Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Barry Lee Phillips on October 16, 2011 at 1:35pm

Jonathan,

Please read my last comment -- AGAIN.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dwayne Smith on November 27, 2011 at 9:59pm

I just read this and I want you to understand that the policy that Obama came to the table with has been the same as the Clinton and G.W. Obama was just the first to openly suggest the 1967 borders.  Can you guys please research and stick to the facts.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clyde Reid on December 21, 2011 at 4:54pm

Mr. Goyings,

I am new here, only joined yesterday but it seems to me you may be a bit confused.  According to The Word of God, which this country was and still is founded on we have no choice except to support Israel.  That is unless you would like to see this country lose the blessings of Almighty God as if our leaders are not already leading us down that path.

 

Just remember The Word of God says Those who bless Israel HE will bless and those who curse or forsake Israel He will curse or forsake.

Jonathan Goyings said:

Lee Phillips,

I am simply pointing out to you that this forum is devoted to American Founding Principle AND WE MEAN IT.

To wit:

- You seem to have an unusual interest in the politics of a foreign country which, by the way, is not part of the West and is not representative of our Anglo Saxon derived form of Government, which is the historical pre-cursor to the American form of government, i.e American Founding Principles.  I must conclude your comments are not in the interests of the FCTP’s efforts to restore Founding Principals to American Government.

- You seem to speak from the point of view of an Israeli Nationalist, not an American Patriot.  Your comments are therefore better suited to another forum rather than the FCTP.

- You have blatantly mis-represented the history of Christianity and imply that Christians must be “inexorably” a fifth column of a foreign people/state.  This is simply false and does not help us restore a system of Government envisioned by the Founding Fathers, or more to the point, the relationship of America to Foreign Powers (see George Washington's comments below)

- You have clearly demonstrated an anti-Arab bias.  Other middle-eastern peoples have legitimate interests and these interests may conflict with your “chosen” middle-eastern nationally. We should be focusing instead on methods and strategies devoted to restoring America to a form of Government based on the Founding Principles envisioned by our Founding Fathers.

 

Here are some quotes from George Washington indicating the relationship to Foreign Powers that we, as Americans seeking a restoration should maintain:

 - 'Tis folly in one Nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its Independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favours and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect, or calculate upon real favours from Nation to Nation. 'Tis an illusion which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.

- George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

 

- But if we are to be told by a foreign Power ... what we shall do, and what we shall not do, we have Independence yet to seek, and have contended hitherto for very little.

- George Washington, letter to Alexander Hamilton, May 8, 1796

 

- 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.

- George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

 

- 'Tis our true policy to steer clear of permanent Alliances, with any portion of the foreign world.

- George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

 

Finally, this is the central statement of the FCTP on their Home Page which indicates the purpose of this site.

 The First Coast Tea Party’s mission is to promote the principles of our founding fathers (emphasis mine) – individual liberty and responsibility, limited government and moral leadership.  We believe our mission statement is concise, focused and hopefully speaks to ALL Americans.  The tea party movement strives to embrace the concerns of all Americans, to focus on the issues (emphasis mine), to inform the electorate of the activities of “our” government and to share ideas on how to restore our country to a constitutional footing intended by our founding fathers (emphasis mine).  Those Americans who participate in the Tea Party Movement are free thinkers and individuals who want to be a part of “their” government, regain their liberties and fulfill the God given promises set forth in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.  The tea party movement places no labels on anyone (emphasis mine) and is open to all who share our mission and want to have a voice in America’s future.

 

Above I have emphasized where, I believe, you have strayed from the purposes of ths site and the intent of the Tea Party Movement.  I mean no offense, but I do hope I am making myself clear here.

 

In conclusion, you can attack the accuracy of my rendering of your statements, the statements of George Washington himself, or the policy of the FCTP forum.  But in any case your comments are not in accord with the purposes and efforts of the FCTP forum or the interests of the Tea Party generally.  Name calling is simply purile in this context.

Check and Mate.

JG

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Roma and Tom Cox on December 23, 2011 at 5:10pm

Netanyahu  understands the progressive movement's "Agenda 21" better than we do. He does not want it infecting his soil.

I totally agree that we should support Israel, and that was one of the things that concerned me most about Ron Paul. We should support our best Allie in the Middle East,  but the way they want us to...not the Progressive's will forced on them. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Roma and Tom Cox on December 23, 2011 at 5:47pm

 Thomas West at The Heritage Foundation writes:

7. Foreign Policy

For the Founders, foreign and domestic policy were supposed to serve the same end: the security of the people in their person and property. Therefore, foreign policy was conceived primarily as defensive. Foreign attack was to be deterred by having strong arms or repulsed by force. Alliances were to be entered into with the understanding that a self-governing nation must keep itself aloof from the quarrels of other nations, except as needed for national defense. Government had no right to spend the taxes or lives of its own citizens to spread democracy to other nations or to engage in enterprises aiming at imperialistic hegemony.

The Progressives believed that a historical process was leading all mankind to freedom, or at least the advanced nations. Following Hegel, they thought of the march of freedom in history as having a geographical basis. It was in Europe, not Asia or Africa, where modern science and the modern state had made their greatest advances. The nations where modern science had properly informed the political order were thought to be the proper leaders of the world.

The Progressives also believed that the scientifically educated leaders of the advanced nations (especially America, Britain, and France) should not hesitate to rule the less advanced nations in the interest of ultimately bringing the world into freedom, assuming that supposedly inferior peoples could be brought into the modern world at all. Political scientist Charles Merriam openly called for a policy of colonialism on a racial basis:

[T]he Teutonic races must civilize the politically uncivilized. They must have a colonial policy. Barbaric races, if incapable, may be swept away…. On the same principle, interference with the affairs of states not wholly barbaric, but nevertheless incapable of effecting political organization for themselves, is fully justified.

Progressives therefore embraced a much more active and indeed imperialistic foreign policy than the Founders did. In "Expansion and Peace" (1899), Theodore Roosevelt wrote that the best policy is imperialism on a global scale: "every expansion of a great civilized power means a victory for law, order, and righteousness." Thus, the American occupation of the Philippines, T.R. believed, would enable "one more fair spot of the world's surface" to be "snatched from the forces of darkness. Fundamentally the cause of expansion is the cause of peace."

Woodrow Wilson advocated American entry into World War I, boasting that America's national interest had nothing to do with it. Wilson had no difficulty sending American troops to die in order to make the world safe for democracy, regardless of whether or not it would make America more safe or less. The trend to turn power over to multinational organizations also begins in this period, as may be seen in Wilson's plan for a League of Nations, under whose rules America would have delegated control over the deployment of its own armed forces to that body.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/07/the-progressive-mo...

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page