Recently by Gary North: The Case for the Non-Revolutionary Ownership of Guns
Would you rather wind up like David Koresh or Barack Obama?
Does this sound like a silly question? It isnt.
Koresh thought he could kill federal officers and get away with it. He got killed, taking a lot of naive, trusting, and armed adults with him . . . and unarmed children.
Obama decided to follow the tactics of Saul Alinsky, a non-violent revolutionary who adopted the tactics of resistance used by Gandhi. A successful revolution avoids violence.
Who has been more successful in pursuing his agenda?
A decade before Koresh died and 19 years before Obama worked with ACORN, an Alinsky-inspired political organization (R.I.P.), I edited two volumes:
In Tactics, I discussed Alinskys tactics. I recommended them, though of course modified so as not to pursue the strengthening of the state. I opposed armed resistance.
Anyone who recommends taking up arms against the government is a Koresh-minded person. Stay as far away from him as you can.
I say this, because the Tea Party movement has attracted Koresh-minded people. I know this, because a few of them have expressed displeasure with my previous article on the use of arms.
It is better to be elected President than it is to die in a hail of bullets or a fire. It is better to appoint the Attorney General than it it is to die under the armed forces commanded by the Attorney General.
This should be obvious. It is not obvious to wanne-be Koreshes.
Koreshs remains are buried in Tyler, Texas. I lived there at the time. I lived there when I edited those two volumes. If he had read them and followed them, he would probably still be alive. But he was not a Christian. He was a cult leader. Sadly for those around him, his cult was armed.