# BE THERE if your a TRUE AMERICAN!



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

I'm shocked that this hasn't been posted in here yet..

So swirling around the internets and especially YouTube, The Ohio Militia released this video, then pulled it after stories were written about it. In the video they announce that there will be a million man militia march on Washington DC on July 4th. All the marchers *will be armed to make a point *about something.






http://www.dailydose.us

Think this call to march will gain steam? Let's see.. participants will all be armed, _but they will not use their weapons._ Pale Horse (the author) says that he'd be happy if ten million people showed up, but one million is the baseline goal.

Here is what the YouTube page says:



> We are trying to organize a Million Armed Militia Man march on Washington July 4th 2009. Be there!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> We can would could should this to death. Bottom line is I am going, we should all go. It sends a powerful message. Like I said they cant arrest 1,000,000 + people. Its not possible. They dont have the manpower or space for that.
> Are we men or cowards???? If I worked for the government this would be the LAST idea they would want me to suggest THINK ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!!!! MAn up people!!!


Wow 

Now let's see if Fox covered this the way it covered the teabag thing. That would be interesting...

I wonder how that march will blend with tens of thousands of people on the National Mall on July 4th for the annual FIREWORKS DISPLAY?

And let's not forget that the next "Tea Bagging" day is also scheduled for the Mall on July 4th too!


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Ummm by the way...

Doesn't this video make a great point, and give complete credence to the DHS report about possible right-wing extremism?

Way to go Ohio militia! :roll:


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

So if this were to gain steam...

Suppose for a moment the nightmare scenario(s) that could form...

1. Confrontations with DC police trying to disarm Americans en masse

2. Fireworks celebrations sounding like possible gunshots in the Mall area, confusing police and/or marchers

3. Families coming to see the fireworks seeing armed people walking around, not being used to it, thinking they "see" an armed terrorist, and calling in thosands of reports

4. The government needing to activate the National Guard for crowd control. Themselves being armed. Then asking them to act as law enforcement with varying levels of youth and inexperience trying to control a bunch of activist gun owners holding firm their right to be armed.
5. A million amped up citizens with guns, crammed into a confined space, being riled up by various speakers....

6. And then for whatever reason armed riot control moves in on some disturbance, that one lone radical decides to create, and the whole thing blows up.

Bad.

The possibilities I'm sure could go on and on...


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Ohh one last thing...

Don't forget to check out the comments before PaleHorse decided to pull the original video!

http://www.youtube.com/comment_servlet? ... r_embedded

Once again... does this give DHS even more fodder?


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I find it amusing that you are comparing people worried about taxes ( TEA Party) to a militia calling for people to be armed...

That is like calling anyone who cares about animals (Pet owners) PETA members.

Now this is Apples to Oranges comparison.

Wait....I forgot to add this....
:stirpot: :stirpot: :idiot:


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Chuck Smith said:


> I find it amusing that you are comparing people worried about taxes ( TEA Party) to a militia calling for people to be armed...
> 
> That is like calling anyone who cares about animals (Pet owners) PETA members.
> 
> ...


Ahh Chuck.... I"m surprised you can't make the connection.

A huge part of the problem, is that the Tea Bagging event had so many different goals, that more than half the participants had signs supporting all types of things, and not only taxation. Even Fox reported that. The lack of unified message and cohesion made the message clouded. Lots and lots of folks reported that. Heck half the people attending were protesting Obama himself, bailouts of banks, and increase in Federal spending, besides taxation.

Keeping on topic though..

I'm simply re-posting a You Tube video created by someone else. The person stirring the pot is the Ohio militia who created the video.

Pointing out the video, the ironies, the problems, and the negative images it will cast upon law abiding gun owners is not stirring any pot.

Consider it more like broadening your horizons on understanding how folks can form impressions based upon the actions of small groups of activists..


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I totally agree that it is a jumbled mess if people show up anywhere armed to protest.

That is just a no win situation.

The stirring the pot is you taking jabs at fox news, the tea party people, etc.
Calling them FAUX News, and TEA BAG....etc. That is stirring the pot.

Most of the tea party coverage I saw was about the bail outs and then the increasing tax or giving up tax breaks and so forth...(in my home state MN). The national coverage I watched you did see the anti-obama signage but you also heard people talk about how they felt they were misled with bail outs and taxation issues.

Or when I watched CNN or MSNBC. I saw reporters being combative towards protesters. Getting up in the face of people and being very comfrontational with people.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

:lol: do the math a million militiamen would be 20,000 from every state :roll:

10 mill would be 200,000 from each state

I doubt there are 20,000 in the whole country, Ive never met one

the only thing kookier than the nut in your video is a guy who has almost a whole thread where hes talking to himself :lol: :lol:

Dang it Chuck I woud of loved to see how far his rant would of carried him

Ryan you need help :wink:


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)




----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Bobm said:


> :lol: do the math a million militiamen would be 20,000 from every state :roll:
> 
> 10 mill would be 200,000 from each state
> 
> ...


1. His numbers not mine.

2. He never said it was limited to militia. He was implying gun owners

3. I split my thoughts into multiple posts, because I have been accused of being too verbose in the past regarding overly lengthy posts. Plus, the video and its implications have several different scenarios, and splitting my thoughts into their own seperate posts allows others to comment individually on each.

I think the original thread speaks for itself if you cared to choose to comment on its merits, implications and message(s).

But as the saying goes... if you can't attack the message... attack the..


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

If you think me kidding you is an attack well I think thats funny

My comment on the subject of the thread was clear there are not even enough of these nuts to fill the city park in Jamestown so why take them serious.

You are right about your posts being too verbose though I guess your new method of splitting them makes it more bearable to read :beer:

Why would you come to a web site where everyone on it is a law abiding gun owner and insult their intelligence implying they are going to all pick up there guns and follow this milita nut YOU CLAIM somehow represents them???

Uh we know why :withstupid:


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Ryan....

I was not attacking you. But when you use words like "TEA BAGGERS" and what not you are starting on the offensive.

So that is why I say you are stirring the pot.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Bobm said:


> If you think me kidding you is an attack well I think thats funny
> 
> My comment on the subject of the thread was clear there are not even enough of these nuts to fill the city park in Jamestown so why take them serious.
> 
> ...


Ok fair response Bob. I can see your point. It was just ambiguous as to your feelings/intent

I didn't think you were attacking me as much as belittling my effort at fostering discussion on something I think is a valid point.

I think we have seen an increasing amount of fear mongering in this forum. Even the most unbiased observer would agree... I didn't imply that everyone should join them. It was more of a subtle poke in the eye that shows how far taking extremist action like the author of the video makes even law abiding gun owners look radical to the vast majority of non gun owning citizens who see this type of call to arms.

We've had similar posts in this forum in the past that did quasi support the words of similar YouTube video authors dressed up in masks with digitized voices. We've had other vague references to armed protests, calls of removing the President, and even more incideniary words about various current political and Presidential responses.

You can see how one might draw a connection

Thanks for clarifying :beer:


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Chuck Smith said:


> Ryan....
> 
> I was not attacking you. But when you use words like "TEA BAGGERS" and what not you are starting on the offensive.
> 
> So that is why I say you are stirring the pot.


Fair point Chuck.


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

Thats sort of like linking all democrats to the psychos that blow up hummers and torch houses in the desert/forest areas.

Not a very credible post to be crying over someone ragging on you about it.

By your methodology, Obama is a terrorist or at least follows in line with his namesake Saddam! (that is sarcasm just in case you can't tell, about his last name).


----------



## doublereed (Mar 27, 2009)

They're going to ruin it for the rest of us that like guns because something's going to happen that shouldn't.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

doublereed said:


> They're going to ruin it for the rest of us that like guns because something's going to happen that shouldn't.


That is *precisely* my worry Doublereed!


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

R y a n said:


> doublereed said:
> 
> 
> > They're going to ruin it for the rest of us that like guns because something's going to happen that shouldn't.
> ...


 :lol: :lol: both of you please report on the big invasion when it happens

some old fat guy in camo ranting about going to Washington and waving our guns at the whitehouse :roll: yeah thats going to get a huge following

Wait I have to fly to Mars and I'm late I'll be back later :wink:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> That is precisely my worry Doublereed!


Your imagination is as good as the nut job organizing this thing. Do you really take this serious? I don't think you do. I think you see gun owners like this and think you can get someone all stirred up. Nice try.  I'm certainly not taking it serious. I don't think it stands a snowballs chance of even getting off the ground. You have to learn when someone is spouting, when they are serious, and when something can actually happen. 
You think this has a chance, and you think the liberals can't get our guns because the Supreme Court has spoken. I think your wrong on both counts. 
How long did it take you to find something that goofy?


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> > That is precisely my worry Doublereed!
> 
> 
> Your imagination is as good as the nut job organizing this thing. Do you really take this serious? I don't think you do. I think you see gun owners like this and think you can get someone all stirred up. Nice try.  I'm certainly not taking it serious. I don't think it stands a snowballs chance of even getting off the ground. You have to learn when someone is spouting, when they are serious, and when something can actually happen.
> ...


Is it really out of the realm of possibility that some nut job will take this serious and bring a gun to the Mall on the 4th of July? Or that a group of militiamen will want to make a political statement and pull some stunt? One only needs to watch these videos to see that there are radical nuts out there willing to rile up those on the fringes.

You keep trying to pin this back on me. That is truly shameful on your part. Rather, I think there are those who are continuing to stir the pot across the country, including various chat boards and websites are a large part of the problem. Don't blame one of the messengers who point out the results of those trying to fan the flames of discontent.

To answer your question... nope I don't believe it will have a snowball's chance... if you are referring to the possibility of the full march taking place. But I think you also know that wasn't my intent by posting the article. You are just engaging in distractions by deflecting my point.

When I quoted DoubleReed, he was talking about a couple guys doing something stupid to screw it up for the rest of us. It will only take a national incident during a major holiday to galvanize the non gun owning public against us.


----------



## doublereed (Mar 27, 2009)

Even if it doesn't take off and actually happen they've already ruined it for some of us because this gives the whole "right wing extremist" concept some steam. It kind of validates the idea of that "watch list" that everyone's so riled up about.
I don't know the answer or what's going to happen, but I do know that the fact that that's even on Youtube is not a good thing.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I'm shocked that this hasn't been posted in here yet..


My interpretation: I thought all you radical right wingers would be pushing this.



> You keep trying to pin this back on me. That is truly shameful on your part.


Oh, please.    Well, so far you think Bob attacked you, and someone else to if I remember, and now you are going with the sympathy pitch with me. Grow at least a thin skin will you, and stop playing innocent, I'm not buying it.

Here is the way I see it. I think you see most gun rights advocates as radical. You perhaps picked up that idea after taking a beating when you promoted ammo control. Simply because we have resisted your left wing back door ammo control doesn't make us all extremists. I think that was your point. At least considering your record on these things that's the way you come across now. 
Tell me you no longer support ammo control and I will reconsider. Currently it looks like we could get what you want by way of the Mexican treaty.

I agree that this would be very bad for rational gun owners. I also believe Obama would love the excuse to drop the hammer on them. I think he is far more willing to kill American gun owners than radical Muslims. Obama is as radical as these people. I'm not going to call them radical right like you do Ryan. Maybe that was your point. You know right = radical.

Simply because we don't agree with you Ryan doesn't make us all right wing crazy gun people. We aren't going to pick up our 870's and march on Washington. Not all of us are buying bulldozers to bury our firearms. We aren't building bunkers in our back yards. We also don't all march on abortion clinics, and we don't sleep with a cork in our rear because we heard a gay has moved into the neighborhood. North Dakotan's are not as isolated and backwards as you have previously stated.


----------



## NDTerminator (Aug 20, 2003)

Ryan, are you somehow related to Fetch, or was it just your mommy didn't give you enough attention as a child?. There must be some logical reason for your pot stirring & attention craving...


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

NDTerminator said:


> Ryan, are you somehow related to Fetch, or was it just your mommy didn't give you enough attention as a child?. There must be some logical reason for your pot stirring & attention craving...


ryan enjoys stirring it...he seldom makes a relevant argument, like most left wingers do, they radicalize everyone who doesn't agree with them.

i think ryan is good friends with Perez Hilton......what is it with people with the last name "Hilton"? i guess those being in the majority and having heterosexual views and being a patriot are considered radical now...funny how that view was the norm in America for so many years....wow, how's that "change" working out for everyone?


----------



## willythekid (Jan 21, 2008)

I think it is funny how when Ryan posts on here it is stirring the pot but when posters like hunter94 spew their liberal bashing on a forum, nothing is said. It may be because there is far fewer liberal posters on here who want to get into a p!ssing match or it may be a lot of the conservative people on here do nothing but b!tch and moan when they hear something that doesn't fit into their right-wing agenda.... in either case i still enjoy this forum and the topics it discusses.... here's to your "stirring the pot" Ryan :beer:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Willy,
So what do you think about these people wanting to go to DC armed? How do you think they compare to the average gun owner? What do you think we should do to retain the second amendment? Does the treaty with Mexico bother you? I think it would render our Remington model 700 useless clubs. 
Since not that many liberals responded maybe you would help us out on that perspective. What does a moderate left person think?
Did that voice sound like Jesse Ventura to you too? To tell the truth I am wondering if it's real. No picture of the guy speaking. I wonder what Napolitano's voice sounds like?  She looks a little like Jesse.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

willythekid said:


> I think it is funny how when Ryan posts on here it is stirring the pot but when posters like hunter94 spew their liberal bashing on a forum, nothing is said. It may be because there is far fewer liberal posters on here who want to get into a p!ssing match or it may be a lot of the conservative people on here do nothing but b!tch and moan when they hear something that doesn't fit into their right-wing agenda.... in either case i still enjoy this forum and the topics it discusses.... here's to your "stirring the pot" Ryan :beer:


Thanks Willy

Spot on assessment! :beer:

I couldn't have said it any better myself.

The double standard (calling my posts pot stirring or trolling) is hypocrisy at its finest. That is why moderate or liberal folks quit posting here after a short time. And it is THE prime reason those former posters who used to contribute here rarely do anymore...

Maybe it should serve as a wakeup call....


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

boo hoo :wink:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I know your ticked because you don't run the whole site Ryan, and you would like to sucker me into a childish whizz match. I refuse to do that. You should know where the line is at and take it to the PM's if you don't like something. Your simply back stabbing now. PM me and I'll give you an alternate view of why some liberals don't post much. It has nothing to do with them.
I think the difference is other liberals don't think I have to agree with them, and I hope they know they don't have to agree with me. That doesn't mean I will not try take apart something I do not agree with. I expect the same in return from them. I have locked very few posts over the years, and I have only deleted things that turn to bad language or personal attacks. However, time after time I have to justify things to you.

So what is it you want to run for in North Dakota Ryan? Remember that fairness doctrine now.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

This country has raised a generation of "girley men" effeminated people that will wimper if someone calls them out

thank God there are still some like Red Labels son

God help us because the Islamic goons, the north Koreans, the red chinese, Hugo Chavez et al. are licking their chops in anticipation


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> I know your ticked because you don't run the whole site Ryan, and you would like to sucker me into a childish whizz match.
> 
> I refuse to do that. You should know where the line is at and take it to the PM's if you don't like something.


No Plainsman. Not at all. That has been repeated numerous times and it simply isn't true.

I know where the line is... you and I have discussed this many times, and I think we've done a good job in these latest threads giving polite give and take, stating our opinions etc...



Plainsman said:


> Your simply back stabbing now.


No backstabbing intended. In fact my comments weren't directed at the mods but rather others who continue taking pot shots.



Plainsman said:


> PM me and I'll give you an alternate view of why some liberals don't post much. It has nothing to do with them.


I'll do that. I appreciate the offer. I'm genuinely curious.




Plainsman said:


> I think the difference is other liberals don't think I have to agree with them, and I hope they know they don't have to agree with me. That doesn't mean I will not try take apart something I do not agree with. I expect the same in return from them. I have locked very few posts over the years, and I have only deleted things that turn to bad language or personal attacks. However, time after time I have to justify things to you.


I never said you had to agree with me. Not sure where you got that. :huh: My words were agreeing with Willy's post. He obviously saw something in the back and forth, that seemed to hold me to a different standard regarding my posts. He hasn't been the only one to point this fact out over the past few months.



Plainsman said:


> So what is it you want to run for in North Dakota Ryan? Remember that fairness doctrine now.


I'm not sure what you mean here? what do I want to run for? when? fairness doctrine?

You got me on this last one? 

Take care.


----------

