Thats right. You, me, our politicians/government, Christians/the church and any other religion that preaches do unto others................ And let us not forget any who profess to take a higher moral ground by claiming “atheism” if they have said they believe in America. Because they are lying.
A bold statement you say. Arrogance you say. I say the truth!
I have written some fairly long posts preceding this one. Not because I thought anyone would read them. They violate the bloggers rule by being to long and will not fit into the media's dumbing down of information into two minute sound bytes or 6th grade level local newspaper reporting. In these posts I have referenced information from a variety of sources so as not to be accused of bias. I did so only for the purpose of substantiating and laying the groundwork for the title of this post. The information I have linked to in the previous posts is minimal in comparison to what it is available should one wish to take the time to find it. And therein lies the problem. We talk so much shit we have come to believe our own lies. If you are not afraid to read further, conservative and/or liberal, and arrive at the conclusion I am full of shit, then fine. I Hope so. I fear not.
WE SAY WE ARE A NATION OF CHRISTIANS, FOUNDED ON CHRISTIAN PRIINCIPLES.
We fight about this constantly. We argue over where to place our crucifix's and nativity scenes. We argue over whose brand of “religion” is correct. Whose interpretation is right. We have confused evangelism with Dogma and trip over our righteousness.
We sue, we condemn, we contribute monies that makes it way to right wing organizations that support war and repressive regimes that engage in atrocities. We claim to be moral yet work for, or own, companies that rip people off and engage in the business of killing. We send missionaries to countries to spread the gospel while those in our own communities go hungry and suffer the ravages of an infinite variety of abuses. We go to Church on Sunday to pat ourselves on the back as we Judge ourselves superior to any who do not or can not believe as we think they should.
In short, we have betrayed the great commissions as sure as Judas betrayed Christ.
WE SAY WE BELEIVE IN FREEDOM.
As a Government we support and participate in torture and the overthrow of democratically elected governments for profit. We pass laws to infringe upon the rights of our own citizens and justify whatever we do with lies.
As a people? We allow it. In fact we support it by continuing to throw our hands up hands up in the air and dismissing the perversion of the foundation of this country with platitudes such as “the government is corrupt”, “thats politics”, “theres nothing we can do about it”, ad infinitum, forgetting that had our forefathers done the same we would still be under a kings rule.
We contribute to it by not only not demanding that our government reign in the multi-global corporations that base themselves in this country, but by participating through our purchase and use of goods and products made at the hands of slave labor and working for the companies that indulge in these practices because as bad as slave labor may be you can't pass up a bargain.
WE SAY WE BELIEVE IN FREE SPEECH:
As long as it is Politically Correct and does not offend the sensibilities of those easily offended making them weaker in the process.
WE SAY THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL, THAT THEY ARE ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH CERTAIN UNALIENABLE RIGHTS
If you lie, cheat, and steal you are held accountable, subject to suit for breech of contract, fine or loss of liberty. We allow those who govern us to do these things with impunity. We have looked the other way, as long as it did not interfere with what we are doing, for so long we are now powerless to stop it.
The word “We” apparently refers to a specific “we” which many of us have been disfranchised from and no longer are “WE” but a balkanized conglomeration of special interest groups interested only in getting our way.
WE SAY WE SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, THE ONES WHO DIE SO THAT WE MAY BE FREE
How many will stand at a soldiers funeral? I have seen people decline because of rain or cold never mind the soldiers duty to endure the elements for your freedom.
We have turned a blind eye to those who have neglected them and subjected them to disgrace and humiliation through lack of, or inadequate medical care. Through homelessness and drug addiction instead of marching on Washington and physically throwing the bums out.
WE CRY, WE WEEP, WE MOAN, WE SHOUT IN RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION OVER THE ABUSES OF POWER OF OUR OWN GOVERNMENT. WE GIVE TO CHARITIES TO HELP THE POOR WE HAVE EITHER HELPED TO CREATE OR TURNED A BLIND EYE AS OUR GOVERNMENT SUPPORTS REGIMES THAT OPPRESS THEM OR PURCHASE PRODUCTS FROM CORPORATIONS THAT EXPLOIT THEM SO THAT WE MIGHT GET A BETTER DEAL FROM WAL-MART!
The world no longer trust us. Many hate us. And our own arrogance is such that we wonder why. Are we so arrogant as to believe they do not recognize hypocrisy when they see it?
And in our self absorbed excuses for fearing to risk our comfort we have sacrificed the future of our children. In GOD WE TRUST my ass. It is the crumbling dollar earned on the backs of the poor and hoarded in the gated communities of the rich and the comforts it provides US in which we trust.
How many times have you heard somebody say in so many words I might stand up for right but can not afford it.
AND WHO IS TO BLAME?????
“DERIVING THEIR JUST POWERS FROM THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED”
the Declaration of Independence
WE ARE! And every day we let the corrupt bastards stay in office without holding them accountable for the atrocities they inflict upon man and country we become more culpable. We dishonor the flag, the fourth of July, our soldiers, our honored contract with God and plaster weeping eagles on websites.
Our forefathers, the Founders of this country we profess to love, did leave us a blueprint as to how to raise America to it's intended and dreamt of GLORY.
It is not through the implementation of any Homeland Security Act. Homeland Security can only be achieved by Free and Brave American Individuals who understand that our forefathers meant it when they wrote the following and framed a constitution around it:
“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —“
From the AMERICAN Declaration of Independence dated 4th July 1776.
Now if you have not read the preceding posts, then you may not understand when I say the time has come to raise another Army to support and assist the Army we currently have. Not to take Iraq. But to take AMERICA back. rcAdd to Technorati Favorites
In our posts on Blackwater we hope we have illustrated that there are possibly some hidden agendas in the machinations of the “Right”. Our posts on the current budget fiasco I would hope illustrates that the left is just as devious in chasing they're own agenda.
But despite what at times would appear to be a polarization among the two parties, could this be some sort of illusion to allow them to pursue a common goal that both sides of the aisle can agree on and keeps them compromising with each other despite their hollow speeches and promises. And that in fact, there is more in common between the two than there is different. BOTH PARTIES ARE AND HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN LYING AND STEALING FROM THE AMERICAN PUBLIC FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
How would we define this commonality I wonder? Let me make a few references and then you be the Judge. You decide if WE are what we claim to be, A CHRISTIAN NATION DEDICATED TO FREEDOM AND LIBERTY??????
U.S. Money Aids World’s Worst Dictators
February 13, 2006 Benjamin Powell, Matt Ryan Parade magazine recently ranked the twenty worst dictators currently in power. Many names are familiar—Fidel Castro, Muammar Qaddafi, Kim Jong-Il, Robert Mugabe and others. They are all guilty of human rights violations and in some cases have committed outright genocide. But there’s another trait common to all twenty leaders—every single one has received foreign aid from wealthy Western countries. Popular Washington, D.C., rhetoric says that development aid should be dispensed to corruption-free countries with laws and policies conducive to supporting sustained economic growth. President Bush created Millennium Challenge Accounts to funnel aid to such countries. However, few countries have qualified for the program and little money has actually been disbursed. Instead, we find that both the U.S. and its partner countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), have contributed a great deal of aid to these oppressive regimes. Parade ranked the Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir as the world’s worst dictator. During his reign OECD countries gave his regime more than $6 billion in non-military aid. The U.S. accounted for more than $1 billion of that aid. Kim Jong-Il was ranked as the second worst dictator and received a little over $1 billion in aid, with more than half of it coming from the U.S. Than Shwe of Myanmar, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, and Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan round out the top five dictators on the list. The U.S. contributed $32 million to Myanmar, $1.1 billion to Zimbabwe, and $385 million to Uzbekistan.
FROM RON PAULS SITE: A partial list of Dictators we have supported. Please note the inclusion of "Adolf Hitler" for a latter reference:
General Sani Abacha / Idi Amin / Hugo Banzer / Fulgencio Batista / Hassanal Bolkiah / P.W. Botha / Humberto Branco / Raoul Cedras / Vinicio Cerezo / Chiang Kai-Shek / Roberto Suazo Cordova / Ngo Dihn Diem /Samuel Doe / Francois Duvalier / Jean Claude Duvalier / King Fahd bin’Abdul-’Aziz / Francisco Franco / Adolf Hitler / King Hassan II / Ferdinand Marcos / Maximiliano Hernandez Martinez / Sese Seko Mobutu / Efrain Rios Montt / Manuel Noriega / Turgut Ozal / Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi (Shah of Iran) / George Papadopoulos / Park Chung Hee / Augusto Pinochet / Pol Pot / Sitiveni Rabuka / Halie Salassie / Antonio de Oliveira Salazar / Anastasio Somoza, Jr. / Ian Smith / Alfredo Stroessner / General Suharto / Rafael Leonidas Trujillo / Jorge Rafael Videla / Mohammed Zia Ul-Haq
Many of the world’s most repressive dictators have been friends of America.Tyrants, torturers, killers, and sundry dictators and corrupt puppet-presidents have been aided, supported, and rewarded handsomely for their loyalty to US interests. Traditional dictators seize control through force, while constitutional dictators hold office through voting fraud or severely restricted elections, and are frequently puppets and apologists for the military juntas which control the ballot boxes. In any case, none have been democratically elected by the majority of their people in fair and open elections.
They are democratic America’s undemocratic allies. They may rise to power through bloody ClA-backed coups and rule by terror and torture. Their troops may receive training or advice from the CIA and other US agencies. US military aid and weapons sales often strengthen their armies and guarantee their hold on power. Unwavering “anti-communism” and a willingness to provide unhampered access for American business interests to exploit their countries’ natural resources and cheap labor are the excuses for their repression, and the primary reason the US government supports them. They may be linked internationally to extreme right-wing groups such as the World Anti-Communist League, and some have had strong Nazi affiliations and have offered sanctuary to WWll Nazi war criminals.
The U.S. has frequently supported non-communist governments, coups, or insurgent movements in Latin America - see Guatemala, Honduras with John Negroponte, the Chilean coup of 1973, and Operation Condor - and has on many occasions even invaded Latin American countries for the stated reason of preventing the spread of Communism in the Americas or of stemming the drug trade. This self-appointed role as regional power has roots that go back to the Monroe Doctrine from 1823 .
The US provided significant support for General Augusto Pinochet in Chile, who came into power in the Chilean coup and went on to commit many human rights abuses. The role of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in this context is the subject of fierce debate. The coup was particularly resented by supporters of Salvador Allende, the elected Marxist president whom Pinochet deposed.
The official American government view, which is shared by many, particularly more conservative, Americans, is that American influence (or interference) in Latin American countries was necessary to stop the spread of tyrannical Communism. Others, especially on the left, charge that America's main primary interest was economic, and that it was willing to do anything to further American corporate interests in the region. The Venezuela coup of 2002, taking place long after the collapse of the Soviet Union, can be read as confirmation of this view of US policy.
In Latin America, it has been alleged that the School of the Americas based in Fort Benning, Georgia taught Latin American officers torture techniques to combat subversion throughout the cold war, without concern for human rights.
The CIA was involved in the overthrow of the democratically elected Premier Mohammed Mossadegh who nationalized Iran's oil. It is interesting to note that the friendly relations between Saddam Hussein and the United States also soured when Saddam Hussein nationalized Iraq's oil. Similarly, the CIA attempted to overthrow Hugo Chavez after he nationalized it's oil industry and other foreign investments.
The CIA tried to assassinate democratically elected prime minister, Patrice Lumumba of the Democratic Republic of the Congo after he nationalized the copper mines of Congo, and he was eventually killed by forces led by Joseph Mobutu, who was supported by the U.S. The US has supported the brutal and barbaric regimes that have controlled Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Both nations have among the worst human rights records but the United States has provided weapons and intelligence which has led to the arrest,torture and execution of political dissidents.And do we blame the right as we so often pointed our finger at in our posts on Blackwater? Consider the following:
In Liberal Fascism, Jonah Goldberg reminds us that the original fascists hailed from the left. An international movement, fascism took on different forms in different countries, reflecting the vagaries of national culture and temperament. Hitler's Nazis were ardent socialists. They believed in free health care and guaranteed jobs. They confiscated inherited wealth and spent vast sums on public education. They purged the church from public policy, supported abortion and gun control, and inserted the authority of the state into every nook and cranny of daily life.
While fascism in Germany found its ultimate expression as genocidal, racist nationalism, in America, it assumed a “friendlier” form. Many fascist tenets were espoused by American progressives like John Dewey and Woodrow Wilson, and FDR incorporated many of the movement’s policies in the New Deal. If this observation sounds strange to modern ears, Goldberg argues, it’s only because most Americans have forgotten the policies and principles that truly define fascism.
Jonah Goldberg is a nationally syndicated columnist and an editor-at-large for the National Review and the National Review Online.
Ostensibly our GOVERNMENT would have us to believe that we have had to uphold/support these oppressive regimes to stop the Soviet Union and the threat of Communism. However the truth is, our country has a long history of exercising our rights at the expense of the rights of others. Going as far back as stealing the land of the American Indian.
and the "Monroe Doctrine". Ideologically attractive sounding bullshit as easily perverted as our current interpretations of the U.S. Constitution. But very useful in justifying our interference in other countries and/or cultures.
And what role do the U.S. Corporations play? See:
Written in 1980: Why US Corporations should get out of South Africa by Ann Seidmen
Coca Cola in Columbia, South America
Unocal settles Burma human rights cases
More On Blackwater- Be Afraid, Be very Afraid
Will there Be more on BlackwaterUSA? You bet your
Our government-selling out our servicemen-it will bite us in the ass-be enraged
think it has been a thinly disquised blast at “Neo-conservataives”, let me put your mind at ease. It is a totally upfront blast at the “neo- cons”. Do not despair however because the Democrats, the left, the liberals, whatever you wish to call them are just as evil. Yes, I used the word “evil”. A word that applies to both the left and the right. Unless of course you would prefer to refer to those you pay to “govern” you who instead cheat you, lie to you, steal from you and sell out YOUR country as “Saints”.
The recent passage of the 550 billion dollar “Omnibus Appropriations bill” is a prime example.
Hello, can you count to a 550 billion? Can you count one billion? Do any of us even know what a billion is?
Remember the Democrats promise prior to the last election. “ Pelosi Promises Fiscal Restraint If Democrats Win Minority Leader Says. Democratic-Run House Would Target Deficit By DAVID ROGERS and SARAH LUECK, July 13, 2006”
Well Consider the following:
December 17, 2007
Omnibus Spending Bill Busts the Budget to Pay for Pork
by Brian M. Riedl
The 3,417-page (and counting) omnibus appropriations bill unveiled by Democratic appropriators provides further evidence that Congress has failed to curb its addiction to spending and pork. On the surface, the bill adheres to President Bush's $932 billion cap on discretionary spending. However, the bill employs enough gimmicks to push total discretionary spending nearly $20 billion above the President's requested level.
Congress would not have to resort to such budget-busting gimmicks if it had not raised the total number of earmarks in the fiscal year 2008 appropriations bills to more than 11,000. Costing approximately $20 billion, this pork violates Congress's own pledge to cut the number of earmarks in half from the 2005 peak. Congress should scrap the earmarks and use the savings to offset the "emergency spending." If it refuses, President Bush should veto the bill and insist on a year-long continuing resolution (keeping remaining discretionary spending frozen at fiscal year 2007 spending levels), which would save taxpayers more than $30 billion relative to the omnibus.
Busting the Budget with Pork
Congressional appropriators are busting the budget with pork. The omnibus adds an estimated 9,170 earmarks to the 2,161 projects included in the recently passed defense appropriations bill. The final cost for these 11,331 earmarks will likely be around $20 billion.
This bill was 3500 pages long and released 24 hours before it was voted on and past. Can you read 3500 pages in 24 hours? Did you trust your representative to? Lets ask the real question, do you think they give a damn if they bankrupt the country as long as they insure their future?
If you want to have some fun, go here and see a few of the things YOU and I get to pay for. Yes US. Just type something stupid in and see how much you are going to pay for it.
I typed in Post Office Museum just cause I happened to know that money had been allocated for such. who would have guessed it huh? You ever been in a damn Post office that wasn't a Museum. Well here's what popped up.
"DIVISION K - TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008 (JES), page 558
... $200,000 Sen. Reid the historic Post Office in downtown las Vegas to a museum on local, histDlY. i!i: City of lincoln, NE for Antelope Valley Project Community Revitalization $180,000 Sen. Hagel, Sen. Ben Nelson" Rep. ... "
In Las Vegas no less. Thats right, “Las Vegas”. So keep that in mind the next time you go to Las Vegas be sure to visit “YOUR” Post Office Museum and remember, “What you do in Las Vegas, Stays in Las Vegas”.
Some other interesting tid bits:
* The Charles Rangel "Monument to Me" ($1.95 million),
* Rodent control in Alaska ($113,000),
* Olive fruit fly research in France ($213,000), and
* A river walk in Massachusetts ($1 million).
Now I suppose these things are important (yeah). But consider this in order to pay for all these wonderful things they had to cut back in some non essential areas. Like Homeland Defense and support for the troops (thats OK though because we have “BLACKWATER”!).
Read The Incredible Disappearing Border Fence by Michelle Malkin Posted: 12/20/2007
In short, there will be no fence. Well there might be some fences somewhere. Besides the token stretches they will put up (which will be even less now) the most fence You and I will probably see is around US prisons housing a large population of victimless crime offenders. The money has been stripped out as fast as it was added.
And PORT SECURITY? What the hell is that? Consider the following:
Conservatives Bow to Industry, Block Amendment to Scan All Shipping Containers
Early this afternoon, conservatives in the House Homeland Security Committee voted down an amendment by Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) that would have mandated 100 percent scanning of American-bound shipping containers for radiological weapons.
The vote followed an “aggressive lobbying campaign” by a “coalition of industry groups” who pressed conservative members to oppose the amendment. Yesterday, committee chairman Peter King (R-NY) announced that he was caving to industry interests. His excuse was that Markey’s plan was “not realistic“:
There’s no sense putting something in the bill if it’s not realistic, if it’s not going to be implemented and can’t be done. We want a real bill, not a headline. From
Money does keep getting allocated to Port Security. Seems though once you drop something in the water it's very difficult to find again.
But you can bet your sweet ass that if you and I decide to fly somewhere “in country” we will not be able to high jack a plane with a pair of finger nail clippers.
Our Homeland security gestapo is ever on guard however. Consider the following chart:
You can go here to see an explanation of the top 10 problems with this is bill:
1. No one read the bill.
2. Non-emergency emergencies drove up spending.
3. Border security is threatened.
4. Energy production is threatened.
5. Excessive regulation burdens chemical plants.
6. The omnibus is larded with pork.
7. The omnibus funds corporate welfare.
8. The omnibus uses budget gimmicks to obscure spending.
9. Misplaced priorities are rife
10 Total spending blows all budget caps.
Now remember the Pelosi's battle cry we quoted at the beginning. So it's no surprise that as usual it was a lie. And we can all sit back and say, “well thats just politics as usual........”. But if you consider the housing crises, the collapse of the dollar, the rising price of oil and the continuing cost of war one might wonder how the hell we are going to pay for this debacle.
Well, Jim Cramer who is generally fairly optimistic seems a bit concerned:
Of Course despite protests the President does have the power to dramatically reduce the waste though don't hold your breath.
A December 18 legal analysis by the Congressional Research Service concluded that "because the language of committee reports do not meet the procedural requirements of Article I of the Constitution -- specifically, bicameralism and presentment - they are not laws and, therefore, are not legally binding on executive agencies... Given both the implied legal and constitutional authority as well as the long-standing accepted process of Presidents, it appears that a President can, if he so chooses, issue an executive order with respect to earmarks contained solely in committee reports and not in any way incorporated into the legislative text."
However it is highly unlikely he will want to read 3500 pages. Actually there is little evidence to date that he can.
Charts from http://www.heritage.org/Press/Misc/ALaChart.cfm