Inciting armed overthrow of the gov?
 

United for peace and justice, storm the white house

Wow, and I thought the Democratic Undergrounders were bad.

Is this crossing the line?

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


i never take this stype stuff seriousyl, though

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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

"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.

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.

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

"Refreshments will be provided"...

Punch and pie?

Undoubtedly CoolAid and brownies.

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:
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, <b>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?</b> 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? <b>The same way as you are?</b>
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.
.....How do any of you know who is legitimately elected, and who isn't ?

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.

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.

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:

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.

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.

*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.

We could always choke them with our dead.

HEHEHEHEHEHE

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.

^^^ubertuber saved me a lot of typing. :thumbsup: This is, after all, why we have term limits and elections every four years.

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:

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.

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.

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

It can be done.

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 ;) )

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.

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?

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.

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 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.

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/

...and decide if these were an "isolated" incidents:
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 <b>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.</b>

Look at <b>yourselves</b>....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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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".

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

Have fun tonight.

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?

There's just an incredibly irony taking place in the above post, and what a perfect person to post it.

That was incredibly confusingly. :thumbsup:

You obviously didn't read the referred to "above post". Everythings relative my friend. Though you did point out to me - I meant "incredible", not "incredibly".

That was my intention.

/grammer nazi...away!!!!

I had faith that minor typo wasn't what confused you. Let the convo continue....

Let's break it down then. Roach 'the prof' boy is saying that even though it would make sense that eventually someone on the right would simply snap, it's possible that the right is like a ray in mathematics, it starts at one point and continues into infinity. Eventually, on this infinate line, the center (reality) is so far gone that there is no longer perspective. The perspective disapears so much that what is millions of miles to the right seems to be centerist.

I have to agree with those who have pointed out that all options, or really ANY options for that matter, have yet to be exhausted.

You can argue war crimes or Diebold election fraud or other things until you are blue in the face or red in the fingers, but the truth is, why isn't anyone doing anything about it within the system?

Personally, I think that anyone who argues for a complete destruction of a system before working through that system first never wanted to be a part of that system anyway. In this case, those are people I would gladly fight, because it means they only desire power for themselves instead of change for all, and I would not want to be ruled by them.

And this can't happen on the other side as well?

Of course it can, that's the point of the thread. I think Roach was pointing out that for every post about weirdo lefties, there are 1200 about wacko righties.

Ok. So the question was thrown out whether the Democrats are "left."

Lets look at it rationally. The Dem's have lost the VAST majority of elections in the last few years. The Republicans (for the most part) are to the Right of the Dem's.

Thus if Republicans are winning elections, the "center" has shifted "right". Which means the average person agrees with the Repub's more than the Dem's. The Democrats have not moved from their origional "left" position, with notable elections by those wishing to hold their constituants. The few left, i.e. Kennedy, are finding their base erroding faster than the damns around New Orleans.

Thus, many of the Democrats are still to the left while shifting to the right due to political pressure. Once Democrats start winning elections one can figure the "center" is moving "left" and thus you can logically argue that the Dem's are becoming less and less "left".

Of course the argument is that the elections are based off of fear, off of lies, or off of simple corruption (tin foil hat's love it here).

Oh, ok. My apologies.

Suppose, hypothetically that a group of people who had not brought articles of impeachment against the President and were uninterested in waiting until 2008 believed "in principle" that violently overthrowing the government would be a good idea. I personally would consider this view to be so far to the left as to be unworthy of anything resembling serious consideration. But that's just me, millions of miles from the political "center". The people advocating the establishment of a liberal tyranny in place of our current conservative representative constitutional republic are the true centrists here.

I can't even imagine what it would be like to live in that reality.

We called it the U.S.S.R. when I was a kid.

This was my favorite part.

My prediction is that when the first batch of baby boomers gets stiffed on their SS benefits, there will be hell to pay.

Whatever party is in office at the time will be out on its ass. That will be as close to a rebellion as we will get. And I doubt it will take more than about five more years.

I'd still like to see every politician who voted in favor of a budget that raided the SS funds to be stripped of his or her retirement and locked up, but that's just me.

Okay....Marv. I've done the necessary research to arrive at a reasoned determination that the 9/11 Commission (along with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Myers, and the MSM....) intentionally whitewashed the issue of whether or not there was a <b>"staged inability of the federal government to muster a timely air defense of the east coast skies."</b>

I've posted my findings here:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...&postcount=182

Have a look....share your own, fact filled reaction. How can a curious skeptic react to the lies, alterations of the previously reported timeline of events of that morning, and unexplained omissions of testimony of a reliable witness <a href="http://www.dot.gov/affairs/mineta.htm">(Norman Mineta)</a> and draw a conclusion that is that much different from mine?

I think that would be every politician who voted for a budget since the stupid plan was put into place.

host there is a reason some threads are in parinoia and not politics :thumbsup:

well, since the last, relatively nice post appears to have baffled the usual rightwing suspects, let me explain:

this thread has slipped into yet another instance of conservatives setting up and battling straw men.

among the straw men is the right-specific "logic" that has constructed this fantasy they refer to as "liberal" -which in fact means "not us" and only "not us" and as "not us" can slide around from designating centrist democrats and stalinists with equal accuracy--accuracy because what is designated is not in the world that other people know about, but rather is a requirements of conservative ideology, which is held together by fear of a Persecuting Other.

the usage of this "logic"--which you can see for yourself above---almost necessarily involves a total loss of perspective.
generally, when a political debate involves one side wholly surrendering perspective, the debate is over.
so it is here.

a similar problem in the "assessments" of the call to action against the bush admin posted by a small group, which here is not only blown out of all proportion, but which is further interpreted around the empty category "liberal" so that it would appear reasonable for someone like ustwo to slide from stalin to democrats to hallucinations of revolution coming from the left as if, at each moment, he was talking about the same thing---and as if, at each moment, he was talking about anything.


nothing about these interpretations is credible:

that it reflects something like a socially acceptable logic indicates, once again, significant problems with conservative discourse as a political formation.

there is no reason to take these posts seriously----except that the same kind of idiocy obviously motivates people like lindsey graham to call for the administration to crack down on the "domestic fifth column"--but i figure that graham must be confusing the sounds being made by the implosion of the bush administration for political agitation from the left.
if there is anything stalinist in this thread, it comes from the right which, once again, repeats features of "the short course of the history of the bolshevik party" (look it up): incapable of imagining that anything bad can happen as a result of policies initiated by the Party, things that go wrong must be blamed on some outside force--in stalinist world, this was the "hitlero-trotskyiste wrecker" the "saboteur"--in conservativeland, the role of the "saboteur" is filled by the "liberal"....

Exactly my point. It seems like your immediate response to near-universal disagreement with your position is to accuse those who disagree with you of being delusional. Five stars for creativity.

It may shock you that we crazy Bushitler residents of Conservativeland think that it would be wrong to attempt to violently overthrow the Bush administration. Why? Because the system provides both a definite termination of his time in office, as well as a mechanism for removing him earlier than that date. Why on earth wouldn't you "utilize" one of these two systemic features rather than destroy the entire system. If you are unable to see the negative consequences of this precident, I am afraid I may not be able to articulate just how terrible an idea such a coup would be. Essentially, we lumpenconservatives (we all have exactly the same opinions, so I can legitimately speak for a majority of the American population) believe that, if all regimes hated by considerable minorities were overthrown by violent methods, no government would be sufficiently stable. Coups are always a bad thing. This is not to say that they are never preferable to the alternative.

But let's be serious: you agree (in principle) that it would be better to overthrow the U.S. government and fight a civil war to replace Bush with unelected liberal leaders... than to wait until 2008? The conservative propaganda must have corrupted my consciousness beyond repair because I think you're crazy.

Quoted for irony, but at least we agree.

I made two replies to this thread last night and did not post either. The theme in both there are times in life when you see you don't have debate, but you are speaking with mad men.

You don't argue fire safety with Herostratus and you don't argue politics with some people.

Politicophile, I picked this little bit out of roachboy's post so we don't have to go back and forth on this one issue.

As for the rest of it, I'd like to invite you guys, and everyone else to talk about our methods of communication in my new thread, which will be dedicated to this topic.

Please attempt to keep the thread you are currently viewing on topic - the possibility/feasibility/rationality of a revolution against our current white house administration.

Like Ustwo, quoted for irony.

Weren't you arguing earlier that Bush = Hitler argument is a valid political ideology?

It saddens me that so many of you summarily discharged the OP article as bogus. While I agree the particular people may not be of the caliber we want in a coup situation, the point of their protest is a good one. First of all, it was mentioned that we need to make use of the tools available, such as impeachment. What is involved in this? Can I file a USGOV-1288-A form to beign such a process? It's not so simple as Americans being upset and starting the impeachment process. Granted, it SHOULDN'T be so easy... but then again, it shouldn't be as hard as it is.

Frankly, I'd love to see Bush out of office, and if such a form existed, I'd surely fill it out and submit it. So what WILL be the cause? What is another Bush is "elected" into office? What if it's Jeb in '08? Well, they're the "properly elected" official. Will you continue to refuse to see through the shitscreen? As I posted in another thread, I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but the last 6 years have been a downhill ride, for the most part, regarding American policies and freedoms. If it all ends in another 2, I can live with that... if not, well...

What I thinki roachboy is responding to is summary dismissal of his points simply on the basis of his (perceived political orientation)--that is, all things "left" synonymous with all things "other." He outlined it pretty carefully given the medium we're utilizing but alas....posts keep coming in lumping his perspective in with some small group trying to do the improbably and, as roachboy himself stated, the undesirable.

Yet you come back with why can't you understand that it would be a bad idea to overthrow the government...this in direct contrast to his own words:

so then it becomes obvious that not much is done to understand what exactly he wrote and much more weight is granted about what one might think he thinks about your orientation...and reaction against that.

never said "crazy"
never said "bushhitlers"
never said "conservativeland"
never said "lumpenconservatives" (at least in this thread)

yet, at least in regard to the last coin of phrase, he isn't pulling it out of his ass, it's a label that is only properly understood with a critical reading of marxist texts.

Does the following fit the conservative standpoint in this thread?

discrediting the messenger, using whatever means necessary. works most of the time. unfortunately too many good messages get lost this way.

It looks to me like a certain group of people are pissed off that they haven't won an election in a long time.

It's hilarious that liberals are kicking around the idea of an "armed" revolution. What weapons do you plan on using? The ones that you encourage the United Nations to ban, or the ones that children use to kill themselves?

Good luck. Let me know how it works out for you.

in the cop who shoots military police officer after high-speed chase thread, the "conservatives" are the ones claiming to be preparing for revolution.

which weapons have the UN banned US citizens from using, btw?
I'm not that familiar with gun control to know the answer to that factoid you posted.

Come on, if a few members of your party was saying something irrational would you want the rest of us to judge you baised on their actions? Im pretty damn liberal but logicaly I dont support any of that sarcastic bs you just said was a liberal point of view. Please dont judge me by what other people in my political party try to do, otherwise I will end up judging all of you by the worst idea's your partys have thrown out over the years, and since dems and reps have been around a LONG time I wager I could find a lot. :crazy: :hmm:

cybersharp, I can accept that I have no chance of influencing <b>timalkin</b>, if his last post is an indication of his capacity to minimize or ignore all of the information that I posted to make the case that the notion that "fair" elections in any number of voting districts (or in whole states) in the U.S., after what has been reported about the integrity of Diebold, it's former CEO, and it's vote tabulation software are indicators, or for that matter, the demonstrated integrity (or the lack of it....) of some public officials responsible for supervising a "fair" and widely, publicly accessible voting process.

timalkin posted that, <b>"It looks to me like a certain group of people are pissed off that they haven't won an election in a long time. "</b> I didn't respond because, especially when I considered that he made his comments without countering my prior postings of well documented points that make the case that "fair" election results are no longer a "given", his statement amounted to nothing more than a "troll", lacking even a rudimentary effort to advance a thoughtful or content rich POV.

My reaction to timalkin was, "what's the use", as he showed no inclination to debate or to advance discussion.

I am, however, extremely disappointed by your response. You did not challenge timalkin....instead....you appealed to him....not to lump you in with the rest of us. You claim to be an openminded individual, presumably aligned with some of the quality candidates who ran for political office in the last few years, and who lost elections under contested voting circumstances....at least in your appeal to timalkin. Cybersharp. do you really believe that "fair" elections are "given"....and that the reason that so many democratic candidates "haven't won an election in a long time"?

Did nothing that I posted sway you to at least consider that timalkin's blind faith in the superiority of the ideology of his candidates, in the eyes of the majority of voters, in one election contest after another, is the reason that they "win" so consistantly?

If you, as someone who says that he is a democrat believes that, consider the following news report. (It is a news article...not an op-ed.) ....and....would you like to know more about a bridge that I have for sale....it's in lower Manhattan, on the East river. I hate my avatar, but I have a feeling....in a losing effort to try to influence even "open minded" fellow readers, that I won't be able to change it for a while....yet!

Did I let it slip that a post like yours frustrates me to the point that I have to ask....if recent Florida and California elections were FUCKING secure (and "fair"), why do hackers continue to successfully hack Diebold voting machine software, and why did Florida state voting officials RELUCTANTLY (as in...after much resistance to the IDEA...) <h3>"abruptly ordered new security measures for all 67 counties"</h3>?
and........
Read the preceding "bold character" paragraph!!!!!!!
I feel sometimes like I'm losing my fucking mind....Diebold admitted in court in California in November, 2004 (I posted the excerpt in another post on this thread) that it would pay California $2.6 million because Diebold could not defend against the memo from it's Jones Day lawyers that it's software was not disclosed to be in violation of the law. Now....they're buying new machines from Diebold....in California...while officials take Diebold's word that they will bring their software code into legal compliance.
Volusia County, Florida just voted to buy more new E-vote machines from Election Systems and Software Inc., that do not print paper ballots or receipts. I first obtained an ATM card (Diebold's core business is manufacture of ATM machines) and did a transaction at my bank in the spring of fucking 1980 !!!!!!!!!!! That 1980 machine spit out a printed receipt. 26 fucking years later, and Americans allow their elected and politcally appointed officials to buy E-voting machines that allegedly cannot provide printed ballots or receipts. They allow officials to buy machines from Diebold, a little more than a year after the company paid a multi-million dollar civil court settlement for it's voting software fraud/deception....before the company can demonstrate software that is legal, in compliance, and hack resistant enough to be deemed secure.
What-the Fuck???? I want to <h3>Scream !!!</h3> Why am I surrounded by so many complacent sheep??? Aggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!

I don't care if 'I' win. Actually, the odds of there being a green president are miniscule. I've come to terms with that, and have moved on. However, it is when authoritarians come to power that I get pissed off. Authoritarians have no place in a democracy. I'm not saying an authoritarian government can't succede...it just won't work here.
Armed revolution does not imply that aa group of rebels will simply go toe to toe with the military. Even so, there is a rebellion going on right now that has almost no funding and seemingly no hope, and is holding it's own against the might of the US military. The fact of the matter is that the US military has an amazing track record against militaries of other governments, and a horrible track record against terrorist cells and insurgencies. Could I overthrow the government? If I wanted to, maybe. Could someone overthrow governmental control with the right motivation, intelect, and drive? Ask our founding fathers.
This is obviously a fringe group that has no support from the 'liberals' of this country. Revolution is far too exreme and costly, not to mention it's not necessary. Bush will be out of office soon, and then will be the best time for the 'liberals' to gather our strength and show our support at the ballot boxes.

Hey host:

http://gazette.net/stories/030306/po...47_31942.shtml
http://www.gazette.net/stories/02170...12_31948.shtml
These are both op-eds, but they are written by a Democrat protesting his party's policies in Maryland.

Just to show that it isn't necessarally a Republican/Neo-con/Bush-Big Brother consperacy when it comes to elections.

It looks as if this group has backed down
if it was ever a "real" group
the article has been pulled from the site

I did read it the other day
So it was posted by a third party on that site,
And it had a RSVP link...asking for name, address, ect.
Looked more like a Trolling for sedition
than a call to action.
I wouldn't be a bit supprised if everyone who filled out that RSVP
gets a visit from the local branch of DHS.

If it were "real"....asking the UN for help?
That dooms it all to failure right there.

djtestudo, I appreciate that you made the effort to read my post and to respond. You were "up front" about your linked articles. They are, as you said "op-eds". I try to avoid posting "op-eds" when I am on the opposite side of an argument with someone who confines their links to news reports.

I want other readers to compare your description of the author of the "op-eds" that you linked to, with this blurb, and the WaPo editorial aimed at Gov. Ehrlich (below). Could the op-eds author be motivated by his develpment interests?
I'll confine myself to offering some things for you to consider if you take the time to compare my argument to the documentation you offered to back your points. In Dec., 2000, candidate Gore lost the office of POTUS by no more than 600 votes in a questionable and recount, halted before it was completed by a verdict of the SCOTUS. The opposing candidate, GW Bush, enjoyed the fact that his brother was the governor of Florida, the state where the outcome of the contested vote would determine who would become POTUS.
To add insult to injury, the ultimate responsibility for fair election oversight in Florida was Fla. Sec. of State, Katherine Harris, who simultaneously held a conflicting interest in her role as the head of the Bush/Cheney Florida 2000 election campaign. Ms. Harris's integrity was suspect in the aftermath of the 2000 election.

This week, our worst fears and strongest negative suspicions about Katherine Harris being too partisan, unethical, and unscrupulous to oversee the Florida 2000 presidential vote in a fair and non-partisan manner (remember the "Felon's List" that kept thousands of voters off the election roles, in error?)
...are beginning to be confirmed, as Harris is tied to the same briber, Mitchell Wade, who Randy Cunningham swore in court, bribed him:

<h4>And...Harris "lawyers up" !!</h4>
Note here at campaign donation reporting site, http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/se...2002=Y&Order=N that fourteen checks of $2000 each, supposedly sent to Harris on the initiative of individual employees of Mitchell Wade's company, were all "donated" on the same day! The only other check came from Wade's wife, two weeks later. Mitchell Wade was the principle "briber" of Rep. Randy Cunningham, who was just sentenced to 100 months in a federal pen., yesterday!

The table here: http://www.opensecrets.org/politicia...882&cycle=2004
makes it clear that Mitchell Wade's MZM Corp., (Wade's employee's checks, illegally remimbursed later by Wade himself, and Wade's family...) was Harris's top 2004 contributor, with $50,000. The next highers was National Beer Wholesalers Assn.'s $20,000 to Harris.

Do even the repub apologists here, believe that Harris could receive 14 checks of $2000 each, on the same day, fronted as independent contributions from Wade's employees, who don't live anywhere near Florida, and then accept Harris saying that she did not know that Wade was not trading to purchase the influence of her elected office for MZM, as he had with Cunningham?

<b></djtestudo, the author of your op-ed columns has the following description. Could he be more than a citizen member of the opposite party who only wants MD Gov Ehrlich to receive a fair "shake"?</b>

Governor Ehrlich does not like the press coverage that he receives from the largest, oldest newspaper in his state. He attempted to censor the reporting of the Baltimore Sun by cutting off the access of it's reporters to MD state government.
That seems all the more foolish when you consider that the "Sun" is owned by the Tribune Corp, owner also of the LA Times. It is also foolish because the editors of the WaPo don't think very highly of Ehrlich and they publish bad things about him, too. He is also mired in the Abramoff slime. The NEWS article below reports that the Governor's $16,000 of Abramoff money came directly from Abramoff and his wife. Other money recipients named in the article received funds from Abramoff clients. The Repub. talking point attempts to persuade that money received from Abramoff's clients is as tainted as money given by Abramoff himself. Labeling an entity's money as "tainted", just because they retained Abramoff's lobbying services before he was indicted, doesn't seem a very Repub. thing to think, does it?
The above report, by the NY Times, declares that Gov. Ehrlich's Deputy COS Miller. was a go between in the funneling of $2.3 million to an "office" at the same California address as the law office of Robert Abramoff, Jack's brother. Mr. Miller, according to a WaPo NEWS reporter, <b>"For several months in 2003, Edward Miller was the registered agent for GrassRoots Interactive in Silver Spring before turning it over to a lobbying associate of Abramoff's"</b> This was the company that sent the $2.3 million to the Robert Abramoff address. Governor Ehrlich has vouched for Mr. Miller after these news reports were printed.

Question for you folks who take issue with nearly everything that I post? Do you hold any politician that you support to a standard that you can explain. Have all of you met Abramoff, and do all who post unflagging support for republican elected officials, know each other?

Well Host, yes I can see where you may be steamed about all the unfairness ect... I was not suggesting that I not be "lumped" in with all the rest of you, rather just not to group invidiualy minded people (like we all are) together into group's simply because it is easyeir for blame to be passed out that way. Because while many people are complacent, there are plenty who are not, and very few people think the same thoughts at the same time in the same way.

Sure there is plenty of inaction and unfairness in the country. If asked if in my opinion is that going to change I would have to reply that I dont believe that it will anytime soon, because it is well within human nature to manipulate all benifits of any said system.

Why does the goverment use code that is hackable? Because there are smart people that can manipulate options to any given benifit they choose.

Why do people do wrong things? Often because they can get away with it. It will likly allways be this way.

You where correct in that I should of prehape's challanged Timalkin and that my response to his post was not very productive, however, I did let me get to read the huge blocks of text and information that you just posted, thx.

Anyway do really think that voting anytime in the near future will be completly secure?

Ballets and voting scam's happen allmost all the time, and historicaly very numerously during election times. (go figure).

What do you think?

Seems like the place to ask this. Are we near a tipping point?
The Hayden appointment is exactly the wrong thing to do....unless it's a final test before all pretense of adherence to constitutional law, fair trials, and traditional rules of evidence are abandoned!
<b>I object</b> but....is it already too late to stop it?
<b>A unified message from the fascists, themselves, through one of their party propaganda "organs", das CNS:</b>
<h3>Uhhhh!!!! Let's Roll......hello?? hello??? anyone???....anybody awake?</h3>

host, if you want to lead the charge, have at it. I completely agree that there are some big problems out there right now, but the violent overthrow of the government is pointless and doomed to failure. Unless and until you can get the armed forces to side with you, any violent revolutionary attempts in this country are going to be stamped out with equal or greater force, with the rebels being label terrorists or worse. Any 2nd Amendment rights "exercises" that you have are pretty powerless against a tank or a plane. At this point, the only logical path that one could take to upturn the Constitution by violent means is to follow the example of the Bolsheviks and agitate in the armed forces and behind the scenes in the seats of power. Good luck with that - make sure your life insurance is paid up.

first off, the claims and arguments that there is no civilian force on this earth that could possibly beat the military might of the US government is patently false. Not only does it discount the will of people, it also throws the advantage of numbers out the window for people that choose to believe otherwise.

I repeat, it would only take 10% of the population of this country to take up arms and the government would crumble.

The military numbers around 4 million, at most, maybe 5 million when you include national guard AND all law enforcement personnel in the mix.

10% of the population, of capable combat status, would number around 13 million to 18 million, and thats not including women. If you take women in to the account, you now have more than 20 million people, armed.

Those who think that one unit with tanks would wipe out that entire force, think again. Explosives work wonders. There are ways to not only defeat tanks, but also to use them afterwards. There are thousands of ex military types out there who know how to fix tanks, fly planes, make explosive ordnance, and all of them would be willing to put that knowledge and skill to use for freedom from tyranny.

Do not underistimate the will and might of an armed civilian force. The British did...twice.

When you talk about going against the military with an armed civilian force, well you're talking about attacking civilians' brothers and sisters. It wouldn't get anywhere, it wouldn't happen. Don't let me in on any discussion cause I'd drop the dime so fast...

Actually, the subject is going against the government, not the military. Now, i'm not trying to obfuscate the issue because we all know that the goverment would then have to employ the military against us so as far as it not going anywhere......I don't know where or how far it would actually go.

you'd drop the dime so fast? stevo, I know that you're a die hard republican fan and support George Bush, but I have to ask you, would you feel the same way if Hillary Clinton was president, Pelosi was speaker, Harry Ried became majority leader, and then they immediately passed legislation to confiscate all privately owned firearms and instead of giving some sort of 'amnesty' or grace period, just started sending paramilitary LE units and raided homes?

This is not the way to argue against someone else.

If you feel insulted, please report the post to a mod. It is not an opportunity to post an insult back.

Two day ban.

:lol:

The politics board is now mostly indistinguishable from the parinoia board because of two people, one who only posts on one forum here. Nice guys.

Thats not quite what's going on here. You're the most outspoken member on TFP for the 2nd amendment. I support and agree with you, there. But host isn't talking about a retaliation because of the appeal of 2nd amendment rights, he's talking about an armed revolution because of bush's policies. I would not support an armed revolution due to any freely elected leader's policies.

The picture you just raised is different. If they sent people home to home to collect individual's fire arms, yes there would be bloodshed, and thats not something I could argue against. But I think what you have just stated and what host has in mind are completely different.

I get it now. I'm mixing up two conversations. my apologies. :thumbsup:

Not to worry stevo, they already......<b>know!</b>

my point wasn't to be some kind of stand alone hero, but to let you know that if I would be willing to inform authorities, that I'm sure millions and millions of others would be as well.

Again....dontcha <b>Get it????</b> They already know !!! They know who you call...how often....and how long your conversations are! Can't you see the implications? They did this illegal "data mining" and ANALYSIS during the last presidential election campaign, stevo.

We didn't have reports of NSA warrantless domestic wiretapping until the NY Times broke the story last December, after they sat on the report for a year, at the request of the Bush administration.

We didn't have this linking of the December reporting, until yesterday:
...and we didn't have this looming....
What we did have is one party rule. There is no authority for anyone but republicans in DC to call hearings, launch congressional investigations, subpoena anyone, and....only republicans control the DOJ policy and oversight, and they also enjoy a SCOTUS majority. No need to "drop a dime" stevo! Welcome to the police state that you voted for, and openly advocate.
Here are some hints:
<b>stevo...</b> when the preceding reports about Bolton and his failure to get confirmed by the senate as U.S. ambassador to the UN came out nearly a year ago, the NY Times and USA Today had not disclosed the warrantless wire tapping and data mining that we now know they are conducting. Did'nt you think it was odd that Bolton could not get confirmed by the republican senate majority? Apparently even a few republicans were "creeped out" enough by what they learned about Bolton's requests for "names" from the NSA, to withdraw support for his confirmation....

Armed insurection has always worked so well against the American government, I'm surprised that more people haven't tried it.

Seriously, numbers mean nothing in this kind of conflict. It would be nothing but a slaughter. A force of 3,000,000 trained professionals with modern arms would completely tear apart 20,000,000 unorganized irregulars with only sidearms. I'm sorry, but I can't imagine any realistic scenario where rebels would emerge victorious. There are reasons why 100,000 Germans held off 2,000,000 Soviets at Stalingrad for 6 months. Any rebeling force would be disorganized at best and a mob in its most likely incarnation. You can't tell me that a highly organized, trained rebel army is going to spontaneous arise from nowhere in this country.

guys, with all thats going on, 3 things will happen....

So many leaks and stories will come out that will without a doubt prove the bush admin broke the law and

a) The republican majorities, in order to keep their majority, will impeach and convict bush, cheney, and anyone else involved, and hope that the american people will acknowledge and accept that the republicans disciplined their own,

b) The republican majority will convince Bush to resign (ala Nixon) in order to save the partys face, and start billboarding their ignorance that Bush was breaking the law and hope for the best,

c) The republican majority will do anything and everything necessary to stifle, block, and classify any and all information proving Bush broke the law, pass whatever they need to criminalize anyone who discloses, investigate anyone who discloses, and basically start the police state type crackdown,

d) do absolutely nothing and hope for the best.

It doesn't matter what they do, it's what WE do.

three words - warsaw ghetto uprising

they didn't emerge victorious, but for one month they held off the germans and they did it with a few sidearms and the weapons they confiscated off of the dead nazi's.

it can be done. will it succeed in a few short days, weeks, or months? absolutely not. It would be a conflict that would take years and be won by attrition.

And people wonder why terrorists do what they do. If there were to be an armed resistence, it would be what is now known as terrorism. There would not be massive civilian armies a la Revolutionary war. There would be blacked out terrorist (or rebel) cells located all over the country. The military could find some of them, but never all of them. These cells would carry out totally independant attacks on government and military targets randomly (which is why I couldn't be directly involved: I don't kill people). Eventually the president and key government figures would go into hiding, martial law would be declaired, and things would get pretty bad for a while. Secret arrests and murders would turn many American citizens against the government, and then the rebelion would gain more and more support. Eventually it'll be a shrinking military vs. a very big rebelion. Then again, maybe the Republicans will grow balls and stand up to their BS leadership. One can only hope.

You're presupposing a level of organization that I just find impossible given the state of technology today and the level of surveillance that goes with it. I find it impossible to believe that a grass-roots rebellion could get to the level of sophistication that you're implying without the government swooping in and arresting the majority of the conspirators.

It would all gain momentum jazz, eventually people would get wise and see that the government is not arresting terrorists or rebels, but are actively persecuting american citizens. it would/could happen. the sad thing about this is twofold

1) the death toll would be absolutely horrendous. we're talking millions, maybe even tens of millions.

2) in order to prevent this kind of genocide, the populace would have to be disarmed in some way.......oh wait, they're already doing that. hmmmmm

OK, color me confused. If the government is actively arresting those who are plotting the violent overthrow of the government, how do those folks NOT qualify as terrorists or rebels? It seems by their very definition they would be at least be rebels. There is specific language in the Constitution that allows the government to protect itself from insurrection, and anyone planning to violently overthrow the government would, fundamentally, be a rebel. Yes, they would still be American citizens, but they're no more worthy of Constitutional rights than a common criminal. In fact, they would only deserve those rights that criminals are afforded.

I agree that if an organized insurrection somehow magically appeared on the scene, the death toll would be horrendous. However, it's not going to appear out of thin air, would likely not be very organized, and would certainly be doomed to failure from the very start. Air superiority alone would dictate that most of the rebels wouldn't survive the initial attack, and you're presupposing an American government that's so vastly unpopular with its citizens that a significant minority decide to risk their lives, comfort and livelyhood to rebel. So long as Americans are placated with cheap goods, readily available entertainment and the ability to live their lives largely as they see fit, no rebellion is imminent. There will always be fringe groups unhappy with the status quo, but personally I file them all under "nut jobs". No offense intended.

Sure, but you're forgetting the relatively recent improvements in guerrilla warfare. A significant and intelligent enough minority would simply blend in with the population (and this is really because they actually represent the population), and possibly begin disrupting the means by which the rest of the citizens can be drugged to such levels of complacency.

Furthermore by blending in with the population (because they are a part of the population) and making it hard to distinguish between rebels and average citizens, the government would have a tough time trying to do their thing right. Eventually they might arrest a citizen for nothing, or they might arrest a rebel who appeared to the rest of the population to look like a citizen.

Such things would really put into question the legitimacy of the government.


Yeah, I know what I said begs the question and sounds fucking insane. But I just wanted to demonstrate to you that insurgency can be a force made impossible to defeat- for both the right and wrong reasons.

I agree that it would have to be something even more major than what is currently going on to incite a violent overthrow of the government. The actually asked if you have attempted or supported the 'violent' ovrthrow of the government on the security clearance questionaire... So I don't support a French revolution style overthrow because it will never work. The_Jazz is right, the FBI, local cops, state cops, national guard and regular military would be able to take out anybody causing trouble. They could get the media to not report about it, or spin it like they always do. This is sounding more and more like this event if anybody tries this.

http://www.cnd.org/HYPLAN/yawei/june4th/
(Banned in China)

What I would worry about is an attack on the rich & religious from the poor. Basically, the main Republican voters are the rich white guys and the extremely religious ones. So, if we have a civil war, that would be one way to eliminate enough of the voters of the opposite party so your guy wins in the next election.

I would have to trust that even a very Republican Congress (Or Democratic one if the Dems have the Presidency), would be strong enough to oust the President if they do something really bad. If for instance Bush called for the imprisonation and execution of all Muslims in the US and abroad. There would be major protests, but they would get arrested too. I don't know what actions the general populance could take against this government besides asking for help from a foreign country. Or moving to one.

Dk, I understand your passion for reclaiming the government of "we the people," but my personal experience of our history tells me that a more effective revolution is possible.

Please recall the anti-war and civil rights militants of our past. They were certainly destructive and got a great deal of press for that reason, but they ultimately failed in garnering main stream support. That support is absolutely necessary in making a fundamental change in government decisions. I believe the militants did more harm than good in prompting government change.

The other more likely avenue for change is civil protest, and sometimes civil disobedience. Don't you find it remarkable the amount of press a few anti-war grandmothers have had? There is a sea change occuring now that should be obvious to most. The abuses of this administration are being condemned by conservatives and progressives alike, which gives "we the people" more power than has existed in our current one party system. Both sides will be scrambling for every vote, and lets make them earn each one.

Dk, "we the people" have the opportunity to exercise our power within the law. I advocate that approach and I hope you will agree after considering our history.

I don't think we are anywhere close to worrying about an armed revolution yet. When it comes I would expect the young men and women in the military to resist shooting their fellow citizens.

Our country came close to breaking up once in our short history. I hope if it comes to this again that the breakup can be accomplished without much bloodshed maybe something like the recent Soviet Union breakup. I guess it will depend on how adament the feds are to maintain power.

I guess our original freedom fighters were considered terrorists by those who wished to continue to rule them.

Elphaba, I wanna believe, but these are just the links to May 12 news reports of the Diebold & Sequoia E-Voting equipment sham:
<div class="list"><li>NAtional: Diebold - Voting machine security flaws uncovered <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=3025" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>NAtional: Diebold - Diebold voting systems critically flawed <a href="http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11391" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>NAtional: Diebold - New Fears of Security Risks in Electronic Voting Systems <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/12/us/12vote.html?_r=1&oref=slogin" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>NAtional: Diebold - Reversing Course on Electronic Voting <a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB114739688261250925-q5rh2ocioxu6mgjmS6bZPCZL0HY_20060610.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>NAtional: Diebold - Wall Street Journal Covers E-Voting Train Wreck <a href="http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002816.htm" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>NAtional: Diebold – NY Times on New Diebold Touch-Screen Security Disaster! <a href="http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002817.htm" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>NAtional: Diebold - States Beef Up E-Voting Security After Report on Weaknesses <a href="http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/8ORCZwsBUtfng4/States-Beef-Up-E-Voting-Security-After-Report-on-Weaknesses.xhtml" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>NAtional: Diebold - On Electronic Voting: We Were Always Right, They Were Always Wrong... <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-friedman/on-electronic-voting-we-_b_20890.html" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>MD: Diebold - Experts see new Diebold flaw. They call it worst security glitch to date in state's voting machines and a 'big deal' <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-md.voting12may12,0,618610.story?coll=bal-local-headlines" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>MD: Diebold - Experts Warn of New Security Flaw in Voting Machines <a href="http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=25&sid=789288" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>UT: Diebold - Hacker's Report Claims Vote Outcomes At-Risk <a href="http://www.kcpw.org/article/649" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>AR: Baxter and Marion Counties - Train Wreck - Election officials are still holding out hope for touchscreen voting (ES&S) <a href="http://www.baxterbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060512/NEWS01/605120321/1002" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>FL: Train Wreck - DIEBOLD DISASTERS CONTINUE: Company Ships Uncertified Machines, Software to 5 Florida Counties! <a href="http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002821.htm" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>FL: Train Wreck - Touch-screen voting devices not certified (Diebold TSx) <a href="http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/News/Local/newEAST01POLL1051206.htm" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>FL: Train Wreck - Five Florida counties get uncertified voting machines <a href="http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/breaking_news/14564485.htm" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>NJ: Essex County – Train Wreck - Sequoia and Essex County-The Outrage Continues <a href="http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1277&Itemid=113" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>TX: Comal County – Train Wreck - Software delay sends Comal voters to paper (ES&S) <a href="http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA051206.05B.e-voting.21495238.html" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>WV: Jefferson County – Train Wreck - Bad ballots created headaches for election officials <a href="http://www.herald-mail.com/?module=displaystory&story_id=137899&format=html" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>CA: Santa Clara County - Paper trail to track June vote (Sequoia) <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/14559722.htm" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>CO: Denver - Auditor challenges voting machine purchase (Sequoia) <a href="http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/elections/article/0,2808,DRMN_24736_4691505,00.html" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>CO: Denver - City auditor: No deal for voting machines <a href="http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4693390,00.html" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>FL: Palm Beach County - Elections panel recommends use of paper trail <a href="http://www.palmbeachpost.com/politics/content/local_news/epaper/2006/05/12/s3b_elex_0512.html" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>FL: Palm Beach County - County panel recommends paper trail for elections <a href="http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/palmbeach/sfl-pelections12may12,0,4455646.story?coll=sfla-news-palm" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>FL: Volusia County - Volusia still lacks way to verify votes <a href="http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/Opinion/Editorials/opnOPN15051206.htm" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>IL: eSlate watchers California-bound (Hart) <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/west/chi-0605120221may12,1,989809.story?coll=chi-newslocalwest-hed" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>MN: Winona County - Grants, county to cover voting machine costs (AutoMark) <a href="http://www.winonadailynews.com/articles/2006/05/12/news/05voting.txt" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>NY: Dutchess County - Paper ballot use pushed <a href="http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060512/NEWS01/605120328/1006" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>NY: Dutchess County - Group pushes for paper ballots in Dutchess <a href="http://www.midhudsonnews.com/News/DC_votingMach-12May06.htm" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>PA: Counties warned of security glitch in machines (Diebold) <a href="http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06132/689559-85.stm" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>PA: Bucks County - Use of old voting machines may cost Bucks $1 million <a href="http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/states/pennsylvania/counties/philadelphia_county/philadelphia/14558512.htm" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>PA: Lancaster County - County's 550 new voting machines ready for debut (Hart eSlat and eScan) <a href="http://local.lancasteronline.com/4/22658" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>PA: Schuylkill County - Schuylkill voters to put down pencils to cast ballots. County readies for Tuesday's election with electronics not paper. <a href="http://www.mcall.com/news/local/lehighton/all-b1_1machinesmay12,0,1990617.story?coll=all-newslocallehighton-hed" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>TX: Denton County - Voters take to electronic voting <a href="http://www.courier-gazette.com/articles/2006/05/12/little_elm_journal/news/news27.txt" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>TX: Tarrant County - Tarrant merges polling places <a href="http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/local/14562627.htm" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>UT: Some rural areas heading for mail-only voting <a href="http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/178540/4/" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>WV: Opinion - A hit – and a miss <a href="http://www.register-herald.com/opinion/local_story_131230710.html?keyword=topstory" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a></li><br /><br /><li>WV: Editorials: West Virginians have had enough (Voter Fraud) <a href="http://www.dailymail.com/news/Opinion/200605121/" target="_blank"><i>LINK</i></a>
********************************
This is the result of the sham "voting reform act of 2002", HAVA:
IMO, the deadline requirements for local purchasing of new E-Vote machines were intended to block competition of "start-ups" who may have responded, given enough time, by designing and manufacturing voting systems that could easily compete with, and wrest contracts from Diebold and Sequoia....

Instead....the following is typical, it will still be the same around the country in November, I fear....and when the polls close, the same thugs who control the federal government today, will control it....exit poll results....be damned!
Elphaba...how the *uck could the voting machines of both principle manufacturers be so *ucked up in mid-2006. This isn't rocket science. It almost has to be this way, by intent....

If I'm right, what's the back up plan? I've talked about it before.....do some of us pick straws daily....to see whose turn it is to throw themselves under the wheels of Dick Cheney's limo...everytime it leaves his residence or office, until the streets are so caked with blood and guts that he and Bush "get the message"....or select less obvious vehicles to transport themselves in ?

You missed my point. The trick to beating a powerful military with exceptional intelligence is to have no central organization, and to basically be dark 100% of the time. If, for example, I wanted to incite an armed rebelion against the current administration (btw, NSA, if you're reading this, welcome to TFP! Feel free to join up and please join us in the discussion. Also, I have no plans to overthrow the government. I'm a pretty peaceful guy.), I would go about my busniess. Every once in a while I would purchase things like styrofoam and gasoline (for napalm). There are thousands of government buildings in California. I know that many of them do not have security durring the night. Boom. I also know where Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, General Dynamics, United Technologies, Science Applications International Corporation, Health Net, and many other US weapons manufacturers do their dirty work. I'm pretty sure they're all in the yellow pages. I could probably destroy 3-4 buildings in a few hours and make a serious statement. Would it have any effect? Not really. The US military is armed to the teeth. The point would be that there are people out there willing to do what it takes to see that (insert complaint about government here). It's really wquite simple. The al Qaeda is a perfect example. Terrorism is an incredibly powerful, cheap and effective tool against what would normally be an invincable foe. Can you imagine Palestine trying to beat Israel military to military? A bit one sided. Yet, we see horrible things like bombs strapped to people going off in crowded supermarkets. Is it right? Of course not. Is it effective? Damn straight.

If, and this is a big if, someone wanted to overthrow the government badly enough, one would only need to become a one man terrorist cell. If enough people become one man cells, then you have a successful rebelion.

Don't get me wrong, when I discussed 'millions' of deaths, I'm scared that it would come to that. With that end in mind, I'm all for trying every available non-violent, non-lethal' method.

As alot of people have claimed, the 2A is the reset button, to be used as a totally last resort.

to further stress the chaos that only a handful of people can cause, take a look at the north hollywood shootout. two guys with auto's held two dozen police at bay. Now, most police departments have auto's, SWAT paramilitary units, etc. but those take time to deploy. A quick explosion for diversion, an ambush hit by 3-4 armed with automatics, and dash.

If 5,000 rioting people can force the police and national guard to hold back from an area for a few days, imagine what a guerilla strike team can accomplish with surprise.