Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Cognitive Dissonance

October 10, 2011 by  

Cognitive Dissonance

America’s “War on Terror” has devolved into a perpetual war in which the boundaries are not defined and the enemy is whoever a secret cabal within the Federal government decides.

Totalitarian nations throughout history have made war on their own citizens. The United States is doing the same and has in one degree or another for at least 150 years.

When Barack Hussein Obama stepped up to the podium and announced the successful assassination of two American citizens on Sept. 30 — Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan — it was proof that America had finally died, Paul Craig Roberts writes. As for Americans, they have been cemented into a state of cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance is a psychological conflict resulting from incongruous beliefs and attitudes held simultaneously. Totalitarian regimes are successful when their subjects reach that state.

This is not the first time Americans have been murdered by their own government. It became common practice in the 1860s under Abraham Lincoln, a President that Obama claims to emulate. I say that was an assault on Americans because, even though most of the citizens of Southern States did not consider themselves any longer a part of America, Lincoln did not recognize their secession. Even if you find justification for the invasion and attacks on Southern soldiers and military installations, Lincoln’s sanctioning of the war crimes against the Southern civilian population — women, children, the elderly and noncombatants — cannot be justified in any civilized society. He was making war on his own people.

40 years ago, one man uncovered a secret so shocking IT CHANGED HIS LIFE FOREVER...

Lincoln advocated “total warfare.” His officers repeatedly killed civilians, burned down entire towns and laid waste farmland and slaughtered livestock in retaliation for attacks by Confederate armies. This began as early as 1861, despite objections by General George McClellan. By 1864, total warfare on the Southern economy was the stated objective. General Ulysses S. Grant told Phillip Sheridan to take the Shenandoah Valley out of the war.

“Grant’s instructions were grimly specific,” writes Bruce Catton in The Civil War. “He wanted the rich farmlands of the Valley despoiled so thoroughly that the place could no longer support a Confederate army; he told Sheridan to devastate the whole area so thoroughly that a crow flying across over the Valley would have to carry its own rations… barns and corncribs and gristmills and herds of cattle were military objectives now, and if thousands of civilians whose property this was had to suffer heartbreaking loss as a result, that was incidental. A garden spot was to be turned into a desert in order that the Southern nation might be destroyed.”

General William T. Sherman took that policy even further. He bombarded Atlanta for days even though there was no strategic military reason for so doing. When he finally entered Atlanta he ordered all non-combatants — the few combatants left were either too injured to flee or had surrendered — to leave, making thousands of civilians homeless and destitute and leaving them in possession of only what they could carry on their backs. He then set out to lay waste to all the Confederate homeland, one-upping Sheridan in the process. Neither women nor children nor recently-freed slaves were spared abuse, torture and murder by Sherman’s troops and the unchecked rabble that followed the army.

Yet the non-education system has for years indoctrinated U.S. children with the idea that Lincoln was a saint who “saved” the Union by forcing it back together. They don’t realize that in so doing Lincoln destroyed liberty. In addition to sanctioning the murder of civilians and the destruction of private property in the South, he suspended habeas corpus, imprisoned politicians and whole State legislatures and dissenting editorialists, shut down newspapers and held citizens in prison without trial IN THE UNION STATES, often ignoring rulings of the Supreme Court in the process. Most today praise Lincoln’s actions as necessary and proper to suppress the rebellion. Our government tells us what Lincoln did was a good thing.

In Egypt this summer, protestors began standing up to the oppressive Hosni Mubarak regime. Americans were appalled when the regime violently cracked down on the protestors and the mainstream corporate media played up the carnage. Mubarak was doing what he thought necessary and proper to suppress the rebellion in his country.

But Obama ordered Mubarak out of power. Because Mubarak was a puppet of the U.S., he was forced to step down. Americans cheered that a tyrant was vanquished even though they didn’t know what was to take his place. Our government told us this was a good outcome.

In Libya’s Arab Spring, protestors stood up to the Moammar Gadhafi regime. Gadhafi cracked down on the protestors with violence, if the reports of the mainstream media are to be believed. He was simply doing what he thought necessary and proper to maintain control of his country.

NATO member nations and finally Obama ordered Gadhafi to step down. Gadhafi, not a puppet of the U.S., refused. NATO forces began bombing and killing Libyans to force Gadhafi’s capitulation.

In Syria’s Arab Spring, troops of Bashir al-Assad began killing protestors by the dozens. Al-Assad is doing what he thinks is necessary and proper to maintain control of his country. So far, the Obama Administration is standing idly by, paying only lip service to a protest.

In some cases the majority of Americans accept that it’s okay for the government to do whatever it says is necessary to suppress rebellion. See Abraham Lincoln and Obama’s ordered killing of al-Awlaki.

In other cases — Libya and Egypt, for example — the government is wrong for doing what is necessary to suppress rebellion. Cognitive dissonance.

For the most part, Americans have accepted the non-war NATO intervention in Libya as necessary to stop the killing that Gadhafi started. But stopping the killing requires more killing. More innocents are dead, whether from Gadhafi forces suppressing rebellion or NATO forces bombing Gadhafi forces. Cognitive dissonance.

We are fighting a war on terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Yemen. Our government tells us the enemy is al-Qaida. Yet, in supporting the rebellion in Libya, U.S. and NATO gave power and aid and comfort to a rebellion that is made up of al-Qaida terrorists that have fought against and killed U.S. soldiers on other battlefields. Cognitive dissonance.

George W. Bush suspended habeas corpus. The USA Patriot Act, passed within days of 9/11 and subsequently renewed under Obama, gives the government carte blanch to spy on Americans. Government snoops can now rifle through bank records, eavesdrop on communications and can even enter the homes of Americans without warrants. Militarized police SWAT teams are knocking down doors and shooting people in their homes — whether they are armed or not. The Federal Reserve is monitoring online communications for signs of dissent.

Americans know in their hearts that something about this is not right. Yet they say to themselves, “I haven’t done anything wrong. I have nothing to fear from my government.”

But in a distant land, two American citizens criticized the actions of our government and told Muslims to oppose it. Our government tells us this is so. Our government tells us that al-Awlaki promoted jihad and the killing of Americans. Our government tells us that al-Awlaki spurred the underwear bomber to try and blow up a jet liner over America.

But the underwear bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, was assisted onto the plane without proper identification by a CIA asset, as we told you here.

Our government tells us that al-Awlaki spurred Nidal Malik Hasan, a U.S. Army major, to kill American soldiers at Ft. Hood. Our government tells us that al-Awlaki was the inspiration for Faisal Shahzad to attempt to car bomb Times Square.

Our government tells us these things but withholds the evidence. Too many take what the government says at face value.

Our government told us the Civil War was about freeing the slaves. Our government told us a central bank would stabilize the economy. Our government told us that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. Our government told us U.S. gunboats were attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin. Our government told us we were winning the war in Vietnam. Our government told us that Randy Weaver was a criminal. Our government told us that David Koresh was abusing children. Our government told us that it didn’t fail us on 9/11. Our government told us that 9/11 was masterminded from a cave in a third-world country. Our government told us the economy was fine. Our government told us a bailout would save the economy. Our government told us that Pakistan was our friend in the war on terror. Our government told us we are not fighting a war in Libya. Our government told us that al-Awlaki deserved to die without due process.

Our government tells us that the FBI is looking out for us, finding home-grown jihadists and stopping them in their tracks. It does not tell us what the FBI does to encourage, equip and enable those potential jihadists to do something they might have thought about doing, but might not have actually done without the persuasion of their FBI enablers.

Our government tells us we must give up our 4th Amendment rights in order to travel on airplanes and trains.

Our government tells us — through the Department of Homeland Security — that Tea Party members, 2nd Amendment supporters, people with Ron Paul bumper stickers, people who waive Gadsden flags, people who oppose the Federal Reserve, and former military members are potential domestic terrorists. Our government tells us that anti-government thoughts equate to a crime.

What will the government tell us when it decides that it is no longer convenient to have some of these people around?  Are we a nation of laws? Or are we a nation in which the government — or a secret cabal — can just decide to murder whomever it wishes?

The U.S. Constitution is only a piece of paper.

Our government, by its actions, has told us this is so.

Bob Livingston

is an ultra-conservative American who has been writing a newsletter since 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Cognitive Dissonance”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • simian pete

    Good points in the article, Mr. Livingston. The causes of the Civil War is somewhat more complex. Virginia was the strongest militarily, and should have prevailed. If the Johnny Rebs had just taken, and occupied Washington DC early in the conflict – they would have won.

    Oh well, maybe better luck next time ? HA HA ! That’s a joke !!

    • Thor

      I gotta hand it to you, Bob, much of this is right on target. On the other hand you allow very little wiggle room for legitimate enemies of state. While political regimes may be corrupt to the core, I still have faith in the system as a whole. And while you have some good examples to illustrate your point, I don’t think al-Awlaki fits the mold.

      Here is some evidence that is every bit as credible as that on, say, the Haskell observations, etc. linked to this posting.

      The 14th Amendment—states:

      “Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

      I believe this is the section of interest here.

      The Supreme Court’s ruling in Afroyim v. Rusk stated that no one who had acquired U.S. citizenship through birth or naturalization in the United States could lose that citizenship without his or her consent. This was the Earl Warren court. [The two most recent and quoted decisions on this issue both evolve from what was essentially a Brennan-Warren court—the most liberal panel of justices of all times; none of you ‘ultra-conservatives’ could possibly be in ideological favor of that! But we won’t go there now.]

      Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U. S. 253, 292 (1967).To the contrary, [the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause] was expected, and should now be understood, to leave Congress at liberty to expatriate a citizen if the expatriation is an appropriate exercise of a power otherwise given to Congress by the Constitution, and if the methods and terms of expatriation adopted by Congress are consistent with the Constitution’s other relevant commands.

      Vance v. Terrazas, 444 U.S. 252 (1980)– the Supreme Court decided, the U.S. government continued to hold to the view that intentionally performing an action which Congress had designated as “expatriating” could be interpreted as clear evidence of the type of consent to relinquish U.S. citizenship mandated by the Afroyim decision. The Court ruled that intent to give up U.S. citizenship had to be proven by itself and could not simply be inferred from a person’s having performed an action designated by Congress as expatriating. The determination of whether a U.S. citizen had indeed given consent to loss of citizenship, however, could be made upon a preponderance of evidence (ABA Journal: 374. March 1980).

      In the opinion of Justice White, “…the trier of fact must conclude ‘the citizen not only voluntarily committed the expatriating act’ but ‘also intended to relinquish his citizenship.’” Furthermore, “just because Congress is devoid of the power to impose expatriation on a citizen [involuntarily], it does not follow that it is without the power to prescribe evidentiary standards to govern expatriation proceedings, a power rooted in Article 1, Section 1, clause 8, of the Constitution.” This gives Congress the power to review and legislatively test powers not specifically mentioned in the Constitution and to (with Judicial review) assign power where it feels necessary—such as passing the Patriot Act.

      “The PATRIOT Act has made a number of changes to U.S. law. Key acts changed were the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA), the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986 and Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), as well as the Immigration and Nationality Act.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act; retrieved 100911, 2:20pm.) You can read more about the specific changes to the law here. The Executive Branch, in the person of the Commander and Chief, has the power to act on the evidence; Congress has the power to respond to that action legislatively. It hasn’t.

      Now, regardless how you may feel about the law itself, it was the law at the time Awlaki was sanctioned and still is because Obama extended it for four years by executive degree. If we are to be a nation under the rule of law then we should allow those acting on our behalf to act in accordance even with those laws we don’t like—until we change them.

      The preponderance of evidence against Awlaki resides in two purviews: openly, on the internet; hear his speeches and sermons yourself at the websites below; and in the archives of the intelligence community, archives of material gathered under the law of the land and because of national security issues, evidence you and I do not have access to at present.

      All the above is of course real proof of only one valid point: the issue of citizenship has been debated since 1868 (and it has yet to be decided) and further that it is immaterial when acting against both foreign and domestic enemies.

      In the end, it is irrelevant in this case. Citizen or not, Awlaki was an enemy combatant.

      The Proof against Al al-Awlaki in his own words:

      http://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?p=anwar+al+awlaki+lectures&tnr=18&b=91

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki

      http://kalamullah.com/anwar-alawlaki.html

      http://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?p=anwar+al+awlaki+lectures&tnr=18&b=55

      http://www.alghurabaa.org/lectures/awlaki/

      The best and most direct evidence from Awlaki himself is not available to many non-believers because they do not speak Mughreb Arabic and they do not trust anyone to translate it for them. Most of the evidence gathered by the intelligence community is therefore invalidated simply because it was produced by a process of which many disapprove, by people they do not trust; therefore, it would not be believed, even if it were revealed to them, unless it were entitled ‘The Pumpkin Papers’ or ‘The Pentagon Papers.’ If anyone were to tell such folk that he has independent and personal verification and validation of same, they would merely brand him a conspirator, too—so, that about eliminates all the evidence I can present…and, as you often say, Bob, ‘so much for independent thinking.’

      Independent thinking is one thing; ignoring plain evidence for the purpose of coming to an ‘independent’ conclusion is fallacious logic.

      My final take on the issue is that Anwar al-Awlaki was an enemy of the US, Europe and the West—so, declared in his own words. And this is not a simple case of someone exercising his free speech in a foreign country like Dixie Chicks in London. The man was an enemy combatant. For those of you skeptical about the ‘combatant’ status, I would point out that if CIA operatives in the field are combatants even though they are not shooting at someone at the time they are blown up and are thus fair game then so is the Al Quaeda English language blogger-in-chief who supported terrorism ideologically and substantially in a leadership role. Historically, it has been an effective strategy to take out the enemy’s command and control combatants. As an enemy combatant, he was located on the battlefield and terminated as such, making it immaterial whether or not he was a US citizen.

      This I accept as an act of faith, based on a preponderant plethora of evidence you folks refuse to accept. On this point we will always disagree until you change your mind.

      Much of this confusion could easily have been cleared up with a touch of cogent, surgical legislation. Neither the Geneva Convention nor the US Constitution has been updated to address the issue of the status of stateless terrorists, citizenship and enemy combatants. This is something that needs to be done; but, it seems all the powers that be still find refuge and opportunity in the legal chaos.

      • Barry

        Nothing you referenced has any legitimate or legal grounds…we have no constitution. All your airy fairy trying to sound intelligent is exactly what has gotten us to this point of Goverment control.Both sides must operate within the same rule of law.
        You would even argue that the 2nd amendent dosn’t say or mean the right to keep and bear arms.

        • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

          The 2nd amndment is not that hard to understand, although the ACLU and other heinous organizations are always trying in court to claim it says otherwise. The money spent by these heinous groups to uphold this simple amendment has been atricious for the simple fact some people believe a gun can reach out and kill you without anyone pulling the trigger, the gun has a mind of it’s own. Th 2nd amendment certainly does give you and me the right to bear arms, and the amendment was easily ratified , and for a singular reason.

          • Curry

            Beg to differ on the Second Amendment, which speaks as well to the purpose of the Bill of Rights as a whole…the right to free speech, self defense, privacy of persons and papers preceded the Declaration of Independence. In this document, our founding fathers proclaimed these rights to be from God and were inalienable. It was tyranny to attempt to remove from the people what God had gifted to all humanity. Therefore, the presence of only some of our rights as enumerated in the Bill of Rights does not mean that any or all were created when the Bill of Rights was ratified, nor does it mean that at some future date or by means of some political act we now ‘have’ these rights and others not specifically listed. Quite rather, the Bill of Rights is a tacit warning to the federal government that its purpose is to protect our freedom and rights from the foreign invader and more significantly, it is to protect our freedom and rights by restraining itself from becoming a domestic tyrant. This is the purpose of the Bill of Rights.

          • alex

            the aclu has an attention span that is only long enough to read half of the statement in the first amendment the second half states they shall make no laws prohibiting the free practice there of

      • DaveH

        Cognitive Dissonance.

      • TML

        I stopped reading your rubbish when you began defending the Patriot Act.

        • professor

          I don’t buy any of it!

          America has to be able to identify the enemy, even if he happened to be born on our land. Sometime, there is a need for “common sense and reason!”

          If we didn’t allow illegal aliens to come here and birth their illegals kids, and we, then, call those kids, “citizens,” we wouldn’t have this problem! We have put little value on “citizenship to America!”

          • professor

            I didn’t read the entire article, either. But, I don’t believe that killing Awlaki has put any American in more danger than he was before Awlaki was,”taken out!” That is possibly the only good thing that this regime has done, in my opinion. (Who really knows about Bin Laden.)

            As for the rest, I never have liked Lincoln and haven’t understood why this country made him a “hero.” Pitting American brothers-against-brothers, made Lincoln a monster.. But, this has nothing to do with Awlaki, A terrorist born of illegal alien parents,from Yemen! Awlaki was taken back to Yemen and that is where he grew up.
            He was not an American because his illegal alien mother had the opportunity to “drop him,” here.

            Do I believe that Americans may be in danger from this government…yes. But, reasonable people can see the difference between a real American and someone like this brat from Yemen..

            The difference between our government slaughtering American and an Iraqi dictator slaughtering his own people, is that Americans still bear their firearms.. That is the reason the Constitution gave us the “right to bear arms,” for protection from a tyrannical government.
            I will start to worry when the UN soldiers are sent knocking on our doors to confiscate our personal firearms..

            I am not worried because of the fact that Middle East dictators like to purge their countries of people they don’t like. THat has been going on for Centuries. But, maybe the fact that there is an illegal alien arab, in our White House…means the killing of citizens might be given more consideration. Whose fault is that….stupid American voters! On one hand, they deserve getting exactly what they wanted!
            And, yes, I am mad because these idiots have effected my family and there future.

          • DaveH

            Individual Freedom and Morality is more important than any “citizenship”.
            All anybody can ask is for us to treat them like we would want to be treated ourselves.

          • professor

            Dave, that and a nickel won’t get you a Starbuck’s coffee.

            There is no morality when it comes to terrorists! That is true lib-thinking. Terrorists only have the Koran…it tells them to kill us, by any means possible! They don’t have our value system, and they are not seeking anything but our annilation.. Certainly, they are not seeking any kind of “treatment,” or approval from us.

          • DaveH

            That and a nickle will get you killed, Professor, by some fanatical Leader who has painted you to be some crazed animal who deserves no day in court. You are naive to think they have no beef, and deserve no defense. Every war we’ve been in has resulted in our Leaders convincing the citizens that their enemies are less than human. Yet before and after the war we might get along with them just fine.
            The people I fear the most are the self-righteous blindered followers who can justify any amount of immorality if it furthers the cause of their gang.

          • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

            It seems Bob’s article is pointing toward the only side he wants you to believe, his side. I have seen the terrorist Al on tape and it was shown on internet stating efernal jihad against all Americans, stating them(which means USA) or us(the terrorist of evil)doctrine and calling upon all true Muslims to join the ause and death to America. Now you can rationalize that it was fake, but it did not seem near as fake as the hogwash I have seen on this same board as relating to 9/11, etc that have people almighty convinced that George By God Bush was the true enemy. Anyone who believes only that kind of one sided propaganda is purely and totally mad.
            And Yes, Abraham Lincloln did suspend habeas corpus, etc. He did fight the war to win as he said he would prior to being elected. But, he did not lock up all dissenters of his total war effort, if that was the case, Horace Greely would never have seen the light of day, Horace Greely was one of his main powerful critics,, besides the men in how own cabinet, Steward, the dimwit Salmon Chase, etc.He locked up editors of newpapers from Philidelphia and other cities who appeared to be working with the South and therefore a hinderandce to the effort to retain our nation as one. Pa and Maryland were hotbeds of Southern resistance. Some cities were totally Southern yet the rest of cities in the state was total Union. He used what some may deem powers beyond him to bring these folks into the fold in order to win the war. You may rest assured, if Ron Paul were Pres or by some miracle is elected, or anyone else you may name, they would not let any state secede from the Union of the United States of America without violnt force when th talk was done, Thank God. And I am Southern and proud of it but I have read enough about the subject from different authors where I think some might have told the opposite side according to Bob.

          • professor

            Dave, I have to disagree, once again.

            Our armies are not immoral criminals, fighting against “innocent enemies!” If that is what you believe,you are the one that is naive, and that can get you killed much quicker!

            I do not believe in, “blaming America first!”

      • Lost in Paradise

        Yawn! Brrrrrrapp! whew that felt good, but stinks.

      • Vicki

        Thor writes a long diatribe on the legality of murdering US Citizens.
        This includes the following:
        “This I accept as an act of faith, based on a preponderant plethora of evidence you folks refuse to accept. On this point we will always disagree until you change your mind.”

        Hummm, Faith. Interesting. Now let us look at the Supreme law of the land.

        No person shall be ….. deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;….”
        http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am5.html (so you can see the other parts.)

        I did not see anywhere in Thor’s list of excuses for murder anything that changed the 5th amendment in a legal manner. Tyrants always claim they are acting “within the law”. Law that THEY wrote.

        • Vicki

          Now let us look at “due process” since the public school system is woefully inept at teaching what words mean. (E.G. Clinton apparently had no idea of the meaning of ‘is’ and the lawyers and court did not laugh him out of the room.)

          “Due process means, for example, that an individual accused of a crime* is guaranteed certain legal procedural rights, such as the right to know the charges against him, to confront his accusers in court, to have legal counsel, and to have a jury trial. These and other rights of the accused are specified in the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments to the Constitution.”
          http://familyrightsassociation.com/educate/rights/

          These problems with the tyrant King George were well known to the founders
          who often found themselves thrown in jail or murdered without benefit of any of the above. The founders even listed in the Declaration of Independence why they chose to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another.

          • Vicki

            Let’s now look at the list of reasons given.
            http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

            Look thru the list and see how many are currently valid grievances between us and our government. Note that many of them did not start with Obama but his hope and non-change perpetuates the offenses.

            He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
            He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
            He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
            He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
            He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
            He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
            He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
            He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
            He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
            He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
            He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
            He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
            He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
            For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
            For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
            For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
            For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
            For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
            For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
            For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
            For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
            For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
            He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
            He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
            He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
            He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
            He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

      • Boo-Hoo

        Why this article is important! First I’m glad that Awhacky is gone.

        But you must consider this. He was an American citizen. The government without trial or legal recourse ASSINATED an American citizen.

        Why is this wrong? BECAUSE IT SETS A PRECEDENCE! The government has now decided on this precedence.

        Why is his dangerous? BECAUSE IT CAN CONSIDER YOU A THREAT for whatever reason to THEIR POWER. Not you the American citizen. Anwhacky was not a threat to America, he was a threat TO THEM!

        And in irony, Anhwacky was an America citizen. The government has just declared war ON YOU!

        • Curry

          “…has just delcared war on you”. Say what? Suggest you review the events surrounding Randy Weaver…certainly his wife was not the first American to die at the hands of our own government. I once worked with a man who spent three of his six years in the military in North Vietnam after 1975, keeping tabs on the POWs who were deliberately left behind. Oh, we should be thankful for what we do not know…

          • Boo-Hoo

            The object of government is to be worshipped. I do not worship MY government. They are my servants.

            The servant is now killing the masters! Anwhacky does not worship my government. So they killed him.

      • http://DoULoveJesus.Wordpress.com Mark Dabney

        You mention the so called 14th amendment – but can we touch on a rather profound question: can it rightly be called an amendment when it was coerced upon the south in a state of martial law? The tragic joke was – to be ‘readmitted’ the confederate states had to ratify the sad joke of the 14th erstwhile amendment that asserted that anyone that fought for states rights was in ‘rebellion’ and lost their right to run for office or even vote. How can we be readmitted when the point of the whole war was our right to leave – now you admit we, the confederates were right all along – but not by leaving us alone – which is all we asked in the first place – but demanding that we ratify something that we cannot do until we are ‘readmitted’.

        The south was looted and coerced into accepting the surrender of God given unalienable rights in exchange for – note this: “privileges and immunities” – those rights have been further shredded because without our informed consent – when each of us took social security numbers – we came into the jurisdiction of the territories of the district of Columbia as corporations [legal fictions] in the outward form of human beings.

        To restore the republic – we must first be honest with where we are – we are the plutocratic oligarchy with the outward trappings of a representative government that the founders warned us AGAINST. From there we need to look at what OUGHT TO BE and what can reasonably and realistically be done to converge what is and ought to be.

        • http://gunner689 gunner689

          That is why the Civil War is known as the Northern War of Agression even today in the South. The real issue then as now is States Rights as opposed to the Federal Gvts. Rights. These are all spelled out clearly in the Constitution. Our enemies in D.C. want the Constitution destroyed piecemeal, as it stands in the way for their plans for a one world gvt.

      • Al

        On those that were killed being called, “Citizens”. The people you are refering to, renounced their allegiance to this country. That is an
        act of, “Treason”, along with their complicit acts of collusion with those who are actively participating in a holy war, (Jihad) against his former country. The person was on TV, associated with the enemy.
        You seem to be one of those who like to convolute the law to fit your own agenda. in your case it is, GIGO, Garbage in and Garbage out.

      • professor

        Thor, sometimes “common sense” must override laws that are inadequate in certain situations. Laws guide the country, but there has to be some allowance, for when it is time to, “do the right thing for America.”

        People are inserting themselves in Awlaki’s position, how incredulous is that! Awlaki wasn’t any-one’s idea of a real American. Those that, “refuse to see things as they are,” can be a danger to this country. People are supporting an enemy, in Awlaki…when, they know that he actively recruited a foreign army against them and their country! This is incomprehensible to me, as a Patriot.

        Political correctness has no place in war! We used to be a strong people, we fought to win. This country is on its way out, not only because of communism, or “equal justice.” It is on the way out because many Americans lack the ability to deal with a more complicated world!

        This blind support of a proven terrorist, is a good example.
        The fact that he was born in this country to “illegal aliens from Yemen,” should be important. The fact that “he grew up in Yemen and hated America,” should be important. These are facts, not false accusations!

        Americans that blindly defend this terrorist.. a well-known enemy, responsible for the death of American soldiers, and caught on a foreign battlefield… should be as guilty of a crime against this country….as was Awlaki! Support and sympathy for the enemy has a name…that of, Traitor.

        The Constitution has been misinterpreted by the radicals, for their own purpose..that of gaining votes. People need to quit supporting this outrageous misinterpretation. Our founders would be aghast at the act of bestowing American citizenship on foreigners, born of illegal aliens that are breaking our laws. It is unbelievable that Americans would support such a law. “Citizenship” should be something that is not easily obtained. It should be something of great value! It should not be given to criminals, as a reward for breaking our laws!

        • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

          Dear professor,

          So for you, one law is sacrosanct but another can be violated on a whim? That, my friend, is cognitive dissonance.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

          • professor

            Dear Bob,

            Yes, there are “bad laws,” and this country has many of them. And, sometimes they are, “not applicable.” It doesn’t pay to be blind. to the facts, in an effort to support a bad law.

            Common sense and self-preservation must reign, in this country, or we are lost!

      • Frogbalz

        Maybe all you lawyers can hold discussion groups in the FEMA Camps, MORONS!!!

      • Average Joe Patriot

        Hey, Thor, it hasn’t occurred to you that, given both your and our government’s reasoning, you may be somewhere down there on the list? For all your legal references, where will you stand when your number comes up? When objection to the State’s un-voted-upon activities defines you as a potential “enemy combatant” while sitting in your office chair?

        (Bear in mind, the majority of the populace apparently voted to stop the wars that are still going on, wantonly slaughtering sovereign innocents under our flag. Let us have no more machine-gunned villages, we use mindless drones, now. We’ve become…civilized.)

        My number will no doubt come up ahead of yours. Mine is 30-30, unless .357 comes up ahead in their numbering system.

        What’s yours, Thor? They won’t get to kill me cheaply, no matter what I personally think, or they think I think, or they think I may be up to thinking or saying. And if I survive the initial attack, believe me I’ll work my way up the chain as far as I can get. THAT is the American way, as seen at Concord/Lexington and Breed’s (Bunker) Hill. Officers first.

        There may indeed be precedents for assassinating American civilians, who cares? There are precedents for shooting back at wanton killers, from whatever source, wearing whatever uniform. The merest babe murdered in Atlanta, had he or she survived, would have every right to grow up and shoot General Sherman through his nearest eyeball.

        I wouldn’t blink, and he wouldn’t have time to.

      • James

        Thor, Nice brief, I wasn’t aware of that case-law. The Article I, Section 1 clause 8, should have been Article I, Section 8, Clause 1, usually referred to as the welfare clause. In our early history, that clause was never considered to be a delegation of power, but was only a leadin statement to the express powers that were delegated below it. The Court reasoned if providing for the general welfare was a power, then Congress could pass whatever legislation they pleased, by that clause alone, and the judicial branch would be hard pressed to declare any such law unconstitutional.

    • patrick H.T. paine

      “To conquer, first divide.”

      “So let it be written, so let it be done.” Ramasees II, according to
      C.B. Demille. These events so critical to the hebrew tale, do not rate even casual mention from any egyptian source.

      That the south failed can be clearly laid at the feet of Davis and Lee, for fighting the war in exactly the wrong way…..and even with Jackson dead, the correct strategy was still available at Gettysburg.
      See Bevin’s latest work, Sun Tzu at Gettysburg, although he has covered this in other works……D.C only had to be threatened, not directly attacked……it could have been isolated and cut off by moving east, to Baltimore and Philadelphia. But the winners still write history for a little while; the Hannibal myth has lasted a very long time…….who after Cannae, a battle of very bad generals on the Roman side, between essentailly equal forces…..Hannibal was completely checked by a single legion for his entire stay in Italy.
      ( see The Punic Wars, Brian Caven )

      We are headed for “interesting times”, the question is, how long will government, at the federal level keep attempting to forstall the “capital destruction” that they have been attempting, since the
      “bailout”.

      What is most interesting about this is that “governments” at all levels are stuck with “unfunded liabilities”, so just how neccessary
      government services ARE…..will be tested…..and they are way overpriced.

      Education is kinda like the health care system…..if at all possible,
      stay as far away from it as you can.

      “Do not ask for whom the bell tolls……..”

    • Bill

      I have said for many years, that the wrong side won the Civil War. All of our problems with a massive central government can be traced back to there!

      • Jonhu

        We haven’t had a civil war, yet.

        • Charlie

          Sometime ago, a southern lady heard somebody talk about the civil war. She replied with “Sir.. there was nothing civil about that war”

      • http://donthaveone Beberoni

        I have often thought of what it would have been like if the south had one, and though Im from the north and have always lived in the north, I think we would be a much better, much stronger, much closer nit nation had the south won. And no, I do not think there would still be slavery, not at all. But I dont think we would have all this political correctness baloney either. Its too bad that we will never know.

    • ron

      Dear Bob, first I find it hard to believe you are the patriot you claim when you seem to be crying for so called citizens who sought the destruction of this great nation yet you and most of your readers seem to dismiss the OWS people as some how un-American. Your argument about the civil war is very disturbing because R. E. Lee was supposed to be a soldier first and, as a soldier was to preserve the union. He should have been court – martialed and executed after the war. As should have Jefferson Davis. Now here we are in present day 21st century and you are being a bleeding heart conservative for a known terrorist. What’s next, will you attempt to bring Obama to justice for sanctioning the killing of Bin Laden???? If Obama says republicans in congress have great smiles they would smash themselves in the face to prove him wrong and then charge him with assault. Lets not let our hatred for Obama blind us to terrorist who’s intent it is to harm us American or not.

      • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

        Dear ron,

        My tears are not for al-Awlaki and Khan but are for the shredding of our Constitution. Article 3 Section III defines Treason, what is required to convict a person of Treason who sets the punishment. Amendments 5, 6 and 8 define the rights everyone has under the U.S. system of justice. Please read it and see for yourself.

        The assassination denied those two men of all those rights. Who decided that those men did not deserve the same rights as every other person–rights granted not by government but by God? Obama and a secret cabal. You say al-Awlaki is a “known” terrorist. Known by who? Certainly not you. The only “evidence” you have is the word of the government–a government that has lied in the past, as I pointed out.

        As to your criticism of my argument about the Civil War, it is obvious you know little about the period. Lee was offered by Lincoln the command of the entire Union army. He declined and gave up his commission because his loyalty was to Virginia, not the U.S. Since he was no longer a U.S. soldier, he could not be court martialed as he was no longer subject to military justice. The attitude of many if not most people prior 1861 was their loyalty was to their state. They believed they were citizens of their states first and the U.S. second. Why? Because that is what the Founders intended. I suggest you study colonial and early American history and the writings of the Founders.

        You write: “…and you are being a bleeding heart conservative for a known terrorist.” That is an oxymoron.

        I chose to live in a nation of laws. Too many people, amped up on the state propaganda surrounding the false flag terrorist events prompted by the shadow government, have chosen to live in a nation where men mold the law to fit their agenda. My question to you is: When the government decides that you have violated one of its laws, do you want to live in a nation that affords you the rights that come from God, or do you want to live in a nation where men determine whether you live or die based on their whims?

        If you say the latter, then you remain in a state of cognitive dissonance.

        Best wishes,
        Bob

        • http://donthaveone Beberoni

          Bob, your post was very well written and has made me see something I didnt before and I thank you for that, as I see the error in my way of thinking. It was wrong to go in and kill these guys. However, I still hold to the point that for everything we do, there is a consequence of it, and right or wrong, if I do something to really tick someone off, I do need to be aware they may come looking for me, and that I had better be prepared for it. Now having said that, if the government or controlling authorities come looking for me for some reason or even no reason at all, I have prepared myself for that, and all of us have years here on earth that are numbered. Last time I checked, one out of one die. I have prepared myself, or I really should say it has be prepared for me, as to what happens after I leave here. Man has no hold on me, nor should I fear any man. My God is a little bigger than that, so that is what I hold true to. If man comes and whacks me, he is probably doing me a favor, and alleviating me from ever worrying about a thing or feeling pain or anything bad ever again. I have that hope, and that is what sustains me. Without that hope, there would absolutely be no point in living life. It is an absurd thought to me, to be here, die, go into the ground and thats it. There would be no point to it. Besides that, I know, and Ive been shown, there is much more that awaits us. One way, or the other.

        • ron

          Thanks for the response Bob, but we will continue to disagree. This is not the first time this has happened. Ask the family of Fred Hampton. I do not question your love for the constitution and Ihope mine is not in question. I for one did not want to wait around for more proof of how dangerous that idiot was. I do know a little something about the civil war but I know more about a soldiers duty. I think the president should have arrested Lee prior to and certainly after he took up arms against the country. As a former soldier I can tell you that it is duty honor country. Not duty honor state. That is why soldiers should never get political. A soldier’s loyalty is to God and country. Lee’s loyalty was to a state. He committed treason. But enough of that. He lost and that’s that. Besides this is not the first time the constitution has ben somewhat overlooked or worked around. Aks the family of Fred Hampton.

        • Average Joe Patriot

          Except for invocation of the “God” part (I’m not an athiest, nor an agnostic, I just doubt our Supreme Being works the way most folks wish He/She did), I’m on this page with you, Livingston.

          Excellent piece.

          When they start, without basic law, monitoring and selectively killing off naysayers, one had best start watching the clock. Can lynch mobs, firing squads, prison camps and gas ovens be far behind?

          Seriously, who’s next? It wouldn’t surprise your next door neighbor if it was you, the things you’ve said…or…did you?

          Doesn’t matter, they’ve lined your children up beside the pit. They must have listened to you at dinner.

      • oldtimeyman

        Ron, a soldier’s oath is to preserve the Constitution – NOT the “union” or a president or an ephemeral “government.” Robert E. Lee proved he was a great American by standing for the Constitution.

        • ron

          I respectfully disagree with you Sir. Robert E Lee committed treason.

    • Marcus Aurelius

      I think a very important thing needs to be remembered in this discussion our government had the patriot act drawn up before 9-11. Everyone reading this article needs to think about this very carefully. 911 was an inside job to set up this police state so the government could call anyone against their agenda a terrorist plain simple. You don’t like the wars terrorist. You don’t like the fed terrorist. You don’t like banks you are a terrorist and so on. This man should have had a trial. This sets a precedent you step over the line this time and its ok? I fail to understand. the president needs to be impeached for starting wars without congressional approval and for assassinating an American citizen. Sadly this will not fix the problem because the bankers will still be in charge.

    • Sutekh

      Our country has been on the path to dictatorship ever since Marbury v. Madsion, when the Supreme Court “interpreted” the Constitution to say that the Supreme Court has the duty and right to interpret the Constitution.

      That is the most circular logic I’ve ever seen. And the current logic of the court is no better, as we are discussing in this thread. I could interpret the 14th Amendment as referring only to those who had already been born in the U.S. at the time the Amendment was passed, since the term “are” might need to be replaced by “are and shall be citizens” to include future generations of anchor babies.

    • Bruce Barron

      Your right:the South should have and could have won and we wouldn’t have had any difficulty freeing the slaves either.

      • ron

        So I assume by your reasoning the South took a dive. Never looked at it that way. Good thing American forces did not do that on D-Day or we would all be speaking German now.

  • s c

    The progressives are already circling, so I’ll take a few moments to add that Egypt has opened a door that can’t be shut. Egypt’s utopian, retrograde version of America’s space cadets has dared to embrace Nazi ‘ideals.’ Apparently, Germany’s little stormtrooper didn’t teach them anything back in WWII. In an attempt to prove to the world that Egypt will not be left behind, “racial superiority” is now a national goal there.
    How Egypt will be able to achieve true racial superiority and not look at Israel in any hostile fashion will be most interesting. Probably, they’re taking the same damned drugs that America’s moonbats, space cadets, wingnuts, lemmings, two-legged sheep and utterly certifiable losers love to take on a daily basis.
    Sanity, it seems, is expendable, especially when ‘God/Allah’ is on a recruiting campaign. I have doubts about Egyptians being able to become socially just or able to build a tent big enough to hold enough eugenics experts to get the job done. Like they say in la la land, just tip that bottle up and take a big swig. It will burn at first, but you’ll get used to it. It’s the “effect” that matters – not the initial pain.

    • DaveH
      • s c

        DaveH, I’d say that back then, Israelis had to choose between being diplomatic and doing what they had to do to survive. I’m not an insider, but I doubt that that Israeli intelligence was developed well enough to rely on themselves. Ergo, if they relied on much intel from outside sources, it would have resulted in decisions that may or may not have been made 10 or 20 years later.
        Throw in the idea that some claim to be Jews (and aren’t), and it gets complex in a hurry. Everyone has to answer for what they do in life, and Israelis/Jews are no different. I’m willing to bet that even Israelis have people in their midst who might as well be Muslims. We have our professional ‘unimpeachable’ traitors, too.

        • KHM

          @ SC,
          You bet there are people, in fact I know of at least one group of lefties in Israel that would like to see Israel cease to exist. Am not sure what they think would be better. But logic and Left is an oxymoron.
          Our country is at a critical juncture in history. We are being divided and the question is (1) Does the USA survive? and (2) What will our country look like,or be like?
          I think we need to get out of telling other countries who should be in power and tend to our own freedom more.

          • theotherrhalf

            Tell that to Dick Cheney.

          • http://donthaveone Beberoni

            Note to theotherhalf: Dick Cheney isnt in power, and hasnt been for almost 4 years. He is an old man, who probably wont be alive for 5 more years. He has no say so in matters. You need to address current issues, and quit beating the dead dogs. We know its all the fault of Bush/Cheney/Halliburton. Everythings is their fault. My foot hurts and its their fault. The sun is in my eyes and its their fault. Obama attacked Libya and its their fault. Next subject please.

        • James

          Biblically, to be an Israelite one must be a descendent of Abraham’s son Isaac, and Isaac’s son Jacob/Israel. Romans 9:1-13.

    • Al

      Why do we use the term Race, when there is only one race occupying this planet, Homo Sapiens, the human race. Might need to address them
      as another culture?????

      • professor

        Political correctness, “Gone Wild.”

        The last time I heard a “wishful lib” comment about his desire for all the different races in the world to become, “one,” I thought he was literally insane. This guy actually was talking about breeding out all differences,,,,and homogenizing the human race…Everyone would look the same, speak the same language, and have the same intelligence… It was not God’s vision of the world, but the vision of an insecure, resentful, “nutcase.”

        • Average Joe Patriot

          Count me as one, “a nutcase.” If we Planet Earthians ever have a future, and we keep having wars shipping our pubescent sons and daughters all over the planet, we’ll all be beige in the fullness of time.

          You misdoubt that this was God’s Plan? I think that’s second-guessing the long-range thinking of your Creator. A no-no. Not to worry, He/She factored you in, as well. SHe included exploration and evolution.

          Check out the history, there’s a strong possibility you’ll come back as a mulatto-Chinese off-white person. Colored beige. If there’s anything to this reincarnation stuff. Me, I’m in a holding pattern.

        • James

          Professor, The Bible’s chronology dates Adam’s creation in 5407 BC, and prior to that date there is no evidence of White man’s presence, here. The Yellow race can be traced back thousands of years before that date, and the Black race can be traced back millions of years before it. The Bible says “kind begets like kind,” nor has any man ever seen otherwise.

    • James

      The only reason Egypt hasn’t destroyed Israel is because we give them $1.3 billion per year in foreign aid, and we give Israel about ten times that.

  • Clint

    Good article Mr. Livingston. Whoever wins the wars gets to describe history. After discovering terrific websites like yours along with many others the last few months, I have been smitten with D.D.D. associated with congnitve dissonance. Debility, Dependence and Dread. All part of a mass psyops program. I really admire people like yourself that tries to inform others of reality. Hopefully, I can start doing something that will allow me to be independent and still help others and make for a better tomorrow.

    • Karolyn

      “Whoever wins the wars gets to describe history.”

      I never really thought about that. Quite an eye-opener. Although there are still many authors with their own viewpoints.

      • DaveH

        You can only make that decision, Karolyn, if you start reading some of them.

        • Karolyn

          Dave – You don’t know what I read, and why do you have to respond to my posts anyway? Just to try to pi$$ me off?

          • DaveH

            There goes another outburst from Karolyn, the fount of Liberal Compassion. You’re coming fully out of the closet, aren’t you Karolyn?

          • Karolyn

            Dave – Even the best of us can get perturbed when constantly baited. At least I admit I’m not perfect like you, nor would I want to be.

          • Average Joe Patriot

            Don’t necessarily love what you say (though often I do), who is this “Dave” $#!+head? Strikes me as a paid troll. I love these guys.

            You’ve apparently been targetted.

      • http://donthaveone Beberoni

        In this day and age, it needs to be added that whoever is in power in those countries who wrote history, also get to re-write history to read it the way they think it should be read. Seems like there is a lot of that going around these days also.

  • Karolyn

    How can you say the government tells us the things about the Civil War when it is the authors of the books and their viewpoints that provide that information? I live in South Carolina, and there was burning of towns here except for one, which, it is said, Sherman favored because of its quaintness and beauty. I have also heard that Sherman was not the one who ordered all the destruction but that it was his company commanders who took it on themselves to allow their men to go wild. There are so many different views and opinions on what happened in the past. Since no one was there, the only things we have to go on are archival materials from those who were alive at the time and the stories passed down through generations.

    Should children be taught the truth? (whatever that is) I don’t know that it would help in any way to teach children that Lincoln was bad. Of course, as they get older, they should be shown both sides of the story. Then it would be too much to learn wouldn’t it?

    • Al Sieber

      Karolyn,I hate to tell you this but the Government lies to us, it’s not hard to figure out. all governments lie to the people, someday you might understand. it sounds like the truth would be to much for you to handle. everyone should know the truth no matter how bad.

    • DaveH

      Do you think it helps those children, Karolyn, to believe a lie?
      Has it occurred to you that most of the people who would write history books are former or current Government Employees? And that since the Government is prone to grow their Power and Perks, that most of them, even on a local level, are going to stick together to feather their own nests? It seems odd to me that so many Liberals, who are quick to judge Corporate Officers as self-centered and evil, turn a blind eye to the fact that those same self-centered and evil people can occupy Government. And in that case they have much more power to abuse since they can use Force on the citizens, unlike the Corporate Officers who can only please the consumers to succeed (I’m excluding the Crony Capitalists in that).

      • http://donthaveone Beberoni

        Good points Dave, and pretty powerful points at that. We the people need to keep an eye on our government, and wholesale change them until they finally understand, that if they dont do it right, they are gone. We the people seemingly got into a rut where we kept putting the same guys in over and over and over, without asking questions, and gave them this power to set up their good old boys network where they started scratching each others back while turning their backs on us. We the people determine who goes in there and who doesnt. We need to pay more attention to who we put in there, or at least it appears that way.

    • Vic Bailey

      If we do not teach our children TRUTH, then why teach them at all? That is what is wrong now days, we sugar coat EVERYTHING, make our crooked politicans look like heroes, when they need to be put in prison, which helps nobody but the criminals in our government. Lincoln was America’s First Dictator, and it would have been a lot worse had he not been assinated. Now we have another person that wants to be a Dictator, and he has 70 some Regestered Socialist in Congress to help him get it done. How can a Socialist legally take the oath of office, when the socialist ideas conflict with the Constitution and our way of life? And people wonder why we are in the mess we are in! This is America NOT Russia or China! Semper Fi.

      • Karolyn

        There are grey areas where one man’s “truth” is another man’s “lie”.

        • vicki

          There are no grey areas in Truth. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/truth

          What you BELIEVE to be truth may be in error but that grey area is belief not truth.

          • Karolyn

            Vicki – Many truths are based on belief, such as in religion and spiritual beliefs.

          • vicki

            Karolyn. I gave you the definition of truth. You may accept it or not. Communication will be easier if we both accept the generally agreed on definition listed in the dictionary

        • 45caliber

          Karolyn:

          I think you were alive when Vietnam was fought. Do you remember the Peace Treaty? How it was to arrange “peace in our time”? And remember what happened once most of the troops were pulled out of Vietnam?

          Well, I was glancing through my daughter’s high school history book and ran upon the Vietnam war history. I was surprised since I hadn’t considered it being “history” to the kids until then.

          And what did I see? “The HEROIC (my emphasis) Senators under Senator H.H. Humphrey saved the soldiers after the military lost the war by arranging a TRUCE (my emphasis) long enough to withdraw the troops in safety.”

          All a lie of course. But – how does it help the child to learn the story of Vietnam this way? It lowers their regard for the military and it increases their belief that the Senators work for the good of us all.

          A girl I know found an “error” in her history book. She brought it to the teacher’s attention. The teacher refused to consider it. “This is the way the government wants you to learn it,” the teacher told her. “So this is the way I teach it. And it WILL be on the test this way so you better learn it the way it is in the book!”

          • Karolyn

            45 – Being in school now and studying American History to 1865, I am faced with that type of instructor who has to be right even when wrong. I think they believe they are above us little people. Fortunately, they are not all that way. This particular teacher in question is much younger than me. So far, I have not found much controversy in what I have learned, and we just finished the Revolution. It’s really interesting to see how much has actually stayed the same. I think that studying any history involving events we lived through will be extremely interesting.

        • http://donthaveone Beberoni

          The truth is the truth is the truth. What is errored is mans perception of the truth. We always want to twist it around to fit what we think it should be, but in truth, the truth stays the truth. It is not the truth to one person and not to another. Its that one accepts the truth and the other doesnt want to, so he tries to change it. Such is the error of man.

      • James

        Why do most congressmen say we are a Democracy when the Constitution says we’re supposed to be a Republic?

    • Ret

      Children can handle any truth if taught in an age-appropriate manner. When I was young, a playmate tried to commit suicide. Why? Because her mother told her, and everyone, that her father was dead (they were divorced), and when she was about 12, dear, dead dad appeared at the door with his 2 children from his 2nd marriage.

    • Average Joe Patriot

      It would be too much to relearn, of course. We’re not talking about Santa and the Easter Bunny, here. Children should be taught how babies happen, and how Columbus discovered a new source of slaves while searching for gold. And how Lincoln destroyed the Constitution.

      We live in a grown-up world circumscribed by the notion that ten-year-olds need to be protected from knowledge of the world around them, hairy sex, violence, and drugs. Doesn’t even begin to happen, mostly, in their teddy-bear universe. I think it should. They are justifiably curious, all kids are. Yet we train them for an alternate reality of a kindly government and baby dolls.

      We dance around these facts “for the kids.” It ill prepares them, and affects our adult lives in rather a major way. To some degree, we end up believing in these things (after all, we were brought up on them, too: fairy tales). I say, screw it. They’re going to know stuff sooner or later, put it up front (in many cultures such has not destroyed them).

      So they don’t perceive grown-ups as liars. Which they will when they figure out dogs and flies aren’t just “hugging.” When they figure out that our government has as much love for them as a tarantula does for a desert wasp.

      When they realize Lincoln and Washington and Columbus were far from perfect. That none of is. And it’s not all teddy bears and Easter Rabbits.

      We weren’t born with cognitive dissonance, it was bred into us. Then we went to school.

  • Monte

    Thanks for setting the record straight on Lincoln’s war. He was the nation’s first true dictator and deliberately destroyed the Republic the founders had agreed upon. I find the mass ignorance of this whole topic appalling, disturbing and depressing. To think that almost half of the nation, populated with former presidents and their kin, military officers, congressmen, military officers, cabinet members, and other VIPs’, would all be classified as ‘traitors’ is so far-fetched and unbelievable that I remain incredulous that most people swallow the lie. While the South was very influential in the course of the nation before 1860 (consider how many presidents, vice presidents and other leaders were Southern in the early Republic), since Lincoln’s war the section has only produced the liberal-likes of Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, the complete anti-thesis of Southern conservatism. They are what was called during Reconstruction “scalawags”. Lincoln’s creation of the totalitarian state was placed atop the ruins of our Confederated Republic. And the South has been forever silenced.

    Thank you Bob for telling the truth. Our present enslavement is based upon that whole fabricated myth.

    • kentucky colonel

      agree with you 100% Monte

    • eddie47d

      Southern Newt Gingrich supported the Patriot Act which lead to a loss of civil liberties. George Wallace gave the South a black eye in his defiance and continued segregation. The South more than the rest of the country supported the Vietnam War and kept it’s blinders on in who really started that war with the Gulf of Tonkin government theatrics.Conservatism also get’s us into a whole sh–load of trouble when history is analyzed.

      • Monte

        I’ve read your comments in the past. Normally I see your name and move on. I have nothing to learn from a leftist blow-hard. Newt Gingrich is a carpetbagger in the South. Wallace was about the limits of the central state and their intrution into state matters. Perhaps a brain-dead leftist like yourself sees nothing wrong with a group of secular priests in the god-like central state determining what is morallly right or wrong based solely upon their own god-like opinon. I see it as only tyranny. If you must find someone to level your leftist drivel upon, place it somewhere else than the South. We tuned your type out long ago.

        • F86

          How dare you call yourself a southerner you yankee bastard!

      • DaveH

        So you judge a whole group of people by a handful in their group, Eddie?
        If you would quit boring us with your ignorance long enough to read this book, maybe you could learn some answers to prejudice in the South (on both sides):
        “The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War”.
        Review of book by David Gordon:
        http://mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=207

      • http://norman@cates-family.com Norman F.

        Eddie, did the Patriot Act pass 1-0? George Wallace stopped a riot by standing in the school house door alone to “stop” little black girls from entering. His actions in accepting the court order and telling the crowd to disperse were heroic. If he hadn’t been killed he might have become president. The first support for South Vietnam was sent by Eisenhower, followed by Kennedy and was in active conflict three years before the Gulf of Tonkin

        • iam

          Excuse me, Norman, George Wallace was not killed. Yes, he was shot in 1972, but he died from a bacterial infection in 1998. He ran for the office of the President in 1968, four years before the assassination attempt, and he lost. So, you struck out on both counts.

          • moonbeam

            Yep, and what is so ironic is that after standing in the doorway to prevent that child from entering school, KARMA later came full circle and made a visit with a paralyzing bullet. Wallace sat in a wheel chair, the rest of his life. Never to stand in the way again.

          • Dennis48e

            If I remember correctly Wallace was running again in 72 and projected to either win or have a good chance of winning when he was shot.

          • eddie47d

            Wallace never came close to winning the big prize.

          • http://donthaveone Beberoni

            I believe some revelations about wrong and right came to George Wallace at the end of his days, as he seemed a changed man from what he once was. Funny how those on the left still slam him, yet if he were on the left, they probably would have given him a Nobel Peace Prize after he got shot. Funny how that works out.

      • eddie47d

        Monte; I was only pointing out that extreme Conservatism can be just as onerous as extreme Liberalism which you railed against.

        • Monte

          I believe the left moves forward in this country by incremental steps. After a decade this slow gradual crawl, it represents a leap, when looking back. What is it that accounts for this? It is because there is no wall to stop the movement. Center of the right keeps making concessions after concessions after concessions. When do we say enough is enough? What radical, tyrannical piece of legislation has the Republican Party ever rescinded? The leftist agenda has moved forward to the point that we now have the most extreme left and destructive president in the nation’s history. The Democratic Party represents the parasite class, any supposed ‘oppressed’ group with an axe to grind, communists, socialists, perverts, atheists, anti-Americans… And what is there to counter these extremists? The Republican Party, home of the neocons and middle of the right? What a joke! Meanwhile, we continue on a decline that is accelerating.

          • amagi

            Some very good points, Monte. However, why ‘atheists” ? The ones I know are great defenders of American liberty, which includes the right
            to question any dogma.

          • Karolyn

            Are you seriously sayng that the replublican party has no parasites, perverts, atheists, etc. that you mentioned? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! BTW – What’s wrong with atheists?

          • theotherrhalf

            good god, Obama is to the right of Nixon.

      • http://donthaveone Beberoni

        I dont know where you are from eddie, but I have stayed in the south over 25 times now, and I see more family, friends, God and country down there than I ever see up north. I have been treated kinder down there, and have had friendship offered to me from total strangers who Ive never seen before, and more than once. And to say there are good folks in the north, I just personally find the south to be more friendly and kind and outgoing and giving than I ever have up north. And Ive also been to New York City and I lived in Los Angeles for 4 years, and I assure you, those are two of the coldest places people wise I have ever lived in. You can slam the south if you want, but I believe your showing a prejudice towards them that is based in ignorance, as I wonder if you have ever been down there. Have you?

    • Revere

      Monte,
      The Southern states committed treason & attempted to destroy the Republic the Founding Fathers envisioned, the Union & the Constitution, when the first shot was fired on Fort Sumpter.Therefore, they deserved everything they got. The traitorous South lost. Lincoln & the Union prevailed. God bless him for it.Lincoln was upholding his Oath of Office.

      • Monte

        Yeah, and Hitler was a great hero for the West.

        • eddie47d

          Maybe to Erroll Flynn and Father Coughlin!

          • Opal the Gem

            sarcasm eddie sarcasm

      • DaveH

        Spare us, Revere. Lincoln provoked the attack on Fort Sumter which was in somebody else’s country at the time, and nobody was killed in the firing on Fort Sumter. The Confederacy wanted the Northerners to leave, but Lincoln didn’t want to comply. What would you say if the US wanted the United Nations out of our country and they refused to leave? When Leaders want a war, they always find a way to unite the ignorant masses behind them:
        http://mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=336

        It is not traitorous to break the bonds of a contract (the Constitution) whose terms have already been broken by the other party (the North). What kind of ignorant people think it wrong to leave a relationship that is being severely abused by the other parties? The North was in complete breach of the Constitution and the South had little choice but to leave or suffer further under the abusers.

      • http://donthaveone Beberoni

        Im sure the South had a better idea of how to live than the North. Look how weve ended up today. Had the South won, Im sure we would have been much better off. Im positive of it.

      • Bruce Barron

        The States have every right to secede from the Union.This is a union not a unity.Unity is always better than union and the States under this Constitution are free and independent.Any time the Fed Govt.usurps the principle of subsidiarity,the 10th Amendment,or harms the common good of the State or frustrates its ends they have broken off from the States and abused the powers that the people have delegated to them.There is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting secession.

    • Bruce Barron

      Lincoln and FDR are 2 of the 3 worst statists and centrists this country has ever known.There was a third before Obama came into the picture.Regardless of color in this country it is heading to a kind of slavery for us all.Do you recall who the third was?

      • http://donthaveone Beberoni

        Bill Clinton.

      • James

        LBJ dropped three times more bombs on Vietnam than we dropped on Germany in WW II. Vietnam was no threat to the United States, yet we killed 3.4 million men, women and children there. Why?

        • http://donthaveone Beberoni

          Because LBJ and his big business cronies made millions of dollars escalating that war, with no intent to win. It was all for the sake of them making money. LBJ was a foul mouthed dirty SOB and thats all there was to it, and he sent our young to die, and left many stranded there without sending in back-ups for them. All for money.

          • James

            That’s the first time I’ve heard a reason for that war. Congress didn’t declare war on Vietnam but they did fund it, and I’m sure our plane and bomb factories made a bundle, but why didn’t the press tell us Vietnam was just a testing ground, and profit for our war machine?

  • Lino

    You have a good point Mr. Livingston, but there is such a thing called
    self-defense. Would you rather that more Americans die by the action
    and encouragement of fellow US citizen who wish us all ills or worse, death? Even if the US citizens killed by the predator drone are tried in absentia, would that stop their intention and desire to kill more Americans? Turning the other cheeck does not work very well anymore

    • DaveH

      Has it occurred to you Lino that the reason they want to kill us has nothing to do with us and everything to do with our Power-Hungry Leaders and their Crony Capitalists who claim to represent the rest of us?
      With the amount of ignorance and prejudice we witness daily from our own well-educated citizens, what would you expect from them? They are spoon-fed by their own leaders as much or more than we are.
      Read just this one example of our sneaky Meddling Government to see just a little of the picture:
      http://www.iranchamber.com/history/coup53/coup53p1.php

      This is by no means an isolated event. Sociopathic Leaders in our Government have been plotting and deluding the citizens almost since our country started. “Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely”.

      • Iva Raggon

        A rare moment in which I am i 100% agreement with you.

        Another example: In the Southeast Asian conflict I had special duty involving the collection of information. More often than not facts were ignored and dire action was take based o orders from Washington thousands of miles away from people who had no real idea what was going on. This frequently resulted in the deaths of innocent people who just didn’t want foreigners, be it the French or us, telling them how to run their lives.

        • Iva Raggon

          sorry about the typos.

      • http://donthaveone Beberoni

        I have to disagree with why they want to kill us Dave. Its because we are a majority of a Christian nation. Their jihad against us comes from our religious beliefs differing from theirs. They seey all the un-godliness in this country, with all the pornography, prostitition, murder, sex, half dressed celebrities, and for some reason, they dont realize that Christians dont like that either, but we dont believe in killing someone for being different or doing things we consider wrong in God’s eyes. But they take the position of God, Jury, and Executioner and kill those who they think do wrong, instead of praying for them and trying to help them see a better way. Yet inspite of that, like all the terrorists that drove the planes on 9-11, they had receipts from them from strip clubs and the very things they claim they hate. But that is why they want us gone, they would like to extinguish the light in the world. Plain and simple.

  • Moby49

    I am waiting for your article in support of the Occupy Wall St protests. If there ever was a group that was a threat to the corporatists and the government, they are it.

    • http://www.myhealthoptimizer.com Jeff Bell

      I agree 100%. You have got that right. Decades ago, Henry Ford, speaking in an unguarded moment said, “If Americans really knew what bankers did there would be revolution befopre morning.” He certainly knew what bankers did.

      It is essential that Americans begin to understand what bankers have been dong for centuries and what they are still doing today at unprecidented levels. It is illegal, immoral and murderous. And most don’t even know what they do.

      I find it interesting that not a single banker clearly guilty of fraud, massive theft and worse has even been indicted since 2008 when the U.S. economy collapsed. None have been arrested. And yet, already hundreds of U.S. citizens, protesting what these bankers have done to us all and what they are still doing have been arrested in the few short weeks since the protests began. That is shameful.

      Those wanting to know what the banks have been doing for at least several centuries, and what they are still doing to all the rest of us, shouold read: “The Webt Of Debt” by Ellen Hodgson Brown, J.D. It is the most brilliant expose of what this crimminal cartel is up to. I am surprised she managed to even get it published. It truly spills the beans and tells what these bankers hope we never, ever find out.

      • death to non believers

        if you really believe these “occupy wall st” scum are saints protesting against banks, you are misgiuded. “occupy” is just a name to justify the stopping of all work in the downtwn nyc area. did the march, and traffic stoping, accorss the brooklyn bridge do any harm to “bankers” ? NO ! it was just another excuse to make chaos. they want the nypd to start beating the protestors, to incense more morons to their cause and degrade the nypd. if nyc had a mayor that realy belived in enforcing its laws, the protests would have ended in the first hour, never to be resumed. we cannot feel any synpathy for these protestors. did anyone think of how these maggots can survive without have real private industry jobs ? they dont have jobs, they are leaching from every local/state/federal govt handouts, like food stamps and other disgraceful programs.

        • DaveH

          Actually, the protesters are a diverse group of people, some protesting Crony-Capitalism, others wanting more Socialism or welfare or other goodies from Government, etc.. See here for some Reason on the issue:
          http://reason.com/blog/2011/10/07/what-we-saw-at-the-occupy-wall

          • JeffH

            DaveH, while I agree that there are some very concerned protester, the OWS movement is, in my opinion, made up of a lot of jobless confused liberals with nothing more to do than protest the capitalism and the free market system that they’ve been programmed to despise. I’ve been listening and watching some of the local California protesters and most don’t have any real clue what they’re there for…some have even missed the protests because they only lasted an hour or less, then they end up heading to Starbucks to plan their next disorganised move.

            “About 300 protestors showed up in a downtown Sacramento park Thursday morning to kick off the Occupy Sacramento movement, and they did not take kindly to the the presence of a local CBS reporter. They also couldn‘t agree on why they’re there.

            When the CBS reported asked the organizer of the movement what the 300 protestors were doing there, his response was “right now its kind of vague..as it stands right now that message team will reveal that tomorrow morning.”

            Others listed a litany of random complaints, some with a tenuous connection to being “angry over corporate greed.”

            Another protestor said into the camera, “I‘ve heard it’s anti-capitalist; I’m a socialist, I’m a Marxist communist.”

            But the most vague response of the day went to a young woman who said, “I’m here to support people.”

            And although the Occupy Wall Street movement has been trying to get as much attention and press coverage as possible, many of the unknowing activists became aggressive and yelled at a reporter for asking basic questions. One of them even began to swat at the camera with his hand in response to the reporter’s question.
            http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2011/10/07/some-%e2%80%98occupy-sacramento%e2%80%99-protesters-lash-out-at-questions/

            These protests have the “union mark” pasted all over them.

          • JeffH

            Occupy Wall Street, Powered by Big Labor…Big Labor, including the AFL-CIO, SEIU, and the Teamsters, is going to work: endorsing the protests, offering manpower and resources, and helping stage a major march in New York City’s financial district on Wednesday. They are adding organizing muscle, fresh energy, and greater numbers to the boisterous demonstrations that began in downtown Manhattan more than two weeks ago.

            I’m reminded of former SEIU official, Steven Lerner comments earlier this year…

            Former SEIU Official Reveals Secret Plan To Destroy JP Morgan, Crash The Stock Market, And Redistribute Wealth In America.

            Lerner’s plan is to organize a mass, coordinated “strike” on mortgage, student loan, and local government debt payments–thus bringing the banks to the edge of insolvency and forcing them to renegotiate the terms of the loans. This destabilization and turmoil, Lerner hopes, will also crash the stock market, isolating the banking class and allowing for a transfer of power.

            Lerner’s plan starts by attacking JP Morgan Chase in early May, with demonstrations on Wall Street, protests at the annual shareholder meeting, and then calls for a coordinated mortgage strike.

            Lerner also says explicitly that, although the attack will benefit labor unions, it cannot be seen as being organized by them. It must therefore be run by community organizations.

            The Left’s Economic Terrorism Playbook: The Chase Campaign by a Coalition of Unions, Community Groups, Lawmakers and Students to Take Down US Capitalism and Redistribute Wealth & Power.
            http://www.theblaze.com/stories/revealed-the-lefts-economic-terrorism-playbook-the-chase-campaign-for-a-coalition-of-unions-community-groups-lawmakers-and-students-to-take-down-us-capitalism-and-redistribute-wealth-power/

          • eddie47d

            You have always stood up for corporate swindlers so why should we expect anything else from you. Greed is your creed as you slyly pay homage to the mortgage crooks and their fancy financing. That debacle is still going on yet you obviously don’t like anyone complaining about it. If they do you go on the attack which falls right into the hands of your Wall Street masters.You see no evil and hear no evil but you sure speak up for the evil.

          • JeffH

            eddie, first off…BITE ME! You can make all the accusations you want, you just can’t back them up.

            Secondly, I present the facts not some simple socialist opinion as in your case. You don’t like it because it doesn’t fit your mindset, you don’t like truth…no apologies here…just prove otherwise is all I ask…which you can’t.

          • DaveH

            No, Eddie, unlike you I look at all sides of an issue before I make my decisions.
            “Greed is your creed”? As usual your side of the story is one presented by a distorting Liberal. It is you, Eddie, who wants to forcibly take the money or property of others. If you don’t want to deal with the “mortgage crooks” than don’t. Who’s forcing you? Borrow from your Unions, or other organizations set up by Ignorant fellow Liberals.
            I speak for voluntary contracts, Eddie. It is you who speaks for the evil of forcibly making people participate in the agenda of your choice. And you know that. I have never stood up for corporate swindlers or any real crooks, Eddie, you lying slandering troll.

          • JeffH

            …and one more thing eddie, you’re the perfect candidate that the unions recruit for the occupy wall street protests. Unlike some of the more thoughtfull protesters, you just listen to what your told…bad, greedy, hatefull, bankers, corporations and CEO’s…just keep eating the gruel they feed you, it fits you well.

            This describes you to a tee eddie…Cognitive dissonance…Americans know in their hearts that something about this is not right. Yet they say to themselves, “I haven’t done anything wrong. I have nothing to fear from my government.”

          • eddie47d

            Biting you would be like biting the head off of a poisonous snake. I’ll pass!

          • JeffH

            …slink out as you always do…never a valid arguement, just slanderous conjecture and lies…

          • eddie47d

            The masters of slander are have a fine day I see.That I will agree on.

          • Jibbs

            eddie,eddie,eddie, this fits you to a “T”……….

            Identifying a Pathological Liar

            Pathological liars – or “mythomaniacs” – may be suffering from histrionic personality disorder or narcissistic personality disorder. The following comments basically reflect a pathological liar who has the characteristics of histrionic personality disorder.

            Some characteristics

            1. Exaggerates things that are ridiculous.
            2. One-upping. Whatever you do, this person can do it better. You will never top them in their own mind, because they have a concerted need to be better than everyone else. This also applies to being right. If you try to confront an individual like this, no matter how lovingly and well-intentioned you might be – this will probably not be effective. It’s threatening their fantasy of themselves, so they would rather argue with you and bring out the sharp knives than admit that there’s anything wrong with them.
            3. They “construct” a reality around themselves. They don’t value the truth, especially if they don’t see it as hurting anyone. If you call them on a lie and they are backed into a corner, they will act very defensively and say ugly things (most likely but depends on personality), but they may eventually start to act like, “Well, what’s the difference? You’re making a big deal out of nothing!” (again, to refocus the conversation to your wrongdoing instead of theirs).
            4. Because these people don’t value honesty, a lot of times they will not value loyalty. So watch what you tell them. They will not only tell others, but they will embellish to make you look worse. Their loyalty is fleeting, and because they are insecure people, they will find solace in confiding to whomever is in their favor at the moment.
            5. They may be somewhat of a hypochondriac. This can come in especially useful when caught in a lie, for example, they can claim that they have been sick, or that there’s some mysteriously “illness” that has them all stressed out. It’s another excuse tool for their behavior.
            6. Obviously, they will contradict what they say. This will become very clear over time. They usually aren’t smart enough to keep track of so many lies (who would be?).

            Another WikiAnswers contributor adds:

            They lie about even the smallest things. For example, saying “I brushed my teeth today,” when they didn’t.
            They add exaggerations to every sentence.
            They change their story all the time.
            They act very defensively when you question their statements.
            They believe what they say is true, when everyone else knows it isn’t.

            An alternate ‘checklist’:
            Lies when it is very easy to tell the truth.
            Lies to get sympathy, to look better, to save their butt, etc.
            Fools people at first but once they get to know him, no one believes anything they ever say.
            May have a personality disorder.
            Extremely manipulative.
            Has been caught in lies repeatedly.
            Never fesses up to the lies.
            Is a legend in their own mind.

            More opinions and input from WikiAnswers contributors:

            I have found a few differences in pathological liar and a “slime ball” liar. Pathological liars cannot tell that they are lying; they actually believe the lie as soon as it comes out of their mouth. They lie about unimportant things that don’t really matter to anyone. This can be caused by mental defect but isn’t always. Slime-ball liars lie about things that make them look better or embellish to get attention. They also lie to keep their butts out of trouble and to get what they want.
            Here are things to ask yourself: How could this many things happen to one person? Would believe these stories if someone else told you? Think back to the beginning: you had red flags and alarms going off in you head. Learn to trust your instincts.
            It is very hard to tell when one is a pathological liar. Some people just are liars and lie to lie because they can and they don’t care about getting caught and aware that you know they have lied. These people care not about lying, it’s no big deal. It’s like “ok, so what? I lied”. The pathological liar on the other hand, IS aware that they are lying BUT will go to extremes to make you believe that they are truthful. They appear to believe their own lies BUT in truth, they know their lies are just that, lies. But because their efforts are constantly backing up their lies, it appears to us that they actually believe their lies, when we eventually do find out about them and then we tend to feel sorry for these people. Then they have an excuse, “I am sick, I don’t know why I lie, I believed what I was saying etc.” The only truth was the fact that they don’t know why they lie. Other than that it’s crap. It is true that most of them have an extremely low sense of self worth and are continuously trying to make themselves feel better about THEMSELVES and this is one reason they lie. It is about them but the lies are not always set up with the purpose to hurt some one else; it’s that these people feel so low about themselves they need to create ANYTHING different from the ugly reality they feel about themselves so they lie about even the most tiniest little thing. The people closest to them get sucked into these lies which sometimes start as something very trivial and then turn into something that can turn everyone involved worlds upside down and inside out.
            Unmasking the pathological liar is an easier task when the pathological liar is no more than a casual acquaintence to the “un-masker.” Close relationships provide camouflage for the pathological liar, and intimacy provides a heavily-fortressed breeding ground.
            Other indicators: 1) Rage attacks after they realize you’re questioning their lies. 2) Distraction techniques, e.g. hanging up the phone when you catch them in lie, playing word games, or even just running out of the room. After using the distraction technique, or rage attack, or sometimes both, they will pretend that nothing ever happened. They re-write history, so it never did happen in their minds. Normal people do it too, but these people take it to the extreme.
            From “Go Ask Alice”: Lies are unplanned and impulsive. Behavior is repeated over a long period of time. Lies don’t seem to exist for any external reason. Behavior may not always be a conscious act. Lies are admitted, changed, and/or adapted if a false story is challenged.
            From Andrea Broadbent “The Truth about Truman”: To begin, the definition of pathological actually means abnormal or grossly atypical. Therefore, a pathological liar prevaricates more frequently than the average person or tells more abnormal lies. In most cases, pathological liars tell lies that are “unplanned and impulsive” (Hausman). These lies are usually very emotional stories that tend to serve no purpose except to impress people (Ford 133). As of now, psychiatrists are unsure whether or not pathological liars are fully capable of realizing if and when they are lying, so detecting whether or not a person is a pathological liar is a very difficult task (Hausman). By looking at the list of conditions commonly connected with people considered to be pathological liars, psychiatrists are better able to determine whether or not a person might actually have the disorder. Some main qualities linked with pathological liars include dysfunctional family origin, family lying patterns, anomalies of sexual life, frequent substance abuse, and a great capacity for language.
            From Raymond Lloyd Richmond, Ph.D. “Psychological Honesty”: Even a pathological liar carries deep in his heart a desire for goodness and honesty and yet, because of painful emotional wounds, believes that the world never has, and never will, recognize his pain. And so, to hide that pain from himself, he uses all the lies he can concoct to hurl at the world as he runs in fear from his own goodness.

            For me, the first indication has been that I hear them tell different things to different people and they can’t all be right, because they directly contradict each other! And I am able to prove it. If you can prove over and over again that things someone is telling you are outright false, then you have a pathological liar on your hands.

            With the Internet, it is now easier than ever to “fact-check” even the most mundane things. I think pathological liars often lose track of the lies they tell different people and it will eventually catch up with them.

          • JeffH

            Gee whiz Jibbs, you’re not the only one that’s come to that same conclusion…

          • eddie47d

            Jibbs; That’s more of Jeff’s personality and apparently yours.I hear the wind blowing but the trees aren’t moving.aka windbag

          • Opal the Gem

            Pay no attention to eddie, he is drunk all the time, drunk on liberal wine, bunches of it, and it’s ruined his mind.

          • eddie47d

            Seldom touch liquor OPAL so keep your Conservative lies to yourself.

          • http://donthaveone Beberoni

            We are casting a movie eddie, and Jon Lovitz’s character from Saturday Night Live is going to play you. Any questions.

          • JeffH

            Beberoni, :)

        • Karolyn

          You obviously are not keeping up with what’s going on and haven’t heard any of the interviews with the protesters, who run the gamut in all ages, races and walks of life. Many different agendas are also being supported. At least they’re standing up for what they believe in. What are you doing?

          • professor

            Lets not forget to mention the $350/week, that is being paid to the scum so they will sh-t in the streets, steal from the local businesses, trash out the area, and cost the city Millions.

          • http://donthaveone Beberoni

            And isnt it sweet how youve got millionaires like Kanye West, and Susan Sarandon out there, showing their support for these protesters. Do you really think these “millionaires” are all for paying more taxes? I dont think so. They are the ones afford so many loopholes that they are the ones not paying their fair share of taxes. Bunch of left wing liberal hypocrites.

      • Lino

        Maybe you should study how the Banks and other Commercial Institutions
        were encouraged or forced to loan money regardless of the buyers ability to pay their mortgages. A good place to start is the Congressional hearing regarding the subject matter chaired by Cong. Barney Frank.

        • Buddy

          It may be difficult to reconcile all these comments, but all seem to have some correctness in them. My take on all of this is that there are sociopaths here and there in the system and their activities are somewhat like roaches in a flour bin. The roaches don’t take a lot themselves, but the flour is sure messed up.

      • DaveH

        Jeff,
        We can’t indict the whole of bankers for the actions of a few, anymore than whites can indict blacks for the actions of a few (and vice-versa).
        The problem is that the Government has long ago rid us of Free Markets, and replaced them with Crony Capitalism. If we could get Government (and their force) out of the marketplace, then that which you fear would be much less possible. Instead of buying off their favorite politicians to gain favors, the Crony Capitalists would have to compete fairly in Free Markets. They could only progress by pleasing the consumers.
        And there is only one Political Party with the Principles to accomplish that feat — The Libertarian Party. Get us back to the kind of country our Founders (those like Madison and Jefferson) intended for us. For Free Markets, Limited Government, Individual Liberty, Personal Responsibility, and PEACE:
        http://libertarianparty.org/issues

      • Bruce Barron

        Jefferson,Adams,Jackson warned us about the evils of the banking cartels beginning with the Rothschilds and epidemic today.Our Fed is the most corrupt bank and its affiliates in this country and outside this country.All the Presidents,even Lincoln,including Kennedy, who have threatened the banking industry has been assassinated apparently for these reasons,corruption on and in every aspect of life.
        Madison also warned about the banking cartel as well.
        See their sayings on the internet.”John Adams on Banking” for example.

    • Raggs

      I think maybe you should look a little harder… Did you hear what queen nancy pelosi said about this “MOB”?…
      If not than I will tell you… She is 100% behind this communist movement… This is Van jones theory of top down and bottom up.. They want to destroy capitolism and turn this country into a Socialist State..

      • theotherrhalf

        You have been conned into believing the right/left argument, to distract you from the real problem which is

        The Fed and the 1% in bed with the politicians, all of them.
        Unlimited funding from PACS, Super PACS & 504′s, and foreigners that contribute to political campaigns.
        A corrupt judiciary system that gives “personhood” status to corporations and puts presidents in power.
        And a political scam, put in place in 2000, to have a never ending war. Costing you billions of dollars. Well guess what now you gotta pay for it.
        How dare you people blanketly call all Democrats leaches. I have had to take care of my republican in laws because the REPUBLICAN children won’t do it. I had republican bosses who would not pay a fair wage KNOWING the govt would have to help those people with food stamps because they could barely pay their rent. And those employees were REPUBLICANS. Who believe in small govt. Hypocrites & Pharisees.

        • Bruce Barron

          It’s all distraction,isn’t it.Everything and anything to keep the American People confused and off guard.We see Obama and he is a distraction.The news is a distraction so the powers that be are always diverting our attention from what we should really be lookin for.The other side of the coin is that they are pulling it off right beneath our noses

        • http://donthaveone Beberoni

          Hmm, Imagine that. Now see, I, the Republican, along with my sister, the Libertarian, take care of our parents, the democrats, because my 3 other democrat brothers and sisters wont. And my Republican boss, pay us, in our non union shop of over 100 people, wages higher than our union counterparts, and he actually knows my name, my wifes name and my childrens name, and asks about them as to how they are doing and how old they are and what school they are in. So Im not buying what your selling. Your griding an ax to fit your agenda, and thats it.

    • GRusling

      Occupy Wall Street is marching in the wrong location. All that people object to about Wall Street is required of those banks by federal regulations. Who demanded low interest loans? The US Government. Who created Fannie and Freddie in the first place? The US Government. Who created and distributed the “Derivatives” that finally trashed and crashed our economy in 2008? Fannie and Freddie, creations of our federal government which STILL follow its orders. Who walked away scott-free while the Wall Street Banks were soundly condemned after the crash? Everyone from Fannie and Freddie, no matter what they had done or what the evidence was against them. Outright FRAUD was simply overlooked, and the fraudsters weren’t even fined, moving on to other hi-level jobs within the bankster community.

      The “Occupy Wall Street” crowd should be picketing in Washington DC at the Capitol Building, the Treasury Department and the SEC…

      • eddie47d

        Americans need to keep there eye on Wall Street and what is going on in Washington.This is not an either or proposition for they are indeed linked. The income of Americans went down 6.7% while politicians lost nothing and the Wall Street(corporate) gangs income went up 7-15%. The protesters are not well defined in organization but their message hits the nail on the head.

        • speedle

          Boy you are right about that Eddie. We certainly do need to keep an eye out on “Washington and Wall Street”. We should understand the dangerous relationship between Obama (and the democratic party) and mega corporations like GE and powerful unions. None of these Crony Capitalists or self serving union organizations are concerned with anything but increasing their influence, and Obama is probably the most corrupt President since LBJ in terms of peddling influence.

          The problem is that these misfits and neer do wells involved in the protests are either functioning morons, anarchists, Communists, union thugs or general miscreants with nothing else to do (or all of the above). And, they really have no coherent message, nor noble cause to rally around. They deserve the same consideration as a housefly disturbing a meal.

          • Monte

            Very well said! Brain-dead leftists are very easily led. These are the fools that probably believe TV is a real source of information and not pure propaganda and distortion. The rebels that overthrew Czarist Russia were screaming ‘freedom’. The end result was the most binding form of slavery known to history. Leftists are fools.

          • eddie47d

            Wall Street has pulled the wool over your eyes Monte so who is really the fool? Do you love losing so much while they keep tricking you and making you so gullible?

          • Monte

            It is the Federal/money collusion that is our enemy. To single out the one and ignore the other is an act of utter foolishness and ignorance. Only a fool would believe the Democratic Party is not a party to this collusion. If they were not, they would not be in power. The organizers of this pathetic charade are to be suspected of the most sinister and hidden motives.

        • theotherrhalf

          Exactly Eddie, I think these people here need to watch a little video about the difference between despotism and democracy.

          http://www.archive.org/details/Despotis1946

        • http://donthaveone Beberoni

          My income didnt go down 6.7%. When Obama first came into office, it got so slow it was cut 10% to keep us all working, but our owners worked extra hard and procured more work, and being that we do top quality work, and dont have the union work attitude of “thats good enough”, we are in demand with a lot of hospitals, colleges, and schools, and we got busy again, and the 10 percent cut we all VOLUNTARILY took to help OUR company stay solvent, was re-instated about 6 months later. Try that with a union shop, actually helping out the company you work for. It isnt going to happen. But there is no 6.7% decrease in wage here.

      • Buddy

        . . . and the FED!

        • Bruce Barron

          There is the tyranny of one and the tyrrany of many which is an economic one.The Fed needs to be dead.As John Adams said that any organization like this should have its life snuffed out like a cockroach.

    • Jibbs

      The government and lobbyist’s made the rules, Wallstreet only followed them. The protest needs to be at the WhiteHouse.

      Those protesters don’t want to fix the problem, they say it’s now a revolution…..don’t you find that a bit scary? They are nothing but fools playing into the hands of the government!

      • DaveH

        The protesters are an eclectic group of people with diverse messages. Some are brain-dead, some are ignorant, some are concerned about Crony Capitalism (which we all should be), and others are concerned about how far we have gotten away from Freedom. The media, as is usually the case, has lumped them all together as if they were one cohesive group of thinkers (or non-thinkers). They aren’t. For more:
        http://reason.org/news/show/1012268.html

      • moonbeam

        Jibbs says:
        “The protest needs to be at the WhiteHouse.”

        I’m with you on that one. Straight down Pennsylvania Ave and refuse to leave until the illegal alien vacates the premises.

        Next Stop: Straight to the front doors of The Complicit Ones responsible for the above.

  • http://www.myhealthoptimizer.com Jeff Bell

    This is indeed a fine article, and the info in it is crucial for Americans to learn and understand. Lincoln was no saint! He was a war criminal.

    Yet he is enshrined as some sort of “hero of liberty”. In fact, in 1968 I failed a U.S. History class for daring to write a term paper that posited that Lincoln violated a number of laws in even prosecuting the U.S. Civil War, and that denying the Southern states the right to secede from the union was a completely illegal act.

    Of course, it turns out that I was right. A number of constitutional scholars have since written articles and even entire books that support my thesis.

    Behind the scenes there were two reasons why the big banks of Europe, who already wielded such enormous power over human affiars, that they could be said to be the defacto “rulers of the world”, did not want to allow any states, but particularly the Southern states to secede from the union: 1. The U.S. was already very heavily indebted to these huge foreign banks, and most of the nations wealth at the time was located in the South. So if the Southern states were allowed to secede then the bulk of the collateral to secure the massive debt to these foreign banks would be gone. They could not and would not allow that. 2. These huge foreign banks had been starting proxy wars and secretly controlling the fate of nations for some time. They cherished the full United States of America as a nation large and powerful enough, if the union could be preserved, to be an emerging proxy that these big foreign banks could then use to carry out their murderous agenda of war, enforced poverty and enslavement all around the globe.

    A simple study of the history since the U.S. Civil War demonstrates that the will of the banks has prevailed and that Lincoln’s 100% illegal actions to preserve the union have worked out quite well for them.

    Not much has changed since then in terms of who runs the show and what their agenda really is. Study history with the blinders off. Then oppose the tyranny that exists today on an unprecidented scale.

    It may not be too late to restore democracy.

    • kentucky colonel

      totally agree with you Jeff

    • GRusling

      Jeff, PLEASE let’s restore our REPUBLIC! Democracy is very close to what prevails in this country right now. Our founders referred to it as “Organized Chaos”…

      • Buddy

        Well, let’s not try to put the republic together – - let it go the way into smaller political entities which can operate without the overwhelming dictatorship of the federals.

      • Sail2pete

        I DO NOT THINK MANY PEOPLE REALIZE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DEMOCRACY AND A REPUBLIC. FIRST OF ALL MOST PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED AND THINK THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS A DEMOCRACY — IT IS NOT — IT IS A REPUBLIC AND DIFFERENCE IS THIS——
        A DEMOCRACY IS LIKE TWELVE WOLVES AND ONE SHEEP VOTING ON WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE FOR DINNER.
        IN A REPUBLIC THE MINORITY HAS A STRONG VOICE — NOT SO IN A DEMOCRACY WHERE THE MAJORITY ALWAYS RULES AND THE MINORITY GETS EATEN.

    • DaveH

      Good comment, Jeff.

  • Chas

    I believe Lincoln was fulfilling his constitutional obligation to defend the constitution and the Republic against all enemies both foreign and domestic. Secession in the manner sought by southern states was not constitutional. One may question and debate Lincoln’s tactics and methods, but the Republic and the constitution were defended and maintained. Our republic, constitutions federal and State, and the Rule of valid Law are all under assault by enemies of constitutional self-government by sovereign citizens. Don’t allow defense of these principles to draw you beyond reason, into extreme positions, be they left, right, or other.

    • Monte

      You said: ‘Secession in the manner sought by southern states was not constitutional”

      Show me where in the Constitution this is stated. During the War of 1812 New England threatened to secede and there was no talk of war or coercion. The Border States remained neutral till Lincoln began to assemble an army to drive the lower South back into the union. That was the turning point for them, as his actions were illegal. The majority of the nation at the time believed secession was a constitutional right. Read the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions written by the author of the Declaration of Independence and by the so-called Father of the Constitution. Let me ask: Why did the Southern states secede? Answer: Because Lincoln had been elected to the presidency (with less than a majority because three men ran for the presidency). South Carolina seceded on the day of his election, the rest of the lower South following. Lincoln was the first purely sectional president, a corporate lawyer and represented the Hamiltonian/Federalist money powers.

      • DaveH

        Excellent, Monte.

      • Chas

        The united States of America was formed by the several States when they approved the Articles of Confederation. The Union created was a perpetual union. This was the view of the founders of our republic, and it was also the view of President Lincoln. Article 13 of those Articles of Confederation which created the perpetual Union declares the only constitution method for withdrawing from that perpetual Union. Our present constitution modified only the form of our government, it did not dissolve the Union nor did it create a new one. The Articles of Confederation, Declaration of Independence, our present Constitution including its validly adopted amendments are our founding and continuing documents and supreme Law. I am a self-declared Christian conservative constitutionalist. I am no ones dupe nor puppet. I don’t call others names, for no one is edified nor persuaded by name-calling. I ask only that folks engage in civil discussions with open minds.

        • dixiesuzan

          The Constitution of the United States was written by agents sent by the States and their legislatures to revise the Articles of Confederation. The power to revise includes the power to revise 100%, that is to write a new document of union for these sovereign states. The Constitution is then the product of these State agents, which is clearly seen by the signators to the document. They signed by State as State agents. The document includes the statement that the decision of proposing this document is “unanimous”. It was “unanimous” in the sense that at least 1 agent of all 13 of the States signed it. It was NOT unanimous among all the State agents sent. The proposed Consitution, technicaly called the protocal document was sent to the States for ratification. Bear in mind the States preceeded in time the existance of the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution as proposed. In Virginia, the most important of the States, the proposed document was denounced as heavily flawed. The leader in this instance being Patrick Henry. He proposed amendments to the document to correct these flaws. The 10 Amendments later adopted are through and by his efforts. Virginia ratified the Constitution with provisos. Virginia ratification was only valid if the amendments were added to the document. Virginia, being wary of joining a union under a Constitution which might contain other flaws not detected added a right of unilateral secession to their ratification. Virginia ratification was valid only so long as the states accepted it into the union with these provisos. The states did so and Virginia became part of the United States. 2 other states were also wary of the Constitution. Rhode Island ratification was only valid with the proviso of the unilateral right of State secession. It was Connecticut (I am going by memory here)which included a unilateral right of State secession in its ratification. Theses ratification documents with their provisos were accepted. Therefore, without using any other historical facts (and there are many more) the unilateral secession of Virginia from the union, under its ratification document was a legal, lawful and Constitutional act.

    • Jack B

      Where, in the constitution, do you find that the individual states were forbidden, by law, to withdraw from the confederation described in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States?
      Give me the specifics or apologize for simply spouting the modern spin on the constitution.

      • Chas

        I Quote Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation:

        Article XIII. Every State shall abide by the determination of the united States in congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a congress of the united States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State.

        There, Sir, are the specifics.

        • independant thinker

          We DO NOT operate under the Articles of Confederation. That was thrown out when our Constitution was adopted. So, once more where in the Constitution does it say the states cannot leave the union.

        • dixiesuzan

          The Sovereign States became Sovereign from England by an ordinance of secession. Justification for this ordinance of secession is called the Declaration of Independence. The US Constitution was once interpreted using the doctrines of the Declaration of Independence as guiding principles. In the first sentence of this Declaration are these words “…. it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…..” The Declaration presupposes that secession can become a necessity, and if it becomes a necessity it is a lega, lawful and valid act of law. If secession is fundamentally a lawless act then the current and all future states of the union are lawless regimes of organized criminals. These criminal lawless states banded together under a equally invalid criminal document to form a criminal lawless syndicate called the United States of America. For the United States of America and its Constitution, the Articles of Confederation, and the individual states themselves rest as upon as legal and lawful entities a unilateral secessionist act without legal grant of permissionact from the civil government of England. To repudiate the possible necessity of secession is to repudiation the foundation stones of this nation. A nation which is founded on necessity of secession and then denies a possible necessity of secession is simply a nation of hypocrisy which has provided the tools of its own destruction. It has proclaimed itself to be an illegal, unlawful entity of lawless insurrections.

    • Jibbs

      You are 100% wrong.

    • Donna Mechalske

      Thank you Chas for an itelligent response to the littany from people who have their own agenda and look to prejudiced (be they right, left or center)stories,reports and not acutal fact and not representative of the history of the US, its Constitution and the wisdom of forefathers who designed a plan that would stand for generations. It is the responsibility of the US citizens to be knowlegable about the facts view both sides of issues and make intelligent decisions and then vote wisely.

      • DaveH

        But it wasn’t an intelligent response, Donna. It was merely the response of a brainwashed minion who has bought into the propaganda that has been dished out by the self-serving Leaders of the Country.
        Lincoln was prejudiced against Blacks from the beginning of his career to the end of his life. He was merely using them as pawns to achieve his real goal of stripping the states of their sovereignty and consolidating that power in the Federal Government complete with Crony Capitalism (mercantilism in those days) where the Government thwarted the Free Market and took on the role of determining the marketplace winners and the losers with taxpayer money.
        You need to shake the bondage of the propaganda that you have endured and start looking for truth. You aren’t going to get that from organizations whose livelihoods depend on Big Government (MSM, public schools, etc.).

      • independant thinker

        Donna try reading the follow up comments from Chas again. He does not have a clue what he is talking about for he keeps refering to the Articles of Confederation which was done away with and replaced by our current Constitution.

    • TML

      Chas says – “Secession in the manner sought by southern states was not constitutional.”

      This is blatantly wrong.

      “The powers NOT delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” – 10th Amendment U.S. Constitution. (Emphesis added)

      And to be more specific…

      “The United States shall GUARANTY to each state its SOVEREIGNTY, freedom, and INDEPENDENCE, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Constitution EXSPRESSLY delegated to the United States.” – 1st Amendment – Rhode Island – Ratification of U.S. Constitution (emphasis added)

      So you see… because the Constitution doesn’t mention ANYTHING about secession, withdraw, etc… or even HOW a state COULD secede… the unilateral secession of individual states was entirely ‘consitutional’.

      • DaveH

        For Chas to argue that states could not secede from the Union, would be like his arguing that a Married couple cannot divorce.
        The concept of secession being illegal is one promoted by the self-interested Leaders of the country who are loath to relinquish any of their power.

        • dixiesuzan

          Consider that Lincoln proclaimed a duty to Preserve the Union. The Constitution contains no duty of the President to Preserve the Union. Congress has no Constituional duty to preserve the Union. There is no mention in the Constitution of a Judicial duty to preserve the Union. To proclaim out of the Presidential office a duty which is not within the Constitution would be to aggrandize powers to the Presidential office which are not delegated. This is not a Constitutional act. It is in fact an Un-Constitutional act, for if a President can add to his powers by public proclamation that he now has new duties self-determined is the death kneel of any and all Constitutional Republics. Powers not delegated do not thereby become Presidential powers. To then use military force to enforce these self proclaimed new powers is the act of tyranny.

          Licoln added one new (but historically very old usurpation method) twist. Lincoln viewed the Constitution as a sunshine only document of law. If all was well, there were no pressures or tensions within the nation, then the Constitution was the law of the land. Whenever a cloud touched the sunshine of the nation under the Constitution then the Coinstitution ceased being the law of the land. With no Constitution the President was compelled to assume all authority of law which he could enforce at will by military troops. That is the history of the Lincoln administration. Seizure of powers since the Constitution ceased as law and more un-Constitutional acts than any President in US History. It is said in praise of Lincoln that he made of America a nation. He did, but at the point of the bayonet. Estimated casualties, via that Constitutional doctrine of sunshine, within the United States from war are 12 to 15 percent of the total population of the time. Killed and maimed, Northern soldiers, Southern soldiers, and civilians.

    • Samrock7

      Thank you–your words are like the oasis in a desert full of shifting
      sand.

      • Samrock7

        Again—thanks Chas

      • DaveH

        That sand kinda gets in your ears, doesn’t it?

    • Bruce Barron

      He started the War and denied these States a republican form of government.The Fed. Govt.is not sovereign.The people are.

  • Eugene G Wierzbicki

    Just ask yourself this question, Who is funding this occupy wall street venture? It takes alot of money and an organization like the white house zars to initiate this. The arrogancy of this administration is unbealeaveable! They are using the hatred of the republicans the democrats have and the democrats are so blind with hate the cannot see what is really happening!!Obama has used class warefare befor and is useing it again,he would continue to lie and do anything to remain in the white house.

    • SMSgt Z retired Nam 68

      Turn off FOX and turn on PBS go to NPR you might get better incite on the the Occupation of Wall Street

      • Jack B

        Sorry, sarge, PBS is a branch of the democrats and CNN is closely attuned to the agenda for a New World Order and the rest of the MSM is in Obama’s corner regardless of his personal, arrogant agenda.

        • SMSgt Z retired Nam 68

          If you do not attempt to gather all the information from all sources you can ;you are not truly informed.The one thing the left and the right do not understand INDEPENDENTS are just that independent We go every were for information.

          • Ken

            Sarg you and I are the same age. Luckily I didn’t end up in Nam smoking hash. I was sent to German 1/61 and just ate the bread and drank some really good beer. Your definition of an independent is a little off. I look at independents as liberals who are just too ashamed to admit it. Stand up soldier and take charge of your own life and quit trying to get everybody else to do it for you.

          • DaveH

            All sources? You just told a guy to turn off Fox, Sgt. Doesn’t that kinda conflict?

    • Raggs

      They are working on suspending the constitution prior to 2012 elections.

      • eddie47d

        Not going to happen Raggs yet you still insist on pushing paranoia.

        • Al Sieber

          Why not eddie, they do what they want any ways. they might suspend it sooner.

      • Bruce Barron

        Obama should be suspended by a rope in my opinion.

    • JeffH

      Eugene…look back at the comments of former SEIU official Steve Lerner made in March 2011.

      The Left’s Economic Terrorism Playbook: The Chase Campaign by a Coalition of Unions, Community Groups, Lawmakers and Students to Take Down US Capitalism and Redistribute Wealth & Power
      http://www.theblaze.com/stories/revealed-the-lefts-economic-terrorism-playbook-the-chase-campaign-for-a-coalition-of-unions-community-groups-lawmakers-and-students-to-take-down-us-capitalism-and-redistribute-wealth-power/

      • eddie47d

        Did you forget that All Men are Created Equal and that is part of the American creed and that there are laws for everyone. When Wall Street breaks the laws (with your approval of coarse)and distribute the wealth upward then there is a serious problem. So the Elites have unscrupulously been distributing that wealth for way too long. They are the ones playing class warfare by taking a bigger piece of the American pie than they earned.

        • JeffH

          How many different ways can you say BAAAAA eddie? You sound the same every time…just a typical jealous and envious member of the sheeple class. So obvious that you support the takers and not the earners {ie} “re-distribution of wealth” or in layman’s terms “theft”!

          • eddie47d

            Wall Street is a den of thieves and you continually pledge your allegiance to Mammon.

          • JeffH

            Polly want a cracker?

          • eddie47d

            With a slice of pepperjack,thanks.

          • Buster the Anatolian

            All eddie recognizes is “profitable business bad-union thugs good”

          • eddie47d

            We know for a fact that Buster is a Thug. There are probably more corrupt businesses than unions even if you averaged them out so you are only smelling your own gas.

        • DaveH

          Which firms of Wall Street broke the laws, Eddie? And which comment did Jeff make supporting such law-breaking?
          If you duck this question, Eddie, then the rest of the readers will know you as the lying, slandering troll that Jeff and I know you as.

          • eddie47d

            Jeff can be as obnoxious as he wants in defending Wall Street and railing against those who speak out. He is part and parcel of their cronyism by exposing the Elites (over the months) as a secret organization then defending them in his next breath. Since Wall Street crooks are never indicted no matter how devious they become then it would be hard to prove their judicial guilt. That is like you saying Lincoln is guilty for doing the things he did without a court of law determining his guilt. You want to be judge jury and executioner with Lincoln (and you may be right) but get very timid about pursuing Corporates who are damaging our system. You may not like them as you said earlier but Jeff does go to their defense. If the Corporates in America and on Wall Street are setting up cleaver schemes to an unsuspecting consumer or even to the Republic of the USA then how are they different than Lincoln? They are responsible for the crash yet received TARP money and still made millions in bonuses. How do you make buckets of money from failure? ONLY IN AMERICA! Vikram Pandit/Robert Rubin of Citigroup..Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sacs..Jaime Dimon of JP Morgan..Joe Cassano of AIG(credit default swaps)..Ken Lew of Bank of America..John Mack of Stanley Morgan..John Thain of Merrill Lynch.. Franklin Rains of Freddie and Fannie and that isn’t even close to a complete list. You said about yourself that “I have never stood up for corporate swindlers or any real crooks”. Even though each and everyone of these officials have swindled this nation in the last 5 years. So either you stand with them or you don’t.So which side of yours can I take to the bank?

          • DaveH

            With all that useless verbage, you didn’t answer my questions, you lying slandering troll.
            As usual you’ve been caught making stuff up about Jeff.
            You’re a one-man creep show, Eddie.

          • eddie47d

            Your question has been answered and there are no lies in what I said. That make your the sinister liar and the slanderous troll.

        • JeffH

          eddie says “Did you forget that All Men are Created Equal and that is part of the American creed and that there are laws for everyone.”

          All men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.

          That doesn’t mean that you, eddie, or anyone else has any right to steal what free men posses or aquire and deprive them from obtaining safety and happiness just because they have more than you or because you are jealous and envious that you couldn’t achieve the same…everyone in America is governed by the same laws and thustly have the same opportuniy to succeed…that others have succeeded doesn’t give anyone the right to steal that success.

          If you truly wanted to stop the thieves, you’d start by getting government out of the deal making process with their cronies and support the return of the free market system

          • eddie47d

            Then why do you Jeff allow the banksters to keep stealing against the public good and then give them a free pass? You pile on working people trying to make a living with all kinds of derogatory terms.Yet play possum when these Wall Street pirates come under fire. Instead of letting this anger against Wall Street run it coarse you want to stiffle their voice.Which puts you right back into the good graces of those who robbed America. When we see a Republican/Libertarian bill coming out of Washington demanding an end to crony capitalism then we can believe your sincerity. Until then you have none. So make it part of your parties platform which the Democrats have done several times but were out voted by Republicans.

          • JeffH

            DUH eddie, I don’t allow wall street to do anything and where have I ever supported the thieving of others money, by wall street or anybody else. It is you that supports the theft of anothers money through your obvious jealous envy.

          • JeffH

            eddie, wild conjecture is all you got…grow up!

            I’ll repeat myself once again with little hope you’ll understand…”everyone in America is governed by the same laws and thustly have the same opportuniy to succeed…that others have succeeded doesn’t give anyone the right to steal that success.”

            “If you truly wanted to stop the thieves, you’d start by getting government out of the deal making process with their cronies and support the return of the free market system”

            Just what party am I a part of eddie? Last time I checked, I have never affiliated myself with any political party.

            I believe in the constitution 100%…how about you?

          • JeffH

            eddie says “make it part of your parties platform which the Democrats have done several times but were out voted by Republicans.”(ending crony-capitalism)

            eddie, you are a flat out liar that will say anything you want…truth be damned!

          • DaveH

            That’s what trolls do, Jeff.

          • JeffH

            Especially this troll who calls himself eddie.

          • eddie47d

            The Democrats have put several bills before Congress advocating for Financial Reform so calling me a lying troll only cheapens your already tarnished spiel. You desperately need to come up with some new material instead of telling falsehoods.

    • Karolyn

      What money do they need? They all have homemade signs and are pitching pup tents. There is no organization. It is a group of concerned citizens, and they should be respected for coming out and standing up. They are employed, unemployed, mothers, kids, fathers, black, white, green, etc. Have you not seen any of the doverage?

  • kentucky colonel

    Mr Livingston: Please send a copy of this letter to Bill O’Reilly, who comes on The Factor every night and plugs (ad infinitum and ad nauseaum) his book on what great men Lincoln, et al,were.
    There is a sign on the city limits of Lancaster, Ohio, proclaiming that this was “the birthplace of Gen William T Sherman.” I have always wanted to stop and add my own sign underneath it: “You mean you’re bragging about this?!”

    • GRusling

      Sherman was, like a good General, simply following the orders of his Commander in Chief. That does not excuse what he did but it does explain it…

      • Bruce Barron

        You can disobey an order when no one has the right to issue this or that order or when a higher order overrides a lower order.No one follows an order to murder innocent citizens or were they just casualties of war?

  • Patrick Ridge

    Our government told us that David Koresh was abusing children. David Koresh was a dangerous nut and well armed nut at that,why the sympathy for such a fruitcake.

    • Robert, TX

      On that basis, should we not invade every inner city in America? Particularly, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Boston, D.C. and New York City? The gangs in these cities make Koresh look weak, and THEIR abuse does not exclude anyone – especially children.

      • eddie47d

        The David Koresh situation was handled poorly yet he was as dictatorial as Jim Jones and any pimp in LA.

      • Capitalist at Birth

        You left out Detroit, Newark, St. Louis, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Kansas City, Atlanta, Miami, San Francisco, Denver, Dallas, Houston, and any other major metropolitan area with an inner city core that has been abandoned if fear of busing, by the middle class. It is white flight that has lead to the concentration of uneducated minorities in the inner core.

        • Robert, TX

          Very true, but I was trying to be brief, and still get the point across. It’s hard to shout over the rep. vs. dem. catfight (while our republic goes down the drain).

    • GRusling

      David Koresh was a nut, for sure, but his preparation was totally DEFENSIVE in nature and threatened no one. He had, in fact, at the time of the Waco attack only violated ONE LAW and that was a tax law, which MIGHT have cost anyone else in America a $200 fine! The Local Sheriff routinely visited the compound, was invited in and given a tour of the entire place immediately upon request.

      There’s a lot about Waco which didn’t make the national news and you probably aren’t aware of…

      • Thinking About

        If you happened to be one of the children abused by Karesh would you still believe he had only violated one law. If your loved one had died as a result of his ordering fires started in the building they were supposed to be protected by Karesh would you feel the same way. I do not get all my information from “our government”, there are many other sources. Warren Jeffs was abusing children and abuse continues in many places without justification.

        • http://teamlaw.org Jazzabelle

          It was the initial media smear that claimed Koresh was “abusing children.” Sorta like, “OMG! He’s got WMDs! Invade NOW!! … I mean, oops.”

          Once they got the children out of the compound, everyone (even CPS, miracle of miracles) agreed that the children were clean, healthy, and well-educated. I have not seen any evidence since then to the contrary.

          • Thinking About

            If you consider being a child “bride” and 25 children burning in a fire ordered by Karesh as not being in the definition of abuse then maybe there was not any abuse going on. By the way maybe you confused WMD’s with Branch Davidians but wrong story line.

          • Opal the Gem

            Thinking (not), Koresh did not order the fire. The fire was started by the feds. Watch the documentary on Waco refered to elsewhere in the discussion for the truth.

          • http://teamlaw.org Jazzabelle

            “By the way maybe you confused WMD’s with Branch Davidians but wrong story line.”

            No, I’m not confused. You apparently can’t read. The line about WMDs was introduced with the words, “Sorta like.” Remember 7th grade English class? “Like” is a comparison word. You know, the Bush administration’s scare tactics regarding WMDs in Iraq is SIMILAR, that is, I’m COMPARING

          • http://teamlaw.org Jazzabelle

            it, to the media smear against the Branch Davidians in which everyone said, “Oh no! They beat their infants with wooden spoons for half an hour!” as one of their excuses to go in with SWAT teams and kill everybody. Of course it wasn’t true, as we found out later.

    • Al Sieber

      There you go believing everything the Govt. says which this article talks about, watch the DVD Waco: Rules of Engagement. the Govt. murdered those people.

    • independant thinker

      “Our government told us that David Koresh was abusing children.”

      The operative word here is told. They never provided any factual hard evedince of the abuse. The government also never provided any hard evidence that Koresh and his followers had maching guns like the feds claimed.

      I agree Koresh was a nut case but if the feds had been truely interested in arresting him they had many opportunities to do so when he was away from the compound as it was they committed government sanctioned murder.

  • SMSgt Z retired Nam 68

    Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan are;sorry were (thanks to the Hell Fire missiles)were two combatants by there own choosing at war with the American way of life the same as someone caring an AK47 in battle. If this administration had not rendered the two combatants unable to attack America or it’s citizens you and the other pundits would have been attacking the administration for inaction.
    As for the Civil War get over it the South lost because they underestimated the North.
    What have you been writing for the last 42 years about our government has it always been this bad;would enjoy seeing some of those writings

    • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

      Dear SMSgtZ retired Nam 68,

      There are two ways you can see some more of my writings. Go here http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/subscribe.asp and subscribe to my monthly newsletter. This will give you access to archives back to 2002, plus you will get my monthly newsletter as soon as it is mailed. You can also purchase my book, 40 Years of Bob Livingston https://shop.boblivingstonletter.com/product/40-years-of-bob-livingston-letter/conservative-politics for a synopsis of my work.

      Best wishes,
      Bob

      • SMSgt Z retired Nam 68

        Dear Bob
        If your writings were true to your cause as a Conservative over the last 42 years you would supply them free.Sorry I forgot Money over all else runs your world.

        Senior Master Sgt Z (ret)

        Last post going sailing

        • GRusling

          Go sailing. Bob Livingston has every right in the world to make a living publishing and charging for his intellectual property…

          • libertytrain

            I wonder how he gets the money to go sailing if he believes everything, including intellectual property should be free for him…

        • Jibbs

          My grass needs mowing, will you do it for free?
          I guess you forgot that a person’s time and effort are worth something.

          Serving one’s country should be a priviledge and noble deed, would you do it for free?

        • Al Sieber

          Sarge chooses to remain ignorant.

          • Opal the Gem

            When sarge first started posting there was as I recall some pretty convincing evidence that he never served in Vietnam and possibly in the military at all presented.

          • JeffH

            Opal the Gem, you’re correct…for a man who “has sworn an oath” he’s got a rather convoluted way of showing it. Mrxism/communism/socialism/progressivism may be the braoder diagnosis for ole sarg.

        • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

          Dear SMSgt Z retired Nam 68,

          Personal Liberty does not receive a stipend from the government; therefore we have to do certain things to earn a profit. That way we can employ the people necessary to continue bringing this information to you for FREE on a daily basis. And unlike government-subsidized failures (Solyndra, for example), we are growing.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

          • Ret

            Bravo!

  • CP

    Eugene, I am SO glad you did not live during the hippy era. IF you had, you would be aware it takes little funding for one man or one woman to go somewhere and stay for a while. Even when you have a million individuals doing the same thing, each is doing so out of his or her own pocket, not some huge organization’s, like the Tea Party. Don’t believe me? Take a good look at Woodstock, and how many people were there on their own hook, with little, if any support from home, let alone an organization.

  • Bruce

    Repeal the 14th Amendment, then we can FIX all the ILLS of this nation. If not we will all FALL, and very soon.

    Thats just how simple it all is take away the 14th Amendment and all the Amendments past that will fall as they are all 100% Illegal based on the Constitution,
    BUT as we have not followed the Constitution in over 150 years that means not a single one of you even knows what this nation was before the 14th Amendment, And all your OPINION’S are at best worthless.

    As well not a single one of you has ever known what real Freedom means, as in when you’re REALLY FREE?
    Your choice more of the same old dance or do you want what this Nation was founded on?

    “To the Victor goes the Spoils,” thats the quote and its as old as Time. The American Public has been Deceived for over 150 years and yet only a few even grasp that.

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      Maybe we should repeal the 13th ammendment too. Bring back slavery. After all it WAS eliminated by military force. Any takers?

      • Bruce

        Bryan,
        The 14th Amendment made SLAVES of all of us. Read it and understand what it means. Then we can talk, BTW get Black’s Law before you begin so you can understand the words and what power they have.

      • Buddy

        Actually, slavery was on the way out at the time of the civil war. Most countries that had slavery eliminated slavery without the death and destruction which was created in the USA. Seem that the civil war was not really about slavery but more about who controlled the economy of the geographic area known as the USA.

        So, no, slavery won’t come back with or without the 13th amendment. Unless, of course, a person is a ‘tax slave”.

        • Bruce

          Buddy,
          Part of what you posted is correct but saddy YOU are a SLAVE, if you knew whats written within the comfines of the 14th Amendment and could comprehend whats written then your last statmet would have never been made.

          But then again you’re really no differant than 99% of the American public living in LA LA land with lots of opinions and yet with no clue.

          Look at your Drivers Licence, your SS card, your Birth Certificate your name is all in Capital letters. Don’t you question why that is or do you just think your really special?

          The real answer is you were sold as a SLAVE of the state when you droped out of the womb, do your self a BIG favor look in to Maritime Law. Also learn what the term “Voluntary Servitude” means.
          Then reread the 14th Amendment and then tell me your not a Slave.

          You were sold on the Stock Market when you were birthed rather you wish to admit it or not, {not knowning something} is totaly differant than just building walls to hold on to whats not really there.

          This is not an insult to you Buddy just a wake up call, and its to all of you.
          Get off you butts and start looking into all of what I posted.

          It makes no differance who you elect as you’re not electing anyone you just think you are.

    • http://teamlaw.org Jazzabelle

      “[T]ake away the 14th Amendment and all the Amendments past that will fall as they are all 100% Illegal based on the Constitution”

      All the amendments past the Reconstruction 3 aren’t even amendments to the federal Constitution. They are just amendments to the corporate constitution of the behemoth that was created to run our government (and other agendas as well).

      The details: http://teamlaw.net/HistoryOutline.htm
      and http://teamlaw.net/history.htm

    • Bruce Barron

      Don’t need to repeal it-its never been ratified.(See;Judge Perez-14th Amendment)

  • Giaco Fenneli

    Thank you for introducing the concept of “cognitive dissonance” into the discussion of today’s government. I only wish that a majority of those who vote could recognize that they are frequently in conflict with themselves, not the slogans and the emotions they elicit. One rule my Italian grandmother taught “us” kids was to be “honest with ourselves”. It is Okay to be wrong. When we talked about getting jobs or working with other people she would say, “if you no like horses, no get a job on a horse farm”. Though trite, it demonstrated to “us”, one of the first virtues that to be learned was, be “intellecutally honest”. Know yourself and think values. Learn to recognize that when these values do not agree with our actions we are headed for trouble. Often times we accept a lesser situation because we can not admit to “ourselves” we may be wrong or have made a bad decision. In today’s world, I choose to call this “un-cognitive dissonance”.

  • Janice Fortin

    Doesn’t a TRAITOR give up his citizen rights? If left alive, these quacks might have been responsible for many many WORTHY NON TRAITOR AMERICAN DEATHS. This man spent his formative yrs in a anti American country. America better look at what American values are NOT shown or praised in our schools. Hire prof like Bill Ayers and think his students will come out pro America? Jackass. Foreign students spend YEARS AND YEArs in AMERICAN SCHOOLS AND NEVER COME OUT OF THEM LOVING AMERICA. SOMETHING IS WRONG IN THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM. What kind of scholarships are handed out that foreigners grab them without one scrap of gratitude for the education GIVEN TO THEM, but use this gift of education to revenge violent acts against the giver? Garbage in. Garbage out. Now invading illegal criminals are given $100,000 worth of college…..for what may I ask? For wiping their behinds with the flag and emailing the picture? Putting flags on the ground in AZ, spitting and wiping their feet on them and making dogs defecate on them? IS THAT WHAT AMERICA REWARDS? Look at the president: it sure seems that way, doesn’t it?

  • Alcam

    It has amused me for decades that Lincoln was credited with fighting the war to end slavery. I had the good fortune to have a history teacher at school who actually searched for the truth and quoted it to us. My impression has long been that the war was about control of the wealth of the country. The south was far too successful. If you can pick a lie and make it sound like the truth you can trick the “masses” into supporting your secret intent. Look at the Boston Tea Party. Tea on which tax was paid ( about 15% of the total imported) was cheaper than the smuggled stuff, but if you can con the masses you are on track. It’s a bit like the George Washington concept. He “inherited” a massive estate from an English aristocrat ( I think an earl ) yet those rotten Poms refused to make him a member of the aristocracy. Of course he supported the rebels, he had been denigrated and the glow of a President outshines that of an Earl.

  • http://none dave buslknkl

    fabulous article. this truly is the history of our tyranny. tyranny which is supposed to have benefitted everyone, us and our enemies or allies, whatever title is chosen by our government. bob, you forgot about the american indians, whose future and identity has been destoyed by our government, and those who believed it, the settlers. look what has happened to their heritage. they will never be the same, because they are on legal reservations. but, i guess that’s “ok”.

    what about black americans? look at the results we have created. the average black american has quite a different view of the world, even today. why is this? are they stupid or uneducated? are they lazy? no, it’s because for centuries, they have been tortured. it’s very difficult to teach your black children that they are growing up in a free country, when their people are imprisoned at a rate five times higher than whites. as a white american, this has continued to disturb me. my father, a lifelong missionary and minister, saw this as a great injustice.

    all of this is finally coming to a head, because wall street, with the help of the government, has terrible damaged the delicate eonomical fairness and balance that has supposed to keep us a great country. the names change over the years, but the philosophy stays the same, one of repression. the economy is not “growing”, it is not “stabilized”, and will not be. we need a revolution. governments do not like revolution. if you are a true, dignified, “real” american who wants true equality and opportunity, you have to agree with the wall street protests. these are not “crazies”, because if they were, they would be looting and destroying wall street. but they are peaceful, becuase they are concerned and sick of the extremities of greed and power. these people are the ones who love their country, not the banker looters, because if they did love their country, they would not continue to abuse the people, and actually try to help build up and recreate out country. if the suppression continues, we might well have another civil war. the south in the civil war may have been wrong, but its much more complicated than that. President lincoln may have had no choice, but what if the government had not existed to suppress the southern machine? what would we be today. are blacks any happier today? they have hurt the most in this financial debacle. the average black wealth in america has shrunk to just over $2,000. that’s their “total wealth”. it’s not their fault if they don’t know how to build wealth, because they don’t really have access to the schooling or mentorship which allows them to understand money, build wealth, or keep it. the suppression of the lower classes is indeed the same as it was during lincoln’s time, or anyone else’s time. but, this is human nature, that part of it that becomes a changed entity when it is exposed to too much power or money. now, the government is so big, what are the chances of any one of them being able to make further war on its people? very high, and this is the reason why we want contained government. all the way back through our history, and the history of almost every civilization that has existed, their is a government that has suppressed the rights and power of its people, people who have the same color blood as its leaders.

    the good thing is that people fight back. they fight back by creating informal economies, economies which exist below the radar of laws and taxes. they do this because they can’t afford to live in the formal economy.

    what we need, as we have always said, is a small government with little influence. but, what we have, is one which has stupendously overstepped their sphere of influence. the last straw in countries like egypt and libra was when their people couldn’t even afford food anymore. ask them, they will tell you the truth. when you need water, you will do anything to can to get it. their fight was out of desperation, not a desire to overthrow the government. who wants their children killed in an unneccessary battle? no one, this was necessary. you don’t have war or civil unrest when people can pay their bills. and this should not be too much to ask in any country, much less ours.

  • Carlucci

    Great article. Too bad the majority of Americans will never “get it”. They know something is wrong, but will go along with all of it for “safety” and “security”. They are just being played by a bunch of players.

    Gotta get to work. Have a great week, everybody – !

  • Jay

    What worries me most is not necessarily what the so-called government tells us, as that can be, by thinking and discerning people, easily verified! What should be worrisome, is what our despots in charge are not, telling us! The obfuscation of truth is the close relative of the lie, two sides of the same coin of deceit. But i propose that the ptb’s greatest success in subjugating the American people could only have been achieved on the battlefield, and control of the information regarding the history of this country. Educated people are not as easy to manipulate. Abolishing public education or restricting access to education would be the direct approach. However, that would spill the beans. The indirect approach is to control the education they receive. And it is here, that the battle is decided, for those who control the truth about the past, control the present, and he who controls the present, controls the future. This can only be accomplished by having obedient, sub-servient, indoctrinated, and non-thinking automatons!

    • GRusling

      In 1913 our Public Education System changed from teaching students to THINK to teaching them to LEARN. These are two entirely different things. A person who can THINK can be succesful under almost any conditions in any place on the planet. A person who LEARNS knows only what they have been taught and can only apply that knowledge under known condidtions. Most people never learn to really think for themselves, they are only able to regurgitate what they have learned. That’s what made Bill Gates and Steve Jobs such unique people in our modern world…

      • Jay

        That is absolutely correct, Grusling, and i believe we have mr. John Dewey to thank for that!

        http://www.ordination.org/dumbing_down.htm

        • Bruce Barron

          Dewey intentionally undermined the public school institution and his carry through has been succesful.Carl Rogers is another one.

    • Ret

      Maybe we can become like Turkey. A friend just returned from a visit and told me that after going through security and passport control, she had to have her passport screened to buy a Snickers bar. Ah yes, the subterfuge of chocolate… Coming soon to your neighborhood grocery.

  • eddie47d

    Seems like the author is egging on both sides of the issue and pitting American against American himself. I agree that the government (any government) can be dangerous and he brought up several valid points. The North was merciless to the South especially in Georgia.Is that any different than commenters wanting to turn the Middle East into a glass parking lot? Was the carpet bombing of Dresden which killed thousands of civilians a necessity to win the war or a tragedy like Sherman’s march? Was the bombing of Hiroshima right or wrong? The horrors of war are real yet we still love the patriotic glamour of it all or when it suits our side. The author also said we shouldn’t have got involved in the Egyptian rebellion yet then chastises Obama for not taking on Assad of Syria. So which is it? I actually agree with the premise of the article since no one wants a police state. Yet Lincoln was killed by an American citizen and that was a far more serious situation than the killing of al Awlaki. Where was Lincoln’s due process?

    • Capitalist at Birth

      That was a note of sarcasm, not chastising Obama for failing to interfere in the internal affairs of Syria.

    • Jibbs

      But then again, your good at making something out of nothing and missing the point.

      We are talking about one suject and you always try to change it to fit your needs(M.O) Maybe you have a hard time staying focused on the current conversation.

      • JeffH

        Ah yes…”missing the point”!…or maybe just not getting it at all.

    • Cawmun Cents

      eddie47d writes:
      “I actually agree with the premise of the article since no one wants a police state.”

      Evidently E47d,you are not looking around.
      We are actively engaged in a”police state”.
      Violating posse comitatus,check.
      Selling,buying,trading,weapons to foreign nations/organizations,check.
      Working as a military agent for foreign nations/organizations,check.
      Assassination of alleged dangerous people in other nations,check.
      Attaining a DNA profile of the worlds indigenous populations,check.
      Use of dis/non-information for subterfuge against the masses,check.
      Working new technologies for the purposes of control,check.
      Offering watered down politicians which perpetuate said state,check.

      The evidence for all these things is easily obtained by even the staunchest of critics.There is far more evidence,but why offer it?
      To exclaim that there is a conspiracy is a blatant understatement.
      The populace in every place with the exception of remote areas,is scrutinized and monitored on every level of activity.
      You are told(in many cases,to wit)where to go,what to buy,and how much of your own resources are available to you.
      Is that not”police” enough for you?
      The pervasive invasiveness grows second by second.
      They call this the”information age”,but my vote is for the”indoctrination age”.
      I used to think that Frank Zappa was just a wild and crazy guy,that liked to mess with drug users minds.Who would have known that he was truly a prophet of todays culturalization?
      The”Central Scrutinizer”is alive and piped to your various activities on a momentary basis.
      In the film”Full Metal Jacket”,F Lee Ermey states loudly to the object of his derision that,”if you don’t un-[expletive deleted]yourself,I will twist off your head,and[expletive deleted]in your neck!”
      The police state as it were,declares this loudy to us all,everyday.
      Yet you dont see us getting it.
      Something smells funny,but since our heads are somewhere else,we just arent quite able to put the puzzle together.
      Meanwhile back at the stationhouse….the booking agents are rife with busy-ness.
      -CC.

    • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

      Dear eddie47d,

      As is often the case, you seem to have missed the point entirely. You write: “The author also said we shouldn’t have got involved in the Egyptian rebellion yet then chastises Obama for not taking on Assad of Syria. So which is it?”

      It is neither. I was pointing out the hypocrisy of involving ourself in one but not the other, as I was pointing out the hypocrisy of condoning the government-instigated murder of 650,000 people in the 1860s but condeming the same thing in Egypt, Iran (oh, wait, Obama didn’t), Libya, Syria (oh wait, Obama didn’t), Bahrain (oh, wait, Obama didn’t), Sudan (oh wait, Obama didn’t), etc.

      Best wishes,
      Bob

  • Jack B

    Thanks, Bob. Few recognize the war for southern independence for what it was. The term “civil war” was applied and has stuck even though there was no effort to overthrow the federal government and institute another in its place.
    Lincoln has been sold to the population as “the greatest president” in US history for over a hundred years because of the circumstances surrounding his tenure and then his being martyred sealed his legacy.
    Kennedy is being sold as a great president for many of the same reasons, especially the fact that he did not live out his full term.
    FDR has been sold to the public as a great president because of his “save the economy”policies during the “Great Depression.” His own secretary of the treasury says in his writings that his policies were a failure, but this is never discussed because it does not go along with the myth that his presidency was wonderfully successful.
    And on and on the misconceptions of presidents and their legacies are sickeningly continued to be taught ot our children.
    BTW–to the person above who wants this article sent to O Reilley–Do you really think he would change his mind. He is as arrogant as Obama.

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      The Civil War was the product of a benighted aristocratic slaveholding southern ruling oligarchy deciding to destroy the nation rather than see thier slave prperty threatened. They then convinced a few hundres thousand pooor illiterate crackers to fight for ‘em so the “po white trash” might maintain their caste “superiority” over blacks. It was treason, and despicable. This egomaniacal clique of southern “chivalry” decided to rise in insurrection against the legitimate government when it appeared to them that their stranglehold over the US Government in the Senate was dissolving. They cost over 600,000 American lives, untold distruction, and set the south back fifty years.

      By the way I AM A SOUTHERNER and like to think I’d have gone north to fight for the constitution and representative democracy in 1861. Are you aware that the ante bellum south was a POLICE STATE? So fearful were the dominant slaveholders that freedom of speech, association, press, and religion were subject to draconian penalties up to and including DEATH; just mention abolition or even mildly criticize the slave system. Every white male was subject to compulsory service in the “patrols;” slave catching posses in every state and county. It was not uncommon for abolitionists to be lynched.

      The war was not about slavery? RIGHT, it was about southern “rights;” the “right” to OWN SLAVES. All this twaddle about “central bank” or northern economic oppression came out of the post war “Lost Cause” school of literature and is pure propaganda with miniscule supporting evidence to support it. Though they WERE right in one respect, so backward, so economically lethargic, so un-enterprising did the slave agricultural system make the south, it was inevitable they’d have to rely on the productive innovative north. Self inflicted wound NOT “northern agression.”

      The whole slave-agrarian ethos held back my native south for over a century. After the treasonous insurrection was extirpated, we suffered from another 100 years of “Jim Crow” backwardness. I’m old enough to remember segregation and the last lynching in my county was in 1961! The south has only grown and prospered once we got rid of this evil incubus.

      Current devotees of the “lost cause” are, and should be, heavily suspect of being ignorant racist fools. Only ever actually known two members of the KKK, both illiterate; FINE specimens of “Anglo Saxon superiority.”

      • 45caliber

        Tell me, if the war was about slavery, how come about 350,000 men died for it – when none owned a slave or had any interest in owning a slave? At best guess, there were about 1200 slave owners in the South then. I hardly think that everyone liked those slave owners so much that they were willing to give their lives for them. Further, why did the blacks then also fight for the South? Over 300 black prisoners of the North refused to sign a statement that they had fought for the South only under duress – and they spent the entire war in prison as a result.

        There were three major reasons for the war. The North wanted to control the South’s economy via Federal laws – since they owned Congress – to insure the North got all the profits. They wanted a strong Federal government to have that control. The South insisted that they didn’t have that right under the Constitution due to “state’s rights”. Slavery was used by the North to insure their own people didn’t know what the real reasons were.

        But it is typical of the progressive thinking. They always take the absolutely worst case for something and insist everything is that way to get what they want.

        • Bryan K Donnelly

          Why did a couple million non Nazi party Germans fight for Hitler? How about conscription? How about mass hysteria? How about the vast non slaveholding majority being propagandized into theinking they were fighting for their “rights?”

          • 45caliber

            How about the fact that the North did not end slavery – in the NORTH – until about 10 years after the Civil War ended? And it ended only then when they were confronted by annoyed vets who had fought in the war against slavery? Or do you not consider “indentured servanthood” slavery when they had multiple generations trying to pay off the original “loan” to the persons who were forcibly taken from Europe and sold in the US?

            Slavery was an issue IN THE NORTH so they could get the young men to fight. It was never a true issue in the South except among the few slave owners. People don’t fight because they are drafted and sent to fight. They have to have a reason. In fact, our military today is taught that they don’t fight because of orders – they fight because of reasons. (This does annoy the libs who believe all military should obey the orders of the President regardless of reason.)

          • eddie47d

            There were thousands of WHITE indentured servants who freshly came from Europe so your assessment that blacks who were servants were slaves is playing with the facts.

        • GRusling

          The North could not allow the South to form a seperate country because of TARRIFS! The seaports were all in the South, and Louisiana controlled the Port at New Orleans which effectively closed the entire Mississippi River system to the Union, placing virtually all international trade in the hands of the Confederacy. The Confederacy would have expanded greatly while the Union would have slowly died on the vine, as all new States applied for membership in the Confederacy, not the Union, for international trade purposes. That’s why America fought the “War of Northern Aggression” and that truely is the war America fought, not a “Civil” war at all…

          • 45caliber

            There was a couple of other reasons as well. The North insisted that all trade was to go through them. The South had only the cottom and tobacco to sell; the North insisted they could sell ONLY to the Northern merchants (at the price the North wanted to pay) and then the merchants would sell to Europe. Further the South was to buy only from the North at the prices the North wanted to charge. The South had gotten the European ships to start picking up the cotton and tobacco and bringing in finished goods a prices far below what the North wanted to charge.

            Then the South discovered coal and iron ore at Mobile, AL. They started to build a smelter to make iron. The North tried to stop it, insisting they could only send the ore to the north for it to be refined and couldn’t do it themselves. There was even a Federal law they tried to force on the South that stated that historically the South was agriculture and therefore couldn’t become industrialized.

            Those were what angered the majority of the South rather than any arguments about slaves.

      • Jay

        BKD stated:The Civil War was the product of a benighted aristocratic slaveholding southern ruling oligarchy deciding to destroy the nation rather than see thier slave prperty threatened.

        Can you disclose the origin and identity of this, as you stated, “benighted aristocratic slaveholding southern ruling oligarchy”? Can you be more precise?

      • TML

        **** “The Civil War was the product of a benighted aristocratic slaveholding southern ruling oligarchy deciding to destroy the nation rather than see thier slave prperty threatened. They then convinced a few hundres thousand pooor illiterate crackers to fight for ‘em so the “po white trash” might maintain their caste “superiority” over blacks.”

        You’re prejudice makes you historically illiterate.

        **** “It was treason, and despicable.”

        Wrong… treason is defined by the Constitution clearly in Article 3 Section 3 as being committed only by those who make war with one of the States. It was the Federal Government itself which carried out war with southern states.

        **** “This egomaniacal clique of southern “chivalry” decided to rise in insurrection against the legitimate government”

        Wrong… they did not rise in insurrection. The state of South Carolina has its own Constitution, its own legislature, its own judicial process, and therefore its own legitimate government. Secession passed formally through both the house and the senate fore each state, at which time a Declaration of Secession was made… not a declaration of war. The Federal Government then failed to guarantee the states sovereignty and independence, by not recognizing such, as it was required to if it followed the U.S. Constitution.

        **** “The war was not about slavery? RIGHT, it was about southern “rights;” the “right” to OWN SLAVES. “

        Wrong… it was over State powers versus Federal Powers.

        **** “…it was inevitable they’d have to rely on the productive innovative north.” Self inflicted wound NOT “northern agression.”

        If that was the case, the why was war needed to free slaves? You should study objectively, rather than with racial prejudice.

        **** “Current devotees of the “lost cause” are, and should be, heavily suspect of being ignorant racist fools.”

        That is only the consensus of racists, as a last resort argument to the War between the states. Your so-called scholarly work is a joke, sir.

        • Jay

          Well i’m glad to discover that i am not the only one that considers bryan to be a racist!

    • 45caliber

      Jack B:

      I agree with you. But there are always people who can’t stand it when the truth comes out. Probably because they make their living on the lies.

      • Monte

        It is the foundation upon which the Federal/money powers rest their tyrannical control. Having gained it through the death of 600,000, they will now maintain it at almost any cost.

        • Buddy

          When one looks at the civil war in those terms (which is probably correct), we all are victims of that war.

          • Monte

            You receive an A+, Buddy!

  • Alex

    The Southeast remains backwards a century and a half after the War of Southern Belligerence.

    • kentucky colonel

      I believe you mean the War of Northern Aggression.

    • Bruce Barron

      The Southeast is economically bustling with financial success.

  • Mike

    Well written. While depriving another human being of all freedom and liberty and treating them as a piece of property is abhorrent and seriously wrong (slavery), it does not justify the wanton destruction of other citizens and their property. While Lincoln freed the slaves by executive order, which is arguable as a “war powers” act, the U.S. congress did pass the 13th amendment by the requisite 2/3 majority, and thus lawfully freed the slaves (although they were not given citizenship, which is a whole other issue). Our Government today is much more egregious when evaluating constitutional actions. It is without question, “out of control!”

    • kentucky colonel

      That Lincoln “freed” the slaves is a total myth. He only “freed” the slaves in southern states where he had no jurisdiction in the first place!

      • Capitalist at Birth

        There was no slavery in the Northern States. Don’t you know the Republican Party was founded to abolish slavery?

        • kentucky colonel

          What did they have in Delaware, Maryland, Missouri, Kansas and Kentucky? A church picnic?

        • Bruce Barron

          There was host and wave of blacks treated worse than their Southern owners.The North was as prejudiced as the South; in fact,much more so.

          • libertytrain

            My experience is that the North still is…

      • Bryan K Donnelly

        He freed those in areas in rebellion against the constitution and legitimate government as a matter of military necessity. The 13th ammendment abolishing slavery everywhere, which he’d started, was passed after he was dead. But for the drunken actor John Wikles Booth he’d have been around for the 14th and 15th as well.

  • Robert, TX

    And correctly, you make no mention of the “opposition” party, that is supposed to be checking the power of this oppressive oligarchy. The republican party wants to “balance the budget” and cap federal spending at 18% of GDP. Hmmmmm, does that 18% include the federal mandates to the states? Yeah, I didn’t think so, either. Of course, the convention that would supposedly give them their BBA, would also unleash a national popular vote (doing away with the electoral college) and 50 other ridiculous proposals. The only party proposing to protect our Constitution IS the Constitution party.

  • Bryan K Donnelly

    Dear Mister Livingston. Your comments on the Civil War indicate either an ,”unreconstructed” Confederate OR an historical illiterate. They are most similar to the writings of the late crackpot economist Myurrya Rothbard and his current acolyte Lew Rockwell of the tiny “Ludwig vin Mises Institute’ in Auburn Alabama. Such a breathtaking ignornace and misinterprteation of history is seldom to be found among educated genuine conservatives; more the realm of the JOhn Birch Society band of cranks following Ron Paul. In either case, quite ABSURD.

    In my “wild misspent youth” I wasted my time on several degrees in hsitory. The subject has remained my avocation for the last 40 years. Your views are so utterly outside ANY reputable scholarship on the Civil War or Lincoln Administration they reflect a propagandist rather than a scholar.

    I’ll not even comment on the rest of the above muddled, confused, febrile nonsense you’ve posited here. Suffice it to say, you expose yourself as a BOOB. Do you realize how silly you sound?

    Lest you think I’m criticizing you from the left, think again. I’ve been a “movement conservative” since I was vice chair of my county Youth for Goldwater. I’ve since worked in many conservative political campaigns including three for Ronald Reagan. More recently I’ve been associated with the Republican Liberty Caucus (www.rlc.org,) the libertarian wing of the GOP. I’m an active Tea Pary member as well and voted for Herman Cain at the recent Florida “Presedency5″ straw poll. You are an embarrassment to any thinking conservative. Needless to say, I’ll no longer bother to read your views. Shame really, since you actually DO generally make sense; fist time I’ve seen this particular NONSENSE. Nontheless, with so many other SANE conservative-libertarian adherents to pick from, I’ll no longer bother with you.

    • Capitalist at Birth

      Bravo Bryan. While I usually agree with most of the articles on this site, this one is way off the deep end, with many innuendos and much conjecture, on Bob’s part.

    • Thor

      Excuse me…Bob is not ‘febrile’ or feverish by any stretch; he is committed, dedicated to his beliefs. No matter what your credentials, personal attacks do not advanced your cause; and if all your degrees are from liberal-progressive US universities (which have existed in this state of affairs for the last half-century)then you cannot make the case your history exists un-skewed. It is a history with its own built-in bias, as Bob pointed out. The victorious always believe their own press. Give more attention to those copyright pages…and think independently. Also, you might want to turn on that ‘spell-check.’

      [I know you don't need my help, Bob...but don't start thinking you've converted me.]

      • Thor

        Please substitute present participle ‘advance’…spell check didn’t catch that one.

      • Bryan K Donnelly

        DO read Shelby Foot’s multi volume History of the Civil War. He hails from Vicksuburg Mississippi of an old slave owning family. Several of his relatives were rebel officials and officers. He does NOT represent “the government” just respectable genuine scholarship. Then consider reading the memoirs of James Longstreet, “From Manasses to Appamatox.” He was a corps commander in the Army of Northhern Virginia under “saint” Robert E. Lee (who also opposed secession) and second in command of the Army. One presumes HE was not a “liberal” set up by the “government.” Such a reading would render Mr. Livinston’s views absurd.

        • Thor

          Having read Foote’s work then, ostensibly, I should agree with you…sorry. First, I don’t think Bennett Cerf or the New York Times have ever recognized or ‘discovered’ a genuine conservative…nor, would they ever put one in print. I find Foote’s work intriguing but almost devoid of scholarly ‘Foote-notes;’ and I do not view an honorary Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina as a certification of truth or an affirmation of conservative thought. Besides, if you could ask him, you may find that Shelby Foote would agree with Bob on many of his points.

        • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

          Dear Bryan K Donnelly,

          “…although few of the place-names strewn about the map had been connected with much bloodshed since the era when settlers ousted the aborigines. In point of fact, harking back to those massacre days, Sherman had something similar in mind for the Confederates to his front, military and civilian. ‘If the North design to conquer the South,’ he had written home two years ago, ‘we must begin at Kentucky and reconquer the country from there as we did from the Indians.’”–The Civil War, A Narrative, Red River to Chattahoochee, Another Grand Design, Shelby Foote, p. 318.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

          • Bryan K Donnelly

            And this is bad because? Sherman was fighting a WAR for our existence as a nation.

      • Bryan K Donnelly

        Sorry about the typos. One may be dedicated to one’s beliefs and be WRONG to the point of absurdity.

        • Opal the Gem

          ” One may be dedicated to one’s beliefs and be WRONG to the point of absurdity.”

          As obviously applies to you.

          • Bruce Barron

            The muslim brotherhood and jihadist are perfect examples

    • Jay

      Not surprisingly, the long winded Mr. Donnelly chose not to disclose his version of the facts. It seems only logical, that one should refute an argument with an opposing argument, not with an avalanche of ad-ho-minims! Clearly, Mr. Donnelly has nothing else to offer, yet proudly boasts of his credentials!

      • Jay

        Mr Donnelly, please pardon the above statement as i see now that you are beginning to disclose your understanding of this period of history.

    • Monte

      You must have studied under Harry Jaffe and the rest of establishment ‘historians’ and neocons. The Soviet Union had the same sort of ‘historians’.

  • Henry Ledbetter

    We have foundation problems and yes they have been under attack for 150 years. (PSALM 11;3) If the foundation be destroyed, what can the rightious do?” We have have for to many souls still trying to slim their way out out of Darwin’s primordial swamp. We were endowed by our CREATOR WITH SURE AND CERTAIN RIGHTS, but Hitler and the progressives of our day were products of Darwinian evolution. Choose , light or darkness, good or evil,.God or chance.

  • Al Hill

    Excellent take on history Bob.

    For those of you who are critical of this column, take note.
    That long paragraph of things the government told us is very intersting. Some of those have been proven to be lies. Others? Maybe, maybe not. The point is this. With the current record, how can you believe anything the government says?

    • Capitalist at Birth

      Who says anybody believes anything the Government says?

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      A century and a half of historical scholarship on the Civil War has NOTHING TO DO with government; but historical records, FACTS, and study. No legitimate scholar, liberal, conservative, or apolitical, takes the views expressed here for one simple reason They are NOT history.

      • 45caliber

        Bryan:

        Apparently your idea of “history” and mine are different. To me, “history” is what happened. To you, “history” is what the government tells you happened. I prefer my definition. I have more history books than any library in the area does. One interesting thing about them is that – while the statement “history is written by the winners” is true – there are still those people out there who are willing to research and print the truth about what happens. You should do some research yourself – and decide for yourself if what you are told must be true by the government is really what you think is best.

        • Bryan K Donnelly

          I’ve accumulated an historical library of several thousand volumes, a few hundred dealing with the Civil War. These include memoirs of just about EVERY principal actor, north and south; generals, politicians, soldiers, even the writings of such as Jeff Davis. About the only one taking such an approach is Davis himself, for obvious reasons. Historians are not “government” types by and large and are bound by a set of scholarly ethics that forbid propagandizing. Even left wing historians of the era like Eugene Geonvese or Eric Foner are dead accurate in their writings; every bit of information cited for reference. Scholars care far less about forwarding their views than on accuracy. Those who don’t are not taken seriously. History is NOT, as Adolf Hitler said, exclusively “written by the victors.” Der Fuhrer was a maniac and thought like one. Ever try and read “Mein Kampf?”

          • 45caliber

            I grew up during the Central High School fiasco in Arkansas. I didn’t attend the school but I knew people who did. What puzzled me at the time was determining what was going on there. They would report one thing on the news and my friends would tell me a totally different story. For instance, one of the things that I thought interesting was the news stating that the people had accepted things and that the troops had been pulled out. The same day a friend had to go through 11 troop check points to pick up his daughter at school for a dental appointment.

            As a result, my hobby has always been trying to discover what things were REALLY like in history vs. what you were told. And the differences can be startling in come cases. You should try the same thing. I’ve been involved in history and in histroy research for about fifty years now.

          • http://teamlaw.org Jazzabelle

            Bryan wrote:
            “Historians are not “government” types by and large and are bound by a set of scholarly ethics that forbid propagandizing.”

            Hah. Just about every history professor in this country has his pay subsidized by government either directly or indirectly. That said, the influences on their scholarship aren’t directly from the government but from the academic culture, which is largely lock-step and anti-intellectual, at least these days.

            Bryan wrote:
            “Even left wing historians of the era like Eugene Geonvese or Eric Foner are dead accurate in their writings; every bit of information cited for reference.”

            I won’t argue that point; I’ll just remind you that fact-checking by itself does not a scholar make. In fact, the most insidious and controlling propaganda doesn’t involve misstating facts but rather leaving facts out. In other words, all of a writer’s cited facts may check out as “accurate,” but since he conveniently omitted some very important facts (or simply a slew of minor details that add up), his conclusions are highly skewed and his readers may never be any the wiser. Here’s an example that may resonate with you: Factually, Rush Limbaugh is more than 97% accurate in everything he says. But I won’t hold my breath waiting for you to say, “That means he is RIGHT! And everyone who thinks differently is a BOOB!”

            LOL.

          • Jay

            45 & Jazzabelle, Excellent rebuttals!!! I suspect mr. donnelly was under the impression that this site would provide fertile soil, but for the purpose to plant his non-sense. Unlike his students, we need not fear a failing grade should we disagree with him!

          • bob wire

            “I won’t argue that point; I’ll just remind you that fact-checking by itself does not a scholar make. In fact, the most insidious and controlling propaganda doesn’t involve misstating facts but rather leaving facts out.”

            I am smitten! Where gave you been?!!!!!! Fresh blood to the debate is good.

  • Al Hill

    Sorry….”interesting”

  • Capitalist at Birth

    Bob, Has your home been invaded? Where are the reports of these types of invasions of American’s homes on American soil, to support your contentions? Can you document these charges? I would certainly like to see the evidence, as I too am concerned about the Patriot Act.

    • JeffH

      …do a simple search…the info is there to find!

  • 2WarAbnVet

    Fine article!
    It is noteworthy that, at one point during the War Between the States (Civil War is a misnomer), a cavalry unit under Col Ulrich Dahlgren was even sent on a raid to Richmond with the express goal of assassinating Jeff Davis and his cabinet officers.
    Nobody, in over a century, has ever complained about these past events. It is peculiar that today is great gnashing of teeth over the death of particular terrorists.

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      We woould have killed Jeff Davis and this band of insugents as readily as Adolf Hitler in a later war. They were the ENEMY of our country. In fact though, the famous “Dalghren raid” was not authourized by Abraham Lincoln directly. He’d probably have thought it a good idea though. He was fighting for our nation’s life.

    • DaveH

      Government is the biggest Gang in the land. Unfortunately, a large portion of the population is either in denial or part of the gang.

      • Bruce Barron

        And the state department and un are infiltrated with communists and the liberal socialists of the democratic party and old republican guard are not much better

  • Jay

    ARE THE UNITED STATES STILL A BRITISH COLONY? Any takers?

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      No but we likely would have been one again had the southern insurrectionists won the Civil War.

      • Jay

        Yet, there seems to be ample evidence that the British Crown still seems to exert a considerable influence on American policy. Do you agree, if so, to what extent, and in what measure? Can you elaborate?

        • Bryan K Donnelly

          The “Crown.” None whatsoever. The monarch exercises little influence even in tht United Kingdom. Great Britian? They are our oldest closest ally. We share a common language, legal system, and billions in trade. Our culture is largely derived from the British Isles. But, except in the fevered brains of “conspiracy” nuts of the Lyndon LaRouche school, the crown exercises NO influence. Answer your question?

          • BrotherPatriot

            Again…WRONG…on so many accounts. Your propaganda isn’t working here, Bryan.

            Many of us know the simple truths like what is revealed by Jay & JeffH below regarding the royal bloodlines and the Conspiracy FACTS that they themselves reveal.

            You lose all credibility on these forumns and anything you say needs to be questioned.

            God Bless!

        • JeffH
  • 45caliber

    When I was still a boy in school I was puzzled as to why everyone considered Lincoln a hero and one of the better Presidents. Of course, since I’m from the South, many of my early family fought in that war. NONE OF THEM OWNED SLAVES or wanted to own one. They were fighting because the North insisted that we had to do everything their way – which resulted in a lot of Norther people getting rich while keeping those in the South poor.

    It is nice to see that some others are now awakening to the disaster Lincoln shoved onto our country.

    • DaveH

      I think the most important lesson in the Lincoln dictatorship is how heavily propagandized we have all been throughout our lives by the public schools and by the MSM.
      Quite a coup for the Federal Government to paint Lincoln as honest and admirable when in fact he was a cold-blooded Sociopath and Dictator, who used whatever tools available (including the death of over 600,000 people) to achieve his goals of a Big Central Government complete with the kind of Mercantilism (we call it Crony-Capitalism these days) that our Founders gave their lives to escape.

    • davidh

      Lincoln was not a dictator, lets not forget the power of the congress and at that time the States. This time period was brewing and fermenting long before Mr. Lincoln, and the threat of war between the states was the rumor of that time. The Constitution was flawed in that its authors could not have foreseen two societies developing due to the industrial revolution, and the concentration of population into small areas, thus upsetting the balance in the congress, and shifting power geographically to the north.

      • DaveH

        Read this book, DavidH, and then see what you think:
        “Lincoln Unmasked: What You’re Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe”.
        http://mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=312

        If you’re the typical brainwashed citizen (not a put-down, just fact), then you will read it kicking and screaming in resistance (or not at all). But I am hopeful you will transcend that tendency and read it with an open mind.

      • http://teamlaw.org Jazzabelle

        David wrote:
        “Lincoln was not a dictator, lets not forget the power of the congress and at that time the States.”

        WHAT power of the Congress?? When the South seceded and Southern representatives didn’t return to Congress, Lincoln declared martial law and ordered the OLD set of Congressmen to report back to their jobs. Get that? NOT the Congressmen who’d just been elected, and should have been taking their oaths of office, but the OLD Congress, some of whom hadn’t been re-elected. Lincoln dragged them back to Washington using FORCE and forced them to serve in their seats again so that he could have a quorum in Congress and get “business” done.

        As for the “power of the States,” you mean like the power to leave the Union when it got oppressive? Oh, THAT “power of the States.” I guess you’re right, Lincoln wasn’t a dictator after all.

  • Jibbs

    Perhaps, some on here should start their own site so we can share in their wealth of correct information and tell them that they are wrong on more than a few occations.

  • http://www.America-Betrayed-1787.com Dennis Oliver Woods

    The root of terrorism is found in I Kings 6,14 — “And Solomon did what was evil…So the Lord said to Solomon, ‘because…you have not kept My covenant and My statutes, which I have commanded you, I will surely tear the kingdom from you…Then the Lord raised up an adversary to Solomon, Hadad the Edomite…God also raised another adversary to him, Rezon…And he gathered men to himself and became leader of a marauding band….”

    At the end of a mostly accurate recitation of American government terrorism against Americans and throughout the world, the author of this article asks a question: “Are we a nation of laws? Or are we a nation in which the government — or a secret cabal — can just decide to murder whomever it wishes?”

    The author, Bob Livingston, observes that the federal government’s war of terror on American citizens has been going on for “at least 150 years” since the American Civil War. It actually started in 1787 at the Constitutional Convention. How so?

    It was 1787 when the Founding Federalists rejected the Law of God: “My covenant and My statutes, which I have commanded you.” Our Puritan forefathers had entered into covenant with God, which is clear from the colonial charters, some of which actually quote statutes from the Pentateuch.

    But the U.S. Constitution rejected the rule of God’s Law with its arrogant assertion that “this Constitution and the laws of the United States made in pursuance thereof…shall be the supreme law of the land.” Like He did with Solomon, God has raised up adversaries in response to our rejection of His law.

    • davidh

      Lets not be ignorant, the Bible also tells us we live in the time of mans law. I once heard that, God’s plan for America, was to ensure the that the time of the gentiles be fulfilled, in light of the threats such as WWII, communism, etc. It sounds believable.

  • BrotherPatriot

    In regards to Bryan K Donnelly’s post above…I 99.99% dissagree with your view point.

    I think Mr. Livingston’s points regarding when our government tells us something that we later find out to be untrue, then that in of itself tells us something about our government. There is a great deal of evidence revealing this statment to be true.

    The false flag 9/11 attack being our modern day Pearl Harbor, for example. This explanation itself reveals the ancient, cabal, Luciferian, Oligarchy that has been running things now for awhile.

    Nope.

    The government is no longer serving the people…it thinks we the People serve It.

    I think Mr. Livingston’s post says a lot of truths. That what we have been told has been proven untrue when compared to what the Historical truths tell us, if you take alittle time to research back into history.

    We must begin to questioning all we were told during our upbringing. I’m 40′ish and now finding that many things I was told during my History class back in school was inaccurate and even untrue.

    It’s obvious propaganda at work. I see it clearly.

    My analysis of what the secret societies records indicates to me is that there is a select group of financially elite, morally corrupt and interconnected Agenda following cabal loyalists who may occassionally shoot one another at a game of gamble but if any outside influence attacks them, they circle wagons.

    This Organisim that is infecting the Body of Humanity needs to be addressed for what they are & what they have done. A massive list of crimes against Humanity becomes revealed when this type of research is done regarding them.

    This group of bankers has a proven record of inciting war and financially benefitting from it. They fund both sides of conflict through satellite entities. They may all have a different name, these various organizations, but they all serve the same common Agenda. <—Historical facts.

    Keep up the good fight Patriots and never stop speaking the truth. We have an enemy out there and this enemy has infiltrated our very law system.

    Nice article, Mr. Livingston.

    God Bless.

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      Don’t forget the Bavarian Illuminati, the Bilderbergers, Club of Rome, Trilateral Commission, and the “international (Jewish”) bankers.” Whle you are at it don’t leave out THEM, the OTHERS, and the CABAL. Why haven’t you mentioned the Knights of Columbus or the notorious Freemasons; the Shriners, those clown cars are really scary! Please excuse me it’s time for our meds, then we go to craft therapy.

      • JeffH
      • Jay

        Brother patriot, pay no attention to this denier, we all recognize why he’s here!

      • DaveH

        All of those suspicions could be put to rest simply by shrinking Government back to its only real societal need — that of stopping people from committing force or fraud on the bodies and property of others. Other than those goals, we certainly don’t need Government with it’s one-size-fits-all intrusion in our lives.
        We need to get back to voluntary transactions among the people, and rigorous protection of property rights. That includes protecting those private properties from the greedy clutches of Big Government.
        Our Government would be 1/3 the size that it is now, and the taxpayers would have 40% more money in their pockets to spend as they please.
        With Big Government out of our marketplaces, anybody could easily become business owners and consumers would once again be king, instead of some self-interested politicians controlling our choices. Our economy would boom. This isn’t just idle talk. You can see the results of Free Markets in Hong Kong and Singapore. Pick the country names to get more information on that country:
        http://heritage.org/index/ranking

      • DaveH

        Here is the Economic Freedom report from Fraser Institute of Canada:
        http://www.fraserinstitute.org/uploadedFiles/fraser-ca/Content/research-news/research/publications/economic-freedom-of-the-world-2011-mcmahon-presentation-092011.pdf

        Note on page 17 of 37 that Chile is now considered to be more economically free than the United States. How far we have retreated from Freedom!
        Time to get our country back.

    • Cawmun Cents

      What seems to be most amusing is that thousands of volumes of history,do not mention what is really happening.
      Can you say”Indoctrination Age?”….
      I knew that you could.
      But get a few disallusioned rock stars together and boy-o-by-golly,you get wisdom for what its worth.
      I harken back to the scribes.
      That ancient group of individuals tasked with taking history seriously.
      Seems that they left out some pertinent parts of historical note.

      When you set out to do such things,purposefully,You may have dissention in the ranks at a later time.

      A person once asked me why the story of Moses wasnt carved in stone as a part of Egyptian history.
      I found it necessary to explain to him that it wasnt something the leaders of Egypt wanted as a legacy of historical note.
      So goeth the rank and file of historical treasure.
      The truth,should it be uncovered….is never a welcome thing.
      But when one goes back to the records in the time of Joseph,it is found that the seven years of famine it mentions in the Bible,were as real as can be established about any history of that given time.

      Not that I give creedence to what experts or scholars think they know about that period of time.Things which a person can attribute to common sense understanding about such times,get thrown out for moments of excitement much like in the Hollywood productions of today.
      That it would seem is the theme of todays historians.
      Much of what is taught revolves around dates and occurences rather than a general knowlege of the people,and how and why they did the things of historical note.
      I have historical volumes from the mid 19th century,passed down by family members.
      These do not reflect that which modern volumes establish,but rather,focus more on the whole of a study in human history.
      The times,the attitudes,the feeling of the historical relevance,is much more prevalent in them,than in todays”past stories”,which is how I personally refer to them.

      But what do I know?
      Apparently very little.
      -CC.

      • independant thinker

        I heard years ago that Joseph’s name was found inscribed in some of the graineries built during the 7 years of plenty that preceded the 7 years of famine.

  • bob pgh

    chas I hate to inform you but the constitution was passed only on the right of the states to leave the union if they found it contrary to their way of life. New York signed the constitution with right to leave if they wanted to. as did several other states. so the lincoln had no right to go to war with the south. Buchanan the prior president drew up and signed ageements with the confederacy that fort sumpter was to be part of the southern states. when lincoln refused to honor an agreement between the north and south on fort sumpter he violated the law. lincoln did not remove troops from sumpter as stipulated in the agreement between the two countries. that was an act of war by lincoln prior to the shelling of fort sumpter. lincoln was a criminal for violating a treaty. he needed an act of war declaration by congress to which he did do.

    • davidh

      and its a shame the South hadn’t pursued it in the courts, if the courts turned it down the Union would have fallen apart

      • 45caliber

        davidh:

        Like Congress at the time, the courts were controlled by the North. And the Northern politicians and merchants wanted to control the South. Any court action would have been useless and the South knew it.

        • Bruce Barron

          Judge Taney of the Dred Scott decision resisted Lincoln courageously.And his decision consideration the history and constitutional elements were absolutely correct.After Marshall,who was as centrist as Lincoln,Taney was considered the most brilliant member to sit on the bench since Marshall and even now.The Dred Scott decision was right and all the recidivist historians and political correct agendists paint Taney in a wrongful manner.A malignant one in fact.

  • Old Henry

    The murder of Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan was nothing more than a test to see how much outrage there would be in the U.S.

    No outrage, they have the green light to begin murdering U.S. citizens within our borders.

    As Bob pointed out they have an extensive “enimies list”. Whether or not Little Barry retains OUR WH or not unless Ron Paul is elected the Feds will begin murdering U.S. citizens who are their “enemies”.

    • davidh

      OH HENRY, plausible, and very scary

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      Killing a terrorist thug like Al-Awaki is one of the few, very few correct things Marxist Obama has ever done. Right along with helping bring down Libya’s Quidaffi. Even a stopped clock in right once every 12 hours.

      • Old Henry

        Bryan:

        YOu are very nieve. I am guessing you are under 35.

        Re-read Bob’s article a little more closely. The murdered Americans were never charged with anything, only accused – by the guvernment that MURDERED them.

        Now young man, extrapolate that in a communist mind such as Little Barry’s and he will be able to justify killing “terrorists” in this country at will.

        Just as the white Hitler did this half-black Hitler will deem his oppostion as “terrorists”.

        Time for sume Critical Thinking, Bryan.

        • Bryan K Donnelly

          I’m a sexagenarian. Know what that means? One guess, it does NOT mean gay.

          • Jay

            Not sure exactly what, or who you are Bryan. But based on your post’s so far, you appear to be an aggressive, arrogant, smug, and contentious, old fool! I really doubt that you are a professor, although making such a claim, you were hoping, would lend credibility to your arguments? You’re a clever little rat, perhaps the sneakiest cyber-bot so far!

    • 45caliber

      Old Henry:

      They have been murdering people in the US since Day One.

      During the Vietnam war in Siagon, an Army sniper was placed on a plane and flown for hours. He was then taken off the plane and immediately moved to a helicopter. He was flown to a country field and told to climb a hill and watch for a man as he left his house. He was to shoot him and then return for the return trip to Siagon.

      When he reached the top of the hill, he was surprised to see a modern house and cars. He didn’t have long to wait before his target came out. He shot and then scanned the place to see if there was any reaction to his shot. That’s when he spotted the Indiana license plates on the car.

      Since this was told me while I was in Vietnam, I seriously doubt if anyone could ever prove it. But I did wonder who was shot.

      • Old Henry

        45:

        What was the time line of this murder? Was LBJ or his eviler twin Tricky Dick in the WH?

        With today’s internet you could most liely find out who the guy murdered by doing Goodgle searches.

        That is a very sad story and I imagine the killer is haunted by that deed, or he will be immediately after his last breath.

        • Jay

          Hopefully the sniper didn’t ask too many questions, or he, would have been the next victim. Remember the Navy Seals? How can people that support the war on terror be so dumb?

        • 45caliber

          It was during Nixon’s first year if I remember correctly.

      • Cawmun Cents

        Much of that story seems a bit of a stretch.I.E.
        A quick scan of the area would likely have revealed the things you said were revealed only after the shot was taken.
        Most snipers will familiarize themselves with the environment to avoid being shot themselves.
        He was either intentionally uninformed,in which case he would likely again call to question the objective,or he would have had to have been debriefed by intelligencia,a point which neither he or you had further elaborated on.This would make the story suspect at best.
        An urban legend,MOST LIKELY.
        I do not rule out some form of truth to that saga,but rather discount it as having been passed down by too many sources to remain credible,in the format which you posted it.
        Soldiers follow orders,but a blatant violation of that kind would be Hollywood-esque in nature,and arise some suspicion,would’nt you surmise?If the soldier in question did’nt ask WTF?,then one would wonder about the viability of his credentials as a military sniper.

        Good story though….even plausible under the current malaise of today.

  • Old Henry

    Bob:

    Once again, I did not receive my Liberty Alerts.

    Are you having problems with your server?

    Old Henry

  • davidh

    I found your article very informative, however I find very difficult to believe Pres. Lincoln had intentionally set out to destroy the republic, to lay that at his feet is a grave misinterpretation of facts, facts that apparently change with every angle in which its viewed. I cannot argue as to the cause of the civil war, I don’t however believe it was or could have been one issue.The South being a society built on agriculture,with its population spread out, and the North being industrial, with its population concentrated in industrial cities, had a profound effect on representation in the congress, we can see the effect of one party having total control, imagine it being geographically so, the differences in tax collection, and its redistribution, the South’s taxes went in and rarely came back. While its a shame that a peaceful resolution could not be found, since technology would soon aid in bringing slavery’s need to an end, it would not have remedied the other issues, and with I believe agitators on both sides, seeking an advantage, or looking for pay back, some sort of conflict would ensue. However, Lincoln’s desire to maintain the Republic was paramount, yet he had few supporters because of the issues being so diverse,with each State being more independent from the Federal Gov. than today, and then being under pressure of the secessions taken place, and events at FT Sumter,forcing his hand, he did what he had to as there was no provisions in the constitution to deal with this, had he lived I believe he would have restored the republic to its origins.
    Perhaps his assassination conspiracy does have something to it.

    • 45caliber

      davidh:

      Lincoln did not set out to destroy the country but he did intend to put all power into the Federal government, taking it away from the states and the people. If that is destruction of the republic, then that’s what he did. Like most of the Northern politicians at the time, he wanted to use the power of the Federal government to force the states and the people to obey the laws they made.

      • davidh

        while I cannot quote sources, I have read accounts saying those around Lincoln even in his cabinet and the congress that despised him, and Lincoln likewise had little use for them, After his death they went after the south like hungry dogs, there’s got to be more to this all then whats being written here, how can we possibly know where one lie ends and another starts, I choose not to hang this on Lincoln, when he could have been victim of it all along. For me what happened after the war and his death is what needs investigating as there should a good money trail to follow.

        • 45caliber

          davidh:

          That is the reason I said the war was fought for economic reasons. The North wanted to control the profits they were getting from the South and prevent the South from growing in industry. They accomplished this for it wasn’t until nearly WWI that they started to industrialize the South. Any industrializing before that was done by Northern people who came South as “carpet baggers”. It was okay to industrialize the South after the war – and even own plantations – IF IT WAS OWNED BY SOMEONE FROM THE NORTH.

          • davidh

            45 caliber thanks for your replies, I had lived in the south for 26 yrs and learned a much different view taught in school,and I agree with you, there was a few financial reasons behind why the war was fought, as well as what those in the public was demanding. In my family ancestry I’ve learned I have a great great great Uncle who fought and was wounded at bull run,I also have family lineage that goes back to the time of the pilgrims landing, so I have through family research developed quite an interest in American history. I am always interested in learning different views as long as they can be researched and verified.

          • BrotherPatriot

            Have you two done any research on the Rothschild & other royal bloodline familes?

            It can be noted they are bankers of course and have a long standing family history of influencing society.

            Of course then this leads you down the Conspiracy Facts road and it gets really deep from there quickly as you connect the dots.

            But of course….shhh…don’t go do any of that kind of research!

            God Bless & please keep speaking the truth to your fellow Patriots.

  • Robert, TX

    After watching 33 years of rep. vs. dem. catfighting, all we have accomplished is to GROW the federal government to double its size, while quadrupling its power – with the use of federal mandates to the states (funded and unfunded mandates). How many “democrats” work, obey the law, and pay taxes – and yet, still vote democrat? Probably 35 million people, at least. Even worse, how many “republicans” think they have accomplished ANYTHING with their vote? Stop feeding the wolves – and become a PATRIOT Grizzly Bear or Eagle, and save our country – all of the clueless sheep will be slaughtered in the fight.

  • Dixiesuzan

    A good historical piece, correct (mainly) and true. Starting with a good dose of cognitive dissonance one can claim anything.

    Cognitive dissonance on some topics lasts about 1 to 2 generations. It must be renewed. However, the next generations notice the flaws of disjoint. Many of the flaws are logical inconsistancies based on the founding fraudulent truths. The next generations makes the fraud more harmonious by rewriting the disjoints into one harmonious whole.

    Thus it took generations to arrive at the full apotheosis of Lincoln. There is now a Greek Temple in Washington DC in which worship of the larger than life statue of the God is encouraged. The God sits. The fact that the God is seated has significance. In ancient Greek temples the God often stood in dignified folded togga arrayed. To be seated is to imply the God is in the judgement seat. Lincoln, the God of judgement, bringing vengence upon the greatest epidemy of evil known to man, involuntary servitude.

    The disjoint is that the 13th Amendment outlaws involuntary servitude EXCEPT for conviction of crime. The greatest epidemy of evil has penetrated into the penal system of the United States. After passage of the 13th Amendment people logically concluded that they no longer had a duty to obey a Jury Summons since that would be involuntary servitude and they were not convicted criminals. This logic spread and people concluded that a court judgement to pay Mr. X a sum of money was a suggestion only, since to pay M. X was a act of involuntary servitude to turn over over voluntary labor earnings in cash. They were not convicted criminals either. Court judgments were suggestions only to unconvicted citizens since compulsion was involuntary servitude. Property taxes were soon realized to be a form of involuntary servitude. Taxes too were suggestions only not enforeable commands of duty except for convicted criminals. Eventualy the US Supreme Court had to rule that the 13th Amendment applies only to PRIVATE involuntary servitude, not PUBLIC involuntary servitude. The greatest evil known to man resides in government. Thus the military draft was public involuntary servitude and enforceable. When the Sarge said to the new recruit “The government owns you” before law he was not lying. In fact, as an agent of the Federal Government, the Sarge was the slave overseer of the Government Property on Government Plantation.

    This led to the rise of the anarchist movement in America to end involuntary servitude as required under the 13th Amendment by recognizing that “Government was the greatest enemy of man.” This being an extension of the Abolitionist teachings to new territory and no longer the old Southern Slaveocracy. The methodolgy of Abolitionism remained the same. John Browns armed assault and attemted capture of Harpers Ferry Federal Military Arsenal was the act of a Godly Saint, and not an act of terrorism. Hence, so too was the act of Assasination of President McKinley in Buffalo, NY in 1901 by a American anarchist.

    Involuntary servitude battles continue even today by Occupy Now folks on the NY City Brooklyn Bridge as they verbally presented their petition of grievances to the NYPD traffic police to end involuntary servitude to “corporate greed”.

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      THAT’S RIGHT. Why whenever you go to Washington you can see thousands lining up to bow down and prostrate themselves before the Lincoln idol! OK, you may NOT see it unless you give up your Thorazene.

      • dixiesuzan

        Is a visit to the Greek Temple considered a high light and almost a mandatory site to visit when going as a tourist to Washington? Read a few travel brochures, and listen to former tourists. How does Hollywood portray the Lincoln Memorial in the movies? Why is there no Greek Temple to George Washington?
        I do not take any non-prescription drugs by the way. I am not a doper nor hippie.
        If you have hear say evidence to that effect it is an error. If you are stalking me to obtain evidence that I am a doper I will have you arrested for stalking.

        • Bryan K Donnelly

          Glad to hear you don’t take any non-prescription drugs, nor do I. Thorazene, however is a prescription medication treating, among other things, severe paranoia. If you really think people go to the DC momorials to worship the idols of Lincoln or Jefferson, I’d recommend you consult your physician about starting to take it.

  • Samuel Clemens

    World War Three
    The United States of America is always reluctantly dragged into war, usually late when the situation has become desperate, and we are usually unprepared. World War II, a classic war of wars, is the best example. Two despot nations, Japan and Germany were murdering hundred of thousands in the 1930’s while we tried economic sanctions, concessions and diplomatic negations. Sound familiar? Point: Evil can not be threatened, placated or reasoned with. President Franklin Roosevelt saw this and allied the United States with China, England, France, etc to oppose the evil axis. In fact, the war became known as Roosevelt’s war. Sound familiar? In 1939, Congress passed The Neutrality Act which specifically forbid the President of the United States from involving the government in the war. Sound familiar?
    Again, the civilized and humane world is facing an evil that is greater than any evil we have ever faced. This evil is Islamic terrorists. These murderers have an edict from their god that grants them the right to murder anyone that stands in their way to power. These monsters number in the millions and are scattered around the world. We are stupid to threaten, placate or negotiate with them. For example, Israel has been trying to negotiate with the Palestinians for half a century. The irony is they are killing ten times more Muslims than infidels. The butchers must be hunted down and destroyed like the mad dogs they are.
    This means we are in World War III and we do not have a choice. Homeland Security can not protect us in isolation forever. We can enter the war when the situation becomes more desperate and be historically unprepared. Iraq is but one battle in this war. Losing this battle will embolden the terrorists and make the situation more desperate.
    Again, as in WW II, politicians are playing upon the citizens’ fear of war to further their political careers, specifically the Democrat party. Treason best describes their actions. Charles Lindberg, a most revered hero of his time, allied himself with Nazi Germany. During WW II, he was an outcast, not allowed to participate in the war in any way. The Democrats should be thinking about him.
    This war will require strategy as does all wars. The Strategy should be- Search out and destroy Islamic terrorists in the world. Terrorism is a capital crime for which the sentence by a military tribunal can be death. That is the Law of the Geneva Conventions.
    The tactics of the war need to be outlined. Not all Muslims support the terrorists, but, and this is an important but, they will not oppose the terrorists. 1. A prime military tactic should mandate that there is no neutrality in this war. A good Muslim that professes not to support terrorists must a. Fight terrorists. b. Do not allow them in their midst. A tactic of the terrorists is to intermingle with civilians, a lesson learned from the Viet Cong in Vietnam. In a war where the enemy intentionally hides behind civilians, this is a vital tactic. If terrorists are in their midst, good Muslims must expect to suffer the same fate as the terrorists. Our military should not be sent in harms way and not be allowed to defend themselves. 2. This military tactic should be a prime propaganda tactic and made clear to the good Muslims. We would be killing far fewer Muslims than the terrorists are currently killing. Until the Muslim world realizes that the greatest killer of Muslims is Muslim terrorists, this war will never end. This is a reality of war that none want to face.
    The sooner we accept the fact that we are in WW III, the better are our chances of survival and the fewer of us will die.

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      DEAD ON ACCURATE! Like it or not, this nation is in a global war with Islamofascism that will, with “cold” and “hot” periods probably last a century. Deying it, hiding from it, attempting to evade it will be every bit as successful as the poor pathetic “America First” isolationist ninnies in the 1930′s to stay out of WWII. America is not the “world’s policeman” because we wanted or asked for the job. We simply inherited it from Great Britain. Ever wonder why the Monroe Doctrine actually worked? The Royal Navy (for thier own self interest) were out in the Atlantic and Carribean enforcing it! Our pathetic little navy of the time wasn not involved. Free trade creates worldwide prosperity. Absent the US Navy patroling the sea lanes, the entire world would resemble the ocean off Somalia. We do it for our OWN SELF INTEREST. Those unable to see beyond the next county line seldom understand this.

      • Jay

        Oh my God, someone please help me, the Islamo-fascists are after me. We best annihilate the lot, before someone discovers that we, by our constant, and arrogant insistence, that they should be our slaves, and that we, the supreme white race, should have complete access to their land and resources, are the architects, instigators, and culprits of their hatred towards us. But behold, by our trickery and lies, we shall convince ourselves, that they are the devils, not we!

        • Bryan K Donnelly

          Let me recommend you read almost any one of the books 80 or so on Islam and the Middle East by Bernard Lewis PhD; formerly University of London, now professor emeritus from Princeton. You will see that radical Islam hates us NOT for what we DO but for what we ARE. They hate the fact that we’ve left them in our dust technologycally and culturally. These are semi civilized barbarians who’se 8th century religion has never had a ranaissance, reformation, or enlightenment. PJ O’ Roarke called them the “remidial reading class of world civilization.”

          • Jay

            Bryan, you stated: You will see that radical Islam hates us NOT for what we DO but for what we ARE.

            Truth be told Bryan, I, myself, at times, hate what we are, and hate what we do. Surly you can’t deny the crap in our own back yard? The human rights violations, the mindless and out of control usury, the blood thirsty genocide against the helpless, especially the unborn, and the not-yet dead, the confiscations of property, the denial of liberty and peace to our own citizens. Who exactly is the barbarian Bryan?

            Bryan, you stated: They hate the fact that we’ve left them in our dust technologycally and culturally. These are semi civilized barbarians who’se 8th century religion has never had a ranaissance, reformation, or enlightenment. PJ O’ Roarke called them the “remidial reading class of world civilization.”

            That is absolute and total non-sense, a lie, in fact! The islamic intellectual contribution to the west, is undeniable. You lie, or you are totally ignorant of Islamic history!

            For Europe and Western civilization the contributions of Islamic Spain were of inestimable value. When the Muslims entered southern Spain – which they called al-Andalus – barbarians from the north had overrun much of Europe and the classical civilization of Greece and Rome had gone into eclipse. Islamic Spain then became a bridge by which the scientific, technological, and philosophical legacy of the ‘Abbasid period, along with the achievements of al-Andalus itself, passed into Europe.

            In the first century of Islamic rule in Spain the culture was largely derived from that of the flourishing civilization being developed by the ‘Abbasids in Baghdad. But then, during the reign of ‘Abd al-Rahman III (912-961), Islamic Spain began to make its own contributions.

            ‘Abd al-Rahman III was passionately interested in both the religious and the secular sciences. He was also determined to show the world that his court at Cordoba equaled in greatness that of the caliphs at Baghdad. Sparing neither time nor expense, he imported books from Baghdad and actively recruited scholars by offering hand some inducements. Soon, as a result, scholars, poets, philosophers, historians, and musicians began to migrate to al-Andalus. Soon, too, an infrastructure of libraries, hospitals, research institutions, and centers of Islamic studies grew up, establishing the intellectual tradition and educational system which made Spain outstanding for the next four hundred years.

            One of the earliest of the scholars drawn to al-Andalus was ‘Abbas ibn Firnas, who came to Cordoba to teach music (then a branch of mathematical theory) and to acquaint the court of ‘Abd al-Rahman with the recent developments in this field in Baghdad. Not a man to limit himself to a single field of study, however, Ibn Firnas soon began to investigate the mechanics of flight. He constructed a pair of wings out of feathers on a wooden frame and made the first attempt at flight, anticipating Leonardo da Vinci by some six hundred years. Later, having survived the experiment with a back injury, he also constructed a famous planetarium. Not only was it mechanized – the planets actually revolved – but it simulated such celestial phenomena as thunder and lightning.

            As in the ‘Abbasid centers of learning, Islamic Spain’s interest in mathematics, astronomy, and medicine was always lively – partly because of their obvious utility. In the tenth century Cordoban mathematicians began to make their own original contributions. The first original mathematician and astronomer of al-Andalus was Maslamah al-Majriti, who died in 1008. He had been preceded by competent scientists – men like Ibn Abi ‘Ubaydah of Valencia, a leading astronomer in the ninth century. But al-Majriti was in a class by himself. He wrote a number of works on mathematics and astronomy, studied and elaborated the Arabic translation of Ptolemy’s Almagest, and enlarged and corrected the astronomical tables of the famous al-Khwarazmi. He also compiled conversion tables in which the dates of the Persian calendar were related to Hijrah dates, so that for the first time the events of Persia’s past could be dated with precision.

            Al-Zarqali, known to the West as Arzachel, was another leading mathematician and astronomer who flourished in Cordoba in the eleventh century. Combining theoretical knowledge with technical skill, he excelled at the construction of precision instruments for astronomical use and built a water clock capable of determining the hours of the day and night and indicating the days of the lunar months. He also contributed to the famous Toledan Tables, a highly accurate compilation of astronomical data. Arzachel was famous as well for his Book of Tables. Many “books of tables” had been compiled before then, but his is an almanac containing tables which allow one to find the days on which Coptic, Roman, lunar, and Persian months begin, other tables which give the position of planets at any given time, and still others facilitating the prediction of solar and lunar eclipses. He also compiled valuable tables of latitude and longitude.

            Another important scholar was al-Bitruji, who developed a new theory of stellar movement, based on Aristotle’s thinking, in his Book of Form, a work that was later popular in the West. The names of many stars are still those given them by Muslim astronomers, such as Altair (from al-tair, “the flier”), Deneb (from dhanab, “tail”), and Betelgeuse (from bayt al-jawza, “the house of the twins” or “Gemini”). Other terms still in use today such as zenith, nadir, and azimuth are also derived from Arabic and so reflect the work of the Muslim astronomers of al-Andalus and their impact on the West.

            Scientists of Islamic Spain also contributed to medicine, the Muslim science par excellence. Interest in medicine goes back to the very earliest times (the Prophet himself stated that there was a remedy for every illness), ” and although the greatest Muslim physicians practiced in Baghdad, those in al-Andalus made important contributions too. Ibn al-Nafis, for example, discovered the pulmonary circulation of blood.

            During the tenth century in particular, al-Andalus produced a large number of excellent physicians, some of whom studied Greek medical works translated at the famous House of Wisdom in Baghdad. Among them was Ibn Shuhayd, who in a fundamental work recommended drugs be used only if the patient did not respond to diet and urged that only simple drugs be employed in all cases but the most serious. Another important figure was Abu al-Qasim al-Zahrawi, the most famous surgeon of the Middle Ages. Known in the West as Abulcasis and Al-bucasis, he was the author of the Tasrif, a book that, translated into Latin, became the leading medical text European universities during the later Middle Ages. Its section on surgery contains illustrations of surgical instruments of elegant, functional design and great precision.

            It continues: http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/ihame/Ref4.htm

          • Bryan K Donnelly

            Great Jay. The Islamic world was ahead of Europe a thousand years ago. Please take a look at thier history since 1600. Zero, nada, backward, beinghted, barbaric. The Iranians hang Christians, Bahais, AND “suductive” 12 year old girls. The Saudis treat women like chattel. Most of the Islamic world practices female genital mutilation. The Quran, their holy book advocates war on all nonbelievers. What other major religion causes problems in TODAY’ world? They are semi civilized savages.

          • Jay

            Bryan, you’re a racist! Crawl back under your rock!

          • Bryan K Donnelly

            Race has nothing to do with it. Muslims come in all races except eskimos; black, white brown south Asian, east Asian. The problem is with the pernicious CULTURE, not anybody’s race.

    • Karolyn

      The extremists hate us because we tread where we are not wanted. Plain and simple. Do you really think they would be terrorizing the west if we weren’t involved in their countries’ politics?

      • http://teamlaw.org Jazzabelle

        Exactly.

      • Bryan K Donnelly

        It is impossible NOT to be involved in their politics. They sit on half the world’s oil, more’s the pity. Colonialism ended a century or two too early.

        They’re a leftover from a bygone age. When was the last time Christians killed unbelievers? In the 17th Century. The Islamic world is an anachronism. By the way, Islam never CREATED any genuine advanced culture. They TOOK OVER the more advanced civilizations they conquered; Persia, Egypt, Byzantium, Mesopotamia. Muhammad was an iliterate desert trader in the most backwqard part of the world save subsaharan Africa. We will, no doubt, have to kill a million or two before they can be properly civilized. DO read Dr. Bernard Lewis’ “What Went Wrong” for an excellent analysis of Islam’s decline.

        • Jay

          It was not Christians that killed, as you asked: “when was the last time Christians killed unbelievers back in the 17 century”? , Rather, it was the roman catholic organization that slaughtered anyone who opposed them, and they were anything but Christian. You sir, posses an anaemic understanding of history!

          • Bryan K Donnelly

            During the 17th century Thirty Years War, Catholics happily slaughtered Protestants, Protestants butchered Cathoilcs with equal glee and various different Protestant sects murdered each other with similar vigor. And, of course, all were murdering Jews. Fortunately that was the LAST major religious war in the west. Islam is still in that state; Shia killing Sunni and both happily murdering Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Bahais.

          • Jay

            Non-sense! The roman catholic corporation in the 17 century was the supreme, religious, military, and political power, even above Kings! All the slaughtering was under the control, and was sanctioned only by the oligarchical, roman-catholic, organization! Which, btw, was not Christian, in any sense of the word. Need ye brush up on its history? I would highly recommend it!

        • http://teamlaw.org Jazzabelle

          Bryan wrote:
          “The Islamic world is an anachronism…. We will, no doubt, have to kill a million or two before they can be properly civilized.”

          This speaks for itself…no comment needed.

          • Jay

            The man is insane!

          • Bryan K Donnelly

            No not insane, just realistic. Socrates said it best 2500 years ago. “Only the DEAD have seen the end of war.”

      • Jay

        My sentiments exactly Karolyn! I would add: Isn’t it interesting that when the west orchestrated the conflict between the Soviets and Afghanistan, the west main stream media, always referred to the mu·ja·he·deen, as “freedom fighters, fierce combatants, fighters for freedom, die-hards, that never say quit”. We generously provided them with MILITARY aid, and we would constantly praise them for their bravery, and commitment to freedom. However, now that they refuse to bend their knee to the will of the west, we label them “Terrorists, Extremists, Radicals, Savages and so on…What manner of hypocrisy is this? Is it any wonder that the American administration lacks credibility?

        • Bryan K Donnelly

          The soviets INVADED Afghanistan, murdered the president, replaced him with their stooge and then made vicious war on the Afghan people. They killed hundreds of thousands. Of course we backed the Afghan resistiance, for our OWN reasons; helped bring down what Ronald Reagan called the “evil empire,” Marxist-Leninist Russia. Made the world a far better place.

          OUR action in Afghanistan was intially to destroy the very bases whence Al Queda trained and dispched terrorist thugs to attack us, killing over 3000 Ameircans. Did you somehow miss 9/11?

          Afghanistan is so utterly backward, tribal, and in a perpetual state of Hobbesian “state of nature,” meaning the “war of all against all” that nobody will ever likely drag it into the 18th century much less the 21st. The British tried for years. Most likely we’ll be compelled to come back again and again. But it is all part of what will likely be a century long war against Islamofascism.

          Pity really. Like most Islamic peoples the Afghans are thier OWN worst enemies. But world civilization and the global economy MUST be defended against these 8th century throwbacks.

          Otto von Bismarck, the greatest political genius of the 19th century pur it best. “Die großen Fragen unserer Zeiten werden nicht durch parlamentarische Debatten und Auflösungen… aber durch Blut und Eisen vereinbart.” “The greatest questions of our times will not be be settled by parlaimentary debates and resolutions… but by BLOOD and IRON.” True then, true TODAY.

  • B

    This is an interesting viewpoint.

    Who is going to ask Obama to step down? It should not be Occupy Wall street, but Occupy White House.

  • FreedomFighter

    We cant change the past, but we can write the future, only if we beat the totalitarians.

    Laus Deo
    Semper Fi

    • Robert, TX

      True! The “totalitarians” control 98% of both parties (as well as the media) and the 100 million sheep that vote are content to call each other names and vote for incumbents. FIRE CONGRESS! and vote for citizen legislators (and they do not have “D’s” or “R’s” by their name.

      • Bryan K Donnelly

        “The “totalitarians” control 98% of both parties”

        HELP THE PARANOIDS ARE AFTER ME!

        • Jay

          Paranoia is a mental disorder, as is the denial of a clear and present danger! There can be no doubt as to the one that ails you, Bryan.

        • JeffH

          hmmmm…Americans know in their hearts that something about this is not right. Yet they say to themselves, “I haven’t done anything wrong. I have nothing to fear from my government.”

        • 45caliber

          Bryan:

          You are not paranoid if people really are out to get you.

          • Bryan K Donnelly

            98% of people? Get back on your meds.

  • Dixiesuzan

    Without repentence, God eventually gives them over to their vain imaginings. This is called Progressive America.

  • bob pgh

    well now we know some truth.

  • azwayne

    Some true points and interesting, touch on facts while not causes the needed rebellion. One statement I noted incorrect, you said our government wasn’t killing citizens until Alawlaki, WRONG, our government killed John F Kennedy, no one specific, the establishment didn’t want him exposing and stopping government control. To use President’s names to blame is pure idiocy, not one of them can do it without CONGRESS support and approval. We better start making changes, NO INCUMBENTS 2012. Just beginning. Expose all lies possible, hard to get justice in a country when your DOJ leader is the most corrupt in America. Call it war, it’s military industrial complex providing economy for corrupt government leaders and congressmen. Buy congress positions so your investments grow 10 fold.

  • bob pgh

    we need to reclaim our nation/

  • Leviathon

    I have to laugh at those who call these ENEMIES of the U.S. “American Citizens”. Those who call them “American Citizens” are Sympathizers, and need to have their heads examined. Obviously they are not “American Citizens”, they are TERRORISTS. They changed their way of life and religion to claim JIHAD on those who are actually American Citizens. They control by fear and threat, wake up people and get your head out of the sand and your back side.
    Any person who claims to be an “American Citizen” and reads from the Quran and shouts Anti American slurs from the street corner, should there for be Targeted as and ENEMY of the U.S. and taken out.
    NO QUESTIONS ASKED!!!!!!!!!!
    Obama is turning this country into Germany back in WW2, where only the rich will dominate and leave the rest to rely on them or DIE. You decide on your fate and direction. Obama is NOT an AMERICAN CITIZEN, he was born in Kenya and bought and pushed into office by those with money, Bildiburgers, Soros, Rothchilds, and the list goes on.
    Wake up America, take control of what is rightfully yours, FREEDOM, the CONSTITUTION and America that your Sons and Daughters, Mothers, Fathers and Relatives died to keep FREE. Obama will SAY and I do SAY anything to get re-elected, He’s a snake waiting to POISON our Soverienty and FREEDOMS. He is willing to let the U.N. into our way of life and herd us like sheep for the SLAUGHTER.

    • http://teamlaw.org Jazzabelle

      Actually, the “Trading With the Enemies Act” defines ALL United States citizens as “the enemy.”

  • David ret Army officer

    Read the “Real Lincoln” for eye opening perspective. Slavery was a major issue, though other countries solved it like Wilberforces’ England without going to a super self destructive war. Industrialization probably would have been a key to not needing agricultural slaves over a 20-40 year period. Though the South had the high ground as far as states rights and Constitution, they stupidly fell without thinking for the goading toward war by Lincoln & Co. Funny how Lincoln had WV secede from Va during the war, just like EP was just for slaves in the South, not for those in the Union.
    Though I am weary of the stupid Middle East foreign and military policy, those 2 guys were traitors (Benedict Arnolds) serving in a foreign terrorist military and declaring hate and destruction for America, and just cause they were born here to foreign parents is a twisting of the 14th, that even Sen. Rand Paul has strongly suggested against the “anchor” babies from illegals.

  • Joyce Sickels

    I read all of your comments and Bob’s article and with all that was commented on I as an American Citizen ONLY wants the THUGS out of our Government and they can leave and go to another country, I don’t care…. just go! America is not for sale and We The People are struggling to get “OUR” Country BACK…America is NOT FOR SALE! Just like Leviathon said in a comment above mine …about the Enemies of the U.S. ” American Citizens…they are and everything the or she said in there comment is exactly how I feel and a lot of other people that I know! This whole deal that America is in is pathetic and we will get America Back!

  • http://httpwwwaol.com ARMY/RET

    I think America will be at war as in revolution befor the end of the year ,and this president is the leader and his agenda is to destroy America and democrats are backing it up.They want riots with blood in the streets of America.If there is a congress or senate Has love for our country Inpeach this dictator fast.If not you are just as blame as he.Love this country or leave it now.Just like they they back up the wars in the eastern country.They devided the eastern nations and now have devided our nation.But in the end they will be judged by allmighty they cant control that & dictate to GOD

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      Much as I despise Obama and his minions, I seriously doubt we’ll see anyghing like “revolution.” Leftists just aren’t up to it; couldn’t organize a two cas funeral. Then too, we on the right are the ONES WITH THE GUNS. Moreover, as you no doubt know, most of our professional military hate Obama’s guts. They WILL attmpt to steal electiions, but that can be handled. Fortunately the STATES run elections.

  • bob pgh

    God blessed us and we gave God the finger. we have banned God from schools, celebatations, and our government, even though our founding fathers asked for Gods guidandce and blessings we think we are better than God. He is now starting to withdraw from blessing us, and protecting us. we as a nation believe in gay marriage, gay teaching in our schools, and gay caring for children over religious care. we are lost

  • JeffH

    Bob Livingston, just as you promised…a great, great follow-up to last week’s article.

    This statement, more than anything else, stood out like a sore thumb:

    Americans know in their hearts that something about this is not right. Yet they say to themselves, “I haven’t done anything wrong. I have nothing to fear from my government.”

    • Jay

      Like cattle before the slaughter, i wonder if they mooo those very same notions: “I haven’t done anything wrong. I have nothing to fear from my keepers.”

      • JeffH

        :) “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”

        • Jay

          YIKES, I”M OUT OF HERE!!!

          • JeffH

            …scares me just saying it…kinda like someone whos always says “trust me”… :)

  • Thinking About

    Where have these stories been for ten years? Congress voted to give GWB the decision of what to do and GWB invaded Iraq. It was reported 10 years ago Al-Queda was in Afganistain. We sent troops there. Our intelligence found bin Laden in Pakistan. Al-Awlaki was found in Yemen. This group does not have a country to invade but we have listened to their threats, “our government” did not have to tell me they was terrorist.
    Now on the other hand if I am not to take information from “our government” what creditable reason should I take from this site Ron Paul should be elected. I question Dr Paul’s decision to seriously enter a presidential race at his age since he probably studied the aging process during his medical training and further medical training over his years of practice.

    • http://teamlaw.org Jazzabelle

      Wow, I guess you think Ronald Reagan shouldn’t have run for President, either.

      • Thinking About

        I saw certain actions in Reagan’s term as president which totally backs up my thoughts. Through no fault of Reagan, Alzheimer’s is a terrible thing to deal with and it was truly evident. It did not make him a bad person but Alzheimer’s has a way of blocking through logic process. L
        This terrible condition can also affect young people and must be addressed.

        • http://teamlaw.org Jazzabelle

          The proper way to address that (if it affects a sitting president) is following the Constitution’s set procedure for declaring the president unable to serve, and the VP takes over. Refusing to vote for an older candidate because he “might” get Alzheimer’s is a juvenile mindset … sort of like the old, “Women shouldn’t be allowed to vote or serve in office because they get irrational once a month and can’t be trusted to act in the best interests of society.”

        • Bryan K Donnelly

          Reagan only exhibited symptoms of Alzheimers several years AFTER he’s left office.

  • http://httpwwwaol.com ARMY/RET

    America has no boundry We are wide open and obama loves it.To also include our shores 360 a round.OH! Dont forget all the combat type weapons which the government gave to drug runners to use on us.I guess this will help this Mr Holdens cause to bring down America Just like he wanted to protected Terrorist under our constitution.I think someone should order a background check a national check ,not just local.And now this hacker I just wonder if they are able to turn the drones on us and blame the hackers

  • http://www.TomBlairEA.com Thomas Avery Blair

    Question: If one who makes Liberals afraid is a terrorist, then why have we not yet already executed each and every component of “The Tea Party” as “terrorist” here in the USA?

    Answer: Most of our armed forces, at least in the ranks, support the principles supported publicly and privately by “The Tea Part.” In the course of further development of “cognitive dissonance” our troops will perhaps stand down and permit UN troops to do the dirty work, perhaps?

    At least food for thought, is it not? Evil thrives when good men do nothing in opposition to that evil…right?

    Respectfully submitted,

    Thomas Avery Blair, EA

  • http://httpwwwaol.com ARMY/RET

    Hey BOB Our government not only gave GOD the finger.But also the American people,the true American.The government now worships strange gods,Monkeys,Trees.power,atheist,Themselves as gods ,Money, sex in the schools with anything goes Anything that is abommination to the true GOD.That America once loved so much.And now America is being under satans curse and this is only the start of it.

  • Buck

    The astute will always be able to tell the difference between our government and our country . If our government is not out to destroy our country then nobody is . The Unitede States constitution has been a thorn in the side of wannabe dictators and idealists of varying creeds from day one and real Americans that love and are proud of our country are losing be cause we took too much for granted and failed to elect leaders with the same values and principles of the people and the good ones we did put in were quickly corrupted by the system put in place by the cabal of corruption that preceded them . Are we now lost people ?

  • http://httpwwwaol.com ARMY/RET

    America has fallin away,AS it states inthe Bible the end will not come till the falling away,And not just America has but the hole world has.Ther is not a nation which has not fell from grace.Nations at war with nations also which our Bible also states,Who says the Bible is not true is a fool,How much more proof do the unbelievers need.??

  • Libertarian58

    Just look at all the FLAK that came the way of Ron Paul from “conservatives” when he questioned the morality of using assasination against a US citizen. Even the “good” guys are using situational ethics to justify murder.

  • Sail2pete

    Sail2pete says:
    October 10, 2011 at 1:59 pm
    I DO NOT THINK MANY PEOPLE REALIZE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DEMOCRACY AND A REPUBLIC. FIRST OF ALL MOST PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED AND THINK THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS A DEMOCRACY — IT IS NOT! — IT IS A REPUBLIC AND DIFFERENCE IS THIS——
    A DEMOCRACY IS LIKE TWELVE WOLVES AND ONE SHEEP VOTING ON WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE FOR DINNER.
    IN A REPUBLIC THE MINORITY HAS A STRONG VOICE — NOT SO IN A DEMOCRACY WHERE THE MAJORITY ALWAYS RULES AND THE MINORITY GETS EATEN.

    Reply

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      I also loathe mobocracy. But you are wrong. We are a democratic republic. The constitution is designed to PREVENT government FROM doing things. We just need to start observing it again. Once we toss out Obama & Co. we can accomplish this, just so long as we do NOT nominate Mitt Romney. I’m for Herman Cain.

      • Clint

        Cain, his last name should be a clue to his true intentions. 999 upside down is 666. Cain worked for the FED in Kansas City. He has worked for Americans worst enemy and you have to take off the blinders! RonPaul2012 is our only choice to try and restore the Republic.

        • Bryan K Donnelly

          Ron has absolutely NO chance of ever getting the nomination OR being elected president. He knows it. I’m a libertarian Republican (www.rlc.org) and many of my confused Republican Liberty Caucus friends have been long time Paul supporters, but have recently dropped him. So many of his backers are of the zany John Birch Society conspiracy nuts looking for cabals and “indsiders” under every bed, he’s become a joke. Ron adamantly refuses to disavow ‘em.

          Come to think of it, there are lots of similar crazies represented HERE. Great quote.

          “The central belief of every moron is that he is the victim of a mysterious conspiracy against his common rights and true deserts.”
          HL Mencken

      • Mad Max

        Total lack of judgement. This is exaclty why the country is in ruin. It doesn’t matter who we vote for, they’re not going change anything. They don’t have a clue.

        FIGHT THE CAUSE – NOT THE SYMPTOM
        OsiXs (Revolution 2.0 – The Smart Revolution)

      • Jay

        Cain may well be Perry’s vice presidential running mate. This Axis of Evil will seal the deal. Most Blacks now are sick of the socialist-communist policies of Islamic Mulatto Barry Davis Obama and his White Roman Catholic master, Joe Biden—as intended. Blacks now seek to vote for another Black man that will begin to “restore the economy.” Herman Cain is their man, well-spoken, patient, backing the pope’s Crusade in the Near East and—most cunning!

        The real Rick Perry is a traitor, a cold-blooded killer secretly aligned with the Black Pope. For Perry is facilitating our future Sino-Soviet-Muslim invasion. Yes, Rick Perry has, in fact, given away Texas to the Jesuit-ruled Red Chinese government and its mega corporations. And that bloody, inquisitional government is the puppet of Rome, the nation of China, now commercialized and militarized, to be the 21st century “hammer” of the Black Pope.

        Governor Perry has worked with Knight of Malta/Knight of the Equestrian Order King Juan Carlos in the planning and groundwork for the building of the Trans-Texas Corridor—the superhighway from Mexico into Canada intended to enable millions of Chinese communist killers to quickly invade North America, divide it in half, and, from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean, exert total control over West. (This was the real purpose for the Order’s Adolf Hitler in building the Autobahn!)

        China may well perform a huge pincer movement, its invaders from the West Coast meeting with the forces from the superhighway to slaughter everything in their path. Agenda 21 will then be realized, the “re-wilding” of Mid-Western and Western North America. In Canada, from apostate Protestant Windsor to Vancouver, China will carry out the same policy of total annihilation, the “extirpation” of all liberals and heretics “from the face of the whole earth!”

        • Bryan K Donnelly

          Are you joking here? One surely hopes so. Otherwise you are a psychotic.

  • Chas

    Our present federal constitution did not mention or address secession because it was already dealt with in Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation. Just as a specific declared number was required to bind the States into perpetual Union, those joining agreed upon its method for leaving constitutionally. Revolution is always the extra-legal method for ending and forming new government. I revere the work of our founders. I revere God and the “Rule of Law.” The civil war was about many things, but it began with treason, followed by an attempt by some to split the Union by force. By force, legal, constitutional force, Lincoln preserved the Union. Our way to restore our perpetual Union is by obeying our supreme Law and removing all unconstitutional Acts which were not lawful when passed nor when signed by presidents. Keep reading folks. But question everything you read. Research authors. Faith and Reason led our founders, let us be guided by nothing less. I agree there is but one set of facts and only One Truth. Let us reason those out together. Let passions be cooled and or controlled. God gave us reason so we could overcome passion. Hot rhetoric is for those unable or unwilling to resort to reason, logic, and Truth.

    • http://teamlaw.org Jazzabelle

      Chas writes:
      “Our present federal constitution did not mention or address secession because it was already dealt with in Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation.”

      This is lame. The Articles of Confederation no longer has legal force. The reason that our federal Constitution doesn’t address secession is because our Constitution is a CONTRACT. A party to a contract can’t exercise powers over the other parties that aren’t agreed to as part of the contract. Anyone can leave a contract at any time unless the contract forbids it–and our Constitution doesn’t forbid states from leaving. So secession isn’t mentioned in the Constitution because nobody had a problem with it happening!

      Chas wrote:
      “Revolution is always the extra-legal method for ending and forming new government.”

      That may be correct, but it’s irrelevant. The so-called Civil War wasn’t a revolution, since it didn’t seek to replace the federal government.

      • 45caliber

        Jazzabelle:

        You are correct. The only reason a government was formed rather than a Confederation in the first place was because the founders didn’t trust the various states to come to the defense of another that was attacked under a Confederation. They knew from their experiences with the English that they had to have ALL of the states united against such an attack. Their real idea was basically each state went its own way EXCEPT during war and then only if we were attacked first. Then all would assemble to meet the threat. They were afraid that some country like England would return and take out one state at a time. The initial government was not meant to do more than that.

      • Chas

        Nothing in the US Constitution declares or even implies that it ended or replaced the perpetual Union identified as the united States of America. Many constitutional scholars debate the “force of law” enjoyed by BOTH the declaration of Independence and Articles of Confederation. Mostly it is liberals and progressives and those who seek to subvert those documents and alter that perpetual Union who take the position you take. But the Articles are clear, explicit, and unambiguous and I insist your or anyone’s position be at least equally clear and explicit. So far no one has provided any facts to refute my assertions. I welcome the ongoing discussion, and continue to ask that all be open minded in considering each view.

        Lastly, the “southern States” not only intended replacing the federal government, they unconstitutionally claimed to have formed a “new confederacy.” Lincoln was crystal clear that he embraced the perpetual Union and was obeying the Articles and US Constitution in preserving the Union. Please continue reading source documents with an open mind and I believe you must then yield to my position.

        Respectfully

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      YOU got it! Congradulations.

    • 45caliber

      Chas:

      “Revolution is always the extra-legal method for ending and forming new government.”

      You are correct. But it is not the ONLY way to end and form a new government. What we are trying to do now in our voting is a try at ending and forming a new government peacefully.

      • Chas

        I didn’t say it was the ONLY way. I said it was an extra-legal or other than legal way. Voting, valid constitutional amendments and another constitutional convention are other ways.

  • JeffH

    We are fighting a war on terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Yemen. Our government tells us the enemy is al-Qaida. Yet, in supporting the rebellion in Libya, U.S. and NATO gave power and aid and comfort to a rebellion that is made up of al-Qaida terrorists that have fought against and killed U.S. soldiers on other battlefields. Cognitive dissonance.

    Our government tells us…LIES!

    Secret panel can put Americans on “kill list’
    (Reuters) – American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/05/us-cia-killlist-idUSTRE79475C20111005

  • robert

    let us remember the truth ehat this country is in a slow revolt against comunistic government of reid and obama

  • Mad Max

    Our government is out of control because we allow it. We have to stop complaining and do our jobs.

    FIGHT THE CAUSE – NOT THE SYMPTOM
    Read “Common Sense 3.1” at ( http://www.revolution2.osixs.org )

    • theotherrhalf

      Thank you Mad Max

  • AJ

    Sad but true “we are a nation in which the government which is a secret cabal — can just decide to murder whomever it wishes.” Gee how long is it going to take to realize this America?

    • Bryan K Donnelly

      Off your meds? Get help.

  • robert

    chas when you look at the conastitutional ocnvention new york said that they retain the right to leave the country if they do not like how it works, as did new jersey, and virgina, and conn. so you have 4 stated that retained their right to leave the union if they deamed it necessary. the southern states exercised their right to leave the union. Buchanan was president and made ageements the southern states on the disalution of the government spliting the north and south. the president made these agreements before lincoln became president and they were signed by the president and the jefferson davis the southern president. it is a fact and lincoln violated the division of property of the north and the south. fort sumpter was agreed to be a southern land. and lincoln sent supplies to sumpter in violation of President buchanans agreements with the south. lincoln is the war monger of his time. he was the dictator and cheif as obama is trying to be now. Obama takes actions he is not qualified to do. He does not have the right to declare war without congress.

    • Chas

      First, I point out all 13 colony/States ratified/adopted the Articles of Confederation establishing a perpetual Union called/styled as the united States of America. Secondly, I re-read New York’s ratification of the US Constitution and it does not state or mention any alteration to the Articles of Confederation nor does it state what you summarized as their sole right to secede. I ask you to quote where you believe your position is supported in New York’s ratification of the US Constitution. I ask for quotes and facts, not wishes, feelings, or opinions. I have clearly stated and quoted the basis for my assertions. Will you do likewise, or else consider you may be in error, and my position just may be valid?

      • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

        You are correct. Wishful thinking in hindsight for anyone who thinks otherwise.

  • Clint

    “It has ever been my experience that folks who have no vices, have very few virtues.” Abraham Lincoln
    The turbulence surrounding the civil war period would have probably forced any people in positions of power to make decisions,that most likely,they wished to never have to make. From my limited query of Lincoln, he refused to take high interest loans from the sociopathic bankster families to finance the war chest. These same sociopaths have been behind central banking schemes like the Federal Reserve/IMF/BIS. These sociopaths finance conflicts behind the scenes and direct history to suit its own agenda. The sociopaths use their money power to finance psychopaths to enforce and eliminate opponents. They use subversion and infiltration tactics. With money power they bribe politicians/judges/bureaucratic policy makers to eliminate competition. All the while, they create an illusion that everything happens by chance and if you vote for one of their 2 puppets things will get better. We need to focus our fury on the central banking families before its too late!

    • 45caliber

      Clint:

      I agree with most of your comments but wanted to point out one thing to you. A sociopath and a psychopath are exactly the same thing. The word “psychopath” was put into disfavor due to the old movie “Psycho” and the name was changed to sociopath so people wouldn’t get as upset about those people. But there is NO difference between them. Both are judges based on their decisions. They make all decisions based on what is good for them alone. It doesn’t matter if they rob or kill as long as they get benefit from it. And they don’t understand why others might get upset about it.

      • Clint

        Fair enough. They have similar traits. I just don’t want to refer to them as elites since they prefer that label. What’s the best word to describe wealthy people that view anyone not of their caliber as expendable vermin?

        • Karolyn

          Pigs?

        • Jay

          Demons!

        • 45caliber

          Psychopath is fine with me.

  • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

    Abraham Lincoln was a real man, not a God. The South knew clearly if he was elected, there would be a violent contest to sustain the Union of these United States. Abraham Lincoln did as Ron Paul or anyone else elected to the Presidency of the United States would do, he used war as the only means left to secure the Union so as not to perish from the earth when the Soutern states rebeliously went ahead with secession. The South was unlawful in it’s means and ways of secession, this was a Union written in blood, not only the Constitution. As I said in a posting toward the beginning, if Abraham Lincoln had locked up all people against his policies, Horace Greely and Lincoln’s own cabinet, the idiot Chase, Steward, etc would never have seen the light of day. It was not quite as simple as Bob portrays. Lincoln did as Lincoln believed he should do as any man or woman in the same seat would do, use war or any tool that came to hand to hold the Union together. I dare say anyone including Ron Paul would do the same today if any state tried to leave this lawful Union.

    • http://DoULoveJesus.Wordpress.com Mark Dabney

      You are missing a few things – first Ron Paul has acknowledged the legitimacy of the south’s cause. Second – the southern states entered into the union with the clear understanding that they were free to leave should they wish to do so. RP acknowledged the fact that there is no place in the constitution that obliges the state to remain in the union. What caused more bloodshed than all other wars combined could have been done peacefully by acknowledging the legitimate concerns – and dealing aptly with those that incited hostility between the north and the south.

      • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

        Mark, Ron Paul has his own interpretations as does everyone else. Tell me where in the Constitution there are any provisons for any single state, or group of states, to legally absolve their contract as a state of these United States of America? To my knowledge, and I hav read quite a bit over several years, there are none now just as there were none when the Southern states illegally left the Union.
        The South quit the rationalizing and talking, they left the negotiating table, and abruptly started illegal separation from the Union shortly after Lincoln’s inaugeration. They did not give Lincoln a choice but to do as he did, hold this Union together. The South started the hostilities when they beseiged Fort Sumter, and they knew well and good what was to com and prayd for it. And Ron Paul is not God, just as Abraham Lincoln was not. Ron Paul can be wrong and is wrong concerning the legality of breaking the Union.

        • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

          You seem to be taking some for granted taht you not understand. I did not state there was any difference in The Revolutionary War and The Civil War. The only difference was the the United States Of America won the Revolutionary War and we were One Nation Under God and in the Civil War the South lost when they illegally tried to leave the Union, and we still remained One Nation Under God. I swear, som of you folks sem to think if Mr Livingston as you call him or Ron Paul says somthing that is fact. You are completely and insanely delusional with those rock solid beliefs. Are you actually in a cult whre the lader knows all? Use your had lad. The points I made are valid and I do say that Bob or Mr Livingston simplified the matter and stand on that statement. And I may read the book you suggest, but I have studied history because I love history, and doubt the book you suggest is going to change a thing I believe, I don’t change with the wind for any nitwit that comes along. Let Mr Livingston and Ron Paul be your God and Protector, what you believe is fine with me, even if irrational.

          • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

            Darn, this was supposed to be in response to Anhydrous Bob. No, I am not talking with myself, go down one and this is the response to AnhydrousBob. Sorry for any confusion

          • AnhydrousBob

            So the only difference between the War for Colonial Secession and the War for Southern Independence is that Americans were victorious in the first and not in the latter? So that made the first war “righteous” and the second one “unrighteous”. Victory makes Right?

            Cognitive Dissonance.

          • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

            Bob, I will grant I don’t understand your reasoning. I thought I gave you a clear reason, it is not lawful for any state or group of states to leave this Union and therefore we remain, One Nation Under God. If you want to continu to put words in my mouth, go ahead but the reason is solely based upon the Constitution and not who won and who lost, although if the South had won we would have had two nations so that is clearly a point if you want to expound upon conjecture. I don’t know where the confusion lies unless only for dislike of the truth. You can turn this any way you want to at your liesure, but the facts speak for themselves.

        • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

          Dear Oakley Mann,

          Perhaps you will take the word of a former judge and former law professor:
          “[Lincoln] blatantly ignored the rights of the states to secede from the Union, a right that is clearly implicit in the Constitution, since it was the states that ratified the Constitution and thereby decided to enter the Union. Surely these same states had the right to decide to undo that act. Lincoln’s view was a far departure from the approach of Thomas Jefferson, who recognized states’ rights above those of the Union. In fact, Jefferson said that the federal government was legitimate only if it served state interests (because Jefferson, like his successor Ronald Reagan, understood that the states created the federal government), the act of joining the Union–of ratifying the Constitution–was a simple state legislative act. And cannot any legislature rewrite its own laws? Of course it can.” The Constitution In Exile by Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, p. 62.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

          • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

            Of course, I disagree Bob. I have been out of touch so I am late in replying. The states came together, the Constitution was done, all states agreed with said clauses, etc. This Constitution of ours is a legally binding contract, which means one cannot brak th contract without the approval of the other, period. You speak much of Thomas Jefferson, if there was ever a man who wanted to be King, it was Thomas Jefferson. He was for big government, regardless of what he said. His very acts speak for him, he wanted to hang Aaron Burr from the highest tree in the land for treason, when in fact Aaron Burr was never anything but a hinderance to Thomas Jefferson which kept him from turning the country into a Kingdom.

          • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

            Dear Oakley Mann,

            That’s a very convoluted understanding of events surrounding Mr. Burr’s treason and Mr. Jefferson.

            Best wishes,
            Bob

          • http://wallaceicenhourfoundation.org Wallace Icenhour

            been reading some of the comments on your blog. I don’t usually write on the blogs, but find the remarks on secession very interesting.The Constitution is a Contract. The government promises to uphold the requirements of the Constitution. The Citizens promise to support the government so long as government upholds its responsibilities.

            The Citizen is the Sovereign, not the Government, (state or federal) The Government is accountable to its civilically virtuous citizens for its behavior and not the other way around unless some citizens break their duty to uphold constitutional principles.

            When the states seceded the Union, it was because the central government had violated their contract. Slavery was not an issue initially but was introduced by Lincoln later in the conflict.

            The atrocities at this time in history, were never fully exposed,and are only now being addressed by schlors(spelling?) on on this blog.

            The South never fully recovered from this conflict until after WWII,
            and when the economics began to grow, then the South was set upon again by “Freedom Riders” who caused unnecessary unrest during this long overdue recovery. It was further aggrivated by the Integration by the supreme court, of Earl Warren, and enough liberals to split the vote 5-4.

            The Constitutional Student will note again, that there is no Constitutional requirement that precludes Separate but Equal educational facilities, but was ruled over, by the ideas of the Libero-Socio-Communist movement in the United States and super imposed on the nation by the Warren Court.

            So those on the highest court of the land, whose first duty it is to protect all citizens equally under the law and see that all constitutional protections are provided all of them, plunged the nation into continual unrest by insisting that the citizens had no right to determine for themselves what was best for them,on the local levels, were forced thru social notions given the wrongful force of law, by a now subverted court, that instead of upholding constitutional law, distracted itself, with revolutionary (away from the constitution)Social Notions.

            At that time this Court lost its Authority to Officiate, and has operated by power shorn of authority, ever since.

            I am not going to argue on this blog, with any person, regarding this opinion. I would appreciate it if all of you would stop name calling, and present your views in an honest and forthright manner, that would be fitting form for any debater, thanks to Bob Livingston for making it possible to participate in this forum.

            It permitted the intrusion of the Federal Government into the Domains of the States, placing the local educational systems under the wrongful powers of the Federal Government, even tho integration
            is no longer an issue, the Federal Plans and programs still remain in control of these local public school systems.

      • Bryan K Donnelly

        “Ron Paul has acknowledged the legitimacy of the south’s cause.” OK, this proves my contention that Ron is a crank.

    • AnhydrousBob

      Abraham Lincoln is quoted as saying “Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable – a most sacred right – a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world.”

      You criticize Mr Livingston for being overly simplistic. Really? In a blog post wherein he is summarizing historical facts you claim he is being too simple?

      You claim to have read quite a lot, but apparently you have read only one side. A book I will recommend is “The Real Lincoln” by Thomas De Lorenzo. In that book, with footnotes, Mr Lorenzo covers the topics you dispute.

      Going back to the idea of secession, what exactly is different from the secession of the colonists from England and the secession of the southern states?

      • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

        AnhydrousBob, you acidic fellow you. Look up one posting for my response to your mistakes, I responded at the wrong location, but you appear to be an all knowing and trustful soul and likely already knew that

        • AnhydrousBob

          Why must you resort to name calling and condescending remarks?

          • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

            Bob, what name or names are you referring to? I deal a little in chemistry and my remark of you acidic fellow you was meant to be light hearted and easy. The meaning of anhydrous you know is containing no water and I have through my career dealt with things like Anhydrous Ammonia,etc. It was just a joke, no harm meant. And I think you started the condescending with your comment that I criticize Mr Livingston with the followup of Really? If you choose to believe only Ron and Ron’s interpretation of world events you are missing a lot , but all I can say is bully for you, your beliefs are your own. But when I criticize either Ron or Ron, you seem to think that is akin to blasphemy in the most evil form which is out and out ridiculous.

  • Mad Max

    Nothing changes in this country because we’ve become a bucket of armchair patriots. Time is running out.

    “WAKE UP PEOPLE!” We don’t have time for this!
    Read “Common Sense 3.1” at ( http://www.revolution2.osixs.org )

    FIGHT THE CAUSE – NOT THE SYMPTOM

    • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

      I agree w/ the armchair warrior rationale, but you can’t understand the present if you know nothing of the past, and that is fact; the earth, nations and people have evolved through time and history. You hav provided a good link, I like what it states, but I don’t see where it says who is to do what when. Everything also has to have a beginning point, the principles are sound and we certainly need the Govt to recognize something that continues to elude them, and has for years and years, they work for us to do our, the majority of the peoples bidding and that this one job they do is non negotitable, and it is not the other way around as they are determined to portray. This one seemingly small detail has caused much harm and friction in our Country.

  • Diwamani

    Dear Bob,thank you for writing this!
    It’s like a breath of fresh air in a room full Nazis. Reading the comments I was amazed that some of your readers had no problem with the government killing US dissidents in foreign countries, heck, even in US. I am not in any way advocating hate speech etc., But even Joseph Stalin did not brag about killing Trozkyi in Mexico, half the planet away from Russia. On the other hand it’s encouraging to see that quite a bit of people are hip to the totalitarians running the show. There are vested interests who have been keeping us, the people, stupid and divided. I hope and pray that there will be enough people who just don’t want to see ANYBODY murdered in their name. Until then there will be no peace. God bless and keep the good work going.

    • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

      That is why our Country is the greatest Country the world has ever seen, we can differ. You state killing dissidents, I state killing traitors, you state killing in my name, I agree the killing was done in my name and for me, you say I am stupid and divided, I say you are stupid and not divided, let’s count them up, seems even. But, we did not take the war to the terrorists, the terrorists brought the war to us; USS COLE, 9/11,embassy bombings, etc, etc and etc. Darn, I’m ahead

  • AnhydrousBob

    To the State Apologists, remember the sentiments of Martin Niemoller:

    When the Nazis came for the communists,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a communist.

    When they locked up the social democrats,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a social democrat.

    When they came for the trade unionists,
    I did not speak out;
    I was not a trade unionist.

    When they came for the Jews,
    I remained silent;
    I wasn’t a Jew.

    When they came for me,
    there was no one left to speak out.

    • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

      Please, do I have to memorize this? It seems quotes abound on this site which make little use of the story. But then, me going on about the Civil War may be redundant also seeing that wasn’t the whole story, even though I’m right.

  • Pete in AZ

    Stick to being comical and satirical, Bob. When you drift into the serious, professorial mode, you become Loony

  • Thinking About

    Bob, you forgot to mention how Tom Delay of Texas used Homeland security to hunt down Texas Legislators to get them back in the state to force a vote when he was drawing district lines so he could be re-elected. Guess this meets the government abusing their authority.

  • robert

    chas here we go. thomas woods phd. the american history. so concerned were the virginians that that the new constitution would infringe on upon their rights of self government that they reserved the right to secede from the union. which no one disputed. I will have to go back to my library to find the other states decisions. but New York said they reserved the right to leave if they did not like it. and as dr woods said if one state has the right secede then all have that same right.i will get back to you soon with the others.

  • hitthedeck

    Your closing statement is an explanation for all the above. (The constitution is just a piece of paper) A constitution that is detoured at the convenience of the government! This president and Attorney General have bypassed the constitution to suit their political agenda. I don’t agree with your opinion about American born terrorists. I believe they automatically forfeit their citizenship when they self confess in public their intentions to kill Americans. I do believe they should be killed but this government should publically advertise that they should surrender for trial. They should be given time to answer the notice and if they do not comply then their death should be sanctions. A dead or alive policy should prevail when lives of the innocent are in harms way. The mistruths our government has told us in the past is mans rule of thumb to make their own mistakes look like success for the preservation of their power. You can also see that our enemies are more skilled in using our constitution for their own advantage more so than the average American.

  • Ridge Runner

    I have never read so much useless crap being commenting on.Any body with one eye and sense enough to tie their own shoes should be able to see that most of the people’s problems are the gov.from local to washington d.c. We have to have a functioning gov to run the country but these people have become parasites feasting on the labors of the people and their thirst for their money is never ending and growing by ieaps and bounds.It is mind boggling and sort of scary to wonder what they are going to turn this nation in to.Some thing has to change and not what this misbegotted moron in the pilot seat is doing to the u.s. If some thing isn’t done he or some other idiot like him is going to fly the plane into the ocean.Brace your self for impact.

    • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

      Election day 2012 is near. I cannot agree more, the pilot is lost and changes must be made, and we need to hold the new pilot’s feet to the fire after elections. When BO was stating his lies of Change you can believe in, there were no exceptions, he could do it and no one could stop him. Now all failures are because of this and that, and that some more and some people actually believe and thrive on that garbage, everything is still George Bushs faultor attributed to something else. It seems his dull supporters forget what year it is, and that none of our country was in the despair it is now, and the reason for the despair is totally Barack Obama. Nothing but lies, there is no reason for his failures but ineptitude for the job and not understanding America.

  • baldmurph

    Humans are a nasty species, and we have killed off so much of our competition we have to practice on eacn other to keep in practice. Individually, so many of us are kind, considerate, thoughtful, etc. as opposed to our collective tendencies . . . . cognitive dissonance! And so we have wars. War is Hell. You will get your hands dirty. Do your best to do the least harm, and try to reign back the more enthusiastic. We have a few more thousands of generations to work this out, if we can, before we wipe us out. Good luck to us!

  • bob wire

    American’s enjoy freedoms few might ever hope for. Is it perfect? no, of course not, not by a long shot.

    What we see here today is a lack of confidence.

    We pick and choose to whom we listen to, what we read and we enjoy many choices. Our nation allows and displays a tolerance for decent. If we lose this “TOLERANCE”, the experiment in freedom is over.

    If any of you are looking for perfection, I’m at a lose in telling you where to look.

    To victors goes the spoils , and are left to write the history.

    Third stringer, arm chair quarterbacks are a dime a dozen as few ever placed themselves in the jaws of death.

    When I flew into Bien Hoa in 68 and pulled zero week waiting for duty station assignment orders. Every morning at reveille, we be assigned to a detail. There were many different details, task that had to be done, from collecting crap from all the latrines and burning it to opening body bags, doing an inventory and preparing the honored dead for their last airplane ride home to awaiting family.

    The fact that the number of dead and reported causality count never matched up did not elude me.

    If you don’t like the way things are, it’s up to you to change them but understand that it’s a lifetime effort and the job will never be finished.

    • http://donthaveone Beberoni

      Good post bob wire. You are absolutely right. It isnt perfect, but it could be a whole lot worse.

    • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

      Very nice. Thanks

  • http://donthaveone Beberoni

    It just seems so many are so into hating our own government because basically they have screwed up so much, and it is true, they have screwed up so much, but so many are so defensive of these terrorists, its almost like why not just give them the reigns of this country and let them run it, then while those who defended them are being trotted off to have their heads cut off, a light will come on where suddenly they realize, shoot, I guess our government wasnt so bad afterall. At least I was allowed to think and live and work and play, and write on threads on line and complain and argue and agree and have constructive critism, and be constructively criticized. When and if the terrorists have their way and take over, I assure you, all these things will be gone. While yes, things could be a lot better, you also need to believe, they could be a whole lot worse. Slap me around if you will, but this is my opinion and I knows its very true.

    • http://bellsouth.net Oakley Mann

      Well spoken.

  • Jay

    7 Essential Rules of Tyranny

    As we look back on the horrors of the dictatorships and autocracies of the past, one particular question consistently arises; how was it possible for the common men of these eras to NOT notice what was happening around them?

    How could they have stood as statues unaware or uncaring as their cultures were overrun by fascism, communism, collectivism, and elitism?

    Of course, we have the advantage of hindsight, and are able to research and examine the misdeeds of the past at our leisure. Unfortunately, such hindsight does not necessarily shield us from the long cast shadow of tyranny in our own day. For that, the increasingly uncommon gift of foresight is required…

    At bottom, the success of despotic governments and Big Brother societies hinges upon a certain number of political, financial, and cultural developments. The first of which is an unwillingness in the general populace to secure and defend their own freedoms, making them completely reliant on corrupt establishment leadership.

    For totalitarianism to take hold, the masses must not only neglect the plight of their country, and the plight of others, but also be completely uninformed of the inherent indirect threats to their personal safety. They must abandon all responsibility for their destinies, and lose all respect for their own humanity. They must, indeed, become domesticated and mindless herd animals without regard for anything except their fleeting momentary desires for entertainment and short term survival. For a lumbering bloodthirsty behemoth to actually sneak up on you, you have to be pretty damnably oblivious.

    The prevalence of apathy and ignorance sets the stage for the slow and highly deliberate process of centralization. Once dishonest governments accomplish an atmosphere of inaction and condition a sense of frailty within the citizenry, the sky is truly the limit.

    However, a murderous power-monger’s day is never quite done.

    Rule #1: Keep Them Afraid

    People who are easily frightened are easily dominated. This is not just a law of political will, but a law of nature. Many wrongly assume that a tyrant’s power comes purely from the application of force. In fact, despotic regimes that rely solely on extreme violence are often very unsuccessful, and easily overthrown. Brute strength is calculable. It can be analyzed, and thus, eventually confronted and defeated. Thriving tyrants instead utilize not just harm, but the imminent THREAT of harm. They instill apprehension in the public; a fear of the unknown, or a fear of the possible consequences for standing against the state. They let our imaginations run wild until we see death around every corner, whether it’s actually there or not. When the masses are so blinded by the fear of reprisal that they forget their fear of slavery, and take no action whatsoever to undo it, then they have been sufficiently culled.

    In other cases, our fear is evoked and directed towards engineered enemies. Another race, another religion, another political ideology, a “hidden” and ominous villain created out of thin air.

    Rule #2: Keep Them Isolated

    In the past, elitist governments would often legislate and enforce severe penalties for public gatherings, because defusing the ability of the citizenry to organize or to communicate was paramount to control. In our technological era, such isolation is still used, but in far more advanced forms. The bread and circus lifestyle of the average westerner alone is enough to distract us from connecting with each other in any meaningful fashion, but people still sometimes find ways to seek out organized forms of activism.

    Through co-option, modern day tyrants can direct and manipulate opposition movements. By creating and administrating groups which oppose each other, elites can then micromanage all aspects of a nation on the verge of revolution. These “false paradigms” give us the illusion of proactive organization, and the false hope of changing the system, while at the same time preventing us from seeking understanding in one another. All our energies are then muted and dispersed into meaningless battles over “left and right”, or “Democrat versus Republican”, for example. Only movements that cast aside such empty labels and concern themselves with the ultimate truth of their country, regardless of what that truth might reveal, are able to enact real solutions to the disasters wrought by tyranny.

    Rule #3: Keep Them Desperate

    You’ll find in nearly every instance of cultural descent into autocracy, the offending government gained favor after the onset of economic collapse. Make the necessities of root survival an uncertainty, and people without knowledge of self sustainability and without solid core principles will gladly hand over their freedom, even for mere scraps from the tables of the same men who unleashed famine upon them. Financial calamities are not dangerous because of the poverty they leave in their wake; they are dangerous because of the doors to malevolence that they leave open.

    Destitution leads not just to hunger, but also to crime (private and government). Crime leads to anger, hatred, and fear. Fear leads to desperation. Desperation leads to the acceptance of anything resembling a solution, even despotism.

    Autocracies pretend to cut through the dilemmas of economic dysfunction (usually while demanding liberties be relinquished), however, behind the scenes they actually seek to maintain a proscribed level of indigence and deprivation. The constant peril of homelessness and starvation keeps the masses thoroughly distracted from such things as protest or dissent, while simultaneously chaining them to the idea that their only chance is to cling to the very government out to end them.

    Rule #4: Send Out The Jackboots

    This is the main symptom often associated with totalitarianism. So much so that our preconceived notions of what a fascist government looks like prevent us from seeing other forms of tyranny right under our noses. Some Americans believe that if the jackbooted thugs are not knocking on every door, then we MUST still live in a free country. Obviously, this is a rather naïve position. Admittedly, though, goon squads and secret police do eventually become prominent in every failed nation, usually while the public is mesmerized by visions of war, depression, hyperinflation, terrorism, etc.

    When law enforcement officials are no longer servants of the people, but agents of a government concerned only with its own supremacy, serious crises emerge. Checks and balances are removed. The guidelines that once reigned in police disappear, and suddenly, a philosophy of superiority emerges; an arrogant exclusivity that breeds separation between law enforcement and the rest of the public. Finally, police no longer see themselves as protectors of citizens, but prison guards out to keep us subdued and docile.

    As tyranny grows, this behavior is encouraged. Good men are filtered out of the system, and small (minded and hearted) men are promoted.

    At its pinnacle, a police state will hide the identities of most of its agents and officers, behind masks or behind red tape, because their crimes in the name of the state become so numerous and so sadistic that personal vengeance on the part of their victims will become a daily concern.

    Rule #5: Blame Everything On The Truth Seekers

    Tyrants are generally men who have squelched their own consciences. They have no reservations in using any means at their disposal to wipe out opposition. But, in the early stages of their ascent to power, they must give the populace a reason for their ruthlessness, or risk being exposed, and instigating even more dissent. The propaganda machine thus goes into overdrive, and any person or group that dares to question the authority or the validity of the state is demonized in the minds of the masses.

    All disasters, all violent crimes, all the ills of the world, are hoisted upon the shoulders of activist groups and political rivals. They are falsely associated with fringe elements already disliked by society (racists, terrorists, etc). A bogus consensus is created through puppet media in an attempt to make the public believe that “everyone else” must have the same exact views, and those who express contrary positions must be “crazy”, or “extremist”. Events are even engineered by the corrupt system and pinned on those demanding transparency and liberty. The goal is to drive anti-totalitarian organizations into self censorship. That is to say, instead of silencing them directly, the state causes activists to silence themselves.

    Tyrannical power structures cannot function without scapegoats. There must always be an elusive boogie man under the bed of every citizen, otherwise, those citizens may turn their attention, and their anger, towards the real culprit behind their troubles. By scapegoating stewards of the truth, such governments are able to kill two birds with one stone.

    Rule #6: Encourage Citizen Spies

    Ultimately, the life of a totalitarian government is not prolonged by the government itself, but by the very people it subjugates. Citizen spies are the glue of any police state, and our propensity for sticking our noses into other peoples business is highly valued by Big Brother bureaucracies around the globe.

    There are a number of reasons why people participate in this repulsive activity. Some are addicted to the feeling of being a part of the collective, and “service” to this collective, sadly, is the only way they are able to give their pathetic lives meaning. Some are vindictive, cold, and soulless, and actually get enjoyment from ruining others. And still, like elites, some long for power, even petty power, and are willing to do anything to fulfill their vile need to dictate the destinies of perfect strangers.

    Citizen spying is almost always branded as a civic duty; an act of heroism and bravery. Citizen spies are offered accolades and awards, and showered with praise from the upper echelons of their communities. People who lean towards citizen spying are often outwardly and inwardly unimpressive; physically and mentally inept. For the average moral and emotional weakling with persistent feelings of inadequacy, the allure of finally being given fifteen minutes of fame and a hero’s status (even if that status is based on a lie) is simply too much to resist. They begin to see “extremists” and “terrorists” everywhere. Soon, people afraid of open ears everywhere start to watch what they say at the supermarket, in their own backyards, or even to family members. Free speech is effectively neutralized.

    Rule #7: Make Them Accept The Unacceptable

    In the end, it is not enough for a government fueled by the putrid sludge of iniquity to lord over us. At some point, it must also influence us to forsake our most valued principles. Tyrannies are less concerned with dominating how we live, so much as dominating how we think. If they can mold our very morality, they can exist unopposed indefinitely. Of course, the elements of conscience are inborn, and not subject to environmental duress as long as a man is self aware. However, conscience can be manipulated if a person has no sense of identity, and has never put in the effort to explore his own strengths and failings. There are many people like this in America today.

    Lies become “necessary” in protecting the safety of the state. War becomes a tool for “peace”. Torture becomes an ugly but “useful” method for gleaning important information. Police brutality is sold as a “natural reaction” to increased crime. Rendition becomes normal, but only for those labeled as “terrorists”. Assassination is justified as a means for “saving lives”. Genocide is done discretely, but most everyone knows it is taking place. They simply don’t discuss it.

    All tyrannical systems depend on the apathy and moral relativism of the inhabitants within their borders. Without the cooperation of the public, these systems cannot function. The real question is, how many of the above steps will be taken before we finally refuse to conform? At what point will each man and woman decide to break free from the dark path blazed before us and take measures to ensure their independence? Who will have the courage to develop their own communities, their own alternative economies, their own organizations for mutual defense outside of establishment constructs, and who will break under the pressure to bow like cowards? How many will hold the line, and how many will flee?

    For every American, for every human being across the planet who chooses to stand immovable in the face of the very worst in mankind, we come that much closer to breathing life once again into the very best in us all.

    http://www.activistpost.com/2011/07/7-essential-rules-of-tyranny.html

  • pete holcomb

    whoever fools the rules rules the fools!

    • bob wire

      well summarized Pete, few word is good for driving the nail home.

      For a good carpenter, the nail must be well placed and the very angle deliberate. Thank you for that final blow, a perfect stroke leaving no bear track.

  • Bryan K Donnelly

    I’ve come to the inescapable conclusion that this particular bolg is not only HOSTED by a crank, but is the venue for half the “conservative” cranks online. I’ve only looked in occasionally to see just how BIZARRRE it becomes. Kooks ‘a ‘poppin.

    • SittingMooseShaman

      …all this- coming from a PostWW2 U.S. NAZI. Criticize all you may: You are known by what you do. You like the ‘feeling’ of what you perceive as, ‘power.’ At any cost; Even your own freedom. Go ahead- pull this s*it on your Komrade when you begin to ‘feel’ stepped upon… Don’t forget what, “Der Party” had done to the heroic and brave, Distinguished Rep. Giffords for leading those true American Democratic Party members of the House in their vote which DE-THRONED ‘Frau Gruppen[Mater]Fuhrer’ Pelosi from the House Chair…Thru’ that time-tested and true, method of ‘layering’ an order of assassination: LEFT-WingNut, Loughner (who never ever, even owned a bb-gun…shows up w/2 of the most advanced hand-guns in this world to lay waste this brave American Congresswoman. For him: It got his rocks off; For ze U.S. PostWW2 ‘NAZI’/Democratic[former] Party…A hard and profound ‘message’ was sent out to the rest of this now, politically errant party- “Don’t f**k w/the Partys’ orders!”
      And, a rather timely yet, brutal,”gun-control” raison d’etre is created. The stakes are high, kid… You willin’ ta die if needs be for yours’, rather, ‘THEIR’ beliefs? The Constitution- especially the Bill of Rights- [is] clear and concise in their(Articles & Amends.)meanings and intent; With very open avenues to the Courts for interpretation(s) when and if necessary. This present and foreign political dogmatism which the, now-so-has-demonstrated, ‘PostWW2 U.S.NAZI’/Democrat Party, has no such, “transparency”. As once- was so loudly proclaimed by our then, Candidate and now, (once again) campaigning Prez Obama…
      Hey, I’m jes’ sayin’… Those, “Kooks’a'poppin.” as you put it, are the ones who gave YOU the RIGHT to do exactly what you do here on this thread: To State Your Own beliefs; In Freedom.
      Both parties hold equal shame in the historical record of this nation. The Constitution holds NO liege to either: Then(at Her inception) and NOW.
      My life(and yours) as an American CITIZEN(NOT SUBJECT) is held within that Document BECAUSE: The Constitution ‘lives’ within my MIND.
      As such LIBERTY IS ALIVE! Corporately within the American Citizen- NOT any “Party”!

  • http://www.r3voluti0n.com/ Jason

    Ron Paul 2012!

  • http://twitter.com/#!/kladionica sportske

    What i do not understood is in truth how you’re no longer really much more neatly-liked than you might be right now. You’re very intelligent. You realize therefore considerably on the subject of this subject, produced me in my opinion believe it from a lot of various angles. Its like men and women are not involved unless it?s something to do with Woman gaga! Your own stuffs outstanding. All the time handle it up!

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.