Skip to main content

Gun-rights march organizer compares self to Gandhi

Mohandas K. Gandhi was a a lot of things to a lot of people: A leader, a teacher, a philosopher, an inspiration, etc. It was through a practice Gandhi referred to as Satyagraha to which he and other Indian natives peacefully resisted British rule over their country. Ever since Gandhi was killed, the world has been searching for another Gandhi. Well, ladies and gentlemen, I think we've found him!

Meet Adam Kokesh. Adam is 31 years old, a political activist, and attempting to organize a gun-rights march protest in this nation's capital on Independence Day.

When asked how he and the other marchers should respond if they are blocked from crossing into Washington, D.C., Kokesh responded, "With Satyagraha."

Does this mean that like with Gandhi, violence is unacceptable according to Kokesh?

To that, he wrote, "Only if absolutely necessary in defense of life or limb."

On Adam's Facebook page regarding the coming event, he wrote that the march "will become violent if 'the government chooses to make it violent.'"

He also added this - "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."

Insinuating that violence is necessary at times, all the while marching with a loaded rifle on his back? Yeah, that's what Gandhi would do all right. Perhaps Adam forgot rule #979 of Fight Club, which is, don't ever compare yourself to Gandhi, unless you wanna sound like a complete idiot.

Rumors has it that in his next interview, Kokesh is going to compare himself to Jesus and say, "I'm going to lead the march in this nation's capital on Independence Day and do what Christ would do - sacrifice myself for the sins of Washington, and shoot every motherf***er that tries to stop me, before ultimately falling to my inevitable death, and rising again three days later with a pair of AK-47s in my hands."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/activist-adam-kokesh-has-history-of-rabble-rousing-and-self-promotion/2013/05/13/95a0ddcc-b986-11e2-bd07-b6e0e6152528_story.html

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/05/15/2012951/kokesh-washington-gun-march/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"