Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher

During the American Revolution 70% supported the crown.
Where's your polling on that?

This is a very common misinterpretation of what Adams actually wrote.
Adams was NOT referring to American support for the American Revolution.
He was actually referring to American opinion regarding the French Revolution.

Also, the hnn.us article is actually arguing against what it is being cited in support for here.

FTA (emphasis added): http://hnn.us/article/5641
The most common piece of evidence cited in numerous books about the Revolution is a letter of John Adams indicating that one third of the Americans were for the Revolution, another third were against it, and a final third were neutral or indifferent to the whole affair.

Oddly, this is the view of the Revolution essentially held by the British at the time. English leaders appeared to believe that only a minority of rebellious Americans, although well organized, desired independence from the Mother Country. Both times British armies ventured into the interior, it was on the assumption there were large numbers of Loyalists there who would support the King's cause.

Significantly, for over a century, a number of American intellectuals, ranging recently from Daniel Elsberg of Vietnam War Pentagon Papers fame, to Irving Kristol, the "Godfather" of today's Neoconservative Iraq Hawks, have cited the Adams' letter as gospel.

A close reading, however, of Adams' letter indicates just the opposite. The "well-known" letter of Adams was to James Lloyd, dated January, 1813. Written so many years after the American Revolution, it becomes clear that Adams was actually discussing American opinion about England and the French Revolution during his presidency, 1797-1801:

For a good breakdown and more details regarding this issue, see here: http://allthingsliberty.com/2013/02/john-adamss-rule-of-thirds/
 
Last edited:
Think Progress weighs in;

Armed Right-Wing Militia Members Descend On Nevada To Help Rancher Defy Court Order

Nevada-Ranch-Protest-638x290.jpg

"A protester kicks a police dog during an altercation between law enforcement and supporters of a Nevada rancher"
:rolleyes:

5521181_orig.jpg
 
Forget violent methods. They're doomed to fail. They'll get people killed. And they'll only turn the public against the cause.

The kind of courage we really need people to have here is the courage of nonviolent resistance. All these people who want to go help should go unarmed, line themselves up around this man's family and cattle, kneel down, show their hands, hold out flowers and other signs of peace to the police, have a prayer vigil, make the government agents arrest them by the hundreds, and get this all on video.
Reading this post brought visions of the '60s when there was a major protest against the war in Vietnam. I will say, I agree with it. It wasn't so very long after protesters started using this style of resistance, our people were brought home.

And kids often consider people who were young in the '60s as old fogies who never tried to change anything. LOL
 
****I JUST HAD AN IDEA*****

Can someone who is in contact with folks on the ground pitch to them the idea of bringing a bunch of mirrors to the sites of protest?

The idea is to let the enforcers see how their tyranny really looks from the receiving end. I saw this tactic used by the European protestors (I think in Ukraine), and I think it would be effective here as well...and if nothing else...the extra heat reflected onto them, in that desert sun, would annoy the sh*t out of the enforcers. It's worth a try.


I remember something else about the mirrors. This is a link to a post with a picture the way the mirror people started out from the old mirror thread of ours:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?444521-Ukraine-Mirrors-Brought-to-Protests-Police-Forced-to-Look-at-What-They%92ve-Become&p=5424038&viewfull=1#post5424038


This is a link to a picture at Fark showing they way the crowd evolved after a couple of days(?). That is unless I have it all wrong.

http://www.fark.com/comments/8153172/89414002#c89414002


"Many protesters also brought signs that read, “Who are you protecting?”"

Kind of looks like they are showing up prepared to protect themselves.
 
Last edited:
The next time they try this, they will do mostly the same thing but they will not set up 1st Amendment areas in advance. From their perspective they will reason that that is what triggered it.
 
Last edited:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...ndy-Ranch-flashpoint-a-Nevadan-s-perspective?

Frightened that so many 'dangerous' militia types are flooding into the state of Nevada? LOL Calling Bundy a 1 percenter and welfare queen? Stating that libertarians break 'contracts' all the time to their advantage? LOL Claiming that we would never ride to the aid of a black rancher? ROFL

Apparently are missing the skin color of some supporters and Militia.

expect as much from SPLC parrots.
 
When this place goes Full Nazi Retard, which it is one "terror" attack away from doing, this is what passive resistance will get you.

execution..bmp
 
At some point the political objective becomes irrelevant, and it is just a question of survival, or kicking your oppressors in the nuts on the way out.

Correct. Stop becoming an easy meal.
 
This is a very common misinterpretation of what Adams actually wrote.
Adams was NOT referring to American support for the American Revolution.
He was actually referring to American opinion regarding the French Revolution.

Quite true, but support for Independence was far from monolithic, or majority at that time.
 
Those Nazis. How'd that work out for them?

Germany is still here, still a world and economic power and many NAZI "higher ups" were brought here to the US.

Or went on to become head of the UN

All those millions of people however, are rotting in the ground.

Their only and last act of defiance a cold glare into a NAZI photographer's camera.

That's our children's future if we don't stop this.
 
From Occam's link:


Let’s start with some basics. According to the U.S. Census Bureau the population of the 13 American colonies in 1770 was 2.1 million people, including about 459,000 slaves. In 1776, the population of the colonies (then the United States) had grown to 2.5 million. In 1780 it was 2.7 million. Such growth makes figuring general percentages of Loyalists a challenge because the population baseline was a moving target. Sentiments also varied by region, opinions about the Rebellion changed over time, and loyalties shifted. And with a population of over 2 million, in an era before the emergence of political opinion polling (that occurred in the nineteenth century), the views of most Americans went unrecorded because nobody ever asked them what they thought. Knocking on doors and polling about loyalties would not have been a wise practice during the Revolution anyhow. At best, you’d get a door slammed in your face. At worst you could wind up tarred and feathered, which made for messy record keeping.

But you can still draw some conclusions through a review of period records and the application of statistical analysis, ratios, and other mathematics that I failed in high school. Historian Thomas Fleming offers that there may have been 75,000 to 100,000 Loyalists in America during the Revolution and that 60,000 to 80,000 fled after the war. In a thorough 1968 study, historian Paul H. Smith estimated that Loyalists comprised about 16% of America’s total population and a precise 19.8% of free citizens. And historian Robert Calhoon wrote that probably 15 to 20% of adult white males remained loyal to Britain, and that 40 to 45% of the free population, “at most no more than a bare majority” actively supported the Patriots.

Let’s add some context to the numbers, because even the U.S. Census Bureau – the oracle of counting people – has called statistics “a valuable adjunct to historical analysis,” (my emphasis). Minority though they were, the Loyalists still presented significant opposition to the Patriots. In his 1813 letter to McKean, Adams acknowledged the difficulties of overcoming Loyalist opposition in New York, Pennsylvania and in the South. About 19,000 men served in American provincial regiments according to Paul Smith, and they fought with conviction. Loyalists played major roles in the New York campaign, on the frontier, raiding Connecticut, in the Mohawk Valley, and especially at battles such as Camden, King’s Mountain, Cowpens, and Guilford Court House, among others. But in comparison to their numbers, note that over 100,000 men served in the Continental Army over the course of the war, not counting the militia. In this light the Loyalist and Patriot efforts were nowhere near equal.
 
Back
Top