I'd thought I'd list some of the major crimes and treaties this current War Criminal of a president has broken:
1. Deception of Congress and the American Public Committing a Fraud Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371)
2. Making False Statements Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 1001)
3. War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148)
4. Misuse of Government Funds (31 U.S.C. § 1301)
5. Improper Detention, Torture, and Other Inhumane Treatment Anti-Torture Statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340-40A)
6. The War Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. § 2441)
7. The Geneva Conventions and Hague Convention: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
8. United Nations Convention Against Torture, and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
9. Command Responsibility (for known illegal acts of subordinates in the military) Detainment of Material Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 3144)
10. Retaliating against Witnesses and Other Individuals Obstruction Congress (18 U.S.C. § 1505)
11. Whistleblower Protection (5 U.S.C. § 2302)
12. The Lloyd-LaFollette Act, or "anti-gag rule" (5 U.S.C. § 7211)
13. Retaliating against Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 1513)
14. Leaking and other Misuse of Intelligence and other Government Information
15. Revealing Classified Information in Contravention of Federal Regulations (Executive Order 12958/Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement)
16. Statutory Prohibitions on Leaking Information (18 U.S.C. § 641, etc.)
17. Laws Governing Electronic Surveillance Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (50 U.S.C. § 1801, et seq.)
18. National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. chapter 15)
19. Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. § 222)
20. Stored Communications Act of 1986 (18 U.S.C. § 2702)
21. Pen Registers or Trap and Trace Devices (18 U.S.C. § 3121)
22. Laws and Guidelines Prohibiting Conflicts of Interest (28 U.S.C. § 528, etc.)
Of course a few of these the administration has already been found guilty of, but Libby took the fall for them. I have a lot of admiration for Libby. However I feel he must of just been the lowest one on the totem pole in the room when they talked about who was going to take the fall.I can only hope and pray the next president’s attorney general brings justice to this evil and vile slaughter of thousands of people, the first true tyrant of the 21st century George W. Bush.
Friday, April 18, 2008
How ancient texts can be used as a window into the ancient world
As a person of faith and a person involved in intensive historical study, I believe the Bible along with other ancient texts can be read two different ways. As a Christian I can read in relation to my faith. However as an historian, along with other ancient faith based texts, it can be read in the context of having a window into the ancient world.
For example the Bible is a great historical family tree; in reading the Bible you can begin; along with other primary and secondary sources begin to trace the migrations of ancient tribes as they moved along the great mid Asian rift.
A good example of this discipline is in the examination of the references of Gog and Magog in the Bible. Ezekiel 38:2, “Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Rosh, of Meshech and Tubal.” Genesis 10 is known as “The Table of Nations”. Magog, Tubal, and Meshech are all described as being the son of Japheth who is the son of Noah. The importance of this information is the descendents of these three sons became known as the tribe of Magog, the tribe of Tubal, the tribe of Meshech.
Herodotus, the ancient Greek historian, mentions the tribe of Meshech and Tubal as being the people named the Samaritans and Muscovites, who lived at the time in the ancient province of Pontus in northern Asia Minor. Josephus, the ancient Jewish historian of the first century, said the people of his day known as the Moschevi and Thobelites were founded by Meshech and Tubal. Josephus said, “Magog is called the Scythians by the Greeks.” Josephus also said these people lived in the northern regions above the Caucasus Mountains.
Pliny, the ancient Roman historian, said, “Hierapolis taken by the Scythians was afterward called Magog.” Pliny shows that the Scythians were identified by their ancient tribal name. Most historians believe the Scythians to be the main part of the people who make up modern day Russia. William Gesenius, who was a Hebrew historian during the 19th century said, “Meshech was the founder of the Moschi, a barbarous people, who dwelt in the Moschian mountains.” Gesenius also believes the Greek name, “Moschi, derived from the Hebrew name Meshech, which he believes is the origins of the name of the city of Moscow. Gesenius believes, “Tubal is the son of Rapheth, founder of the Tibereni, a people dwelling on the Black Sea to the west of Moschi.” His conclusion is that these people make up the modern day Russian people.
This is just one example of how ancient texts can be used as a window into the ancient world. The Bible, with close study, can offer many great insights into the ancient world, as well as being a piece of religious faith.
For example the Bible is a great historical family tree; in reading the Bible you can begin; along with other primary and secondary sources begin to trace the migrations of ancient tribes as they moved along the great mid Asian rift.
A good example of this discipline is in the examination of the references of Gog and Magog in the Bible. Ezekiel 38:2, “Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Rosh, of Meshech and Tubal.” Genesis 10 is known as “The Table of Nations”. Magog, Tubal, and Meshech are all described as being the son of Japheth who is the son of Noah. The importance of this information is the descendents of these three sons became known as the tribe of Magog, the tribe of Tubal, the tribe of Meshech.
Herodotus, the ancient Greek historian, mentions the tribe of Meshech and Tubal as being the people named the Samaritans and Muscovites, who lived at the time in the ancient province of Pontus in northern Asia Minor. Josephus, the ancient Jewish historian of the first century, said the people of his day known as the Moschevi and Thobelites were founded by Meshech and Tubal. Josephus said, “Magog is called the Scythians by the Greeks.” Josephus also said these people lived in the northern regions above the Caucasus Mountains.
Pliny, the ancient Roman historian, said, “Hierapolis taken by the Scythians was afterward called Magog.” Pliny shows that the Scythians were identified by their ancient tribal name. Most historians believe the Scythians to be the main part of the people who make up modern day Russia. William Gesenius, who was a Hebrew historian during the 19th century said, “Meshech was the founder of the Moschi, a barbarous people, who dwelt in the Moschian mountains.” Gesenius also believes the Greek name, “Moschi, derived from the Hebrew name Meshech, which he believes is the origins of the name of the city of Moscow. Gesenius believes, “Tubal is the son of Rapheth, founder of the Tibereni, a people dwelling on the Black Sea to the west of Moschi.” His conclusion is that these people make up the modern day Russian people.
This is just one example of how ancient texts can be used as a window into the ancient world. The Bible, with close study, can offer many great insights into the ancient world, as well as being a piece of religious faith.
Is the United States becoming a Fascist State?
Below are my comments to a study conducted by Dr. Lawrence Britt:
I think the point by point breakdown of fascism by Dr. Lawrence Britt was pretty close to accurate. Fascism in its simplest definition is basically extreme nationalism. It is the dichotomy to communism. Communism is on the extreme left, while fascism is on the extreme right. It is no surprise those who find their political philosophy leaning to the right would have some agreements or sympathies to fascism. What is surprising is how easily concepts of fascism are being embraced by many of American citizens who describe themselves as conservatives. When at the same time many of these same neo-con’s grandfathers and grand-relatives fought so hard to stop the spread of fascism in the world during World War II.
Below I will try to relate how many of these points have a direct relation and reference to the current path our great American experiment of democracy seems to be quickly leading. Dr. Britt's comments are numbered in bold.
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
This point leaves out the condemnation fascist use against those who oppose the extreme forced nationalism. This brings to mind a very good quote from a famous fascist, who gave advice on how to treat those who stand in opposition to the fascist government:
"Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country"-Hermann Goering
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
Boy this one sure does hit home, while seeming to apply directly to the present social conservative acceptance of torture and executions. The United States has the highest percentage of its population imprisoned, and even though our jury system is so flawed at the present many conservatives still demand to put people to death. Guess they figure its ok, as long as they are not the poor guy wrongly convicted of murder. I can not imagine no worse situation to be in; sitting on death row knowing you did nothing wrong.
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
Hmmm…..lets see this would be the racist condemnations of migrant workers and the extreme belief society has some “God” given right to dictate whom can marry whom. In addition you can see this form of fascism on any neo-con’s face when they pronounce the word “liberal”. And the same disdain which in the past use to be associated with the word “communism” now is replaced with the word, “socialism”. They seem to forget the belief of Theodore Roosevelt when he said, “"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public"
4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
The U.S. military and Bush’s War has pretty much created a debt that my great-great-great grandchildren will still be paying on; while the idea of charity amongst many Christians seems to be forgotten in their neo-conservative political viewpoints.
5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
Again point five seems to describe the present government social structure neo-conservatives believe in: that it is their right to dictate and export what is morally correct to any law abiding citizens home, just because they do not agree with their sexual preference. However just a short comment on divorce, single divorced mothers or fathers who have custody of their children would be able to make ends meet a lot easier if the states aggressively pursued the dead-beat parents who get away without paying their child support. Some studies have shown that only 18 out of 100 single parents ever receive their full amount of child support. That is appalling and inexcusable, but states need more money to pursue these dead-beats, which that would mean the other evil word that neo-conservatives love to hate, “taxes”.
6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
The Murdoch Group, do I need to say more! The censorship which goes on in the present is by law not allowed to be reported by the media. Many times my friends overseas in England and Australia will ask me did you see this footage or that footage, and my answer is always a no, because again Bush & Co. have censored what Americans are allowed to view coming into our country.
7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
Paranoia is rampant in our Country ever since 9/11. What I have found curious about this predicament is before 9/11 the neo-cons were the leaders of the free-trade globalization of our economy movement. Now they are at the forefront of being the fear-mongers using the plight of migrant workers as their whipping post, while denying the responsibility our government has played in the previous centuries of welcoming them into our economy. Funny how neo-cons do not wish to address the fact that most migrant workers from Mexico are descended from Native American Indians, guess they do not want to include the term “Native American” in their racist attacks against migrant workers, wouldn’t really fit.
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
Religion and government have become almost synonymous in our nation ever since the rise of the New Right. About the only people who still believe there is a separation are those who have benefited and agreed the most to this movement; the neo-conservatives.
9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
I can not imagine any presidential candidate getting elected without the support of multinational corporations. Many of these multinational corporations are today more powerful politically than most countries of the world.
10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
Labor unions have definitely declined in numbers and strength. In fact the anti-labor movements have convinced many workers in the country they would be better off without them.
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
This is an area that most neo-cons love to step onto the preverbal stump, claiming universities are full of left-wing liberal professors. I am currently a senior at Indiana University majoring in history. I have yet seen this phenomenon, almost all the professors I have had, I am never able to identify where they stand on issues. On the contrary, they go to great extremes to help students freely express their viewpoints regardless if they are conservative or liberal.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
I do think the 80s war on drugs is ridiculous, most people in prison right now are there on non-violent drug related charges. In addition the recent move by Bush & Co. to sacrifice many of our civil liberties in the name of security seems to forget the great advice Benjamin Franklin gave, “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
This has Bush regime written all over it, he surrounds himself with “yes” men and a woman with no backbone. While Bush’s use of executive authority in the Scooter Libby case would reflect how he protects his friends, without adding any comments to his alliance to his Saudi and fellow oil buddies.
14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
Well this sounds like the first Bush election, although I don’t really believe Gore would have been any better, but that election will go down in history as one of the biggest shams in American election history.
I think the point by point breakdown of fascism by Dr. Lawrence Britt was pretty close to accurate. Fascism in its simplest definition is basically extreme nationalism. It is the dichotomy to communism. Communism is on the extreme left, while fascism is on the extreme right. It is no surprise those who find their political philosophy leaning to the right would have some agreements or sympathies to fascism. What is surprising is how easily concepts of fascism are being embraced by many of American citizens who describe themselves as conservatives. When at the same time many of these same neo-con’s grandfathers and grand-relatives fought so hard to stop the spread of fascism in the world during World War II.
Below I will try to relate how many of these points have a direct relation and reference to the current path our great American experiment of democracy seems to be quickly leading. Dr. Britt's comments are numbered in bold.
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
This point leaves out the condemnation fascist use against those who oppose the extreme forced nationalism. This brings to mind a very good quote from a famous fascist, who gave advice on how to treat those who stand in opposition to the fascist government:
"Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country"-Hermann Goering
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
Boy this one sure does hit home, while seeming to apply directly to the present social conservative acceptance of torture and executions. The United States has the highest percentage of its population imprisoned, and even though our jury system is so flawed at the present many conservatives still demand to put people to death. Guess they figure its ok, as long as they are not the poor guy wrongly convicted of murder. I can not imagine no worse situation to be in; sitting on death row knowing you did nothing wrong.
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
Hmmm…..lets see this would be the racist condemnations of migrant workers and the extreme belief society has some “God” given right to dictate whom can marry whom. In addition you can see this form of fascism on any neo-con’s face when they pronounce the word “liberal”. And the same disdain which in the past use to be associated with the word “communism” now is replaced with the word, “socialism”. They seem to forget the belief of Theodore Roosevelt when he said, “"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public"
4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
The U.S. military and Bush’s War has pretty much created a debt that my great-great-great grandchildren will still be paying on; while the idea of charity amongst many Christians seems to be forgotten in their neo-conservative political viewpoints.
5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
Again point five seems to describe the present government social structure neo-conservatives believe in: that it is their right to dictate and export what is morally correct to any law abiding citizens home, just because they do not agree with their sexual preference. However just a short comment on divorce, single divorced mothers or fathers who have custody of their children would be able to make ends meet a lot easier if the states aggressively pursued the dead-beat parents who get away without paying their child support. Some studies have shown that only 18 out of 100 single parents ever receive their full amount of child support. That is appalling and inexcusable, but states need more money to pursue these dead-beats, which that would mean the other evil word that neo-conservatives love to hate, “taxes”.
6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
The Murdoch Group, do I need to say more! The censorship which goes on in the present is by law not allowed to be reported by the media. Many times my friends overseas in England and Australia will ask me did you see this footage or that footage, and my answer is always a no, because again Bush & Co. have censored what Americans are allowed to view coming into our country.
7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
Paranoia is rampant in our Country ever since 9/11. What I have found curious about this predicament is before 9/11 the neo-cons were the leaders of the free-trade globalization of our economy movement. Now they are at the forefront of being the fear-mongers using the plight of migrant workers as their whipping post, while denying the responsibility our government has played in the previous centuries of welcoming them into our economy. Funny how neo-cons do not wish to address the fact that most migrant workers from Mexico are descended from Native American Indians, guess they do not want to include the term “Native American” in their racist attacks against migrant workers, wouldn’t really fit.
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
Religion and government have become almost synonymous in our nation ever since the rise of the New Right. About the only people who still believe there is a separation are those who have benefited and agreed the most to this movement; the neo-conservatives.
9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
I can not imagine any presidential candidate getting elected without the support of multinational corporations. Many of these multinational corporations are today more powerful politically than most countries of the world.
10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
Labor unions have definitely declined in numbers and strength. In fact the anti-labor movements have convinced many workers in the country they would be better off without them.
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
This is an area that most neo-cons love to step onto the preverbal stump, claiming universities are full of left-wing liberal professors. I am currently a senior at Indiana University majoring in history. I have yet seen this phenomenon, almost all the professors I have had, I am never able to identify where they stand on issues. On the contrary, they go to great extremes to help students freely express their viewpoints regardless if they are conservative or liberal.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
I do think the 80s war on drugs is ridiculous, most people in prison right now are there on non-violent drug related charges. In addition the recent move by Bush & Co. to sacrifice many of our civil liberties in the name of security seems to forget the great advice Benjamin Franklin gave, “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
This has Bush regime written all over it, he surrounds himself with “yes” men and a woman with no backbone. While Bush’s use of executive authority in the Scooter Libby case would reflect how he protects his friends, without adding any comments to his alliance to his Saudi and fellow oil buddies.
14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
Well this sounds like the first Bush election, although I don’t really believe Gore would have been any better, but that election will go down in history as one of the biggest shams in American election history.
What is your Number?
I think every war, including the current war in Iraq, has many more reasons of being fought than just one; some are noble, but too often many are cowardly deceptions for profiteering. Every war seems to have the same general shades of patriotism, and hidden at the time the war is being fought, selfish agendas from powerful men. Sartre once said, "When the rich wage war, it is the poor who die." How often in the past have the rich and powerful men in this country found ways to spare their off spring to serve in battle? We that are still old enough all remember too well the ridicule so many of the elite received, because of the favoritism's their children received to avoid going into battle in Vietnam. Of course the irony of this is, now certain figures in politics wish us to just forget it happened, then even go so far as to act offended for when they are called out.
I suppose Mr. Bush has no problem with the elitist of our country of finding ways for their sons and daughters not to serve, for he now not only justifies his tour of duty in the "rich boy squadron", he some how even acts like he earned his way there. The obvious irony is Mr. Bush has abused the mission of our national guard, the same guard that so protected his preverbal bottom when he was young from fighting in over seas combat. We as a nation lost over 58,000 American lives in Vietnam, before as a nation we realized we made a mistake. We have lost over 4,000 now in Iraq. As a proud veteran of the USMC, I just wonder what the number in Iraq is. Is it 5,000? Is it 10,000? Is it 20,000? The longer we stay the more these numbers will become a reality. Surely to God the American people have grown wise enough to never allow these numbers to grow that high.
One of the greatest presidents ever to sit in the oval office once said, "History teaches that war begins when governments believe the price of aggression is cheap." I for one believe Mr. Reagan was right on the money there. For I do not believe one American soldier dead in action in Iraq justifies 100 million Iraqi's free. The Iraqi's freedom should be earned by their blood, not by our brave young soldier's blood. But sadly this government of ours, obviously like Mr. Reagan stated, believe the price of aggression was cheap.
Furthermore, we need to bring our boy's and girl's home! It does not matter who is president, how long we stay, or what strategy we have. When we leave Iraq it will be a matter of days, not even months before they are ruled by yet again another ruthless dictator. Probably more than likely this time a religious zealot to boot! The Iraqi people have never and probably will never fight for their freedom. You can't shove freedom down a person's throat that hates and despises everything we as a nation stand for. We need to learn from the lessons of our own past.
Now is the time to act, not later, before these numbers grow higher.
If you disagree with me that's, ok, but I am just wanting to compare numbers with you in closing here for a second, what is your number? Hopefully your number is not as high as the current President! Mine was ZERO! This government is way over 4,000 from what I would have considered too many, and the number even as I write is rising. We need more patriotic Americans writing this president and congress, demanding that they send our young men and women home! "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public" Theodore Roosevelt. Exactly how many more brave young Americans must sacrifice their lives in Iraq before the American people will finally, regardless of political affiliation; make a stand against our own ruthless dictator George W. Bush?
I suppose Mr. Bush has no problem with the elitist of our country of finding ways for their sons and daughters not to serve, for he now not only justifies his tour of duty in the "rich boy squadron", he some how even acts like he earned his way there. The obvious irony is Mr. Bush has abused the mission of our national guard, the same guard that so protected his preverbal bottom when he was young from fighting in over seas combat. We as a nation lost over 58,000 American lives in Vietnam, before as a nation we realized we made a mistake. We have lost over 4,000 now in Iraq. As a proud veteran of the USMC, I just wonder what the number in Iraq is. Is it 5,000? Is it 10,000? Is it 20,000? The longer we stay the more these numbers will become a reality. Surely to God the American people have grown wise enough to never allow these numbers to grow that high.
One of the greatest presidents ever to sit in the oval office once said, "History teaches that war begins when governments believe the price of aggression is cheap." I for one believe Mr. Reagan was right on the money there. For I do not believe one American soldier dead in action in Iraq justifies 100 million Iraqi's free. The Iraqi's freedom should be earned by their blood, not by our brave young soldier's blood. But sadly this government of ours, obviously like Mr. Reagan stated, believe the price of aggression was cheap.
Furthermore, we need to bring our boy's and girl's home! It does not matter who is president, how long we stay, or what strategy we have. When we leave Iraq it will be a matter of days, not even months before they are ruled by yet again another ruthless dictator. Probably more than likely this time a religious zealot to boot! The Iraqi people have never and probably will never fight for their freedom. You can't shove freedom down a person's throat that hates and despises everything we as a nation stand for. We need to learn from the lessons of our own past.
Now is the time to act, not later, before these numbers grow higher.
If you disagree with me that's, ok, but I am just wanting to compare numbers with you in closing here for a second, what is your number? Hopefully your number is not as high as the current President! Mine was ZERO! This government is way over 4,000 from what I would have considered too many, and the number even as I write is rising. We need more patriotic Americans writing this president and congress, demanding that they send our young men and women home! "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public" Theodore Roosevelt. Exactly how many more brave young Americans must sacrifice their lives in Iraq before the American people will finally, regardless of political affiliation; make a stand against our own ruthless dictator George W. Bush?
The Plight of Immigration in Modern Day America
First let me explain why I feel so impassioned about the plight of migrant workers. Then I would like to address some misperceptions in regards to migrant workers. When I first got out of the Marine Corps, it was during the height of the unemployment problem in the 80’s. The only job I could find that summer was working alongside migrants picking tomatoes and pulling tassels on corn. I was astonished by their work ethic. These people would work long hours for just a few dollars. Whole families would work from dawn to dusk. I was in great shape then, considering I was fresh out from the Corps, and even the smallest migrant worker could out work me! Some were as young as eight years old. Since then, I have had great respect for migrant workers, as should all Americans. They work harder here in our country than most Americans! I now live in La Junta, Colorado; a town that is predominately Hispanic in decent. While living here I have become great friends to many Hispanic people and I sympathize with many of their concerns.
The greatest misperception about migrant workers coming from Mexico is misidentifying their ethnic heritage. Most migrant workers coming from Mexico are descended from: Apache, Aztec, Amuzgo, Cheyenne, Ch'ol, Cochimi, Cocopa, Cora, Guarijio, Huichol, Hopi, Kickapoo, Kiliwa, Kumiai, Matlatzinca, Mayas, Mixe, Mixtec, Mojave, Nahuatl/Mexica, Navajo, OaxacaChontal, Opata, Paipai, PimaBajo, Popoluca, Pueblo, Purepechaor, Seri, Sioux, TabascoChontal, Tarahumara, Tepehu, Tlahuica, Tonto, Tubar, Yaqui, Yucatec, Yuma, Zapotec, Zoque,and Zuni Native American Indians. I suppose most neo-conservatives and other groups who oppose open borders would feel uncomfortable to demanding the government to kick-out “Native Americans” from the United States; it must make them feel more comfortable to use their self-justifying racist overtones and condemnations.
One of the most ironic points neo-conservatives make on the issue of immigration surrounds how they spout the government needs to be a “responsible” government in dealing with this issue. The irony is that I agree the government needs to be HONESTLY responsible for their actions which lead to the current plight of migrant workers in America. However, most neo-conservatives do not want the government to be truthfully responsible for their past historical actions.Our country’s responsibility lies in two different concepts; the first being historical. I assume everyone is familiar with the term “blowback”. The first blowback began at the end of the Spanish-American War; which resulted in the annexation of over 60% of Mexico with the agreement and understanding the borders would always be open to Mexican families on both sides of the border; this historical agreed openness lead to the present situation with American businesses and employers being more than welcoming to migrant workers. During these times, migrant workers helped to build our great nation; just a few examples being their contribution in building the continental railways and in helping turn the desert southwest into productive farmland. The second blowback occurred more recently in the form of American corporate greed. During the late 20th century and early 21st century, widespread austere poverty and starvation in Mexico was at almost pandemic levels due to US corporations relocating their cheap-labour plants from the US-Mexico border to Asia; plunging millions into poverty causing mass migration.
Now to further clarify my point, in regards to responsibility, the United States is a great nation. As a great nation, we should also be a responsible nation in accordance to our past actions. In addition, I strongly believe the current mentality of those who just want to "kick them all out" fail to realize the responsibility our nation has played in promoting the plight of migrant workers.
Furthermore, being a responsible nation doesn’t mean to just kick out everyone who for over a century were more than welcomed and helped to create this great nation. When did the words on the Statue of Liberty change? Last time I read them they said this, “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore, Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door.” Regardless, citizens on both sides of this issue realize real reform needs to take place. Why not have gateway cities on the southern border that resemble an “Ellis Island” type of entry stations for migrant workers? Although the divide on the debate on this issue is wide there is a common ground where real reform can begin. Most everyone agrees there needs to be accountability of who is in our country and for what reason, and most everyone agrees migrant workers are exploited terribly in our country. “Ellis Island” gateway cities would begin to solve both of these issues.
A very common question which arises from the issue of immigrations is this; “If America has so much to offer them, what do they have to offer us in return for all of that free stuff they get?” This question is answered by quite a statistical reality. Migrant workers pay over $7 billion annually into the Social Security Administration. Since this money mainly goes to the federal government and hardly little goes to the local and state governments this results in the misperception that migrant workers receive more than they give. This is also undoubtedly why state and local governments are so active in anti-immigration policies, while the federal government has more sympathy to immigration reform.I believe many white European descended neo-conservatives realize their European based culture is changing. This inevitable coming change in the racial and ethnic make up of the population of America threatens their sense of nationalism. This is the reason they spout, “It’s the law, and it’s the law” over and over again. And in this regard of identifying migrant workers as “illegal’s”, not all laws are just, that is what makes our country great, when a law is not just we change the laws. I fear that many of these insecure Americans have a stark comparison to the same people who defended “Jim Crow” laws during the 60s. I wonder would they have had the same passion to tell a “Negro” during the 60’s they could not drink from their white water fountains; because it was the law.
In addition, why do we forget that all but one of the 9/11 hijackers came across the Canadian border. Some studies have shown there are over 300,000 Canadians living in our country under illegal status, no one speaks out against them. Why? Canada has a very strong and a growing fundamentalist Muslim population, but I see no demands for a fence along our northern border. Is this because Canadians are predominately white European decent?Moreover, we will never 'kick them all out', because for one important simple reason the demographic culture of the United States is changing. Soon the Hispanic population will gain the upper hand in dealing with this problem, due to white European descent Americans dropping to below 50% of the population; so whatever tough legislation may or may not be passed by the federal, state, or local governments in the present; is in reality a little too late so to speak. When the Hispanic population gains the upper hand, they will either reverse or create new immigration laws that will show more sympathy to migrant workers more than the current public opinion and trend. Much like the early part of the 20th century when European descended Americans created immigration laws which showed more compassion to the Europeans immigrating to the United States.
The greatest misperception about migrant workers coming from Mexico is misidentifying their ethnic heritage. Most migrant workers coming from Mexico are descended from: Apache, Aztec, Amuzgo, Cheyenne, Ch'ol, Cochimi, Cocopa, Cora, Guarijio, Huichol, Hopi, Kickapoo, Kiliwa, Kumiai, Matlatzinca, Mayas, Mixe, Mixtec, Mojave, Nahuatl/Mexica, Navajo, OaxacaChontal, Opata, Paipai, PimaBajo, Popoluca, Pueblo, Purepechaor, Seri, Sioux, TabascoChontal, Tarahumara, Tepehu, Tlahuica, Tonto, Tubar, Yaqui, Yucatec, Yuma, Zapotec, Zoque,and Zuni Native American Indians. I suppose most neo-conservatives and other groups who oppose open borders would feel uncomfortable to demanding the government to kick-out “Native Americans” from the United States; it must make them feel more comfortable to use their self-justifying racist overtones and condemnations.
One of the most ironic points neo-conservatives make on the issue of immigration surrounds how they spout the government needs to be a “responsible” government in dealing with this issue. The irony is that I agree the government needs to be HONESTLY responsible for their actions which lead to the current plight of migrant workers in America. However, most neo-conservatives do not want the government to be truthfully responsible for their past historical actions.Our country’s responsibility lies in two different concepts; the first being historical. I assume everyone is familiar with the term “blowback”. The first blowback began at the end of the Spanish-American War; which resulted in the annexation of over 60% of Mexico with the agreement and understanding the borders would always be open to Mexican families on both sides of the border; this historical agreed openness lead to the present situation with American businesses and employers being more than welcoming to migrant workers. During these times, migrant workers helped to build our great nation; just a few examples being their contribution in building the continental railways and in helping turn the desert southwest into productive farmland. The second blowback occurred more recently in the form of American corporate greed. During the late 20th century and early 21st century, widespread austere poverty and starvation in Mexico was at almost pandemic levels due to US corporations relocating their cheap-labour plants from the US-Mexico border to Asia; plunging millions into poverty causing mass migration.
Now to further clarify my point, in regards to responsibility, the United States is a great nation. As a great nation, we should also be a responsible nation in accordance to our past actions. In addition, I strongly believe the current mentality of those who just want to "kick them all out" fail to realize the responsibility our nation has played in promoting the plight of migrant workers.
Furthermore, being a responsible nation doesn’t mean to just kick out everyone who for over a century were more than welcomed and helped to create this great nation. When did the words on the Statue of Liberty change? Last time I read them they said this, “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore, Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door.” Regardless, citizens on both sides of this issue realize real reform needs to take place. Why not have gateway cities on the southern border that resemble an “Ellis Island” type of entry stations for migrant workers? Although the divide on the debate on this issue is wide there is a common ground where real reform can begin. Most everyone agrees there needs to be accountability of who is in our country and for what reason, and most everyone agrees migrant workers are exploited terribly in our country. “Ellis Island” gateway cities would begin to solve both of these issues.
A very common question which arises from the issue of immigrations is this; “If America has so much to offer them, what do they have to offer us in return for all of that free stuff they get?” This question is answered by quite a statistical reality. Migrant workers pay over $7 billion annually into the Social Security Administration. Since this money mainly goes to the federal government and hardly little goes to the local and state governments this results in the misperception that migrant workers receive more than they give. This is also undoubtedly why state and local governments are so active in anti-immigration policies, while the federal government has more sympathy to immigration reform.I believe many white European descended neo-conservatives realize their European based culture is changing. This inevitable coming change in the racial and ethnic make up of the population of America threatens their sense of nationalism. This is the reason they spout, “It’s the law, and it’s the law” over and over again. And in this regard of identifying migrant workers as “illegal’s”, not all laws are just, that is what makes our country great, when a law is not just we change the laws. I fear that many of these insecure Americans have a stark comparison to the same people who defended “Jim Crow” laws during the 60s. I wonder would they have had the same passion to tell a “Negro” during the 60’s they could not drink from their white water fountains; because it was the law.
In addition, why do we forget that all but one of the 9/11 hijackers came across the Canadian border. Some studies have shown there are over 300,000 Canadians living in our country under illegal status, no one speaks out against them. Why? Canada has a very strong and a growing fundamentalist Muslim population, but I see no demands for a fence along our northern border. Is this because Canadians are predominately white European decent?Moreover, we will never 'kick them all out', because for one important simple reason the demographic culture of the United States is changing. Soon the Hispanic population will gain the upper hand in dealing with this problem, due to white European descent Americans dropping to below 50% of the population; so whatever tough legislation may or may not be passed by the federal, state, or local governments in the present; is in reality a little too late so to speak. When the Hispanic population gains the upper hand, they will either reverse or create new immigration laws that will show more sympathy to migrant workers more than the current public opinion and trend. Much like the early part of the 20th century when European descended Americans created immigration laws which showed more compassion to the Europeans immigrating to the United States.
The Christening of the Blog
This blog is dedicated to all free, unique, thinkers, philosophers of the 21st century. Too many people are stuck in the 20Th century in their way of thinking and conducting their lives. New ideas are welcome, new philosophies are embraced.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
