the outcome will not be what anyone wants… even those fomenting it

“nothing can be done against it, unless you really go against it” – Artfldgr

That is usually the case when conflicts become existential (that is, you must go one way or the other in order to continue existing). That is the crisis point that the Left is trying to accelerate toward (“silence is violence”), but I’m not convinced yet that the outcome will be what they want.

Any contention is welcome to the Forces of Evil (TM); cf. “The Screwtape Letters.”
A leftist victory would be preferred by the Unmakers, but a corruption of the right to defeat the left is acceptable.

A conversion of both factions to actual peace and justice would be the best outcome for all of us, but it’s unlikely. Red-pilling more people, especially black skeptics, is still possible, as we are seeing in some of the eSamizdat circulating on the conservative web.

Yesterday (two days ago?) in one of the threads about our current political situation one of you (MBunge?) made a statement that cutting off funding to companies working to eliminate our rights is critical to fighting this scourge. I wholeheartedly agree, and there was some continued discussion in the comments on how to coordinate the effort.

Since it’s such an obvious and good idea (no offense to MBunge{?}, but I’ve had the thought myself, many times, as I’m certain we all have), I was fairly certain several organizations must already be doing this on the web. With a bit of research today I found this site, https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=C2200

This seems to be a very good start. The link goes to their page on Cable & Satellite TV Production, but you’ll notice the search boxes in the right margin. Choose a drop down there and hit the magnifying glass and research any industry you prefer.

Does anyone know anything about this organization, and whether they are fair? Their mission statement on their “About” page sounds good, and the data I looked at seems to be in-line with what I’ve seen in other publications. If this is a reliable resource, let’s spread the word and start taking action.

Mares eat oats,
And does eat oats,
And little lambs eat ivy.
A kid’ll eat ivy too,
Wouldn’t you?

As i pointed out before, to go in and break up the zones is a mistake
As long as they are not fully formed, it is easy to make claims as to “what they could have been” or “how it would have been” and no one can argue in a way that would reach people.

but here is our example, by leaving the zones mostly alone… the people in the zones are now giving reports to the news that they have no rights there, there are borders and fencing, there is inequality in terms of gardening and food.

there is something that is here that is in front of everyone but its not clear
i hope in a short few paragraphs to make it clear

in our society, we are free… we can riot at any time… there is no cap on our behaviors that prevent action, there is only a response to actions taken
we generally live by the social contract that under our freedom, we will not act that way, we will not make fuel based hand grenades and throw them around
but we ARE free to do that, and then have a response

in the zones and the kinds of states that these kids are desiring, you have the opposite… there IS a cap on behavior that is backed by a gun. there IS a cap on what you can buy, how much, what it can be used for, who you can meet and so on. while it may be looser than it was before, the power and the cap actually exists. the state attempts to prevent things like riots by having lots of caps on behavior and cameras and other things that mostly induce fear as a way to stop action

the problem with the young is that when nothing is happening, they both LOOK the same… they both look peaceful… the protestors in the zone appear to be peaceful, but they are peaceful because the warlord leader will beat them up, and hurt them… they are not voluntarily peaceful… they lost their rights.

the people outside the zone, are peaceful as they want to be. they can do what they want, even make things that any regime would find dangerous. they can wander around with guns… they are free up to the point they take an action that is prohibited, and suffer consequences… there is no warlord, police, or black clad somethings that will beat them up for a MAYBE..

let me point out that some worry that there would be violence with guns if the police went in. no. that will not happen. the police will not just go in like a mob. they will issue statements and they will give warnings, they may even drop flyers from a drone or plane into the zone to inform the people.

“anyone holding a firearm, who lifts it towards a police officer or official will be considered a combatant and will be shot by police/nat guard snipers”

you can hold your firearm, you wont be allowed to lift it to fire upon the police
it will be that easy… they will probably even give them time to leave unmolested as they will be innocent.

these zones do not need to be broken up.. they need to be left to fester, to let those who create them learn what the difference is… to figure out and then go home and open their mouths to others… i was there man, there was no freedom… but i was free to leave and come here and not go to jail because i was there… that will do more to prevent the future than any kind of show of superior force would. then after that, to hold the leaders and organizers financially responsible to reparations for the damage… all quite easy and regular to do in our system already.

there is no reason to go in with force… none..
the zones are not sustainable… using force to prevent a creation of one and destruction of more property, that can be justified given the force is usually just chasing people away and removing the things used to create the blockades

but if one is created and exists… let it stand as an example
let it be the living testimony of what the side that is doing this will do when in power
let it die because the people inside want freedom, and inside there isnt any

except that now we know the name of the person who shot off a gun to start it since we have analysable audio recordings

Kent State tape indicates altercation and pistol fire preceded National Guard shootings
https://www.cleveland.com/science/2010/10/analysis_of_kent_state_audio_t.html

KENT, Ohio — A noisy, violent altercation and four pistol shots took place about 70 seconds before Ohio National Guardsmen opened fire on antiwar protesters at Kent State University , according to a new analysis of a 40-year-old audiotape of the event.

The discovery adds new perspective to — and raises new questions about — one of the signature events of the 20th century, after four decades of spirited discussion and research.

“They got somebody,” an observer says. “Kill him!” at least two male voices repeatedly shout, followed by sounds of a struggle and a female voice yelling, “Whack that [expletive]!” or “Hit that [expletive]!” Four distinct shots matching the acoustic signature of a .38-caliber revolver then ring out, according to a review by New Jersey forensic audio expert Stuart Allen.

Earlier this year, Allen and colleague Tom Owen examined the recording at The Plain Dealer’s request and determined that Guardsmen were given an order to prepare to fire moments before they unleashed a 13-second fusillade of rifle shots at a May 4, 1970 demonstration that killed four students and wounded nine others. What compelled the Guard to shoot is the central mystery of the iconic event, which galvanized sentiment against the Vietnam War.

Commotion that ‘didn’t sound right’ led to re-examination of Kent State tape
https://www.cleveland.com/science/2010/10/commotion_that_didnt_sound_rig.html

The audiotape that forensic audio expert Stuart Allen analyzed was made by Terry Strubbe, a Kent State student who put a reel-to-reel tape recorder in his dorm window on May 4, 1970 to capture the sounds of the antiwar protest unfolding below.

Strubbe has kept the original in a bank vault. Allen, president and chief engineer of the Legal Services Group in Plainfield, N.J., worked with a copy obtained from Yale University’s Kent State archives, where materials used in various investigations of the shootings are kept.

While examining the tape with his colleague Tom Owen for The Plain Dealer this spring to determine if a command for the Ohio National Guard to fire was audible, Allen said he heard a commotion that “didn’t sound right” in a segment before the Guard gunfire.

When he re-analyzed and enhanced the section later, he picked up details of the yelling and what sounded like gunfire. He compared the acoustic signatures to his library of weapon sounds to determine that it was a .38-caliber revolver. He ruled out the possibility that the sounds were tear gas canisters being fired, by comparing them to earlier tape segments where the canisters are audible.

“It’s a crack, indicative of a higher velocity,” said Allen, who has decades of experience in government and law enforcement cases involving recorded evidence. He is confident “to a strong scientific certainty” about the altercation sounds and the pistol fire.

He said he can’t determine whether there is any connection between the incident and the volley of Guard rifle fire that follows approximately 70 seconds later.

Allen will describe his findings Saturday as part of a live, weekendlong webcast “Kent State Truth Tribunal” organized by filmmaker Michael Moore and Laurel Krause, the sister of Kent State shooting victim Allison Krause.

and lastly

Further analysis of the audiotape revealed that what sounded like four pistol shots and a confrontation occurred approximately 70 seconds before the National Guard opened fire. According to The Plain Dealer, this new analysis raised questions about the role of Terry Norman, a Kent State student who was an FBI informant and known to be carrying a pistol during the disturbance. Alan Canfora said it was premature to reach any conclusions

Norman worked with the FBI at the height of its COINTELPRO (COunter INTELligence PROgram) activities. In the words of director J. Edgar Hoover, its purpose was to “expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit or otherwise neutralize” anti-war organizations as well as individual demonstrators with no group affiliation. Students Allison Krause and Jeffrey Miller, two of the Kent State shooting victims, fit this profile;

Norman was the only person on campus other than a Guardsman who admitted to having a firearm at the scene;

The Guard contended that a single shot of unknown origin preceded the 13-second volley of gunfire; and

There had been a previous and never-fully-explained incident on Blanket Hill in which Norman drew his gun and pointed it at students who had attacked him. Norman had scuffled with some fellow students and reportedly drawn his gun before being chased by several men to the campus police and National Guard. One of his pursuers, graduate student Harold Reid, yelled, “Stop that man! He has a gun!”

The FBI squelched speculation regarding Norman’s involvement by announcing that his gun had never been fired. However, the issue of his role on May 4 was revived three years later. Peter Davies, the author of the book The Truth About Kent State, and William A. Gordon, a journalist for the college’s student newspaper and the future author of Four Dead in Ohio, reported that there were three additional witnesses who said they had heard either Norman admit “I had to shoot” or a Kent State police detective exclaim, “My God, he fires his gun four times. What the hell do we do now?”

in a guardian article they literally said that the protests with molotov cocktails was a peaceful one… in one breath..

IF this were true:
Then the Vietnam war was a peaceful camping trip, except for the few who used their rifles…

[most at the war supported combat, and in combat there are long periods of no fighting and sitting on edge… So to take a page out of how these riots are being reported, the above is how you could describe the Vietnam war!!!!!]

Indeed, the Kent State shooting remains symbolic of the division in public opinion about war in general, and the Vietnam War specifically. Many believe it permanently changed the protest movement across the American political spectrum, fostering a sense of disillusionment regarding what, exactly, these demonstrations accomplish—as well as fears over the potential for confrontation between protesters and law enforcement.

https://www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/kent-state-shooting
______________________________________________

I don’t consider history.com the last word on anything, but I’m not alone in my opinion.

I was around then and in college. My impression was that students had become weary, if not a little frightened, of protests and there was so much other interesting, exciting stuff going on with music, drugs, communes and spirituality that it was easy and counter-culturally acceptable to head in those directions.

here is what i wrote, that it will not be in vain

Good work, but i think you miss how law works. Your not putting things in proper perspective, and i hope this works.

The WORST sentences in law have to do with how people THINK when they are committing the crime from start to finish and their awareness of the potential outcomes of their actions.

Cause a death because your acting like an idiot, you get a much more lenient sentence. Cause a death because you premeditated the crime, you are a totally different kind of person

let me put this in perspective: These people premeditated manufactured fuel based hand grenades with lots of time to change their mind, and the known intent of murdering someone with extreme malice…

think on this a second… FUEL BASED HAND GRENADES, and you think this is about THEM? NO! This is, as with other crimes with long sentences, about making a statement that taking time to premeditate the act of murder will not be tolerated.

They could have said this was nuts as they thought about doing it. They could have said this was nuts and stopped as they went to buy the gas, collect the bottles, fill the bottles, find rags to tear up to cork the bottles, transport the bottles, find a means of lighting the bottles, choosing a target, and throwing the fuel based hand grenades!!!

we have put people in jail for life for having a gun, turning away, walking away, changing their minds after two steps, coming back and killing..

think of that whole process of how to concieve of manufacturing, manufacturing, transporting, engaging, and targeting another human being with the idea you were going to set them on fire and let them burn to death slowly… cause burning to death is not a fast death… and if they survive, they will suffer decades of pain, operations, and suffering (not limited to themselves but to their families too), and may even become shunted for being too ugly for others to face!

and you think psychopaths crying for being locked up and not able to harm others is a reason to lighten their sentence?