Skytrooper

Originally posted by johnh101: What a surprise! Now you know what every American third grader with an IQ above room temperature knows: that most of the USA's Founding Fathers, or their ancestors, emigrated from Great Britain. Next, you just have to learn that they successfully waged a revolution to avoid living under British tyranny and to enjoy unalienable individual rights; personal liberties your ilk has long since rejected and abandoned. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add “within the limits of the law,†because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual. — Thomas Jefferson We shall tax and tax, spend and spend, and elect and elect. — Harry Hopkins, close advisor to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1933 Liberty is defended in three stages: The ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box. — Ambrose Bierce

Originally posted by johnh101: "Everyone else" except the U.S. District Court judge that dismissed her, the South Dakota Bar Association who sanctioned her, and "everyone else" familiar with the facts. Not that facts have ever mattered to an amoral twit like yourself. It's no mystery why you self-abasing, craven blokes are British "subjects" rather than citizens. I'm sure you'd eagerly agree to become an informant for the vile BATF and even sell out your mother to save your own worthless hide. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We are now involved in a war in this nation, a last-ditch struggle in which the other side contends only the king’s men are allowed to use force or the threat of force, and that any uppity peasant finally rendered so desperate as to use the same kind of armed force routinely employed by our oppressors must surely be a “lone madman†who “snapped for no reason.†— Vin Suprynowicz, The Ballad of Carl Drega (2002) We find it perplexing that there are people who do not realize that a right may be neither granted nor withdrawn by the State. If the Bill of Rights were repealed, the right to keep and bear arms would still exist, since it was to defend that right that the Constitution was established. (See the Declaration of Independence.) Thus the state may destroy me, but it may not rescind my right to self-defense. This all seems pretty clear, but frequently I find people who do not understand it. — Jeff Cooper, LTC, USMC (Ret).

VikingInOz, Yes, you're perfectly free to post whatever false information you want in your member profile. You're certainly experienced at posting falsehoods. BTW, I may "ask" you or anyone else to do anything. That doesn't require the "police." Personally, if I were going to inexplicably pretend to be a citizen of another nation than my own, there are better choices than Norway. The "countries" you referred to didn't exist as independent political states in the modern sense at the time of the Vikings, but you rarely let reality interfere with your posts. Since you've confessed to posting false information about yourself, my "honor" is scarcely in jeopardy at the hands of a miscreant too fearful to reveal his true identity (which is already known to many members) or answer simple, straightforward questions. The many Cubans, Haitians, Mexicans, and people from other nations who died while trying to reach freedom in the USA are just people I "claim to exist?" You're really a piece of work. A person who restricts his fighting to posting lies and insults on the Internet (that would be you) doesn't participate in genuine "battles." It's no wonder you refuse to discuss your (nonexistent?) military service. I've never claimed to be "a representative for the whole American continent" (there are actually two American continents, North and South, but I realize Europeans are weak on geography) and, predictably, you neglected to explain your bizarre assertion. How does the fact I killed enemy soldiers in RVN (and a few other countries) remotely constitute a "threat" to you? Besides displaying worse spelling than usual ("conviniently" [sic] ?), your recent posts have been more deranged than normal. As I've posted previously, I have never threatened anyone in my life. As Sarik of Vulcan stated, "Threats are illogical." Rational people either do something or decline to do something; they don't provide their adversaries with advance warning. BTW, have you ever placed your liberty, let alone your life, on the line to protect anything other than your own miserable existence? No, I didn't think so. You have plenty of company on this board. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight; nothing he cares more about than his own personal safety; is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions and blood of better men than himself. — John Stuart Mill We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm. — George Orwell The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops. — Noah Webster, 1787

VikingInOz, If you're not Norwegian, you might want to change Oslo, Norway from the location you cite in your member profile, remove the Norwegian flag from your member ID, and delete your many past posts about Norway and Norwegians, especially your Viking ancestors. You called Babepecker your "chum" (which I'm sure you regret now) so don't try to obfuscate that admission. "Merely a citizen of the USofA?" People risk their lives and many die all the time in trying to get here to live. I don't believe that to be the case with Norway. I am most definitely your enemy. I am an enemy to every oath-breaking minion of tyranny on Earth and every statist such as yourself who spits on the concept of unalienable individual rights for the sake of a vile political agenda. Oh, yes. I am your enemy. I derive great comfort from that fact. At one time NVA regulars were also my enemy. The principal difference, however, is that they, unlike you, were worthy of a measure of respect. Not that this interfered with my killing them. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock. — Thomas Jefferson I am sure there was no man born marked of God above another for none comes into the world with a saddle upon his back, neither any booted and spurred to ride him. — Last words of Richard Rumbold before being hanged for planning an insurrection against the tyrant Charles II, 1679 Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one. — Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason (1795)

bloodyhell, Thank you for your pledge to no longer post in this thread. Allow me to correct a few of your misstatements: 1. Many individual Americans own hundreds of firearms in their collections. I once owned 104. As difficult as it may be for hoplophobes such as yourself to understand, a person may only effectively use one firearm at a time. A person who owns a thousand guns is no more or less dangerous than a person who only possesses one (or none). Killing is a matter of will, not weapons. 2. The figure of 60,000 "rounds of ammunition" you cited relying on bogus BATF figures includes thousands of primers and other reloading components, not actual cartridges. This fact was established in court. 3. What you refer to as "explosive material" were some 1-lb. cans of FFFG black powder, propellant for a Ruger "Old Army" black powder revolver. The can of gasoline for my lawn mower and propane cylinders for my campstove were more dangerous. 4. You conveniently neglected to mention that District Court judge (and Clinton appointee) Lawrence L. Piersol, acting upon the request of the prosecutor, issued an order prohibiting me from speaking on any subject relevant to my defense during trial. I was specifically forbidden to mention the U.S. Constitution, the illegality of any federal statute, any illegal act by any federal agent, the voluminous perjury contained in the affidavit for a search warrant, the rights and duties of jurors, and other pertinent topics. I "waived" a jury trial since there was no point in my disrupting the lives of 70 prospective jurors when I was barred from speaking to them. I desperately wanted a trial by jury which is precisely why the court and prosecution denied me one. I was also prohibited from speaking during my bench trial, which accounts for why it only lasted 2 to 3 minutes. 5. I neither hired or "fired" the "court-appointed lawyer" you mentioned. She was dismissed by the court. Besides knowing less about jurisprudence in general, and federal anti-gun laws in particular, than I did at age twelve, she sought (without my knowledge or consent) a psychological evaluation because I refused her solicitation to become a BATF informant. I realize you can't imagine a human being refusing to rat out other decent people simply because they choose to possess a firearm in exchange for not going to prison, but I'm not like you. I derive great comfort from that fact. BTW, you also failed to mention this lawyer was later sanctioned by the South Dakota Bar Association for her misconduct in my case. I wouldn't allow that woman to represent me over a jaywalking citation. 6. You also conveniently neglected to mention that the Feds disobeyed three court orders directing the return of all of my money they seized, thereby preventing me from being able to hire a competent private attorney. The same judge who zealously enforced his order forbidding me to speak in my own defense curiously refused to enforce any of his orders against the government. Besides ignoring the overt unconstitutionality of the statutes in question, you also failed to mention that the only reason I was prosecuted was in retaliation for my published writings which infuriated various top DOJ & BATF officials. At sentencing, the judge castigated my (perfectly truthful) articles even though they'd never been introducted as evidence and without explaining how he came to have read them. Finally, you neglected to mention the evidence fabricated by BATF agents which, when I exposed in court, the judge dismissed (without sanctioning any federal agent for felony evidence tampering). Again, the pride you take in being ignorant and your willingness to pontificate on subjects you know precious little about while denigrating decent human beings will hold you in good stead on this board. VikingInOz, Yes, really. How many times do I have to repeat this for you? You profess to being Norwegian. You've admitted Babepecker is your "chum." The content of many of your posts reveal you to be a socialist. How, therefore, is it a lie to refer to you as Babepecker's Norwegian socialist chum? You've been particuarly dense lately. I surely wouldn't object to you calling me your American libertarian enemy. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom. — Thomas Jefferson A gun in the hands of a free man frightens and angers the autocrat, not because he fears the power of the gun, but, rather, the spirit of the man who holds it. — Unknown I think that if you do even a cursory reading of 20th century history, you can’t help but come away with a somewhat skeptical attitude towards government power. But it really doesn’t have to grow out of any fundamental philosophical or political belief system. Really it’s very simple—if there’s a big beast that keeps running around eating people, then you can see that it ought to be caged or done away with. You don’t need to base that opinion on any kind of belief system. — Neal Stephenson, SFX magazine, January 1996

Originally posted by bloodyhell: I presume by "politition" [sic] you actually mean "politician." Now, who's calling people "nasty names?" Politicians, by nature and to assure their reelection, consistently ignore the U.S. Constitution, betray their sworn oaths, and lie incessantly. Don't let the fact I steadfastly refuse to behave in that manner keep you from insulting me as you did. As I stated previously, you're going to fit right in on this board. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I had to explain to somebody yesterday why I don’t fly. “Because I refuse to run the TSA Gestapo gauntlet,†I said. “But why?†the person asked. My first flash of impulse was to answer sarcastically. “Because I might kill the goons.†Then I realized the much sadder truth — that I don’t fly because I wouldn’t kill the goons. Which might say something about my (and most everyone else’s) basic good sense and humanity. But says something terrible about any pretentions we have to real courage or determination to be free. — Claire Wolfe

Originally posted by bigfoot: You’re not the first amoral twit here to baselessly accuse me of being someone I’m not. I know facts are irrelevant to you, but I’ve posted my identity several times and at least twice other members posted links to the 8th Circuit’s ruling on the appeal in my federal firearms case. At the time this “Piston Pilot†of your’s was writing on this board, I was confined in a federal gulag in Minnesota, specifically FCI, Sandstone. That’s a matter of public record. If you think I was allowed access to a computer while in federal custody, let alone the Internet, then you possess less intelligence than Kev, which is truly sad, even for an Aussie. bloodyhell, 1. I don’t attempt to control either the length or content of your posts; kindly do not attempt to control mine. The most I’ve ever asked of other members is to refrain from needless lies and profanity; not that my requests were ever honored. 2. The fact I’m proud Americans had the courage and resolve to revolt against the tyranny of the most powerful nation then in existence has nothing to do with other members here who clearly exhibit an obsession with their genealogy. I’ve discussed this topic in great detail previously on this board. As I’m routinely condemned for repeating myself, I’ll pass on doing so again. If you’re bored, you may research this point yourself. 3. It should be obvious “who gives a shit which country is closer†to Cambodia and why I “mentioned that.†People, and nations, generally take actions out of their own self-interest. Bill Clinton (may he burn in Hell) was ready to invade Haiti in 1993-1994 due to its close location to the USA (mostly to curry favor from the Congressional Black Caucus); he wasn’t willing to send one American soldier to Rwanda. If Aussies and/or Kiwis weren’t willing to intervene to stop genocide occurring in their neighborhood, why do you expect Americans on the other side of the world to send troops there? When the USA intervenes in countries where our vital national interests are not at stake, foreigners denounce us as the “worlds [sic] policeman.†If the USA doesn’t intervene, we’re branded a bunch of uncaring isolationists. As far as Saddam Hussein, that issue has also already been beat to death on this board, which you’d know if you did a bit of research. 4. The fact my “knowledge of world events†(and most other important subjects) is “indeed superior†to your own is no great achievement. Your “guarantee†of knowing more about New Zealand than I do is based solely upon wishful thinking. I routinely have to correct misstatements foreign members here post about their countries. The fact you possess some knowledge of the USA is also no major feat. A Botswana tribesman in the middle of the Okavango Delta is likely to possess some knowledge of the USA while being unable to locate New Zealand on a world map. 5. Once again, you brought up the subject of people “wanting a piece†of me. The fact every person who’s tried to “get a piece†of me has failed miserably is not due to my being “tough.†It was a consequence of their poor judgment and my possessing superior intellect and martial prowess. The four jarheads my friend Hector and I laid out on the floor of a bar at the Bien Hoa VNAF base in July 1972 (while a fifth Marine ran for his life) were all “tougher†than I am. But, being jarheads, they were none too bright (or moral) and thought they could abuse a Vietnamese woman in the presence of two Cav troopers. As RWB (not RLB) can attest, there’s nothing unusual about Marines making errors in judgment. It's virtually a way of life for them. 6. As far as “nasty names,†unlike many other members here, I have never used obscene language when referring to any other member, even those who commonly use vulgar names against me. Nor have I ever made baseless, false accusations as bigfoot recently did above. If a member clearly demonstrates he’s a twit, buffoon, statist, liar, etc. then I will not hesitate to use applicable terms when addressing or referring to him. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters. — Benjamin Franklin All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. — Thomas Jefferson

RWB, As I indicated in my initial post in this thread, a simple Google search reveals that tourists may bring firearms and ammunition into Thailand once they secure the necessary cursed government approval in advance. As far as ex-pats living in LOS, I'm sure that information is also readily available to anyone willing to do a bit of research. My armed acquaintances in LOS are more concerned with protecting their lives than with what's "legal." BTW, I don't "work overtime pissing people off." On this board, as in prisons, merely having more intellect than a houseplant, more integrity than a politician, and telling the truth will suffice to incense most cretins. I may have to post more USMC jokes here, however. Originally posted by Babepecker: Rather than work on increasing your English comprehension, I suggest you concentrate on history and improving your character and reasoning ability. Many of the German and other Jews who walked into Nazi extermination camps were highly educated. Ignoring the small detail of vicious hoodlums (as you invariably do), having a "willingness to act in order to preserve their own and their fellow citizens' freedom" is of scant value if you're unarmed and helpless in the face of armed oppressors. I know you're not stupid, so I wish you'd cease ignoring reality solely to promote your statist political agenda (which is contemptuous of genuine human liberty). The Armenians had a "willingness to act," but that only benefited the small minority who disobeyed Turkish laws disarming them; "law abiding" Armenians are a footnote in history under "genocide victims." ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The state that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools. — Thucydides It is not only the juror’s right, but his duty to find the verdict according to his own understanding, judgment and conscience, though in direct opposition to the instruction of the court. — John Adams, 1771 All we ask is to be left alone. — Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America, 1861 Any government that is the exclusive judge to the limits of its own power is in effect a tyranny. — James Ronald Kennedy and Walter Donald Kennedy, The South Was Right! (1995)

bloodyhell, 1. Not only have I never denigrated the military service of any Vietnam veteran (including NVA regulars), I’ve expressly stated the exact opposite of your ludicrous assertion on this board. You, of course, infer what “impressions†you desire to suit your purposes. BTW, I believe that even in gutterspeak, “there†and “they’re†have very different meanings. 2. Once again, you brought up the subject of people “wanting a piece†of me. Unlike some other members of this board, I have never referred to myself as “tough.†I simply cited some instances from reality that tend to skewer your baseless assertion. I’m keenly aware how unpopular reality is with many folks here. 3. Ever since I was old enough to form my own independent, rational judgments, there’s never been a day I haven’t been enormously grateful for my ancestors’ courage and resolve in revolting against the forces of tyranny. In my own modest way, I’ve sought to emulate their conduct with my military service and civilian activities. It was doing precisely such acts on behalf of the cause of personal freedom that resulted in my being incarcerated for over five years in vile federal gulags. This has nothing to do with genealogy. As annoyed as I am with most of my countrymen, when I look at your ilk across the world as you willingly sacrifice your liberty in exchange for the illusion of safety or out of cowardice and fear, it only reaffirms my zeal not to allow unbridled statism and tyranny to prevail in America. 4. Your seriously flawed character is matched by your seriously flawed knowledge of history. Many nations have engaged in wars without “fighting for their national survival.†Your notion is not only erroneous, but downright bizarre. I invite your attention to numerous wars in English history, the U.S.-Mexican War (1846-1848), the Spanish-American War of 1898, the U.S. involvement in World War I (as a consequence of British lies and propaganda), Korea, RVN, Grenada, Panama, the Gulf War, and the current war in Iraq. American “national survival†wasn’t at stake in any of these conflicts. 5. As far as Pol Pot, the last time I checked, Cambodia was much closer to Australia and New Zealand than the USA. I’m quite sure Americans didn’t prevent you chaps from intervening in Cambodia. As far as your ever-changing status as a snitch, I can’t keep track of your prevarications. BTW, my knowledge of world (not just U.S.) history, and most other important subjects, exceeds your own by several orders of magnitude. There’s some more unpleasant objective reality for you to assimilate. Eneukman, Contrary to what you once asserted, I’ve never considered you to be “stupid†so I can’t fathom why you persist in trying to convince me otherwise. I’ve already addressed this very point long ago in an OT thread. Purely for the sake of brevity, I’m just going to give a modest reply. Only individual human beings have “rights,†governments have “powersâ€; either legitimate powers delegated by the consent of the people or illegitimate powers of usurpation. The U.S., British, and several other national governments possess nuclear warheads and other weapons now speciously labeled “weapons of mass destruction.†A government may not legitimately possess a power not conferred by the people. If a government has a lawful power to possess such weapons then, obviously, individual human beings have the right to possess them. A person or group of people (which is all a nation is) cannot delegate a power they personally have no right to. If your government has a lawful power to possess a fusion bomb then you have an individual right to possess the same weapon. I realize how strange this must sound to a “subject†who is no longer “allowed†by his political masters to possess even a single-shot pistol. Does that mean I want Osama bin Laden to possess a nuke? No more than I “want†the French, Indian, Pakistani, Israeli, Chinese or North Korean governments to possess “weapons of mass destruction.†If you do even a casual study of history, you’ll learn that genocide is perpetrated by governments, not private citizens. Osama bin Laden took advantage of the laws you endorse to have his henchmen hijack airliners and convert them into “poor man’s cruise missiles.†That should be of more concern to you than your fictional superweapon. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We are now involved in a war in this nation, a last-ditch struggle in which the other side contends only the king’s men are allowed to use force or the threat of force, and that any uppity peasant finally rendered so desperate as to use the same kind of armed force routinely employed by our oppressors must surely be a “lone madman†who “snapped for no reason.†— Vin Suprynowicz, The Ballad of Carl Drega (2002) A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude. — Aldous Huxley, Brave New World

Originally posted by bigfoot: [... deep libertarian sigh ... engage dealing with buffoon mode] “Imbicile [sic]?†“Seargent [sic]?†Between your avatar, your atrocious spelling, encouraging another member to commit suicide, etc. you clearly demonstrate who is the imbecile here. I suppose this is what constitutes the behavior of mature, responsible adults in Australia. Where are all the new members railing against gratuitous insults? [... disengage dealing with buffoon mode ...] Originally posted by bloodyhell: 1. The reason you’re surprised I didn’t see any Kiwis in Vietnam is because you’re ignorant; not that this deters you from writing on subjects you’re poorly informed about. Due to the vastly larger number of American soldiers in-country and the small quantity of Kiwis and the limited areas they operated in, most U.S. servicemen in Vietnam never saw a Kiwi (or an Aussie) during their tour. As I explained previously on this board, all Aussie and Kiwi combat troops had been withdrawn from RVN before I arrived. I did see an Aussie land rover parked in front of the Long Binh main PX in January 1972 if that counts. 2. You are the person who inexplicably brought up the subject of the “attitudes†of New Zealand combat veterans. They were in RVN to “maybe†fight communism? While I can’t recall ever meeting a Kiwi Vietnam veteran, I’ve always got along fine with the Aussie ones I've encountered. Of course, none of them talked nonsense like you and none showed the slightest inclination of wanting “a piece of me.†FWIW, due to my steadfast refusal to adopt the behavior of typical convicts, I was frequently assaulted by sociopathic mesomorphs in various state and federal prisons (more accurately “gladiator schoolsâ€). While these miscreants were always younger and physically stronger, as the prisons’ medical staff can attest, they didn’t fare too well. Like yourself, they shared deficient wit and martial prowess. 3. No member of this board exhibits more interest in history than I do. Genealogy is a different matter. In my experience (buttressed by folks on this board), most people obsessed with genealogy have led undistinguished lives and seek to compensate by basking in whatever past accomplishments may have been performed by their ancestors. 4. For reasons that should be obvious to anyone with three or more functioning brain cells, I mentioned other members because, despite being new here, you lamentably behave as many of them do and you stated you were in agreement with Bazle that I, with no basis for your allegation, am a psychopath (despite the written evaluation of a clinical psychologist that I'm in perfect mental health and my having passed numerous psychological screening tests in connection with prior employment). BTW, I never suggested I was the “only person†to donate money to the causes I cited. My question, among others you evaded, was why a “psychopath†would contribute money to charities, let alone risk his life to help total strangers. Is there a cogent reason why you failed to answer the questions I asked? 5. I’ve been called many disparaging terms (usually by cowards at a safe distance) before, but you have the distinction of being the first person to label me “politically correct.†I’m usually called just the opposite. I never gave “every other nation a hard time about their past war efforts.†I simply stated the “poms and aussies†were fighting for their national survival in World War II. Why does a recognition of objective reality annoy you? The reason why I mentioned Iraq was obvious from the context I used it in. For some undisclosed reason, you appear upset the USA didn’t enter World War II before it was attacked. Most of the “poms and aussies†on this board are angry at the USA for going to war in Iraq without first being attacked. Reasoning ability isn’t one of your stronger traits, is it? 6. While I concede I often have trouble deciphering Aussie/Kiwi/Brit gutterspeak, am I to understand you’re now withdrawing your retraction of being an informant and are, once again, a self-professed snitch? No, I’ve “never done this†before. I’ve been locked up with plenty of snitches, however; usually drug dealers who’d sell out their mother in exchange for a 3-day sentence reduction. I’ll leave morally repugnant conduct to you and others of your ilk. Calling me an “idiot†as you did will surely get you a free drink at davethailand’s bar in Pattaya. Regarding the gibberish you ended your last post with, I could write some sage remarks in Sindebele for you, but I don't know what purpose it would serve. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is sobering to reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence. — Charles A. Beard A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves. — Edward R. Murrow There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for you. — Robert A. Heinlein

Originally posted by johnh101: You're repeating yourself. I advise you to "get yourself" some additional intellect and character; or, at the very least, a dictionary. Originally posted by bloodyhell: 1. You are the person who introduced the subject of having disdain (not “distainâ€) for people who spend “many hours with their nose in books.†Your enmity against people who possess more knowledge than you will surely hold you in high esteem with many members on this board. 2. Calling certain Americans in southern states a “Yank†is an excellent way to get your lights punched out. I’ve never met an Australian who resented being called an “Aussie,†but I’d really enjoy watching you call a group of Japanese men, preferably Sumo wrestlers or karate instructors, “Nips.†3. You neglected to mention what plausible connection there is between the attack on Pearl Harbor and this thread. The USA had no reason to enter World War II until we were attacked. In case it escaped your attention, Europeans and Aussies on this board routinely condemn the USA for invading Iraq when our nation hadn’t been attacked. When I mention the minor detail of Saddam Hussein being a brutal dictator who murdered thousands of his own people and invaded two neighboring countries, I’m called names I won’t repeat here in the public access area of the board. You also conveniently neglected to acknowledge the UK and France were directly responsible for the rise of the Nazi Party and facilitating Germany’s scheme to conquer most of Europe. 4. I’ve discussed my heritage before and I’m often castigated by members for repeating myself. You’re welcome to go to my member ID profile and click on the link to all of my previous posts. I’m as uninterested in my genealogy prior to 1775 as I am in anal sex, ladyboys, whether to pay 5 or 10 baht for a baht bus ride, or many other subjects which hold tremendous fascination for many members here. It’s sufficient for me to know my ancestors fled the tyranny of Europe and sought, at great peril, to create what was once the freest nation in the history of the world. 5. You are the person who raised the point of what I would tell the widows of Australians killed in World War II. I would tell them the truth (that’s a bad habit of mine; it causes me no end of trouble on this board). Some of them died on behalf of the British Empire fighting in North Africa. Some of them died to preserve their nation’s independence from Japan. What any of this has to do with anything I posted eludes me. 6. Thank you for admitting you’ve never been in the military. Such candor is rare on this board. Unlike some other folks here, I firmly believe everyone is “allowed an opinion.†I guess you missed the part about my being a libertarian. I don’t seek to impose my beliefs on others just as I don’t infringe, let alone abrogate, other people’s individual rights. I’m just always astonished at people who’ve never even been in the Boy Scouts lecturing me on the military, especially combat. It’s as amusing as M1903 having two graduate degrees yet exhibiting worse spelling than many third graders. 7. Regarding your comment about the two New Zealanders who fought in RVN, once again you’re not being very lucid. I volunteered for infantry service in Vietnam (while every other GI I met was trying to do the exact opposite) solely to help the Vietnamese resist communist subjugation. If that wasn’t the “same attitude†of your two mates, I can’t help it. What were they in Vietnam for ... the food, women, beaches? 8. As far as your admission of being an informant and your subsequent retraction, do you often write statements that aren’t true? If so, you are definitely going to be right at home on this board. BTW, is there any chance of you explaining why a "psychopath" volunteered for combat duty in Vietnam, sacrificed his hard-won RA commission rather than needlessly jeopardize the lives of his troops in Alaska, resigned his appointment as an FBI agent because he refused to "enforce" unconstitutional laws, donated money he can ill-afford to the tsunami relief effort and HILLY's noble project, etc.? Your chum Bazle refuses to answer these (or any other) questions so, since you share his opinion of me, perhaps you will. 9. Where did you get the bizarre notion that Amnesty International cares one whit about American gun owners imprisoned in violation of the U.S. Constitution? In case you’ve been away from Earth the past forty years, please be advised that “left wing outfits†invariably oppose the private possession of firearms. “Clear my name?†I was imprisoned, officially, for exercising an unalienable individual right—the possession of a gun collection I’ve peacefully owned since age 14. I was imprisoned, unofficially, for exercising another unalienable individual right—unhindered political speech—by writing published articles that infuriated Janet Reno, Louis Freeh, and several other top FBI & BATF bureaucrats. The prosecutor, as vile a man as ever existed, conceded in court that there was no victim in my case. Where you got the peculiar idea that merely exercising unalienable individual rights inexplicably tarnishes one’s name is beyond my comprehension. 10. Your definition of “mate†appears nowhere in any of the “American English†dictionaries I checked. I have as much inclination to adopt your curious lingo as you do in not writing specious twaddle like Americans with “19 tours of duty†and other pejorative falsehoods. I’ve never abandoned reason or moral principles at any period in my life, even when incarcerated with vicious hoodlums who share identical mind sets with many members of this board, and neither you or the minions of tyranny here in the USA will ever change that. To use your words, “Get used to it.†----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The liberty of one man cannot be limited or diminished by one or any number of men, and none can give away the right of another. — Algernon Sidney If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. — Samuel Adams

Originally posted by johnh101: Gee, you've been a member of this board for two whole weeks and evidently haven't read many posts in the Members' Only section. If you had, you'd know that most of my posts are in the Off Topic and General Chat forum which is dedicated to topics unrelated to Pattaya and Thailand. I entered this thread to correct misstatements made by another member and to provide assistance to the original poster. Let's see if I understand this right. I'm routinely attacked by vituperative, unethical statists who use insults and lies because they're intellectually unable to defend their falsehoods and untenable positions. I'm routinely cursed with obscenities by foul-mouthed buffoons. I've repeatedly been urged to commit suicide and be raped by homosexuals. Despite being a confirmed heterosexual, I've repeatedly been falsely and baselessly accused of engaging in homosexual acts by my moral and cognitive inferiors. My country is often vilified by leftist Eurotrash and others, largely out of envy and pure unreasoning hatred. You have no objection to any of this, while you castigate me despite the minor detail of my having never engaged in such behavior. You're going to be very popular on this board. There are plenty of morally and intellectually deficient chaps here to keep you company. If you really want to see insults and abuse, I suggest you research past Members' Only threads more thoroughly. It's customary, however, for your ilk to try and silence others by banning rather than use reasoned discourse to defend your position. BTW, since you appear determined to join with other vulgar Brits, you might ask one to help you with the spelling of "fcuking." ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am mortified to be told that, in the United States of America, the sale of a book can become a subject of inquiry, and of criminal inquiry too. — Thomas Jefferson Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. — George Santayana, The Life of Reason

bloodyhell, I no more than mention the prevalence of ignorant, vulgar, amoral miscreants on this board than Kev makes an appearance. What serendipitous timing. Besides taking uncommon pride in his ignorance, profanity, and immaturity, he's another descendant of penally-transported English highwaymen (although he prefers to call them "bush rangers"). You won't have to worry about Kev spending too many hours with his "nose in books." A Hustler magazine, perhaps, but not worthwhile books. Originally posted by Kev: If you really want to examine a genuine "wasted space," check out the area between your ears. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state. — Thomas Jefferson No nation ancient or modern ever lost the liberty of freely speaking, writing, or publishing their sentiments, but forthwith lost their liberty in general and became slaves. — John Peter Zenger Liberty is defended in three stages: The ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box. — Ambrose Bierce

Originally posted by bloodyhell: 1. Purely by accident, you made a correct statement. Spending “many hours with your nose in books†does “mean nothing†about character. Unlike your chum, Bazle, I’ve never posted a lie on this or any other Internet board and never refused to defend my posts with reason, facts, and civil language. This, of course, is irrelevant to you. Your disdain for people who read books will hold you in good stead with many other members who derive great pride in their ignorance. 2. “Nips?†If I used that word, a mob would soon form up denouncing me as a racist. 3. Unlike you and nearly all other members of this board, I’ve posted my identity and address on several occasions. I’m also not at all surprised that you confess to being an informant. Nor is it a surprise that you don’t “give a rats [sic] arse†about facts, particularly in a criminal case. Boy, did you ever join the right Internet discussion board. Facts, reason, and moral behavior are as unpopular among the riffraff here as they are among typical convicts in prison. 4. I understand facts in general, and the U.S. Constitution in particular, mean nothing to a disreputable lout such as yourself, but I’ll go through this again as non-registered members haven’t seen it before. The U.S. Constitution is our supreme law of the land. Any law violative of the Constitution is null and void. That’s not my lowly opinion, but the consistent ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court since their landmark 1803 decision in Marbury v. Madison. The Second Amendment expressly states “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed†and forbids any type of anti-gun legislation. In addition, our federal government only has those powers expressly delegated to it (by the people) in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. No power was ever delegated to our government to restrict or prohibit the private ownership of firearms. Unfortunately, for most of the past century, politicians and their appointees in the judiciary have used legal sophistry to ignore or circumvent constitutional safeguards in order to advance their political agenda. An ignorant, apathetic populace (you know the type) more interested in booze, ball games, and rock music than their eroding individual liberties sadly betrayed the blood spilled by their ancestors. 5. I was targeted for prosecution in retaliation for my published writings critical of misdeeds by federal agents at Ruby Ridge and Waco. Ex-FBI agents can’t write what I did with impunity. That’s a violation of the First Amendment. Despite having never committed any violent crime, I was denied bail without a hearing; that’s a violation of the Eighth Amendment. The search of my residence was based upon an affidavit replete with 15 pages of perjury; that’s a violation of the Fourth Amendment. I was denied counsel, a violation of the Sixth Amendment, and the government violated three court orders directing the return of my seized funds, thereby preventing me from being able to hire an attorney. I was denied, by court order, a jury trial; that’s another violation of the Sixth Amendment. My bench trial which you cited lasted between two and three minutes as I was still prohibited by court order from speaking in my defense. Due to your blind prejudice, none of this, of course, matters a whit to you. 6. I come from a long line of “criminals.†When eleven companies of grenadiers and light infantry (the cream of the British army) sought to confiscate privately-held firearms at Lexington and Concord on 19 April 1775, my gallant ancestors killed many of them and chased the survivors back to Boston. They waged a successful revolution so their progeny wouldn’t have to be “poms†and live as you do, as a craven subject of a tyrannical government, with no individual rights, just whatever "privileges" your rulers grant, curtail or withdraw at their whim. 7. I’m supposed to take “American bashing like a man†while you and your ilk squeal like gelded pigs if anyone responds to your insults. Thank you for explaining that. 8. As far as my never criticizing the American government, I spent over five years confined in a cage with retarded sociopaths who think precisely as you for doing exactly that. As far as my never criticizing mistakes Americans have made in the past (and today), it’s obvious you’ve never read through my posts in the Member’s Only forums. Your abysmal ignorance, of course, in no way deters you from posting fallacious misstatements. Once again, you surely picked the right board to join. 9. Besides my name and address, at the request of members, I’ve disclosed much of my military service and my service as a special agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation. BTW, I resigned my appointment as an FBI agent because I refused to violate my oath to support and defend the U.S. Constitution, the same document you display such ignorance of and/or contempt for. BTW, most of the “poms and aussies†on this board are harsh critics of the Iraq War. Also, not only did Tony Blair not get “a standing ovation†in my house, I wouldn’t let the statist scoundrel into my house. 10. While I'm not your "mate," I look forward to reading about your military combat service. Bazle, Babepecker, spike, VikingInOz, et al. are all strangely reticent to mention their's. I'm particularly interested in your explanation as to why a "psychopath" would volunteer for infantry service in Vietnam in order to try and keep total strangers on the other side of the world from having to live under communist tyranny. This is just one of many questions your chum Bazle won't answer. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. — Thomas Jefferson Nothing is unchangeable but the inherent and inalienable rights of man. — Thomas Jefferson Much of the world today and through centuries of history has suffered the terrible consequences of unbridled government power, the prime evil that the writers of the American Constitution sought to guard against. Judges who “interpret†constitutional safeguards out of existence for the sake of some ideological crusade, presidents who over-reach their authority for personal or political reasons, and a Congress whose powers are extended into matters that the Constitution never empowered them to legislate about are all part of the quiet repeal of the American revolution. — Thomas Sowell, The Quest For Cosmic Justice

Babepecker, I realize it's much easier for you to simply copy my post than respond to the points I raised. Your fellow GW Bush hater, Bazle, refuses to answer questions, too. Go figure. It's a pity that with all the excellent reasons to dislike or even despise GW Bush, you clowns pick the wrong ones as well as concoct false assertions about the miscreant. BTW, do you still think John Kerry is a "right-winger?" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. — George Orwell I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it. — Thomas Jefferson Those who have no voice nor vote in the electing of representatives, do not enjoy liberty but are absolutely enslaved to those who have votes. — Benjamin Franklin

Originally posted by jimmac: Let's see if I understand this right. Numerous members of this board have falsely and baselessly accused me and other ardent heterosexuals of having engaged in homosexual acts. Members of this board have repeatedly urged me to commit suicide and to be raped by homosexuals. I've lost count of how many times I've exposed flagrant, obvious lies on this board. It was by doing so that I first infuriated certain chronic liars and their sycophants. Any casual review of this board, particularly in the Members Only section, will reveal the vulgar language I mentioned. If you like, I'll direct your attention to such examples in the public section, too. Why is my stating irrefutable facts "outrageous?" What should be outrageous is the willingness by you and most other members to passively condone such reprehensible conduct. You never object to lies, profanity, and vile false accusations, yet you protest my recitation of reality. You certainly found a board where many members share your absence of moral behavior. Hello wombat, No. Amoral twits get my prompt attention. I did appreciate the levity in your original post in this thread, however. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. — Winston Churchill The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it. — John Hay, 1872

Fatboyfat, It's curious that you and your ilk never have any objection to members who routinely post lies and misstatements, who use vulgar language as obscene as any drunken sailor's, who falsely accuse heterosexual members of engaging in homosexual acts, who encourage other members to commit suicide or be raped by homosexuals, and other vile behavior. Perhaps that's your idea of "harmony." BTW, are you Croatian by any chance? jackie45, While wombat's explanation for the member registration process is actually quite humorous (for an obscure marsupial), it has no basis in reality. If you think real hard, the reason for the registration scheme should be obvious. Unfortunately, the process fails to screen out people with deficient intellect and/or character. Drat. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Man’s mind is his basic tool of survival. — Ayn Rand Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom. — Thomas Jefferson The more complex an economy becomes, the more essential it is to rely on free-market capitalism. Indeed, Leonard Reed’s pencil example emphasizes just how misguided government planning of the economy is: no group of experts could possibly possess the knowledge required to produce a simple pencil, let alone “plan†an entire economy. The delusion that a single person or group of government planners could possibly possess such information and manage an entire economy is what Nobel laureate economist Friedrich Hayek called the “pretense of knowledge†or the “fatal conceit.†Central planning inevitably leads to economic chaos. — Thomas J. DiLorenzo, How Capitalism Saved America (2004)

Babepecker, Considering it's defending my political beliefs (which happen to be the views of the Founding Fathers of the USA) that engenders the greatest venom against me by statists such as yourself, your latest malicious attempt to denigrate me is more fallacious and bizarre than usual. If there's a member of this board who's repeatedly responded to more questions about politics, history, government, law, his personal background and identity, than myself, I can't imagine who it would be. But don't let little things like truth and objective reality interfere with posting a perfectly good lie. That's never stopped you before. BTW, I know English isn't your first language, but your spelling in various threads lately has been worse than usual. Not being a pedantic sort of person, I didn't post corrections. Do you still support victim disarmament laws which would forbid any private citizen from possessing any type of firearm (or knife) for recreation or personal protection? You know, the odious laws your Austrian chum cybers1b said never put any person in prison. I'm sure you have a good reason for defending your fellow European statist's pathological lies. How many thousands of people in the world must be imprisoned and how many lives must be ruined before you acknowledge reality? bloodyhell, you'll also get along fine with Babepecker. What he lacks with facts and reason, he compensates for with lies and smilies. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. — Thomas Jefferson With well-enforced property rights people have the ability to sell goods and services to others as a means of improving their own standards of living. Consequently, secure property rights (minimal or nonexistent levels of government confiscation through taxation, for example) create incentives to develop greater skills and abilities to produce goods and services for others and to profit from that. And because they create the ability to profit from one’s own productive enterprises, property rights are the keystone of modern capitalism and of civilization itself. (That’s why Marx and Engels wrote in big capital letters in The Communist Manifesto that a prerequisite for socialism was ABOLITION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY.) — Thomas J. DiLorenzo, How Capitalism Saved America (2004)

Bazle, What took you so long to show up? BTW, have you got a copyright on that piece you keep repeatedly posting yet? Folks, Bazle is one of this board's leading amoral British statists. He recently used a thread devoted to the Phuket tsunami victims to make a gratuituous, politically-motivated attack against GW Bush and the majority of the American electorate. He first entered my life when he posted inexplicable insults to a Costa Rica trip report I made. He never bothered to explain what it was in my trip report he objected to and steadfastly refuses to answer simple questions. Bazle assiduously refuses to engage in reasoned discourse since he lacks sufficient wit and facts to support his untenable, reprehensible political beliefs and his lamentable tendency to lie. He specializes in drive-by insults like the one above. bloodyhell, you and Bazle will get along fine. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We must confine ourselves to the powers described in the Constitution, and the moment we pass it, we take an arbitrary stride towards a despotic Government. — James Jackson, first U.S. Congress There is no crueler form of tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of law and in the name of justice. — Baron de Montesquieu Force is the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism. — Thomas Jefferson

Originally posted by bloodyhell: 1. Since you just joined this board today, you’ve obviously never read the voluminous attacks against the USA posted by Aussies and various types of Eurotrash in the Member’s Only forums here. These members ranted blind hatred (usually founded on envy) and vulgar insults against Americans long before I ever joined this board and will do so long after I’m gone in a few months. 2. Your ignorance of this reality did not, of course, deter you from making your specious comments. Why you think I am going to meekly submit to my country (or myself) being an Internet punching bag for amoral foreign halfwits is beyond my comprehension. You will, however, have plenty of company on this board. 3. The "Poms" and Aussies who fought in World War II did so for their own survival. Had Britons and Frenchmen not crafted the unconscionable Treaty of Versailles which led to the creation of the Nazi Party, supinely watched while Germany rearmed, and then sold out the Czech people, World War II wouldn’t have occurred. None of the members of this board I’ve responded to fought in World War II. Instead, they consistently reject the objective reality that the only reason the Allies prevailed in that war was due to U.S. industrial might and military forces. This subject has already been exhaustively discussed on this board. 4. I don’t know where you learned (or, more accurately, failed to learn) history, but the Poms not only didn’t fight in RVN, they provided supplies to North Vietnam throughout the war. The subject of Aussies in RVN has also already been addressed on this board if you’d do a little research before making accusatory remarks. Australian combat troops withdrew from RVN before I arrived in-country. The last time I checked, Australia had more reason to stop the spread of communism in Southeast Asia than the USA did. Besides history, you might want to bone up on geography and spelling. 5. I don’t “live†in Thailand. I live in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USA. If you care to check the documents Thailand requires before issuing its 30-day tourist visa, it doesn’t inquire about tourists’ criminal history. Does it bother you that the law I willingly violated was drafted by Senator Thomas Dodd using an English translation of the Nazi Law on Weapons of March 18, 1938 and is blatantly violative of the Second Amendment and Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution? No, I didn’t think so. No more than the fact the Feds denied me bail, counsel, a trial by jury, and other trivial individual rights ostensibly guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, our supreme law of the land, troubles you. The fact you know virtually nothing about the specifics of my case did not, of course, keep you from pontificating upon something you're largely ignorant about. 6. You are a prime example of why I “do not like†(all) ignorant, amoral, cognitively deficient, statists; regardless of their nationality. Since I don’t obey immoral, unjust, and/or unconstitutional laws in the USA which abrogate unalienable individual rights, why would you think I’d adhere to such pernicious laws in another country? Unalienable individual rights are universal. They’re not applicable only within certain national boundaries. Individual rights (as opposed to "privileges") aren't created or conferred by any government, nor may any government legitimately deprive a person of such personal liberties. You may add that to your list of fallacious misconceptions. BTW, I much prefer to be a rational, morally conscious human being than to curry favor with amoral statists such as yourself. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it. — 16A American Jurisprudence 2d § 203 at 90-91 (1998) In questions of power then let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.— Thomas Jefferson One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. — Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them. — Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491 (1966)

Originally posted by Babepecker: Since VikingInOz already acknowledged himself as your "chum," there's no predestination on my part necessary. "Worthy" fits, but not "supernaturally." Supernatural [adj]: of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe; especially of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil; departing from the usual or normal so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature; attributed to an invisible agent (as a ghost or spirit). Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition. Keep working on your English comprehension. If and when you eventually get a handle on it, you may instruct Code Monkey, M1903, johnh101, et al. BTW, contrary to what you may think, filling your posts with smilies is not a substitute for intellect. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. — Winston Churchill Tis really astonishing that the same people, who have just emerged from a long and cruel war in defense of liberty, should now agree to fix an elective despotism upon themselves and their posterity. — Richard Henry Lee, 1788, opposing ratification of the U.S. Constitution. In my reading of history I recall no instance where a government perished because of the absence of a secret-service force, but many there are that perished as a result of the spy system. If Anglo-Saxon civilization stands for anything, it is for a government where the humblest citizen is safeguarded against the secret activities of the executive of the government. — Rep. J. Swagar Sherley (D-KY), 1908, opposing creation of the Bureau of Investigation (today’s FBI).

Originally posted by johnh101: Pot, meet kettle. It's a pity how the descendants of William Wallace have degenerated to such a breed of vulgar, supine louts. BTW, how much "bravery" does it take for a pusillanimous Aussie safe in Kangarooland to call an American combat veteran a "silly old cunt" on the Internet? Oh, that's right. You never have a problem with twits labeling me an "asshole" or worse after I've gutted their asinine posts like a fish. Originally posted by johnh101: "Fcuking?" I spent years being threatened, cursed, and often assaulted by sociopathic mesomorphs in prison who share identical personality traits with many board members here. As intellectually deficient as most convicts are, they could usually spell this word correctly. "Sad" indeed. Perhaps you attended the same graduate schools M1903 did. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- When we assumed the soldier, we did not lay aside the citizen. — George Washington Take time to deliberate; but when the time for action arrives, stop thinking and go in. — Andrew Jackson ‘Tis the evil that men do, if they have a dollop of power...†— Edward Cline, SHADOWHAWK Book Three: Caxton (2004)

bigfoot, I guess that means you're not going to mention which country saved Australia from being invaded and occupied by the Japanese. What a surprise. BTW, for what it's worth, I agree with your avatar. I wish you'd been aborted, too. Originally posted by jackcorbett: Boy, did you ever pick the right Internet discussion board to join. Babepecker and Company share your enthusiasm for Joseph Goebbels' techniques. "We" were fighting the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong? No, I, and a great many other soldiers whose shadow you're unfit to stand in, were fighting the NVA. I'm quite sure you weren't in RVN. Gee, you got an "A" in a history course on the Vietnam War and don't understand the Viet Minh and Viet Cong weren't the same entity and didn't exist at the same period in history. Oh, that's right. You can twist the meaning of words to suit your purposes as you please. That's certainly convenient. Much of my knowledge of the Vietnam War was acquired while fighting the war you read about while safe and comforable in the confines of a classroom. I guess your history teacher never told you that many of the "descendants" of the Viet Minh went on to hold positions in the South Vietnamese government or ARVN. Considering M1903 has two graduate degrees and can't spell, it's no surprise you have a graduate degree and twist facts and the meanings of words to suit your purposes and drive while intoxicated. There's certainly no shortage of liars and drunk drivers on this board. It's curious how you obey immoral, unconstitutional anti-gun laws, but openly flaunt just laws against driving while under the influence of alcohol. Originally posted by jackcorbett: "... I will have out such credentials." Based upon your poor grammar and spelling, I hope your "Masters [sic] Degree" wasn't in English. Since you drink alcohol which is an irrational act and drive while intoxicated which is irrational, immoral, and illegal, I'll pass on you being an authority on rational (or ethical) behavior. So you "get away" with writing whatever you want for five magazines. Let me guess: You don't mention your drunk driving in your numerous articles, right? My writings were published in more than five firearms, hunting, scuba, and other magazines in the past along with newspapers across the USA. My last article in American Handgunner magazine in 1998 targeted me for prosecution and six years in a federal gulag. Ex-FBI agents can't write what I did with impunity. I'm confident a neutered sort like yourself doesn't write the things I did. Originally posted by jackcorbett: What do you call drunk driving other than "breaking U.S. laws?" Originally posted by jackcorbett: Yes, I know what "pissant" means. I've been called far worse than that by craven anonymous cowards on this board many times. I've posted my identity and address here on several occasions. Feel free to drop by Sioux Falls and call me some names in person. It will give you the opportunity to experience some of the action you missed by avoiding military combat service. In the meantime, I hope the Missouri cops eventually nail you for DUI and put you away where you belong. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And like the Founders, we should adopt the attitude that “there is one thing in the world more wicked than the desire to command, and that is the will to obey.†We have an illegitimate Congress and Supreme Court. Both have massive government might to impose their will, but they have little or no moral authority. If people sworn to uphold the Constitution don’t obey it, why should we the people obey their edicts? The only answers I find are ignorance and/or fear of death. — Walter E. Williams, More Liberty Means Less Government The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. — Henry St. George Tucker, on William Blackstone’s 1768 Commentaries on the Laws of England.

Originally posted by jackcorbett: “We?†Do you have a mouse in your pocket? Originally posted by jackcorbett: “Felt?†I’m not a woman or a cocker spaniel. My beliefs are based upon reason and empirical evidence; not “feelings.†Originally posted by jackcorbett: You introduced into this thread your irrational enthusiasm for the consumption of physically and mentally harmful chemicals. You introduced your unconscionable willingness to drive motor vehicles while under the influence of alcohol. You introduced your reprehensible willingness to obey immoral, unjust, and unconstitutional legislation. Originally posted by jackcorbett: 1. You might want to brush up on your history. The USA never fought the Viet Minh in RVN. The Viet Minh had ceased to exist long before U.S. ground combat troops entered the country. The Viet Cong (which was not the same entity as the Viet Minh) ceased to exist as an effective fighting force after the horrendous losses they suffered during Tet 1968. When I fought in RVN, my adversaries were NVA regulars in-country and Democrats in the USA. For reasons I’ve never understood, I was legally prohibited from killing members of the latter group. 2. Your assertion the USA could not have militarily won the Vietnam War is preposterous. If the USA had fought World War II under the same ludicrous restrictions it did in RVN, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperial Japan would still be in existence. It’s tricky to win a war when a government forbids its army from crossing the border of the country it’s ostensibly fighting. 3. While I’ve fought in wars in six countries on two continents, I’ve never fought in a trench. You evidently have the Vietnam War confused with World War I. BTW, who were the "politically unaligned" people the USA bombed? The South Vietnamese people I met had as much enthusiasm for living under communist subjugation as I do in becoming a BATF or IRS agent. The ARVN troops I trained were still fighting in the Mekong Delta months after Saigon fell in 1975. 4. I’m not aware of any senior U.S. officials who seriously believed North Vietnam was a “puppet†of Red China. The USSR had far more influence in Hanoi than the Chinese communists did. Your notion the USA should have fought on behalf of Ho Chi Minh is bizarre. Did you want American paratroopers to aid the Soviets in suppressing the rebellions in Hungary and Czechoslovakia, too? Originally posted by bigfoot: 1. Other than a temporary cross-border operation to clean out NVA troops in the Parrot’s Beak region, the USA never had any significant number of troops in Cambodia (unlike North Vietnam which had tens of thousands of soldiers there for years). We certainly never had a garrison in Cambodia which fled before the fall of Phnom Penh as you baselessly and falsely asserted. 2. Since U.S. forces weren't in Cambodia as you alleged, you'll have to concoct another lie to account for why Australia didn't intervene against Pol Pot's henchmen. 3. Would you care to cite the name of the country that prevented the Japanese invasion and occupation of Australia in 1942? No, I didn’t think so. BTW, the USA soundly defeated Japan before it dropped two fission bombs. It’s hard to discern which is the most ungrateful group of louts—the French, Brits or Aussies. I suppose morally conscious behavior is too much to expect from the descendants of penally transported English highwaymen. 4. I’m also happy the millions of gutless, docile statists that comprise Australia are on the other side of the world. I turned down a free trip to Australia in 1998 as I had no desire to visit a populace so ignorant and supine as to have just willingly surrendered the greatest individual liberty a free people may possess. Unfortunately, Americans have a bunch of amoral, Tory statists living just to the north of us. It’s an insignificant, obscure nation called ... wait, it will come to me ... ah, that’s right ... Canada. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The time for passive resistance and legal redress is past, and the time to take up arms has come. — John Ross, Unintended Consequences (1996). Those who are capable of tyranny, are capable of perjury to sustain it. — Lysander Spooner The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed. — Thomas Jefferson, 1824 History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. — Dwight D. Eisenhower

Originally posted by M1903: Having lived in Alaska for ten years, I'm quite familiar with bears although I can't fathom what your "bear with Sinbin" means. What's a "point of few?" I'm certainly impressed with your two graduate degrees. I only have one graduate degree, an MBA, so I'm obviously not in your league. I notice all I have to do to be called an "asshole" or worse by vulgar halfwits on this board is to eviscerate their posts using reason and empirical evidence. Since I'm not aware of any other libertarians on this board, I have no idea who you think I'm "backing up." If you erroneously mean jackcorbett, I have precious little in common with people foolish enough to drink alcohol (especially in East St. Louis bars), who drive while intoxicated, and who obey immoral, unconstitutional laws. Originally posted by bigfoot: You conveniently neglected to explain why the USA had any moral or legal obligation to intervene in Cambodia during Pol Pot's reign. Cretins like you usually condemn the USA for acting as the world's policeman. Also, the last time I checked, Australia was a lot closer to Cambodia than the USA is. Is there a reason why you Aussies didn't intervene? Individual human beings are the ones most responsible for their own self-preservation. The victims of government genocide all allowed themselves to be disarmed ... Armenians, Ukrainians, Jews, Cambodians, Tutsis, etc. As an Aussie, you should be familiar with this mind set. Your government enacted laws more tyrannical than those of Nazi Germany and supine Aussies docilely complied. The only reason you're alive and/or not speaking Japanese is because of armed Americans. In the future, I hope you folks have to suffer the consequences of your own folly. Originally posted by jackcorbett: I don't know what unit(s) you served with in RVN, but the NVA didn't "kick my butt out of Vietnam." Originally posted by VikingInOz: So now you've admitted to being Norwegian and Babepecker's "chum." Just have to get you own up to being a socialist. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Diplomacy is the art of saying, “Nice Doggie,†while you’re looking for a rock. — Will Rogers A few honest men are better than numbers. — Oliver Cromwell Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes ... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. — Cesare Beccaria