The American Flag banned - in America!!

[d3adp00l]

another thing, who said anyone has the right not to be offended? I dont care if your offended (not directed at anyone here per say, but if you are then it does)

Until we remember that we dont have that right, but we have the right not to look, or think about it. We are screwed.

Remember as a child, you worry about you, and let them worry about them. There is a reason for that bit of wisdom

[ANTIQUER]

One World Gov't?

Quote by d3adp00l:

I would like to see a world government or governing body to address issues of global concern.

And who would be capable of running this without bias and with justice, the $#***&** U.N. or some new outfit that would be as screwed up and ineffectual?

How's this for a taste of a world government?

Monckton contends that the word "government" appears twice in paragraph 38 of the draft, and that paragraphs 36 through 38 explain that the purpose of the treaty is to establish a world government. "Whose job," he explains, "will be to transfer wealth from the wealthy countries, such as the United States most of all, to Third World countries -- and the excuse for this transfer of wealth is so-called 'reparation.'"

Reparation for so-called "climate debt," he adds. Monckton notes that the U.N. believes the U.S. owes the world this debt because of its use of fossil fuels, which he says are mistakenly blamed for causing "manmade global warming." He adds that this world government will have the ability to make the U.S. pay. Monckton is hopeful that the U.S. will lack the willingness to ratify such a dangerous treaty

Entire report is here:

Of climate control and one-world gov't (OneNewsNow.com)

It's bad enough the stuff we have to put up with from our own government; at least we have some degree of control over them and can voice our opinions, pro or con. This group would be untouchable and could do pretty much anything they wanted. Is that really what you want?

I sincerely hope not!

Al

[rickoff]

Al, your lead-in quote is referenced to d3adp001 in error. That was by user ImBill from post #12.

Good example of NWO world government control, though, when Obama signs away US sovereignty via the Copenghagen treaty in December.

Rick

[ANTIQUER]

Correction

HI Rick;

Thanks for the correction and my apologies to d3adp001. My only lame excuse is my eyes were watering pretty badly from my allergies.

So I redirect my comments to ImBill and await any reply.

Al

[wpage]

The Flag represents...

Wise sage said...

The men of the country often go astray.

That flag. Well, many good men have died for it, and what it represents.

Long may she wave. Freedoms symbol. Stars and Stripes!

[Aaron]

contact reps

when Obama signs away US sovereignty via the Copenghagen treaty in December.

Of IF he does - we need to hound our representatives like white on rice!

[Vortex]

Wise sage said...

The men of the country often go astray.

That flag. Well, many good men have died for it, and what it represents.

Long may she wave. Freedoms symbol. Stars and Stripes!

I agree, may she wave .. but what flag are we waving?
Which flag are we waving: a flag of war or a flag of peace?
There was a non-military US flag.

Since the US customs does not fight in wars, that flag has vertical stripes.

There was (is) another flag flown by the non-military and civilians . .

A flag to be flown by the peaceful for the rules of war state to leave the
civilians alone .. there are not active combatants .

Should we fly a flag that indicates civilians or one that indicates military?
Are we military?
Civilians are suppose to have a high status, which a military flag takes away.
A Military flag means a non-civilian,
the military and war rules apply to those that fly the Military flag.

The Mystery of the Forgotten U.S. Flag
The Lieber Code Of 1863 covers how civilians are to be treated
which is given up if you fly a military flag?

[Aaron]

Civilian Flag

Interesting flag and history!

[ImBill]

So I redirect my comments to ImBill and await any reply.

I'm not going to sit here and try to tell you that I have a plan and it will work perfectly. Basically, I would prefer to see something along the lines of the way this country was founded. There are global issues that need to be addressed: whales and dolphins being killed (indeed, oceans being fished dry), endangered and threatened species, climate change, pollutants in the atmosphere, global shipping, global communications, etc. What the right body is and how they would be monitored and kept from being corrupted is something that would need to be worked out. Having power hungry, morally bankrupt leaders in any situation is bad for the people.

The federal government in this country was supposed to be a hands off type organization except for those concerns outside of local purview (maritime law, military, dealings with other country's governments, and other national concerns). They have slowly usurped power from the other branches of government so that they are now wrongly and firmly enmeshed in our every day lives. They have socialized many things that should not have been socialized and privatized things like the military that should remain out of private hands.

In order for any government to work well for the people, it should be mostly handled by the people. We should be way more responsible for our government and they should be way more responsible for us. We've developed a laissez-faire attitude and they are taking every advantage of it that they can. They keep taking away more of our power (so that we are now just about powerless) and adding to their own.

As long as our individual world governments are owned and operated by the banking concerns, we're gonna get screwed. We need to find a way to get rid of them once and for all (if that's even possible, lol). You rightly point out that the UN is definitely not serving our best interests, either.

Sorry I don't have a utopian plan available. I just know that what we have, ain't it.

To get back to the original subject, this was clearly a case that should never have come to the point it did. However, there are more things here that deserve consideration, IMO. One is our attachment to things and giving them more importance than they should really have. In this instance, the firefighter decided this little sticker (probably made in China) that symbolizes a symbol of our country was worth more on the door of his locker than his job. He could have thousands of these stickers on his car and his home (property that he owns). I don't know the rules at the station, but he could probably have hundreds of these stickers in the locker and on the inside of the locker door. What I'm getting at is that he could choose to have plenty of these stickers almost anywhere he wanted them on HIS PROPERTY, but he chose to make it about that one sticker in the one place that he was told he couldn't have one. I think we've all been subjected to some rule that we didn't think was right, but decided it wasn't worth the trouble to fight it. Obviously it was worth it to this individual.

I sincerely doubt that his fight is going to change the world or stop tyranny in its myriad forms. It was and is a small issue and will have small consequences. One of my pet peeves is people assuming it is okay to erect their little memorials anywhere they choose, usually on public property, but sometimes on private land without permission. Whether it is an advertisement for someone running for office or the site near where a loved one died, there are appropriate places for these things that worked well for centuries. I hope my view is not too offensive...

[ImBill]

To imply that a grown person needs to be treated like an adolesant is rediculous.

And get off the damned political fence. If you don't think it was right for them to suspend the man, then grow a pair and THEN STAND UP for it. I can understand the intent and spirit of the rule, I have common sense.

Well, d3, I see adults acting like children all the time. They do, indeed, need to be treated like adolescents, and are. What about helmet laws, for instance? What about seat belt laws? What about talking on a cell phone while driving like a drunk? What about all the people who have been killed by drunk drivers? We have a toothless law against driving while talking on the phone in this state, but I still see countless drivers talking on the phone while driving, not using turn signals, cutting people off, changing lanes willy-nilly, running stop signs, etc., etc.

As for the rest of your rude diatribe, I don't usually get involved in politics because I can usually see both sides of an argument and oftentimes the shades of gray between the two sides. What's to stand up for in this instance? My input won't have any bearing on the case and I don't feel strongly enough about either side of the issue to "take a stand". Feel free if you feel so inclined. It has nothing to do with me or anyone I care about more than in a general they-are-all-part-of-me sense. In a discussion about the issue raised, I can see both sides of the argument and could argue from either viewpoint. I have no need or desire to choose a side or get off of any fences. I could even choose a tack that hasn't been broached yet in this discussion. That's the beauty of this country. We have choices. I don't have to behave or write the way you want me to.

[ImBill]

another thing, who said anyone has the right not to be offended?

Umm, the Constitution does.

I dont care if your offended (not directed at anyone here per say, but if you are then it does)

Nice.

Until we remember that we dont have that right, but we have the right not to look, or think about it. We are screwed.

According to your myopic view.

Remember as a child, you worry about you, and let them worry about them. There is a reason for that bit of wisdom

I thought adults didn't need to be treated like children...

Let's throw out just one simple example for you, since you seem to be an authority on the subject. Let's say a Hispanic family moves into a predominantly white neighborhood because it's a house that they love, near shopping and work, in a good school district for the kids, and at a price they can afford. After they move in, someone writes "Go Home, Wetback" on their garage door, hangs a Hispanic person in effigy from the tree in their front yard, and the neighbors all call the parents and kids names whenever they see them. Should they just quit looking at the tree in their front yard, keep the garage door up, and never go outside? Should they move to a more Hispanic friendly neighborhood? Should they just quit thinking about it?

What about someone being offended by being stabbed, shot, or run over by a car? They should just suck it up and go on about their business?

[ImBill]

Civilians are suppose to have a high status, which a military flag takes away.
A Military flag means a non-civilian,
the military and war rules apply to those that fly the Military flag.
covers how civilians are to be treated
which is given up if you fly a military flag?

Our rights were usurped when the country went bankrupt in 1933 and a state of emergency was declared. Except for a few brief periods of time since, we have been under the military flag as we are still in that state of emergency. Our courts almost all fly the military flag with the gold trim around it. Very convenient for the government to take any power we may have had and throw away such things as due process and unalienable rights.

[Vortex]

Interesting flag and history!

Fly a civil flag


Purchase one here
Us Civil Flags Products: Civil Flags, Sons of Liberty Flags, Sons of Liberty Patches, Mini Flags, Caps, Hats