gov't trains clergy to quell dissent
via
pecunium and
raaven:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_joe_park_070825_government_training_.htm
"A KSLA-TV news report from Louisiana has confirmed the story that Clergy
Response Teams are being trained by the federal government to "quell dissent" and pacify citizens to obey the government in the event of a declaration of martial law."
http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=6937987
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-BtWhs8qlg
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_joe_park_070825_government_training_.htm
"A KSLA-TV news report from Louisiana has confirmed the story that Clergy
Response Teams are being trained by the federal government to "quell dissent" and pacify citizens to obey the government in the event of a declaration of martial law."
http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=6937987
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-BtWhs8qlg
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
But really by and large the kind of people that would be influenced by this would probably lean that way without a whole lot of intervention to begin with.
no subject
no subject
I remember when I was younger and had read quite a bit of post-apocalyptic fiction and realizing that a large percentage of those who survived would in fact be the crazy survivalist types. I feel it's a good caution when scaled down as well.
no subject
no subject
And it probably is my take on post-apocalyptic fiction that contributed to my right leaning belief that guns are o.k. That and the fact that I grew up with them.
no subject
I do however feel that anyone who is willing to jump through a realistic hoop or two should be allowed to carry a weapon. After a lot of reading on the subject I am confident in statistics that crime drops in even the worst areas when legitimate wielders are present. But it is a matter of more than a stupid conceal/carry class to determine if someone should or should not be allowed to have a side-arm.
Anywho, weapon or no i'll still put a world of hurt with my own little hands on the meth-head, etc that ever threatens me or mine to any significant degree.
no subject
no subject
He also mentioned during our chat that he actually had to remind people more than once during sessions that you cannot shoot someone in the back even if they just got done harming/robbing/etc you because at that point they are fleeing and don't present an immediate threat.
I can't believe people who would have to be 'reminded' of that.
no subject
A few years back we had an incident where a pastor at a somewhat rural church shot and killed two men who had apparently been robbing the church. The evidence clearly showed that he had shot them in the back, but he was still acquitted.
Yup, I live in Alaska all right.
no subject
I however am not talking about the meth-heads, etc... Feeling like I'd take them on with out a weapon as well. I am talking about being armed against my government or the absolute chaos in the streets. Not so much your just random acts of violence.
no subject
Mostly likely I would let them have a gun or two, but hide the rest. I don't think anyone should have to give up the right to defend themselves regardless of government propaganda
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Hello from Bubbaville.