AuH20
05-21-2015, 10:35 AM
The fish rots from the head down.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Gonzalez/servando144.htm
The military breeds dishonesty and cognitive dissonance by it's very design:
Currently, however, some knowledgeable people strongly disagree. According to them, the U.S. military is better described with the words deception, untruthfulness, untrustworthiness, and dishonesty, where ethical numbness and lack of honor and integrity have turning lying, cheating and stealing easier to choose by officers.
Now, before you jump to conclusions, I would like you to know that those are not my words, and I didn’t take them from a leftist, liberal, unpatriotic publication whose goal is to discredit the U.S. military. No. I took them from a paper entitled: “Lying To Ourselves: Dishonesty in the Army Profession,” by two scholars and retired Army officers. It was published in an official U.S. Army publication of the Strategic Studies Institute, of the U.S. Army War College.[1]
Unfortunately, however, the authors of the study focus their analysis on low-level dishonesty and deception as the results of a failure to comply with burgeoning, irrational requirements. Though near the end of their study the authors mention that “After all, dishonesty in the Army is not new,” they don’t dig deep enough into the problem — which goes far beyond low ethical standards in filing bureaucratic reports, to a point closer to treason.
To deviate from the stated objectives of their civilian leadership is tantamount to career suicide:
The wordings of the current oath of enlisted soldiers and the oath of commissioned officers are slightly different. While both swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, only enlisted men swear to obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers above them. Commissioned officers, however, just swear to “take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion,” and that they “will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter” — no mention is made to blindly obeying the orders of the President or the officers above them.
The distinction is important, because it gives officers the power to question ethical and moral judgments about the orders they get, either from the President or from officers above them. Unfortunately, this is an option that most officers in the U.S. military have refused to exert.
So, there is something in the oath of officers that doesn’t work. While the U.S. military has excessively focused on defending the U.S. against foreign enemies, the fight against the domestic ones is nonexistent. Why?
Were the Founding Fathers crazy when they mentioned the possibility of domestic enemies attacking the Constitution? Do Americans have no domestic enemies who are conspiring in the shadows to destroy U.S. sovereignty and ban the Constitution? Why has the U.S. military never tried to protect us from those domestic enemies? Have our military officers betrayed oath? Well, some of them have.
Three officers who in WWII chose to protect and defend the interests of our domestic enemies instead or our country were Generals Dwight Eisenhower,[2] George Marshall[3] and Matthew Ridgway. All of them were members of the anti-American Council on Foreign Relations, an organization where oil magnates and Wall Street bankers have been conspiring for many years to destroy the U.S. sovereignty and ban the Constitution.
American soldiers in WWII were betrayed by the deliberate refusal of CFR members Generals Dwight D. Eisenhower and George C. Marshall, in complicity with President Roosevelt, to allow Gen. Patton to take Berlin and win World War II at least one full year before the hostilities ended.[4]
During the Vietnam War, CFR honcho Henry Kissinger repeated again the betrayal of American fighting men. Today, other CFR members are sending American boys to die in foreign lands fighting wars the CFR conspirators don’t want to win.
A powerful reason why most high-ranking officers of the U.S. military have ignored the threat posed by our domestic enemies is because fighting them is a career ending choice; as it was in the case of Gen. McArthur[5] (in some cases, such as Adm. Forrestal, Gen. Patton, Adm. Bourda and many others, it has been career ending with “extreme prejudice”), and the goal of most career officers is nothing but to advance their careers to retire with maximum pay grade — that’s why they never rock the boat.
In the study I mentioned above, the authors mention that “Tolerating a level of dishonesty in areas deemed trivial or unimportant also results in the degradation of the trust that is vital to the military profession.” If this is true, it is no less true that tolerating dishonesty in critical areas and important areas, such as the betrayal of their oath of commission, results in a total degradation of the trust that is vital to the military profession.
They aren't here to protect America but rather advance the New Gay World Order.
There was a time when, to some extent, there was some logic for the U.S. military to protect the interest of American corporations. Today, when most of these corporations don’t see themselves as American anymore, but as transnationals who have outsourced American jobs to Third World countries for the sole purpose of increasing their profits, there is no logical reason for American taxpayers to pay the U.S. military to protect them.
It is difficult to explain without using the word treason why 132 high-ranking officers of the U.S. military are members of the Council on Foreign Relations,[8] an organization whose leaders have overtly expressed innumerable times their belief that the U.S. Constitution is outdated and that sovereign nation-states are obsolete and should be replaced by a world government under the control of an elite of international bankers, oil magnates and CEOs of transnational corporations — the New Gay World Order.
Moreover, key CFR members have openly expressed their hatred for the U.S. military. According to CFR member Henry Kissinger, military men are “dumb, stupid animals to be used” as pawns for foreign policy.[9]
Republicans are incapable of seeing the treachery for what it is:
Many homes of conservative Republicans have American flags hanging from the garage tops. If you venture to ask what is the reason for this, the answer may be something close to this: “To show our support for our troops in the Middle East and the war on terror.”
There is, however, something difficult to understand about this unconditional support for the U.S. military.
On September 11, 2001, our well-funded military failed miserably to protect us from our enemies, foreign and/or domestic. A few years later, they failed to protect our country from a veritable invasion of illegal aliens who, unopposed, crossed our southern border. Even more important, they have failed to protect us from the anti-American conspirators at the CFR who want to eliminate our borders and cancel the very same Constitution our military men have sworn to preserve and defend.
Frankly, I don’t think that there is much to be thankful about the present role of the U.S. military. Actually, far from protecting our borders, our freedoms and our Constitution, their actions abroad are helping the anti-American globalist conspirators to impose their communo-fascist, totalitarian New Gay World Order.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Gonzalez/servando144.htm
The military breeds dishonesty and cognitive dissonance by it's very design:
Currently, however, some knowledgeable people strongly disagree. According to them, the U.S. military is better described with the words deception, untruthfulness, untrustworthiness, and dishonesty, where ethical numbness and lack of honor and integrity have turning lying, cheating and stealing easier to choose by officers.
Now, before you jump to conclusions, I would like you to know that those are not my words, and I didn’t take them from a leftist, liberal, unpatriotic publication whose goal is to discredit the U.S. military. No. I took them from a paper entitled: “Lying To Ourselves: Dishonesty in the Army Profession,” by two scholars and retired Army officers. It was published in an official U.S. Army publication of the Strategic Studies Institute, of the U.S. Army War College.[1]
Unfortunately, however, the authors of the study focus their analysis on low-level dishonesty and deception as the results of a failure to comply with burgeoning, irrational requirements. Though near the end of their study the authors mention that “After all, dishonesty in the Army is not new,” they don’t dig deep enough into the problem — which goes far beyond low ethical standards in filing bureaucratic reports, to a point closer to treason.
To deviate from the stated objectives of their civilian leadership is tantamount to career suicide:
The wordings of the current oath of enlisted soldiers and the oath of commissioned officers are slightly different. While both swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, only enlisted men swear to obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers above them. Commissioned officers, however, just swear to “take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion,” and that they “will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter” — no mention is made to blindly obeying the orders of the President or the officers above them.
The distinction is important, because it gives officers the power to question ethical and moral judgments about the orders they get, either from the President or from officers above them. Unfortunately, this is an option that most officers in the U.S. military have refused to exert.
So, there is something in the oath of officers that doesn’t work. While the U.S. military has excessively focused on defending the U.S. against foreign enemies, the fight against the domestic ones is nonexistent. Why?
Were the Founding Fathers crazy when they mentioned the possibility of domestic enemies attacking the Constitution? Do Americans have no domestic enemies who are conspiring in the shadows to destroy U.S. sovereignty and ban the Constitution? Why has the U.S. military never tried to protect us from those domestic enemies? Have our military officers betrayed oath? Well, some of them have.
Three officers who in WWII chose to protect and defend the interests of our domestic enemies instead or our country were Generals Dwight Eisenhower,[2] George Marshall[3] and Matthew Ridgway. All of them were members of the anti-American Council on Foreign Relations, an organization where oil magnates and Wall Street bankers have been conspiring for many years to destroy the U.S. sovereignty and ban the Constitution.
American soldiers in WWII were betrayed by the deliberate refusal of CFR members Generals Dwight D. Eisenhower and George C. Marshall, in complicity with President Roosevelt, to allow Gen. Patton to take Berlin and win World War II at least one full year before the hostilities ended.[4]
During the Vietnam War, CFR honcho Henry Kissinger repeated again the betrayal of American fighting men. Today, other CFR members are sending American boys to die in foreign lands fighting wars the CFR conspirators don’t want to win.
A powerful reason why most high-ranking officers of the U.S. military have ignored the threat posed by our domestic enemies is because fighting them is a career ending choice; as it was in the case of Gen. McArthur[5] (in some cases, such as Adm. Forrestal, Gen. Patton, Adm. Bourda and many others, it has been career ending with “extreme prejudice”), and the goal of most career officers is nothing but to advance their careers to retire with maximum pay grade — that’s why they never rock the boat.
In the study I mentioned above, the authors mention that “Tolerating a level of dishonesty in areas deemed trivial or unimportant also results in the degradation of the trust that is vital to the military profession.” If this is true, it is no less true that tolerating dishonesty in critical areas and important areas, such as the betrayal of their oath of commission, results in a total degradation of the trust that is vital to the military profession.
They aren't here to protect America but rather advance the New Gay World Order.
There was a time when, to some extent, there was some logic for the U.S. military to protect the interest of American corporations. Today, when most of these corporations don’t see themselves as American anymore, but as transnationals who have outsourced American jobs to Third World countries for the sole purpose of increasing their profits, there is no logical reason for American taxpayers to pay the U.S. military to protect them.
It is difficult to explain without using the word treason why 132 high-ranking officers of the U.S. military are members of the Council on Foreign Relations,[8] an organization whose leaders have overtly expressed innumerable times their belief that the U.S. Constitution is outdated and that sovereign nation-states are obsolete and should be replaced by a world government under the control of an elite of international bankers, oil magnates and CEOs of transnational corporations — the New Gay World Order.
Moreover, key CFR members have openly expressed their hatred for the U.S. military. According to CFR member Henry Kissinger, military men are “dumb, stupid animals to be used” as pawns for foreign policy.[9]
Republicans are incapable of seeing the treachery for what it is:
Many homes of conservative Republicans have American flags hanging from the garage tops. If you venture to ask what is the reason for this, the answer may be something close to this: “To show our support for our troops in the Middle East and the war on terror.”
There is, however, something difficult to understand about this unconditional support for the U.S. military.
On September 11, 2001, our well-funded military failed miserably to protect us from our enemies, foreign and/or domestic. A few years later, they failed to protect our country from a veritable invasion of illegal aliens who, unopposed, crossed our southern border. Even more important, they have failed to protect us from the anti-American conspirators at the CFR who want to eliminate our borders and cancel the very same Constitution our military men have sworn to preserve and defend.
Frankly, I don’t think that there is much to be thankful about the present role of the U.S. military. Actually, far from protecting our borders, our freedoms and our Constitution, their actions abroad are helping the anti-American globalist conspirators to impose their communo-fascist, totalitarian New Gay World Order.