Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 3/27/2006 9:13:40 AM EDT
1st a refresher-

Originally Posted By Matt45:

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:

Originally Posted By Matt45:
1. Will you follow the Governer's orders, to the letter?NO I have actually dealt with the criminal cunt in court cases when it was AG, it is a evil criminal and any orders would be subject to scrutiny to make sure they were lawful but if lawful and prudent then yes I would follow the orders

2. Will you perform your duties without pushing your own agenda?Affirmative without question

3. If so ordered, will you fire into a crowd that is looting and comitting arson?Depends, what are they looting and burning, if criminal politicians no, if private property YES!

4. Would you bar a person from entering an area that has been deemed "Unsafe" because of contamination or some other reason? Even if they owned property there?NO

5. Would you fire upon a crowd that is rioting and your "troops" were in danger of being seriously harmed? Even if it were at a food distribution point?Again not enough information, there should be a mission plan and rules of engagement that answers that question before it arises.

5a-The whole concept of local control is that those questions do not arise because I know what belongs to who, the people that have a right to be there and I can ID strangers that do not belong.

You are thinking military designed to be deployed anywhere in the world, not anywhere in the county and state.



6.
Would you fire tear gas into a crowd, and disperse them will physical force, if they are assembly unlawfully, in not in a peaceable manner?Define unlawful

7.
Will you stand down once ordered to do so?YES






OUTFUCKINGSTANDING-

I will now allow you to be assimilated into the Neo-ZOG War Machine I represent. (Since apparently I was somehow elected "Tyrant and Supressor of the People" this month, or at least "Most likely to commit Bosnianesque Massarces" by the Senior class....)
(Much humor to be added to that.)


I don't have the time to ask a few "redirect" questions, add information or any of that, BUT- I think out of that response we might be able to resume to a milder tone on the topic. Everyone else not involved with the discussion can settle down and those of us IN the discussion will continue to attempt to find a small peice of common ground.


ETA-

How about a link or reposting the questions as I can not reply to locked threads and it seems you can't behave yourself enough to keep a thread from being locked.Yeah...sorry bout' that, I thought about it after I posted it, but figured you'd be able to find it-

Seriously bro a jibe here and there is all in good fun but when all you do is attack the person and refuse to discuss the ideology nothing is accomplished.Agreed-In my opinion, many of your responses come off as STRONGLY militant (Like in a "Hamas" kinda way), and that you're eagerly willing to use force to accomplish what are really minority political goals. You make it more than easy to attack the methodology with some of what you post.
OTOH, Blowing the shit out of things IS my job in the military, that will always bleed through when I speak of the military, or actually doing my job.





From top to bottom- I think I understand where you are coming from in reference to Gregwhore (And any politician) being suspect...Let's assume the orders are being given with good faith.
Since your idea of a lawful and prudent order most likely differs from mine, I'd like to hear what orders would be unacceptable?

Moving on to the third- You're saying it's acceptable for lynch mobs to go about stringing up politicians (Or anyone else they see fit), in addition to looting and buring certian properties, but not private property? That doesn't sound balanced....

4- Why not? What if the issue there is a health hazard? What if you're ordered to deny entry to the area everyone but HAZMAT teams?

5- Let me re-phrase, will you allow "Mob rule" to be the order of the day? It's this simple, when the populace turns ugly, what are you going to do?

5a-I'm trying to figure out how your militia is going to intergrate with the rest of the system, is there a clear SOP or is your leadership just going to wing it, and react with whatever whimsey is in their head at the moment?? I assume you mean for your militia to deployable statewide? You know everyone in Monroe?

6-It's during a time of emergency-and a curfew is imposed due to high levels of looting and arson. The order to disperse is given, multiple times, the crowd begins to pelt you with rocks & bottles.


Here's another aspect to think about- let's talk about the scenario in three levels, Bad, Worse & TSHTF aka TEOTWAWKI.
"Bad" is simply a natuaral disaster-Flood, Fire...what have you.
"Worse" is a natuaral disaster coupled with a significant national event- Another WTC.
"TSHTF"- WTC times 1,000, China Invades ala Red Dawn & D_B runs out of coffee. Whatever, just think "apocalyptic".

Does your response change with each new level of "Oh shit"?? and how so?



Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:14:24 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:18:50 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:20:24 AM EDT

Originally Posted By OdT:
IBTL





Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:32:18 AM EDT
Why don't you two just get a room?
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:32:50 AM EDT
Awwwwwwwwww- FerChrissakes!!!!!!!!

Why can't we all just get along?????

C'Mon- let's give civil communication a chance!
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:58:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Matt45:
From top to bottom- I think I understand where you are coming from in reference to Gregwhore (And any politician) being suspect...Let's assume the orders are being given with good faith.strong evidence against this but for the sake of argument lets run with it


Since your idea of a lawful and prudent order most likely differs from mine, I'd like to hear what orders would be unacceptable?Orders that protect people from themselves, if they want to harm themselves they may do so without interference according to the natural law, that stops the second they present a clear and present danger or act against a individual or people other than themselves, example if someone wants to enter their basement in NOLA filled with diease and crocadiles they may do so, but they should not expect rescue.

Moving on to the third- You're saying it's acceptable for lynch mobs to go about stringing up politicians (Or anyone else they see fit), in addition to looting and buring certian properties, but not private property? That doesn't sound balanced....precedent, judges that issued orders to recoats to enforce the stamp act had their homes looted and burned, stamp act was just one thing that eventually led to the fourth amendment

4- Why not? What if the issue there is a health hazard? What if you're ordered to deny entry to the area everyone but HAZMAT teams?situational, take the city and suburban area of Carnation washington, if FEMA used police and military personel to quarantine the area the militia is best equiped to help manage the quarintine, again and again in responses to these hypothetical situations the locals will always have a better handle on managing a emergency than outsiders because knowledge is power, this does not apply to high density urban scenarios.

5- Let me re-phrase, will you allow "Mob rule" to be the order of the day? It's this simple, when the populace turns ugly, what are you going to do?Mobs did attemp to enter suburban areas during the rodyking LA riots, the militia in Coeurdalene ID formerly lived there and sucessfully kept the peace in their own neighborhoods and repelled the angry mobs

5a-I'm trying to figure out how your militia is going to intergrate with the rest of the system, is there a clear SOP or is your leadership just going to wing it, and react with whatever whimsey is in their head at the moment?? I assume you mean for your militia to deployable statewide? You know everyone in Monroe?I know the CO's for each county in each state in the Pacific corp, SOPs ROEs ICs we work with existing city county state officers as much as possible, but historically existing emergency officers and resources are instantly overwhelmed and the people are left to their own care, the current militia system is based upon a instructor cadre local to each area that assists the people helping themselves, training, communications, resources.

6-It's during a time of emergency-and a curfew is imposed due to high levels of looting and arson. The order to disperse is given, multiple times, the crowd begins to pelt you with rocks & bottles. After floods earthquake or other catastrophe they has been a few looters but only a few and easily handled, if we are discussing high density urban then again i would leave the masses to their own destruction.


Here's another aspect to think about- let's talk about the scenario in three levels, Bad, Worse & TSHTF aka TEOTWAWKI.
"Bad" is simply a natuaral disaster-Flood, Fire...what have you.
"Worse" is a natuaral disaster coupled with a significant national event- Another WTC.
"TSHTF"- WTC times 1,000, China Invades ala Red Dawn & D_B runs out of coffee. Whatever, just think "apocalyptic".

Does your response change with each new level of "Oh shit"?? and how so?

Ofcourse it depends on the severity and who is effected, what is the nature of the disruption, is commercial transport disrupted ? Is food needed on the hundreds of tons level ? if so we have plans for alternate heavy transport for food resupply large scale, I have friends that live outside Seattle but work downtown, there are extraction plans to get those people out considering surface roads not an option.

Informational purposes= The Cont U.S. is devided into six parts, Atlantic corp, Central Corp, Pacific Corp, Pacific corp is everything from mountain time west, a line running west to east devides north from south corps but at present we operate border to border and don't much attention to north south lines.





Link Posted: 3/27/2006 10:34:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:

Originally Posted By Matt45:

Since your idea of a lawful and prudent order most likely differs from mine, I'd like to hear what orders would be unacceptable?Orders that protect people from themselves, if they want to harm themselves they may do so without interference according to the natural law, that stops the second they present a clear and present danger or act against a individual or people other than themselves, example if someone wants to enter their basement in NOLA filled with diease and crocadiles they may do so, but they should not expect rescue.As much as I agree legislating stupidity is a bit senseless, and prefer allowing Darwinism take it's course, therein lies a reason to NOT use the Unorg militia, someone harming themselves usually does affect another, and while "enter at your own risk" is a common sense proposition, there are a great number of liabilities you're opening the State to, while acting as a representitive of the State. That just simply won't be allowed.


Moving on to the third- You're saying it's acceptable for lynch mobs to go about stringing up politicians (Or anyone else they see fit), in addition to looting and buring certian properties, but not private property? That doesn't sound balanced....precedent, judges that issued orders to recoats to enforce the stamp act had their homes looted and burned, stamp act was just one thing that eventually led to the fourth amendmentI simply cannot get "onboard" with your comparision of the 1700's situation, and today's. this response confuses me a bit more-Are you saying you think a modern lynch mob's actions are acceptable because of what Tory's/Redcoats/English rule allowed?


4- Why not? What if the issue there is a health hazard? What if you're ordered to deny entry to the area everyone but HAZMAT teams?situational, take the city and suburban area of Carnation washington, if FEMA used police and military personel to quarantine the area the militia is best equiped to help manage the quarintine, again and again in responses to these hypothetical situations the locals will always have a better handle on managing a emergency than outsiders because knowledge is power, this does not apply to high density urban scenarios.


5- Let me re-phrase, will you allow "Mob rule" to be the order of the day? It's this simple, when the populace turns ugly, what are you going to do?Mobs did attemp to enter suburban areas during the rodyking LA riots, the militia in Coeurdalene ID formerly lived there and sucessfully kept the peace in their own neighborhoods and repelled the angry mobs Great, one example, and you're avoiding the question- Are you or are you not willing to use deadly force? After all other measure have failed, and that's all that is left, what'ya gonna do?

5a-I'm trying to figure out how your militia is going to intergrate with the rest of the system, is there a clear SOP or is your leadership just going to wing it, and react with whatever whimsey is in their head at the moment?? I assume you mean for your militia to deployable statewide? You know everyone in Monroe?I know the CO's for each county in each state in the Pacific corp, SOPs ROEs ICs we work with existing city county state officers as much as possible, but historically existing emergency officers and resources are instantly overwhelmed and the people are left to their own care, the current militia system is based upon a instructor cadre local to each area that assists the people helping themselves, training, communications, resources.
SOPs ROEs ICs - Care to post some examples?


6-It's during a time of emergency-and a curfew is imposed due to high levels of looting and arson. The order to disperse is given, multiple times, the crowd begins to pelt you with rocks & bottles. After floods earthquake or other catastrophe they has been a few looters but only a few and easily handled, if we are discussing high density urban then again i would leave the masses to their own destruction. Soooooooo.....Fuck Seattle? Again, you're avoiding the question concerning using deadly force.



Link Posted: 3/27/2006 10:36:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By OdT:
IBTL





Give them a chance.

We all need to be on the same side if there is ever a SHTF.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 10:36:35 AM EDT
Wow, I'm confused. M pocket guide to the US Constitution I carried with me in Iraq does'nt have anything remotely close to what Stratiotes has written. Do you have a different constitution that i do?
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 10:38:14 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 10:49:56 AM EDT
5- Let me re-phrase, will you allow "Mob rule" to be the order of the day? It's this simple, when the populace turns ugly, what are you going to do?Mobs did attemp to enter suburban areas during the rodyking LA riots, the militia in Coeurdalene ID formerly lived there and sucessfully kept the peace in their own neighborhoods and repelled the angry mobs Great, one example, and you're avoiding the question- Are you or are you not willing to use deadly force? After all other measure have failed, and that's all that is left, what'ya gonna do?

So the militia that was in LA is now in CDA, ID? Wow the whole group just up and re-located? Great, more kali rejects in N. Id to run the property values up. We finaly got rid of the Aryan Nations in N. Id and now we have the Kali militia to take their place. Did they leave Kali because they were afraid of the blacks and mexicans or did they move to live in an area were there is vitually no chance of a SHTF situation ever taking place? Must be why there are so many SKS and Mosin rifles on the used market around here. White Power and all that.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 10:53:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/27/2006 11:18:00 AM EDT by R-32]

Originally Posted By Torakan:
Wow, I'm confused. M pocket guide to the US Constitution I carried with me in Iraq does'nt have anything remotely close to what Stratiotes has written. Do you have a different constitution that i do?



Im even more confused...

What does your post have to do with this thread? ( you do know this will open up a whole new can of worms.)

(Strat if you were a little closer I would throw a brick at you for your post on the Idaho Militia in LA., but this thread is already going to get messed up and I dont want to divert the dialog between you Matt)
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 10:54:45 AM EDT





Link Posted: 3/27/2006 10:59:11 AM EDT
The use of leathal force is well defined in law, in situations/scenarios of limited disruption the law very much applies the as when martial law is declared the constitution is not suspended just habeas corpus and only during the actual emergency, if you lock OdT up in your prison camp I can still sue you for habeas corpus on OdT's account.

Now under the most extreme examples the use of leathal force must still be justified, meaning that if a whole family including the pets and barnyard animals, aging from infant to 100 years old want to strap on bombs and blow themsleves and the enemy up they may do so but no agency/office can make that decision for them.

Concerning crowd control, is there a situation where I would employ leathal force large scale ? YES
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 11:04:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Torakan:
Wow, I'm confused. M pocket guide to the US Constitution I carried with me in Iraq does'nt have anything remotely close to what Stratiotes has written. Do you have a different constitution that i do?



There are two, there is The Costitution for the united states of America, and the U.S. Consitution they look very similar but in law worlds apart.


Law is 'a rule of conduct arising out of the natural relations of human beings established by the Creator, existing prior to any positive precept, discovered by right, reason and the rational intelligence of man.' (Kent) ... This definition gives significance to the idea that man by nature seeks an ideal of absolute right and justice as a higher law by which to measure all other rules of conduct.

Law, when set against a background of divine principles, becomes a rule of reason, pronounced by reasonable men for the benefit of mankind and the establishment of the good community. Man as a reasonable being is able to distinguish between good and evil. Above him there exists law resting on reason and divine authority, which validates man-made law. Thus, when the state by legislation or by judicial process lays down rules of conduct that are unfair, unreasonable, or inimicable to the common good, they are in violation of natural or divine law.”

Such citations as this do shed sufficient light so as to make it self-evident that this general concept of “Natural Law” is the most Fundamental Body of Principles of Law known to mankind. From words such as the above; our American people may find Reason for “Hope”, and perhaps even for “Faith”, that by close adherence to such Sociological “Natural Laws”, our American people can obtain that "Justice", "Domestic Tranquility" (Peace), and "More Perfect Union"; as so eloquently framed in the "Preamble" to our 1789 written "U.S. Constitution" document. The men who framed that written "Constitution" document, affirmed at least token approval of the pre-existing idea that this Sociological “Natural Law” is Supreme over all other man made Rules and Regulations. For example; Mr Blackstone wrote before the generally recognized birth of these United States of America, as follows:

“The law of nature, being ... dictated by God Himself, is ... superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive their force, and all authority ... from this original.”

Link Posted: 3/27/2006 11:10:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By tweeter:

i19.photobucket.com/albums/b196/smartb0mb/goodcitizenshandbook2.jpg








Voilà ! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both
victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer
of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the
once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once
vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands
vivified, and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin
vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious
violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a
votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day
vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of
verbiage veers most verbose vis-Ã -vis an introduction, and so it is my very
good honor to meet you and you may call me Valiant

Link Posted: 3/27/2006 11:15:03 AM EDT
Two constitutions, one country. Which one is the real one?
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 11:15:29 AM EDT
Originally Posted By R-32:


(Strat if you were a little closer I would throw a brick at you for your post on the Idaho Militia in LA., but this thread is already going to get messed up and I dont want to divert your dialog with Matt)[/quot]
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 11:19:47 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/27/2006 11:20:59 AM EDT by STRATIOTES]

Originally Posted By Torakan:
Two constitutions, one country. Which one is the real one?



The constitution for the united states of America is the real one, the U.S. consitituon is being enforced by the only active clause remaining.



Article. VI.

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.


The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.



Thats the only part of the constitution still being enforced.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 11:33:00 AM EDT
This daily headbutting thing is dragging the WAHTF down.... IBTL
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 11:35:00 AM EDT
Ok, when I google anything to do with the constitution, US Constitution, or Constitution of the US. of A, I can only find one text. I will differ to you as a subject matter expert on the constitution, so can you please explain how there is two constitutions and how to they relate to law and government? This is a bit aof a hijack, but is interesting and may relate to how some here are interpeting constitutional issues.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 11:55:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:

Originally Posted By Torakan:
Two constitutions, one country. Which one is the real one?



The constitution for the united states of America is the real one, the U.S. consitituon is being enforced by the only active clause remaining.



Article. VI.

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.


The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.



Thats the only part of the constitution still being enforced.



Does this second constitution exist only in the Matrix????
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 12:01:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Torakan:
Ok, when I google anything to do with the constitution, US Constitution, or Constitution of the US. of A, I can only find one text. I will differ to you as a subject matter expert on the constitution, so can you please explain how there is two constitutions and how to they relate to law and government? This is a bit aof a hijack, but is interesting and may relate to how some here are interpeting constitutional issues.



The U.S.C. is a contract, rules/laws enacted for the public good supported by the people themselves.

The LAW IS FORCE !
Force is justified, violence is not.
The law discerns the difference from the just use of force for the public good and violence that is unjustified and destructive to the public good.

The law/constitution is just words written down on a piece of paper, words can be defined to say whatever the person using them wants them to say as long as that person/office/agent has the force to define the words to mean what it wants them to mean.

The written law will always have flaws, the law will alway abuse force on occasion, thats why trial by jury is the foundation of American common law in the constitution for the united states of America, the founders knew how the law can tyrannize the people when abused and why a jury judges both facts and the LAW !

The difference between the two constitutions is how the law is employed and still violate the spirit of the consitution without violating the letter of the law.

Contracts are an absolute right that the U.S. office holders or foreigners can not interefere with, so what they are doing is calling all law private law and free from public interference, in others words you are the law in your own house, taking boots off at the door rule is your right in which the state can not interfere, your house your rules/law !

The supreme law of the land is supposed to be American common law, but in truth the supreme law of the land is commercial contract law.

The actual legal authority of the invasion of Iraq or invasion of your home is contract violation, not the common law !

Link Posted: 3/27/2006 12:09:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Cyclic240B:
This daily headbutting thing is dragging the WAHTF down.... IBTL



Only if you let it, I bear no animosity to any individual member here, it is only a contest of ideals and if we ever meet person to person I will gladly buy the first beer ! not only that but if someone is in distress from unforeseen circumstances I will come to their aid with all the resources I can muster.


Now to what higher object, to what greater character, can any mortal aspire than to be possessed of all this knowledge, well digested and ready at command, to assist the feeble and friendless, to discountenance the haughty and lawless, to procure redress to wrongs, the advancement of right, to assert and maintain liberty and virtue, to discourage and abolish tyranny and vice?
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 12:26:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Cyclic240B:
This daily headbutting thing is dragging the WAHTF down.... IBTL



Are choking on that cupcake? Here's some free advice, if you feel this situation is "sensitive".

Don't open the link.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 12:41:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/27/2006 12:44:57 PM EDT by Matt45]

Originally Posted By R-32:


(Strat if you were a little closer I would throw a brick at you for your post on the Idaho Militia in LA., but this thread is already going to get messed up and I dont want to divert the dialog between you Matt)



I was going to leave this alone, but...OK.

Strat.....WTF are you talking about!?!?!


Moving on-

The use of leathal force is well defined in law, in situations/scenarios of limited disruption the law very much applies the as when martial law is declared the constitution is not suspended just habeas corpus and only during the actual emergency, if you lock OdT up in your prison camp I can still sue you for habeas corpus on OdT's account.

You're rambling a bit here, but, I'm thinking the courthouse is going to be closed if martial law is in effect.


Now under the most extreme examples the use of leathal force must still be justified, meaning that if a whole family including the pets and barnyard animals, aging from infant to 100 years old want to strap on bombs and blow themsleves and the enemy up they may do so but no agency/office can make that decision for them.
Not a very good answer...you're hiding something. You contend that no agency or office may dictate that it should be illegal to (1) construct a bomb (2) have it in a public place, (3) Be allowed to deploy and detonate such said aforemention device, at a time and place of their choosing??????

Off to the deeper end-
So to you, it's NOT a logical conclusion that a person with an IED strapped on is intending to damage to more than themselves? It's also logical that infants should be allowed to guide themselves, because they possess a rational process? My horse or cow should construct a bomb and deploy it as well????

Now, back on track-


Concerning crowd control, is there a situation where I would employ leathal force large scale ? YES
Would you please describe, in the clearest of terms, what situations you find the application of lethal/deadly force to be acceptable.




Moving on to the third- You're saying it's acceptable for lynch mobs to go about stringing up politicians (Or anyone else they see fit), in addition to looting and buring certian properties, but not private property? That doesn't sound balanced....precedent, judges that issued orders to recoats to enforce the stamp act had their homes looted and burned, stamp act was just one thing that eventually led to the fourth amendment. I simply cannot get "onboard" with your comparision of the 1700's situation, and today's. this response confuses me a bit more-Are you saying you think a modern lynch mob's actions are acceptable because of what Tory's/Redcoats/English rule allowed?



5a-I'm trying to figure out how your militia is going to intergrate with the rest of the system, is there a clear SOP or is your leadership just going to wing it, and react with whatever whimsey is in their head at the moment?? I assume you mean for your militia to deployable statewide? You know everyone in Monroe?I know the CO's for each county in each state in the Pacific corp, SOPs ROEs ICs we work with existing city county state officers as much as possible, but historically existing emergency officers and resources are instantly overwhelmed and the people are left to their own care, the current militia system is based upon a instructor cadre local to each area that assists the people helping themselves, training, communications, resources.SOPs ROEs ICs - Care to post some examples?


6-It's during a time of emergency-and a curfew is imposed due to high levels of looting and arson. The order to disperse is given, multiple times, the crowd begins to pelt you with rocks & bottles. After floods earthquake or other catastrophe they has been a few looters but only a few and easily handled, if we are discussing high density urban then again i would leave the masses to their own destruction. Soooooooo.....Fuck Seattle? Again, you're avoiding the question concerning using deadly force.





Link Posted: 3/27/2006 12:59:58 PM EDT
I've started to read these threads while wearing 3-D glasses.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 1:04:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tweeter:
I've started to read these threads while wearing 3-D glasses.



Way less headache that way!

Thanks for the idea.

Link Posted: 3/27/2006 2:27:10 PM EDT
If they start using the other colors it'll make a pretty pretty rainbow.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 2:35:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Unicorn:
If they start using the other colors it'll make a pretty pretty rainbow.



When did the forum get invaded by liberals? It's starting to sound like everything East of Stevens Pass is New England.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 3:04:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Da_Bunny:

Originally Posted By Unicorn:
If they start using the other colors it'll make a pretty pretty rainbow.



When did the forum get invaded by liberals? It's starting to sound like everything East of Stevens Pass is New England.



his name is Unicorn, he likes rainbows... you get the idea.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 3:36:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Matt45:
Strat.....WTF are you talking about!?!?! first hand account as opposed to hypothetical/pretended scenario.

Moving on-

The use of leathal force is well defined in law, in situations/scenarios of limited disruption the law very much applies the as when martial law is declared the constitution is not suspended just habeas corpus and only during the actual emergency, if you lock OdT up in your prison camp I can still sue you for habeas corpus on OdT's account.

You're rambling a bit here, but, I'm thinking the courthouse is going to be closed if martial law is in effect.
Andersonville as an example, quo warranto/ habeas corpus only means you need to show there is a reason why you have someone in particular locked up.

You contend that no agency or office may dictate that it should be illegal to (1) construct a bomb (2) have it in a public place, (3) Be allowed to deploy and detonate such said aforemention device, at a time and place of their choosing??????The only law during hostilities is the common law, malum en se the only one to answer to is the Creator.

Off to the deeper end-
So to you, it's NOT a logical conclusion that a person with an IED strapped on is intending to damage to more than themselves? It's also logical that infants should be allowed to guide themselves, because they possess a rational process? My horse or cow should construct a bomb and deploy it as well????don't be a psycopolitician now ! There are conditions worse than death, so stipulated that a man with the right to self sacrifice has the moral authority to do so, if a invading alien force can be stopped by self sacrifice with the added benefit of reducing his own families suffering then ofcourse it would be prudent for him to do so but no other agency has the right beyond what the individual has, standard natural law precepts.

Now, back on track-


Concerning crowd control, is there a situation where I would employ leathal force large scale ? YES [/quote Would you please describe, in the clearest of terms, what situations you find the application of lethal/deadly force to be acceptable.Hostile aggressor forces with intent and means !



[quote;Moving on to the third- You're saying it's acceptable for lynch mobs to go about stringing up politicians ]
Are you saying you think a modern lynch mob's actions are acceptable because of what Tory's/Redcoats/English rule allowed[/quote* There is local active justice system to deal with such cases, it is very possible that due process of law is invoked here, may be somewhat sarcastic but I am not going to Olympia to save gregwhore from a lynch mob unless she actually did have a change of heart and honored her oath to the Washington state consitution.

5a-I'm trying to figure out how your militia is going to intergrate with the rest of the system, is there a clear SOP or is your leadership just going to wing it, and react with whatever whimsey is in their head at the moment?? I assume you mean for your militia to deployable statewide? You know everyone in Monroe?SOPs ROEs ICs - Care to post some examples? IC= standard incident command used for state emergencies, something the majority of people are familiar with, some SOP and ROE are in the national standards, specifics or special depend upon the state and county they are in and all the details pecular to that AO.



6-It's during a time of emergency-and a curfew is imposed due to high levels of looting and arson. The order to disperse is given, multiple times, the crowd begins to pelt you with rocks & bottles.Soooooooo.....Fuck Seattle? Again, you're avoiding the question concerning using deadly force. No I am well versed in natural law as a little about rules of land warfare, you will not get me to advocate lawlesness to the contrary I advocate peace and the rule of law and the just use of force when necessary !




Link Posted: 3/27/2006 4:34:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Matt45:

Originally Posted By Cyclic240B:
This daily headbutting thing is dragging the WAHTF down.... IBTL



Are choking on that cupcake? Here's some free advice, if you feel this situation is "sensitive".

Don't open the link.



Your best post yet!

This time your more rational. Keep it that way

If this thread doesn't sink. We all learn more.

NOW, ON WITH THE DEBATE
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 5:42:17 PM EDT
To hell with ye all.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 5:58:47 PM EDT
"OH NO" not the pirates.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 6:20:03 PM EDT
Ok Strat, you have to explain it in more detail. So the US Constitution is not the real constitution, but a contract (with who?) and the Constitution of the United States of America is the official constitution, but its just the law written on paper and does'nt mean anything because it can be defined to mean anything someone wants it to mean? Can you expalin this or is it just retoric?
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 6:51:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Torakan:
Ok Strat, you have to explain it in more detail. [No problem./blue] So the US Constitution is not the real constitution, but a contract (with who?) and the Constitution of the United States of America is the official constitution, but its just the law written on paper and does'nt mean anything because it can be defined to mean anything someone wants it to mean? Can you expalin this or is it just retoric?



The law is only as good as the people that enforce it, the constitution was written by two groups of people, one group of plutocrats known as federalists and one group of libertarians known as anti-federalists, when they had the convention in 1789 the larger more powerful group the federalists suspended the rules and did a majority vote to force the present U.S.C on the states, Rhode Island is the only state to actually have a vote of the people, 84% voted against, George Washington marched the army up there and forced them to sign/ratify at gunpoint.

Though the U.S.C was adopted 1789, it was not ratified until 1791 and the bill of rights was amended to it, it was thought that if the people enforced the BoR we could sill have a free nation even with a fascist commercial law document the U.S.C. if the three branchs of government agree then there is a constitutional dictatership.

At it's very basis/foundation this is a struggle between people that labor an honest living and merchants that buy and sell&ship, American common law and the law merchant/commercial contract law.

After the war for independence some northern states had contracts that they could not break even with the victory of the war, the consitution was a bankruptcy protection act for those states that forced all the states to cover the debts/contracts of other states.

Art-6 Sec-6 quoted above shows we must honor those contracts no matter what and for that reason every other article and section or BoR is meaningless when it comes to the supreme law of the land, unless the people themselves stand up and enforce the common-law = BoR.

I have been threatened with comtempt/jail for refering to the constitution in Snohomish superior court as opposed to having had victories using commercial law = UCC Uniform Commercial Code.

I do not speak from speculation, I speak from first hand experience pro-per in the courts.

Link Posted: 3/27/2006 7:19:57 PM EDT
So, despite all the retoric about supporting the constitution and all, you really dont support "THE" constitution? So what constitution do you and your bunch support? It seems to me you just take any quote or statement from history and use it out of contex to support whatever point of view your supporting at the time. Now the constitution really is'nt the constitution and is an illegal document forced into ratification by gun point?
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 7:27:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Torakan:
Now the constitution really is'nt the constitution and is an illegal document forced into ratification by gun point?



It does not matter if the written document/contract has flaws, it will still work if it is enforced in the "spirit in which it was intended", all thats going on here is an explanation between statuatory law black letter law and how it is enforced by living breathing souls.



Link Posted: 3/27/2006 8:37:29 PM EDT
So, our constitution, The Constitution of the United States of America, is the real constitution right? And the second constitution you mention, the US Constitution, is actually the "spirit" of the orriginal constitution and is used to define the actual written constitution? Now, in my research the Constitution (I'll combine the two for ease of explanation) was written in 1787, ratified in 1788 after New Hampsire gave the needed 9th vote, adopted by 12 of the original 13 colonnies by 1789, and finally adopted by Rhode island, the smallest of the colonnies, in 1790 after 4 anti-federalists abstained from voting. Thus making Rhode Island the last of the original 13 colonnies to become a state. BTW, could'nt find anything about the Federal Army invading RI to force them by gun point to adopt the Constitution, possibly more militia urban legend? Anyway, the Federalists, who were/are the guys you keep quoting, were the ones who supported the constitution so are they the good guys or the bad guys? So I go back to my original question, why does your constitution says stuff my constitution does not?
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 8:53:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/27/2006 9:02:20 PM EDT by Torakan]
Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:

Moving on to the third- You're saying it's acceptable for lynch mobs to go about stringing up politicians (Or anyone else they see fit), in addition to looting and buring certian properties, but not private property? That doesn't sound balanced....precedent, judges that issued orders to recoats to enforce the stamp act had their homes looted and burned, stamp act was just one thing that eventually led to the fourth amendment


Well, from what I have read, the Stamp Act, a consumption based Tax BTW, was imposed by England in 1765 and repealed leagally by the British parliment in 1766 after colonial pressure in the form of boycotts. I could find no reference to any judges ordering the British army to enforce the tax or of their homes being burned and looted by the law abiding citizens in revolt to the tax. It did in fact force the British parliment to pass a law taking representation in taxation or policy away from the colonies. Now the 4th Amendment refers to unlawful search and seizures, how does that pertain to taxation and the stamp tax?
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 8:53:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:

I have been threatened with comtempt/jail for refering to the constitution in Snohomish superior court as opposed to having had victories using commercial law = UCC Uniform Commercial Code.

I do not speak from speculation, I speak from first hand experience pro-per in the courts.



I know for a fact that this has happened to others as well. It is not an uncommon practice amoung the man-god judes in black robes who support the Status-Quo, which is about 99% of them. When push comes to shove they will all do it. The judiciary sold us out a long time ago.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:07:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By RedDawg6:

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:

I have been threatened with comtempt/jail for refering to the constitution in Snohomish superior court as opposed to having had victories using commercial law = UCC Uniform Commercial Code.

I do not speak from speculation, I speak from first hand experience pro-per in the courts.



I know for a fact that this has happened to others as well. It is not an uncommon practice amoung the man-god judes in black robes who support the Status-Quo, which is about 99% of them. When push comes to shove they will all do it. The judiciary sold us out a long time ago.



Facts can be backed up. Can you or Strat cite any specific court rulings/cases or links to specific rulings?
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:18:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Torakan:
BTW, could'nt find anything about the Federal Army invading RI to force them by gun point to adopt the Constitution, possibly more militia urban legend? You will find most of this info in a book called "Hologram of Liberty" by Kenneth W. Royce Anyway, the Federalists, who were/are the guys you keep quoting, were the ones who supported the constitution so are they the good guys or the bad guys?Federalist were the bad guys, they want big centralized government, anti-federalists wanted small decentralized rural agrarian type government. So I go back to my original question, why does your constitution says stuff my constitution does not?

Becuase I know the difference between the spirit of the law and the letter of the law, the letter of the law kills/brings death the spirit of the law brings life, the constitution is a negative law document meant to restrict and place limits on it, so it does not grow to be so big that it has a power monopoly, those limits and restrictions were exceeded/ they broke the law in other words when they call it a living document.

The flaws in the U.S.C are best explained in the most simple and concise manner in the anti-federalist papers, don't bother with the federalist papers it just fascist BS to justify plunder.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:21:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Torakan:

Originally Posted By RedDawg6:

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:

I have been threatened with comtempt/jail for refering to the constitution in Snohomish superior court as opposed to having had victories using commercial law = UCC Uniform Commercial Code.

I do not speak from speculation, I speak from first hand experience pro-per in the courts.



I know for a fact that this has happened to others as well. It is not an uncommon practice amoung the man-god judes in black robes who support the Status-Quo, which is about 99% of them. When push comes to shove they will all do it. The judiciary sold us out a long time ago.



Facts can be backed up. Can you or Strat cite any specific court rulings/cases or links to specific rulings?



John Pitner was told by Federal judge John Couganhour that he could not refer the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights at his trial in 1994. John Pitner was the former head of the Washington State Militia. He was sentence to 5 years at the Seatac Detention Center on trumped up weapons charges.
Specifically judge Couganour stated "the US Constitution might work out in the street but it has no place in my court room.!" I do not have the documents or the transcripts in front of me to back it up but John Pitner has the transcripts and the time in the box to back it up. Also another interesting fact is that John Pitner's attorney was former Washington State governor John Spellman. JP asked his attorney to trie his case in constitutional grounds and not go by the game plan and rules of admininstrative law and rely on common law and the US Constitution. John Spellman (former governor) said he would get disbarred if he did that. Go figure!
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:26:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:

Originally Posted By Torakan:
BTW, could'nt find anything about the Federal Army invading RI to force them by gun point to adopt the Constitution, possibly more militia urban legend? You will find most of this info in a book called "Hologram of Liberty" by Kenneth W. Royce Anyway, the Federalists, who were/are the guys you keep quoting, were the ones who supported the constitution so are they the good guys or the bad guys?Federalist were the bad guys, they want big centralized government, anti-federalists wanted small decentralized rural agrarian type government. So I go back to my original question, why does your constitution says stuff my constitution does not?

Becuase I know the difference between the spirit of the law and the letter of the law,So your the self-pro-claimed prophet of the Constitution? the letter of the law kills/brings death the spirit of the law brings life, the constitution is a negative law document meant to restrict and place limits on it, so it does not grow to be so big that it has a power monopoly, those limits and restrictions were exceeded/ they broke the law in other words when they call it a living document.

The flaws in the U.S.C are best explained in the most simple and concise manner in the anti-federalist papers, don't bother with the federalist papers it just fascist BS to justify plunder.

Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:27:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/27/2006 9:48:09 PM EDT by R-32]
Edit: Never mind, the question was found in Reddawgs post..
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:31:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Torakan:
Well, from what I have read, the Stamp Act, a consumption based Tax BTW, was imposed by England in 1765 and repealed leagally by the British parliment in 1766 after colonial pressure in the form of boycotts. I could find no reference to any judges ordering the British army to enforce the tax or of their homes being burned and looted by the law abiding citizens in revolt to the tax. It did in fact force the British parliment to pass a law taking representation in taxation or policy away from the colonies. Now the 4th Amendment refers to unlawful search and seizures, how does that pertain to taxation and the stamp tax?




England was an empirial power but the nation building wars had England deep in debt, so England was forcing the colonists to pay for the English debts, England restricted the manufacture and was forcing the states/colonies to export raw materials, domestic goods had to have a stamp to show tax had been paid, the british soldiers went with tax collectors and kicked in doors to check for stamps whether they had stamps or not really did not matter the soldiers often took everything anyway, this was just one practice of tax collecting/plunder that lead to the fourth amendment.

Just becuase something is written in a book does not make it true, however careful research can verify, read the writings of the philosophers of the time, history is written by the bad guys but they never bother to change the philosophers writings.

Another point which has not so much do with geneology but continuity of history is my family has been in this country from approx 1545, I have a lot of family history including the distant relation to George Washington. to his grand parents if memory serves
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:54:00 PM EDT
More 3-D!!!!!!!

Rainbows? East of Stevens? More like West of I-5.


Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:
Originally Posted By Matt45:
Strat.....WTF are you talking about!?!?! first hand account as opposed to hypothetical/pretended scenario.So go ahead, give me the first hand account of how the ID militia, living in LA, repellled angry mobs, and then later moved to CD'A.


Moving on-

The use of leathal force is well defined in law, in situations/scenarios of limited disruption the law very much applies the as when martial law is declared the constitution is not suspended just habeas corpus and only during the actual emergency, if you lock OdT up in your prison camp I can still sue you for habeas corpus on OdT's account.

You're rambling a bit here, but, I'm thinking the courthouse is going to be closed if martial law is in effect.
Andersonville as an example, quo warranto/ habeas corpus only means you need to show there is a reason why you have someone in particular locked up. What's the purpose of Habeas corpus? It means you can file a Writ with the court and the Gov't has to produce the accused, and evidence that there has been a violation of law. But if there is no court......Now you're in a loop. And you have drifted faaaaaaaaar away from the dealy force question- Almost enough so that you daon't have to answer, but let's see what we have in the rest of this thread-

You contend that no agency or office may dictate that it should be illegal to (1) construct a bomb (2) have it in a public place, (3) Be allowed to deploy and detonate such said aforemention device, at a time and place of their choosing??????The only law during hostilities is the common law, malum en se the only one to answer to is the Creator. So, during hostilities, it's every man for himself? THAT sounds alot like, you know what,"A______!". Especially since MY militia follows what we call the Rules of Land Warfare & Geneva Conventions. This is all beginning to lead me to believe that unregulated, unorganized militias must scribble something on the inside of a empty carton of Camels with a grease pencil and then refer to the specific articles later as, "Oops! missed that one too!" or "OK, we'll try harder!".


Off to the deeper end-
So to you, it's NOT a logical conclusion that a person with an IED strapped on is intending to damage to more than themselves? It's also logical that infants should be allowed to guide themselves, because they possess a rational process? My horse or cow should construct a bomb and deploy it as well????don't be a psycopolitician now ! There are conditions worse than death, so stipulated that a man with the right to self sacrifice has the moral authority to do so, if a invading alien force can be stopped by self sacrifice with the added benefit of reducing his own families suffering then ofcourse it would be prudent for him to do so but no other agency has the right beyond what the individual has, standard natural law precepts.
Psychopolitician nothing Strat- I gave you the rope and YOU tied the knot. You often bounce from one extreme to the.....well you go to one extreme and stay there.
What you've just said is that no office or agency should be allowed to institue a draft, or direct persons in harms way? Isn't contrary to the Authority given to the Executive and Legislative branches??? Or was I reading the wrong Constitution?


Now, back on track-


Concerning crowd control, is there a situation where I would employ leathal force large scale ? YES
Would you please describe, in the clearest of terms, what situations you find the application of lethal/deadly force to be acceptable.
Hostile aggressor forces with intent and means ! So you're outnumbered 4-1, crowd advancing, with rocks, bottles & impact weapons? Is that enough? What if there is women and teenagers in the crowd as well?




Moving on to the third- You're saying it's acceptable for lynch mobs to go about stringing up politicians.
Are you saying you think a modern lynch mob's actions are acceptable because of what Tory's/Redcoats/English rule allowed in the 1700's?

There is local active justice system to deal with such cases, it is very possible that due process of law is invoked here, may be somewhat sarcastic but I am not going to Olympia to save gregwhore from a lynch mob unless she actually did have a change of heart and honored her oath to the Washington state consitution.OK, in two sentences you infer that you trust the justice system to do it's job, that you believe in law and order, but then infer you are not about to save a citizen from lawlessness??? In what way shape or form is a lynching a form of due process, AS SET FORTH by the????(Drumroll please) Constitution? (BTW- Go to the last paragraph for your own words.

5a-I'm trying to figure out how your militia is going to intergrate with the rest of the system, is there a clear SOP or is your leadership just going to wing it, and react with whatever whimsey is in their head at the moment?? I assume you mean for your militia to deployable statewide? You know everyone in Monroe?SOPs ROEs ICs - Care to post some examples? [/redIC= standard incident command used for state emergencies, something the majority of people are familiar with, some SOP and ROE are in the national standards, specifics or special depend upon the state and county they are in and all the details pecular to that AO. Examples of the SOP's & ROE themselves ya ninny! I KNOW what an Incident Commander is and how a Standard Operating Procedure is structured...I want to see an actual fleshed out example, and specifically the one for FF-42. (For a frame of reference, this relates directly to the Genva Conventions comments I made above)


6-It's during a time of emergency-and a curfew is imposed due to high levels of looting and arson. The order to disperse is given, multiple times, the crowd begins to pelt you with rocks & bottles.

No I am well versed in natural law as a little about rules of land warfare, you will not get me to advocate lawlesness to the contrary I advocate peace and the rule of law and the just use of force when necessary!





Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:54:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:
Another point which has not so much do with geneology but continuity of history is my family has been in this country from approx 1545, I have a lot of family history including the distant relation to George Washington. to his grand parents if memory serves



Hell, I'm also related to Adam & Eve!

Strat, you left yourself open. I just couldn't help it, I had to say it!
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top