Side 3 af 14 FørsteFørste 12345613 ... SidsteSidste
Viser resultater 31 til 45 af 204

Emner: Dagens citat

  1. #31
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Dec 2001
    Indlæg
    2,361
    Att: Begbie.

    At frygte gøgl er at overleve.
    H. C. Andersen
    -----------------

    Du har nappet det fra et klistermærke, ik' ??

    mvh
    Klaus A
    Death by football!

  2. #32
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Oct 2002
    Indlæg
    1,641
    (At Dixie Dean's funeral) "I know this is a sad occasion but I think that Dixie would be amazed to know that even in death he could draw a bigger crowd than Everton can on a Saturday Afternoon."
    -Bill Shankly-


    orb.
    If wars can be started by lies - they can be stopped by truth. (Julian Assange)

  3. #33
    Tilmeldingsdato
    May 2002
    Indlæg
    1,374
    Att. A

    Jepper!

    Set på bardisken på Pilegaarden. Der står desuden med store bogstaver DØ GØGLERSVIN! over citatet - og det er jo så smukt så smukt.

    Mvh
    Begbie

  4. #34
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Nov 2001
    Indlæg
    3,550
    "Now, this bell tolling softly for another, says to me: Thou must die.

    Perchance he for whom this bell tolls may be so ill, as that he knows not it tolls for him; and perchance I may think myself so much better than I am, as that they who are about me, and see my state, may have caused it to toll for me, and I know not that. The church is Catholic, universal, so are all her actions; all that she does belongs to all. When she baptizes a child, that action concerns me; for that child is thereby connected to that body which is my head too, and ingrafted into that body whereof I am a member. And when she buries a man, that action concerns me: all mankind is of one author, and is one volume; when one man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so translated; God employs several translators; some pieces are translated by age, some by sickness, some by war, some by justice; but God's hand is in every translation, and his hand shall bind up all our scattered leaves again for that library where every book shall lie open to one another. As therefore the bell that rings to a sermon calls not upon the preacher only, but upon the congregation to come, so this bell calls us all; but how much more me, who am brought so near the door by this sickness. There was a contention as far as a suit (in which both piety and dignity, religion and estimation, were mingled), which of the religious orders should ring to prayers first in the morning; and it was determined, that they should ring first that rose earliest. If we understand aright the dignity of this bell that tolls for our evening prayer, we would be glad to make it ours by rising early, in that application, that it might be ours as well as his, whose indeed it is. The bell doth toll for him that thinks it doth; and though it intermit again, yet from that minute that that occasion wrought upon him, he is united to God. Who casts not up his eye to the sun when it rises? but who takes off his eye from a comet when that breaks out? Who bends not his ear to any bell which upon any occasion rings? but who can remove it from that bell which is passing a piece of himself out of this world?

    No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were: any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. Neither can we call this a begging of misery, or a borrowing of misery, as though we were not miserable enough of ourselves, but must fetch in more from the next house, in taking upon us the misery of our neighbours. Truly it were an excusable covetousness if we did, for affliction is a treasure, and scarce any man hath enough of it. No man hath affliction enough that is not matured and ripened by and made fit for God by that affliction. If a man carry treasure in bullion, or in a wedge of gold, and have none coined into current money, his treasure will not defray him as he travels. Tribulation is treasure in the nature of it, but it is not current money in the use of it, except we get nearer and nearer our home, heaven, by it. Another man may be sick too, and sick to death, and this affliction may lie in his bowels, as gold in a mine, and be of no use to him; but this bell, that tells me of his affliction, digs out and applies that gold to me: if by this consideration of another's danger I take mine own into contemplation, and so secure myself, by making my recourse to my God, who is our only security."

    John Donne

  5. #35
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Nov 2001
    Indlæg
    816

    Du CX

    "Fat dig i korthed"
    af NN
    "Impulser, det er noget kvinder får når de kører plasticken gennem revnen" - Henrik Rønsbo
    PeterMT's Avatar

  6. #36
    zebos er offline can't put this day back
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Jan 2002
    Indlæg
    2,837
    THE CANONIZATION.

    FOR God's sake hold your tongue, and let me love ;
    Or chide my palsy, or my gout ;
    My five gray hairs, or ruin'd fortune flout ;
    With wealth your state, your mind with arts improve ;
    Take you a course, get you a place,
    Observe his Honour, or his Grace ;
    Or the king's real, or his stamp'd face
    Contemplate ; what you will, approve,
    So you will let me love.

    Alas ! alas ! who's injured by my love?
    What merchant's ships have my sighs drown'd?
    Who says my tears have overflow'd his ground?
    When did my colds a forward spring remove?
    When did the heats which my veins fill
    Add one more to the plaguy bill?
    Soldiers find wars, and lawyers find out still
    Litigious men, which quarrels move,
    Though she and I do love.

    Call's what you will, we are made such by love ;
    Call her one, me another fly,
    We're tapers too, and at our own cost die,
    And we in us find th' eagle and the dove.
    The phoenix riddle hath more wit
    By us ; we two being one, are it ;
    So, to one neutral thing both sexes fit.
    We die and rise the same, and prove
    Mysterious by this love.

    We can die by it, if not live by love,
    And if unfit for tomb or hearse
    Our legend be, it will be fit for verse ;
    And if no piece of chronicle we prove,
    We'll build in sonnets pretty rooms ;
    As well a well-wrought urn becomes
    The greatest ashes, as half-acre tombs,
    And by these hymns, all shall approve
    Us canonized for love ;

    And thus invoke us, "You, whom reverend love
    Made one another's hermitage ;
    You, to whom love was peace, that now is rage ;
    Who did the whole world's soul contract, and drove
    Into the glasses of your eyes ;
    So made such mirrors, and such spies,
    That they did all to you epitomize—
    Countries, towns, courts beg from above
    A pattern of your love."

    Af John Donne

    Mvh

    zebos
    At the first world's fair, the 1851 Crystal Palace Exhibition in London, trinkets abounded, everything from handbills to small cards, all emblazoned with the image of the Crystal Palace.

  7. #37
    zebos er offline can't put this day back
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Jan 2002
    Indlæg
    2,837

    Onsdagens citat :

    Zuma i Politiken :

    "90 perfekte minutter mod Brøndby med mål og godt spil kan vende alting rundt for mig. Derfor her jeg også tænkt mig at spille den her kamp, som om den var min sidste nogensinde." -citat slut.

    Mvh

    zebos
    At the first world's fair, the 1851 Crystal Palace Exhibition in London, trinkets abounded, everything from handbills to small cards, all emblazoned with the image of the Crystal Palace.

  8. #38
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Mar 2002
    Indlæg
    63
    "If the sun comes up tomorrow, it is only because of men of good will. That is all there is between us and the devil."

    Thirteen Days (2000).

    Lad os så håbe på en smuk solopgang over København i morgen!

    Post-Hippie, der nu slet ingen kontrol har over sine kropsfunktioner.
    "I'm not normally a religious man, but if you're up there, save me, Superman!"

  9. #39
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Nov 2001
    Indlæg
    3,550
    "[H]e and all the rest of mankind are one community, make up one society, distinct from all other creatures. And were it not for the corruption and vitiousness of degenerate men, there would be no need of any other; no necessity that men should separate from this great and natural community, and by positive agreements combine into smaller and divided associations."

    John Locke

  10. #40
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Mar 2002
    Indlæg
    63
    "In taking revenge, a man is but even with his enemy; but in passing it over, he is superior."

    Sir Francis Bacon

    "Jo senere vi kommer foran, jo kortere tid har de andre til at score"

    Ikke Sir Francis Bacon

    Post-Hippie.
    "I'm not normally a religious man, but if you're up there, save me, Superman!"

  11. #41
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Nov 2001
    Indlæg
    3,550
    "...I have, therefore, chosen this time and this place to discuss a topic on which ignorance too often abounds and the truth is too rarely perceived — yet it is the most important topic on earth: world peace.

    What kind of peace do I mean? What kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children — not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women — not merely peace in our time but peace for all time.

    I speak of peace because of the new face of war. Total war makes no sense in an age when great powers can maintain large and relatively invulnerable nuclear forces and refuse to surrender without resort to those forces. It makes no sense in an age when a single nuclear weapon contains almost ten times the explosive force delivered by all the allied air forces in the Second World War. It makes no sense in an age when the deadly poisons produced by a nuclear exchange would be carried by wind and water and soil and seed to the far corners of the globe and to generations yet unborn.

    Today the expenditure of billions of dollars every year on weapons acquired for the purpose of making sure we never need to use them is essential to keeping the peace. But surely the acquisition of such idle stockpiles — which can only destroy and never create — is not the only, much less the most efficient, means of assuring peace.

    I speak of peace, therefore, as the necessary rational end of rational men. I realize that the pursuit of peace is not as dramatic as the pursuit of war — and frequently the words of the pursuer fall on deaf ears. But we have no more urgent task.

    Some say that it is useless to speak of world peace or world law or world disarmament — and that it will be useless until the leaders of the Soviet Union adopt a more enlightened attitude. I hope they do. I believe we can help them do it. But I also believe that we must reexamine our own attitude — as individuals and as a Nation — for our attitude is as essential as theirs. And every graduate of this school, every thoughtful citizen who despairs of war and wishes to bring peace, should begin by looking inward — by examining his own attitude toward the possibilities of peace, toward the Soviet Union, toward the course of the cold war and toward freedom and peace here at home.

    First: Let us examine our attitude toward peace itself. Too many of us think it is impossible. Too many think it unreal. But that is a dangerous, defeatist belief. It leads to the conclusion that war is inevitable — that mankind is doomed — that we are gripped by forces we cannot control.

    We need not accept that view. Our problems are manmade — therefore, they can be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings. Man's reason and spirit have often solved the seemingly unsolvable — and we believe they can do it again.

    I am not referring to the absolute, infinite concept of peace and good will of which some fantasies and fanatics dream. I do not deny the value of hopes and dreams but we merely invite discouragement and incredulity by making that our only and immediate goal.

    Let us focus instead on a more practical, more attainable peace — based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions — on a series of concrete actions and effective agreements which are in the interest of all concerned. There is no single, simple key to this peace — no grand or magic formula to be adopted by one or two powers. Genuine peace must be the product of many nations, the sum of many acts. It must be dynamic, not static, changing to meet the challenge of each new generation. For peace is a process — a way of solving problems.

    With such a peace, there will still be quarrels and conflicting interests, as there are within families and nations. World peace, like community peace, does not require that each man love his neighbor — it requires only that they live together in mutual tolerance, submitting their disputes to a just and peaceful settlement. And history teaches us that enmities between nations, as between individuals, do not last forever. However fixed our likes and dislikes may seem, the tide of time and events will often bring surprising changes in the relations between nations and neighbors.

    So let us persevere. Peace need not be impracticable, and war need not be inevitable. By defining our goal more clearly, by making it seem more manageable and less remote, we can help all peoples to see it, to draw hope from it, and to move irresistibly toward it.

    Second: Let us reexamine our attitude toward the Soviet Union. It is discouraging to think that their leaders may actually believe what their propagandists write. It is discouraging to read a recent authoritative Soviet text on Military Strategy and find, on page after page, wholly baseless and incredible claims — such as the allegation that "American imperialist circles are preparing to unleash different types of wars . . . that there is a very real threat of a preventive war being unleashed by American imperialists against the Soviet Union . . . [and that] the political aims of the American imperialists are to enslave economically and politically the European and other capitalist countries . . . [and] to achieve world domination . . . by means of aggressive wars."

    Truly, as it was written long ago: "The wicked flee when no man pursueth." Yet it is sad to read these Soviet statements — to realize the extent of the gulf between us. But it is also a warning — a warning to the American people not to fall into the same trap as the Soviets, not to see only a distorted and desperate view of the other side, not to see conflict as inevitable, accommodation as impossible, and communication as nothing more than an exchange of threats.

    No government or social system is so evil that its people must be considered as lacking in virtue. As Americans, we find communism profoundly repugnant as a negation of personal freedom and dignity. But we can still hail the Russian people for their many achievements — in science and space, in economic and industrial growth, in culture and in acts of courage.

    Among the many traits the peoples of our two countries have in common, none is stronger than our mutual abhorrence of war. Almost unique among the major world powers, we have never been at war with each other. And no nation in the history of battle ever suffered more than the Soviet Union suffered in the course of the Second World War. At least 20 million lost their lives. Countless millions of homes and farms were burned or sacked. A third of the nation's territory, including nearly two thirds of its industrial base, was turned into a wasteland — a loss equivalent to the devastation of this country east of Chicago.

    Today, should total war ever break out again — no matter how — our two countries would become the primary targets. It is an ironic but accurate fact that the two strongest powers are the two in the most danger of devastation. All we have built, all we have worked for, would be destroyed in the first 24 hours. And even in the cold war, which brings burdens and dangers to so many nations, including this Nation's closest allies — our two countries bear the heaviest burdens. For we are both devoting massive sums of money to weapons that could be better devoted to combating ignorance, poverty, and disease. We are both caught up in a vicious and dangerous cycle in which suspicion on one side breeds suspicion on the other, and new weapons beget counterweapons.

    In short, both the United States and its allies, and the Soviet Union and its allies, have a mutually deep interest in a just and genuine peace and in halting the arms race. Agreements to this end are in the interests of the Soviet Union as well as ours — and even the most hostile nations can be relied upon to accept and keep those treaty obligations, and only those treaty obligations, which are in their own interest.

    So, let us not be blind to our differences — but let us also direct attention to our common interests and to the means by which those differences can be resolved. And if we cannot end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity. For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mortal.

    Third: Let us reexamine our attitude toward the cold war, remembering that we are not engaged in a debate, seeking to pile up debating points. We are not here distributing blame or pointing the finger of judgment. We must deal with the world as it is, and not as it might have been had the history of the last 18 years been different.

    We must, therefore, persevere in the search for peace in the hope that constructive changes within the Communist bloc might bring within reach solutions which now seem beyond us. We must conduct our affairs in such a way that it becomes in the Communists' interest to agree on a genuine peace. Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy — or of a collective death-wish for the world.

    To secure these ends, America's weapons are nonprovocative, carefully controlled, designed to deter, and capable of selective use. Our military forces are committed to peace and disciplined in self- restraint. Our diplomats are instructed to avoid unnecessary irritants and purely rhetorical hostility.

    For we can seek a relaxation of tension without relaxing our guard. And, for our part, we do not need to use threats to prove that we are resolute. We do not need to jam foreign broadcasts out of fear our faith will be eroded. We are unwilling to impose our system on any unwilling people — but we are willing and able to engage in peaceful competition with any people on earth.

    Meanwhile, we seek to strengthen the United Nations, to help solve its financial problems, to make it a more effective instrument for peace, to develop it into a genuine world security system — a system capable of resolving disputes on the basis of law, of insuring the security of the large and the small, and of creating conditions under which arms can finally be abolished.

    At the same time we seek to keep peace inside the non-Communist world, where many nations, all of them our friends, are divided over issues which weaken Western unity, which invite Communist intervention or which threaten to erupt into war. Our efforts in West New Guinea, in the Congo, in the Middle East, and in the Indian subcontinent, have been persistent and patient despite criticism from both sides. We have also tried to set an example for others — by seeking to adjust small but significant differences with our own closest neighbors in Mexico and in Canada.

    Speaking of other nations, I wish to make one point clear. We are bound to many nations by alliances. Those alliances exist because our concern and theirs substantially overlap. Our commitment to defend Western Europe and West Berlin, for example, stands undiminished because of the identity of our vital interests. The United States will make no deal with the Soviet Union at the expense of other nations and other peoples, not merely because they are our partners, but also because their interests and ours converge

    Our interests converge, however, not only in defending the frontiers of freedom, but in pursuing the paths of peace. It is our hope — and the purpose of allied policies — to convince the Soviet Union that she, too, should let each nation choose its own future, so long as that choice does not interfere with the choices of others. The Communist drive to impose their political and economic system on others is the primary cause of world tension today. For there can be no doubt that, if all nations could refrain from interfering in the self-determination of others, the peace would be much more assured.

    This will require a new effort to achieve world law — a new context for world discussions. It will require increased understanding between the Soviets and ourselves. And increased understanding will require increased contact and communication. One step in this direction is the proposed arrangement for a direct line between Moscow and Washington, to avoid on each side the dangerous delays, misunderstandings, and misreadings of the other's actions which might occur at a time of crisis.

    We have also been talking in Geneva about the other first-step measures of arms control designed to limit the intensity of the arms race and to reduce the risks of accidental war. Our primary long range interest in Geneva, however, is general and complete disarmament — designed to take place by stages, permitting parallel political developments to build the new institutions of peace which would take the place of arms. The pursuit of disarmament has been an effort of this Government since the 1920's. It has been urgently sought by the past three administrations. And however dim the prospects may be today, we intend to continue this effort — to continue it in order that all countries, including our own, can better grasp what the problems and possibilities of disarmament are.

    The one major area of these negotiations where the end is in sight, yet where a fresh start is badly needed, is in a treaty to outlaw nuclear tests. The conclusion of such a treaty, so near and yet so far, would check the spiraling arms race in one of its most dangerous areas. It would place the nuclear powers in a position to deal more effectively with one of the greatest hazards which man faces in 1963, the further spread of nuclear arms. It would increase our security — it would decrease the prospects of war. Surely this goal is sufficiently important to require our steady pursuit, yielding neither to the temptation to give up the whole effort nor the temptation to give up our insistence on vital and responsible safeguards.

    I am taking this opportunity, therefore, to announce two important decisions in this regard.

    First: Chairman khrushchev, Prime Minister Macmillan, and I have agreed that high-level discussions will shortly begin in Moscow looking toward early agreement on a comprehensive test ban treaty. Our hopes must be tempered with the caution of history — but with our hopes go the hopes of all mankind.

    Second: To make clear our good faith and solemn convictions on the matter, I now declare that the United States does not propose to conduct nuclear tests in the atmosphere so long as other states do not do so. We will not be the first to resume. Such a declaration is no substitute for a formal binding treaty, but I hope it will help us achieve it.

    Finally, my fellow Americans, let us examine our attitude toward peace and freedom here at home. The quality and spirit of our own society must justify and support our efforts abroad. We must show it in the dedication of our own lives — as many of you who are graduating today will have a unique opportunity to do, by serving without pay in the Peace Corps abroad or in the proposed National Service Corps here at home.

    But wherever we are, we must all, in our daily lives, live up to the age-old faith that peace and freedom walk together. In too many of our cities today, the peace is not secure because the freedom is incomplete.

    It is the responsibility of the executive branch at all levels of government — local, State, and National — to provide and protect that freedom for all of our citizens by all means within their authority. It is the responsibility of the legislative branch at all levels, wherever that authority is not now adequate, to make it adequate. And it is the responsibility of all citizens in all sections of this country to respect the rights of all others and to respect the law of the land.

    All this is not unrelated to world peace. "When a man's ways please the Lord," the Scriptures tell us, "he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him." And is not peace, in the last analysis, basically a matter of human rights — the right to live out our lives without fear of devastation — the right to breathe air as nature provided it — the right of future generations to a healthy existence?

    While we proceed to safeguard our national interests, let us also safeguard human interests. And the elimination of war and arms is clearly in the interest of both. No treaty, however much it may be to the advantage of all, however tightly it may be worded, can provide absolute security against the risks of deception and evasion. But it can — if it is sufficiently effective in its enforcement and if it is sufficiently in the interests of its signers — offer far more security and far fewer risks than an unabated, uncontrolled, unpredictable arms race.

    The United States, as the world knows, will never start a war. We do not want a war. We do not now expect a war. This generation of Americans has already had enough — more than enough — of war and hate and oppression. We shall be prepared if others wish it. We shall be alert to try to stop it. But we shall also do our part to build a world of peace where the weak are safe and the strong are just. We are not helpless before that task or hopeless of its success. Confident and unafraid, we labor on — not toward a strategy of annihilation but toward a strategy of peace."

    John F. Kennedy

  12. #42
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Jan 2002
    Indlæg
    702
    ...We choose to make Martin realise that his quotes are far to long in this decade and do other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others too.
    Mvh,
    Bopa

  13. #43
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Nov 2001
    Indlæg
    3,550
    "Great speeches have always had great soundbites. The problem now is that the young technicians who put together speechesBopa are paying attention only to the soundbite, not to the text as a whole, not realizing that all great soundbites happen by accident, which is to say, all great soundbites are yielded up inevitably, as part of the natural expression of the text. They are part of the tapestry, they aren’t a little flower somebody sewed on."

    Peggy Noonan

  14. #44
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Nov 2001
    Indlæg
    15,394
    "Et andet tegn på, at det går godt er, når journalisterne begynder at spørge om vi dog ikke snart taber en kamp. Det ser jeg nu hverken nogen grund til eller tegn på skulle ske foreløbig, selvom alt selvfølgelig kan ske i fodbold. Som vi spiller i øjeblikket, og som vi har spillet længe, kan jeg faktisk slet ikke se hvilket dansk hold der skulle kunne slå os!"

    Per Nielsen

    mvh,
    -smølle

  15. #45
    zebos er offline can't put this day back
    Tilmeldingsdato
    Jan 2002
    Indlæg
    2,837

    Hold kæft nogle lange citater du kommer med, Martin.. :-)

    Og så er der dette citat :


    "The Time Was-Or Is Still-Now!
    A letter to the citizens of the United States of America


    The time was now!?...Was the time then, or is it still now? Once again, I have been called to write to you all a third time, in as many decades. People are now talking about the American Dream in the past tense. Our image as a major world power has once again been seriously assaulted. Our will as a people, and our confidence in our government, is again shaken! Have we been hijacked again or are we just waking up?

    No longer can we trust our government to do the right thing--to protect us and keep us safe. (#1) Within less than one year, our confidence in our economy takes a big "hiccup" and in the "blink of an eye," we find ourselves knee deep in wars which, of course, were not even subjects, or issues of our country's recent presidential campaign. We hear our commander in chief define an objective for this war so broad; can it ever be achieved? Or, is that its purpose? Is this our elite's pledge to wage war on any suspect anywhere, paying little attention to matters of culture, sovereignty or international law, and further alienating ourselves in the world of nations? Is this truly what is necessary to preserve "freedom?"

    This is not a war against terrorism. This is a war of ideologies and Principles! And what are our principle(s)? How did we become defendants and "victims" so quickly? Have we pawned our virtues and principles over the decades for slaughter at the heels of a New World Order edict? Should other cultures roll over too, and yield to our Government's unilateral dictates? In the alternative, are there principles that are absolute, and complete, which are not just relative and always changing with the climate of people's opinion that should be dusted off and applied now?

    What are the long-term consequences to closing doors on accountable citizens' rights to "freedom?" They did not attack freedom; "they" attacked what they believed was the "enemy within." Our leaders cry out for leadership abroad. But, are we reading 'leadership' at home that in fact doesn't exist? Did we win the "cold war" only to set ourselves up and lose "the war" that counts; the "hot" war(s)? We will know who is loosing the "war on terrorism" by which side delays the reporting of it's losses to its 'own.' Our nation is not war ready! Are we truly on higher ground?


    Where does our jurisdiction begin and where does it end? What is the principle we are using for our retaliation?..."He/they hit me/us first?" This is an explanation a child is apt to give his mother when she is forced to break up a sandbox squabble. Does it look this way to us because we are not one of them, and if we were one of "them," would we perceive it differently? What is terrorism, but unwarranted violence upon the innocent...? When special interests (politics) screw with international rules of law, and terrorize other cultures, conflict results. If we are not pleased with the "consequences" of our wants, we should consider correcting the causes of our "wants." Are we being diverted from the very principles that would provide long-term security by being "sold" attitudes and hysteria for the benefit of a few? We seek comfort by mocking what we fear. "Attitude," without guidance from sound principles, is a loaded gun in the hands of a child!

    Should we use a club to kill the tic(s) on an abandoned dog? Could we injure the dog before we kill the tic? Will other dogs come to his aid? Have we even found the tic(s) we claimed are responsible for this recent tragedy? Desecrating each other's shrines will only escalate the violence and memorialize hurt. Our costs continue to escalate, easily reaching a trillion dollars and beyond in just a few months. And we haven't even found the tic---or have we? The universe is an organism. We live in a closed system. What goes around will most likely come back around! If not in our life time, in our childrens'. It's only a matter of when.

    We will not succeed by "thugging" others with our perceptions of right and wrong, for we lack a rudder in the water ourselves. Where are our "higher ground" principles? Have we sold those principles for a potage of short-term benefits and privileges? Do we waste our time and resources politicking over our egos? Are we any longer 'worthy stewards' of our Father's land and wisdom?

    Just because we may think we are right, doesn't mean we are. Just because we may be richer, doesn't mean we are wiser. And, just because we may be bigger, does not mean we are stronger. Before we hunt down the "wolf" who threatens our home, we must ask ourselves why our home is under attack in the first place! Human beings are a specie that make all of their choices based upon their perceptions. The foreboding questions; who and what do we allow to skew our perceptions? Where do we go from here? Do any of us care? What other consequences are we due from endorsing "double standards" at home and abroad?


    No longer can we trust our elected officials to tell us the truth. (#6) Our perception of our government has certainly changed while we've been struggling to believe in our elected representatives! In 1958, the Institute of Social Research in Michigan, together with The New York Times-with CNN joining them in 1990-have conducted a poll every two years of about sixteen to seventeen hundred people in the U.S. Each time, they asked the same question, "In the time of need, do you believe the government will do the right thing by you?" In 1958, 72% of those responding said "most of the time" and 19% said "always." The numbers have changed in the last 40 years! In 1996, only 17% said "most of the time," and less than 1% said "always." Most civilized countries reach a point of revolution or civil war long before the confidence of the people in their government has reached the low tide that ours has.

    As long as "they" get us to recycle our greed, "their" culpability remains hidden and unaccounted for. Where is accountability in America? The stories we have been getting from our government for too many years are something besides the truth. We must develop a sense of what is false. Seeing only what this Administration and others wants us to see, and admitting to our citizens only that which it is forced to admit, is not only a problem for these usurpers, but for each of us. We condemn others for not being consistent and keeping their "word" while we 'excuse' ourselves from having to abide by the same principle. Can we do any better now, than wobble, and flounder in the world of nations and get tough on U.S. CITIZENS?

    The disease festers deep within us, for Iran, Iraq-and now Afghanistan-are only symptoms. We can look back on the last 40 years to see the results of this policy of secrecy and distortion. The more the government we elected ignored and stonewalled the sore of Vietnam, the more and more our credibility suffered. Our country still bears the scars that war caused. It seemed like overnight, the United States confessed to a military blunder, misjudgment of a regime and, most importantly, to a philosophy of professing righteousness through deceit. Vietnam succeeded in shaking our nation's very moral "fiber" and seriously injuring and breaking our inherent trust in our government.


    When we look at Watergate, we see a similar defeat caused by the stonewall attitude of our nation's administration. Again, in 1979, our leaders told us Iran's revolution was going to be short-lived and Ayatollah Khomeini would fall from power in weeks. The regime of Saddam Hussein would certainly topple under the brutal forces of our Gulf War armies in '91. We proclaimed we had won the war! We even celebrated victory at home with countless "welcome home the troops" parades. Today, Iran remains just as unpredictable and, of course, Mr. Hussein still remains. Just 10 years later, we continue to push the envelope of completing a war we now realize we didn't win. The credibility of what was supposedly right, was later determined to be wrong. Arrogancy usually has its consequences. Is this the path we are insisting to take once again, before we find our rudder in the world of nations? Can our beloved country afford to be wrong again? When will we be right ? When do we learn? Do we care?

    How can we remedy this situation? Our "true strength" lies within our ability to live honest and accountable lives. The truth and our desire and innate ability to promote love, health and well-being throughout the world will succeed. But, when we allow our government(s) to be encouraged by "special interests," to hide and distort the truth, only failure will result!


    America must right itself with its self and its neighbors, now! Others who control and influence our nation's power must also come forth and tell us the truth. Heads, in the West, will resign. Religions and fictions will collapse on the shoulders of their "false messengers" until We The People get the message, act and turn this 'human tragedy' around! Could it be that Vietnam, Watergate, the Iranian, the Iraqi and now the Afghanistan crises are intricately planned creations of financial and cartel magnates? Or, could it be, we are doing or letting this be done to ourselves? Are the beliefs and attitudes we have created in pursuing our technological wants, now so far removed from the real elements of human rights and love for our earthly brothers, that they are no longer appropriate? And now, will we drive ourselves into an endless swamp of shifting principles and ambiguous and contradictory policies? Is our "pleasure seeking society" preparing our grandchildren to bear more burdens, pay more taxes, and have fewer freedoms?


    No longer can we pay corporations to distort the truth. (#2) Where is corporate accountability? Labor and Ownership has become a vehicle for taxation in America and its uses are now generally a matter of privilege. Today, fictions are permitted to manipulate the masses' minds unbridled, and alter the 'self-images' of certain citizens, while predicting their behavior. Other than for greed, where are the virtues and principles that will sustain us in the long haul? Could furthering the relentless pursuit of "capitalism" disguised as a "New World Order" be considered by some as a form of terrorism? There is no sanctity in greed! Was the time then, or is it still now, for citizens to rise above their government's special interests that put the "tax value" of a citizen above the human value of a citizen? Is there still a place for "principle-based leadership" in American politics? Will speed serve us as well? Doors are closing on U. S. CITIZENS and they are not opening soon!


    Isn't the time now to hold our representatives and corporate CEO's accountable to the principles of universal accountability? Let us realize once and for all that if, in making a profit, it requires another or our planet to suffer, no "profit" of any kind is realized. Instead, the suffering accumulates like steam in a confined kettle. Sooner or later the greedy profiteer will hear his brother's and planet's cry. Those who come to their aid with respect, caring and understanding will be forgiven for their deeds, but those who deceive, and evade will reap the results of their choices: crime, welfare, illness, endless conflict, even if they are Goliath! The earth will continue to shake and skies smoke, for our planet will too react to the 'cries' and the dis-ease of the afflicted.

    Why couldn't we adopt the higher principle of universal accountability which would set the pace for groups and nations to follow, then wage endless wars to preserve our form of "hypocrisy democracy" as our so-called way of life? Those not on board with the 'us' attitude; "If you are not for 'freedom,' you are against us"... are our enemies?! Wow! Are we too blind to recognize that all nation states have mandates to respect each other's sovereignty, regardless of an individual citizen's criminal activities? We have no excuses now! Before "terrorism" we had Principle...and the world looked up to us for our principles! Our enemies have said, "It is not the American people we despise, it is their government!" Could our support for unlawful corporations and the special interest initiatives they promote, be translated into someone else's 'terrorism?'


    Achievements in "human rights," domestic or foreign, are materialized through an alchemic process of understanding cultures and the ideologies and principles that support them with reverence for all life. This cultural exchange should not be abused by the special interests of fictions. Have the corporations we created become our brothers' feared despots? Was this their ultimate purpose or has our greed permitted these hungry animals to go astray?"


    Eli Mellor
    December 14, 2001


    http://www.thetimeisnow.us/

    Mvh

    zebos
    Sidst redigeret af zebos : 21.06.03 kl. 11:22
    At the first world's fair, the 1851 Crystal Palace Exhibition in London, trinkets abounded, everything from handbills to small cards, all emblazoned with the image of the Crystal Palace.

Side 3 af 14 FørsteFørste 12345613 ... SidsteSidste

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Lignende emner

  1. Dagens BBB-citat vol. IV
    By Maarum in forum Diverse
    Svar: 566
    Sidste Meddelelse: 27.01.24, 11:52
  2. Dagens dybsindige citat
    By Perec in forum Diverse
    Svar: 72
    Sidste Meddelelse: 31.07.22, 17:23
  3. Svar: 16
    Sidste Meddelelse: 15.06.04, 13:54
  4. Dagens citat: Thomas Helmig
    By -smølle in forum Diverse
    Svar: 22
    Sidste Meddelelse: 10.05.04, 13:13

Regler for meddelelser

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •