Inciting armed overthrow of the gov? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

dksuddeth · 02-26-2006, 11:45 AM

United for peace and justice, storm the white house

Quote:

TAKE THE WHITE HOUSE BY STORM - Stop Genocide, Torture and Occupation

For Nat Turner, For Martin and Coretta, For all the Torture and Assassination in Afghanistan, Iraq, Haiti and many others - We will not allow the Slave Holders that Still Prevail in this Country to Rule us any longer. Imprisonment and torture based on race, religion, resources or region is no different than the slavery we sought to abolish years ago. The Administration is Criminal and if they will not step down, we must storm in.

We are calling on all Member Nations of the U.N., All Representatives and Justices in the World Court and International Criminal Courts, all soldiers and CIA agents and government officials who have been blackmailed by the dictators to incarcerate Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. The Political Cooperative will put a new government in place that is comprised of people from Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and all the organizations that have finally made us aware of the truth of the savage practices and illegal policies of our government in assassinating our own officials as well as people throughout the world who oppose their criminal activity. We need all of you to save U.S. citizens and Global Victims from their ongoing criminal activity. We are calling on the military, police, citizens and religious organizations to stand with us and help us to bring democracy back to the United States and by doing so, free the world from the wrath, occupation, theft, torture, blackmail and assassination by the Criminals in the United States Government.

Wow, and I thought the Democratic Undergrounders were bad.

Is this crossing the line?

Paq · 02-26-2006, 12:53 PM

isn't something similar to this in "Stupid white men" by big guy..forgot his name

i never take this stype stuff seriousyl, though

irateplatypus · 02-26-2006, 01:08 PM

someone should tell these people that we're having a little get-together this november... it's called the national elections.

why do all these crackpot organizations have the most Orwellian names?

djtestudo · 02-26-2006, 01:54 PM

Glad to know that it's an "all-day event" according to that calender

Boy, it's always good to know that there are people in this world far more fucked-up then I could ever be. Kind of like that joke about going to the state fair; just go to ultra-liberal websites and you will feel good about yourself and your mental state.

djtestudo · 02-26-2006, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irateplatypus

someone should tell these people that we're having a little get-together this november... it's called the national elections.

why do all these crackpot organizations have the most Orwellian names?

Where do you think they see the world going under their control?

Besides, going through national elections would eliminate their purpose; to take power for themselves because they think all of us insane people who vote Republican can't handle the responsibility, so we shouldn't have the chance.

They are truely no better then the worst things they say about the Bush administration, even if any of it were true.

politicophile · 02-26-2006, 02:02 PM

You know they're trouble when they advocate toppling democratically elected leaders and replacing them with... well, themselves, basically. They are saying, more or less, that our elected leaders are doing such a terrible job of governing that they should be violently overthrown and replaced with non-elected leaders. ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS a bad idea.

I've got an idea: wait until 2008.

ratbastid · 02-26-2006, 02:42 PM

That's the worst idea I've heard this week.

MSD · 02-26-2006, 03:14 PM

"We are calling on all Member Nations of the U.N., All Representatives and Justices in the World Court and International Criminal Courts..."

If they took over the country, I'd start thinking about armed overthrow. Of course, at that time, I'd be kicking myself for not having taken the time to buy a single gun that doesn't have to be pumped or manually cocked between shots, but I'd try anyway.

maximusveritas · 02-26-2006, 05:55 PM

I can envision what this event will be like: a handful of nuts holding signs outside the White House and chanting idiotic slogans before being dragged away by the cops. Note that this event is not being put on by United for peace and justice itself. It's just being posted on their calender by a third party which explains why it's so unprofessional.

djtestudo · 02-26-2006, 05:56 PM

The only thing that would make that calender entry better would be a line at the bottom:

"Refreshments will be provided"...

ratbastid · 02-26-2006, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djtestudo

The only thing that would make that calender entry better would be a line at the bottom:

"Refreshments will be provided"...

Punch and pie?

Ustwo · 02-26-2006, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Punch and pie?

Undoubtedly CoolAid and brownies.

host · 02-27-2006, 02:37 AM

Okay....what would have to occur before some of you would lean toward a reaction that "storming the palace" was an option to end the malfeasance and abuse of power practiced by the ruling elite, that could be embraced as a gesture of patriots risking their lives to confront and depose tyrants? Would callous and deliberate misuse of the lives of our soldiers by their CIC in an illegal invasion of another country, be justification? Did the POTUS do that?

We don't know....and he has blocked three investigations that could have cleared or indicted him, his actions, and motives...... Was the POTUS legitimately elected in 2000, or in 2004? We don't know...and the stench still lingers....

Your responses exhibit alarming complacency and distraction. The ruling administration has deliberately avoided, for three years....an investigation to determine whether it intentionally manipulated intelligence as an excuse to start an unnecessary war. If their actions were proper, why did they demand that the 9/11 and Silverman Commisions, and the Senate Select Intelligence Committee, avoid investigating those circumstances?

In the mid 1770's, would the founders of our country have reacted similarly to the thread starter, as most of you seem to be reacting, given the following state of affairs? Why the knee-jerk, polite deference to the current administration's outrageous disregard for accountability? Just this week, we note the following from the head of the 9/11 Commission. (The 9/11 Commission and the Silverman Commission on Intelligence were specifically blocked by the Bushies from investigating whether the administration improperly manipulated intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq. In July, 2004, and again in Nov., 2005, Senate Intel. Committee Chair Pat Roberts promised to finish the "Phase II" portion of that committee's investigation into that controversy...it still hasn't happened, three yeara after the Iraq invasion:

Quote:

http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/...n/13959171.htm
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration yesterday said it would not reconsider its approval for a United Arab Emirates company to take over significant operations at six U.S. ports, a deal that the former head of the Sept. 11 commission said "never should have happened."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,175433,00.html
Transcript: Sens. Roberts, Rockefeller on 'FNS'
Monday, November 14, 2005......

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Pentag...I_of_0130.html
Pentagon investigation of Iraq war hawk stalling Senate inquiry into pre-war Iraq intelligence

Larisa Alexandrovna
Published: January 30, 2006
.....But according to Senate sources, instead of forcing the release of documents, Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Pat Roberts (R-KN) has deferred to the Pentagon's Inspector General, allowing the Pentagon to investigate itself, Feith and its clandestine Office of Special Plans...

Cumulatively, isn't everything listed in this post, still just a smattering of examples that do not include an oil industry friendly energy policy that screws average Americans, a hemorrhage of trade and budget debt that threatens the national security, an assault on EPA enforcement and credibility that included deliberately exposing post 9/11 recovery workers and residents to known but concealed health risks from contaminated air and dust, enough of a justification to convince a couple of you to be less reasonable, or angrier, or more outraged at Bushco and the repub congress, than at the statements in the threadstarter? After all...are the ideas in that inflammatory article, more or less troubling than the track record of the entrenched, ruling officials?

The world has turned upside down. I am persuaded by events since election day, 2000, and the contents of the following article, that it is already too late to take stock of what has actually happened to "free-dumb" and our former system of constitutionally mandated checks and balances, to reverse the course that some of us actually recognize that "we, the people", are actually on.

Most of your comments are indicative of the conclusion that it is, sadly, too late to reverse the coup, and the only thing left to do is to swiftly take up residence in another country. Who among you can convince even yourselves that what has happened to our country in terms of political "leadership", is the result of the "intent" of the voters?

Do not let the following article distract you from the fact that it is just one bit of information that accompanies the torture policies, pre-emptive war, collapse of house and senate ethics oversight, the staged inability of the federal government to muster a timely air defense of the east coast skies, or Katrina disaster relief, or an orderly roll out of an easy to understand medicare drug benefit that logically exploits it's buying power to the benefit of taxpayers and recipients. Consider that your government has reversed a late 90's policy of aggressive declassification of documents to a policy of classifying a majority of all new documents and the re-classifying of formerly de-classified documents. Consider that the FISA court has been discredited as "too slow" and no longer trusted to deal with secret intelligence. Consider that there were 12 names on the "no fly" list on 9/11, and more recently there were 30,000 requests by folks asking that there names be removed from that list, even though it isn't possible to completely delete names. Consider that your POTUS has the lowest approval rating since Nixon, and that his Veep's approval rating is lower than Nixon's. Consider 2300 dead U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and the comments the other day by a U.S. Senator that an additional "20 to 30,000" were wounded. Consider that the sole Iraqi security force battalion that was rated able to fight on it's own, has been downgraded, just as Iraq descends into a civil war.

While a defense of the status quo and the "rule of law" is reasonable in most circumstances, how do you think that Jefferson, Hamilton, Henry, or Franklin would react to the thread starter under present circumstances? The same way as you are?
More <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-soby-jr/whistleblower-charged-wit_b_16411.html">background</a> to the following report: (The word "system(s)" in the following article, refers to Diebold's suspicious "software"....)

In this <a href="http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpost.php?p=1543718&postcount=8">post</a> on a TFP thread in Nov., 2004, I brought you the editorial reaction to Diebold's assault on California voters, by the investigating Oakland newspaper.

Quote:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/po...politics-local
From the Los Angeles Times
Man Pleads Not Guilty in Voting Device Case
By Hemmy So
Times Staff Writer

February 22, 2006

A word processor accused of stealing damaging documents about electronic voting machine manufacturer Diebold Election Systems was arraigned Tuesday on three felony counts.

Stephen Heller was charged in Los Angeles Superior Court with felony access to computer data, commercial burglary and receiving stolen property. He pleaded not guilty.

"It's a devastating allegation for a whistle-blower," said Blair Berk, Heller's attorney. "Certainly, someone who saw those documents could have reasonably believed that thousands of voters were going to be potentially disenfranchised in upcoming elections."

The charges arise from Heller's alleged disclosure two years ago of legal papers from the Los Angeles office of international law firm Jones Day, which represented Diebold at the time. Heller was under contract as a word processor at Jones Day.

The documents included legal memos from one Jones Day attorney to another regarding allegations by activists that Diebold had used uncertified voting systems in Alameda County elections beginning in 2002.

In the memos, a Jones Day attorney opined that using uncertified voting systems violated California election law and that if Diebold had employed an uncertified system, Alameda County could sue the company for breaching its $12.7-million contract.

The documents also revealed that Diebold's attorneys were exploring whether the California secretary of state had the authority to investigate the company for alleged election law violations.

The Oakland Tribune published the legal memos on its website in April 2004. By then, the issue of whether Diebold used uncertified systems was already receiving widespread attention, because many of its systems failed during the March 2004 primary. As a result, poll workers had to turn away some early voters in San Diego County, and Alameda County voters had to use paper ballots.

A subsequent report by the secretary of state's office found that Diebold had marketed and sold its systems before gaining federal qualification and had installed uncertified software on election machines in 17 counties.

The company's AccuVote-TSx model was banned in May 2004, but Diebold machines were conditionally recertified by Secretary of State Bruce McPherson last week for use in 17 counties for this year's elections.

McPherson ordered Diebold to make long-term programming changes and submit the modifications to a federal panel for recertification.

The conditional recertification follows a turbulent history for Diebold's electronic voting systems.

In November 2004, the company settled a civil lawsuit brought by two activists and later joined by the state attorney general after he dropped his criminal investigation of the company.

Diebold paid $2.6 million to settle the suit, which alleged that the company had sold its touch-screen voting systems to Alameda County through misrepresentations about their security and certification.

One of the activists, Jim March, said he was the person who actually turned over the allegedly stolen documents to the Oakland Tribune and the state attorney general's and secretary of state's offices.

Sandi Gibbons, spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County district attorney's office, refused to call Heller a "whistle-blower."

"We call him a defendant," she said. "He's accused of breaking the law…. If we feel that the evidence shows beyond a reasonable doubt in our minds that a crime has been committed, it's our job as a criminal prosecutor to file a case."

Although state law protects whistle-blowers from retaliation by their employers, they can still be criminally prosecuted, said Tom Devine, legal director at the Washington, D.C.-based Government Accountability Project.

"It's very rare that it's successful," he said. "It's a tactic where the primary goal may be to scare other would-be whistle-blowers rather than a realistic attempt to obtain a conviction."

Heller's preliminary hearing date will be set at a trial conference April 24.

If convicted on all three counts, he could face up to three years and eight months in state prison, Gibbons said.

.....How do any of you know who is legitimately elected, and who isn't ?

Quote:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0828-08.htm
Published on Thursday, August 28, 2003 by the Cleveland Plain Dealer
Voting Machine Controversy
by Julie Carr Smyth

COLUMBUS - The head of a company vying to sell voting machines in Ohio told Republicans in a recent fund-raising letter that he is "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."

The Aug. 14 letter from Walden O'Dell, chief executive of Diebold Inc. - who has become active in the re-election effort of President Bush - prompted Democrats this week to question the propriety of allowing O'Dell's company to calculate votes in the 2004 presidential election.

O'Dell attended a strategy pow-wow with wealthy Bush benefactors - known as Rangers and Pioneers - at the president's Crawford, Texas, ranch earlier this month......

ubertuber · 02-27-2006, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

Okay....what would have to occur before some of you would lean toward a reaction that "storming the palace" was an option to end the malfeasance and abuse of power practiced by the ruling elite, that could be embraced as a gesture of patriots risking their lives to confront and depose tyrants?

Simply put, there's no reason to even have this talk until Bush refuses to leave office after the next election - which I think there's virtually no chance of. Until then, the obvious solution is to wait until 2008 and vote.

Call your representative and ask for impeachment charges, donate all your money to the DNC, whatever, but until 2008, this guy is our elected president. Comparisons to the spirit of 1776 are seriously far fetched in the meantime.

politicophile · 02-27-2006, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubertuber

Simply put, there's no reason to even have this talk until Bush refuses to leave office after the next election - which I think there's virtually no chance of. Until then, the obvious solution is to wait until 2008 and vote.

Call your representative and ask for impeachment charges, donate all your money to the DNC, whatever, but until 2008, this guy is our elected president. Comparisons to the spirit of 1776 are seriously far fetched in the meantime.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

Host,

No matter how much you disapprove of the President's performance, calling for a violent coup to throw him out of office is surely unwise. Your guy lost in 2004. Maybe he/she will win in 2008. Until then, I would be appreciative if you stopped calling for the violent overthrow of the U.S. government. Nice touch with the originalist reference, BTW. It's refreshing to see you thinking in that mode.

Ustwo · 02-27-2006, 08:37 AM

The irony is that the only way Bush would stay president past 2008 is if there was an attempted armed revolt and we were unable to hold elections.

Reminds me of the Illuminatis Trillogy where the racist, old boy network sherrif was really a communist but acting in such a way as to inspire others to revolt

Perhaps this 'revolt' is just what Bush planned, and is but a wheel within a wheel, a plan within a plan, ending in world domination for the NWO.

or perhap we will have an election in 2008, and then the people who like to talk in this way will find some other windmill to slay.

roachboy · 02-27-2006, 08:44 AM

in principle, i would have no problem with organized revoluationary action.
and in principle, the bush administration does make a mockery of the american system.
an argument could be made that this administration should be brought down.

but in this situation, there has been nothing even remotely approaching the political work that would be required for such an action to be coherent, never mind successful. so this particular call is not worth the bandwidth that it takes up.

on the other hand, that this call has been picked up and disseminated is curious.
a link to the article below turned up in one of my mailboxes--i'll post it here because it completes the circle that could explain why it has become something worth debating in a space like this:

Quote:

Bush's Mysterious 'New Programs'

By Nat Parry
February 21, 2006

Not that George W. Bush needs much encouragement, but Sen. Lindsey Graham suggested to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales a new target for the administration?s domestic operations -- Fifth Columnists, supposedly disloyal Americans who sympathize and collaborate with the enemy.

?The administration has not only the right, but the duty, in my opinion, to pursue Fifth Column movements,? Graham, R-S.C., told Gonzales during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Feb. 6.

?I stand by this President?s ability, inherent to being Commander in Chief, to find out about Fifth Column movements, and I don?t think you need a warrant to do that,? Graham added, volunteering to work with the administration to draft guidelines for how best to neutralize this alleged threat.

?Senator,? a smiling Gonzales responded, ?the President already said we?d be happy to listen to your ideas.?

In less paranoid times, Graham?s comments might be viewed by many Americans as a Republican trying to have it both ways ? ingratiating himself to an administration of his own party while seeking some credit from Washington centrists for suggesting Congress should have at least a tiny say in how Bush runs the War on Terror.

But recent developments suggest that the Bush administration may already be contemplating what to do with Americans who are deemed insufficiently loyal or who disseminate information that may be considered helpful to the enemy.

Top U.S. officials have cited the need to challenge news that undercuts Bush?s actions as a key front in defeating the terrorists, who are aided by ?news informers? in the words of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com ?Upside-Down Media? or below.]

Detention Centers

Plus, there was that curious development in January when the Army Corps of Engineers awarded Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root a $385 million contract to construct detention centers somewhere in the United States, to deal with ?an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs,? KBR said. [Market Watch, Jan. 26, 2006]

Later, the New York Times reported that ?KBR would build the centers for the Homeland Security Department for an unexpected influx of immigrants, to house people in the event of a natural disaster or for new programs that require additional detention space.? [Feb. 4, 2006]

Like most news stories on the KBR contract, the Times focused on concerns about Halliburton?s reputation for bilking U.S. taxpayers by overcharging for sub-par services.

?It?s hard to believe that the administration has decided to entrust Halliburton with even more taxpayer dollars,? remarked Rep. Henry Waxman, D-California.

Less attention centered on the phrase ?rapid development of new programs? and what kind of programs would require a major expansion of detention centers, each capable of holding 5,000 people. Jamie Zuieback, a spokeswoman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, declined to elaborate on what these ?new programs? might be.

Only a few independent journalists, such as Peter Dale Scott and Maureen Farrell, have pursued what the Bush administration might actually be thinking.

Scott speculated that the ?detention centers could be used to detain American citizens if the Bush administration were to declare martial law.? He recalled that during the Reagan administration, National Security Council aide Oliver North organized Rex-84 ?readiness exercise,? which contemplated the Federal Emergency Management Agency rounding up and detaining 400,000 ?refugees,? in the event of ?uncontrolled population movements? over the Mexican border into the United States.

Farrell pointed out that because ?another terror attack is all but certain, it seems far more likely that the centers would be used for post-911-type detentions of immigrants rather than a sudden deluge? of immigrants flooding across the border.

Vietnam-era whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said, ?Almost certainly this is preparation for a roundup after the next 9/11 for Mid-Easterners, Muslims and possibly dissenters. They?ve already done this on a smaller scale, with the ?special registration? detentions of immigrant men from Muslim countries, and with Guantanamo.?

Labor Camps

There also was another little-noticed item posted at the U.S. Army Web site, about the Pentagon?s Civilian Inmate Labor Program. This program ?provides Army policy and guidance for establishing civilian inmate labor programs and civilian prison camps on Army installations.?

The Army document, first drafted in 1997, underwent a ?rapid action revision? on Jan. 14, 2005. The revision provides a ?template for developing agreements? between the Army and corrections facilities for the use of civilian inmate labor on Army installations.

On its face, the Army?s labor program refers to inmates housed in federal, state and local jails. The Army also cites various federal laws that govern the use of civilian labor and provide for the establishment of prison camps in the United States, including a federal statute that authorizes the Attorney General to ?establish, equip, and maintain camps upon sites selected by him? and ?make available ? the services of United States prisoners? to various government departments, including the Department of Defense.

Though the timing of the document?s posting ? within the past few weeks ?may just be a coincidence, the reference to a ?rapid action revision? and the KBR contract?s contemplation of ?rapid development of new programs? have raised eyebrows about why this sudden need for urgency.

These developments also are drawing more attention now because of earlier Bush administration policies to involve the Pentagon in ?counter-terrorism? operations inside the United States.

Pentagon Surveillance

Despite the Posse Comitatus Act?s prohibitions against U.S. military personnel engaging in domestic law enforcement, the Pentagon has expanded its operations beyond previous boundaries, such as its role in domestic surveillance activities.

The Washington Post has reported that since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, the Defense Department has been creating new agencies that gather and analyze intelligence within the United States. [Washington Post, Nov. 27, 2005]

The White House also is moving to expand the power of the Pentagon?s Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA), created three years ago to consolidate counterintelligence operations. The White House proposal would transform CIFA into an office that has authority to investigate crimes such as treason, terrorist sabotage or economic espionage.

The Pentagon also has pushed legislation in Congress that would create an intelligence exception to the Privacy Act, allowing the FBI and others to share information about U.S. citizens with the Pentagon, CIA and other intelligence agencies. But some in the Pentagon don?t seem to think that new laws are even necessary.

In a 2001 Defense Department memo that surfaced in January 2006, the U.S. Army?s top intelligence officer wrote, ?Contrary to popular belief, there is no absolute ban on [military] intelligence components collecting U.S. person information.?

Drawing a distinction between ?collecting? information and ?receiving? information on U.S. citizens, the memo argued that ?MI [military intelligence] may receive information from anyone, anytime.? [See CQ.com, Jan. 31, 2005]

This receipt of information presumably would include data from the National Security Agency, which has been engaging in surveillance of U.S. citizens without court-approved warrants in apparent violation of the Foreign Intelligence Security Act. Bush approved the program of warrantless wiretaps shortly after 9/11.

There also may be an even more extensive surveillance program. Former NSA employee Russell D. Tice told a congressional committee on Feb. 14 that such a top-secret surveillance program existed, but he said he couldn?t discuss the details without breaking classification laws.

Tice added that the ?special access? surveillance program may be violating the constitutional rights of millions of Americans. [UPI, Feb. 14, 2006]

With this expanded surveillance, the government?s list of terrorist suspects is rapidly swelling.

The Washington Post reported on Feb. 15 that the National Counterterrorism Center?s central repository now holds the names of 325,000 terrorist suspects, a four-fold increase since the fall of 2003.

Asked whether the names in the repository were collected through the NSA?s domestic surveillance program, an NCTC official told the Post, ?Our database includes names of known and suspected international terrorists provided by all intelligence community organizations, including NSA.?

Homeland Defense

As the administration scoops up more and more names, members of Congress also have questioned the elasticity of Bush?s definitions for words like terrorist ?affiliates,? used to justify wiretapping Americans allegedly in contact with such people or entities.

During the Senate Judiciary Committee?s hearing on the wiretap program, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, complained that the House and Senate Intelligence Committees ?have not been briefed on the scope and nature of the program.?

Feinstein added that, therefore, the committees ?have not been able to explore what is a link or an affiliate to al-Qaeda or what minimization procedures (for purging the names of innocent people) are in place.?

The combination of the Bush administration?s expansive reading of its own power and its insistence on extraordinary secrecy has raised the alarm of civil libertarians when contemplating how far the Pentagon might go in involving itself in domestic matters.

A Defense Department document, entitled the ?Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support,? has set out a military strategy against terrorism that envisions an ?active, layered defense? both inside and outside U.S. territory. In the document, the Pentagon pledges to ?transform U.S. military forces to execute homeland defense missions in the ? U.S. homeland.?

The Pentagon strategy paper calls for increased military reconnaissance and surveillance to ?defeat potential challengers before they threaten the United States.? The plan ?maximizes threat awareness and seizes the initiative from those who would harm us.?

But there are concerns over how the Pentagon judges ?threats? and who falls under the category ?those who would harm us.? A Pentagon official said the Counterintelligence Field Activity?s TALON program has amassed files on antiwar protesters.

In December 2005, NBC News revealed the existence of a secret 400-page Pentagon document listing 1,500 ?suspicious incidents? over a 10-month period, including dozens of small antiwar demonstrations that were classified as a ?threat.?

The Defense Department also might be moving toward legitimizing the use of propaganda domestically, as part of its overall war strategy.

A secret Pentagon ?Information Operations Roadmap,? approved by Rumsfeld in October 2003, calls for ?full spectrum? information operations and notes that ?information intended for foreign audiences, including public diplomacy and PSYOP, increasingly is consumed by our domestic audience and vice-versa.?

?PSYOPS messages will often be replayed by the news media for much larger audiences, including the American public,? the document states. The Pentagon argues, however, that ?the distinction between foreign and domestic audiences becomes more a question of USG [U.S. government] intent rather than information dissemination practices.?

It calls for ?boundaries? between information operations abroad and the news media at home, but does not outline any corresponding limits on PSYOP campaigns.

Similar to the distinction the Pentagon draws between ?collecting? and ?receiving? intelligence on U.S. citizens, the Information Operations Roadmap argues that as long as the American public is not intentionally ?targeted,? any PSYOP propaganda consumed by the American public is acceptable.

The Pentagon plan also includes a strategy for taking over the Internet and controlling the flow of information, viewing the Web as a potential military adversary. The ?roadmap? speaks of ?fighting the net,? and implies that the Internet is the equivalent of ?an enemy weapons system.?

In a speech on Feb. 17 to the Council on Foreign Relations, Rumsfeld elaborated on the administration?s perception that the battle over information would be a crucial front in the War on Terror, or as Rumsfeld calls it, the Long War.

?Let there be no doubt, the longer it takes to put a strategic communication framework into place, the more we can be certain that the vacuum will be filled by the enemy and by news informers that most assuredly will not paint an accurate picture of what is actually taking place,? Rumsfeld said.

The Department of Homeland Security also has demonstrated a tendency to deploy military operatives to deal with domestic crises.

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the department dispatched ?heavily armed paramilitary mercenaries from the Blackwater private security firm, infamous for their work in Iraq, (and had them) openly patrolling the streets of New Orleans,? reported journalists Jeremy Scahill and Daniela Crespo on Sept. 10, 2005.

Noting the reputation of the Blackwater mercenaries as ?some of the most feared professional killers in the world,? Scahill and Crespo said Blackwater?s presence in New Orleans ?raises alarming questions about why the government would allow men trained to kill with impunity in places like Iraq and Afghanistan to operate here.?

U.S. Battlefield

In the view of some civil libertarians, a form of martial law already exists in the United States and has been in place since shortly after the 9/11 attacks when Bush issued Military Order No. 1 which empowered him to detain any non-citizen as an international terrorist or enemy combatant.

?The President decided that he was no longer running the country as a civilian President,? wrote civil rights attorney Michael Ratner in the book Guantanamo: What the World Should Know. ?He issued a military order giving himself the power to run the country as a general.?

For any American citizen suspected of collaborating with terrorists, Bush also revealed what?s in store. In May 2002, the FBI arrested U.S. citizen Jose Padilla in Chicago on suspicion that he might be an al-Qaeda operative planning an attack.

Rather than bring criminal charges, Bush designated Padilla an ?enemy combatant? and had him imprisoned indefinitely without benefit of due process. After three years, the administration finally brought charges against Padilla, in order to avoid a Supreme Court showdown the White House might have lost.

But since the Court was not able to rule on the Padilla case, the administration?s arguments have not been formally repudiated. Indeed, despite filing charges against Padilla, the White House still asserts the right to detain U.S. citizens without charges as enemy combatants.

This claimed authority is based on the assertion that the United States is at war and the American homeland is part of the battlefield.

?In the war against terrorists of global reach, as the Nation learned all too well on Sept. 11, 2001, the territory of the United States is part of the battlefield,? Bush's lawyers argued in briefs to the federal courts. [Washington Post, July 19, 2005]

Given Bush?s now open assertions that he is using his ?plenary? ? or unlimited ? powers as Commander in Chief for the duration of the indefinite War on Terror, Americans can no longer trust that their constitutional rights protect them from government actions.

As former Vice President Al Gore asked after recounting a litany of sweeping powers that Bush has asserted to fight the War on Terror, ?Can it be true that any President really has such powers under our Constitution? If the answer is ?yes,? then under the theory by which these acts are committed, are there any acts that can on their face be prohibited??

In such extraordinary circumstances, the American people might legitimately ask exactly what the Bush administration means by the ?rapid development of new programs,? which might require the construction of a new network of detention camps.

source: http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/022106a.html

apologies for all the goofy question marks--transposed quotation marks for the most part.
i am agnostic on the article, but like i said, it at least completes the circle.

ubertuber · 02-27-2006, 09:25 AM

Roachboy and Host -

I don't entirely disagree with you that this administration has done Bad Things. I don't personally feel that it rises to the point of removal, but I can imagine people trying to make that case. My point is that talk of revolution is absurdly premature because any wrong-doing should be first addressed within the system. There hasn't been a real effort to make use of the tools provided - impeachment, etc. Until that fails or some other indication arises that our current administration is acting in a way that is totally outside of the bounds of our governmental system (such as attempting to remain in office or prevent another election) I'm not sure why revolution is even coming up.

powerclown · 02-27-2006, 09:57 AM

*Armed* overthrow of the US Govt?

What exactly would you be armed with? Last I checked, the Govt had all the good weapons.

They have the aircraft carriers, they have the atomic submarines, they have the F15 Raptors and Hornets, they have all the M1 Abrams tanks, Paladin self-propelled artillery systems and M6 LineBacker missile launchers, AH-64 Apache and AH-1W Super Cobra attack helicopters...they have all (or most of) the M60 7.62 machineguns, M249 Light Machine Guns, M16 Automatic Rifles, M40A1 Sniper Rifles, M203 40mm Grenade Launchers, Javelin Antitank Missiles, Avenger Pedestal Mounted Stinger mobile missile systems, Tomahawk/JDAM/HARM cruise missiles, SideWinder/Hellfire missiles, B2 Bomber aircraft, CG-47 Ticonderoga-class Destroyer warships, 900' Naval Battleships (Wisconsin-class), GCCS (Global Command and Control System) Nuclear capabilties, MQ-1 Predator/DarkStar Drones, M56 Coyote Smoke Generators, M151 Multi-Utility Tactical (MUTT) 4x4 Attack Jeeps, M1 Grizzly Mine Breachers,

...SAMOS-A Pioneer Military Satellite Systems equipped with KH-4 CORONA/KH-5 ARGON Optics Arrays, Kennan KH-11 Photographic Intelligence Satellite Operations, a Lacrosse Imaging Radar satellite, the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) advanced surface-to-air guided missile air defense system, Ground Based Radar [GBR] / X-band Radar [XBR] primary fire control sensor (providing surveillance, acquisition, tracking, discrimination, fire control support and kill assessment), JLENS (Joint Land-Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensos) systems, Firefly Aerial Decoys, HEXJAM (Hand-Emplaced Expendable Jammer) Systems...etc.

I would say the USA circa 2006 is probably THE most coup-proof government in the history of mankind.

Mojo_PeiPei · 02-27-2006, 10:02 AM

We could always choke them with our dead.

powerclown · 02-27-2006, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

We could always choke them with our dead.

HEHEHEHEHEHE

roachboy · 02-27-2006, 10:13 AM

ubertuber:

i am not sure if you read the post i put up in this thread carefully or not, but the argument in it was that this "call to action" is worthless not because the idea is something that i would rule out, but because the political work simply has not been done.

further, i think that any such attempt would be a debacle, not just in itself, but also in that it would provide a pretext for responses that would make the present situation seem like some vacation idyll.

i posted the article because it gives an outline of bush admin paranoia and programs geared toward suppressing domestic dissent (the ole 5th column)...

such an action would require extensive organization and mobilization of many many people. a successful mobilization could mitigate the state's monopoly on firepower--but it would have to be very large and highly organized for that to happen. the conditions simply do not exist at this point.
so i would oppose the action.

but i am not sure that this is a serious call to a serious action: i find it interesting that, in this phase of almost total absence of public protest against the bush people, you have this call surfacing as if it was serious coupled with the lovely exchange in congress with gonzalez concerning proposals to suppress domestic dissent.

Bill O'Rights · 02-27-2006, 10:16 AM

^^^ubertuber saved me a lot of typing.

This is, after all, why we have term limits and elections every four years.

ubertuber · 02-27-2006, 10:23 AM

Hi roachboy,

I read it (and just re-read it again). I get that you think this "call to action" is premature if for no other reason than the ground has not been prepared.

However, I was responding to this part:

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

in principle, i would have no problem with organized revoluationary action.
and in principle, the bush administration does make a mockery of the american system.
an argument could be made that this administration should be brought down.

I should have been more clear about that - I didn't mean to imply that the rest of your post went unread... I guess I just felt moved to respond to the first thing you put because... well, because it was first...

I did read your article with interest though - I've had a gut feeling that there are some things happening that I don't like for some time now. It's important to follow these feelings up with a rational understanding.

stevo · 02-27-2006, 10:28 AM

While those of us on TFP would not see this as a "serious" call to a serious action. I'll garuntee you those at United for Peace and Justice do. Just like their partner in agitation, ANSWER, these people are nothing but marxist agitators, communist sympathiesers, anti-semetic pro-palestinian rabble-rousers. They beleive america should be punished for its prosperity. In their eyes all the inequality in the world is the fault of the united states. If you ever get a chance check out one of their protest rallies and you will see how far out there these people are. They are the cooks of the cooks and would side with al-qaeda before they sided with america.

dksuddeth · 02-27-2006, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

*Armed* overthrow of the US Govt?

What exactly would you be armed with? Last I checked, the Govt had all the good weapons.
I would say the USA circa 2006 is probably THE most coup-proof government in the history of mankind.

Bursor, Scott; Toward a Functional Framework for Interpreting the Second Amendment.

Quote:

Is the view of an armed populace embodied in the Second Amendment still valid in a society with professional military and police forces? Is an armed populace still capable of performing the functions detailed above? Many have argued that it cannot and thus, that the private ownership of arms is an anachronism inapplicable to our current circumstances. These arguments rest on empirical assertions that are highly debatable to say the least.
Commentators often attack the vitality of the military and political functions of the militia concept with the argument that they can no longer be performed by a militia. Simply stated, the argument is that an armed citizenry cannot restrain a domestic tyrant or deter a foreign conqueror backed by a modern army. This empirical assertion is frequently made by lawyers, politicians, or other advocates who offer neither argument nor authority for the proposition. And while this assertion may be true in some limited number of circumstances, as a categorical assertion it is demonstrably false.

Consider some recent examples. The Vietnam War demonstrated that a modern military power can be resisted by guerilla fighters bearing only small arms. This lesson has not been forgotten. In 1992, the United States declined to intervene in the conflict in Bosnia-Hercegovina after an aide to General Colin Powell, then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, advised the Senate Armed Services Committee that the widespread ownership of arms in the former Yugoslav republic made even limited intervention "perilous and deadly." The deterrent effect of an armed populace was emphasized by Canadian Major General Lewis Mackenzie, who led United Nations peace keeping troops in Sarajevo for five months. Despite the tremendous capabilities of the United States Armed Forces, he explained, the prevalence of arms ownership in the area caused him to believe that if American forces were to be sent to Bosnia, "Americans [would be] killed.... You can't isolate it, make it nice and sanitary."

The validity of these concerns has also been demonstrated in the current conflict in Chechnya where "[m]ore than 40,000 soldiers from the Russian army ... have quickly been humbled by a few thousand urban guerrillas who mostly live at home, wear jeans, use castoff weapons and have almost no coherent battle plans or organization." The Russian army's nuclear capability apparently has not translated into a tactical advantage in the streets of Chechnya.

In addition to these anecdotal examples, there is further evidence of the military practicality of an armed citizenry. The 1966 Arthur D. Little, Inc. Report ("the Little Report"), commissioned by the United States Department of the Army, concluded that in spite of recent technological developments in the modes of waging war, a modern war will almost certainly be a "shooting war" in which the basic individual weapon of combat will be the rifle. The Little Report does more than refute the notion that riflemen are militarily obsolete in the nuclear era. It offers an additional insight into the military value of armed citizens: they make better soldiers when they enter the service. They are significantly better marksmen than those who did not own arms prior to enlistment (even when marksmanship is measured after military training) and are more confident in their ability to perform effectively in combat. Furthermore, gun owners are more likely to enlist, to prefer combat outfits, and to become marksmanship instructors.

It can be done.

Pacifier · 02-27-2006, 10:39 AM

I thought thats why you have your weapons:
to overthrow a tyranical goverment
sure the value of "tyrannical" may vary but that hardly surprises me

(no I don't think that the Bush Administration should be overtrown, assasination will do fine

)

Ustwo · 02-27-2006, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

*Armed* overthrow of the US Govt?

What exactly would you be armed with? Last I checked, the Govt had all the good weapons.

They have the aircraft carriers, they have the atomic submarines, they have the F15 Raptors and Hornets, they have all the M1 Abrams tanks, Paladin self-propelled artillery systems and M6 LineBacker missile launchers, AH-64 Apache and AH-1W Super Cobra attack helicopters...they have all (or most of) the M60 7.62 machineguns, M249 Light Machine Guns, M16 Automatic Rifles, M40A1 Sniper Rifles, M203 40mm Grenade Launchers, Javelin Antitank Missiles, Avenger Pedestal Mounted Stinger mobile missile systems, Tomahawk/JDAM/HARM cruise missiles, SideWinder/Hellfire missiles, B2 Bomber aircraft, CG-47 Ticonderoga-class Destroyer warships, 900' Naval Battleships (Wisconsin-class), GCCS (Global Command and Control System) Nuclear capabilties, MQ-1 Predator/DarkStar Drones, M56 Coyote Smoke Generators, M151 Multi-Utility Tactical (MUTT) 4x4 Attack Jeeps, M1 Grizzly Mine Breachers,

...SAMOS-A Pioneer Military Satellite Systems equipped with KH-4 CORONA/KH-5 ARGON Optics Arrays, Kennan KH-11 Photographic Intelligence Satellite Operations, a Lacrosse Imaging Radar satellite, the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) advanced surface-to-air guided missile air defense system, Ground Based Radar [GBR] / X-band Radar [XBR] primary fire control sensor (providing surveillance, acquisition, tracking, discrimination, fire control support and kill assessment), JLENS (Joint Land-Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensos) systems, Firefly Aerial Decoys, HEXJAM (Hand-Emplaced Expendable Jammer) Systems...etc.

I would say the USA circa 2006 is probably THE most coup-proof government in the history of mankind.

Powerclown I think you are mistaken, more than one well armed government has been overthrown. What these people lack is not the arms but the quality of men. A bunch of parinoid crackpots, so far out of the main stream thought that they couldn't drink from said stream with a hose, are not the type of men who could pull something like this off.

Charlatan · 02-27-2006, 11:12 AM

Ustwo you are being too one-sided in your approach.

The other thing to consider is a group of well intentioned patriots (much like yourself) taking up arms for all the right reasons. IF they were the right reasons, all the military hardware would be of little use, many soldiers could be pursuaded to *not* fire on their fellow citizens.

It has happened in other nations, why not the US?

Poppinjay · 02-27-2006, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Powerclown I think you are mistaken, more than one well armed government has been overthrown. What these people lack is not the arms but the quality of men. A bunch of parinoid crackpots, so far out of the main stream thought that they couldn't drink from said stream with a hose, are not the type of men who could pull something like this off.

Yeah, I think if the mighty USSR could be overthrown by hungry, tired roustabouts then it could happen here, given the right seet of circumstances.

As long as the vast majority of us enjoy an unparalleled environment of wealth combined with free will, there will be nothing resembling an armed resistance.

I mean, I understand the anger directed towards Bush. I don’t like him or almost anything he does. And he may well have used dirty tricks to get elected. Ever heard of Tamany Hall? Roscoe Conkling? I won’t go into how much election fraud has happened in this country. But coups generally happen when the lifestyle of the citizens just flat out sucks. And to suggest that the American standard of living is that far down in the dumps is ridiculous.

As little regard the rest of the world gives Bush, they'd consider us absolute fools to even consider such a thing. Which is why these guys are fools.

powerclown · 02-27-2006, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Powerclown I think you are mistaken, more than one well armed government has been overthrown. What these people lack is not the arms but the quality of men. A bunch of parinoid crackpots, so far out of the main stream thought that they couldn't drink from said stream with a hose, are not the type of men who could pull something like this off.

If you're saying you wouldn't count on todays Democratic Party of the United States of America orchestrating such a manuever, you'd get no argument from me. The term 'leadership vacuum' immediately comes to mind.

flstf · 02-27-2006, 12:07 PM

I don't think our current government is in danger of being overthrown anytime soon especially by the likes of the group mentioned in the OP. It will take some major negative events like our currency collapsing and another major depression.

Upheaval will probably occur when things get bad enough and people realize that the two major parties have no solutions and have the elections rigged so that only they can win. Today many people are getting along just fine and are still optimistic and think it makes a difference which major party gets elected.

host · 02-27-2006, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights

^^^ubertuber saved me a lot of typing.

This is, after all, why we have term limits and elections every four years.

Bill O'Rights, I suggest that you research the circumstances of the lawsuit against Diebold by the State of California that was settled for $2.6 million in Nov., 2004, and visit these sites to keep up to date on disclosures and controversies related to electronic "voting":
http://www.votersunite.org/news.asp
http://http://blackboxvoting.org/
http://fairnessbybeckerman.blogspot.com/

Quote:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...2/ai_n16019546
Oakland Tribune, Jan 22, 2006
..... For more than two years, Diebold Election Systems Inc. has hit one political or technical snag after another trying to reap more than $40 million in voting-machine sales in California.

Now only a collection of tiny software files on Diebold's latest voting machines stand in the way of those revenues and more. Last summer, a Finnish computer expert using an agricultural device found he could rig the votes stored on Diebold's memory cards and rewrite one of those files to cover his tracks.

The revelation posed a double problem for Diebold: Not only could its optical-scanning voting machines be hacked, but state and federal rules for more than a year have forbidden those files in voting machines. ........

...and decide if these were an "isolated" incidents:

Quote:

http://www.unionleader.com/columns.a...9-b71df3b7f0cc
MORE KA-CHING

More than $2.8 million.

That appears to be the new total of the Republican National Committee’s legal bill for the defense of convicted 2002 Republican phone-jamming conspirator Jim Tobin.

We reported two weeks ago that the RNC’s year-end financial report, on file with the Federal Election Committee, contained a $1.7 million payment to Williams and Connolly, the Washington law firm the RNC hired to represent Tobin. ..........

......In November 2004, the GOP Virginia paid 33 Democratic lawmakers $750,000 to settle an eavesdropping case, which, according to a Virginia news report at the time, had “bedeviled Republicans for more than two years.”

It seems the former Virginia GOP executive director had eavesdropped on private conference calls of Democratic officials who were discussing political and legal strategies. Reportedly, he eventually pleaded guilty to intercepting a wire communication, a felony. ........

Quote:

The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions,
that I wish it always to be kept alive. It will often be exercised when
wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little
rebellion now and then. -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Abigail Adams, 1787

Quote:

[W]hat country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not
warned from time to time that [the] people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms...The tree of liberty must be
refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Col. William S. Smith, 1787

Quote:

"I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as
necessary in the political world as storms in the physical."
-- Thomas Jefferson, Letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

Quote:

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it.
Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise
their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to
dismember it or overthrow it." -- Abraham Lincoln, 4 April 1861

The sentiment on this thread is a far cry from Jefferson's attitude, in a time when the citizenry had recently put down existing government via a violent revolution, that government officials are scoundrels who must be intimidated by an angry, suspicious, volatile electorate with a reputation of being capable of a violent reaction, if provoked.

Look at yourselves....and your words here, in reaction to all that has taken place to undermine representative government, transparent, fair elections, your right to know the deliberations of an open and accountable government, and then tell me that I am wrong to advocate leaving this country as soon as possible. Do you really believe that your demeanor would change in time to counter current political trends, when you, even now, show know signs, with your nearly universal, blind faith in an election process that may no longer even exist?

ubertuber · 02-27-2006, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

Bill O'Rights, I suggest that you research the circumstances of the lawsuit against Diebold by the State of California that was settled for $2.6 million in Nov., 2004, and visit these sites to keep up to date on disclosures and controversies related to electronic "voting":

...

The sentiment on this thread is a far cry from Jefferson's attitude, in a time when the citizenry had recently put down existing government via a violent revolution, that government officials are scoundrels who must be intimidated by an angry, suspicious, volatile electorate with a reputation of being capable of a violent reaction, if provoked.

Host, we're a far cry from Jefferson's times. Jefferson was a guy who wrote a lot of pretty words that we continue to profess admiration for. However, a lot of things came before those writings, and he wrote a lot of other words that we would not hold in such esteem these days. In fact, the differences between today and the mid to late 18th century are profound - so marked as to lead me to believe that you are attempting to use Jefferson's words as a standard that people will flock to without ensuring that the comparison is apt.

First off, and this is the point that I've made that BOR agreed with, Jefferson, Washington, Franklin et al (with the possible exception of Hamilton) tried very hard to work within the British system before tearing it down. They attempted many constructive approaches towards reconciliation before initiating a revolution. This has not yet happened with the Bush administration. I'm hesitant to say this lest I initiate a threadjack, but consider for one second that the Democrats have not made even a paltry effort to investigate or impeach this administration. They've thrown a little mud, but there has been no serious, sustained effort. The Republicans managed better than this 8 years ago over a lie about a blowjob. If you want to change our country, start there. If you want to follow Jefferson's example, start there and work with it for several decades. Only after exhausting all constructive avenues of reform is it even concievable to start talking about armed revolutions.

At any rate, Jefferson is not a great example to hold up when talking about military or violence as a political solution. He may have said that the tree of liberty must be refreshed by the blood of patriots, but he was talking about the French Revolution - and look where he ended up on that one. Jefferson's military contribution to the American Revolution was fleeing the capitol of Virginia while the British sacked it while he was governor. So if you want a standard-bearer, at least pick one in which the facts fit the case. I'd suggest Hamilton, but he was all for a strong federal government and powerful executive.

Hell, I'd make the argument that Truman's firing of MacArthur invited a more serious threat to our republic than George Bush. Only Truman's deft handling of the Joint Chief's of Staff prevented MacArthur from being a serious contender for the presidency. So, in terms of historical events, I've got to conclude that your opinions about the current administration are clouding your sense of context.

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

Look at yourselves....and your words here, in reaction to all that has taken place to undermine representative government, transparent, fair elections, your right to know the deliberations of an open and accountable government, and then tell me that I am wrong to advocate leaving this country as soon as possible. Do you really believe that your demeanor would change in time to counter current political trends, when you, even now, show know signs, with your nearly universal, blind faith in an election process that may no longer even exist?

As for this, I don't think anyone has yet told you that you are wrong to advocate leaving this country. So far we've responded to the idea of "storming the palace" as you put it, and a few of us think that it isn't time to think of those options. I know you like to pin personal responsibility on people for the results of the opinions and voting, and I'm going to accept that. However, I'd rather stay here than leave the country - there is still time and there are still ways to effect change. It's not time to jump ship or throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Ustwo · 02-27-2006, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

If you're saying you wouldn't count on todays Democratic Party of the United States of America orchestrating such a manuever, you'd get no argument from me. The term 'leadership vacuum' immediately comes to mind.

I wouldn't say the democrats have a leadership vacuum, what they have is no vision for the future. Their leaders are firmly in place, they are just focused myopically. Likewise their power comes from the current system, directly in the form of hand outs, indirectly in policy, a revolt would only upset that applecart.

What I mean is the quailty of men who would currently call for a revolt is poor. These are not clear thinking men with education, character, and leadership skills behind them. They are Don Quixotes, fighting windmill dragons that only they can see. It requires more than anger to make a revolution work.

Willravel · 02-27-2006, 04:13 PM

It'd be a lot cheaper to just get Bush a bag of pretzels.

Actually, I've been throwing a similar idea around in my head since the election was stolen back in 2000. I mean the guy has been a lame duck for 6 years now. Since then, he's committed war crimes, massive coverups at the cost of the trust and security of the American people, has given tax breaks to the wealthy which have actually managed to trickle UP, gotten all of his idiot friends jobs, and screw up foriegn relations for the next decade. He is clearly guilty of bipassing the FISA court, illegally holding detainees, international kidnapping, and STILL being completly unable to pronounce the word "nuclear". Bottom line, this guy is scum. Much of his administration is scum. For as long as they are in office, bad things will happen. This is why I considered the possibility of an armed resistence. Of course, I only considered it. I never drew up plans and organized people. Why? Even if the plan were to succede, Bush would be a mayrter to his supporters. People must continue to hate Bush and wish him to leave office. That seed, which has been steadily growing, must continue to grow until it has born the fruit of impeachment. In the end, he must be removed by stricktly legal means. It would be wrong to remove him illegally, just as it is wrong of him to spy on us and detain us illegally. Resist legally.

Also, Host is in the right direction. When and if this gets as bad as it can get, people like Host will be our salvation (and he will be justified in his "I told you so"s). If the course continues and it becomes clear that by no leagal means can the immoral and illegal actions of the current administration be stopped, revolution could end up being a viable solution. In other words, I will never discount the possibility of revolution completly and this situation does continue to bring the idea of revolution to mind.

matthew330 · 02-27-2006, 05:02 PM

interesting. The whole thing really, but especially your reason for not drawing up plans and organizing people for a resistance, that was my favorite part. That and Host being my savior. good read will.

Willravel · 02-27-2006, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by matthew330

interesting. The whole thing really, but especially your reason for not drawing up plans and organizing people for a resistance, that was my favorite part. That and Host being my savior. good read will.

This response was just so vague as to make me think, "Is he being sarcastic? I mena I know he probably was about the Host thing, but what about the legality of removing the president from office? I better respond and ask..." Then I wrote this post. Now I'm going to hit "submit reply".

matthew330 · 02-27-2006, 05:35 PM

Yeah will, i was being sarcastic. Your somewhat comical response, almost made me feel bad about it.

Have fun tonight.

roachboy · 02-27-2006, 06:21 PM

sometimes i wonder if there is an outer edge to right, a place you'd fall off of and where you would land once you had fallen, what that strange world would look like and how long it would take you to adjust to the fact that everything is upside down.

but then i thought that maybe there was no border, and no edge, because the right extends infinitely in its direction--and that everything being upside down has long since stopped being a problem--it just looks normal now--after all, like everything else, it is just a matter of opinion.

so ustwo: do you really think the democrats are a leftist party?

02-26-2006, 12:53 PM	#2 (permalink)
Paq Junkie Location: South Carolina	isn't something similar to this in "Stupid white men" by big guy..forgot his name i never take this stype stuff seriousyl, though __________________ Live. Chris

02-26-2006, 01:08 PM	#3 (permalink)
irateplatypus can't help but laugh Location: dar al-harb	someone should tell these people that we're having a little get-together this november... it's called the national elections. why do all these crackpot organizations have the most Orwellian names? __________________ If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. ~ Winston Churchill

02-26-2006, 01:54 PM	#4 (permalink)
djtestudo Baltimoron Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD	Glad to know that it's an "all-day event" according to that calender Boy, it's always good to know that there are people in this world far more fucked-up then I could ever be. Kind of like that joke about going to the state fair; just go to ultra-liberal websites and you will feel good about yourself and your mental state. __________________ "Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen." --Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

02-26-2006, 02:02 PM	#6 (permalink)
politicophile Addict	You know they're trouble when they advocate toppling democratically elected leaders and replacing them with... well, themselves, basically. They are saying, more or less, that our elected leaders are doing such a terrible job of governing that they should be violently overthrown and replaced with non-elected leaders. ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS a bad idea. I've got an idea: wait until 2008. __________________ The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

02-26-2006, 05:56 PM	#10 (permalink)
djtestudo Baltimoron Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD	The only thing that would make that calender entry better would be a line at the bottom: "Refreshments will be provided"... __________________ "Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen." --Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

02-26-2006, 02:42 PM	#7 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	That's the worst idea I've heard this week.

02-26-2006, 03:14 PM	#8 (permalink)
MSD The sky calls to us ... Super Moderator Location: CT	"We are calling on all Member Nations of the U.N., All Representatives and Justices in the World Court and International Criminal Courts..." If they took over the country, I'd start thinking about armed overthrow. Of course, at that time, I'd be kicking myself for not having taken the time to buy a single gun that doesn't have to be pumped or manually cocked between shots, but I'd try anyway.

02-26-2006, 05:55 PM	#9 (permalink)
maximusveritas Winner	I can envision what this event will be like: a handful of nuts holding signs outside the White House and chanting idiotic slogans before being dragged away by the cops. Note that this event is not being put on by United for peace and justice itself. It's just being posted on their calender by a third party which explains why it's so unprofessional.

02-27-2006, 08:37 AM	#16 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	The irony is that the only way Bush would stay president past 2008 is if there was an attempted armed revolt and we were unable to hold elections. Reminds me of the Illuminatis Trillogy where the racist, old boy network sherrif was really a communist but acting in such a way as to inspire others to revolt Perhaps this 'revolt' is just what Bush planned, and is but a wheel within a wheel, a plan within a plan, ending in world domination for the NWO. or perhap we will have an election in 2008, and then the people who like to talk in this way will find some other windmill to slay. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

02-27-2006, 09:25 AM	#18 (permalink)
ubertuber spudly Location: Ellay	Roachboy and Host - I don't entirely disagree with you that this administration has done Bad Things. I don't personally feel that it rises to the point of removal, but I can imagine people trying to make that case. My point is that talk of revolution is absurdly premature because any wrong-doing should be first addressed within the system. There hasn't been a real effort to make use of the tools provided - impeachment, etc. Until that fails or some other indication arises that our current administration is acting in a way that is totally outside of the bounds of our governmental system (such as attempting to remain in office or prevent another election) I'm not sure why revolution is even coming up. __________________ Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

02-27-2006, 09:57 AM	#19 (permalink)
powerclown Junkie Location: Detroit, MI	Armed overthrow of the US Govt? What exactly would you be armed with? Last I checked, the Govt had all the good weapons. They have the aircraft carriers, they have the atomic submarines, they have the F15 Raptors and Hornets, they have all the M1 Abrams tanks, Paladin self-propelled artillery systems and M6 LineBacker missile launchers, AH-64 Apache and AH-1W Super Cobra attack helicopters...they have all (or most of) the M60 7.62 machineguns, M249 Light Machine Guns, M16 Automatic Rifles, M40A1 Sniper Rifles, M203 40mm Grenade Launchers, Javelin Antitank Missiles, Avenger Pedestal Mounted Stinger mobile missile systems, Tomahawk/JDAM/HARM cruise missiles, SideWinder/Hellfire missiles, B2 Bomber aircraft, CG-47 Ticonderoga-class Destroyer warships, 900' Naval Battleships (Wisconsin-class), GCCS (Global Command and Control System) Nuclear capabilties, MQ-1 Predator/DarkStar Drones, M56 Coyote Smoke Generators, M151 Multi-Utility Tactical (MUTT) 4x4 Attack Jeeps, M1 Grizzly Mine Breachers, ...SAMOS-A Pioneer Military Satellite Systems equipped with KH-4 CORONA/KH-5 ARGON Optics Arrays, Kennan KH-11 Photographic Intelligence Satellite Operations, a Lacrosse Imaging Radar satellite, the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) advanced surface-to-air guided missile air defense system, Ground Based Radar [GBR] / X-band Radar [XBR] primary fire control sensor (providing surveillance, acquisition, tracking, discrimination, fire control support and kill assessment), JLENS (Joint Land-Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensos) systems, Firefly Aerial Decoys, HEXJAM (Hand-Emplaced Expendable Jammer) Systems...etc. I would say the USA circa 2006 is probably THE most coup-proof government in the history of mankind.

02-27-2006, 10:02 AM	#20 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	We could always choke them with our dead. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

02-27-2006, 10:13 AM	#22 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	ubertuber: i am not sure if you read the post i put up in this thread carefully or not, but the argument in it was that this "call to action" is worthless not because the idea is something that i would rule out, but because the political work simply has not been done. further, i think that any such attempt would be a debacle, not just in itself, but also in that it would provide a pretext for responses that would make the present situation seem like some vacation idyll. i posted the article because it gives an outline of bush admin paranoia and programs geared toward suppressing domestic dissent (the ole 5th column)... such an action would require extensive organization and mobilization of many many people. a successful mobilization could mitigate the state's monopoly on firepower--but it would have to be very large and highly organized for that to happen. the conditions simply do not exist at this point. so i would oppose the action. but i am not sure that this is a serious call to a serious action: i find it interesting that, in this phase of almost total absence of public protest against the bush people, you have this call surfacing as if it was serious coupled with the lovely exchange in congress with gonzalez concerning proposals to suppress domestic dissent. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

02-27-2006, 10:16 AM	#23 (permalink)
Bill O'Rights will always be an Alyson Hanniganite Location: In the dust of the archives	^^^ubertuber saved me a lot of typing. This is, after all, why we have term limits and elections every four years. __________________ "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony "Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

02-27-2006, 10:28 AM	#25 (permalink)
stevo Rail Baron Location: Tallyfla	While those of us on TFP would not see this as a "serious" call to a serious action. I'll garuntee you those at United for Peace and Justice do. Just like their partner in agitation, ANSWER, these people are nothing but marxist agitators, communist sympathiesers, anti-semetic pro-palestinian rabble-rousers. They beleive america should be punished for its prosperity. In their eyes all the inequality in the world is the fault of the united states. If you ever get a chance check out one of their protest rallies and you will see how far out there these people are. They are the cooks of the cooks and would side with al-qaeda before they sided with america. __________________ "If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

02-27-2006, 10:39 AM	#27 (permalink)
Pacifier undead Location: Duisburg, Germany	I thought thats why you have your weapons: to overthrow a tyranical goverment sure the value of "tyrannical" may vary but that hardly surprises me (no I don't think that the Bush Administration should be overtrown, assasination will do fine ) __________________ "It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death — Albert Einstein

02-27-2006, 11:12 AM	#29 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	Ustwo you are being too one-sided in your approach. The other thing to consider is a group of well intentioned patriots (much like yourself) taking up arms for all the right reasons. IF they were the right reasons, all the military hardware would be of little use, many soldiers could be pursuaded to not fire on their fellow citizens. It has happened in other nations, why not the US? __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

02-27-2006, 12:07 PM	#32 (permalink)
flstf Easy Rider Location: Moscow on the Ohio	I don't think our current government is in danger of being overthrown anytime soon especially by the likes of the group mentioned in the OP. It will take some major negative events like our currency collapsing and another major depression. Upheaval will probably occur when things get bad enough and people realize that the two major parties have no solutions and have the elections rigged so that only they can win. Today many people are getting along just fine and are still optimistic and think it makes a difference which major party gets elected.

02-27-2006, 04:13 PM	#36 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	It'd be a lot cheaper to just get Bush a bag of pretzels. Actually, I've been throwing a similar idea around in my head since the election was stolen back in 2000. I mean the guy has been a lame duck for 6 years now. Since then, he's committed war crimes, massive coverups at the cost of the trust and security of the American people, has given tax breaks to the wealthy which have actually managed to trickle UP, gotten all of his idiot friends jobs, and screw up foriegn relations for the next decade. He is clearly guilty of bipassing the FISA court, illegally holding detainees, international kidnapping, and STILL being completly unable to pronounce the word "nuclear". Bottom line, this guy is scum. Much of his administration is scum. For as long as they are in office, bad things will happen. This is why I considered the possibility of an armed resistence. Of course, I only considered it. I never drew up plans and organized people. Why? Even if the plan were to succede, Bush would be a mayrter to his supporters. People must continue to hate Bush and wish him to leave office. That seed, which has been steadily growing, must continue to grow until it has born the fruit of impeachment. In the end, he must be removed by stricktly legal means. It would be wrong to remove him illegally, just as it is wrong of him to spy on us and detain us illegally. Resist legally. Also, Host is in the right direction. When and if this gets as bad as it can get, people like Host will be our salvation (and he will be justified in his "I told you so"s). If the course continues and it becomes clear that by no leagal means can the immoral and illegal actions of the current administration be stopped, revolution could end up being a viable solution. In other words, I will never discount the possibility of revolution completly and this situation does continue to bring the idea of revolution to mind.

02-27-2006, 05:02 PM	#37 (permalink)
matthew330 Banned	interesting. The whole thing really, but especially your reason for not drawing up plans and organizing people for a resistance, that was my favorite part. That and Host being my savior. good read will.

02-27-2006, 05:35 PM	#39 (permalink)
matthew330 Banned	Yeah will, i was being sarcastic. Your somewhat comical response, almost made me feel bad about it. Have fun tonight.

02-27-2006, 06:21 PM	#40 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	sometimes i wonder if there is an outer edge to right, a place you'd fall off of and where you would land once you had fallen, what that strange world would look like and how long it would take you to adjust to the fact that everything is upside down. but then i thought that maybe there was no border, and no edge, because the right extends infinitely in its direction--and that everything being upside down has long since stopped being a problem--it just looks normal now--after all, like everything else, it is just a matter of opinion. so ustwo: do you really think the democrats are a leftist party? __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite