Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When looking over the Tea Party folks, many of who have made such suggestions as my title indicated, I can see some legitimate concerns, even if I don't agree with the methods. (ie seceding because you don't like the current administration) However, when we look abroad at places like Yemen, we tend to take a very different stance. Folks who seem to have no issue with calling for a revolt or revolution here will look at others revolting or in the process of revolution and deem them terrorist. Yemen for all practical purposes is a civil war in which terrorist elements have been attracted to but that is hardly justification to paint this situation as some kind of Al Qaeda uprising as it has been in our press. The Zayid tribal people have taken up arms against their government in Yemen because they claim their grievances aren't being heard and the presence of US forces in their country. Whether or not we agree hasn't stopped us from labeling them all as terrorist and bombing them wholesale. Strangely, the people most supportive of US bombing in Yemen are also the same people advocating things like secession, revolt, and revolution here.
I think the situation in Yemen is about the failure of the rebels to make their case internationally. And in developing nations that don't have access to communication outlets, it's not just a Yemeni failure. You won't find me defending the modern press. I think the commercialization of the press is very troublesome, and I applaud the upsurge in blogging and internet posts that have risen to fill the void. But I also appreciate the problem that comes with blogging, in the increasing difficulty we see on all fronts, blogs, TV commentary, newspapers, of filtering out opinion from the news. It's always been a problem, it's not a new problem by any means, but as opinion and editorial commentary presents itself as the news, and as bloggers publish "news" that is unverified, I think we are getting into a new period of "yellow journalism". And that hurts the average American, because what starts out as distrust of the media rapidly disintegrates into disinterest. And we need to be interested, in what's happening at home and what's happening in Yemen as well.
I'm just curious, with all the many threads and talk of when it would be appropriate to rebel, start a revolution, or engage in seceding from the Union, I have to wonder why one parallel seems to escape those who might promulgate this view.
When various Muslim groups wish to rebel or break away from say, Iraq or Yemen or wherever, there is this almost consensus view that they be labeled as terrorist and must be stopped at all cost for the sake of stability in whatever region. Yet when there is talk of it here, it is of course not seen in a similar light.
While there are a variety of reasons why various groups and people have a desire to revolt or start a revolution in this country, one thing that is almost universal is that these are the same people who wish to categorize others as terrorist and invade or respond militarily to these types events elsewhere.
Is this simple rationalization or an example of American exceptionalism at its worst?
I think this is a horrible analogy. You cite Iraq and Yemen, but do not cite which breakaway groups you're referring to. The world does not care if there are breakaway groups if the group in question is peaceful. If a group wants to re-populate in a remote desert and live peaceably, we don't care. The Iraqi Kurds are a good example. If a group wants to breakaway and reconstitute some version of Al Qaeda in the remote deserts of Yemen then, yes, we give a damn.
So to broadstroke those in this country who don't view the Federal Government favorably as also being gung-ho for dropping bombs on others who breakaway is egregiously wrong at the very core.
We the People have a Constitution. It's our Lifeline--it's in our blood. It's what makes us different from other Countries. If our Federal government is taking away our Lifeline that is what entitles us to react. We have the RIGHT to demand this!! It's what makes us different from other Countries.
Everything humanly possible will be done to Keep our Rights!
We are fighting a Revolution right now. We will continue to do so in each phase we are presented with. We have the Right too.
Google and read "The Ultimate Delusion" by Stephen Ames.
There is a difference wanting to prevent tyranny and to establish tyranny. Once tyranny is established we lose our individual rights.
A man cannot be forced to devote his life to the happiness of another man or group. Obama's goal is socialism and we do not need anyone's permission to prevent it from happening. Only a slave acts on permission.
I'm just curious, with all the many threads and talk of when it would be appropriate to rebel, start a revolution, or engage in seceding from the Union, I have to wonder why one parallel seems to escape those who might promulgate this view.
When various Muslim groups wish to rebel or break away from say, Iraq or Yemen or wherever, there is this almost consensus view that they be labeled as terrorist and must be stopped at all cost for the sake of stability in whatever region. Yet when there is talk of it here, it is of course not seen in a similar light.
While there are a variety of reasons why various groups and people have a desire to revolt or start a revolution in this country, one thing that is almost universal is that these are the same people who wish to categorize others as terrorist and invade or respond militarily to these types events elsewhere.
Is this simple rationalization or an example of American exceptionalism at its worst?
The radical muslims are fighting for a theocratic view that they wish to impose on others as well. Generally, the secessionists in the U.S. desire greater freedom for everyone (yes, I know there's a few exceptions, like that Christian group that wanted to take over South Carolina, but those types are the exception not the rule, in the U.S.).
The Americans live in a mature democracy,where the will of the people is usually benign,even on fantasies like sessecions,"revolutions " etc...
While the kinds of people in other countries who talk about "revolution " are mean & they really...mean it...
They would really provoke armed revolt,massacres or genocides,if they had the number & the power to act...
The question posed doesn't assume whether one group here or there has righteous cause or reason. It was more conceptual in that while many here in this country will use terms like, against tyranny, for democracy, freedom, etc... to rationalize that they have a noble duty to maintain things they believe our founding fathers granted us. Well if some Muslim group which makes up 30% of a country decides they want to live in some theocratic, ultra conservative religious order, then so what, do they not have a right as human beings to pursue life as they believe it should be lived? Or is it only right when prescribed by our views? If some Muslim group wants to live life in the mountains in outright hatred of the US, do they not have the right to hate us?
Reading through some of these posts I can only conclude that it is American exceptionalism. This notion that the American citizen is superior to all other peoples of the world and since others are lesser human beings, they should subscribe to our world views. ie freedom to worship our version of God or their own religion by our standards.
Reading through some of these posts I can only conclude that it is American exceptionalism. This notion that the American citizen is superior to all other peoples of the world and since others are lesser human beings, they should subscribe to our world views. ie freedom to worship our version of God or their own religion by our standards.
It's not exclusive to America. The Soviet Union also believed their form of government was the best thing since sliced bread and that everyone should live under it, whether they like it or not. Both America and the Soviet Union use their military might to enforce their form of government on others.
Question are you willing to live under laws that will not allow freedom of speech, assembly ? Those that are not willing to give up those freedoms could be called terrioist. Look at Executive Orders recently signed.
Posted on December 17, 2009 at 04:32 PM EST EXECUTIVEORDER - - - - - - - AMENDING EXECUTIVEORDER 12425 DESIGNATING INTERPOL ... Organization (INTERPOL), it is hereby ordered that ExecutiveOrder 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended ... , including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order ...
Search | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/search/site/executive%20order - broken link)
Interpol has full imunity in the US now no checks and balances, also can bring in any and all agents of interpol including foreign military as long as they are classified as interpol.
Posted on January 11, 2010 at 06:09 PM EST ExecutiveOrder will Strengthen Further Partnership Between the Federal and State and Local Governments to Better Protect Our Nation The President today signed an ExecutiveOrder (attached ... Guard Bureau. The Secretary of Defense will designate an Executive Director for the Council ...
Why do 10 hand picked governors by the president, need to be on a council to help decide national departments doesn't this go agianst the constitution, what about the other 40 state governors shouldn't they be equal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
