reply to post by OmegaLogos
reply to post by OmegaLogos
Personally I understood this perfectly and was not in any way offended, as far as whether or not you are insane or communist is not for me to judge,
besides as an American myself, most Americans are unaware of the original terms of communism. It wasn't a bad idea until our government demonized it.
They like to do that, along with other activities the constitution would not condone. Wait, US government officials disobeying the constitution?!
It seems this thread has created quite a few misunderstandings. First of I'm pretty sure I said second revolutionary war, I do not see anything about
a second civil war. Since it seems a few hear are not familiar with the difference, allow me to clarify. By second revolutionary war I meant the
following. Tensions are high between us (the citizens) and the government (corrupt political wealth mongrels that control the country). Now we can sit
here and argue sublantics until we die from sleep deprivation.
Alas, the point of the matter is; us Americans with half a brain see what the government is doing to OUR country, and it makes US sick. You see we are
sick of being pushed around by our governing body, just as our ancestors were sick of being pushed around by their governing body, great Britain. Do
you get it yet? I'm not talking about us attacking our soldiers, I'm talking about us standing up to our corrupt government. Now, since their seems
to be some level of illiteracy, I also made a comparison to the revolutionists reveling non violently, and the red coats fired on them. I did not
suggest any sort of terroristic actions, such term is used ever so loosely these days. Well hell I guess we're all terrorists in that case. What I
asked, evidentially not clearly enough is; if we rebelled ( non violently, maybe "illegally" but without violence) and the government ordered you to
kill us would you? It seems that the answer is yes since I observe an failure to recognize the difference between upholding the Constitution versus
protecting the corrupt officials who use it as a shield.
I could be a corrupt official, and let's say hypothetically I've done some pretty shady crap, and the people find out and aren't happy so they
protest or attack or what not. Well I deserve it because that would mean that I myself did not uphold my oath. Thus civilians exacting justice on me
for my crimes. So, I play the terrorist card on them, and order soldiers to take care of it. Now, in said hypothetical situation these soldiers are
acting on my orders without true knowledge of why I was being attacked, or my crimes. They act obediently because they think that protecting the
constitution means protecting me. Innocent people die under my corrupt orders, and I walk free. I and my fellow officials who also took part in my
crimes create a false flag diversion to demonize the rebels and hide my trail.
Now, there are many officials that are horrible people, no one knows what hellish things they've done to get in power and wealth. Very few people
ask, and soldiers questioning these motives or these officials of whom are their superiors could be found as disobediant. Is it becoming clear now? I
would have no wish to harm a soldier or the constitution, what I want to know is, in the end who would the soldier choose? Me or some corrupt
superior. Personally I would disobey before trusting the say so of some dirty politician. I know the contents of the constitution, and I know enough
to say our own government isn't following it, their hiding behind it. I'm a 16th generation American, something few can say, and I'm a patriot. I
say this because a true patriot wouldn't choose a corrupt government before his own people. I would choose my people over any official just on
instinct, because I know it's right. I had a best friend once who shared similar ideals, then he joined the army, I dunno what happened. All I know
is it changed him, we're now exact opposite, and he would choose and official over a citizen, he said I was a terrorist. Needless to say we're no
oh and P.S. the term the British used 300 years ago to describe my ancestors actions against the government was and equivalent
of today's loosely used word "terrorist." the Brits called him a terrorist, and he was one of our founding fathers, guess what that'd mean George
Washington was also a terrorist. There's a vast difference between the words "terrorist" and "revolutionist." LEARN THE DIFFERENCE!! - Peace