TMDS Blog
|
Political Prisoners, Bad to Worse |
 |
 |
 |
|
Friday, 09 July 2010 03:01 |
Hash: SHA1
I have two things to report about political prisoners currently
being held by the U.S. fascists. I hate reporting either of them,
but I'll get the "even worse" one over with first. Then comes the
merely "bad" one.
1) From what I have heard, after Dick Simkanin was released
recently, he decided not to report for "supervised release," based
on the theory that doing supervised release is "contractual." From
what I've heard, he was then arrested, and sentenced to seven MORE
years in prison for violating "supervised release." I haven't
independently confirmed that last part, but he is in BOP custody
again.
At the moment, I'm too discouraged and infuriated to even comment
on this. If it turns out to be true, and doesn't get reversed ...
well, I can't even think about it right now. But I thought you all
should know.
(Dear G.N., I was about to forward what you sent on to Mr. Simkanin
when I heard the news. Hopefully you'll notice this note and let me
know what you want me to do now.)
2) As some of you may know, the Bureau of Prisons has been shipping
Sherry Jackson around, for the sin of having pointing out the
crumby medical attention she got a while back. (Classic government
behavior: someone points out the bad they're doing, and their
response is to attack the truth-teller.) Even though the BOP
website lists Sherry's location as "in transit." I recently got a
letter giving her address. Hopefully she's still there, and she's
having a tough time, so any of you who want to drop her a note, do
it now:
Sherry Jackson 59085019
RADDF
POB 730
Lovejoy, GA 30250
That's all the lousy news I have for now. I think I'm going to
throw up on the next person I see waving an American flag.
Sincerely,
Larken Rose
larken@larkenrose.com
|
|
Richard Simkanin, Political Prisoner, Getting Out |
|
|
|
|
Monday, 14 June 2010 12:23 |
This Friday, June 18th, Richard Simkanin, after having been held as
a political prisoner by the U.S. tyrants for over SIX YEARS, will
be free (relatively speaking). I cannot even begin to express the
injustice that Mr. Simkanin has had to endure, in so many different
ways. What the god-complex megalomaniacs and their mercenaries--
especially one sadistic fascist swine called "Judge" John McBryde--
did to Mr. Simkanin is despicable. They hate him for his honesty
and courage, and his determination to tell the truth and do the
right thing, and they made sure to do whatever they could to
destroy his business, ruin his finances, mess up his family and
social life, assault his reputation, and otherwise do their best to
wear him down, in mind and body.
But Mr. Simkanin's integrity remains intact. His devotion to truth
and justice still live. The parasites did what they could to take
everything else away from him, but they could not touch his soul.
As odd as it sounds, being RELEASED from prison can be an extremely
difficult thing for someone to go through. And the longer someone
has been inside, the more traumatic the transition can be. I was
only in for a year, in a minimum security prison "camp"--more or
less "pretend" prison--and even then getting out of the cage felt
really weird. I can't imagine what it would be like after SIX
years, with family and social relationships messed up, finances
gone, and so on. But I know, despite the obvious positive side of
"getting out," it would be quite disturbing and difficult.
So, when Richard Simkanin steps out of the evil clutches of the
U.S. tyrants, I hope he gets the support he deserves, in light of
the huge personal sacrifice he made in an effort to defend freedom
and justice. I'm not sure which is more important: sending him a
word of support, or sending him a few Federal Reserve Notes. So do
both. If you mail them out TOMORROW, they should be waiting for him
when he steps out of prison on Friday. Here is the address for
sending letters or donations. (Checks should be made out to Daniel,
NOT to Dick, who I doubt has a bank account anymore.)
Richard Simkanin
c/o Daniel Schinzing
P.O. Box 222
Cleburne, TX 76033
I could say so much more about the injustice of this case, but this
will have to do for now. Figure out the most you can afford, double
it, and send him that.
Sincerely,
Larken Rose
http://www.larkenrose.com
|
|
Tuesday, 01 June 2010 06:50 |
MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Two quick announcements:
1) Tomorrow night (Wednesday, June 2), from 8:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.,
I will be on Peter Mack's radio show. For more info, or to listen
to the show online, go here:
http://www.petermacshow.com/
I would tell you the topic of the show, but it's a secret, even
from me. (In other words, I'm not entirely sure what we'll talk
about, but I'm sure it will be fun.)
2) As many of you know, at the end of this month the Free State
Project folk will be holding their annual "Porcfest" event ("porc"
as in porcupine, not pig--I don't think fascist pigs are invited).
I'll be there, lurking around, hopefully selling some extremist
propaganda, and maybe even doing a rant. The event starts on
Thursday, June 24th (my birthday, coincidentally), and goes until
Sunday the 27th. Here's all the info about it:
http://porcfest10.eventbrite.com/
See ya there!
Larken Rose
http://www.larkenrose.com
|
|
Tuesday, 25 May 2010 14:24 |
This may come as a shock to collectivists, but narrow-minded,
prejudiced, rude, stupid bigots have the same rights as everyone
else.
The recent television discussion between Rand Paul (son of Ron
Paul) and Rachel Maddow (collectivist propagandist) has gotten a
lot of attention, and has prompted a flood of comments from people
who don't know how to think. Personally, I think Rand deserves
some criticism for his comments ... for being too civil and too
"moderate" with the state-violence-worshiping hostess. To the
question of whether a restaurant owner has the right to have a "No
blacks allowed" policy, the principled answer would have been,
unapologetically and unconditionally:
"Yes, a restaurant owner has the absolute right to serve and not
serve whomever he damn well pleases, for any reason or no reason at
all. An owner can say 'No blacks allowed,' or 'No whites allowed,'
or 'Only atheist albino midgets allowed.' It's his damn property,
and no one--not you, not me, and not any collective or any
'government'--has the right to initiate violence to FORCE him to do
whatever WE think would be the polite, fair, noble thing."
It's bizarre how statists--those who advocate that the violence of
"government" be used to fix every "unfairness" they see (or
imagine)--are the ones who most often claim to be "tolerant." To
"tolerate" something doesn't mean to approve of something, or to
support it--it only means to LET IT EXIST. Therefore, the bigot who
chooses not to deal with HIS money, or on HIS property, with a
particular racial or religious group, but who doesn't go onto THEIR
property to harass or attack them, is being 100% TOLERANT of them.
On the other hand, Rachel Maddow, and millions of other well-
indoctrinated collectivist Americans, who seek to have "government"
FORCIBLY IMPOSE their version of "fairness" on the bigot, are being
completely INTOLERANT. Ironically, they feel GOOD about it, and
consider themselves compassionate and morally superior for wanting
to INTRODUCE VIOLENCE into the situation, via "legal" coercion.
I wonder what Comrade Maddow would think if the Department of
Fairness determined that she was spending too much of HER money at
white-owned businesses, and COMMANDED her to change her evil ways.
Would she suddenly recognize the PRINCIPLE involved here? How about
if the Fairness Fascists told Black Entertainment Television (BET),
or the NAACP, that they were required to hire more whites, and were
commanded to stop trying to target their services towards one
particular RACIAL GROUP?
The principle is not complicated: You get to decide who YOU will
associate with and trade with, and I get to decide who I will
associate and trade with. And yes, some people--quite a few, in
fact--will make choices that you or I would find stupid, or even
offensive. You have the right to not patronize businesses you don't
approve of. You have the right to publicly criticize their
practices. You have the right to encourage other people to boycott
such businesses. But you do NOT have the right to choose what is to
be done with someone ELSE'S property. The notion that the
collective has some right to forcibly impose its beliefs on every
individual is infinitely more destructive than letting people be
stupid with their own
property.
Exactly what threat is posed to society by some racist dude who
won't let people of another race onto his property? Damn near none.
(And how many customers do you think the guy would get anyway?) His
choices of who to associate with, and who to trade with, are his--
and his alone--to make. That is true of everyone, of all races and
religions.
In contrast, an enormous threat is posed to society by people
thinking that they have the right, via "government" mercenaries, to
FORCE people into associations and trades those people don't want
to make. You can call it "affirmative action," or "anti-
discrimination laws," or some other euphemisms that make you feel
better about it, but what you are advocating is adding VIOLENCE
into a situation to try to achieve whatever YOU deem to be "fair."
And if you think that using the state to FORCE people to deal with
each other is going to lead to peace, love and harmony, you're a
bonehead. Do you really think the KKK guy with the "government" gun
pointed at his head is suddenly going to start loving black people?
Of course not. Getting "government" mercenaries involved will only
exacerbate the problem.
And don't think the tyrants don't know this. What those in
"government" have done in the name of improving "race relations"
was DESIGNED to forever DIVIDE the races, and to keep both sides
forever begging "government" for its blessings and preferential
treatment. The result is perpetual strife among the citizenry, and
increased power for politicians.
Keep in mind, slavery lasted as long as it did only BECAUSE IT WAS
SANCTIONED BY "GOVERNMENT." How long do you think slavery would
have lasted if there was not a national network of "law
enforcement" using violence against those who attempted to free
slaves? And the Jim Crow "laws" were edicts from the tyrants,
FORCING business-owners to discriminate. Remember the Rosa Parks
incident? It was the result of a "law" mandating racial segregation
on busses.
So do you really think that the establishment DEMOCRAT party which
pushed for those segregation and other racist "legislation"
suddenly grew a conscience when the "civil rights movement"
expanded? No, they just found a NEW way to control and subjugate
people, black and white. The racist, divisive, oppressive "Jim
Crow" type policies were replaced by racist, divisive, oppressive
"civil rights" legislation. (Heck, they didn't even change the
faces. Try doing an internet search for Robert Byrd--U.S. Senator
and former KKK big-wig--and the term "race mongrels," and see if
you still believe the Democrat party establishment has the best
interests of black folk at heart.)
(As an aside, I find it very impressive that way back in 1865,
Frederick Douglass, a former slave, could already see that
"government" efforts to "help" the freed slaves was a really bad
idea, and that the best thing the politicians could do was NOTHING.
Regarding the politicians' "attempt to prop up the Negro," Douglass
implored them to simply "Let him alone," and "Let him fall if he
cannot stand alone!")
In short, if you want to be tolerant, open-minded, compassionate,
and peacefully coexist with people of all colors, creeds, etc.,
then you need to recognize that "government" is ALWAYS the enemy,
even when it pretends to offer "help." It will ALWAYS try to pit
you against some other group, and will ALWAYS try to use
differences (or make differences) in order to increase its own
power. It will ALWAYS add threats and coercion to the situation--
that's all it ever does, and all it can do (that's all "law" is)--
and that is NOT the way to achieve harmony, justice, or fairness.
"Government" is the enemy of blacks, the enemy of whites, the enemy
of humanity. But as long as the people keep falling for the tyrant
tricks--as long as we keep crying to the control freaks in
"government" to forcibly impose OUR preferences and beliefs on
everyone else--then human society will be nothing but a cage full
of squabbling brats, all whining for the jailer to whip the OTHER
prisoners harder (which is pretty much what every election is).
The other choice--and I realize this is pretty darn radical--is to
accept
the fact that ....
I OWN ME, and YOU OWN YOU.
Larken Rose
http://www.larkenrose.com
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 2 of 69 |
|
Your Cart
Your cart is empty
|
