Enemies of Liberty are ruthless. To own your Liberty, you'd better come harder than your enemies..

Thursday, September 3, 2015

Today's Face of Tyranny in America

Kim Davis - put in jail for refusing to marry homosexuals in Kentucky

What do we do as the III?



  1. Ya lets put this Christian albeit a democrat in prison for this with criminals who have murdered raped beat the fuck out of people and what do you think is going to happen to her in there?

    I have admiration that she took a stand. it is an elected position she held, i think I would have just quit. WOW.

  2. I know what I would like to do, but I doubt that I would be able to garner the brothers in arms to make it happen.

    And suicide just isn't in my list of things to do.

    I guess the woman is on her own.

    1. I'll just sit here quietly for a few days and see what all the loudest voices in the III suggest we do. I know - let's Camel Toe!!!

      Gonna be a lot of crickets, I'm thinkin'...

      Do we have any Kentucky III willing to suggest anything? I know the Inwood/Ceres/Greencastle contingent won't have anything useful to offer, and I'm with Alan - suicide isn't my ticket out of here.

      But if anyone in Kentucky has a plan, let's hear it.

    2. K, I'm right there with you and Alan: there's 'what should be done' , and then there's 'what will be done'...

      And if this goes in the usual direction, then everyone has already activated their SEP field, poured themselves a tall happy, and is settling in to enjoy the long holiday weekend...

      Confortably forgetting that, "By their fruit shall ye know them" applies equally to all, and that "every tree which bears not good fruit is cut down and cast into the fire". MATT 7:17~20

      Kim Davis is an elected official, and the State of Kentucky has a marriage amendment in thier Constitution: therefore she has an obligation to act as she has, in accordance with the highest law of the State of Kentucky, which she is sworn to observe and uphold. If she just walked away, or should she capitulate, then she would be breaching her oath. But she hasn't; she's walking the right path.

      So, good for her. We are each called to fight the good fight. She's doing it with the power and abilities she possesses, as should each of us.


    3. Well, K, you certainly called
      that right.
      She has been imprisoned almost
      five days now, and all I hear is
      the beginning of the crickets late
      summer death song.
      However, for the past few days
      crowds of "everyday" people have
      gathered to protest, without any
      help or patronizing hand holding by
      the infallible and omnipotent
      (in words and deeds) of the purest
      Patriots of the breed.
      You know which ones I mean,
      those "III percenters" that regard everyday
      people as lower than dog shit on shoe soles
      and dumber than a box of rocks.

    4. CavMed: Interesting, no?

  3. Why not get the III Society together and make a plan, then let's hear it?

    1. So, now you want to punt to the III Society?

  4. there is only one thing to do, but you haven't got the balls to get 'er done.....!

    1. What is the plan, who is coming with you, where and when do we meet?

    2. You are a cowardly shitbag
      and more worthless than
      the dogshit on my boots.
      Fuck you, "Anonymous"
      you are a toxic twat waffle queef.

      Most sincerely, Dwayne Chandler.

    3. To "Anonymous": The III are ready to do what needs done when it's time. To senselessly throw lives away (whether through death. or rotting in a cell, either way leaving their families exposed in this fucked-up world) when this woman has chosen her fate of her own free will (she could have resigned) would be stupid. It's easy to talk shit from your keyboard. As K said (paraphrasing here, hope he doesn't mind), bring y'ass, walk the walk you are claiming, or shut the fuck up . . .

  5. As far as I'm concerned, the state has no business regulating marriage at all, but as long as they are, they should do so fairly, she has no business making up her own rules, when you work for .gov, you follow their rules.

    If she was a private business, I'd have a different stance. I don't support any private citizen being forced to do anything against their personal beliefs. Don't work for .gov if you can't treat people equally.

    1. Gerard: Your points are on-target. As I have held for quite a while now (with more vigor these days) if you take the King's Shilling, you are the King's Man. How many other duties in her daily routine were also unconstitutional? Probably many.

      Did she refuse to resign because she didn't want to surrender her years-in toward retirement?

      Let this be a lesson to all .Gov employees.

    2. That big 'ol retirement account is a pretty good stick to keep gov employees in line, that should be a lesson for us too, how many are willing to uphold their oath, knowing they are throwing away their pension? I bet it would take a lot.

      Luckily we have cities like Chicago helping us in a way because they can't pay all the plush pensions they've been promising everyone.

    3. Excellent point, Gerard - there are two key questions that every .gov peon should ask themselves:
      1. will they have the money/resources to keep their promises to me regarding retirement/healthcare/etc?

      2. if they have the money/resources, will they really spend them on me when I am of no more use to them, or will they break that promise and spend those resources on something which is of greater value to them?

      Remember, they're politicians - they'll spend every dollar they can lay claim to, five times over, in promises, and then they'll steall to fulfill those promises later.

      Every time you accept a .gov check, you become an accessory to (at a minimum) perjury, robbery, bribery, and conspiracy, of which *every* politician is guilty. You're probably also guilty of innumerable counts of aiding and abetting, and accessory to murder (both before and after the fact), and if you still accept the payment knowing these truths, then you are also guilty of criminal collusion.


    4. The conflict here is between state law and federal government. As an elected official he took an oath to uphold her state laws and state constitution. By state law (which wasn't changed) homosexuals are still restricted from marriage. SCOTUS says it is the new law of the land, yet, only congress has the power to make law. Even if federal law says she is in violation, she is only guilty of upholding the laws of her state. Therefore she went to jail for upholding her oath of office. NOT failures to do so.

  6. Without question, she should not have been imprisoned.

    1. Agreed - prison is NOT for moral objectors. There are many other possible remedies, for all sides in this dispute. Prison is inappropriate.

      So I ask again - Kentucky III: Do you have a plan of action to be discussed? If it is solid, it will earn support from many quarters.

  7. I think the problem is she is trying to serve two masters. On one hand it is God on the other hand she is a Democrat and we know how Democrats feel about guberment.

    If God truly is her driving force, then she should have resigned.

    "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's..."


  8. Just sayin . . .
    Option1: crack a cold one, scratch your belly, and turn on the ball game, while muttering "this country is headed down the shitter." Oh well . . .
    Option2: kit up, race off to tilt windmills and commit suicide by GOV.
    Option3: howzabout dressing respectable, visit Dulcinea in her place of "incarceration" and ASK what SHE thinks. It MIGHT be enlightening, and might save a LOT of angst and consequences of poor judgment..

    Determine the FACTS. Assess what is POSSIBLE. Decide what is most PRODUCTIVE. PLAN - then ACT. Keep it COOL, keep it SANE. After all, she may not WANT to be rescued - propaganda value = ????.

    Just sayin . . .

    1. Wow you are one sane individual. I Agree with this mans thoughts. IU watch the video of her husband I think you are spot on brotherman!

  9. That big 'ol retirement account is a pretty good stick to keep gov employees in line,

    I walked away after a total of eight years/Army/civil service/embassy, when my buddy told me I was probably going to kill my boss if I stayed on, started driving a cab and never looked back.

  10. What most people seem
    to be forgetting is the speed
    with which she was unnecessarily
    arrested and imprisoned.
    Without question, she is being
    made an example of and the process
    is a blatantly overt and intentional
    communist attack and traitorous crime.
    And to answer your question, downeast,
    that is the focus of my critical thinking
    and analysis, of the who, what, where,
    when, why and how as to possible
    responses in defense of my freedom,
    Constitution and Republic.
    Whether or not she wants to be "rescued"
    has nothing to do with my decision making

    1. Maybe not, but it has a LOT to do with whether or not you get dead because you failed to check that particular six. Froggy? Then hop on - she's not the boss of you! Big brass balls are only half of the equation - if they aren't connected to a fully operational set of brains, you are fucked before you get out of the gate. Think before you jump.

      Go in as a respectable gray-man, feel her out and get her to talk. That way you can include her likely reactions in your planning. It ain't that hard . . .

    2. Obviously, you are the "Anonymous" punter
      K mentioned above, and beyond a doubt
      you are a trolling douche.
      Without question, by openly using the moniker
      "downeast hillbilly" you passionately believe
      you have openly proven and earned your manhood
      stripes (finally), by upgrading yourself from
      an "Anonymous" toxic twat waffle queef.
      Moreover, if you are not the above mentioned
      "Anonymous" punter, tolling douche or toxic
      twat waffle queef, you are most certainly
      a knee-jerk butt hurt FanBoy of the most
      slavish variety.
      And that is all the response and time a
      back alley whore like you is worth.

  11. What should the 3% do ? From my perspective, the government should not be handing out revenue tickets in the form of marriage licenses. Not only is it forcing people to pay for a natural right, it let's the state enter into the marriage as well. If we are to be for liberty and freedom, then whoever, how many, and to what you want to get married to is your personal business and no one else's. It begs the question, if I must get a license to get married, then it is illegal not to ? George Washington didn't need a marriage license, so why do we have them now.

    This lady will continue to help the enemy "government" generate revenue by helping sell the marriage license, but only if it is for heterosexuals? She has no problem helping the state collect even more authority over the masses, as long as it agrees with her beliefs ? How does this make the woman a hero ? She is working to smother liberty and freedom by doing the bidding of the government. If these government workers refused to do the enemies bidding, then where would we be in terms of the evil that is the government ? Those who do the bidding of the government, are the only reason the government is the evil that it is.
    Back to what the 3% should do. Anytime the government demands that someone get a permit, license, sign an application, title, etc.. the 3% should stand up and deny the enemy from getting it's extortion revenue.
    As for the contempt of court, contempt of court is simply an immoral, illegal, and down right criminal tool used to further indoctrinate, and dominate the chattel. Then again, if the bailiff refused to do the judges bidding, then many an individual would not be doing contempt of court sentences. This also brings the this question to my mind. Why is upholding the oath to the government contract such a top priority? That is what the constitution is, a service contract. Federal means contract. So we are talking about the contract government. How is a contract that people do not consent to, binding ? Furthermore, this contract that I did not consent to, it allows a very small group of people the right to take as much of my property from me as they please, using a monopoly on the use of force to extract it. It also allows the same group to kill me if I want to stop it. If the "people" created it, shouldn't I have a right to end it, or at least opt out ? Liberty and freedom, I think not.
    For those that champion the declaration of independence and the constitution, how does that work ? They are in conflict with each other, and very confusing to say the least. Also, the government and constitution are null and void, and swearing an oath to something that is dead makes no sense. It's all divide and conquer. The enemy has us exactly where they want us. Fighting with each other, instead of standing steadfast side by side pointing the finger back at them in unison. When we go along with the royal decrees of the government, we give them more authority over us. Until we understand that liberty is allowing everyone to do as they please, as long as it does not interfere with the liberty of the next individual, we are going to be stuck in this insidious circle of slavery. How can one give power and authority to another that we do not have ourselves. Government is nothing more than a religion. The constitution might be well intentioned, but you know what the road to hell is paved with...

    The Philosophy of Liberty Self Ownership Freedom

    Statism: The Most Dangerous Religion


Please post anonymously. III Society members, please use your Call Sign.