Words of courage and commitment ...

Gelisgesti
Maybe I have missed your drift. But are you suggesting we take up arms against the government? I should remind you the the American public has it in their power to change a government if they don't like through the vote.

Gelisgesti,

Exactly what "great nation are we referring to? Would one be accurate to assume it is the United States of America?

In reply to your:

"If todays citizens came to an event 'in the course of human events', that required them to take whatever action was necessary to defend their freedom, what would be the outcome?"

Are you referring to civil war brought about by say, citizens refusing to pay taxes or an International conflict of the Iraqi, North Korean, or even Afghani type?

JM

The first paragraph in my thread is from the declaration of independence so I am speaking of the USA. The question was 'would todays citizen recognize if they were being stripped of their rights'?
As far as voting, Iraq elected Sadam with an incredible 100% of the votes cast while in the USA our 'appointed' leader got half a million votes less than his adversary. Between the two, Sadam or Bush, who would be the more legitimate leader as far as the vote count?

Our leader has us in debt and still wants to spend a trillion dollars on a war against a countrty of people that have for the best part suffered for 12 years due to our actions. Those people will pay while Sadam will be somewhere in hiding and will die of old age, not starvation.

What is wrong with a peacefull resolution? Shouldn't we at least look?

Good question, ge. I wonder if it takes something up close and personal to get the ire in the blood, and that without such an impetus, most good people would prefer to do nothing? Even if it meant surrendering some of our freedoms/civil rights?

Peaceful solution is the best, but it is not always possible. The Muslim Hadith contains an interesting story: when Muhammad had a feud with the Kureish tribe (they were pagans by the time), at first they were stronger than his troops were. He signed with them a peace treaty, and in meantime strengthened his military force. When he felt himself strong enough to win the feud, he surprisingly attacked the enemies, defeated them and killed or enslaved all those that refused to convert to Islam. Kureishite will for peace turned against them...

Gelisgesti, as regards your statement:



One must consider the legitimacy of the entire voting process in a given election. There are those that would look at the Iraqi elections with a jaundiced eye if for any reason because of a lack of an opposition. Asking simple questions such as: What were the opposition's party platform and where did they stand on certain issues as opposed to Saddam and his party? I suspect that if one posed such questions to an average Iraqi citizen one would be greeted with blank stares.
So, accorded conventional democratic procedures such as in our country or France or Germany, the Iraq election was illegitimate and no comparison between G.W Bush and Saddam presents itself. Ya gotta have at least two guys runnin for the same post!

In answer to your question, there is no problem in this country with citizens recognizing their rights and any attempt to withdraw them.
The public media has always been successfully employed as a watchdog in this respect. However, problems can arise when citizens are either too lazy to speak out or are caught up in the latest hysterical fad. Case in point is the new "Patriot" law that comes close to marshal law in suspending such rights as Habeas Corpus and foregoing search warrants to get wiretaps for certain targeted individuals. Some say this is necessary, others see a slippery slope leading to additional abuses. For a brief discussion related to this see this article in the NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/24/opinion/24LEWI.html?pagewanted=1

JM

In the 2000 election five candidates spent just short of $370,000,000 trying to win the election. In the end it came down to .... I can't really call it a win so I will call it a loss ..... a loss for America a loss of faith in the system that has worked for over 200 years.

The redcoats exercised their tyranny at the point of a gun .... more direct and certainly more visable ........ I think I prefer the gun ... it is more honest.

There are some that actually prefer tyranny.

The so called fathers/founderders of USA are
cowards.
Rich.
and conservatives. pure.
by the word Conservative i mean inhuman