Get Ready…

Print Friendly

Because here it comes.hook 1

The bodies weren’t cold before the slaughter perpetrated by a single homicidal maniac became the basis for calls to slaughter the rights of millions of non-maniacs.

That’s us, in case you missed it.

That 27 are dead is horrific, a nightmare. That the deaths of these innocents will be used to demagog gun ownership generally is arguably more so. For our rights – our liberties – are everything. Without them, our lives are nothing more than biological datum. We exist – but we do not live. Because it is not living when your life is controlled by others (those “others” being the people who control the machinery and enforcement apparatus of government) … when your freedom of action is denied, limited, constrained…. not because of any harm you’ve caused.

But because someone else caused harm. And worse, because someone else might cause harm.

For which you are to be held presumptively responsible.frisk 1

It is the logic – no, poor word choice there. It is the justification used for every abridgement of liberty we’ve suffered in recent memory. Someone might drive drunk. Therefore, anyone who happens to be out driving must submit to being treated as presumptively drunk driving – until they’ve demonstrated otherwise, to the satisfaction of armed and costumed goons. There might be a terrorist at the airport. So millions of innocent people trying to get someplace must submit to being handled – literally – as presumptive terrorists by armed, costumed goons. Purchase “too much” Sudafed – and you are presumed to be a confector of arbitrarily illegal “drugs.” And treated accordingly by armed, costumed goons – despite your having done nothing.

That someone else might have done something is sufficient warrant to assume you did – or are about to.

And to treat you as if you already had.

There’s no end to it – because it’s open-ended. If “someone” might do something then certainly any of us could be that someone.

A free society cannot withstand this.

Which is exactly why this country is no longer free.

Yet few people see the connection. If Smith can be restrained – punished – because of the actions of Jones… because of the potential actions of Jones – then Smith is not free. Moral hazard – the notion that each of us ought to bear the consequences of our actions (not the actions of others) is the ethical basis of a free society. Punishment before you, as an individual, have done anything to anyone – in other words, the application of random, arbitrary aggressive violence against a peaceful person – is the sine qua non of unfree societies.

The ancient question, why? – is answered with: “There is no why here.”hook 2

Just because. Because they can. Because they have power. And because you are powerless.

Submit. Obey.

Ironically, neither Smith nor Jones is “safer” as a result – the supposed benefit to be had by the evisceration of Smith’s freedom because of the actions (or potential actions) of Jones – because both are now subject to unrestricted, arbitrary violence against their persons – for any reason or no reason. When a person – any of us – is no longer secure in “their persons and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures” – and all the rest of it – then we are by definition insecure.

And insecure is another way of saying, unsafe. Because we are at the mercy of others – within government and without. They can do things to do us – and we have no defense. Not legally, not physically. Just … Submit. Obey.

Or else.

America used to be place where you knew that if you hadn’t done anything – or given good reason to suspect you were about to – you had a shield of immunity against arbitrary force being applied against you. Cops could not just stop you – without cause, for no reason having to do with anything you’d done.  Your home was your castle. They had to have specific reason – evidence of crime having been committed – to violate your space. We could come – and go – without obtaining permission slips. You could buy a car, or cold medicine, a gun or even dynamite – and not be regarded as (and treated as) a presumptive criminal. You felt securesafe.

Free.

People actually used to say things like, “It’s a free country.” It’s not anymore. Obviously. Depressingly so. And less so, seemingly with the passing of every day. Especially days such as yesterday – and what they imply about tomorrow.

Which is why that saying is rarely said anymore.

So, it’s not about guns – as such.black hole

A child could – should be able to – see through the infantile idiocy of banning handguns. (How’s that ban on arbitrarily illegal drugs – or murder, for that matter – working for you, Herr Schumer, Moore, et al?) People who feed on such pap are already over the event horizon and cannot be salvaged. It is the adults in the room – the people who can grasp the principle at stake – that must be the focus of our attentions. Who may still be reached before they, too, slip across the threshold and into the abyss. Taking the rest of us along with them, alas – if we fail to reach them before it’s too late.

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. 

  301 comments for “Get Ready…

  1. Brad Smith
    December 15, 2012 at 12:59 pm

    One of the first things Oblabla said (before he cried) was that something will be done. Of course no tragedy can ever be let go to waste.

    Too bad the cause of this will remain hidden until the public has lost interest. What is the cause? Most likely medications.

    • Jay Wocky
      December 15, 2012 at 4:58 pm

      “before he cried”

      As an IL state senator, BHO voted against</i) a bill that would have required that life-saving medical attention be given children who survived an abortion. I wonder if he wept for them.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        December 16, 2012 at 12:52 pm

        US population 310,000,000 and growing rapidly.

        • Jay Wocky
          December 16, 2012 at 1:40 pm

          Your point? I choose not to assume it is what it seems to be. Instead, I give you, for now, benefit of the doubt. Call me dense, but further clarification would be appreciated.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            December 16, 2012 at 2:32 pm

            I will not support anti-abortion statutes.

            tgsam

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            December 18, 2012 at 8:05 pm

            I saw your post as an attempt to hijack the forum for the sake of antiabortionism. I should have simply ignored it, but as the bulldozers continue to relentlessly strip the natural surface of America to accommodate more naked apes it infuriates me. How many goddamned naked apes does one small planet need?

            tgsam

          • Jay Wocky
            December 19, 2012 at 2:45 am

            Excuse me, but did I just read an attempt by a naked ape to “hijack” this forum for the cause of misanthropy? If there really are too many of his kind on the planet, I can think of no better candidate than he to be the first one to volunteer to find another one to live on.

          • Boothe
            December 19, 2012 at 4:53 am

            Jay Wocky, I don’t hesitate to point out to real “greens”, watermelons and others that espouse getting rid of this “cancer” known as mankind that they should be the first to set the example for the rest of us by leaving the planet first. So far I haven’t seen any volunteers. Somehow I think Tinsley, et al, believe that other people should be the first to go; not them. It appears much the same as the way tax feeding classes believe in generosity with other people’s money.

          • December 19, 2012 at 10:55 am

            Morning, Boothe –

            In defense (elliptically) of Tinsley’s position, I am guessing it arises from the understandable disgust and frustration with the sort of people who seem to be proliferating. The Free Shit Army. White trash. Black trash. Belligerent, ignorant, coarse, violent. They are, indeed, outbreeding us – and that’s the worry. Or rather, it’s my worry – and I suspect it’s Tinsely’s too.

            This country is reversing evolution by providing every incentive for the dregs of humanity to increase at a geometric rate while at the same time providing every disincentive for people who aren’t not to.

            Result? Civilization is literally crumbling. It grows noticeably harder with each passing year to avoid human barbarism. Because there are more and more barbarians.

          • Boothe
            December 19, 2012 at 7:16 pm

            Hi Eric – I understand Tinsley’s position quite well, having been there myself for many years and for the same reasons. Only my first hand experience with the FSA was in the Old Dominion, not in New Orleans; the same perceived entitlement, the same systemic corruption and the same social conditions prevailing. But…if none of us can be a good king and we can’t because we are all fallible, then who dares play God? Perhaps a mass die off through pestilence, disease and famine is all but inevitable based on human action; Nature and Nature’s laws will prevail as they have in the past. It is elitist and downright evil for any man or group of men to intentionally attempt to precipitate this though and that is a key element of population control.

            If and when the excrement extrudes in the rotary air mover, those most dependent on the system will undoubtedly be many if not most of the first to go. But I don’t feel qualified to determine who goes first; nor should any other man. Now if they are directly attacking me, which would include attacking my family and neighbors, they have made that choice for me. I will do whatever is necessary to stop them and if it results in their untimely demise that is their fault. And I fully intend to retain the means to provide that defense should the need arise. I hold a very basic tenet; when someone infringes my fundamental Natural rights they implicitly forfeit their own. Visiting unwarranted violence on me and mine can only be construed as a Natural rights violation.

            However, the original issue was abortion. It is an analogue to the practice of worshipping Moloch; the idea that you can kill your children today to ensure your future prosperity. It tends to be women that have a future that engage in the practice. Those that are most dependent on the system tend to retain their multitude offspring for the advantage it gives them with the welfare state. If we dare subscribe to the validity of the eugenics doctrine, then we should be able to see that the PTB are selectively breeding a dependent, nonproductive and downright parasitic underclass.

            At the same time we have lawmakers, “judicial legislators” (Tinley’s favorite folks, lawyers and judges) combined with the social normalization of what was once considered licentious and irresponsible behavior. This has enabled or even worse, encouraged the middle class or those who arguably more genetically predisposed to productivity to kill off their own offspring. Why? Because just as the priests of Moloch promised rain and bumper crops if the masses would burn their children alive in a bronze statue, abortion promises that you get to finish school and have a career. Never mind that there could be no greater human rights violation than to be at your most vulnerable point in life and have the person charged with your nurture and protection, unceremoniously mutilate and murder you. And based on discussion with numerous women that made this decision, they never get over it.

            No matter how the pregnancy occurs the child is never at fault. They are not an invader, they are put there. If one leans toward atheism, this is especially true since without a God, the child could not possibly have a choice in the conception. Abortion is a clear cut and I would argue the most egregious violation of the non aggression principle. As the most defenseless of humans at the earliest point in their life these children are cut short and denied what little they have and everything they would have had and could have been before ever even having a chance to try. The can be no greater breech of the NAP. When you consider that this has been perpetrated on between 50 and 70 million Americans since Roe v. Wade, it not only makes the Nazi Holocaust pale by comparison, but should make us consider what this nation will reap by sowing seeds such as this.

          • methylamine
            December 19, 2012 at 7:45 pm

            @Boothe–

            Simply excellent, I cannot add a word.

            The eugenicists are coming, and coming fast.

          • Jay Wocky
            December 19, 2012 at 9:53 pm

            @Boothe 12/19/12 7:16pm:

            You da man!! Thanks for your eloquence.

        • Zorg
          December 17, 2012 at 3:33 pm

          “US population 310,000,000 and growing rapidly.”

          That’s your response to a post about murdering children who managed to survive the first state-sanctioned murder attempt?

          Unbelievably disgusting.

          • Boothe
            December 17, 2012 at 4:14 pm

            Zorg, based on a multitude of his previous posts, Tinsley is a dyed in the wool population control true believer. They crammed this elitist over population tripe down our throats in the 1960′s, even in the private school I attended. The “population explosion” was to get us desensitized to mass democide. Tinsley apparently bought in. That doesn’t surprise me, because he lives in Neew Ah-leens and I suspect that what he has seen in that city would convince just about anyone that eugenics is not only desireable but necessary. I don’t think he has anything to worry about though, because I’m pretty sure there are plenty of folks in the U.S. Feral Gun-vernment, along with their spiritual kindred at the U.N., getting ready to make his wish of a reduced population come true one way or the other. One must be careful what one wishes for…

          • BrentP
            December 17, 2012 at 4:31 pm

            It rather interesting that those who have great influence over fedgov have used it to change the environmental factors to create conditions that without examination would indicate to those who don’t understand the if-than-else that eugenics was valid. I find it very bizarre that to prove eugenics those who supposedly believe in it used techniques that in fact disprove it.

            Perhaps “Trading Places” is a lot deeper than most give it credit for being.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            December 18, 2012 at 12:31 am

            It is my response to an anti-abortionist.

            tgsam

          • Jay Wocky
            December 18, 2012 at 6:46 am

            “Unbelievably disgusting.”

            Thanks for taking the words out of my mouth. In his response to my post, tgsam indeed left no doubt as to his true sentiments.

          • Ed
            December 29, 2012 at 2:07 pm

            “Unbelievably disgusting.”

            Yes, I’m with you there. Such a statement is revelatory of collectivist thinking.

        • Tor Munkov
          December 17, 2012 at 5:00 pm

          Growing because of 0.9% annual “legal” immigration of 2,790,000 + other immigrants.

          American female fertility is 1.8 children each (below minimum replacement rate) and dropping.

          800 Million Muslim females have 8.1 children each, but I’m don’t believe loud singing of “Jingo Bells” nor “I’m Dreaming of a White Christianmas” to be the answer.

          The decline of America, now dropped to 12th on the Prosperity Index, is mostly driven by a decline in the number of US citizens who believe that hard work will get them ahead.

          http://smallbiztrends.com/2012/12/balancing-economic-control-and-entrepreneurship.html

          • December 19, 2012 at 3:25 am

            Dear Tor,

            Not to worry.

            When the S hits the F, the US drops off the fiscal cliff.

            No more free shit. No more free shit army. Foreign or domestic.

        • Zorg
          December 18, 2012 at 3:13 am

          You should teach ethics.

          Funny story, I said this recently to someone on the internet who was artfully defending a well known “bioethics” professor who preaches the right of parents to kill their children if they are sick, retarded, have a low “quality of life,” etc. And lo and behold, the guy replied, “I do teach ethics!” Then he proceeded to set me straight on the ethics of child killing.

          The sarcasm was completely lost on him. He really believed his own bs.

          • methylamine
            December 19, 2012 at 4:22 am

            The eugenicists are back in a big, nasty way.

            Death panels. Search-and-destroy abortions.

            And now, these pointy-head Poindexters (who, by the way, apparently lack the organs of procreation explaining partially why they’re so opposed to it) formulating abstruse arguments on the virtues of killing unhappy or unwanted three-year-olds!

            Who the fuck are these people? Did the PTB just flip a giant crazy switch somewhere and tell their minions “Let it ALL hang out boys”?

          • Jay Wocky
            December 20, 2012 at 3:12 am

            @methylamine on December 19, 2012 at 4:22 am

            “…who, by the way, apparently lack the organs of procreation explaining partially why they’re so opposed to it…”

            Meth, this is a priceless turn of phrase. I intend to quote it, with attribution, of course.

      • Tor Munkov
        December 18, 2012 at 8:20 pm

        Actually Tinsley, you’re spot on insofar as the insinuation that Obama of The Left Hand Gang of MaoMao failing to saddle up with The Right Hand Gang of the Sons of the Boston Teabagger Chaingangers is a bad thing.

        Funny how that snuck by me, that he’s peeved the Chi Town Class Hustler wasn’t asking the Senate to shake us down for more loot to enlarge the Wounded Unwanted Children Warriors Fund.

        • Jay Wocky
          December 19, 2012 at 2:55 am

          Hmmm…this comment stumped even Google translator, but I think I finally got its gist. I had no idea so much irrelevance could be read into the simple point that I made above in plain English. Maybe it was my html code typo that confused a couple of readers.

    • me2
      December 15, 2012 at 5:40 pm

      This is tragic and nothing to minimize it but;

      Where are the tears for the countless children killed daily by the US around the world?

      Oh, right, they are Untermensch to these assholes.

      • ERLE
        December 15, 2012 at 6:43 pm
        • Tor Munkov
          December 15, 2012 at 7:05 pm

          ONE old coot volunteer in sneakers, could have blown that fuck into a thousand points of light with only a few initial lives lost.

          Senior Minute Men, take up your arms. Take up your posts. Stand sentinel and at the ready at the nearest school. Burn your AARP cards , stand resolute and vigilant, for the children.

          http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3173/2552047591_54eebcf3e3.jpg?v=0

          3.3.08 Obama victory sermon upon the Saint Paul Speakeasy Tunnel Church:

          “The journey will be difficult. The road will be long. I face this challenge with profound humility, and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people. Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth. This was the moment – this was the time – when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals. Thank you, God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America!”

          • December 16, 2012 at 1:17 pm

            Dear Tinsley,

            “Can’t any longer play off black against old – young against poor. This country cannot house its houseless – feed its foodless. Blub blub blub blub blub!”

            – Bill McKay, the title character in the classic 1972 political satire “The Candidate,” portrayed by Robert Redford

            McKay realizes the hollowness of his own political rhetoric and begins mocking his own speeches.

          • December 16, 2012 at 1:18 pm

            * Tor, not Tinsley

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        December 16, 2012 at 12:53 pm

        The politicians will milk the murders for all they’re worth.

        tgsam

        • Jim
          December 17, 2012 at 6:54 pm

          Maybe if we called the murders very very very late term abortions everything would be cool…

          • goldhoarder
            December 17, 2012 at 9:34 pm

            LOL. We’ll get that population down for sure this way.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            December 18, 2012 at 12:42 am

            Call them anything you like. I don’t give a shit.

            As far as I’m concerned a pregnant female is the one who has the right to decide what to do about her own damned pregnancy.

            tgsam

          • Boothe
            December 18, 2012 at 1:47 pm

            Perhaps you’re right Tinsley, but the abortion issue should be settled at the state level, not the national level. And it certainly shouldn’t be “legislated from the bench” in any case.

          • Jay Wocky
            December 20, 2012 at 6:03 am

            @Tinsley Grey Sammons on December 18, 2012 at 12:42 am:

            The intensely misanthropic anger in this comment is quite remarkable. At the risk of provoking even more such rage, I will pray for its emanator.

    • Bill Jones
      December 18, 2012 at 2:53 am

      I found this interesting

      “Half a century ago, Freudianism possessed the same kind of hegemonic dominance that the neurobiological approach now enjoys within the psychiatric community. Think about that for a moment. We often nowadays meet people who tell us they’re ADD or bipolar, but when was the last time you heard someone blame their problems on an unresolved Oedipus complex? An entire catalog of Freudian analytical diagnoses has been rendered obsolete, yet we are expected to accept as definitive the diagnostic categories and prescribed remedies offered to us by Freud’s scientific heirs. One is condemned as a heretic for suggesting the possibility that the High Priests of the Temple Cult of Progress may be as mistaken as their predecessors, and that their “cures” may in some ways be worse than the disease.”

      here
      http://theothermccain.com/2012/12/16/criticism-from-a-friend-can-we-help-victims-of-random-sarcasm-syndrome/
      .

      • December 18, 2012 at 10:08 am

        Hi Bill,

        Yup –

        “ADD” is probably nothing more than the pathologizing of normalcy. Boys naturally fidget, get bored – and act out when bored. Often, for perfectly reasonable reasons – such as being an inmate in a government school. Instead of removing the kid from a dreadful environment of stifling conformity, rote memorization and mindless obedience to authority – they pump him full of Ritalin.

      • methylamine
        December 18, 2012 at 3:36 pm

        I can absolutely attest to that, Bill!

        Before returning to my first love–computer programming–I earned an MD and specialized in neuropsychiatry.

        I had a hard-science background; so I was totally baffled at how much utter bullshit passed as “scientific reasoning” in the psychiatric field.

        For instance: the entire model of depression is a hand-waving flim-flammery no different than the ancient idea of “bileous humors”. To whit–the working hypothesis was a shortage of monoamines*, especially serotonin. But it was circular reasoning; the first drugs that seemed to help depression were actually developed to treat tuberculosis. One theory for their effect was their inhibition of monoamine oxidase–the enzyme that breaks down monoamine neurotransmitters like serotonin.

        From that, we get the entirety of antidepressant theory…that is, more of the right monoamines (humors) means less depression. Tweak dopamine? That’s what cocaine and methamphetamine do…too much. Tweak norepinephrine? Too much stimulation.

        Tweak serotonin? Aaah–you get a flattened emotional response, not so much not depressed as just emotionless. Hence, the “SSRI’s”–that boost serotonin, the depression humor.

        But it’s not fixing the problem–you’re depressed for a reason, whether it’s psycho-social, nutritional, physiological, or just situational. It’s masking the symptoms by flattening you emotionally.

        Here’s the bullshit part: none of the antidepressants are significantly better than exercise, cognitive-behavioral therapy (also known as addressing your problems logically), bright light, sleep deprivation, or placebo treatment. In fact, nobody can show a correlation between brain serotonin levels and depression!

        It’s all shooting in the dark.

        That’s just depression, one of the best-studied. The flim-flammery for “diseases” like ADHD is simply jaw-dropping.

        The “bible” of psychiatry–the Diagnostic and Statistic Manual, DSM, now going from DSM-IV revised to DSM-V…is made up by a committee! Literally, a group of High Priests meet and decide on which “illnesses” will be included; then, decide on “criteria” to define the “illness”.

        The “illness” is boiled down to extremely simple criteria–read through this one-pager to “diagnose” your depression. Remember, defined by a committee of “experts”. The head of the outgoing DSM-IV, Allan Frances, has publicly admitted “Whoopsie! Maybe we made the definition of ADD a teensy bit too broad

        Whoopsie. Sorry about the hundreds of thousands of mentally wrecked young boys, whose now dopamine-starved brains will crave drugs the rest of their lives; the thousands who’ve died of “side effects” including arrhythmias and cardiomyopathies.

        The pharmaceutical companies–started, remember, by those charming and altruistic Rockefellers–are definitely NOT unhappy. They can pawn off hundred-year-old crude drugs like amphetamine as ADD “medications”…for a thousand times the cost of making them, under a government-enforced monopoly, at the behest of anointed High Medical Priests to a population too stupid to ask questions.

        So yeah–Bill, you’re right on the mark–psychiatry is 99% scam.

        * monoamine neurotransmitters include dopamine, norepinephrine, serotonin, and some rare species.

        P.S. the modern “humors” (serotonin etc.) are coming under pressure as they’re being debunked…so more esoteric models like TRH are being proposed. But nobody can explain why a new class of antidepressants that actually DECREASES serotonin “works” just as well as the opposite…

        • methylamine
          December 18, 2012 at 3:42 pm

          P.P.S. I think someone’s mentioned it here already…but I’ll chip in again.

          Almost ALL the mass shootings since the mid-90′s, including Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Aurora, have been perpetrated by people using an SSRI.

          It’s even on the package insert:

          Nervous System — Frequent: emotional lability; Infrequent: akathisia, ataxia, balance disorder1, bruxism1, buccoglossal syndrome, depersonalization, euphoria, hypertonia, libido increased, myoclonus, paranoid reaction; Rare: delusions.

          • Tor Munkov
            December 18, 2012 at 4:00 pm

            So you’re saying, Billy in the corner with glazed-eyes-and-mouth grunting at his Guitar Hero Guitar. A Guitar he can’t play because his fingers are all clumped-together-hooflike. Billy’s not cured?

          • BrentP
            December 18, 2012 at 6:04 pm

            I thought all of them were on some drug or another or the records are sealed so we can never know which drug they were on.

  2. z
    December 15, 2012 at 1:34 pm

    I wonder what they’re going to try to do. “Assault” weapons ban, I presume. It matters not that this demon or mind control soldier used handguns (not “assault” weapons, even by the enemies of freedom definition). Connecticut already has some of the most draconian gun laws in the country. And more and more people like their handguns thanks in part to the growing popularity of concealed carry permission slips handed out by almost every state. I know people that have many guns who have a little clover in them. Many handguns even.

    I know, how about states letting those who are licensed to carry (or better yet, everyone) have the OPTION of carrying at schools. If I were a principal I’d have no problem with a teacher keeping a gun on their person or in a safe in the classroom. I’d encourage it. Letting only the costumed thugs carry at schools ensures the maximum number of casualties in a Sandy Hook situation.

    A quick search tells me that all Utah public schools are NOT gun free zones. I wasn’t able to find any mass shootings at Utah schools. This means, at minimum, that letting adults carry at school will not result in bad things.

    • December 15, 2012 at 1:40 pm

      in re “mind control” – anyone remember this classic?

      • mithrandir
        December 15, 2012 at 11:00 pm

        Good film. It was plausible enough to be frightening.

        The woods are dark lovely and deep, but I have many miles to go before I sleep.

        • Tor Munkov
          December 16, 2012 at 12:40 am

          Whose woods these are I think I know. His house is in the village though; He will not see me stopping here. To watch his woods fill up with snow.

          My little horse must think it queer. To stop without a farmhouse near. Between the woods and frozen lake. The darkest evening of the year.

          He gives his harness bells a shake. To ask if there is some mistake. The only other sound’s the sweep. Of easy wind and downy flake.

          ^$^$^$^
          12 year old Yasinda stops robbery in Istanbul.

          • mithrandir
            December 16, 2012 at 1:11 am

            A hero in my mind.

          • Runaway slave
            December 16, 2012 at 12:46 pm

            Now theres a good young man. A vigilante anarchist.

          • December 17, 2012 at 2:23 am

            Not one of the sheeple!

  3. December 15, 2012 at 1:59 pm

    Opportunistic authoritarian collectivist psychopathic control freak narcissistic parasite thugs (left/right whatever) love it when shit like this happens. It is manna from heaven to them

    • Tor Munkov
      December 15, 2012 at 5:45 pm

      Only morons have autistic brats like this Lanza turd. Autistic kids who take guns and kill other, equally idiotic but socially functional stepford kids. Lock them out. They’ll come around to ask you for food, a place to sleep, a place to take a shit.

      You’re damn straight, autism speaks, when the pangs and growling get loud enough.

      Their prisons, police, schools fail, their marxist/prussian/mussolinian monoliths never acknowledge their failure. Are you people that blind to how inadequate, unmotivated, ill-suited the Sandy Hook Preschool Panopticon is to anything you care about.

      For Christ’s sake, knock on some fucking doors. Get a list going, and hire your own Goddamn babysitters. Get some books, shop class materials, home ec class materials, computers, supplies, and never look back. Never stand down.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting

      Print this out and tape it to your walls, you neo-judens. How many kristallnachts and kristalltags is it gonna take?

      What is so magical about having the droopy shoulder little Fauntleroys barking at you from the couch about their video games and their hitler youth homework?

      Find someone to teach them to cook, to clean, to weed, to shop, to organize, to repair, to cooperate and accomplish a task. To be men and women, right now. Lock the cupboards, the fridge, your room, even the bathroom. Hungry, crap filled little tykes will overcome their autism right quick. Free Shit Home Army time is over.

      What will it take to disengage. To turn your back. To tune them out. To unplug from their system?

      • December 15, 2012 at 6:48 pm

        It does appear that there are more not-functional kids/young people out there than there were in the past. I’m a Gen Xer and the whole autism thing just didn’t exist when I was a kid. You never heard about it – or at least I never did. Maybe it was there and just not publicized? I dunno…

        Maybe it’s all the dope they force-feed so many kids these days. That, too, was largely nonexistent when I was a kid.

        Or maybe it’s the sense of entitlement – the “spayshullness” that modern kids are inculcated with? Then they encounter the real world – and can’t handle it…

        • Hot Rod
          December 15, 2012 at 7:40 pm

          Eric and Tor my sentiments exactly. I know exactly how this tragedy occured, because both my grandparents were public school teachers way back when. First when you are born into a family of school teachers and/or military as my father and his brothers, the first thing you must acknowledge is that teachers are always right. Further, for the same reason a salesmen is most likely to be conned by another salesmen and a doctor is most likely to believe that the drugs he prescribes are helpful and therefore use them on his own family. A teacher’s family will therefore receive more than their fair share of public stool indoctrination. Even today my father leans sympathetic to the state when it comes to “education” and he is a libertarian that should know better.

          Basically it takes two generations to 180 degrees out but only after the subsequent two generations have taken all the sucker blows first. If you are unfortunate to be born into a statist paradise today its unlikely you’ll ever see a revolt again, as they are likely to subjugate you as a child into a pyschotropic state of drug induced hell and stupidity. Children who use things like ritalin have irreversible lower IQs the rest of their life, and ritalin is just the beginning of the list of poisons they feed young rebels these days in public stools.

          What makes me such a government hater today? Mostly by public stool indoctrination. I can’t tell you the nightmares, humiliations, and punishments I experienced there. But I can say that all of us who have experienced it and aren’t captive to the stockholm syndrome and those of us who grow spiritually and don’t go killing 23 young kindegarten children know exactly how these things occur. If you were fortunate enough to be raised home schooled or private schooled, than thank your parents for being wise and showing compassion. Know this though that any man or woman that has undergone such public stool abuse and isn’t still under the spell will be the fiercest opponet of the government scam project that is causing social unrest. This raises our liberty enrollment as the youngest of our nation even experienced worse prison public stools than even me. Want to know why so many young love Ron Paul?

          This evil must be stopped now! Its literally killing our children, freedoms, and society. I blame the parents of this supposed autistic kid and I rarely do such, but they are the culprits behind all of what has happened. Their (Teacher’s) kid was not autistic, they drugged their own son because their peers were making government funded returns for enrolling him. And they believed their peers B.S. A man reaps what he sows, they worship the wrong god.

          • BrentP
            December 15, 2012 at 9:21 pm

            HR, I doubt the masses will ever recognize the damage that government schools do to children. Especially children a standard deviation or three from the mean.

          • Hot Rod
            December 15, 2012 at 10:10 pm

            I understand exactly what you are saying Brent, but I feel that something big is coming here because of people like us.

            Like the movie “Taken” our desire to change the world is “personal”. Though we plan to use our energy in a postive way, we have already forgiven all those who have caused us harm or will in the future. Let it be known to the furthest intelligence of this universe that like my brother those who bite our ankles will have their evil skulls crushed if they don’t change their ways. Like our enemies we will take no prisoners. We plan to be the Pied Piper and take their children from them, though unlike the government who does the same, we will break their chains of bondage and set them free from wicked enslavement. They the evil will hate us for our good deeds now, while their children and grandchildren will see us fondly for all we believe and all that we will accomoplish with our kindness and goodness. Our kind words, deeds, works, and intelligence will galvanize their children in our mold.

            The reason we will win is the simple reason I have won on every other matter in my own life. Because:

            We have no excuses but only world class results. We receive outstanding benefits because we simply ask for it. We love challenges. We enjoy the process of attaining our goals and we stay focused on our dreams (freedom for all). We release our past’s but use it to improve the lives of others. We learn more and therefore we earn more. We stay focused on our core genius. Like abolitionists we will win our movement because we speak of prosperity, freedom, and individuality and we will win converts and reaping the harvest of masses thus. They will listen because they yearn for truth and courage and they will also re-radiate that confidence and intelligence. An eternal and intelligent God is on our side and will reward all our righteousness because that is what builds and creates most. This greater creation encourages abundance and further maximizes production that comes with independence. My own life as a witness that when a good man stands by these principles that I know the rest of you also embrace in your hearts that nothing but victory can result.

            God bless you all for all your times and efforts to provide mercy, freedom, and methods for future generations that would otherwise be slaves and in bondage. Everything you do now will drastically change the course of humanity not so far in the future, stay the course and keep the good fight.

          • Tor Munkov
            December 16, 2012 at 4:21 am

            Original Taken Movie Quote:

            Bryan Mills: The next part is very important. They’re going to take you.

            Corrected Taken Movie Quote:

            Bryan Mills: The next part is very important. Fire warning shots at your kidnappers. That way, they’ll move along and try to take someone else, why risk it with an armed person?

          • me
            December 17, 2012 at 5:40 am

            God does not crush peoples skulls HotRod. God doesn’t do anything. If the world is a mess it is because that is how you/we made it. God loves people more than anything. I guess that’s why some angels were jealous. When you can be totally messed up and know that there is one thing that loves you more than anything, no matter what, well…

          • Hot Rod
            December 19, 2012 at 1:31 am

            @me
            “God does not crush peoples skulls HotRod.”

            I understand and if you could see my previous posts you would see that I do not advocate any form of violence. My statement of crushing skulls is more metaphorical in destroying the foundation of evil, than in physically crushing another man’s skull. But I do appreciate that you bring this point out as I can understand how someone who doesn’t know me would interpret it literally. I shake with fear the day I would ever have to kill another even for self defense. I want no more blood on my hands nor on anyone elses, hence why I practice and preach peacefull defiance. Nor am I an armchair warrior promoting others to take up arms for me or anyone else or in God’s namesake. When I use crushing skull’s in God’s name you can be assured I mean the thinking orgainism of evil thought and not a human brain.

            Now as far as using physical force to stop another mans intent on causing evil such as murdering your loved one or say raping a man’s daughter. It very clear that the God or any reasonable intelligence understands and even approves of physical personal defense including crushing that mans evil intent or his evil head if it needs to be so. I believe David and Goliath is one such case that from a biblical estate God probably gave David the strength, courage, and immunity to do such. I also believe that Jesus told his disciples to sell thier cloaks and buy swords for protection is another point. And even though I’m not a Paul subscriber there are plenty of references to the morality of self defense even with him, even though I could really care less what he has to say really and hence I’m not really a contemporary Christian. Call me a protestor of Protestors of faith, but still getting the message of the real Christ Yeshua loud and clear. Therefore I’m only metaphorically speaking about crushing evil’s head when the assault can only be handled at a lower level because of its aggression level is much lower than primal. I am pro second amendment henceforth, and I believe a high caliber rifle or any other necessary weapon can be highly effective at stopping a lone thug with evil intent. Is the government plural “thugs”? They sure as heck can be, though I don’t advocate that because simply there are much better ways to tackle a group of people on the wrong side of history/God at this place and time of growing tyranny. When it comes to soldiers bashing down a man’s castle and group raping say a woman or girl in your company, then the gloves come off and I will resort to much heavier handed techniques of defense against this sort of predation as any reasonable person of God would whether a lone thug or a group of them wearing costumes and badges.

            Most of these concerns are of not worth worrying about because I believe that we are actually winning this war with our minds and beliefs. I believe that great things and a Golden Age of freedom and technology. The more brilliant and enlightened technologist we bring on our side the faster pace we will leave behind the unrighteous, they simply will not have the man power nor desire to keep up with the fast growing tree of liberty. Nor will this tree of liberty require any watering with blood. And I believe that God (or I should say greater intelligence) is going to place us all on the right track without a physical confrontation, simply because this God is a creator and not destructor. This is what happens when people become spiritually awake as is happening now. Thankfully we have great speakers such as Eric and others at Lew. With enough critical mass of the truly productive and technical savvy this movement will be viral and the only thing that would make it get ugly is if the other side can not win their side on their own merits and resort to evil violence. Where it would go from there, or where it is most likely to go from here is really up to us and the goal is to maximize Godly or intelligent growth with the least to no loss of property and peoples.

            Best Regards,
            HotRod

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          December 16, 2012 at 1:08 pm

          Such multiple murders were unheard and probably even unthought of until many years after I left school in 1953.

          Tinsley Grey Sammons (1936 –)

          • Boothe
            December 18, 2012 at 2:04 pm

            Uh…Tinsley, the worst school massacre occurred in 1927: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            December 18, 2012 at 7:47 pm

            Thank you Boothe. I was unaware of the incident and I assure all that it will not go unmentioned in the future.

            Viva Internet and the WHOLE truth.

            tgsam

        • J
          December 17, 2012 at 5:02 pm

          Eric,
          I’m a 65YO Boomer. I’m pretty sure that Autism was virtually non-existent when I was growing up. The difference then was that meals were prepared from scratch raw ingredients, unlike the processed chemical laden garbage from chemical laden containers that is served up to the innocent children of today, along with state mandated poisonous injections and vaccinations. It’s no wonder the child of today has a good opportunity to become a member of the drool gang as he goes unoticed by clover parents who spend all their time on the state’s treadmill to nowhere.

          • Boothe
            December 18, 2012 at 2:14 pm

            We had close personal friends with a son diagnosed with ADHD and being doped up on Ritalin (i.e. Kiddie Cocaine). We were home-schooling our son at that time. He was very bright, energetic, animated and imaginative (i.e. ADHD or more accurately NHBS – Normal Healthy Boy Syndrome). We encouraged this couple to pull their son out of child prison and take him off refined sugar products. They did so; once he was properly challenged, engaged and off the simple carbs, he was healed! His parents couldn’t believe the difference. We’ve seen this same thing play out on numerous other occasions. The state and its schools should come with a warning label just like a pack of cigarettes…

          • methylamine
            December 18, 2012 at 4:23 pm

            @Boothe–

            Pack of cigarettes? No, government schools are as deadly as a vial of strychnine.

            And on nutrition vs. ADHD–YES! Take them off all simple sugars, and preferably off all wheat…

            The ideal is a ketogenic diet–primal/paleo, extremely low-carb, high-fat and high-protein.

            The brain works ideally on a mixture of 20% glucose and 80% ketones.

            Try adding a few tablespoons of coconut oil, the easiest fat for the body to transform into brain-feeding ketone bodies.

      • Kevin McCune
        December 17, 2012 at 10:09 am

        People have it too easy now,mandatory boot camp after a certain age-autism didnt exist in my age group either.
        I came up in the 2.5 world called Appliachia,my child wasnt Golden,didnt have much-but was taught to respect others( my biggest advantage as a child? no TV for many years)-Kevin

  4. December 15, 2012 at 2:49 pm

    Dear Eric,

    Oh yeah, Telefon. I watched that again on TV a couple of years ago. Saw it first run in the theaters when it first came out. Good flick.

    Lee Remick was one of my faves. She was one of the “smart sexy” female stars. The opposite of a bimbo.

    The TV series “Homeland” is vaguely reminiscent of “Telefon.”

    • Tor Munkov
      December 15, 2012 at 6:50 pm

      Looks good, bookmarked the full movie for later. Thanks in advance to MOVIEMANIAK420 for his “work” http://veehd.com/search?usr=3314&t=abc&page=56

      Nicolai Dalchimsky: “The woods are lovely, dark, and deep, but I have promises to keep. And miles to go before I sleep, and miles to go before I sleep. Remember. Miles to go before I sleep…”

      Worst woods to be thrown in, 66 years running?
      Tavistock Institute Woods, of the World Federation for Mental Health, funded by the Rockefeller Foundation.

  5. BrentP
    December 15, 2012 at 4:07 pm

    My argument as I began to see the cries for control for restriction is simple. Restricting people’s lives based upon extreme statistical outliers is not what what most people would call life.

    There over 300 million people in this country and six sigma is 3.4 defects per million as I recall. That’s over a thousand people. We are looking at something well under a six sigma defect rate.

    Furthermore, people have lost their historical perspective. The Bath School disaster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster was accomplished without a shooting a single person.

    • Rog
      December 17, 2012 at 4:44 pm

      Here’s some interesting stuff. CBS reports ”
      Police found two semi-automatic handguns with the gunman inside the school: a Glock 9mm and a Sig Sauer pistol.

      The gunman was armed with a Glock 9mm semi-automatic pistol a Sig Sauer semi-automatic pistol.

      Police also found a semi-automatic Bushmaster .223 caliber rifle inside the car he drove to the school, his mother’s car, and shell casings inside the school”.http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57559336/conn-school-shooting-what-we-know/

      And,”In what appeared to be an uncomfortable moment for Carver, he said all of the victims he had examined had all been shot by a Bushmaster .223 caliber assault rifle, one of at least two weapons Adam Lanza, the 20-year-old suspected shooter, used to commit one of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history.”http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/medical-examiner-sandy-hook-victims-died-multiple-gunshot-211722237.html

      Did you get that? the “assult” rifle was found inside the car. He was found with a 9mm glock and a 10mm sig sauer. No one was shot with these rounds. These accounts have disappeared from the news cycle. Two other shooters were apprehended one, running from the school and one on the ground in the parking lot. I can’t find that link anymore.

      The stories are changing. I hope you all understand the significance of this. Something is very rotten in Denmark.

      • methylamine
        December 17, 2012 at 5:43 pm

        I’m all over it, Rog, thanks–Alex Jones had a long run on this Friday and I’m sure he’ll follow up on his Sunday and Monday broadcasts.

        It stinks to high heaven–the usual shifting story, the sudden, massive fed-cop intervention. The questions about multiple shooters, and those stories getting scrubbed from dinosaur media.

        And to all those here who’ve commented on the choice of weapons…oh ye of little faith, I believe a Connecticut school teacher had a Sig, a Glock, and an AR. Hold on I hear the Easter Bunny knocking, he’s brought Santa, and the elves are throwing me a Prozac Party.

        I’m really impressed with the forensic acumen of the investigators, who’ve determined the shots were from a Bushmaster AR. You know, because it’s obvious they weren’t from a Rock River. Or Colt. Or DPMS. No, definitely Bushmaster.

        Here’s the silver lining: my wife’s partner, and her husband who’s an ex-cop and a decent guy, BOTH said this morning they thought it was a false flag. I have never heard them talking like that before. Yes, they’re preppers, but they’re strictly in the left/right Matrix…their daughter’s in the military. And yet, this all stinks so much that she took the time to call ME and ask me what I thought!

        People are waking so fast the PTB are shitting their pants.

        The Caeusescu execution–coming soon to a town near you.

  6. Blake
    December 15, 2012 at 4:31 pm

    The fact the so many seemingly intelligent people truly believe that someone that has lost it enough to commit the worst crime imaginable: mass murder and suicide – is going to think twice when he sees the “no guns allowed” sticker never ceases to amaze me.

    To accept this as rational, you must also accept this as rational:

    Set the posted speed limit within 5 miles of any bank at 3 mph. This way – the bank robbers can’t get away without being caught by the police. You know – because the criminals that just committed armed bank robbery would never think about breaking the posted limit during their getaway.

    Or do these people believe that more gun control – even up to banning all guns completely – will make them disappear?

    Do they realize that banning crack, cocaine, heroin, and meth – everywhere – has failed to make them unavailable?

    I would say “unbelieveable,” but have stricken the word from my vocabulary.

  7. Tor Munkov
    December 15, 2012 at 5:02 pm

    http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us/Portals/Newtown/District/images/JLM%20Train/JLM%20images/Main%20page%20pics/character%20tree10-23-12.png?dummy=439

    A READING FROM THE NEWTOWN PUBLIC SCHOOLS CORE BELIEFS GOSPEL…

    WE BELIEVE THAT:

    1 Each individual is unique and has value.
    2 Everyone can and will learn well.
    3 It takes effort and persistence to achieve one’s full potential.
    4 High expectations inspire higher level of performance.
    5 Honesty, integrity, respect, and open communication build trust.
    6 Quality education expands the opportunities for individuals and is vital to the success of the entire community.
    7 Educating children is a shared responsibility of the
    entire community.
    8 Family is a critical influence in each individual’s development.
    9 Understanding all forms of diversity is essential in a global society.
    10 All individuals are responsible for their behavior and choices.
    11 Educated and involved citizens are essential for sustaining a democratic society.
    12 Everyone has the responsibility to contribute to the greater good of the community.
    13 Continuous improvement requires the courage to change.

    3 Primrose Street, Newtown, CT 06470.
    203-270-4867 203-426-7616

  8. a name goes here
    December 15, 2012 at 5:44 pm

    Over in China a freak fruitcake attacked kids with a knife on the same day as Connecticut. Are they prattling on about knife control in China? I’m sure Comrade Chairman Hussein is so heartbroken those kids won’t grow up to be dependents on uncle sam’s plantation. Why he is postponing his Hawaii vacation as soon as he navigates that 54 christmas tree maze. It is hard work taxing and redistributing for the middle class and he needs a break. Comrade Chairman Hussein fears guns in the hands of Americans since they will be able to fight back against his and Billy Ayers golden communist paradise plans. The shooter was apparently autistic and on SSRI’s which are known to cause erratic and violent behavior. So how about SSRI control? The rifle belonged to his mother. The local AM station has been covering this story and nothing else since noon yesterday. I’m thinking of calling and telling them to please talk about something else.

    • December 16, 2012 at 1:08 am

      Dear “a name”

      Yeah. I notices that report too.

      Sad to say my native China, including the Taiwan region, has always had gun control, for centuries, ever since the invention of gunpowder and primitive muzzle loading matchlocks in China.

      How sad that “The Government” in the land where gunpowder and early guns were invented forbade the people from keeping and bearing arms.

      I always think of the Rape of Nanking. An estimated quarter of a million civilians were slaughtered by Japanese fascists in a month long orgy of savagery.

      I always think, “what if” the populace in China had been more like the populace in Afghanistan? Or the minutemen in the Thirteen Colonies? Or the Swiss when the Nazis judiciously bypassed Switzerland in their sweep across Europe?

      What if those quarter of a million victims each had a Mauser 98? The outcome would have been very different.

      The Japanese were the primary culprits of course.

      But “The Government” of China was also an indirect contributor to their deaths. Its “gun control” policy rendered them utterly defenseless.

      Just like the US government left “the children” in Sandy Hook utterly defenseless against Adam Lanza.

      Never forget that “gun control” is not English. It is Orwellian Newspeak. Translated into English it means “victim disarmament.”

      • IndividualAudienceMember
        December 16, 2012 at 1:48 am

        The government… was also an indirect contributor to their deaths.

        Got that right.

        It’s sad that so many People fail to see this.

        • December 16, 2012 at 5:56 am

          Dear IAM,

          Maybe a multimillion dollar law suit naming the the various and sundry “competent authorities” as defendants is in order?

          Don’t you just love that term? “Competent authorities?”

          Instead of always fighting a rear guard action, why not go on the offensive?

      • Ed
        December 17, 2012 at 12:19 pm

        “slaughtered by Japanese fascists” They were slaughtered by Japanese soldiers, not fascists.

        OK, sorry for nitpicking. I agree with the rest of what you wrote.

      • rEVOLutionary
        December 17, 2012 at 5:25 pm

        True gun control means hitting your target.
        Nothing will stop the wacko who is intent on taking himself out, but not alone. But just the possibility that there might be an armed defender will make some rethink their plans, even if there is not actually one there.
        And if there is someone there, they hopefully can at least decrease the death toll by taking out the bad guy before he does more damage.
        And when you talk about prohibiting things, don’t forget Prohibition of alcohol and how well that worked.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      December 16, 2012 at 1:18 pm

      Do we now arrest the licensed EXPERT who prescribed the drug(s) and charge him or her with being accessory in the fact?

      tgsasm

  9. 3DShooter
    December 15, 2012 at 6:48 pm

    This was a atrocious act by a disturbed individual and the clover control freaks couldn’t wait to start waiving the ‘bloody shirt’ of exploitation. It is just disgusting . . .

    Instead of looking at guns, how about people start looking at the environment that breeds this callous conduct. Divorced overbearing single mothers, a school where it is unlikely that there was a single male to be found. The pinnacle of a feminist society where men have become disposable and increasingly disenfranchised is one which breeds this kind of aberrant behavior.

    May the families of these little guys eventually find peace.

    • Runaway slave
      December 16, 2012 at 1:06 pm

      Why dont they ban schools, there really dangerous now adays!

      • rEVOLutionary
        December 17, 2012 at 5:45 pm

        No, don’t ban all schools. Just gunverment schools.

  10. December 15, 2012 at 8:41 pm

    Clover (in a typical appeal to emotion): What if those children were yours? Why is it that countries like Great Britain, Germany, and others have so few murders and rampages like this and have strict gun control laws? How many more Newtowns do we need to experience before we stop the madness?

    Me: Hey, I won’t stop you from imposing strict rules on gun use on your neighbors. If they disobey, feel free to fine them. If they don’t pay the fine, throw them into a cage. If they resist being thrown into a cage, shoot them.

    Clover: Gee, I couldn’t do that.

    Me: Why not?

    Clover: I don’t have the right to.

    Me: OK, then who has the right?

    Clover: The government.

    Me: Who gives the government the right to do that?

    Clover: We the people.

    Me: Wait. Are you telling me that you can delegate a right you don’t have to some other group of individuals calling itself government, and that they can do on your behalf that which you yourself cannot do?

    Clover: (Some stupid, cognitively dissonant excuse supporting of his illogical pea-brain position)

  11. Tor Munkov
    December 15, 2012 at 8:42 pm

    There’s a sad sort of clanging from the clock in Sandy Hook. And the bells in the steeple too. And up in the nursery an absurd little bird. Is popping out to say “cuckoo.” Cuckoo, cuckoo

    Regretfully they tell us Cuckoo, cuckoo. But firmly they compel us Cuckoo, cuckoo. To say goodbye. Cuckoo! to you So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, good night. I hate to go and leave this pretty sight.

    So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, adieu. Adieu, adieu, to yieu and yieu and yieu. So long, farewell, au revoir, auf wiedersehen.
    I’d like to stay and taste my first champagne.

    So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, goodbye. I leave and heave a sigh and say goodbye — Goodbye! I’m glad to go, I cannot tell a lie. I flit, I float, I fleetly flee, I fly.

    Gretl: The sun has gone to bed and so must I

    So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, goodbye
    Goodbye, goodbye, goodbye. Goodbye!

    • Tor Munkov
      December 15, 2012 at 8:55 pm

      This movie illustrates what teaching looks like without the prison matron matrix bull dyke collectivist bargainers. With a proper outdoor real world class room setting and an older non-psycopath at the helm.

  12. December 15, 2012 at 10:36 pm

    Does anyone remember the “second man” they arrested in the woods outside the school? I’m not talking about the brother. This guy had camo pants and a black jacket. He was mentioned frequently on TV for the first couple of hours….then all references totally disappeared. Can you say “mind control handler?”

    • December 15, 2012 at 10:50 pm

      Here’s a link to an article about the “second man” that has not been pulled. 12th paragraph. yet.http://connecticut.cbslocal.com/2012/12/14/school-shooting-leaves-multiple-injured/
      Just for documentation, you might want to download this.

    • December 16, 2012 at 12:44 am

      Extra, extra creepy… and yeah, I noticed it, too.

      Similar to the Aurora shooting…

      • liberranter
        December 16, 2012 at 6:30 am

        You’ve given me the perfect opening, Eric.

        Call me an incurable cynic, but the first thought that came into my head when I heard about this shooting was “I guess this is the latest attempt at a ‘False Flag’ op. Since the Aurora shooting fell flat, this their ‘next try’.”

        Sorry, but this “one-school-shooting-each-quarter” trend just smells like pure State-sponsored terrorism to me. There is NO WAY this was a “random” event!

        I actually thought about ranting about this over on my own blog, but I decided that I’m not going to add any more digital ink of my own to the coverage of this event. Tragic as it is, “they” want us to fixate on this – for all the wrong reasons. I’m just not gonna swallow the bait.

        • December 16, 2012 at 9:44 am

          Ditto, Lib –

          I just finished posting a similar reply to someone else.

          The Batman thing flopped. It “went away” real fast once certain elements of the story began to get traction. Now, a bunch of dead kindergarten kids. What’s next if this one doesn’t do the trick?

          It’s just too convenient – and weird – that literally all of a sudden we’re having shootings of this sort occur every couple of months.

          And, here’s the thing: Though it seems crazy – literally, shit-statue carving nuts – to imagine such a thing could have been planned and egged on by the government… one must always always keep in mind what the government has already proved itself to be capable of.

          This is an entity (and people) that engages in deliberate mass murder on a regular basis, for calculated reasons.

          What’s 27 kids to such creatures?

          • MoT
            December 16, 2012 at 10:05 am

            Eric, I’ve said this ever since 9/11. I’ve asked people that if they could put themselves in the shoes of some sociopath, where they knew that there were no consequences or even a hint of getting caught even at the cost of three thousand plus lives, if they wouldn’t go ahead and do it? Think about it…. that’s about the equivalent of the nations highway death toll for just one month! What’s one month of traffic fatalities when you can get filthy rich and tool over all the proles in the process! It should be obvious that they’re going to do it. Why? Because they can and because they’ve gotten away with it for decades.

          • December 16, 2012 at 10:18 am

            Dear Eric,

            Yeah. They’re going to have to escalate the atrocities.

            They’re going to have to send one of their ciphers into a hospital nursery and massacre the infants in the incubators.

            I almost hesitate to write this. Tempting fate, and all that.

            But these sociopaths are probably already in the advance stages of planning some even more appalling atrocity, and probably already have a code name for the operation.

          • December 16, 2012 at 10:35 am

            Indeed.

            Nietzsche said something along the lines of looking into the abyss. It’s the only way to see monsters – but then, you are in peril of becoming one yourself.

            I think most people cannot conceive of such things as we’ve been discussing because they aren’t sociopaths. I don’t know how it is that we can conceive of them and yet not be sociopaths. Perhaps it’s because we’ve come to know our subject through personal experience. Perhaps because we’ve got a greater capacity to grasp what people – some people – are capable of by dint of coming to terms with certain facts. Most people turn away, instinctively. But we just have to know.

            And that, I expect, is how it is we know.

          • December 16, 2012 at 10:59 am

            Jeez Eric!

            That was heavy!

            LOL.

          • December 16, 2012 at 11:28 am

            It was – but then, so is the subject.

            Imagine what it takes to cold-heartedly sanction the murder of a bunch of kindergarten kids. Or countenance the destruction of a skyscraper full of innocent people. Or send drones to blow up people – including mothers and children and old people who just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time… .

            It boggles the mind.

          • December 16, 2012 at 11:00 am

            Dear Eric,

            Kidding aside, agree totally.

          • DD
            December 16, 2012 at 11:34 am

            It may come from empathy…Putting yourself in other people’s shoes in order to understand where they come from. It works with the psychopaths as well if you have the stomach for such thoughts.

            “What would you do if you wanted to exterminate 6 billion people and own the remaining 1 billion as your slaves?”

            That’s the shit evolved human beings have to deal with on this primitive fucking planet.

            Government/Religion Terrorist Cartel – Murdering and enslaving you for your own good…Established 1000 BC.

          • December 16, 2012 at 12:12 pm

            Government/Religion Terrorist Cartel – Murdering and enslaving you for your own good…Established 1000 BC

            More like 9000 BC:

            Bad Quaker – 0220 pc157 In The Mud; Eating Worms; Arguing With The King

            Ben starts talking about the origins of the state in Jericho at around the 20 minute mark. Good listen.

          • December 16, 2012 at 12:49 pm

            Dear Eric,

            We have become real life versions of Jerry Fletcher, the protagonist portrayed by Mel Gibson in the political thriller “Conspiracy Theory.” Fletcher’s “paranoid ravings” turn out to be dead on.

            The day to day reality we are living, Project Northwoods, Oklahoma City, and 9/11, is more bizarre than the most far out conspiracy thriller Hollywood has ever filmed.

            Everyone has probably seen the documentary “9/11: Explosive Evidence — Experts Speak Out,” produced by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

            But I mention it because of the segment at the end. It includes interviews with psychologists who explain how the 9/11 conspirators are protected, ironically, by the public’s incredulity. To put it bluntly, the sheeple can’t believe “our government” could do this to us.

            Hint: It’s not “our government.” It’s “their government.”

            That’s why I’m looking forward to “September Morn.” As far as I know, it is the first non-documentary to directly address the concerns of 9/11 truth movement people such as ourselves.

          • BrentP
            December 16, 2012 at 3:37 pm

            ‘their government’. I’ve started to use the term ‘your government’ when arguing with statists. It’s not ‘our’ government, it’s the government of the people who run it and the people who want it.

          • December 16, 2012 at 5:29 pm

            I’ve been using “your government” for years. Statists hate it, and usually respond with “It’s your government, too, whether you want it or not” I try to give them some reasonable reply back like :freedom of association” and such, but the words usually just slide off of their Teflon coated brains.

          • MoT
            December 16, 2012 at 6:29 pm

            @Bevin… I have to laugh when people who’re typically brainwashed use the phrase “Conspiracy Theory”. I ask them “Where is the “theory” in the face of the facts that we have before us?” That usually gets the nodding heads and blinking eyes going. As I read somewhere they said “I’m not interested in conspiracy theories only in the facts of conspiracy”

            The founders of the US were “conspiracists” themselves for christ sakes! They weren’t bellowing it from the roof tops and using the robotic “If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear” line of shit. They’d have hanged! So what’s different from today, eh?

            There are a lot more angry people out there who’re well aware of the game that’s going down than are reported because it would likely overwhelm the media indoctrination centers, AKA Mainstream Propaganda Outlets. I’ve read plenty of it even though there are plenty of knuckleheads who believe otherwise. When the government, THEIR governments, bullets start flying, I wonder just how long it’ll take before they wake up.

          • December 16, 2012 at 11:26 pm

            Dear Brent,

            It’s not ‘our’ government, it’s the government of the people who run it and the people who want it.

            Damned straight!

            I love the way Walter Block describes coerced “citizenship” in the LRC podcast on the Non-Aggression Axiom:

            “Where’s the evidence that I joined this club?”

          • December 16, 2012 at 11:35 pm

            Dear lberns1,

            “It’s your government, too, whether you want it or not”

            “… whether you want it or not.”

            Yup. So much for “land of the free.”

            The Mafiosi with a Flag want their monthly payments for “protection.”

            Whether you want their “protection” is irrelevant.

            I’m gonna start using “your government” too. Don’t know why it never occurred to me earlier.

            It’s something I sometimes invoke in written rebuttals. But somehow it never occurred to me to use it in realtime verbal arguments.

          • December 16, 2012 at 11:42 pm

            Dear MoT,

            I ask them “Where is the “theory” in the face of the facts that we have before us?”

            Right!

            I like the way Charlie Sheen put it on The Alex Jones Show. Sheen said the biggest conspiracy theory was put out by the government itself.

            “We’re not the conspiracy theorists on this particular issue. It seems to me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75% of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory.”

            My estimation of Sheen shot way up after that.

          • Me2
            December 17, 2012 at 1:04 am

            Bevin – “They’re going to have to send one of their ciphers into a hospital nursery and massacre the infants in the incubators. ”

            It’s not like they haven’t used something similar before for propaganda. Remember the Iraqi’s dumping babies out of incubators in Kuwait?

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_%28testimony%29

          • December 17, 2012 at 1:07 am

            Dear Eric, DD,

            “… thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds [the masses] more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie… It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation.”
            —Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X

            It is impossible for a building to collapse straight down into its own footprint at free fall speed unless one first pulverizes the structural framework below with explosives.

            Otherwise the physical resistance it offers the collapsing structure above will result in a long, protracted and painfully obvious delay.

            But as the architect of the false flag Reichstag Fire himself so gleefully noted:

            “Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation.”

          • December 17, 2012 at 10:08 am

            Morning, Bevin!

            Der Fuhrer’s manifesto is hard going, but well worth reading as doing so helps one understand the mentality we’re dealing with.

            One of the (many) things about nahnleven that stinks to high heaven is the absence of photos/videos of the airplane that – allegedly – struck the five-sided structure just across the Potomac river. Not chunks afterward. The alleged airplane in flight.

            I grew up in the DC area. Lived there until early ’04. Anyone who knows the area knows that on a nice warm, sunny day – a day like nahnleven – there will be literally thousands of tourists with cameras and video recorders in close proximity to the structure in question. Not to mention all the people who just live there. Numerous high-density condos and so on.

            Yet no one – apparently – took pictures or film of a commercial jet flying erratically and toward its intended target. Not one of the thousands of people thought to look up – after having heard the roar of two GE high bypass turbofans … on a day when everyone knew that two commercial jets had already been flown into the two you know whats in Noo Yoik.

            There is only – as far as I know – the one heavily edited film taken by a security camera at the point of impact.

            The absence of any still pics or video of the airplane in flight is extremely suspicious. It defies belief, as far as I am concerned.

            This business got me to questioning other aspects of the Official Fable. Such as the likelihood that a person conceded to be a barely competent Cessna pilot could have executed the series of maneuvers we’re told he did – in a heavy commercial jet not designed to perform acrobatic maneuvers such as banking turns.

            As with Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, after a certain point, it’s no longer possible to believe.

          • December 17, 2012 at 1:20 am

            Dear Me2,

            Quite right.

            I remember being taken in by that tearful account of the looted incubators back in 91.

            Turned out the “eyewitness” was a shill.

            The chilling thing is that the Kuwaiti incubators lie did not involve killing the Kuwaiti infants.

            The nomenklatura’s false flag operations on the other hand, require just such inconceivable atrocities.

          • December 19, 2012 at 3:19 am

            Dear Eric,

            Re: the alleged airliner crash into the Pentagon.

            Sorry I missed your response. Because of the time zone difference, it was already off the “What’s Happening?” list.

            I’ve probably missed more than a few responses, and for that I apologize.

            Yup. The glaring impossibilities keep adding up — to hoax, to staged agitprop, to false flag operations.

            It is only our inability to contemplate the depths of the NWO’s depravity that shields them from the increasingly obvious truth.

            It was an inside job.

          • December 19, 2012 at 11:11 am

            Morning, Bevin!

            Yup – something is very rotten in Denmark…

            We’re told the AA 757 piloted by the barely-able-to-fly a Cessna “terrorist” executed a banking corkscrew maneuver to descend from altitude to near ground level – and then literally flew mere feet (inches, even) off the ground for the last portion of its journey, prior to impacting the five-sided hive.

            Literally incredible. Not credible. Defies belief.

            I’ve mentioned this before: I have a friend who flew combat in F4s in Vietnam. This carrier-qualified aviator doesn’t buy The Story. He’s told me it would be a challenge for an experienced pilot to maneuver a heavy jet the way our alleged “terrorist” supposedly maneuvered it.

          • December 19, 2012 at 12:18 pm

            Dear Eric,

            “Literally incredible. Not credible. Defies belief.”

            Amen.

            It’s gratifying how professionals in various fields have applied their expertise to debunking various aspects of the official fairy tale.

            Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have blown the WTC fairy tale out of the water. For me, a retired architect, that’s the easiest lie to spot.

            Meanwhile Pilots for 9/11 Truth have blown the Pentagon fairy tale out of the water as well.

            You probably watched this video long ago. But in case others haven’t, here’s the URL.

            Long story short. The alleged 757 “flight” into the Pentagon was aeronautically impossible, just as the alleged “collapse” of the WTC Towers was architecturally and structurally impossible.

            The official fairy tale is consistent in one respect. It is consistently in defiance of elementary physics.

  13. skunkbear
    December 16, 2012 at 12:58 am

    Eric said: “It is the adults in the room…”

    And therein lies the problem – there are so few adults left in Amerika. The fact remains: the vast majority of Amerikans are dolts. Dolts that are easily manipulated by the conniving grifters running the show: politicians, media whores, educrats, banksters, etc. They simply cannot be salvaged because they do not want to be. They want their bread and circuses and nothing else matters to their childish minds.

    We few, we thinking few, are outnumbered. Overwhelmingly so. Do not think of me as a coward but I think the only hope for us adults lies in secession. I see no other solution.

    • IndivdualAudienceMember
      December 16, 2012 at 1:57 am

      As if it matters, I don’t see anything cowardly.

      Also, maybe it’s only a partial solution, but the other solution is to find freedom within yourself and to live that way no matter the crazyness.

      Be a freedomista.

      Of course, YMMV.

    • DD
      December 16, 2012 at 12:11 pm

      Agreed.

      Government’s schools, TV broadcasts, and “food pyramid” poisoning has turned Amerikans into retarded sociopathic brats – life-sucking sissified-nanny meat-sacks – Clovers. Individual secession is the only answer. You can find freedom in poor countries where the political terrorist class has little power because of their unproductive and disobeying tax cattle…Avoid countries with oil and gas reserves. Find a nice island and chase native girls around whilst ripping-off the Clover tourists. I’m outta here.

  14. skunkbear
    December 16, 2012 at 1:16 am

    And I ditto Brad Smith as to the cause of this terrible shooting: follow the medications.

    It won’t come out right away but in six months or so on page G17 of the NYT there will be a little blurb about how the shooter had previously been on some type of anti-psychotic drug (for ADD or HADD or some such). Same for the Batman theater shooter.

    There is a reason why the military will not accept kids who were force fed Ritalin by the gubment skools. But since there are no investigative reporters willing to take on Big Pharma this aspect of these insane killings will be kept from the public.

    Follow the money and eventually you will find a gubment racket…

    • MoT
      December 16, 2012 at 6:35 pm

      Of course, ironically enough, when our previously non-medicated warriors return from doing their dastardly deeds they’re doped up high as a kite just to keep the lid on the ever growing suicide and violence epidemic. Coincidence?

  15. methylamine
    December 16, 2012 at 1:34 am

    I had an epiphany with a co-worker yesterday. I’m shortening it slightly but it came out in about a minute of conversation:

    She started off on a “…but maybe some reasonable controls on those assault rifles…” tack.

    I didn’t want to hear it; I just can’t take it anymore, we’re too far gone to be polite.

    I cut her off–”Mary*, quit it. Seriously. Stop right there–because it’s thoughts like THAT, that got those kids killed!”

    “What do you mean? It’s because a crazy guy could get guns!”

    “No. The problem isn’t guns, or what kind of guns, it’s who’s got the guns. We have more than 20,000 gun control laws and all they do is hurt people. Most or all of those kids would be alive if the teachers had guns of their own.”

    “You want the teachers to carry guns, too?”

    “Do you want to prevent tragedies like that from happening? Then the only morally correct option is to get back to individual rights. Don’t you think everyone has a right to defend their own life? And others’?”

    She was actually listening; she’s not a full clover, but she was ready to jump on the usual “reasonable controls” railroad. We briefly went down the “but why do they need those military guns” line of thought–and I steered her back to the “what kind of guns” straw-man to point out again–They Exist.

    I felt powerfully that I had the moral high ground–and I’ve never really felt it before in these arguments.

    But we DO. We just have to internalize it–and then argue from it. I didn’t throw out statistics–of which there are certainly enough to back the argument if it goes that way.

    * her real name

    • Boothe
      December 16, 2012 at 3:49 am

      Methyl, keep up the good work. When Minnesota passed their CCW law some of the hotels there immediately posted circle-bar-handgun signs on premises. I was traveling up there quite a lot and would usually stay at the full service Holiday Inn by the airport the night before my departure flight. They posted it no guns allowed. I had the clerk and the manager stunned when I asked why they wanted to put their patrons in danger of life and limb. They wanted to know how I thought they had done that. So I explained that by posting the premises, they were ensuring that only the law abiding and upright would leave their weapons outside; they had created the perfect environment for an armed criminal to commit robbery and murder with no fear of being stopped in the act. They now had a gun free crime zone. I could tell they both got it, but neither of them knew how to respond. I asked them to pass my concerns on up the chain of command. We need to take every opportunity we can to make this point with anyone that will listen.

      • December 16, 2012 at 7:32 am

        Dear Booth,

        Wonderful anecdote.

        I’m going to copying and pasting it into emails to my friends and acquaintances.

        It really zings in on the core issue.

    • December 16, 2012 at 7:03 am

      Dear meth,

      I felt powerfully that I had the moral high ground–and I’ve never really felt it before in these arguments.

      This is so important. The importance of this cannot be over-emphasized.

      I’ve contributed a lot of money to most of the gun rights groups over the years. But sad to say most of them don’t really know how to defend our gun rights.

      Most of the gun rights groups are about as inept at defending our gun rights, as the Republican Party is at defending our economic rights.

      The problem of course, is that although they are organized, and they are politically connected, they do not really understand the moral and ethical basis for gun rights.

      They do not really feel they have the moral high ground, even though they in fact have the moral high ground.

      This of course is Rand’s “unearned guilt” syndrome all over again.

      Until champions of individual rights and political liberty thoroughly understand what the moral high ground is, and become confident that they in fact hold it, they will keep fighting a rear guard action and keep losing ground to the statist/collectivists.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        December 16, 2012 at 2:14 pm

        THOMAS SZASZ

        For those who have an interest in so called mental disorders, I strongly recommend the opinions of Dr. Thomas Szasz. Would that America’s political office holders had the perception and inherent decency of the late Dr. Szasz.

        Tinsley Grey Sammons (1936 –)

        • methylamine
          December 16, 2012 at 7:55 pm

          Hear, Hear, Tinsley!

          Thomas Szasz–RIP, he died Sept 8–was the anti-psychiatry psychiatrist, a libertarian of the highest order.

          His prolific writings are a balm for the soul; logical, iconoclastic, and devastating to the PTB.

      • Tor Munkov
        December 16, 2012 at 3:30 pm

        Well said, Bevin.
        This incident illustrates conclusively why Nationalism and Christianity, are not the high moral ground, and “reasoning from first principles” is the high moral ground.

        Turning the other cheek; waiting for the minutemen; are both grotesquely absurd and unworkable. Nationalists & Christians reactively consult outdated tomes of dogma, they are unable and unwilling to adapt and solve the evolving challenges of unpatriotic and impious real people.

        “Buy more flags, say more prayers” they cackle callously, secure in their little bubbles of dutiful patronage.

        Not us. We respond in mind. We respond in body. We respond in action. Personally, I prefer these schools be disbanded, but that is neither here nor there. Here’s but one of the several common sense solutions offered by the Cantons of the Libertarian Confederacies:

        The talk about gun control is a variant of DENIAL. That D must be discarded, it forces a retreat to lower ground, and gives privateer and elected criminals the higher ground.

        These are the right D’s:

        DETER – Have alert, visible and armed security on site. Yesterday you had crossing guards. Tomorrow you will have schoolyard guards. Train and equip these schoolyard guards to a high standard and make their capabilities known (though the details of their response techniques should remain classified). Convince the potential attackers they won’t succeed in killing innocent targets if they come to your kid’s school.

        DETECT – Like Detectives, be ever vigilant for “clues.” Virtually every school attacker, student or terrorist, including Adam Lanza, visit their target. They analyze the availability of ingress and egress points. They ask questions about the site’s security preparations. They may photograph and/or sketch the area. Onsite human and video surveillance can help you recognize these recon missions.

        DELAY – Harden the target with parental patrol security checkpoints and random security patrols. Drill lockdown procedures to remove easy targets from their potential kill zone. Make sure the lock-down procedure includes the means to lock the doors to areas of refuge hopefully of the type witnessed in the movie “Panic Room”. Where possible, avoid the urge to evacuate anyone into an area not proven to be safe from armed attackers.

        DESTROY – If your site is still chosen as a target, you must respond quickly and forcefully. Seconds count, help is minutes away. In most incidents, the only chance available to save lives is an instant response by on-scene protectors, parents, and children. Best case, you will have the additional help of a single first arriving officer. At this point you are not just seeking to defeat the attackers.

        The armed contingent, the ones not in a secure room or able to leave the scene, must attack immediately, with maximum violence, and no intention of pulling back or giving up ground. Attack the intruder hard and fast and DESTROY them before they destroy more innocents.

        • December 17, 2012 at 6:51 am

          Dear Tor,

          Thanks.

          Champions of the free market have been yielding ground to coercive redistributionists for the last century, at least.

          Champions of the right to self defense have been yielding ground to victim disarmament clovers for the same reasons.

          It’s one thing to lose when one is in the wrong. That’s justice.

          It’s another thing to lose when one is in the right, but loses merely because one is cluelless about how to argue one’s case from the moral high ground.

          Never underestimate the importance of holding the moral high ground — and making sure that undecided elements open to persuasion sense that.

          The moral high ground works on both rational individuals and sheeple.

          Rational individuals are converted by the unassailable logic of the moral high ground.

          Even sheeple may be intimidated by the “branding” of the moral high ground.

          I’m not a a military vet, but holding the moral high ground is akin to holding the high ground on a battlefield. Your opponent is a sitting duck.

          • Tor Munkov
            December 17, 2012 at 8:52 am

            You need sharp elbows on that ground, Bevin.

            There’s 3.5 Billion Jew/Christian/Muslim redistributionists out there, and they reject the NAP in favor of a pseudo-altruistic three-card-monty blood game.

            It’s like they’re sitting in someone else’s seat and they know it. Take modern Christian socialists:

            To quickly summarize, but it’s good, on one hand, to hold meetings and distribute free loaves and fishes to your willing followers.

            It’s another, tragic thing, on the second hand, to be persecuted and forced to fight lions in arenas, and be cut down by swords on the cobblestones.

            It’s a third, horrific thing, on the third hand (please allow for rhetorical purposes), to start persecuting, looting, and caging whoever doesn’t want to redistribute all their loaves and fishes with people they don’t even know.

          • December 17, 2012 at 9:06 am

            Dear Tor,

            I’m not going to use words like “cakewalk” of course.

            LOL!

        • Jim
          December 17, 2012 at 7:08 pm

          Screw all that shit – HOMESCHOOL. Why are you handing your kids over to The State in the first place???

          • Greg
            December 17, 2012 at 10:53 pm

            Or send your kid to a private school where gunsmanship is part of the curriculum, there is a whole variety of guns on premises (safely stored of course) and the teachers are packing. I wonder if such a place exists and is not a military academy?

    • skunkbear
      December 16, 2012 at 2:09 pm

      meth said: “…I had the moral high ground…”

      Correctomundo meth!

      And we must be specific about what exactly is the basis of the moral high ground. It is simply this: it is the absolute right of every living being to defend itself. We humans do not have sharp claws or powerful fangs. What we do have is tools. And we have every right to use those tools to defend ourselves, our families, and our property (the fruit of our time and labor).

      Self defense is a human right, therefore gun ownership is a human right. This must be our argument. And we must do it vigorously!

      Here’s a tip for how to debate gun control with women: always make it about rape. “Why do you want to take away a woman’s ability to defend herself from a rapist?!” is my opening line about gun control with women. Readers here will know how to finish the debate but I also recommend inviting any of these women to the range with you. I have found that once a woman throws a few down range she will change her thinking almost immediately.

      And come Monday when this tragedy is being discussed around the water cooler, make sure you ask what would have been the outcome had that first grade teacher who put herself between her students and the killer had had a gun and could have shot back at the murderer rather than just stand there helplessly awaiting her doom.

      • methylamine
        December 16, 2012 at 8:00 pm

        Hi skunkbear–

        Absolutely, take them to the range! Once you demystify the ooga-booga-gun, they can start to see it as a tool; like a chain saw, it’s made for a purpose and it’s dangerous if misused. Nothing more.

        And I love the “defend-against-rape” argument! That’s how to hit them; use the same emotional techniques our enemies use!

        We can get to the logic of it later; but we need to do everything we can to wake them from the trance, first…and if that takes an emotional argument, so be it.

        “how would they defend against rape?”

        Brilliant!

    • MoT
      December 16, 2012 at 6:40 pm

      There are NO reasonable controls. Defined by whom? The gubmint? That right there tells you it’s a lie. If all the so-called “laws” already on the books worked, by the shear volume alone, then there shouldn’t be any gun violence, eh? They continuously come back to gun control of the populace but notice they won’t get rid of their own arsenals. Why don’t they take the proactive lead and disarm themselves entirely before asking others to do likewise? Ah! Bet they’ll squeal like the little piggies they are once you mention that.

    • Me2
      December 17, 2012 at 1:25 am

      Anyone else catch this bit:

      http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html

      Seems to have been left out of the mainstream reports.

      • mithrandir
        December 17, 2012 at 2:15 am

        Thanks for the article. It is good to highlight situations where an armed individual made a positive difference.

    • Glen2Gs
      December 17, 2012 at 6:09 am

      “You want the teachers to carry guns, too?”

      Yup….The problem isn’t too many guns, it’s too few guns.

      • BrentP
        December 17, 2012 at 6:20 am

        The problem, given the track record, is the government pharmaceutical cartel and its all too many damaging products.

  16. Olaf Koenders
    December 16, 2012 at 7:51 am

    You guys are lucky you have the right to bear arms, even if a bit suppressed lately. In Oz, we need a damn good reason, such as a farmer or target shooter, and it’s not an easy thing to get.

    Just for personal protection? No. The only one’s here with a clear ability to possess and use firearms are the bad guys – police and crims alike.

    As some have said already, I would prefer the teachers had the right to carry in every school. I continue hearing the laments of the clovers here saying that if the right to bear arms in the US was removed, this kind of thing wouldn’t happen. Geez, think of all the Columbine’s in the US and often in other countries that WOULDN’T have been as severe if teachers could carry.

    I believe in some parts of the world, carrying a firearm at all times is mandatory – sans crime. Correct me if I’m wrong.

    • December 16, 2012 at 9:28 am

      Like freedom from unreasonable searches (null and void) I suspect the right to keep and bear arms will soon be defunct as well.

      The spate of recent shootings smells – no, reeks – of false flag. How likely is it that in a matter of months several such incidents would just occur?

      Fast & Furious failed.

      This may work.

      Remember: These people are capable of anything.

      • skunkbear
        December 16, 2012 at 2:29 pm

        Yes it certainly reeks, Eric.

        The guy arrested in the woods,the witnesses from Aurora who said there was a second shooter,same for the Sikh Temple shooting – these are very plausible false flag ops. And ever so timely for exploitation…

      • clover
        December 16, 2012 at 5:23 pm

        Let us talk about freedom. Am I free to board a plane without having to worry about a gunman on board? Am I free of worrying that a bomb is on board? If the police stop the drunk on the road am I free from worrying that he will kill me or my family?

        freedom

        Tell us how free we really are if there is no security at all? Tell us how free we are if we have to wear a helmet build a crash cage in our cars because we start letting anything goes?

        Eric tell us how much freedom you really want.

        Then it comes down to the pictures in this article. Did the kids or parents give consent on publishing their pictures? Do they have any freedom of staying off of the internet? Do they have freedom from helping Eric make money on the internet? You say that a person’s rights are violated by being searched. Do the kids in this article have any rights or freedoms?

        • dom
          December 16, 2012 at 5:37 pm

          Hope you don’t mind, but I added an image of freedom to your post.

          • clover
            December 17, 2012 at 1:07 am

            CloverDom, what that picture you posted shows is that our security is working. When the terrorists can no longer carry a gun on them or a bomb in their carry-on, they start to resort to a lot harder things to get their weapons on the plane. When they have to resort to bombs in underwear and bombs in their shoes, it shoes that what they are doing is working. I am all for your rights. You have the right to not board a plane if you do not like any type of security.Clover

          • December 17, 2012 at 10:16 am

            Clover, how about a picture of a guard at a Super Max doing the same (and more) to a prisoner? Is that security working, too? Answer: No, it’s not. Somehow, the cons still get pretty much whatever they want – including weapons and drugs – despite the security. Do you really think an actual terrorist – someone with an organization behind him, probable access to military-level equipment and training – is less clever, less determined than a thug in prison? Are you that simple?

            Yes, you are.

            And because you are so simple – and so afraid – you’d rather have us all treated like prisoners in order to make you feel “safe.”

          • mithrandir
            December 17, 2012 at 2:24 am

            Clover,

            You might as well stay in bed in the fetal position.

            Having some dude stick his hand up into my groin does not make me feel safer. It makes me feel violated and is demeaning.

            Giving up essential freedoms for the illusion of safety guarantees one will lose both.

            It is not a all or nothing proposition. It is possible to have a security without treating all people as guilty.

          • December 17, 2012 at 2:27 am

            Clover, why don’t you go find yourself a nice little TSA agent, invite him over for a few drinks, then show him how much you really appreciate his service?

          • Me2
            December 17, 2012 at 2:36 am

            I assume Clover will not be happy until every passenger is hog tied and handcuffed to the seats, possibly sedated in order to fly. Can’t be too careful in the name of safety now can we Clover?

          • mithrandir
            December 17, 2012 at 2:39 am

            lberns1,

            What kind of sick SOB appreciates receiving that kind of service?

            People are NOT heifers or other types of livestock.

          • December 17, 2012 at 2:56 am

            What kind of sick SOB appreciates receiving that kind of service?

            Clover would.

          • December 17, 2012 at 3:07 am

            Dear dom,

            Two points.

            One. Clover “reasons”:

            “When they have to resort to bombs in underwear and bombs in their shoes, it shoes that what they are doing is working.”

            I trust everyone sees where this “logic” is leading?

            Metal detectors, scanners, groping, strip downs, body cavity searches, [ ? ], [ ? ],[ ? ]

            Two. Clover “reasons” that

            “I am all for your rights. You have the right to not board a plane if you do not like any type of security.”

            So why isn’t clover all for our right to board a plane without his idea of “security?”

            Why not allow passengers to decide what level of security they want?

            Clover can board the TSA gate rape plane. Libertarians can board the one without the “added safety measures.”

            Never mind. Rhetorical question.

            That’s not the way clovers “reason.” As many of us noted earlier, for clovers, everyone has to be a “member” whether they want to be or not.

          • dom
            December 17, 2012 at 3:24 am

            “what that picture you posted shows is that our security is working.”

            Then how come it hasn’t caught one terrorist?

          • BrentP
            December 17, 2012 at 3:47 am

            Dom, the answer is because there aren’t any. Not because if there were any they would detect them but because there simply aren’t any. They are just an idea like Santa Claus.

          • clover
            December 18, 2012 at 12:56 am

            OK. You all say that no security checks should be done. I would think that if any terrorists with even below mental ability would be smart enough to wrap a series of bombs around his waist before he boarded if he knew he would never be checked. Tell me, how many planes would it take to go down before you want security added back in? Clover

            Many years ago after a large number of planes went down by terrorists or were hi-jacked the government added metal detectors etc. That worked pretty good for a while. Then the terrorists started working around the security that was there and we needed to add more. Clover

            Millions of people would stop flying without any security. After the first dozen planes go down the airlines would go broke. No one would fly.

            Eric says that inmates get weapons so why have security? They get them through anyway. If they truly wanted weapons and drugs out of prisons it could be done. Just make it a federal offense for someone that brings the stuff in and do a thorough search. Many years ago I went into a couple of prisons as part of my job that I had at the time. I could have easily brought something in. I was not searched.

          • December 18, 2012 at 10:26 am

            Clover, do you ever actually read the posts you respond to before you respond to them? Or are you just incapable of comprehending the plain meaning of words – and series of words (that thing called a sentence)?

            No one here argued for “no security.” That’s a straw man of your invention.

            What has been argued against is this business of treating every person attempting to travel by air as a presumptive terrorist. Is your brain capable of appreciating the distinction?

            I suspect not.

            I’ve come to the conclusion you’re simply, well, simple.

            I don’t say that lightly – or out of meanness. It is rather a conclusion based on your apparent inability to grasp basic concepts. It’s not about agreeing or disagreeing. You just don’t get it.

            You routinely miss the point being made – and then blather on about something at best tangentially related. Your own posts evidence incredibly sloppy, low-wattage thinking (if it can be called that). Mostly, you just emote.

            There is no point in trying to have a discussion with you. Because it is not possible to discuss things with a person who will not or cannot acknowledge facts, who cannot reason. Who simply feels and believes.

          • BrentP
            December 18, 2012 at 5:09 am

            Many years ago after a large number of planes went down by terrorists or were hi-jacked the government added metal detectors etc.

            Are you delusional, a liar, or both?

            The number of planes crashed by ‘terrorists’ who boarded planes if you believe your government’s fable is three. All on one day in 2001.

            No planes were crashed before metal detectors. Your government’s fable says those in 2001 were armed with box cutters which should have been detected by the metal detectors and a level of weapon your current TSA still can’t stop. Why? because it’s on the level of a prison shank and could be made in a maximum security prison, and the environment behind the security checkpoint isn’t even close to that.

          • clover
            December 19, 2012 at 12:07 am

            CloverOK Eic. You are now saying some security is OK? You do not want to treat everyone as a threat? Tell us who you would not treat a a threat? A little old lady you would let through? How about the terrorist that kidnaps her family and tells her to wear the bomb or her family would be killed? Do we let little old ladies go and when they start bringing planes down then check them and let the kids go without security? Eric you need to use your entire brain not just one or two brain cells.Clover

          • December 19, 2012 at 1:58 pm

            It’s not “ok,” Clover.

            It is (your position) reductio ad absurdum.

            Why not have invasive cavity searches of every single person – including infants?

            After all, a terrorist might implant explosives!

            You’d apparently subject everyone to anything you think might reduce some theoretical risk – even at the price of causing everyone real harm.

            Despicable.

        • Tor Munkov
          December 16, 2012 at 6:32 pm

          In adultery, there is usually tenderness and self-sacrifice; in murder, courage; in profa-
          nation and blasphemy, a certain satanic splendor.
          In the current age—In the proper “context,” all supposed “crimes” are legal.

          Do you like to lie? Become a journalist. Do you like to slander the dead? Become a historian. Do you like to libel the species? Become a novelist.

          Are you an authoritarian? Do you like to degrade, humiliate, and dominate others? Become an elementary school teacher.

          Are you a sadist? Are you excited by the agonized shrieks of helpless beings? If you like to torture animals to death, become a kosher butcher. If you like to torture people to death to poison, burn and cut them with impunity become an oncologist.

          Do you enjoy doing evil and spreading terror? If killing strangers from behind with a knife, a garrote, or your naked hands arouses you, become a military commando.

          If mass murder is your interest— if exterminating thousands of people like germs and insects pleases you — become a combat pilot.

          Or— if you prefer to kill without danger to your own person— find employment in an abortion clinic. Over his career, one abortion pioneer in
          Canada personally killed more than thirty thousand unborn humans!

          • MoT
            December 16, 2012 at 6:43 pm

            Tor, I figure karma gets its due one way or the other. My old man used to tell me “Justice is ever so slow but it grinds ever so fine”

        • BrentP
          December 16, 2012 at 10:31 pm

          How about this Clover, we have a free market. You can choose the airline which best suits your needs.

          How about those of us who like cars start forcing clovers to buy the best brakes money can buy. Can’t be too safe. Maybe we should make clovers buy the best performing suspensions and manual transmissions. Both key safety items. How about that Clover? You want to pay for that? I can keep going with all sorts of technology where you clovers like ‘good enough’ but not the best. But if it’s for safety you’ll gladly open your wallets and put up with the balance point someone else prefers, correct?

          • methylamine
            December 16, 2012 at 10:44 pm

            Oh, that’s an excellent argument BrentP!

            If you’re releasing it to the public domain, I’d like to use it myself.

            It’s so much smarter than being on the defensive; take it to them!

            “How can you object to six-piston Brembos on every car, if it will save even one life!?!

            “I think it’s really callous that you’d be OK with a dozen children dying every year because you’re too cheap to invest in Koni coil-overs; I mean, you’re killing children!

            I can tell you’re a very mean and devious person, Brent. I like you more already :)

          • BrentP
            December 17, 2012 at 3:30 am

            Feel free to use it. It first came to mind when Ford offered the “Brembo brake package”. It comes with a number of unlisted changes to suspension, software, etc. It was a name change away from ‘track pack’ and was now insurance friendly better brakes.

            These would be real safety standards of handling, avoidance maneuvers, braking distances, and so on. We can’t expect car buyers to research road tests in the relevant publications, the government needs to do something so everyone can be assured of getting a car that has the abilities to avoid a crash when needed. :)

        • Rog
          December 17, 2012 at 9:06 pm

          Sorry to break it to you clover, but freedom is not secure. ” Do the kids in this article have any rights or freedoms?” The kids in this article were victims of a crime. Of course their rights were violated, that’s what crime is.

          “Am I free to board a plane without having to worry about a gunman on board? Am I free of worrying that a bomb is on board? If the police stop the drunk on the road am I free from worrying that he will kill me or my family?” You are free to worry about whatever your pea pickin’ heart desires.

          “Did the kids or parents give consent on publishing their pictures? Do they have any freedom of staying off of the internet?” They didn’t and they don’t.

          My goodness, clover, you take my breath away.

        • Me2
          December 19, 2012 at 3:23 pm

          Yo, Clover. Is this OK with you?

          http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2250218/Angel-Ashley-Dobbs-suing-Texas-troopers-shocking-BODY-CAVITY-search-caught-tape.html

          If yes, why?

          If no, why?

          Asked fully expecting non-sequiter or no response at all. Prove me wrong.

    • MoT
      December 16, 2012 at 6:41 pm

      Police and criminals? An oxymoron if there ever was one.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        December 17, 2012 at 1:19 am

        Never mind the cops. They are mere attack canines who enforce laws good or bad. Remember Nuremberg and hang the lawmakers who make bad laws that contravene the Principles supporting the Unanimous Declaration.

        tgsam

        • Jim
          December 17, 2012 at 7:12 pm

          Both get the rope.

      • liberranter
        December 17, 2012 at 8:33 am

        Not an oxymoron, but a redundancy. They’re one and the same.

        • Tor Munkov
          December 17, 2012 at 1:32 pm

          Oxymoron of the day? “Public Servant.”

          How does one go about butlering, housekeeping, nannying, chauffering, and groundskeeping for all of the public?

          They must either cease attempting to help the many, and to serve the few, or the one.

          Or cease being a servant, and become a guest, or a master.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            December 18, 2012 at 7:29 pm

            More than fifty years ago, Art Linkletter’s KIDS SAY THE DARNDEST THINGS was published. I recall that a small boy on Linkletter’s show had referred to “Public Serpents”.
            Simply amusing at the time, today I find it WRYLY amusing.

            Tinsley Grey Sammons (1936 -)

          • December 18, 2012 at 10:39 pm

            Dear Tinsley,

            “Public Serpents”

            Be warned! I’m going to be using that one in future comments.

            After all, what better name for these “snakes in the grass?”

  17. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    December 16, 2012 at 1:47 pm

    THOMAS SZASZ

    For those who have an interest in so called mental disorders, I strongly recommend the opinions of Dr. Thomas Szasz. Would that America’s political office holders had the perception and inherent decency of the late Dr. Szasz.

    Tinsley Grey Sammons (1936 –)

    • MoT
      December 16, 2012 at 6:44 pm

      Great man. He’s since gone onto his reward but I wish we’d have him for another lifetime.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        December 16, 2012 at 11:35 pm

        The late Balint Vazsonyi is another Hungarian emigre worthy of respect and admiration.

        If only a small percentage of Hungarians are Critical Thinkers like Szasz and Vazsony, America should grant citizenship to as many as would like to have it. Gawd only knows America continues giving citizenship to multitudes that America would probably be better off without.

        tgsam

        • Tor Munkov
          December 18, 2012 at 8:09 pm

          Tinsley, many Americans are indistinct hinterland / metropolitan blobs. Since you say you’re from New Orleans, I know I could ferret you out of a random crowd of 100 earthlings if you were the only only Cajun there.

          Same with Texan/Cowboys, Alaskan/Frontiersmen, Califaggots, Georgian/Drawlers, Hawaiian/Islanders, Chicago/Grobnicks, New Yorker/FuckinA’s, Appalacha/Mountineers, Boston/Chowdaheads, Utah/Mormons, Vegas/Sinners, Minnesota/You Betchas, Jersey/Guidos, Nashville/Country Singers, RockyMountain/Highs, Washington/Flannels, Detroit/Thugs, Kansans/Bob Doles, Iowans/Farmers, Montana/Preppers…

          The rest of Americans are bamazona – okegonpenn – connectarkandahoniana – carocolodelaflorirhod – mainmaryvirginwyotenntucky – sippinewmexohioans of no particular distinction.

          • methylamine
            December 18, 2012 at 8:32 pm

            Tor–sir, a tip of the hat to you and your rhetorical cuisinart!

  18. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    December 16, 2012 at 3:36 pm

    INSANITY DEFENSE CHALLENGED

    INSANITY DEFENSE

    ttps://www.google.com/search?q=Szasz on the insanity defense.&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&source=hp&channel=np

    This is a real KEEPER folks, I am unabashedly a fan of the late Dr. Szasz.

    Tinsley Grey Sammons (1936 –)

  19. December 16, 2012 at 5:53 pm

    So did anyone catch this particular story here where they connected the shooter’s mother to the prepper movement?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2248782/Adam-Lanza-How-classmates-remember-genius-turned-heartless-killer.html

    They’re now using this incident to further portray anyone who preps as a potential psychotic mass murderer.

    Stock up now while you still can because the shits about to hit the fan.

    • December 16, 2012 at 6:36 pm

      Look at all the useful idoits (primarlily outside of the U.S.) in the comment section defending their masters. It really puts into perspective just how deep the illness runs.

    • MoT
      December 16, 2012 at 6:45 pm

      They’re already labeling preppers as potential terrorists, just as I’m certain they monitor this site and view US the same way.

      • December 16, 2012 at 7:37 pm

        According to the words listed here, These 377 Words Will Get You Monitored by the Government, Eric’s site has probably been on the radar, and a regular part of the gangsta gubmint’s sweep, for quite some time.

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          December 16, 2012 at 8:22 pm

          It is always good to speak truth to power. Let the sons-of-bitches listen.

          tgsam

          • IndividualAudienceMember
            December 16, 2012 at 8:59 pm

            Speaking truth to power seems kind of pointless, even meaningless.

            Speaking truth to the People, now that’s something.

          • December 16, 2012 at 9:23 pm

            Speaking truth to the People, now that’s something.

            Exactly. Keep pecking away no matter how frustratingly delusional they are when it comes to believing in the legitimacy of the state.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            December 16, 2012 at 9:54 pm

            Yes, do some Critical Thinking and speak TRUTH to power. If for no other reason because it frustrates those who wield power unjustly. When they react to it they add to the paper trail that might one day send them to the gallows.

            Remember Nuremberg

            tgsam

        • IndividualAucienceMember
          December 16, 2012 at 9:38 pm

          “These 377 Words Will Get You Monitored by the Government” – Seems more like they are monitoring everyone, just like in East Germany?:

          “In a secret government agreement granted without approval or debate from lawmakers, the U.S. attorney general recently gave the National Counterterrorism Center sweeping new powers to store dossiers on U.S. citizens, even if they are not suspected of a crime, according to a news report.” …

          http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/12/gov-dossiers-on-us-citizens/

          • December 16, 2012 at 9:45 pm

            Seems more like they are monitoring everyone, just like in East Germany?

            Yep. Clover is probably in the john reading the article while pleasuring himself. It’s serious porn to bootlicking descendant of whores like him.

          • Tor Munkov
            December 17, 2012 at 1:40 pm

            Speaking truth to the People, The First Estate, now that’s something.

            They might realize the power that has run amok was ours all along, and had just been delegated, or usurped.
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
            EPA Official: S-sir, I’m afraid you’ve gone mad with power…
            Russ Cargill: Of course I have. You ever tried going mad without power? It’s boring. No one listens to you!

          • MoT
            December 17, 2012 at 3:38 pm

            Tor…. That was priceless!

        • methylamine
          December 16, 2012 at 10:38 pm

          I welcome it–listen in, you pencil-necked pallid-skinned chicken-shit little bastards!

          Who knows; perhaps some of the lower-level minions who are tasked with looking for “suspicious” activity in one of our emails or posts flagged by an NSA mainframe will read it, and begin to ask questions.

          This is definitely NOT the time to go quiet, because “they’re listening”. Chances are most of us are on a List somewhere already…

          …in fact, I’m sure I am because three years ago I was mysteriously on the no-fly list–despite (at the time) working for Continental Airlines. I had to appeal through the airline; it was lifted as mysteriously as it had appeared a month later. The letter from TSA said, in short, that the reason I was on was secret and the reason I was off…was also secret.

          In other words–sit down and shut up scum American! You’ll do as we say!

          As a side note– the reason I use pen-names like “methylamine”? I’ve chosen every email address and pen-name from a list of verboten precursor chemicals for “illicit” drug manufacture. Some poor schlub at the DEA has probably gone libertarian after having to read all my raving lunacy.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            December 16, 2012 at 10:58 pm

            Thank you.

            tgsam

    • Ed
      December 17, 2012 at 12:50 pm

      I’d be willing to bet that the mother of the shooter actually had no firearms registered to her at all before her drug addled “child” went out on his killing spree.

      The only proof that the dead woman had guns is the mention of it in the media accounts. It doesn’t fit the profile of her type, a school teacher who went along with the drugging of her autistic son. It doesn’t follow that she would also be a gun owner, especially in Connecticut.

      Also notable in the media accounts is the absence of mention of what the local Porkies were doing during the shooting. Are we to assume that this is the one public school in the US with no donut gobblers hanging around?

      After the Columbine massacre, we had the reports of how the local Porkies stayed outside, pissing their pants until the shooting stopped. Where are the tales of the brave police in the coverage of this latest mass murder?

      The coverage, predictably, reeks of bullshit.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        December 17, 2012 at 1:25 pm

        Media focus is on guns when it should be on Big Pharma.

        tgsam

      • December 17, 2012 at 1:29 pm

        I agree, Ed.

        Stories mention a Sig handgun was used. These are expensive, high-grade “serious shooter’s” guns. I find it unlikely in the extreme that a connecticut hausfrau bought such a weapon. Ditto the high-powered rifle. Few women can handle such guns. This one doesn’t fit the profile of the few who can.

      • IndividualAudienceMember
        December 17, 2012 at 1:53 pm

        “the absence of mention of what the local Porkies were doing during the shooting.” – I’m not surprised by that. Weren’t the reporters too busy asking the children questions?

        I don’t watch the TV news anymore, are they talking about how funds to pay for security at schools were taken away?

        I read somewhere a school ‘official’ was flabbergasted awhile back when informed this was happening. Are People talking about that? Probably not, that would require thinking – and putting two and two together – that’s old school, or so I’ve been told in the past.

        Myself, I just think it’s really stupid of them not to look at the things mentioned in this thread. I’m still surprised by that, even though I know I shouldn’t be.

        • Mike in Spotsy
          December 19, 2012 at 12:33 am

          I happened to be driving through Connecticut last Friday, and talk of the shooting dominated the radio stations. (And I-84 was practically a parking lot getting through Newtown.) I managed to catch an interview with the head of the CT state po po. One reporter actually asked him if shots were still being fired when the first officers entered the building. I was so wishing for an honest answer, but all he said was that he didn’t have that information at that time.

          The honest answer would have been: “Of course not. Entering a building where someone is firing off rounds would endanger the officers. Since officer safety is the first and only consideration in all circumstances, the brave men established a perimeter and waited until they were certain that the shooter was dead before entering the building. Make no mistake about it: it would be better for a hundred school buildings full of children to be exterminated than for one of our heroic men in blue to receive a paper cut. Not only are those things are really painful, but they degrade the ability of the officers to perform their important duties. Next question.”

      • MoT
        December 17, 2012 at 3:37 pm

        I went through my old high school year book, class of ’80, to look at all the out of focus stills, that 70′s hairstyle where everyone looked like the Dukes of Hazzard, when I spied the pics for the faculty and staff. Lo and behold, I never thought to notice, but there were two school security dudes! Back then? Sheesh! And I can’t recall ever noticing them.

        • MoT
          December 17, 2012 at 3:41 pm

          Blast! Hit the enter before I finished… Well, I was going to add that with the proliferation of weapons on people like school security you’d have thought they’d be johnny on the spot, eh? And the point about the SIG is a good one. Was the teacher even a licensed owner? Begs a lot of questions.

        • Tor Munkov
          December 17, 2012 at 4:11 pm

          Punta Gorda FL Fighting Tampons, errr Tarpons? Class of 1978.

          http://charlottehighschool78.com/photos_-_1978_1

          ^^^
          Cause back in school. We are the leaders of it all. So. Transpose. Or stop your lies. It’s what you do.

          So run. Right. Right back to school

          Look back I sift through all the cliques. Roaming’ the halls all year, making me sick
          While everyone’s out trying to make the cut. What? When you think you know me right I switch it up. Behind the walls smokin’ cigarettes and sippin’ vodka. I profess to catch a cab, ain’t no one can stop us. Give me a break about some other mess. What were you? Act like it’s everything you got.

          Push back the square. Now that you need her but you don’t. So there you go. Cause back in school.
          We are the leaders of it all. Stop that, quit! – All that, quit! Who ruined it? You did! Now grab a notebook and a pen. Start taking notes, I’m being everyone who’s on the top. You think we’re on the same page – but, oh we’re not! I’ll be the man, watch your backpack and the pencils.

          Just like he now flipping it, why you just keep it simple? You just can’t go wrong rocking’ the clothes. Coppin’ the stance. ‘Cause really it’s everything that you got!

          So run. So why don’t you run back to school.
          All you are – Now I’m on the next page
          All you are – It’s time to close the book up
          All you are – I’m on the next page
          All you are – Close the book up now

          Deftones >>> Back to School (Mini Maggit)

          • MoT
            December 17, 2012 at 7:34 pm

            At least you rated color photos and better photographers. Still looking at those pics it’s a flashback to the 70′s show that was.

      • liberranter
        December 17, 2012 at 4:55 pm

        Also notable in the media accounts is the absence of mention of what the local Porkies were doing during the shooting. Are we to assume that this is the one public school in the US with no donut gobblers hanging around?

        Would anyone be the least bit surprised to learn that the assigned skool-porkos were “withdrawn” for the day for some “administrative meeting,” “training,” or some other bogus reason to prevent their presence?

        Just like NORAD “stood down for training exercises” on 9/11/01.

  20. Tor Munkov
    December 17, 2012 at 6:44 am

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=525_1355434792

    Ossifur John Moody kills Ernie Duenez, Jr., 35, on 6/8/2011.

  21. Joe Hoagland
    December 17, 2012 at 12:08 pm

    Are Americans, as individuals AND as a country, willing to give up

    our Constitutional rights codified under the law of the land,

    defended and paid for by the lives of over 1.3 million of our fellow Americans,

    for the tyranny of ‘civil rights’ – a subset of our inalienable rights, look it up -

    granted by a government which is now becoming our ‘ruler’?

    Will the tyranny of despotism, elitism, NOW BE COMPLETED by individuals lacking in responsibility

    and bring about the self-administered damnation of our freedoms?

    You, my fellow American will and must make that choice! Choosing freedom or choosing to accept the government as the ‘ruler’ and your role as the ‘servant’?

    IF NOT NOW, WHEN; IF NOT YOU, ME, THEN WHO?

    The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted.
    Psa 12:8

    In the fight until,
    Joe
    UCC 1-308 without prejudice
    http://www.republickeepers.com
    http://www.trsot.com
    http://www.defactodefecto.com
    “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free”. Goethe
    “I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.” — Winston Churchill
    “This republic was not established by cowards, nor will cowards preserve it!”
    Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner.
    Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.

    “They sowed the wind and NOW they will reap the whirlwind”

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      December 17, 2012 at 1:20 pm

      Give up our Rights? WE the People already have. The “giving up” began in earnest in 1912.

      tgsam

  22. Lee
    December 17, 2012 at 12:46 pm

    One of the legal experts on the CNN media frenzy made an interesting comment yesterday on the move to pass feel-good gun control legislation. He mentioned the language in the Second Amendment about a “well-regulated militia” and said that the Second Amendment was no longer relevant because the Federal government, with its overwhelming police and military force, has become so invincible that no homegrown militia or other armed, anti-social, anti-government force could possibly prevail against it. We don’t need to bear arms because no tyranny can any longer threaten us.

    What rights we have, goes the logic, are granted to us by the state. And there’s Soledad and the other CNN mannequins nodding their heads and hoping, perhaps not consciously, that their coverage of this “horrible tragedy” will get higher media ratings than Peyton Manning and the Broncos taking on Joe Fusco and the Ravens while Atlanta was obliterating the other Manning and the Giants.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      December 17, 2012 at 1:17 pm

      Butler Shaffer has an excellent piece in LewRockwell.com today.

      tgsam

      • Tor Munkov
        December 17, 2012 at 2:00 pm

        Hell yeah he did, Tinsley. In that article I found out that once again, the bulk of my half baked theories (better when fully baked?) have already been properly and lucidly assembled and vetted by an Austrian – in this case, Leopold Kohr.

        Leopold Kohr, born 1909 in Salzburg, was known both for his opposition to the “cult of bigness” in social organization and a “philosophical anarchist.” His most influential work was The Breakdown of Nations.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_Kohr

        Bigger is better and cheaper until that tipping point when bigger doubles back, takes a predatory run at you, and fuses into the amalgam of the 2nd thru 4th Estates to join their rampaging and crushing of the 1st Estate: “The People”

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          December 17, 2012 at 4:24 pm

          Bigness allows lawmakers and other office holders to distance themselves from personal responsibility.

          Note how few convictions were produced by the “Victors’ Justice” produced by the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal. The Trial of the Judges produced not a single hanging.

          There were no convictions for the Katyn Massacre since there was no trial.

          *****

          I’ve given considerable thought to Crimes Against Humanity and urge my fellow citizens to do likewise. It’s actually rather easy. One need only begin with the right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

    • Jim
      December 17, 2012 at 7:17 pm

      Can never prevail, eh? That CNN talking head needs to tell that to the Afghanis – Soviets down, US soon to follow.

      It doesn’t take guns alone. What it does take is the WILL. Americans have lots of the former and none of the latter.

    • MoT
      December 17, 2012 at 7:37 pm

      “no tyranny can any longer threaten us.”… Except the tyranny that is the government itself. But, of course, that’s the inconvenient truth they’d rather not admit.

  23. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    December 17, 2012 at 1:46 pm

    When you put the ball in the air three things can happen, and two of them are bad. –Johnny Unitas

    When you pass a law many things can happen, and most of them are likely to be bad. –Tinsley Grey Sammons

    • MoT
      December 17, 2012 at 3:32 pm

      Passing laws is like passing gas. They come from assholes, they both stink, but only one offers relief. – MoT

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        December 17, 2012 at 3:40 pm

        Incomparably eloquent. Critical Thinking at its best. Now that’s a KEEPER.

        tgsam

      • Tor Munkov
        December 17, 2012 at 3:42 pm

        Right you are, MoT. Dickens once wrote “The law is an ass” I’ve always wondered what he meant by that.

      • liberranter
        December 17, 2012 at 4:59 pm

        MoT, that just made it into my “Quotable Quotes” collection. PRICELESS!

        • Tor Munkov
          December 17, 2012 at 6:04 pm

          My collection too.
          In Latin.
          Transcendit leges similis est transiens gas. Assholes venerunt ambo olere, unum remedium affert.
          Chinese. 通過法律,就像是放屁。他們來自蛀蟲,他們都臭,但只有一個提供救援。
          Arabic. سن القوانين مثل تمرير الغاز. أنها تأتي من المتسكعون، وكلاهما نتن، ولكن واحدة فقط تقدم الإغاثة.
          Hebrew. להעביר חוקים זה כמו להעביר את הגז. הם באים מאידיוטים, הם שניהם מסריחים, אבל רק אחד מציע הקלה.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            December 18, 2012 at 1:30 am

            I find sophisticated communication by pictograms fascinating. I read somewhere many years ago that certain types of brain damage can cause a person to lose his ability to write. In the case of Westerners it is damage to the left hemisphere. In the case of Far Easterners it is damage to the right hemisphere. If true, it is very interesting and of course very thought provoking.

            tgsam

      • methylamine
        December 17, 2012 at 5:30 pm

        I shall hang this from the doorposts of my house, like a libertarian Mezuzah.

        Thanks, MoT!

    • December 18, 2012 at 12:13 am

      “No man’s life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.”
      – Mark Twain

      I’ve always preferred “life, liberty, or property” over “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

      Jefferson’s last minute “improvement” was a mistake.

      • December 18, 2012 at 12:14 am

        * and property

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        December 18, 2012 at 1:22 am

        It may not have been Jefferson himself who made the “improvement”. The Second Continental Congress made many changes to the now unamendable Declaration.

        I can see where some persons, especially those incapable of sophisticated thought, upon seeing “the right to property” would start asking, Where’s my property? as though simply by virtue of the Declaration, every person is entitled to a piece of real estate and a share of the treasury.

        I find the right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness to be philosophically just and broadly inclusive.

        tgsam

        • December 18, 2012 at 1:24 pm

          Dear Tor,

          The clovers would probably twist the meaning of “property” that way, wouldn’t they?

          Man, ya can’t win for losing.

        • December 18, 2012 at 1:27 pm

          *Tinsley.

          Tor’s post was below.

          Lost track while scrolling up and down.

          • Tor Munkov
            December 18, 2012 at 2:14 pm

            Perhaps, Bevin, a little – but not a lot – of anarchy in the sequence of replies is a good thing.
            Makes the reader work harder, to ascertain just what is being said, and thus, puts more of the readers’ and posters’ corneal eye skin in the game.

          • December 18, 2012 at 2:19 pm

            Dear Tor,

            Mebbe… mebbe.

      • Tor Munkov
        December 18, 2012 at 12:09 pm

        Hey Bevin!

        I just learned that Jefferson was a Dick who conspired to form the Dependent States of America. In Mason’s original Bill of Rights, armies were to be disbanded during peacetime and their place taken by a Well Regulated Militia of private citizens.

        Section 13. That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

        We were also due the right to pursue Happiness and Safety. Having a holstered firearm on my person and in my home makes me quite happy and safe.

        Section 1. That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.

        From what I’ve read, Bevin, Thomas Jefferson “improved” many documents because he was the man with the best penmanship, which was a critical skill in his day. Two or three or more copies of long declarations had to be flawlessly executed at one time.

        Here in full is The Virginia Declaration of Rights, written by George Mason, a man 18 years older than Jefferson, and a man Jefferson once called the “wisest of his generation.”

        The VDoR was adopted by the Virginia Constitutional Convention on June 12, 1776 and had been copied by five other colonies by the end of 1776. By 1783 every state had some form of a bill of rights.
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
        A DECLARATION OF RIGHTS made by the representatives of the good people of Virginia, assembled in full and free convention which rights do pertain to them and their posterity, as the basis and foundation of government.

        Section 1. That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.

        Section 2. That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants and at all times amenable to them.

        Section 3. That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration. And that, when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community has an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal.

        Section 4. That no man, or set of men, is entitled to exclusive or separate salaries or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services; which, nor being descendible, neither ought the offices of magistrate, legislator, or judge to be hereditary.

        Section 5. That the legislative and executive powers of the state should be separate and distinct from the judiciary; and that the members of the two first may be restrained from oppression, by feeling and participating the burdens of the people, they should, at fixed periods, be reduced to a private station, return into that body from which they were originally taken, and the vacancies be supplied by frequent, certain, and regular elections, in which all, or any part, of the former members, to be again eligible, or ineligible, as the laws shall direct.

        Section 6. That elections of members to serve as representatives of the people, in assembly ought to be free; and that all men, having sufficient evidence of permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the community, have the right of suffrage and cannot be taxed or deprived of their property for public uses without their own consent or that of their representatives so elected, nor bound by any law to which they have not, in like manner, assembled for the public good.

        Section 7. That all power of suspending laws, or the execution of laws, by any authority, without consent of the representatives of the people, is injurious to their rights and ought not to be exercised.

        Section 8. That in all capital or criminal prosecutions a man has a right to demand the cause and nature of his accusation, to be confronted with the accusers and witnesses, to call for evidence in his favor, and to a speedy trial by an impartial jury of twelve men of his vicinage, without whose unanimous consent he cannot be found guilty; nor can he be compelled to give evidence against himself; that no man be deprived of his liberty except by the law of the land or the judgment of his peers.

        Section 9. That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

        Section 10. That general warrants, whereby an officer or messenger may be commanded to search suspected places without evidence of a fact committed, or to seize any person or persons not named, or whose offense is not particularly described and supported by evidence, are grievous and oppressive and ought not to be granted.

        Section 11. That in controversies respecting property, and in suits between man and man, the ancient trial by jury is preferable to any other and ought to be held sacred.

        Section 12. That the freedom of the press is one of the great bulwarks of liberty, and can never be restrained but by despotic governments.

        Section 13. That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

        Section 14. That the people have a right to uniform government; and, therefore, that no government separate from or independent of the government of Virginia ought to be erected or established within the limits thereof.

        Section 15. That no free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.

        Section 16. That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practise Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other.

        • December 18, 2012 at 1:35 pm

          Dear Tor,

          It’s discouraging finding out that some of my idols had feet of clay.

          Fortunately they had redeeming virtues as well. Especially borerline anarchists such as Thomas Paine. Eric mentioned him earlier, and I chimed in with my two cents worth.

          But looking back, one can’t help wondering what could have been. If only the Framers had studied the example of the medieval Icelandic Republic more closely. If only they had attempted to replicate its free market anarchist system, instead of an ultimately doomed minarchist system.

          • Tor Munkov
            December 18, 2012 at 2:25 pm

            Thomas was a giant, a colossus of awesomeness. But still, human, with two feet each containing exactly 26 bones, 33 joints, and over 100 muscles, tendons, and ligaments.

            George Mason wrote better rights. The work of John Locke, on which Mason based his on, was better still.

            I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these ideas draw in part or in whole from things long ago discussed within the Great Red Dragon, the Lesser Dragons, or the Tiger states of Eastern Asia.

          • December 18, 2012 at 2:52 pm

            Dear Tor,

            I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these ideas draw in part or in whole from things long ago discussed within the Great Red Dragon, the Lesser Dragons, or the Tiger states of Eastern Asia.

            History is funny. Murray Rothbard, the acknowledged father of modern libertarianism, rightly credits the Daoist sages of ancient China for originating free market anarchist theory.

            Yet the sad irony is that their compatriots never got around to putting it into practice. Why the hell was that?

            It’s a rhetorical question. There were many reasons. Chief among them was the acceptance of Confucianism — a rival philosophy with a striking resemblance to conservative republicanism and the Protestant ethic.

            As history would have it, Vikings on the other side of the world, in a land of glaciers and geysers, tested it out and made it work, for three centuries at least.

            Like I said history is funny that way.

      • Mike in Spotsy
        December 19, 2012 at 1:06 am

        Hello, Bevin. I have heard the, possibly apocryphal, explanation that Jefferson used “pursuit of happiness” instead of “property” in order to avoid the obvious contradiction that would be exposed if a document proclaiming all men to be created equal also implied that slavery was legitimate. Slaves, after all, were considered property, and therefore could not be equal.

        • December 19, 2012 at 1:22 am

          Dear Mike,

          Interesting.

          Hadn’t heard that one.

          The version I heard was the “official” one I guess.

  24. Tor Munkov
    December 17, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    Misinformation by independent journalists is a crime, says the Connecticut Police spokesman in charge of misinformation.

    • liberranter
      December 17, 2012 at 5:02 pm

      Connecticut police are an even more heinous crime.

      • Tor Munkov
        December 17, 2012 at 5:31 pm

        They even have their own movie, liberranter. Check out Connecticut State Trooper Charlie on duty even when he’s off duty during Me, Myself, and Irene…_ _ _…

        • ray
          February 4, 2013 at 5:57 pm

          I thought he was a Rhode Island State Trooper

    • December 18, 2012 at 12:28 am

      Dear Tor,

      Disinformation by dependent journalists is the law of the land.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        December 18, 2012 at 12:57 am

        Damn! Another Keeper.

        I’m a wordfreak and I do admire a powerful thought expressed in only a few words.

        Blatherskites should be limited to communication by Twitter.

        tgsam

  25. Bob Robertson
    December 17, 2012 at 3:13 pm

    Two points:

    Obama’s hypocrisy of murdering children, and condemning someone else who murders children.

    The calls to “ban automatic weapons” when no automatic weapons were used.

    My only hope is that Leviathan’s death throws don’t kill too many good people before this Empire finally collapses.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      December 17, 2012 at 3:36 pm

      Following a successful revolution I want to be the Attorney General. For those who have knowingly violated Unalienable Rights for political and financial gain I employ the incomparably eloquent promise made by standup Richard Pryor’s father:
      Ah got sumthin’ for yo’ ass*.

      Tinsley Grey Sammons (1936 –)

      Since I am a Georgia born Redneck my version might be: Ah got sumpthin’ fer yo sorry ass.

      • December 18, 2012 at 12:04 am

        Dear Tinsley,

        Ah… you have an ear for dialect.

  26. Dave P.
    December 17, 2012 at 3:26 pm

    “It is the adults in the room – the people who can grasp the principle at stake – that must be the focus of our attentions.”

    I don’t know about that, because it’s the “adults” who refuse to listen to reason and understand what’s truly at stake here. That’s why Ron Paul has had so much success with the young people, because they can be taught.

    • rEVOLutionary
      December 17, 2012 at 7:59 pm

      Age dies not an adult make.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        December 17, 2012 at 8:41 pm

        If an inherently stupid individual lives long enough s/he will be a stupid Geezer. Old age doesn’t even automatically grant wisdom.

        I’ve known several Geezers who have managed to avoid knowledge.

        tgsam

  27. IndividualAudienceMember
    December 17, 2012 at 4:45 pm

    “… Paragould Chief Stovall is adamant though. Citizens will be stopped and asked to produce ID and a reason for being on the street. “They may not be doing anything but walking their dog,” he said. “But they’re going to have to prove it.” …”

    http://www.infowars.com/armed-swat-teams-to-patrol-streets-in-arkansas-city/

    Faster and faster they burn what I was taught it was meant to be an american. And along with it, their supposed authority.

    Guilty, until proven innocent,… if even then. Psft.

    • liberranter
      December 18, 2012 at 2:32 am

      I just read Will Grigg’s post on the LRC blog about this, which usually presages a full-fledged article.

      I sincerely hope that Chief Porko Stovall and his little fascist sucklings are in for a very unpleasant surprise.

    • Me2
      December 18, 2012 at 9:55 pm

      “… Paragould Chief Stovall is adamant though. Citizens will be stopped and asked to produce ID and a reason for being on the street. “They may not be doing anything but walking their dog,” he said. “But they’re going to have to prove it.” …”

      The mind-numbing stupidity of this…

      What does showing ID prove? That you have ID?

      Reason for being on the street? It’s how you get from one place to the other.

      Prove that you are walking your dog? Lemme see, um, dog, check, walking, check.

      F’ing moron.

  28. IndividualAudienceMember
    December 17, 2012 at 6:02 pm

    According to his video, the fathers of the shooters both in Sandy and Aurora are connected to the LIBOR scandal and were set to testify at trial. A bit too much of a coincidence, eh? And there’s this:

    “What about the other shooters who are seen on video being captured?” At the 6:55 mark:

    http://www.conspiracy-cafe.com/apps/videos/videos/show/17442985-sandy-hook-elem-3-shooters-a-close-look-

    Saw the above link on The Daily Bell.

    I guess it was a good thing the reporters were asking the children questions.

    My fellow American’s: it looks as though we’re being played for suckers.

  29. methylamine
    December 17, 2012 at 6:26 pm

    I just had an epiphany; I think I see the end-game for guns.

    Step 1: Make America hated world-wide for its bellicosity, augmented by its hundreds of war crimes–killing civilians, renditions, torture, indiscriminate bombing, drone “double-taps”.

    Step 2: Run a few false-flags–Fast & Furious, Aurora, Sikh temple, Sandy Point

    Step 3: Pass the UN gun-ban treaty by executive order

    Step 4: Let the UN come ashore and direct police and military in the gun-grab. Create a civil war in the process, wiping out the cops and military. The UN troops feel morally justified; after all, America’s the new Nazi Germany. Time to git’em!

    Enjoy UN control; the country, exhausted and broken, is at that point already occupied.

    But the game’s not done.

    The economic collapse continues; there’s total chaos. What’s the New World Order mantra? Ab chao, ordo

    A “benevolent” global dictatorship of the UN establishes a new currency unit derived from the SDR, and “backed” by gold–totally false but convincing.

    And behold, there is economic prosperity–short-lived, but the sheeple are so relieved they don’t see it…fooled again. The UN “globo” ushers in renewal and prosperity.

    But there’s a dark side–you have to be chipped or bar-coded to use it. Step outside the “law”, and (like Nick Rockefeller revealed to Aaron Russo), “poof!”–the chip’s turned off, and you cease to exist.

    Voila–world fascism in a few easy steps, and finalized to the sound of applause from exhausted, war-torn Americans.

    • Tor Munkov
      December 17, 2012 at 9:09 pm

      Here’s the 1st occurrence of Step 1 – Finding of U.S. war crime

      On December 13, 2012, Khalid El-Masri won an Article 34 case at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

      Khalid El-Masri is a German citizen who was kidnapped in the Republic of Macedonia, flown to Afghanistan, beaten, strip-searched, interrogated and tortured by the CIA for several months, first in Macedonia, then in Afghanistan.

      After two hunger strikes, and four months in the CIA’s renound “Salt Pit”,the CIA finally admitted his arrest and torture was based on an unverified “hunch” of a CIA officer and released him.

      A U.S. State Department cable, dated February 2007, makes clear that the United States pressured the German Justice administration to not press charges against the CIA, citing that Italian relations had suffered pending Italy’s prosecution of CIA officers in another 1996 rendition-and-torture case. In 2011, El Masri, supported by the ACLU, was refused recourse in the United States, due to the state secrets privilege.

      In the court, it was acertained that El Masri was tortured by the CIA while in the hands of the Macedonian Police. This marked the first time that the CIA activities against detainees was formally declared ‘torture’.

      http://www.dw.de/european-human-rights-court-rules-on-el-masri-rendition-case/a-16451584

  30. BrentP
    December 17, 2012 at 7:58 pm

    The mainstream news and the clover-hive are beginning to turn on ‘wierd kids’ now. Next step will be calls to institutionalize (incarcerate) the ‘wierd’ kids if not execute them outright. Who knows what they’ll do the ‘wierd kids’ who are already grown up.

    This sort of thing scares me. Most the police state stuff doesn’t scare me because I know they are ultimately weak people, but the collective deciding they are empowered to imprison or kill anyone who isn’t what they declare ‘normal’ does. It’s like those twlight zone episodes where neighbors single out the ‘different’ guy and go after him as the cause of their problem.

    • Mithrandir
      December 17, 2012 at 8:21 pm
      • liberranter
        December 18, 2012 at 2:38 am

        Two of my all-time favorite Twilight Zone episodes, especially The Obsolete Man.

        I can’t wait for New Year’s Eve on the SciFi channel!

  31. anarchyst
    December 17, 2012 at 9:50 pm

    If I were a teacher , I would purchase a can of “wasp spray” and keep it where I could get to it in a hurry. Shooting a “perp” in the face would most certainly incapacitate and make it possible to minimize or negate the “bad guy’s intentions.
    Just a thought . . .

    • methylamine
      December 17, 2012 at 10:46 pm

      I’d carry my Glock–regardless of “school policy”.

      THEN… Shooting a “perp” in the face would most certainly incapacitate and make it possible to minimize or negate the “bad guy’s intentions.

      Such as:
      this school in, you guessed it, Texas

      I see a flurry of activity among legislators to encourage/allow teachers to carry guns.

      It’s a start.

      Meanwhile, I’ve just increased my share of toys of the type that go “bang” in anticipation of the inevitable “bans”.

      Remember those “pre-ban” magazines that sold for a hundred bucks? Go buy some high-cap AR and AK mags…might be a good investment.

    • ray
      February 4, 2013 at 5:50 pm

      Meth,

      I’m with you on that.

      anarchyst,

      As a contractor I keep a can of that stuff in my truck and work trailers as it is fairly often that we’ll have to deal with wasps. Watching the way that those creatures react to the spray I have often wondered about the effects it would have on a person. It couldn’t be good!

  32. IndividualAudienceMember
    December 17, 2012 at 11:25 pm

    I thought you all would be interested in this list of “murderous rampages caused by [People on] psychiatric prescription drugs” which I saw in the comments at The Daily Bell, wow:

    Posted by MetaCynic on 12/17/12 01:43 PM

    Here’s a depressing list of some of the murderous rampages caused by psychiatric prescription drugs. I found this on Michaels Rivero’s “What Really Happened” site:

    Nobody is saying that Asperger’s or Autism is the cause of the violence. It is the medications used to treat those conditions that have a long record of triggering suicide and violence.

    Eric Harris age 17 (first on Zoloft then Luvox) and Dylan Klebold aged 18 (Colombine school shooting in Littleton, Colorado), killed 12 students and 1 teacher, and wounded 23 others, before killing themselves. Klebold’s medical records have never been made available to the public.

    Jeff Weise, age 16, had been prescribed 60 mg/day of Prozac (three times the average starting dose for adults!) when he shot his grandfather, his grandfather’s girlfriend and many fellow students at Red Lake, Minnesota. He then shot himself. 10 dead, 12 wounded.

    Cory Baadsgaard, age 16, Wahluke (Washington state) High School, was on Paxil (which caused him to have hallucinations) when he took a rifle to his high school and held 23 classmates hostage. He has no memory of the event.

    Chris Fetters, age 13, killed his favorite aunt while taking Prozac.

    Christopher Pittman, age 12, murdered both his grandparents while taking Zoloft.

    Mathew Miller, age 13, hung himself in his bedroom closet after taking Zoloft for 6 days.

    Jarred Viktor, age 15, stabbed his grandmother 61 times after 5 days on Paxil.

    Kip Kinkel, age 15, (on Prozac and Ritalin) shot his parents while they slept then went to school and opened fire killing 2 classmates and injuring 22 shortly after beginning Prozac treatment.

    Luke Woodham, age 16 (Prozac) killed his mother and then killed two students, wounding six others.

    A boy in Pocatello, ID (Zoloft) in 1998 had a Zoloft-induced seizure that caused an armed stand off at his school.

    Michael Carneal (Ritalin), age 14, opened fire on students at a high school prayer meeting in West Paducah, Kentucky. Three teenagers were killed, five others were wounded.

    A young man in Huntsville, Alabama (Ritalin) went psychotic chopping up his parents with an ax and also killing one sibling and almost murdering another.

    Andrew Golden, age 11, (Ritalin) and Mitchell Johnson, aged 14, (Ritalin) shot 15 people, killing four students, one teacher, and wounding 10 others.

    TJ Solomon, age 15, (Ritalin) high school student in Conyers, Georgia opened fire on and wounded six of his class mates.

    Rod Mathews, age 14, (Ritalin) beat a classmate to death with a bat.

    James Wilson, age 19, (various psychiatric drugs) from Breenwood, South Carolina, took a.22 caliber revolver into an elementary school killing two young girls, and wounding seven other children and two teachers.

    Elizabeth Bush, age 13, (Paxil) was responsible for a school shooting in Pennsylvania.

    Jason Hoffman (Effexor and Celexa) – school shooting in El Cajon, California.

    Jarred Viktor, age 15, (Paxil), after five days on Paxil he stabbed his grandmother 61 times.

    Chris Shanahan, age 15 (Paxil) in Rigby, ID who out of the blue killed a woman.

    Jeff Franklin (Prozac and Ritalin), Huntsville, AL, killed his parents as they came home from work using a sledge hammer, hatchet, butcher knife and mechanic’s file, then attacked his younger brothers and sister.

    Neal Furrow (Prozac) in LA Jewish school shooting reported to have been court-ordered to be on Prozac along with several other medications.

    Kevin Rider, age 14, was withdrawing from Prozac when he died from a gunshot wound to his head.

    Initially it was ruled a suicide, but two years later, the investigation into his death was opened as a possible homicide. The prime suspect, also age 14, had been taking Zoloft and other SSRI antidepressants.

    Alex Kim, age 13, hung himself shortly after his Lexapro prescription had been doubled.

    Diane Routhier was prescribed Welbutrin for gallstone problems. Six days later, after suffering many adverse effects of the drug, she shot herself.

    Billy Willkomm, an accomplished wrestler and a University of Florida student, was prescribed Prozac at the age of 17. His family found him dead of suicide – hanging from a tall ladder at the family’s Gulf Shore Boulevard home in July 2002.

    Kara Jaye Anne Fuller-Otter, age 12, was on Paxil when she hung herself from a hook in her closet.

    Kara’s parents said ‘…. the damn doctor wouldn’t take her off it and I asked him to when we went in on the second visit. I told him I thought she was having some sort of reaction to Paxil…’).

    Gareth Christian, Vancouver, age 18, was on Paxil when he committed suicide in 2002, (Gareth’s father could not accept his son’s death and killed himself.)

    Julie Woodward, age 17, was on Zoloft when she hung herself in her family’s detached garage.

    Matthew Miller was 13 when he saw a psychiatrist because he was having difficulty at school. The psychiatrist gave him samples of Zoloft. Seven days later his mother found him dead, hanging by a belt from a laundry hook in his closet.

    Kurt Danysh, age 18, and on Prozac, killed his father with a shotgun. He is now behind prison bars, and writes letters, trying to warn the world that SSRI drugs can kill.

    Woody ____, age 37, committed suicide while in his 5th week of taking Zoloft. Shortly before his death his physician suggested doubling the dose of the drug. He had seen his physician only for insomnia. He had never been depressed, nor did he have any history of any mental illness symptoms.

    A boy from Houston, age 10, shot and killed his father after his Prozac dosage was increased.

    Hammad Memon, age 15, shot and killed a fellow middle school student. He had been diagnosed with ADHD and depression and was taking Zoloft and ‘other drugs for the conditions.’.

    Matti Saari, a 22-year-old culinary student, shot and killed 9 students and a teacher, and wounded another student, before killing himself. Saari was taking an SSRI and a benzodiazapine.

    Steven Kazmierczak, age 27, shot and killed five people and wounded 21 others before killing himself in a Northern Illinois University auditorium. According to his girlfriend, he had recently been taking Prozac, Xanax and Ambien. Toxicology results showed that he still had trace amounts of Xanax in his system.

    Finnish gunman Pekka-Eric Auvinen, age 18, had been taking antidepressants before he killed eight people and wounded a dozen more at Jokela High School – then he committed suicide.

    Asa Coon from Cleveland, age 14, shot and wounded four before taking his own life. Court records show Coon was on Trazodone.

    Jon Romano, age 16, on medication for depression, fired a shotgun at a teacher in his New York high school.

    • IndividualAudienceMember
      December 19, 2012 at 2:01 pm

      The FDA and government monopoly is the real culprit here. It May seem like guns, drugs or doctors might be, but it’s the FDA saying the drugs are ok to use which removes a lot of the liability and responsibility from doctors and… so they think, parents too, imho.

      “This is what happens when you have only one entity which you are FORCED to pay for impose its operating standards on what is, in actuality, the responsibility of a patient’s doctor to independently determine the efficacy of a medication without having to rely on just one source.”…
      http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/40919.html

      If the FDA didn’t have this monopoly, doctors and parents would likely be A Lot more cautious and might even try other remedies with better success.

      Not many others want to think of it this way, but there it is.

      • IndvidualAudienceMember
        December 19, 2012 at 3:33 pm

        The whole system is rotten to the core.
        The FDA is corrupt.
        The executive and legislative branches of gobement are corrupt.
        And the court system is corrupt.

        The following applies to the court system but it may as well be any goberment organization they are describing:

        “.. what we are seeing is tyranny in action in which those who rule over the rest of us declare that they are so pure and so holy and so necessary to our well-being that we cannot and will not hold them accountable no matter how egregious their actions might be. This is not the institution of justice; it is the institutionalization of lying, the very antithesis of justice.”

        http://lewrockwell.com/anderson/anderson351.html

  33. Mark
    December 18, 2012 at 12:35 am

    Hi Eric,

    You are a good writer, and this is the best piece you’ve written so far, in my humble opinion.

    • December 18, 2012 at 10:33 am

      Thanks, Mark!

      And, welcome to the site – good to have you with us!

  34. Robert
    December 18, 2012 at 4:02 pm

    It is Very Sad what Happened in Connecticut Namely the
    Shooting and the Tragic Loss of Human Life

    However Banning Firearms is Not the Answer because if
    a Burglar breaks into somebody’s House and they have a
    Firearm and the Victim does Not they have No Means of
    Self Defence Burglars and Murderers will take No Notice
    of Firearms Laws whilst their Victims who do will Suffer as
    a Consequence

    The 2nd Amendment the Right to Bear Arms is as Important
    as the Right to Freedom of Speech in the 1st Amendment
    and should be Defended

  35. Don Cooper
    December 18, 2012 at 6:10 pm

    The scene of a deadly mugging:

    Cop: did the mugger have a gun?
    Survivor: yes
    Cop: did you or your friend have a gun?
    Survivor: no
    Cop: why not?
    Survivor: guns kill.

    Moral of the story boys and girls: if you don’t have a gun, have a friend willing to take a bullet for you.

    • methylamine
      December 18, 2012 at 6:25 pm

      Don, the problem is Clover doesn’t understand this esoteric, abstract reasoning you do.

      That story is SO complicated; he’ll never understand it.

      We have only ourselves to blame for not putting across the point better to Clover.

      With narratives like this, how can he possibly understand the need for gun rights?

      :)

      • Tor Munkov
        December 18, 2012 at 8:38 pm

        Dr. Methylamine,

        There’s humor and truth in what you say. We SHOULD draw Clover a picture of what we’re saying. That way he can upload our concepts right into his Central Executive via his Visio-Spatial Sketchpad (See Attached)

        http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ed/Working_memory_model.svg/269px-Working_memory_model.svg.png

        (P.S. Yes, this is a straight line)

        • mithrandir
          December 18, 2012 at 11:39 pm

          :) Funny.

          Similar to the story of two hikers that come across a bear.

          Hiker A quickly puts on his running shoes.

          Hiker B: Why bother, you can not out run a bear.

          Hiker A: I do not need to out run the bear. I only need to out run you.

          • December 18, 2012 at 11:49 pm

            Dear mithrandir,

            It is indeed similar.

            After all, a firearm in one of the two hikers’ hands would have enabled both hikers to stop running, catch their breath, and frighten off or even kill the attacking animal.

          • December 19, 2012 at 11:19 am

            About three years ago, on a hiking trail near VA Tech, a young couple was assaulted (girl raped) and both murdered. No assailant has yet been apprehended.

            Who needs a gun in the woods?

        • December 19, 2012 at 1:19 am

          Here’s another image I stumbled upon that speaks volumes.

          It’s a photo of an Israeli woman school teacher with a rifle slung over one shoulder, watching over her students.

          The caption reads:

          “Meanwhile, at a school in Israel, armed teachers protect children from assailants. RIP children of Newton.”

          http://i1076.photobucket.com/albums/w445/richawesome1/j_zpsb80ec8e6.jpg

          Sorry. Even though I’m a firearms enthusiast, the image is too small for me to be sure of the make and model. Possibly an M-1 carbine.

          • Tor Munkov
            December 20, 2012 at 7:10 am

            Damn! I wish Miss Hittenmiller would have been strapped.

            I still remember her calling me out to stop being a douchebag and lording it over the other fauntleroys because I could recite the multiplication tables the fastest.

            She went off-curricula-grid to read us part of a short story each day. It was about a girl kidnapped and kept in a cold damp underground in a makeshift dungeon, by an unseen man with unknown dark intentions.

            Song of Childhood

            When the child was a child
            It walked with its arms swinging,
            wanted the brook to be a river,
            the river to be a torrent,
            and this puddle to be the sea.

            When the child was a child,
            it didn’t know that it was a child,
            everything was soulful,
            and all souls were one…..

            When the child was a child,
            it had no opinion about anything,
            had no habits of concealment,
            it often took off running,
            had a cowlick in its hair,
            and made no faces when photographed.

            When the child was a child,
            It choked on spinach, on peas, on rice pudding, and on steamed cauliflower,
            and eats all of those now, and not just because it has to.

            When the child was a child,
            It played with enthusiasm,
            and, now, has just as much excitement as then, but only when it concerns its work.

            When the child was a child,
            Berries filled its hand as only berries do, and do even now,
            Fresh walnuts made its tongue raw,
            and do even now,
            it had, on every mountaintop,
            the longing for a higher mountain yet,
            and in every city,
            the longing for an even greater city,

            It reached for cherries in topmost branches of trees
            It awaited the first snow,
            And waits that way even now.

            When the child was a child,
            It threw a stick like a lance against a tree, and it quivers there still today.

    • Me2
      December 18, 2012 at 9:39 pm

      But, if we ban all guns then the muggers won’t have them either….

      The guns will all disappear once the law is passed outlawing them.

      ^Clover impersonation^

    • Boothe
      December 18, 2012 at 9:54 pm

      I had a relative by marriage, who also happened to be a die-hard liberal journalist. His mantra was resisting violent criminals would only beget more violence and having a gun on hand was more likely to kill or injure an innocent than a criminal; all guns in the hands of the public should be banned. Right after my ex shot a serial rapist in our bedroom, Mr. Liberal went right out and bought a handgun and a rifle. As soon as I heard about this I confronted him to inquire about his philosophical about face. The only responce he could come up with was “Well it’s my right…”

      • methylamine
        December 19, 2012 at 4:18 am

        That’s beautiful, Boothe…even though he couldn’t admit it to himself, he’s become an asset to us instead of an enemy.

        Our biggest win right now is the 2nd Amendment; every one of these shootings sends even libtards scurrying on their skinny pale legs to the nearest gun store where they shuffle around guiltily like gawky teenagers buying condoms. The PTB are really screwing themselves with this operation, I think it’s going 180 degrees in the wrong direction for them.

        I saw a couple of trendy-looking young men the other day in a big Houston gun shop; guys you’d never imagine would be gun-shopping. You know the type; the new BPA-male, testicles hovering somewhere in the inguinal canal and coiffed hair shiny with product.

        But there they were; welcome, young men, I say. And welcome to embracing your manhood. ‘Bout fucking time!

      • December 19, 2012 at 4:46 am

        Dear Boothe,

        “Right after my ex shot a serial rapist in our bedroom…

        I’m not even going to ask.

      • December 19, 2012 at 4:48 am

        Dear Boothe,

        Almost forgot.

        Here’s to philosophical about faces.

    • December 18, 2012 at 11:39 pm

      Dear Don,

      When I lived in the Peoples Republic of Santa Monica, my downstairs neighbor was a clone of the person in your anecdote.

      He was married. Wife. Young daughter. Kindergarten age.

      One day he went around to all the neighbors telling them a scuzzy-looking character, straight from central casting, had been peering in the windows of his first floor apartment.

      He wondered whether I would I would rush downstairs and intervene in the event of a life or death emergency he called out for help.

      I assured him solemnly that of course I would, and that needless to say, I would not arrive empty-handed.

      Instead of gratitude, you can probably guess what happened next.

      I was regaled with every victim disarmament fallacy ever parroted by Diane Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, and Sarah Brady.

      In other words, I kid you not, he expected me to rush downstairs to his help unarmed, and become another potential victim.

      Meanwhile, he was supporting “gun control” (victim disarmament) laws whenever they came up for a vote.

      I would never of course actually have erected a sign such as the one I linked to a moment ago. But I sure as know how that guy felt.

  36. Tor Munkov
    December 19, 2012 at 12:23 pm

    My dear depopulator friends,

    There is no rational criteria for an individual to go about killing people. And certainly no justification for asking a group of others to kill for you. On the average, you will destroy more product capacity than you will conserve. And now you are someone who, by definition, deserves to be killed.

    There is plenty of room and resources to support more people in America. Each man of achievement carries the load for thousands of nobodies. The more nobodies there are around to do the mundane tasks, the more the man of greatness is free to achieve even more.
    As long as each man contributes even the slightest of things, to the extent they free up the great man’s time, it is as if they are as productive as he is.

    It’s also not the inclination of the productive man to kill his fellow man, he prefers to compete and win. He has no need of nobodies, he just asks to be let alone to pursue his projects.

    No, it’s the nobodies that want to kill others. Because they live off the surplus of the good man and blindly lash out for more. They want the stolen fruits of others’ labor and then the solitude to enjoy them as well. Because they are ignorant of the world.

    If you measure a lone tree in your yard, and find its canopy to be an uneven circle of 30 feet in diameter, you might conclude that the closest you can plant such trees is every 30 feet.

    Yet if you find a dense grove of that same tree, you will learn that a tree’s canopy is of variable diameter. There branches grow up towards the light instead of outward. The same trees have grown up only 4 feet apart.

    The trees of the grove are more hardy, resilient, and protect each other. They weather storms and droughts much easier. Having less room, yet a longer, fuller life. This is a tree’s natural state.

    The lone tree is at a distinct disadvantage. He is exposed to the winds. He is at the mercy of the predators and pestilence. He will require tending by humans, he will live a shorter, more sickly, un-natural life.

  37. Tor Munkov
    December 20, 2012 at 6:53 am

    @Jay Wocky.

    Maybe there’s a way Tinsley is right. If we start challenging the real misanthropes to duels, there will be a lot less people around, and it would be worth it, providing we win most of the time.
    Given the time and effort he has put into his thought and his writing, I am confident he is trying to create value, not mindlessly destroy others.
    He creates things, which, he acknowledges, are mostly rejected for now. But that’s what best serves the world. Not a bunch of mass hallucinated happy-crappy group thoughts.

    Getting to the truth of something is like charging into a gauntlet of land mines, sniper fire, choking chemicals , and unseen micro-psychological mind nanobots.

    I know you’ll make it through to where your truth objective lies. And then stalwartly and vigilantly guard your hill of truth.

    This is Very Long piece on abortion, but a Must Read.

    Wendy Mc-Elroy on Abortion

    When I was eighteen, I chose to have an abortion. Accordingly, the question I am addressing here is nothing less than whether I have committed murder. If the fetus is a human being with individual rights, then I am among millions of women who have committed first degree, premeditated murder, and I should be subject to whatever penalties are imposed upon that crime. The fact that I did not know I was killing a human being is irrelevant, just as the state of knowledge of a racist who kills blacks while believing them to be animals is irrelevant to the fact that he has committed murder. If you shy away from such prosecution, you are shying away from the antiabortionist position.

    Before advancing the pro-choice position–to which I subscribe–it is necessary to distinguish between morality and rights, between the moral and the legal.

    Peaceful activities may be moral or immoral, but they never violate rights. Taking drugs, gambling, or lying to a friend may or may not be immoral, but they are not a violation of rights. In libertarianism, the purpose of law is to protect rights, not to enforce virtue; as such, the law does not concern itself with the morality of an action but asks only if it is invasive.

    Many people oppose abortion on moral grounds without considering it to be a violation of rights which should be addressed by law. I have no argument with this particular antiabortion position. My argument is with antiabortionists who attempt to translate their personal moral convictions into laws restricting what I may do with my body … those who advocate mandatory motherhood.

    Although libertarianism is often expressed as ‘the noninitiation of force” or ‘anything that’s peaceful,’ there is a more fundamental theme running through libertarian thought. The Levellers in seventeenth-century Britain called it ‘self-proprietorship’; Josiah Warren, the first American anarchist, referred to ‘the sovereignty of the individual”; abolitionists in opposing slavery used the concept of ‘self-ownership’-that is every human being simply by being a human being has moral jurisdiction over his or her own body. The principle underlying libertarianism–the reason it is wrong to initiate force against anyone–is that it violates that person’s self- ownership. This moral jurisdiction is what I mean by the term individual rights.

    The concept of rights is key to the abortion issue. Antiabortionists claim that abortion violates the rights of the fetus. I contend that antiabortion legislation violates the rights of the pregnant woman. I also contend that the fetus is not a human being. It possesses no rights. Up until the point of birth, it is not a self-owner.

    To say this is not to deny that the fetus is in some sense alive, or that the zygote is a potential human being. A potential is not an actual, however; it is a hypothetical possibility. To their credit, Libertarians for Life (the libertarian antiabortionist organization) do not ascribe individual rights to the fetus on the basis of its potential, but on the assumption that at the instant of conception–at the moment there is a fertilized egg-there is a human being with individual rights.

    The essential question becomes: ‘What does it mean to be an individual?” For only by being an individual can the fetus possess individual rights. When defining a thing, it is necessary to discover the core characteristics-the characteristics without which it would be something else. With human beings, you subtract accidental characteristics such as race, sex, and hair color until you are left with the things which cannot be subtracted without destroying humanness itself.

    One such characteristic is a rational faculty.

    An essential characteristic–indeed, a prerequisite–of considering something to be individual is that it be a discreet entity, a thing in and of itself. Until the point of birth, however, the fetus is not a separate entity; it is a biological aspect of the pregnant woman which possesses the capacity to become discrete. At birth, the fetus is biologically autonomous and is a self-owner with full individual rights. Although it cannot survive without assistance, this does not affect its biological independence; it is simply the dependence that any helpless individual experiences.

    Let’s rephrase this argument: having a DNA encoding, which is all that is probably present at the point of conception when rights are assigned, is not sufficient grounds upon which to claim individual rights.

    What is missing? The missing piece is individuality … autonomy … a biologically discrete person. As long as the fetus is physically within the woman’s body, nourished by the food she eats, sustained by the air she breathes, dependent upon her circulatory and respiratory system, it cannot claim individual rights because it is not an individual. It is part of the woman’s body and subject to her discretion.

    Birth is the point at which the fetus becomes an actual human being in the legal sense of that term. There is no point, other than conception, at which such a clear, objective change occurs in the status of the fetus. All other changes are a matter of degree rather than of kind and, thus, are inadequate for legal theory which demands a definable point of enforcement.

    Antiabortionists often detail the physical development of the fetus, the development of toes and brainwaves, in order to give weight to the claim that it is human. But this development, by their own standards, is irrelevant, since they have already assigned individual rights to the zygote, which has no discernible features.

    Therefore these features are beside the point. Moreover, this development actually supports the pro-choice position; i.e., that the fetus is a potential rather than an actual human being.

    One means by which antiabortionists attempt to load the issue of abortion against the woman and in favor of the fetus is by ascribing responsibility to the woman. But there are two senses in which you can use the word responsibility. The first is as an acknowledgment of an obligation to another person. This is the sense in which antiabortionists use the word, and it begs the question. It assumes as a given the point in contention; namely, is the fetus an individual toward whom obligations can be incurred?

    In contrast, the other sense of the word responsibility does not involve another person. It refers to the acknowledgment that a certain situation results from your actions and to the acceptance in terms of money, time and moral accountability of handling the situation. When a woman uses her own money to pay for an abortion, she has assumed full responsibility for the pregnancy.

    There is something odd and inconsistent about the way antiabortionists use responsibility. The pregnant woman is said to be responsible for the fetus because it resulted from her choice to have sex. How then does the antiabortionist handle the rape pregnancy?

    An individual is not morally responsible for a situation in which there was no choice. The consistent position is that the fetus is still a human being and abortion is still murder, in which case one wonders why the issue of responsibility has any relevance. Whether or not the woman is responsible, she is prohibited from having an abortion. On the other hand, if an exception is made in cases of rape pregnancies, antiabortionists must explain how their libertarian theory can sanction willful, premeditated murder.

    Similar problems exist in the contract model of pregnancy by which the woman is assumed to have contractual obligations to the fetus. This assumes that the fetus is not only an individual who can contract, but that it was present at the point of sex from which the obligation is said to have arisen.

    In a more fundamental sense, however, the issue of contract is irrelevant. Individual rights are attributed to the fetus and the protection of rights is independent of contract. I do not have to contract with neighbors not to kill me or steal from me; my body and property are mine by right. Contract enters the picture only when I desire something to which I have no right, such as another’s labor. Through contract, I acquire a negotiated claim over that person. If individual rights are granted to the fetus, then a contract is superfluous to the protection of those rights. If individual rights are not being claimed, then no contract is possible since a contract is a voluntary exchange between two human beings.
    But what if, for the sake of argument, the fetus were acknowledged to possess individual rights? What consequences would this have for the pro-choice position?
    The principle of self-ownership states that every human being, simply by being a human being, has moral jurisdiction over his or her own body. Thus, even if the fetus possesses rights, those rights could never include living within and off of the woman’s body, for this would be tantamount to asserting that one human being could own the bodily functions of another … that two people can have rights in one body. The word used to describe a system in which one man has property rights in another is slavery.
    One of the concepts upon which ‘rights” rest, from which the word derives meaning, is the concept of ‘a natural harmony of interest.” This does not mean that all men feel benevolence toward each other and their desires never come into conflict. It means that the exercise of my self-ownership, my rights, in no way violates the similar exercise of your rights. My right to believe in God does not conflict with your right to be an atheist. If it did conflict, it could not be an inalienable right which all men possess; rather it would be a privilege which I possessed at your expense. Two fundamental characteristics of individual rights are that all human beings have them and that they do not conflict.
    Imagine a world in which the act of swallowing a pill murdered another human being. In what sense could I claim the right to swallow? On the other hand, in what sense could I claim the right to my own body when I cannot properly control what is put into it?
    This is the dilemma posed by the antiabortionists who grant the fetus a right to control the woman’s body which competes and conflicts with her own right. The result is not conflicting rights, but the destruction of the framework from which rights derive meaning. Unlike gray areas of libertarian theory in which disputes arise because rights are not well defined, the alleged rights are clear and in direct contradiction. The fetus’s life requires a claim on the woman’s bodily functions; the woman’s right to her body requires the fetus’s death.

    In Randian terms, this is ‘the fallacy of the stolen concept.” In this fallacy, a word is used while the conceptual underpinnings which are necessary to the definition of the word are denied. Thus, the antiabortionists use the concept of ‘rights’ without regard for the fact that the fetus is not a discrete individual, the alleged rights conflict, and the rights involve two people claiming control of one body. Whatever version of rights is being attributed to the fetus, it is not the natural rights championed by libertarianism.

    Antiabortionists often counter that the fetus should have a right to the woman’s body because it is a matter of life and death. But rights are not based on how important it is to have them. Nor is there a cost-benefit chart giving us how much pain balances how much use of force. Rights are not granted or open to adjustment; they are inalienable. And they derive from only one source–the right to control your own body. The antiabortionists are not depriving the pregnant woman of some percentage of her rights; they are denying the right of self-ownership altogether.

    The important thing about the antiabortionist position is not that it is wrong, but that it has disastrous consequences. Antiabortionists dislike dealing with these consequences and consider such discussion to be ‘scare tactics.’ As long as the basic thrust of their position is “there ought to be a law,’ however, it is reasonable to ask what this law would look like.

    If the fetus is a human being, then abortion is clearly first-degree, premeditated murder and should be subject to whatever penalties that category of crime merits. Aborting women and doctors would be liable to punishment up to, and perhaps including, the death penalty. If this is ‘scary,’ the fault lies not with the person who points it out, but with the one who advocates it. Antiabortionists sometimes backpedal on this issue by stating that, since abortion has not been subject to such penalties historically, there is no reason to suppose they would occur in the future. But this is evasion. The debate does not concern history, but moral theory. By antiabortionist standards, abortion is premeditated murder and they should be decrying the tradition of slap-on-the-wrist penalties rather than using them to reassure us.

    Moreover, if you admit the idea that the fetus is a human being for whom the woman is legally responsible, then the woman cannot take any action to imperil the life and well-being of the fetus. Almost everything she puts into her system is automatically introduced into the system of the fetus and, if the substance is harmful, it constitutes assault upon the fetus on the same level as strapping me down and forcing drugs into my body. Moreover, life-endangering acts, such as parachute jumping, would place the unconsenting fetus in unreasonable danger. If the woman has no right to kill the fetus, she can have no right to jeopardize its life and well-being. Thus, if the fetus has rights, it is not merely a matter of prohibiting abortion; it means that the woman is criminally liable for harm befalling the fetus on the same level as she would be for harming an infant.

    This dilemma is not just a dilemma for anti-abortionists. It is not avoided by McElroy. She would have to say that she has the right to put the murdering pill in her body.
    The only framework from which “rights” derive meaning is the Christian framework. I discussed this here.

    Ayn Rand is not the only writer who has spoken in terms of “the stolen concept” or “stolen capital.” Christians have spoken of “intellectual capital” or “moral capital” in these articles:

    The Eschatology of Education

    Review of “The Matrix”

    Counter-Cultural Christianity

    A “World” of Difference

    If “the natural rights championed by libertarianism” permits a man to swallow a pill which murders another, then that particular libertarian position is not worth anyone’s support.

    The rights which the Founding Fathers recognized derive from only one source: God. McElroy does not acknowledge the “Faith of our Fathers.”

    The Consequences of Anti-Abortionism

    McElroy suggests that there are terrible consequences to the belief that killing babies is wrong. But all her consequences depend upon the existence of a State of dubious moral character. As an anarchist, my position is not subject to these challenges. But they should still be addressed.

    She is correct when she says that “abortion is clearly first-degree, premeditated murder and should be subject to whatever penalties that category of crime merits.” She is also correct when she observes that to some people “this is ‘scary.’” But we live in a culture which is so “tolerant” that it ignored the murder of 10,000 per day every day of the 20th century. Calling a person a murderer or a thief seems so “judgmental.”

    McElroy is correct to hold pro-capitalpunishment anti-abortionist advocates to the fire:

    By antiabortionist standards, abortion is premeditated murder and they should be decrying the tradition of slap-on-the-wrist penalties rather than using them to reassure us.
    McElroy, with a razor-sharp mind, raises other very interesting questions, which she dismisses as silly, but deserve careful thought. There are indeed acts which endanger the life of her child and should subject a mother to criminal liability. The law used to recognize such liability. Many laws protected the rights of unborn children. These laws recognized the unborn as legally human. (A link to a list of laws which allow, for example, a dying man to leave his estate to an unborn child and have that will enforced by courts, will soon be here.)

    The important question about protecting the fetus is, of course, how will this be accomplished? There is no way that this can be done short of massive interference with the pregnant woman’s civil liberties. Again, antiabortionists protest that enforcement problems are not properly part of the abortion issue, that we are simply investigating the right and wrong of the matter. But antiabortionists themselves go beyond this line by advocating laws to remedy the situation. Pro-choice advocates merely insist that this solution be clearly defined, especially with regard to whether anti-abortion legislation can be enforced without violating rights. For even if the fetus merited protection, such protection could not be rendered at the expense of innocent third parties. The impact of the antiabortionist position on birth control is another unexplored implication of that argument. Since an individual with full human rights is said to exist at the moment of fertilization and since IUDs work by disrupting fertilized eggs, women who use these devices must be guilty of attempted murder, if not murder itself. Other forms of birth control which work not by preventing fertilization but by destroying the zygote would be murder weapons and doctors who supplied them would be accessories. As absurd as this sounds, it is the logical implication of considering a zygote to be a human being. The moral animus behind IUD’s is identical to that behind abortion. McElroy’s questions must be seriously considered, not dismissed out of hand.
    The antiabortionist position is weak, riddled with internal contradictions, and dangerously wrong. It is a sketchy argument which does not address key issues. It uses the word ‘rights” in a self-contradictory manner which denies the framework from which the concept derives meaning. Although the message is ‘there ought to be a law,’ antiabortionists refuse to address the question of what this law would entail or how it would be enforced. I believe this refusal serves a purpose. It permits antiabortionists to argue on the side of compassion and children without having to face the truly inhumane and brutal consequences of their theory. Self-ownership begins with your skin. If you cannot clearly state, “Everything beneath the skin is me; this is the line past which no one has the right to cross without permission,” then there is no foundation for individual rights or for libertarianism

    • February 3, 2013 at 8:35 am

      Dear Tor,

      I also contend that the fetus is not a human being. It possesses no rights. Up until the point of birth, it is not a self-owner.

      As long as the fetus is physically within the woman’s body, nourished by the food she eats, sustained by the air she breathes, dependent upon her circulatory and respiratory system, it cannot claim individual rights because it is not an individual. It is part of the woman’s body and subject to her discretion.

      Birth is the point at which the fetus becomes an actual human being in the legal sense of that term.

      McElroy is correct.

      I don’t see how anyone can argue otherwise.

      If one leaves aside the minarchist vs. anarchist issue aside temporarily, this is the only point on which I disagree with Ron Paul.

      To Paul’s credit, he does make an allowance for rape.

      [Paul was asked] whether he thought that, if one of his daughters were raped and impregnated, she should carry the baby to term.

      Paul responded, “No. If it’s an honest rape, that individual should go immediately to the emergency room. I would give them a shot of estrogen or give them…”

      “You would allow them to abort the baby?”

      Paul replied, “… an hour after intercourse or a day afterwards, there is no legal or medical problem. If you talk about somebody coming in and they say, well, I was raped and I’m seven months pregnant and I don’t want to have anything to do with it, it’s a little bit different story.”

      I still disagree, mind you. But at least he does make an allowance for rape.

    • ray
      February 4, 2013 at 6:45 pm

      Certainly thought-provoking. Thanks Tor

  38. Tor Munkov
    February 2, 2013 at 4:17 pm

    Video showing “extras” circling the Sandy Hook Firehouse in a loop to give the illusion there are more people.

    If you pay attention to what is really going on around the Sandy Hook Firehouse- People are walking in circles, out one door, in the other, over and over again. They also walk all the way around the firehouse, only to enter through another door.

    Why are these people doing this? Do they mean to keep leaving and entering over and over again- or is this the same method that is used in movie productions where extras walk around on a loop in the foreground and background to create the illusion of a busier atmosphere?

    It is interesting that Gene Rosen appears to have spent quite a bit of time around the firehouse- he doesn’t really mention this much in his interviews though- Who is the man Gene Rosen keeps talking to?

    The actors at the Sandy Hook firehouse – Spinning around and around.

    • dom
      February 2, 2013 at 4:35 pm

      Excellent find. This was a full scale production!

    • BrentP
      February 2, 2013 at 4:55 pm

      I am coming to the conclusion that television news is produced just like any other program. It has probably been that way for decades. The methods were developed when people just had the three networks and no means to record it. Even after VCRs people didn’t really record the TV news and analyze it later. Now technology is in such a state that there is easy recording and it can be analyzed later. Frame by frame, by just about anyone. Not just some konspiracy kook who takes his VCR tape to a video expert to have it analyzed. So the production techniques are showing through.

      The question is then, how much of the story is real? How much is production, spin, illusion? 50%? 95%? 25%? Who knows. Then what parts of it are fake and what parts are real?

      What may be good is that people are seeing the production of the news and rejecting all of it as fake.

      The news is produced. Like Dan Rather’s story on Bush jr. Which I still wonder about when it comes up. It seemed to be something that network news did routinely. It’s as if Dan Rather didn’t understand why he was being nailed for it. Someone probably wanted him taken out. Just like in politics there is stuff everyone does that is technically wrong or illegal but its selectively enforced on only some. Like speeding. I think that may have been mainstream americans’ first insight into what ‘news’ is. Trouble is most applied the usual ‘isolated incident’ thinking to it. I doubt it was isolated, but rather SOP. It seemed as if Dan Rather didn’t know what had been done wrong. They simply produced the story.

      Did GWB go AWOL? Probably. But they had to produce the story to make it good for TV. That’s what we are most likely seeing with Sandy Hook. There’s a basic story in there somewhere that really happened, but it’s surrounded by so much story and production who knows what it is anymore.

      • Tor Munkov
        February 2, 2013 at 5:35 pm

        Remember, even if something actually occurred, you’re only seeing the Karaoke version. Politicians, actors, newsmen, are all just reading teleprompters. Watch their eyes and their blink-rates. All TV minute is a commercial for something.

        This also means comedians, talk show hosts, reality TV stars, sitcoms, dramas, are required to cover an agenda at all times. They’re never permitted to pick their own topics as they pretend. Advertisers, defense contractors, government agencies, NGOs, are always shaping everything you’re allowed to see, hear, think, and feel.

        Why do the PTB all blink rapidly and lick their lips?

        • dom
          February 2, 2013 at 7:57 pm

          So weird. I tried blinking as much as they do for a few seconds and it takes work.

          • Tor Munkov
            February 2, 2013 at 8:35 pm

            Sonic Frequency Attack by Electromagnetic beings?

    • February 2, 2013 at 7:42 pm

      Two things about Sandy Hook really skeeved me out – and one just disgusted me:

      * The performance of Interview Dad – who is caught yukking it up just before he goes on mike…

      * The second individual seen on tape “proned” by cops in the woods… who was this person?

      And, disgusted:

      The despicable lies about the “assault rifle” – to this day uncorrected by the media. The rifle in the car. The one not used to shoot anyone.

      • Tor Munkov
        February 3, 2013 at 12:43 pm

        As dc.sunsets once wrote: “America is a crystal meth economy.” Until that changes, we’ll be shown the amount of dignity we have earned, which isn’t much. No one forced Robbie Parker to go on TV. He made a choice to be a pawn in their gun grabbing game.

        Whether this tragedy occurred or not, Robbie Parker is a despicable thesbian weepy faggot traitor to humanity for playing the dutiful helpless plucked chicken dithering Daddy who needs Pappa Joe Stalin’s Theater Company to bring him justice and a happy ending with endless stolen blood money to keep him warm and safe.

        Begin Inquisitr Excerpt:

        “Robbie Parker is seen nervously approaching what is very likely his first ever appearance live on national television, an experience that can in and of itself be intimidating. Someone off camera prompts parker to “read the card,” providing blatant evidence the event is being scripted and shaped for political purposes.

        Given the length at which Parker speaks and the coherence of his statement, it’s not difficult to imagine his remarks were prepared ahead of time.

        Regardless of the situation’s gravity and horror, it’s likely anyone speaking to every major media outlet in the US will prepare their statement to facilitate presenting a clear and consistent set of remarks.

        Imagine how the press conference would have gone, for a second, had the heartbroken man not had a guardrail of remarks on which to cling as he described the murder of his child the previous day to every single American tuning in?”

        …End Inquisitr Excerpt

        So even when our children are killed, in THEIR FUCKING CUSTODY, we are supposed to cling to their guardrails of remarks? Who the fuck would agree to that. How can it be, none of these parents blame the proprietor of this establishment. The DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION and all the other government shitbags aren’t being blamed by even one family?

        http://www.inquisitr.com/486693/sandy-hook-truthers-say-robbie-parker-video-is-evidence-of-hoax/

        How about, if someone you love is killed while forcibly conscripted into a government education camp, one person somewhere at least, opens their eyes and has a HUGE MOTHERFUCKING PROBLEM with the whole ridiculous KIDDIE CONCENTRATION CAMP crapsickle?

    • February 2, 2013 at 10:04 pm

      Dear Tor,

      They were the same extras used in “Wag the Dog!”

    • skunkbear
      February 3, 2013 at 12:27 am

      Tor, any idea from what vantage point this video was filmed? It is obviously pretty high but is not from an aircraft. And it is at an excellent angle to show the “crowd”.

      It is truly bizarre behavior for people who are there right after a mass shooting.

      I would suspect something about this but Glen Beck has already dis-proven and denounced all Sandy Hook conspiracies.

      • February 3, 2013 at 10:38 am

        Beck is insufferable and unendurable. I prefer Russssssssshhhhh (to the pill box) Limbaugh, even. Limbaugh, at least, is a sort of honest con man.

  39. MoT
    February 2, 2013 at 5:33 pm

    Actors? Check!
    Sets? Check!
    Extras? Check!

    Lights… Cameras… Action!

    • dom
      February 2, 2013 at 5:46 pm

      Another Video:

  40. Tor Munkov
    February 3, 2013 at 1:18 pm

    Every nation crashes differently towards the end of its fiat money methamphetamine binge. If America was still experimenting with new freedoms and permissiveness, I wouldn’t even complain. But its not. American are the sort of insufferable Babbits who spend a day at a Groundhogs Day festival, while outlawing or taxing into oblivion every fulfilling and sincere celebration.

    Punxsutawney Phil
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2013/feb/02/groundhog-day-punxsutawney-phil-prediction-video

    No booze allowed. No free food. No cute chicks. No music. Just a God-Damned ground hog and a bunch of old illuminati yokels in top hats. Even the Zombie Zealot Saudi & Iranians aren’t this far gone up their government’s ass yet!

    The caption of a photo 3 reads:
    The Groundhog Club ‘Inner Circle,’ wearing top hats, is led through the crowd by Pennsylvania state troopers.
    http://www.newser.com/story/162113/groundhog-day-phil-predicts-early-spring.html

    Well sure troopers of course. And scan the crowds too. Don’t touch that “service rodent” you filthy mundanes, or they’ll taser and wood shampoo you until you flinch at your own shadow for six more weeks. Land of the arsenic laced free lunch, this is.

    America is geeking and tweaking so ridiculously, it’s intolerable. No drinking or smoking on the way Gobler’s Knob, citizen. Wear your seatbelt, no sodas over 16 oz, see something say… hey, is that the eightball of blow I’ve been missing over there by my shadow? Sweet!

    The whole world must be watching in befuddled horror, while American Morons run up the central bank’s tab by a trillion dollars every week for the kind of autistic idiocy contained in the idea of a safe and diverse Ground Hogs Day celebration for the whole rainbow coalition of mental muppet leprechauns.

    • ray
      February 4, 2013 at 7:08 pm

      “I’ll give you a winter prediction”

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7amSrgtINI

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJOjHWr5jQc

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VF5P7qLaEQ

      “maybe the real God uses tricks. maybe he’s just been around so long he knows everything”

      • Tor Munkov
        February 4, 2013 at 7:39 pm

        Outstanding, Ray!

        “I was in the Virgin Islands once. I met a girl. We ate lobster, drank pina coladas. At sunset, we made love like sea otters. That was a pretty good day. Why couldn’t I get that day over and over and over?”

        “Don’t you have some kind of a line that you keep open for emergencies or for celebrities? I’m both. I’m a celebrity in an emergency.”

        - Phil Connors – Character portrayed by Bill Murray – Dialog written by Danny Rubin & Harold Ramis.

      • methylamine
        February 4, 2013 at 7:41 pm

        LMAO, thank you ray–perfect timing, we just re-watched that brilliant movie this weekend.

        Groundhog Day…right up there with Caddyshack, better even.

        Don’t drive angry!

  41. Tor Munkov
    February 4, 2013 at 5:21 pm

    Bill Stevens – Citizen whose daughter was in lockdown during the Newtown CT shooting. Finally, a sane response from a MAN who has not yet succumbed to estrogen overdose.
    http://www.youtu.be/9bCA3yqkMUI
    Video 24,049 views 642 likes 2 dislikes

    • February 4, 2013 at 5:53 pm

      Hot damn! That guy’s a live one!

  42. Principle3000
    February 4, 2013 at 5:51 pm

    The World is a Crazy Place

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *