Monday, 21 September 2009
Ron Paul's "Neo-Conned" speech (2003)
The modern-day, limited-government movement has been co-opted. The conservatives have failed in their effort to shrink the size of government. There has not been, nor will there soon be, a conservative revolution in Washington. Political party control of the federal government has changed, but the inexorable growth in the size and scope of government has continued unabated. The liberal arguments for limited government in personal affairs and foreign military adventurism were never seriously considered as part of this revolution.
Since the change of the political party in charge has not made a difference, who’s really in charge? If the particular party in power makes little difference, whose policy is it that permits expanded government programs, increased spending, huge deficits, nation building and the pervasive invasion of our privacy, with fewer Fourth Amendment protections than ever before?
Someone is responsible, and it’s important that those of us who love liberty, and resent big-brother government, identify the philosophic supporters who have the most to say about the direction our country is going.
The godfather of modern-day neo-conservatism is considered to be Irving Kristol, father of Bill Kristol, who set the stage in 1983 with his publication Reflections of a Neoconservative. In this book, Kristol also defends the traditional liberal position on welfare.
More important than the names of people affiliated with neo-conservatism are the views they adhere to. Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:
1. They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.
2. They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.
3. They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.
4. They accept the notion that the ends justify the means—that hard-ball politics is a moral necessity.
5. They express no opposition to the welfare state.
6. They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.
7. They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.
8. They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.
9. They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.
10. They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill-advised.
11. They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.
12. They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.
13. Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should not be limited to the defense of our country.
14. 9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.
15. They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)
16. They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.
17. They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party.
Related: Stewart Rhodes (of Oath Keepers) - Neocon Think Tank Calls for Enslaving or Killing All Mexican Immigrants and Invading Mexico
(Images source: Liberty Stickers)
- ► 2010 (647)
- Everything is OK Montage
- Payze Duez: "We the Sheeple of Amerika"
- Best (or worst) chemtrail video ever
- News From the Department of Precrime, UK
- Muse-ing Against Tyranny
- More of Rep. Alan Grayson grilling the Fed
- Marxist Neocon Mark Levin is Evil
- How Accurate Are Swine Flu Figures, Really?
- We Are Change Investigates Military Checkpoints
- Nurse: "Why I left mainstream medicine"
- Rick Simpson's "Run From The Cure"
- Implanted microchips will make YOUR life easier! (...
- Weather - Sunny until Chemtrails, 18C
- Obama Family to get H1N1 Vaccine
- Ron Paul's "Neo-Conned" speech (2003)
- Newsweek: The Case for Killing Granny
- How An Elite Control Politics
- Become a Leader of Tomorrow, Global Citizen!
- Nigel Farage in Dublin: Lisbon Treaty Debate
- Something to ponder
- FEMA have never operated a camp, honest
- Was a deal cut with Russia over Iran?
- Flu Shot Propaganda
- The Semantic War to Destroy Jihad and Militia
- Mecca Pilgrims, take your forced vaccine
- Vaccination "a superstition" - Dr Hadwen (1923)
- How many people in DC on 9/12?
- People don't want pandemic martial law?
- O'Reilly and Rivera discredit only themselves [UPD...
- Ignatius Piazza: "Don't just remember 9/11...uncov...
- Social Services: Bride 'not intelligent enough' to...
- And thus ends my 9/11-a-thon
- 8 Years on, 9/11 Families still want answers
- Charlie Sheen asks for meeting with Obama
- Cognitive Dissonance Meets 9/11 Truth
- Asia Times: Fifty Questions on 9/11
- But if 9/11 was a "conspiracy", people would have ...
- Evelyn de Rothschild addresses Bohemian Grove
- Homeland Security: Hitler Redux
- Charlie Sheen: "Challenge me on the facts"
- Why I cannot and do not support Glenn Beck
- Charlie Sheen: 20 minutes with the President
- CLIMATE COPS: children told to monitor "climate cr...
- Enjoy a nice glass of fluoride
- Secrets of the UK National Health Service
- Why the Government Party loves the BNP
- Are you a racist?
- More School Kids Singing for Obama
- The "mark of the beast" is still coming, Brits
- ObamaCare supporter bites finger off old man...
- British "death panels", denial of care
- A question of law enforcement
- A Rothschild Education Effort
- Interesting BBC ad
- Congressman laughs in Bernanke's face
- ▼ Sep 2009 (55)
And You Tell Me There's No Suppressed Technology?
It's another of those 'conspiracy theories' that good citizens don't notice. Imagine the standard of living if all the secret technology was released to the public...we'd be "free and independent" as JFK said! No more poverty anywhere! Can you imagine being sick enough to withhold such technology from society just to maintain your position of control? (Bearing in mind that we don't know just how much technological capability is being withheld, because, duh, it's secret.) What did Nikola Tesla really develop?
Individual Liberty? But that's "selfish"!
No, we need to look after each other voluntarily without having a government do all that at gunpoint. Sounds absurd at first but soon you realise that the reason it sounds so is because of the very unfree nature of our current existence. Envision greater possibilities! Ok, some kind of massive wake-up would be needed before this kind of free, responsible, uncontrollable society could emerge. And that's what we are seeing day by day in the world - a massive waking up of the previously enslaved masses (including myself I must add!)