Obama revises Oath of Citizenship
If you aren't willing to defend what you've fought to obtain, did you really earn it?
- Navigation
- Hot
- New
- Recent Comments
- Activity Feed
- Marketplace
- Members Directory
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
Previous comments... You are currently on page 7.
What I would say is that religions such as these are fucked up. What happend hundreds or thousands of years ago needs to be just brought up to date. Who cares if a particular spot is somehow "holier" than another spot. We are here NOW, and our ancestors are NOT. All this jew vs arab stuff needs to be just RESET in my opinion. By helping Israel, we are actually hurting them I think by enabling them to keep up this religious nonsense. And by buying all that oil from the arabs, we are enabling THEM to keep up their islamic nonsense of intolerance and violence.
They both need to snap out of it and shed off the nonsensicel religious demands. But I am politically incorrect and would probably be banished by both sides....
I don't understand if you mean people still need religion or people need to live under religion. People have a right to be left alone with the religion and not live under a religion.
Of course it does. But it also protects trade and promotes similar government. Without NATO to show a united stand, WW III would have happened a long time ago. Should treaties be vigorously debated for their merits? Absolutely.
Israel - contrary to what you might believe - was actually formed by the British from land the British owned. It was not Arab land - that is a complete myth. As to why they can't get along, that's a one-sided issue. The Israelis employ the Arabs who live in Israel and most of the ones who live in the Palestinian terrortories (sp intentional) - the ones who aren't trying to blow people up or launch mortars that is. They have a vibrant economy, despite being hemmed in on all sides, literally having the entire rest of the world against them, and having almost no natural resources (read oil) to make them rich. Yet despite that, their standard of living is higher than most other nations in the region, they have a representative government which includes Arabs, and they uphold natural rights. They are everything we would want in a regional ally - minus the land mass on which to establish a base.
Compare that to the surrounding nations, all of which are Islamic. No support for natural rights. Nations which have formed a cartel and actively seek to destroy American businesses (oil) and influence our politics. Even nations which support terrorist operations. I don't know a more clear choice could be presented.
As to the hate, that is a religious matter. Abraham had two sons: first Ishmael by a concubine and then Isaac by Sarah. The birthright, meaning inheritance of lands, etc., always went not to the first son (Ishmael), but to the first son of the first wife (Isaac). Most Arabs are descended from Ishmael - or from Isaac's son Esau who sold his birthright to his brother Jacob (later renamed Israel) for some beans. Literally. According to both sides (Jews and Arabs), Abraham was given the area known at the time as Canaan by God as his to rule over. Each side disputes the actual passage of the birthright, the Jews claiming it through Isaac and then Jacob while the Arabs claim it through Ishmael or alternately Esau.
That being said, however, it wasn't nearly as acrimonious in the past as it is now. Part of that might be because at one point the Israelites actually owned and controlled the land in question but their own internal problems got them conquered by the Babylonians, Assyrians, Medes, Persians, and finally Romans before they were nearly destroyed as an ethnicity entirely. And all that happened before the rise of Islam, which forcible converted all the Arabs (the remaining Arabs being known now as a few scattered tribes of Bedouins or the Pashtuns) and brought back the hate of the Jews to give them a common enemy.
Oh, and then there's the issue of the Temple Mount. History has the Temple Mount in Jerusalem as the cite of the first Temple of the Israelites and according to the Torah the only place they can complete several of the ceremonies critical to their religion. That Temple was destroyed and rebuilt two other times before the Romans razed it to the ground following an uprising about 66 AD. The Wailing Wall is one of the original foundations of the Temple, and it is all that remains to this day. It is the holiest site in Jewry until a new Temple is built. Problem: The Muslims hold that Mohammed had a vision in the same spot, so they built a mosque called Dome of the Rock on the very same spot as the original Jewish Temple, and it is one of the holiest sites in Islam behind Mecca and Medina, respectively. It doesn't help that the Muslims looted the area and destroyed Israelis history and artifacts under the Temple Mount or that they currently own and manage the Temple Mount. Muslims frequently hold services at the Dome of the Rock which turn into rock throwing protests, so current attendance is limited strictly to men over forty. The Jews are forbidden from massing on the Temple Mount and instead are relegated to the Wailing Wall. So you see, it's an intractable problem. Only one religion can win in this circumstance - or neither.
What is remarkable to me is that despite Israel being outnumbered 1.5 billion to 8 million (about half of which are Arab), every war launched against them starting from the day when the British turned over control to them has failed - and the list is long. From the War of Independence to the Yom Kippur War onward, many cite the sequences of events to be miraculous, but the facts remain that the nation of Israel has managed to defend itself to this day, even inventing some of the best technology for warfare in the world: the Iron Dome counter-missile battery, the Uzi sub-machine gun, the Galil infantry rifle, Merkava tanks, and much, much more. Despite their religious heritage and beliefs, the Israelis are a self-sufficient people who believe in the right to self-defense as well as other natural rights, and though they do receive some military aid (mostly aircraft from the US), they are a much more sensible ally than nearly any other in the world but certainly in the region.
Hope that helps.
2. Figure out which LEA will respond
3. Decide what constitutes 'suspicion' and ' probable cause.' The first is for DOHS and the second is for real law enforcement.
Based on that criteria Obama should be on the no fly list already for suspicion of supporting terrorism and on the LEA lists as a canddate for 'probable cause.' The neat part of the Patriot Act Rules are their are no regulations, definitions or guidelines. One man's probable is anothers suspect depending on did the wife burn the eggs again this morning. Probably the safest place for any real citizen to be is simply report ones own self. It's called hide in the open or maskirova. That waiy you won't stand out among the other 200 plus million.
The strongest proof of the none required though is US Citizen, no police record, military service and did not vote Democrat or Reipublican - with no record of gun purchases nor traffic tickets.
Insert any exclusions and exemptions ear marked. There already attached. Push a button and the first notifications to appear are in the mail or email as the case may be.
I'm of the opinion we need an oath not to serve,comment or get in the way. Except to go see the latest Marky Mark movie.
But you cannot paint everyone with that broad brush.
A. Removal of the military service requirement.
Goes back to the Constitution itself. 'asupport and DEFEND which in and of itself denoted physical violence. To get the whole picture you have to read the Consitution as a whole entity and then think of the context of the time.
Then B. George Washington no stranger to war became President and not only that but the first one. This was one of his issues. As it happened it added in religious freedom. He sat down and wrote a letter to the Quakers who had asked for consideration of exemption from military service. Washington came up with two statements.
1. No exemption. The requirement was placed in the document for a good and needed purpose and as we are building a nation we need grant no special favors until we build that cohesiveness that does not yet exist. Notice no quotes.
2. He then recognized religious freedom which was of prime importance in the 1770's - 1780's. His letter to the Quakers while refusing to support an exemption stated can we sit together and work out a compromise which will honor religious freedom on the one hand while fulfilling the requirements of the Constitution on the other? The idea of duty but not combat duty but in a combat area was born from an offering by the Quaker elders. That's where conscientous objectors came from. They wanted to NOT tie it to religion or even any one religion for that would be a violation of the establishment clause. Both sides agreed and Quakers served and were drafted. But did not carry weapons and munitions. Instead they carried medical packs and stretchers. In handing out medals religion was never mentioned. An inbetween the absolutism of the Quakers no weapons, no killling belief stood another category of conscientous objectors and one of them was Sgt. AlvinYork who later came to terms with his religious and patriotic beliefs.
This poltical formula was used in many areas which conflicted citizens and government. Something no other country had ever thought of nor tried. Successfully.
The next part goes back to the draft.
This is Heinlein again. If enough do not come forward it's not worth doing. If enough come forward voluntarily it's worth doing.
Add to that modern technology and weapons and other support items. No longer does a company of troops line up as if on parade and using parade drill line uip their 150 or so rifles direction and elevation and fire as one weapon nor do they act as a shield wall or attack one - with high casualties. No more cannon fodder. It's not needed nor required
With technology in ANY combat environment IF backed up by the nation and government 150 of ours are worth more than 150 of theirs. So ethe amount to make the rule,'if enough come forward volntarily' IS possible.
Add to that service other than in a strict military sense. Inner city combat zones none the less.
So what impels a citizen to become a citizen soldier. Patriotism that's one for sure but Dollars is even more important. GI Bills for Education top of the list. Why not they are doing something extra without coercion other than the offer of some financial reward same as building cars in Detroit. Laborer is worthy of this or her hire. But now we're adding complete equality.
What we're not doing is ditching the draft.
Why? Government is afraid for itself. insead of doing the obvious and not acting in a shameful way they want to build a protective wall, a shield wall, a protective echelon. Translate back to Gereman a Schutz Staffel. SS Why is government that scared of it's citizens?
And do we want that type of employees.
The fourth branch of government says yes. But that's a discussion on bureaucracies with more power than the Eectuive, legislative and Judicial have at present added togeher. On branch with al lthe power.
Next Time.
Does you candidate want to keep the SS alive and well? How do you feel about that? Still voting for him. or her.
Remove the chaff to get the wheat. If you find something useful , something that helps you live your life. Be resourceful , be creative don't interfere with anyone else doing the same.
Mill the tree to get the 2x4. Somethings in those religious texts might be helpful to some that is for them to decide not me. I say have at it but don't f...... with me. To me the litmus test is behavior.
I have no tolerance for murderers or slave masters
They are evil and the brain washing is on full cycle all around the globe.
To politicians or egoist around the world who think they should dictate and mandate and loot.
I SAY FUCKOFF FASCISTS
Load more comments...