« advance warning | Main | about the crack and smack and whack that hits the street »

in our name

in our name

In Our Name

Pledge of Support

By Vincent M. Ferrari

In Our Name

We believe that as citizens of the United States, it is our responsibility to resist those who wish to destroy our country.

In our name, wage war against those who would destroy us. There will be no more deaths of Americans in senseless acts of terrorism against innocent people.

In our name, invade countries who harbor terrorists. Countries where freedom is at the whim of a murderous tyrant. Countries that would smite us from the face of the earth given the opportunity to do so.

In our names, defend the freedoms which allow the protestor to protest your actions. Defend these freedoms forcefully; the only appropriate way to defend freedom against those who would take it from us.

By our hands we will supply aid to any country wishing to free itself from the chains of a tyrannical government. That aid may come in the form of money, arms, or food.

By our actions, we will not allow fear of reprisal to persuade us away from doing what is right.

By our hearts, we will not allow moral relativism to preclude identifying those who are evil as such.

By our will, and in our name.

We pledge support.

We pledge allegiance with those whose tyrannical governments repress them.

We pledge alliance with those living in countries overrun by warlords and terrorists.

We pledge support for women who are treated as property and not as people.

We pledge to defend freedom in whatever way it is so manifested throughout all the nations of the world.

A world of peace and freedom is possible.

And it is not achieved by standing idly by and hoping for it.

We encourage the protection of peace

The fostering of freedom

and the return of dignity to the oppressed

In Our Name.

For me, this is not so much a petition as an act of standing up for what I believe in, and making those thoughts known. Thanks, Vin.

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference in our name:

» In Our Name from Cato the Youngest
Vincent M. Ferrari, at Insignificant Thoughts has published the following pledge, In Our Name (link via a small victory). In [Read More]

» internet poker game from internet poker game
You can also check the sites about free poker game download true poker poker tour [Read More]

» pacific poker from pacific poker
In your free time, check the sites dedicated to pacific poker online poker [Read More]

» blackjack from blackjack
You are invited to check out the sites about blackjack roulette [Read More]

» poker rooms from poker rooms
You can also check some helpful info about party poker bonus code poker game download [Read More]

» poker game from poker game
great poker game [Read More]

Comments

Here the item that probably inspired Mr. Vincent M. Ferrari's response:

The Pledge of Resistance

We believe that as people living
in the United States it is our
responsibility to resist the injustices
done by our government,
in our names

Not in our name
will you wage endless war
there can be no more deaths
no more transfusions
of blood for oil

Not in our name
will you invade countries
bomb civilians, kill more children
letting history take its course
over the graves of the nameless

Not in our name
will you erode the very freedoms
you have claimed to fight for

Not by our hands
will we supply weapons and funding
for the annihilation of families
on foreign soil

Not by our mouths
will we let fear silence us

Not by our hearts
will we allow whole peoples
or countries to be deemed evil

Not by our will
and Not in our name

We pledge resistance

We pledge alliance with those
who have come under attack
for voicing opposition to the war
or for their religion or ethnicity

We pledge to make common cause
with the people of the world
to bring about justice,
freedom and peace

Another world is possible
and we pledge to make it real.

Just another point of view.

Respectufully,

Deech

Deech,
I could stand idly by if I could be sure that you and your ilk were the only ones that would be destroyed by the terrorists... but that isn't how it works... you have every right to be a peaceful pacifist but you have no right to force me to submit to fear and destruction. Crawl back into your hidey-hole... we will let you know when it's safe to come back out...

Better yet, find a terrorist with a bomb belt and stand next to him and care about him so much that he changes his mind and repents... it could happen... I'm certain that this type of person would appreciate the love... after all, terrorists only do this sort of thing because some of us in the west do not show them the loving concern they feel they deserve...

Me, I'm going to push my government to protect my family with whatever force is required, even if it means creating a radioactive glass skateboard park stretching from Tripoli to Bagdad.

If I'm wrong about this I will have to listen to folk like you tell me about it... If you are wrong, you and people like you will be the first ones executed by the new Islamic regime...

Place your bets...

Orwell said of livnig in autocracy: "imagine a boot stamping on a human face -- for ever."

We are so lucky to be free. If we were generous, we would share our good fortune with the rest of the world. We'd put bounties on the heads of the dictators, and let a thousand Marshall Plans bloom.

Or we could try appeasement. I hear sometimes that works, right?

We are not free by luck. We are free, because countless soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, etc. placed themselves between their loved ones and tyranny, and said, "You shall not pass." Deech, and his ilk, apparently do not get this. Vincent, apparently does. So do I. I only wish I had said it as well. Thanks, Vincent. And thank you, Michele, for providing a link.

Riyadh delenda est!

I've posted this on my site as well. This is a great idea.

Deech and his unwashed friends are a minority. A noisy minority but a minority all the same. It's up to us to stand up and make some noise for our cause and the american way.

Deech has a right to his opinion but we shouldn't make the mistake of letting the world think that he speaks for us.

Cato: too true, too true. By 'lucky,' I guess I meant fortunate to be in a place that pretty much got everything right. Capitalist, wealthy, liberty-loving and oh-so-strong. If you were to read my web log, I think you'd agree that I give ample space to our wonderful armed services.

Deen and his ankle-grabbing cohorts are the unfortunate by-product of a free society. In such a society, even the most ignorant and hopelessly naive of fools have a voice. But I wouldn't have it any other way. And THAT is why we are fighting. Excellent declaration, Vincent.

Excuse me....Deech. I've forgotten his drivel already.

Since Deech and his/her comrades are so convinced that the USA is evil, let me ask this:
Deech, would you be willing to trade places with a citizen from Iraq, Iran, Bosnia, the Sudan, Somalia?
What I am asking is very simple: put your money where your mouth is. I dare you to volunteer to go live in one of the countries we are supposedly "oppressing." I'll even chip in for your ticket.

Looking forward to the invasions of Colombia, Burma, Zimbabwe, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United States of America then.

Oh and New Zealand. That would be fun to watch.

Wow. Such hostility toward one person's POV.
It's scarier in here sometimes than it is outside.
I don't agree with Deech, but do people have to be so rude? Yeah, I guess they do........
I just feel that arguements/debates don't require personal insults.

Deech's point of view is insulting to the men and women who have lost arms, legs, friends, spouses, parents, children, and lives in America's wars. He has a right to be a dumb shit, and believe as he does. He has a right to be an asshole, and say the things he does. And I claim the right to call him an asshole, and an ingrate, as well.

It has become fashionable, in some circles, to mock the men and women who stand guard in the night, so that we may sleep soundly. But I find the inhabitants of those circles hateful. They portray their cowardice as compassion and superior moral development. They scorn men and women whose shoes they are not fit to shine. I've looked in two encyclopedias, three dictionaries, and a thesaurus, and I still cannot find words to adequately express my utter contempt for their sort.

I suppose that they are the inevitable product of a free and prosperous society, just as shit is the inevitable product of digestion. But I don't have to like them. And It'll be a damnned cold day in Hell, before I show them anything remotely resembling respect.

Riyadh delenda est!

Excellent, Cato the Youngest. Because when there are two opposing sides to an issue, it's best to refuse to respect those who don't share your side. That always leads to a productive resolution. Disrespect the viewpoint, not the people; it really does work better.

Anyway, Cato, let me ask you, have you ever lost arms, legs, friends, spouses, parents, children, and lives in America's wars? Because if you have not, please stop speaking for a group you don't represent.

Not to piss on the campfire here, but Deech posted a poem and six of his/her own words, none of which, individually or taken together, were an endorsement of that poem except by (very sketchy) implication. From this, it seems people can tell Deech is American, hates America, is a pacifist, is a coward, is ankle-grabbing (aside: ankle-grabbing cohorts is a wonderful phrase.), is unwashed, and does not understand that his/her freedom came at a price. It is that kind of amazing logic that makes me loathe to enter these discussions. And it comes from both sides, I am fully aware of that.

As for the rightful topic of this comment session, well I suppose you already know I disagree with the statements that make up In Our Name. It is well crafted though, and I'm glad to see it out there. Too often discussions about these issues center around assumptions, often erroneous assumptions, so clear statements of belief are always welcome as far as I am concerned.

It isn't contempt that I feel for Deech... it's worse than that... I feel pity... anyone who thinks they can reason with homocidal sociopaths could only have grown up in an environment protected by the kind of folks he heaps with disdain.

My Dad taught me that any idiot can die for his country... that part is easy... the hard part is to kill for your countrymen and remain human... to do what must be done and not lose that which we value... the men and women in our Armed Forces reflect this in spades...

They do the job that must be done, with tears in their eyes...

Tom, I have had friends not come back, but even if I had not, one does not need to belong to a group, to recognize insult to it, and be offended by that insult. Must one be an African-American, to be offended by the use of the word, "nigger", and condemn its user? A Jew, to be offended by the word, "kike"? I think not.

As to my disrespect for those I disagree with, do they have no obligation to respect me and my point of view? The "Not in Our Name" piece was a clear statement of moral condemnation of the War on Terror, its advocates, and its practitioners. It made no real distinction between the politicians who decide to go to war, who are fair game for criticism, and the soldiers, who merely obey their lawful orders, and are not. Ever since the Vietnam War, the antiwar Left has assuaged its guilty concience by attacking the morality of honorable soldiers. I find that tactic, and its practitioners, utterly reprehensible. If you don't like being dissed, show some respect for your betters - our men and women in uniform.

Riyadh delenda est!

Tom:

"Disrespect the viewpoint, not the people; it really does work better."

I'm sorry, am I understanding this correctly? Disrespect the viewpoint of white supremacy, do not disrespect the inbred asshole in the bedsheet soaking that big cross in kerosene?

Disrespect the viewpoint of Nazis and antisemitists, do not disrespect Hitler, Goebbels, Goering & Co?

Disrespect the viewpoint of terrorism, but don't disrespect the piece of scum strapping dynamite around himself?

Repeat after me, Tom: 'I'm a moral relativist idiot and should not spout my infantile crap in any comments section of any blog for fear of ridicule'.

Opposing war no matter what is tantamount to taking a leak on the graves of those who died to save your free ass. I don't simply disrespect the viewpoints of people who piss on the graves of heroes, I disrespect the people themselves.

Tom,

Anyway, Cato, let me ask you, have you ever lost arms, legs, friends, spouses, parents, children, and lives in America's wars? Because if you have not, please stop speaking for a group you don't represent.

I'll bet you like to use the term "chickenhawk" as well.

Well I've had lots of friends and family who paid the price. Spent 10 years of MY life riding submarines. We all did it so people like Cato could have a country where they can express themselves. I (and I'm sure they,as well) appreciate the respect they show us. It sure beats all the spit I got from YOUR kind.

The same here. Honestly...I never see these same lunatics giving the kind of respect they demand from other people. Go and find a dictionary, and look up the word "hypocrite". You'll find it describes the usual manner of these whining children quite accurately.

And Cato said it better than I did about my lack of respect: simple disagreement I can understand and respect, but this goes above and beyond "disagreement." And worse, preening and pretending you are better than the people like Hodadenon and myself who served our country is one of the biggest load of festering bovine-produced by-product in existence. You make me sick.

I am not a moral relativist, have never used the word chickenhawk outside of discussions of Loony Toons, and I don't think I am better than any of you. Thanks for illustrating my point about assumptions, though.

Cato, obviously I don't speak for anyone but myself, but yes, I think I do have an obligation to respect you, no matter how much we disagree. I also highly respect our armed forces in general, and I'm sorry if that wasn't clear, but it really wasn't the topic of my previous comment.

Tom, those of us who were unfortunate enough to live during the Vietnam War era have run into the sort I described frequently enough among the antiwar left. The "Not In Our Name" piece, is so typical of their brand of sneering moral superiority, as to approach the level of self-parody. Many of them, having avoided service in the war, attempted to portray their cowardice as some sort of moral courage. The corollary of their position was that the soldiers who served honorably in the war were immoral - "baby killer", was their favorite epithet for returning servicemen. "Not In Our Name" is exactly the sort of crap that they used to specialize in.

Some of us look back on the way America treated its Vietnam vetrans with shame, and whenever we see that sort of moral thuggery surface, we do our best to drive it back under the rock it came from. We show them precicely the same level of respect they show us (none).

I will take you at your word that you do not share the attitudes I attributed to the creator(s) of that filthy screed. But you can safely bet your last nickel that he or she does have those attitudes. If you insist on defending that sort of scum, don't be surprised, if some of us mistake you for them. Riyadh delenda est!

Well to all who posted, thanks for your personal attacks and personal insults. I did not say if I supported or agreed with the not in my name folks.

I was merely posting the document that inspired the Pledge of Support document. I admit that I lean pretty far to the left but I wouldn't go as far as the pledge of resistance.

Do I agree with making war with Iraq at this time? No, Not yet. Do I think that Saddam will cooperate with the inspections? No, probably not.

Will I support the invasion of Iraq when Saddam does cheat on the inspectors? Yes, I probably will.

Do I support the men and women in uniform? Yes, I do value them and know my freedom depends on them.

Do I respect the veterans of the Vietnam War? Yes, they got a raw deal and didn't deserve the treatment they received from the people and the government.

Do I believe in everything posted in the Pledge of Support? No, I do not.

Just thought I'd clear somethings up. I am not the liberal peace-loving, soldier-hating, monster you paint me as. But neither do I beat for the drums war or rejoice in the suffering of others.

Respectfully,
Deech

As Prime Ministers say, during Question Time, "I refer the gentleman to my previous answer."

Riyadh delenda est!

Minor point: 'disrespect' is NOT a verb.