Under our current circumstances, lawsuits serve a constructive purpose whether we win or lose: It would be wonderful if we won, but every court that twists or ignores the law to deny us redress helps us justify our next form of recourse, whatever that may be. When you're up against abject tyrants, going through the formalities is an important part of building your public case for stronger measures, e.g. secession. The Founding Fathers did it too.
Mods need to figure out how to recognize this abusive downvote-botting and put a stop to it.
I had the same reaction. There is something so fundamentally wrong with her facial expressions, like she's always two seconds from tearing into someone's face with her teeth.
Why do I feel like her stated reason is not her real reason? Oh yeah, because she already brandished her axe to grind.
Thanks, man. I need to sleep now, but I'll check that out tomorrow.
I know that one of his parents was on the IBM board or similar, so he definitely had a leg up, but I'm not too familiar.
That said, I didn't mean to imply that his success was from merit. Instead, I was trying to say that he can't blame his evil on a distant blood relation to a Rockefeller. He made his own choices.
Apparently Nelson Rockefeller is his 7th cousin, 3 times removed, whatever that means. The relation seems to be very, very distant, and I wouldn't be surprised if I were at least that closely related to someone in the cabal.
Gates is beyond evil, but the distance of the Rockefeller relation makes me think he has no such excuse. I'm betting he got there entirely on his own "merits."
I share your feeling of lying awake, at least figuratively speaking. After two decades as an agnostic, the overwhelming reality of the evil around us rapidly pushed me back toward Christianity around November/December 2019, and it has been a necessary restraint on my anger. Ever since the George Floyd riots especially I've been almost paralyzed with worry for our country, performing below my capabilities at work, etc. My lifelong dream job turned to ash in my mouth, because it is just so meaningless next to the gravity of what I know is coming.
This conflict with the globalists could last a generation or more, and at its peak I anticipate a sort of "world civil war" that will doom humanity to a humiliating slavery for a thousand years if we lose. We are so technologically advanced that the advent of one world totalitarianism may be a one-way trip to hell on Earth. I'm at peace with suffering almost any fate if it means I helped stop this evil, but my sense of urgency to prepare and figure out what role I should play has felt like an overwhelming burden.
I've been telling people online to get civically involved for over a decade, and yet I've hypocritically procrastinated myself, because I didn't think I was socially "respectable" enough yet to make a difference. Sooner or later, good enough has to be good enough. Now I'm connecting with people at my church, looking up calendar dates for local party politics, and planning on joining something like American Contingency. Once I follow through, that will be a good start.
Is the Pope Cath...actually, not that one.
Is such a thing even possible? Yes, it is!
This is one of my favorite comments, lol.
I pray for the father's soul that he doesn't do it, and yet I pray for society that he does. Vengeance is the Lord's...and yet some people are just lost causes who need to go.
This guy has way too many muscles for how dull and lifeless his eyes are, like he's just a walking mountain of murder meat. That was never going to turn out well.
Some of the people hammering this point home may be aggressively racist, but we've gotten to the point where avoiding these discussions may be just as dangerous as having them.
I've always been reluctant to discuss racial crime demographics, because in the past it would have been more likely to destabilize the individualism and racial progress of mainstream American society than force overdue reflection on our most sensitive problems.
The problem is, we have now regressed far past the point of destabilizing an individualist consensus. Individualism and meritocracy are simply no longer the norm in polite society, because the left is obsessing over socioeconomic disparities and demonizing "white supremacist" American culture as the singular cause. If we continue to look the other way and let these charges go unanswered by any counter-narrative, the jackals of the left will "convict" any/every white (and maybe Asian) person who isn't a slave to their agenda.
The left will not stop talking about disparities to divide and destabilize American society. We can't make them shut up and stop setting the country ablaze with extreme asymmetric racism, so either we let their narrative go unchallenged, or we say, "No, there is another reason for these disparities, and it's not white people's fault (except exploitative Democrats spreading dependence and degeneracy on purpose)."
If we even want a hope of solving these problems, we need to start telling the truth. That's extremely difficult, because it's taboo to propose other narratives, and heavily propagandized people have a ton of mental resistance to even considering them. Emotional people are impervious to statistics, so you pretty much need to inundate them with emotional examples before they're willing to even remotely confront the truth.
Obviously, that's also dangerous: If it doesn't work well enough, the normies capitulate to the Woke mob and shun everyone associated with you. If it works too well, the normies become radicalized white nationalists or worse.
I don't like either of those outcomes: For a brief period of time, the United States became the most successful and most color-blind multi-racial society in history, and I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I think that was legitimate moral progress over the norms of human history, and if subversive multiculturalism hadn't poisoned us at the same time, the experiment might have turned out a heck of a lot better. Maybe some other country can and should be the "white Japan," but I don't think the United States can or should be that country at this point.
I want to see a stable, successful color-blind United States...but if the enemies of our nation insist on dividing us over disparities, we may need to confront them head-on.
I'd prefer some trials involved, but...I mean, yeah.
The problem is that applying the definition of treason to nonviolent "administrative" actions is technically subjective, and endemic bad faith conduct has spread moral confusion too far for the public to distinguish legitimate from illegitimate applications.
You and I know that it's treason when a Marxist (or similarly anti-American) enemy politicizes the military to purge everyone who believes in traditional American values based on a false pretense of white supremacy. Meanwhile, they're spreading the propaganda that traditional American values are "white supremacy," and that white supremacy is treason. They throw mud at the wall until it sticks. It's obvious to us who is telling the truth and who is aggressively politicizing the military as a precursor to genocide, but the average American is too demoralized to reliably tell the difference. They'll split about half and half based on political ideology, because we're that far past the point of no return.
The worst part is that the real treason comes from the top on both the military and civilian sides, so there is no stable and orderly legal mechanism for any of the good guys to take action. You'd need a whole lot of "I'm relieving you of your command" from the bottom up, which carries the worrisome appearance of mutiny, instead of the relieving appearance of restoring stability. Ultimately it would come down to who has the most guns, and I think there's enough confusion that actual shooting would start. That's not a great option.
I think the purged enlisted and NCO's are going to have to organize into a parallel militia to maintain the discipline and organizational parity to deter genocide. The enemy will anticipate that though, so they'll drag the purge out gradually enough to give people hope of being "passed up," while they take the time to make examples of anyone who organizes outside their chain of command.
Unless they back down, this whole thing is likely to get out of control.
I think you have a good point when it comes to regular good old American troops from good homes, but the entire point of this political purge of the military is to get rid of those types. Once a military starts selecting for vicious monsters with a political axe to grind, it's all downhill from there. Just ask all the babies the Japanese skewered, or the women the Russians brutally tortured and raped.
If the Joint Chiefs of Staff of a united, patriotic military had revealed conclusive military intelligence that Biden was a Chinese agent, and that they would never accept his command, that would have changed everything without anyone firing a shot.
That may not have been realistic even if the military were not so subverted (and it is), and it would have opened up a nasty can of worms, but it's a hypothetical scenario which may have, in the end, avoided an armed conflict which may yet come.
I don't think there's anything the enlisted could have done yet though.
Finally some good news.
WTF? The guy wasn't giving sob stories. He was giving insight into the specific aspect of military culture that leftists are leaning on to brainwash the enlisted.
You said, "If they somehow "ignore" the rules? Then they would have done so anyway, would have removed our rights by means of some other theater."
What you're overlooking here is that rewriting the Constitution is much, MUCH worse than merely violating it "anyway." Government power ultimately depends on the population believing it is legitimate enough to tolerate, and as long as the Constitution itself is on our side, every violation thereof is evidence of our enemy's illegitimacy, which raises the ire of the population. If they "legitimately" rewrite it, we lose much of our evidence of being the good guys, and many otherwise sympathetic people will view limited government as a lost cause (as they have basically anywhere else it has happened). That may not affect how you or I view the battlefield, but it would definitely affect people with less conviction.
I don't think your argument about the Senate holds either: First, they'd need a 2/3 majority to propose specific Amendments, and doing so would immediately show the hand of every corrupt GOP Senator who voted to propose something awful. They wouldn't want to risk that if it didn't guarantee them final victory. In comparison, people can project whatever motives they want onto the states convening a Constitutional Convention, yet we may only find out what was actually discussed once they send their proposals to the states...which, in a runaway convention, may not require ratification by 3/4 of the states after all.
As for Soros, I don't know whether he wants to risk a Constitutional Convention or not. However, as far as the power elite goes, he's a new kid on the block who goes his own way on a number of things. As rich and powerful and evil as he is, I'm probably more worried about the less public faces of the NWO, who seem to have had a plan in place for quite a while.
Now, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe a Constitutional Convention happens and helps turn the tide. I'm just saying, it is an incredible risk with far more downside potential than upside potential, and the deck is still stacked against us. Look at how much Georgia betrayed us for instance. Would I always oppose such a convention? No, but I'd want to see a clearer margin of victory before putting everything on the line in our political last stand.
This guy is transparently trying to incite black violence against Asians, so it can be blamed on white people.
I noticed that too. I'm in the bad habit of editing and revising my comments all the time, and it doesn't play well with this forum.
I'm a big fan of Rand, but I have to stand with the JBS on this issue: https://jbs.org/concon/
Someone else also has a post below describing how the globalists have been preparing for a Constitutional Convention for literally 30 years: https://patriots.win/p/12hl0Ub6D0/x/c/4DyND4Bkf0C
Did I say to do nothing and just wait to lose?
No.
I said we need to get civically engaged. That's a prerequisite for ANYTHING to work well, including a Constitutional Convention...but out of all our options, a Constitutional Convention is potentially the most suicidal thing we could possibly do.
The current Constitution, if it were enforced, is a pretty good document. The enemy wants to destroy it utterly. We stand much more to lose than gain from opening the language up to arbitrary modification. And yes, we DO have a lot left to lose. The Supreme Law of the Land is currently on our side, and even though it's ignored, it still gives us an objective moral claim over our country that we can never get back if they "legally" change it. That's a huge motivating factor for the moral conviction of a lot of people.
What I'm saying is this DOESN'T get rid of lifers. It only pretends to. Instead, it just makes unelected lifers in bureaucracy more powerful, and it makes us prematurely replace the few good politicians we manage to get, while the bad ones go "all-in" on selling America out in their final term, because they have nothing to lose.
The worst that can happen is far worse than the status quo. The worst that could happen is that Rand Paul and Thomas Massie get replaced by Trey Grayson and some globalist pedophile, and the same goes for Lauren Boebert, MTG, Matt Gaetz, etc...right around the time they finally would have started to get the hang of things.
Are things bad now? Yes. Have they been bad for decades? Yes. I understand how blackpilled people were before Trump. I was too. I understand the need to shake things up, because what we're doing now clearly isn't working...but when most politicians are bad guys, term limits disenfranchise the good voters far more than the bad ones. I know that we're basically desperate, but we still have to avoid traps tempting us to make things worse.
Long-term, the real solution is that we need more civically engaged manpower, both politically and for actively working toward a self-sufficient parallel economy. The real solution is going to be extremely messy and potentially end in secession or war, but the unskippable first step is for more of us to get pissed off enough to leave our comfort zones and get off our asses. If that seems unrealistic, it just means we're due for a lot more pain before we have the critical mass necessary to fix the problem.
Now, letting states select Senators again would help...but that's not what we'd get from a Constitutional Convention either, and almost nothing is worth opening that door unless we have a guaranteed pro-liberty supermajority in over 38 states. As desperate as we are, the current Constitution, unenforced as it is, is far better than what would emerge from a Constitutional Convention.
No matter what means we use to win, we need more people...and if you have the people to win violently, you typically have the people to win via peaceful civil disobedience, unless/until the other side tries to massacre you for trying.
Half the population leans our way, but precious few truly understand the cost of capitulation enough yet to maintain disciplined resolve through thick and thin. I fear you severely overestimate how many people would currently risk their lives and offer material support in the absence of a cohesive organizational support structure. Without this, any support from the passive population would be short-lived. When the neighborhood children are becoming collateral damage in an armed conflict between a totalitarian government and maligned terrorists and the only news people ever hear is bad, it doesn't take long before they pray for it to end no matter the cost, "For the children."
Your level of commitment and determination is WAY ahead of the curve here, and projecting it onto other people is the same kind of fatal mistake that smart kids make right before they say/do something that gets them dogpiled by their mouth-breathing peers. The tallest blade of grass is the first to be cut by the lawnmower. Things have to get a LOT worse before enough people wake up to provide the levels of material support seen in e.g. the Revolutionary War.
How do I know people aren't at the point of taking huge risks yet? Because too few are even willing to take small token risks. People keep their viewpoints to themselves under their own names, because they're afraid of being canceled and know that nobody will stick up for them in unison. We don't have the level of social organization to have each other's backs on any level, and most people just grimace and think, "Glad it's not me." We don't even have sufficient people to keep churches open and tell arresting officers and municipal functionaries to shove it (or even to say, "I'm willing to be arrested for this"). There's too much, "But muh job, muh credit rating, muh retirement fund."
People are still invested in the system and praying things magically go back to normal, and the cognitive dissonance is off the charts. We still have conservatives and libertarians waxing poetic about some globalist corporation's absolute private property rights to make us wear masks to buy groceries, as if we're still living in a stable peacetime society where that should be our priority. Heck, we even have tone-deaf conservatives and libertarians defending big tech as if international public corporations colluding with each other, NGO's, and politicians to censor half the population and push coordinated propaganda are the same in principle as a sole proprietorship local bakery run by Christians with deeply held religious principles. Conservatives are nowhere NEAR the level of "fed up" yet that they need to be.
You may doubt that a third of our organized military would actively engage the public, but the brass is actively purging anyone from the military for wrongthink, which makes room for Woke jackboots. Their replacement grunts may not be as disciplined as GWOT vets, but they hold the territory and the crew-served weapons.
The alternative option is for a significant percentage of the population to actively work to organize and become economically independent of the subverted institutions before they get the death camps running. We need to make our communications infrastructure more resilient to shutdown. We need to start standing up together to keep our churches open, and to understand how to work together and rely on each other to stand strong together. If we have enough people to win a ground war, we have enough people to win with civil disobedience, unless/until it freaks them out enough to massacre us all; and then, because we took the time to organize, we'll be much more ready.
We need to organize better to sustain any form of resistance whatsoever, and I think you know this, deep down. If you didn't, I would've seen something on the news about another guy in a Killdozer.
The state of our scientific researchers has never been worse.
Sooner or later, they'll require not only vaccine passports but stellar "social credit" scores to fly anyway. I won't even be allowed to experience the thrill of flying with pilots picked on the basis of "diversity" instead of merit. I guess I'll just have to stay on the ground and film all the mid-air collisions.