Hillary, Cronkite call for World Gov't
- Thread starter DC
- Start date
Karanas, your remark about "Democracy" hits the nail square on the head. It's shades of the "Deutsche Demokratische Republik," (Red East Germany) the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen (also Communist), and the sogenannte "People's Republic" of China.
The leftists like to sing the praises of communism-socialism. But here in South Florida, we get so many incidents per year of Cubans escaping by boat to reach America. I recall in 1989 all the East Germans making the trip through Czechoslovakia through Austria to make it into West Germany. If Communism was such a Paradise, this wouldn't be happening.
And if America should crumble under this globalist government Dreck, I guess there'll be no refuge for anyone anymore.
LEFTIST IDEOLOGY IS A FAILURE!!! It does not create a more productive State nor more productive people--it hinders it. The only one receiving any benefit from the system are the political Elite (which is why the influential advocate it so loudly). Read Orwell's "Animal Farm" sometime to get some insight into this. Everyone else suffers.
I wonder how loudly Hillary or any other of the social elite would speak for such a system if they were not assured the benefits thereof. But as it stands now, for them, it would be just more of the same, leeching off a system they really had no hand in building.
Rant mode off, but still steaming.
jth
------------------
"Corruptisima republica plurimae leges." (The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws.)
- Tacitus
[This message has been edited by Ulfilas (edited December 15, 1999).]
The leftists like to sing the praises of communism-socialism. But here in South Florida, we get so many incidents per year of Cubans escaping by boat to reach America. I recall in 1989 all the East Germans making the trip through Czechoslovakia through Austria to make it into West Germany. If Communism was such a Paradise, this wouldn't be happening.
And if America should crumble under this globalist government Dreck, I guess there'll be no refuge for anyone anymore.
LEFTIST IDEOLOGY IS A FAILURE!!! It does not create a more productive State nor more productive people--it hinders it. The only one receiving any benefit from the system are the political Elite (which is why the influential advocate it so loudly). Read Orwell's "Animal Farm" sometime to get some insight into this. Everyone else suffers.
I wonder how loudly Hillary or any other of the social elite would speak for such a system if they were not assured the benefits thereof. But as it stands now, for them, it would be just more of the same, leeching off a system they really had no hand in building.
Rant mode off, but still steaming.
jth
------------------
"Corruptisima republica plurimae leges." (The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws.)
- Tacitus
[This message has been edited by Ulfilas (edited December 15, 1999).]
Yes, the Leftist systems of Socialism/Communism are failed systems. They have never worked, and they can not work. Socialism does not generate National Capitol, it redistributes it, stagnating the National economy. It is an antiquated ideology in vogue with the RPC because it is good for one thing: Total control of the peasantry. It seemes our RPC, as examplified by the Clintons, Kenedys, etc, hope to use technology to keep such a system working and to firm their hold on the population.
This globalism is nothing more than a loose Union of Socialist Internationalists trying to expand thier power base. See how Hillary likes to travel the world and make "recomendations" to local governments about such things as womens rights?
I'm not a NWO theorist. But I do acknowledge the massive ego and callousnes of the RPC and the desire of those politicos apointed to positions in the UN to have more power. Socialism and international agreements are the easiest ways for the massively corrupt to grow in power and prestige. One thing could instantly shatter thier hopes. The United States instantly and totaly, withdrawing from the UN and seizing all UN properties on US soil. Wouldn't that be fun to watch on CNN?
Failing that, we need to wright, E-mail, call, every congressman and senator we can to let them know we do not favor a stronger UN. Just as we fight for The Second, we need to fight for our National Soveriegnty. We all know those in the UN Security council want the peasants unarmed just as much as our home-grown Leftists do.
This globalism is nothing more than a loose Union of Socialist Internationalists trying to expand thier power base. See how Hillary likes to travel the world and make "recomendations" to local governments about such things as womens rights?
I'm not a NWO theorist. But I do acknowledge the massive ego and callousnes of the RPC and the desire of those politicos apointed to positions in the UN to have more power. Socialism and international agreements are the easiest ways for the massively corrupt to grow in power and prestige. One thing could instantly shatter thier hopes. The United States instantly and totaly, withdrawing from the UN and seizing all UN properties on US soil. Wouldn't that be fun to watch on CNN?
Failing that, we need to wright, E-mail, call, every congressman and senator we can to let them know we do not favor a stronger UN. Just as we fight for The Second, we need to fight for our National Soveriegnty. We all know those in the UN Security council want the peasants unarmed just as much as our home-grown Leftists do.
Assasination Politics has been an interesting topic of conversation on other lists over the years. An objective participant in these discussions can easily come to the following conclusions;
Assasination Politics is as vehemently anti-american a concept as can concieved.
a) there is no greater denial of rights than murder, which is what assasination is.
Assasination Politics after the fact, as was referred to earlier is not politics at all, but rather some twisted type of vengance, which is best left to higher powers in the first place, and secondly could hardly be more counter productive to a cause.
I am greatful to live in a land where these ideas can be discussed, if even in hushed tones, but some research will show that assasination is murder, no more, no less. While there are some beautific arguments concerned with speculation about an assasination of Hitler, Saddam Hussein, and others, one does well to keep in mind that most these discussions take place in the full light of hindsight.
I understand that a great deal of these utterings take place in jest, but not everyone does, regardless of disclaimer.
Bad guys are bad guys, one does what one has to do to protect and defend. An enemy soldier is an enemy soldier, one does ones duty. A fellow citizen, even a criminal, has the right to a trial by peer. Our law is pretty miserable by some standards, but it is the best law I have heard of, (yes I have lived elsewhere) and I did take an oath to uphold and defend it, and last I checked, no one relieved me of that oath.
Lets hear no more of this. It does no one honor. Run a search on Assasination Politics if you want to know more. But lets keep it off this list, it is not really germaine.
Assasination Politics is as vehemently anti-american a concept as can concieved.
a) there is no greater denial of rights than murder, which is what assasination is.
Assasination Politics after the fact, as was referred to earlier is not politics at all, but rather some twisted type of vengance, which is best left to higher powers in the first place, and secondly could hardly be more counter productive to a cause.
I am greatful to live in a land where these ideas can be discussed, if even in hushed tones, but some research will show that assasination is murder, no more, no less. While there are some beautific arguments concerned with speculation about an assasination of Hitler, Saddam Hussein, and others, one does well to keep in mind that most these discussions take place in the full light of hindsight.
I understand that a great deal of these utterings take place in jest, but not everyone does, regardless of disclaimer.
Bad guys are bad guys, one does what one has to do to protect and defend. An enemy soldier is an enemy soldier, one does ones duty. A fellow citizen, even a criminal, has the right to a trial by peer. Our law is pretty miserable by some standards, but it is the best law I have heard of, (yes I have lived elsewhere) and I did take an oath to uphold and defend it, and last I checked, no one relieved me of that oath.
Lets hear no more of this. It does no one honor. Run a search on Assasination Politics if you want to know more. But lets keep it off this list, it is not really germaine.
I said years ago that "Uncle Walter" was a communist. He had an autobiographical special on TV a while back, reviewing his years as a journalist. He belly-ached about how some have classified him as a communist. It almost made me feel sorry for him....so much so that I almost cried..... 
..... 
I guess crying about the fact that so many Americans put him on a pedistle as a great American hero and don't realize that they are being deceived by his communist view point won't make things better.
There is an actor that reminds me of Walter Clondike. He played the role of a newsman/editor in the old Mary Tyler Moore show. I think his name was Ed Asner.... Does anyone know who ol Mr. Ed is a card carrying member of?
Robert
------------------
"But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." -Jesus Christ (Luke 22:36, see John 3:15-18)
..... I guess crying about the fact that so many Americans put him on a pedistle as a great American hero and don't realize that they are being deceived by his communist view point won't make things better.
There is an actor that reminds me of Walter Clondike. He played the role of a newsman/editor in the old Mary Tyler Moore show. I think his name was Ed Asner.... Does anyone know who ol Mr. Ed is a card carrying member of?
Robert
------------------
"But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." -Jesus Christ (Luke 22:36, see John 3:15-18)
The laughable part is this dope "Crankcase" went through WWII and all the horrors that went with it and here he is virtually coming out with suggesting the same thing. A totalitarian regime (UN) with the loss of the member nation's sovereignty.
------------------
Nothing Lasts Forever, Unless It Does.
------------------
Nothing Lasts Forever, Unless It Does.
Good idea Leadfoot.
We could ask them if they would like to set up that utopia in a nice secluded place like their comrads in Russia send their friends. I think its near the arctic circle. I'll pitch in for the one way ticket. They can board for departure from Knome AL. Its only a stones through across the bearing straight from there. The "Communist Party USA" card should buy them special rights in that country. Kinda like a Ruski Visa.
------------------
"But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." -Jesus Christ (Luke 22:36, see John 3:15-18)
We could ask them if they would like to set up that utopia in a nice secluded place like their comrads in Russia send their friends. I think its near the arctic circle. I'll pitch in for the one way ticket. They can board for departure from Knome AL. Its only a stones through across the bearing straight from there. The "Communist Party USA" card should buy them special rights in that country. Kinda like a Ruski Visa.
------------------
"But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." -Jesus Christ (Luke 22:36, see John 3:15-18)
Hi everyone,
First time ever on this forum. After reading some of your posts I thought you might like to check out what I thought was a pretty good website dealing with a Clintonian-Algorian Regime. Before you all laugh take a look at-- http://www.americanfreedompress.com
I think you'll be surprised.
I've known about Cronkite being a one worlder for many years. He's also been a member of the "CFR" for many years. I have a basic website where I've listed his (Cronkite) recent comments.
First time ever on this forum. After reading some of your posts I thought you might like to check out what I thought was a pretty good website dealing with a Clintonian-Algorian Regime. Before you all laugh take a look at-- http://www.americanfreedompress.com
I think you'll be surprised.
I've known about Cronkite being a one worlder for many years. He's also been a member of the "CFR" for many years. I have a basic website where I've listed his (Cronkite) recent comments.
I've always felt that we need a single government for this world IF, AND ONLY IF it was set up as a Represenative Republic and the system works as it was originally intended by our founding fathers.
Think of all we could acommplish if we could manage to get everyone on this planet working together. Disease, poverty, famine, etc could become a thing of the past. The Earth could be paradise.
Ah, but here's the catch. The only way to accomplish this lofty goal would be to have World War III with the U.S. coming out as the ultimate winner and even that would depend on getting our own government working like it was intended to. Then again, after WW III, what would be left to govern?
In order to establish any other form of One World government, The U.S. and all its citizens would have to be crushed and reduced to slavery. I, and many others, would die in an attempt to stop such a thing. Also, with the death of the most powerful and productive nation on earth, any new government would be doomed to failure.
One World government is nothing more than a pipe dream. To be sucessful, it would depend on the U.S. voluntaraly joining and commiting its full resources to that goal.
That, my friends, won't happen. Not while I'm still breathing.
Think of all we could acommplish if we could manage to get everyone on this planet working together. Disease, poverty, famine, etc could become a thing of the past. The Earth could be paradise.
Ah, but here's the catch. The only way to accomplish this lofty goal would be to have World War III with the U.S. coming out as the ultimate winner and even that would depend on getting our own government working like it was intended to. Then again, after WW III, what would be left to govern?
In order to establish any other form of One World government, The U.S. and all its citizens would have to be crushed and reduced to slavery. I, and many others, would die in an attempt to stop such a thing. Also, with the death of the most powerful and productive nation on earth, any new government would be doomed to failure.
One World government is nothing more than a pipe dream. To be sucessful, it would depend on the U.S. voluntaraly joining and commiting its full resources to that goal.
That, my friends, won't happen. Not while I'm still breathing.
The concept of a World Governement is simply ridiculous because of the vast differences in this world. If the entire globe was exactly the same... same traditions, same beliefs, same economics, same language, etc, then MAYBE. I believe the US government, even with all of its faults, is better than most. Even having said that, I still believe they are WAY TOO involved in my life. A world government would only be worse. The BEST government possible is the one that makes you forget they exist. I should be able to live my life and make my decisions knowing that the government is doing the right thing, and NOT restricting or adversly affecting my life. We have given up soooo much of our rights and freedoms to a government that wants to play "mommy" that if we were to revert to a truly CONSTITUTIONAL government overnight, everything would fall apart. We do, however, need to make those changes, and accept nothing less. It will take time, and each of us must do his/her part. Those who think they are fighting just to keep the rights they have today are in for a shock when they realize how few rights they really have left. The battle should not be to 'prevent' further loss of freedom, but to keep what we have, while fighting to restore what was lost. Defence is fine, but its nearly impossible to win with a strategy of defence only. We have to go on the offence and FIGHT to win our rights and freedoms back.
-Spyderman
-Spyderman
This is a wonderful example of one of the basic differences between liberals and conservatives, their opinions of government.
Liberals have an inate trust in the goodness of government, despite what the many lessons of history have taught us. The rationality is, if any government is good, then an all encompassing government would be the best.
Conservatives on the other hand, tend to believe that the government that governs least governs best. This is more in line with the thinking of our founding fathers, who had a deep seated distrust for government. A reading of the Constitution shows that it was written to limit the power of government over the people, not to inform the people what privileges are allowed them by the government.
One world government types like to point to the U.N. and say that an example of its success as a quasi-global government is that the world has had no major conflicts in the last 54 years. Just think what they could do if they had absolute control! This thinking is totally wrong and ignorant of reality! The reason the world has seen a deficit of major global conflicts is because of M.A.D., mutual assured distruction, from nuclear weapons. This is proven by the number of regional conflicts around the world. If the U.N. could prevent major conflicts, which are caused by many complicated issues, then the regional ones that generally are caused by one or two simple issues should be a piece of cake to prevent. However, the facts are that the U.N. has been completely unable to prevent these regional conflicts and could not prevent a major one.
I sincerely doubt that the majority of the American people would consent to being ruled by a world government. Some liberal elitists, such as the Clinton's and Cronkite would support it in an attempt to wield even more power over a greater number of people. Even in the most repressive of governments, there are a group of people who prosper. These elitists feel that they will belong to that group and will be able to use their "superior" intellect and morality to govern us benignly. I reject that notion and will fight it till my last breath.
In order for a one world government to become a reality, we would have to rip up the U.S. Constitution. God help us if this were to happen. All of the freedoms that the millions of courageous men and women of America have fought and died for over the last 225 years could be subject to the whim of some ruler whose beliefs concerning the rights of a free people are not the same as ours.
Thankfully, I do not foresee that day happening.
[This message has been edited by Cactus (edited December 28, 1999).]
Liberals have an inate trust in the goodness of government, despite what the many lessons of history have taught us. The rationality is, if any government is good, then an all encompassing government would be the best.
Conservatives on the other hand, tend to believe that the government that governs least governs best. This is more in line with the thinking of our founding fathers, who had a deep seated distrust for government. A reading of the Constitution shows that it was written to limit the power of government over the people, not to inform the people what privileges are allowed them by the government.
One world government types like to point to the U.N. and say that an example of its success as a quasi-global government is that the world has had no major conflicts in the last 54 years. Just think what they could do if they had absolute control! This thinking is totally wrong and ignorant of reality! The reason the world has seen a deficit of major global conflicts is because of M.A.D., mutual assured distruction, from nuclear weapons. This is proven by the number of regional conflicts around the world. If the U.N. could prevent major conflicts, which are caused by many complicated issues, then the regional ones that generally are caused by one or two simple issues should be a piece of cake to prevent. However, the facts are that the U.N. has been completely unable to prevent these regional conflicts and could not prevent a major one.
I sincerely doubt that the majority of the American people would consent to being ruled by a world government. Some liberal elitists, such as the Clinton's and Cronkite would support it in an attempt to wield even more power over a greater number of people. Even in the most repressive of governments, there are a group of people who prosper. These elitists feel that they will belong to that group and will be able to use their "superior" intellect and morality to govern us benignly. I reject that notion and will fight it till my last breath.
In order for a one world government to become a reality, we would have to rip up the U.S. Constitution. God help us if this were to happen. All of the freedoms that the millions of courageous men and women of America have fought and died for over the last 225 years could be subject to the whim of some ruler whose beliefs concerning the rights of a free people are not the same as ours.
Thankfully, I do not foresee that day happening.
[This message has been edited by Cactus (edited December 28, 1999).]
Cactus,
You’re right.
Additionally, liberals WANT all of us, regardless of location and living
conditions, to become virtually identical. Thusly, we can be better
controlled.
In a letter to Ted Kennedy in 1963, I stated that expecting a person in New
York City, one in the Florida Everglades, and a third in Montana to suffer the
same laws was inappropriate from every angle except totalitarianism.
Would you believe it? He disagreed!
I must disagree with one point. Nobody would need to rip up the Constitution. All they need to do is ignore it - just as they do with gun laws; just as was done in the U.S.S.R.
The Constitution already is being ignored. As the Democrat/Republican government and the people of the U.S. both become accustomed to this, we will become more and more victimized as everyone ignores one of the greatest documents ever written by man - our Constitution.
------------------
Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't.
Stick it to 'em! RKBA!
You’re right.
Additionally, liberals WANT all of us, regardless of location and living
conditions, to become virtually identical. Thusly, we can be better
controlled.
In a letter to Ted Kennedy in 1963, I stated that expecting a person in New
York City, one in the Florida Everglades, and a third in Montana to suffer the
same laws was inappropriate from every angle except totalitarianism.
Would you believe it? He disagreed!
I must disagree with one point. Nobody would need to rip up the Constitution. All they need to do is ignore it - just as they do with gun laws; just as was done in the U.S.S.R.
The Constitution already is being ignored. As the Democrat/Republican government and the people of the U.S. both become accustomed to this, we will become more and more victimized as everyone ignores one of the greatest documents ever written by man - our Constitution.
------------------
Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't.
Stick it to 'em! RKBA!