About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Forward one pageLast Page


Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 40

Sunday, May 4, 2008 - 10:51amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

It Works For Me

Michael, yes there is some Phelps creep who goes around with placards saying God hates fags. A conservative congress passed a law to prevent him from "demonstrating" too close to funerals. Which Christian sect with more than .01% of the population countenances him? While what percentage of m^slims countenanced 9/11?

In what way does Phelps' rhetoric jibe with Jesus' teachings?

As for whom I should fear? You presume. But to answer you in good faith, in the few instances I can remember when people have uttered fighting words in my presence about fags or niggers (my two male lovers have been black) I have advised them to shut their mouths or have their jaws broken. Perhaps not the preferable solution for a pacifist, but it seems to work for me.

As for McVeigh, his only stated justification was anger at federal tyranny in the Ruby Ridge case. (At whom were the beltway shooters angry?) He attacked a federal building. He claimed not to know that there was a nursery on the first floor. He died in silence, without calling out for all@h to justify him.

Yes, to the victim of violence, the attacker's motives rarely matter. But in an ideological war, it matters much whether we identify the nature of our enemy or not. The Cold War was won over the screams and howls of the left. For 50+ years we heard that a vast right wing conspiracy was the true enemy. I cannot fathom any rational reason to pooh-pooh the hurricane of isl@mism while gleefully drawing attention to the domestic fart that calls itself white/Christian hate. Do you believe Bush/the CIA/the Jews did 9/11? What do Monart Pon and Liberty have to say on this issue?

A. Q. Khan's "Islamic" Bomb




Post 41

Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - 3:11pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

DHS defines Founding Fathers, Christians, Gun-Owners, People who Possess and Refer to the Constitution as Terrorists

(Thanks to Gigi)



Post 42

Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 6:28amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
G. Edward Griffin... now there's a name I have not heard in a long time...  I remember him from 1966 as the author of The Fearful Master (Western Islands Press, 1964).  He must be about 100 years old now, unless, of course, he was 17 when I was 17...

Listen to the video again.
The so-called DHS agents did not identify themselves.  So, how did the pastor know that they were DHS agents?

Accepting the word of a "pastor" from a (ahem) "Bible college" where he is earning a Ph.D. (in what?), is a perfect example of how our cultural context lets us ignore the danger of these people. 

Again, you expect me to accept as a credible witness a man whose entire epistemology of life -- but gratefully not how to drive a car -- is based on faith, i.e,, the lack of proof

Come on, Ted, get with the program  here...


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 43

Saturday, June 28, 2008 - 7:37pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Kyrel Zantonavitch claimed: "The main purpose of the right to keep and bear arms is to slaughter government officials."


(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 6/28, 7:39pm)


Post 44

Saturday, June 28, 2008 - 11:41pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Michael & Kyrel -- agreed, though generally it is considered expedient to advance other reasons when seeking to persuade public officials to not further infringe upon the right to bear arms.
(Edited by Jim Henshaw on 6/28, 11:42pm)


Post 45

Sunday, June 29, 2008 - 5:33amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
True - there is such a thing as prudence.......

Post 46

Sunday, June 29, 2008 - 7:24amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jim is a little behind the power curve on this, but Robert should know me well enough to parse this.  Let me be perfectly clear about this.

The Declaration of Independence cited a long train of abuses that could not be remediated because the colonists, though English by birth and birthright, had no representation in Parliament.  They had tried and tried to get the King's attention and been repeatedly rebuffed -- and their primary point of contention was that under the English Constitution, the monarch answers to Parliament because Parliament hires the monarch.  They called George III a tyrant, a nuance lost on us today, but clear to anyone raised on Greek classical thought.  We have a functioning democratic republic.  Much is made of the power of incumbancy, but the truth is that at all levels, newcomers do raise popular support.  Moreover, cry as some do about lobbyists, the fact is that any constituency with $300 can buy an hour of a lobbyist's time to make an appointment and present a case.  That, too, is how this republic operates.

That said, this Topic is my compiled argumentation against rightwing superpatriot attacks on the American federal government.  Superpatriot militias -- the Guns, God, and Gold crowd -- are more of a danger than the ELF.  If not surpassing Al Qaida, then the superpatriots are surely in the same league, including their anti-Jewish paranoia and fear of compound interest on borrowed money.

Kyrel Zantonovitch has made just those kinds of threats in the past and he did so again.  His views find a lot of support here -- too much support -- as the Guns, (God sometimes) and Gold (Double Capitals on Gold, please) crowd -- finds a lot of sympathy in conservative, libertarian and objectivist circles.


Despite the risks attendant with arson – certainly to firefighters – no lives have been lost to ELF/ALF actions. In 2001, Michael James Scarpitti (alias “Tre Arrow”) held off police and forest rangers for 48 hours by leaping from one 100-foot high perch to another (Sullivan 2006). However, direct confrontation with law enforcement is just not their style. On the other hand, right-wing extremists have confronted law enforcement. Christian activists have killed and wounded doctors who worked for abortion clinics. Militias have been arrested with large quantities of poisons intended for the public water supply, as well as with fake ID to allow them to pass for law enforcement officers.
[...]
The fact remains that there is a cultural divide between law enforcement and environmentalists – and this is not always the case with patriotic militias. In fact, they often share a lot: military service, nuclear family, Christian religion, love for traditional American culture and pride in American history. No Heroes: Inside the FBI's Secret Counter-Terror Force by Daniel Coulson and Sharon Shannon (Pocket Books, 1999) tells of how Coulson formed the Hostage Rescue Team. In one armed stand-off after another, Coulson talked the militia out of their positions. The worst confrontation played out when he was assigned to stay in Washington.

Marotta, Michael E., The Earth Liberation Front, School of Staff and Command, SSC 441: Foreign and Domestic Terrorism for First Responders, Eastern Michigan University, Winter 2008, Gaylord, Michigan.



In case anyone mired in the concrete of Objectivist catechism is unable to understand the concepts here, I say again:
  1. Violence is the last resort of the incompetent.
  2. There is no reason to physically attack the government of the United States of America, any of the Fifty States and Ten Other Things, or any county, city, township or village. 
Are there any questions?

(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 6/29, 7:29am)


Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 47

Sunday, June 29, 2008 - 3:04pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"In case anyone mired in the concrete of Objectivist catechism is unable to understand the concepts here, I say again:
  1. Violence is the last resort of the incompetent.
  2. There is no reason to physically attack the government of the United States of America, any of the Fifty States and Ten Other Things, or any county, city, township or village. 
Are there any questions?"

Just two questions -- do you agree with the British loyalists who advanced the exact same argument in 1776?

And if so, shouldn't the rebels who are currently in charge of the illegal insurrectionary movement (aka "the government of the United States of America") be violently suppressed via a physical attack, and these traitors hung for committing an act of treason against the rightful British government?

Fine, a third question -- do you think that 51% of the voters looting the rest of the populace, and appropriating up to half their income, is less tyrannical than a monarch looting his subjects and appropriating perhaps 10% of their income?



Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 48

Sunday, June 29, 2008 - 9:52pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
  • It's dead, Jim.

Jim, I traveled down the road you are on.  I know where it leads: nowhere.  Like you, I read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and dreamed of a second American revolution.  More than that, back in 1965 and 1966, I read the John Franklin Letters from which The Turner Diaries were derived. The Minutemen and the American Nazi Party intersect the Objectivist-libertaran movement at the nexus known as "The Tannehills."  There are other points of overlap.  "Raise it high, high, the flag of freedom...." sang Vera Vanderlaan at the 1965 YAF National Convention.  She said that some people confuse her song with another about raising a banner high, but she did not see the similarities.  "There's nothing wrong with that song, either!" someone yelled.  The next day American Nazi Party  literature was passed out -- and just as quickly confiscated.  Not that they disagreed with the message, but that it would look bad, you understand...

The problem is symmetrical.  The liberals have the communists.  The conservatives have the nazis. 

Both are opposed to the marketplace as the meeting place, to petit bourgeois sentimentality and to bourgeois rationalism and objectvism. 

Jim, you probably do not follow my work here, but I have a bachelor of science degree in criminology.  I assure you that the patriotic militias are a criminal network, no different from the Crips and Bloods or the Mafia.  They just use political ideology to justify their criminality. 

 Look at yourself in the mirror, Jim.  Are you in any shape to take on the U.S. government?  How many pull-ups can you do?  How many push-ups?  Myself, I am not physical.  'All I ask of my body is that it carry my brain around,' said Thomas Edison.  Neither do I pretend to be prepared to go to war against the lawfully constituted government of the United States.

If you don't like it, leave.  Go someplace else.  Retreat into to city, like a vonuan.  Drop out any way you choose.  But, please, realize that if you declare war on the United States you will be fighting school teachers and garbage collectors -- and they are protected by SWAT teams and Delta forces.

(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 6/29, 9:58pm)


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 49

Monday, July 7, 2008 - 3:03pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

July 7, A Busy Day for the Religion of Peace

A Clayton County man faces murder charges in the strangulation death of his 25-year-old daughter early Sunday over what police said was her desire to end an arranged marriage.

"That said, there is no shortage of unattached, educated Muslim women here. You just gotta be interested in them." [MEM, here.]

From Pamela Gellar's Atlas Shrugs:

Today in Islam:

Suicide attack on Indian embassy kills 41 in Afghanistan
Serial bomb blasts rock Karachi, Pakistan; one dead, 45 injured
Suicide bomber kills nine in Iraq
Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia claims role in Anbar suicide bombing
The New Suicide Bombers
Londoners mark July 7 bombings anniversary

Whoops! Did I post this in the wrong forum?


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 50

Monday, July 7, 2008 - 8:23pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

BURLINGTON, Vermont (AP) -- A 12-year-old girl found dead last week in a shallow grave near her uncle's home was killed, a federal prosecutor said Monday at an initial appearance for the uncle on charges of kidnapping the girl.

 

Michael Jacques, who is accused of abducting his niece, Brooke Bennett, was ordered held until his trial on a federal kidnapping charge. His attorney, Michael Desautels, did not ask U.S. Magistrate-Judge Jerome Niedermeier to release Jacques....

 

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/07/missing.vermont.girl.ap/index.html

 

Ted, bad guys are everywhere.  There is no society without violators.  The problem transcends cultures. This thread is specifically about the threat to the United States of America from rightwing superpatriots.  If you have something to say about that, please share it.  I saw the story about the tragic murder of Sandela Kanwal and thought about posting it on RoR, though in a different forum.  You posted first, albeit in the wrong forum.

 


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 51

Monday, July 7, 2008 - 9:36pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Moral Blindness

What part of the contradiction "honor killing" don't you get?

Yes, there are registered sex offenders who kill. At best your post perhaps implies a tougher stance on rapists. But here is a list of dozens of girls murdered not (necessarily) by serial rapists, but by men following an evil culture that foments murder for refusal to wear a hijab, or for dating a Christian. There is even a special term "honor" killing for what they do. Why does this term exist? One does not multiply concepts beyond necessity! It is perverse in the extreme to minimize an ideology of evil by comparing it to the acts of random individuals, or arguing that its abominable evil is no different from some other abominable evil.

There are no rape schools, but there
are madrassas.

And imams who talk about how to beat one's wife. Partisans of isl@m might be understood for arguing that m^slims are just as good as Christians. But why would m^slims and leftists want to argue that Christians (or name your group) are just as bad as m^slims? Look at the official statement on "racial profiling" (isl@m is a race?) at the website of the Society of Professional Journalists according to wikipedia "one of the oldest organizations representing journalists in the United States."

Cover the victims of harassment, murder and other hate crimes as thoroughly as you cover the victims of overt terrorist attacks.

When writing about terrorism, remember to include white supremacist, radical anti-abortionists and other groups with a history of such activity.

What, exactly, does this sort of moral equivalence mean? Christians get away with murder, so we should too? If "other things kill people too" is a good argument, then why talk about the odd white supremacist? Why not compare m^slims and mudslides? What end does this self-inflicted moral blindness serve?

I posted in exactly the right forum.



Post 52

Tuesday, July 8, 2008 - 6:58pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Militia member gets house arrest
By Jason Cato and Bonnie Pfister
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Thursday, June 12, 2008
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_572278.html
[...]   A federal judge in Pittsburgh was not as lenient with two others arrested Sunday. U.S. Magistrate Judge Amy Reynolds Hay ordered Marvin Hall, 49, of Rimersburg in Clarion County, and Perry D. Landis, 62, of Sabula in Clearfield County to remain jailed pending trial.
...
Landis told undercover agents that he would have killed a Clearfield County magistrate judge had he been charged in a criminal case, Yocca said. The electrician also said Sen. Hillary Clinton being elected to the White House would have started a revolution, because she would have tried to disarm American citizens.
"That would bring us out of the woodwork," Landis told agents, Yocca testified.

Does anyone remember the case of Libertarian Party of Colorado senatorial candidate, Rick Stanley, from 2003 (which continues today)?
 The Rick Stanley Story
The purpose of the militia was to engage law enforcement in armed standoffs if any of their members were confronted with arrest by what they see as illigitimate governmnental agencies. This militia claims over 700 members nationwide. After the Thornton judge convicted him and was within days of sentencing him, Rick sent out a message to the militia, declaring an arrest warrant would be issued for two Adams county judges, and that any militia member should, by force of arms, arrest the judges. He sent the court that same message. On paper.

http://www.walterindenver.com/archives/000535.html



Post 53

Tuesday, July 8, 2008 - 8:22pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
According to George O'brien, LP activist and student of Irish history, it was when the Irish finally got the idea of creating their own courts, issueing judgments, and ignoring entirely the British courts, that they finally started succeeding and ultimately won independence.  The problem with these right-wing militias is a little item called "reality."  They don't have anywhere NEAR the amount of public support and agreement necessary to make something like that work.  I suspect that many of them might just drift apart and dissolve if it weren't for the funding and cohesion provided by the legions of undercover federal agents who make a living by infiltrating such groups and then typically try to egg them on to acts of violence in order to justify their own existence.

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 54

Tuesday, July 8, 2008 - 8:30pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 55

Wednesday, July 9, 2008 - 3:30amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
  They don't have anywhere NEAR the amount of public support and agreement necessary to make something like that work.

Ain't that the truth.  Where as Islam has already done the ground work, no need to seek out support, haphazard.

As deep as you often are, Mike, I can't believe you're ignoring some obvious differences.

It's fine if you want to make evil relative, but at least be honest enough to be up front with a motive.  Either all radical groups (read: ideologies which are held singularly, or collectively)  are dangerous on the same level, or they are not.  Either there are properties that make one group more dangerous than another, or there are not.  Either there are identifying characteristics as to what poses a danger in my own life, or there are not.

If we should all be equally afraid of the same causes and outcomes, say so, and why.  Either every bad idea poses a threat to me personally, or every bad idea does not.  The goal is either ideological Utopia, or it isn't. 



Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 56

Wednesday, July 9, 2008 - 11:40amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Michael,

Would it help if I would acknowledge that the extremist conservatives, nationalists, and Christians you describe are dangerous? They are dangerous, and they do things that are evil and wrong. They should be dealt with as we deal with any other threat. I think most people on this forum would join with me in condemning all of the cases you have described.

What you need to understand is the following: A rational person seeks to avoid any and all threats to his or her happiness. Because there are so many threats, we cannot treat them all equally in terms of time or energy. It would be foolish for me to spend as much time worrying about an airplane falling on my head as I do about getting hit by a car on my afternoon run.

The point that many people here are making is that radical Islam is a more credible and imminent threat to our lives and happiness. According to them, this is because violence in the name of Islam is more widespread and more institutionalized.

I don't see why someone would disagree with you that the extremists you describe are threats that should be dealt with. I also don't see why you would disagree with the items described in the previous two paragraphs.

Perhaps it would be beneficial to define the exact point of disagreement before continuing.


PS - About the picture: I think it very bad form to post potentially disturbing images on a forum like this, regardless of the reason. Wouldn't hosting these pictures somewhere else with a link allow those who were interested to see it, while sparing those who did not wish to see it? Example: (graphic) image that relates to ___

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 57

Wednesday, July 9, 2008 - 3:02pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Posting the image was not potentially disturbing. It was intentionally disturbing. But the reality was a lot more disturbing to the person whom the image depicted. And the evasion of those who would avoid naming the issue or would pooh-pooh the issue is much more disturbing than the image. If upon consideration the truly disgusting image bothers you more than the evasion then you are a perceptual-bound payer of lip service to principles for which you have not the courage. Perhaps you did not yourself evade. I am sorry that you were caught in the crossfire. But the issue merits distress. I know people who have been murdered or died under questionable circumstances, and know what it is to have such matters brought up in the press, or to have people call your house about it. This is a free society, the press will print these photos, and I and my family have had to deal with such things. It is not pleasant, but the moral outrage is directed at the perpetrator, not the one who shows what has been perpetrated. I did not send the image to the victim's family or have any reason to believe they will see it. Victims do not search for such things, and if they do, they are prepared for what they might see. Had I merely posted a link, there would have been no point in posting the image at all.

I sanctioned your post for your other points, Joseph.

Post 58

Wednesday, July 9, 2008 - 4:34pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ted,

I shouldn't have brought it up, as it is a tangent of secondary importance. Hopefully it will not distract anyone else from the main topic, but I think it deserves some discussion. I'll create a separate thread to talk about it.

Post 59

Wednesday, July 9, 2008 - 4:48pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

I'm not interested in discussing it further - or, I should say, justifying myself further. It was intended to address a greater offense, but was itself undoubtedly offensive. I can understand people's upset. It's as pleasant an experience as being awoken by the firetrucks down the block or overhearing a family spat, or watching people leap from the Twin Towers. The moderators acted and I did not protest.

Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.