1911Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
81 - 100 of 123 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,809 Posts
I never studied Franco, but I have studied Hitler and the Nazi a lot over the years...So what I can infer based on your description of Franco, he may have been a Fascist but he wasn't a Socialist. Hitler may have been a Fascist but he most certainly was also a socialist. He controlled/directed all parts of Nazi life, including massive propaganda of the mind, massive government projects, Nazi approved marriages, mandated vacations which included Nazi-propaganda, etc. and so forth. The entire Nazi regime in Germany was an "architecture" of Socialism. Yes, it was National Socialize, but a form of Socialism nevertheless.

And of course the American Constitution is the best Political System ever invented, I don't think anyone on this forum ever argues otherwise (except a Lefty-Troll once in a while). It is the best Political System because it is founded on God-Given-Rights, and puts the individual before the collective-spirits of the "mob".

This system has been under assault for many, many, years. And under the political freedoms we allow in this country, it always will be under assault...

But we lost a lot of ground over the last 100 years. Most of the reason for this is because our side is loosing the propaganda war slowly but surely.

Food for thought for all reading this:

2A: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

"Necessary" yes, but not sufficient. The Founders knew that 250 years ago, and it is 100X truer in the society we live in today.

So after folks have the arms and ammo, train, at least you can protect your family. But you have to be politically active in the here and now in order to assure a free state in today's America. I think most people on our side got the "necessary" part taken care of, but we have a long way to go on the "sufficient" part - the Propaganda war, being excellent at it, and gaining the political advantage which comes from it! This takes money and smarts.

This is a war of the "mind' far, far, more than a war based on violence.

This is what we have done wrong (in the main) in the last 100 years...Lots of guns and ammo for the proverbial SHTF-scenario but the society is slipping away into the abyss because we are not fighting the propaganda war effectively.
You are right, the left won the propaganda war. A year ago, when in the Salt Lake area visiting an american friend, we got in touch with an old gentleman from Vietnam, talking about politics, he told us a couple of things: the first thing the left do is to divide people between good and bad, the second thing is to take control of education and media, controling propaganda thus population, he was seeing the same trend in America.

And in fact, same kind of things happened in my country, Spain before the start of the Civil War (1936-1939).

The spanish fascism like the italian fascism had few things in common with the nazis, first of all, fascist were not racist. In fact, many european volunteers in the Wehrmacht like the spaniard volunteers in the german army (250th Infantry Division, the Blue Division) were not nazis just fighters against communist. The Wehrmacht was an international army composed by many european nationalities not just germans, all of them gathered to fight communist, the real evil.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,498 Posts
Dear Friend,

I am from Spain and I am talking about General Franco Regime.

If you ask me about the best way of Government ever devised by human minds, my answer will be the Constitution of the United States as envisioned by your Founding Fathers but the United States of today has nothing to do with the United States of 1776 nor with the United States of 1890 nor even with the United States of 1945. Your Founding Fathers never envisioned a multiracial, multicultural and inclusive United States with the biggest government on earth, no Sir. I know the States pretty well, have been fortunate to visit your land for more than 25 years, some of my best friends live there, I represent and distribute some of the premier american gun companies on this side of the Atlantic so my ties with the States are strong and I can attest that the United States of 25 years ago is gone. The western State I used to visit for two decades, one of the most beautiful places I ever seen is now full of strange people....crime is on the high and values and way of life is changing for the worst.

Talking about here, is the same crap, so yes, life was easier and much better when Franco rule the nation. Plenty of jobs, affordable housing, no taxes, start up a business was really easy and best of all, unless you were a socialist or a communist, the small government did nor rule on your life. Even gun ownership was much easier, now after 40 years of democracy gun ownership is at risk for the first time.

Democracy does not always have to mean liberty and prosperity, just take a look to the UK.. or any other EU nation, mine included, pf course.

All the best,
You have a better understanding of America than 90% of Americans. Looking at us from afar offers a clearer view, uncluttered by the 24/7 conditioning and propaganda Americans receive from every direction. By choosing artificial equality over liberty, we destroyed our freedom and our nation. Some of us saw it coming while most continued to keep their head in the sand. You can almost feel the noose tightening and they haven't even taken over yet. Unfortunately they have a massive government apparatus already in place that can't wait to tighten the screws.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
510 Posts
Great idea! Let's all do this guys/gals, and then we can talk about the 1911s etc we used to own. Gonna rent a rowboat later today. Yep, gonna be a go-along/get-along kinda guy from now on. Oops, time for my favorite CNN show, gotta run.
Row boats are the best.
Especially when ALL of your guns are in them.
Be careful thought, they can tip over . . .
just sayin'.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
510 Posts
You are right, the left won the propaganda war. A year ago, when in the Salt Lake area visiting an american friend, we got in touch with an old gentleman from Vietnam, talking about politics, he told us a couple of things: the first thing the left do is to divide people between good and bad, the second thing is to take control of education and media, controling propaganda thus population, he was seeing the same trend in America.

And in fact, same kind of things happened in my country, Spain before the start of the Civil War (1936-1939).

The spanish fascism like the italian fascism had few things in common with the nazis, first of all, fascist were not racist. In fact, many european volunteers in the Wehrmacht like the spaniard volunteers in the german army (250th Infantry Division, the Blue Division) were not nazis just fighters against communist. The Wehrmacht was an international army composed by many european nationalities not just germans, all of them gathered to fight communist, the real evil.
Thank-you for your insight . . .
Trump for President 2020.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
384 Posts
A couple of observations.

First, it's true that the Electors could be appointed to, or themselves decide to, vote contrary to the popular vote - in 2020 that would mean voting against Democrat theft of the election. But does anyone really expect or believe that said persons would actually stick their necks out do do so? I'd love to see it happen, but I'd put the odds in the thousands-to-one category. And as to SCOTUS fixing things, I'm not sure they'll even grant cert. SCOTUS avoids "political questions" (remember the Obamacare opinion?) and is going to be very leery of taking a case like this if they're going to be seen as actually picking the president. Sidney Powell, Lin Wood etc. will need to present a whole lot of really solid evidence of fraud in order for SCOTUS to take this up. If they only show some changed votes it probably won't do; they'll need to show something big, or eve better, systematic. And they may have exactly that with all that's being discovered about this Dominion/Smartmatic voting software. Apparently it was invented either in Venezuela by or for Hugo Chavez for the express purpose of stealing elections, and not only a bunch of American politicians but the Chinese supposedly have financial stakes in it. If she has proof of that, SCOTUS will be much more likely to get involved. If SCOTUS bails, then the odds of something formerly considered farfetched such as rogue Electors or a declared unresolved election with a House vote go up a lot higher.

Second, yes, both the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were "socialist" according to their names. But neither was actually socialist, in the strict sense of the word.
The Soviets were pretty much Marxist/Leninist communists interested in converting the world by guile or by force.
In the 20s and 30s there were a lot of socialist parties from the Christian Democrats and Social Democrats to the generic German Socialist Party.
Hitler's National Socialism was originally conceived as a counter to the rising Soviet power and IIRC he took one over, absorbed several of the others and the result was the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

For the most part, socialism is almost never actually practiced the way it's described in college. Socialism and even communism sound great on paper, and are very seductive to the young, ignorant and stupid. Politicians of a certain sort simply use socialism as a disguise, and then once in power the true agenda is revealed. What they don't tell the college kids is the part about centralized power and the decision-making power resting in the hands of a very few elites who are usually the most ruthless and power-mad sociopaths a country can produce. Lenin may have meant it, but Stalin and Hitler used the lure of socialism to gain and then keep iron control. Almost every country, including the so-called European "Democracies", winds up with power wielded by a self-serving, more or less uncaring elite. Look at the UK, France, etc. - who's in charge? The very people thrown out of power in the early 20th century recaptured their power and re-established the class system via socialism.

That's a very simplistic explanation because this isn't a classroom, but here's the thing to know, and to take away: Socialism, whether sincere or false, is BAD.
At its best it is a soul-destroying system that stunts the human spirit and denies individual potential; at its worst it is simply a means for a select few to gain and keep absolute power over the People.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,394 Posts
Absolutely! Looks like the Op was ready, willing, and prepared to turn in all of his. :rolleyes: And, I watched that interview with Maria Bartiromo on Fox News Sunday. It still sounds really iffy for the Trump legal team to be able to produce enough evidence to back up the claims. They have a witness, but, sounds like no hard evidence to back up the witness' claims.

I really want this to be true and provable in court. Obama wasn't as bad as I was expecting as far as civil rights (including 2nd Amendment) infringements (I was expecting far worse). But, with Biden and his association of self described socialists (communists if they were honest) that want cabinet positions, as well as Biden's own career of attempting to violate the Constitution and Bill of Rights, I really expect a Biden, corrupt administration to deal a terrible blow toward the destruction of our Constitutional Republic. If the commies (democrats) get a senate majority, then that spells the beginning of the end for our Republic and the Constitution that is it's foundation.

Sworn testimony is, in fact, “hard evidence”.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,324 Posts
kitchencounsel -

Your perspective is very good on this, and appreciated. The only thing for SCOTUS to do, if involved, is to look at the evidence of election fraud and rule if it did or did not occur - there is plenty (IMO) of evidence that indicates there was. After that, they can declare the election invalid due to fraud and rule a new one is needed, or let the House decide through their Constitutional duty (regardless of electoral college) to choose a president by one vote per state as laid out in the Constitution. The USSC cannot decide a president from my reading of the Constitution.

Socialism, in my perspective of education, is an economic application of the philosophical principle of collectivism, and communism is the political application of it. Philosophically, only two real philosophies exist - collectivism and individualism; everything else is an application of those. Whether economics, politics, culture, or whatever - they are always applications of those two abstract ideologies; collectivism vs. individualism.

Socialism is redistribution of wealth (economic) while communism is all property, lives, and anything physical belong to "The State" or "The Party". Karl Marx stated that communism (all belongs to the state and distributed at its discretion) could never be implemented without socialism (the concept of what you produce as wealth as an individual is subject to the claim of others and must be transferred to them) by any claim on it whether you agree or not (BTW - you are REQUIRED to agree in that system).

On the other hand, individualism, is the belief that those that produce wealth are the owners of it, and trade freely and fairly with those that work with them to build that wealth. As always, fair trade amongst consenting parties to produce wealth, distributes (AND CREATES) wealth, and even the poor have an avenue to prosperity - this is what our Republic is based on. Alas, there are always scoundrels that are attracted to power, and use subterfuge to acquire it; and once in power, don't relinquish it readily. The Founders knew this, and provided many mechanisms to protect against it, but were cognizant of, and stated it plainly, that it had to be maintained by eternal vigilance by moral men. No other populous or course of action could maintain it.

I'll leave my comments at that, as I agree that this is not the place for a classroom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 15roundsof9

·
Registered
Joined
·
384 Posts
kitchencounsel -

Your perspective is very good on this, and appreciated. The only thing for SCOTUS to do, if involved, is to look at the evidence of election fraud and rule if it did or did not occur - there is plenty (IMO) of evidence that indicates there was. After that, they can declare the election invalid due to fraud and rule a new one is needed, or let the House decide through their Constitutional duty (regardless of electoral college) to choose a president by one vote per state as laid out in the Constitution. The USSC cannot decide a president from my reading of the Constitution.

Socialism, in my perspective of education, is an economic application of the philosophical principle of collectivism, and communism is the political application of it. Philosophically, only two real philosophies exist - collectivism and individualism; everything else is an application of those. Whether economics, politics, culture, or whatever - they are always applications of those two abstract ideologies; collectivism vs. individualism.

Socialism is redistribution of wealth (economic) while communism is all property, lives, and anything physical belong to "The State" or "The Party". Karl Marx stated that communism (all belongs to the state and distributed at its discretion) could never be implemented without socialism (the concept of what you produce as wealth as an individual is subject to the claim of others and must be transferred to them) by any claim on it whether you agree or not (BTW - you are REQUIRED to agree in that system).

On the other hand, individualism, is the belief that those that produce wealth are the owners of it, and trade freely and fairly with those that work with them to build that wealth. As always, fair trade amongst consenting parties to produce wealth, distributes (AND CREATES) wealth, and even the poor have an avenue to prosperity - this is what our Republic is based on. Alas, there are always scoundrels that are attracted to power, and use subterfuge to acquire it; and once in power, don't relinquish it readily. The Founders knew this, and provided many mechanisms to protect against it, but were cognizant of, and stated it plainly, that it had to be maintained by eternal vigilance by moral men. No other populous or course of action could maintain it.

I'll leave my comments at that, as I agree that this is not the place for a classroom.
The SCOTUS isn't quite as limited as that; think back to Bush v. Gore where the SCOTUS basically told Florida to obey its own constitution and laws, and remanded the case back for appropriate action.
In this case, for example, the Court might find systemic fraud based on evidence of individual sworn testimony of things like vote tampering and denial of access to poll watchers, demonstration of vote manipulation via software or whatever. To put the case within Original Jurisdiction of the SCOTUS, Powell et. al. will and base their cases on sound Constitutional issues like Equal Protection (again, Bush v Gore), say, and tell PA, MI, WI, GA and whoever else to go back and apply their own law by the letter and the intent. To get everybody's attention (everybody meaning the DNC) the SCOTUS could preemptively state in dictum that noncompliance would result in a Contingent Election, which would probably result in a second term for Trump given the Republican control of so many state governments (I think 30?).

As to your comments on socialism, I repeat that it's not this or that definition of socialism that matters. The important thing to be aware of is the use of socialism as a cure-all for society's ills to conceal the agendas of those intent on gaining and keeping power. They talk a great game, of "reform" and "common-sense" this or that, but they never get around to mentioning whose common sense, or that it is they who define what "reform" means, not you.
They gain power on the promise of sweetness and light, then once they have the power, they use it however they like. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" and socialism is a wonderful means by which to gain absolute power.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,324 Posts
The SCOTUS isn't quite as limited as that; think back to Bush v. Gore where the SCOTUS basically told Florida to obey its own constitution and laws, and remanded the case back for appropriate action.
In this case, for example, the Court might find systemic fraud based on evidence of individual sworn testimony of things like vote tampering and denial of access to poll watchers, demonstration of vote manipulation via software or whatever. To put the case within Original Jurisdiction of the SCOTUS, Powell et. al. will and base their cases on sound Constitutional issues like Equal Protection (again, Bush v Gore), say, and tell PA, MI, WI, GA and whoever else to go back and apply their own law by the letter and the intent. To get everybody's attention (everybody meaning the DNC) the SCOTUS could preemptively state in dictum that noncompliance would result in a Contingent Election, which would probably result in a second term for Trump given the Republican control of so many state governments (I think 30?).

As to your comments on socialism, I repeat that it's not this or that definition of socialism that matters. The important thing to be aware of is the use of socialism as a cure-all for society's ills to conceal the agendas of those intent on gaining and keeping power. They talk a great game, of "reform" and "common-sense" this or that, but they never get around to mentioning whose common sense, or that it is they who define what "reform" means, not you.
They gain power on the promise of sweetness and light, then once they have the power, they use it however they like. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" and socialism is a wonderful means by which to gain absolute power.
On socialism we are getting at the same thing - you from a "promise and application" perspective, and I from an abstract philosophical basis - those two, BTW, are directly connected. Philosophy is the basis of moral values as perceived by an individual (and by definition, a society), and is the guiding principle of every decision made by every individual (and thus society) in which moral principles are held; some obviously better than others. These are the basis for laws, which men adopt as the basis for social contracts like our Constitution.

The USSC may indeed find that certain states did not follow their own election laws, but what they determine as a "remedy" is not well defined in the Constitution, so there may be some new ground here in what they are able (or willing) to define for "process" for deciding this election. I don't think any of us can guess that outcome. As far as Contingent Election based on states' legislatures, that would be interesting on how the electoral college would then be defined as to invalid states' election results based on fraud. So, if the states with proven fraud have no electoral votes allowed (due to fraud), then yes, Trump would get re-elected by electoral votes. However, if the electoral college is invalidated by proof of election fraud, and this is new ground for the USSC and our country, then it does indeed revert to the House for the one vote per state provision where Trump would undoubtedly be re-elected.

This is all conjecture at this point, because we really don't know at this point how it will play out.

What I suggest is to be supportive of the legal challenges in those states that have been shown to be corrupt, and concurrently be planning what the course of action will be to legally thwart any attempts by Biden/Harris administration on 2A rights should they get in. None of life's answers are easy when dealing with other men.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,953 Posts
Post #85 - SCOTUS has no choice in some cases. Just as Chief Justice had to preside over the impeachment trial, that's a judicial person in a political environment, and, he holds the tie vote!

So, SCOTUS may very well need to decide a political thing. It's an area they don't like to be, but that's how things are designed.

Electors do not need to vote against the State's popular vote, they could simply choose not to cast a vote for either candidate. If the Electors believe the election was too problematic (which it is, very obvious) then it's on them to do the right thing. I think this is possible in AZ, GA, PA. However, Trump may actually win GA soon, and maybe even PA. They have another 28days to stop the steal !

AZ's Doug Duchey said today that the election process had integrity, yet provided no facts to support that. I bet ya many votes cast in AZ were dupes from CA !!!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
510 Posts
I have read all of the above and have a response that I believe to be a good summary . . .
Trump for President 2020.

Thank-you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
I think we are forgetting just how much power the Government has. If they want your guns, you will give them up with a grin. After they have frozen your bank accounts, suspended your credit cards (but not the bill) and put a lien an all of your property until such time as you prove to their satisfaction that you no longer possess any gun their records and internet surveillance show you own(ed), it won’t be long until you are digging those rifles out of the ground and carting the to the nearest police station. What you do with them once you get them there is a personal decision.

Rusty Bolts
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phreddie30.06

·
Registered
Joined
·
425 Posts
I think we are forgetting just how much power the Government has. If they want your guns, you will give them up with a grin. After they have frozen your bank accounts, suspended your credit cards (but not the bill) and put a lien an all of your property until such time as you prove to their satisfaction that you no longer possess any gun their records and internet surveillance show you own(ed), it won’t be long until you are digging those rifles out of the ground and carting the to the nearest police station. What you do with them once you get them there is a personal decision.

Rusty Bolts
My financial advisor wife told that as we were getting ready for bed last night.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,953 Posts
Post #92-93 - you will kneel & obey w/o letting off a single round? Wow.
Now you are saying I would need to prove I don't have something the govt says I have?
That's an out-there idea for the movies.

If BoR says I have natural rights 1-10, then I could care less what the govt thinks. I also expect the millions of American Patriots to be on the same battleground on same side as me, and I believe it that to be the case. So sure, the govt takes whatever I don't have by force, and then the rest will see that, and voila, some next new-gen civil war will occur. So be it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
607 Posts
I think we are forgetting just how much power the Government has. If they want your guns, you will give them up with a grin. After they have frozen your bank accounts, suspended your credit cards (but not the bill) and put a lien an all of your property until such time as you prove to their satisfaction that you no longer possess any gun their records and internet surveillance show you own(ed), it won’t be long until you are digging those rifles out of the ground and carting the to the nearest police station. What you do with them once you get them there is a personal decision.
I can't tell you the zero respect level I have for chest-beaters who go on about how they're going to have a shootout with the government when they come to take their guns, or other great plans of their heroic resistance, they've got it all planned out, yet when it comes to taking any action NOW on the theft of our country, they've rolled over. They're suddenly going to become action heroes at that future date, while being ball-less blowhards now?

I refer specifically to no one here. My current example in mind is on a forum my wife participates on, but I have seen a lot of bravado over time about how many would supposedly act in the future, and a whole lot less standing up for our Republic now.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
510 Posts
I think we are forgetting just how much power the Government has. If they want your guns, you will give them up with a grin. After they have frozen your bank accounts, suspended your credit cards (but not the bill) and put a lien an all of your property until such time as you prove to their satisfaction that you no longer possess any gun their records and internet surveillance show you own(ed), it won’t be long until you are digging those rifles out of the ground and carting the to the nearest police station. What you do with them once you get them there is a personal decision.

Rusty Bolts
I thought We the People had the power.
That's the way the constitution is worded.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,731 Posts
I thought We the People had the power.
That's the way the constitution is worded.
Technically correct of course. But only true in the real world if we realize it and act upon it. Otherwise it's just a pleasant thought.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,731 Posts
I can't tell you the zero respect level I have for chest-beaters who go on about how they're going to have a shootout with the government when they come to take their guns, or other great plans of their heroic resistance, they've got it all planned out, yet when it comes to taking any action NOW on the theft of our country, they've rolled over. They're suddenly going to become action heroes at that future date, while being ball-less blowhards now?

I refer specifically to no one here. My current example in mind is on a forum my wife participates on, but I have seen a lot of bravado over time about how many would supposedly act in the future, and a whole lot less standing up for our Republic now.
I assure you, good sir, that in the future when they come for my guns or to forcibly inject me with an mRNA vaccine which does much more harm than good, I will be violently resisting from within my home, behind the moat I plan to dig as soon as I can get the required construction permit for it. (Apparently there is a backlog on moat construction approval.) Should the response be overwhelming force, I will escape via the tunnel in the basement which I will dig eventually. But right now I have too many Netflix shows to watch.

Until then I am complying meekly with all lockdown and mask orders. Just to throw them off of course.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
510 Posts
I can't tell you the zero respect level I have for chest-beaters who go on about how they're going to have a shootout with the government when they come to take their guns, or other great plans of their heroic resistance, they've got it all planned out, yet when it comes to taking any action NOW on the theft of our country, they've rolled over. They're suddenly going to become action heroes at that future date, while being ball-less blowhards now?

I refer specifically to no one here. My current example in mind is on a forum my wife participates on, but I have seen a lot of bravado over time about how many would supposedly act in the future, and a whole lot less standing up for our Republic now.
I think what we are coming down to,
is that the battle is litigious in nature,
at this time.

And we need ALL HANDS ON DECK FOR THIS.
If you can attend a rally - great.
If not, donate.

The more ground we take in the courts,
the better position we will be in.

Once the entire legal process has been exhausted,
then there very well might be a civil war to fight.

But if all we do, at this time is zero our sights,
and keep our powder dry,
then any armed action we take,
once the legal process is over,
is going to have much less impact.

Think of it like this:

Once we win this Stop The Steal campaign,
there will be chaos in the streets.
But we will then have the backing of the entire US Judicial System,
Federal, State and Municipal Law Enforcement,
The National Guard,
and The US Military.

If we were to lose this Stop The Steal campaign,
the only chaos in the streets would be The Patriots.
We would then be condemned as Traitors,
Racists, Predatory Capitalists.
Every negative definition in society would be plausibly applied to our cause,
even though we are the good guys.

Let that sink in for a minute.

So in a Biden/Harris world,
every time, a Patriot brandishes his weapon,
in the defense of his home against Antifa,
it gets video taped,
the tape gets broadcast with damning commentary,
his personal information gets doxed,
and his entire life gets destroyed.

WE MUST win this legal battle.
RIGHT NOW.
It is, all there is.

Trump for President 2020.
Stop The Steal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,498 Posts
I think we are forgetting just how much power the Government has. If they want your guns, you will give them up with a grin. After they have frozen your bank accounts, suspended your credit cards (but not the bill) and put a lien an all of your property until such time as you prove to their satisfaction that you no longer possess any gun their records and internet surveillance show you own(ed), it won’t be long until you are digging those rifles out of the ground and carting the to the nearest police station. What you do with them once you get them there is a personal decision.

Rusty Bolts
Those will be part of the government's initial response. It won't be armed people coming and knocking down your door. It will be faceless clerks and bureaucrats and computers. The people doing it to us will be comfortably far away in Washington living the high life.
 
81 - 100 of 123 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top