Posted by rezinate on May 27, 2014
In the spam bin one of multiples made reference to the raid on Crow Dogs as though such things exonerate past or future deeds.
There are accounts to be found of a raid on Crow Dogs place and the killing by federal agents of a horse by the name of Big Red.
A long held tenet of Americanism is that an individual has the right to defend their life, home, and property, liberals are making every attempt to dilute that.
It’s no longer politically correct to stand up or defend what is yours.
But liberal, conservative, or whatever, I don’t consider myself a part of the process. A process that has been corrupted by money and influence.
Unless “Big Red” was wielding an AK or an Uzi there is no justification for shooting him, and I’ve yet to hear of a horse doing that.
If the story the AIM crowd tells is true then whoever is responsible should be held to account. In this day and age people are routinely jailed for abusing an animal much less maliciously killing one.
Defending the story will involve “witnesses” who say they were there and saw the whole thing – and they could be telling the truth – but if the word of witnesses is to honored then it has to become an across the board approach, one that accepts the statements of others related to the various crimes AIM committed.
Of course we all know that a witness can and will lie, just like the AIM leadership and their counterparts on the other side of the aisle – and that’s where things can become a little murky.
A metric I employ is to ask who benefits from the lie, and in what manner? Using that as a starting point I then search both sides of the aisle for supportive statements and evidence, and I’m willing to be convinced either way.
Sometimes I compose a list of pros and cons and tally the results – that doesn’t insure that the truth has been revealed in it’s entirety but it will get a person closer to it than merely repeating a party line.
This act of repetition I believe is the way of it for many, they’re content just to repeat what they’ve been told or heard, and once having invested themselves in it they aren’t eager to backtrack and often enough expand on what’s been said.
That was kind of the way of it when I supported Peltier, but the contradictions, obvious lies, and unanswered questions became too overwhelming to ignore. And yeah, I initially felt like a fool for buying into the innocence story, but better for a fool to do an about face than remain one.
Having once been a believer I know how the game is played, the selling out that is required, the arrogant expectation of ignorance and gullibility on behalf of supporters.
It is a cult with a well defined belief system that requires total commitment to the “prophet”- the teachings don’t have to make sense and seldom do, as time passes the attributes assigned to the “prophet” increase – he, she, or they become a demigod, all seeing, all knowing, and of course a “threat” to the powers that be.
Such a professed threat is meant to unite the believers and the truth be damned. A dimming of the light to conceal the reality.
Neither Peltier or the AIM leadership are prophets, messiahs, liberators, or for that matter even victims, they haven’t a message of truth to deliver.
What they represent is greed and self aggrandizement, that and nothing more. WK2 was meant to be an affirmation, their version of the coming to collect the faithful – in retrospect one can only assume none of the leadership were found worthy.
I was advised in this particular spam that I am not even in Crow Dogs league – I take that as a compliment as I don’t sell ceremonies or keep an eye on the graves of murdered innocents.