Cute.
A less benign interpretation is a little game I like to call "Find the Terrorist."
Take your time, now...
[Via Steven P]
Saturday, April 12, 2008
ATF Troop
Click on the title link to see a graphic from The Guns Network representing the professional competence of our friends at BATFU.
Cute.
A less benign interpretation is a little game I like to call "Find the Terrorist."
Take your time, now...
[Via Steven P]
Cute.
A less benign interpretation is a little game I like to call "Find the Terrorist."
Take your time, now...
[Via Steven P]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
28 comments:
For that to be a good game, you would need to post a picture of someone who isn't a terrorist, too.
kent, you have nailed the flaw in the game, alright. I suspect David didn't think anyone would tumble to it that quickly.
But then - to some folks one of the two is a patriot and the other a government sponsored terrorist.
Why would a legitimate LEO need to conceal his or her identity behind a balaclava?
I know - no one need answer a rhetorical question...
The question is, whom is he serving and protecting?
one kills for god, the other thinks he IS god.
-hobbit
Heh.
Speaking of games, anyone like Counter-Strike?
I'll e-mail you an ATF "skin" for the Phoenix model.
C.H.
I think with this you've crossed the line in my opinion. I know we're just bloggers, but I expected some level of professionalism here. Not so much now.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
For government sympathizers, the truth hurts.
For government sympathizers, the truth hurts.
I guess when the enemy is the government, equating it with terrorists might be somewhat self-satisfying. Maybe I'm looking at things too complex -- that a government acting as one entity consistently in one direction, as if it had an agenda against us, is perhaps oversimplified. But I don't think I am.
It'll be a sad day when we have so little friends within government that it actually becomes the enemy. To you, Kent perhaps it is, but when you try to persuade people acting like it is, it wont make you many friends, which in the practical world are invaluable.
Tell us all about your invaluable friends at BATFU, Stan.
For someone who never even approaches a line, passing judgments on when they are crossed is understandable.
I don't know any BATF agents, and unless that particular agent did something similarly horrendous as al Qaeda, I fail to see how the ATF can be generalized in such a manner.
That is the line I will not cross. If and when they do purposefully terrorize on a scale that incriminates more than a few bad apples, it will be them that has crossed it.
Statists and their useful idiots in government are no friends of mine. And though in cases of their negligent or wrongheaded actions they commit horrible crimes against both individuals and the people, does not mean the entire government or BATF personnel is right up there with al Qaeda.
But what do I know about lines? I haven't had to approach any that jeopardized my life or liberty yet, but that was mighty presumptuous of you.
I'm not going to cross a line for the sake of crossing it, like painting each and every BATF agent as a terrorist, which is insulting and patently absurd.
No presumption--I just look at your words. You're a government apologist. But then, you're in the government, so no surprises there.
"If and when they do purposefully terrorize on a scale that incriminates more than a few bad apples, it will be them that has crossed it."
I'm sure some of the "bad apples" they've incriminated will appreciate that vote of confidence. And sorry you haven't been paying attention, but they've crossed it many times--their very existence crosses it.
You go ahead and defend hooded ninjas on full auto, Stan. I'm sure you'll have no shortage of pragmatists who agree with you, and think the enslavers would treat you with respect and appreciation rather than the contempt they reserve for inmates trying to make nice.
It's pretty telling that what you consider "over the top" is a caricature, no different from a political cartoon, really, as opposed to being offended that government employs goons to destroy citizens who would claim their natural rights as human beings, not to mention Constitutional rights as citizens.
Looks to me like it's "all of the above"!
When the "management" of the BATFE prosecutes those "few" bad apples to the full extent of the law, then I will grudgingly admit that the entire BATFE is not a terrorist organization (even though it would remain an illegal agency). Until that day, their actions (or lack thereof) speak volumes. Which prisons are the butchers of Waco, Ruby Ridge, and numerous other terrorist acts rotting in?
kent has made the point in undeniable fashion, yet stan denies it.
Stan, do not tell me you are on my side or the side of liberty and justice.
If by friends you mean people of your caliber and bent, you may have as many of them as you wish. I would prefer to have real friends who are not afraid of truth and who would not castigate me for speaking it. Oops, guess that means you are not a friend.
Stan, do not tell me you are on my side or the side of liberty and justice.
I am on the side of responsible liberty. What the game above seems to imply is that it is well past time for revolution if what is symbolized is indeed the case. I disagree, and merely because I do, does not mean I apologize for the government or side with these thugs. They should be punished for any and all rights violations severely.
But I call for justice not revolution. There is a difference, and when we as Americans can no longer appeal to the law for redress of grievances, then and only then we face the option of exercising our right to alter or abolish the government. For some this might well be the case, to which I say have your revolution. But don't expect to win without at least a million friends who will fight to the death their own brothers... I'll go even further, don't even expect to be a source of inspiration for posterity either, after your martyrdom, you'll be written in the history books as crack-pots which in the grand scheme of things will only serve the Statists.
If you want to change things you have to persuade people, and you aren't going to do that very easily comparing LEOs to terrorists. Enjoy your small circle of perpetual outrage. Love thine enemies.
David - I'd say you were in pretty good company:
"Already a couple of the faithful have sent in checks for a foundation memorial to the innocents who perished at the hands of the ninja at Waco. ... I have been criticized by referring to our federal masked men as "ninja" … Let us reflect upon the fact that a man who covers his face shows reason to be ashamed of what he is doing. A man who takes it upon himself to shed blood while concealing his identity is a revolting perversion of the warrior ethic. It has long been my conviction that a masked man with a gun is a target. I see no reason to change that view."
Col. Jeff Cooper
What would an honest man enforcing laws need with a cover for his face? If he is in the right, and backed with the full force of government, why should he worry?
The mask wearing thug depicted there, relies on terrorism backed by the government of the united states. His job is the same as an islamic terrorist. He goes in with a gun and no identity. He makes you comply with HIS wishes and desires through terror, coercion, and fear. If you choke down the kool-aid in your cup you'll be able to see things a little better.
Here's the definition of terror stan
Main Entry:ter£ror
Pronunciation:*ter-*r, *te-r*r
Function:noun
Etymology:Middle English, from Anglo-French terrour, from Latin terror, from terr*re to frighten; akin to Greek trein to be afraid, flee, tremein to tremble — more at TREMBLE
Date:14th century
1 : a state of intense fear
2 a : one that inspires fear : SCOURGE b : a frightening aspect *the terrors of invasion* c : a cause of anxiety : WORRY d : an appalling person or thing; especially : BRAT
3 : REIGN OF TERROR
4 : violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands *insurrection and revolutionary terror*
synonyms see FEAR
–ter£ror£less \-l*s\ adjective
The BATFU do not go after the real criminals, they go after people who TRY to comply with their arbitrary bullshit edicts. You willful violator you, this form only has a "Y" on it. AH, you illegal transferred a machine gun, don't bother use with the facts that it was a malfunctioning rifle. Where are they when real crimes are committed? Busy harassing people because of unconstitutional "laws" against Americans.
Stan, you're a liar. I don't take lightly even the most trivial infringements on my rights, as my ancestors fought and died for them. Maybe it's time to update your profile, because you DO accept infringements, you defend them and those terrorists whose sole purpose in life is to carry them out, at gun point.
Hobbit, because BATF agents enforced unconstitutional laws does not make them terrorists. If you want to paint me as one who will gladly help those take your guns away go ahead just because I don't think every BATF agent should be characterized as a terrorist, I must be a staunch advocate of their horrible practices and policies. Whatever. I don't take lightly any infringements, and for those infringements I advocate justice, not wholesale condemnation. But I suppose being fair is not enough for you guys.
That is my main objection to this post: portraying the entire BATFE as equivalent to al Qaeda is wrong and unfair. And it wont help the cause. But what do you care, I might taint the absolutism by preaching decency.
Point out ONE thing that the BATFE does that is Constitutional. Just one.
"The first large-scale cigarette trafficking case tied to terrorism was prosecuted in North Carolina in 2002. A federal jury in Charlotte convicted Mohamad Hammoud, 28, of violating a ban on providing material support to terrorist groups by funneling profits from a multimillion-dollar cigarette-smuggling operation to Hezbollah."
I thought this site was about gun rights. Stan wants to talk cigarettes? I don't see that as an enumerated delegated authority either, but for the sake of argument let's accept legislative usurpations and stare decisis perversions of the original intent of the commerce clause and examine Stan's story.
So let me see if I've got this straight: tyrannical government extortion of and interference with free market choices creates an inevitable black market workaround guaranteed to provide lucrative opportunities for criminals? They create the laws that create the opportunities for terrorist organizations to gain entree to the economy? And their criminally negligent border policies allow the terrorist-aligned Mohamad Hammoud's of the world to get into this country in the first place, just as they did with the 9/11 hijackers?
And let's take a look at Mr. Hamoud:
Mohamad Youssef Hammoud, an 18-year-old Shiite Muslim from Lebanon, arrived at New York's Kennedy Airport on June 6, 1992. He had come, accompanied by two close male relatives, from Caracas, Venezuela, where each of them had plunked down $200 for a counterfeit U.S. visa. American border guards caught the fraud, and the trio did not exactly begin their American careers with distinction; but they did begin them in character-with a crime. The U.S. government also responded in character, just as it would many times over the next eight years: It allowed them into the country.
They create the problem and then claim credit for an occasional spill cleanup--all the while padding their budgets and advancing their careers--at the expense of the tax slaves?
This sounds just like that other criminal enterprise, the war on drugs. Hey, just wait 'til guns are illegal--talk about an opportunity for smugglers!
Meanwhile Stan claims sole arbitership of professionalism and decency, and exhibits more hostility to "absolutists" than he does to agents of tryranny, who he defends?
Is that pretty much it?
Think what you like, Stan, I've wasted too much time already on your petty indignation.
Likewise. I merely pointed out a constitutional role, the one about congress regulating commerce...
Strange way to advance a cause, by purging your allies.
Guy comes on your site, starts a fight, gets his ass kicked and then accuses you of purging him? He fights like a Huffington Post liberal.
No Stan, their tactics and behavior make them terrorists.
You can;t seem to grasp the facts
1)the agent pictured has his identity hidden. He is a symbol.
2)he does this in order to hide his identity and appear as just another stormtrooper for the sole purpose of confusion and intimidation
3) he uses the same tactics as terrorists
4) the outcome is the same- in effect the elimination of choice, freedom, and everything America was supposed to be. You can't control criminals by controlling everyone else. Never worked, never will.
I'll concede that there may very well be some good guys in the government, but then you have agencies like BATFU, the national guard troops who admitted they would shoot Americans in NO while confiscating weapons as two examples you have a very large problem.
That is ignorance and outright hostility to the highest laws we have. We'll have justice when we see face charges, let alone be behind bars doing hard labor, or worse. Until then, having the nerve to call them what they are is fine by me. Also, wholesale condemnation against thugs with no written standards, limited oversight and accountability, a long record of abuses who shouldn't be doing anything besides collecting taxes should be rewarded with a medal.
Any criminal act the government wishes to engage in is "justified" under the interstate commerce nonsense. It justifies no such thing. Do you know what "interstate commerce" was really about? Preventing Virginia from enacting a trade embargo against Pennsylvania and stuff like that; NOT sticking the federal nose into what I may choose to buy or sell.
There is NO Constitutional authorization for the government to arrest people for selling one of this countries primary foundational crops: tobacco.
The BATFE is a completely unconstitutional, criminal, government agency.
Even if the Constitution were amended to make its criminal acts "legal", they would still be wrong and immoral.
No matter how many "laws" are passed to "legalize" evil actions, they are still evil. You can't "legalize" gun regulation (or alcohol regulation or tobacco sales restrictions) any more than you can "legalize" rape.
Things like this are the reason I am proud to be an ethical anarchist.
Stay on your knees Stan, we don't need you. If you feel like you have been purged, good! I certainly don't want any association with you.
You can't even keep your lies straight.
You claim you are for justice, as long as it doesn't offend government terrorists. As Kent asked, how many of those miscreants at BATFU have been jailed?
The answer to that question alone, tells you how many good people are in the organization.
A better question might be; which are you more afraid will kill you and your loved ones? Possibly by holy fire, possibly by regular fire.
Post a Comment