"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 9/29/2011 8:35 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
Am 29.09.2011 08:25, schrieb John Smith:
On 9/28/2011 10:12 PM, Scout wrote:


"Thomas Heger" wrote in message
...
Am 28.09.2011 23:05, schrieb Gray Guest:
Thomas wrote in news:9eh1fuFakeU1
@mid.individual.net:

Am 28.09.2011 01:29, schrieb John Smith:
.410 buck (or a choice), .357/.38 ....

good obama blaster, criminal public servant controller, etc. Could
stop
'em from stealing you SW radio, golf clubs, other guns, or save
your
arse when you wake up to the conspiracy and the conspirators want
you
silenced!

Civil war in the US would be really terrible. (And I have doubt,
that
such handguns would be the weapons of choice.)

Better would be to prevent havoc.

I think, that violence isn't the right way. People would better
try to
reacquire control about all elements of the society: the
communities,
politics, education, health-care, nutrition, transportation,
military
and even entertainment.

In all these fields, there are people involved, that do not want
their
country destroyed. But there are also 'bad guys', that like misery,
violence, sickness and dirt.

If you want nicer people, you had to clean your (personal!)
environment,
remove the rubble, overpaint the graffiti, disallow drug
trafficking,
rethink education, watch less tv, cook your own food, walk, smile -
but
don't carry a gun around.

To regain control you need to start with local affairs and
reorganise,
what is in reach. Do not let any dubious character have any
influence on
any public office. To identify such persons is difficult, but some
characteristics you certainly don't want to have at - say - a
teacher.
For example membership in any sort of 'secret society' is definitely
not acceptable or massive tattoos, drug consume, sexual disorder,
known
violence or extremistic political opinions.

Such persons are generally a threat to more 'usual' people, because
they
are too boring for their sick brains.


TH


The resort to violence however is sometimes thrust upon people. The
evil,
the criminal and the aggressor has their own aganda. No amount of
conciliation can deter them, only answering kind with kind.

You are refered to the 1930s for an example of wooly headed peace
with
honor stupidity and where it led. Had Europe stood up to Hitler any
time
between 1936 and 1938 the conflagaration of 1939 to 1945 could have
been
avoided.

Sometimes a small amount of preemptive violence is preferable to
large
amounts of avoidable violence.


The armament of the American society is most likely the greatest
stumbling block for globalistic self-proclaimed fascistic elite.

But these arms are not to be used, because in a real fight, the
professionals are better off than you with a handgun.

That assumes many things which aren't necessarily true.




I don't know, personal experience has taught me that there are quick
fixes.

The biggest bully in the world, if I can get access to him, when he is
away from his gang, and I with the proper tool(s), can be fixed in damn
short order ... cut off the head, the snake dies, it may wither a bit,
but it dies ...

A gun is a fabulous tool, however, experience, cunning, stealth,
intelligence, purpose, motivation, etc., these are all equally important
... a single man with the "righteousness of God" in his heart and soul
can be an amazing thing to witness -- a group of such men brought the
whole british empire to its' knees and established America ... masters,
in fear of their slaves, will always down play the importance of even a
single man, let alone the awesome powers which exist in a group of such
men, men who were not born to be slaves simply ignore their whining ...
most men know what they are, they have already looked into the core of
their being and know what exists there ... a coward, or not ...

Well, I understand what you mean, but this is not, what I wanted to say.
(If you intend to fight a real fight against armoured vehicles, than you
need a little more 'punch' than a handgun.)
I do not understand the idea itself. How could people consider this
could be necessary?

I'm German, but I'm really interested in this question, because it seems
not very plausible to me, that people feel, they need to defend
themselves against the own government.




You Germans are supposed to be excellent engineers, no one there can make
a flame thrower big enough to incinerate vehicles? IUD's to take them off
the road? Devices to roast pigs in a Kevlar vest?

I agree, those fancy tanks and SWAT vehicles would need to be taken out
quickly and put 'em on their feet. A section of drilling pipe, with a
simple explosive charge and big cast lead slug should make it though those
bullet proof windows, etc. Some cleverly twisted pieces of tool steel
metal tossed out in front of the tank tracks should be able to wind up in
them and slow/stop them. My gawd man, the American forefathers, the
"terrorists" in iraq and iran, afghanistan, etc. can come up some great
ideas, are fine German engineers to be outdone? It will be the
helicopters which will take a bit of thought and experimenting ...

V-cong. Plant a number of thin pools around potential LZs wire grenades to
the poles and run lines between the poles. When the down draft starts wiping
the poles around, it pulls the pin, *bang*, one damaged or downed helo.

I think something like the bird traps which use projectiles to fire a net
over an area, but do the same thing with light wire hooked into heavier
gauge stuff. Once the rotor pulls in enough around the rotor head....well
that's the end of that helo.


But, peaceful revolution first, then anyway possible ... and don't forget
waiting, getting the leaders into vulnerable positions, isolated from the
main group, stealth, cunning, poisons, etc.

Remember the earth pits of vietnam with sharpened bamboo spikes which had
been urinated on -- scared the bejesus up and was an excellent
psychological weapon, and effective too ... snares to snap a mans neck ...
where there is a will, there is ALWAYS a way ... it is VERY DIFFICULT to
take any nation where the citizens have a will and weapons. They must
break the peoples will or it is a no-go. The real danger is in government
programs to mentally enslave the populations, get them used to be
unquestioning slaves, brainwashed, feminized males, etc.

Regards,
JS

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 20:58:29 +0000 (UTC), Gray Guest
wrote:

But to change the subject and the subject line....
I am looking for a good and readable intro to US Civics for a friend who
is going to become a US citizen.
He wants more than just to pass the test - which he's already fully
qualified to do
He wants more in depth analysis and commentary
In a way, I wish that Isaac Asimov had written a book on this comparable
to his Guide to the Bible..
it would have been a hell of a read...




Democracy In America by De Tocqueville.


Should be required reading by most USAmericans.

--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."

- James Madison

On Sep 29, 2:05*pm, Gray Guest wrote:
Thomas Heger wrote in news:9ejucrFg8tU1
@mid.individual.net:









Am 29.09.2011 18:16, schrieb SaPeIsMa:

"Thomas Heger" wrote in message
...
Am 29.09.2011 08:24, schrieb Gray Guest:

The "professionals" only prevail if you fight them on their terms.

Has no one heard of Sun Tzu?

'The art of war' old Chinese philosophy of government.

LOL
Too bad you only know of the title and haven't' actually read it.

Actually I've not read it, but listened to it as audio-book - in English
btw, what is a second language for me.

But anyhow: there is a difference between a person and a country.

Really ?
Do tell..

Really!

The difference is cooperation and organisation. A single person cannot
know, what *other people do, only guess. The uncertainty makes it much
harder for an individual to defend himself than a multitude of organised
individuals.

This means, that individuals should find trustful friends.

In modern times people are too often separated and have not many trusted
relations.

To overcome this, I kind of 'invented' a concept, I call 'tribes':
imagine 'Indians', but young, modern, western people, equipped with
computers and other electronic means, that mimic Indians to some extend
(wear a feather or alike).

Would that include scalping and slow cooking an enemies haed over a low hot
fire while they are still alive.



..

Note, you sure spew a lot of words to demonstrate crass and abyssal
ignorance..
Are you a graduate student in the arts or alleged sciences ?

Actually I live in Germany and am an engineer. American society is
something I have not too much knowledge, but certain developments really
frighten me. There are these FEMA camps for example or military grade
weapons in private hands or in that of policemen. A lot of other things
I really don't like, but usually the people and have quite a few friends
from the US.

TH

Okay, first of all the FEMA camps are the product of diseased imaginations.
2nd if it were true why wouldn't we want to arm ourselves to prevent us
being cast into concentration camps.

As to military grade hardware in the hands of civilians? Tough ****. We as
a people are grown up enough to decide our own fate, needs and wants. If I
want to own something it's my business so long as I do no harm to another..

Now the police having them, I don't much care for that. But your cops have
military grade weapons don't they. Ever hear of GSG-9.

What is military grade anyway?

--
Words of wisdom

What does not kill you... probably didn't cause enough tissue damage.

The Minutemen and the Redcoats where equally
Armed {Balance-of-Power} -so- Why Should That
Change Today : The Power of the People Should
Equal or Exceed the Power of the Government.
-insures-the-government-serves-the-people-
-not-the-government-enslaves-the-people-

"RD Sandman" wrote in message
...
"Scout" wrote in
:



"RD Sandman" wrote in message
...
"Scout" wrote in
:



"BDK" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
says...

On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 16:29:19 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

.410 buck (or a choice), .357/.38 ....

good obama blaster, criminal public servant controller, etc.
Could stop 'em from stealing you SW radio, golf clubs, other
guns, or save your arse when you wake up to the conspiracy and
the conspirators want you silenced!

http://bondarmsusa.com/

(make sure you watch the video!)

Would even fit in the san fransicko boys' purses!

Regards,
JS

**** that. This is a much better weapon.

http://www.ruger.com/products/sp101/index.html

Five shots, better reload time, much more accurate.

Leave it to Johnny Kook to pick a POS like a Bond Arms 2 shot.

Dozens of better guns out there.

Depends on what you're after.

On a shot per shot basis, the .410 is going to deliver more to
target.

effectively ten 30 caliber pellets to target in the time it takes to
pull the trigger twice.

A .410 handgun round contains 8 or 9 pellets if it is a #4 shot.

That's about right, the problem is you lose space because the pellets
are staggered. Thus a lot of the shell capacity is empty air.

It
contains 3 pellets if it is 000 which is approximately .36 caliber.

Maybe a few brands, but if you look around even in 2.5" you can get 4
pellets.

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct...tNumber=533166

and in 3" (which I believe I mentioned somewhere) you get 5 pellets.

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct...tNumber=170759

and .36 matches up nicely with the .357 caliber of the .38 and .357.


A
12ga shoots about 9 pellets in 00.

Again, with the 12, you lose capacity because the pellets are
staggered.

In the .410 they are neatly lined up, making maximum use of the
available space.

Use a buffered shot and you will get a nice tight group at close
ranges.

Whereas the Ruger is going to take 5 trigger pulls, a reload, and
than another 5 trigger pulls.

Nope. Go back and revisit the .410 load fired by a Judge.

Are you talking the regular Judge or the 3" Judge?

Both seem to contain the same number of pellets in 000. The difference
is in the powder charge, apparently.

Check the links given. You can get 5 pellets in a 3" shell, and 4 in a 2.5"
shell.


One gives you 4 pellets of triple aught, the other gives you 5.

Not per wiki.

Midway sells them.

Maybe wiki is wrong?

There, corrected it for you. 2.5" shell holds 4, not 3

per http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct...tNumber=533166

The Bondarm's Century 2000 derringer, the gun under discussion,
accepts up to a 3" .410 shell.

Hence the 5 pellets discussed.

Perhaps of 00.......but the heavy load mentioned was 000.

Yep, and as cited above in a 3" shell even according to wiki it's 5 pellets
of 000

Of course, you could also load in a .410 with 5 pellets of 0000 buck
(0.375). Of course, you're probably going to need to mail order those,
and I think only a few manufacturers even make them.

:-)

That's not to say that one is a better gun than the other, but as in
so much it depends on what you're looking for it to do.

Also the .410 loading is generally reported to have a fairly high 1
shot stop percentage, since you are usually effectively hitting the
target multiple times in 1 shot.

Three, if all impact and you are shooting 000 buck.

Actually even if more than 1 hit, you will still be hitting the target
multiple times. :-)

Same with two trigger pulls on an SP-101.

Yea, but 2 trigger pulls take longer than 1.


However, if that's the case, odds are you didn't hit much of
consequence unless you're talking the head.

Both at close range would be effective to center mass....the edge going
to the .410.

Simply my point, the .410 derringer isn't automatically unsuitable as Dudu
asserted.

You need to fire
both barrels in a Bond 2 shot to equal the number of rounds in an
SP-101.

Uh, an SP-101 in .38/.357 only holds 5 rounds. That's equal to the
number of pellets of triple or quad aught buck in a 3" shell.

Again, not per wiki on the .410 shotshell. Anyway, I have three SP-101s
(as you can tell, I hate them), two in .357 and one in .327Federal. The
latter holds six rounds.

True, but Dudu cited the .38/.357

Again, my comments weren't intended to address all the possible
combinations, only to challenge Dudu's immediate dismissal of the derringer
and the assertion that the SP101 would be drastically better for self
defense.



So you would have to fire until empty, reload, and then empty again,
your SP101 to get an equal number of lead pieces headed downrange to
match those produced by 2 pulls of the Bond's trigger.

:-)

Not going to argue with you. You can see what wiki says as well as I
can.

Yep, and in this case it was wrong. Which is why I provided the cites above
for you.

Based on reports and testing, the rounds that produce the best one
shot stops are those that produce a nice hydrostatic shock wave in
the blood pressure that effectively shuts down the brain for a
period of time. Now that's not to say they are going to stay down,
only that they are going to drop on the first shot and stay down for
a bit. Shotguns do this quite effectively since they tend to dump a
large part of their energy to a broad section of the body inducing
such a hydrostatic shock. This, of course, depends upon a reasonably
direct impact to center mass.

So it all depends on your preferences, choices, and so on.

This is true.

My biggest objection would be the weight of the piece which IMO
makes it less of a carry piece. On the other hand it's flat which
again IMO makes it easier to conceal than a revolver.

True with the Bond derringer, not so with a Taurus Judge or the S&W.

Well, I wasn't intending this to be an in-depth review of all the
variations, only contesting Dudu's immediate and apparently arbitrary
dismissal of the Century 2000 as being unsuitable for self defense,
and challenging each of his talking points to establish that.

Dudu tends to run off half cocked over anything you say or suggest so I
don't pay much attention to him on those points. What got me going was
mention of the SP-101. It is one of the things he and I agree on. It is
an excellent gun.

It is, and I'm not challenging that. I'm simply challenging his dismissal of
the derringer as something far worse.


About the only point that was really valid was the accuracy issue, but
at self defense ranges a gun doesn't need to be particularly accurate
hence my noting it as pretty much a moot point.

Fair enough.

I thought so.
:-)

"Howard Brazee" wrote in message
news
Democracy In America by De Tocqueville.


Should be required reading by most USAmericans.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've not personally read the book, but perhaps I'll find a copy.

I do know that most in the US need a civics and history refresher course,
since most really have no idea of either, aside from what they read on the
internet, which is dubious at best, and outright untrue at worst.

"RD Sandman" wrote in message
...
"Scout" wrote in news:j60gjn
:



"RD Sandman" wrote in message
...
"Scout" wrote in
:



wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 20:30:19 -0400, "Scout"
wrote:



wrote in message
news:tlo487po2f32t9m9csq48fgkjnvbencbtk@4ax. com...
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 16:29:19 -0700, John Smith

wrote:

.410 buck (or a choice), .357/.38 ....

good obama blaster, criminal public servant controller, etc.
Could
stop 'em from stealing you SW radio, golf clubs, other guns, or
save your arse when you wake up to the conspiracy and the
conspirators want you silenced!

http://bondarmsusa.com/

(make sure you watch the video!)

Would even fit in the san fransicko boys' purses!

Regards,
JS

**** that. This is a much better weapon.

http://www.ruger.com/products/sp101/index.html

Five shots,

Which you get from one round of .410 triple aught buck (3" shell)

I can get 5 shots on target. And reload in about 2 seconds.

Get, the .410 can do the same thing in about 50ms, and do it again
50ms later.

If one still has control of it after the first BANG!!!

Hence the weight we were discussing earlier.




Perhaps on that particular one.

Which is the only one I was discussing. :-)

Many derringers are quite light hence
more vicious recoil.

Yep, however, it's really only vicious at the range, when you need it, you
don't really notice the recoil nearly as much......only later when your hand
starts to ache.

"Brenda Ann" wrote in
:



"Howard Brazee" wrote in message
news
Democracy In America by De Tocqueville.


Should be required reading by most USAmericans.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------

I've not personally read the book, but perhaps I'll find a copy.

I do know that most in the US need a civics and history refresher
course, since most really have no idea of either, aside from what they
read on the internet, which is dubious at best, and outright untrue at
worst.




That or the revisionist crap that passes for an education these days.

--
Words of wisdom

What does not kill you... probably didn't cause enough tissue damage.

"Scout" wrote in
:



"Gray Guest" wrote in message
44.100...
"Scout" wrote in
news:j6182n :



"Gray Guest" wrote in message
44.100...
"Scout" wrote in
:



"RD Sandman" wrote in message
...
"Scout" wrote in
:



"BDK" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
says...

On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 16:29:19 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

.410 buck (or a choice), .357/.38 ....

good obama blaster, criminal public servant controller, etc.
Could
stop 'em from stealing you SW radio, golf clubs, other guns, or
save your arse when you wake up to the conspiracy and the
conspirators want you silenced!

http://bondarmsusa.com/

(make sure you watch the video!)

Would even fit in the san fransicko boys' purses!

Regards,
JS

**** that. This is a much better weapon.

http://www.ruger.com/products/sp101/index.html

Five shots, better reload time, much more accurate.

Leave it to Johnny Kook to pick a POS like a Bond Arms 2 shot.

Dozens of better guns out there.

Depends on what you're after.

On a shot per shot basis, the .410 is going to deliver more to
target.

effectively ten 30 caliber pellets to target in the time it takes
to pull the trigger twice.

A .410 handgun round contains 8 or 9 pellets if it is a #4 shot.

That's about right, the problem is you lose space because the
pellets are staggered. Thus a lot of the shell capacity is empty
air.

It
contains 3 pellets if it is 000 which is approximately .36 caliber.

Maybe a few brands, but if you look around even in 2.5" you can get
4 pellets.

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct...ctNumber=53316
6

and in 3" (which I believe I mentioned somewhere) you get 5 pellets.

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct...tNumber=170759

and .36 matches up nicely with the .357 caliber of the .38 and .357.


A
12ga shoots about 9 pellets in 00.

Again, with the 12, you lose capacity because the pellets are
staggered.

In the .410 they are neatly lined up, making maximum use of the
available space.

Use a buffered shot and you will get a nice tight group at close
ranges.

Whereas the Ruger is going to take 5 trigger pulls, a reload, and
than
another 5 trigger pulls.

Nope. Go back and revisit the .410 load fired by a Judge.

Are you talking the regular Judge or the 3" Judge?

One gives you 4 pellets of triple aught, the other gives you 5.

The Bondarm's Century 2000 derringer, the gun under discussion,
accepts up to a 3" .410 shell.

Hence the 5 pellets discussed.

Of course, you could also load in a .410 with 5 pellets of 0000 buck
(0.375). Of course, you're probably going to need to mail order
those, and I think only a few manufacturers even make them.

:-)

That's not to say that one is a better gun than the other, but as
in so much it depends on what you're looking for it to do.

Also the .410 loading is generally reported to have a fairly high
1 shot stop percentage, since you are usually effectively hitting
the target multiple times in 1 shot.

Three, if all impact and you are shooting 000 buck.

Actually even if more than 1 hit, you will still be hitting the
target multiple times. :-)

However, if that's the case, odds are you didn't hit much of
consequence
unless you're talking the head.


You need to fire
both barrels in a Bond 2 shot to equal the number of rounds in an
SP-101.

Uh, an SP-101 in .38/.357 only holds 5 rounds. That's equal to the
number of pellets of triple or quad aught buck in a 3" shell.

So you would have to fire until empty, reload, and then empty again,
your SP101 to get an equal number of lead pieces headed downrange to
match those produced by 2 pulls of the Bond's trigger.

:-)

Based on reports and testing, the rounds that produce the best one
shot stops are those that produce a nice hydrostatic shock wave in
the
blood pressure that effectively shuts down the brain for a period
of time. Now that's not to say they are going to stay down, only
that they are going to drop on the first shot and stay down for a
bit. Shotguns do this quite effectively since they tend to dump a
large part of their energy to a broad section of the body inducing
such a hydrostatic shock. This, of course, depends upon a
reasonably direct impact to center mass.

So it all depends on your preferences, choices, and so on.

This is true.

My biggest objection would be the weight of the piece which IMO
makes it less of a carry piece. On the other hand it's flat which
again IMO makes it easier to conceal than a revolver.

True with the Bond derringer, not so with a Taurus Judge or the
S&W.

Well, I wasn't intending this to be an in-depth review of all the
variations, only contesting Dudu's immediate and apparently
arbitrary dismissal of the Century 2000 as being unsuitable for self
defense, and challenging each of his talking points to establish
that.

About the only point that was really valid was the accuracy issue,
but at self defense ranges a gun doesn't need to be particularly
accurate hence my noting it as pretty much a moot point.






Honestly, after several years of looking at derringers and some of
the absurd calibers they come in, I find it hard to fault the choice
of any lightweight J frame. The more serious calibers are often as
wide and nearly
as long and always weigh more. Mine hides very well and while
reloading isn't really an issue at close range (IMO) reloading a
derringer can be
a
PITA. I bought some Speed Strips and I can carry the J-Frame and 2
Speed strips very comfortably. I really only would carry it if the
908 or G-19 was impractical for some reason, though.

Different strokes for different folks. Doesn't mean a derringer in
.410
is
the automatically bad choice Dudu tried to assert.

You have your preferences, I have mine, Dudu has his, and John has
his.

But a .410 is a proven performer.



Undoubtedly, I have merely stated my preference.

Dogmatism amongst gun owners is amusing and frequently annoying.
Especially
when paired with innaccurate information. 8)

Which I think is the point I'm trying to make. We all have preferences,
and just because John has one preference and Dudu another, doesn't
justify his assertion that this derringer isn't suitable.



Well, would you truly expect Doodoo to be rational or even courteous about
anything?

--
Words of wisdom

What does not kill you... probably didn't cause enough tissue damage.

"Scout" wrote in
:



"Thomas Heger" wrote in message
...
Am 29.09.2011 08:24, schrieb Gray Guest:
Thomas wrote in news:9ei6ptFeh9U1
@mid.individual.net:

Am 28.09.2011 23:05, schrieb Gray Guest:
Thomas wrote in news:9eh1fuFakeU1
@mid.individual.net:

Am 28.09.2011 01:29, schrieb John Smith:
.410 buck (or a choice), .357/.38 ....

good obama blaster, criminal public servant controller, etc. Could
stop
'em from stealing you SW radio, golf clubs, other guns, or save
your arse when you wake up to the conspiracy and the conspirators
want you silenced!

Civil war in the US would be really terrible. (And I have doubt,
that such handguns would be the weapons of choice.)

Better would be to prevent havoc.

I think, that violence isn't the right way. People would better try
to reacquire control about all elements of the society: the
communities, politics, education, health-care, nutrition,
transportation, military and even entertainment.

In all these fields, there are people involved, that do not want
their country destroyed. But there are also 'bad guys', that like
misery, violence, sickness and dirt.

If you want nicer people, you had to clean your (personal!)
environment,
remove the rubble, overpaint the graffiti, disallow drug
trafficking, rethink education, watch less tv, cook your own food,
walk, smile - but
don't carry a gun around.

To regain control you need to start with local affairs and
reorganise, what is in reach. Do not let any dubious character have
any influence
on
any public office. To identify such persons is difficult, but some
characteristics you certainly don't want to have at - say - a
teacher. For example membership in any sort of 'secret society' is
definitely not acceptable or massive tattoos, drug consume, sexual
disorder, known
violence or extremistic political opinions.

Such persons are generally a threat to more 'usual' people, because
they
are too boring for their sick brains.


TH


The resort to violence however is sometimes thrust upon people. The
evil,
the criminal and the aggressor has their own aganda. No amount of
conciliation can deter them, only answering kind with kind.

You are refered to the 1930s for an example of wooly headed peace
with honor stupidity and where it led. Had Europe stood up to Hitler
any time
between 1936 and 1938 the conflagaration of 1939 to 1945 could have
been
avoided.

Sometimes a small amount of preemptive violence is preferable to
large amounts of avoidable violence.


The armament of the American society is most likely the greatest
stumbling block for globalistic self-proclaimed fascistic elite.

But these arms are not to be used, because in a real fight, the
professionals are better off than you with a handgun.

But people could 'take it back'. I mean 'the real life', the
communities, local affairs, education and so forth. It is all about
people and how they behave. People should know, that certain things
are not allowed and should not be done.

Drugs of all sorts feed the 'bad guys', so you should try to avoid
any drugs - at least not pay for them. This because the money for the
drugs goes into the wrong canals and supports the criminals and
unwanted behaviour.

Any person without a shelter is a thread to public health. So it is
mandatory to allow every person access to soap and water, some sort
of housing and food.

Any kind of toxic waste should be removed from public places, to
allow kids safe play in their neighbourhood.

Public land should be accessible. Even farmland should be allowed to
enter for pedestrians, that just want to pass.

To create a strong society based on civil affairs, the industry and
the smaller companies had to be protected.

The Americans fought endless wars without apparent reason and without
apparent benefit. Many think, these wars are somehow good for
America. But - for example- what kind of benefit do you expect from
the invasion of Afghanistan, Somalia, Irak? It always ends like
Vietnam: with a lot of dead soldiers and no real gain.

TH


The "professionals" only prevail if you fight them on their terms.

Has no one heard of Sun Tzu?

'The art of war'
old Chinese philosophy of government.

But anyhow: there is a difference between a person and a country.

I have trouble to understand the idea, that people think, they have to
defend themselves against the own government.

I take it then you're not a student of history?


I mean, not only with words, but with real guns. Ain't these
professionals the own soldiers? How could soldiers even consider to
fight against their own people?

I accept this as confirmation you know next to nothing about history.


They get brainwashed, for sure. But even zombies on drugs would
remember, were they came from. Or is that about money? Well, 'rip off
the pharao' was the favourite game of the Egyptian 'priests'.

Or are there religious motives?





Considering what an education costs today, WTF are they teaching? A good
case of malpractice and/or deceptive practices lurks here.

--
Words of wisdom

What does not kill you... probably didn't cause enough tissue damage.

"SaPeIsMa" wrote in
:

To overcome this, I kind of 'invented' a concept, I call 'tribes':
imagine 'Indians', but young, modern, western people, equipped with
computers and other electronic means, that mimic Indians to some extend
(wear a feather or alike).


Actually, you are coming across as a pedantic idiot who seems to really
solely on book knowledge...

Didn't you mean "incorrect" book knowledge?

--
Words of wisdom

What does not kill you... probably didn't cause enough tissue damage.