Lt. Col Joe Repya is tired of spineless politicians

Lt. Col Joe Repya wrote a column describing the things he is tired of.

Joe Repya wrote, "I'm tired of spineless politicians, both Democrat and Republican who lack the courage, fortitude, and character to see these 'difficult tasks' through".

Difficult tasks?? Spending our country into bankruptcy and killing thousands of people in an unnecessary war is more than a difficult task Colonel. It is madness!

Joe Repya wrote, "I'm tired of the hypocrisy of politicians who want to rewrite history when the 'going gets tough'."

There you go again Joe. Using sophomoric platitudes and rah rah cheering to say we should stick to "it" even if "it" makes no sense.

Joe wrote, "I'm tired of the disingenuous clamor from those that claim they 'Support the Troops' by wanting them to 'Cut and Run' before victory is achieved."

Most Americans are overawed with themselves as a powerful country. They cannot stand that their mighty group might not achieve victory. Victory has become more important than the reason for the war. "Cut and Run" is a cliché designed to make some feel guilty simply because they have more logic than emotion in their opinions.

Joe Repya wrote, "I'm tired of a mainstream media that can only focus on car bombs and casualty reports because they are too afraid to leave the safety of their hotels to report on the courage and success our brave men and women are having on the battlefield."

Joe, If the brave men and women are having the success on the "battlefield" you claim, then it would be safe for the reporters to go out into the battlefield and see what you call successes. Success will be when the local tribal chiefs want it to happen, not by our military presence.

Joe Repya wrote, "I'm tired that so many Americans think you can rebuild a dictatorship into a democracy over night."

Me to Joe. But I was tired of those Americans who in the first days of the war thought you could turn Iraq into a democracy over night. It was you and your CIC who thought Iraq would be an overnight success. I guess that means you are tired of your Commander in Chief and all the other war lovers like you who thought the Iraqi people would embrace democracy overnight, and Iraq would be a shining victory for God and his missionary warriors.

Joe Repya wrote, "I'm tired that so many ignore the bravery of the Iraqi people to go to the voting booth and freely elect a Constitution and soon a permanent Parliament."

We don't ignore the Iraqi vote, you do. You think the word democracy will mean people who have hated each other for centuries over simple beliefs will now get along. Update August 1, 2007. The Sunni bloc of the Iraq government just resigned leaving the Iraqi government in peril.

Joe Repya wrote, "I'm tired of the so called 'Elite Left' that prolongs this war by giving aid and comfort to our enemy, just as they did during the Vietnam War."

You claim to have fought for our freedoms and you want the Iraqi people to have the same freedoms. Yet when people dissent, you label it treason, and you want to silence them. So much for the freedoms you said you fought for.

Joe Repya wrote, "I'm tired of antiwar protesters showing up at the funerals of our fallen soldiers. A family who's loved ones gave their life in a just and noble cause, only to be cruelly tormented on the funeral day by cowardly protesters is beyond shameful."

They did not "Give" their lives Joe. Their lives were taken from them in a brutal and horrific way. Their lives were offered as human sacrifice to the worshippers of Ares, and not in a noble and just war, but in an unnecessary and evil war of invasion and occupying another country.

Joe Repya wrote, "I'm tired that my generation, the Baby Boom -- Vietnam generation, who have such a weak backbone that they can't stomach seeing the difficult tasks through to victory."

Same old platitudes Joe. No matter how immoral and illegal the tasks you think we should just have the stomach to see them 'succeed'. You call it "Victory".

Joe Repya wrote, "Mostly, I'm tired that the people of this great nation didn't learn from history that there is no substitute for Victory."

I'm tired to Joe, that our leaders did not learn from history that you cannot invade other countries without making the rest of the world fear and hate you. Joe, when goods, services, and ideas cross borders, armies do not.

Bilbo Baggins

South Korean Christian missionaries in Afghanistan

After the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq by the U. S. Military, one could safely bet the Christian missionary invaders would soon follow the military.

The South Korean Christian missionaries captured in Afghanistan indicate a long train of the part religion has played in past wars. False beliefs in long dead gods were used as an excuse to get the masses involved in wars. The missionary zealots and priests always followed the soldiers to conquered lands. The Catholic priests who followed Columbus, Cortez and others to new lands threatened the natives with death unless they converted to the new religion.

The following is from a Time Magazine article of July 27, 2007. An interesting comment about "competition" among the churches in South Korea. Competition among religions is rarely mentioned, but it is the cause of most conflict between religions. The competition starts from the top because the winners live lavishly and have enormous political power. The Pope is an example of a competing religion that is a winner. Islam leaders want to live a lavish lifestyle like the Pope lives. The Muslim leaders do not like the Christian competition so they are sending a strong message to the competitors.

Charles Tolleson
-----------------------
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1647646,00.html
The execution earlier this week of one hostage, pastor Bae Hyung Kyu, 42, brought the expected outpouring of grief and condolences. But non-evangelical Koreans are still scratching their heads over why the Saemmul church group trotted off to such a volatile region, thumbing its nose at government warnings not to enter Afghanistan.

Devout Christians here readily admit the mission was poorly organized, but they insist that it had an admirable purpose. They argue that the group was only doing what it is supposed to do: help others, as Jesus directed them to do. The missionaries wanted to deliver aid and simply didn't care if they were in harm's way.

This is not the first time Korea's Christians have found themselves in strife. In 2004, a Korean interpreter and aspiring Christian missionary was taken hostage and beheaded by militants in Iraq. Seven other missionaries have been kidnapped but later released in that country. Afghanistan also deported more than 1,000 Korean Christians, including children, for gathering at a peace festival there last summer.

Many of Korea's Christians are passionate evangelists, exhibiting the zeal of the newly converted. Evangelical Protestantism is a relatively recent arrival on the peninsula, having taken hold only after the Korean War. Now, fully one-third of the 45 million people in this traditionally Confucian society follow the practices of Jesus (about 10% are Roman Catholic). An estimated 16,000 Korean Christians were working around the world as missionaries in more than 150 countries last year. Most Korean missionaries work in China, and go there under the guise of being researchers, or businessmen, so they won't be imprisoned for proselytizing. Russia is apparently the next most popular destination for Korean missionaries, followed by Europe and South East Asia.

An unfortunate side to the evangelical movement in Korea is increased competition. Churches number in the tens of thousands here, and are competing so intensely for members that pastors feel pressured to engage in a kind of one-upmanship: sending congregants on as many overseas missions as possible. New markets and riskier missions tend to garner more publicity, which until now has translated into more kudos and ultimately more money for the pastor and the church.

Will the hostage crisis put a damper on Korea's missionary zeal? Some say the crisis will certainly reduce the desire of would-be missionaries to go abroad, particularly since Seoul has been unable to secure the release of the hostages thus far. The widespread public criticism also may force Korea's spirited Christians to recalibrate their strategies. "It will definitely lead to a purge at churches" on the peninsula, says Douglas Shin, a pastor involved in missionary activities with North Koreans. "People will wonder if it is worth the risk now, and donors will probably withhold more funds because they fear they could be causing someone harm." Though Shin believes the Afghanistan mission was sincere, he expects that what he calls "camcorder missions" — assignments that are more or less photo ops for groups looking money for supporters — to wane in the near future.

Mike Nifong, No Crime Was Committed

Beliefs are what divide people. Doubt unites them. Peter Ustinov (1921-2004)

Former prosecutor Mike Nifong finally admitted there was no crime in the Duke Rape Case. http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/07/26/ap3958786.html

I think you are wrong Mike. How about the false report filed by the accuser? After traumatizing multiple families and costing the "Rich White Boys" hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, are you and the other "Prosecutors of Justice" going to do nothing to the lying stripper? Can you at least charge her with a misdemeanor, or something, just to show false reporting of a crime is in itself a crime?

This link http://www.truthinjustice.org/p-pmisconduct.htm provides a list of other prosecutors like you Mike who were more interested in revenge from some long past personal injustice, or biases, instead of public justice.

Were you teased by your classmates when in high school? Did the jocks get the girls and you were unable to get a date while excelling in academics? Did envy of the Duke jocks corrupt your soul? Or was it because you could not say no to all the females in your office. You may have seen yourself as a chivalrous knight saving the ladies, hoping they would reward you with their affections.

You may have believed a crime existed at Duke, only because you wanted it to be. You needed that high profile crime for your own ego and public career.

You made a deal with Mephistopheles. Then you got caught. Had you not gotten caught, and sent three innocent men to jail, you would have stood in front of the courthouse and praised the justice system.

Why did you continue with the "persecution"? From the beginning you knew there was no evidence to support the accuser's claims.

Now you are just another man in the long list of mankind who was corrupted with power. You are an example of the kind of man the writers of our constitution feared.

Charles Tolleson

Iraqi Children

Someone just sent me several images of American soldiers in Iraq interacting happily with Iraqi children. I suspect these images were created by the Minister of Propaganda.

I think it is good that children are willing to accept the American soldiers. The children are young and naive. Their minds are still malleable. They are poor and desperate. This is a good time to form their opinions of the world.

I think it would be less expensive and more productive if we brought all our soldiers home. Each soldier could bring 10 children with them. This would equal about one and a half million children. The children could be housed on our military bases throughout the world. They would go to school with; Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and Atheists. They would not be taught any religion. These one and a half million Iraqi children would grow up believing in America and the Bill of Rights. Many of them would return to Arab lands as a moderating force for the Middle East.

The problem with this modest proposal is many Iraqi parents would object to their children not being taught the family religion and mores. Somehow, parents always believe their myths and traditional ways are the proper way, and therefore should be passed on to their children. Successful control of the next generation goes to the group that has control over the minds of children.

No where in the U. S. Constitution does it say the President or Congress has the right to nation building, which is what the President says we are doing in Iraq. Congress can declare war, but we are not at war with the Iraqi government, the one we helped create. We are their allies. We are not at war with Iraq.

Are we at war with the Taliban? Which country are they in? Are we at war with Al Qaeda? Al Qaeda is in America and many other countries! Do we declare war on ourselves? Do we declare war on every country that has a group of Al Qaeda? The President would love to. War is the health of the State.

Bilbo Baggins

Negotiating with Iran

It is good news that the U. S. is willing to talk to Iran, the first time in 27 years.
Only if egos and State ambitions are set aside will any meaningful results pass.

Of course we will never know what went on in the negotiations. We will be told something of the negotiations, but we will never know the truth. Negotiations are the private property of the Executive, with very few checks and balances. The voters have no say in the negotiations for war, or no war. We have no say in the matter. Nor do we have any say in negotiations for peace during war! If negotiations fail, each side will spew forth with how intractable is the other side. Somewhat like business and labor negotiations that fail. The arrogance and hubris, or the reasoned humility, of the two leaders will never be known.

Could thousands of lives have been spared if the United States had negotiated a peace agreement with Japan before the invasion of Okinawa? I think so. But men must have unconditional surrender! For men to sit around and reach a civil agreement would make them look feminine.

The negotiations should be open for public viewing. That way the masses could see which leaders bargained in good faith.

Randolph Bourne said in, "War is the Health of the State", "Good democrats are wont to feel the crucial difference between a State in which the popular Parliament or Congress declares war, and the State in which an absolute monarch or ruling class declares war. But, put to the stern pragmatic test, the difference is not striking. In the freest of republics as well as in the most tyrannical of empires, all foreign policy, the diplomatic negotiations which produce or forestall war, are equally the private property of the Executive part of the Government, and are equally exposed to no check whatever from popular bodies, or the people voting as a mass themselves."

Charles Tolleson
------------------------------

Iran, U.S. to discuss Iraq this week By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press Writer
The United States and Iran have set a date for ambassador-level talks in Baghdad on the deteriorating security situation in Iraq - the first such meeting since late May, U.S. and Iraqi officials said Sunday.The two sides will sit down together on Tuesday, according to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari and U.S. Embassy spokesman Philip Reeker, amid U.S. allegations that Tehran is supporting violent Shiite militias in the country. Zebari told The Associated Press by telephone that the discussions would be at the ambassadorial level and would focus on the situation in Iraq, not U.S.-Iran tensions.Iraq's fragile government has been pressing for another meeting between the two nations with the greatest influence over its future,and Iran has repeatedly signaled its willingness to sit down.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said last week that Washington was also ready to hold new talks with Iran on the security situation in Iraq.The May 28 meeting marked a break in a 27-year diplomatic freeze between the U.S. and Iran and was expected to have been followed within a month by a second encounter. But following that meeting,Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other U.S. officials said Iran had not scaled back what the United States claims is a concerted effort to arm militants and harm U.S. troops.

Tensions also have risen over Tehran's detention of four Iranian-American scholars and activists charged with endangering national security. The U.S. has demanded their release, saying the charges against them are false. At the same time, Iran has called for the release of five Iranians detained in Iraq, whom the United States has said are members of Iran's elite Quds Force - accused of arming and training Iraqi militants. Iran says the five are diplomats in Iraq with permission of the government.

Dog Fighting Sport, Who are the real animals?

"If God were suddenly condemned to live the life which he has inflicted on men, he would kill himself." Alexander Dumas

In a floor speech, Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W. Va.) gave a tearful speech about dog fighting. He was referring to the current news story of Atlanta Falcons Quarterback Michael Vick's indictment for being involved in dog fighting. Byrd said, "It is a brutal, sadistic event motivated by barbarism of the worst sort and cruelty of the worst, worst, worst, sadistic kind. One is left wondering: Who are the real animals? Who are the real animals, who are the real animals -- the creatures inside the ring or the creatures outside the ring?The training of these poor creatures -- weigh them -- the training of these poor creatures to turn themselves into fighting machines is simply barbaric. Barbaric! Barbaric! Barbaric! Let that word resound from hill to hill and from mountain to mountain, from valley to valley across this broad land. Barbaric, barbaric!"

Animal cruelty changes with cultures, and over time, within cultures. When people are worrying about survival they have little time to be concerned with the welfare of animals, or other humans. As a culture becomes more abundant with food sources and leisure, it has time to reflect upon the feeling of animals and others humans.

I strongly oppose cruelty to animals. I have a dog that evokes so much sympathy from me that I become her slave. Still, I would like to say a word to Senator Byrd.

Senator Byrd, I remind you that we do the same thing with young humans. We train our young men to turn themselves into fighting machines! You vote to fund this training. Then you, and other old men, and war lovers, become the promoters of the grandest fighting sport of them all, War! If you could sell tickets to viewers of your wars you would become rich.

Charles Tolleson

Does Congress Represent You?

I bet you thought a congress person represented you. Wrong. It/he/she/ represents their political party. Whatever the party leadership says, that's how congress members vote. If you don't do as the party says, look for your party to run an opponent against you in your next primary election.

Charles Tolleson
-----------------------------------------
Is Congress doing its job?

On paper, they sure look busy. Over the week of July 9-14 the House passed 14 bills totaling 663 pages. The Senate passed 3 bills that came to 498 pages. (A complete list of the Bills Congress passed,along with links to roll call votes, is available in the blog version of this Dispatch found here.)http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/2007/jul/19/make_congress_do_its_job

One bill in particular stands out. On July 11, Congress passed the Food and Drug Administration Administration Act (you read that correctly), which ran to an astonishing 308 pages. Health freedom advocates warn that this bill will turn the FDA into a public-private partnership with the ability to develop and patent drugs on its own.They further warn this bill will jeopardize our access to vitamins and other nutritional supplements that compete with Big Pharma.

But only forty minutes were allowed for debate, and amendments could not be proposed or considered. Instead of questioning this process,Congress rubber-stamped the bill with only 16 votes against it.

How many of the 403 who voted "yea" blindly followed the advice of lobbyists and Congressional leaders? How many then patted them selves on the back for "protecting" the American people from supposedly"dangerous" foods?

How many, if they actually read the bill, would have been appalled by some of the provisions, and demanded full debate and amendments? How many would have worked to defeat the bill?

We'll never know, because right now members of Congress aren't even required to read and understand the bills they pass. But when they rubber-stamp bills, they're not representing us. They may look busy,but they're not actually doing the job they were elected to do.

We can change this. We can force Congress to pass the Read the Bills Act and make them do their job. You can learn more about the Read the Bills Act here. http://www.downsizedc.org/read_the_laws.shtml

And you can tell your Congressman and Senators to introduce the Read the Bills Act here. http://action.downsizedc.org/wyc.php?cid=27

And finally, you can help us spread the word by joining the Read the Bills Act Coalition. When you join, we will link to your website from our blog. Details are here.http://www.downsizedc.org/rtba/coalition/

Thank-you for being a DC Downsizer.

James Wilson, Assistant to the President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

Envy in the Arab world

Columnist Gary North wrote an excellent column titled the Evil of Envy. http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north548.html North talks about how socialists do not want equality, out of justice, but want to punish those who have more, out of envy.

In 1966, the German sociologist Helmut Schoeck wrote a classic book, Envy: A Theory of Social Behavior. He argued that envy is the root cause of socialism and other forms of compulsory wealth redistribution. Most people think the cause is jealousy. The jealous person says: "You’ve got something I want. I’m going to take it away from you." Schoeck said this explanation misses the more intransigent underlying outlook: envy. "You’ve got something I want. I can never possess it. So, I’m going to destroy what you have. I don’t want anyone to have it until everyone can have it."

This envy applies to our current situation in the Arab world where the average age is 21 years old. The unemployment rate is very high and the standard of living is very low. One estimate is the Arab world needs to create one hundred million jobs by 2020 just to keep up with the present employment.

Bitter and unemployed young men are envious of the United States, the powerful and rich country that is invading their country. The same old envy that has plagued the Jews, America's friend in the Middle East, for generations is now rampant among young Arab men who are unemployed. Envy makes these young men want to destroy what we have, because they cannot have the same things.

The United States should adopt a foreign policy that addresses the causes of the anger in the Arab world. Killing a few hundred million of them may make a few war lovers feel good, and makes the timid feel safe, but it only breeds more Arab men filled with hatred. These young men will produce future generations that will be filled with hatred, and envy.

Hitler did not hate the Jews, he envied them. He could not have their family structure, wealth, and mores, so he destroyed them.

Bilbo Baggins

Negotiations during State conflicts

When two men are in disagreement the disagreement does not last for years with escalating costs. Small groups may carry out conflicts for years at personal costs, like the Hatfield and McCoy family feud.Two combatants will often show one side winning and the other side running away. When one looses and walks away, the victor does not usually continue the attack and ask for unconditional surrender.

Conflicts between States usually are settled differently when one side is winning. After victory is achieved the victorious State will not cease fighting, but will continue fighting. Why the difference in the actions of a State that is winning a conflict and an individual that is winning a conflict?

During WW II Allen Dulles was stationed in Switzerland with the OSS (which preceded the CIA) and was assigned the primary duty of seeing if there was a resistance movement in Germany which might overthrow Hitler. Dulles learned of a very substantial plot to kill Hitler early in the war in 1942 after Germany’s defeat at Stalingrad. While Stalin had murdered 35,000 to 50,000 of his senior military officers prior to the war in order to put in his loyal officers, Hitler had resisted this strategy and did not purge the regular German army of its senior officers. Early in the war a large number of these senior officers, including his Chief of Staff, General Ludwig Beck, built up a strong resistance movement with the purpose of assassinating Hitler and then surrendering to the American and British forces. This was in 1942! Three years before the killing in Europe stopped. When Roosevelt first learned of this significant resistance movement and the plan of the Germans to surrender immediately to America and the British, he unilaterally announced the unconditional surrender policy which caused much of the resistance movement to dissolve and their plans to be abandoned.

In World War II the United States was victorious long before Japan surrendered, unconditionally. Why did the United States not cease the hostilities earlier? The U. S. could have negotiated a cease fire much earlier. The U. S. had killed ten times as many Japanese as Americans were killed at Pearl Harbor. By continuing the conflict thousands more Americans were killed at Okinawa and Iwo Jima. Millions of Japanese were killed.

Could not the terms of the cease fire stipulate that Japan will withdraw all her troops from China, Korea, and other places, and pay for the damages that occurred at Pearl Harbor? These kinds of agreements are settled between individuals and private organizations.

I think the reasons States don't reach an agreement when one side is winning are egos of the old men in air-conditioned offices that do not have to fight and die. War is the health of the State. President Roosevelt and President Truman probably thought they would show the Japanese and the rest of the world what great warriors they were, even though they were not fighting in the miserable South Pacific jungles. It was not their costs, but their gains. It was at the cost to taxpayers, and the unnecessary loss of lives, on both sides.

"War is the health of the State". Randolph Bourne

How do you know when to trust government?

“We're never so vulnerable than when we trust someone - but paradoxically, if we cannot trust, neither can we find love or joy” Walter Anderson

I just read an article about trust, which reminded me of how trusting and naive I was when I was a young man fresh off the farm. I was not distrustful. I was not "street smart".

Over the years I have become the opposite of that young man. Now I trust very few people because I have witnessed so many charlatans and prevaricators. Now I make someone work harder to earn my trust than in my early years. I don't give my trust away on any whim.

A business that does one transaction for a customer has little need to build trust. A business that counts on repeat customers needs to build trust.

Family members and close friends demand and try to build trust because it is in their best interest. It promotes the strength and survivability of the family and group. A business that has earned trust from its employees and customers also promotes its strength against competition.

As a society we promote truth. We use truth as a means of commerce and social interaction. We consider truth and honesty as community property. Someone will always try to get more from the community property than they contribute.

The same issue of trust applies to a culture's government. If the government earns trust from the people, the government builds strength. Do we measure a government by what it does, or what it says? How do we know when a government lies, or when it tells the truth? Trust in a government can be an illusion, based on lies. Destroy our illusions and you destroy our happiness. People want to trust their government. They feel safe in its cocoon. Therein lies danger.

Charles Tolleson

Pamplona "Cow" run for women

How many women would run in the Pamplona "Cow" run if the cows were Texas Longhorns?

---------------------------------

Women demand female Pamplona bull run - with cows Mon Jul 9, 5:29 AM ET

Women in the northern Spanish city of Pamplona, world-famous for its ferocious bull-running festival, are demanding their own version complete with cows instead of bulls.

A student Web site, http://www.estudiln.net/, set the ball rolling with its campaign "Cows want to run" which asks for a separate encierro, as the bull-runs are known, where only women are allowed to take part.

Women have been allowed to take part in the San Fermin bull-running for some years but they still represent a tiny minority of the thousands of runners who attempt to dodge 600-kilo bulls along an 800-metre course through the streets of Pamplona.

The students say it's only logical that women should have their own bull-run.
"Cows, as well as bulls, have four legs and a natural instinct to run," says their manifesto. "An encierro for cows, would put Pamplona at the vanguard of traditional fiestas with equality for men and women."

Organisers of the festival, which runs from July 7-14, have not responded to the suggestion.

And just what the late Ernest Hemingway, who made the bull-run in Pamplona internationally famous, would have thought will never be known.

Copyright © 2007 Reuters Limited.

Freedom: The History Of An Idea, J Rufus Fears

The Foreign Policy Research Institute is one of those think tanks that believe the United States should police the world. These are some of my comments to a recent article by Professor Fears.

Professor Fears, I enjoyed your essay about freedoms. I agree that too many people take freedom for granted. I assure you I do not. I treasure my past and present freedoms, which is why I speak so vociferously about protecting them.

You also made a good point about the desire for freedom not being universal. Nor do I think freedom is our natural urge. Our natural state is to survive and procreate. We will chose what we think is the best way to achieve our natural state with the least effort. Our choices may be to submit to kings, popes or some other committee of protectors, or take the hazardous path of independence and responsibility. I happened to believe individual freedom is the best way for the most people to achieve their natural desires without harming others.

Young people born into a caste system in India for centuries accepted their fate. Today many young people in America think it is normal to have so much of their lives regulated. These young people do not have an innate desire for freedom, as you correctly stated.

Prof Fears wrote, "We are engaged in what I believe is a noble crusade to bring freedom to the world. But that crusade is faltering now, in part because we have failed to ask some very fundamental questions."

Professor Fears, the noble crusade you wish for is faltering because it never should have started. You and others keep trying to apply this invasion and occupying of other countries with the colonies wanting independence, our own civil war, and WW II. The only comparison is now we are the "British Empire" who are occupying countries that want us out.

Priof Fears wrote, "Thus our national freedom is founded on absolute truth and upon abelief in God."

How can you say it was founded upon a belief in God? No where is God mentioned in the original Articles of Confederation, or even in the U.S. Constitution. The Declaration of Independence does not say anything about the "Nation" being created by God or for God. It refers only to individuals being created, and by anyone's "creator". It does not say a new nation should be formed, but that the colonies shall be "free and independent states." It is not law. It is only a declaration.

The founders were readers of John Locke, who had lived through some of England's bloody 17th century. It was Locke who inspired the ideas of freedom! Our founders just continued the ideas. Locke's ideas grew and flourished in the same bloody soil they were planted. Without the 1776 revolution, the sun would still not set on the British Empire, and Gary would now have his Universal Health care because we would still be part of the United Kingdom.

Prof Fears wrote, "Napoleon learned this in Spain. History should have taught us to be skeptical of the claim that we would be welcomed as liberators in Iraq."

Very true. (Napoleon - "With my banner bearing the words 'Liberty and Emancipation from Superstition,'" he said, "I shall be regarded as the liberator of Spain.") Like you I fear we do not learn from history, instead we repeat it.

Prof Fears wrote, "First, there is the legacy of the Old Testament, the idea that we are a nation chosen by God to bear the ark of the liberties to the world. Our Founders believed that deeply. Abraham Lincoln believed it deeply. Franklin Roosevelt believed it."

Lincoln loved the New Testament but abhorred slavery? He killed 600,000 people to preserve Big Government, which is why he is so admired.

So, after centuries of allowing slavery, according to the Old Testament, God finally comes to his senses and decides freedom is important! God must have read John Locke's, "Two Treatises of Government" (1690).

To think one is chosen by God is typical arrogance of people filled with delusional self adulation and importance. It leads them into traps like South Korea, South Vietnam, and now Iraq.

Charles Tolleson
--------------------------------
The Newsletter of FPRI's http://www.fpri.org/
Marvin Wachman Fund for International Education
FREEDOM: THE HISTORY OF AN IDEA by J. Rufus Fears Vol. 12, No. 19 July 2007

Shoe bomber Richard Reid Sentenced

Judge William Young said this when sentencing shoe bomber Richard Reid: "It seems to me you hate the one thing that to us is most precious. You hate our freedom. Our individual freedom. Our individual freedom to live as we choose, to come and go as we choose, to believe or not believe as we individually choose".

---------------------------------------------------------
Here is what Reid actually said was his reason for declaring war on the United States. He did not say he hated our freedoms. We should learn what they believe about us, whether it is true or not. What Reid believed about the U.S. turned him into a terrorist, not our freedoms, which we have had for over 200 years. http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/01/31/reid.transcript/

"I start by praising Allah because life today is no good. I bear witness to this and he alone is right to be worshiped. And I bear witness that Muhammad Sa'laat Alayhi as-Salaam is his last prophet and messenger who is sent to all of mankind for guidance, with the sound guidance for everyone.

Concerning what the Court said? I admit, I admit my actions and I further, I further state that I done them."

JUDGE WILLIAM YOUNG: I didn't hear the last. I admit my actions and then what did you say?

REID: "I further admit my allegiance to Osama bin Laden, to Islam, and to the religion of Allah. With regards to what you said about killing innocent people, I will say one thing. Your government has killed 2 million children in Iraq. If you want to think about something, against 2 million, I don't see no comparison.
Your government has sponsored the rape and torture of Muslims in the prisons of Egypt and Turkey and Syria and Jordan with their money and with their weapons. I don't know, see what I done as being equal to rape and to torture, or to the deaths of the two million children in Iraq.

So, for this reason, I think I ought not apologize for my actions. I am at war with your country. I'm at war with them not for personal reasons but because they have murdered more than, so many children and they have oppressed my religion and they have oppressed people for no reason except that they say we believe in Allah.

This is the only reason that America sponsors Egypt. It's the only reason they sponsor Turkey. It's the only reason they back Israel.

As far as the sentence is concerned, it's in your hand. Only really it is not even in your hand. It's in Allah's hand. I put my trust in Allah totally and I know that he will give victory to his religion. And he will give victory to those who believe and he will destroy those who wish to oppress the people because they believe in Allah.

So you can judge and I leave you to judge. And I don't mind. This is all I have to say. And I bear witness to Muhammad this is Allah's message."

The Iraq war has been a success for American Generals

This following extract from- http://tinyurl.com/35zneb reminds me of something I read somewhere that war in a democracy is a way for the lower and middle class to move up in rank and status. The Private gets promoted to Sergeant (my own military experience), and the Captain get promoted to General.

Bilbo Baggins

"In reality, the Iraq war has been a roaring success for American Generals. Their decade-long effort to expand the size of the Army and Marine Corps has been approved. Budgets have nearly doubled, which include the limitless "war" funding that has little congressional oversight. Dozens of new permanent American military bases have appeared overseas, while Congressional efforts to close outdated Cold war bases have ended. The number of commands and slots for General officers has risen. They can lead thousands of soldiers on massive offensive sweeps in Iraq, and do whatever they want without permission from the Iraqi government. Finally, Generals enjoy the illusion held by most Americans that they are fighting to preserve America's freedoms.

None of this would be possible if they had opposed the illegal invasion of Iraq or effectively contained the Iraqi rebellion back in 2003. While America's Generals don't want to lose in Iraq, they refuse to make changes needed to win. This requires actions deemed disloyal by their bureaucracies and civilian puppeteers, thus inviting condemnation, poor performance reviews, forced retirement, and a loss of opportunities for lucrative jobs in the defense industry. Generals benefit from a perpetual war for perpetual peace. This war will not end until "unpatriotic" war protestors and the "liberal" media educate the American people." http://tinyurl.com/35zneb

Senator Joseph Lieberman, a shill for Israel, wrote an op ed for the WSJ ("War" Street Journal), July 6, 2007, charging Iran with attacking American troops in Iraq. He thinks we should attack Iran.

What would Senator Lieberman do if Iran invaded our neighbors Mexico, or Canada? Would the senator stay out of Mexico and Canada, or would he be clamoring for us to defend our neighbors and protect us from Iran's expansionism?

It appears the senator thinks it is acceptable for the United States to invade other countries and their neighbors should accept our expansionism. He thinks Iran has nothing to fear from America and Israel. His hubris and arrogance is mystifying.

Iran has not invaded another country during the past 75 years. How many countries has the United States invaded during that same time?

Charles Tolleson

Lycurgus, the lawgiver of Sparta, is reported to have reared two dogs of the same litter by fattening one in the kitchen and training the other in the fields to the sound of the bugle and the horn, thereby to demonstrate to the Lacedaemonians that men, too, develop according to their early habits. He set the two dogs in the open market place, and between them he placed a bowl of soup and a hare. One ran to the bowl of soup, the other to the hare; yet they were, as he maintained, born brothers of the same parents. In such manner did this leader, by his laws and customs, shape and instruct the Spartans so well that any one of them would sooner have died than acknowledge any sovereign other than law and reason. "The Discours sur la servitude volontaire of" ÉTIENNE DE LA BOÉTIE, 1548

Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

Pete wrote, "My wife and I are on Medicare. It works well."


It seems to work well because we are over 65. But if you Google "Medicare problems" you will see it does not work well. There are many doctors who are opting out. And as Ron Webber said, how much did we pay into the system before we got to use it? Your Medicare premiums likely increased the following amounts during the last few years. 2003-9%, 2004-13%, 2005-17%, 2006-13%, and 2007 a whopping 40%! Over a 5 year period my Medicare premiums increased 140%! Try opting out. If you want to opt out of Medicare you must drop ALL Social Security benefits! The government mafia thugs simply tell you to shut up and pay up.

As far a Medicare being more efficient than private health care, many will disagree.http://tinyurl.com/352van

I was always academically and intellectually challenged. That must explain why I don't understand how so many bright and brave men, some who volunteered to risk their lives for freedoms, only in their senior years to act like meek kindergarten children who say to their Big Sister government, "Just take care of me. If my earnings are not enough, then take some from others". These once proud and brave men seem to have more desire for their free Viagra and discounted lunches at the senior center than the freedoms they once fought for.

Gary wrote, "I know you would like to just see government go awaycompletely."

No, I would just like to see the federal gov reduced to its original intent. It is absurd to have a Federal Department of Education. That's saying States cannot teach kids to read and write. I would also like to see smaller State governments, especially the state I live in. However, their constitutions do not prevent them from providing social programs, or health care.

As we celebrate July 4th we should remember this country was founded on the principal that the individual has rights. The government is supposed to protect those rights. The government is not supposed to have the power to prevent worry or all the miseries of life. The lure to socialists is that governments can solve all our worries. If socialism worked all the tribes who used it would still be around. The lure is so strong socialists are willing to use force on others, just like those on the right are willing to use force for their beliefs. Government operates only by force and coercion, and that's why I fear its power, and why I try to advocate for less power for government, not more.

Happy "Independence" Day.

Charles

Our bipolar government.

Our government used to encourage us to grow hemp. Now our government puts us in jail for growing hemp.

Bilbo Baggins

"Working together we can treat Washington's 40 billion dollar a year addiction to the War on Drugs." - Polly Wilmoth Waco, TX

More on Socialized Medicine

Gary wrote- "recent polls indicate a majority, around 62% if I remember correctly, favor universal health care even if it means a tax increase."

That's because the way the question reads implies the amount of taxes paid will be less than their current insurance premiums.

Gary wrote, "And why the big fear of the word "socialized"?

Because it means someone else has control of my life. Socialism is force and aggression. It is not voluntary.

Gary wrote, "We have 'socialized' fire and police services, schools, utilities, mail, etc, and it seems to work pretty well."

Pretty well! Compared to what? Government schools do not work as well as private schools. Government security does not work as well as private security. Government roads that kill 40,000 people each year would not tolerate such carnage if they were privatized.

Gary wrote, "There are some areas of life and society where government-provided services just make more sense than private, free market solutions."

How would you know? Have you ever tried private security, private mail, private schools, private roads, etc.? The only purpose of government is to protect our natural rights to live as free individuals! If its purpose is to provide some services, why not a government store where we all buy the same jeans, shirts, and ovens? Wait, that's exactly what the new Marxism is when it comes to global warming. No more unnecessary goods and services.

You use the same tactic that most socialists use in saying the free market health care in the U. S. is not working. Gary, there is no free market health care in the U. S. That is the problem! Write on the chalk board 500 times, "The U. S. health care system is 'NOT' a free market system.

Gary wrote, "To me, there is something innately discordant about for-profit health care. The two parties involved, the insurance companies and the patients, are immediatelyat odds with each other, since the insurance company's profits are endangered with every claim they approve."

That's why insurance contracts specify what is covered and what is not. However most buyers of insurance do not know what is in their contract because government or labor has required the employer to buy group insurance. There are also more than two parties involved. They are; the patient, insurance company, doctor, hospital, pharmacy, and in too many cases, the biggest gorilla, the government. If you want to imagine a free market in health care, try to imagine one where there is no one involved except the patient and the doctor and no government involvement and no insurance company. Then you would see the patient negotiating with the doctor. You would also see many expensive tests and procedures not ordered. There is more harmony in a free market with for-profit motives. In socialism, as in free markets, each individual is trying to get through life with the most pleasure and the least pain. People who advocate for socialism simply think they will benefit more. Government to them is community property. They worship big government that can use force on them, and deplore big business that cannot force them to do anything.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people think the government can make all our problems go away. If we had a completely egalitarian socialist society, some people would be all in a dither because some were happier than others, or some were taller than others. Good Samaritans never are happy. They always need a cause to feel important. It reminds me of "Looking Backward, 2000 to 1887", by socialist Edward Bellamy, cousin to Francis Bellamy, another socialist who wrote the Pledge of Allegiance, worshiping the State. "Looking Backward" is where a man falls into a coma in 1887 and awakens to a utopian socialist world in 2000 where the government owns and runs everything. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bellamy It was published in 1888 and was a best seller. People long for something, anything, to make their trials and tribulations disappear. They want safety, even if it means giving up their freedoms. If you go to a government prison you give up your freedom, but you are not safe.

People in America continue to give up their freedoms when they give the government responsibility. The government employees love being responsible for your health. That means their numbers will grow, and their power, and they will eventually have the authority to tell you what to eat and how much exercise you must do. Each group loves authority to be used to force others to behave; pro life, environment, war, religion, drugs, prostitution, flag burning, etc. So many people want to take away a little freedom here and a little there until we have none left.

Charles

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe