No More Yes Sirring

Print Friendly

It is an act of civility to be respectful toward others – but it’s an act of cringing servility to call a cop “sir.” It degrades the speaker and it elevates the recipient of the honorific beyond his station. A cop is just a guy (or a he-gal) wearing a uniform designed to intimidate and the hardware to back it up.  To call this enforcer “sir” is of a piece with a field hand circa 1840 doing the same as he inquires, oh-so-deferentially, of massa.

The “yes, sir” bowing and scraping one routinely sees during episodes of fascist porn such as the TV shop, Cops is atrocious. Hulking, buzz-cut Officer 82nd Airborne stuffed inside his flak jacket and BDUs has pulled over some hapless motorist and is unctuously lecturing his captive prey about such things as the luscious goodness of seat belt laws or the Great Evil of possessing an arbitrarily illegal drug. The prey has assumed the position – meekly nodding and yes-sirring. Agreeing with all that Officer 82nd Airborne tells him.

Or at least, pretending to. In precisely the same way that striped apes on the chain gang would yes boss the guy on the horse cradling the Remington 870.

Once upon a time, citizens didn’t behave like stripe apes or prison inmates in the presence of a mere cop. The attitude was best expressed by the character Paulie in the Rocky movies: “I don’t sweat you,” Paulie told Clubber Lang.

Citizens in a free country bound by the rule of law ought not to sweat cops, either.

Unfortunately, they have to – chiefly because the country is no longer free and the law is no longer on their side. Cops have been empowered to do almost anything – and can get away with doing almost anything. Hence, the fear. And the fearful Yes sirring. But this only encourages them. You’ve accepted your status as their plaything. Made it clear you will tolerate anything – are guilty, ipso facto, of everything. Stop resisting!

Yes, sir!

This is dangerous, both on the individual as well as the societal level – for the same reason that deferring to bullies on the playground is dangerous. It emboldens them – and it conditions you to accept being bullied. 

Let’s equalize things a bit, try to get them back on an even keel. Cops are still – in theory, at least – mere public servants. Typically, they are guys in their 20s or 30s who just barely got out of high school – or just barely into Turnpike Tech. They are not “heroes.” They are not the Boss of you – or me, either. They are government workers with badges and guns. That’s all. And certainly, nothing more – unless they have done something to earn being regarded more highly. Manning “safety” checkpoints and radar guns ain’t that, either.

Civility enjoins respectful adress: Hello, officer. Fine. But not Yes, sir. You are probably a grown adult. Probably older than the cop who has cornered you. The only occasion when Yesssir is appropriate is when addressing one’s superior in age – or one’s superior in rank, if you are in the military. A 50-year-old woman addressing a 24-year-old kid in a blue or black uniform as “sir” is a species of vileness formerly confined to the nations and places Americans once thought of as the opposite of what it used to be like here.

The tragedy is we’ve grown accustomed to fearing Officer 82nd Airborne – and have been conditioned to behave in his presence like a quaking raw recruit in the spittle-breeze of his drill field exhortations.

No wonder they treat us accordingly.

The time has come to man (and woman) up. It is necessary to comply with their (cough) “lawful orders.” It would be foolish to call Officer 82nd Airborne a pig or a thug – even though he may very well be. Think this, perhaps. Do not do this. But do not call him Sir, either.  Officer will suffice.  Once. Upon first addressing him. Speak to him in a calm voice, as a citizen entitled to respectful treatment by a public servant – not a serf in the presence of lord.

When he begins his lecture about wearing seat belts, hold up your hand and tell him – calmly – that you disagree. Or just aren’t interested. You understand what the law is. But you disagree with the law – and only obey it under duress. Also, that the law does not require you to listen to a speech touting the merits of said law.

If you are really bold, you might ask the officer whether he believes it ought to be a criminal offense to eat foods that are “not good for you.” Or to be “overweight” (something many cops are personally knowledgeable about). If he agrees, follow up by asking him why it should be a matter for law enforcement whether you wear a seatbelt… . This may unsettle him.

Or at least, might get him to thinking.

If you are really, really bold, you might tell the officer that ordinary people are losing respect for cops because of the way they’re treating citizens. That while they may Submit and Obey, in their hearts and minds they increasingly fear the police. That they do not feel safe when they see a cop. This, too, may possibly start the wheels turning – among the few with wheels capable of turning.

If enough of us quit yes sirring and grew a pair, maybe the cops would once again respect us.

And perhaps, treat us accordingly once again.

Throw it in the Woods?

Share Button

eric

Author of "Automotive Atrocities" and "Road Hogs" (MBI). Currently living amongst the Edentulites in rural SW Virginia. 

  312 comments for “No More Yes Sirring

  1. Ken
    August 28, 2012 at 3:19 am

    I’m absolutely positive that I have never said “sir” to a cop in my entire life. I’ve loathed the police for as long as I can remember. I answer a simple “yes” or “no” when asked a question -and mostly I don’t answer their questions at all. After handing over my license and registration I say, politely, “I’d prefer not to answer.” SO FAR none of them have given me a hard time about that.

    I did refer to a TSA supervisor as a Nazi once. She was NOT pleased.

  2. Rand
    August 9, 2012 at 3:32 pm

    Nice piece. More people do need to stand up to the rudeness and attitude of the police, but know that in this day and age, standing up to them, even politely, will frequently land you in the slammer with trumped up charges if you encounter one of the more arrogant cops. The key is not to stand up to them so much as it is reducing their numbers and reducing the laws that criminalize behavior with no victim, such as the example of the seatbelt law.

    • Rocky Bass
      August 9, 2012 at 5:54 pm

      Couldn’t agree more. The constitution guarantees us, in matters where the total effected exceeds $20, a common law trial under common law procedures. A valid cause of action is required to bring a case under common law, that requires three things. Someone whom had a right violated by the accused, damage done by that violation and the remedy sought that the court the case was brought before has the power to effect. Corpus delicti and Mens rea both being ABSOLUTE requirements for any conviction to occur. No body of the crime, no crime, no criminal intent, no crime.
      Where are our REAL courts anymore? This whole thing is LOST.
      I talk to folks about freedom all the time and just get blank stares as so many have no clue what it even means anymore.

  3. PJ
    August 9, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    “When he begins his lecture about wearing seat belts, hold up your hand and tell him – calmly – that you disagree. Or just aren’t interested.”

    In the past I have not been very assertive with cops – more on the cringing end of the spectrum. However last run-in it was different.

    I had pulled off the freeway because I was sleepy, looking for a place to snooze for a bit. The exit took me into a state park; I drove in. At one point I was pulled over. The cop told me I had gotten above the 15mph speed, and I had no seatbelt on. I told him my seatbelt was off to access my papers in the glove box (which was true). He said no, I was driving without it. I was getting grumpy with the back and forth so finally I just waved my hand and said loudly “I’m not arguing about it” in a tone of voice that said I was done. He went back to his car for a while, then came back, gave me my stuff and let me go. He was more respectful than previously and no longer maintained that I was driving without a seatbelt – merely because I no longer put up with crap and stopped arguing with him. My age may also have had something to do with it (I’m 60).

    • Don
      August 9, 2012 at 3:37 pm

      I have found that by only rolling down my window enough to communicate and simply stating that I do not consent to any searches of my person or my vehicle and always answering their questions with a question tends to work well.

      It’s as if they realize that they aren’t going to get you to play along with their bullshit investigation of you even though they have no reason to suspect you of anything in the first place, so you’re no fun. lmao.

  4. graham
    May 14, 2012 at 1:17 am

    for all the cop defenders out there…

    • dom
      May 14, 2012 at 2:06 am

      Sickening, I’v seen this before.

  5. Tor Munkov
    May 14, 2012 at 12:59 am

    No government has the right to decide on the truth of scientific principles, nor to prescribe in any way the character of the questions investigated. Neither may a government determine the aesthetic value of artistic creations, nor limit the forms of literacy or artistic expression. Nor should it pronounce on the validity of economic, historic, religious, or philosophical doctrines. Instead it has a duty to its citizens to maintain the freedom, to let those citizens contribute to the further adventure and the development of the human race.

    Looking back at the worst times, it always seems that they were times in which there were people who believed with absolute faith and absolute dogmatism in something. And they were so serious in this matter that they insisted that the rest of the world agree with them. And then they would do things that were directly inconsistent with their own beliefs in order to maintain that what they said was true.

    Ричард Филлипс Фейнман
    http://youtu.be/QkhBcLk_8f0

    We scientists are clever — too clever — are you not satisfied? Is four square miles in one bomb not enough? Men are still thinking. Just tell us how big you want it.

  6. graham
    May 14, 2012 at 12:58 am

    This is one of the ways we get what we deserve as a nation. We dehumanize young men, send them off to kill and invade foreign lands and reward them with perverse worship and affirmation. Then they return to our shores and do what we trained them to do as brutes. We fully deserve what we get and much more. We have killed and maimed score of millions abroad and we have the nerve to question why? Does anyone think God doesn’t notice? [for the atheists out there, please substitute the word "karma" for "God"] “We reap what we sow” or “Karma is a bitch”. Take your pick.

    End the wars. End the Fed. End the fascist kleptocracy. End the IRS. End the TSA, the DHS, the CIA, the FBI, end the whole f@$#ing thing. Alter or abolish!

    • methylamine
      May 14, 2012 at 5:04 pm

      Graham, you’re a mensch and I like your thinking, sir.

    • Boothe
      May 14, 2012 at 5:47 pm

      Graham, I second methyl’s motion. You are right on the money, especially on the “We reap what we sow” point. And for those who doubt the nasty return on investment “Karma” brings us for doing things to others we wouldn’t want done to us, I would refer them to simple physics: For every action, there is an equal an opposite reaction. Walk into a concrete box and tee off with a nine iron, you can expect to pick up a few bruises before the ball loses velocity. Do it repeatedly and you may end up unconscious or deceased. Go stomping all over the world carrying T.R.’s big stick, intimidating the neighbors and taking their land and resources, you might just end up with a corrupt government, a broken economy and a morally bankrupt society all on the verge of reaching critical mass. Hmmm. Sound familiar?

  7. graham
    May 13, 2012 at 11:32 pm

    I have read this before…

    http://lewrockwell.com/casey/casey90.1.html

    Don’t cringe and supplicate. Stand tall, look the agent straight in the eye and, under no circumstances, smile. Your demeanor should not be, like most, that of a child, afraid to be scolded. It should be that of an objective scientist studying a familiar but unappealing insect. Answer questions curtly, with a single word. Don’t volunteer anything. Don’t make small talk. Don’t make pleasant conversation like all the whipped dogs around you.

    “like an unappealing insect”… LOL that says it all.

  8. Brad Smith
    May 13, 2012 at 4:51 pm

    Purity of race is hogwash perpetuated by people who wish to believe they are better than others based on BS. It’s used to divide us all. Are there true cultural differences? Yep, there are. However, if you think your kids are smarter, or more phycically fit than my children who are true American mutts you are wrong. I don’t give a flying fuck about racial purity.

    I don’t care to be PC I don’t care who you are, if you care to believe that your genetic background makes you stonger go for it. I highly doubt that you could take me in a fight armed or unarmed. I have kicked in doors next to my black, brown and yellow brothers. One of the few things I learned in the Infantry was that we are all green. 5/21 2/75 7th SFG. 88-04. Act like a nigger I will call you one, same for wetbacks, or crackers.

    • May 13, 2012 at 5:34 pm

      Brad,

      I like your style, amigo!

    • spiritsplice
      May 13, 2012 at 5:56 pm

      Depends on how you define “purity”.

      There is clearly something inherently and fundamentally different between a black man and a white man and an asian man. Everyone knows this from personal experience, yet many have been convinced otherwise by the media. This difference results in real consequences. Many of the problems experienced throughout history are the direct result of two or more incompatible groups living in the same space. It is also one of the main contributing factors to the fall of nearly every great civilization we know of. It is happening again.

      “Men are generally more careful of the breed of their horses and dogs than of their children.” William Penn

      The question is not “who is better”. That is propaganda.

      But consider this, Government wants to force everyone together, against the will of the parties involved. Since when does government ever force you to do something that is in *your* best interest?

      Think long and hard about that one.

      • Brad Smith
        May 14, 2012 at 2:37 am

        “Men are generally more careful of the breed of their horses and dogs than of their children.” William Penn

        How well has that turned out? How many breeds have become so inbred that they have genetic problems? Human mutts are not only more healthy they are more attractive as well. Adding new blood to a breed is necessary. Why do you think we can find people from other nations attractive? Why do groups of people like white supremicist have to force their beliefs on their cultish following? If they didn’t have it beat into them from birth and ostracised otherwise would it exist? Formal government isn’t the only social constuct that forces people to comply. Religion, government and other such institutions are not all that different.

        • Scott
          May 14, 2012 at 3:01 am

          I think it’s worked out pretty well myself, the congenital defects in purebred dogs are pretty well understood and they’re rare as long as you’re working with a breeder that understand simple things like not breeding brothers and sisters. If you apply the same rules to dogs we do to humans (no first cousins) it isn’t a problem.

          But you’re right about some pretty spectacular results from inter-racial encounters. I won’t name names since I’d be exposing myself to ridicule (but Halle Barry comes to mind). Then there are the offspring of French Indo-China…

          • methylamine
            May 14, 2012 at 5:29 am

            Catherine Bell, of “JAG”–half-white, half-Persian.

            Kristen Kreuk. Derek Jeter. Nicole Scherzinger. Vanessa Hudgens. Adriana Lima! Thandie Newton! Jessica Alba! Salma Hayek!

            Hybrid vigor is real.

            Sexual procreation exists to thwart parasites and pathogens; blending the immune systems of widely divergent stock yields more disease-resistant offspring.

            So there are some pretty good arguments for cross-breeding, aside from the hotties it produces.

          • Scott
            May 14, 2012 at 7:15 am

            Well, I said *I* wouldn’t name names. I didn’t say anything about you doing it.

            My personal favorite happens to be a young lady I used to work with who was the daughter of a Japanese mother and an English father. Smart *and* good looking. I think she got her looks from her father :)

          • Scott
            May 14, 2012 at 7:35 am

            And yes I sort of understand the immune system argument, but not completely.

            Genetic diversity presents a harder target for opportunistic organisms and macro environmental changes. I’m pretty sure of that.

            If you have a single breed of “proto dog”, which would be the doggie equivalent of the Carlin Strategy, all it takes is one lethal virus targeted at that specific genome to kill every dog on the planet.

            That’s why diversity is good. And I really don’t care *how* much you happen to lust after Catherine Bell; it’s STILL a good idea.

          • Scott
            May 14, 2012 at 8:14 am

            Should have put a :) after that last one. Of course I do care how much you lust after Catherine, I just think it’s less important in the larger picture.

          • Scott
            May 14, 2012 at 8:21 am

            Of course you’re equally capable of suggesting my observations concerning the sexual attractiveness of Ms. Berry are without merit.

          • spiritsplice
            May 14, 2012 at 1:24 pm

            Mutts are only attractive in relation to how much a certain white characteristics they contain amd none are as attractive as the real thing. Most people consider something attractive because they are told to, no different than people saying that America is a free country. Most people inherit their opinions and rarely think about them much less critically examine them. Having been on both sides of this debate, I can personally attest to this. There is a very real and deliberate push by the media to promote the worship amd idolization of non whites.

          • methylamine
            May 14, 2012 at 4:56 pm

            @Scott:
            Did I say I lusted after Catherine Bell?
            Well OK. But is that so wrong? :)
            I will grant you Miss Berry, but only for unfettered access to Miss Bell. Deal?

            @spiritsplice:
            There’s certainly an element of indoctrination. Since the days of Edward Bernays, the media has been an incredibly powerful brainwashing tool.

            Do I find Catherine, or Jessica Alba, or Kristin Kreuk attractive because of the media presentation? Or, had a “purebred” (whatever that means in America where finding “pure” stock is nigh impossible) been promoted as assiduously, would I find her more attractive?

            Perhaps Madilyn Monroe would be an example. I don’t see her as nearly as attractive as Catherine Bell; I just prefer brunettes.

            How about Kate Beckinsale? Between Catherine Bell and Kate Beckinsale at the same age, I’d be hard-pressed to choose.

            There have been excellent studies on our innate desire for genetically different mates. One of the best did a very simple test; men were asked to wear a white t-shirt for a week. The t-shirts were then put into jars, and a large group of females were asked to sniff the shirts.

            They ranked their preferences for the smells.

            The men and women were tested for MHC variation; MHC is “major histocompatibility complex”, a set of genes that determine what one’s immune system “presenters” look like, and giving a good overview of your immune vulnerabilities/strengths.

            With extremely high correlation, women preferred the smell of men whose MHC’s were most different than their own.

            This lends credence to the idea that we seek mates of distinct immune-system capability with the (subconscious) desire to produce fitter offspring.

    • Scott
      May 13, 2012 at 7:54 pm

      Brad, where do you think Chinese food comes from? Have you *ever* had a decent taco in Winnipeg? I know, that isn’t about racial purity it’s about culture, but those cultures came from people who were different from each other and who preserve those cultures from a sense of pride in who they are.

      Racial purity isn’t about being better, it’s about being different and maybe even being proud of it.

      There are plenty of examples of successful racial crossings, at least if you consider only aesthetics of the human form, but they inevitably dilute the racial identity (therefore cultural identity) of the resulting people. The US prides itself in being the world’s “melting pot”, but can you say there’s a uniquely American cuisine? Maybe Cajun food :) Texas Barbeque. So yeah, it can work, but there’s also nothing wrong with wanting to preserve your unique racial heritage and taking pride in it. Nobody should feel bad about being white and anyone who says he’s proud of his race and wants to preserve it shouldn’t be boo’d out of the room and called a racist.

      Don’t get me wrong, anyone standing on a soap-box telling me his race is better than mine (or anyone else’s for that matter) and we should all try to be just like him (or be culled from the gene pool) is going to make me pretty upset. That includes people who think they’re green and want to fight with me (armed or unarmed) or kick in my door because I’m not. Not real fond of that.

      • Brad Smith
        May 14, 2012 at 3:32 am

        I hear you and I actually do think it’s great to be proud of where you came from. My great great grandmother was a slave. My one great grandfather was from Mexico he was Spanish, Portugese, Native American and Scandinavian. I also have Russian, Irish, Scottish, German and God knows how many others in me. My dads father’s family were trappers from Canada, they were French and English with some other stuff thrown in.

        I have actually had a blast looking up my family history.

        In a way it is a shame that we all didn’t continue speaking our foreign tongues. For instance my Grandfather who fled Russia could speak 12 languages. He didn’t speak anything but English to us. He wanted us to be American.

        • Scott
          May 14, 2012 at 3:49 am

          I’m working on the language problem myself. I’m French Canadian, Swedish, Czech and Dutch. My maternal grandmother died when my Mom was 10 so I never heard her speak any Swedish but my maternal grandfather was born in Rotterdam so I got a lot of Dutch/German as a child. I’m pretty good with German and there was a time I was fluent.

          I can get by in Czech but you have to stay on top of it and there just aren’t that many opportunities to use it. Right now I’m working on Spanish (Castillano) since I’m thinking seriously of emigrating to Chile in the near future. That’s my contribution to learning the “romance” languages.

          I really enjoy languages. I think Americans are at a disadvantage because we have so few borders and they’re so far away.

          Dobrý večer! Buenas Noches! Gutten Nacht!

          • methylamine
            May 14, 2012 at 5:33 am

            Thinking of Chile, too?

            It’s top of my list. All that troubles me is making a living, but it shouldn’t be hard…software engineering is in high demand in Chile.

            Are you looking at Simon Black’s “Galt’s Gulch” there, or are you going it alone?

            How will you earn your living?

            I haven’t looked at the immigration policy in detail there, but from what I understand Chile is wide-open if you’re skilled and won’t be a burden. Basically if you’re there to work, they welcome you.

            Is that your understanding too?

          • Scott
            May 14, 2012 at 5:47 am

            I have to claim ignorance of Simon Black’s effort, I picked Chile for its climate, its politics and its free markets. I base the final pick on that article in Wired I mentioned to you a few days ago.

            My thinking is any country with a thriving unregulated market is a good candidate, and according to Wired’s analyst Chile does OK. Santiago has a pretty good climate and they grow some very distinguished grape vines in the ares. The surfing is said to be good. The revolution was televised and is perhaps safely in the past.

            I will earn my living by being friendly, smart and hospitable. And by exposing a solid working knowledge of C++ :)

          • methylamine
            May 14, 2012 at 6:04 am

            Ha! A fellow code jock!

            Simon Black is establishing a redoubt similar to Doug Casey’s Cafayate Argentina…but probably for the less-well-heeled. I’d love to join Doug’s place, but I’m not living off investments yet.

            Hables C#? It’s my choice mostly nowadays…just love the expressiveness, and the big fat safety net.

          • Scott
            May 14, 2012 at 6:18 am

            I’ve been reading Doug’s stuff too and plan a ’round the horn tour in December that lands in Buenos Aires after hitting Costa Rica, Peru, Chile and the Falklands. I haven’t made up my mind yet, this is an exploratory mission but I’m leaning towards Chile already. My plan is to drive back from Buenos Aires to Valparaiso at the end and get a look at some of the real estate Doug talks about. I used to raise cattle (still raise cow horses) but I’m really too old for that stuff now. I think life on the coast will probably suit me better.

            In truth, I’m almost married to Objective C and haven’t ever worked in C#. Maybe we could form a little company? :)

          • methylamine
            May 14, 2012 at 5:03 pm

            And maybe form a company?

            You bet. If I land up anywhere near like-minded ex-Amerikans, I’ll be eager to explore the freedoms of our new home…and hopefully get rich (or make a very good living) in the process.

            Starting a business here today is like pulling your own teeth. I don’t even have employees–except myself–and the paperwork for even simple independent contracting is un-fucking-believable.

            Moreover, I despise that the more I make, the more I “contribute” to a system I loathe; a system which takes my slave labor and funds vile weapons, then uses them on innocents with whom I have no quarrel. Not to mention, funding the lavish lifestyles of useless parasites I wouldn’t trust to wash my car in real life.

            Was it Jefferson who said there’s nothing more despicable than forcing a man to pay for ideas contrary to his principles?

  9. Paul Repstock
    May 12, 2012 at 6:11 pm

    Police are no more cookie cutter facists than ordinary people are sheep. Perhaps if we had to deal with idiots all day, in the office and out, we might act the same??
    http://freecanada.wordpress.com/a-message-for-the-police/

    • May 12, 2012 at 6:27 pm

      The problem is that the laws they enforce are “cookie cutter fascist” – which makes them cookie cutter fascists. They do not have the option of declining to participate in the enforcement of tyrannical laws, such as manning “safety” checkpoints, or “busting” people for possessing/using arbitrarily illegal drugs. You pretty much have to be an asshole to do this job. Non-assholes want no part of such work.

      I support peace-keepers. I am not a fan of law enforcers.

      • Paul Repstock
        May 12, 2012 at 6:38 pm

        Trouble is Eric; everybody wants a paycheck. And if you don’t do what the ‘Man’ says you are to do…You soon won’t be having an income to pay the mortgage or even for food…:(
        It’s a dog eat dog world really, and if you get to bust a few heads in the course of your day…Well, that might put a bit of lead in the pencil.

        • May 12, 2012 at 11:16 pm

          Anyone who chooses to spend his days harassing harming-no-one people is a dick. If it “puts lead in their pencil,” they’re sociopaths.

          • Scott
            May 12, 2012 at 11:59 pm

            I used to have a test for people who wanted to hire me (managers). I always asked them if they enjoyed their work and if it was something they’d always wanted to do. I picked the ones that bitched about the job, the ones who complained they preferred (writing code, designing hardware, etc).

            When I started working for my local Police department, one of the guys asked me why I was doing it and I told him it was because I wanted to help people. He smiled and said “that’s what I thought”. These are simple questions, simple tests. Someone pointed out that corruption becomes rampant when the sociopaths rise to positions of authority and start hiring thugs like themselves.

            I guess what I’m trying to say is there are good people out there but they’re getting harder and harder to find. I think it’s because the “industry” of First Responders grew way too fast under the Bush administration. A lot of cops who shouldn’t be cops got hired to do, well, nothing in particular. Tinsley’s got a solution with his Grand Jury idea, but it’s going to take serious effort on the part of individual citizens to root out the bad apples and prune them. This is another Bush legacy the current administration isn’t doing diddly about.

          • Scott
            May 13, 2012 at 12:10 am

            Another observation: under Bush we got DHS, which in turn got lots of money to influence the policies and funding of local police departments. They created a new “mission” for local law enforcement, which was to find Terrorists. They cast this mission in military terms and thereby transformed entire organizations of Peace Officers into front line soldiers, then they sent them all out on a snipe hunt.

            This is how we got where we are.

          • methylamine
            May 13, 2012 at 3:39 am

            @Scott–

            I’d agree that DHS greatly accelerated the militarization of police…but the proximate cause was much earlier, namely the War on (some) Drugs.

            When it began in earnest in the early 80’s, people still had the good sense to worry about the violence done to the first, fourth, and fifth amendments. The PTB were careful to limit SWAT raids to “heavily fortified crack houses”; a dandy justification.

            Now there are 50,000 SWAT raids per year, most of them to serve misdemeanor warrants.

            It’s all part–like TSA violations–of slave training.

            We can come into your state.
            We can come into your house.
            We can get into your pants.

            Sit down. Stay. Good prisoner.

            • May 13, 2012 at 10:25 am

              Agree completely.

              The “war” also established – normalized – such grotesqueries as seizing (and keeping) the property of “drug” offenders. A guy with a bag of pot loses as $30,000 car. A guy with some plants in his back yard has his $300,000 home stolen. Disproportionate punishment meted out for manufactured “offenses.”

              A real problem, though, is that probably a majority supports all this. I mentioned in an earlier post the people we know – college-educated, professional, solidly upper middle class – who are adamantly against even decriminalization, let alone legalization. They, of course, enjoy their drug – alcohol. And blithely, obliviously, consign other people to cages for doing no more (and no less) than they themselves do.

              It is a mentality – a mental defect – I cannot get my own head around.

          • Scott
            May 13, 2012 at 4:53 am

            Methyl, my opinion on the difference between the War on Drugs and the War on Terror is you had to have physical evidence to prosecute the War on Drugs.

            All you need to do to play in the Terrorist game is look funny.

            • May 13, 2012 at 10:29 am

              Oh, the same applied in the “war” on drugs, too. The pig just has to claim he “smelled marijuana” and – viola – instant probable cause. This is still done all the time.

          • Scott
            May 14, 2012 at 4:30 am

            Yep! And these days it goes past cars.

            There was a recent case somewhere in the mid-west, cops were in pursuit of a running victim that entered an apartment complex. They followed and began searching the hallways when one of them “smelled” marijuana coming from behind a door.

            An officer knocked and announced himself, then heard the sound of a toilet flushing and called his partner to assist in breaking down the door.

            The Court upheld the officer’s actions because they were in “hot pursuit” and there was a threat that evidence was being destroyed.

            How does THAT grab you? The sound of a flushing toilet is now grounds for breaking down the door to a private residence on suspicion “evidence” is being destroyed? Personally I have never been able to tell the difference between the sound of dope going down a toilette and the sound of anything else doing the same thing.

            • May 14, 2012 at 9:06 am

              Even worse, the victims of this assault had no legal right (under “the law”) to defend themselves. This is a measure of just how far down the road we’ve traveled. Twenty years ago, had these people fired at the intruders, probably they’d have been exonerated on the basis of reasonable self-defense against a sudden, totally unprovoked, violent entry by unknown thugs claiming to be cops. Today, they’d be up on murder charges.

          • methylamine
            May 14, 2012 at 5:19 am

            @Scott–

            Maybe they’re able to discern that drugs are being flushed, because it’s “good shit”

            :)

      • Tor Munkov
        May 12, 2012 at 7:01 pm

        The problem I see, is there is no need to associate with strangers for no good reason. I don’t want a bunch of polyester unitard wearing eunichs anywhere near me or my family.
        Especially if they have guns and psychological issues.
        I don’t need these auslander gaijin bastards.

        White Pigs Go Home
        http://youtu.be/hzmgyFQNvvU

        The internet or a post office is more than enough civic connection, take my tax money with my blessing.

        Imagine a new post office that brought your groceries and took your trash away too, doesn’t that sound good? No, Fuck You! You’re a government tit sucking asshole.

        A government agent doesn’t clean your house, or drive your car for you, or cook you dinner. Why in the hell should it carry a gun for you, you stupid shitbag.

        Anyone who supports these drittsek pinche pendejos is my enemy, no comprimise or excuses.

        • Paul Repstock
          May 12, 2012 at 8:17 pm

          Sorry; I don’t understand what you mean.

          • Scott
            May 13, 2012 at 12:35 am

            Translation: Tor is unhappy with your apologist statement concerning thugs, particularly the part about putting “lead in your pencil” by bashing heads.

            I can sort of understand the statement as a self-deprecating joke, but agree with Tor that it’s in very, VERY bad taste.

            Hope this helps.

  10. Tor Munkov
    May 12, 2012 at 12:41 pm

    Officer Enoch Clark blinded a 30 year old mother who was less than thrilled by his service at a DUI check point in Beaumont, CA this February.

    http://www.youtu.be/Fm4PcYoaFFQ

    • May 12, 2012 at 2:25 pm

      Another buzzcut thug. It’s the main reason I wear my hair long – so there’s no confusion!

      What a soul-less asshole.

      • methylamine
        May 13, 2012 at 3:34 am

        Dead pool: a gambling game that involves wagers on the date of someone’s demise, typically a public figure.

        Typically a web site, participants put up money for particular “dead-by” dates, or a range of dates. The participant(s) closest to the actual date of demise collect the entire pool.

        Obviously, one who causes said demise is in the best position to collect the pool–as that person would place the most accurate bet.

  11. charlie
    May 11, 2012 at 9:05 pm

    Eric, your big mistake here is assuming that somebody gives a damn, namely cops. They don’t become cops to help people, they become cops to intimidate and assault, and they LOVE IT!!!! You cannot teach them anything.

    • May 12, 2012 at 12:33 am

      While there are exceptions (or so I like to imagine) I ruefully concede the point….

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        May 12, 2012 at 2:25 am

        Good or bad, cops must not be given bad laws to enforce. Every damned law that contravenes the Principles underpinning the Unanimous Declaration must be repealed. In addition to that, every jurisdiction in America must maintain a competent grand jury ready to “run away” if necessary and deal with crime regardless of its source.

        I urge my Fellow Citizens to learn all they can about the grand jury and subject what they have learned to Critical Thinking.

        Competent grand juries can indict crooks in office and even embarrass and drive suspected crooks out of office even without an indictment.

        Tinsley Grey Sammons

        • Paul Repstock
          May 12, 2012 at 6:21 pm

          Excellent point Tinsley. I wish we had that option in Canada.
          Only problem is; Where do you find the people with the guts to really stand up and be counted? Those people who must risk everything including their lives and their families. The people who participate will be attacked on every side, even their friends will abandon them and they will stand alone.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 12, 2012 at 8:10 pm

            Paul, in that case the Grand Jury Secrecy nonsense would backfire.

            Over the years America’s dangerous Brotherhood of Juris Doctors and others in government have done their very best to put access to the Grand Jury out of the reach of the ordinary citizen who wishes to report a crime directly to his grand jury without alerting an agent of government since the target of their investigation might be someone that the agent of government might wish to protect.

            Tinsley Grey Sammons

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 12, 2012 at 8:19 pm

            Attorney Michael H. Brown of THE ERWIN ROMMEL SCHOOL OF LAW openly condemns what he calls: A lot of grand jury secrecy nonsense.

            The law is the weapon, the courtroom the battlefield, the judge your enemy and your lawyer is an enemy spy. —Michael H. Brown, The Erwin Rommel School of Law

            This is one of the things that angered and inspired me almost twenty years ago.

            Tinsley Grey Sammons authoR of AMERICA’S FORSAKEN PROMISE

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 12, 2012 at 8:57 pm

            The Fifth Amendment gives implicit authority for a person to report a criminal act directly to the grand jury. The grand jury can then use its Presentment Power to order that an indictment be drawn.

            This is at or near the top of the list of things that desperately need to be generally known about and enforced.

            Every Human Being on Earth ought to insist that Grand Jury Presentment Power be included in his country’s Constitution.

            tgsam

          • Boothe
            May 12, 2012 at 10:55 pm

            Tinsley, I finally met Michael Brown and Peter Jon Simpson last year. Unfortunately, Dwayne Rogers passed away a couple of years ago. I bought ERSOL back in the 90’s when I think there was still a vestige of decency left in the courts. Some of the things I learned from that course did help me in dealing with cops, lawyers and the courts. Now, I believe that decency and integrity in the courts are the exception rather than the rule; de facto “public policy” having replaced de jure Constitutional law. I don’t think you’ll receive the same kind of success these days that Simpson, Brown and Rogers achieved ‘back in the day’ with their forays into non-licensed non-lawyer litigation.

            As evidence I present one Bernard Von Nothaus and the Liberty Dollar. That man was providing Constitutionally lawful (and honest) private money to an apparently growing group of satisfied customers. The courts locked him up labeled as a financial terrorist and let the real counterfeiters, Bernanke, Geithner and their bankster cronies et al remain at large. The principles set down in your precious Unanimous Declaration were in no small part nullified by the Constitution where it says (Art. 1, S. 8) “Congress shall have the Power To…” It should have read “The United States government shall be restricted to the following and only the following…” (and the list should have been bloody short). The 9th and 10th Amendments attempted to accomplish this, but we see how that turned out. The whole system is so rotten and corrupt, reestablishing honest grand (and petit) juries alone ain’t gonna fix it.

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 12, 2012 at 11:48 pm

          Boothe, it is uplifting to encounter someone as well informed as yourself.

          In my not the least bit humble opinion, the first step in enforcing respect for Liberty and Justice should be the most difficult one. Repealing unlawful Drug Prohibition would create a Precedent that would initiate the devastation of American Statism.

          How many additional casualties would have America suffered by failing to fight a Strategic War instead of a bloody War of Attrition?

          tgsam

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 13, 2012 at 12:15 am

            Referring to WWII.

          • Scott
            May 13, 2012 at 12:25 am

            Are you suggesting we apply the nuclear option to the War on Drugs? Just kidding. I got the point.

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 13, 2012 at 12:12 am

          Except for the Bill of Rights part along with the Fourteenth Amendment, I no longer debate the Constitution. I prefer instead to champion and defend the Principles underpinning the unamendable Unanimous Declaration. That’s what actually merits the use of deadly force if Reason is persistently ignored and/or rejected.

        • methylamine
          May 13, 2012 at 3:28 am

          Give us a hint; how’s a grand jury convened, absent the impetus of a prosecutor or DA>

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 13, 2012 at 12:17 pm

            A grand jury can exclude anyone from its meetings.

            I welcome discussion but I really don’t want to start from scratch and try to laboriously train interested persons, so, I suggest they read the Fifth Amendment and then use the Internet.

            I do have considerable material that I would be happy upload for interested persons.

            tgsam

          • methylamine
            May 14, 2012 at 5:16 am

            @TGS–I’d like that. If you can find the time to upload the docs it would give us a head-start in pursuing privately convened grand juries.

            People don’t understand the immense power they have over government.

            Juries are meant to judge the case and the law; judges who instruct otherwise are liars and charlatans…which sadly includes 99% of them.

  12. mikehell
    May 11, 2012 at 4:01 pm

    When left to their inherent nature, White and Black naturally mix about as well as oil and water.

    What would the reaction be here if Clover were to spout off the exact same nonsense?

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 11, 2012 at 4:54 pm

      I call ‘em like I see ‘em. That’s what honest persons do.

      tgsam

    • ThatOneGuy
      May 11, 2012 at 4:58 pm

      Well I see the Two Minutes Hate has gone into triple overtime. Clover wouldn’t say such a thing because he’s plugged into this portion of the globalist plan seeking the suicide of Western civilization same as you apparently are, so you can stop wondering.

      I never expected to encounter such liberal-feminist-style sanctimonious wailing on this site. Get over yourself.

      An old Chinese proverb:

      May you find yourself in Norfolk when the EBT cards run out.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 11, 2012 at 10:07 pm

      No amount of nitpicking and obfuscating could ever have caused me to Mistake Louis Armstrong for Dolf Lundgren. Or Toshiro Mifune for Sonny Liston.

      tgsam

    • spiritsplice
      May 14, 2012 at 1:11 pm

      It isn’t nonsense.

  13. Douglas
    May 11, 2012 at 11:44 am

    (Already expounded on this…). True to the extent that you can be construed as operating a business or be using “public” facilities (like a park or a school). However, if I put up a “Tuff Shed” in my backyard, and spray-paint on the door, “Men’s Klub…no gurlz alloud”, and let Spanky and Alfalfa in but tell Darla to take a hike, there’s damned little the “Gubmint” can do about it. Of course, some self-appointed crusader would likely find some excuse to harass me over “zoning” issues, or have the bullies with a badge come barging in under the pretext that we’ve got a “cache” of firearms or something illegal, if they want to do so bad enough.
    The key is mass action. By ones and twos, it’s easy for the powers-that-be to pick us off. By the hundreds, they get overwhelmed.

    • dom
      May 11, 2012 at 5:04 pm

      Not so sure. This is a bad example I know, but the Occupy Wall Street crowd had over 4,000 people arrested. Didn’t seem like it slowed the PTB down one bit. Shit, if anything it helped as more training!

      • Douglas
        May 12, 2012 at 1:52 am

        I had in mind a whole city of “menz klubz”, so numerous that the local so-called “civil rights commission” vapors locks trying to deal with them all. When you’re talking about 4,000 yahoos massing TOGETHER in the OWS movement, all they did, beside advocate utter nonsense, was make themselves any easy target. Hence guerilla warfare, when it comes to shooting. The Viet Cong could never, even during Tet in ’68, take on the US Army in a pitched battle. Even the NVA regulars were themselves little more than speed bumps when they chose to take on the grunts in a massed attack. They learned and waited until “Vietnamization” had run its course by ’72, but found again that though they had better luck against the ARVN (but were still overmatched), they wilted in the face of American air strikes. It took until the 55-day offensive in early ’75 before the ARVN rot had set in, and, thanks to the Paris Peace Accords and Watergate, the US Air Force wasn’t there to blast the NVA to smithereens. The lesson overall is that you have to wear out the power that has more money, organization, and firepower, with dispersed tactics. Ergo, ‘pen-knife’ them to death….

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 12, 2012 at 2:44 am

          Doug, the Vietnamese have been wearing out enemies for about a thousand years now. Too bad America’s Power Elite seems not to have done their homework prior to the Gulf of Tonkin lie that ended up costing about 60,000 American lives and Gawd only knows how many body parts.

          What I find particularly interesting, is the fact that Vietnam seems to be doing well without having been conquered by the United States of America.

          Of course the pimps and whores in Saigon have probably had to engage in different work.

          Perhaps the world won’t actually come to an end absent growing American intervention.

          tgsam

          • Brad Smith
            May 13, 2012 at 4:27 pm

            The pimps and whores are still in business.

  14. Joe Fondren
    May 11, 2012 at 10:44 am

    Old joke but still funny: A man being written a ticket for speeding asks the cop, “What happens if I call you a sonofabitch?”
    Cop: “Then I’ll take you to jail.”
    Man: “Can you take me to jail for what I think?”
    Cop: “No, you can think what you want to.”
    Man: “Okay, then I THINK you’re a sonofabitch.”

    Another great article, Eric. The comment thread it provoked is interesting in itself, especially how it devolved into a debate on racism. Just as TPTB labor long and hard to introduce distortions into the free market, so do they continue to artificially contort our natural human interactions. I’m an elderly white male. Anyone evaluating my career over the last fifty years, I think, would not rate me anywhere near being a racist, but I am one, and so is everyone else. When the worst comes, or if race were the only consideration, and you think you will hunker down with anyone but your own kind, you’re not being totally honest. I’m not saying that no Black or Hispanic or Asian would be welcome in my, or your, redoubt. But, when given a free choice people will naturally and generally favor their own race and there is nothing wrong or evil about that. TPTB know that the demographic group that will give them the most trouble are American white males. That’s the reason that we have become the only unannointed class in this country. We are the only ones who don’t have “special” rights. Now, before you call me a whiner, hear this. I don’t give a flying fuck. I neither need nor want “special” rights. But I will have the rights consistent with, and enumerated in, our two founding documents. Had there been no Lincoln’s War to Prevent Southern Independence, subjugation of the South, and the horrors of so-called “Reconstruction” there would have been no KKK, no Jim Crow Laws, and race relations would have been predicated on calm acceptance instead of what we have today. The Feds have always used black people as cannon fodder, both literally and metaphorically speaking. “Divide and conquer” may be a tired cliche’ but it still works. I’d like to see Americans throw off the yoke of totalitarianism and not fall for our usurpers’ manipulation regarding race relations.

    • May 11, 2012 at 11:14 am

      Thanks, Joe – and, great “oldie but still a goodie” joke!

      On the race stuff:

      I agree that people naturally gravitate to those who are more rather than less similar to themselves – and also that everyone ought to be free to associate (or not) with whomever, for whatever reason. One of the most odious developments of the past 50 years was “civil rights” legislation which vitiated the legitimate (and essential) right of free association. As a consequence of this, a bar owner is no longer free to allow smoking in his restaurant. A landlord cannot decline to rent his property to people with children. I cannot hire the person I wish to hire – or fire the person I’d like to fire. It is noxious and anathema to a free society.

      Sematics matter. A “public” space is not someone else’s private property. And if “property” has any meaning, then it is mine to dispose of as I please. If the government can tell me to whom I must rent “my” property, or else – then it is not my property, is it?

      Discrimination is a natural part of human life. Some forms of it are rational (I prefer old cars rather than new ones) while others may not be. The reasons are not relevant to the question of what’s ok (and not ok) in a free society. In a free society a person ought to be free to do as he wills, for whatever reason, provided his actions do not infringe upon the rights of someone else. My declining to serve someone, or do business with them (for whatever reason) is not a violation of their rights. They are free to do business with someone else – and they with them.

      Is life unfair? Are some people not nice? Certainly. Neither is an excuse for vitiating people’s rights. I might not like it if, say, a black fellow declined to serve me in his restaurant – and pointed to a sign that said “No Honkies Allowed.” But it would never occur to me to try to use the force of government to compel him to serve me. I’d just go eat someplace else!

      • Douglas
        May 11, 2012 at 11:33 am

        Amen, Eric. It can be said that the “lunch counter sit ins” of the early sixties were the effective death knell of the Constitution as the founders envisioned. Now, it’d have been one thing for, say, Woolworth’s (and you’re on the high road to old fartdom if you can remember eating at one) to have caved in to public opinion and of their own accord de-segregate their eating establishments. That’s the marketplace doing its thing. It’s another to force any private person or establishment to accommodate, serve, or employ anyone they’d rather not against their will, and to hell with whether or not the reason is ‘rational’. The nature of “freedom” is the freedom to be an idiot or to be odious. We can ostracise bigots voluntarily if we so choose. Free men and women don’t NEED the “Gubmint” to take care of their social matters.
        My big peeve, being a Californian, in this regard is how the pussy-whipped men caved in to the likes of one Gloria Allred over the issue of her and her feminist bitch clients not being admitted to a so-called “men’s” club! Hello? Who cares whatever “business” might or might now be discussed there? Do you really think that the guys go to discuss serious business when they’re drinking themselves to oblivion together? What’s the matter with this dumb bitch with a law degree? Has she harbored a grudge about not being picked for a pickup game of baseball on the sandlot? Yet it’s not her I fault, it’s the ball-less judges that allowed such a matter to have occupied court time at all! Had it been me, I would have said, “Ma’am, I’m not going to issue a court order to force a gaggle of ol’ boys to admit someone whose company they don’t want! Form your own club and exclude THEM!”

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 11, 2012 at 4:00 pm

          A dumb bitch with a law degree is infinitely worse than a dumb bitch without one.

          “Women are not men.” –Katherine Hepburn

          What a lady! Had she run for president I would surely have bothered to vote for her.

          Why did Americans elect a Black before electing a Woman? Were I a White Female I’d sure be pissed about that.

          tgsam

          • Scott
            May 12, 2012 at 12:11 am

            Unfortunately Miss Hepburn has shuffled off this mortal coil.

            • May 12, 2012 at 12:41 am

              She was a broad – in the best sense of the term. They don’t make them much anymore.

        • Art Thomas
          May 11, 2012 at 6:17 pm

          The purpose of lunch counter sit-ins was to break Jim Crow laws. It was forced segregation they were attacking. And those sit-ins at first WERE public opinions in action. Many lunch counter served blacks but segregated from whites because Jim Crow required it. Granted, once the federates meddled, it went beyond eliminating bad laws to enacting more bad laws that favored blacks at the expense of the property rights of white business people. But I think your wrong to lay the blame for this travesty on the original lunch counter sit-ins.

          As an aside, when Jim Crow laws were under consideration here in Virginia circa early 1900’s, the then privately owned railroads lobbied against them for economic reasons: they didn’t want the added expense of separate cars for the two races.

      • methylamine
        May 12, 2012 at 1:32 am

        100% agreed Eric.

        As strongly as I feel skin color has nothing to do with character or philosophy, I completely support discrimination.

        After all, it’s “your” property; and in a just world, it would indeed be your property and your right to refuse to associate with anyone.

        The situation would take care of itself, and we’d all be much happier being able to choose with whom to associate.

        Would there be bigoted little towns where a bunch of toothless thugs enforce “racial purity”? Sure. But they’d be as ostracized as they themselves ostracize others.

        In fact there would be less racial tension, because we could all find a level of integration–or isolation–to our comfort.

    • Douglas
      May 11, 2012 at 11:15 am

      We can still refuse to polite not associate with anyone we don’t want to. Note that I said be polite. For example, being recently back on the dating circuit, I’ve had a young lady (she’s 25, I’m 53) of the African persuasion show an interest in yours truly. I’ve had to politely demur, not only because of the obvious utter mismatch in ages, but simply that I don’t believe in racial mixing. I was raised that way. Does that make me a bigot? Well, since it’s my life and my body, I dont give a fuck that I won’t be giving one to her or any non-white gal. It’s also a matter of respect, not only for myself but not to selfishly trifle with a young lady’s feelings. Better not to lead her on if all I could get is some “brown sugah” (not that I’d entirely object, but I’m old enough to know better) than to hurt her feelings. It is possible to be polite and respectful and still insist on voluntary racial separation. Note that I’m NOT advocating a return to “Jim Crow”, which was INVOLUNTARILY imposed by the several states, and was at least an unofficial but de facto policy of Uncle Sam in both the military and civil service until the 1950’s!
      If enough white Americans really feel that they don’t want to associate with non-whites, then they should have the guts to just say so and live that way to the lawful extent possible. Of course, watch the President and his “Attorney Generul” use every excuse to censor any Internet communication and blogs, and juxtapose same as some manner of “hate crime”.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        May 11, 2012 at 7:55 pm

        Scott, you nailed it. Please go to the head of the class.

        A world with no White Folks? Only the rejection of government, media, and even educator’s lies, distortions, and exaggerations in favor of knowledge of the whole truth, however painful that it might be to some, can prevent such an avoidable tragedy.

        Tinsley Grey Sammons

      • Mike in Spotsy
        May 12, 2012 at 2:57 am

        Douglas, to the extent that you are saying that you prefer not to have an interracial relationship, I fully support you. If, on the other hand, you are saying that nobody should, I have to disagree. In my view, it has to be an individual choice. As I mentioned in an earlier post, my fiancee is a wonderful black woman. If you are suggesting that that makes me some sort of race traitor, then so be it. I am a very happy traitor. :-)

    • Douglas
      May 11, 2012 at 11:22 am

      Associate with and without whomsover you will (or won’t). The “Gubmint” can’t tell you who to be friends with.
      Of course, if you or I were to put up a website advocating VOLUNTARY racial separation, even if it were entirely non-violent, non-inflammatory, and utterly polite, we’d be painted a huge bulls-eye on ourselves not only for the race-baiting hacks like Sharpton, but also our beloved Attorney General and President as potentially guilty of “hate crimes”. Who sez the “Stasi” is dead?

      • May 11, 2012 at 11:26 am

        Oh, but it can – and does.

        Try having a club restricted to people of your own choosing only – who choose to associate only with those they’d like to associate with. See how long it lasts.

        • Art Thomas
          May 11, 2012 at 6:52 pm

          Eric,

          You have to be creative and a bit blasé but it is being done.
          I’ve known of people who guest chef at private homes. The home owner invites 10+ couples to their home and splits the proceeds with the chef. No health inspectors, no business permits, no taxes. Some risk, but no bullshit. Catering is an even easier way to make a living outside the law.

          How long before the purple people eaters come snapping.? Who knows.
          With a little luck, never. But I found it invigorating to ignore these laws, and during 20 years of my work life, I was fortunate.

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 11, 2012 at 3:17 pm

          No picture of the savage?

          Frankly I don’t care what his mental state is, kill him.

          tgsam

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 11, 2012 at 3:23 pm

          Where are Eastwood and Bronson when they are so desperately needed?

          tgsam

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        May 11, 2012 at 3:28 pm

        Remember White Separatist Randy Weaver and Ruby Ridge. If you do not there are many hits on the ‘net.

        tgsam

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        May 11, 2012 at 3:43 pm

        When left to their inherent nature, White and Black naturally mix about as well as oil and water. Unfortunately, with the assistance of government, the media, and what passes for education they seem to be mixing just well enough to eventually effect the extinction of the White Race. Even a spoonful of black can ruin an entire gallon of White Paint.

        Someone once lamented that the United States is becoming the Brazil of the Northern Hemisphere. What I am seeing today verifies the accuracy of that prediction.

        tgsam

        • BrentP
          May 11, 2012 at 4:03 pm

          “When left to their inherent nature, White and Black naturally mix about as well as oil and water.”

          Absolutely false. Inherent nature cannot be determined because upbringing and culture and society are dominating influences.

          • mikehell
            May 11, 2012 at 4:11 pm

            @BrentP, forget about trying that argument on him, bro. He’s already made it clear that he intends carry his bigotry to the grave and along the way take a great big shit on this blog.

            But nevermind him anyway, this is life on the ‘net: some guy shows up and sounds reasonable, even erudite, for a time and then one day he goes off his meds or hits the sauce too hard and it’s all down hill. From here on he’s wasting everyone’s time, including what’s left of his own. Those here who agree with him are few in number and mostly scared trolls anyhow, and the rest of us will ignore him until the lack of attention forces even more extreme views and eventually the host shuts him down. I’ve seen this sad course of events unfold not on one site but *every site* I have bothered to blog for more that just a few posts.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 11, 2012 at 5:06 pm

            Brent, I’m sure you and your ilk would like very much to shut me down. Somehow I feel that the host is a better American than to do so.

            And by the way, quotation marks look like this: ” ”

            Honest thinker/writers use them.

            If I am to be condemned for what I have actually written, then so be it.

            tgsam

          • BrentP
            May 11, 2012 at 6:33 pm

            I don’t shut anyone down when it comes to expressing their views. Shutting people down is what intellectual cowards do.

            The quote marks look just fine on my screen. I don’t know what you’re complaining about.

            Anyway race is essentially a construct of eugenics. If we adopt the constructs and views of eugenics then we risk becoming no different than the ruling class which believe that some people can be free while others must be treated as livestock. Some people individually are now hopelessly conditioned, but the only genetic component is their proclivity to be conditioned in this manner and remain so. The conditioning is still the cause of their state, not genetics. No different than a weakness to a particular disease.

          • Scott
            May 11, 2012 at 7:34 pm

            I’m not sure you and Mike are reading what Tinsley is writing. If you are, You aren’t presenting an argument against what he’s written, you seem to be arguing against *bigotry*, which he isn’t arguing *for*.

            To maintain we are all equal before the law is entirely different from saying that there are no racial differences, or as a corollary, there are no valuable differences therefore attempting to preserve racial distinctions is without merit, perhaps even somehow evil, then imply a person who holds such beliefs must be a “bigot” because he has recognized and wishes to preserve racial distinctions.

            I breed and train purebred dogs. There are differences between German Shepherds and Rottweillers that I appreciate. I like both breeds but when forced to choose by economics (how many dogs can one have really?) I choose one or the other. My reasons are personal and are not meant as a slur or slight on the breed I didn’t choose.

            Now, it happens to be true these two breeds or “races” can cross-breed, resulting in something we call a “mutt”. Those who appreciate distinct breed traits don’t value mutts. They make fine dogs, but they have mixed physical characteristics that will have unknown effects on their suitability for some kinds of work and their longevity. If a particular beneficial trait *does* appear in a mutt, it’s difficult or even impossible to isolate it and reliably re-produce it in future generations.

            Tinsley is, I believe, presenting an argument for the preservation of “purebreds” that have developed naturally over the course of millennia, it’s the same argument used by members of the American Kennel Club. It isn’t bigotry, he isn’t saying he doesn’t like German Shepherds and thinks they’re an inferior breed, he’s rather saying he appreciates the diversity that occurs in nature and wishes to see it preserved.

            I hope I’m not misrepresenting what he’s actually said. I don’t think either of you are responding to his position, rather it appears you’re just calling him a racist and tarring him with that brush.

            The obverse argument, that there is no inherent advantage to preserving racial differences, is the George Carlin “let’s just fuck ’till everybody’s brown!” strategy. To accept it has merit, you must agree there is no value in the racial distinctions we see in the world around us; this would inherently require rejecting Darwin’s theories of evolution and natural selection.

            In the case of so called “purebred” dogs, the eugenics are planned. In the case of human races, they represent thousands of years of natural selection and adaptation which are now threatened by the promotion of “cosmop” culture, geo-political mobility and cheap transportation.

            Honestly, if we saw such a threat to species diversity occurring in certain types of tree frog, many would be screaming foul at the tops of their lungs.

          • BrentP
            May 11, 2012 at 9:25 pm

            I am arguing against the construct that there is some ‘natural’ condition based on race alone.

            Go back in time and you’ll find things like the ‘Irish race’ and other such nonsense. Reducing the number of divisions further doesn’t change the underlying eugenics absurdity of the construct.

            Deliberate long term breeding of humans for particular physical traits and certain personality characteristics has not really been attempted outside of the ruling classes and we know how that turned out. Pure bred dogs also have various genetic problems as a result.

            Also, those who are into raising and breeding dogs will often be very clear that dogs aren’t bad genetically. It is the conditioning applied to them by human beings that brings about the result more times than not.

            The role of conditioning and culture is far more powerful in humans than is in dogs. As I stated before, if we were just animals the ruling classes would not construct institutions like schools or manipulate people socially and so on to keep them from seeing the reality. Dogs aren’t going to revolt if they figure out the truth. Dogs are going to be dogs until the end of time.

            The eugenics way of looking at humans comes from animal breeding. If we accept this nonsense being bred for a particular purpose, or particular work, or for the good of society or to preserve society or whatever we might as well shitcan all this nonsense about liberty and freedom. Because then we are just animals and the ruling class has it correct. It’s about domination and survival of the fittest.

            If I allow myself to agree to this argument of TGS, then we must have government health care. We must have the FDA, we must have laws regarding who can have children and how many. Some small group of must take charge, as is done with dog breeds, and document and track, and control the future of humanity. To bring us into that wonderful world of Eloi and Morlocks. The underclass will be bred to work, the Eloi to enjoy intellectual pursuits.

            Maybe I’m wrong… but if I am and I am convinced of it, then there is no point discussing liberty.

          • Josh
            May 11, 2012 at 11:45 pm

            Brent I appreciate the effort you put into your rebuttal, but I don’t think we’ll ever see “eye to eye” on this subject.

            I celebrate diversity in all things, in opinion, culture, economics, genetics, the list goes on. I celebrate the unique individual that I believe I am, and that I see in others.

            I have no desire for universal sameness. It’s in that spirit that I interpreted Tinsley’s writing and it’s how I live. I don’t have Latino friends to prove I like Mexican culture; I appreciate Mexican culture and I’m not willing to destroy it by merging it with mine.

          • BrentP
            May 12, 2012 at 2:09 am

            Where did the idea I am arguing for universal sameness and merging come from? I am not. I am arguing against this idea of ‘natural state’ applied to cultural constructs being genetic in origin. I am arguing against the idea there should be some master program of who can breed with whom as though we are animals and need preserve our kennel club papers for generations to come.

            It’s the control required to maintain this so called purity that I argue against. Because that is part of the control system we should be opposing here.

            The ideas of liberty are cultural. The state, the government has worked well to dismantle them in every community it touches regardless of who lives there. Even England, where many such ideas originated in recent centuries has fallen prey to the state.

            Another thing is that the introduction of foreign populations is another control mechanism. People fight amongst themselves about silly things instead of noticing the controllers all while giving the controllers more power to keep them safe from the immigrants.

          • methylamine
            May 12, 2012 at 3:12 am

            @Scott–

            As a dog breeder, you should know that “race” is not “species”; the tree frog analogy is spurious because white and black humans aren’t sub-species, they’re variants…just as German Shepherds and Basenjis are both canis vulgaris.

            But the larger mistake in ALL these arguments is the confusion of race and culture.

            The divisiveness that generates is one of the many tools the Elite use to sow discord among people, and assure we remain divided as their plans laid patiently over centuries play out.

            Do you really want to play at the same failed game of eugenics that is the Elite’s purview?

            By the way; hasn’t it occurred to you that the same breed purity striven for in purebred dogs has given us over-bred, sickly dogs? German Shepherds–hip dysplasia. Weimeraners–cervical dysplasia. Dachsund–intervertebral disk disease.

            The list goes on.

            You and TGS can keep your racial purity. I’ve got miscegenated kids, with seemingly indomitable immune systems and the overall health and vigor characteristic of hybrids.

            Ask the Galton/Darwin families about eugenics and racial purity. Fucked them up good.

          • Scott
            May 12, 2012 at 3:49 am

            Methyl, again you advance new arguments. I didn’t suggest human guided eugenics was a good idea. You’re arguing with my analogy. not with Tinsley or me.

            Maybe we should try to boil it down; diversity within a species is good vs. diversity within a species is bad. I accept your re-statement of my terminology and will refer to this as “variation” if it pleases you.

            I don’t know where you have found a reference to cultural diversity in this argument. Please be more specific. The conversation involves race or “species variation” as you prefer to call it. I mentioned “cosmop” culture as an enabler for reducing variation in the species, I think that was the only reference to culture I made.

            The failures of planned eugenics are well documented; hip dysplasia & etc. Again you argue with the analogy. I believe the original discussion concerned preserving the results of natural selection, which some refer to as “God’s work”. It’s true eugenicists who “play” with dogs are a very good example of why such activities should never be attempted on humans. In fact, they’re a pretty decent example of why they should only be attempted by those who spend a great deal of time studying the problem on *any* life form. Playing God has its consequences.

            This has little to do with the argument that there may well be value in preserving the racial traits that have differentiated the peoples of the world through natural selection. Let’s do a thought experiment?

            What happens to the world population when petroleum fuels go away? Imagine being blown back to 1800– wooden sailing ships and horse drawn carriages.

            You’re from Sapporo visiting Malmo Sweden. You survive. Your from Panama visiting Malmo, maybe you don’t?

            Species diversity, what you call “variation”, is important. We should all be very supportive of diversity. It could very well be critical to our survival.

          • methylamine
            May 12, 2012 at 4:39 am

            @Scott–

            That’s reasonable enough; diversity as a bulwark against adversity. I’ll buy it.

            And I’m not of the Carlin school of “fuck ’till we’re all brown”, either.

            I’m objecting to TGS’ various assertions equating culture with race…er, “variation”. THAT’S what’s got me so hot in this debate.

            I don’t think you’re quite in that camp; perhaps you celebrate the variations and are proud of your own. But TGS sees the downfall of America in the darkening of its skin tones, whereas I see the downfall of America (and the world) in the dumbing of its minds.

            Or from a different perspective: if everyone who fails the paper-bag test were ejected from the US today, would a new era of freedom and prosperity arrive?

            I realize that’s not your argument; I think it is TGS’ and it’s what I’m railing against.

          • Scott
            May 12, 2012 at 5:21 am

            “I realize that’s not your argument; I think it is TGS’ and it’s what I’m railing against.”

            Well, all I can say is there’s the old adage that to assume is to make an ass of u and me :)

            It may be his argument but I couldn’t find conclusive evidence. I also prefer to find the best in people, for which I have been roundly criticized in the past.

          • spiritsplice
            May 12, 2012 at 6:47 pm
          • Scott
            May 13, 2012 at 6:19 am

            @Spirit –

            From your cite:

            “First, on every known measure of cognitive ability, on IQ, SATs, GREs, everything, blacks average about one standard deviation, fifteen IQ points, below whites. The gap is a fact.” — Fred Reed

            Perhaps they do, does that mean you can treat Blacks as a homogeneous mass of slackers? Well, in a nutshell, no. Because when you run into a Black fellow who’s three standard deviations above the mean in IQ and you fuck with him he’s probably going to do everything in his considerable power to make sure you never do it again.

            Where does this desire to generalize come from? Is it rooted in a desire to prove one’s worth above others? What’s YOUR IQ Spirit? You know, White people, Chinese people, American Native people, all have a statistical variation around the mean? Ever consider the overlap? It’s real likely there’s a Black guy out there somewhere that has your IQ beat by 60 points. Think about it.

            Unless *your* IQ is in the 170-190 range, you have significant competition from just about *any* race. Get used to it.

          • BrentP
            May 13, 2012 at 6:41 am

            standardized tests are a skill. All these tests really show is a person’s skill at the tests.Plus there is the deliberate attack on people with government schools and so forth.

            That said, people from the ghetto manage to run multi million dollar corporations in illegal trades. Every bit as intelligent and sociopathic and ruthless as their counterparts in the legit corporate and political world.

          • Scott
            May 13, 2012 at 6:54 am

            @Brent – “All these tests really show is a person’s skill at the tests”

            Again you strike a chord, I have no idea how it happens but you do it over and over again. Kurt Vonnegut had this idea of a Karass in hi novel “Cat’s Cradle”, it described a group of people unrelated in any way except a common purpose. I’m beginning to think you and I are in the same karass.

            After completely baffling all of my school guidance counselors for decades, I was finally labeled a person who had “an aptitude for taking aptitude tests”.

            What’s your excuse?

          • spiritsplice
            May 13, 2012 at 3:23 pm

            The desire to generalize is a survival skill and helped man survive in a world without natural weapons. Generalizations are generally true, that’s why they are named as such. Does this mean that I judge every black person I meet to be an idiot? Of course not. There are other generalizations such as general appearance, dress, personality, energy, etc that I also apply. But the bad ones are usually pretty obvious right from the start.

            My IQ is 135-140. Are there smarter blacks then I? Sure. How is this relevant to the general mass and the observation about them? Sure there is deviation about the mean, but the mean for blacks is much lower. That was his whole point. This fact has consequences.

            What I would like to see is separate living space, as we once had (and as they still have elsewhere. Whites don’t have their own living space anymore thanks to the State). Since this is unlikely to happen, the next best thing (for everyone) is to honestly treat *everybody* equally and let their abilities decide whether they succeed or fail.

            This won’t happen because of the intelligence gap and the black failure that has and will result from it. The idea of meritocracy scares socialists to death. They want nothing to do with it because they, like we, already know what the eventual outcome will be. That is why merit is always called racist, or the system must be racist, or ,or ,or. There is no intellectual honesty when discussing this subject with them because they are ideologically driven by ideas that do not coincide with reality.

            Here is quote about this that I found to be dead on:

            “Liberals have a multi-layered onion of deceptive rhetoric:

            (1) Deny that there’s such a thing as race.

            (2) When forced (by medical/biological evidence) to admit the existence of different races, deny that there are any behavioral differences between them.

            (3) When forced (e.g., by FBI crime statistics) to admit that there are racial differences in behavior,
            deny that race is the cause of those differences by asserting that poverty is the cause of them.

            (4) When forced (by correlating crime rates with socio-economic status) to admit that poverty is not the cause
            of the statistical excess of Black violent behavior, assert that class-envy is the cause.

            (5) When forced (by controlling for urban-rural factors in addition to socio-economic status) to admit that class-envy is not the cause of the statistical excess in Black violent behavior, assert that the other guy is a bigot, refuse to argue with him further, and begin all over again at step (1) the next time somebody else brings up the subject.”

          • BrentP
            May 13, 2012 at 6:20 pm

            Race used to be an indicator a particular culture or way people were raised etc. Now it’s reduced to prevailing statistical chance a person has come from a particular upbringing.

            There is no genetic programming to a particular way of life. Back a hundred years ago or more the PTB used to use various european ethnicities against each other. However that didn’t work after awhile as within a few generations most had very common backgrounds. Once the commonality was seen the conflict fell apart. Then it became a question of race to keep the same manipulations going.

            And of course to do things politically and socially to keep them isolated from each other so the game could go on.

            So what have the government programs done? They aim to split segments of the population up to always be at conflict with each other. You wouldn’t expect someone raised in a rich suburb to have much in common with someone raised on welfare in a trailer park even if they are the same ‘race’, right?

          • Scott
            May 13, 2012 at 6:56 pm

            @Spirit – I generally disagree generalizations are generally true :)

            I too have heard the theory our ability to do it is a survival trait, but I’m pretty sure that’s way down at the perceptual/sensory level. The way I understand it, being able to generalize sensory input allows us to quickly decide what to pay attention to and I believe we share this characteristic with squirrels. Not sure how it bears on higher cognitive functions, in fact I’ll argue it’s a detriment to critical thinking.

            I liked your example “Liberal Argument”. Socialists are the ultimate generalizers.

          • That One Guy
            May 13, 2012 at 7:03 pm

            “Standardized tests are a skill”

            If this is true, and is found in certain races in much greater frequency than others, it suggests a genetic explanation. Which makes our point. It’s been suggested that the artistic complexity of the written languages of East Asia account for the memorization skills of the people descended from those areas and can explain the faster brain activity that accounts for their increased IQ over Caucasians. They have to recognize multiple complex symbols with only slight variations that have great variation in meaning. That can only be genetic.

            “There is no genetic programming to a particular way of life.”

            People descended from populations that did not traditionally keep domesticated animals have a higher rate of lactose intolerance.

            We see that populations that spent many generations in harsh-winter climes are more predisposed to low time preferences than populations from climates where nature is bountiful year-round.

            Nature has selected for these traits. The argument isn’t that genetics determine way of life. The argument is that way of life determines genetics over time. We would like to preserve this as much as we can.

            What is the single greatest factor contributing to the differences in the fortunes of Detroit and Pittsburgh? Demographics. There is no better explanation.

          • BrentP
            May 14, 2012 at 3:05 am

            @TOG:

            ‘way of life’ in what we were discussing, things that make people incompatible to live near each other. Physical and chemical processing traits are irrelevant to that.

            School is a skill. It’s most evident in professions like engineering where people have the knack or they do not. The problem with government regulation is that school becomes a bigger and bigger requirement to enter a given profession.

            The degree by which children succeed at school is roughly determined by the value their parents put on school combined with perceptions of their own abilities to learn.

            One of things John Taylor Gatto did was to take these supposedly unteachable kids and get them to perform at the levels of the kids of the wealthy. How? He taught and treated them the way kids of the wealthy are taught. In one story he related a class of kids were doing astoundingly well until one said in class that they were the ‘dumb kids’ and this shouldn’t be. It reinforced the perception. Things still went better than expected according to his story, but not like they were before that moment.

            Culture has a astounding effect on people. How they are treated as children. The perceptions they form. Very powerful stuff and the ruling class knows it and has known it for a very long time.

          • That One Guy
            May 14, 2012 at 4:16 am

            I see your point Brent, when you put it in those terms. My wife has an accountant on her team with a masters degree who is in the middle of CPA testing and she says he doesn’t get the most basic accounting functions.

            My point is just that to me I don’t think it’s that cut and dried. Both nature and nurture play a role. In my case, my stepfather was my primary male role model and I only ever spent time with my father sporadically. I’ve taken on my stepfather’s mannerisms and social skills but my general nature, outlook, and disposition are the same as my biological father. These things can be passed on genetically, just the same as physical and chemical processing traits.

            This feels a lot like our prior disagreement regarding the “intelligent and moral populace” requirement of libertarianism, whether or not there is one. I think philosophically the disagreement comes from the same place as this one.

            I think I’m just going to have to agree to disagree. I lack the debate skills to further press this with you guys anyway, and I’m sure we agree on better than 90% of things anyway. I like it better when we focus on those things.

          • Scott
            May 14, 2012 at 5:12 am

            “The degree by which children succeed at school is roughly determined by the value their parents put on school combined with perceptions of their own abilities to learn.”

            Brent, not to be a dickhead or anything, but I failed miserably at school, had upper middle class parents who placed a great regard on succeeding at school and made their opinions very clear, was told by numerous agents of the State I had an exceptional ability to learn, failed High School, was never admitted to college, then went on to help map the central parsec of our galaxy, successfully image the maiden flight of the Space Shuttle Columbia doing Mach 17 at 178,000 feet off the coast of Oahu, and build the internet without a HS education.

            This theory of Mr. Gatto’s needs some re-work in my opinion :). Really.

            It ought to be clear to anyone that generalizations simply don’t work. That’s the “elite” secret. Everyone is an individual, even kids. Try and build a massive education system designed to “leave no child behind” and I assure you you’ll leave just about every child behind.

          • methylamine
            May 14, 2012 at 5:14 am

            @Scott:

            and I’m sure we agree on better than 90% of things anyway. I like it better when we focus on those things.

            I agree. I think we’ve come full circle on the race debate, and discovered we think somewhat differently on it.

            Let’s get back to sharpening our wits on what we do agree on–that people should be FREE, and that individual liberty is the most powerful tool of human progress.

            Anything less is slavery, and intolerable.

            I’m amazed at the level of discourse on this board. It gives me hope that there is enough of a remnant left that when the collapse comes, we will be around in numbers sufficient to rebuild around a new, but old, paradigm–liberty.

            Then we can choose to live in all-white enclaves…or not. And no-one will be able to tell us otherwise!

          • Scott
            May 14, 2012 at 5:40 am

            @Methyl

            I’m pretty sure you were replying to That One Guy.

          • BrentP
            May 14, 2012 at 5:33 pm

            @Scott Um the word roughly is in there for a reason. We were discussing statistical results. Thus, I intentionally put the word roughly in there because it is not an absolute rule. Don’t say you’re not trying to be a dickhead and then do a classic usenet style dickhead move of stripping context and trying to create an absolute where statistical variation was being discussed.

            When you look at bell curves of IQ tests and grades and other measures you’ll find that they parallel the general cultures of the people that compose those races with regard to the importance they place performance in school and on tests, generally speaking. It’s a bell curve for a reason. There are always outliers.

            Furthermore I believe I made a clear break between my statement and what I learned from Gatto.

            If you read Gatto you’d find your story there is a text book case supporting his views of education.

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 12, 2012 at 2:50 pm

          RAILING AGAINST

          Railing against TGS’ argument is railing against the right of a particular race or kind to exist. There are more subtle ways to effect a Genocide than by conducting a so-called Holocaust.

          TGS

          • methylamine
            May 13, 2012 at 3:26 am

            ???

          • Scott
            May 13, 2012 at 8:11 am

            I think he’s alluding to the use of psy-ops in the destruction of the white race. Whites are in a genetic death spiral and have been for almost 30 years. The replacement rate of whites worldwide doesn’t compensate for the death rate. We bought the big lie of overpopulation in the 1960’s and we’re all buying the farm.

            How many people can Stand on Zanzibar? Well, more than we have.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 13, 2012 at 12:36 pm

            Referring to the Natural Right of Whites to work for the survival perpetuation of their race.

            If being shunned hurts someone’s feelings that’s just tough. Blacks with whom I’ve had a face to face acquaintance are smart enough not to set themselves up for it.

            tgsam

        • Scott
          May 13, 2012 at 7:58 am

          @Spirit –

          I wish to apologize for the tone of my earlier reply, I plead discomfort with the earlier exchange on racism, along with the fact that I’m short on sleep due to the birth of a very large number of puppies in my house last Tuesday.

          I could have said all of that much better and in a less antagonistic way. As you can tell, my Anger Management class wasn’t a complete success.

          Regards,
          Scott.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 13, 2012 at 12:24 pm

            Scott, never apologize for being White.

            tgsam

          • spiritsplice
            May 13, 2012 at 5:41 pm

            I don’t mind antagonism as long as one is honest in their argumentation. Too often people try to “win” the argument by saying things they know aren’t true and conflict with their own personal experience. We are after the truth, not some PC utopia. That sort of thing hurts all races.

          • spiritsplice
            May 13, 2012 at 6:25 pm

            Tinsley, Indeed!

      • Boothe
        May 11, 2012 at 6:32 pm

        TheThe really sad part is the mindset that has been inculcated in certain American demographic groups to find the demon of racism behind anything you do or don’t do that offends their apparently delicate sensibilities. The county I’m from in Virginia is rural and 61% black. I am Caucasoid, but do not consider myself actually “white” having both Cheyenne and Blackfeet genetics mixed with Scots, German and English. I actually get darker than the Mexicanos that work at my favorite restaurant and tease them about actually being the “gringos” there. Most of us that are from families that have been here since the founding (or probably even into the late 19th if not early 20th century have some American Indian blood whether we care to admit it or not. But in my case, my features would place me squarely in the “honky” or “cracka” camp in the county where I’m from. I am very familiar with racial prejudice because I have been the unhappy recipient of black bigotry on numerous occasions. When I have objected to it, I was excoriated as being the racist for daring to point out the truth. After all, everyone knows that black people are incapable of racial prejudice…

        For instance, I had a coworker, neighbor and (I thought) friend of many years who happened to be black (I won’t use the term African – American, because most of the people that demand we call them that aren’t from Africa, they are from America just like me, irrespective of the amount of melanin in their skin). One day out of the blue he asked my why I didn’t ever let any black people come to parties at my house. I said that would be because we don’t ever have parties. He responded that I probably didn’t have parties at my house because that way I wouldn’t have to invite any black people. I explained, no, I preferred the intimacy of no more than a couple of friends (or even family members) at a time for drinks, dinner and civilized conversation. I went on to tell him I didn’t (and still don’t) have “parties” because I don’t want a bunch of people at my house eating my food, drinking my liquor, getting drunk, burning holes in the carpet with cigarettes, puking in the bathroom floor and potentially getting in fights. I had a couple of parties when I was younger, that was my experience and I wasn’t going to let it happen again. He still insisted that I was prejudiced. Then I reminded him that he had been in my house, at my table for conversation and drinks on more than one occasion and he was black. He explained that was different, because even though he was black he was my friend, so I must still be a racist. I thought to myself “yes, you *were* my friend prior to this little peek into your psyche.”

        So in this fellow’s mind somehow he had gone from the mindset of a sign in the store window saying “No Xs allowed” being racist, to ‘if you don’t open your house to the neighborhood so they can trash it, you’re a bigot.’ The logical progression of this erroneous and perpetual “victim” thought pattern is “That cracka be following me (through a crime ridden neighborhood I don’t live in at 3:00 AM while I’m covering my face with a hoody). He a racist honky who need a ass whippin’. That mindset, of course, can end up the way that the George Zimmerman – Trayvon Martin case exemplifies. Or it results in flash mob “wildings” of department and convenience stores. Or it was seen in the rage of those where were dragging people out of their cars and off their motorcycles at the Wisconsin State Fair and beating them for the crime of being “white.” BTW, any of you that think you’re actually “white” need to hold a clean sheet of white printer paper next to your skin and get back to us on that. Forced integration and racial stratification has been forced on us and cultivated by the PTB for the express intent and purpose of creating friction where none should exist. This is to ensure that we don’t all get together, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion or gender and tar and feather their loan sharking, money changing, grifting, and power hungry (and otherwise sorry) asses. It really is that simple folks.

        • spiritsplice
          May 14, 2012 at 1:08 pm

          The white paper argument? Give me a break!

          • Boothe
            May 14, 2012 at 3:09 pm

            Well spiritsplice, if you don’t like the “white paper” argument, how about the red blood argument: Any human, regardless of pigmentation, shot down in the street by agents of a dictatorial government, leaves a pool of blood that is remarkably indistinguishable from any other after the body is dragged away. I suspect you’re going to see more of that here in Amerika real soon since our handlers are striving to fabricate excuses for martial law and even harsher dictatorial control. My point was that we, as humans, are considerably more alike than any superficial differences in skin shade might lead us to believe. This is the state of being (one with unrestricted individual liberty and especially freedom of association) that our would-be overlords want to ensure we as Americans overlook and forget. We as individuals might tend to segregate (or not) voluntarily along ethnic, racial and religious lines and coexist (for the most part) peacefully. Rather, the PTB would prefer we are forced into artificially (i.e. governmentally) created situations that incite racial and ethnic friction to ensure we remain divided and stay conquered. Based on America’s current socio-political and economic situation, ‘tis working quite well, dontcha’ think?

          • dom
            May 14, 2012 at 3:25 pm

            Absolutely amazing description:

            “Rather, the PTB would prefer we are forced into artificially (i.e. governmentally) created situations that incite racial and ethnic friction to ensure we remain divided and stay conquered.”

            Just perfect!

      • Brad Smith
        May 13, 2012 at 4:22 pm

        Ultimately you either believe in property rights or you don’t. Just like free speech. I will defend anyone’s right to speak their mind even if I detest their point of view.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 11, 2012 at 4:38 pm

      The Industrial Revolution had already doomed slavery by the 1860s. Six hundred-thousand* mostly young Whites died for no morally supportable reason. The White Race in America must have paid a heavy genetic price for that insane slaughter. Fratricide at its very worst.

      Unlike MLK, Lincoln will never be the object of adoration by Blacks.

      Are Blacks grateful to the White Yanks who died in that dreadful carnage?

      I was with the Atlanta Patrol Boys who went to Washington by train in 1947. I remember standing in youthful awe at the Lincoln Memorial. Could I possibly do so today I’d curse it and shit on it.

      tgsam

      *Try to visualize 600,000 men standing in ranks on an open plain. What would the dimensions be? And if they were in flag covered coffins what would the dimensions be then? The Nuremberg rallies would likely pale in comparison.

      • Tor Munkov
        May 11, 2012 at 10:26 pm

        The confederate boys were the only heroes, fighting for self-determination, and upholding of a mutual contract.

        Note on the Gettysburg Address

        by H.L. Mencken

        The Gettysburg speech was at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history…the highest emotion reduced to a few poetical phrases. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous. But let us not forget that it is poetry, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it. Put it into the cold words of everyday. The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination – that government of the people, by the people, for the people, should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in the battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves.

        • Scott
          May 13, 2012 at 8:41 am

          As I understand it, the Confederates fought for the right to do what they wanted to do and the Union fought for the right to tell the Confederates what they wanted to do?

          I have a question for the historians out there; Did the cotton gin invented by Whitney in 1793 play a role in the Civil War? I wonder because it was a product of the Northern Industrial Revolution that might seem to change the economics of human labor prior to the war. References to discussion would be appreciated.

          • mithrandir
            May 14, 2012 at 4:07 am

            I think the cotton gin help lower the cost of using cotton as a fabric. This help to make slave labor more efficient (cost effective) in processing cotton.

            Without the cotton gin I think that most people could not financially maintain a large slave labor force.

            As smaller and smaller numbers of southerners owned large quantities of slaves, over time slavery would probably have been outlawed as in other parts of the world.

            The south probably would have developed differently. I think larger farms/plantations would not have been as feasible.

          • Scott
            May 14, 2012 at 5:27 am

            That was my thought as well, but then that just leaves the two of us.

  15. clark
    May 11, 2012 at 1:54 am

    I wonder if Shawn has spent any time over at freedominourtime.blogspot.com

    For every example he gave of a “good” cop, there are just as many counters, if not more.

    Most Americans today are Helots. Interesting that word, helots. For example:

    The Youngest Victim of Police Abuse

    “What this means is that Levii literally had the sh*t kicked out of him by a bullying cop before he was born.” …

    http://www.freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2012/05/youngest-victim-of-police-abuse.html

  16. Jonny
    May 11, 2012 at 1:31 am

    Eric, great job; well-stated.
    Unfortunately, your enlightnment cannot be explained to the typical Citizen who has their head in the sand, or if limber, up their rectum.
    Your neighbors will feel safe when those nice policemen haul your druggy, infidel – TERRORIST – ass away to be waterboadrded!!!

    Jonny

    • May 11, 2012 at 10:33 am

      I know!

      Even though I don’t partake of arbitrarily illegal drugs (though I do sometimes partake of the arbitrarily legal ones) and even though I am an ardent defender of our rights as individuals and want nothing from you or anyone else that we can’t agree on among ourselves, by peaceful, mutually agreeable free exchange – I and people like me are regarded as “un-American” and “enemies of freedom” in the New Reich.

      It’s a strange thing indeed.

      • Douglas
        May 11, 2012 at 11:02 am

        But even though I would encourage you, Eric, to not partake of ANYTHING that would impair your functionality, in a take on Voltaire, I would defend to the death your right to get shit-faced with whatever intoxicant you wish, provided you don’t pose a hazard to others (e.g, DWI).
        When did we Americans cede to Uncle Sugar, or anyone, to presume to tell us what is good or bad for our “baidies” (as my late “grand-mama” from Joplin, MO would have said it) and put in under force of law? I submit that once we allowed Prohibition (the “ignoble experiment”) or so-called “drug enforcement”, we in effect should have had an ownership certificate tattooed to our collective asses, signed by Uncle himself. At least in SM Stiriling’s Sci-Fi series, “The Domination”, the Draka serfs have highly-visible necks tattoos and know that they are owned. Who knows, perhaps before I take the dirt nap the all-beneficent “gubmint” will be planting an RFID chip in my ear lobe and know when I’m sleeping (and with whom), and know when I’m awake….

      • Boothe
        May 11, 2012 at 10:56 pm

        Eric, I’m not so sure that the “illegal” drugs are arbitrarily so. Take cannabis for example: Cannabis hemp is visually indistinguishable from the psychoactive varieties. It will grow abundantly practically anywhere in the United States. It tends to mellow people out where alcohol tends to rile them up. There is no known practical lethal dose. It can be used for so many different medical applications it is indeed a wonder drug. The oil from the seeds and fiber from the stalks has myriad industrial and commercial uses. It is nearly uncontrollable as a commodity when its use and production are widespread. So it is much like gold and silver money; private, valuable, universally recognized, generally useful and portable.

        So how would American culture have changed if cannabis had retained its commercial and industrial footing while gaining ground in medicine and for recreational mood alteration? Alcohol sales and tax revenue would have dropped because people can (and often do) grow it at home. Hemp oil would cut into the petroleum market for paint and varnish base and who knows what else since it’s truly annually renewable. We’d being wearing hemp clothing as much or more than cotton. Our paper would be hemp not wood pulp. We’d have plastics made from hemp. We’d be treating cancer with it, cutting off chemo / nuclear therapy revenue. We’d have less violence because it would be cheaper than alcohol so we’d need less law enforcement. Much like freely circulating sound money, cannabis would improve our quality of life. No one could patent it and the government essentially could not (and in fact cannot truly) control and tax it.

        I suspect the reason (at least on the medical and distillery front) is essentially true for cocaine and opium as well. Although the cultivation of coca is probably more difficult to accomplish en Los Estados Unidos , I’m sure enterprising individuals would find a way. But that would cut into the pseudoephedrine market and we can’t have big pharma taking a hit. Opium poppies, on the other hand, apparently grow quite well even in the Ozarks (since the gubmint found a bunch of cultivated poppies growing in “their” National Forest there a few years back). That tells me that common folk could undoubtedly grow one of the most effective pain meds there is in the privacy of their own homes. Here again the establishment takes a control, tax and profit hit. After prohibition it was easy to take control of distilled spirits because of the infrastructure required for mass production and distribution. Sure there are few bootleggers and moonshiners out there to this day, but once they start raking in enough money to put a few ripples in the pond, Uncle Sugar cracks down on ‘em hard. Getting a license to do it “legally” is cost prohibitive for the small player. Still think some drugs are “arbitrarily” illegal? I’m betting there’s nothing arbitrary about it at all.

        • methylamine
          May 12, 2012 at 1:25 am

          GREAT points, Boothe.

          Indeed the rot goes far deeper than that.
          As Hitlery the Bitch said, “It’ll never be legal; there’s too much money in it.”

          Her handlers must have freaked out when she said it because it’s entirely too honest. Look up Mena, Arkansas some time.

          The CIA admittedly flew cocaine into LA during the 80’s “crack epidemic”. Afghanistan under the Taliban had nearly eradicated poppy production; under our loving tutelage, soldiers carrying sacks of fertilizer, Afghanistan’s share of the world opium market has once again exceeded 90%.

          Cui bono, friends. The big banks launder most of the approximately $ 1 trillion in the worldwide drug trade. Occasionally they get “caught” and pay paltry fines, amounting to less than 1% of the take. The CIA funds black ops with drug money. And who knows where the rest goes? It is an Amazon river of cold hard cash; and I promise, a thousand drug lords as rich as Pablo Escobar couldn’t begin to consume that $1 trillion.

          Needless to say, there’s enormous profit on the home front too–and not just from the drugs themselves. Our prison-industrial complex houses 7 million souls, half of them there for non-violent drug “offenses”. Wonder why manufacturing jobs are hard to come by? Those 7 million serve as a cheap source of slave labor. Just as an example, Microsoft software is boxed up by prison labor.

          But I’m proud to be an Amerrrrricaaaan, where at least ah know ahm freeeeeee…

          • Boothe
            May 12, 2012 at 1:10 pm

            Quite right Methyl and let us not forget that heroin addiction is back up in the inner cities (I read recently that big H use has increased fourfold since the Beltway Bandits sent men with guns into Afghanistan). Not only do the Criminals In Arlington get to skim the obscene profits, but the “product” they provide ensures that a high percentage of their customers (primarily “weed people”) will die. Now if you were the spiritual progeny of a small group of wealthy New England white supremacist elite, the situation couldn’t get much more win-win for you than this; sell the underclass you despise and want rid of high priced poison and let them commit suicide for you.

  17. mikehell
    May 11, 2012 at 12:06 am

    If y’all haven’t seen this Frontline piece about the black white supremacist, Clayton Bigsby, I highly recommend it.

    http://tinyurl.com/6uyqfdv

  18. Peter Courtenay Stephens
    May 10, 2012 at 9:37 pm

    Shawn, You are correct up to a point. There is no doubt a very fine line that has been crossed by the federal government and local law enforcement when it comes to federal infuence on local law enforcement. The military style swat teams that are being employed for minor criminal acts are some examples.

    • Shawn
      May 11, 2012 at 12:14 am

      Pete, I totally agree with you on that point, and in my brief 13 years, I have seen the federal influence really come about. Sometimes the phrase between a rock and a hard place come into my thinking.

    • Bill Jones
      May 11, 2012 at 2:51 am

      And there are of course countless instances of this piece of shit

      http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2012/05/10/cop-boots-pregnant-woman-stomach-dept-fine-132251/

      • May 11, 2012 at 10:25 am

        Another “hero.”

        This sort of thing is potentially explosive (socially) … as it ought to be.

        I don’t have all the facts, but assuming the story is generally accurate, the “hero’s” actions are indefensible. Unless he’s a pipsqueak – and the woman was a raging she-beast – no man should ever have to (or resort to) kicking a woman, cop or not. There are numerous alternatives, if the situation gets physical.

        I hope this “hero” (notice the buzz cut?) gets what’s coming to him.

    • Douglas
      May 11, 2012 at 10:55 am

      There’s a scripture in my faith (which admittedly I myself am not as stringent in adhering to as I could be)…D&C 121:39…”We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.” Of course, me wonders if dear “Brother Joseph” really took this lesson to heart, since once he received a commission from the Illinois Governor to form a local militia, appointed himself a “Leutnant General” (was then the highest possible military rank in the USA).
      It’s all about intimidation. Hey, if you get to play “soldier boy” with toys furnished for free by Uncle Sugar, and push around the “civilians”, hey, it’s another job perk, right?

  19. Shawn
    May 10, 2012 at 8:53 pm

    Wow. What a hit job article. I have been a police officer since 1999 in a small town. I have seen these types of officers, you write about, but as in any other profession those are the ones that stick out, while the rest of us that don’t mind being called by their first name, or shake hands with new citizens in town, you are portraying a ugly stereotype. Your hatred and vitriol to police officers is your choice, but it is articles like yours, and closemindedness that effects, and creates the younger generation that have listened to closeminded hatred.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 10, 2012 at 9:31 pm

      Bad law and excessive fines intensify the natural resentment individuals feel for authority. The enforcer gets the blame for the overpaid legislator’s dirty work.

      I am pleased to have Deputy R.B. for my neighbor. R.B. is a good-natured Cajun and I’ve yet to meet a bad one. We often discuss laws and he openly admits that that Drug Prohibition is bullshit. Like something out of a movie script, he met his charming divorcee wife years ago when he arrested her during a bust. I first encountered her during an AA meeting. She no longer uses alcohol and other recreational drugs.

      tgsam

      • Tor Munkov
        May 10, 2012 at 11:56 pm

        Nothing like a tender sovok romance, right comrade? I like your dhimmitude! I can just hear the soft whispers of her cadre: “spread your legs, or I’ll send you back to your cage.”

        Obedience and passive acceptance of everything that government imposes on you and defenseless females is the hallmark of the new Homo Sovieticus 2.0, Western Bloc version.

    • BrentP
      May 10, 2012 at 11:33 pm

      I’d like to introduce you to the PTSD cop who came racing after me and then screamed at me because I shrugged when I was forced to stop when he turned left in front of me with his cell phone to his ear.

      I’d like to introduce you to the cop who had the driver stop short and then he opened his passenger side door into my path because I dared sound the horn on my bicycle when the driver brush passed me while I was traveling at the posted 25mph speed limit.

      I would like to introduce you to the cop who pulled me over because he didn’t like the way I looked at him after he tailgated me and nearly clipped the corner of my car while going around me as I drove the posted limit. As if I would ‘speed’ with a cop on my ass.

      I would like to introduce you to the cop who demanded I bike in the 3in space between the white line and the gravel or else.

      I could go on, but you get the picture. The vast majority of my interactions with cops have been like those. The vast majority. As in only 2 maybe 3 exceptions to this rule if I don’t count being simply ‘revenued’. Being revenued is of course also a negative experience, but doesn’t give quite the negative impression as the other experiences.

      When I see a cop I wonder if he is going to see me as prey to make his performance objectives or he’s just going to decide to hassle me because I am different or don’t properly defer to his authoritah.

      Cops by and large treat me as some new “maggot” in the boot camp sense of the word, prey, child, or just someone weaker than them they can hassle for the fun of it. So, no, they aren’t going to get my respect as a group. Each individual will need to earn it through his words, tone, and especially actions.

      These men have decided to be ‘law enforcers’ for the most part. With the way laws are constructed today this at the very least means they claim some sort of parental authority over other adults. I think you’d object to being treated that way too. Most cops do when they get treated like a mundane by other cops.

      • Shawn
        May 11, 2012 at 12:05 am

        I can play that game too. I can introduce you to the cop that has to notify a family a loved one is dead, I would like to introduce you to the cop that tries and talks someone out of suicide, introduce you to the cop that sits there and takes verbal abuse from people like yourself that transfers some other actions from people onto that cop that hasnt done anything wrong. Your generalising makes about as much sense as me hating all Mcdonalds workers because a few have given me bad service in the past.

        • BrentP
          May 11, 2012 at 12:33 am

          You don’t get it, and you probably never will because you won’t be treated like a mundane to experience it first hand.

          The group of people you have chosen to become part of can ruin someone’s day or life or end it just because they want to or because it advances their career and they’ll most likely get away with it. Hell most likely it will be deemed legal.

          We mundanes don’t have the luxury to assume a cop is ‘one of the good ones’. There’s are a lot of naive people who have suffered because they assumed cops would be reasonable people. Encounters with cops always need to be assumed to be adversarial if a mundane wants to remain outside of prison. Proper language must be observed as to not fall into various traps cops are trained to set for people in order to bust them.

          Assuming a cop is one of the good ones makes as much sense as assuming some random canine animal out in the woods is like the neighbor’s friendly dog.

          Furthermore, cops are trained to see and treat us mundanes as criminals until proven otherwise. Officer safety and all… so why shouldn’t I see a cop as a threat to my wallet, freedom, and life until proven otherwise. My safety.

          My favorite youtube video on the subject of encounters with police:

        • May 11, 2012 at 10:53 am

          Shawn,

          You mention McDonalds. A key difference is that if I get poor service there, I can decline their services in the future. The clown cannot force me at gunpoint to buy a burger.

          We are not free to decline your services – which to a great extent involve harassing peaceable, harming-no-one citizens who have merely committed some or other technical foul infraction such as “speeding” or not wearing their seat belt for “safety.” I hope you will take this in the spirit intended; that is – I am trying to give you some insight about how people like me (people who are not the problem) are coming to regard people such as yourself – people who have chosen to become enforcers of outrageous, unjust laws. We do not feel “safe” when we see you in the rear view mirror. We do not feel “safe” when we are forced to stop and present our papers and submit to a verbal interrogation and visual (sometimes physical) inspection of our vehicles at a “safety” checkpoint.

          To be very clear, because I want you to understand: I am a guy who respects legitimate peace-keeping. I despise people who steal, who attack others, who destroy property – and so on. I am completely behind you if you spend your days dealing with that sort of thing. But the truth is you spend a lot of your time bothering people who have harmed no one. Enforcing laws that criminalize actions that have no victim.

          And that I have no respect for.

          • Douglas
            May 11, 2012 at 11:52 am

            “Law Enforcement” serves the interests of the Government that employs them, not the “citizens” (more like serfs/subjects in that scenario) that they allegedly serve. If you’re some asshole committing a felony, then it’s great PR for the department and a notch on your belt to getting the sergeant’s stripes someday. But if you’re “Joe Citizen”, well, there’s still the ticket quota to fulfill. Who gives a shit about “Joe’s” insurance rates, or whether the citation is reasonable or just? And if “Joe” makes enough of a stink, then it’s call for backup, get out the baton, and haul his “felonious” ass off to jail for having dared to oppose the “annointed brotherhood” that is so-called law enforcement…more like armed assholes with a badge and an attitude.
            Gimme Mexico anytime. At least there you just pay the “mordida” and they let it be. There, a cop bought stays bought.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        May 11, 2012 at 1:42 am

        The intelligent thing to do is to repeal all government power that is repugnant to the Principles underpinning the Unanimous Declaration. Only then can an accurate assessment of the general humanity and competence of America’s law enforcers be made.

        In my opinion America’s “educated” lawmakers are among the most despicably irresponsible people in America. Bad law goes a very long way toward making and supporting bad cops.

        Tinsley Grey Sammons

        • Douglas
          May 11, 2012 at 12:21 pm

          And “bad cops” lobby to perpetuate the cycle. California has long been in the grip of the Correctional Peace Officers Association. Why did I ever get two Masters Degrees in different engineering disciplines? I could have saved the schooling, become a “screw”, and spent the past thirty years bullying felons, and made more money and have a cushier retirement. It’s they that push for the so-called “War on Drugs” as the lion’s share of their “clientele” are drug-addled idiots too stupid to evade law enforcement in pursuit of their respective pathetic habit(s).

    • Bill Jones
      May 11, 2012 at 2:47 am

      You work in the occupation that is the most likely to murder people.

      Hatred, contempt and violent resistance is you rdue.

    • Douglas
      May 11, 2012 at 12:08 pm

      How long have you been on the force, Shawn? Hey, if you’re genuinely protecting and serving, and being a human, that’s great! No one that I’ve read on this site “hates” the police, they hate unjust law enforcement and the mindless automatons that politely mumble, “just doing my job, sir..”.

      • May 11, 2012 at 12:30 pm

        A real problem is that even “good cops” – the psychologically normal ones who joined up for the right reasons, who want to do go after criminals – are forced to spend a great deal of their time enforcing unjust, outrageous laws. Shawn cannot, for example, decline to man a “safety” checkpoint – and subject random motorists to by definition unreasonable search and seizure. He must also arrest people who have harmed no one – but who are found to be in position of an arbitrarily illegal drug. He probably has no choice about issuing a certain number of traffic cites for bullshit “offenses” every month – causing people who harmed no one to hand over large sums of their hard-earned money to the government (and the insurance cartel) “or else.” If he does not perform these functions of “law enforcement,” he will be fired.

        His only option is to quit. Which he won’t do.

        True peace officers are not wanted; because keeping the peace is no longer the function of “law enforcement.”

        Now, Shawn may retort that it is not his fault. He is only doing his job. The law is the law. If you do not like the law, then work to get the law changed, etc.

        It is a tedious evasion.

        Shawn chooses to act as an enforcer of these laws. He – unlike us – doesn’t have a cocked gun pointed at his head.

        He is just as culpable as any apparatchik in Soviet Russia – and yes, Nazi Germany. “I was just following orders” cut no ice at Nuremburg. And it cuts no ice with me, either.

  20. Peter Courtenay Stephens
    May 10, 2012 at 7:30 pm

    It is interesting that the posts have slid into a completely unreal;ted issue and that little has actuially been said about the rapid deployment of the Obama Junta’s Marxist/Fascsist Pole State. The militarization of this nations police and the illegal interception and interdiction of trave,lers now on the nations hyways by the TSA.
    I can claim that during my life I have had more tickets and spent more money on fines and lawyers than anty one posting here. One ticket cost me $13,000. I could buy a very nice Porsche with the money I have spent over 55 years. I have been suspended in at least 5 states. So I am the ranking authority.
    I don’t bend over for any man including a Cop but, I also do not look to make matters worse by getting nasty or argumentative.
    The Police State is what is the issue and it’s ramifications for our Feedom. Not the collapse of the White Race be it true or not.
    Death to Tyrants !

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 10, 2012 at 10:10 pm

      IN A MANNER OF SPEAKING, SHIT HAPPENS

      Bastiat

      THE LAW

      Lincoln

      Tyrant

      Civil War

      Crime of the Nineteenth Century

      600,000 Whites slain

      Then the White enviers/haters jumped in and the subject was off and running.

      It is a tribute to the Character of Eric that he let Freedom of Speech run its unmoderated course on his site. It has been a very revealing experience that opens the door to some serious questions, such as: Why does the United States with its population of more than 310,000,000 need to import new Citizens from Africa . . . or anywhere else for that matter?

      Tinsley Grey Sammons

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 10, 2012 at 10:41 pm

      FINES AND LAWYERS

      What did the lawyers do for you in exchange for the money you paid them?

      tgsam

  21. Len
    May 10, 2012 at 6:41 pm

    Going to have to disagree here somewhat. Seat belt law, yes..we’re able to make our own decisions concerning our safety.

    Speeding is another issue however ( and I say this as one who will take 10 or 15 over). Let’s all roads are privately owned. Well, likely a good number of those owning the roads would have speed limits so as to ensure the safety of those driving so that they do good business. These speed limits would be part of the contract of driving on the roads, and also likely there will be monitors to ensure that people are not violating the contract, and there would be penalties per the contract for violating it, just like any business contract.

    A good question, as you’ve pointed out before, is what is a good speed limit? In a private market, these would probably be higher, and less likelihood of violation.

    • Douglas
      May 11, 2012 at 12:06 pm

      Speed limits and other traffic laws are often more designed as tools of revenue generation rather than serious considerations of safety and/or traffic engineering.

      http://www.motorists.org/press/watch-your-wallet-in-these-10-states

      My fave peeve is US 95 in Oregon. One hundred and twenty-two miles of “double-nickels”, from the McDermitt Indian Reservation all the way to the Idaho border (near Jordan Valley, OR). This on a stretch of fine two-lane blacktop with typically light traffic and mostly level terrain (there are a few interesting gorges and one really significant grade). Judging by the paltry number of souls that actually live there, it’s obvious that the intent of “gotta drive 55″ is to snag impatient motorists travelling between CA/NV and metro Boise. There is an alternate route through Jackpot, NV, but by the time you’ve taken it, yoy may as well have kept it at 60 (admittedly, the Oregon highway patrol does give a fair amount of leeway, they don’t usually ticket anyone below 70 on that road) and just come to peace with it.

  22. Tor Munkov
    May 10, 2012 at 4:46 pm

    What if the 1861 Operation Civil War was a covert op that didn’t free any slaves at all, but rather took over the plantations and enslaved most of the plantation owners to new northern carpet bagger masters? What plantation are you working for?
    http://youtu.be/vb8Rj5xkDPk

    • Douglas
      May 11, 2012 at 11:58 am

      I’m a “transplanted Southener”, Suh…(an Air Force brat born in Metairie, LA, of parents who were CA residents). Stop calling it the “Civil” War…it was an INVASION of a country that freely, legally, and peacefully seceded from the Union that no longer served their interests. It was “Dishonest Abe’s” admitting that the voluntary union of a FEDERAL government serving the interests of the several states and the peoples at large had been replaced by a CENTRAL government that could decide that the several states were now it’s subjects and could not leave w/o it’s deference. That was as of 09 April 1865 at Appomattox. Now, in 2012, the Government is restricting the exit of persons that it believes either owe taxes or may be taking assets out of the country. The road to serfdom has been fully travelled.

      • Tor Munkov
        May 11, 2012 at 6:17 pm

        You are right, sir.

        Republican Holocaust, Yankee Lebensraum, or Gettysburg Massacre is more like it.

  23. louie
    May 10, 2012 at 4:26 pm

    I agree and disagree.
    Most of us will only encounter officers on a traffic stop, or if you need them as a crime victim.
    Generally it’s not a you’re going to get tazered situation.
    Maybe you have enough free cash to be flip or borderline disresepctful with that officer.
    Maybe his ticket quota was reached and this ticket is optional.
    Me?…saying a few “yes sirs” is certainly better than getting that ticket.
    Five minutes of being respectful – maybe even overly – has gotten me out of more than one traffic summons.
    I believe it’s worth it.

    • clark
      May 11, 2012 at 1:48 am

      I think the point of the article and the comments was, your display of respect is actually an act of submission.

      What you exchange for such submission and what it’s worth to you, is your own call.

  24. Mr Paladin
    May 10, 2012 at 3:41 pm

    I’ve found that suburban cops tend to be more civil than their big-city brethren, even when pushed. One September in the ‘burbs I was stopped for exceeding the school speed limit — a week before schools opened! The school speed zone lights were flashing, I thought “WTF!”, rounded a curve and saw a cop standing in the road, waving me over. Double WTF!

    I was pissed! Being treated like a child, expensive ticket on the way, etc., and I let the cop have it. “This is bullshit!” I yelled right away. “The schools aren’t even open yet!”

    “Well, my commander wants us to get the message out ahead of time,” he responded. (Whether that idea makes sense is fodder for another day.)

    Still thinking I was getting a ticket, I continued fussing and cussing, and at one point he began yelling back and almost lost it. But he composed himself and then I heard him say the word “warning,” and I realized no ticket would be issued. So I calmed down and he calmed down. After a short, more civil conversation, he let me go on my way. Five minutes later, in retrospect, I was surprised I wasn’t arrested for “verbally assaulting an officer” or something.

    This happened about twenty years ago, and I haven’t had many encounters with the police recently, but in each case they’ve been polite and reasonable. I suspect that since suburbs are smaller communities and not much “hard crime” happens, the police become less jaded and can afford to be polite and reasonable. I recommend the 1977 non-fiction book “Signal Zero” to gain some insight into police officers’ heads.

  25. Crosby
    May 10, 2012 at 2:41 pm

    Great article and thanks.

  26. mikehell
    May 10, 2012 at 2:38 pm

    Does anyone else here keep expecting Tinsley to say, “Ha ha ha, I got you all! I’m just kidding. I hate racist ‘tards but thought I’d work on my parody of them here.”?

    Anybody?

    • methylamine
      May 10, 2012 at 4:36 pm

      We can only hope. I’m saddened to see someone of otherwise impeccable ideas lapse into a collectivist/eugenicist mode.

      A logical blindspot the size of Texas.

      If one were to substitute “culture” for “race”, what he says would almost make sense; it would still be collectivist, though, because I can think personally of dozens of exceptions.

      But calling it “race” puts it into both camps. It’s illogical, irrational, and frankly stupid.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 10, 2012 at 6:29 pm

      I do hope that my fellow White Folks will judge me by what I actually wrote instead of basing their opinion of me on what certain intellectually dishonest others would have them think that I wrote.

      I really care nothing for other races, other than to insist that they have equal protection of the laws that do not contravene the Principles underpinning the unamendable Unanimous Declaration.

      There is nothing more despicable than attempting to make others believe what you yourself know is untrue.

      WE hold these Truths…

      Tinsley Grey Sammons, author of AMERICA’S FORSAKEN PROMISE

  27. Tor Munkov
    May 10, 2012 at 12:45 pm

    Transcript of a modern “white” person’s traffic stop.

    Yeah But No But Yeah But No But Shut Up Officer, I wasn’t even supposed to be anywhere near this road until Meredith called and started stirring it all up or something or nothing.

    http://youtu.be/1mpMEnxcVkA

  28. Tor Munkov
    May 10, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    The ominous changes in America all stem from one root cause. The fiat has hit the fan. For every ounce of precious metal, gems, oil, pork belly, there are 1000’s of competing national IOUs.
    Gold, silver, and almost everything else tangible and durable for the long term is going to skyrocket, we are in the 6th year of a great depression and the wheels are coming off.
    http://www.forecast-chart.com/graph-housing-starts.html
    Every petty official and podunk village is in a mad dash to get their hands on something with real value, the greenbacks are the bait to lure you into their snares.
    All the Western Central Banks are counting Gold and Assets on the Same Footing! as of equal value. That is some serious Enron b@ll shit, you either have assets or your don’t. There is no such thing as a gold receivable.
    There is about 6 trillion in gold and 22 billion in silver actually available right now, everything else is a mess of pottage.
    You should either own hard assets, or have a hard skill that can earn your living no matter what happens to the nations’ economy.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=262NPWpzBnE

  29. Liberty 2012
    May 10, 2012 at 11:17 am

    Civility and Servility are Separate Things

  30. May 10, 2012 at 8:08 am

    Eric : You and I think alike. You never write a bad column. It used to be serve and protect – no more. Police are revenue agents and unfortunately police work draws to its ranks many dominating, meddlesome, confrontational, bully types who have trouble leaving others alone. Yes, all should read Tom DiLorenzo’s great books. Tom is a fine fellow – I’ve gotten nice e-mail responses from him. LRC writers are a great, freedom-loving group. Of course I tell all to read LRC and I forward your columns around…I miss Joe Sobran, Sam Francis and Paul Harvey.

    • May 10, 2012 at 9:50 am

      Thanks, MM!

      I knew Sam (briefly and slightly). He was still at The Washington Times when I first went to work there in the early ’90s. He was, of course, fired not long afterward.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 10, 2012 at 12:15 pm

      REVENUE AGENTS

      Indeed they are. Kathy just coughed up 160 bucks for driving thru what is obviously a revenue collecting speed trap in Gonzales, LA. There was little traffic and no school on that beautiful Sunday morning. The speed limit suddenly changes at least three times on Hwy 44 and she was driving a safe 40 mph when the limit was suddenly reduced to 25. Unfortunately for us, the steroid bloated motorcycle gorillas were lurking with their radar*.

      Kathy is 65 and has never had an accident or a ticket. I can only wonder how much revenue was generated that day, law-extorted from persons who were endangering no one.

      We had just left Home Depot on that beautiful spring morning and were happily discussing the improvements to our patio that we planned to make that day. Two harmless Senior Citizens just trying to enjoy the evening of our lives. Of course, the outrage and frustration that we felt after being trapped by the revenue crooks put a damper on our spirits and spoiled our day. A hundred and sixty bucks for a “violation” that only a uniformed thug with radar would even have noticed on a quiet Sunday with no school and little traffic.

      Tinsley Grey Sammons (1936 –)

      *A technology that occurred to Tesla and was developed by the British in time for the outnumbered Royal Air Force to defeat the powerful Luftwaffe during the Battle of Britain in WWII. It is unlikely that either of the motorcycle gorillas had any knowledge of how and why radar actually works. The same is likely true of the courthouse crew that shares in the legal plunder.

      • Mr Paladin
        May 10, 2012 at 3:49 pm

        This kind of thing pisses me off. It turns people off to the police. If they want to WARN you that going too fast in that spot might lead to an accident, fine. But making you PAY for that information is bull. IMHO, government has no right to do anything but post warning signs and recommended speeds on roadways; if you ignore them it’s at your own peril, and you are responsible for any damage you might cause. Gov’t has no right to fine you for ignoring their recommendations, especially in cases where you’re exceeding their ultra-conservative mph recommendation on a low-trafficked road.

        • marcus sammons
          May 23, 2012 at 4:13 am

          THE LAW SUCKS. NO RESPCT.

  31. Georgiaboy61
    May 10, 2012 at 6:06 am

    Eric, a very well-done article, but permit me to add something further: Americans have grown far too deferential to government employees of all kinds, not only cops. One of the key means by which the citizens of this nation are kept in line is via psychological conditioning; each time one calls a judge or legislator “Your Honor” or “The Honorable,” that conditioning is strengthened. Politicians speak of being “public servants” and of “having served” in office – justifications they use to extort ridiculous benefits and undeserved pensions from us, and a means by which they continue to hold power over us. It isn’t going to be easy to unlearn these habits of deference, or without cost, but it has to be done if we the people are to stuff govt. back within its constitutional box.

    • May 10, 2012 at 9:57 am

      GB,

      You make a great point –

      “Judge” is much better than “your honor” – and so on. I’m especially weary of the worshipful attitude we’re supposed to have toward soldiers (note – not “our troops”). I do not thank them for their service.

  32. clark
    May 10, 2012 at 5:47 am

    Another excellent video to see: What happens after you refuse a police search (in layman’s terms.)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iXNhL2pkb0s

    Also, here’s a very cool comment from Claire Wolfe’s blog where I found the video:

    just waiting Says:
    May 9th, 2012 at 1:44 pm

    My daughter was taught these lessons at an early age, especially to ask am I free to go and if no, why not.

    She had her drivers license for a couple of months when her and a girlfriend got pulled over for being 2 young girls in a car. The cops in town are notorious for smelling marijuana on everyone they pull over.

    When they asked my daughter for consent to search, she said no, and asked if she was free to go. Her friend almost had a heart attack “what do you mean no?” She said “my dad’ll take my car if he finds out I consented to a search” (note: her and her friend were both clean, sober, straight A HS students)

    At that point, they told her they smelled burnt marijuana, made her get out, and searched her car. They found nothing. She again asked if she was free to go. She took her purse when she got out, they asked to search that and she told them since they found nothing in the car, she refused searching her purse as well. For the third time, she asked if she was free to go. Thats when the cop said he was calling for the sniffer dog. She said go ahead, call, but you’ve searched and found nothing, you have no grounds to detain me, I’m not waiting.
    The cop threatened to call her parents. She burst out laughing “Please do, and can you do it on speaker so I can hear what my Dad has to say to you?”
    She came home with this tale and no tickets to a very proud papa.

    • May 10, 2012 at 9:59 am

      Outstanding, Clarke!

      That story made my morning!

  33. Tor Munkov
    May 10, 2012 at 5:24 am

    Like cockroaches, every one of these pests you catch on video means at least 200 more you don’t see.

    Taser probe pierces 14 year old girl’s cranium and lodges in brain.
    http://youtu.be/wMeL6GUow24

    Former Tucumcari, NM Police Chief Roger Hatcher was fired but has successfully scurried to a new position as Deputy Sheriff of Roosevelt County, NM.
    http://rcsonm.org/deputies/hatcher.html

  34. hp
    May 10, 2012 at 4:30 am

    I look forward each year to reminding any “officers” I encounter of this little tidbit.
    I don’t do it in a threatening manner, more an offhand casual reminder. Something to think about.

    On opening day of deer season here in Pa. there are some 800,000 men and women ‘out and about’ armed with high powered rifles and pistols.

    One state. 800,000 on day 1

    Most are outdoors type people, the kind a state like Pa. has always been full of. They shoot pretty well (been shooting most of their lives) and a whole lot of them are veterans. Not only veterans but also the fathers and mothers, son and daughters, friends and neighbors of veterans.

    Just saying.

    • graham
      May 14, 2012 at 12:23 am

      I declare it open season… start at the crack of dawn… no limit either

  35. michael.white
    May 10, 2012 at 4:23 am

    I try to avoid the cops by either driving a borderline beater-looking car (old CJ or Land Rover) or taking the “scenic” route – cops don’t hang out on roads that have only a few cars an hour.

    I travel to Mexico a couple times a year. The cops & military there have always been courteous to me, even when asking for a bribe :). Even the guys working the border are usually decent enough. They’ve no more than supficially looked into my car.

    But I hate crossing back into the US. Perhaps it’s my obvious contempt for the border patrol, but my CJ used to get searched thoroughly two out of every three crossings. They even X-rayed it once – a CJ with an open bed, no panels to hide anything, and minimal drive train. And I’ve been commanded to empty my pockets on more than one occassion. One of the border patrol agents even bragged how I had almost no rights there and the cops loved working there because they didn’t have to worry about anything like due process. The first thought that entered my head (which fortunately stayed there) was “Sort of like a pedophile running an elementary school”.

    I’ve learned to bring a decent book when crossing back over. I get to ignore the border agents and it keeps me calm enough that my anger doesn’t show through.

    • May 10, 2012 at 10:10 am

      Hey Mike,

      This – “Sort of like a pedophile running an elementary school” – cuts right to the bone. It’d exactly what “law enforcement” has become: Systematic abuse in the name of protection by those ostensibly there to do the protection. Great analogy!

  36. liberranter
    May 9, 2012 at 7:23 pm

    Or at least, might get him to thinking.

    Nope, not a chance – at least not if he/she/it is an “active duty” cop. If these creatures were capable of critical, independent thought, they’d already be gainfully employed in what little remains of the productive private sector. In fact, they would almost certainly never have even CONSIDERED “employment” in “law enforcement” in the first place.

  37. Tor Munkov
    May 9, 2012 at 5:56 pm

    Dad, They Are Killing Me

    http://fullertonstories.com/video-details-surprise-many-at-thomas-trial-preliminary-hearing/

    From Pelosigrad to Bloombergistan, we are a police
    state from sea to fighter jet patroled sea. This incident occurred within the Hollywood Pravda Disney Progaganda District last year.

    The video of Kelly Thomas’ Public Safety Sacrifice
    ends with medics taking Thomas from a spot covered
    with a large bloodstain, while police gather their
    equipment and discuss the struggle.

    “We ran out of options so I got the end of my Taser
    and I probably… I just start smashing his face to hell,”
    Cicinelli said.
    Earlier in the day, Fullerton Fire Capt. Ron Stancyk
    testified that he found the shirtless, handcuffed
    Thomas lying on the ground. His skin was ashen, his
    hair and face bloody, and he was breathing slowly, but
    nothing was being done,” Stancyk, a Fullerton
    paramedic with 20 years of experience, told the court.

    Praetor Ramos
    http://woofie4.pixiq.com/files/ramos_2.jpg

    Praetor Cicinelli
    http://t.qkme.me/353d7r.jpg

    Kelly Thomas Aftermath
    http://woofie4.pixiq.com/files/kelly_thomas_crime_scene.jpg

    http://woofie4.pixiq.com/files/thomas2_6.jpg

    The city surveillance video that shows a group of Fullerton police officers beating a homeless mentally ill man to death last year was finally released and it layed to rest any argument that Kelly Thomas was a threat to anyone.

    The shocking video, was finally released to the media on May 7th, 2012.

    “Now you see my fists?” Fullerton police officer

    Manny Ramos asked Thomas while slipping on a pair of latex gloves.
    “Yeah, what about them?” Thomas responded.
    “They are getting ready to fuck you up,” said Ramos, a burly cop who appears to outweigh Thomas by 100 pounds.
    “Well, start punching,” Thomas responds, never once displaying any physical aggression towards Ramos.

    Moments later, as Thomas is standing while Ramos is ordering him to get on his “fucking knees,” Fullerton cop Joseph Wolfe, who is not charged in the case, walks up and starts beating his legs with a baton. Then Ramos gets into the act and Thomas takes off
    running. Ramos and Fullerton cop Jay Cicinelli catch
    up to him and mount him as Thomas repeatedly apologizes and tells them he is unable to breathe.

    The cops keep telling him to put his hands behind his back and lay on his stomach, but they are both laying on top of him, making it impossible to even breathe, much less move.
    As the video continues, one of the cops can be seen kneeing him.
    “Please, I can’t breathe,” Thomas pleads as the officers keep telling him to put his hands behind his “fucking back.”
    The cops keep telling him to “relax” to which he
    responds, “I can’t, dude.”
    More cops eventually arrive and a little more than
    four minutes into the video, they start tasing him.
    And a little after five minutes into the video, as three
    cops are piled on top of him, beating him, tasing him,
    one cop looks up at another cop who just arrived on
    the scene and says, “help us.”

    At one point Kelly yells out, “Dad, they are killing me.”
    Even after seven minutes into the video, when six
    cops are on top of him and all Thomas is doing is
    crying for his father, they keep telling him to “relax.”

    Last year, Ron Thomas, Kelly’s father, a retired
    Orange County Sheriff’s deputy, said the City of
    Fullerton offered him $900,000 to just go away.
    Thomas was pronounced dead on July 10, five days
    after the beating that left him in a coma.

    When a Fullerton paramedic with 20 years of
    experience was finally called to the scene, Ramos
    demanded treatment for a scrape on his elbow while
    Kelly lay dying a few feet away like some kind of
    insignificant animal carcass.

  38. Tor Munkov
    May 9, 2012 at 2:29 pm

    A California handicapped lady riding the bus gets sucker punched in the face by a fat pig deputy sheriff.

    http://youtu.be/oDsDNkQKgi4

    • May 9, 2012 at 2:42 pm

      Despicable.

      One thing that seems to always be the case, too: The thug is a fat slob who’d get his ass handed to him in a fair fight.

      • liberranter
        May 9, 2012 at 7:57 pm

        Yep, exactly. That’s why the little castrati bitches are never far away from a backup army of other cowardly castrati bitches. Get one of them by themselves, however, and even if they’re in a ‘roid-induced rage it would be easy to tear them limb from limb.

        I’m waiting for the debut of the first YouTube video of some thugscum pig getting beaten to a bloody pulp by a crowd of “turds” after he crosses the ultimate line.

        • david
          May 10, 2012 at 5:06 am

          Several years back Michael Carbajal, the lightweight champ, was filling his gas tank when a drunk, obnoxious, off-duty Mesa, AZ cop started harassing him. Mike backed of as much as possible but the retard cop (redundant, I know) kept at him. Finally when Mike had no other recourse he let loose with a barrage of blows that put the dumbass on his backside. All of this was caught on tape and was such a joy to watch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • May 10, 2012 at 10:06 am

            Hopefully, he was not charged with “assaulting” the “officer.”

          • methylamine
            May 10, 2012 at 4:29 pm

            Oh, I’d pay money to see that video!

  39. May 9, 2012 at 12:54 pm

    Precisely that. It’s concentrated in certain areas, though, like some KwaZulu-Natal villages where something like 80% of the population is HIV-positive.

    • methylamine
      May 9, 2012 at 2:47 pm

      Does anyone here lend credence to the theory that HIV/AIDS is an engineered bioweapon?

      There are some compelling arguments in that direction.

      • Tor Munkov
        May 9, 2012 at 3:32 pm

        1.8 million die of AIDS each year and it is not increasing. Hepatitis kills a lot more than that.
        The AIDS “epidemic” arose from bureaucratic reclassification of certain blood pathogen deaths to include cases of malaria, generally unhygenic lifestyles, living conditions and poverty.

  40. mikehell
    May 9, 2012 at 12:38 pm

    Yikes, Ned! What has happened to life expectancy in southern Africa since 1994? Aids?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Life_expectancy_in_some_Southern_African_countries_1958_to_2003.png

  41. May 9, 2012 at 12:17 pm

    It’s still better than it was before. At least there’s lively debate these days (though we have a sort of national talent for getting the issues completely wrong!). But it is steadily sliding back.

    • methylamine
      May 9, 2012 at 2:46 pm

      Hello Ned, fellow (ex) countryman!
      Where in SA do you live?

      We emigrated from Johannesburg. I still miss the beautiful Veld weather.

      Ja–my parents escaped the “African disease”. One man, one vote, one time.

      That son-of-a-bitch Cecil Rhodes set the wheels in motion when he “conquered” the Boers; what we’re seeing now is the inevitable outcome.

  42. May 9, 2012 at 9:41 am

    Here in South Africa the cops have gone back to a military rank structure after a few short, golden years beginning with the Mandela presidency. During the apartheid years the idea of a police colonel always struck me as peculiarly banana-republicish; consequently I had great hopes in ’94 when the ranks changed to civilized ones like inspector and superintendent. And I was not disappointed: for a time police behaviour improved drastically.

    Now the rank structure has gone back to the old way, and so is police behaviour …

    • May 9, 2012 at 9:58 am

      I’ve also noticed the correlation. And more and more in this country, you see “four star” sheriffs, the “colonels” you mention – and so on – as opposed to just sheriff or officer.

    • mikehell
      May 9, 2012 at 11:09 am

      Ned,
      Are you saying that the ‘hope and change’ rhetoric of the Mandela years has been flushed down the political commode? Say it ain’t so!

    • Boothe
      May 9, 2012 at 6:07 pm

      Ned, as Eric points out, our police in the USSA routinely display military insignia of grade such as colonel, captain, sergeant, etc. This is nothing new though. This has especially been the case in big city police forces (hence mayor Bloomberg saying he has an army in the NYPD). I’d say this concept in Amerika goes all the way back to the hostile occupation of the Southern States after the war of federal aggression. It may even have its roots in the pre-state situation in some of the territories. When California became a territory it was necessary to “occupy” it (i.e. to put men at arms on the soil to let the rest of the world know who “owns” it). I have read in the past that the constabulary (or police in modern parlance) was that occupying force. A basic principle of the Law of War is that when a sovereign occupies a territory with its military, that territory is subject to the will of the sovereign. When you see men on the streets with guns, in uniform, wearing insignia of grade, that enjoy special privileges you do not and can do things to you that you don’t dare defend against on pain of death even when you’re in the right, then you live in an occupied country. I think the reason you saw a return to militarized police in your country is because this is the worldwide law enforcement paradigm the transnational banksters want in place. Actual civilian peace keepers genuinely charged with protecting our property rights might ultimately have to carry out the arrests and prosecution of some of the “elite” for little things like fraud, counterfeiting, grand theft, inciting riots, illegal wars, etc. Now we can’t have that, can we?

    • liberranter
      May 9, 2012 at 7:47 pm

      I think this trend is international. Militarized “law enforcement” seems to be the norm everywhere. No doubt there’s a U.N. dimension to the trend.

  43. DD
    May 9, 2012 at 5:20 am

    The entire point of The Terrorist’s public schools and TV broadcasts is to make you cower to, and obey “external authorities”…Them. The Terrorist’s agents in their TV broadcasts always refer to the proletariat psycho-parasite scum in blue government costumes as “Authorities” and The Terrorists in Congress as “Lawmakers” or even the more pathetic “Leaders”.

    Anyone who refers to politicians as “Leaders” needs to be ejected from civil society.

    All statist terrorists (All scum who claim to own any aspect of your life) get violently angry when you don’t cower. Indoctrinated runt Clover is basically a childish envy-ridden parasitic psychopath.

    • May 9, 2012 at 10:06 am

      Agree, DD!

      They don’t even put forward the pretense of being more than Enforcers anymore. I’ll be damned if I call one “sir.”

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 9, 2012 at 3:51 pm

      I never refer to politicians as “Leaders” nor do I let doing so go unchallenged. They are only “followers” who will follow the money for as long as their crimes go unchallenged.

      A man like Ron Paul is a political anomaly. Would that there were more like him.

      tgsam

  44. clark
    May 9, 2012 at 4:59 am

    I’ve read several online comments elsewhere to the effect that, “I never have problems with the cops like in all these stories of cops gone bad. They’re always nice and respectful to me.”

    I wonder if, along with saying, “Yes sir.” these People always take a submissive posture and submissive tone of voice without even realizing that’s what they are doing? And that’s why they have no problems, that and they always toe-the-line except for doing minor stuff like 10-over speeding?

    Insert image of dog rolled over on it’s back in a submissive posture, here X.

    Not that being submissive helps in many cases. Or maybe it does help? I don’t know, it’s hard to say. Maybe in every instance of being submissive and a cop lets someone off the cop was going to do it anyways without the submissiveness?
    It’s just something I was thinking about.

    Also, is there anyone here who hasn’t seen the video, Don’t Talk to the Police by Professor James Duane? If so, you should see it.

    Myself, I never say officer or sir. Never. And I never understood those who do.

    • May 9, 2012 at 10:11 am

      Years ago, before the country turned this corner, I would try to be deferential in the hope that I could talk my way out of the ticket. It worked sometimes, too.

      But I’ve gotten to the point that I have so much contempt for what they do – insofar as issuing tickets and harassing people over victimless “crimes” – that the best I can do is to keep myself under control during the interaction. I say virtually nothing. This guarantees a ticket, of course. But I retain my self-respect and have hopefully conveyed my utter loathing to the “officer.”

  45. dom
    May 9, 2012 at 1:02 am

    What kind of person enjoys hiding like some kind of creep waiting for people to make a foul? Then they get all hot when they catch you as if you just executed a personal tort on them. I hate cops.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 9, 2012 at 1:55 am

      Legal Plundering

      Frederic’ Bastiat nailed it more than 160 years ago. THE LAW can be downloaded free from sources on the Internet. In my opinion every freedom loving American would benefit by having a copy to study often.

      Whenever I know that I’m in for an otherwise boring wait, I always take along some material that will make me a more effective Citizen. Most of what I carry fits into a pocket along with a small notebook. I often also take along an inexpensive usb memory stick full of good material. If and when I encounter someone that I think might benefit from it I give it to him or her.

      tgsam

      • May 9, 2012 at 10:52 am

        In addition to Bastiat, I also urge people to read Tom DiLorenzo’s books about Lincoln and the (so-called) Civil War.It is imperative, if we are to recover our senses, that we as a people come to understand the truth about the war between the states – or more accurately, the war of federal aggression. Lincoln was the ur tyrant – the first one to spray shit all over the Constitution in principle, not just here and there. It is because of him that we have what we have today.

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 9, 2012 at 12:17 pm

          LINCOLN

          Unfortunately, few minds can get past “Slavery is wrong.” It never occurs to them that the slaughter of 600,000 mostly young White boys and men in the 1860s, supposedly to end something that the Industrial Revolution had already doomed, was surely the Crime of the Century.

          At least when a machine has outlived its usefulness you can recycle it or simply “Throw it in the woods.” in the hope that it will do no harm. Not so with living entities.

          If what I see daily is any indication, the aftermath of slavery and Lincoln’s Crime spells extinction for the White Race in North America. Miscegenation is irreversible, yet more consideration has been given the snail darter than has been given the survival of the White Race in America.

          By the time Whites in general develop an Identity Awareness their number will be much too small for the race to survive in any meaningful way. The magnificent Idea called, The United States of America will not outlive the extinction of the race of men that created it.

          Tinsley Grey Sammons (1936 –)

          • methylamine
            May 9, 2012 at 2:41 pm

            TGS we agree wholeheartedly on a number of issues–but not this one.

            Ideology, philosophy, principles have nothing to do with race.

            They are issues of character, upbringing, moral fiber, the very content of one’s soul.

            I’ll grant you that (by sheer happenstance) the holders of the classical liberal, reformation, free market, individual liberty ideals who founded this country were Anglo-Saxons in the original sense.

            But those ideas aren’t genetic; they’re derived from careful study and logic, and supported by a framework of ethics and morals conceivable by any astute mind.

            So: my miscegenated children (half Asian Indian, half South African*) will, intellectually and spiritually speaking, kick the asses of any purebred Anglo-Saxon descendant who’s allowed himself to degenerate morally to the point that 80% of Americans have.

            While that pure white poisons himself with Doritos, fluoride, and Dancing with the Stars…my kids will be slaying the dragon his apathy has created.

            You’ve offended, sir, and I require your response.

            * and that half South African is half English/Scottish, half Dutch on my side

          • May 9, 2012 at 3:00 pm

            You beat me to it, Meth!

            How Dutch is the Dutch bit? My 75% Dutch is thoroughly shot through with spatterings of Khoi-San. My ancestors could hardly survive 330 years on this continent without picking up a goodly bit. My maternal grandmother’s family is descended from a Khoi-San slave woman.

            I’ve just seen your other post on the “What’s Happening?” thing on the right. I’m in Cape Town, born here but spent many years up in Pretoria.

            I’ll comment on your left/right post this evening when I have a bit of leisure (I mainly agree.)

          • methylamine
            May 9, 2012 at 3:53 pm

            @Ned:

            Ja, I’m supposedly 6% Hottentot but my mom’s the classic Afrikaner blond-haired, blue-eyed Dutch descendant…no African there. Dad’s engels through and through.

            My dad and I tan really well.

            Both sets of family arrived in the early 1600’s; we’re more native than any of the so-called “natives” except the Hottentots. Nobody here understands that neither white nor black were aboriginal in S. Africa–just the Hottentots.

            Ned please tell me this; if I were to re-obtain my SA passport, would you recommend Cape Town as a bug-out? Or should I take my chances in Chile?

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 9, 2012 at 4:02 pm

            Nothing evokes an unfavorable and often even a verbally vicious reaction more quickly than a call for White Solidarity dedicated to avoiding White Extinction.

            tgsam

          • May 9, 2012 at 4:29 pm

            TGS: And with good reason.

            Meth: So far so good, but there are some disturbing developments. On the other hand the first real non-racial dissent is emerging in developments like the Unemployed People’s Movement (http://www.abahlali.org/)

            I’ve been noting a lot of interest in Argentina and Chile among the liberty-minded, though.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 9, 2012 at 5:08 pm

            “Good reason?”

            What good reason Ned?

            tgsam

          • methylamine
            May 9, 2012 at 6:38 pm

            @tgsam–

            “Good reason” being:

            Aligning yourself with a particular race in support of a philosophy makes no sense; it is not the race that imparts the philosophy.

            “Race” is a nebulous concept, anyway. We’re all about 4-6% Neanderthal; we’re almost indistinguishable from chimpanzees genetically, and the differences between “races” is miniscule.

            Now culturethat I can get behind, because it is the dying of the culture I’m worried about…particularly, the culture promulgated by our intellectual ancestors–Jefferson, Locke, etc.

            See, they (Jefferson et al) are not my genetic ancestors…except very loosely. In fact Mary Stuart WAS my ancestor; should I hew to her philosophy therefore? And Murray Rothbard–a short, plump, Jewish guy–would have far more in common with me philosophically than, say, a Skull and Bones alumnus with Scottish blood.

            Do you understand TG? Philosophy, intellect, character, and soul are not transmitted via semen.

            One could argue for a left- or right-shifted distribution of intelligence based on race; in fact “The Bell Curve” did just that and stuck a fist in the hornet’s nest with it.

            And does “race” (too associated with skin color) often coincide with culture? Yes. But is it inevitable? No.

            What’s your fear? Do you imagine that by preserving some idea of racial purity, you’ll guarantee philosophical or moral purity as well?

            Because that’s the idea I find laughable.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 9, 2012 at 8:40 pm

            Laugh all you want, I will continue urging my fellow Whites to take pride in their Identity as such and do what they can to avoid White Extinction. I can think of no greater avoidable tragedy than the extinction of my race. Volumes of blathering are incapable of changing my feelings about it.

            Extinction is forever.

            tgsam

          • mikehell
            May 9, 2012 at 10:02 pm

            Tinsley, I’m surprised to hear you espouse a collectivist worldview with respect to skin color. Everything else I’ve read here indicated that you were a radical individualist. Guess we all have our contradictions, eh?

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 9, 2012 at 11:01 pm

            Mikehell, what “contradiction”? Have you not noticed that nowhere have I advocated the use of government force. I merely encourage my fellow Whites to voluntarily choose White mates. I also encourage Whites to have an Identity Awareness strong enough to resist the extinction of their race. In my opinion White Extinction would be a tragedy without equal.

            tgsam

          • BrentP
            May 9, 2012 at 11:07 pm

            Skin color? Bah.

            As many here may remember I live in a giant metro area. People are here from all colors and cultures. Guess what? It’s not a person’s ancestry that is the best indicator of whether or not I’ll get along with them, it’s if they grew up on the south side or the north side or somewhere else entirely.

            Worrying about genetic traits is what the control freaks do. Much of their desire to control stems from their preoccupations with bloodlines and eugenics.

            If genetics really mattered so much the ruling class would not need government schools and other mechanisms to maintain their control. It is odd that this is not understood, that if they were truly genetically superior they would not need these scams. They would not need to fear people ‘waking up’ in mass. We would all be incapable of waking up.

            I think Randolf and Mortimer Duke are pretty good characters to represent what the ruling class thinks of other people. That we are just their experiment to do with as they will.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 9, 2012 at 11:31 pm

            Skin Deep?

            Not only would it be extremely sad but it would also be rather dull and uninteresting to see a Miss America lineup without a single redhead, blonde, or brunette.

            tgsam

          • dom
            May 10, 2012 at 12:45 am

            The only places race/genetics really seem to matter is in prison, or in a gang. Neither of which I give me shit about. My wife is Japanese and I am white. Our daughter is a brunette. Things will be okay.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 10, 2012 at 1:36 am

            I don’t see Japanese bringing about the Browning of America nor do Japanese with whom I’ve been acquainted express a particular affection for Gaijin in great numbers.

            I’m betting that most Japanese in Japan would be rather upset at the idea of assimilating twenty million* Blacks.

            As for me, if Blacks collectively express a desire to not mix genes with Whites I assure you I’ll do nothing to discourage them.

            tgsam

            *A guesstimate based on the comparison of the population of Japan with the White population in America.

          • Mike in Spotsy
            May 10, 2012 at 2:03 am

            My fiancee is the finest woman I have ever known. Oh, and she is black. We are past the age where we will be having children, but if I had met her years ago, I would have rejoiced in our mixed race children. And we would have tried to raise them not to be bigots.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 10, 2012 at 3:33 am

            So what? Although it troubles me to see the White Race headed for extinction, I’m certainly not going to advocate creating and ratifying a law to give government the power to deny you your freedom of choice.

            I wonder if little Iceland will be the last White nation left in the world? Had I the wealth to afford it, I would spend my remaining summers in Iceland where I would not be constantly reminded of what the future holds for America.

            tgsam

          • clark
            May 10, 2012 at 3:44 am

            Tinsley Grey Sammons wrote, “Volumes of blathering are incapable of changing my feelings about it.”

            Reminds me of some lyrics, “Feelings, nothing more than feelings.”

            Also reminds me of The Fuzzy Logic of Useful Idiots:

            http://www.alt-market.com/neithercorp/press/2010/11/the-fuzzy-logic-of-useful-idiots/

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 10, 2012 at 3:58 am

            Whatever “Fuzzy” thinking there is on this thread certainly isn’t mine. If the Out of Olduvai and Out of Africa evidence is believable, it strikes me as insane to reverse the last hundred thousand or more years of evolution.

            tgsam

          • methylamine
            May 10, 2012 at 4:10 am

            @TGS:

            The magnificent Idea called, The United States of America will not outlive the extinction of the race of men that created it.

            Absolute hogwash. The “race” of men who created it are the same white, bloated, hooting thugs juggling their fat panuses on national TV at staged gladiator events called “football”.

            How do you hold such an irrational belief–that somehow “race” determines philosophy?

            If instead you appealed to aesthetics, it would somehow be more understandable.

            Had I the wealth to afford it, I would spend my remaining summers in Iceland where I would not be constantly reminded of what the future holds for America.

            I simply cannot fathom that, except purely as an aesthetic choice. What do you have in common with Icelanders? Skin color? But philosophically, what? And do you share that with every Icelander? Are they a hive-mind collective, who think in “white” ways and are congenial to your “white” thinking? And you imply that’s it’s the browning of America that’s responsible for its decline.

            “Identity awareness” as you term it and define it, is nothing more than base eugenics–a discredited art–and collectivism.

            Are you aware that the globalist banksters, particularly the most elite among them, are “white”? I thought all “white” was good and noble?

            Endless blathering? No, you’ve had half a dozen capably-written and logical rebuttals and you’ve answered with the childish equivalent of “la la la la la I’m not listening” and “that’s what I believe so NYAAA”.

            It’s a shockingly stupid thought from an otherwise intelligent mind.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 10, 2012 at 1:28 pm

            The worst thing that Whites do today is run for cover instead of defending their right to exist as a race.

            It’s sickening to see Whites run for cover or become apologetic for their very existence at the mere mention of the R word. But I suppose that there are economic and other “reasons” for their lack of courage in the face of bullshit and unlawful force.

            Being the Lone Defender is tiresome but I’m damned proud of my White Race and I will continue to advocate White Pride, White Solidarity, and perpetuation of the White Race. All the blathering imaginable will never change the way that I feel about White Survival.

            Again, if Blacks advocate the exclusion of Whites from their gene pool, I have no objection.

            Google: colorism. It is both interesting and profoundly revealing.

            Tinsley Grey Sammons

          • That One Guy
            May 10, 2012 at 3:03 pm

            You’re not the only one. I just don’t bother with it here anymore because I know it’s an exercise in futility. The libertarian’s aversion to any group identity whatsoever forces him to swallow the globalist program of multiculturalism in a suicidal adherence to principle rather than stray from the absolutist narrative his ideology forces him to accept.

            You and I both know why folks leave the flatlands for the mountains, and it ain’t traffic or Republicans. We also know that when TSHTF all this high-minded new thinking about race will go out the window and all these guys will get back to baser instincts once they learn the hard way that groups exist independent of the state. Their very survival will depend on it.

            Thousands of years of history is on our side Tinsley. Just like the Romans didn’t embrace and celebrate the culture of the Dacians, and the Pilgrims didn’t reject Puritanism to live in wigwams and wear loincloths, the various incompatible races flooding into America today will almost certainly not embrace Jeffersonian ideas of liberty, just like they’re rejecting the culture and ways of France, Britain, Scandinavia, and most of the rest of Europe for the ways of their own homelands.

            Anthropologists will puzzle for hundreds of years over how the inheritors of Western culture and civilization gladly opened their own veins and gave it away without the least bit of struggle. It’s a singular peculiarity in the historical record. Extinction is definitely forever.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 10, 2012 at 3:26 pm

            Thanks for coming in That One Guy. I was beginning to feel like a brave soldier must feel when he charges to the top of the enemy berm, takes a moment to look over his soldier, and realizes that he is all alone.

            Being White and defending the Race can sure be lonely at times. And I have a sickening feeling that it is going to get much lonelier.

            tgsam

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 10, 2012 at 3:36 pm

            Takes a moment to look over his shoulder…

          • Tor Munkov
            May 10, 2012 at 3:51 pm

            Lincoln was a railroad lawyer. He negated countless individual property rights and decreed their being part of the railroad right away.
            This public property eminent domain theory, is infinitely expandable to include highways, streets, parks, waterways, airspace and so on until there is no private property at all.

            I get along fine with racists, should you be one of them, as long as you respect the non-aggression and non-interference principles. If you hire a Scotsman, and you’re too lazy to evaluate him individually, you can hope that he is true to his ethnic brand name and has the known attributes and performance metrics ascribed to Scotsmen.

            In our absurd Chihuahua eat Rottweiler society, racism is regarded as a crime if practiced by a majority, yet regarded as an inalienable right if practiced by a minority. Where racists tend to go afoul, is when they jump on the statist bandwagon and advocate plundering, enslaving, or exiling their fellow men who are of a different race.

            Like all collectivisms, racism is a quest for the unearned. It is a quest for automatic knowledge—for an automatic evaluation of men’s characters that bypasses the responsibility of exercising rational or moral judgment—and, above all, a quest for an automatic pseudo-self-esteem.

            Racism is an ancient, crudely primitive form of determinism and collectivism. It is the notion of ascribing moral, social or political significance to your genetic lineage—the notion that your intellectual and characterological traits are produced and transmitted by your internal body chemistry.

            Which means, in practice, that a your are to be judged, not by your own character and actions, but by the characters and actions of a collective of your ancestors.

            Racism claims that the contents of your mind are inherited; that a man’s convictions, values and character are determined before he is born, by physical factors beyond his control. This is the caveman’s version of the doctrine of innate ideas—or of inherited knowledge—which has been thoroughly refuted by philosophy and science. Racism is a doctrine of, by and for brutes. It is a barnyard or stock-farm version of collectivism, appropriate to a mentality that differentiates between various breeds of animals, but not between animals and men.

            Racism invalidates the specific attribute which distinguishes man from all other living species: his rational faculty. It ignores reason and choice and replaces them with chemical predestination.

            If I am a moron, it is so regardless of the number of geniuses who share my same racial origin.

            If I am a genius, it is so regardless of the number of morons who belong to the same race, even if my race as a whole is the stupidest race.

            A belief in your culture being superior to all others is chauvinism if claimed by a majority, and then using doublethink, it is “ethnic” pride if claimed by a minority.

            The optimal social and economic arrangement is for the majority to allow minorities to pursue their own cultures as long as they do it peacefully, unobtrusively and without leaching or expecting bailouts from the more successful dominant majority culture.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 10, 2012 at 4:02 pm

            AESTHETIC CHOICE?

            Gladly. Try this:

            SKIN DEEP
            by
            Tinsley Grey Sammons (1936 –)
            bastlaw@yahoo.com

            There is nothing unnatural about so-called racism. In fact, it is the pretended absence of it that is unnatural. Unfortunately for the White Race, fifty years of government pressure and media propaganda have caused most Whites to forsake their Genetic Identity. Government force and media propaganda have been so successful that the White Race is meekly headed toward extinction.

            Sad indeed.

            It obviously galls Blacks that most Whites avoid them whenever they can both lawfully and legally do so. With the help of government and the media, they do all they can to thwart the White’s lawful right to Freedom of Association. While “equal protection of the laws” is a Law of the Land fact, claims of “color blindness” are pure political nonsense, or self-deception, or both.

            Concerned Whites would do well to take the White v Black argument into the realm of the unarguable. Other than myself, nobody does that . . . yet. The old arguments about intelligence, morality, and crime statistics are easily demolished by simply trotting out examples of honest, intelligent Blacks, whereas: An argument based on hair texture, eye color and complexion easily forces opponents of freedom of association to support the denial of what their own senses tell them. It frustrates the “there’s only one race, the human race” pretenders every time, quickly reducing them to ad hominem attacks and red herrings.

            When it comes to personal decisions that facilitate the possible extinction of the White Race, “only skin deep” is surely deep enough.

            Tinsley Grey Sammons, April 2006

          • methylamine
            May 10, 2012 at 4:28 pm

            I see the problem.

            tgsam and TOG have confused race with culture.

            So, if two little black girls are adopted by a whiter-than-white family, sent to private school, and raised in the Judeo-Christian, free-market, classical liberal ideal by their whiter-than-white adoptive parents…are they still Undermensch?

            Turns out, no–for I know two such little girls in my (miscegenated) little girl’s private school.

            Because interestingly–and tgsam and TOG, listen up, here’s the key point–

            Culture is transmitted by nurture, whereas race is transmitted by semen.

            Oh by the way–if we choose to move to the Redoubt (MT,ID,WY), my wife (a crack shot) will still defend your freedom to think like a jackass, to the death.

            Because despite being brown, she has principles and courage.

          • Mike Stahl
            May 10, 2012 at 6:07 pm

            TSG,

            “Just like the Romans didn’t embrace and celebrate the culture of the Dacians, and the Pilgrims didn’t reject Puritanism to live in wigwams and wear loincloths….”

            Actually, both of those things were in fact significant issues-have you ever read John Locke? You might want to.

            The Roman and British(and later US) *government* certainly did not embrace the lifestyle of the “savages” and “barbarians”, but many of the poor bastards doomed to live in their hellish societies did-it is simply historical fact. As I said, go read Locke.

            Thank God Rome AND London fell.

            Also, just what constitutes “White?” Are Italians? Russians? Arabs? Black Caucasians? Jews? Mexicans? Indians-both from India and the Americas? Barack Obama?

            Who decides? You?

            How about me? Caesar would have considered my ancestors to be barbarians and future slaves-am I white?

            You have a seriously flawed world view, one that is both sickening and while you deny it does indeed facilitate government intervention.

          • That One Guy
            May 10, 2012 at 6:56 pm

            “We’re all the same” is the mother of all collectivist thought.

            Hey I’ve already gotten farther into this pissing match than I wanted to. I just couldn’t leave him hanging out there all alone. I don’t give a shit what you all believe or how you choose to live your lives. Unlike you all I won’t get personal with it, suggesting flaws in your respective intellects, characters, and moralities.

            It’s always laughable the reactions you get from people who take these statements and run far and wide with them, attributing all sorts of nefarious and ugly opinions and thoughts to you, far in excess of what you have expressed. You’ll even get a flirtation with Godwin’s Law (undermensch!? come on…) from one of the best debaters on this site.

            But this chilling statement:

            “…and while you deny it does indeed facilitate government intervention.”

            It appears Tinsley and I need re-education. This is the absolute last place I ever thought I’d hear that suggestion.

            By the by, can you guys see from way up there on your high horses that this site links to VDare? Does that mean Eric agrees with the positions of Peter Brimelow? Is he next in line to be struck down by a lance of contrived righteous racial indignation?

          • Andrew
            May 10, 2012 at 11:34 pm

            TSAM and TOG:

            FWIW,I am in squarely in your camp on this issue. The notion than Aryan men have a right to advocate for their race, to associate with their own kind in the workplace or the classroom, to disassociate from other racial or ethnic groups, to hire or fire on their own property whomever they want for any reason, or even to establish a homeland are not inconsistent with Libertarian thought. All groups, whether based on race, culture, or philosophy, have a right to do likewise. Neither integration nor segregation should be coerced, as they mostg definitely have been in this country.

            MA’s words: “Do you understand TG? Philosophy, intellect, character, and soul are not transmitted via semen.”

            This is an ignorant and arrogant comment. Culture profoundly affects genetic selection, which in turn affects transmission of cultural predispositions.

            MA’s words: “Are you aware that the globalist banksters, particularly the most elite among them, are “white”? I thought all “white” was good and noble?”

            This is also an ignorant and condescending comment.

            The Khazar Jews or Jewish Ashkenazim (Rothschilds, Warburgs, Leobs, Schiffs, etc)who control the international fiat banking cartel are not Aryan. They self-identify as separate from, and superior to, White Gentiles in particular and all other races in general. Genetically they are primarily of Eastern European and Mongolian extraction. I concede that their Anglo collaborators across the Atlantic (Rockefellers, Morgans, Bush’s, et al) are equally inimical to freedom, White males, and the genetic integrity of all races, but they do are not the innermost circle.

        • Mike in Spotsy
          May 10, 2012 at 3:51 am

          Tom DiLorenzo’s books are certainly important to understanding US history. But I urge everyone to read John T. Flynn’s “As We Go Marching”, written in 1944, to understand what has happened to this country since the 1930s. It is truly scary in its prescience.

          • May 10, 2012 at 10:12 am

            Yup. Another good one that’s not well-known is “The Ominous Parallels,” by Leonard Peikoff. It was written in the ’60s and noted the fascistic tendencies erupting at that time and compared them with Weimar-era Germany.

    • May 9, 2012 at 10:57 am

      I’m as much frustrated as furious. I, too, hate the creeps who are out there trolling for manufactured “offenses” – and then get all agro over it when they “catch” you. But by nature I am a “law and order” kind of guy – by which, I mean I value the rules of civilized life – and get pissed at people who violate them. So, I hate thieves, bullies and crooks. If we had peace officers – people who went after crooks, bullies and thieves (and worse) – then I’d be a strong supporter. I’d probably even gibs them a dollah (when I had some extra). But modern police work, to a great extent, involves little better than harassing people who are causing no one any harm – and I fucking hate that.

  46. Justin
    May 9, 2012 at 12:19 am

    Im polite to the revenue collection officers, but I dont call them “sir”

    I say as little as possible, speak only to answer their questions and try to keep my answers to one syllable, either yes or no.

    • May 9, 2012 at 11:00 am

      That’s what I do, too. To do less invites a Tasering. To do more (kiss their ass) is to lose one’s self-respect.

  47. BrentP
    May 9, 2012 at 12:18 am

    I have never called a cop ‘sir’ or even ‘officer’. I do not address them by title or name. They are to me, some stranger who is inserting himself into my life and doesn’t deserve anything more than any other such stranger.

    When I am stopped for some BS I tend to make it clear I know the law. I’ll argue with them. They don’t like it one bit but I think it knocks them off guard. I am probably obviously scared that they can ruin my day or my life or cost me but I’ll usually argue with them. Not one has carried through on their threats of ticketing me or worse. (tickets were in obvious revenue/performance objective stops)

    Sometimes I think I’ve been too submissive and I don’t like it when I do that. But I suppose with cops these days its about survival and getting away from their grasp unscathed is goal. It doesn’t matter how you get away from the predator, just so you get away.

    Given my experiences I believe there really is something to this concept of not allowing them to dominate or at least without showing it will take effort and risk (to their job or performance review) on their part. The key is avoid physical confrontation. Too many cops live for that.

    • dom
      May 9, 2012 at 1:22 am

      I have no choice but to call them sir and be extra kind in a lot of cases. Especially when I am getting nabbed for middle night/nowhere in excess of 30mph over. I have a serious problem keeping my speed down in the middle of the night and nowhere.

      • clark
        May 9, 2012 at 4:44 am

        Been there, done that, Dom.
        You *always* have a choice.

      • May 10, 2012 at 12:40 pm

        Cruise control is your friend.

        • May 10, 2012 at 12:44 pm

          Not my friend! CC makes driving soporific – and a bored, uninvolved driver is a dangerous driver.

        • mithrandir
          May 10, 2012 at 1:23 pm

          If I am driving on a relatively flat road, I will press the accelerator to desired level and put my foot against the center to lock my foot in place.

          If there are big hills then I find that the above will have slow down up the hill and speed up down the hill.

  48. Brandonjin
    May 8, 2012 at 10:14 pm

    Sounds good, won’t call them sir. What do you say to them when they get you for speeding?

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 8, 2012 at 10:43 pm

      Nothing at all.

      tgsam

      • Brad Smith
        May 9, 2012 at 12:13 am

        Right on!

    • methylamine
      May 9, 2012 at 2:26 pm

      “Am I being detained?”
      “Am I free to go?”
      “I do not consent to any search.”

      And if it turns ugly:
      “I am calling my lawyer”–at which you roll up your windows and if you didn’t already, lock your doors.

  49. Tor Munkov
    May 8, 2012 at 9:52 pm

    Great article, Eric!

    I know Massa’s mad that I runs away, after he spent good money building all this infrastructure for me’s to provide my taxlabor on his federal plantation, but I got’s to be free.

    Nothins worse than the snivel-coward-high-brain-shutdowns I used to gets when massa caught me, or I got’s to fearin he would.

    Massa’s constructs and mental chains be broken my will so early in life, I cant stops smilin and laughin at all his highly-pixelated cornucopias of freedom I know aint real.

    Massa gives me the freedoms to see and hear other guys livin it up in his magical-smoke flatscreen-freedom-boxes.

    But I needs to touch, embrace, and feel real freedom with my own hands and body. Me and my friends still remember the freedoms we had, back in peasant america, africa, asia, and europe.

  50. Brad Smith
    May 8, 2012 at 8:30 pm

    I served in the military and it became very easy to spot the gung ho types that live for abusing their authority. I can easilly spot them in just about any line of government worker. The problem with these people is that as they work their way up into positions of authority they actuall get to do the hiring and firing. Who do you think they will hire? Some power hungry nitwit like them or someone who believes in protecting your rights? Corruption breads further corruption in government work in particular, because they all have the power to use force against you from the lowest to the highest.

    Furthermore, all people compete in three ways. Some people simply want to maximize their benefits. Some want it to be even for everyone and last group wants to win even if it means they get next to nothing. Studied have been done on people all over the world and it’s universal.

    Your average socialist type wants to force equality on you regardless of your actual ability. These types are dangerous because they actually think they are using the force of government for your own good and any level of force is acceptible if they honestly believe it’s for the better. Many of these tend towards jobs like social workers. (these are the people who compete for equality, if four people are competing for a hundred bucks they want everyone to get 25)

    The true fascist Authoritarian types don’t care how much damage they do as long as they come out on top. These are the “cut off your nose to spite your face” people. Many of these tend towards, police jobs. (They will be happy with one cent as long as everyone else gets zero)

    The third type doesn’t generaly work towards positions were they use the force of government. They are more likely to be business owners or people who find work in a field they simply enjoy. (They will do their best to get as much of the pot, they don’t care if someone else gets more or if someone gets nothing, or to keep it even, they compete to get their share.)

    I think most Libertarians fall into the third category. At least I did when I took part in the case study. I don’t care if you make more than me. I don’t care if you make less. I won’t go out of my way to hope to make more than you. I simply try my best to get my share fo the pot.

    One interesting thing about the study was that the $100 was not the upper limit. You could actually make twice that. The only times that groups were able to do this was when the individuals worked towards their own ends without regard for the others. Not that they didn’t work as a team they did, but they were not afraid to let there be others that made more or less.

    • Bill Jones
      May 11, 2012 at 2:42 am

      Why do you clowns use “served” as a verb for your career choice?

      The phrase you are looking for is “worked for the military”.

      It raises the question as to who you were working for, it sure as shit wasn’t me.

      • BrentP
        May 11, 2012 at 2:56 am

        That term.. ‘served’ for anyone working for government irritates me too. The only people they served are themselves, the politicians and wall street banks.

        Those who serve the people are the ones who provide goods and services to the people in the free market.

        • dom
          May 11, 2012 at 3:05 am

          I’ve seen the inner workings of the military very well. I was born a military dependent on Camp Lejeune in North Cackalacky. My father “served” for 30 years in the USMC. Only thing I ever witness was disservice. I could write a book on all the fucking bullshit I witnessed just as a dependent being around the shit.

          • Mike in Spotsy
            May 11, 2012 at 3:54 am

            dom, I spent several years as a Marine officer at Lejeune. know the Jacksonville area well. lol. These days, I tend to regret my “service”, having realized that the military is not there to defend the country, but to dominate other countries.

            As far as the bullshit, I agree wholeheartedly. That’s all it was. My best buddy and I, after we went through Amphibious Warfare School, agreed that if we went to war against the (then) Soviets, we would win only because they were even more screwed up than we were. For anyone who wants to know what the military is really like, “Catch-22″ gives a pretty good view of it.

      • Mark Helmich
        May 11, 2012 at 4:09 am

        Look up “served” in a dictionary. One of the definitions is “Do military service”. Would you say that someone who was drafted “worked for the military”, or call it “a career choice”?

        • BrentP
          May 11, 2012 at 1:23 pm

          I consider the draft to be what it really is, slavery.

          • Mark Helmich
            May 11, 2012 at 5:52 pm

            You got that right!

      • babydriver
        May 14, 2012 at 6:46 pm

        That’s easy, they serve the government.

  51. DD
    May 8, 2012 at 5:32 pm

    “…And the fearful Yes sirring. But this only encourages them. You’ve accepted your status as their plaything.”

    Man-o-Man, that bit made me physically ill.
    A “plaything” of some psychotic taxtaker proletariat monkey.

    I can’t read on….

    • May 8, 2012 at 7:02 pm

      The pervasiveness of video recording has made it possible to get a large sampling of cop performance in situ. And the picture isn’t pretty.

  52. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    May 8, 2012 at 5:00 pm

    Good Critical Thinking and writing, Eric. Keep up the good work.

    I’m a Georgia born Redneck (dob 5-1-36) so naturally a respectful M’aam and Sir came easily for me. Hell, when I enlisted in the Military, minimal disciplinary adjustment was necessary.

    Sadly, Government and its operatives have become so predatory and incompetent that, decades ago, I became profoundly disrespectful of them. The really big ones for me are Esquire., and, Your Honor. Today, I make it a conscious point never to address or refer to a lawyer as Esquire or a judge as “Your Honor”.

    Prior to retiring from my Automobile Service and Repair business, I referred to my numerous military customers by their rank. While so doing I was no more obsequious in the presence of a general than I was in the presence of a corporal.

    Many years ago, from Alfred Adask’s ANTISHYSTER publication I came to realize that America’s legal system is “essentially an extortion racket”. Then, when Thoreau taught me that, “There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.” I decided to do everything that I can to strike the root. As far as I know, I am the only individual who persistently focuses on the lawful/legal solution to the growing problem of plundering by law.

    In the last twenty years I’ve spent a few thousand dollars and countless hours of research and study only to be systematically ignored and rejected. Time and time again I’ve quit in disgust only to have my passionate love for Liberty and Justice nag me back to the Books and the Keyboard.

    Tinsley Grey Sammons

    • May 8, 2012 at 7:05 pm

      Thangya!

      I, too, am very stridently anti-shyster. “The law” ought to be readily understandable by any average-bright high school graduate. The Talmudic parsing of the legal profession, on the other hand, serves only to render impenetrable that which ought to be straightforward – solely for purposes of obfuscation and pettifoggery.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        May 8, 2012 at 11:13 pm

        What I find most sad is the reluctance of politically disenchanted Americans to actually do anything but vote and hope.

        There are alternatives to elections and revolutions but those who are aware of them are too few to matter. We are so pitifully few in fact that the Establishment doesn’t even take us seriously enough to kill us.

        tgsam

        • Jeremiah Shultz
          May 10, 2012 at 7:48 pm

          What are they? I’m legitimately interested, but haven’t heard many options that don’t involve me dying after the feds lob CS gas through my compound and kill my family and take my guns.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 11, 2012 at 1:51 am

            The so-called runaway Grand Jury Jeremiah. There is a wealth of Grand Jury information about it on the Internet. Study it.

            Google: Tinsley Grey Sammons
            I will gladly share whatever hard earned knowledge I have with you or anyone else.

      • Bill Jones
        May 11, 2012 at 1:21 am

        The underlying issue is the much bigger one of the move away from the principals of English Common Law (what do most people do) to the Talmudic: everything is either specifically allowed or forbidden. From the “don’t abuse animals” to “good Jewish shepherds must always work in pairs” as a way of cutting down on sheep-shaggary.

        We now have about 4,000 specific Federal Offenses.

  53. Art Thomas
    May 8, 2012 at 3:34 pm

    Many years ago (mid 80’s) three of us were returning home from a catering job (Central Va.). We were relaxing, talking about the job, smoking a doob, and passing a state cop. We were a mite over the speed limit and he decided to pull us over. The person with the weed baggie panicked and threw it out and the cop picked this up in his headlights and waved the bag to the driver when he came up.

    He yelled at us to get out and up against the van. I turned my head to him and said, ‘you don’t have to be rude about it.’ He eventually calmed down and our interactions with him were mutually respectful. He didn’t call for backup though a county cop happened by; and he told us later he was going to drop the matter if this cop was not witness.

    He and I actually had a conversation about the drug laws. He listened to my arguments and was sympathetic but suggested that given these laws, it would be wiser to smoke in private and not on the highways. He was a genuinely nice and thoughtful man. Of course this was a time when the police acted like peace officers, a time before their militarization.

    • liberranter
      May 9, 2012 at 7:26 pm

      Ah, the good old days. I’m sure this cop is long since retired, or was cashiered off the force after being caught thinking critically and treating the “turds” (as today’s cops often refer to us mere mundanes) with actual respect and human dignity.

    • Mike
      May 10, 2012 at 5:41 pm

      Nice and thoughtful, and busted you for dope, right….

      • Art Thomas
        May 10, 2012 at 10:57 pm

        He asked which of us wanted to take the rap. My friend took it because it was his weed. After 6 months my friend got the rap expunged from his record.

        And yeah, Mike he was nice and thoughtful. You weren’t there.

  54. Eric_G
    May 8, 2012 at 12:34 pm

    Take a page from Penn Jillette:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLIT-0Q-Ms0

  55. mikehell
    May 8, 2012 at 12:11 pm

    Well said, Eric. Nice piece.

    • May 8, 2012 at 12:42 pm

      Thanks, Mike!

      It’s rainy out today – and I’m three big cups of very strong coffee deep already…

      • James
        May 8, 2012 at 2:54 pm

        Eric, I was going to ask if recent, involuntary facetime with the plod was the catalyst for this article. I see now that your own, voluntary buzziness is actually the culprit. :)

      • babydriver
        May 14, 2012 at 6:34 pm

        lol

        I call everyone ‘Sir’ (male) and Ma’am.

    • stefan
      May 10, 2012 at 10:39 am

      If you’re driving somewhat over the speed limit or not wearing a seatbelt and a cop pulls you over he can choose to let you off with a warning or write you a ticket. So most motorists choose to be super polite to the officer by deferring to his authority (“yes sir”, “no sir”. “I’m sorry sir”, “I guess I was in a hurry sir”) in the hope they will get off with a warning. It’s nothing more than that Peter. Duhhh!!

      • May 10, 2012 at 10:42 am

        It’s also accepting the premise as valid (i.e., that you actually did something wrong – and are sorry that you did) and so, legitimates the stop and the cop’s harassment of you. It’s time to stop letting them feel good about what they do – even if it means getting a ticket. My self respect – and my respect for my right to be left in peace – matters more to me than sucking up to a thug in uniform.

        Ticket-writing, warrantless-searching “safety” checking assholes should be treated with the contempt they deserve. As pariahs not worth your spittle. Instead, you advocate playing along – pretending to respect them and what they do. If that works for you, go for it.

        It doesn’t work for me.

        • Texas Chris
          May 10, 2012 at 1:15 pm

          Exactly.

          No victim, no crime.

          Traffic cops aren’t out to spread safety like a cozy blanket over the community; they are out to generate some revenue for the city.

          In other words, highway robbers.

    • May 10, 2012 at 3:42 pm

      thank you for supporting ron paul.the cops here in montana are unlike any others,they treat you with respect and are respectful of your rights. that being said anytime i leave this state i feel like i left the “world” and am now “in country”. please visit my website since we have the bd2thbn in common(past history for you) and i would be honored if you gave me and old-fashioned call. thank you and keep up the good work you do.

    • Joe
      May 10, 2012 at 4:46 pm

      You might just get the crap beaten out of you nowadays with that kind of attitude, especially with the wrong cop, Eric. It is a sad state of affairs this day and age.

      • May 10, 2012 at 8:40 pm

        Unfortunately – that’s true. Hence, try to carry some means of recording the interaction. It’s awful that things have come to that – but there we are.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *