The Texas 2013 PatCom is scheduled later in the month. “Unfinished Business”
We are hoping for a rather small gathering of like mind, no need for raw numbers. A few of the guests from our previous gatherings will not be attending. Things always work the way they are intended, patience is a virtue.
Atonement, what the fuck does it really mean? And who the fuck is really deserving of it? Militia Law you wrote this in my comments section not long ago……….
As a former prosecutor, for the rest of my life I have to bear the burden of knowingly participating in the use of snitches to convict men of crimes that shouldn’t be crimes. I was the scum I now rail against. We got snitches through pre-existing felonies and tax problems. So I’d be less than worthless and a complete monster if I did not shout from the rooftops the risk felons pose to folks involved in any kind of patriot group
I suppose you feel atonement applies for you, I happen to agree. Yet because of Kerodin’s background he somehow fails to qualify? Vanderboegh in your book qualifies. You also stated you left your sordid past occupation behind you, washed your hands of it.
Look I am not sitting in judgement of the men and women you falsely convicted and imprisoned, nor am I making a ruckus of our constitution you and your affiliates pissed on. This is not an attack Militia Law, I am merely trying to wrap my head around my perception of Duplicity.
As a prosecutor did you not break the laws to enforce the law? You stated you left the business, prosecutorial misconduct is a very serious issue. How many felonies could you be charged with?
PROSECUTORS WHO INTENTIONALLY BREAK THE LAW
I implore anyone that comes to this site today to read that document, it’s information we are already aware of, read it!
Militia Law I stated earlier this is not an attack, rather information to be ingested. Forgiveness for the Prosecutor……………………….. Atonement for the Prosecutor………………Why?
Are your crimes against the people and the Republic any less serious than Kerodin’s? I bet there are many that believe your crimes are more heinous. There is not an American alive today that has not broken their fair share of felonies, they may never have been caught or convicted, yet are their hands clean in your eyes?
We all have sullied hands my friend, make zero mistakes about that. Militia Law I am not asking for a formal response, it is not necessary.
Myself and a few others do not use pseudo names. I would ask if you must continue your conquest………… Be fair, stop the games and publish your Name and the office you held, after all Should Not The Prosecutor be judged as well for his crimes against the Republic?
I do understand using your real name would be very dangerous for you, after all you have enemies, enemies I am sure would love to hunt you down, this unfortunately is part of the sordid business you were employed within. And NO this is not a veiled threat……. Sadly it is the truth to the line of work you were involved in, locking away human beings like animals ……. deserving or NOT.
Lying and cheating to get convictions, we happen to be on the same page on many issues, I took the time to read your entire blog and all the articles you published.
I do happen to think you are operating in the grey, for an agenda that may or may not be as you have described, this is my opinion that is not backed up by facts at the moment. What is factual is your statements about your prior employment, and why you left. I commend the fact that you got out, yet somehow I am finding it very hard to find the atonement for you…………………………….. You are still acting as a Prosecutor, Judge and Jury.
Militia Law……………………sullied hands are sullied hands. Please understand they can’t be wiped clean, just as you state Kerodin’s hands can’t be wiped clean. Now I have to ask a rhetorical question to those that will read this, if you prescribe to the notion that a former felon can’t be trusted because he is compromised…………………..would the same not hold true for a former Prosecutor?
After all the premise is………………damaged goods. What leverage could the Feds use against a former Prosecutor? Think about that one long and hard folks……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
SAN JACINTO COUNTY OUTLAW 
you know I think the issue here is going to go much further and deeper than what militia law has conveyed to you.
Trust is going to be a precious thing in the near and unpleasant future.
Guncraft I am not quite sure I understand….. would you please expand.
Whoa, cowboy! You need to read a little closer on two points I have made that you have managed to badly misconstrue.
First, I wrote “convict men of crimes that shouldn’t be crimes.” I thought it would be abundantly clear to a constitutionalist what I am referring to.
I guess not.
I’m referring to the crimes of drug possession and gun possession. Strict constitutionalists don’t believe it is moral to criminalize possession of inanimate objects. It’s unconstitutional to prohibit a felon from owning a firearm, just as it is unconstitutional to search a car with a dog based on “an odor of marijuana.” But it is presently lawful to enforce both of those things because 9 men in robes say that is what the USCON actually means, not withstanding the plain writing to the contrary.
So to be perfectly clear: unlike Kerodin, I never broke the law nor shirked my duty to my fellow man. If I didn’t believe I could prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt, they walked. Any Brady evidence I had was immediately provided to the accused’s attorney. Jurors were empaneled and treated per the code. I was a model prosecutor.
And that’s why I quit.
I quit because that is what anyone who takes the oath to enforce or defend the USCON needs to do right now.
Second, you have completely missed the mark on what I am warning about re: convicted felons. They pose an unnecessary risk because they are oh so easy to turn based on my experience. It’s my observation, do with it what you wish.
Finally, I will remain anonymous, and not just because of these kinds of posts that wrongly besmirch me or wrongly accuse me of crimes.
I will remain anonymous because I’m not selling anything, unlike Kerodin.
I have not waived my right to privacy because I’m not trying to organize meetings, unlike Kerodin.
I have not waived my right to privacy because I’m not trying to be a leader in this, or any movement, unlike Kerodin.
-ML
Militia Law,
I am trying to see your perspective, I am very confused, here in your own words…………….
“As a former prosecutor, for the rest of my life I have to bear the burden of knowingly participating in the use of snitches to convict men of crimes that shouldn’t be crimes. I was the scum I now rail against.”
“We got snitches through pre-existing felonies and tax problems.”
You upheld unconstitutional laws and prosecuted, how can you possibly state you were an oathkeeper?
Nice.
No apology. No retraction. Yet you were clearly in the wrong.
Oh well. I’ve made my record.
Your hamfisted attempt to defend Kerodin is as transparent as Kerodin’s refusal to produce evidence.
-ML
ML,
No apologies!!!!
Classy.
Like I said, I’ve made my record and everyone can see where you went off the rails.
“But it is presently lawful to enforce both of those things because 9 men in robes say that is what the USCON actually means, not withstanding the plain writing to the contrary.”
Funny how you LE types rail against the Supremes when they go against something you believe but fall back on them to support your positions.
Sorry, just because 9 judges say it’s ok doesn’t make it right.
I could go on and on but I think Bill covered it pretty well.
“Fall back on them to support my positions”
Either you didn’t read my comment and just posted something you thought had to do with SCOTUS or you didn’t understand what I wrote.
Militia Law,
You also stated this……………….
“I was a prosecutor in California and I have taken many a plea under 3k. I am a former prosecutor because I finally woke up and realized that I could not continue to “just follow orders” and prosecute anti-drug and anti-gun laws. Despite “going soft” as my former co-workers would say, I support 3k laws.”
Those people you put behind bars for breaking unconstitutional laws. I am trying to understand, maybe those in the community that had family members locked up for the unconstitutional laws you upheld and prosecuted can help me understand. 2A or petty drug laws, matters not as an oathkeeper you sent them to prison………. Well “Until you woke up”
Click to access ethics-and-the-prosecutor.pdf
The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary
party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to
govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all;
and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that
it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a
peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold
aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer.6
An inscription on the walls of the Department of Justice in
Washington, D.C. reads, “The United States wins its point whenever
justice is done its citizens in the courts.”14 To conclude, James Madison’s
words also are appropriate here: “Justice is the end of government.
It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be
pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit.”
Bill, I have no intention of hijacking your conversation with MilitiaLaw – he and I have nothing to discuss, so I will not respond here if he poses questions/snarks/whatever my way. So here is my clarification for you and your general audience: My 2 convictions were for malum prohibitum crimes – crimes that exist only because they were written as laws, not because they were “evil”. As most know a malum in se crime is a crime of evil (rape, murder, et cetera).
My “Extortion” crime was because I, and I will quote the relevant passage from the US Code: “…inflicted the fear of economic harm to a corporation…” Yes, that was my “Extortion” charge. Ain’t I scary?!
My firearms charge – a 10″ AR upper. In my closet. Next to a complete AR.
So, I “committed” 2 “malum prohibitum” “crimes” and earned a felony conviction.
No other human being was involved. No violence or threat of violence. They needed to shut me up and ruin my credibility because – and it worked. MilitiaLaw is well-versed in such activity – it is called Lawfare.
Now to MilitiaLaw: Bill’s quotes above say it all – this PoS knowingly and willfully put men in prison for “crimes” that he KNEW were unconstitutional, and he gladly took a paycheck from the Government to do it (money that was stolen from working Americans). He ruined lives, knowingly. His penance? He claims to suffer guilt for his actions.
OK – guilt is a good start – but now how ’bout you man the fuck up and write about what you did and get those people out of prison or at least reveal your colleagues still on the job for the fucks they are? No? I didn’t think so, you are willing to rail and bitch, but not lose any skin in the game. You are not even willing to use your real name when calling me out. MilitiaLaw remains a coward and is precisely the kind of garbage (linked to White National footsie players) that this country needs to put on a ship and away from decent people. Oh – MilitiaLaw probably didn’t think he’d be revealed as an ally to the WN fucks – but there it is. Just another butt-sore fuck willing to ruin people while hiding.
Garbage. Just another MBV ass-licker.
End of my involvement on this one, Bill.
Kerodin
III
“Militialaw’s” felonies far outnumber yours. “Actions, not words”. Sam, your actions speak for themselves. You are delivering what you promised in phenomenal fashion. From concept to reality, with all the legal hoops jumped through, in less than a year. That in itself speaks volumes about the content of your character. I would trust you WAY before I would ever trust “Militialaw”, Tool of the State, Enemy of the People. He broke the Supreme Law of the Land, boobs in black robes be damned. I can read plain fucking English, and I know what the Bill of Rights means.
“Militialaw’s” felonies far outnumber yours.”
Really? Post’em.
“Sam, your actions speak for themselves. You are delivering what you promised in phenomenal fashion. From concept to reality, with all the legal hoops jumped through, in less than a year.”
Sounds like you might have some of the proof Kerodin won’t turn over. Can you post it?
“As a former prosecutor, for the rest of my life I have to bear the burden of knowingly participating in the use of snitches to convict men of crimes that shouldn’t be crimes. I was the scum I now rail against. We got snitches through pre-existing felonies and tax problems. So I’d be less than worthless and a complete monster if I did not shout from the rooftops the risk felons pose to folks involved in any kind of patriot group”
“Felonies” is putting it mildly. And the contradiction in that statement is truly pathetic. You are guilty of TREASON, which is far, FAR worse than any petty “felony”. So there, I have posted them.
Kerodin and company post the proof of their actions quite regularly. III Arms progress. Citadel progress. Status of orders for III Gear. Kerodin and company have posted it, therefore I don’t need to.
Any further “argument” you may have is moot, though I am sure you won’t be intellectually honest enough to admit it.
I’m not getting into any of the personal stuff. Loyalty and action are for meatspace; these blogs are about ideas. There are two monster ideas (at least) in this thread. Kerodin wrote…
“No other human being was involved. No violence or threat of violence.”
That’s THE paramount ethical point and it doesn’t matter what any Constitution, statute, vote or anything says about it. It’s the REALITY of the matter. It’s what it MEANS to say every person is a free-willed volitional being and has the inalienable right to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness. It’s not subject to agreement and it can’t change with a vote. It’s “inalienable,” duh.
It’s what the NAP is all about and it’s why that principle trumps all, ethically/socially speaking, no matter anyone’s opinion about the issue. Any person or group may have the POWER to be a thug, but this is why no person can ever have the (so-called) RIGHT to be one except in the literal, physical defense of his own life and all that goes along with it.
I say it thusly: “There can be no crime without a complainant.” Or proxy, of course, but it’s got to be an ACTUAL person who was ACTUALLY physically impeded, not what anyone imagined. That’s the ethics of it, and that’s all there is to it. Meanwhile, on the lesser point of legality, militialaw wrote…
“It’s unconstitutional to prohibit a felon from owning a firearm, just as it is unconstitutional to search a car with a dog based on ‘an odor of marijuana.’ But it is presently lawful to enforce both of those things because 9 men in robes say that is what the USCON actually means, not withstanding the plain writing to the contrary.”
As you might guess ml, I’m no great fan of most attorneys but I gotta say that’s about the screwiest thing I ever heard any attorney assert. “Not constitutional” MEANS “not lawful.” That’s what the constitution IS, is a law. It’s the law which subsumes all other laws, usually called statutes. To think there could be a statute that’s both “lawful” and “unconstitutional” is an error of the highest order. It explicitly states that A is not-A.
I presume you’re saying that there’s an institution, personified in the Supreme Court, which can give cover to the usage of UNLAWFUL POWER. I suppose that’s true enough, but to imply that there could POSSIBLY be something that’s both unconstitutional and lawful…well, like I say, that’s a contradiction of the highest order.
This is THE difference between Rule of Law and Rule of Men.
Though I do grant you this…because we’re on this planet at this time, “Rule of Law” is just an imaginary fantasy and so we are all–as an existential fact–relegated to the Rule of Men. That’s a worthy and accurate point, well hidden in what you wrote. And it will remain true for each person until and unless that person decides, “No, I’m not.”
Everyone here would do well to understand this. As a FACTUAL matter, there is simply no other way out of this mess, at least in the long haul. Alright, that’s it for the afternoon’s boredom and pompous arrogance. Carry on.
It may be screwy, and it most certainly is a contradiction of the highest order, but its true: In this country, it is lawful to enforce laws that are unconstitutional on their face.
That is, a cop can’t be arrested for arresting a felon with a firearm and a prosecutor can freely prosecute the man. Why? Because 9 men in robes say the Second Amendment contains a hidden clause that says felons are not allowed to own firearms. Conveniently for them, only they have the power to read this secret writing.
It’s an incredible the People have allowed them to rule by “secret writing” for as long as they have.
“It may be screwy, and it most certainly is a contradiction of the highest order, but its true: In this country, it is lawful to enforce laws that are unconstitutional on their face.”
FUCK YOU, NO IT IS NOT!
Without question, or doubt, you most certainly would have
happily enjoyed dumping Zyklon B into the ventilation system
of the “showers” at Dachau.
As you stated, “it is lawful to enforce laws that are unconstitutional on their face.”
In closing, FUCK YOU!
Most sincerely, Dwayne Chandler.
Moreover, when you send your traitorous and domestic enemy
friends(still badged) to visit me, don’t act like the “elected” shitbag
chickenhawks in D.C.; never failing to rabidly call for war on the backs
of everyone but themselves and their families.
When they come to discuss the content of my comments, you
come with them.
YOU COME WITH THEM, YOU FUCK!
So you didn’t read my comment?
Again, FUCK YOU!
That’s my sole response to your traitorous
bullshit , Zyklon B.
Fuck you in the ear two times!
Collectivists scumbags to the left of me, phony patriots who want to rule to
the right of me.
I’m fed up with both sides of that fence, you fucking
fence hopper.
Now, go run and snitch to master, Zyklon B.
In closing, FUCK YOU and your pompous rationalizations.
Most sincerely, Dwayne Chandler.
My comment is maybe a hundred words. 30 seconds of reading. Just read it.
“…it most certainly is a contradiction of the highest order, but its true…”
I get slammed sometimes when I bring up epistemology, but there’s no such thing as a true contradiction. Period. I don’t know who you are or why you’re here, but if you think a contradiction can actually be true, then you’ve got much deeper challenges than politics or how you make a living.
I tend to be forthright. The more important issue for me is how deep a challenge I now have. But like so many others, I’m gettin’ awfully used to having challenges.
I threw away a future, an income, and the ability to not live like a fucking animal because of personal lines that were drawn. It is funny how politicians and sophists are sorry and air dirty laundry as some kind of damned career enhancer. They can have their fat streets of gold, I am on my knees, trying to find keys to a car that is out of gas. I would rather fight with an evil genious that did not care about money, just putting every other life before their own, than the poor imitations. Luck matters, but there is a price, this world does not support compromise in matters of character, and faith.
Don’t mean to embarrass you, but I actually quoted you.
The day someone actually(!) quotes me saying a contradiction is true, is the day I’m no longer lookin’ at the soil from the top.
@militialaw — I posted on your original comment that I commended you on seeing the absurdity of the prosecutions you were involved in and getting out. I also agree with you that it’s rather astounding that Boobus Americanus (a.k.a., sheeple) have allowed self anointed pseudo intellectual governing elites – including those that wear black robes and demand respect not earned — to assert what is lawful or unlawful regardless of what the Constitution may say.
I virulently disagree with you that it is “lawful to prosecute unlawful laws” because any mortal body of men declare such actions as “lawful” — that smacks of the law is what the king says it is regardless of anything else. It is never lawful, nor moral, to undertake such prosecutions/persecutions because you’re just doing your job. Prosecutors, police, any other “law enforcement” personnel should either refuse to follow illegal and immoral laws and/or orders, or get out immediately. Otherwise they are part of the problem, not the solution. There’s no grey area involved. You get kudos for finally getting out, but nothing but distrust and disdain for the innocent men and women you put in prison and/or ruined the lives of when you were “just doing your job” and following the king’s law…
While I do understand your concern about run-of-the-mill ex-felons being a possible opsec risk for patriot groups as they can be turned easily by the various gestapo units — including “run-of-the-mill politically concerned prosecutors (of which are the majority these days) — I don’t think you can cover all ex-felons with the same broad stroke. Many ex-felons were felons due to reasons well beyond their control — revenge by politicians, police or prosecutors, someone to “make an example of.”
After a rather long, SAD, “government career” (not a lifer by any means) I left in disgust when I realized the work I was doing was not protecting my country but further advancing what I consider a rogue government supporting their supporters (corporatism/fascism) and authoritarian/imperialistic ambitions. Following that I became an entrepreneur of sorts (nothing related to my former career, all consumer based). I started seven companies from scratch and sold each of them when they were profitable, sustainable and would bring a could price — five of those companies I sold to the employees who helped me build them. I also bought four failing companies and turned them around and sold them also. Each of my companies provided jobs for between 35 to 110 employees each when I sold them.
The reason I tell that part of my personal history is as a segue into how I built those companies — by seeking out and hiring highly self motivated people with strong character and integrity. Degrees, including high school, didn’t matter if they could do the job. Also of no consequence was their criminal records — including felonies — if I found them to be of strong personal character. I hired many ex-felons, probably around 80 to 100 and only got burned once. I found that a lot of people were either falsely convicted — convicted due to being a convenient patsy, by over zealous (therefore immoral and criminal prosecutors) or breaking laws that shouldn’t have been in place to start with (drug possession when a mother wouldn’t “turn state’s evidence against” her boyfriend, in example).
I also found than many people who “did the crime and then did their time” could turn over a new leaf and become very productive, honest and sincere citizens (and personal friends).
I don’t know Kerodin other than what I read about him or is posted by him — some of which I can agree with and some I reject. I do have a brother-in-law who purchased some merchandise from him and is happy with the transaction. Until he shows me otherwise, I categorize him as someone who did his time (why he was prosecuted is of no concern to me — he could have been made an example of or he may have been a master extortionist who stumbled) and has moved on in his life. It’s up to HIM — not Nye or any of his friends confirming sincerity — to prove me wrong in my assumption.
He’s working closely with a lot of people who embrace the the liberty and survivalist movements. If he is being sincere he’s doing a good job in coordinating diverse groups of people who are by nature suspicious without generating any red flags other than by people outside his sphere of influence. If he is conning them I’m sure that it will bubble to the surface sooner or later and then he’ll have a large group of well armed people looking for justice — I’m sure that he is cognizant of that element as well, and if he is a con man I would think he would find a more congenial and less dangerous group to ply a nefarious trade on.
In the meantime, ML, what are you doing to restore the freedom and rights of those you prosecuted under immoral, illegal laws? What are you doing to challenge those laws? What are you doing to demonstrate that you have not only condemn your previous immoral actions but have turned a new leaf in fighting against the inequities of our unjust justice system? Before you condemn others on their past activities, I encourage you to clean your own house.
First, thank you for a coherent response to my comments. It is refreshing and invigorating,
“I virulently disagree with you that it is “lawful to prosecute unlawful laws” because any mortal body of men declare such actions as “lawful””
You aren’t disagreeing with me. I was stating a fact. A sad, and demented fact, but a fact nonetheless. If anyone here knows how to arrest someone for faithfully executing the laws of the US, please post it.
“I don’t think you can cover all ex-felons with the same broad stroke.”
Well, my experience contradicts your gut feeling. They are a clear and present danger to any patriot group.
“I hired many ex-felons”
You need to read my other comment. I stated I would hire a convicted felon to do a job. That’s not the issue. I share your belief that if they can do the job, I don’t care about their past. But when it comes to associating with them in anything “patriot” related, I give a wide berth and advocate everyone else to do the same.
“[Keordin’s]working closely with a lot of people who embrace the the liberty and survivalist movements.”
As I stated before, that’s why I have questions. He’s put himself out there. He’s made claims. I asked for proof of his claims and between his responses and his minions’ responses I have a feeling there is no proof to many of his claims. I think everyone should know that because “he’s working closely with a lot of people… .”
As I stated before, that’s why I have questions. He’s put himself out there. He’s made claims. I asked for proof of his claims and between his responses and his minions’ responses I have a feeling there is no proof to many of his claims. I think everyone should know that because “he’s working closely with a lot of people… .”
The proof is in the puddin’. He has done what he said he’d do. His core group, and his investors have had no complaints. The only “complaints” we’ve seen have been from fucktards like you making ad-hominem “attacks” with nothing but hearsay and conjecture to “back it up”. So, Mr. Many Times Over Unconvicted Felon Yourself, put the fuck up or shut the fuck up.
And fuck “felony”, you are self admittedly guilty of Treason. Yet we are supposed to trust you over Kerodin. Yeah, let me hold my fucking breath. I ain’t “buddies” with Kerodin. He hardly ever mentions or acknowledges little ol’ me. And I don’t give a fuck if he does or not. I am not ego driven. But I do recognize when someone is a stand up guy, versus a blowhard with no substance such as yourself. Your “credentials”, as far as I’m concerned, make YOU the Enemy. As does the statist vomit you’ve been spewing. SCOTUS is nothing more than a bunch of political hacks, appointed for whether they sucked the left nut or the right. They are FAR from impartial, as they are supposed to be. Kerodin stands much higher on principle than any of those black robed pieces of shit.
“I am not ego driven.”
I always figured you must have some character flaw somewhere. After all, nobody’s perfect. Hahaha.
OTOH there’s also the fact of the matter—of course you are. What else could drive you?
How about truth. Honesty. Integrity. It is not ego. I have taken thousands of head shots for my views and opinions, so it is most definitely not ego that drives me. If I wanted my ego stroked, I would post what everyone else wanted to hear, which I have certainly not. If that is a “character flaw”, then you have a long way to go yet in your education. I always thought you were above the fray, guess I was wrong.
Aw chill. No fray and I wasn’t trying to show that you’re a selfish egoist. Quite the opposite…NOT being a selfish egoist is the character flaw! Get it?
Of course I understand what you’re saying. Maybe in a thousand years someone in these parts will understand what I’m saying. FWIW it’s this point which is THE key to whole scam. By denying the ultimate value of oneself, it’s just a question of which fantasy one will supplant it with. Plenty of those around, right?
Needing to be “stroked” is the OPPOSITE of being ego-driven. One of the ways the scam is pulled off, is by changing the meanings of words. “Selfish” becomes “rotten bastard” and “moral” becomes “living for others.” It’s just a giant con.
I doubt Bill wants this sort of thread drift, but who knows. It was just a crack; maybe think about it carefully. “What else could drive you?” Denial of facts causes dissonance. Plenty of that around too, right?
“The proof is in the puddin’. He has done what he said he’d do.”
So you didn’t read my comment either?
“And fuck “felony”, you are self admittedly guilty of Treason.”
Thanks for retracting the felony remark. But you need to look up “treason.” You are using it wrong.
“Yet we are supposed to trust you over Kerodin.”
OK, now we know for sure you haven’t read any of my comments.
“Your “credentials”, as far as I’m concerned, make YOU the Enemy. ”
So quitting the beast makes me the enemy? Interesting value system you have.
Just because something is a law, doesn’t mean it’s right OR Constitutional, I don’t care if some puffed up piece of political shit wearing a black robe says so or not. If you are part of the system using those same laws on the people of this country, especially, if you know in your heart they are wrong, I hope Karma makes you her bitch.
Miss Violet
You didn’t even read my comments.
I read your comments.
Why? FUCK YOU, that’s why!
That’s my operational ground rule for a “coherent, refreshing and invigorating”
conversation with the likes of you Zyklon B.
Arbeit macht frei and FUCK YOU.
My sentiments exactly.
I did read your comments asshole. YOU obviously don’t get what EVERYONE here knows. You may have done your “job” perfectly “accordingly” to the law, crossed all your t’s and dotted all your i’s, but that does NOT exonerate you from what you have done to your countrymen. Period. End of Story. The onlyhonorable thing left for you to do is just admit ithat and try to right your wrongs. I’m sure it will take the rest of your life…and quite frankly, if you think Treason is a forgivable crime, perhaps you should do some reading on the life of Benedict Arnold.
Miss Violet/ Teresa Hoke House
You should look up the definition of “treason.”
And I think you should take your advice and read about Benedict Arnold. You are using him wrongly in this comment.
The more you comment, the more you show your stripes.
Maybe you should look up the definition of treason. It doesn’t just mean a betrayl of a government, it also means a breach of faith and treachery. As far as Benedict Arnold goes, he fully filled the definition of treason. He was loathed and hated and his name is invoked to this day to describe a traitor.
You may be so very clever with your words, obviously a true testement to how you served an immoral system, but you haven’t figured out you’re not going to achieve anything by being condescending.
This thread has touched on a raw nerve, one that makes people passionate, one that has generated many comments. The comments can double, triple, and you can answer everyone of them, trying to defend your position, it will not matter. What you did was wrong even if it was “lawful” for you to do it.
Miss Violet
“He’s working closely with a lot of people who embrace the the liberty and survivalist movements. If he is being sincere he’s doing a good job in coordinating diverse groups of people who are by nature suspicious without generating any red flags other than by people outside his sphere of influence. If he is conning them I’m sure that it will bubble to the surface sooner or later and then he’ll have a large group of well armed people looking for justice — I’m sure that he is cognizant of that element as well, and if he is a con man I would think he would find a more congenial and less dangerous group to ply a nefarious trade on.” David
Been following Kerodin closely since Drudge broke the Citadel story, trying to decide whether to get in the game here or just move overseas before things get much worse. The felony conviction concerned me but his blogs say he truly “gets” Jefferson’s rightful liberty. The cited quote gave me a new and better way to look at the risks associated with the project. Still have lots of questions but its time to get my application in.
Lemmus
What is it that’s expected to get worse? Can you name one thing that’s changed for you, besides the fact that there’s a n*gger in the white house?
Vic,
I did not delete your comment, Leave Race out of this subject. GOT IT?
My question explicitly takes race out of the subject. My point is that, once you take race off the table, what’s changed? The answer is obvious. Nothing’s changed. Period.
Vic,
I am not playing… GET IT?
If you want to delete the question, by all means do so. I think it’s legitimate – maybe you disagree.
…hhhmmm …besides your quite evident case of rectal-cranial inversion?
Lemmus
He’ll be at the NC PATCON the first week in October if you are anywhere near.
There will be no atonement, only just reprisal.
Militalaw
(captaincrunch)
I was planning to stay out of this fracus but others are correct.
Write down everything you remember about every case in which you knowningly broke the law and unknowingly broke the law.
Go to a media representative and “confess your crimes”
“Maybe even write a book on it”
If cases of dirtbags are appealed and the dirtbags are exonerated, then so be it.
You will start to gain respect and you may get some sleep at night.
We were raised as children to respect the law. We were told to look up to Police Officers and lawyers and judges as people that were “impartial and above reproach” We were told our legal system was the fairest in the world.
I know that’s a fantasy, but if you came forward it would be a very small step in the right direction in restoring some faith in an otherwise failed system.
I say all this with respect to you. I will not cuss you out, nor will I be disrespectful. If anything I wish you well and pray you make the right decision and free those who have been framed. Maybe a few of them will have ‘come to Jesus moments” and follow a different path upon their release.
“Write down everything you remember about every case in which you knowningly broke the law and unknowingly broke the law.”
And that is why you should have stayed out of this fracas. I never claimed to have broken the law.
“Go to a media representative and “confess your crimes””
You are confusing me with Kerodin. Kerodin is the felon. I’ve never committed a crime.
““Maybe even write a book on it””
Shortest book ever: I used to be a really good prosecutor. I did everything by the book and was respected by the defense bar and judges. Then one day I woke up and realized I was participating in a system that makes up its own laws and pretends the plain language of the USCON is irrelevant. I realized that meant I was breaking my oath. So I quit without notice. The end.
“I know that’s a fantasy, but if you came forward it would be a very small step in the right direction in restoring some faith in an otherwise failed system.”
And this why you should have stayed out of this fracas. That’s what I have done and Bill’s minions think I should either (1) remained silent or (2) acted like virtually all other oathers ignore my conscience and keep suckling off the beast’s teat.
“free those who have been framed.”
You suffer from the same mistake as Bill Nye. You are confusing bad prosecutors and cops that make up cases and break the law with oathers that go by the book and are just doing their jobs. The former are a whole separate animal.
I’m in the very very small group of oathers that resign once they realize they are helping a runaway govt.
Nobody joins the police force with the idea “I’m going to shred the constitution and help a junta maintain its power.” Instead, we think “I’m going to go do justice” and join up.
Then one day they read a powerful essay.
Or have an interesting conversation with someone who points out that their conduct is supporting a beast.
That causes them to realize they had been mislead and are actually working for injustice.
The person can then do 3 things.
Ignore their conscience and keep that money flowing.
Physically disrupt the beast.
Or three, quit.
Those are the only 3 options and unfortunately most oathers choose number 1.
Militalaw
(captaincrunch)
I was trying to put on a positive slant to all of this. That’s why I got involved in this “fracus”
Point us to that “Powerful Essay” you mentioned and let us in on some of that “interesting conversation” that you had on “supporting the beast”
I am not attacking you.
I am not one of “Bill’s Minions”
I do not worship at the alter of “Kerodin”
I am my own man.
Militalaw you have insider information. You have invaluable information that you can bestow on us to empower ourselves in situations where “the beast” is destroying us.
That’s why I got into this fractus. You are an very intelligent with invaluable information.
Start your own blog, write a book. I will be the first one in line to buy the book. We are all potential fodder for “the beast” and knowledge is our best defense.
Start with basics like “how to keep your mouth shut so you don’t incrimidate yourself”
How to get a good defense attorney that will actually work for you.
How the navigate the legal system as a defendant.
The possibilities are endless.
Militialaw.
You can do a lot good and help a lot people out.
Funny stuff. ML says “I used to be a prosecutor but I couldn’t in good conscience continue so I did the right thing and quit. ” This experience, he advises, puts him in a position to know how easily cons like Hyman can be turned. He doesn’t ask that you follow him, do anything for him, or even thank him.
And you all attack, attack, attack him (and his “kind” or his “ilk”) because he questions the wisdom of your blind worship of everything The Felon Hyman says. Also that you might think twice about giving him money for all his obvious scams.
You might give the man a listen instead of trying to undercut everything he says through tricks of logic and your silly interpretation of how the country should work.
Fuck you. People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw rocks.
Miss Violet
Cogent reply, Miss V. Thanks for your contribution.
Ditto to you.
Miss V
I concur with coffeeaddict above.
If Militialaw is not full of baloney in his ‘admissions’, and sincere in his regret, and truly of a character we NEED in our country he WILL EXPOSE what we all know has existed for at least 50 years: a judicial system which puts the State over the citizen; which puts the ‘LEGAL’ over the Constitutional; and which puts conviction rates above JUSTICE.
Is he immune under whistle-blower laws? Is it even a consideration even if he is NOT, be he truly repentant?
Put up or shut up I say. Do the right thing. Our founders pledged the “lives, fortunes, and sacred honor” in defense of Liberty and Justice for all. Put up or shut up.
I agree. Go one step farther and set up a defense fund with the profits from your best selling book for the people and their families that you ruined.
Miss Violet
What book? Am I missing something?
SJCO
(captaincrunch)
I politely suggested to Militalaw that he write a book on all of his misgivings and transgressions.
A book like that is something we can learn from to protect ourselves from “overzealous prosecutors” and it may help exonerate wrongly convicted individuals.
I like to think there is always a positive way out of bad situations. That’s why I suggested this course of action to Militalaw.
I did “put up.” I walked out. I wish I could say the same for all those so-called Oath Keepers.
ML,
Have you seen this yet?
@Militialaw: Re: “As I stated before, that’s why I have questions. He’s put himself out there. He’s made claims. I asked for proof of his claims and between his responses and his minions’ responses I have a feeling there is no proof to many of his claims.”
What claims are you looking for validation of?
~Proof that he’s no longer thinking/acting like a felon? Isn’t that asking him to prove a negative, a herculean task that cannot be accomplished.
~Proof that he is operating as an honest merchandiser? Haven’t seen any issues outside of shipping times/delays (and they’ve been resolved from what I see).
~Proof that he really believes in liberty and the ‘patriot movement’? Only his actions can confirm or deny that. What other ‘proof’ could he provide — or are you setting the stage of ‘guilty until proven innocent’? Again, an impossible herculean task (and a favorite of the various branches of the American gestapo).
May I suggest that you detail your questions of the man or back off. While I think a lot of the ad hominem attacks on you are at the best counter-productive to a legitimate discussion, immature at the worst (ala, the usual tact of the leftists in attacking and denigrating the opponent) I understand where they are coming from. You are making accusations bordering on character assassination without preventing anything except your suspicions of nefarious intent.
Just as disingenuous as your attack on Kerodin based on the past with no evidence of future nefarious actions (do you attack all ex felons knowingly involved in the ‘patriot movement’ or just this one) is your claim to anonymity based on: “I will remain anonymous because I’m not selling anything, unlike Kerodin… because I’m not trying to organize meetings… because I’m not trying to be a leader in this, or any movement, unlike Kerodin.”
Pardon me as it’s difficult to camouflage a profanity with a cough in writing, but bullshit. You are trying to sell something — your expertise and credibility in tearing down another individual. While you may not be the thesis pulling together meetings, you have embraced the role of the antithesis in destroying such meetings. Whether or not you want to be a leader is yet to be seen as we only have your word that you don’t seek such a role (prove it?). And even if you don’t want to be a leader you are trying to influence who is in leadership role/s so your claim of justifiable anonymity rings hollow when it appears you want to be power behind the power so to speak.
So to me I find your claims as you thrust yourself and your opinions onto the patriot movement in an effort to influence said community at par with any claims made by Kerodin to be a leader. Prove me wrong….
“What claims are you looking for validation of?”
You inject yourself into the middle of a discourse and have no idea what we are discussing?
Nice.
Nice dance around the issues. You’ve made a lot of claims and accusations without being specific or on point — must be the old prosecutor seeping out from the shadow of your past. Your credibility goes down the more you try to justify your intellect and expertise — you must have been a very effective, even if immoral, prosecutor. You’re showing yourself to be a preening pompous ass…
What are you selling or attempting to entrap, Mr. Anonymous, he of claimed superiority and intellect?
coffee addict on September 4, 2013 at 5:11 am said:
………….
Go to a media representative and “confess your crimes”
“Maybe even write a book on it”………….
I was going of the post of CoffeeAddict
Miss Violet
ML don’t you get tired of wasting your breath on these mouth-breathers? Apparently no amount of logic will suffice; nothing short of public flaying and your eventual suicide will do.
It’s also hilarious that everyone here seems to know better than the Supreme Court what’s constitutional. Sorry, campers, but they’re the duly appointed and confirmed people who get to decide that. Not you. Whine about it all you want – you won’t change a single thing.
Rail and wail all you want about how badly you’re treated. See how far that victim mentality gets you. Keep yelling FUCK YOU at everybody who doesn’t agree with you. That should work. Give your money to the great leader with the scammer record kerodin at kerodin dot com and see where that gets you. There’s one born every minute. You’re proof.
Vic
III
I’ll go with your second option.
As always, FUCK YOU, Herr Dictator!
Or should I just call you Herr Dick?
In closing, FUCK YOU!
Most sincerely, Dwayne Chandler.
ROTFLMAO!!! …the man who claims nothing has changed in America “besides the fact that there’s a n*gger in the white house?” thinks that “no amount of logic will suffice” …how about this logic Vic, we KNOW you’re a racist by your own words, we KNOW Kerodin isn’t as defined by his choice of spouse …by definition, that logically makes YOU a threat to the patriot community …if the choice is between Kerodin and you, he wins every time.
As for your pro Supreme Court rant, the simple fact is that the SCOTUS has on many occasions reversed itself as time, members, facts, and public opinion have changed. On many occasions, Congress itself has enacted legislation to reverse the results of SCOTUS rulings. Amendments to the Constitution have on several occasions reversed the effects of prior SCOTUS rulings, and we now have the States themselves legislating laws that effectively reverse SCOTUS rulings under the enumerated powers clause, the Montana Firearms Freedom Act of 2009 being an example of such. In simplest form, I do not accept the SCOTUS as the final word on any law if it’s ruling clearly contravenes the plain words of the Constitution itself. I can read the 2nd Amendment as well as any SCOTUS justice can …”the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” PERIOD.
As for Kerodin, its only necessary to note that on this very day he stands on III Citadel owned land, joined by fellow patriots who have freely chosen to cast their lot with him. Many of those fellow patriots bear the highest quality arms made by III Arms, an Idaho registered and licensed FFL manufacturer, all of who’s profits go to support the Citadel project. ALL of this has been done in less than one year from scratch …and all of it was led/coordinated to a significant degree by Kerodin …and all while the naysayers, racists, and egotists posted rant after rant that it was all a Kerodin scam, that nothing would ever come of it, that it was all a pipe dream …and all while YOU, Vic have achieved what?. PERIOD.
One more item of note re ML’s unfounded and illogical rants about how we can’t ever trust a former felon in our midst. Samuel Adams, entrusted with the tax monies of Boston was once audited and found to be several thousand pounds short in the public accounts. Only the intervention of his friends and family to cover the shortage prevented him from criminal prosecution. Yet he went on to become a key leader in the coming revolution and a Founding Father of the nation. By the standards you and ML voice, Sam Adams would have been ostracized long before he became a leader in the patriot movement.
Lemmus
I don’t see how pointing out that SCOTUS is the ultimate arbiter of the laws of the land can be construed as a “pro Supreme Court rant.” Like it or not, that’s what the constitution says and all your butthurt about rulings with which you disagree won’t change that.
And nice dodge on the other part. The straw man about racism and Kerodin’s unfortunate wife and co-conspirator doesn’t answer the question of what’s changed? You hate that dumb darkie in the White House and call him names, but you can’t really name anything he’s done to deserve it. Typical.
“Kerodin’s unfortunate wife”. Wow. You pretty much donned your white sheet and dunce cap there. That can be taken two ways of course, but it was a Freudian Slip if there ever was one in my humble opinion. “Unfortunate” in what way? In Kerodin’s choice? Because she is black? That’s how I took it.
As far as the “supreme” court, well it has been stacked with partisan hacks since time immemorial. They are supposed to be neutral, but instead have been chosen for their views either right or left. Therefore they are irrelevant. “Impartial” is what they are supposed to be, but they are not.
The Constitution is written in plain English, yet the “supremes” have violated it over and over again with their “decisions”.
Was Dred Scott v. Sanford the “supreme law of the land”? After all, it was decided by the “supreme” court. I rest my case…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford
I’m trying to find where I claimed the supremes were impartial, non-partisan or neutral. I’ve come up empty so I suppose you’ve brought that up as another dodge. I also failed to come up with my statement that they’ve never made an error. However I’m pretty sure that even the worst of them knows more than you about the law and the constitution, Dred Scott and Bush v Gore nothwithstanding.
Also, I have no idea what color Hyman’s wife is, nor why you brought her into the conversation. I referred to her as “unfortunate” just as I would refer to anyone else associated with a known and duly convicted scam artist.
Give it up guys, this is fruitless. Vic has been convicted by his own words, nothing he says at this point will change that. “that dumb darkie in the White House” and “there’s a n*gger in the white house” are his words and no one else’s. He’s simply a true blue hater who can’t stand the idea that real patriots are creating something tangible that Vic will never be allowed to be a part of.
His even feebler attempts to defend the clear contradictions in ML’s posts contribute nothing of any value to the conversation …he’s just rantin’ to hear himself rant. More likely a fed troll trying to generate fodder for his leftwing fellow travelers to drool over. If there is anyone the patriot movement should be avoiding, its Vic and his ilk.
I’m done with this thread.
Lemmus
Done , huh? As I suspected, you have no answers to my question about what’s changed. Good luck in the citadel. See you when the thing falls apart and Hyman splits with your money.
“Like it or not, that’s what the constitution says and all your butthurt about rulings with which you disagree won’t change that.”
Wow…there are two Constitutions out there? My copy doesn’t say anything about the Supreme Court determining the constitutionality of any law. You got the cite from your copy?
My very straightforward question was to Lemmus.
You might want to pull out your copy of the Constitution. Specifically, Article III which addresses the judicial power in the United States. It does not grant the SCOTUS the arbitrary power to determine what is or isn’t constitutional.
The power to be the final arbiter of Constitutional issues was unilaterally claimed by the SCOTUS in the infamous case, Marbury V Madison, 5 US 137, 1803. The fact that such a claim by SCOTUS was in and of itself “unconstitutional” didn’t seem to get in their way, nor the politicos in charge (but I repeat myself) at the time, and the “decision” became long standing — and devastating — precedent, accepted “law.”
& we have John Marshall to thank for that. I grew up from 5 to Vietnam in Marshall, Virginia named for him after the War. Named Salem during the Late Unpleasantness and where Mosby disbanded his troops.
” I can read the 2nd Amendment as well as any SCOTUS justice can …”the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” PERIOD.”
It’s so convenient to leave out the first part of the second amendment, ain’t it? Taken out of context it’s pretty clear. Shorten the sentence and it takes on a different meaning. All the ambiguity just up and disappears.
“In simplest form, I do not accept the SCOTUS as the final word on any law if it’s ruling clearly contravenes the plain words of the Constitution itself.”
That right there is THE difference between Rule of Law and Rule of Men. It’s also why the damn philosophers are to blame for this mess—they spend all their time at the public trough proving that there’s no such thing as “plain words.” Well, it’s what they call “proof” anyway.
It’s also why there will be no Rule of Law on this planet for many, many generations…so many that nobody will need it by then. Till then, it’s Rule of Men no matter what it’s called. You either believe that some other men should rule you, or you don’t. Either-or. Nice comment, Lemmus.
“A is A” Jim …don’t think I need to source that “philosopher” for you.
Lemmus
That “philosopher”, along with Orwell, and a few others have proven to be more “prophets” than “philosophers”…
Hey, militialaw and vic, here is a new syphilitic dick for your
whoring asses to suck on: PINE BLUFF, Ark. (KTHV) – A 107-year old Pine Bluff man died Saturday after a shootout with officers and S.W.A.T. members. The Pine Bluff Police Dept. released the following information about the incident on Saturday evening. http://www.thv11.com/news/article/278849/2/107-year-old-Arkansas-man-dies-in-shootout-with-SWAT
Leaving aside your homoerotic fantasy, I see a story about a guy who got into a gunfight and got what was coming to him. What’s your point?
Exactly.
That’s my point, “vega,” you made it.
As always, an impotent shitbag resorts to the weak
and trite accusation of homosexuality, to compensate for a lack of thought
other than what is required to be a taint eating slave.
Fuck you, .gov, .fed, jackbooted punk, traitorous enemy(aka COP).
Most likely, you are one in the same.
As other Patriots have suggested for you and yours, “go eat a bullet, or two, or three.”
No noose is too tight, no gallows to high, for traitors and enemies like you.
As always, respectfully in closing, FUCK YOU!
P.S., When you send your cunting badger buddies to visit, please be with them.
What the hell, bring militialaw along for the ride to dirtville.
Most sincerely, Dwayne Chandler.
I believe it was you who brought up the homosexual stuff. Not sure why that was on your mind, but it wasn’t part of the conversation we were having. If you want to discuss homosexual acts, I suppose that’s ok, but you might want to start another thread.
It was mentioned because that’s what you do, suck
syphilitic dick, being that you justified your shitbag SWAT
partners killing a 107 year old in Arkansas.
However, no harm, no foul, right syphilitic dick licker?
Remember what your partner militialaw commented,
“It may be screwy, and it most certainly is a contradiction of the highest order, but its true: In this country, it is lawful to enforce laws that are unconstitutional on their face.”
Which certainly must be your justification for your recent comment, “I see a story about a guy who got into a gunfight and got what was coming to him.”
Yep, that’s what 107 year old’s are known for doing, having the coordination for, and justifying a SWAT team(on ready standby) in rual, Pine Bluff, Arkansas.
In closing, FUCK YOU, FUCK YOUR SCUMBAG oathbreaking(cop) partners, FUCK YOUR .fed partners, FUCK YOUR .gov partners and FUCK YOUR partner militialaw!!!
As always, no noose too tight, no gallows too high, for traitorous enemies such as yourself, militialaw and those like you.
Most sincerely, Dwayne Chandler.
Again with the homosexual sex talk? Stay on topic please. Like I said – if you want to discuss gay sex acts that’s fine, but this isn’t really the place.
You make it sound as if the 107-year old guy was sitting there, minding his own business when the cops showed up. I think if you re-read the article, (maybe get help reading it – there are big words in there) you’ll find he fired on the police multiple times and they tried several other tactics to subdue him. He was a bad guy with a gun. Good guys with guns put him down. Tough luck. You don’t want to die, don’t get in gunfights with guys with more guns.
Actually, you should just declare yourself to be the shitbag trolling cop you
are. Better yet, you should take a lesson in not believeing everything someone reads to you. I’d prefer that you go eat a bullet, you racist fuck.
“Tough luck. You don’t want to die, don’t get in gunfights with guys with more guns.”
Advice you should heed, when you are not slavishly sucking MVB’s cancerous taint.
You should not pretend to be a Patriot, who respects the rule of Constittuional Law, Liberty and freedom.
You don’t want to do that, you could die.
Now run along, MVB, militialaw, stewie rhodes, and whatever other proxy you can invent to hide your identity.
Run along, scumbag cop sucker, run along.
You make a lot of sense. A word of advice though – get that gay thing taken care of. You talk way too much about taints and cocks and asses.
Yes, because that’s what scumbags like you eat daily, as you shamelessly lie about being a Patriot, when in truth you are a scumbag cop.
I see. And where did I make that claim? It’s ok – take your time. And if you can’t find it, then please shut the fuck up.
“He was a bad guy with a gun.”
Do you have any evidence for that? I’m not questioning the killing itself…if someone fires, you gotta fire back. I’m just wondering how you know him to be a bad guy. [Yes, I read that he pointed a weapon at two residents, but I also read that the two residents remained nonetheless. That leaves in question just how bad he was, and I can’t imagine how you could know otherwise.]
Jose Guerena and Matthew Speese were also murdered by such teams, and they were both known NOT to be bad guys and, relevantly, DIDN’T fire at any officers.
See, your credibility on such matters is pretty low since you pulled out of thin air that the Constitution authorizes SCOTUS to determne the constitutionality of laws, when it doesn’t.
Good points Jiim. I don’t know if he was a good guy or a bad guy before he decided to start firing. I was paraphrasing the adage “The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” Didn’t mean to pass judgement on his character. Just knew he was actively endangering lives.
“I don’t know if he was a good guy or a bad guy before he decided to start firing.”
Bill hasn’t asked me to stop, so I’ll keep takin’ ’em. I’ll have a few tidbits later, but for now I wanna make it clear where I stand, should it ever happen that there’s no point in talking or writing.
Not only do I agree with this, I also don’t know whether he was a good guy or bad guy AFTER he started firing. I can make guesses, I can use stats; I suppose I could even do a full investigation and find out about him and the residents too. I could actually know the instance and the history.
But I’m not gonna, and I’m not gonna pretend I know the situation or that guy’s mind or anything like that. I already acknowledged that the guys fired upon, are expected to fire back. Though dig this—-IF THEY WERE WEARING HOODS OVER THEIR FACES, then the presumption is with him. I’ve never, ever met someone with a hood over their face and I’m saying unequivocally that in my judgment, someone with a hood over their face is threatening my life directly. We can find out why his face was covered, after. That might’ve had nothing to do with this, doesn’t matter. In the wider context, those hoods have got to go.
I still don’t know why he did it, and I’m not gonna presume, nor presume about the Govco agents either. IT’S NONE OF MY BUSINESS, and doesn’t figure to ever be at all. One could say it doesn’t fall under “rational” because he ceased to live. OTOH, at 107, maybe that was the rational choice. Who the hell knows? WHO THE HELL CARES?
It’s not that I don’t care about a stranger. It’s that I’m not gonna know. So what the hell would I be doing trying to judge someone that far away, doing whatever he was doing, with whomever he was doing it with? Like I’m gonna spend time finding out that guy’s story? And even if someone did…then what? Does that mean it extrapolates to every other old codger who fires a weapon?
Me, I’m just gonna (try to) make sure no old guy, with dementia or not, or even young for that matter, is in a position to take me down first. Isn’t that the way it is, with everybody?
“I was paraphrasing the adage ‘The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.'”
Yeah well, that’s the point. You can’t know by someone having a gun, whether they’re good or bad. Me, I want as many people armed as possible, because I think there are an overwhelming number of decent people. “An armed society is a polite society,” ain’t merely a saying. There’s a referent to it, something that exists in reality, a fact.
“Didn’t mean to pass judgement on his character. Just knew he was actively endangering lives.”
Yeah sure, and all the other guys–and everything that brought them there–weren’t. Is that it?
Here’s the thing. I didn’t read anything about hoods or dementia or whether he was previously a good person or a bad person. Somebody sent me a link – presumably for comment – and I commented on what I read. Absent a whole lot of other information and based on strictly what was in that link, I said – and I’ll say again – a guy got into a gunfight and got what was coming to him. Based simply on this: I don’t care how old you are, if you’re firing away at me or my family or my friends or anybody else I know, I’m on the side of whoever’s gonna take you out. Period. Like you said – get fired on, you have to fire back. Pretty simple.
Oh and thanks for making intelligent comments and having a discussion. Some people around here just try to trip you up with logic tricks, misdirection and silly semantic arguments. Either that or they sit there hurling insults and shit like a fucking chimpanzee. Maybe their mothers didn’t hug them enough or they were dropped on their heads. Or both.
“The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”
The hell you were shitbag.
Don’t backtrack now, Frau national socialist.
Your “nigger in the white house comment, previous slander, and slavishly stupid support for the traitorous dirtbag, militialaw, MVB, makes it clear you ain’t no patriot.
“Good guys with guns put him down. Tough luck. You don’t want to die, don’t get in gunfights with guys with more guns.”
I’ll certainly remember that, when you and those like you are in my iron or scoped sights.
Most sincerely, and FUCK YOU, Dwayne Chandler.
Ah, Mr Chandler with another astute observation. It’s nice that you’re here. We need this kind of high-level discourse.
Also I’ve not claimed to be any kind of constitutional scholar. I obviously don’t know fuck-all about the constutution one way or another. My day to day is taking care of my husband and kids. However I’m pretty sure laws get kicked up to the SC as their final test and get overturned or upheld based on the judges’ interpretation of the relevant part of the constitution. As for credibility – I never claimed that either. Just like any commenter on any blog…take it with a grain of salt.
“My day to day is taking care of my husband and kids.”
That sounds nice, but I don’t know the specifics of that either. Another thing that has nothing to do with my life, probably. The important point is that what this MEANS–that is, the referent, the reality, the fact to which it refers–is generally true for most people.
And it’s a great thing generally; too bad so many won’t admit that.
“However I’m pretty sure laws get kicked up to the SC as their final test and get overturned or upheld based on the judges’ interpretation of the relevant part of the constitution.”
In theory, they’re supposed to arbitrate, not create. But no matter because yes, this is what happens. That’s physics; wackos murder people too. “Happening” doesn’t tell us anything about right or wrong, especially these days.
“As for credibility – I never claimed that either……take it with a grain of salt.”
This’ll make you 2-1, at least this post. The implication is that it doesn’t matter TO YOU. That’s about the most serious error a person can make, if credibility (meaning honesty when it’s to oneself) isn’t an EXTREMELY high value.
That’s not a charge against you; it’s just a statement of fact. This is how the valuing human mind works. “Claiming it” is indeed quite another thing. But if you think about it carefully, you’ll discover both individuals and all of society would be a ton better off, if everyone who were in fact truly credible, were openly declaring it. Think of the Information shared…it might even become an Age.
“But what about the ones who lie?”
What about them? They had their day. We’ll see how they do on their own.
No, I don’t need to have a high level of discourse with shitbags like you.
It was made clear, many comments ago, that your worthless, fake patriot
ass has no place here.
I have neither the time, or interest, to deal with the likes of you, mvb, stewie rhodes, militialaw
and those like you.
The only worthwhile way to deal with a such a group of pandering
whore is with a brick to the head. Anything else is a waste.
No more wasting time with conversations of respectability.
It’s dumber than adding hot sauce to a bowl of diarrhea, and expecting
the taste of ice cream.
When you decide to admit that MVB, militialaw or stewie rhodes is your dad,
I might respond with a fart in the wind.
Honestly, I’d much rather crack traitorous shitbags between the eyes
with a Louisville or a ragged clump of ragged shale.
As always, FUCK YOU, traitor.
Thanks Dwayne. I love you.
As always, FUCK YOU, traitorous shitbag.
Go tell it to some dogshit oathbreaking badger.
I’m certain you have many friends amongst
that muderdering scum.
As soon as I look up “muderdering.”
Request: Since I know I won’t get a straight answer from my beloved Dwayne (who will predictably still find it necessary to hurl another torrent of pointless invective), can someone explain to me what is meant by his calling me “badger?” I’m familiar with the animal, but not the insult. Thanks.
I didn’t catch the instance, but usually the concept “badger” includes an element of “keep attacking.”
It might behoove you to cut through Dwayne’s style and see the substance of what he’s saying, cuz it’s mighty important and there are millions and millions of Americans who feel exactly the same way.
Basically it says, “I try to live a civil life and a bunch of thugs won’t get the hell out of my way.” And more…it says, “There’s no point in trying to be rational with a thug, or any group of them, so this is the way it’s gotta be.”
The last time some Americans got fed up, over 600,000 of them ended up dead. It ain’t gonna be a massacre this time…men of the mind will always eventually win out over brute animals. I’ve paid close attention to “Patriot” blogs for a long while now, and there’s hardly a single person among them who actually wants this to reduce to a physical fight.
But the statists just keep comin’ and comin’, and it’s NEVER about rationality, or civil living, or individual liberty. The rotten choices and the thuggery are exclusively from one side of this “disagreement.” What Dwayne is telling you in so many words is, “Alright then…you makes your choices and you live or die with the consequences.”
As I say, that sentiment is shared by millions and milions of hard-working decent Americans, each in their own way and each for their own reasons. IMO if anything you ought to be grateful to Dwayne for cluing you in on the fact of the matter. As is usually the case when someone uses their real name on a blog, you can believe it.
Interesting. So just so I’m clear, you think a neutral observer would consider me a thug, due to my behaviour, but Mr Dwayne Chandler of the FUCK YOU, traitorous shitbag dogshit oathbreaking badger cunting badger muderdering scum pandering whore brick to the head fart in the wind traitorous shitbags between the eyes with a Louisville go eat a bullet, you racist fuck slavishly sucking MVB’s cancerous taint scumbag cop sucker syphilitic dick licker syphilitic dick for your
whoring asses to suck on” is a man of substance, if not style. Very interesting.
To me, he sounds like a severely repressed homosexual, fighting off his natural impulses by lashing out with violent sexual projections.
If this is the voice of someone who doesn’t want this imminent – yet existent wholly in the fevered imagination of “Patriots” – battle to come to physical violence, I think your little movement is in trouble. But good luck anyway.
“So just so I’m clear…”
Sorry. No, you’re not clear and the mistake was mine for not making it clear. My very first sentence in this thread was, “I’m not getting into any of the personal stuff.” I remembered, but I can’t expect you to remember. So that’s my fault.
My claim stands, however, and there is substance there. You just gotta look for it. And yes, I believe any person should be grateful for receiving any message of substance; I know I am.
You’ve defended unconstitutionality and then backtracked. You judged a deceased 107-year-old man and then backtracked. You started with an off-the-wall racist remark that I for one still don’t get. But hopefully, I’ve made it clear now—“I’m not getting into any of the personal stuff.” I don’t care who you are or why you believe what you believe. I care about IDEAS, and I care about my life and the lives of those whom I choose to care about.
I’m surprised David doesn’t see the “substance” here. I don’t know anything about Dwayne nor why that’s his style nor why he’s fed up. But I do know why millions and millions of Americans are fed up, and I know the trouble to which that’s gonna lead.
This has been a recurring theme throughout. Everyone’s got their own lives, see, and we’re either gonna be a society where they can live them, or there’s going to be one helluva war. That’s the extent of what I’m saying and it’s got nothing to do with you. Like the 107-year-old and like Dwayne and everyone else here, I don’t know the first thing about you. I only know what you write, so it’s THAT which I address. If you need any further clarification, just ask.
Jim —
Any substance is buried in hateful spewing, ad hominem attacks and incoherent ranting. While I do realize how and why such raw emotion can come bubbling to the surface when considering the corrupt government illegally and immorally controlling us — the Lord knows I have the same emotions coursing through my veins — falling prey to it and letting it express the rebellion against such government/social tyranny is totally counterproductive. It turns people away from the arguments, not towards them.
Emotions, whether in debate or battle are fatal when relied upon for survival, let alone victory. Emotionalism is the kissing cousin of panic. In battle the surviving, and sometimes victorious warrior is always in fear of succumbing to the enemy, but is able to harness that fear, that awareness of reality and use it as a tool to be wielded for victory whether that victory is total defeat of the enemy at the time or “mere” survival in order to return to the battle and fight again. Panic (like emotionalism) is almost always a fatal error as the reality of the situation is overwhelmed by irrational thoughts and actions leaving one vulnerable to not only the enemy by to oneself. The underlying “substance” of the situation is ignored as irrational thought takes control and is expressed — usually in a suicidal effort.
Scumbag, oathbreaking, cops, wearing badges; being a badger. As always, FUCK YOU, and your “good guys” with a lot of guns. Now go run and snitch that to the badgers.
And I should be grateful. What fucking planet do you guys live in?
I live on planet FUCK you! Jim Klein’s recent comment makes it clear why I hold that position. Like him, I’m tracking the same facts about the BS in your previous posts; the shit you are backtracking on. There is no reason to be civil with shitbags like you and those like you. It’s much too late for that. All of you, the collectivists masters, the badgers(COPS), those fake and criminal “patriots” like Mike, Stewie, militialaw and you, I will not entertain will civil discussions. As always, no noose too tight, no gallows too high, and FUCK YOU! You, and those like you are my enemies. I am a free man. FUCK YOU! You want discourse? There it is.
Well, this discourse sure turned left into irrelevancy at the corner of Ad Hominem Ave and Gratuitous Juvenile Profanity Blvd., and crashed into the back wall of grade school playground taunts. It went from a serious debate discussing liberty and the rule of law vs. the rule of man, governmental retribution and individual atonement, into a Alinsky inspired attack of identify, ridicule and vilify the perceived enemy by any means without regard for objective, honest reasoning — essentially ripped right out of the Progressive’s handbook.
And people wonder why the patriot community has a hard time attracting the fence sitting naive sheeple into the movement when conversations end up devolving into hateful profanity laced invectives without logic.
No shit.
David – that’s known as “style.” The “substance” that I should be “grateful” for – because that’s what he’s “cluing me into” – is the important part.
“David – that’s known as ‘style.’ The ‘substance’ that I should be ‘grateful’ for – because that’s what he’s ‘cluing me into’ – is the important part.”
That’s exactly right, at least IMO. I’m not defending any brand of style, not even mine. That’s because it doesn’t matter. But yes, there is a message in what Dwayne wrote and pretending that there isn’t because of the style…well, I’m never in favor of pretension; let’s just leave it at that. Obviously anyone can ignore that message and maybe you think I’m reading invisible ink, but I do indeed see it and am just passing it along for those who can’t.
To lighten things up a bit, and to help David, there hasn’t been a single sentence in this whole thread that consists of the Ad Hominem Fallacy. While it’s true that “ad hominem” means “against the man,” that’s not what an ad hominem argument is…that’s just insulting, that’s all. If someone calls me an asshole, that’s an insult but it’s not an instance of ad hominem fallacy or argumentation. For that to occur, he’d have to say, “You’re an asshole and because you’re an asshole therefore you’re wrong.”
Indeed…if you want to get super-technical, the closest to an ad hominem argument in this thread, has been the implication that Dwayne is wrong because of the way he chose to word what he said. But nobody’s said that directly; the claim has rather been that he should be ignored because of the way he worded something. FWIW in my book that’s even worse, but that’s because I view evasion as the cardinal sin for a rational being.
Now “vic vega,” since my previous admitted slip-up, I’m trying to be as clear as I can. So if you’ve got any questions or challenges, just ASK. And David, I’m sure you know that I completely agree with you about emotionalism and panic. But a lot of people in this country are going into panic mode anyway…that’s the substance of what I was trying to express, and ignoring it ain’t gonna make it go away. I think all facts are worthy of note; that one maybe doubly so.
Ad hominem (Latin for “to the man” or “to the person”), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally against an opponent instead of against their argument. Hence, by invoking an “intellectual” quiver of invectiveness, demeaning and/or marginalizing the person while circumventing or discounting the underlying argument is an ad hominem attack. Such an attack is meant to undermine and debase the character of the opponent in order to overcome an argument put forth without adequately addressing the argument — an ad hominem attack.
Parsing words and meanings only adds intellectual fraud and ineffectual justification for emotional laden invectiveness by attempting to give it a pass, to achieve a sort of intellectual “social justice.”
Respectfully, I am not in panic mode.
As many know to be true, there is no way
out of the threat to our Republic without
a fight.
True?
Yes.
Tragic?
Yes.
Wholesale violence and bloodshed without limits?
Yes.
Am I scared, terrified, afraid?
Shitless.
I don’t care.
Those who are the enemies of our Republic(never stop fucking with us)
our Constitution, our
individual freedom to be left the fuck alone, provided we live(not preying)
on others and honor the Constitutional rule of law.
That’s what forms and shapes my comments.
Nothing more, nothing less.
To those who want to remain a slave, to be my masters, FUCK THEM.
I AM A FREE MAN.
Moreover, as we should all know, there are far worse things
than death.
I am tired, so very tired of lying and living in fear.
That is why I have no more patience, false civility, pity or mercy
for those who fuck with me or any free people.
Now you have presented a well reasoned and understood argument that makes sense and is based on real substance. Whether or not your “opponent” accepts it, he will understand it and be forewarned that you are not to be trifled with.
No decent citizens of our Republic should be trifled with. You, me or any of us. Each commentI’ve pisted on this topic is in respone to the criminal, traitorousshit vic vega and militialawpreviously posted. Militialawseems to have had sense enough to quiet. However,VV kept pn with it by shamelessly trying to walk bac her shit. My breaking point with her BS was when she agreed with an Arkansasswat team’s killing of a 107 y/o man last Saturday. No, I will never again play the game of respectable conflict resolution with my enemies.
Thanks again… “No decent citizens of our Republic should be trifled with.” You’re kickin’. Though personally these days, I’m losing track of “traitorous to what, exactly.” At this stage, if the other guy isn’t gonna mess with me, that’s quite good enough. Seen this?
http://zerogov.com/forum/index.php?topic=2776.msg16799#msg16799
Thanks.
I gave it a quick look this morning.
Tonight, I will go back and give each
page of that thread a good reading.
It’s probably a good thread, but it’s the pic I wanted you to see. You may not like it, cuz it’s not very “constitutional.” Still, as I mentioned (pelletfarmer), I thought it was EXCELLENT.
cav medic
Well said. I was at a recently opened gun store today run by a retired Msgt who mentioned that he was glad he wasn’t going to be in DC tomorrow as it would probably start a race war, to which I replied we might as well get it over as it will come sooner or later.
I hear you.
Without question, when we finally
honest with ourselves about our mortality
everything changes; the playing field,
the rules, the objectives and goals quick
and sharp about face.
It’s a beautiful thing, a beautiful thing.
Thanks for the feedback.
Thanks for that. I wrote a mighty long screed and then scratched it. It covered nothing that you didn’t cover here.
I know you’re not in panic mode…that was probably me projecting, cuz sometimes I feel like I’m getting close. Really, I don’t know how to go into panic mode, and I’d much prefer not to learn.
“Substance” left this discussion long ago. The “style” is immature, abrasive and without any underlying substance that can be discerned other than emotional frustration and/or hate — it repels rather than attracts, fogs rather than enlightens, and divides in place of unites. It is a textbook example of counterproductive ideological suicide.