Looks like Obomber is going to use today's shooting to create a constitutional crisis

[AsheSkyler]

Heheh, it's a wonder my own mother wasn't charged with a BS crime. People didn't appreciate that I was energetic and wanted me drugged up instead of letting me romp outside when I had no homework or chores. Would you believe I had a social worker jumping up and down at me and accusing ME of being a child abuser just because I made a nurse respect my privacy?

I'm all for any video saying government and their lackeys should just butt-out and let people raise them and their kids how they best see fit.

[eye_of_the_storm]

Obomber = Barack Ohbummer - United States Empire Supreme Leader and Nobel War Prize Winner ( BTW that prize is dynamite! )

 

The claim that people go on a killing spree because it is considered glamorous is absurd. The media has always acted like it does regarding violence, and there have always been violent thriller movies and such. Fiddling with symptoms will only mask the real problem, and that's what society does all the time. They're in denial and don't want to take responsibility. It's classical immaturity.

Also, I almost had to laugh at the TV show there consulting a psychiatrist who then gave the advice to make the reports boring. Problem solved, haha. Setriously, psychiatry is highly questionable because it violates so many scientific principles, and psychiatry is light years away from psychology, especially when goverment-appointed. Psychiatrists are licensed drug pushers for maintaining the dominant order, and there are interesting studies that show how the doctors in psychiatric clinics are the ones acting irrationally and like psychotic sociopaths.

 

As usual, the real causes are suppressed in the corporate media. I highly recommend the following video for some examples of what is kept from the mass public:

The Drugging of our Children

One very shocking example from that documentary is the fact that when a caring mother doesn't want her child to be forced into taking mind-numbing drugs for making it more obedient and controllable, she is accused - the mother - of kidnapping her own child and then the government will kidnap her child and hide him from her. This is severe tyranny. And as history repeats itself, it is possible because the masses are uninformed, fed with bullshit propaganda, and they want it that way.

 

Excellent post!

 

The doco I posted "The War on Kids" (Off Topic)

 

goes into this fairly well too

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/26590-the-war-on-kids/

 

man, things are bad...

Edited January 20, 2013 by White Wolf Running On Air

[joeblast]

Continuing the war on kids....

 

Guest Post: Kindergartner Suspended For "Bubble-Gun Terrorism"

Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market blog,

Now obviously, anyone with any common sense would react to this story with immediate shock and disbelief. The 5 year old child merely discussed "shooting bubbles" with a bubble gun she didn't even have with her, and she is immediately suspended? How does this compute? Have school districts gone completely insane? Actually, I believe they are quite aware and cognizant of what they are doing...

"A 5-year-old girl was suspended from school earlier this week after she made what the school called a "terrorist threat."

Her weapon of choice? A small, Hello Kitty automatic bubble blower.

The kindergartner, who attends Mount Carmel Area Elementary School in Pennsylvania, caught administrators' attention after suggesting she and a classmate should shoot each other with bubbles..."

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/01/kindergartner-suspended-over-bubble-gun-threat/

Teachers and school administrators attend educational seminars (propaganda seminars) just like law enforcement, social workers, and most other state employees. They are given "action plans" and memo's on "suspicious behavior". They are trained to create very specific environmental conditions within their classrooms. Do they understand the full implications of their behavior towards their students? Probably not. But they are aware that they are implementing an educational regime designed to condition out certain behaviors and ideas in the children they teach.

I remember well the DARE program from my early years, which taught us that drug possession was paramount to murder and that it was okay to turn in one's own parents for usage because it would "save their lives". I also remember the constant drone of environmentalism (some of which was legitimate, but most of it nonsense), which taught us the evils of humanity and "overpopulation", as well as the horrors that awaited us in the year 2000 (including the complete disappearance of fresh drinking water. I guess they missed the mark on that one...).

There is in fact a longstanding tradition within American public schools of manipulation. Hell, let's just call it what it really is: Brainwashing!

In 2013, little has changed accept the subject matter. Today, children are being trained with fear and shame to despise the very idea of firearms. Not only the misuse of firearms, but the concept of firearms ownership for ANY person. It is also no mistake that school officials chose the word "terrorist" when describing the Kindergarten girl.

I recently wrote an article covering the suggestion by Reuters gun control advocates (among others) that public schools be "forced" to institute anti-gun propaganda by the federal government using the threat of funding cuts:

http://www.alt-market.com/articles/1231-gun-grabbers-call-for-re-education-programs-in-public-schools

They were quite bold and open with the purpose of this re-education curriculum; to breed out the American gun culture by browbeating our children. The problem is, this was already going on for years before Sandy Hook; they have only picked up the pace since.

School children across the country are now being suspended for toy guns, games with gun imagery, and even pointing their fingers as if using a gun:

http://www.kvue.com/news/Child-suspended-for-using-finger-as-imaginary-gun-187349051.html

This is not just a "zero tolerance policy" on the part of school officials. This is a concerted and directed effort to frighten children away from the whole of American gun culture using negative reinforcement. Like Pavlov's Dog, which was taught to salivate at the sound of a bell, America's youngest generation is being taught to cringe at the mention of firearms. Anti-gun proponents will argue that is is not necessarily a "bad thing" to teach children to shy away from guns, however, regardless of the subject matter, it is NOT the job of the government or government employees to implant their personal world views into the minds of our kids. It is not their job to inject their personal biases into America's youth. Character development is the job of the parent and the child together. Period. The state should never be allowed to play middle-man and dictate philosophical and political ideals to anyone, especially the young, impressionable, and fragile. Once this methodology becomes acceptable to the public, it will never end, for if the government is allowed to choreograph the thought processes of school kids in one area, then why not eventually tell them how to think in ALL areas?

[Owledge]

And many US Americans are still to busy calling the Chinese and North Korean government evil. No time looking at the own government.

From the top down there will only be more crap with the current power structures. It's unavoidable to practice civil disobedience. If people can get along on a local level, person-to-person, and the more distanced it becomes, the more messed up, then what's required is more local self-administration. There's one problem though: You could call that Communism, haha.

I'm wondering whether people are aware that most families have an internal socialist rule.

 

Regarding civil disobdience: Encourage ALL kids to use any kind of gun symbology they can think of. This will make the indoctrination system go batshit crazy, and that's what's needed to wake people up.

Edited January 22, 2013 by Owledge

[AsheSkyler]

I've read of kindergarteners up to fifth graders being suspended or even expelled for bringing a GI Joe 2" plastic gun for Show And Tell, bringning a water gun to school, pointing a chicken bone at another kid and saying "bang", kissing one another on the cheek, hugging each other, singing a song, shaving a person's face into their hair, saying their teacher was cute, and passing out candy.

And one teenager for "breaking dress code" by growing his hair so Locks For Love could make a wig for his sister who had cancer.

 

And to think, when my parents were growing up it was quite common to have your hunting rifles mounted in your truck while you were at school. Of course, they also told me that if anybody had a beef to settle, they'd just brawl it out and never once think of reaching for a knife or gun.

[joeblast]

Last night, a feller asked me:
Why would you need more than seven rounds in a magazine?
(Well, it was actually “bullets in a clip,” but we’ll overlook that ignorant faux pas.)

 

My answer was shorter, but this would’a been the long version:
Well, that depends …
• Do I have additional magazines at hand? Will I have time to reload?
(It takes me 2sec to reload from a pouch, 5sec standing from a loose pocket.)
• What weapon and ammo am I using?
(Lower-power cartridges require more hits to stop an attack.)
• How good of a shot am I under pressure?
(The range ain’t “pressure.” Do I have any real-world experience?)
• What is the ambient visibility?
(Can’t hit effectively, if I can’t see clearly: darkness, smoke, light in eyes, etc.)
• What is my physiological situation?
(Glasses off, contacts out? Sweat? Sleeping pill? Flu? Had a few drinks? Adrenaline pumped? Wounded?)
• What is my psychological situation?
(Calm? Afraid? Terrified? Concerned for family members? Panicked? Frozen? Fetal position?)
• Can I employ a good, practiced firing posture?
(One-handed, weak-side, lying on my back, or crouched ain’t very accurate.)
• How many friendlies?
(If there’s another armed defender, can we divvy-up the work?)
• How many attackers?
(Budget: 3 effective hits from 6+ shots per customer under pressure. Worse if more than one target at a time.)
• Could there be more targets than I know about?
(When you’re out of ammo, surprises are baad, m’kay?)
• Are they insane, angry, or on drugs?
(Even more good or crippling hits may be needed.)
• Are they armed? With what?
(Being shot at reduces one’s marksmanship considerably, and firing from cover/concealment affects accuracy.)
• Are they exposed?
(The target’s cover/concealment makes it more difficult to get effect hits.)
• Are they aggressive?
(If I need to stop an aggressive attack, then I need to shoot a lot more.)
• What are they wearing?
(Some clothing reduces the effectiveness of some bullet types.)
• What is the background?
(If it’s not safe to miss, then I need to fire carefully and accurately.)
• Is the attack channeled?
(Can I depend on a narrow field of fire, or do I need to cover a broad area?)
• Can I escape?
(If my exit is blocked or risky, or if I have to protect family, then I may need to stay and fight it out.)
• Do I need to get to another room to protect family?
(I may need to lay down suppressive fire to move through an exposed area.)
• How long will it take for help to arrive?
(If I can even call 9-1-1 before the fight is over, what’s the response time?)
• What is my strategy?
(Have I thought this through ahead of time, or will this be a total goat-rope?)
• Will the attackers flee?
(Dunno, but hoping they will ain’t a strategy.)
• etc.

 

The answer is none of any body else’s danged business (especially not the government’s),

 

and I won’t know the real answer until the fight is over.

Let’s just hope that the answer isn’t, “More than they allowed me to have.“

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

In response to Ashe: we need to return to the sense of self sufficency and personal responsibility that those old day mentalities came from.

Edited January 23, 2013 by Northern Avid Judo Ant

[AsheSkyler]

I agree, Zen Nomad, whole-heartedly. But, man, this is America! Land of the Free-to-Finger-Point, home of the Not-So-Brave-to-Accept-Personal-Responsibility. Maybe the day that changes, we can expect to see the psychotic violence drop.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

might take extreme, concentrated, harmful object/substance/element/intended psychotic violence before people open their eyes to see what is and is not necessary to conduct successful and productive life/lives...


Hate to/love to be the one to "quote/unquoteDo it.[/unquote]"... or something like that.

[eye_of_the_storm]

Edited January 24, 2013 by White Wolf Running On Air

[joeblast]

So is anyone else surprised that Feinstein's Nazi-copy gun bill bill exempts...

-government workers, of course

-police, active & retired

 

and conspicuously absent,

 

military, retired or otherwise. (of course you get to use actual assault weapons if you're active an in such a role, but beyond that...? not seeing anything.)

 

Keep that protected class protected! Any wonder those with a complete lock on rule making, make rules favorable to themselves...

[Aetherous]

I could understand their argument for police and military. Those people aren't really in a higher class...they are considered public servants (or government pawns) and are considered lower class. Their job typically requires firearms.

But government workers? What a joke that woman is.

If this country were run correctly, anyone attempting to infringe on a right that says "shall not be infringed" would be imprisoned for life, at the very least.

[joeblast]

that's part of it, where's the military in there? apparently if you're retired military, you're in that group of people they'd rather disparage since they tend to have more affinity for the constitution than the crop of liars & thieves we have making our rules these days.

[Aetherous]

Ah, now I see what you said. Yep, best not to arm people that swore an oath to defend the Constitution against domestic enemies.

[gendao]

So is anyone else surprised that Feinstein's Nazi-copy gun bill bill exempts...

-government workers, of course

-police, active & retired

 

and conspicuously absent,

 

military, retired or otherwise. (of course you get to use actual assault weapons if you're active an in such a role, but beyond that...? not seeing anything.)

 

Keep that protected class protected! Any wonder those with a complete lock on rule making, make rules favorable to themselves...

Meanwhile...

Conn. massacre records secret, media seeks access

 

authorities are continuing to keep search warrants and police records secret. Media outlets have pressed for the release of more records

 

Prosecutor Stephen Sedensky III successfully argued in December to keep search warrant affidavits and applications related to Lanza's house and the car he drove to the school sealed for 90 days, saying disclosure would jeopardize an ongoing investigation.

 

News media advocates say the records should be unsealed, arguing the public has a right to see such records, which include what was found in the house and car. They say records may be sealed only when an investigation would be hurt by disclosure.

 

"There seems to be absolutely no reason that they would need to. It's not going to jeopardize the case in any way," said Linda Petersen, chairwoman of the Freedom of Information Committee of the Society of Professional Journalists.

 

William Fish, an attorney who has represented the news media in high-profile cases that were sealed in Connecticut, also said the sealing does not appear justified since no prosecution is likely. He conceded, however, that "it's not a surprise to me that a court has in fact sealed the records just because it's so horrible."

Newtown police denied requests by The Associated Press for 911 calls and any police reports involving Lanza or his family. State police also declined to release records, citing the pending investigation.

 

In an editorial last week, The Hartford Courant said such records should be released sooner, not later, since they might answer the public's questions about the murders and could guide legislators making policy decisions in reaction to the crime.

 

Richard Hanley, graduate journalism director at Quinnipiac University, said he understood the 90-day sealing while the investigation unfolded but said there should be no extension of that sealing.

 

"This was a case that had a profound impact on people beyond the immediate area and it will have a profound impact on public policy," Hanley said Monday. "It's imperative that the authorities release the full investigative records, the 911 calls and other documents relative to this slaughter, because the overriding interest is the public's right to know."

 

Sedensky, the prosecutor, noted that authorities have disclosed details about the weapons used in the shooting: a Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle was used to kill the children and educators and a handgun to kill himself. He said he advised Newtown officials not to disclose the 911 calls.

Holder: Yep, Obama could kill Americans on U.S. soil

President Barack Obama has the legal authority to unleash deadly force—such as drone strikes—against Americans on U.S. soil without first putting them on trial, Attorney General Eric Holder wrote in a letter released Tuesday.

 

Paul had asked the Obama administration on Feb. 20 whether the president "has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil and without trial." On Tuesday, he denounced Holder's response as “frightening” and “an affront to the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans.”

 

Paul, whose office released the letter, denounced the attorney general’s comments.

 

"The U.S. Attorney General's refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening—it is an affront the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans," the senator said in a statement.

 

The exchange came as the White House agreed to give Senate Intelligence Committee members access to all of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel opinions justifying Obama's expanded campaign of targeted assassination of suspected terrorists overseas, including American citizens.

[chi 2012]

I quit a full time job on an Air Force base in 2007 - because our base was switching from KC 135's to Predator Drones. I didn't want to spend my days doing busy work waiting for the transition - so I quit. Drones are just another step in Air Force evolution. Nothing to get paranoid about. It's still safe to leave the house and walk outside in the U.S..

[Owledge]

Nothing to get paranoid about. It's still safe to leave the house and walk outside in the U.S..

Not for long, especially with that attitude. (In some cases, it's not even safe not to leave the house.)

The advantage of drones is that your dictatorship doesn't have to rely on hiring sociopaths for enforcement. There might be a lack of those. Drones are perfectly loyal, no matter what you tell them to do. No more risk of individual soldiers refusing illegal orders. Also, playing 'robot assault' on a computer monitor can be done with only minimally sociopathic personnel.

Also, no more fear factor of subjecting yourself to mortal danger. It's a bit like non-lethal weapons like tasers or LTL ammo: You don't have to worry about killing civilians - just fire at will. And while they in fact CAN be lethal, we all know that for many people truth is in the name, not in reality.

 

Seriously, looking at all that's happening right now and comparing it to historical events, there's absolutely no reason not to be worried or at least vigilant and defiant. It's textbook prelude to tyranny.

 

But hey - you have nothing to worry if you don't have anything to hide, right? ... Like, say, a jew in your basement. Your own fault if you do.

Never again! ... LOL

Edited March 6, 2013 by Owledge

[chi 2012]

Did you ever look into Spiral Dynamics like I mentioned before? Drone bombings make it easier to fight pockets of "red"(Terrorism). Here's Ken Wilber using spiral dynamics to explain the Iraq War - fighting "Red".

http://www.integralworld.net/iraq2.html

[Owledge]

Wow, the guy talks a lot in drawers, concepts and jargon to express things that are not new. It seems all his talk about second tier means little more than what the word "wisdom" and its spawns describe. Like drawing a picture for those who don't get the words or inherent wisdom.

The problem I see with the color-coding is that it is an incentive to think in drawers instead of just seeing what is. In the linked text, he's already doing that to a great degree. It's one of so many attempts to make the world simpler for someone who is uncomfortable with a more complex world-view. But ironically, in its outcome this reverses simplicity and complexity.

 

Also, his idea of an enlightened world governance - well, that's nice, but the path towards that is a different thing. That's the perpetual struggle in the world. I think it would be healthy to have less interdependance between countries, because interdependance is used as a control and oppression tool.

 

The most important work is to be done on a personal level, by helping people to get the courage and strength to face fears and thus overcome them. And a 'World Federation' (if one aspires to that idea) is not going to bring about this, but we need this to bring about a World Federation.

 

 

That said, please elaborate on what you mean in your last posting. What message are you trying to convey and on what assumptions is your statement based?

The reality of foreign politics does not fit into the color coding system if one doesn't know the reality. This is evidenced in Wilber's statement: "There is no mistaking Mr. Bush's values: they are essentially blue-to-orange." No mistaking, eh? ... Bush (as a person) fits a lot better into red. (Since he wasn't a dictator, the foreign policy result is more complex.) Apparently Wilber actually takes what people say and assumes those words reflect their values and motivations. That's naive, and thus would be an example of a widespread folly of making logical deductions based on erroneous information.

"The best that can be said is that it takes blue to curtail red, and Bush's actions are serving the larger Spiral by rooting out pockets of red terrorism." - Those actions are the most blue that an on average higher evolved mindset in the population would tolerate, and those actions still represent so-called 'red terrorism', thus it's a bit weird to claim they are rooting out just that.

Then, Wilber drops the bombshell that underlines my point:

"As for world leaders—are any taking something resembling an integral view? The only world leader who comes close, in my opinion, is Tony Blair."

Another myth that I as an informed German would like to dissolve is that the German government was against the Iraq war. To begin with, it is discredited by the evidence of their participation in it. But there also was a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes.

 

By looking down on first-tier people based on false assumptions, Wilber acts first-tier style himself. He, too, is entertaining an exclusive belief system.

"There is plenty of truth on each side of the debate, just not the whole truth, which both sides vociferously claim to possess."

There is almost no truth on one side of the debate. He simply believes differently, because then he can believe himself to be 'balanced', 'above dispute'.

 

In summary, one can not claim to be of a certain standard while violating that standard and claiming it's for its sustenance. But people do it all the time because they are fooling themselves. This is what's called "corruption".

[chi 2012]

That said, please elaborate on what you mean in your last posting. What message are you trying to convey and on what assumptions is your statement based?

 

This goes back to an older discussion we had – when you were speaking out against the U.S. being a police state – and I asked you if you ever studied Spiral Dynamics – and I think you said you would look into it. I was trying to get you to see that your views were essentially Libertarian orange meme thinking – and you weren’t taking all the first tier meme’s into account. Interdependence between countries does cause tension like you have mentioned – but that is because all countries are still stuck in first tier thinking as of this moment. However there is always going to be the problem with “pockets of red”. And who scares red the most? Blue. A second tier world government would use blue when needed to defeat red.

 

Also since this is a gun thread I think people should be able to better understand the gun issue by using Spiral Dynamics.

 

Blue – People are shooting up schools because they weren’t raised with Christian Values. We need prayer in schools – and the right to stockpile guns.

 

Orange – If the government would get out of the way – the free market would ensure that more people had access to guns – and they would gun down the bad guys – and everything would take care of itself in the end.

 

Green – Guns kill people. Guns should be outlawed.

So all of these first tier gun views do have some truths to them – and it takes 2^nd tier thinking to consider all these options when making a decision on guns. You can see how politicians like Bush, Paul, and Obama fit into the different meme’s – and which ones are closer to 2^nd tier.

 

But bottom line Spiral Dynamics is just another map to try and explain things. You don’t seem to resonate with it….which is fine. Everybody has got to use what works best for them.

[gendao]

Drones are just another step in Air Force evolution. Nothing to get paranoid about. It's still safe to leave the house and walk outside in the U.S..

This concerns me because:

 

1) This allows the US to eventually amass an "unlimited & unaccountable" robotic army at its utter and complete disposal against (what they hope for) unarmed citizens.

2) Even if you forget about the drones...Obama has effectively eliminated the Legislative & Judicial branches in his role as unchecked Executioner. Where he can now immediately deliver the death sentence to ANYONE at the push of a button WITHOUT A TRIAL! I mean, I expect the right to a fair trial with a speeding ticket...much less OUR LIVES!!!

3) ALL this despotic power is ALL PAID FOR by OUR TAX DOLLAR$!!!

 

As far as Wilbur's color-coded spiral, I find it a bit inverted. IMO, the deeper you go in your spiritual journey, the more personal and inward you actually delve (not more outward & collectivist).

 

But going by his convenient labels, wouldn't the US be the most "red terrorist" on the planet today? So, would they deserve a fair trial before getting drone-blown?

Edited March 8, 2013 by vortex

[Owledge]

Blue – People are shooting up schools because they weren’t raised with Christian Values. We need prayer in schools – and the right to stockpile guns.

 

Orange – If the government would get out of the way – the free market would ensure that more people had access to guns – and they would gun down the bad guys – and everything would take care of itself in the end.

 

Green – Guns kill people. Guns should be outlawed.

So all of these first tier gun views do have some truths to them – and it takes 2^nd tier thinking to consider all these options when making a decision on guns.

Please point out the truth that allegedly all those first tier views have in them. I don't see any in what you wrote.

[chi 2012]

Vortex – Ever since Airplanes carried bombs – we’ve all been one push of a button away from being destroyed by our government….But so far it hasn’t happened. The chance of being bombed by a drone is about the same as being gunned down by an F-16 on a commercial flight because the plane has been hijacked and is heading for a nuclear reactor. It could happen – but very unlikely.

 

Also, anybody can play semantics with spiral dynamics and say that Bush is “Red”….Maybe he is. It’s just a map.

[chi 2012]

Please point out the truth that allegedly all those first tier views have in them. I don't see any in what you wrote.

 

Blue - The shooters were lacking in values. The problem starts at home.

 

Orange - Government should not take away the right to bear arms.

 

Green - Guns kill people. Some gun control is needed.

[Owledge]

Blue - The shooters were lacking in values. The problem starts at home.

 

Orange - Government should not take away the right to bear arms.

 

Green - Guns kill people. Some gun control is needed.

Blue is an erroneous belief, orange is wise (or only logical, since it is part of the legal foundation of the government) and green (first sentence) is a philospohical distortion of reality, a blame-game to reject responsibility.

Edited March 7, 2013 by Owledge