Crimea's pro-Kremlin government chief Sergiy Aksyonov -- installed in power Thursday after an armed raid on the region's government building and not recognised by Kiev -- immediately named Berezovsky as head of the peninsula's own independent navy.
I beg you, fellow Patriots, dig deep and into the darkest places you can reach into your Soul, and understand what forces are moving in the world. This drama is not simply some over-the-horizon Euro-Russo affair. What is happening right here in America is innately, inextricably part of the whole. You and your ideals and everyone, everything you hold dear is being hunted by true Evil.
This is not some cutesy fucking game where you write trifle and snarky letters to petty bureaucratic functionaries over the number of bullets you may or may not have in your magazine, or the physical shape of your rifle. And the currents of Evil run deeply and from places whence may surprise you - like US financing of activity in Ukraine, here.
Still think Communism isn't the main problem in America? Still think your Liberal neighbor simply has a "...legitimate difference of political opinion..."
You do not half-ass your response to Evil.
You kill it. You grind it mercilessly under your heel until it is dead.
Or, it will kill you.
Dude, what are you doing? You criticize others about writing and sending trifling letters yet you have not acted. Crush evil under your heel? Since when have you started doing that? Seems a bit hypocritical.ReplyDelete
MD: I have not acted? Either you are seriously unschooled on this topic, seriously biased, or brain-damaged. Either way, you waste my time and the time of my allies when you come here and offer nothing but critical BS without defending your positions with facts.Delete
I've been fair and given you space on several threads, and you continue to offer only gratuitous attacks. And just for the record, switching your screen name doesn't hide who you are...
Contribute something substantial, or contribute elsewhere.
Crush evil under your heel? Since when have you started doing that? Seems a bit hypocritical.Delete
I will assume this is merely an error that you mistakenly entered twice - because only a flaming fucking retard or one of the worst-trained Fed provocateurs in the history of the republic would ask such a question on open air.Delete
Jeesh K, when I read comments like the one above I sometimes think you're doomed to be the Idiot Whisperer. Dude...;-)ReplyDelete
I do tend to draw some interesting folks into my orbit, who just can't seem to walk away when fear and common sense tell them it is the wise choice, huh?Delete
This one in particular is known to me, doesn't like my "tone" and always considers himself to be the smartest guy in the room. He's on a personal mission that I personally find terribly amusing, and sad that instead of a direct, public, open debate (where he feels inadequate - for good reason) he is trying to be the clever secret agent man.
The last time I posted under another name, you didn't allow the comments.Delete
Then you must've been pegging the ass-meter, because the comments I dis-allow are very few.Delete
"This is not some cutesy fucking game where you write trifle and snarky letters to petty bureaucratic functionaries over the number of bullets you may or may not have in your magazine, or the physical shape of your rifle."ReplyDelete
'trifle'? I think you meant 'trite', but whatever.
Using words against people who only use words is an appropriate task. Obviously it doesn't work on people who act rather than gab, but a battle fought on your behalf is a battle you don't have to fight.
"Still think Communism isn't the main problem in America? Still think your Liberal neighbor simply has a "...legitimate difference of political opinion...""
You cannot kill everyone with whom you disagree. You simply do not have the time/energy/strength. You also do not have enough people who agree with you to carry that out, and that's before we even get to the folks who will ally with you to that point but will end up trying to kill you instead of the lady down the street with the Obama-stickered Prius.
You need a narrower definition of Evil for starters, and don't discount the social effect of having the Defeated walking amongst us as a living example and a warning. Trash and dog poo don't pick themselves up, you know, and you'll need to keep them busy while you're teaching their offspring what Jeffersonian Liberty is all about.
If you stop and think through what I just wrote, you'll realize that I'm a lot less kind than you are about OPFOR. You want to end them, and I want them alive and suffering. We can argue about 'legitimate political differences' later.
Peter: Thank you for the timely example of my largesse and compassion in permitting even the Special People to have space to mumble through a keyboard.Delete
One general rule in life as most of my readers already know and you should try to respect: Instead of telling me what I can't do or why I can't do it, STFU and go figure out your own limitations without projecting yours on me. I've already proven more than a dozen times I have the people skills and other necessary skills to get Patriots working together on big, real, complex, tangible, useful, rewarding, productive projects for Liberty. Those of us involved in such projects simply have no time or use for "Patriots" who run off at the mouth ad nauseum without ever contributing or risking anything tangible. If I had to exist for even an hour at your level of intellect and intellectual dishonesty I'd kill myself with a spoon.
Have a nice Fuck You.
Hey, Pete, since you are personally able to suck your dick, do you ever leave the house?Delete
"If I had to exist for even an hour at your level of intellect and intellectual dishonesty I'd kill myself with a spoon."ReplyDelete
You can't hack my level of intellect, Sam. That's why you resort to schoolboy insults. Keep it up: it's entertaining and amusing.
There would be no appreciable difference between a restored Republic and Pol Pot's Cambodia if the same path is used to get there. Remember that the description of America is a 'shining light on a hill' not a 'shining light atop a mountain of skulls'.
Ending the gunfire will be a lot harder than starting it. There will be all sorts of scores that will be settled, and having the Restored Constitutional State engaging in the same thing will ensure that the killing continues well past your ability to control it.
That's an example of my "level of intellect", Sam: I'm already thinking about the aftermath, even though I know that I won't be around for that part. If nothing else, at least try to make different mistakes. Polling shows O's approval at ~45%, and quite a few of those people have children, children who will grow up talking about how you and yours murdered their parents if you get your way. If your solution to the current problem is to create other problems that our posterity will need to fix, then whose "intellect" is suspect here?
Wow - hit a button with mention of your sub-par intellect and intellectual dishonesty, eh?ReplyDelete
See, here's your intellectual dishonesty on display: Ending the gunfire will be much harder than starting it. and ...how you and yours murdered their parents...
Your words, written above. Yet you can't find one example, typed by my hand, anywhere, that I have ever advocated murdering anyone. But we've had this discussion before, you are simply once again attempting to forward the false meme that Kerodin advocates murder and malum in se behavior.
Peter, you are intellectually inferior, you are intellectually dishonest, and you are a liar. If you have a problem with any of that, I'm easy to find. But you are done wasting time and space on my blog. Go away now.
Damn. That escalated quickly. I'm not going to go round and round with you about it...we've done that before...but he does bring up one of the biggest concerns I have. The "mountain of skulls" image is pretty powerful, whatever else was said. Managing a conquered people after a civil war is a feat few have pulled off. The South is still resentful to this day about what happened 150+ years ago, though less so than a couple generations ago. I think that's the question with no answer. In the dark recesses of my mind I see a lot of ethnic cleansing happening in some areas, political cleansing in others and just some good old fashioned feudalism or tribalism in others. Debating the injustice of those methods doesn't change the reality that humans can and do resort to such groupings on a regular basis (Africa/ME/Asia comes to mind). Most people have been raised unable to take on adult responsibilities (circa pre-1930's) and would resort to some pretty primal behavior if the magic in the outlets suddenly stops working for any appreciable time or they actually have to go without their daily dose of distractions. Doesn't take a rocket surgeon to wonder who will step up when people are so desperate to trade their liberty for safety/convenience. The generation after will hold the key to America's future, that much is certain. Most today who can vote are beyond repair, sadly. Hearts and minds will be the keystone to restoring anything beyond our generation, and it will be the hearts and minds of the children today and those unborn. Remember, murder or heroism is largely determined by who's writing the history books. Doesn't change the facts, but someone once said that perception is reality...Delete
Jesse: Peter has a long history of trolling over here and at Bill Nye's place, so I don't tolerate his shit once he goes ad hominem. (It's obviously not Pete from WRSA)Delete
I get the mountain of skulls imagery and even though I do not, have not, will not, ever advocated that policy, there is a simple truth in America right this minute: There are mountains of skulls, still connected to living bodies, owned by people who mean to have anyone and everyone who favors Liberty bend knee and/or die.
A mountain of skulls is coming to kill you, and me.
They will never be swayed by Hearts and Minds, reason or logic or compassion. Their children have already been hard-wired to be essentially useless to a future that includes Liberty (that is a broad brush and you know I don't mean "every" one, but most) so they, too, must be forbidden the controls of society, or this cycle will simply continue to repeat rapidly. Yes, I have simple resolutions to this problem, no it does not include hurting anyone.
There is no good outcome for anyone alive right now. But we do have a few facts that we ignore at our peril: There is going to be a fight between those who mean to be masters and those who refuse to be enslaved.
I intend to win, regardless of what PR posters may be made by later generations.
I intend to win without ever committing a malum in se crime, or tolerating one.
Final fact, repeated: There is a mountain of skulls, with flesh still attached, who mean to have you bend knee or die.
Let me add just a bit of accuracy here. You can contrast what I write with what Sam did. Make your own judgment.
First off, the "trolling" crap. I don't troll. I attack, I criticize, and all using my real name. Trolls don't do that. Sam cannot intimidate me, he's tried. He's still trying, as a matter of fact. Plus, let me mention what I *don't* talk about: 1) Sam's past. What's done is done, and Sam's actions now are not those that landed him in trouble. 2) The Citadel. My initial skepticism has been replaced by approval for getting things done. 3) III Arms. I think that the 'III' was appropriated from the Author, but Sam/Jim got to the Copyright Office first. Case closed. Plus I have yet to hear *anything* other than praise for III Arms products. Doesn't seem very trollish, does it? Trolls don't make approving comments about the Citadel on a third-party blog, as I have done. Remember that, Sam?
Sam: you've been beating the Killing Commies thing for years. However vaguely you think you've covered yourself, that is an endorsement of life-taking, whichever legal term you care to assign to the act. When it all goes to hell and you're out of comms, what is left is the Commander's Intent: kill the commies. Oh, and Jeffersonian Liberty, but also kill the commies. You might not consider that a problem, but I disagree.
"See, here's your intellectual dishonesty on display: Ending the gunfire will be much harder than starting it. and ...how you and yours murdered their parents..."
Look to the end of our Civil War and the raiding, etc., that occurred after 14Apr1865. You could also use the search function on your computer and find numerous other examples of shooting/fighting that went on after an agreed cease-fire instead of making arguments that are hardly worth the effort of their refutation. And you're heard of the news? Go and look for yourself. See all the thug families crying about how the Decedent was a good fella who was getting his life together? That's the Lib/Dem entitlement mantra, and you'll get variations in accent and syntax only when it gets sporty. And what is your plan for the surviving families, people who haven't the faintest clue what Rightful Liberty is? All they're going to see is a corpse and who did it. What is you plan, Sam? Besides letting them know that you called me a troll when I brought it up?
I'm seeing you put in a lot of effort here, but there are things you don't write about. I think that's a problem, so I'm bringing it up, Sam. I know you and I have a history. I know that you and I have each other on a very short leash because of that. However, listen to the message, not the messenger. As I've said before, I don't want your job, I want you to do it right, and that includes planning for after. There will be all sorts of messes to clean up, ones that neither one of us can see now. Don't go and volunteer for an additional one that you can easily foresee and account for.
Peter: You are forwarding the conversation, so I won't kill the thread until the argument becomes redundant, ad hominem, or silly.Delete
An honest admission from me to you: I am not trying to intimidate you - that would be quite a silly thing to do on the internet. You can accept that at face value or not - but I don't do intimidation. I'm too short and thin for that to work. I do sometimes provide people who render themselves obnoxious the opportunity to meet and discuss their behavior in person, in an environment that permits immediate social ramifications for unacceptable social behaviors - but that is not an attempt to intimidate - it is an attempt to remind the obnoxious that words and actions have consequences.
At the end of graf #3 you state: ...that is an endorsement of life-taking, whichever legal term you care to assign to the act. When it all goes to hell and you're out of comms, what is left is the Commander's Intent: kill the commies. Oh, and Jeffersonian Liberty, but also kill the commies. You might not consider that a problem, but I disagree.
Is your disagreement that killing Communists somehow makes achieving Jefferson's Rightful Liberty unattainable? Killing Communists who are actively seeking to enslave and steal from innocents is a problem for you?
And do not quibble with wordplay or try to blur and conflate Killing and Murder: Killing is not Murder - there is a significant moral distinction. I have never murdered anyone, and never will.
Though by your use of the phrase "...an endorsement of life-taking..." I must conclude you see no distinction between Killing and Murder. Is that correct? Because you are essentially accusing me of advocating murder when I do no such thing.
An attempt to enslave and/or steal from someone, whether done personally or by proxy, is still an attempt to enslave and steal - it is an act of violence that morally entitles me (and everyone else) to respond in Self Defense. Killing some idiot for trying to enslave me, my children, or take the food from my pantry that is for MY child to eat is killing - NOT murder.
Bringing into this discussion the actions of people at the end of the Civil War is wholly intellectually dishonest, a strawman designed to link me to actions with which I have zero affiliation. Guilt by association? I call bullshit.
Next issue: What do I "not" write about that is a problem for you? (You wrote that in the first sentence of your final graf)
Final issue: You think I am somehow responsible for the surviving members of the family of the man who tried to enslave me, or steal bread from my wife? I am somehow responsible for the family of the dead bankster in my neighborhood who gets skull-stomped by someone who had beef with him? I am not responsible for them, morally or otherwise.
I do have a moral responsibility to provide a plan for those people who associate themselves with the Citadel, and that work has been done, continues to be done and refined, simply outside the view of people who do nothing to contribute.
As to Vanderboegh and your accusation that I wrongfully "appropriated" the III from him - let's not go there. Mike has done a splendid job of rendering himself irrelevant in the real Liberty Movement, and he doesn't get space on my site.
Oh, you had a monster line...Delete
"An attempt to enslave and/or steal from someone, whether done personally or by proxy, is still an attempt to enslave and steal - it is an act of violence"
That's right. Agency does not cause Responsibility to disappear.
"that morally entitles me (and everyone else) to respond in Self Defense."
That's twice wrong, maybe more. First it's an instance of the Fallacy of Tu Quoque. But almost nobody's ready for that yet, so this is the real problem: NOTHING "morally entitles" anyone to anything, in the sense that there could be something outside of ourselves doing that. There are only judgments, decisions and choices. Yes it matters what they are, but first it's necessary to recognize WHAT they are.
There's additionally the more practical issue that physical self-defense is physical self-defense.
And then trivially, if anyone who had ANY part in this madness is eliminated, then none of us will be left standing at all. Yeah, there are differences...I myself have been screaming about this for decades, but I paid for a drop of it and so did everyone else.
"There would be no appreciable difference between a restored Republic and Pol Pot's Cambodia if the same path is used to get there."ReplyDelete
No matter who wrote this, it's true. The means are what we DO, and no ends can justify any means which themselves aren't justifiable. That's the general principle, without regard to any particular instance. Ends do not justify means, in and of themselves. OTOH...
"You need a narrower definition of Evil for starters..."
No. Nobody needs a narrower definition of either evil or good. Socially, any person can make any judgments he or she wishes. The ONLY relevant issue in a social context is whether or not physical coercion--or aggression or initiation of force or thuggery or whatever you wanna call it--is used.
That's all. Defensively, force must be used to stop force. Duh. So all that's left is identifying whether force is being used coercively or not. There may be some disagreement about when it is or isn't, but the principle should be steady through all individuals who wish to live freely and responsibly.
It's either-or. A person is either a thug or not.
Sam, I'll do this in "sort-of" reverse order.ReplyDelete
I didn't mention He Who Must Not Be Named deliberately. First off, one of his readers came up with "III" (or it got fleshed out in a comment thread; I forget exactly at this point), he then popularized it. Therefore no need to poke at that particular anthill, OK? And the point I was making was about the success of III Arms without glossing over everything, and noting (I guess a little too obliquely) that Fortune Favors The Bold.
No, Sam Kerodin is not, and can not be responsible, legally or morally for the actions of others. I'm kinda surprised that I actually have to state this.
I'm not accusing you of personal responsibility, I'm accusing you of responsible leadership.
The Citadel occupies mental and spiritual space just as much as physical space, and what you say (and how you say it) reverberates in ways that I'm not entirely sure you fully grasp at times. That's a human thing, not a Sam one, OK? No need to get all bristly about this.
Intimidation. (I am literally smiling right now) Come on, man! You don't discuss, you counterattack! Look, we're both responsible for our (non)relationship, and I'm aware of it when I make a comment. Don't sweat it. I might not like your reaction at times, but I can't say I haven't earned it. (And for you spectators, please notice that Sam & I are talking these days and not screaming past one another).
I think what I'm getting at is a "III UCMJ". One thing that must be mentioned is that people won't need to answer for every body, but they *will* need to explain how some of them stopped being a threat to the Republic. I think it's something to consider, even if I *am* an asshole.
Just out of curiosity, who's paying for this grand vision, and how?
Sometimes I think that if they paid a zillion dollars for a study that revealed humans are actually gerbils, most people might swallow it. Round and round and round... Easy life, I guess.