A Gun Nut's Notion of "Subtlety"

[paft.livejournal.com]

Adam Kokesh: We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, & returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free.

So Adam Kokesh has a GREAT idea! A thousand men marching on Washington DC on July 4th, carrying loaded weapons.

Kokesh says that his intent is "to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated [and] cower in submission to tyranny," which is pretty rich coming from someone whose response to legislation he dislikes is to wave a loaded gun at the legislators. It's especially interesting, if not especially reassuring, to read his comments about the marchers' commitment to non-violence.

There's a remote chance that there will be violence as there has been from government before, and I think it should be clear that if anyone involved in this event is approached respectfully by agents of the state, they will submit to arrest without resisting. We are truly saying in the SUBTLEST way possible that we would rather die on our feet than live on our knees.

All of which, of course, depends on every single marcher's interpretation of being approached "respectfully." This frankly sounds more like a barely veiled... excuse me... "SUBTLE" threat that Kokesh thinks they should start shooting if things don't go the way they want it to.

He elaborated further on that same Facebook page:

(Emphasis Added) Now that it's undeniable that this is going to happen, allow me to make clear how. There will be coordination with DC law enforcement prior to the event. I will recommend that they do the best they can to honor their oaths and escort us on our route. Failing to provide that commitment to safety, we will either be informed that we will only be allowed up to a certain point where we would be arrested. If this is the case, we will approach that point as a group and if necessary, I will procede to volunteer myself to determine what their actual course of action with someone crossing the line will be at which point fellow marchers will have the choice of joining me one at a time in a peaceful, orderly manner, or turning back to the National Cemetery.

Okay, Everybody clear on this?

I am a woman who wrote graduate papers on Henry James. I attend a Bloomsday celebration of Joyce's Ulysses on a regular basis, and listen with pleasure and comprehension to the readings. I've read every word of Mrs. Dalloway, The Sound and the Fury and The Life and Opinions of Tristam Shandy. Mandarin writing holds no terrors for me. But I have to confess Adam Kokesh's "subtlety" here defeats me. As near as I can figure out, he's saying that, as the leader of a thousand individuals marching with loaded weapons into our capital, he will generously instruct the DC police on how to deal with someone "crossing the line," backed up by lots of armed marchers crowding around and helping him in this negotiation.

As Crooks and Liars Crooks and Liars puts it -- What could possibly go wrong?

Especially given what he Tweeted last week:

When the government comes to take your guns, you can shoot government agents, or submit to slavery.

Comments

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

I think some were just used in Syria.

[usekh.livejournal.com]

I think you know very little about chemical weapons.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Oh, hi. I've almost missed the inanity of your snipes; it's been a while.

We both used the term "I think"...

While it is true I know very little about chemical weapons, my "I think" has a bit of foundation (google sarin gas syria for lots of news reports). Since you have never met me, and rarely engage me in actual discourse, and I have never commented on chemical weapons; I can only conclude that your "I think" is based on some strange, random thought process that may very well be broken.

[usekh.livejournal.com]

"They never did find those WMD's did they"
"I think some were just used in Syria"

Either you phrased your reply clumsily, or you were trying to get at the conspiracy theory that Sadam shipped them to other countries. Which was it?

Or was it one of your little 'jokes'.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure that qualifies as a "conspiracy" theory. I'm aware of 3 scenarios:
1) He (Saddam) used al his WMDs against the Kurds and in the Iran/Iraq war.
2) He actually did destroy them all.
3) He managed to ship some out of the country.

[usekh.livejournal.com]

4)America's intel about how many he had was wrong is the accepted version.

Also look at how long most chemical weapons last even in perfect storage conditions.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

I would suggest that your #4 is the what (or the fact of the matter if you will) My 3 points are options of the why.

(Since we are having a real discussion I hope I didn't come off too pedantic)