allstaractivist note: To understand what our military is really like inside, check out;
You can also skip to the bottom of this post for all four embedded videos. The military is behind Gang Stalking since most of what they do are Psy-Ops (Psychological Operations). Mrs. Kay Griggs talks about being “Gaslighted” by military operatives after she blew the whistle. It is also interesting to think that most police departments have “Veteran’s Preference” hiring policies and recruit heavily from the military. The police run Gang Stalking in whatever city you may be in. You can watch a video by Geo-scientist and Targeted Individual Ms. Leuren Moret for more on that. Anyway, this is just a good epilogue to the videos above so that you have a clearer understanding of just how dirty our military is, and just how involved they are in our day to day lives, unseen.
When you think about all that our country needs, Infrastructure, good schools, decent healthcare, jobs, protection for small business, police reform, the list goes on and on, what the hell are we doing in so many other peoples business and doing so much evil crap? Do any of those military bases we have across the globe help us with any of the above? Does any of the trillions of dollars both stolen and wasted benefit us or, a bunch of defense contractor mercenaries doing horrible things in our name? (9/10/2001: Rumsfeld announces $2.3 TRILLION Missing from Pentagon). Is making the world our enemy while enriching a bunch of military and corporate gangsters in the process what we want to sacrifice the lives of our children for? What good is it doing the average American? None, that’s the answer, no good at all.
We’ve lost control of the government and the government has total control over us now. We are all slaves that have just about finished their usefulness. We have allowed a small group of evil men and women conspiring in “Think Tanks” to draft federal policy without our input. Their biased academic authority substituting for the will and common sense of we the people. These two organizations below and any other entities that advocate “foreign entanglements” should be banned from effecting policy and be deemed illegal through an amendment to the Constitution.
President George Washington’s warning against us getting involved in any foreign entanglements, including the signing of treaties and military aid, was a sound admonishment back then just as it is now. If you look across the globe to nations who are neutral, at least in terms of military projection, you will find a population healthier, wealthier, and far less violent than ours.
Be that as it may, we have already entered into the abyss that Paul Craig Roberts spoke of below, A FULL FIVE YEARS AGO. We are here now, China is cutting it’s losses and selling our debt
, the dollar is about to be dumped as the world’s reserve currency meaning that it will instantly lose anywhere from 10% to 50% of it’s value. President Putin has already propositioned Europe openly to dump the US Dollar. Of course, we will be at war long before that happens. With the three recent massive chemical plant explosions
in China, coupled with them now parking three Chinese war ships and two supply ships off the coast of Alaska
, it has already begun. Remember, currency wars
equal trade wars
and trade wars lead to actual war (Military Keynesianism
). The Brics
nations are coming to destroy us with China and Russia in the lead. The age of the “American Empire
” has lead to our destruction and is over. It is important to identify whom else is to blame besides our own ignorance and apathy.
The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was a neoconservative think tank based in Washington, D.C. that focused on United States foreign policy. It was established as a non-profit educational organization in 1997, and founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan. The PNAC’s stated goal was “to promote American global leadership”. The organization stated that “American leadership is good both for America and for the world,” and sought to build support for “a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity”.
Of the twenty-five people who signed the PNAC’s founding statement of principles, ten went on to serve in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz. Observers such as Irwin Stelzer and Dave Grondin have suggested that the PNAC played a key role in shaping the foreign policy of the Bush Administration, particularly in building support for the Iraq War. Academics such as Inderjeet Parmar, Phillip Hammond, and Donald E. Abelson have said PNAC’s influence on the George W. Bush administration has been exaggerated.
The Project for the New American Century ceased to function in 2006; it was replaced by new think-tank Foreign Policy Initiative, co-founded by Kristol and Kagan in 2009.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
America, cast off foreign entanglements and return to the Proclamation of Neutrality!
George Washington’s Farewell Address is a letter written by the first American President, George Washington, to “The People of the United States of America”. Washington wrote the letter near the end of his second term as President, before his retirement to his home Mount Vernon. Originally published in Daved Claypole’s American Daily Advertiser on September 19, 1796, under the title “The Address of General Washington To The People of The United States on his declining of the Presidency of the United States,” the letter was almost immediately reprinted in newspapers across the country and later in a pamphlet form. The work was later named a “Farewell Address,” as it was Washington’s valedictory after 20 years of service to the new nation. It is a classic statement of republicanism, warning Americans of the political dangers they can and must avoid if they are to remain true to their values.
Foreign relations and free trade
Washington dedicates a large part of his farewell address to discussing foreign relations, and the dangers of permanent alliances between the United States and foreign nations; so-called ‘foreign entanglements’. This issue dominated national politics during the French Revolutionary Wars between France and Britain. Federalists favored Britain and the Jeffersonian Republicans favored France. They wanted the U.S. to honor the 1778 Treaty of Alliance, which established the France-American alliance, and aid France. Washington had avoided American involvement in the conflict by issuing the Proclamation of Neutrality, which in turn led to the Neutrality Act of 1794. He clearly tries to further explain his approach to foreign policy and alliances in this portion of the address.
Once again making reference to proper behavior based upon religious doctrine and morality, Washington advocates a policy of good faith and justice towards all nations, and urges the American people to avoid long-term friendly relations or rivalries with any nation. He argues these attachments and animosity toward nations will only cloud the government’s judgment in its foreign policy. Washington argues that longstanding poor relations will only lead to unnecessary wars due to a tendency to blow minor offenses out of proportion when committed by nations viewed as enemies of the United States. He continues this argument by claiming that alliances are likely to draw the United States into wars which have no justification and no benefit to the country beyond simply defending the favored nation. Washington continues his warning on alliances by claiming that they often lead to poor relations with nations who feel that they are not being treated as well as America’s allies, and threaten to influence the American government into making decisions based upon the will of their allies instead of the will of the American people.
Washington makes an extended reference to the dangers of foreign nations who will seek to influence the American people and government. He makes a point to say that he believes both nations who may be considered friendly as well as nations considered enemies will try to influence the government to do their will and it will only be “real patriots” who ignore popular opinion and resist the influence of friendly nations to seek what is best for their own country. Washington had a recent experience with foreign interference, when in 1793 the French ambassador Edmond-Charles Genêt organized demonstrations in support of France, funded soldiers to attack Spanish lands, and commissioned privateers to seize British ships. His mobilization of supporters to sway American opinion in favor of an alliance with France crossed the line and he was ordered to leave.
Washington goes on to urge the American people to take advantage of their isolated position in the world, and avoid attachments and entanglements in foreign affairs, especially those of Europe, which he argues have little or nothing to do with the interests of America. He argues that it makes no sense for the American people to wage war on European soil when their isolated position and unity will allow them to remain neutral and focus on their own affairs. As a result, Washington argues that the country should avoid permanent alliance with all foreign nations, although temporary alliances during times of extreme danger may be necessary, but does say that current treaties should be honored although not extended. (Despite his claim that current alliances should be honored, Washington had in fact through the Proclamation of Neutrality not honored the Treaty of Alliance, which promised aid in case the French were ever attacked by the British.)
Washington wraps up his foreign policy stance by advocating free trade with all nations arguing that trade links should be established naturally and the role of the government should be limited to insuring stable trade, defending the rights of American merchants, and any provisions necessary to insure that the government is able to insure the conventional rules of trade.
Proclamation of Neutrality
The Proclamation of Neutrality was a formal announcement issued by U.S. President George Washington in May 1793, declaring the nation neutral in the conflict between France and Great Britain. It threatened legal proceedings against any American providing assistance to any country at war.
News that Revolutionary France had declared war on Great Britain in February 1793, and with this declaration that France, by the country’s own volition, was now at war with all of Europe, did not reach America until the first half of April of that year. President Washington was at Mount Vernon attending the funeral of a nephew when he was given the news. He hurried back to Pennsylvania and summoned an emergency meeting of his cabinet.
In this initial meeting, Washington relayed the news, and gave each member of his cabinet a list of 13 questions. He wanted their answers to these questions, he explained, in time for their meeting the following day. These questions ranged from “Should the United States receive an ambassador from France?” to “Should earlier treaties still apply?” But first and foremost came the question: “Should the United States issue an official proclamation of neutrality?”
Washington’s cabinet members agreed that neutrality was essential; the nation was too young and its military was too small to risk any sort of engagement with either France or Britain. Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, in particular, saw in this question, as well as in the other twelve, the influence of the Federalists — his political rivals; yet he too agreed a proclamation was in order, though perhaps not an official one.
In a cabinet meeting of January 14, Thomas Jefferson argued that while neutrality was a sine qua non, there was no real need to make a Proclamation of Neutrality either immediately or even officially; perhaps there might be no need for an official declaration at all. The United States could declare its neutrality for a price, Jefferson intimated, “Why not stall and make countries bid for [American] neutrality?” In response, Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton declared that American neutrality was not negotiable. Jefferson eventually resigned from his duty as Secretary of State in disagreement with the Proclamation of Neutrality.
- By the President of the United States of America
- A Proclamation
- Whereas it appears that a state of war exists between Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, Great Britain, and the United Netherlands of the one part and France on the other, and the duty and interest of the United States require that they should with sincerity and good faith adopt and pursue a conduct friendly and impartial toward the belligerent powers:
- I have therefore thought fit by these presents to declare the disposition of the United States to observe the conduct aforesaid toward those powers respectively, and to exhort and warn the citizens of the United States carefully to avoid all acts and proceedings whatsoever which may in any manner tend to contravene such disposition.
- And I do hereby also make known that whosoever of the citizens of the United States shall render himself liable to punishment or forfeiture under the law of nations by committing, aiding, or abetting hostilities against any of the said powers, or by carrying to any of them those articles which are deemed contraband by the modern usage of nations, will not receive the protection of the United States against such punishment or forfeiture; and further, that I have given instructions to those officers to whom it belongs to cause prosecutions to be instituted against all persons who shall, within the cognizance of the courts of the United States, violate the law of nations with respect to the powers at war, or any of them.
- In testimony whereof I have caused the seal of the United States of America to be affixed to these presents, and signed the same with my hand. Done at the city of Philadelphia, the 22d day of April, 1793, and of the Independence of the United States of America the seventeenth.
- By the President:
The proclamation started a war of pamphlets between Hamilton (writing for the Federalists), and Madison (writing for the Jeffersonian/Republicans). In his seven essays, written under the nom de plume “Pacificus”, Hamilton dealt with objections to the proclamation. Among these were:
- The decree was, in fact, constitutional; for while Congress has the sole right to declare war, it is “the duty of the executive to preserve peace till war is declared.”
- The Neutrality Proclamation did not violate the United States’ defensive alliance with France, as the Jeffersonians were claiming. The treaty, Hamilton pointed out, was a defensive alliance and did not apply to offensive wars, “and it was France that had declared war upon other European powers”, not the other way around.
- By siding with France the United States would have left itself open to attacks within American borders by the governments of Britain and Spain stirring up “numerous Indian tribes” influenced by these two governments.
Jefferson, (having read several of the “Pacificus” essays) encouraged James Madison to reply. Madison was initially hesitant. From his Virginia plantation he offered Jefferson excuses as to why he could not write a reply, including that he didn’t have the necessary books and papers to refute “Pacificus”, that the summer heat was “oppressive”, and that he had many houseguests who were wearing out their welcome. Ultimately Madison agreed to Jefferson’s request, though afterwards he wrote to him, “I have forced myself in to the task of a reply. I can truly say I find it the most grating one I have ever experienced.”
Writing under the name “Helvidius”, Madison’s five essays showed the animosity that had evolved with the two political factions. He attacked Federalists, and Hamilton in particular, and anyone who supported the Neutrality Proclamation as secret monarchists, declaring: “Several features with the signature of Pacificus were [as of] late published, which have been read with singular pleasure and applause by the foreigners and degenerate citizens among us, who hate our republican government and the French Revolution.” Madison brought to light the strict constructionist’s view of both the Constitution and the Proclamation, demanding that Congress, not the president, had full authority over all foreign affairs except those areas specified in the Constitution.
- Chernow, Ron, Alexander Hamilton (Penguin, New York 2004) p. 435
- George Washington (April 22, 1793). “Proclamation 4 – Neutrality of the United States in the War Involving Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, Great Britain, and the United Netherlands Against France”. Retrieved 2010-10-30.
- “Pacificus No.1” June 29, 1793
- Chernow, Ron, Alexander Hamilton'(Penguin Books, NY) 2004, p.442
- Ralph, Ketcham, James Madison(University of Virginia Press 1971) p.436