Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

C

Cornelia

Member
Messages
234
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

I wouldn't be afraid of Russia. In EU we never are. They don't like to attack other countries, and they do it only when you pull their hair. But they are the best in the world to defend their country.
And Putin is a smart man, he knows how to keep his country powerful without nuking anyone... ;)
 
D

Darkwolf

Active Member
Messages
713
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

I wouldn't be afraid of Russia. In EU we never are. They don't like to attack other countries, and they do it only when you pull their hair. But they are the best in the world to defend their country.
And Putin is a smart man, he knows how to keep his country powerful without nuking anyone...


Click to expand...

Uh, Poland, Yougoslavia, Afganastan, Romania, Norway, Finland, Hungry. The entire eastern Block. Unless you don't call "liberating" a country and then not letting it go attacking it.

Before anyone says anything, I know Norway and Finland were not part of the communist block, that is beacause they faught off the Russians after the war.
 
K

kat_woman

New Member
Messages
4
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

Did Titor ever say the Waco type events were to happen on our soil or did he say we would hear about them a lot in the press? I was reading the newspaper the other day and said to myself, Waco type events, in the news most of the time, we have to already know about it and not be seeing it. Then I read the Sunday paper and all I could find was the normal stuff on the Iraq war..... then I did a search for Iraq and Waco and here is the article I found.....



Free Republic
Home ? Browse ? Search News/Activism
Topics ? Post Article

State of the Union: A Libertarian Response
myself


Posted on 01/30/2003 9:43:59 AM PST by Undecided


This isn?t the first time in our history that we?ve had the possibility of dangerous weapons in the hands of a leader we didn?t trust, and this won?t be the first time we?ve responded to this possible threat with a military assault.

In 1992, the U.S. federal government conducted a military siege at Ruby Ridge, ultimately killing Randy Weaver's dog, son and wife. Mr. Weaver was suspected of being a cult leader, hording weapons and ammunition for anti-government purposes.

The government was never able to prove their allegations, but ends-justify-the-means justice was the explanation for the loss of life.

Did we learn from this tragedy? Ask the surviving members of the Branch Davidian conflict. A short eight months after Ruby Ridge, Americans watched the siege at Waco, Texas. Again, anti-government beliefs and the possibility of dangerous weapons were offered as justification. When some people questioned this justification, accusations like rape and torture were thrown in for good measure.

Does this remind you of anything? That was essentially our President?s message in his state of the union address. A bad person with cultish followers might have or might be trying to obtain dangerous weapons. If this was good enough evidence to justify the slaughter of our own citizens, surely it must be good enough to justify wiping out some Arabs.

Does anyone remember the Oklahoma City bombing? It was a direct retaliation for Ruby Ridge and Waco. If unjust use of military force can inspire one of our own, Gulf war veteran Timothy McVeigh, to become a terrorist, just what do we expect to come from unjust use of military force on a sovereign nation? Think about it.

Granted, Saddam Hussein is an unstable person with dangerous beliefs. But that alone doesn?t justify military assault on Iraq anymore than it did on Ruby Ridge or Waco. The ends don?t justify the means, and the process of justice is more important than the result.

If Hussein really is a threat to us in the future, a terrorist waiting to happen, then wait for it to happen. Recognizing evil doesn?t make one holy, but dealing with evil actions does make one justified ? dealing with evil thoughts, ideas and aspirations is God?s work.

In a world where one long range hunting rifle can be enough to bring our nation?s capitol to a halt, weapon?s of mass destruction aren?t nearly as terrifying as are mass numbers of individuals with weapons and the means and desire to use them. Regrettably, that is exactly what an unjustified use of force on Iraq would give us unless we can show tangible evidence that it is unquestionably necessary.
 
A

Alyxavior

Member
Messages
241
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

Originally posted by Cornelia@Nov 18 2004, 02:54 AM
In EU we never are. They don't like to attack other countries, and they do it only when you pull their hair.
​
Click to expand...


*PULLS Cornelia's Hair*

*wink*

*prepares to defend his dragon lair*
 
StarLord

StarLord

Senior Member
Messages
3,187
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

For over 20 some years China has figured in War College senarios. If asked, most Naval officers that are in the know would tell you that. Like Paul has said, Russia is Russia.

I myself have never underestimated a country that used to collect countries like a child with his first box of animal crackers. Hair had nothing to do with world domination. What I was trying to point out was Russia is beseiged by origanized crime (read Russian Mafia) and the fact that they are having very rough times with their economy to the point that pay comes in the form of vegetables to their servicemen.

Most of us are familliar with a way of stimulating an economy through the mode of military conflict elsewhere in the world as we have seen that ploy run before under the guise of something entirely different. So, that in mind along with Russias' current state of affairs, much is possible. There is but one problem.

All three sides realize that once statred, EVERYBODY looses at the ICBM game. There are no winners. Both the Russians and the US have enough War Head Kilo Tonage to fry the earth many, many times over. Sure, you might survive but to what end?

It may all be yours, but it will glow in the dark and kill your ancestors for many generations.
 
I

icepick_lobotomy

Junior Member
Messages
46
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

Anyone noticed today in the news bushco is starting to arrest media people for reporting news and not giving up sources? Didn't Mr Titor mention something about the government stripping constitutional rights also? Welcome to the prelude to the new christian conservative nazi germany or the civil war part 2
 
D

Darkwolf

Active Member
Messages
713
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

Yeagh ice, I did and he did. However thats a grey area. The media and a source do not share the same protection as say a lawyer or doctor and client do. If you want to see a stripping of constitutional freedoms, look at how much acess they have to your medical records.
 
J

Judge Bean

Senior Member
Messages
1,257
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

Originally posted by icepick_lobotomy@Nov 19 2004, 12:56 AM
Anyone noticed today in the news bushco is starting to arrest media people for reporting news and not giving up sources? Didn't Mr Titor mention something about the government stripping constitutional rights also? Welcome to the prelude to the new christian conservative nazi germany or the civil war part 2
​
Click to expand...

Whoa! Russian warmongers to arresting the sacred journalists! What a dizzying ride this thread is.

The Justice Department's answer to the problem of the leaked CIA agent's identity is to go after the reporters to cough up their sources. Of course, you know, it was the Cheney-Rove-Bush triumvirate who leaked the name to begin with: this puts them in a corner. But they also know that the actual leaker is a lower-level person (Rove's MO is to use others to spread dirt on, e.g., political opponents) that is either expendable or unknown and expendable. So he or they will be sacrificed in order to defuse the scandal.

Which is, as I say, a matter of the federal government tightening up its own security so that those who are disloyal to Bush and the Cheney agenda will suffer and be silenced. The CIA agent was married to a dissident within the government.

But let me say this: the rights of journalists mean almost nothing to me. The press must be free of government interference or dictation, but journalists? Dime a dozen. They don't represent the American people. They have no special rights on account of being journalists, as far as I'm concerned, and they do not hesitate to trample on the rights of noncelebrity, everyday people.

Cornelia excepted of course.
 
I

icepick_lobotomy

Junior Member
Messages
46
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

But let me say this: the rights of journalists mean almost nothing to me. The press must be free of government interference or dictation, but journalists? Dime a dozen. They don't represent the American people. They have no special rights on account of being journalists, as far as I'm concerned, and they do not hesitate to trample on the rights of noncelebrity, everyday people.

Cornelia excepted of course.
​
Click to expand...


So how does that make the bush administration any less responsible for trying to control the news?
Click to expand...
 

Top