FOREIGN POLICY
Constitution of the United States
Article One) Section One…All legislative Powers herein
granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist
of a Senate and House of Representatives
Section Eight…To declare war…
There is NO, I repeat NO provision for the President or
Executive branch to have, or be granted, power by the legislature to declare war
or commit our military to combat or foreign service of any kind: PERIOD. A crime
of the highest magnitude has been committed by the legislature, judicial and
executive branches of government. The law of the land has been breached by those
given the power to uphold it. Your lives, liberties, and properties have been
compromised. Truman was the first to seize this power when he committed American
troops to the Korean War WITHOUT a declaration of war. He did it with the
blessing of a gutless legislature who should have stopped him in his tracks. The
executive branch has continued to hold on to and expand this power. The war
powers act, which was born out of Truman’s criminal behavior, is
UNCONSTITUTIONAL. There is no provision in the Constitution for the legislature
to come up with such an act. The power our current legislature gave to the
president (executive branch) takes this crime to new heights. You who think you
can trust Bush with this power should consider, his successors will have the
same power and probably more considering how the legislature thinks and acts.
Over the years, I’ve had the opportunity to work and visit in
eleven foreign countries. On one of my trips abroad, I was in the Mid East
having lunch with a retired General. It was not a diplomatic mission. My
relationship was both of a friendly and business nature. In light of the
tensions that have existed in that part of the world and America playing a role
as a "peace keeper and nation builder", I asked him to tell me honestly, "what
do people in this part of the world think of Americans?" I should tell you,
people in other nations watch America and Americans far more diligently than we
watch ourselves. The General was no exception. He knew more about our heritage
than probably 80% of the people walking our streets. (We are denied studies into
our Declaration of Independence and Constitution by government schools). He
looked at me as one looks at someone he truly feels sorry for when he said..."Wil,
America has become like a Lion with a brain disorder, unprincipled and
unpredictable, but, very, very dangerous." The answer caught me totally off
guard but on reflection, I could not offer any defense. Has become? How far
we’ve come.
In trying to put together thoughts that would be consistent
with the policies our Forefathers envisioned for our relationship with other
countries, I read President George Washington’s Farewell Address. Considering
there was nothing I could add or delete that would improve our countries posture
in world affairs today, I vow to copy his thoughts, should I be elected. This is
the section pertinent to this issue.
"In the execution of such a plan nothing is more essential
than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations and
passionate attachments for others should be excluded, and that in place of them
just and amicable feelings toward all should be cultivated. The nation which
indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some
degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of
which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy
in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and
injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and
intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur.
Hence frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody
contests. The nation prompted by ill will and resentment sometimes impels to war
the government contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government
sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion
what reason would reject. At other times it makes the animosity of the nation
subservient to projects of hostility, instigated by pride, ambition, and other
sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty,
of nations has been the victim.
So, Likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for
another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation,
facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real
common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays
the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without
adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the
favorite nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure
the nation making the concessions by unnecessarily parting with what ought to
have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a disposition to
retaliate in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld; and it gives
to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the
favorite nations) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own
country without odium, sometimes even with popularity, gilding with the
appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for
public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good the base or foolish
compliance’s of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such
attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent
patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions,
to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or
awe the public councils! Such an attachment of a small or weak toward a great
and powerful nation dooms the former to become a satellite of the latter.
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me
fellow -citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake,
since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most
baneful foes of republican
government. But that jealousy to be useful, must be impartial,
else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a
defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive
dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side,
and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real
patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become
suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and
confidence of the people to surrender their interests.
The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations
is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political
connection as possible…
AVOID POLITICAL ALLIANCE
The World has a set of primary interests which to us have none
or a very remote relation. Hence the World must be engaged in frequent
controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns.
Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial
ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics or the ordinary combinations
and collisions of her friendships or enmities.
Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to
pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient
government, the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from
external annoyances; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the
neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when
belligerent nations, under the impossibilty of making acquisitions upon us, will
not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may chose peace or war, as
our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.
Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit
our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that
of any part of the World, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of the
Worlds ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice?
THE SIMPLE RULES OF TRADE
It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances
with any portion of the foreign world, so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty
to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to
existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to
private affairs that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat, therefore, let
those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But in my opinion it is
unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.
Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable
establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to
temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.
Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations are recommended
by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an
equal and impartial hand, neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or
preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying
by gentle means the streams of commerce, with powers so disposed, in order to
give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable
the Government to support them, conventional rules of intercourse, the best that
present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary and liable
to be from time to time abandoned or varied as experience and circumstances
shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look
for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its
independence whatever it may accept under that character; that by such
acceptance it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for
nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving
more. There can be no greater error to expect or calculate upon real favors from
nation to nation. It is an illusion which experience must cure, which a just
pride ought to discard.
In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old
and affectionate friend I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting
impression I could wish – that they will control the usual current of the
passions or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked
the destiny of nations…"
Would that our Presidents in the 20th Century had
followed this sound advise. Actually it was President Theodore Roosevelt that
changed our destiny from being a free and independent nation to a budding Empire
when he took it upon himself to invade the Phillipines and Columbia on the side
of the Panamanian rebels. During WW1, England, France and Italy had borrowed
some $5,000,000,000 from the United States. We had also loaned money to Germany,
but not such a large amount. These loans were UNCONSTITUTIONAL as there is NO
provision for those in the federal government to loan the peoples money to any
foreign power. This debt falsely obligated us to take the side of England,
France and Italy as they threatened, if we didn’t, we might nor get repaid. To
hide the deceit Woodrow Wilson’s administration engaged in propaganda to
stimulate the people into participating in a foreign war. There was no other
reason for us to have any part in it. Woodrow Wilson, the first President to
travel abroad, sat down with the victors and rewrote geography in Europe,
insuring another world war. He even set the stage with his move to formulate a
league of nations for what would eventually become the U.N. Another organization
there is NO CONSTITUTIONAL provision for us having a part in. It is interesting
to see how politicians, not Statesmen, can manipulate a peoples thinking to
acting aggressively over matters they do not know anything about.
WAR
"Why, of course people don’t want war. Why should some poor
slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it
is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don’t want
war, neither Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is
understood. But after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the
policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag to people along, whether it is
a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding
of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being
attacked, and denounce the pacifist for lack of patriotism and exposing the
country to danger.
IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY."
Herman Goering, Nazi leader, speaking at the Nuremburg Trials
after WW11
Consider Kosovo, the invasion of a sovereign nation which
posed no threat to us. The Kuwaiti / Iraq war based on lies perpetrated on us by
Bush 1. The lies perpetrated on us by Bush 2 and his comrades to get us involved
in another unconstitutional act of aggression in Iraq. The lies told by Lyndon
Johnson to get us involved in Vietnam, Korea and all the other unconstitutional
involvements our military people have been thrown into. Do you honestly believe
the American people gained anything from these engagements? The government we
serve uses propaganda to arouse the population into a killing frenzy. It’s very
similar to a mob mentality on a grand scale. Stimulus response, the underlying
theme in government education works. They stimulate. We respond. As Americans,
it is our right and duty to question our servants as to their motives and
intentions before jumping to their tune. It is our duty as citizens to stand
between the soldier and the governing body to be absolutely certain not one of
them will be put in harms way other than to defend our country. It is also our
right and duty to see to it the people we hire only act under the guidelines
established by our Constitution. When you think about it, the Viet Nam Police
action (no war was declared) protestors missed the boat when they did not
challenge our involvement on Constitutional grounds. But then, what government
affiliated school teaches, or even exposes students to, the Constitution? That
large of a body might have awakened people to the fact that our involvement was
criminal on the part of the government; as was our involvement in Korea. This
paper is not intended to in any way take credit from or degrade our soldiers
caught up in those "unconstitutional police actions." They truly believed their
Commander in Chief and all their cohorts in crime. We’re the ones to blame for
what happened to them by not holding leadership to its Constitutional bounds.
It’s interesting, Roosevelt gave the Communist their teeth during and after the
2nd World War and then we fought no-win "Police Actions" with them
during the last half of the 20th Century. Interesting. Even the
Godless ideology and goals that make up the communist form of government are
showing their ugly head in America’s government. Some times I wonder; did our
leaders defeat communism or learn from it?
Look at the geography of the rest of the world during this
century. Notice how borders have shifted, and continue to shift. Nations have
changed names, alliances have lead to wars. Our participation has only served to
get Americans killed and get us enemies that will bring their anger to our
shores.(I wrote that line for the 2000 elections when I ran against Lieberman)
If we build a Navy and Air Force (Defensive forces) formidable to the point no
one would dare seek our wrath on themselves, and a Reserve Army that could be
called up at a moments notice (the Army is an Occupation Force not a Defensive
one), and stay out of the love hate relationships that dominate the government
we serves thinking today; we could find ourselves being a beacon to a better
way, rather than living in fear of terrorism, occupying lands where they hate us
and spending billions to purchase friends while at the same time creating
enemies. But if we did that, the Socialist who have wrested control would not
have the use of America’s might to further their agenda. Neo-Cons are only a
part of the socialist movement.
The New World Order is a dream of people like Bush 2 and his
band of neo-conservative comrades pledging allegiance to a foreign power, not
America. We must sever all of the entanglements; the U.N., NATO, SEATO, NAFTA
and anything else that comes in conflict with our Constitution.
We must eliminate all foreign "aid."
We must bring all of our military personnel home. Their
soldiers retained to defend America, not be new world order policemen.
We must appoint a Secretary of State knowledgeable in the
Constitution and willing to follow it to the letter.
We must sever economic ties with countries that have Imperial
designs. Helping their economies serves to strengthen their ability to achieve
their goals and gives them to a large degree, control of ours.
We must in summary sever all political ties and build an armed
force capable of maintaining our neutral position.
We should encourage foreign trade but keep the exports and
imports in balance. Bartering would not be a bad idea. Everybody wins. Consider
the lesson of Japan. Japan has exported to the U.S. in unprecedented volumes. We
pay them in dollars which are useless in Japan. Their wealth, being in American
dollars, they have been forced to invest in banks and businesses in the U.S.,
which does nothing for their home economy. In other words, if they chose to cash
in the dollars, they have to buy American goods and services. Good for us, bad
for them. The condition of the economy in Japan proves my point. Another way to
look at it is, if I came into your business and made a Credit Card purchase and
the only way you could cash in the Credit Card debt was to spend it in my
business, who would be the winner? The down side is; as long as other countries
accept our Federal Reserve Notes "money" and we continue buying to a point where
we no longer produce, we are vulnerable to their willingness to sell to us. The
price (most likely decided by the political powers in control) and
ability/willingness to produce to meet our demands? There always is a day of
reckoning.
With the "republicans" supporting and expanding on Clinton’s
debt to the Communist Chinese we should stop and consider the strengths and
weaknesses of communist countries. History teaches communist nations crumble
from within (see section on socialism). As there is no incentive for people to
be productive in communist countries, our entering into trade agreements with
the Chinese GOVERNMENT (not people) only helps to insure they remain stable to
the point they can export their political philosophy. It provides enough income
to pacify the people while giving the government the tools they need to
propagate their cancer. As any Communist Economist will tell you, they need only
control 10% of your market to control you. Walk through any mall, look who made
your Computer, TV, Radio, Clothing, Appliances etc. etc. and judge for yourself;
to what extent the Communist Chinese control us?
In closing, let me ask you, would you knowingly give your life
to rid the world of Saddam Hussein? Unless you can honestly answer in the
affirmative, don’t tell me the price we are paying to democratize Iraq is worth
the lives of the unknowing and unwitting. The man in the white house is one of
the worst kinds of liars as he believes his own lies. He sees himself as Pope
Urban did, a man capable of standing between you and God even though the veil in
the temple was ripped in half at the time of the crucifixion.
P.S. Kerry is a horse of the same color. Is this the best we
can do out of 275,000,000 of us or is it the choices a corrupt government could
be expected to offer?
This candidacy, and the other people willing to run for office
in support of the Law of the land offers you a clear choice. Either you are
ruled by the members of the Command Class (republicrats) or you take on the roll
of ruler for yourself. Remember, there are no innocent victims. If you are not
part of the solution, then you are part of the problem.
