Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
RavenHawk

Hope and Change

18 posts in this topic

When you think we are seeing something new, all you have to do is talk to a Cuban exile.

At the FreedomWorks Free the People event on July 6, Mr. Rafael Cruz, father of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), delivered this inspiring speech on his personal history, surviving Fidel Castro’s communist regime and coming to the land of opportunity and freedom.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you think we are seeing something new, all you have to do is talk to a Cuban exile.

At the FreedomWorks Free the People event on July 6, Mr. Rafael Cruz, father of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), delivered this inspiring speech on his personal history, surviving Fidel Castro's communist regime and coming to the land of opportunity and freedom.

[media=]

[/media]

That was a very interesting video. Thanks for posting it. :tu:

He brought up some very interesting points for sure....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I watched the video, he gave a good speech, sounded a bit like Mel Gibson from Braveheart, all he needed was the blue face paint lol I kid.. It was a good speech though.........BUT, what are these freedoms that are taken away?

Someone else made a thread rather recently, and in block CAPS he posted - "WE SHOULD DEMAND OUR RIGHTS BACK"... I asked, what rights did you loose? he said none...

This has left me thinking, well if no rights have been literally stripped away and I mean in the most literal sense, then why the constant outcry over rights and freedom lost?

Logic has it, there is no point in demanding rights and freedom back if you haven't lost any to begin with..It's like walking into a police station and demanding your $50 back, did you loose $50? No, but I want it back anyway....

Now I know I will likely be jumped on for this, but before anyone does, please do so with something credible that confirms American rights and freedoms are literally taken away?... I am not interested in - "Well he lied about this and that",.. I know politicians lie, it's nothing new.

So please anyone with something credible ( not from infowars ) That I can read that confirms Americans have indeed lost their rights to whatever, and their freedoms are taken...

I am asking so I can give it a fuller view and gain more understanding...I like to see both sides to all fences..

Edited by Beckys_Mom
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched the video, he gave a good speech, sounded a bit like Mel Gibson from Braveheart, all he needed was the blue face paint lol I kid.. It was a good speech though.........BUT, what are these freedoms that are taken away?

Someone else made a thread rather recently, and in block CAPS he posted - "WE SHOULD DEMAND OUR RIGHTS BACK"... I asked, what rights did you loose? he said none...

This has left me thinking, well if no rights have been literally stripped away and I mean in the most literal sense, then why the constant outcry over rights and freedom lost?

Logic has it, there is no point in demanding rights and freedom back if you haven't lost any to begin with..It's like walking into a police station and demanding your $50 back, did you loose $50? No, but I want it back anyway....

Now I know I will likely be jumped on for this, but before anyone does, please do so with something credible that confirms American rights and freedoms are literally taken away?... I am not interested in - "Well he lied about this and that",.. I know politicians lie, it's nothing new.

So please anyone with something credible ( not from infowars ) That I can read that confirms Americans have indeed lost their rights to whatever, and their freedoms are taken...

I am asking so I can give it a fuller view and gain more understanding...I like to see both sides to all fences..

Well, quite a few....

That is at least the theory of the Declaration of Independence, and that is the basis for our 237-year-old American experiment in limited government, and it is the system to which everyone who works for the government today pledges fidelity.

Regrettably, today we have the opposite of what the Framers gave us. Today we have a government that alone decides how much wealth we can retain, how much free expression we can exercise, how much privacy we can enjoy. And since the Fourth of July 2012, freedom has been diminished.

In the past year, all branches of the federal government have combined to diminish personal freedoms, in obvious and in subtle ways.

In the case of privacy, we now know that the federal government has the ability to read all of our texts and emails and listen to all of our telephone calls — mobile and landline — and can do so without complying with the Constitution’s requirements for a search warrant.

We now know that President Obama authorized this, federal judges signed off on this, and select members of Congress knew of this, but all were sworn to secrecy, and so none could discuss it. And we only learned of this because a young former spy risked his life, liberty and property to reveal it.

In the past year, Obama admitted that he ordered the CIA in Virginia to use a drone to kill two Americans in Yemen, one of whom was a 16-year-old boy. He did so because the boy’s father, who was with him at the time of the murders, was encouraging militants to wage war against the U.S.

He wasn’t waging war, according to the president; he was encouraging it.

Simultaneously with this, the president claimed he can use a drone to kill whomever he wants, so long as the person is posing an active threat to the U.S., is difficult to arrest and fits within guidelines that the president himself has secretly written to govern himself.

In the past year, the Supreme Court has ruled that if you are in police custody and fail to assert your right to remain silent, the police at the time of trial can ask the jury to infer that you are guilty. This may seem like a technical ruling about who can say what to whom in a courtroom, but it is in truth a radical break from the past.

Everyone knows that we all have the natural and constitutionally guaranteed right to silence. And anyone in the legal community knows that judges for generations have told jurors that they may construe nothing with respect to guilt or innocence from the exercise of that right.

No longer. Today, you remain silent at your peril.

In the past year, the same Supreme Court has ruled that not only can you be punished for silence, but you can literally be forced to open your mouth. The court held that upon arrest — not conviction, but arrest — the police can force you to open your mouth so they can swab the inside of it and gather DNA material from you.

Put aside the legal truism that an arrest is evidence of nothing and can and does come about for flimsy reasons; DNA is the gateway to personal data about us all. Its involuntary extraction has been insulated by the Fourth Amendment’s requirements of relevance and probable cause of crime.

No longer. Today, if you cross the street outside of a crosswalk, get ready to open your mouth for the police.

The litany of the loss of freedom is sad and unconstitutional and irreversible. The government does whatever it can to retain its power, and it continues so long as it can get away with it. It can listen to your phone calls, read your emails, seize your DNA and challenge your silence, all in violation of the Constitution.

Bitterly and ironically, the government Jefferson wrought is proving the accuracy of Jefferson’s prediction that in the long march of history, government grows and liberty shrinks. Somewhere Jefferson is weeping.

Read more at http://angrywhitedude.com/2013/07/thomas-jefferson-would-be-weeping-have-we-lost-our-constitutional-republic/#euyB2elZZD2x81yg.99

Here's another article that goes more in depth on the subject:

Link: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/02/constitution.html

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The freedom to not be searched unreasonabley. Our right to a public trial. Many more actually but no one really pays attention to em unless your affected by it.

If i was a Gman I could search your phone,bank account and internet usage. I also could say your a terrorist lock u up forever and you would never know why I locked you up nor would you have a trial.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched the video, he gave a good speech, sounded a bit like Mel Gibson from Braveheart, all he needed was the blue face paint lol I kid.. It was a good speech though.........BUT, what are these freedoms that are taken away?

That’s a very good question. I won’t jump all over you. This is a question more people should ask. I ask it myself. But the answer is partially inherent. Meaning that if you never had this freedom, then you never will understand it or even miss it. And those that did have it, take it for granted and don’t realize they are losing it or have lost it until it was too late. I would have preferred that Rafael tell us. But short of writing to him to explain, let me use a part of what he talked about. The Freedom that is being taken away is “Opportunity”. The Right to do things for ourselves without government involvement or infringement. That is the core fiber of what makes us human. Any kind of Socialist government takes away this Right either slowly or all at once and it ends up enslaving the population. It becomes to a point that you can only do what the government dictates that you can do and any violation of even the smallest rule is met with drastic punishment. Sort of like how theft or adultery is met with amputation or death in some Muslim nations.

Try googling such men like: John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Sir William Blackstone. They express the ideas of natural rights or Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. These rights are always in opposition to government. Now, SOME government must exist or there is no Freedom. But government should be used to protect those Rights and not curtail them. But a Socialist government cannot be content until is has complete and total control.

Now most people in the world has grown up in some form of Socialism. We see Socialist Democracies in Europe but are the people really “Free”? These SDs evolved from Monarchies that took care of their populations. The people have never known anything else. And to a degree there is nothing wrong with that but since the age of Enlightenment, Man had bitten the apple and a few knew what true Freedom really was. As Rafael said, the two greatest documents ever penned were the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. These documents are as timeless as when the ink was still fresh. The Heart and Soul of what it is to be a free individual Human Being unfettered by government is in the words of those two documents.

Does this answer your question?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a very good question. I won't jump all over you. This is a question more people should ask. I ask it myself. But the answer is partially inherent. Meaning that if you never had this freedom, then you never will understand it or even miss it. And those that did have it, take it for granted and don't realize they are losing it or have lost it until it was too late. I would have preferred that Rafael tell us. But short of writing to him to explain, let me use a part of what he talked about. The Freedom that is being taken away is "Opportunity". The Right to do things for ourselves without government involvement or infringement. That is the core fiber of what makes us human. Any kind of Socialist government takes away this Right either slowly or all at once and it ends up enslaving the population. It becomes to a point that you can only do what the government dictates that you can do and any violation of even the smallest rule is met with drastic punishment. Sort of like how theft or adultery is met with amputation or death in some Muslim nations.

Try googling such men like: John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Sir William Blackstone. They express the ideas of natural rights or Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. These rights are always in opposition to government. Now, SOME government must exist or there is no Freedom. But government should be used to protect those Rights and not curtail them. But a Socialist government cannot be content until is has complete and total control.

Now most people in the world has grown up in some form of Socialism. We see Socialist Democracies in Europe but are the people really "Free"? These SDs evolved from Monarchies that took care of their populations. The people have never known anything else. And to a degree there is nothing wrong with that but since the age of Enlightenment, Man had bitten the apple and a few knew what true Freedom really was. As Rafael said, the two greatest documents ever penned were the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. These documents are as timeless as when the ink was still fresh. The Heart and Soul of what it is to be a free individual Human Being unfettered by government is in the words of those two documents.

Does this answer your question?

Just have to say I disagree with your statement that some government must exist for there to be freedom, government does not grant you freedom. This is whats wrong with allot of politicians thinking. Constitution and Bill of Rights arnt some universal power that gave men freedom. There ideas to limit the government so the people under it are not oppressed. A governments whole purpose is to govern or in our case uphold the law of the land; for the sole purpose of social growth and prosperity.

It is not a requirement or necessity of man to have a governing authority over him.

Also I would say imo the Magna Carta is higher up there globaly than our Declarations and Constitution.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

To Becky's mom...

It's difficult if not impossible to say any one particular right has been totally stripped away...but many have been "infringed upon" curtailed and limited.

The First amendment article allowing Freedom of speech is now limited thanks to "politically correct speech" and calling someone with a different opinion a hater or a racist

The First amendment article allowing "Freedom to publicly assemble" has been limited by Hr 347 ...The Gov's wiretapping and seizures are attacks on the "Freedom of Press" (so far freedom of religion and the right to petition the Gov haven't been touched...yet)

The 4th amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. This was reduced/compromised by the Patriot act and lessened more by NDAA...

there are more...

so it's not a total stripping away, it's a slow and steady diminish-ment...which leads one to believe they will eventually be so restrictive, they won't really be "freedoms" at all anymore.

Edited by Jeremiah65
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To Becky's mom...

It's difficult if not impossible to say any one particular right has been totally stripped away...but many have been "infringed upon" curtailed and limited.

The First amendment article allowing Freedom of speech is now limited thanks to "politically correct speech" and calling someone with a different opinion a hater or a racist

The First amendment article allowing "Freedom to publicly assemble" has been limited by Hr 347 ...The Gov's wiretapping and seizures are attacks on the "Freedom of Press" (so far freedom of religion and the right to petition the Gov haven't been touched...yet)

The 4th amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. This was reduced/compromised by the Patriot act and lessened more by NDAA...

there are more...

so it's not a total stripping away, it's a slow and steady diminish-ment...which leads one to believe they will eventually be so restrictive, they won't really be "freedoms" at all anymore.

Very true. This link goes into more detail, and explains what rights have been taken and curtailed:

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/02/constitution.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

To Becky's mom...

It's difficult if not impossible to say any one particular right has been totally stripped away...but many have been "infringed upon" curtailed and limited.

The First amendment article allowing Freedom of speech is now limited thanks to "politically correct speech" and calling someone with a different opinion a hater or a racist

The First amendment article allowing "Freedom to publicly assemble" has been limited by Hr 347 ...The Gov's wiretapping and seizures are attacks on the "Freedom of Press" (so far freedom of religion and the right to petition the Gov haven't been touched...yet)

The 4th amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. This was reduced/compromised by the Patriot act and lessened more by NDAA...

there are more...

so it's not a total stripping away, it's a slow and steady diminish-ment...which leads one to believe they will eventually be so restrictive, they won't really be "freedoms" at all anymore.

Great post. The bolded part isnt entirely true though. A paster isnt allowed to endorce a political figure running for office. Which is a violation of both speech and religion. Actualy thinking about it, they just signed a law saying no one can protest if someone who is protected by the secret service is within a certain range, so we are no longer allowed to petition our government with our grevences either. Not in the form of protest anyway.

Edited by preacherman76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post. The bolded part isnt entirely true though. A paster isnt allowed to endorce a political figure running for office. Which is a violation of both speech and religion. Actualy thinking about it, they just signed a law saying no one can protest if someone who is protected by the secret service is within a certain range, so we are no longer allowed to petition our government with our grevences either. Not in the form of protest anyway.

That infringement on the "Freedom to Assemble" was HR347. It covered the secret service thing you mention...it also had some other "clauses"...one (of several) that burned me up was a clause that says "you can be removed and arrested from an area if you disrupt the operations of Government"...now how silly am I?... all this time...I thought that was THE POINT of a public protest...to be disruptive...

No....we can still submit written petitions to the Gov...but now that you mention it...I recall, there has been some restrictions put on those as well....paper type, text size...etc...etc. If your "petition" is not to specification, it will be ignored.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

freedom is only taken away from those that give it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

That's a very good question. I won't jump all over you. This is a question more people should ask. I ask it myself. But the answer is partially inherent. Meaning that if you never had this freedom, then you never will understand it or even miss it. And those that did have it, take it for granted and don't realize they are losing it or have lost it until it was too late. I would have preferred that Rafael tell us. But short of writing to him to explain, let me use a part of what he talked about. The Freedom that is being taken away is "Opportunity". The Right to do things for ourselves without government involvement or infringement. That is the core fiber of what makes us human. Any kind of Socialist government takes away this Right either slowly or all at once and it ends up enslaving the population. It becomes to a point that you can only do what the government dictates that you can do and any violation of even the smallest rule is met with drastic punishment. Sort of like how theft or adultery is met with amputation or death in some Muslim nations.

Try googling such men like: John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Sir William Blackstone. They express the ideas of natural rights or Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. These rights are always in opposition to government. Now, SOME government must exist or there is no Freedom. But government should be used to protect those Rights and not curtail them. But a Socialist government cannot be content until is has complete and total control.

Now most people in the world has grown up in some form of Socialism. We see Socialist Democracies in Europe but are the people really "Free"? These SDs evolved from Monarchies that took care of their populations. The people have never known anything else. And to a degree there is nothing wrong with that but since the age of Enlightenment, Man had bitten the apple and a few knew what true Freedom really was. As Rafael said, the two greatest documents ever penned were the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. These documents are as timeless as when the ink was still fresh. The Heart and Soul of what it is to be a free individual Human Being unfettered by government is in the words of those two documents.

Does this answer your question?

Thanks for taking a bit of time to answer my question, due to your answer, I felt I had to re-watch your video again ( as I am only learning more about these things going on in US politics etc )

Basically, I feel he could well be right when he compares Fidel Costro with Obama, ref to the changes gradually falling in the same way.... If this is true, and things are falling the same way, then I can see why a good number of citizens can feel upset over it... It could be that things are changing, slowly and surely building up and up until one day you sit in shock and think "WHAT THE FLOOK IS GOING ON?"... The man in the video speaks with not just passion, but fear in his words, you can even hear it in his voice... He saw how badly things went under Fidel, and he see's the same things slowly creeping up on you in the US.That would put fear into anyone who has seen the same things before and it shook them..History has an awful habit of repeating itself now and again...

Gotta hand it to the man in the video ( Cruz ) he has taken great observation...

He is the type of person I can tolerate and listen to ... His speech was not filled with the usual hate about the government, to a point where you can sence the uncomfortable anger, he differs and he stood out for me...

So, thanks for sharing the video, and thanks for taking a bit of time to explain things to me..I feel a bit relieved that I wasn't jumped on by someone screaming things about hate for him and so on, that sends off an uncomfortable vibe, and I prefer to skip those rants as much as I can... The man in your video demonstrates it perfectly well, as does your post..

Edited by Beckys_Mom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just have to say I disagree with your statement that some government must exist for there to be freedom, government does not grant you freedom. This is whats wrong with allot of politicians thinking. Constitution and Bill of Rights arnt some universal power that gave men freedom. There ideas to limit the government so the people under it are not oppressed. A governments whole purpose is to govern or in our case uphold the law of the land; for the sole purpose of social growth and prosperity.

You should go back and reread that post. Pay attention to the annotation of SOME and the next sentence. I never said that government grants freedom, but without it to protect those freedoms, there would only be anarchy. Government needs to run itself administratively and also Establish Justice and Insure Domestic Tranquility. Another way to look at that is to arbitrate conflicts between individual’s Rights.

The way I think about government is on a scale, with 0% being anarchy and 100% being totalitarian. Government in its proper place would be a non shifting shell (anchoring and protection) encompassing from about 10% to 30% (leaving plenty of room for debate), with even the most benevolent Socialist government starting at 30% then progressing toward 100% as time progresses.

It is not a requirement or necessity of man to have a governing authority over him.

There still needs to be some very limited authority in order to form a more perfect union. When a body of people come together to live in a society, there must also be limited government.

Also I would say imo the Magna Carta is higher up there globaly than our Declarations and Constitution.

Well, I’ll disagree with this. There are the 12 Tables of the Roman law. There are the writings of Solon, or even the Code of Hammurabi. All of these are sputtering starts. Is the Constitution the ultimate? Probably not and something better can always come along (which we haven’t seen yet). Becky or her children may one day bite the apple and that will lead to a new lease on Freedom. For sure, we are squandering it here. It is almost as if we have a psychosis over American Exceptionalism. As if we are the sole survivor of some catastrophic disaster and we are going around asking why only we survived? There is definitely a curse (ala ‘Oath’) upon us. But we need to get over it (Shake the Dark Energy) and become the Beacon of Light that we once were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To Becky's mom...

It's difficult if not impossible to say any one particular right has been totally stripped away...but many have been "infringed upon" curtailed and limited.

The First amendment article allowing Freedom of speech is now limited thanks to "politically correct speech" and calling someone with a different opinion a hater or a racist

That's the same over here, we have to watch our words carefully ..I hate it, there was a time when we all had more freedom to say certain things without being told we are not politically correct...

For example.. My dearest great uncle Tommy was deaf and dumb, in his day, all his family and friends ref to him as the dummy calling him - Dummy Donnelly as his nick name.. Now some of you may think - OH NO WAY, but see, it was long before I was born, that is how people addressed people like my uncle.. Thing is, my uncle was loved by them all..He was a very proud Irish football supporter and well dressed man, also sociable.... No one had a bad word to say about him, well other than the fact I felt he was tight with money, because any time an ice cream truck jingled by, he refused to give me money for ice cream lol ..That's just one example...But the political correctness has been going on for many years, long before Obama...I think it was introduced by the liberals? I could be wrong.. I feel they are ripping the ar*e clean out of this political correctness.. Its gone mad..

The First amendment article allowing "Freedom to publicly assemble" has been limited by Hr 347 .

I don't understand what that means?

The 4th amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. This was reduced/compromised by the Patriot act and lessened more by NDAA...

there are more...

so it's not a total stripping away, it's a slow and steady diminish-ment...which leads one to believe they will eventually be so restrictive, they won't really be "freedoms" at all anymore.

Oh this I do understand, I think everyone does.. It does seem like things are slowly slipping away bit by bit...I hope in the next 5 years or so that it hasn't gone completely pear shaped for any of you.....That would be a disaster...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that, I read through yours first before re-watching he video... It is hard for me to get my head around all of it at once ( as you can imagine if you were only learning about other cultures etc ) ..I am taking it all in, bit by bit... So thanks for the help on this... If I have more questions, I know I can ask...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post. The bolded part isnt entirely true though. A paster isnt allowed to endorce a political figure running for office. Which is a violation of both speech and religion.

A pastor has the same right as anyone else regarding political speech, even from the pulpit.

He cannot be prosecuted for that.

He can lose tax-exempt status for that.

Actualy thinking about it, they just signed a law saying no one can protest if someone who is protected by the secret service is within a certain range, so we are no longer allowed to petition our government with our grevences either. Not in the form of protest anyway.

Protesting doesn't mean disruption. In today's world, they're very careful to prevent assassination, thus the restriction. But there has always existed the same process for petitioning the government regarding grievances. Today we call it lobbying.

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for taking a bit of time to answer my question, due to your answer, I felt I had to re-watch your video again ( as I am only learning more about these things going on in US politics etc )

I’m glad you liked it. What you describe as “It could be that things are changing, slowly and surely building up and up until one day you sit in shock and think "WHAT THE FLOOK IS GOING ON?"” is the true nature of government. Government is a great danger and like fire, if it can be controlled becomes a useful tool, but should never be taken for granted. Rafael does speak with passion and fear, but also of knowing. If you’ve never experienced that kind of fear, you can never understand the passion. And that is why it can get confused with hate. Rafael is one that you can learn the difference from. Passion should turn into vigilance but I fear that hate will into fanaticism.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.