|
|
| |||||||
| From | Message | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 The Standing Armies of Yesterday and the Police State Today"This subject is so self-evident, that I am almost ashamed to prove it: for if we look through the world, we shall find in no country, liberty and an army stand together; so that to know whether a people are free or slaves, it is necessary only to ask, whether there is an army kept amongst them?" John Trenchard 1697 “An Argument Shewing, that a Standing Army is inconsistent with a Free Government, and absolutely destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy” www.reformation.org |
||||||
|
Let's comment on each others threads |
||||||
|
Globalism Uses "Foreign Threats" to Keep Citizens in Perpetual Fear! Imagine if instead of turning our plowshares into swords, we turned them into pruning hooks? Wasn't that the purpose for his Peace Corps? |
||||||
|
Kennedy? |
||||||
|
inhis_service 06-Apr-21, 21:18 |
Deleted by inhis_service on 07-Apr-21, 09:34.
|
||||||
|
Kennedy Had Same Enemies As You And I "President Kennedy establishes the Peace Corps" On March 1, 1961, President John F. Kennedy issues Executive Order #10924, establishing the Peace Corps as a new agency within the Department of State. The same day, he sent a message to Congress asking for permanent funding for the agency, which would send trained American men and women to foreign nations to assist in development efforts. The Peace Corps captured the imagination of the U.S. public, and during the week after its creation thousands of letters poured into Washington from young Americans hoping to volunteer. www.history.com "Why did President John F. Kennedy create the Peace Corps?" socratic.org President Kennedy was murdered as a direct result of his "uncooperative" stance against military action in Vietnam. "The Who, How and Why of the JFK Assassination – and Why It Still Matters" The JFK assassination, now 54 years later, is still a subject that generates a lot of emotion, curiosity and speculation. Rightly so – the event was of extreme significance and is a telling reminder that the people who run this world are far above the level of prime ministers and presidents. Like 9/11, the JFK assassination was a severe blow to the psyche of the public in America and the world. It was mass trauma, not only crafted to remove a man who opposed the New World Order manipulators in many ways, but also designed to shatter innocence and send a powerful message: that the controllers can kill whomever they want and get away with it by controlling the key power centers of society (White House, CIA, FBI, Texas state governorship, local police and sheriff's departments, etc.) so that any subsequent investigation will go nowhere. The implications of the JFK assassination remain large to this day, a fact lost on Noam Chomsky when he stated "Who knows? Who cares? Why does it matter?… The evidence against [a high-level conspiracy to kill JFK] is overwhelming" — and thus revealed himself to be either unintentionally narrow-minded or an intentional gatekeeper of truth. wakeup-world.com President Kennedy sent two aides to Vietnam, McNamara and Taylor, who gathered intelligence that convinced him that the United States needed to withdraw from Vietnam. Their memo to the president was entitled, Report of McNamara-Taylor Mission to South Vietnam. With this report in hand, President Kennedy had what he wanted. It contained the essence of decisions he had to make. He had to get re-elected to finish programs set in motion during his first term; he had to get Americans out of Vietnam. — Col. L. Fletcher Prouty, JFK: The CIA, Vietnam, and The Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy, Carol Publishing Group, p. 264. www.pacinst.com "New Evidence on Assassination of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy" thedailycoin.org |
||||||
|
"Why the Founding Fathers Feared a Standing Army" What, sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. …Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins. ~ Elbridge Gerry, Fifth Vice President of the United States fee.org |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
President Eisenhower's Warning Went Unheeded "President Eisenhower warns of military-industrial complex" On January 17, 1961, Dwight D. Eisenhower ends his presidential term by warning the nation about the increasing power of the military-industrial complex. www.history.com |
||||||
|
Thumper Coming to Terms With the American Empire worldview.stratfor.com |
||||||
|
Easier Said American Politics and Political Policies, including the brainwashing of the American people would make this premise most difficult to say the least. Suggestions? |
||||||
|
IHS "What, sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. …Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." Elbridge Gerry, Signer of the Declaration of Independence, Fifth Vice President of the United States While what you say about peace is true the quote is clearly about keeping our liberty here at home. On that note I just got back from a long weekend in DC, While we had a great time one can't help but feel like it's a city under siege. The w****house (you know, the white one) & Lafayette Park surrounded by a tall fence thejewishvoice.com The WW 1 monument across form the hotel in the same condition. Standing forces tempt foreign adventures which provoke attacks on us. This triggers a police state to stop terrorism & keep the people under control. One feeds on the other. |
||||||
|
Worse if not done |
||||||
|
Practically Speaking Sorry for interrupting/ interfering with your ideals and dreams. Far be it from me to discourage or criticize another's thoughts and interests. Especially when those thoughts are so noble and possibly a means to establishing a better America. Let me watch and listen to the conversation, instead. |
||||||
|
strangely speaking |
||||||
|
Darrenlobo My "problem" isn't implementing your ideas", as much as, maybe, you're not acknowledging my ideas that President Kennedy was not entirely against American Freedom and Autonomy. You haven't commented on my previous points on Kennedy and his efforts towards World Peace instead of feeding the Military Industrial Complex, correct? Then you continue to "accuse" Kennedy of being only concerned with the "Standing Army" problem - "Military spending increased by $8 billion under Kennedy. He was all for the US having standing forces." As true as that comment is, it still not address my other comments about his focus on Peace, does it? Another, confession, of sorts. My time is currently focused on thread issues which I am developing on the "Neutral Club" which I sincerely believe are far more important regarding current events which are tearing America apart - the land I love with all my heart - and which are far more "relevant" as far as making an impact TODAY in the lives of Free America than any efforts regarding "Standing Army" because current political policies which are NOW IN PLAY are threatening our lives unlike anything since Pearl Harbor in 1941. Maybe you could take a look at some of these issue at the Neutral Club? |
||||||
|
From Kennedy's inaugural address: "We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed." He certainly gave lip service to peace but he pushed for more conventional weapons. Kennedy also supported what Jefferson warned against, "entangling alliances". “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none.” |
||||||
|
Don't Bring A Knife To A Gun Fight Wonder, no, I actually doubt very much President Jefferson would have been as critical of Kennedy's words as you're personally describing them. "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty." President Kennedy well understood that the threat from Communism's Subversion within the United States was as real as the threat from Communism internationally. Had President Jefferson been faced with these threats, do you think he would have ignored these threats? "JFK and Communism" www.pbs.org "Kennedy: Communism within the U.S." Senator John F. Kennedy talks about the internal threat that communism poses to national security. Kennedy describes that these internal factions are serious and should be taken care of by supporting laws that the U.S. has already passed. These laws were passed to protect us form the people who want to destroy the U.S. from within, and Kennedy feels that these laws should be supported and enforced with alertness. Kennedy explains how the government must sustain the Department of Justice and the F.B.I., and the nation must be continually alert. However, Kennedy believes that a strong society would beat any major internal threat, and the real threat to national security is external. Lastly, Kennedy believes that these external threats will continue to exist. www.history.com << He certainly gave lip service to peace but he pushed for more conventional weapons. Kennedy also supported what Jefferson warned against, "entangling alliances. >> One international treaty Kennedy entered into was the Nuclear Test Ban treaty designed to limit nuclear weapons. He hoped it would deter Communism's aggression. "After settling the nuclear crisis, Kennedy knew that nuclear weapons should have a form of control. The Limited Test Ban Treaty was signed by the United States, Britain and the Soviet Union to ban nuclear testing in the atmosphere, outer space, and under water (Goldfield, 832). The treaty was the start of nuclear disarmament." www.studymode.com |
||||||
|
Applied The idea that Jefferson would have reacted like Kennedy to communism is ridiculous. TJ would have been horrified at Kennedy's national security state & big govt POV. Remember that the US faced 3 powerful empires (British, French, Spanish) at the time of the founding & still chose liberty. A quick history lesson. It was the Alien & Sedition Acts that motivated TJ to run for president. He got rid of most them as fast as he could & pardoned everyone convicted under them. He wrote the Kentucky Resolution of 1798 arguing against them constitution.org Number 8 is especially on point. |
||||||
|
Sour Grapes? to a club called Neutral Ground. Hopefully Thumper will look favorably upon my request The idea that Jefferson would have reacted like Kennedy to communism is ridiculous. >> Sure, glad you did this. Thumper will allow all kinds of points of view to be expressed, just as I have done here. Maybe your chagrin is aimed at my not adopting YOUR particular views? This Club IS FREE in that all kinds of views are also freely expressed. W/O any guarantees of wide acceptance, correct? |
||||||
|
Chagrin? Sour grapes? "that these and successive acts of the same character, unless arrested at the threshold, necessarily drive these States into revolution and blood and will furnish new calumnies against republican government, and new pretexts for those who wish it to be believed that man cannot be governed but by a rod of iron: that it would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism — free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power: that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go; and let the honest advocate of confidence read the Alien and Sedition acts, and say if the Constitution has not been wise in fixing limits to the government it created, and whether we should be wise in destroying those limits, Let him say what the government is, if it be not a tyranny, which the men of our choice have conferred on our President" --Thomas Jefferson, Kentucky Resolutions, No 8 |
||||||
|
Opinions Are Like Body Parts, We All Have Them! << I'm actually very happy that I proved you wrong. >> Examples of two opinions which you're free to express on this Club, and which I'm pleased to find make you happy in expressing them. |
||||||
|
How about the evidence? |
||||||
|
Yes, Evidence is Most Pertinent, Providing We're Looking At The Same Thing The reason I haven't "addressed it at all", is simply because your presenting ideas and policies, (good and wonderful as they are) which do not and can not be applied to the dynamics which America is now engaged in. Namely the dynamics of a concerted effort of enemies from within and without, which are determined to exterminate all vestiges and boundaries of Government pertaining to American Freedom and Liberty. While I can agree and applaud even, the premises that "a standing army" is detrimental to American Freedom and Liberty, and I do wish that such an ideal could be implemented in our world today. The facts of life as they now interrelate between belligerent and powerful Governments which are capable of destroying our nation 10's of times over, make such an ideal situation impossible. That's why I titled my post above "Don't Bring a Knife to a Gun Fight". Finding common ground in this discussion would go a long way if you would/ could recognize some of the current issues which are destroying America and our Republic. Current issues which you have yet to acknowledge and consider in this discussion, sir. It seems almost as if you're stuck in a time warp from a past when America was not dealing with very real threats to our way of life? Can we first begin to find some consensus on this before proceeding and comparing our thoughts on the past and how those thoughts and ideals would be brought to bare on America today? |
||||||
|
Deja vu all over again, no As to the enemies within have you noticed that they have the strongest hold in areas with heavy govt involvement? Academia, mainstream media, sports, Hollywood, tech, law enforcement (especially federal) even the military is getting woke. Worse of all it's the conservatives who claim to stand against socialism & for freedom that support most of these institutions. You brought a gun to the gun fight, too bad you gave your gun to the enemy. Now back to the wisdom of the Founders. People like Jefferson & Patrick Henry knew that liberty is what protects us from foreign & domestic threats. If the people in the form of the militia have the power of the gun in their hands & the govt is disarmed, they knew we could defend our liberty. An big, armed govt is always a threat to liberty. Far from ignoring the present situation I'm dealing with it realistically. Don't you see that it's liberty that will protect us not Uncle Sam? Our corrupt system is helping foreign powers gain influence over us. "Is it necessary for your liberty that you should abandon those great rights by the adoption of this system? Is the relinquishment of the trial by jury and the liberty of the press necessary for your liberty? Will the abandonment of your most sacred rights tend to the security of your liberty? Liberty, the greatest of all earthly blessings—give us that precious jewel, and you may take every thing else!" "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined." "It was but yesterday, when our enemies marched in triumph through our country. Yet the people of this country could not be appalled by their pompous armaments: they stopped their career, and victoriously captured them. Where is the peril, now, compared to that? Some minds are agitated by foreign alarms. Happily for us, there is no real danger from Europe; that country is engaged in more arduous business: from that quarter there is no cause of fear: you may sleep in safety forever for them." "O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone...Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation, brought about by the punishment of those in power, inflicted by those who had no power at all? You read of a riot act in a country which is called one of the freest in the world, where a few neighbors cannot assemble without the risk of being shot by a hired soldiery, the engines of despotism. We may see such an act in America. A standing army we shall have, also, to execute the execrable commands of tyranny; and how are you to punish them? Will you order them to be punished? Who shall obey these orders? Will your mace-bearer be a match for a disciplined regiment?" --Patrick Henry en.wikisource.org |
||||||
|
inhis_service 19-Apr-21, 00:32 |
Deleted by inhis_service on 19-Apr-21, 03:28.
|
||||||
|
Hmm, Beginning To Think This Conversation Is Becoming Circular "We are facing nothing like that today" - are you serious? A quick search on the Internet brought up recently published articles confirming the CCP's long running threats to the United States, which are now even more dire with this Democratic President who's family has established hugh financial ties to the CCP. "Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Advisor Details Plan to Defeat and Replace U.S." March 29, 2021 Beyond the numerous other statements of intent, strategic plans that have been revealed, the massive military buildup and bellicose actions by China, now add a candid admission by a top Chinese political advisor, to list of proof showing China's clear goal of world domination. In order to achieve that audacious objective by their intended date of 2049 – the 100th anniversary of the founding of the people's Republic of China (PRC) – first the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) must ruin the United States. And if it wasn't already clear enough, notes The Epoch Times (TET), Chinese officials have a very specific plan – a Grand Strategy – to do so. In newly revealed information the paper notes: A leading Chinese professor [Jin Canrong, a professor and associate dean of the School of International Studies at Beijing's Renmin University of China] – who is also an adviser to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) – laid out a comprehensive plan for the communist regime to overthrow the United States as the world's superpower. The professor's multi-pronged strategy involves a range of malign actions to subvert the United States while strengthening the Chinese regime. They include: interfering in U.S. elections, controlling the American market, cultivating global enemies to challenge the United States, stealing American technology, expanding Chinese territory, and influencing international organizations. Jin Canrong, dubbed "teacher of the state" by the Chinese, is a prominent anti-U.S. scholar and an advisor to two powerful bodies of the CCP, the Organization Department, and the United Front Work Department. He detailed this Chinese grand strategy in a July 2016 speech on "Sino-U.S. Strategic Philosophy" given during the course of two full days at Southern Club Hotel Business Class in south China's Guangzhou City. The Chinese language document is linked above. The Epoch Times reports that Jin Canrong stated unequivocally – "We want to be the world leader," explaining Chinese Leader Xi Jinping's desire for a "national rejuvenation" of the country. And to get there, America must be defeated and neutralized as a world power. TET continues: (1) (1) www.theepochtimes.com americandefensenews.com "China's economy and military can overtake US, but it still won't become global superpower" 21 January, 2021 There is an ongoing discussion that China is emerging as a new superpower and replacing the US from the global power structure. China emerging strongly (1) from the growing global economic crisis due to the Covid-19 pandemic and Donald Trump's ally-alienating policies within NATO for the last four years have pushed this narrative forward considerably. There is no doubt that China has already become the global powerhouse economically, and is expected to surpass the US as ( world's biggest economy by 2028. (2) China is still behind but on its way to surpassing the US in military power with increased spending on weapons technology (3) and developing several secretive weapons. (4) There is no doubt over China acquiring economic and military strength superior to the US sooner than later, but the question is, can the Communist Party-led China be ever as formidable and complete a superpower as the US has been for the last eight decades? When the Soviet Union competed with the US to claim superpower status during the Cold War period, it somewhat matched America's strength in leading alliances and military power. However, at the height of its power, the Soviet Union was never a match for US domination economically or culturally. (1) www.ndtv.com (2) www.businesstoday.in (3) media.defense.gov (4) www.businessinsider.com theprint.in www.ndtv.com "How China Has Infiltrated the U.S." spectator.org www.theamericanconservative.com << As to the enemies within have you noticed that they have the strongest hold in areas with heavy govt involvement? Academia, mainstream media, sports, Hollywood, tech, law enforcement (especially federal) even the military is getting woke. Worse of all it's the conservatives who claim to stand against socialism & for freedom that support most of these institutions. >> You're asserting that it is the American Gov't who's has the "strongest hold" in these areas - "Academia, mainstream media, sports (?!), Hollywood, tech (who exactly are you referring to here, please? ), law enforcement (especially federal) and even military is getting woke"? You really need to be more specific in your accusations, please? Let me assert you not identifying the Deep State's influence in these areas of America. In fact, you've yet to identify the Deep State at all. As many times as I've made reference to them, it's as if you do not understand what I'm saying? Several instances in previous posts I've referenced this Deep State takeover of America, and you haven't acknowledged me at all for some reason. Could it be because you've not been keeping up with recent disclosures by CIA Whistleblowers? "Part 1: Kevin Shipp, CIA Officer Exposes the Shadow Government' www.youtube.com wikispooks.com "CIA Whistleblower Kevin Shipp (NWO, Chemtrails, Deep State, JFK, False Flags" www.youtube.com "From the Company of Shadows" From the Company of Shadows. Read firsthand accounts of fascinating events inside the CIA. Learn how the CIA conducts operations, recruits agents and protects defectors from assassination. Understand the current global and domestic threat of terrorism from the perspective of a decorated CIA officer. Read an insider's expose' of the CIA's use of secrecy and the executive branch's abuse of the shadowy State Secrets Privilege. Information www.amazon.com << Now back to the wisdom of the Founders. People like Jefferson & Patrick Henry knew that liberty is what protects us from foreign & domestic threats. If the people in the form of the militia have the power of the gun in their hands & the govt is disarmed, they knew we could defend our liberty. An big, armed govt is always a threat to liberty. >> These great and profoundly important principles by which our Gov't should be based are tremendously important principles to keep and understand. However, based on the world and the powers now ruling it, implementing these important and tremendously important principles and ideals would be a trick greater than anything David Copperfield could cook up. Do you have any ideas how we can begin to move forward against the powerful cabals now ruling the world? << Far from ignoring the present situation I'm dealing with it realistically. Don't you see that it's liberty that will protect us not Uncle Sam? Our corrupt system is helping foreign powers gain influence over us. >> Again, getting this information out to ANYONE who can begin to make a difference is going to be a great magic act as has ever been achieved. |
||||||
|
Already answered your irrelevant point We get out there & try to change minds even if 1 at a time. Again, the difficulty of implementing ideas has no bearing on their correctness. We may never be free, that doesn't mean that liberty is a bad idea. I think reverting to this variant of the ad populum fallacy is just a way of clinging to ideas that you can't defend. Leftist do this a lot. <<"We are facing nothing like that today" - are you serious? >> Serious as a heart attack. The CCP is a threat to US imperial interests not an existential threat. If we weren't a worldwide empire they wouldn't give us so much thought. Why would they? |
||||||
|
America As A World-Wide Empire Is Undeniably A Fact Serious as a heart attack. The CCP is a threat to US imperial interests not an existential threat. If we weren't a worldwide empire they wouldn't give us so much thought. Why would they? >> But we ARE a "world-wide empire", aren't we? Not only are we the nightmare which former President Eisenhower had warned us - the America which you're so concerned over and I as well - but we're a corrupted and compromised America, as well. This particular fact is of utmost importance for Americans to realize if we're ever, EVER, going to return to any kind of semblance of the kind you're proposing. You describe me and my "points" as "irrelevant", but aren't you being irrelevant here? You're denying this very real reality. Yes, it is monstrous and scary and probably so well entrenched that reversing what America has become is impossible, but your proposal to . . . << We get out there & try to change minds even if 1 at a time. >> Against a monolithic and all powerful, and corrupt system, while noble and as patriotic as the Declaration of Independence is in the final analysis, but a dream of dreamers without hope of success. Like the child in "The Yearling" who didn't want to grow up to be man. << Again, the difficulty of implementing ideas has no bearing on their correctness. We may never be free, that doesn't mean that liberty is a bad idea. I think reverting to this variant of the ad populum fallacy is just a way of clinging to ideas that you can't defend. Leftist do this a lot. >> Mixing or confusing my assertions as being a barrier or deterrent to the "correctness" and the historical basis for American Freedom and Liberty is but redefining or falsely accusing me of being on the wrong side of reality of what America has become. I have noticed you have repeatedly not addressed any of my points specifically where I have outlined the reasons for my premises. Why? You're calling the American Deep State/ the Congressional Military Complex the "ad populum fallacy" is nothing but denial on your part of the conversation, sir. I did not make up these circumstances out of my own fanciful misinterpretation of recent American History, but I am willing to admit and identify them for the enemy of American Freedom and Liberty that they are. Now, we may either work together to help others realize this reality or we will not work together. Cooperating with you from the honest and truthful supposition that early American Politics and Principles alone may solve our problems "1 person at a time" is as impractical as it is naïve. I can not do that, sir. with all due respect. |
||||||
|
OK Ihs BTW, one thing overlooked by many is primer non nocere, first do no harm. Often, out of a desire to be relevant & to do something, people become the unwitting helpers of the forces they oppose. We see that in the US as Republicans insist on being law abiding & constantly compromising away their principles. I've watched it in Venezuela for the last 22 years as the so called opposition shucks & jives while allowing the commie regime to stay in power. |
||||||
| |||||||
