Blog Archives

Has NDAA Made Shooting Federal Agents, Soldiers, and Cops Legal?

Mar 30

Posted by


No court should ever find one guilty of murder or manslaughter if defending their own lives from murder or kidnapping. For many people, NDAA, and violations of Posse Comitatus by military represents such a threat, and more recently, the Monsanto Protection Act. Therefore, we all might ought to so consider their reasoning; if one man should so fear the tyrannical act of their government, so then should we all.

by H. Michael Sweeney
copyright © 2013, all rights reserved. Permission to repost hereby granted provided entire post with all links in tact, including this paragraph, are included.

Reading this post you will learn…

  • That self defense is a right, perhaps even when facing authorities acting legally;
  • That NDAA threatens EVERYONE’s life and liberty if it threatens even ONE;
  • That NDAA may just have let loose the Dogs of War, one confrontation at a time.

 Can you shoot a lawman or soldier lawfully exercising his duty and still claim self defense?

Are Molotov Cocktails ever self defense? (click) From interesting art collection feedtacoma.com

In a casual conversation with some friends, an interesting dialog evolved which led to some serious debate and troubling afterthought at the implications of what had been said. It started simply. The topic of NDAA, having come up, someone replied, “Given that the government can simply haul someone away without any form of due process, and vanish them to some hell hole in Cuba or elsewhere for torture, endless imprisonment, I’m wondering…”

He was invited to continue. “Suppose some activist feels targeted by government in heavy-handed ways… someone who has been forced to a paranoiac defensive posture as result… and some Federal agents decide to show up for some reason.  What happens if he figures they are there to vanish him like some South American dictatorship?  What if he acts in self defense and pops the agents before they can do much more than flash their badges. Would that be reasonable self defense? Even if they were only there for some more innocent reason?”

“Or…” added another, “suppose someone started shooting at soldiers or Cops when they engage in these so-called ‘mock drills’ with Police in urban settings… thinking that the soldiers were coming after them or their guns. I’m surprised that pop shots haven’t already been fired.”

And I would have added, if the conversation were taking place today, the day Barry Sorento signed the Monsanto Protection Act… “Suppose someone burns down a Monsanto factory and ends up killing company employees in the process, trying to prevent the company from poisoning everyone with GMO crops, knowing that now, it is illegal to seek redress in the courts for cause? Would that be self defense?”

I know. You are probably thinking what I was thinking. Absurd questions. No one could convince a jury the FBI or the Army was there to kill them, or that the mere appearance of Agents or soldiers was logically a threat, right? Or arson and resulting deaths? And that is what caused the conversation to get interesting, because that very doubt sparked a lot of verbal wrestling in anecdotal exchanges.  We eventually pinned the issue to the mat with a chain of logic which indeed deserves further consideration, here.

“There was this case I saw in the news,” another started, and he proceeded to describe something I myself recalled seeing, once he got out the details — which actually hit a little close to home, as will be explained shortly. “This Black guy, a known felon, used an illegal machine pistol to gun down a bunch of cops who had just busted down his door to serve a warrant. He went to jail, but not for their murder. It was ruled self defense. Imagine. A Black kills White cops in New York, and gets away with it?”

“How is that possible?” asked another.

“I saw a reenactment on TV,” I offered. “He was seated with his back to the door, watching TV in the dark with the volume up. Seven Cops entered the front door after a knock with guns drawn, and shouted for him. He had a fully automatic Ingram there on his armrest with 30 rounds, because some bad cops had already threatened his life. So he instinctively grabbed the gun and emptied it on full-auto and dove for cover, and then made good an escape. All but one of the cops died, despite wearing vests. He feared for his life, and once apprehended, the Defense was able to prove in court a reasonable basis for that fear. They got him on weapons charges, but not murder.”

Then I told them how easily I could identify with that. I recounted true events about a time when my first brush with ‘spooks,’ where some of those arrayed against me were in-place assets within five different local law enforcement agencies. When my investigations got close to unraveling their criminal enterprises, several of them apparently felt their offices gave them cart blanch to ‘get away with murder’ to protect their part in matters. They unilaterally sought to eliminate me, it seems:

a)  a County Sheriff from a distant County threatened me with a gun in a folded newspaper, but was turned away due to a security camera’s presence after I pointed it out to him;
b) a local cop, with a possible helper as getaway driver, carved out a sniper’s nest in a tree on a hill outside my bedroom, from which a laser beam shown through my window as I retired in the dark one night — but I saw the beam drawing down the wall and rolled out of bed to avoid it;
c)  that same cop later used a patrol car as a weapon. He zoomed onto the empty freeway from an entrance as I passed it, no lights or siren (not even headlights, until after he fled the scene). He crossed six lanes at about a 45 degree angle to force me to run me off the road on the far side at a bridge abutment, himself swerving into the parking meridian to avoid crashing himself, because I had managed to successfully evaded a side-swipe and retained control without ending up in the river;
d) two patrol cars pulled me over at an underpass at two AM in the morning, joined by several more pairs of cars both ahead of and behind me; County, local Police, and unmarked units. It was an ambush. But my wife turned out to be present, so they ‘explained’ their stop: “You have a burned out tail light.”  Uh huh.

There were other incidents not quite as scary, too, involving high-speed chases with up to six vehicles, and a series of break ins by men with walkie talkies. So I had every reason to be paranoid about cops in those times. If you want to know how I ended these problems, read my book set, Fatal Rebirth, which also explains why I had become targeted in the first place. But here is the part which directly relates, also in the book: you can imagine my surprise when, after all those threats, two local Sheriffs walked in my front door without so much as knocking.

Had I had a gun sitting on my sofa arm, I would likely have at the least leveled it on them and demand their hands up. Fortunately, there were extenuating circumstances and their purpose was no true threat, and I had no such gun to risk any undue complications. But I would certainly have considered my actions to have been in self defense had it been so. I surely could relate to the story being cited.

With that realization, the dialog between us started to examine the questions asked more carefully. What follows are some additional observations and conclusions which illuminate the matter more thoughtfully, some of which include references to appropriate quotes. Some were offered at the time, others are added here, by me.

1) The Bill of Rights has as its sole purpose the intent, beyond cementing the integrity of government’s covenant with We, The People, that all citizens should be able to pursue happiness, and enjoy life and liberty, and carefully spells out a series of interlocking safeguarding Amendments to insure it so. One has no liberty if kidnappable on demand, and no assurance to life when torture and murder are part of the kidnapper’s tools. While it does not specifically addresses self defense as topic, it was concluded that “the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments specifically assure us that the Man who would be King’s portion of NDAA has no force of Constitutional law behind it”, as it tramples on these rights in the worst possible ways. Me.

2)  Seven people felt so terrorized by NDAA’s threat upon their lives as activists and journalists reporting on sins of government that they went to Court. These included Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges, MIT Professor Noam Chomsky, and Daniel Ellsberg who was a focal point in the Pentagon Papers and Watergate debacles in the 60s, both exposing the Federal government’s abuses of the day. Supporters of Wikileaks were also party to the suit. A lawyer for the group said “There’s a lot of activists who understand how serious this is, but it’s less well known to the general public.”

3) We concurred in commentary on the case that, “Because the ‘war on terror’ is a war on a tactic, not on a state, it has no parameters or timetable. Consequently, this law can be used by authorities to detain (forever) anyone the government considers a threat to national security and stability – potentially even demonstrators and protesters exercising their First Amendment rights.” Journalist, Brian J. Trautman.

4) A Federal Judge in the case ruled those provisions in NDAA of concern are indeed unconstitutional and issued an injunction against their use. However, there has been no acknowledgement or sign from any quarters in government that they will abide by the findings, and there is every indication that the Obama Administration intends to ignore the ruling in further lawless ‘off the books’ application of NDAA. In appealing the case, it was revealed in arguments by government Lawyer’s that government had been utilizing such methods all along. Indeed, the government refuses to discuss if it is being used or will be used on Citizens in the United States, and it is known for a fact it has already killed three American Citizens abroad, including a 16 year old, with a Drone Strike.

5) Worse, at request of Justice (per the above link), another Federal Judge has granted a ‘Emergency Stay’ against the former rendering it moot and the Justice Department has argued that NDAA is not even necessary, because the Authorization for Use of Military Force Act of 2001, as interpreted already for use in permanent detention in Guantanamo, already gives government like powers. Eric Holder, U.S. Attorney General, told Congress it would be legal to kill an American in America with a drone. Oh, what slippery slope…

6) An almost endless series of Acts from the Patriot Act forward have spelled out an almost unlimited list of ‘reasons’ which can be used to ‘define’ a given act as ‘terrorism,’ all such reasons generally described in nebulous and sweeping terms deliberately vague so as to allow the broadest possible interpretation to suit the needs of government at any given moment in time with any given individual. You can even be deemed a terrorist for illegally downloading or copying a song or movie — an ‘act of financial terrorism’ which de facto enjoins the teenager ripping a song in an imagined conspiracy to topple the music industry and harm American free enterprise. A Mother was recently jailed under the Patriot Act as a terrorist for spanking her children on an airline, and detained for three months before she could even enter a plea.

7) The rhetoric out of Washington and media spin doctors is all-too often such that almost anyone who disagrees with the official point of view is demonized and described as a mix of ‘dangerous,’ ‘mentally ill,’ and/or even (especially) as ‘terrorist,’ all in the name of political expedience. FBI has recently circulated to Police Departments and Community groups (a Hitler-like attempt at recruiting citizens to spy on citizens) a series of official lists of ‘indicators’ that a person is a potential terrorist to specifically include persons ‘overly concerned with the Constitution,’ or who ‘buy coffee with cash,’ or ‘use a hot spot.’ Ron Paul supporters are potential terrorists, according to FBI, which shows just how easily the label can be applied for political convenience. These lists actually ask you to call and report such persons to DHS/FBI. Indeed, not one person present in the conversation leading to this post remained free of such wholesale classifications. Such labeling establishes in the minds of the outspoken, real or imagined, an air of viable threat of loss of life and liberty and, thereby, sways the minds and mood of the public against them closer to becoming potential reality. It is, in my opinion, a form of calculated psyops mind control. “In a government bottomed on the will of all, the liberty of every individual citizen becomes interesting to all.” Thomas Jefferson.

8) All the talk of banning guns, and the U.N. Treaty which would, if signed by the man claiming to be President, and ratified, would force the end of the Second Amendment and the disarming of America, came into play simultaneous to a series of violations of Posse Comitatus so brazen as to make news in mainstream media. It has seemed in the minds of some as if these mock invasions of U.S. cities by military was in preparation for coming after the guns. Add to that the military’s ‘Shoot Americans’ questionnaire to troops, General Tommy Frank’s admission that we are headed for a military government, revelations of military manuals which dictate that protestors should be shot, the ordering of 1.4 billion rounds of ammunition by Homeland Security, the refusal of Obama’s candidate to head and actual atrocities already committed (Ruby Ridge, Waco, The Liebe Street Raid, Katrina, ICE ‘border stops’ checkpoints nowhere near the border, and similar TSA abuses, etc.), there is little reason for an informed thinker to see such fears as wholly baseless.

9) Every State in the Union recognizes exercise of deadly force in self-defense as a right, provided the acts were undertaken with a demonstrable reason to fear for their life or liberty (e.g., kidnapping, vanishing, torture, or murder, and in many cases, simply serious harm or significant casualty loss).

So, if someone ‘deemed’ a terrorist by loose rhetoric of manipulative minds or secret edicts of government machines because of unpopular political views… should such a person be approached by Men in Black, or Blue, or Army Green, the question remains valid: has Obama created a situation where even one such person might reasonably fear for their lives sufficient to arm themselves and proactively defend against the possibility?

We pray not, and yet, it is likely unavoidable that such will eventually come to pass one way or another, in time. It may indeed already have come to pass but simply not have made the news beyond statements that (the party) was ‘killed resisting arrest.’ What reason would authorities have to broadcast details suggesting otherwise?

When government embarks on a tyrannical course against its own citizens, some such confrontation is ABSOLUTELY ASSURED. How it turns out is a matter of happenstance no one can predict for certain, though it must result in a bad end for someone, or multiple someone’s. In truth, it is bad for us all, as it ratchets up the tension and increases the likelihood of a repeat scenario. In time, if we study history, we learn it must lead to armed rebellion. Thus we should be mindful to the tenth point we had concluded in our conversation:

10)  If just one person’s rights can be trampled upon by government at will, than the rights of no one is respected and do not remain valid; they become mere political rhetoric, a lip service. If one of us lives in fear for cause, then we all ought be mindful; the fear is truly a threat to us all. If one of us must act in self defense, then ultimately, we might all be better off acting in mutual defense sooner than later. “Freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit political convenience. I don’t believe you can stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others.” — Coretta Scott King. “The rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened.” ― John F. Kennedy

 When is it a greater crime: to kill in self defense of others, or to allow others to die for lack of preempting their murder?

So, each of us must ask ourselves the following question: “Do I fear my government enough to consider the possibility that a confrontation may represent a kidnapping and life or death situation for me, if not at that moment, then as result of events which follow the moment? How can I, in good conscience, not consider to defend myself?

Indeed, for me, merely writing this makes me even more likely the target of NDAA. And I freely admit to qualifying to no fewer than a dozen ‘traits’ of a terrorist according to FBI’s little snitch lists. And, you know, with 85 terror tactics like ‘paying with cash’ on that list, SO ARE YOU. That’s exactly what I’m saying. If one of us… all of us.

And just as important, who has the most ultimate power: the individual with rights under just Law of the Land, or an unjust and illegal law in the hands of the corporate state? The answers SHOULD be, the former, especially when there is no individual, but a united collective of individuals with the same intent.

The United States of Sorento Corporation

My ultimatum to the Sorento Corporation:

So I’m putting government on notice: Dear U.S. Sorento Corporation, fictitious holding company DBA United States, as listed in Dun and Bradstreet, and now a wholly owned subsidiary of Monsanto Corporation: I have a reasonable fear for my safety by YOUR own assigned definitions under your illegal corporate bylaws, which relegate me to the class of client termed therein as a terrorist. This terrorist therefore reserves the right of self defense, by any available means, up to and including your discorporation, and that of your parent and holding company. This I do under the authority granted my by the Constitution of the United States, the Bill of Rights, and the license of being a Free Sovereign Man, and not your personal property or chattel.

Moreover, the weapons I have and will use in my defense are beyond your ability to overcome by drone, by stealthy assassins, or by overpowering forces. They are ideas, and you cannot kill an idea. It is truth, and you cannot imprisson a truth once it is revealed. It is a willingness to die for my country, and you cannot kidnap that fact. You may, in fact, only martyr me, at best — a thing more to my advantage than to yours.

Take your best shot, if you dare, for I am everyman, and what you do to one of us you do to all of us. And frankly, I don’t think you can afford very many more martyrs before you spark a revolution. Which leads me to the notion, with apologies to friends Anonymous…

 Does Anonymous act in self defense given they fight tyranny?

We are all everyman. We are Legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us!

Related articles

Posted in Abuse of Power, Government, military, Political Commentary, Uncategorized

Leave a comment

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Monsanto Protection Act Lights Fuse of Armed Insurrection

Mar 30

Posted by


Self Defense is the right of all Men regardless of any Law. When an illegal law deems to both make redress and self defense illegal, many will see it as time for a revolution. The Monsanto are coming. To Arms! To Arms!
 
by H. Michael Sweeney
copyright © 2013, all rights reserved. Permission to repost hereby granted provided entire post with all links in tact, including this paragraph, are included.
Will Monsanto GMO spark a revolution?

Reading this post and its links, you will learn…

 
• Things so terrible that I will not bullet list them, lest you flee this page in fear of dark things;
• Things which may mean life or death to you, your family, and America as you know it;
• Things which, in the best of outcomes will undoubtedly mean thousands of lives taken by violence and/or a biowar intending depopulation.
Why does Monsanto have its own Police Force?

They keep perfecting mass murder. (click) From an interesting beforeitsnews.com piece

Many of us ‘prepers’ and ‘conspiracy buffs’  have warned for some time that government wants a showdown with YOU in their gunsights. Now we start to see proof there is a price to be paid for failing to heed, for those not prepared to face what apathy and inaction leads us all toward at speed. Got Bushmaster? No? Gave it up to Feinstan, Bloomberg, Sorento, et. al? Better put your affairs in order, then.

This latest tyrannical atrocity, The Farmer Assurance Provision Act of 2013, also dubbed the Monsanto Protection Act to reflect fascist provisions burried deep within it, is one line in the sand many will not likely let be crossed without a gunfight, or similar violence. Understand this: a fuse has been lit, and while the length of its burn is not known, the bang at the end could very well turn into a repeat of 1776.

Frankly, I don’t know whether to pray it does, or does not; it’s THAT SERIOUS a line in the sand, to me.

But it is not my opinion which matters as much as does YOURS. But do you even have one? If you do not, or don’t even know of and understand the nature of the threat from GMO corn, soy, and other bioengineered seed programs, and matters closely related, you will be happy to know Mother nature has a special place for you. It is called survival of the fittest, and destruction of the weakest, you being the latter in the equation; those who die from eating genocidal foods, a very real possibility in almost any proper review of facts.

We are talking about crops genetically modified to have built-in pesticide powers based on Monsanto’s Roundup, a known poisonous substance, and other ‘properties’ which make it even more dangerous. The Act gives Monsanto the power of life and death decisions with zero responsibility (impunity), and takes away the ONE THING which is designed by our Forefathers to PREVENT armed revolution; the means of the People to seek redress of grievances with government through the courts.

OK, then, if that’s how they want it… get ready to ‘pass the ammunition,’ instead.

Because why? Because there is so much resistance to labeling such foods at every turn, and because they are used to feed animals you eat in other foods, there is no way currently to avoid eating them, or know if you are or are not, save perhaps eating only organic produce. Even then, contamination is not impossible. The only solution left would be to stop Monsanto and friends DEAD in their tracks, and unfortunately, it appears they wish for force matters such that the only option available for us to do so may be to seek it in literal terms.

We would rather it be figurative. But if YOU otherwise make no collective effort to stop them peacefully, you will deserve your fate for being a dumbed-downed mind-controlled Sheeple. Your apathy and non participation will be causal to any escalation toward violence forced on those unable to make headway peacefully. Their failure will be because of your lack of support.

If you don’t get that, stop reading this until you’ve visited Oz to find some brain matter to replace the straw in your head. It’s all over the Internet, and from many, many viable sources (even the disinformation deliberately put out as a straw man tactic is based on ‘kernels’ of fearsome truth — and efforts to debunk this particular ‘conspiracy theory’ themselves lack credibility and tend to follow the 25 Rules of Disinformation, such as employing straw men, vanishing evidence, and so forth).

Is self defense justified if GMO threatens the lives of you and your family?

Things to know for your survival:

GMO is tied to the Doomsday Vault, Agenda 21, Codex Alimentarius, depopulation

Doomsday Vault, Agenda 21, Codex Alimentarius, = depopulation

If the above still does not convince you, ask yourself why GMO crop makers, Bill Gates, and Rockefeller have funded, along with Bilderberger leaders, a ‘Doomsday Seed Vault’ protected by the highest of security on a private Island in frozen wastelands owned by a Bilderberger. There, non GMO seeds are being stored for some future use, accessible ONLY by the Globalist Elite — while at the same time we see from the above that these same people are taking steps to insure non GMO seed cannot even be purchased, much less used, without violating law. We are talking about billionaires who have private chefs, often having them travel with them on trips, and NEVER eat anything we eat, except on a rare lark.

Part of that story requires us to add to this complex mix of topics some equally scary things outside of, but tangent to GMO: Agenda 21 and Codex Alimentarius, for instance, and the concept of depopulation, long a known goal of Globalists to reduce us to a half million souls. Consider all these things collectively, and you realize that violence may be the only recourse, sooner or later, unless we can unify and find a quick way to avoid it. But the fuse, having been lit, makes sooner more urgent, and later less tenable.

Now, Sorento and Congress show their true colors as traitors to all Americans and the American way of life… even life itself, in fact, the hallmark of Satanic thinking in the Illuminati Plan to create a one-World government that they might seat the Antichrist. It’s O.K. if you don’t want to subscribe to that ‘theory,’ but I’ve written books with over 1,500 footnotes to make that very case.

But it is just a Congressional Bill we are talking about, and, after all, Congressmen will simply excuse themselves, saying they ‘didn’t read the Bill’ before they voted it. Sorry, but if things erupt with violence (and to a lesser degree if it does not), they will still be held accountable if they voted for it, as will the Great Pretender who signed it. Consider the full measure of risk they undertake by their crime against humanity, which is also treasonous. There can be no greater penalty than those common in such crimes, especially if during a war (revolution).

And for the matter, therein (Sorento’s signature) lies the problem for Monsanto. Even if Monsanto is not razed to the ground by angry citizens… even if their poisonous ‘product,’  which is nothing more than a tool designed to give them a global monopoly on farming and to depopulate the World with a soft kill is not destroyed in grain stores and warehouses before it is planted… even if they survive attacks against them and their evil seed… the Act does not afford the protection they presume by its signing into ‘law’. It is a fictional belief… not Law at all, but a fictional ‘law’ which is at best temporarily useful while government pretends it legitimate.

Any Bill signed by Mr. Sorento under a false identity will eventually be ruled null and void as will be all ‘law’ of the last four plus years of his charade; his pretense cannot long last, even if it requires a number of years after his final term in office expires to force the Courts to admit it. He has no power, and neither does anything he signs. There has been zero Law enacted since he took Office. He, and all who helped in the charade will be jailed or worse, and of no power whatsoever to help Monsanto (Oh, happy day!)

There will be no protections if the ‘law’ thought affording them was found illegal. Nor if collusion between Monsanto and politicians writing the Bill, and the White House are established as criminal in nature (as is already seeming to be the case in the links above). Even if the Courts were so foolish as to overlook such reasons for nullification, perhaps due to bribes or threats, or the influence of Clarence Thomas, the court of Public Opinion and a little thing called self defense will still afford a final ruling which will be enforced.

Can self defense ever be peaceful?

PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEFEND THEMSELVES FROM HARM

This ACT, I fear, is the final spark which has at last lit a fuse which cannot easily be put out; a fuse leading to armed insurrection. I’ve tried to warn government and citizens in my earlier posts that every time politicians elect a criminal or unconstitutional choice, they put a gun to their own heads in a game of Russian Roulette, a game which decides if armed revolt breaks out.

Given the levels of frustration that I feel in this matter, I can only imagine how famers feel, and picture them raiding grain stores and destroying Monsanto product wholesale, if not marching on Monsanto properties with guns and torches to level them and drag corporate bosses into the streets. I fear hanging in effigy may not be seen sufficient. Hopefully I am wrong, and mere alarmist. But if I thought it would actually end the matter usefully, I’d be tempted myself. But would it be useful, really?

I wonder. I wonder because I also fear this is exactly the situation intended by Globalist leaders who seem to control our government. I fear it why DHS has placed bid requests for 1.4 billion rounds of munitions, including 9 million sniper rounds, none of it for normal military operations. In fact, I fear it related to a long list of other curious purchases and moves by government over the last few years, especially those since Sorento took office.

They collectively point to an intent to light such a fuse, I fear. Such pointers include, for instance, a steady stream of military mock raids on American cities with armed helicopters discharging gattling guns, soldiers repelling from or landed from the choppers to blow the doors off of buildings and engage in combat with ‘resistance,’ of some imagined sort.

Who will stop GMO crops from killing you or your family?

WE ARE THAT RESISTANCE

Confrontation is exactly what I and many others have feared all along was intended at some point in the future, and now, with the Act — it seems absolutely unavoidable and on the near horizon. Now that they see they cannot arrange to ban guns which approximate military grade, thereby effecting a de facto gun seizure, indications are now that they are going to instead foment a wave of violence in the heartlands and cities to justify labeling gun owners as a threat to national security, and come after them by force.

I even worry they may even foment that violence themselves and blame it on us (false flag operations) to justify their heavy hand to passive onlookers, the Sheeple at large. For this Act will undoubtedly result in such outrage and frustration as to move those most concerned to violence, even if it takes some entrapment or priming of the pump of anger and concern. If not shooting, then arson or bombing, from which must eventually evolve shooting by on side or the other. The fuse has been lit.

While there are only a few million rural persons who’s livelihoods still depend on farming success, almost all are quite well armed. There are tens of millions more who truly understand GMA enough to side with Farmers, a large number of them also armed, and some number of them are surely angry enough to say, “Pass the ammunition!”

But even if only 1% of farmers dared take a militant stand and resist with forceful action to protect their way of life, and the lives of all us… to save us from domination and ruination by Monsanto and a truly insane and clearly fascist government (defined, in part, as a government which makes oppressive laws to the benefit of corporate profits and the power elite to the detriment of the citizens)… even 1/tenth that number is  more than enough people to start a full-scale armed revolution (statistically proven through history).

The mechanics of revolution, as I have pointed out in above linked post, clearly require only two things: a handful of angry people willing to do something which cannot be ignored by government, something which is seen to strike a blow for freedom; and a government willing to use a heavy hand to quash them for their trouble. In every instance, instead of quashing them, they make martyrs and fuel the anger in those previously asleep in their inaction. As result, those who survived the start of matters are joined by many millions more, and a full-scale revolution is born. “Pass the ammunition!”

This time, I fear government has indeed gone to far, and I urge everyone who is angered and moved to action to please stop, think, and act responsibly. Do not react carelessly out of emotion. Violence on your part is likely expected, and desired. Do not give in. Instead, organize and resist in every legal way you can muster (there are ways to do that). As part of the protest, I beg you make clear, as this post attempts to warn, that escalation will be the consequence of inaction by government and the criminal corporations.

They must be shown we will not let them continue to consider humans as mere objects they may move about on a financial and political chessboards, and knock off the board as pawns to suffer death or a life of misery or servitude. We will not idly stand by and let them win the game in which only they, Globalists all, deem to be onlyplayers with any chance at winning. We pawns must become our own self-guided army, and change the rule of the game so that we… we mere avatars of their avarice, are the ones who win.

How can GMO crops be stopped?

WE DARE NOT LET THE GAME CONTINUE AS IS

The fuse is lit. Who will help extinguish it by right action? Who will fan it to burn faster? Only YOU can decide. YOU are what you’ve been waiting for. Either way, I’m looking forward to ruining their game. But I can do nothing without YOU, be it words or bullets that eventually do the talking.

Enough talking. It’s all made me hungry. Let’s get something to eat…

On second thought, I’m not so sure there’s anything good to eat any more. Perhaps I’ll just share this post with some friends, instead, and start a dialog about what we might be able to do change that little problem.

What can we do to stop Monsanto madness?\\\\\\\\\\\

Related articles

Posted in Abuse of Power, Conspiracy, Crime, Government, Health, News Events, Political Commentary

Leave a comment

Tags: , , , , , ,

%d bloggers like this: