Redemption

Bob Marley sang about it in Redemption Song
"But my hand was made strong
By the hand of the Almighty.
We forward in this generation
Triumphantly.
Won't you help to sing
These songs of freedom?
'Cause all I ever have:
Redemption songs,
Redemption songs."

I was reflecting on this lately, and stumbled upon "Seven Pounds" which also deals with redemption, in a new and interesting way to tell the story.

Western Rifle Shooters has an important re-post HERE where he lists his "what to do list" with the number one point under emotional preparation as: "Get square with God as you understand Him. Even if atheist or agnostic, one needs a Larger Context in which to place the upcoming suffering and struggle."
Now I am not a religious man, but I am a man of great faith. Someday I, in-fact all of us, am going to need to come to grips with what I have done, or not done. I will need either redemption, atonement or acceptance of my life by me or "He." I tend to follow my impulses to speak when I am "spoken to" and for whatever reason, by whatever faith I am compelled to ask you, all of you to pray... pray for life, liberty and love for it is an all or nothing deal. Do not be shy, do not ask why, but make sure you are at the ready for the fight that is coming. A fight to everyone of us in many different ways. I often describe myself by quoting myself:
I am a husband and father, first and always.
I am a jack of all trades and master of some.
I am self taught, and defy institutions.
I will refuse to relent.
Failure is not an option.
Success is not an accident.
I am lost and sometimes confused, I will find the way.
Period.
Redemption is calling, may I be the man I need to be at this time.
Jason

III

The 23rd Psalm:
The Lord is my Shepherd; I shall not want.
He maketh me to lie down in green pastures:
He leadeth me beside the still waters.
He restoreth my soul:
He leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for His name' sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
I will fear no evil: For thou art with me;
Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me.
Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies;
Thou annointest my head with oil; My cup runneth over.
Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the House of the Lord forever.

Justified, Part 4

I have previously posted parts here, here, and here to little fanfare. I continue to relate my justification for descent. This will be link thick, read them, then come back.


Armed Citizen has an important essay here where he clarifies in layman's terms the pursuit of "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."


Reverend Franz has some essential reading on "choices" here and here along with an IMPORTANT essay HERE


Now that you have absorbed these, if you have not yet, check out Anthony Martin's writings here


Caught up? Good. Lastly absorb knowledge here


Now you have a basis of my slightly off-center state of mind. I openly call for revolt, violent if necessary, against a tyrannical government. The reasons are posted above in detail. However I will attempt to simplify it here.


I am a husband and father first, patriot second, and follower of MY faith third. Sad as it is, I have been forced to have a discussion with those that I love and respect. The summary is that there is a time and place for how we act/react. If my hand is forced I will react in a way that causes my death, I am okay with that. May my sons grow strong in proud in the path they have been placed. On the brink of history to fight and kill, if needed, for Liberty. We have lost the vision of our Fathers, we have lost the visions of freedom. For pop culture we have forgotten the Spartans, William Wallace, Roland of Gilead, and Bob Lee Swagger. For purists we have ignored Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington. We have all been taught (fooled) to believe that there is hope in a two party system. There is none. I do not recognise the rule of man. I do not blindly follow a nationalistic flag. I believe the founding fathers and their ideals reign true.


When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.


Do not follow the idea that barack obama is to blame, nor that george w. bush is. Not even bill, or jimmy c. It is a system that has been growing for generations, stripping us of truth and justice.


Soon we stand and we fight. Train, prepare, and tell those that you do that you love them. Say good bye. Hope that I am wrong, fear that I am not.


Jason

III

Right, Wrong, Indifferent

I was one of a group that received an e-mail from a writer for the Washington Post referring to an article on Obamas comment about the 90% of guns in Mexico. On face value, as more than one person reminded me, the e-mail could have been an innocent attempt at providing us (bloggers) with a noteworthy link. I saw it to be different, and responded as i felt was accordingly.
If you would have bothered reading many of the sites you sent the article to you would know they are already all over the story, and it's inherent LIES. Please remove me from any further e-mails unless it is to renounce your "profession" and the lie it tries to sell to the American people. We are not "AUTHORIZED JOURNALISTS," simply stated we call em as we see em. Good luck in your endeavor, your article on the bats was entertaining. Flawed as the "global warming," giant fans are going to save us syndrome is. Read the sites you mailed, they are top notch and full of things you could report on, things that matter.
Jason
III
I acted in a way that was entertaining to me for me. I "copied" everyone the original Wash Post email had attached and expected no responses. Oops. For the record I was at first flattered to be grouped in with blogs I read daily, for I neither have their content, readership or skill. That is what pissed me of at the same time, NO WAY would anyone put my Blog on par with theirs. More likely an email blast was created off of someones blogroll, and a spam was used to increase Wash Post readership. My site is for my entertainment and to occasionally provoke discussions I see as relevant. Childish yes, do I care, not really. I am still content with my response, but I did not intend to imply I was speaking for anyone other than my self.
Sebastian asked:
"What's wrong with a polite request be removed from his list?"
Nothing, just not in my personality, I occasionally feel like being an A-hole.
and "Why the need for lengthy exoriating screeds against journalists and journalism?"
Too be honest I had to look up the definition of exoriating, and no it wasn't necessary but it was entertaining, and I believe acceptable considering the source and the perceived intentions of the email. To be honest I do not accept elitism by title and call BS as I see it, I also felt the request was condescending in its content and spam like address bar.
D. Codrea stated: "To my knowledge, I coined the term "authorized journalist"--"
Would never mean to disrespect you or "steal" one of your ideas without credit being given. It was used off the cuff and ownership was not intended, I felt it fit the response perfectly. Similarly I frequently refer to your site and its reference to the "only ones" you track so well when it fits the discussion.
Others chimed in but the above statements I felt were directed at me and responded to here. Attention, easy come easy go. For anyone who did not originate the email, hopefully no harm no foul. As for the "journalist" that sent it I still say "Read the sites you mailed, they are top notch and full of things you could report on, things that matter."
Jason
III

From Comments Come A Post

From HERE, which you all should be reading daily:

This comment caught my attention:

Why is it, exactly, that if I disagree with you as to how to interpret the Constitution and various related documents, I somehow don't understand them? Is your interpretation the right one and anyone who doesn't agree with you somehow either ignorant or corrupt?...I want everyone to take a step back and consider that the founding fathers may have been wrong on some things. Is that such a terrible thing? Does admitting that they have flaws make me somehow dead-set against this nation? Is it possible that the comments about the consistent need for bloodshed ("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants") were made at a time when Jefferson was enraged over the treatment of the colonies?... Mayor- if you truly believe that the government has no role in protecting its citizens, do an experiment. For the next 12 months, suspend all police activity in your town. If, a year from now, your citizens are safe, happy, and prosperous, perhaps you're right. If, instead, violent gangs are present, burglaries are omnipresent, and the murder rate has ballooned, perhaps government has some duty to protect its citizens? I'm anxious to learn the results.

To which I replied with:

The argument, at least mine, over the Constitution being living is over the existing amendments interpretation. They say what they say, period. Most that were added were IMHO unnecessary clarification. Equal rights are established in the preamble and the DOI. The separation between today and the times of the founding is our desire to say everything so that it is so clear, that we get laws/bills that are not read and then passed covering every possible detail that they can imagine.Sadly the imagination is lacking in a lot of cases. The conventions of the 1770's and 1780's debated every word, ensuring it said was was needed and nothing more. We only debate party support or PORK trade offs now. Before anyone says it, ALL PARTIES are guilty of this, and no it is not specific to our current or most recent admins. Our representatives are struggling for power and sound bites, not liberty for individual citizens. I personally find no fault with the original document, only the way its reading has been butchered in the past 100 years. And no the country cannot simply come for our guns without removing the 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 10th. That is not adaptation, but disintegration. Besides the 2A argument is not about "guns" only, it is about the right of self defense, the right to remove consent of the governed, the ultimate check and balance the equalizer between predator and prey. As for the idea of "For the next 12 months, suspend all police activity in your town"... Would you be willing to grant me and a small group the "privileges" of LEO's? I would love that opportunity, and it would be truly transparent. Look at Chi-town, NYC, DC... do the Police really make you safer? Why would you not be willing to step up in the defense of YOUR community? Read Warren v. District of Columbia, or "Domestic Violence -- When Do Police Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect?" Special Agent Daniel L. Schofield, S.J.D., then look at the past of BOTH recent cop murdering scat of these past few weeks. Rehab does not work for child molesters or "violent" criminals. As the old saying goes "I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy," or "911, when seconds count Police are only minutes away," if you prefer.

The retort-

The ratification of the Constitution was far from unanimous - in fact, it barely happened. If the founding fathers themselves could not agree that the document was pure, flawless, why do you assume it to be so?Jason - no, I do not want to give you the power of law enforcement officials. I never claimed that you could do the same job as the police. The mayor suggested that government control of citizens was not necessary. I just want him to put into action his rhetoric. And, despite how horrible our inner cities are, they are in a better condition than if there was no police presence at all. Jason, I understand that you want to protect yourself from the child molesters and violent criminals. But what happens when they protect themselves from you? And you then protect in return? If we allow a police force, a force that keeps us from destroying each other, we can all survive. If that police force has problems keeping order, that does not mean that they are evil or trying to eliminate you. Perhaps they don't have the resources they need? Perhaps we are having a problem with society that we can address with better education and improved social support (which is far from new - such problems have occurred every few decades for about as long as there have been societies). Taking the law into our own hands solves nothing - in fact, it exacerbates the problem.

My final comments on this particular essay:

Thank you for some reasonable and intelligent discussion about topics that can quickly become emotional. I believe the central core of our few but important disagreements is that you recognize and support the "power of the state" while I believe the state should have NO rights greater than her citizens. I agree that with the laws of "today" the Mayor could not survive without the resources of his local PD. But that is the problem with a gov't that has subservient citizens. We have lost the ideals of true civil service. We do not need a police "force" with full time SWAT teams, the charge to stop Charles Whitman was lead by citizens. Police are not held to the call of "protect and serve", that is fine, but do not restrict me from protecting. That is my crux so to speak. For my entire life I have been no threat. If I was in possession of fully automatic firearms and/or a shotgun with a less than 18" barrel that will not change. It is an education and a way of life, raised on hero worship, honor codes and the way of the warrior. Police officers come from the general populace, (as we both agree I believe carries the good, bad and ugly)my main question/point is: why do they get the "right" to have a fully automatic M16, carry concealed without a permit in some states, or carry on an airline? I am trained, safe and responsible, more so than some officers. I am not trying to besmugde law enforcement, but their "title" makes them no better or qualified than I. In closing I believe you illustrated my point rather than disputed it by citing the portion you did. I am not saying compromise is bad, IF it is compromise. We as citizens are instead force fed 2 choices a GOP of high taxes/low liberty, or the current progressive DEM platform of high taxes/low liberty. Yet the arguments of modern elections are STATE not Federal issues. We have moved to a very federalist country that is empowering the exec. branch with more power than we have ever seen before. I for one cannot cite when that power has been returned to the people without following Jeffersonian ideals, his most radical ones at that. I realized before the first key stroke that at the end we would have to agree to disagree, so once again thank you all who took place in this discussion, H/T to you Mr.Martin for starting it, it was a pleasurable discourse.

Jason

III

I re post these here because I feel that it was a pleasant discussion of opposing sides without resorting to crap like this the following day:

That's right tea partiers. The Soros-Kos-Acorn-Lefties are plotting to infiltrate your mad-hatter festivities.You people are so demented it transcends parody. I hope you are all shaking in your boots and tin-foil hats. BOOO!

To which bait I bit:

"I hope you are all shaking in your boots and tin-foil hats. BOOO!" Yeah, unless you forgot, we got the guns. We are all blood thirsty, racist rednecks who want blood to run down the streets. Or is that analogy to last year for the always cool minded liberals. Yes we independent members of the community who openly speak of the possibility of our role in a VIOLENT overthrow of government, we are afraid of some liberal professor, or union rep who has no scars. Think again. What we are concerned about is one of you a**hats causing trouble and disrupting a peaceful, Constitutionally protected right to free assembly.

Let's try to keep it civil, yet get our points across.

Jason

III

Consequences and Repercussions

"To all elected officials, sheriffs, deputies, marshals, constables, sundry law enforcement officers, and military personnel. As a Vietnam era veteran and former peace officer myself, I respect your service and understand that most of you value our Liberty as much as any citizen. For the few who may not fully comprehend what that means, this is a reminder that as a condition of your employment as one of our public servants, you were required to swear an oath to defend the Constitution of these United States of America. We the people who employ you, take this oath seriously and regard any breach of same treasonous.
Be advised that hereafter your sovereign employers will consider any order to disarm private citizens, in any jurisdiction within these United States, a brazen act of treason. Further, any officer who obeys such a treasonous order, and attempts to confiscate our arms, is himself engaged in an act of treason. Keep in mind, “I was just following orders…” never has been, and never will be, considered a valid defense for treason. Anyone receiving such an order has the solemn duty to arrest immediately the traitorous fool who made it; and, most regrettably, any fellow officers inclined to execute it. Failing that, it would be advisable to resign and get out of a conspicuous uniform immediately."

Read the whole thing here
Jason
III
h/t Western Rifle Shooters

Parental Advisory, Explicit Language

MR. President, members of congress,
FUCK YOU.
Anyone who is proposing forward movement of the proposed “bailout” package is a traitor to this country and needs to be treated accordingly. (Package details here) Any agreements and pacts that have been made between this governing body, the United States Federal Government, and the citizens of the United States should be considered null and void. Since all governmental power is derived from the governed, especially true of our government which “asked” for permission to exist under the “ratification requirements” set forth in 1786. Revoke their power.

From the Declaration of Independence

Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

From HR2034

Whereas, on July 4, 1776, our founding fathers proclaimed that the people had the right to alter or abolish their government and declared thirteen British colonies to be free and independent, or sovereign, states; and
Whereas, on March 1, 1781, the thirteen states formed a central government they called the United States of America under a charter known as the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, which stated that "each state retains its sovereignty, freedom and independence"; and
Whereas, on September 17, 1787, the leaders of the Continental Congress signed the present Constitution of the United States, which was then transmitted to the thirteen states for ratification and the formation of a new central government; and
Whereas, several of the states delayed ratification of the Constitution and three states made clear their position regarding sovereignty by stating that "the powers of government may be resumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness"; and
Whereas, eventually all thirteen of the independent states ratified the Constitution of the United States and joined the new Union, while retaining their sovereignty as states. The states made the new central government sovereign only to the extent that the states delegated to it limited and specific powers; and
Whereas, the Constitution of the United States is merely a treaty among sovereigns, and under treaty law when one party violates the treaty the other parties are automatically released from further adherence to it unless they wish to continue; and
Whereas, the fifty current principals, or signatories, to the treaty have done well in honoring and obeying it, yet the federal agent has, for decades, violated it in both word and spirit. The many violations of the Constitution of the United States by the federal government include disposing of federal property without the approval of Congress, usurping jurisdiction from the states in such matters as abortion and firearms rights and seeking control of public lands within state borders; and
Whereas, under Article V, Constitution of the United States, three-fourths of the states may abolish the federal government. In the alternative, if the states choose to exercise their inherent right as sovereigns, fewer than thirty-eight states may lawfully choose to ignore Article V, Constitution of the United States, and establish a new federal government for themselves by following the precedent established by Article VII, Constitution of the United States, in which nine of the existing thirteen states dissolved the existing Union under the Articles of Confederation and automatically superceded the Articles.
Therefore
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona, the Senate concurring:
1. That when or if the President of the United States, the Congress of the United States or any other federal agent or agency declares the Constitution of the United States to be suspended or abolished, if the President or any other federal entity attempts to institute martial law or its equivalent without an official declaration in one or more of the states without the consent of that state or if any federal order attempts to make it unlawful for individual Americans to own firearms or to confiscate firearms, the State of Arizona, when joined by thirty-four of the other fifty states, declares as follows: that the states resume all state powers delegated by the Constitution of the United States and assume total sovereignty; that the states re-ratify and re-establish the present Constitution of the United States as the charter for the formation of a new federal government, to be followed by the election of a new Congress and President and the reorganization of a new judiciary, similarly following the precedent and procedures of the founding fathers; that individual members of the military return to their respective states and report to the Governor until a new President is elected; that each state assume a negotiated, prorated share of the national debt; that all land within the borders of a state belongs to the state until sold or ceded to the central government by the state's Legislature and Governor; and that once thirty-five states have agreed to form a new government, each of the remaining fifteen be permitted to join the new confederation on application.

Our beloved Constitution has been spit on and ripped to shreds, call out your “representatives” and let us pick a fight. Require them to leave the ivory towers and palaces of self absorption. Call them into the streets; demand them to be accountable to YOU.

They want “change”, give them fucking change. Show them that revolt is not American History, it is tradition. Wake “the Sleeping Giant” that is a pissed off populace and see how well that works, distinguished gentleman fucktard bernake. I for one am mad as hell, and if “my” government decides in its infantile wisdom to shit on me and the Constitution again, I say “fuck you too.”
Jason
III

Justified Part 3

Secession is a necessity, not an idea

I am impatient by nature, and believe most people in today’s nanosecond instant gratification world are too. We cannot afford to wait anymore for “the big one” to hit various regions of the world. Since I cannot and will not support the extermination of peoples, either indiscriminately or intentional, we have fewer options to exercise. The only ones I see out there are http://www.freestatewyoming.org/ and http://freestateproject.org/ . See this is where impatience comes in. They are taking too long and at best putting a band aid on our hemorrhaging country. The solution as I see it is radical on one hand, yet common sense on the other. Look at the Constitution of the United States, the Confederate States of America, John Locke, and other political theorists, and then throw the “American Experiment” of the present day out the window. We do not need “a line in the sand”; we need several of them, on a map. We need to dissolve our current Empire and create a true Union of States United. Relegating the Federal Branches to their true place, regulating trade, addressing grievances between the States and ensuring that the individual’s rights are not trumped by the States interest. There should be NO federal agencies designed to investigate individual citizens or private groups, only the jurisdictional governments. My friend the Reverend likes to remind me “All government power is still derived, as always from the consent of the governed” We need to revoke the power from the (current) federal government, by any means necessary. I realize that verbalizing this puts instantly into the nutsack community to the average Joe, my question is why? Does this sound crazy because it forces involvement of individuals who govern to the citizens directly? Maybe it is because the excuse of "the bureaucracy is too large to change" goes away? Nah, I bet it still has to do with the idea that any persons who currently rely on the government, would suddenly be forced to eat dog food and would soon die. What did they do for the first 140 years of this country without "welfare programs"? History shows us it won't happen, but that is the story we are told. But, what about the children and their "right" to State mandated education/indoctrination? Well for the first 100+ years there was no institution, then we collected data, and now they mandate. But what about our security? Do you really rely on the state to protect you, if the answer is yes I am sorry for you. If the answer is no, then why do you rely on them for the protection of the state(s). See, removing the federal government will only localize, if desired by the local communities, existing programs and charities to deal with local problems. I am not really against most federal policies other than the fact that they are federal. If a group of citizens in Florida want to enact a law that I in Arizona don't agree with so what, if a federal organization wants to create a law that restricts everyone at the same time, BIG F'N problem. We who want liberty (e.g. Gun Rights, Women's Rights, Gay Rights, drug rights etc..) need to realize it is all the same argument: my life, my rights, my choice. Choose which region you live in and raise your children in based upon the legislation by like minded peoples. The core of the American identity is to band together when the SHTF, for good. This is why we did not dissolve after the Revolution, the war of 1812, the War Between the States, Westen Deveolpment, the Depression, WW1&2, etc.This is one of the few occasions however when our enemies are domestic.

I do not have a crystal ball, or a grand plan of how to get the public motovated. Just an idea and a computer. It has taken less before. If you blog, try to do it more, (I know it can be a pain in the ass somedays) if you don't want to write online, write your local papers, call you local radio stations. At the minimum spread the word, your words, anyway you can.

From "The Patriot"
Charlotte: "You have done nothing to be ashamed of."
Benjamin Martin: "I have done nothing, and for that I am ashamed."

Don't be ashamed, be vocal, be true.
"I am an optimist because I want to change things for the better and I know that blood has to be spilled and disharmony and cruelty are necessary to do that." Henry Rollins


Sic vis pacem para bellum,
Jason
III
Thanks, I feel better now.

Justified Part 2

Our current structure of reality is flawed and will fall one day.

Humans have tried to use technology based on population, not "needs." My house is in a "new" area where the entire infrastructure is less than ten years old. All the latest and greatest bells and whistles, yet in that ten years we get flooding, water shortages, drain back ups, all the modern conveniences of home ownership. Over 2000 years ago the Romans and Turks had a form of indoor plumbing that worked and still would today with a little upkeep. But no, we replaced a functioning system that lasts millennium for shit that doesn't last a decade. Only so we can move it to more people over a larger area. We insisted on more land for more people to house more shit, and somebody else better make it hospitable for us. Well we developed a way to move more of our shit throughout the land and now have too much shit. Is it time to develop more "technological advances"? Let's see, if you look at as an equation it appears a little simpler than it is.
x+y=z
x= people y=possessions z=desire for technology
Do you still need you GPS guided satellite phone with e-mail, Internet and the ability to instantly connect with anyone if you can provide everything you need and have everyone you care about in a 5 mile radius? FUCK NO! Sure it is easier but you don't need it. So change he equation:
(x+y)/A=z
xyz= same as above A= Armageddon(natural or man made take your pick)
Change the people and their possessions and you get a lower "desire for technology." Sure you may have to learn how to build shelter or have some knowledge to barter with a shelter maker, how is that different than today? It is different because it forces participation in the community. Throughout history people have banded together through tragedy. Throughout history leaders have risen from the rank and file to usher in hope and prosperity in lives. With "A" being the wipe out of 80-90% of the population small communities will develop into completely independent city states, unknowingly working towards a common goal. This is where that document we alluded to in part 1 comes in. (in case you still haven't read it I will add some of the key phrases)
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government

Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance

(Emphasis added by me, sorry Mr. Jefferson)
Our rights are "natural" and because of that city states will try to develop the quickest path to them they can, in a way their leaders will develop. Once the paths are started their change is difficult. That is why it is also natural for struggle and strife, natural preparation for the wars ahead.

Jason
III

Justified Part 1

The consistent de-evolution of life and liberty has developed a new need in my opinion.

In the past 100 years, or more, what has the "industrial revolution" done for life, or liberty? We have touted at "marvels" and "breakthroughs", I am asking why? What was marvelous? What has "improved"? Are we better off than 2000 years ago? Sure we are more complacent, live longer, things are "easier", but are we better?
Complacency- We accept our reality for what it is. People as individuals don't think they can make a difference, so why try, things are okay. FUCK THAT! If you are not challenged daily, are you living? If you accept the reality and life people around you dictate for you, are you living? Especially if the people making these decisions are in a marble, and limestone building thousands of miles from you. What if they are from one or even two generations before you? Are they right, are they better? What the fuck gives them the right to make these decisions. Sadly, you do. Even I do, but not with complacency. About 230 years ago a group of men wrote and signed a fantastic piece of paper and asked for it to be read throughout the land. It is called the "Declaration of Independence". If you cannot with nostalgia recite or at least recall some part of it, shame on you. Find a copy and read it, better yet have it read to you. Imagine the emotion and the vigorousness of its message at that time. Can you feel it? (THAT TIME IS NOW JACKASS!) We go down without a fight everyday. We pay our taxes; we follow their rules without question. Do you cross the street at the intersection because of the law, or safety? Why do you pay a property tax, it is YOUR property. Why do you pay an income tax, because on this one they were sharp, remove the ability to opt out. If you don't see it most won't question it, besides they give you some back every April since you were nice enough to give them an interest free loan at gunpoint, for (once again) shit you do not want and certainly do not need. (reality check, it was all your money to begin with)
Live Longer- Now with you daily dose of snyhetic-hyphoid-typhoid-caffine-viagra-oxycoton-deep dish sausage-big mac-summers eve- enema, you to can live beyond your bodies decay so you can shit yourself at the local market and go senile. But hey at least you can still get wood now and again. Try hitting some physical fitness once and again. Don't tell me "I go to the (insert cooperate gym here) every other Tuesday that is an odd number" bullshit. As humans our advances have made us lazy, unhealthy and predictable. I know it is hard to pry yourself out of the routine of watching a box that has people on it actually doing something. People used to actually live life, now we might witness parts of it. A simple look around you next time you step out would help you see this. The obesity rate is ridiculous; people who say they are fine with being overweight are liars. They just acknowledge that they are to lazy to change their position in life. Don't get me wrong if we were cannibals this would be great, have you ever had veal? I want to live, preferably long, as far as I can with it being real. Medicines have their place but why is it the more drugs we have created in labs, the deadlier our world becomes. Cancer, HIV/AIDS, Parkinson's, high cholesterol, bird-flu, mad cow. Hell even the bumble bee is now deadly. WHAT THE FUCK? Our advancement has brought us nothing as it pertains to true longevity.
Easier- How many emails do we send and receive in a single day? Hell right now I am typing on a box that is smarter then ½ the world's population, why you ask? Did you not read the first two points? Easy is not better, it is easier. But we cannot come full circle any more. Millions of people are unchallenged because we don't want them to feel "failure". I have failed at many attempts and EVERY great lesson I have learned has been from not wanting to feel failure again. If you are not failing, you are not trying. PERIOD! We are missing the balance, most people cannot taste true success, because they don't under stand the bitterness of failure. I am an elitist, sure but the real question is why aren't you? I set my goals just out of reach and when I reach them I feel "high" sometimes the are way out of reach, yet somehow they can be overcome. Unless you have done that first hand you have no clue of what life is. Yet even an elitist prick like me recognizes I am not doing enough. That is were our tale begins.

Jason
III