the starving hordes gather to turn back the genocidal greed with love.

You have to learn the difference between what you are convinced you are doing, and what you are doing; between your convictions and their workability in the conditions. OR you can join Kevin Zeese's gravy train of nonprofits for "activists" [aka people whose conviction is, at bottom, making a living at activism theater], join in with other utterly pointless GREAT ideas about making changes inside a culture that won't even BE this culture over the long haul it would take to get there.

You do NOT seem to get that America isn't America anymore, and it is on the cusp of not even SEEMING Americanish anymore. This NWO is about bringing back feudalism for real, AND YOU KNOW DAMN WELL PEOPLE'S STOMACHS WILL PREVENT THEM FROM FIGHTING IT.

I don't think you know damn well that all this wonderful stuff you advocate will have no platform, no society in which to grow into what you seek. It might already be gone... but it CERTAINLY will be gone LONG before it can take hold.

It's true that if EVERYBODY just ignores them, right now, stops paying taxes, stops submitting to their PATRIOT Act crap, mows down the TSA at airports, stops paying traffic fines, takes all their money out of banks, start importing doctors and drugs, the works, that would set them back a looooong way, but not stop them. IF WE ABOLISH MONEY, THEY'RE FINISHED. But, Blue, all that has to happen IMMEDIATELY.

☛ Blue! said... There is a story circulating that back in the late 90's a Venezuelan indigenous jungle tribe was granted sovereign autonomy by the Venezuelan government...reporters rushed out to the jungle to get the tribe's reaction.

When asked what they thought about Venezuela granting them their autonomy the tribal elder asked..."What's a Venezuela"?

They had no idea that a Venezuela even existed... they didn't win their autonomy by armed conflict or any conflict at all... they simply grooved along doing their thing and taking care of their own.

That's just one example...

99 you're accusing me of anger when I'm not angry...you're making up and assigning me positions I never stated or took. You're not being fair or rational here. But it's fitting for one whose sole idea about the times we live in is grab your guns.

I'll walk my walk... you'll walk yours... I think mine will be a more pleasant stroll, dare I say more meaningful.

☛ Bluebear2 said... Wow....

☛ 99 said... 99 said... LOL

☛ 99 said... Oh! You nailed me here: "one whose sole idea about the times we live in is grab your guns".... I better run right off, get naked, paint my face and pretend I never heard of America....

☛ Bluebear2 said... Sounds like fun....

☛ 99 said... You know what! I was thinking the SAME thing while I was writing it!

☛ 99 said... Canadians have more guns per capita than we do, and radically lower gun violence. Switzerland MANDATES a gun for every citizen, including training in how to properly use it. Go find Michael Moore's excellent documentary on guns... Bowling for Columbine. He covers extensively how the availability of guns thing has no correlation with gun violence. And, if I am not mistaken, even Naomi Klein admits that the prelude to closing down a society is disarming its citizens.

So. In the matter of guns, for all the reasons I have stated, and all the work that has been done on the matter, I have had to grow a pair, had to open my slammed-shut mind to allow as how that old saw about guns not killing people is DIRT TRUE, and even more lives and quantum agony can be saved by the use of them by decent people, true humans AND in such a world where fatsos and thugs can take everything away from you at whim, I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT TELLING PEOPLE THEY CAN'T HAVE WHATEVER MEANS OF SELF-DEFENSE THEY DEEM APPROPRIATE.

You asked earlier why I don't want cities being able to pass gun control laws. It's not right and it's unconstitutional and it's a fucking fascists-in-denial idea of liberalism. I hate always to be asking you to cut out so much time to learn about things, but you REALLY should take out a couple hours to listen carefully to Derrick Jensen.

☛ Blue! said... 99, Bluebear's reaction has shown that this convo has careened off the rails...

My simple statement that I repeated several times here is that any local government or state even HAS THE RIGHT TO REGULATE GUNS as they see fit... The government (SCOTUS) has taken that right from localities... that can't be a good thing.

I've also agreed that guns for anything more than home protection are useless. Again you've seemed to have assigned to me a position that I never stated or taken.

You seem to think our guns will be protection against a government domestic or foreign that decides to come against us, I wholehearted disagree because those entities have much more technological hardware than we could even imagine... I feel there are other options besides that, I've spelled those out here.

I understand the necessity to protect one's family and home... I however don't understand or agree with the notion that our guns are our sole protection against a government that doesn't need troops on the ground to subdue it's population... in that case guns will only be effective in civil war (against one's neighbor's). That's what the soulless plutocrats know and are creating as we speak. Citizen vs citizen...deconstruct the economy, ruin the currency let the citizens war with each other and when the time is right they'll swoop in and clean up the mess and declare they're saviors who averted a disaster.

Yes I believe your position is short sighted, you seem to focus on fighting them in a game they've rigged... My focus is on higher values... If we were to take a stance they haven't prepared for and can't comprehend, disengage from their system and confound them. I think humanity will have learned a new thing in the process and rise higher in it's existence... Yours will only continue the same old paradigm and we'll be fighting for our freedom again down the road. A neverending cycle.

Anyone that chooses to read back this thread will see I've been consistent in my position... you 99 have railed all over the place with ridicule and derision of what I think.

Guns won't save us... it's that simple. I'm done again. Although I will check back to see if you've twisted my position into something ridiculous. Deal with what I say 99... not how you can turned into something ludicrous.


☛ 99 said... One by one:

My simple statement that I repeated several times here is that any local government or state even HAS THE RIGHT TO REGULATE GUNS as they see fit...The government (SCOTUS) has taken that right from localities...that can't be a good thing.

The CONSTITUTION states that! Because some have twisted THAT to get rid of guns, doesn't make it a lawful right in the United States. For some reason I'm thinking of that Clint Eastwood blockbuster, "Unforgiven", where he and his buddy are gunfighters and they come to a town where no guns are allowed.

I understand the necessity to protect one's family and home...I however don't understand or agree with the notion that our guns are our sole protection against a government that doesn't need troops on the ground to subdue it's population...

It happens that guns have been just about our sole protection, but the Constitution gives us the lawful right to bear ARMS... so it's conceivable we could do better balance-of-power-wise, but even if not, insofar as they don't use their drones and they come to your door, you are, or can be about evenly matched... which is probably why they're so into lobbing grenades ahead of themselves now... but, since no one is leaping up to PROSECUTE them for it... we're stuck needing to grenade-proof our homes.

in that case guns will only be effective in civil war (against one's neighbor's).

I agree that the Democratic Fascists and the Republican Fascists are trying pretty hard to start a Civil War. One of their MAIN tools is this bottomless fight by the "left" [what a laugh] to unwrite the 2nd Amendment, and, worse, to insult the living snot out of anyone who sees the wisdom in it, whether or not they personally choose to bear arms.

That's also a BIG leap to say this makes them ONLY good for civil war. When a population is so disadvantaged against their government, they have only numbers and/or strategy on their side, and I can't explain to you where the guns are so important to the strategists without it sounding like I'm some kind of terrorist. You have a good head, use it.

That's what the soulless plutocrats know and are creating as we speak. Citizen vs citizen...deconstruct the economy, ruin the currency let the citizens war with each other and when the time is right they'll swope in and clean up the mess and declare they're saviors who averted a disaster.


It is precisely because of THIS.

But you are loaded for bear on THIS wedge issue, Blue! If this civil war scenario is what you wish to PREVENT, you will shut yer insulting yap about it. Man up! Drop yer mental conditioning. Lose the lifetime of agonizing over the senseless deaths from gun violence. Quit avoiding the REAL killers, the humans doing the killing and the society that brings them to it.

WE make this world. WE have let sociopaths take it over because we didn't want to be bothered with that stuff. It has turned the inner cities into places of such violence and subhumanity that decent people have dreamt of shooting them off world, but each one of those bullet holes was really aimed at everyone. I don't say that means there's no personal responsibility, but I do understand.

NOT GOOD ENOUGH! And since no one woke up to use resolve where it would do the most good, NOW it's going to take FORCE. The only good thing about this OBSCENE state of affairs is there is a glimmer of a possibility it will FINALLY wake people up to the real enemy, and give them the determination to USE that force. [And don't give me the "new" peace and love paradigm, I stuck daisies in too many gun barrels decades ago. THEY BUY OFF PEACE AND LOVE. Works like a charm. Been there, done that, the t-shirt has disintegrated.]

Yes I believe your position is short sighted

You're wrong.

you seem to focus on fighting them in a game they've rigged...

You have to use the materials at hand. Not my fault we've let them rig it, while wasting ALL this time fighting people more our own size on the streets and on the tubes INSTEAD of the enemy. It isn't as though I haven't been bellowing about this to everyone for a very long time.

My focus is on higher values...

Bully. So is mine. So are a lot of people's. We have to drag our focus from that to WHAT IS ACTUAL.

If we were to take a stance they haven't prepared for and can't comprehend, disengage from their system and confound them. I think humanity will have learned a new thing in the process and rise higher in it's existence...

They are NOT prepared for massive, MASSIVE, uprising, no matter how well-equipped to put it down they are. It would bring their whole thing to a halt instanter if they did put it down.

"The smartest thing the Nazi's did was to make it so that every step of the way they made it so it was in the Jews' rational best interest to not resist. ... I'll tell you something very interesting, which is that the Jews who participated in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising had a higher rate of survival than those who went along. The Jews who participated in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising had a higher rate of survival than those who went along. The Jews who participated in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising had a higher rate of survival than those who went along." [quoth Derrick Jensen]

Yours will only continue the same old paradigm and we'll be fighting for our freedom again down the road. A neverending cycle.

Fallacy. NOTHING about what I advocate continues the dominant paradigm. We may or may NOT be fighting again down the line... IF there is a down the line for any living things. This never ending cycle business is EVIDENCE you do NOT grok the imperatives.

Again, I beseech you to listen to to that Derrick Jensen lecture. Not only does he make mincemeat of your position, but he's SUPREMELY clear on why you should be GIDDY with love to learn how wrong you are.

Anyone that chooses to read back this thread will see I've been consistent in my position... you 99 have railed all over the place with ridicule and derision of what I think.

I have been mirroring your insults, hoping to shock you into realizing they ARE insults, thinking my expression of love and solidarity with you before would help you see that I'm not some harridan who's gone native on you here, but someone staying consistent with her solidarity, trying to drag you out of a DANGEROUS mind set. It is dangerous because it won't ever address the threat to all life blooming right now... might if this threat would wait some generations... and dangerous because you are furiously fueling the civil war you so wish to avoid.

Guns won't save us...it's that simple.

Just EXACTLY like guns don't kill people. People kill people. And if people are killing massive numbers of people AND the planet, they MUST be stopped. Not generations from now. NOW. Anyone who loves humanity, loves living things, loves the earth, loves their family and friends, will do what it takes to stop them NOW. A truly nonviolent person would NEVER brook this destruction while still living and breathing. They would get straight to the heart of the matter and make it stop. If the perps make it so force has to be used, force is used. If the perps make it so that force must be violent, that force is violent.

Nonviolence is HALTING the violence, is self-defense, EVEN when it has to go out from its home to snuff the violence, even when the violence requires violence to halt it.

A nonviolent guy breaking up a fight to the death rarely can just say "halt!" to be effective. He has to, at the least, manhandle combatants, and he DOES it, BECAUSE he's nonviolent.

☛ Blue! said... 2nd Amendment: "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."

Seems state and local governments are the "well regulated" part of that amendment. The SCOTUS just trumped state and local government's "well regulating" firearms.

In 1919 the 18th amendment was repealed (prohibition) yet there are 100's of dry counties in America. Seems Chicago or any other city should be able to ban HANDGUN ownership if they deem it necessary for the common peace. Chicago didn't ban firearms...they banned HANDGUNS which have killed thousands, no 10's of thousands over the years in that city.

As for the rest of your screed 99...you're still assigning to me positions I never took, using loaded language to antagonize (like I'm agonizing over this) and stuff like that. If there's any agony 99 it's me agonizingly trying to convey a point without you becoming defensive and unglued Jeesus!

My main points...

1. states and cities should be able to regulate HANDGUNS as they see fit, your Clint Eastwood Unforgiven example is a movie 99, not real world. Movies are those things where one "suspends disbelief"...you need to remember that.

2. Guns won't save us from government tyranny, not anymore. They only serve to give people a false sense of security that they're on guard against a rampaging government. The government can now subdue this country from a bunker buried in a mountain somewhere...Hell they could just destroy the dollar and let all of you gun nuts go at it... and then vacuum up the mess when it's all over. Your gun won't stop a government intent on fascist dictatorship.

99 this is your wedge issue not mine... I stated my opinion and you've been hopping mad about that ever since... earth to 99... we don't agree about this... let it the hell go.

And for the record I NEVER said I was 'non-violent. I work for peace, I'm not a pacifist. I know what kind of world we live in...and I'm working to raise it's consciousness before I leave. You seem to feel that everyone should think like you do or something is wrong with them.

Everything else you wrote bears little resemblance to anything I wrote or said...

I'm probably done commenting on your blog 99...Seems you only want people to mirror your thoughts and feelings...not actually express what they're really thinking.

Have a nice life Agent 99.

☛ Blue! said... Also...

99 you accused me of "insulting" you. That was the last straw with me. Just because I said something you didn't like doesn't mean it's an insult.

That's why I'm done here...either someone falls in line with 99's program or she's "insulted".

This is hardly a place for the free exchange and critique of ideas...Not if your ideas don't match the host's.

☛ 99 said... Any time you want to come back, you are welcome.

Seems Blue! is taking advantage of the supposed ambiguity of the wording of the 2nd Amendment:
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.
Maybe you will pardon me for stating that if someone with no bias in any direction looks at this amendment, the meaning is crystal clear. Before we had a standing army, it was felt that citizens should bear arms and drill together to keep in shape for the defense of the nation, but they also injected the word "free" in the security of the State, showing that a free State was the imperative. People argue over the commas. It is obvious that the framers intended to keep both the ability to defend the State and for it to remain a free one, and it was written before we had every government agency armed to the teeth and militarized police forces and the megalithic military we have today. STILL, these militate toward an unfree State, and so the blessing of this wording, commas and all, is that our right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Blue! has idiotically let his idea of the terms shift a bit to back himself up. "State" means the entirety of the United States, and "well regulated" means ORGANIZED, some semblance of a command structure in the militia, not government permits and regulations. Duh. That is PLAIN. Had they not put "free" into that sentence, and the entirety of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and everything they stood for hadn't been ABOUT freedom, then, yes, we could read it Blue!'s way.

Blue! wouldn't be reading it this way if he were not committed to infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It's as simple as that. You can't read anything through the filter of your own biases or you can't READ... or HEAR. Stuff that seemingly makes no sense suddenly is clear as a bell when you stop trying to make of it what you make of it and just read it or just hear it. This is the entire problem with trying to keep the Constitution happening. People, including Justices, use their bias-filtered "understanding" to change its meaning to their advantage.

As I mentioned in our exchange, I'm thinking Blue! must be seriously elder or he'd remember we did the peace and love antidote to war pigs back in the sixties... remember shoving daisies down gun barrels aimed at us... before they bought most of us off.

I'm thinking he must be that seriously elder also, because I have taken the brunt of old guys' knee-jerk reactions to certain stimuli, and shock that you should be offended by being patronized and your points being called seriousness-diminishing things. He seems genuinely vexed that I would take offense at his words and tone and oft-repeated insistence that he's thinking on a higher plane than I am, or the people who keep and bear arms do. He seems to be utterly disregarding our freedom. I'm thinking "progressivism" is just about turning us into well-regulated, in HIS sense of the term, androids.

But most of all I'm thinking it because he seems so sure there's anything approximating the kind of time left to accomplish these darling ends... like Bill Moyers with an old friend groping for reasons to be optimistic about the prospects of liberalism. I want them too. But I am unwilling to sit around and dream up preposterous excuses to make do as reasons for optimism. That is suicidal. That is GENOCIDAL. Look around. I know we better fucking well have King Arthur ruling the world by next week or there will be NO chance of real reasons for optimism for a minimum of many generations, IF even we have that long left on earth.

I would feel outright depression over my friend seeming so sure I'm "committed to armed struggle"... not having the insight to see where HE is projecting stuff onto me and that I am mirroring him FOR him... if there were time to be depressed... if this whole long, dead serious, SILLY thread would do ANYTHING to turn things around. I would feel depressed over the apparent loss of a friend from having chosen to uphold the real for his sake over abandoning it for the sake of maintaining agreeable interaction. He has shown in the past a willingness to consider that he is wrong, or given lip service to it, anyway, and so maybe he will cool off and proceed more thoughtfully whenever he comes up against this wedge issue again.

I know he stated it isn't one, but that's just silly. "Guns, God and Gays" is a damn slogan EVERYONE has heard, even if they don't use it. So. He's not a dope. He's just mad.

Fighting each other, getting so angry about stuff that we FREAK OUT on each other, unconsciously solidifying into "sides", continuing to generate endless us-and-thems on ANY issue obviates the one thing that can save us. Unity. We cannot get free of the garrote of fascism without unity.

So, Blue! stays in my bag full of good people, but doesn't go atop my Everest of heroes, and remains welcome here, despite flipping out. My friends don't stop being my friends because they get angry with me or I get angry with them. Some disagreements can definitely end friendships for me, but not very often my feeling of good will. And, both as part of my long process of dropping the bad habits of a lifetime, and because times are too dire to indulge in it, I will not allow myself to be laid low by it. That takes up too much time I don't have left on earth, and maybe WE don't have left on earth.



Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.