Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
-
BTH&T
- captain of 100
- Posts: 906
Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
Would love to see how others view this election, and what many think.
Last edited by BTH&T on May 1st, 2016, 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
BTH&T
- captain of 100
- Posts: 906
Re: Will it matter?
Thanks Ezra for this gem!
Joseph Smith Jr.: "We shall have the satisfaction of knowing we have acted conscientiously and have used our best judgement, and if we have to throw away our votes, we had better do so upon a worthy rather than an unworthy individual who might make use of the weapon we put in his hand to destroy us!" (Comprehensive History of the Church 2:208-209)
Joseph Smith Jr.: "We shall have the satisfaction of knowing we have acted conscientiously and have used our best judgement, and if we have to throw away our votes, we had better do so upon a worthy rather than an unworthy individual who might make use of the weapon we put in his hand to destroy us!" (Comprehensive History of the Church 2:208-209)
-
Different
- captain of 100
- Posts: 296
Re: Will it matter?
I don't think it'll matter, just look at everything happening. But hey it was all prophesied, just sad to see it happen
-
David13
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 7080
- Location: Utah
Re: Will it matter?
Should we not interpret that to read "her hand"? Won't it be "her hand" that destroys us? I think so, unless ...
dc
dc
-
BTH&T
- captain of 100
- Posts: 906
Re: Will it matter?
expound pleaseDavid13 wrote:Should we not interpret that to read "her hand"? Won't it be "her hand" that destroys us? I think so, unless ...
dc
-
lundbaek
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 11123
- Location: Mesa, Arizona
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
I think/fear that Hillary Clinton will be elected President of the country and we will rapidly decline spiritually, economically and socially more rapidly that we have thus far.
l hope to have the satisfaction of knowing I will have acted conscientiously and used my best judgement. To some it will mean throwing away my vote, not that I much care what others think. But I will do so upon Darrell Castle, who I am convinced espouses the principles of the US Constitution as it was meant to be understood, and not on an unworthy individual who might make use of the weapon we put in his hand to destroy us.
l hope to have the satisfaction of knowing I will have acted conscientiously and used my best judgement. To some it will mean throwing away my vote, not that I much care what others think. But I will do so upon Darrell Castle, who I am convinced espouses the principles of the US Constitution as it was meant to be understood, and not on an unworthy individual who might make use of the weapon we put in his hand to destroy us.
-
David13
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 7080
- Location: Utah
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
I have a suspicion that if a weapon is put into a "his" hand, it won't destroy us.
However, I am convinced, as is lundbaek that there is a possible "her" hand, that will destroy us.
dc
However, I am convinced, as is lundbaek that there is a possible "her" hand, that will destroy us.
dc
-
BTH&T
- captain of 100
- Posts: 906
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
Not a large sample size, but so far +90% believe that things look bleak for the good ol' USofA
-
lundbaek
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 11123
- Location: Mesa, Arizona
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
We must keep in mind that establishment-dominated forces in the executive, legislative and I believe even in the judicial branches of the U.S. government are using their powers to push us into the New World Order, eventually under a global government. Let's not forget, that speaking in the Church General Conference in October 1988, President Benson said "I testify that wickedness is rapidly expanding in every segment of our society. It is more highly organized, more cleverly disguised, and more powerfully promoted than ever before. Secret combinations lusting for power, gain and glory are flourishing. A secret combination that seeks to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations and countries is increasing its evil influence and control over America and the entire world.” And more recently, President Boyd K. Packer, in the August 2010 Ensign, Pg. 23 said "We live in a time of war, that spiritual war that will never end. Moroni warned us that the secret combinations begun by Gadianton ‘are had among all people. . . . Wherefore, O ye Gentiles [and the term gentile in that place in the Book of Mormon refers to us in our generation], it is wisdom in God that these things should be shown unto you, that thereby ye may repent of your sins, and suffer not that these murderous combinations shall get above you. . . . Wherefore, the Lord commandeth you, when ye shall see these things come among you that ye shall awake to a sense of your awful situation, because of this secret combination which shall be among you. [Ether 8:20, 23–24]”
-
Silver
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
This just in...
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2 ... ebels.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
ERIC ZUESSE | 28.04.2016 | WORLD
Seymour Hersh Says Hillary Approved Sending Libya’s Sarin to Syrian Rebels
The great investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, in two previous articles in the London Review of Books («Whose Sarin?» and «The Red Line and the Rat Line») has reported that the Obama Administration falsely blamed the government of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad for the sarin gas attack that Obama was trying to use as an excuse to invade Syria; and Hersh pointed to a report from British intelligence saying that the sarin that was used didn’t come from Assad’s stockpiles. Hersh also said that a secret agreement in 2012 was reached between the Obama Administration and the leaders of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, to set up a sarin gas attack and blame it on Assad so that the US could invade and overthrow Assad. «By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria». Hersh didn’t say whether these «arms» included the precursor chemicals for making sarin which were stockpiled in Libya, but there have been multiple independent reports that Libya’s Gaddafi possessed such stockpiles, and also that the US Consulate in Benghazi Libya was operating a «rat line» for Gaddafi’s captured weapons into Syria through Turkey. So, Hersh isn’t the only reporter who has been covering this. Indeed, the investigative journalist Christoph Lehmann headlined on 7 October 2013, «Top US and Saudi Officials responsible for Chemical Weapons in Syria» and reported, on the basis of very different sources than Hersh used, that «Evidence leads directly to the White House, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, CIA Director John Brennan, Saudi Intelligence Chief Prince Bandar, and Saudi Arabia´s Interior Ministry». And, as if that weren’t enough, even the definitive analysis of the evidence that was performed by two leading US analysts, the Lloyd-Postal report, concluded that, «The US Government’s Interpretation of the Technical Intelligence It Gathered Prior to and After the August 21 Attack CANNOT POSSIBLY BE CORRECT». Obama has clearly been lying.
However, now, for the first time, Hersh has implicated Hillary Clinton directly in this «rat line». In an interview with Alternet.org, Hersh was asked about the then-US-Secretary-of-State’s role in the Benghazi Libya US consulate’s operation to collect weapons from Libyan stockpiles and send them through Turkey into Syria for a set-up sarin-gas attack, to be blamed on Assad in order to ‘justify’ the US invading Syria, as the US had invaded Libya to eliminate Gaddafi. Hersh said: «That ambassador who was killed, he was known as a guy, from what I understand, as somebody, who would not get in the way of the CIA. As I wrote, on the day of the mission he was meeting with the CIA base chief and the shipping company. He was certainly involved, aware and witting of everything that was going on. And there’s no way somebody in that sensitive of a position is not talking to the boss, by some channel».
This was, in fact, the Syrian part of the State Department’s Libyan operation, Obama’s operation to set up an excuse for the US doing in Syria what they had already done in Libya.
The interviewer then asked: «In the book [Hersh’s The Killing of Osama bin Laden, just out] you quote a former intelligence official as saying that the White House rejected 35 target sets [for the planned US invasion of Syria] provided by the Joint Chiefs as being insufficiently painful to the Assad regime. (You note that the original targets included military sites only – nothing by way of civilian infrastructure.) Later the White House proposed a target list that included civilian infrastructure. What would the toll to civilians have been if the White House’s proposed strike had been carried out?»
Hersh responded by saying that the US tradition in that regard has long been to ignore civilian casualties; i.e., collateral damage of US attacks is okay or even desired (so as to terrorize the population into surrender) – not an ‘issue’, except, perhaps, for the PR people.
The interviewer asked why Obama is so obsessed to replace Assad in Syria, since «The power vacuum that would ensue would open Syria up to all kinds of jihadi groups»; and Hersh replied that not only he, but the Joint Chiefs of Staff, «nobody could figure out why». He said, «Our policy has always been against him [Assad]. Period». This has actually been the case not only since the Party that Assad leads, the Ba’ath Party, was the subject of a shelved CIA coup-plot in 1957 to overthrow and replace it; but, actually, the CIA’s first coup had been not just planned but was carried out in 1949 in Syria, overthrowing there a democratically elected leader, in order to enable a pipeline for the Sauds’ oil to become built through Syria into the largest oil market, Europe; and, construction of the pipeline started the following year. But, there were then a succession of Syrian coups (domestic instead of by foreign powers – 1954, 1963, 1966, and, finally, in 1970), concluding in the accession to power of Hafez al-Assad during the 1970 coup. And, the Sauds' long-planned Trans-Arabia Pipeline has still not been built. The Saudi royal family, who own the world’s largest oil company, Aramco, don’t want to wait any longer. Obama is the first US President to have seriously tried to carry out their long-desired «regime change» in Syria, so as to enable not only the Sauds’ Trans-Arabian Pipeline to be built, but also to build through Syria the Qatar-Turkey Gas Pipeline that the Thani royal family (friends of the Sauds) who own Qatar want also to be built there. The US is allied with the Saud family (and with their friends, the royal families of Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, and Oman). Russia is allied with the leaders of Syria – as Russia had earlier been allied with Mossadegh in Iran, Arbenz in Guatemala, Allende in Chile, Hussein in Iraq, Gaddafi in Libya, and Yanukovych in Ukraine (all of whom except Syria’s Ba’ath Party, the US has successfully overthrown).
Hersh was wrong to say that «nobody could figure out why» Obama is obsessed with overthrowing Assad and his Ba’ath Party, even if nobody that he spoke with was willing to say why. They have all been hired to do a job, which didn’t change even when the Soviet Union ended and the Warsaw Pact was disbanded; and, anyone who has been at this job for as long as those people have, can pretty well figure out what the job actually is – even if Hersh can’t.
Hersh then said that Obama wanted to fill Syria with foreign jihadists to serve as the necessary ground forces for his planned aerial bombardment there, and, «if you wanted to go there and fight there in 2011-2013, ‘Go, go, go… overthrow Bashar!’ So, they actually pushed a lot of people [jihadists] to go. I don’t think they were paying for them but they certainly gave visas».
However, it’s not actually part of America’s deal with its allies the fundamentalist-Sunni Arabic royal families and the fundamentalist Sunni Erdogan of Turkey, for the US to supply the salaries (to be «paying for them», as Hersh put it there) to those fundamentalist Sunni jihadists – that’s instead the function of the Sauds and of their friends, the other Arab royals, and their friends, to do. (Those are the people who finance the terrorists to perpetrate attacks in the US, Europe, Russia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, India, Nigeria, etc. – i.e., anywhere except in their own countries.) And, Erdogan in Turkey mainly gives their jihadists just safe passage into Syria, and he takes part of the proceeds from the jihadists’ sales of stolen Syrian and Iraqi oil. But, they all work together as a team (with the jihadists sometimes killing each other in the process – that’s even part of the plan) – though each national leader has PR problems at home in order to fool his respective public into thinking that they’re against terrorists, and that only the ‘enemy’ is to blame. (Meanwhile, the aristocrats who supply the «salaries» of the jihadists, walk off with all the money.)
This way, US oil and gas companies will refine, and pipeline into Europe, the Sauds’ oil and the Thanis’ gas, and not only will Russia’s major oil-and-gas market become squeezed away by that, but Obama’s economic sanctions against Russia, plus the yet-further isolation of Russia (as well as of China and the rest of the BRICS countries) by excluding them from Obama’s three mega-trade-deals (TTIP, TPP & TISA), will place the US aristocracy firmly in control of the world, to dominate the 21st Century, as it has dominated ever since the end of WW II.
Then, came this question from Hersh: «Why does America do what it does? Why do we not say to the Russians, Let’s work together?» His interviewer immediately seconded that by repeating it, «So why don’t we work closer with Russia? It seems so rational». Hersh replied simply: «I don’t know». He didn’t venture so much as a guess – not even an educated one. But, when journalists who are as knowledgeable as he, don’t present some credible explanation, to challenge the obvious lies (which make no sense that accords with the blatantly contrary evidence those journalists know of against those lies) that come from people such as Barack Obama, aren’t they thereby – though passively – participating in the fraud, instead of contradicting and challenging it? Or, is the underlying assumption, there: The general public is going to be as deeply immersed in the background information here as I am, so that they don’t need me to bring it all together for them into a coherent (and fully documented) whole, which does make sense? Is that the underlying assumption? Because: if it is, it’s false.
Hersh’s journalism is among the best (after all: he went so far as to say, of Christopher Stephens, regarding Hillary Clinton, «there’s no way somebody in that sensitive of a position is not talking to the boss, by some channel»), but it’s certainly not good enough. However, it’s too good to be published any longer in places like the New Yorker. And the reporting by Christof Lehmann was better, and it was issued even earlier than Hersh’s; and it is good enough, because it named names, and it explained motivations, in an honest and forthright way, which is why Lehmann’s piece was published only on a Montenegrin site, and only online, not in a Western print medium, such as the New Yorker. The sites that are owned by members of the Western aristocracy don’t issue reports like that – journalism that’s good enough. They won’t inform the public when a US Secretary of State, and her boss the US President, are the persons actually behind a sarin gas attack they’re blaming on a foreign leader the US aristocrats and their allied foreign aristocrats are determined to topple and replace.
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2 ... ebels.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
ERIC ZUESSE | 28.04.2016 | WORLD
Seymour Hersh Says Hillary Approved Sending Libya’s Sarin to Syrian Rebels
The great investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, in two previous articles in the London Review of Books («Whose Sarin?» and «The Red Line and the Rat Line») has reported that the Obama Administration falsely blamed the government of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad for the sarin gas attack that Obama was trying to use as an excuse to invade Syria; and Hersh pointed to a report from British intelligence saying that the sarin that was used didn’t come from Assad’s stockpiles. Hersh also said that a secret agreement in 2012 was reached between the Obama Administration and the leaders of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, to set up a sarin gas attack and blame it on Assad so that the US could invade and overthrow Assad. «By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria». Hersh didn’t say whether these «arms» included the precursor chemicals for making sarin which were stockpiled in Libya, but there have been multiple independent reports that Libya’s Gaddafi possessed such stockpiles, and also that the US Consulate in Benghazi Libya was operating a «rat line» for Gaddafi’s captured weapons into Syria through Turkey. So, Hersh isn’t the only reporter who has been covering this. Indeed, the investigative journalist Christoph Lehmann headlined on 7 October 2013, «Top US and Saudi Officials responsible for Chemical Weapons in Syria» and reported, on the basis of very different sources than Hersh used, that «Evidence leads directly to the White House, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, CIA Director John Brennan, Saudi Intelligence Chief Prince Bandar, and Saudi Arabia´s Interior Ministry». And, as if that weren’t enough, even the definitive analysis of the evidence that was performed by two leading US analysts, the Lloyd-Postal report, concluded that, «The US Government’s Interpretation of the Technical Intelligence It Gathered Prior to and After the August 21 Attack CANNOT POSSIBLY BE CORRECT». Obama has clearly been lying.
However, now, for the first time, Hersh has implicated Hillary Clinton directly in this «rat line». In an interview with Alternet.org, Hersh was asked about the then-US-Secretary-of-State’s role in the Benghazi Libya US consulate’s operation to collect weapons from Libyan stockpiles and send them through Turkey into Syria for a set-up sarin-gas attack, to be blamed on Assad in order to ‘justify’ the US invading Syria, as the US had invaded Libya to eliminate Gaddafi. Hersh said: «That ambassador who was killed, he was known as a guy, from what I understand, as somebody, who would not get in the way of the CIA. As I wrote, on the day of the mission he was meeting with the CIA base chief and the shipping company. He was certainly involved, aware and witting of everything that was going on. And there’s no way somebody in that sensitive of a position is not talking to the boss, by some channel».
This was, in fact, the Syrian part of the State Department’s Libyan operation, Obama’s operation to set up an excuse for the US doing in Syria what they had already done in Libya.
The interviewer then asked: «In the book [Hersh’s The Killing of Osama bin Laden, just out] you quote a former intelligence official as saying that the White House rejected 35 target sets [for the planned US invasion of Syria] provided by the Joint Chiefs as being insufficiently painful to the Assad regime. (You note that the original targets included military sites only – nothing by way of civilian infrastructure.) Later the White House proposed a target list that included civilian infrastructure. What would the toll to civilians have been if the White House’s proposed strike had been carried out?»
Hersh responded by saying that the US tradition in that regard has long been to ignore civilian casualties; i.e., collateral damage of US attacks is okay or even desired (so as to terrorize the population into surrender) – not an ‘issue’, except, perhaps, for the PR people.
The interviewer asked why Obama is so obsessed to replace Assad in Syria, since «The power vacuum that would ensue would open Syria up to all kinds of jihadi groups»; and Hersh replied that not only he, but the Joint Chiefs of Staff, «nobody could figure out why». He said, «Our policy has always been against him [Assad]. Period». This has actually been the case not only since the Party that Assad leads, the Ba’ath Party, was the subject of a shelved CIA coup-plot in 1957 to overthrow and replace it; but, actually, the CIA’s first coup had been not just planned but was carried out in 1949 in Syria, overthrowing there a democratically elected leader, in order to enable a pipeline for the Sauds’ oil to become built through Syria into the largest oil market, Europe; and, construction of the pipeline started the following year. But, there were then a succession of Syrian coups (domestic instead of by foreign powers – 1954, 1963, 1966, and, finally, in 1970), concluding in the accession to power of Hafez al-Assad during the 1970 coup. And, the Sauds' long-planned Trans-Arabia Pipeline has still not been built. The Saudi royal family, who own the world’s largest oil company, Aramco, don’t want to wait any longer. Obama is the first US President to have seriously tried to carry out their long-desired «regime change» in Syria, so as to enable not only the Sauds’ Trans-Arabian Pipeline to be built, but also to build through Syria the Qatar-Turkey Gas Pipeline that the Thani royal family (friends of the Sauds) who own Qatar want also to be built there. The US is allied with the Saud family (and with their friends, the royal families of Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, and Oman). Russia is allied with the leaders of Syria – as Russia had earlier been allied with Mossadegh in Iran, Arbenz in Guatemala, Allende in Chile, Hussein in Iraq, Gaddafi in Libya, and Yanukovych in Ukraine (all of whom except Syria’s Ba’ath Party, the US has successfully overthrown).
Hersh was wrong to say that «nobody could figure out why» Obama is obsessed with overthrowing Assad and his Ba’ath Party, even if nobody that he spoke with was willing to say why. They have all been hired to do a job, which didn’t change even when the Soviet Union ended and the Warsaw Pact was disbanded; and, anyone who has been at this job for as long as those people have, can pretty well figure out what the job actually is – even if Hersh can’t.
Hersh then said that Obama wanted to fill Syria with foreign jihadists to serve as the necessary ground forces for his planned aerial bombardment there, and, «if you wanted to go there and fight there in 2011-2013, ‘Go, go, go… overthrow Bashar!’ So, they actually pushed a lot of people [jihadists] to go. I don’t think they were paying for them but they certainly gave visas».
However, it’s not actually part of America’s deal with its allies the fundamentalist-Sunni Arabic royal families and the fundamentalist Sunni Erdogan of Turkey, for the US to supply the salaries (to be «paying for them», as Hersh put it there) to those fundamentalist Sunni jihadists – that’s instead the function of the Sauds and of their friends, the other Arab royals, and their friends, to do. (Those are the people who finance the terrorists to perpetrate attacks in the US, Europe, Russia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, India, Nigeria, etc. – i.e., anywhere except in their own countries.) And, Erdogan in Turkey mainly gives their jihadists just safe passage into Syria, and he takes part of the proceeds from the jihadists’ sales of stolen Syrian and Iraqi oil. But, they all work together as a team (with the jihadists sometimes killing each other in the process – that’s even part of the plan) – though each national leader has PR problems at home in order to fool his respective public into thinking that they’re against terrorists, and that only the ‘enemy’ is to blame. (Meanwhile, the aristocrats who supply the «salaries» of the jihadists, walk off with all the money.)
This way, US oil and gas companies will refine, and pipeline into Europe, the Sauds’ oil and the Thanis’ gas, and not only will Russia’s major oil-and-gas market become squeezed away by that, but Obama’s economic sanctions against Russia, plus the yet-further isolation of Russia (as well as of China and the rest of the BRICS countries) by excluding them from Obama’s three mega-trade-deals (TTIP, TPP & TISA), will place the US aristocracy firmly in control of the world, to dominate the 21st Century, as it has dominated ever since the end of WW II.
Then, came this question from Hersh: «Why does America do what it does? Why do we not say to the Russians, Let’s work together?» His interviewer immediately seconded that by repeating it, «So why don’t we work closer with Russia? It seems so rational». Hersh replied simply: «I don’t know». He didn’t venture so much as a guess – not even an educated one. But, when journalists who are as knowledgeable as he, don’t present some credible explanation, to challenge the obvious lies (which make no sense that accords with the blatantly contrary evidence those journalists know of against those lies) that come from people such as Barack Obama, aren’t they thereby – though passively – participating in the fraud, instead of contradicting and challenging it? Or, is the underlying assumption, there: The general public is going to be as deeply immersed in the background information here as I am, so that they don’t need me to bring it all together for them into a coherent (and fully documented) whole, which does make sense? Is that the underlying assumption? Because: if it is, it’s false.
Hersh’s journalism is among the best (after all: he went so far as to say, of Christopher Stephens, regarding Hillary Clinton, «there’s no way somebody in that sensitive of a position is not talking to the boss, by some channel»), but it’s certainly not good enough. However, it’s too good to be published any longer in places like the New Yorker. And the reporting by Christof Lehmann was better, and it was issued even earlier than Hersh’s; and it is good enough, because it named names, and it explained motivations, in an honest and forthright way, which is why Lehmann’s piece was published only on a Montenegrin site, and only online, not in a Western print medium, such as the New Yorker. The sites that are owned by members of the Western aristocracy don’t issue reports like that – journalism that’s good enough. They won’t inform the public when a US Secretary of State, and her boss the US President, are the persons actually behind a sarin gas attack they’re blaming on a foreign leader the US aristocrats and their allied foreign aristocrats are determined to topple and replace.
-
simpleton
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 3080
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
clinton....trump...obama...bush....clinton again...bush again...reagan....nixon...kennedy...ford....carter....truman....roosevelt.... (not necessarily in their proper order) were all corrupt and gave power to the beast...... so you know how I voted...
-
simpleton
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 3080
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
Or better yet I'll take clear back to Martin van Buren ...he was not any good either....and neither was Lincoln...
-
simpleton
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 3080
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
Joseph Smith was the best candidate for president the US ever had...George Washington was the best president we ever had....
But now "when the wicked rule the people mourn"
But now "when the wicked rule the people mourn"
-
Col. Flagg
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 16961
- Location: Utah County
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
Our nation was lost to secret combinations and conspiring men when George Bush Sr. was elected in 1988... it's been Gadiantons ever since.
-
Silver
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
Col. House and Woodrow Wilson had pretty good Gadianton bona fides, too.Col. Flagg wrote:Our nation was lost to secret combinations and conspiring men when George Bush Sr. was elected in 1988... it's been Gadiantons ever since.
-
lundbaek
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 11123
- Location: Mesa, Arizona
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
Let's not leave out FDR. Curtis Dall, for years a son-in-law of Franklin D. Roosevelt, wrote the following observations in his book FDR - My Exploited Father-In-Law: "For a long time I felt that F.D.R. had developed many thoughts and ideas that were his own to benefit the country, the U.S.A. But he didn’t. Most of this thoughts, his political ammunition as it were, was carefully manufactured for him in advance by the CFR - One-World Money group."
Last edited by lundbaek on May 2nd, 2016, 6:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Ezra
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4357
- Location: Not telling
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
And since then exempt 2 elections they have had a presidents or vp in office.Silver wrote:Col. House and Woodrow Wilson had pretty good Gadianton bona fides, too.Col. Flagg wrote:Our nation was lost to secret combinations and conspiring men when George Bush Sr. was elected in 1988... it's been Gadiantons ever since.
-
kennyhs
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1537
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
Oh good grief, this thinking is what gave us our last Pres., come one!simpleton wrote:Or better yet I'll take clear back to Martin van Buren ...he was not any good either....and neither was Lincoln...
-
OCDMOM
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1418
-
BTH&T
- captain of 100
- Posts: 906
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
By reading your post are we to assume that this is just another election and as long as it's not Clinton we're golden?kennyhs wrote:Oh good grief, this thinking is what gave us our last Pres., come one!simpleton wrote:Or better yet I'll take clear back to Martin van Buren ...he was not any good either....and neither was Lincoln...
A couple of questions;
Do you think the country is where the Lord wants it to be and we are still a blessed nation, were we ever a blessed nation?
what are your thoughts on where we are as a nation?
-
lundbaek
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 11123
- Location: Mesa, Arizona
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
If we had a Congress that would hold the POTUS to his job description in Article Two of the Constitution and adhere to its own job description in Article One...well, dream on. That would require voters who would insist on such compliance.
-
BTH&T
- captain of 100
- Posts: 906
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
Excellent point, we truly do get the Gov't we deserve (or are content with)lundbaek wrote:If we had a Congress that would hold the POTUS to his job description in Article Two of the Constitution and adhere to its own job description in Article One...well, dream on. That would require voters who would insist on such compliance.
-
lundbaek
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 11123
- Location: Mesa, Arizona
Re: Will it matter, Clinton or Trump, or?
By far most members of the LDS Church of my acquaintance are doing their best to live the principles of the gospel with which they are familiar. But they seem totally oblivious of these tfour things:
Our responsibility to learn, uphold and abide by the principles of the U.S. Constitution. To my mind the most powerful statement in this regard was made by President Ezra Taft Benson in the October 1987 Church General Conference, when he said that “We must learn the principles of the Constitution in the tradition of the Founding Fathers.” As far as I know, since 1987 there has been no actual clear instruction from the First Presidency about learning and abiding by the principles of the Constitution and protecting it from further destruction. However, in previous years we were given by prophets such statements as "We therefore commend and encourage every person and every group who is sincerely seeking to study Constitutional principles and awaken a sleeping and apathetic people to the alarming conditions that are rapidly advancing about us."
(David O. McKay, April 1966 General Conference); and "We urge members of the Church and all Americans to begin now to reflect more intently on the meaning and importance of the Constitution, and of adherence to its principles.
(President Harold B. Lee, November 1973, The First Presidency Statement on the Constitution, The Ensign).
Secret combinations and threats to our freedoms Speaking in the Church General Conference in October 1988, President Benson said "I testify that wickedness is rapidly expanding in every segment of our society. It is more highly organized, more cleverly disguised, and more powerfully promoted than ever before. Secret combinations lusting for power, gain and glory are flourishing. A secret combination that seeks to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations and countries is increasing its evil influence and control over America and the entire world.” And more recently, President Boyd K. Packer, in the August 2010 Ensign, Pg. 23 said "We live in a time of war, that spiritual war that will never end. Moroni warned us that the secret combinations begun by Gadianton ‘are had among all people. . . . Wherefore, O ye Gentiles [and the term gentile in that place in the Book of Mormon refers to us in our generation], it is wisdom in God that these things should be shown unto you, that thereby ye may repent of your sins, and suffer not that these murderous combinations shall get above you. . . . Wherefore, the Lord commandeth you, when ye shall see these things come among you that ye shall awake to a sense of your awful situation, because of this secret combination which shall be among you. [Ether 8:20, 23–24]”
The proper role of government It seems not much has been said by LDS Church authorities on this subject. However, in his October 1968 General Conference address “The Proper Role of Government”, Ezra Taft Benson said some things deserving our serious consideration. The following statements should provide a general start into this subject:
“It is generally agreed that the most important single function of government is to secure the rights and freedoms of individual citizens.”
“Since God created man with certain inalienable rights, and man, in turn created government to help secure and safeguard those rights, it follows that man is superior to the creature which he created. Mas is superior to government and should remain master over it, not the other way around.”
“The proper function of government is limited only to those spheres of activity within which the individual has the right to act. By deriving its just powers from the governed, government becomes primarily a mechanism for defense against bodily harm, theft, and involuntary servitude. It cannot claim the power to redistribute the wealth or force reluctant citizens to perform acts of charity against their will.”
“In general terms, therefore, the proper role of government includes such defensive activities as maintaining national military and local police forces for protection against loss of life, loss of property, and loss ofliberty at the hands of either foreign despots or domestic criminals.”
Education Specifically, learning of events past and present that impact our lives, especially our rights to life, liberty, and control of property. In the October 2009 General Conference President Uchtdorf stated that “For members of the Church education is not merely a good idea, it is a commandment. We are to learn “Of things both in heaven and in the earth, and under the earth; things which have been, things which are, things which must shortly come to pass;”” (D&C 88:79). Verse 79 was referenced in a foot note in the conference report in its entirety. The remainder reads: “things which are at home, things which are abroad; the wars and the perplexities of the nations, and the judgments which are on the land; and a knowledge also of countries and of kingdoms--”
Our responsibility to learn, uphold and abide by the principles of the U.S. Constitution. To my mind the most powerful statement in this regard was made by President Ezra Taft Benson in the October 1987 Church General Conference, when he said that “We must learn the principles of the Constitution in the tradition of the Founding Fathers.” As far as I know, since 1987 there has been no actual clear instruction from the First Presidency about learning and abiding by the principles of the Constitution and protecting it from further destruction. However, in previous years we were given by prophets such statements as "We therefore commend and encourage every person and every group who is sincerely seeking to study Constitutional principles and awaken a sleeping and apathetic people to the alarming conditions that are rapidly advancing about us."
(David O. McKay, April 1966 General Conference); and "We urge members of the Church and all Americans to begin now to reflect more intently on the meaning and importance of the Constitution, and of adherence to its principles.
(President Harold B. Lee, November 1973, The First Presidency Statement on the Constitution, The Ensign).
Secret combinations and threats to our freedoms Speaking in the Church General Conference in October 1988, President Benson said "I testify that wickedness is rapidly expanding in every segment of our society. It is more highly organized, more cleverly disguised, and more powerfully promoted than ever before. Secret combinations lusting for power, gain and glory are flourishing. A secret combination that seeks to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations and countries is increasing its evil influence and control over America and the entire world.” And more recently, President Boyd K. Packer, in the August 2010 Ensign, Pg. 23 said "We live in a time of war, that spiritual war that will never end. Moroni warned us that the secret combinations begun by Gadianton ‘are had among all people. . . . Wherefore, O ye Gentiles [and the term gentile in that place in the Book of Mormon refers to us in our generation], it is wisdom in God that these things should be shown unto you, that thereby ye may repent of your sins, and suffer not that these murderous combinations shall get above you. . . . Wherefore, the Lord commandeth you, when ye shall see these things come among you that ye shall awake to a sense of your awful situation, because of this secret combination which shall be among you. [Ether 8:20, 23–24]”
The proper role of government It seems not much has been said by LDS Church authorities on this subject. However, in his October 1968 General Conference address “The Proper Role of Government”, Ezra Taft Benson said some things deserving our serious consideration. The following statements should provide a general start into this subject:
“It is generally agreed that the most important single function of government is to secure the rights and freedoms of individual citizens.”
“Since God created man with certain inalienable rights, and man, in turn created government to help secure and safeguard those rights, it follows that man is superior to the creature which he created. Mas is superior to government and should remain master over it, not the other way around.”
“The proper function of government is limited only to those spheres of activity within which the individual has the right to act. By deriving its just powers from the governed, government becomes primarily a mechanism for defense against bodily harm, theft, and involuntary servitude. It cannot claim the power to redistribute the wealth or force reluctant citizens to perform acts of charity against their will.”
“In general terms, therefore, the proper role of government includes such defensive activities as maintaining national military and local police forces for protection against loss of life, loss of property, and loss ofliberty at the hands of either foreign despots or domestic criminals.”
Education Specifically, learning of events past and present that impact our lives, especially our rights to life, liberty, and control of property. In the October 2009 General Conference President Uchtdorf stated that “For members of the Church education is not merely a good idea, it is a commandment. We are to learn “Of things both in heaven and in the earth, and under the earth; things which have been, things which are, things which must shortly come to pass;”” (D&C 88:79). Verse 79 was referenced in a foot note in the conference report in its entirety. The remainder reads: “things which are at home, things which are abroad; the wars and the perplexities of the nations, and the judgments which are on the land; and a knowledge also of countries and of kingdoms--”
