posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 09:38 PM
Ok your problem is that:
When you unite its only briefly before you break apart because no one adresses the others problems that arrise out of fear
You only adress one problem at a time and allow more to fester and take over, as in you solve on or attempt to but ten more pop up.
You are unable to admit that others have problems, you like to focus on YOUR problems and not everyones problems.
Whenever the enemy roars you run like rats to a haven, you never have the guts to unite then hold the ground you have taken. Instead I see people
breaking and running in every direction immaginable when they attack, you only hold your line long enough to make a public debue then run away after
We do need a one powerfull group, however its the problem of who controls it or how its run. Now currently we only have bickering fools who do not
unite, they must be removed and more confident leaders appointed along with serveral thousand other things that need to be done.
However, as one person pointed out: When you have two large opposing groups, war usualy ensues. To me at least I would rather have war than to give up
the hope of freedom by having divided groups not united ones. Let me translate that for you:
Freedom but have to suffer a war to have it=I am willing to put up with it because it would have reason (other things pending at the same time).
Never seeing freedom because we are divided and getting our rears kicked at every turn.