|
| |
Liberals' Bodyguards
Packing Heat
Aug. 14, 2000
Editor,
It just occurred to me that some of the top dog liberals for gun control
cart around with them a bodyguard contingent packing more heat than the police
force of a small town.
If they truly believe in getting rid of guns, why don't they start with the
guns of their body guards?
You may say, "But they are important figures whose lives are endangered
by crazy people who might try to kill them!"
Are we not all important in the eyes of God. Why can't the common citizen also
have the right to protect his person?
Isn't this a double standard?
I vote we keep the second amendment in tact.
Sincerely,
Sterling D. Allan
Manti, UT
Feedback
From: "Loren Pearce"
<lorenp48@yahoo.com>
To: "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@greaterthings.com>...
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 1:03 PM
Subject: Re: Editorial: Liberals Packing Heat
Sterling,
You should know by now that the motto of politicians and celebrities is
"hypocrisies R us". Hypocrisy is so embedded in their system that
they wouldn't be normal without it. I love the ultimate hypocrisy of
"Baby your baby" prenatal health campaign by the government while at
the same time allowing partial birth abortions. Would somebody please stand up
and explain that one?
Loren
From: "Lisa & Don"
<weir5116@execpc.com>
To: "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@greaterthings.com>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: Editorial: Liberals Packing Heat
that's a really good point. thanks and keep up the good work
Paul Weir
[webmaster for TopPoliticalSites]
From: ***
To: "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@greaterthings.com>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: Editorial: Liberals Packing Heat
'Dog liberals?' And you call yourself a Christian? How about- HYPOCRITE?
Liberals are the reason you HAVE the freedom to call them dogs!
From: "Nathan Allan" <nallan@enol.com>
To: "'Sterling D. Allan'" <sterlingda@greaterthings.com>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 2:44 PM
Subject: RE: [SDA_biggies] Editorial: Liberals Packing Heat
Ster
This very point was a hot topic a few months ago when Rosie O'Donnell (sp?),
an avid anti-gun comedian and talk show host, hired an armed body guard. You
may want to look for some commentary/discussion on the web concerning this.
--
Nathan Allan
Softwise, Inc.
From: "Missouri FreeNet Administration" <measl@mfn.org>
To: "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@greaterthings.com>
Cc: "Greater Things Newsletter" <Greater_Things@listbot.com>;
"Greater Things Christian Newsletter" <gt_christian@egroups.com>;
"SDA Biggies newsletter" <SDA_biggies@listbot.com>; "SDA
Friends list" <SDA_friends@listbot.com>; "David's Outcasts
e-group" <davids_outcasts@egroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 5:51 AM
Subject: Re: Editorial: Liberals Packing Heat
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Sterling D. Allan wrote:
:SUBJECT: Liberals' Bodyguards Packing Heat
:http://www.greaterthings.com/Editorial/liberals_guns.htm
:
:Editor,
:
:It just occurred to me that some of the top dog liberals who are for gun
:control cart around with them a bodyguard contingent packing more heat than
:the police force of a small town.
:
:If they truly believe in getting rid of guns, why don't they start with the
:guns of their body guards?
They [obviously] don't believe in "getting rid of guns": they
believe in getting rid of OUR guns.
:You may say, "But they are important figures whose lives are endangered
by
:crazy people who might try to kill them!"
No, actually. I'd be more inclined to say something like "they are highly
visible hypocrites and thieves whose lives are endangered by the rage of those
they have screwed (and who rightfully seek revenge)".
:Are we not all important in the eyes of God. Why can't the common citizen
:also have the right to protect his person?
Because then the common person would have the means to protect his *property*
as well, and it would be that much harder for "authorities" to act
with impunity (illegal taxation; random police stops for "DWB [driving
while black]"; heavily armed forcible searches with small armies of
hooded "police" who care not if they have the right house, or even
the "right" to "search" in this way; "forfeiture
laws" which allow the state to take whatever they want, WITHOUT ANY FORM
OF DUE PROCESS; etc..)
:Isn't this a double standard?
You bet your ass it is.
:I vote we keep the second amendment in tact.
What second amendment? Wake up buddy: it's gone. Along with the rest of them -
you want them back? Better get ready to fight for them... Hmmmm, how are you
going to do that *without guns*??? See: this is the most important reason for
them to push "gun control" -- so that those few who have woken from
the sheeple dream and seen the truth have no physical way to attempt to regain
their rights through the only avenue with any real chance of success [armed
revolution].
Throughout history, every dictatorship has practiced arms [gun] confiscation
and regulation in order to impede reactionary / revolutionary backlashes from
their crimes - from Ceasar through Hitler, Stalin, and Clinton.
:Sincerely,
:
:Sterling D. Allan
:
Yours,
J.A. Terranson
sysadmin@mfn.org
--
If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they
should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by
force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws
(which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place);
the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional
abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract
an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must
surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the
fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates,
or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt
there would be a problem to b[***] about in the first place...
| |
|
