As I scrolled through my Facebook news feed, I discovered the following artwork here, being shared by the page, “The Art of Not Being Governed,” and originally posted it to my own wall, along with commentary…
“I felt then, as I feel now, that the politicians who took us to war should have been given the guns and told to settle their differences themselves, instead of organizing nothing better than legalized mass murder.” – Harry Patch (Last surviving soldier of World War I)
My Commentary: And, this is just one of the many reasons I choose to call them the “Cowards-that-Be”!
The following correspondence originally took place upon my Facebook wall, after I posted artwork being shared by the page, “The Non-Aggression Principle“…
Rayn:
(Hiroshima 60th Anniversary) “Which terrorist group did that?”
Adam G.: The politics around this are super disturbing: no less than 200,000 Japanese dead from an act of intimidation against the USSR.
Rayn: SUPER, indeed! And, yet, many Americans happily justify this act of terrorism, and the mass-murder of civilians that it caused, as a “necessary” step towards ending WWII. Yet, to demolish that lie: would such an excuse be valid for the Iraq government to use, even after enduring an unprovoked attack by the American military, based on a pure lie? NO, of course not!
Rayn: Gun-Free Zone = Guaranteed 100% Defenseless Victims
“Gun-Free Zone Guaranteed 100% Defenseless Victims”
Brian K.: You seem to assume that guns are the only means of defense
Rielly J.: I myself am a libertarian thus I embrace the non aggression principal so it’s obvious that I support gun ownership. The thing that differentiates the non aggression principal from pacifism is that it does not preclude violence as a form of self defense or the defense of others.
Jonas A.: Very true….weapons of any kind should only be used as self defense…nothing should deviate from my libertarian principles either!
David C.: this dude knows whats up. thanks for sharing this!
Rielly J.: The non aggression principal is even incorporated in to our national seal: the eagle holds 13 arrows (the symbol of war) in one talon and an olive branch in the other and it is looking over the olive branch. We are supposed to be a nation that prefers peace but is comfortable with war (although this is not how we have been since the late 80s)
Jonas A.: You’re most welcome! And yeah, non-aggression as defined by the national seal or our constitution should not be a piece of paper, which is what current admins have been doing since Reagan…
As I scrolled through my Facebook news feed, I discovered the following artwork here, being shared by the page, “Bastiat Institute,” and originally posted it to my own wall, along with commentary…
“Death by government: 145 Million in the 20th Century. Private murders: 8.5 Million in the 20th Century”
My Commentary: Google “Democide” to understand this illustration. Then, realize that the numbers shown here are actually outdated, as the first figure has been readjusted by two separate sources to be over 200 million dead:
As more investigation is done, I’m sure that both stats will continue to climb, since the margin of error leans largely towards overall underestimation. However, the enormous discrepancy between the two numbers will remain largely the same!
As you can see, humanity cannot empower liars, thieves and murderers to protect us from liars, thieves, and murderers! The very notion that we ever could do so is completely ILLOGICAL! Enabling governments to have a legal monopoly on the use of violent force under the pretext of “protecting” their “citizens” is oldest and most effective recipe for mass murder!
(Independent Institute Blog, Anthony Gregory) Sixty-seven years ago, on August 6, 1945, the Truman administration dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, instantly killing tens of thousands of men, women, and children, and causing a nuclear catastrophe that took thousands of more lives in the weeks and years that followed. Three days later, on August 9, the U.S. followed up by dropping a plutonium bomb on Nagasaki.
Assuming the conventional narrative we hear about these events is true, these acts were acts of terrorism by any reasonable standard. The typical story is that the Truman administration made a necessary and difficult calculus, deciding that the lives of about two-hundred-thousand Japanese civilians were worth expending so as to save the lives of even more American servicemen who would have had to invade Japanese mainland and secure victory.
My Commentary: “If nuclear holocaust inflicted upon innocent civilians for the purpose of securing a diplomatic result is not terrorism, then there is no such thing,” says Anthony Gregory.
Today marks the 67th anniversary of the American government’s terrorist attacks against Japanese civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
