The Right To Defend Freedom

July4Patriot (a man savagely attacked by our criminal court system on entirely trumped up charges of rape and weapons violations, and a former decorated Marine) has released a new video explaining why we have a right to armed revolt that is guaranteed to us by the fact we are human.

July4Patriot was found not guilty of the weapons charges in federal court, and here’s a small sample of what he’s going through with the “rape” charges.

Sgt. Charles Dyer aka July4Patriot, former USMC, is a vocal and outspoken advocate of Oathkeepers, the US Constitution and the militia movement. In December of 2009, he was arrested and charged with possession of a stolen and illegal weapon when police raided his home on a CPS warrant. The events leading up to the warrant were shady at best and included his ex wife reporting the so-called “molestation” to several local authorities, including the internal affairs division of the USMC. After investigations concluded zero evidence, his former wife drove 90 miles to file the report with the Sheriff’s Department where what is assumed to be a “zero tolerance” policy prompted the arrest of Charles Dyer.

For a full recent interview of July4Patriot on the fraudulent charges that have been brought against him, look here.

Good video. I've always thought the 2nd Amendment justifies armed rebellion, implicitly perhaps. Whatever the case, American grievances continue to be ignored by a disinterested government, what other justification is needed? I agree, none.

I think a big reason why wake up calls, like the video, are being unanswered right now is because the general public is still too comfortable. Most still have roofs over their head, food on their table, room on their credit cards and their favorite shows on tv. Until conditions for the average person get much worse I expect popular support to remain wishy-washie.

Sometimes I wish I were a nationalist, a patriot, oh the life I'd lead.

Whoever (or whatever) created the human race gave us the ability to use violence at any time. But it only becomes right when the violence isn’t counterproductive!!!
That means political violence must have an organised plan, where objectives can be checked against accomplishments. It means linking a computer (with something incriminating) to a printer, but never the internet.
It means boycotting the financial backers of politicians, before damaging their property. Its means assassinating politicians, but never civilians.

In fact anyone who targets civilians is a traitor, only guaranteed to make their stated beliefs unpopular.

After all I believe that’s why most people understand the government had a part in making 9/11 happen.

And of course the reality is that once you target the government you may as well think of yourself, as already dead (or at the very least stuck in a cage). After all they will extract info if you live, and may still ask a freeman questions at any moment. Also those DNA, and CCTV surveillance pre-cautions have got to be mighty!! However if you pulled it of, remained un-captured, then as long you lived they would live in (at least some fear) of the people they oppressed.

I know it might seem a bit morally irresponsible of me, but I’d say Resistance is defiantly a useful hobby for the 50 plus!!![b/] At that age your still strong, but won’t be for very much longer. Also cos you’ve lived a life, you’ll know that whoever you’re sending to the grave, isn’t being sent because by an assailant who lacked maturity-life experience.

reply to post by mnemeth1

July4Patriot (a man savagely attacked by our criminal court system on entirely trumped up charges of rape and weapons violations, and a former decorated Marine) has released a new video explaining why we have a right to armed revolt that is guaranteed to us by the fact we are human.

I thought you were against violence???


Or is violence only ok when it is used to further YOUR agenda???

We don't have any rights.
Rights, ha, don't make me laugh.
You think you got rights, you really think?
Try combining them. Like, sure, you could get
a permit and peacefully assemble, or maybe you could
go buy a rifle, but can you get a permit to assemble with riffles?
Can you practice religion with riffles? Can you assemble in public
and practice religion? The only right in the USA is the right to pursue property.
And now that everything breaks or goes obsolete on schedule, even that one is fading into a tax.

If it was a right we wouldn't be required to pay tax on arms sales, if it was a right
we wouldn't _have_ to get a permit to assemble, if it was a right we wouldn't
be required to have a license to run a church, let alone do all three.

I should be able to spontaneously call five friends, go to the
front lawn of the state capitol and found the church of
[color=gold]Thor, warhammers and all, even if only for an hour.

How about this. How about we leave all
the MSM with no wheels on their car.
We abandon rights, except one.
What about the right to
agree with each
other.


Has anyone noticed
that a lot of discussion goes into rights.
And all this discussion has done is completely obliterate
the right to agree with each other. Do we need a permit to do this?
The impending lack of anonymity for the Internet seems to say that we do.

Will we agree more, or less, with people when everyone knows
who everyone _really_ is. Why don't we agree right now.
Is it because we all have different takes on our rights
that we are all busy defending against each other.

This belief in things like rights, liberty, political
correctness, is just emotional baggage.
Just be human, and remember we
do have the right to agree.

Didn't Bruce Lee say something about
Pattern and Awareness are never exclusive.


David Grouchy

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


I am against violence.

That doesn't mean I don't believe I have a right to defend myself.

I am against the use of violence to enact social change, unlike democratic socialists who believe violence can solve problems such as homelessness and poverty.

To clarify, simply stating I believe I have a right to armed revolution does not mean I condone violent revolution or want to see it occur.

Further, I am against the use of violence to enact a revolution because I see the federal government imploding all on its own due to the financial situation it has created. It will come to an end, and hopefully when it does, the violence that ensues will be minimal.



[edit on 30-8-2010 by mnemeth1]