Charles Drago Wrote:Uniforms and oaths sworn to protect laws of nations are precisely the problem.
I agree with this to a degree. Individuals need to be free-thinking in order to preserve their individuality and maintain their own sense of right and wrong. However, I also hold our constitution very high as it was written primarily to protect and promote the Rights of the Individual. Unfortunately, governments tend to be self-serving over time--as was predicted by the Founding Fathers and even mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. It is an interesting task: To support the government ONLY when it is compliant with the Constitution in its support of the individual. People lose track of the compass and many times find that they no longer have enough crumbs to find their way back home...
Quote:Deny this, make tribalism your default position, and none of the good we seek will be attained.
Agreed.
That which James Douglass terms The Unspeakable and this forum's founders frame as Deep Politics is the fog which drifted in from the last great war and wraps its arms around the planes and the pantries and the motorcades.
Some would continue the lightning rod distraction: lone Communist gunman (seek no more), pilot error (seek no more), Islamist cult with OBL as Manson (thus far and no more).
In 1964 Bertrand Russell compared that kabuki to Dreyfuss, why the fuss over national security if it's a Lone Gunman/No Conspiracy.
The national security state is building a mirror of Ft. Mead in Utah. The Thugruppen for the Defense of the Reich has its 450 million rounds of hollow-point .40 caliber. The president may detain or assassinate any citizen.
The Constitution in my view represents the historic struggle of the people to secure freedom from the tyrant du jour.
Today it is the national security state defended by the League in Defense of the Coup on Floor Six of Potemkin Plaza.
As well as by the aquarium-cleaning snails among them one Shermer, sliming along the greasy trail of Posners and Bugliosis.
The technology is better.
The tyrants have the same odor.
The treachery is always up to the moment.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]3764[/ATTACH]
Quote:Some would continue the lightning rod distraction: lone Communist gunman (seek no more), pilot error (seek no more), Islamist cult with OBL as Manson (thus far and no more).
Say hello to Charlie......:mexican:
Jemanee but what great points are made above. WOW.
Mr. Jim Douglass' book on JFK is one of the best I've read in decades on the issue attending the real nature of the Secret Team members that did our POTUS to his mortal end in brutal and public fashion.
I will read his Ghandi book soon. And look forward to his MKL and Malcolm X book mentioned on this week's Black Op Radio show.
Without the internal MORAL compass mentioned by Greg, BLIND OBEDIENCE in the uniform can be a cloak for fascists BUT I cannot abide painting the uniform service in total with a tar brush. No. (I don't think anyone really did. I just want to clarify a point).
Nor do I paint all intell persons as "spooks" but I am wary of intell personnel until I discern whose side they are on. I detest "us and them" thinking but I know it is required on occasion. Non-Spook Intelligence personnel do exist keeping their head down - nuff said 'bout that.
Too many fine examples of anti-fascists in uniform or after for career service persons. Smedley Butler first to mind.
Just consider Fletcher Prouty and Ed Lansdale.
One lived to his sworn word and quit, but after he retired he still honored his oath and exposed as much as he could. He kept the integrity of his word even when slammed by lessers for not telling all. Fletcher honored himself by that conduct and still is attacked for not telling all. He kept his humanity and Moral Compass intact.
He wrote IMHO the best most revealing book on dirty deeds done dirt cheap by the Elite.
Where as Ed Lansdale wore the same USAF uniform as a cloak to hide in and was involved in unknown multitudes of vile deeds. No Moral Compass.
If honoring the first example and having pride in honorable service rendered is tribal, I can deal with it. Semper Fidelis.
I am from the wrong heritage and wrong family to NOT honor service in uniform if rendered in line with a moral Compass.
One GrandFather served in USA between the first and second war, the other was held as a machinist in Allison Engineering from the draft. He won a very RARE personal "E" award from the USArmy for improving exhaust valve seats in the Allison aircraft engine in P-40s and P-38s.
Not too bad for a dumb dirt farmer, eh? He taught most of my own internal moral compass and his son had a hand it that too.
One Great Uncle survived the death march on Bataan, shipment to Japan proper and enslavement in one of the Japanese death mines to be liberated in 1945. Those details I had to get over time from my Grandmother. He never ever drove or rode in a Japanese vehicle after that.
Another Great Uncle was surrounded in Bastogne and later helped liberated Dachau. He detested Fascism. He witnessed Omar Bradley and Dwight Eisenhower bringing to Dachau, by direct order, the military and civilian press to document truth specifically telling all in hearing "No one will ever be able to say this didn't happen". His truths I heard at the elbow of he and my Father swapping service stories.
This man was flown to the 50th Anniversary of D-Day at US Army and Nato expense, they awarded him a totem made of materials from Algeria, Sicily, Italy, England, France, Belgium and Germany were he served. He was very proud of it and kept it in a glass cabinet. He was proud of it. I am proud of having even known him let alone being related to that kind of person.
Another Great Uncle drove landing craft full of living Marines to the landing beaches of Okinawa and hauled wounded and dead Marines and G.I.s back to repeat the process. I am proud of him. He was a uniformed firefighter for all my minority and was a preacher when he retired.
I am proud of him too.
My Father's generation? One Merchant Marine saving Britain's bacon sailing the North Atlantic - he didn't live long enough to be recognized as a veteran by the corrupted DOD. All that generation males served save one. One of my direct uncles retreated from a frozen reservoir called Chosen in 1950. He jumped from airplanes.
My generation? Eight honorable discharges from USA, USMC. mostly grunts and one Huey crew chief. In all this family only one less than honorable discharge, he went UA from the air wing circa 1974. No POTUS Ford sponsored Pardon for him. I do honor the man for who he is and forgive that indiscretion, it is little in the long view. We all must nurture and follow the internal Moral Compass.
To me patriotism is not a refuge for scoundrels given the proper internal moral compass. This is not a trained or "issued" trait. It is acquired long before one raises a right had and executes an oath to the Constitution.
That is a personal choice to follow the example of Fletcher Prouty or Ed Lansdale made long before enlisting or being drafted, sometimes before one even knows who Prouty or Lansdale are, it is a functional moral compass and being receptive to the reading right or wrong.
My patriotism renders the Declaration of Independence and Constitution valuable - as the baby in the nasty bathwater.
The documents were written by design to be read and understood by the citizenry without need for interpretation by anyone. The tools for our own protection were provided by the Bill of Rights.
It is the citizens that don't participate in the fight to preserve those rights that are the problem to me. That is leaderless tribalism to me.
In this age of the "Abridged Bill of Rights" and HSA and TSA the issues are even more important.
Co-IntelPro if not the Palmer Raids should have taught the lessons long ago.
The abuse of the color of authority is the tribal danger, that I endorse 110%. Note the lack of the Moral Compass required for this.
In 1967 a high school social studies teacher insisted "Apathy is killing this country!" She was right. She also provided a road to independent critical thinking and hence liberalism in a very racist and red-neck environment. I latched onto to it because my internal compass told me to do it.
Jim
Still sending best to all
========================================================================================================
I once swore an oath to defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. That oath NEVER expires, even when one no longer wears a uniform. I think Fletcher Prouty and Penn Jones Jr. would agree. It is our Republic and I want it back. Semper Fidelis
Welcome to the forum, my friend...
Points of contention are, in the aggregate, the sine qua non for enlightenment.
To wit:
It never has been and never will be my intention to demean those who, with noble intentions, wear uniforms.
They are not villains.
They are victims.
Their noble sacrifices are made on altars unimaginable to them.
I decry patriotism insofar as it is the antithesis of the notion of universal kinship.
Give me one morally sound reason why I should value the life of a person born within the borders of the nation state of my birth more highly than the life of a person born outside those borders.
Take all the time you need.
Flags are best appreciated as shrouds.
The U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution acknowledge and codify human rights, not American human's rights.
Pledges of Allegiance are implicit declarations of pending wars.
To my sisters and brothers around the world, to my animal companions, I extend my wish for peace.
I posted on the EF:
Mr. Morrow,
I deeply believe that not only is your incessant predilection with posting "all things of a sexual nature" off topic to the JFK Assassination, but it is also most instructive as to how you spend the majority of your day. Hypothetically, if one was a sex addict or addicted to pornography in the depth of their psyche, while simultaneously experiencing self loathing for their own secret homosexual tendencies they may still attempt to keep themselves self deluded of these things by combining a legitimate research subject with "all things sexual" and thus justify their pursuit of sexual arousal. This technique serves two purposes. First, one would be enabled, through self-delusion, to justify the stimulation of their own libido; and two, that person would be insured to be punished (through ridicule) for that very behavior, which they themselves loath.
It would be different if you were attempting to offer the argument that "The conspirators assassinated him BECAUSE he was cheating on Jackie..." -- Although there is NO evidence to support that assertion, at least it would not be off topic.
I wish the only issues of Elite conduct I had to be concerned with was who they had sex with or what drugs they did like the news wants us to know about.
......... Or much to that effect.
I think this came from Mr. John Judge IF memory serves properly. It may well not but I like the point. I think the point is relevant.
My point is:
It is other conduct of the Elite I care about and it is on topic.
Thanks Greg clear elucidation as always.
Jim
===========================================================================================================
I once swore an oath to defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. That oath NEVER expires, even when one no longer wears a uniform. I think Fletcher Prouty and Penn Jones Jr. would agree. It is our Republic and I want it back. Semper Fidelis.
Greg Burnham Wrote:I posted on the EF:
Mr. Morrow,
I deeply believe that not only is your incessant predilection with posting "all things of a sexual nature" off topic to the JFK Assassination, but it is also most instructive as to how you spend the majority of your day. Hypothetically, if one was a sex addict or addicted to pornography in the depth of their psyche, while simultaneously experiencing self loathing for their own secret homosexual tendencies they may still attempt to keep themselves self deluded of these things by combining a legitimate research subject with "all things sexual" and thus justify their pursuit of sexual arousal. This technique serves two purposes. First, one would be enabled, through self-delusion, to justify the stimulation of their own libido; and two, that person would be insured to be punished (through ridicule) for that very behavior, which they themselves loath.
It would be different if you were attempting to offer the argument that "The conspirators assassinated him BECAUSE he was cheating on Jackie..." -- Although there is NO evidence to support that assertion, at least it would not be off topic.
Totally GB Morrows stuff is totally off the planet.
However it's a credit to you GB that you actually show a piece of shit like that respect. I really wish I had your patience mate.