User Answers

HAPPY THANKSGIVING!

There will be no blog today as it is a holiday in the USA, Thanksgiving, or as we sometimes call it, "turkey day." So, be with your family and friends today, have a Happy Thanksgiving, and I'll see you tomorrow. BTW, there will be a vidchat tomorrow!

HAPPY THANKSGIVING!

26 thoughts on “HAPPY THANKSGIVING!”

  1. The interesting thing about Thanksgiving is as a national holiday. We should be serving soul food it came about as a national holiday because of the American Civil War. Todays Republican Party betray it’s founding principals but it’s been doing that with it’s partner in crime the Democratic Party. Have a Thanksgiving if you can stand the stench of corruption that’s fast enveloping the Empire.

    1. Marcos,

      I don’t follow you. The Republican Party has been the party of Big Business, and therefore corruption, from the beginning. Big Business and corruption ARE the Republican Party’s founding principles, and arguably no political party has ever remained truer to its founding principles.

      For 70 years before 1860, the same parasitic, opportunistic, money-grubbing faction went through many short-lived guises, from Federalists to National Republicans, to Whigs, to Republicans, but never could supplant the strict constitutional order impressively maintained (given the state of fallen man) by the original Democratic Party (not in any way, shape, or form to be confused with the Democratic Party of the 20th and 21st centuries). The guiding star of this parasitic element was “internal improvements” which was the 19th century term for corporate welfare, which, of course, is the root of the most pervasive corruption possible. Only with Lincoln and the new Republican guise did this element finally succeed in supplanting the Democrats’ constitutional order, and therefore in overthrowing the rule of law as established by the founding fathers.

      And if you are suggesting that the Republican Party was an abolitionist party, that is absurdly false. Neither Lincoln nor the Republican Party would have been caught dead with the abolitionist label. They merely stood for the non-extension of slavery into the territories (a cynical ploy to gain the white labor vote). There had been an abolitionist party, the Free Soil Party, but it never acquired much support or popularity.

      So if you want to tie Thanksgiving to Lincoln and the Republican Party, then we are giving thanks for the overthrow of the constitutional order, and therefore the rule of law, and all for the sake of MONEY, MONEY, MONEY. We had a fantastic republic until Lincoln and the Republican Party destroyed it. For this reason, arguably no one better represents Republican “principles” today than the Bush Crime Family. As should be obvious by now, there is no getting rid of the Bush Crime Family in our joke of a polity today, and this is because there is no getting rid of that overpowering “stench of corruption” for which we give thanks to Lincoln and his Republican Party on this day.

      1. Today we should give thanks for minds free and clear of official lies and propaganda, and for sites such as this which only appeal to minds free and clear of official lies and propaganda.

      2. Firstly, it is highly unlikely Lincoln would have been at one with either of the two Bush presidencies.

        Secondly, the forces against which Lincoln contended, were are work long before Lincoln’s presidency.

        Thirdly, totally contrary to your malicious assertions, and evidenced by Lincoln’s personal concern for the future of America, Lincoln writes, “I see in the future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country … Corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the republic is destroyed.” [President Abraham Lincoln, November 21, 1864]

        To the contrary, Lincoln was one of America’s greatest patriots, who did all in his power to save the republic.
        Indeed, what America needs today, is another Lincoln.

        1. Lincoln was the leading trial lawyer in Illinois. Nothing more needs to be said (or would need to be said but for the ridiculously absurd legend spun by the “victors” over the past 150 years). The LAST thing America needs today, or ANY day, is another trial lawyer.

          1. To the contrary…

            Neither the North nor South were “victors” in the Civil War. With the “Act of 1871” and the founding of the FED and the IRS now ensconced within the structure to which this Act gave legal form, the MONEY powers opposed to Lincoln won. Just because one is a “trial lawyer,” does not make them bad. Besides, unlike all lawyers today, Lincoln was a “self-educated” man, born in Kentucky and spoke out often and repeatedly AGAINST slavery.

            To be sure, Lincoln attempted to balance on a rail’s edge his efforts to reach a diplomatic accommodation between ardent anti-slavery factions in the North, and pro-slavery factions in the South. These efforts however, came to an abrupt end when military forces of the South fired upon Fort Sumter.

            It was the South that needed the Civil War, and it was the South with the support of Great Britain that fully expected to win the war. In fact, rather than the long drawn out conflict which ensued, they expected the war to be over within months. In fact, if not for the intervention of the Russian Tsar on behalf of the North, an invasion of British troops from Canada would have been imminent, the North would have been defeated and the republic split into two post war bankster indebted entities. Whereas Lincoln preserved, albeit temporarily, the republic, both he AND Jefferson Davis inevitably lost the war. In other words, the “ridiculously absurd legend” to which you refer, is the the North actually “won” the Civil War. This legend has kept the North & South divided to this day.

          2. Elm,

            This is in response to your 2:23 am post on 11/28, but will land in the wrong place:

            I’m sorry but it is indeed “ridiculously absurd” to contend that there was no victor in the War for Southern Independence, and I am not going to waste my time addressing your points. Declare victory and go home if you wish, but please start reading history with a critical eye if you do.

            But more significantly, it is as “ridiculously absurd” as can be to state as fact that the “money powers” were “opposed to Lincoln.” In reality, that is a highly disputed point, but, in TRUTH, it should be clearly understood that Lincoln represented that very same parasitic, money-grubbing faction which, under previous guises of Federalists, National Democrats, and Whigs, had always supported the First and Second Banks of the United States (i.e. any and all American central banks). Any reasonable mind would err on the side of caution and conclude that it was likely Lincoln who was the tool of the “money powers.” But that absurd Lincoln legend of the undisputed victors still too often prevents clear thinking in too many individuals.

            So if Lincoln was likely the tool of the money powers, why was he killed? Well, personally I’ve always wondered about those greenbacks he printed, whether they did him in (just as Kennedy’s greenbacks may have done him in). A broken clock is still right twice a day, and, yes, even a trial lawyer might reasonably be right on occasion. Lincoln, the law-disrespecting, constitution-killing tyrant that he clearly was, was right to print those greenbacks, thereby cutting the money-grubbing, parasitic element behind him and his faction out of the loop when all their efforts were always geared toward ensuring that they were ever in the loop, continually sucking the wealth out of the country while assuming ever increasing control over it (and control always is the ultimate goal of these and all other psychopaths). Lincoln double-crossed human garbage and I suspect that may well have cost him his life. No Lincoln’s sacrifice does not redeem him, but no man, no matter how evil or wrong-intentioned should ever suffer at the hands of human garbage. Psychopathic human garbage should never have any power, any CONTROL over anybody…ever. THIS point should be everyone’s exclusive focus in opposing any New World Order, not whether Lincoln was right or not.

          3. We certainly can agree on this….

            “Psychopathic human garbage should never have any power, any CONTROL over anybody‚Ķever.”

            As for those against whom Lincoln contended, see the movie Lincoln, Vampire Hunter.

            As for Lincoln playing the bankster’s tune?
            Even less than likely. Abraham Lincoln was of the same moral stature and patriotic disposition as George Washington or a John Adams. He was a man of his times.

      3. PS: As for your Democrats constitutional order, “Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty (so-called).” Plato

        Democrats love to play both sides of the coin — first of license, and then of an authoritarian tyranny. Democrats also love to rule by so-called “public opinion,” a euphemism for rule by the mob.

        The pertinent question for us today relative to Lincoln is, would Abraham Lincoln have worked with the New World Order, against the republic he strove so ardently to preserve, or would he have opposed it? I think we all know the answer to this question.

        1. You need to read for comprehension. I could not have made it clearer that we had a republic, not a democracy, and that the Democratic Party of the first 70 years maintained a republic, not a democracy. And I also clearly stated that the Democratic Party of the 20th and 21st century has had absolutely nothing in common with the Democratic Party of the 19th century, which so successfully maintained the constitutional republic until the advent of Lincoln and the Republican Party. So nothing you state in your first two paragraphs bears any actual relation to anything I stated above. You are merely addressing your strawman. Read what I wrote, not what you wish I had written.

          Lincoln is unambiguously the closest thing this country has ever had to a dictator, and whether you call a hypothetical contemporary Lincoln dictatorship the New World Order or not is kind of irrelevant. It is all the same thing with no rule of law to prevent fallen man from imposing his arbitrary will on everybody else. That is the very root of the problem with any New World Order, and anybody who can support that is truly no enemy of said New World Order, all claims to the contrary notwithstanding.

          1. To the contrary, the dictators were operating in the South, and aligned with the interests the Knights of The Golden Circle to found a slave empire throughout the South, encompassing a 2,500 mile radius, through central America, the West Indies, slave states as well as contested states. The goal was to achieve a monopoly over the labor intensive commodities of tobacco, sugar and cotton using slave labor. So contrary to your false assertion, the Civil War was about two things — slavery and union. Indeed, without these two incendiary catalysts, the Civil War would never have occurred.

            As for Democrats, of either yesterday or today, they easily encourage and inculcate a popular skewed perception, America was founded as a democracy, which of course has been a most useful obfuscation.

          2. Question: With Lincoln preserving the republic as intended by the founding fathers, and having rejected the offers of the New York Bankers high interest finance, how would a Lincoln in your mind fit into the current New World Order? Did not all of the founding fathers, juxtaposed with Great Britain also “impose” or assert their “wills?” Would you then also, refer to them as “dictators?”

            War is war, and Lincoln was offered little chance to advance his plans for post war reconstruction and his desired return to normalcy and reconciliation between North and South. After Lincoln’s assassination, what could he have done about anything? But this was the idea, wasn’t it?

          3. Elm,

            Regarding your 2:37 am:

            Your “slave empire” argument is as absurdly false as all your other arguments rooted in the victors’ fantastical 150 year old legend. Mechanization was rapidly rendering slavery unnecessarily costly and, therefore, OBSOLETE. Slavery had already been abolished in most of the world and was living on borrowed time in the last few places which still had it. No war was ever necessary to eliminate something which was very rapidly disappearing on its own, thanks to technological advancement. This is common sense. This is black and white without the slightest trace of gray. There is absolutely nothing to discuss here, and never has been. Yet this ridiculously absurd discussion continues thanks to the completely irrational and bogus fairy tale concocted and maintained by the victors over the past 150 years.

            And let us be crystal clear about something else. The 1/3 of the national population living in the Southern states was being forced by the federal government through high tariffs to provide fully 2/3 of federal tax revenues, while deriving no benefit whatsoever from those high tariffs erected exclusively to protect Northern manufactures…quite the contrary. None but a few radicals of the day cared more than a whit about slavery (this may be sad but, regardless, it is the fully documented and well established truth). The ONLY reason Lincoln and the Republicans committed that naked military aggression in invading the neighboring country to the south was, certainly not to free any slaves as the absurd legend dictates, but quite obviously and understandably to ensure that that 1/3 of the (previous) national population to the south CONTINUED to provide that 2/3 of federal tax revenues against their will, which was so critical to their money-grubbing industrialization scheme vis-a-vis British competition, and which naturally provided so much graft for all the myriad corrupted parties concerned in the North.

            Again, this is as black and white as can be without the slightest trace of gray. It is fallen human nature and perfectly understandable for anybody who has lived here on planet earth for any period of time. But for the absurd fairy tales of the victors, there never would have been anything to discuss here at any time. But alas….

            If you still refuse to forget the official fairy tales and think for yourself for a change, Elm, then simply declare victory and go home. I have long since lost any and all interest, at this late stage of the game, in arguing that the sky is blue to brainwashed (through the edjukashun system) individuals who continue to steadfastly maintain that it is green. Life really is too short.

          4. In response to your assertion, Delurkin, that, “Mechanization was rapidly rendering slavery unnecessarily costly and, therefore, OBSOLETE.”

            To the contrary, prior to an introduction of the cotton gin, i.e., “mechanization,” slavery and a demand for slaver were on the DECLINE. With the coming of the cotton gin however, “suddenly cotton became a profitable crop, transforming the southern economy and changing the dynamics of slavery. The first federal census of 1790 counted 697,897 slaves; by 1810, there were 1.2 million slaves, a 70 percent increase.” So, contrary to your assertions, “with an introduction of the cotton gin, and mechanization, this simply made slavery more profitable,” sort of like the multiplier effects of technology and mechanization on labor today.

  2. May we all have a Thoughtful Thanksgiving…

    “May the sun bring you new energy by day,
    May the moon softly restore you at night,
    May the rain wash away your worries,
    May the breeze blow new strength into your being,
    May you walk gently through the world
    and know its beauties all the days of your life.”

    Apache Blessing

  3. There are many things to be grateful for and GDS is one of them. My heartfelt thanks and appreciation to you Dr Farrell and Daniel for everything you so generously offer … and to you, the many contributors who make coming here so enlightening and entertaining. Best wishes to all for a happy holiday!

    1. Margaret, you took the words out of my mouth. Many thanks, Dr. Farrell, for your refreshingly courageous intellectual independence and your selfless pursuit of truth rather than ego. Thank you for providing this website as a sanctuary for all of us nauseatingly weary of the vanity, jingoism, willfully conceited ignorance, insipidity, and juvenile obsession with toys, sex, and gold that has clamped it’s hold on our contemporaries like a religion. May you and yours be truly blessed, and may you continue to be a shining light in the darkness for all of us for many years to come.

    2. We don’t celebrate Thanksgiving here in Australia, but may I take this opportunity to second everything Margaret (and Button) has said.

      Finding your site was the best gift I could possibly wish for, and I thank you for so freely and willingly giving us your time, and sharing your vast knowledge.

      I thank you for this with all my heart.

Comments are closed.