Bill of Rights Defense Resolutions

[dancho]

Bill of Rights Defense Resolutions

I received a letter today from the national Libertarian Party (asking for money, of course) that contained the following "P.S." that was under the signature of LP Executive Director Joe Seehusen:

"Have you heard that there's a mini-revolution already underway in America? In response to the Patriot Act, 196 cities and towns have now passed Bill of Rights Defense Resolutions. These communities are defying orders to help conduct "sneak-and-peek" searches, spy on political protesters and turn over library records to the FBI.

That's right: Ordinary Americans are rising up against the rapidly expanding police state -- and we're trying to help them...."

Yikes!

Then I did a Google search on "Bill of Rights Defense Resolutions" and got a bunch of hits, including this:

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Civil_Li...PatriotAct.html

which is really interesting reading.

 

[Darkwolf]

Bill of Rights Defense Resolutions

What do you mean Yikes, this is a good thing.

 

[CaryP]

Bill of Rights Defense Resolutions

Yeah, this is definitely a good thing. Thanks for the post dancho. I think you're in the right place.

Cary

 

[dancho]

Bill of Rights Defense Resolutions

Originally posted by Darkwolf@Nov 23 2004, 07:06 PM
What do you mean Yikes, this is a good thing.

​

I mean in terms of the Titor predictions-- not in terms of the Bill of Rights Defense Resolutions. I'm all for that. But the way it ties in with Titor's predictions is spooky-- I am still trying to figure out if Titor was a fraud. But when I see this kind of thing, I am leaning towards believing that the scenario he described is more likely, and that means that a civil war of some kind is more likely, and I'd have to say "yikes" to that.

 

[Timescholar]

Bill of Rights Defense Resolutions

Originally posted by dancho+Nov 23 2004, 11:28 PM--><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Darkwolf@Nov 23 2004, 07:06 PM
What do you mean Yikes, this is a good thing.

​

I mean in terms of the Titor predictions-- not in terms of the Bill of Rights Defense Resolutions. I'm all for that. But the way it ties in with Titor's predictions is spooky-- I am still trying to figure out if Titor was a fraud. But when I see this kind of thing, I am leaning towards believing that the scenario he described is more likely, and that means that a civil war of some kind is more likely, and I'd have to say "yikes" to that.

[snapback]16033[/snapback]​

[/b][/quote]

But, didn't JT say something about "The enemy is in the cities"? I wonder how that plays into it...

 

[Darkwolf]

Bill of Rights Defense Resolutions

I would assume that the In the cities comment ment that the major metros were under tighter controll than the countryside was. This makes sense in that the feds, and or the UN don't have the manpower to keep a very tight leash on people across the entire landmass. People who are willing to put up with that will stay in the cities, buy the propaganda against the constitutionalists, and will be hostile tward them. The government would probably pull it's military and enforcement assets in to the cities in order to protect the metros, and to make sure that it's garrisons woulden't be isolated and overrun. Some cities may have signed the bill, but once it comes time to actually stand up to the feds, I'd expect the small towns to have more luck at it if alot of them do it.