Adam Kokesh armed march on DC

Source: http://fauxcapitalist.com/2013/05/08/hes-either-on-the-other-side-or-hes-not-very-bright-dr-stan-monteith-on-adam-kokesh-and-his-planned-armed-july-4th-march-on-washington/

“Grandpa Liberty”, Dr. Stan Monteith, a 50-year veteran researcher of alternative information suppressed by the mass media, and radio broadcaster since 1993, said (at 42:43) on the May 8, 2013 episode of Radio Liberty in response to a caller’s question about Adam Kokesh‘s planned armed July 4th march on Washington, D.C. (emphasis mine):

I think that he could not do more harm to the conservative movement. If he wants to have a march on Washington, fine. If he wants to have an armed march on Washington, he’s laying this thing open for a confrontation, and that’s the last thing we want to do. What we want to do is educate people. We don’t want an armed confrontation. I think that certainly he’s either on the other side or he’s not very bright.

For more on Dr. Stan Monteith, see my articles here.
 
Source: http://fauxcapitalist.com/2013/05/0...s-planned-armed-july-4th-march-on-washington/

“Grandpa Liberty”, Dr. Stan Monteith, a 50-year veteran researcher of alternative information suppressed by the mass media, and radio broadcaster since 1993, said (at 42:43) on the May 8, 2013 episode of Radio Liberty in response to a caller’s question about Adam Kokesh‘s planned armed July 4th march on Washington, D.C. (emphasis mine):

I think that he could not do more harm to the conservative movement. If he wants to have a march on Washington, fine. If he wants to have an armed march on Washington, he’s laying this thing open for a confrontation, and that’s the last thing we want to do. What we want to do is educate people. We don’t want an armed confrontation. I think that certainly he’s either on the other side or he’s not very bright.

For more on Dr. Stan Monteith, see my articles here.

'let's petition the king again.'
there will be those people.
 
why is everyone claiming that someone with a bad idea is controlled opposition? I mean Adam Kokesh eats, sleeps, and breaths liberty. If he weren't truly passionate about the liberty movement then this whole "act" would be pretty tough to keep up.
 
why is everyone claiming that someone with a bad idea is controlled opposition? I mean Adam Kokesh eats, sleeps, and breaths liberty. If he weren't truly passionate about the liberty movement then this whole "act" would be pretty tough to keep up.

So, your vote is for not very bright?
 
why is everyone claiming that someone with a bad idea is controlled opposition? I mean Adam Kokesh eats, sleeps, and breaths liberty. If he weren't truly passionate about the liberty movement then this whole "act" would be pretty tough to keep up.

Dr. Stan is speaking from his 50-year experience of repeatedly seeing top figures in the movement and some of their closest friends being outed as government agents. For example, he spoke out against the infiltration of Ron Paul's campaign when most wanted to ignore it or pretend it didn't exist.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...y-have-been-infiltrated&p=4431127#post4431127
 
Yeah, an ARMED march is a pretty bad idea. If he's going the civil disobedience route (which I assume he is), it would be a lot easier to gain sympathy if you're attacked and NOT armed. If this turns violent, apologists will always have the out of "well, they were armed."

I don't have a problem with a march. It's the armed part I have a problem with.
 
Yeah, an ARMED march is a pretty bad idea. If he's going the civil disobedience route (which I assume he is), it would be a lot easier to gain sympathy if you're attacked and NOT armed. If this turns violent, apologists will always have the out of "well, they were armed."

I don't have a problem with a march. It's the armed part I have a problem with.


then you don't understand this is civil disobedience over gun control.

imagine 200,000 people who submit to arrests in d.c. on the same day for gun control crimes.
how would they even jail, process, and try all those people?
calls of political prisoner campaigns would be ongoing.
 
then you don't understand this is civil disobedience over gun control.

imagine 200,000 people who submit to arrests in d.c. on the same day for gun control crimes.
how would they even jail, process, and try all those people?
calls of political prisoner campaigns would be ongoing.
QFT

People attacking civil disobedience need to look it up. It is the only thing that worked for anyone.
 
I should look it up again, but isn't this kind of like MLK Jr. vs Malcolm X? Didn't they both want the same thing? Wasn't one peaceful while the other violent? I don't remember exactly.

If you put this into civil disobedience then I'm mistaken.
 
Last edited:
What's this debate about anyways? are you trying to convince someone of your view to adopt it, or is this an exercise in confirming your own beliefs at this point?
 
Yeah, an ARMED march is a pretty bad idea. If he's going the civil disobedience route (which I assume he is), it would be a lot easier to gain sympathy if you're attacked and NOT armed. If this turns violent, apologists will always have the out of "well, they were armed."

I don't have a problem with a march. It's the armed part I have a problem with.

Ghandi got himself a nuclear power. He, however, had a lot of help on the international stage. No one cries for Americans.
 
So, your vote is for not very bright?

my opinion is pretty neutral as far as the validity of the idea goes. I really dont know if its good or bad, but i certainly don't think that Adam is some kind of controlled opposition.

Dr. Stan is speaking from his 50-year experience of repeatedly seeing top figures in the movement and some of their closest friends being outed as government agents. For example, he spoke out against the infiltration of Ron Paul's campaign when most wanted to ignore it or pretend it didn't exist.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...y-have-been-infiltrated&p=4431127#post4431127

I didn't really take anything from that article. Ron regularly turned down interviews he didnt want to do.
 
I should look it up again, but isn't this kind of like MLK Jr. vs Malcolm X? Didn't they both want the same thing? Wasn't one peaceful while the other violent? I don't remember exactly.

If you put this into civil disobedience then I'm mistaken.
It has been my opinion that armed Black Panthers prevented a lot of violence.

The violence was already happening.. armed Black Men were a deterrent.
 
It's a brilliant tactic. From the get-go it has been billed as a peaceful protest. The advance knowledge really makes the next move up to the State.

Yeah, an ARMED march is a pretty bad idea. If he's going the civil disobedience route (which I assume he is), it would be a lot easier to gain sympathy if you're attacked and NOT armed. If this turns violent, apologists will always have the out of "well, they were armed."

I don't have a problem with a march. It's the armed part I have a problem with.
 
It has been my opinion that armed Black Panthers prevented a lot of violence.

The Black Panthers

The Black Panthers were formed in California in 1966 and they played a short but important part in the civil rights movement. The Black Panthers believed that the non-violent campaign of Martin Luther King had failed and any promised changes to their lifestyle via the 'traditional' civil rights movement, would take too long to be implemented or simply not introduced.

The language of the Black Panthers was violent as was their public stance. The two founders of the Black Panther Party were Huey Percy Newton and Bobby Seale. They preached for a "revolutionary war" but though they considered themselves an African-American party, they were willing to speak out for all those who were oppressed from whatever minority group. They were willing to use violence to get what they wanted.


http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/black_panthers.htm
 
Source: http://fauxcapitalist.com/2013/05/0...s-planned-armed-july-4th-march-on-washington/

“Grandpa Liberty”, Dr. Stan Monteith, a 50-year veteran researcher of alternative information suppressed by the mass media, and radio broadcaster since 1993, said (at 42:43) on the May 8, 2013 episode of Radio Liberty in response to a caller’s question about Adam Kokesh‘s planned armed July 4th march on Washington, D.C. (emphasis mine):

I think that he could not do more harm to the conservative movement. If he wants to have a march on Washington, fine. If he wants to have an armed march on Washington, he’s laying this thing open for a confrontation, and that’s the last thing we want to do. What we want to do is educate people. We don’t want an armed confrontation. I think that certainly he’s either on the other side or he’s not very bright.

For more on Dr. Stan Monteith, see my articles here.

Keep doing the same thing over and over expecting different results is a common definition of "insanity".

We have been doing the same things over and over. Time for something different, ja hello. The options are fairly limited.

This is a risk-laden deal to be sure, but how does one fight the good fight without risk?
 
Keep doing the same thing over and over expecting different results is a common definition of "insanity".

We have been doing the same things over and over. Time for something different, ja hello. The options are fairly limited.

This is a risk-laden deal to be sure, but how does one fight the good fight without risk?

yep.
 
Woot! 2,938 say they are going. This is going to make for some great videos if this goes through.
 
Back
Top