Good message to police

[JimTh]

This video needs to be broadcast around the world. New blogger...give her some support.

 

[Rich kid]

This video needs to be broadcast around the world. New blogger...give her some support.

She has my support 100%, but don't expect much from this pro-police site populated by those that believe the police can do no wrong.

 

[JimTh]

She has my support 100%, but don't expect much from this pro-police site populated by those that believe the police can do no wrong.

Just wanna make sure that leo has to deal with pretty smart girls as well. Maybe the more they hear this they might begin to adjust their stinkin attitudes.

 

[BluesStringer]

This video needs to be broadcast around the world. New blogger...give her some support.

No criticisms of anything she had to say in the video, but there's an undercurrent in this one and the other three on her new channel of the modern Anarchy movement led by folks such as Larken Rose. That's not necessarily a criticism either, as Larken Rose has produced many videos which I have both enjoyed and learned from, but if I'm right about Josie being part of the same movement, I personally would prefer that their anarchist's mindset be put out front instead of intertwining ideals of constitutional liberty with seemingly interchangeable anarchist ideas.

I did visit her website (as requested in the Description of the OP video) to see if there were links to "Friends of Josie's" or something like that. I was wondering if there might be a connection to Larken or infowars or Adam Kokesh or some other folks who are seemingly liberty activists, but in reality, are little more than provocateurs for anarchist and/or communist and/or Russian organizations/governments. Her site isn't finished (not even close) though, so finding out who she aligns herself with, or what .orgs and meat-world movements she identifies with, is impossible for the time being. I learned a long time ago not to jump at the first exposure to an internet commentator until their beliefs and affiliations become apparent, either through their own disclosure, or through being exposed by others as having sing some hidden agenda, such as in the case of Adam Kokesh.

All I'm suggesting is, don't put too much faith in the sincerity and veracity of a newcomer to the liberty movement until there's been a chance to vet that sincerity under the harsh light of scrutiny. She may turn out to be just exactly what she seems. Then again, she may not, but I will monitor her rise through the liberty movement and see what it reveals before making a judgment either way about her. Thanks for posting the video though. She was worth the few minutes it took to watch and listen.

Blues

 

[JimTh]

No criticisms of anything she had to say in the video, but there's an undercurrent in this one and the other three on her new channel of the modern Anarchy movement led by folks such as Larken Rose. That's not necessarily a criticism either, as Larken Rose has produced many videos which I have both enjoyed and learned from, but if I'm right about Josie being part of the same movement, I personally would prefer that their anarchist's mindset be put out front instead of intertwining ideals of constitutional liberty with seemingly interchangeable anarchist ideas.

I did visit her website (as requested in the Description of the OP video) to see if there were links to "Friends of Josie's" or something like that. I was wondering if there might be a connection to Larken or infowars or Adam Kokesh or some other folks who are seemingly liberty activists, but in reality, are little more than provocateurs for anarchist and/or communist and/or Russian organizations/governments. Her site isn't finished (not even close) though, so finding out who she aligns herself with, or what .orgs and meat-world movements she identifies with, is impossible for the time being. I learned a long time ago not to jump at the first exposure to an internet commentator until their beliefs and affiliations become apparent, either through their own disclosure, or through being exposed by others as having sing some hidden agenda, such as in the case of Adam Kokesh.

All I'm suggesting is, don't put too much faith in the sincerity and veracity of a newcomer to the liberty movement until there's been a chance to vet that sincerity under the harsh light of scrutiny. She may turn out to be just exactly what she seems. Then again, she may not, but I will monitor her rise through the liberty movement and see what it reveals before making a judgment either way about her. Thanks for posting the video though. She was worth the few minutes it took to watch and listen.

Blues

I agree with everything you stated, but I never am about the messenger, but always about the message!

 

[Rich kid]

Amazing that there are 41 pages of replies to the post regarding whether you should carry with a round in the chamber and yet there are scarcely a pages in response to this thread. This is the stronghold of those who believe the police can do no wrong. Perhaps they will feel differently when their door is being kicked down.

 

[Rich kid]

I lived in Western Europe when I was very young and I actually know a few of the old Germans that had served in the Wehrmacht. They all told me the same thing: I never fought against the Americans, only against the Russians and I was a professional soldier that was honor bound to follow orders no matter what they were.

 

[r1derbike]

Rich kid, I've seen many pro and con posts regarding LEO behavior on this site. I haven't counted how many of each, but both are represented here.

At 3:21, isn't that Adam Kokesh (in gray jacket) being arrested for something?

I agree Blues; being led down the road to anarchy by Adam Kokesh and his ilk is unacceptable, even if that isn't him at 3:21.

 

[BluesStringer]

Rick kid, I've seen many pro and con posts regarding LEO behavior on this site. I haven't counted how many of each, but both are represented here.

At 3:21, isn't that Adam Kokesh (in gray jacket) being arrested for something?

I agree Blues; being led down the road to anarchy by Adam Kokesh and his ilk is unacceptable, even if that isn't him at 3:21.

Yeah, that was him, and she mentioned one of his arrests (for dancing at the Jefferson Memorial) in the text of her soliloquy too. That doesn't necessarily mean that she is directly affiliated with him or anyone else whose motives might be suspect, but it was one of the clues that led me to make the post I made above. Kokesh is one of the examples that I personally learned from not to just jump to lend support to commentators and activists (or even politicians for that matter) who say all the right things, but hidden agendas start trickling out of the woodwork after they've gained a lot of support. For that matter, RT, the Russian propaganda machine he works for, is a good example too. I got taken in by both Kokesh and RT when they first came on the scene. I'm just more discerning now, and that's all I'm suggesting everybody else does.

I understand what Jim said about the message vs. the messenger too though. That's part of the discernment process, deciding whether or not the messenger has the moral authority to speak for a moral liberty movement. I can't answer that for myself yet, but I can say it's a question I will be able to answer before I consider this woman a sister in arms (or any other kind of sister).

Blues

 

[Johnny Dollar]

I don't know anything about the modern anarchy movement but her basic premise makes sense. i'd like to here more about infowars being a propaganda tool of the Russians though

 

[BluesStringer]

I don't know anything about the modern anarchy movement but her basic premise makes sense. i'd like to here more about infowars being a propaganda tool of the Russians though

You really don't read so good, do you?

 

[Johnny Dollar]

You really don't read so good, do you?

Then perhaps you could educate my my B.A. is in Agribusiness not poly-sci.

I've known Alex Jone was full of monkey **** since he put out the video about W sacrificing little black boys to Molech at Bohemien Grove but I always assunmed he was in it for the money (book sales and such)

 

[BluesStringer]

Then perhaps you could educate my my B.A. is in Agribusiness not poly-sci.

I've known Alex Jone was full of monkey **** since he put out the video about W sacrificing little black boys to Molech at Bohemien Grove but I always assunmed he was in it for the money (book sales and such)

Alex Jones is full of crap. I never said he was affiliated with Russia though, and that's what the reply above alluded to. That would be Adam Kokesh who works directly for the Russia propaganda machine (and indirectly, for Putin) in his role as a commentator with Russia Today (RT).

I'll cop to being a bit imprecise in the way I mentioned infowars. I have no idea what Jones' motivations for being a provocateur are, but I did include infowars in saying the website was such by saying, "I was wondering if there might be a connection to Larken or infowars or Adam Kokesh or some other folks who are seemingly liberty activists, but in reality, are little more than provocateurs for anarchist and/or communist and/or Russian organizations/governments." Kokesh is a self-described employee of the propaganda arm of Russian media, and Larken Rose is a self-described anarchist. Alex Jones is just a lying, huckstering snake oil salesman as far as I can tell, so if it's money that motivates him, I can accept that, but I shouldn't have said anything about infowars in the same sentence that I mentioned communists, anarchists and Russian propagandists, especially knowing you're around to twist everything I say to fit your own jaded (and woefully uninformed) opinion(s) of me personally.

My oft-stated antipathy for, and distrust of, the most visible and provocative members of fringe (so-called) conservatism is exactly why I am so flummoxed by your knee-jerk (and completely wrong) conclusions about me. There are members here whom I consider at least allies, even actual friends, who use RT and infowars fairly regularly as sources for their threads and/or cites and comments, and I almost always say something about negative about such sources when I see them used, yet we are still allies/friends. Your knee-jerk conclusions about what I think are so wrong, and so offensive, that it seems like you literally relish just looking intentionally antagonistic and stupid in the way(s) you state them though.

It wouldn't surprise me one bit to see another such reply in response to this post. If you want to surprise me, how about actually saying something about what you know, instead of always saying stuff about that which you know so little?

If you cared about knowing what you're talking about before you actually talk about it, you could've done a search on "FEMA" for my user-name. You would've not only found what I think about the FEMA camp scare, you would've found what I think about the biggest purveyor of it, Alex Jones. The last thing I said in this post more than a year ago was this:

Otherwise, as to the OP, since the bulk of the FEMA camps and mass grave sites etc. are an outgrowth of Alex Jones asshattery, I'm going to say they're most likely BS.

YMMV.

And in a follow-up reply to the same poster, I said this:

So you say you "hate" Alex Jones. Are you aware that one (or actually, more than one) of his webcasts is what made the video of the concrete boxes go viral as "FEMA coffins?" The guys who video-taped the original footage either were already followers of Jones, or they just forwarded the footage to him on a whim, but Jones and his myrmidons are the source of the terminology you originally referred to as, "FEMA coffins."

And yet you came to the conclusion that I was a believer in, and purveyor of, the FEMA camp myths and that an off-hand sarcastic and dismissive mention of "joining the resistance" was meant to be taken seriously. Quit being such an intentionally obfuscating tool, and try reading and understanding what you claim to be "replying" to. You just look dumb as a box of rocks when you don't.

Blues

 

[Johnny Dollar]

Alex Jones is full of crap. I never said he was affiliated with Russia though, and that's what the reply above alluded to. That would be Adam Kokesh who works directly for the Russia propaganda machine (and indirectly, for Putin) in his role as a commentator with Russia Today (RT).

OK so my bad I mis read

I'll cop to being a bit imprecise in the way I mentioned infowars. I have no idea what Jones' motivations for being a provocateur are, but I did include infowars in saying the website was such by saying, "I was wondering if there might be a connection to Larken or infowars or Adam Kokesh or some other folks who are seemingly liberty activists, but in reality, are little more than provocateurs for anarchist and/or communist and/or Russian organizations/governments." Kokesh is a self-described employee of the propaganda arm of Russian media, and Larken Rose is a self-described anarchist. Alex Jones is just a lying, huckstering snake oil salesman as far as I can tell, so if it's money that motivates him, I can accept that, but I shouldn't have said anything about infowars in the same sentence that I mentioned communists, anarchists and Russian propagandists, especially knowing you're around to twist everything I say to fit your own jaded (and woefully uninformed) opinion(s) of me personally.

My oft-stated antipathy for, and distrust of, the most visible and provocative members of fringe (so-called) conservatism is exactly why I am so flummoxed by your knee-jerk (and completely wrong) conclusions about me. There are members here whom I consider at least allies, even actual friends, who use RT and infowars fairly regularly as sources for their threads and/or cites and comments, and I almost always say something about negative about such sources when I see them used, yet we are still allies/friends. Your knee-jerk conclusions about what I think are so wrong, and so offensive, that it seems like you literally relish just looking intentionally antagonistic and stupid in the way(s) you state them though.

It wouldn't surprise me one bit to see another such reply in response to this post. If you want to surprise me, how about actually saying something about what you know, instead of always saying stuff about that which you know so little?

I admitted I don't know much about the Anarchist movement

If you cared about knowing what you're talking about before you actually talk about it, you could've done a search on "FEMA" for my user-name. You would've not only found what I think about the FEMA camp scare, you would've found what I think about the biggest purveyor of it, Alex Jones. The last thing I said in this post more than a year ago was this:



And in a follow-up reply to the same poster, I said this:



And yet you came to the conclusion that I was a believer in, and purveyor of, the FEMA camp myths and that an off-hand sarcastic and dismissive mention of "joining the resistance" was meant to be taken seriously. Quit being such an intentionally obfuscating tool, and try reading and understanding what you claim to be "replying" to. You just look dumb as a box of rocks when you don't.

Blues

Given I'm fairly certain you're a dumb ass why would I go digging through your old posts?

 

[Axeanda45]

She is a spokesperson for Larken Rose... (whom I personally agree with on most things) These videos are produced by him because he is concerned that people wont listen to him (chubby male) but will listen to her (not bad on the eyes).....

Here is the link where he explains it.....

"Operation Outlaw" (formerly Secret Project)


She does look better than he does...

 

[Johnny Dollar]

She is a spokesperson for Larken Rose... (whom I personally agree with on most things) These videos are produced by him because he is concerned that people wont listen to him (chubby male) but will listen to her (not bad on the eyes).....

Here is the link where he explains it.....

"Operation Outlaw" (formerly Secret Project)


She does look better than he does...

I don't think anarchism is the way to go. Some form of government is necessary. We can't have a bunch of earth Gypsies running wild

 

[BluesStringer]

Given I'm fairly certain you're a dumb ass why would I go digging through your old posts?

So the dumb ass who can't bother to confirm if his suspicions are true or not by doing a simple search thinks I'm a dumb ass. I'm heartbroken I tells ya, simply heartbroken. Pffft.

 

[BluesStringer]

I don't think anarchism is the way to go. Some form of government is necessary. We can't have a bunch of earth Gypsies running wild

You don't have a clue what Larken Rose advocates, but he's got you pegged to a "T".

From the link that Axe gave:

One major obstacle is that it takes too much effort to actually
UNDERSTAND things, so crowd-followers usual prefer to just BELIEVE
things instead. Instead of logically and objectively analyzing
different things they hear, usually they just base their beliefs on
how the MESSENGERS..... sound.

In reply to Axe, I have been subscribed to Rose's YouTube channel for a long time. I would listen to what he has to say whether he's a chubby white guy or a chubby white girl like he enlisted for "Operation Outlaw." I do not, however, like being BS'ed about who is behind those videos. I think he shot himself in the foot by going that route. Considering he went to prison on a highly principled stand against the IRS that he took, he's got nothing to hide, and nothing to gain, by hiding behind a female who he perceives will be better-received saying the same things he would say if he was speaking for himself. He's actually a very good speaker - much better than Josie in my estimation - and if he ain't getting enough hits with his own writings and speeches, getting more hits just because he enlists a buxom brunette to speak for him isn't going to make the new listeners any more interested in his message(s). It would seem they'd just be attracted by more puerile interests, and I don't see how that engenders more understanding of the philosophy he advocates for.

Not a smooth move, Larken. Knowing she's just a mouth-piece for him calls into question how much, if any, of what she says in those videos, she actually believes herself.

Blues

 

[Axeanda45]

I believe he (Larkin) addresses this in the link, She is well known in her local area for being a rights supporter and is active in demonstrations and such. (that is how he found her). My opinion is that she may be able to reach some who wouldnt or couldnt be reached by him.... At least the message itself is being put out there for more to be possibly be woken up by.


I think he is more believable than she is, as he speaks more from the heart vs reading from a cue card for a video..... even if (and I believe she does) she believes what she is saying, it isnt necessarily in her words...

 

[Johnny Dollar]

Not a smooth move, Larken. Knowing she's just a mouth-piece for him calls into question how much, if any, of what she says in those videos, she actually believes herself.

I would imagine that appearing in this type of video has landed her on some kind of Government watch list. I can't imagine a person risking that for something they don't believe in. I also belive she must have some understanding of what she's saying or she woulding be able to make it believeable.