Make a Comment

Comments in Response

Comment by Frosty Wooldridge
Entered on:

Well done sir! Thank you. You're tops in my book.


Comment by Ed Vallejo
Entered on:
"There are people who wish to be left alone. And there are people who won't leave them alone. These latter, are perfectly willing to murder, enslave, ripoff at gunpoint those who wish to be left alone. They are a gang with a flag. They are ruthless. Efficient. Have a well worn play book. And now have most of the chips on their side of the table, except that they are in the minority. The gang with a flag have done a good job of convincing the majority of those who want to be left alone that the government have legitimate reasons for interfering, observing and confiscating the labor of those who wish to be left alone for their own good and protection. It is a con that has been well played since before there was writing.

Well that time for America is at an end. Soon, there will literally be no wealth left to take. Gulfstreams will fire up and the elite shall depart for better pastures leaving the Roman Centurions that you so love to run the little people. When you have nothing left, perhaps then you will pick up a gun. I am guessing a one in three chance."

Absolutely brilliant, sir! May I quote you on this?

Friends like you make me feel less alone in this world. Thanks, Powell.

Comment by Ernest Hancock
Entered on:
I saw the email sent to me as Publisher that I understood to be a notice that the mentioned story had been deleted from the site. So I Googled the title and came across the original "Union Leader" story and posted earlier today.

Comment by Brock Lorber
Entered on:
Thank you for this Powell. As an article like this, there is rational context and not just an advertisement for violence. It's a great discussion to have, but a separate one from the blog post linked to.

Make no mistake, the blog's author takes the already high level of violence, and wishes for that plus deaths. Specifically, deaths of federal agents, but that would also surely have resulted in the death of the Browns.

As your point #4 noted, that blog post is not about the Browns; they are used by that person as a vehicle to wish for the violent death of unnamed persons based solely on their job title. By not naming names or exploring, at all, what makes them willing to use force, he dehumanizes them; it's OK to kill them because they are less than human, and if the Browns die in the process, oh well.

That's not a reminder of the Browns, that is a mental sickness that is wholly contrary to what I've come to understand of your life philosophy. It's a psychopathic rant not worthy of promotion except to denounce.

And, that's it. There is nothing to the blog post besides the "titillating" bit you pulled for the link. There is nothing else to link to except the MSNBC article.

Maybe you are correct that a violent confrontation is needed. Maybe that's the direction you want to take Freedom's Phoenix. And, that's OK.

But, by doing so, you are making a tactical decision for anyone associated with Freedom's Phoenix, and not just the publisher and senior editor. It's only fair to give warning, so that anyone who thinks that is a tactical error can distance themselves and make their stand at the time and place of their choosing.

That's different from shying from the fight. As an analogy, I'm not afraid of being near live grenades, but I'm not going to stand anywhere near the guy who decides it would be a good idea to juggle them.

I apologize for being abrupt. I appreciate your response. And, I hope you can understand the anger one would feel towards a surprise grenade juggling act.

Make a Comment