When a government shows a clear and repeated pattern of abuses aimed at total control, the Declaration of Independence states that it’s the duty of the people to replace it. In reality, this duty falls primarily on the military, as they are uniquely capable of confronting entrenched corruption. For any military intervention to be legitimate, it must be transparent, demonstrating clear evidence of restoring lawful governance and protecting constitutional rights. The Counterinsurgency Warfare Manual emphasizes that successful operations rely on public trust, accountability, and sustained engagement. Q, a military psychological operation, actively raises public awareness of ongoing, repeated abuses, helping citizens recognize that military action is meant to defend constitutional order, not seize power. Crucially, intervention is justified only when there is a sustained effort to subvert the Constitution, not isolated incidents.
Any arguments?
The Bill of Rights are not rights 'given' by the Gov., they are absolute restrictions ON the Gov. of the People's Rights that the Gov. Can Not infringe. It is More than obvious that DC. and some state Govs. are violating those rights Every Day, 24/7. There is No grey area here, it is called treason and the US. Military is past time to shut it down.
Cowboys and government
I asked GPT to say it for a child's ears and this is what it wrote;
People should only change their government if things are really, really bad for a long time. Usually, people put up with problems to keep things steady. But if someone tries to take away everyone’s freedom over and over, then it’s not only okay, but also their responsibility to stand up, make changes, and create better rules to protect everyone.
How do we know the Generals have the citizens best interest in mind instead of just being shills for the deep state? Milley is such an example. Will ALL the Generals need to be vetted or will they be picked because of the number of stars on their shoulder boards?