A recent post by "Zulu Cowboy" recommends going to the gun show for the purpose of arming yourself for a revolt, or at least that is where the conversation seems to be heading with other members shifting the conversation to "Waco".

http://pub8.ezboard.com/fchemtrailschemtrails.showMessage?topicID=5157.topic

Will Carnicom delete another "politically incorrect" thread?

No one on that thread appears to be claiming knowledge of activity that could be construed as illegal in nature, therefore I doubt it will be deleted.

I thought I would see what had transpired on that thread over the last couple of weeks. The thread is still there, but the post (or posts) that referred to Waco or defending yourself from a tyranical government are gone. Has talking about defending yourself against government tyranny become an illegal subject, or is there another reason for the sensorship?

********************

About a month ago you said: Lets face it. We now live in a country where you can be booked into jail for not wearing a seatbelt. Or any other infraction, for that
matter. Having a sticker on your rear window. One hand on the steering wheel. Spitting on the sidewlak. Literally anything.

People remain largely unaware of some of the ridiculous laws that are on the books in most communities.

Word to the wise: nobody ever said the law was fair.

Oh wait. The 'pledge of allegiance'... "truth, liberty and justice for all".

I thin we're going to need a new pledge. How about "compartmentalized information on a need-to-know-basis, the highest incarceration
rate of any country but you can get away with just about anything if you've got enough bank for a good legal team".

And justice for all...

****************

I guess we are really on the same page but I wonder...
... who pays for sensoring a chemtrail board?

I'm glad this is a "truth board" and I don't have to worry about that here.

In my experience, Enigma, there are a lot of people involved with this issue that have a wide variety of agendas. Some of these people may be sincere, some may not.

It can be awfully hard to tell the difference sometimes. But in the end you have to do what it is best for the initiative. If a certain topic creates a potential liability for the partipants of a forum, you may have no choice but to delete it, regardless of your own personal beliefs regarding freedom of speech. Recent events have confirmed that there are agencies at work that do not share our forefathers respect for freedom of speech and they will hang their hat on anything they can to intimidate or otherwise neutralize their opponents.

So it's not really a philosophical difference, per se, but a strategic one....

walk softly, keep your opinions to yourself, and
watch out for you and yours. No one else will.

snip- - -


"Once the military is used for local police activity, however minor initially, the march toward martial law with centralized police using military troops as an adjunct force becomes irresistible." said Rep. Ron Paul R-Texas, addressing the United States Congress.


"Law enforcement must serve persons who are guaranteed presumptions of innocence and right not appropriate when dealing with an enemy during times of war," Kopel writes. "Our citizens are not supposed to perceive themselves as subjects of an occupying force."

snip - - -



With constant advancements in technology, however, police are becoming more capable of finding crimes - and therefore articulable suspicion – that would otherwise go undetected. Random enforcement is becoming a thing of the past. Today's police are like small armies that target groups in the name of social reform. Now and in the future, you'll have to watch out who your friends are. You can be targeted for who you associate with."

"There's an unsettling trend among police to view demonstrations as crime scenes," says Blewitt. "Police are beginning to view crowds of demonstrators as enemies of the state, to be controlled, rather than groups of people exercising their constitutional right the police should be working to uphold."

"It's all being done out in the open, and many people don't see it as frightening," says defense lawyer Blewitt. "That's because Americans have been conditioned to think it will affect only criminals. They've been convinced society if being destroyed by crime - even though violent crime has steadily decreased in recent years - and these military style police are our only hope. What they should worry about is an emerging police state that threatens the very fabric of free society."
------------------------------------------------
Enigma, censorship totally sucks, but one must
walk softly, keep your opinions to yourself, and
take care of you and yours, NO ONE ELSE WILL FOR YOU!!

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/const/bor.html

THE BILL OF RIGHTS
Amendments 1-10 of the Constitution

The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution;

Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:


Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


Amendment II
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.


Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.


Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.


Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.