America's Second Civil War

[tonyz]

Originally Posted by Uman

https://mises.org/sites/default/files/thelaw.pdf

This is a true today as it was when written.

Interesting read. Thanks for posting. One tiny excerpt below.

“It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder.

What are the consequences of such a perversion? It would require volumes to describe them all. Thus we must content ourselves with pointing out the most striking.

In the first place, it erases from everyone's conscience the distinction between justice and injustice.

No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain degree. The safest way to make laws respected is to make them respectable. When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law.

These two evils are of equal consequence, and it would be difficult for a person to choose between them.

The nature of law is to maintain justice. This is so much the case that, in the minds of the people, law and justice are one and the same thing. There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate. This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are “just” because law makes them so.”

[Peregrino]

Originally Posted by tonyz

Interesting read. Thanks for posting. One tiny excerpt below.

“It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder.

What are the consequences of such a perversion? It would require volumes to describe them all. Thus we must content ourselves with pointing out the most striking.

In the first place, it erases from everyone's conscience the distinction between justice and injustice.

No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain degree. The safest way to make laws respected is to make them respectable. When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law.

These two evils are of equal consequence, and it would be difficult for a person to choose between them.

The nature of law is to maintain justice. This is so much the case that, in the minds of the people, law and justice are one and the same thing. There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate. This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are “just” because law makes them so.”

Unfortunately there is no allowance for a populace both ignorant and complacent. Ask the average "citizen" to explain the difference between "malum en se" and "malum prohibitum" and watch their eyes glaze over. Explain the difference and ask where the duty to comply lies and watch their heads implode. Don't even try to engage them in a philosophical examination of the morality of complying with or ignoring unjust laws. Too many will default to the drone's stock "Nuremburg Defense". A people without a strong moral compass will always eventually acquiesce to tyranny. A people with a strong moral compass will usually prefer liberty. I say usually, because freedom is by far the more difficult course.

[Box]

A lot of good points being made in this thread. I for one would like to also make a point...

While SOME Americans read and take heed of the snake like behavior of our government and ask questions about the legality of congressional over reach, upwards of 60 million of them are more interested in asking, "Why did they cancel 'Big Bang Theory and 'Modern Family'

......discuss

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by Box

While SOME Americans read and take heed of the snake like behavior of our government and ask questions about the legality of congressional over reach, upwards of 60 million of them are more interested in asking, "Why did they cancel 'Big Bang Theory and 'Modern Family'

......discuss

That’s a good question Box.

This reminds me of this guy Mike who once asked me if I had seen some chick on the cover of People Mag and if I heard the rumors about Brad and Angelina.....Mmmmm, No. Why would I? Well everyone is talking about it....




Seems to me that most of those types have been provided for from cradle to grave, and missed out on the blood, sweat and tears that have made their carefree lifestyle possible.

[Uman]

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

[Uman]

I just finished a class instructing teachers how to shoot. When I asked them, what is the legal duty of the LEO's, to protect and serve or enforce the law.

The jaws hit the floor when I explained it is to enforce the laws, see SCOTUS ruling on Warren vs DC.

It is Enforce The Laws part that the Founding Father understood to justify the 2A as bad governments make unjust laws.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by Uman

It is Enforce The Laws part that the Founding Father understood to justify the 2A as bad governments make unjust laws.

It is why gun control has always been about control. The notion of armed peasants scares, to this day, both the tyrant and those who are told by them to be scared.

The degree to which a politician is tolerant of an armed citizenry is a crystal clear window into their view of that citizenry. In the end, it's all you need to know.

[Uman]

So how many in the DOD are on board with this idea of Global Governance.?

If there are people in uniform who are on board with this, did they lie when the took their Oath?


https://news.iheart.com/featured/rus...-donald-trump/


https://www.amgreatness.com/2019/08/...-global-order/

[bblhead672]

Originally Posted by Box

A lot of good points being made in this thread. I for one would like to also make a point...

While SOME Americans read and take heed of the snake like behavior of our government and ask questions about the legality of congressional over reach, upwards of 60 million of them are more interested in asking, "Why did they cancel 'Big Bang Theory and 'Modern Family'

......discuss

Sadly, it seems that a lot more than 60 million are uninterested in their upcoming demise at the hands of tyrants if they don't get off their asses and start caring about important things.

Every day Socialist Democrats (and Republican Socialists acquiescence) put forth non-Constitutional ideas in order to achieve more unopposed power over the citizenry.

I cannot see any scenario where those who love liberty and freedom will be allowed to separate themselves peacefully unto their own lands from those who wish to bring about their surrender or their destruction.

[Box]

Originally Posted by Uman

So how many in the DOD are on board with this idea of Global Governance.?
If there are people in uniform who are on board with this, did they lie when the took their Oath?

If I've said it once - I 've said it uhm - well, I said it a lot of times - Senior Leaders in the DoD are subconsciously beholden to Newtons Laws of Motion:

1.) every object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless compelled to change its state by the action of an external force
In other words - a General Officer at war will remain at war unless compelled to make peace by an external force

2.) the velocity of an object changes when it is subjected to an external force
In other words - the intensity of a conflict changes when subjected to an externally funded budget
In even more 'other words - Give a GO more money and they will escalate the conflict - take away some money and they will initiate a draw down

3.) for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction - for every single use of the military there is a zealous partisan disagreement on why
In more other words: if a republican president sends troops to a country with "colored" citizens, it is to oppress them - when a democrat does it - it is to liberate them



If you think that there is a GO serving today that would resign his commission and publicly 'cry out' against global governance then not only to I praise your analytical thinking - I would also like to invite you to invest in an awesome real estate deal I am putting together. I also have some financial opportunities with a Nigerian Prince that I'll share with you for a small finders fee.....

In all seriousness- you have to take a thoughtful look at the "oath" you are talking about. Enlisted members take an oath of enlistment. Enlisted members swear an oath to follow orders...
support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice

Isn't it safe to say that Panama, Haiti, Bosnia, Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan are al examples of the US exercising some degree of Global Governance?
I dont feel like going to any of those places has an equivalency to "lying" under oath.

Officers still swear to uphold and defend and all THAT jazz - but conspicuously refrain from an agreement to follow orders. They just swear that they arent crazy and they will try to do a good job:
"I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter"


Nothing in there say we cant make the world a Murica'


What should worry you is the word "domestic" - Stand by and let Americans elect government officials that are willing to "redefine" the Bill of Rights and POOF

with the single swipe of a pen YOU become the "domestic" enemy that American service members took an oath to oppose.
A nation of laws means when those "laws" change - the consequences change.

When the day comes (and it may not be that far away) that DEMOCRATS are finally able to redefine the Bill of Rights...
...people beter HOPE that those OFFICERS that swore their oath understand the weight behind NOT swearing an oath to follow orders. We'd better hope that there are enough OFFICERS that are willing to continue "well and faithfully discharging" their duties.
Once enlisted members begin to "obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers" that have been appointed by the latte-limousine-liberals that yearn to dictate Global Governance - well - it might be too late to even discuss it for fear of being jailed for hate speech.


"domestic" enemies are still enemies - the real threat is trynig to figure out who gets to 'define' the word domestic.
...fun fact - President Clinton couldn't even define the word "IS" - and the democrats think he is a modern day King Arthur. You better hope people like the clint0ns dont get to start defining the word "domestic"



So - rant mode deactivated -


Happy Monday everybody !!!

[Uman]

What is a Legal Order, in a time of crisis in the US, taking into account the US Constitution, Nuremberg Trials Principle Number 4 and in relations to the EO that support the COG and COP agendas of the ruling class?

[Golf1echo]

Originally Posted by Uman

What is a Legal Order, in a time of crisis in the US, taking into account the US Constitution, Nuremberg Trials Principle Number 4 and in relations to the EO that support the COG and COP agendas of the ruling class?

That there is the million dollar question...

[Uman]

https://www.enmnews.com/2019/08/19/p...ets-a-rewrite/

[WarriorDiplomat]

Originally Posted by Box

If I've said it once - I 've said it uhm - well, I said it a lot of times - Senior Leaders in the DoD are subconsciously beholden to Newtons Laws of Motion:

1.) every object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless compelled to change its state by the action of an external force
In other words - a General Officer at war will remain at war unless compelled to make peace by an external force

2.) the velocity of an object changes when it is subjected to an external force
In other words - the intensity of a conflict changes when subjected to an externally funded budget
In even more 'other words - Give a GO more money and they will escalate the conflict - take away some money and they will initiate a draw down

3.) for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction - for every single use of the military there is a zealous partisan disagreement on why
In more other words: if a republican president sends troops to a country with "colored" citizens, it is to oppress them - when a democrat does it - it is to liberate them



If you think that there is a GO serving today that would resign his commission and publicly 'cry out' against global governance then not only to I praise your analytical thinking - I would also like to invite you to invest in an awesome real estate deal I am putting together. I also have some financial opportunities with a Nigerian Prince that I'll share with you for a small finders fee.....

In all seriousness- you have to take a thoughtful look at the "oath" you are talking about. Enlisted members take an oath of enlistment. Enlisted members swear an oath to follow orders...
support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice

Isn't it safe to say that Panama, Haiti, Bosnia, Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan are al examples of the US exercising some degree of Global Governance?
I dont feel like going to any of those places has an equivalency to "lying" under oath.

Officers still swear to uphold and defend and all THAT jazz - but conspicuously refrain from an agreement to follow orders. They just swear that they arent crazy and they will try to do a good job:
"I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter"


Nothing in there say we cant make the world a Murica'


What should worry you is the word "domestic" - Stand by and let Americans elect government officials that are willing to "redefine" the Bill of Rights and POOF

with the single swipe of a pen YOU become the "domestic" enemy that American service members took an oath to oppose.
A nation of laws means when those "laws" change - the consequences change.

When the day comes (and it may not be that far away) that DEMOCRATS are finally able to redefine the Bill of Rights...
...people beter HOPE that those OFFICERS that swore their oath understand the weight behind NOT swearing an oath to follow orders. We'd better hope that there are enough OFFICERS that are willing to continue "well and faithfully discharging" their duties.
Once enlisted members begin to "obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers" that have been appointed by the latte-limousine-liberals that yearn to dictate Global Governance - well - it might be too late to even discuss it for fear of being jailed for hate speech.


"domestic" enemies are still enemies - the real threat is trynig to figure out who gets to 'define' the word domestic.
...fun fact - President Clinton couldn't even define the word "IS" - and the democrats think he is a modern day King Arthur. You better hope people like the clint0ns dont get to start defining the word "domestic"



So - rant mode deactivated -


Happy Monday everybody !!!

Damn I think we are linked in to the same universal wisdom energy.....look a General in the eye when he is talking and take notice of the glint in it when talking about a war possibility that he himself will never physically be part of......Generals are notorious in their wanting of more territory, glory and things they can govern they absolutely crave it. This is the exact same thing I have been talking about now the GO's would sell all our souls to Satan for a chance at conquering glory....they should be held accountable for the lives of us peasants at the bottom of the military social ladder....they will keep us in perpetual war if not for their career certainly for their post career aspirations with contract companies who are the profiteers of war, the same one they have supplied with the need for contracts.

Caveat: Righteous and necessary war......one that is required is what I am willing to die for not profiteering I think most of us are of this mindset but when this thing is over and us who make it to the age of wisdom if we can't look back and see this for what it is and for whose egos it serves then we deserve the life of regret....as the SJW's like to say America needs woke...god bless the soldiers following orders without them the free world would not be free but to hell with the profit and glory seeking GO's

[Uman]

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/12/chie...trol-laws.html