October 1st, 2012

Over There And Over Here: A Letter From The Editor


Chinese Female Soldiers

Chinese Female Soldiers


Over There And Over Here

By Elias Alias on October 01 2012

As a Viet Nam Veteran, USMC, I find various random tidbits of our history rather fascinating. When I quit college in 1965 and volunteered to serve my country, I trusted the government’s story of the day, which ran something like this – We must fight communism “over there” so that we would not later be forced to fight communism on our doorsteps, “over here”.


Chinese Female Calvary

Chinese Female Cavalry


That was the official line, the story which justified embarking on an undeclared war which would last ten years and cost America fifty-eight thousand military deaths while countless others were maimed for life. Some, all these years later, still languish away on upper floors in Veterans Administration hospitals, out of sight and for the most part out of mind.

In looking back upon those tumultuous times, I realize that I had been predisposed to believe the government’s deception by simply being confused throughout my school years. That which confused me had supplanted the truth of America with a subtle but powerful deception. The deception had it that the government was America.

I say to you today that America is not the government, but instead is the people and the land. America is our good neighbors who live and work out their lives on the most bountiful continent on earth, and it is our tradition of moral uprightness, personal responsibility, family values, the honor and dignity which arises naturally from living a life based on love.  It is “We The People” and our properties, our creativity, our ingenuity, our inventiveness, our work ethic, our loyalty to the vision of the founders who created the greatest written documents of human history, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution for the united States of America. That is America to me. And that America is worth fighting for. It is worth dying for. And it is worth living for.

That is a bit of what America really is, and that is not to be confused with the government which came out of those documents signed by the original Patriots. To confuse this country, these people, this land, with a man-made government is of course the single-most damning alienation to ever hit a youthful mind, and cannot help but render a confusion which distracts one’s patriotic allegiance, makes one unwittingly subjected to the control of power-mongers who would influence American policy, both foreign and domestic.  That deception erodes the vigilance required for proper oversight of our self-governance.




So in my old age I hark back belatedly to the words of Henry David Thoreau:

That government is best which governs least”; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe — “That government is best which governs not at all”; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against a standing army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government. The standing army is only an arm of the standing government. The government itself, which is only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it.”

The Viet Nam war was the second serious war spawned by the United Nations, (Korea being the first). The influence of the United Nations is why our Congress did not “declare” war as required by the U.S. Constitution.  The fact that the Congress did not declare war is not an indictment of the founding documents, but instead is an indictment of the government which came out of those documents. In fielding an army to a foreign sovereign nation-state without a declaration of war, the government displayed its ability to act outside the parameters of its granted authority. In other words, the government violated its own law. It has done so with every war since WWII.

Still, across ten years of war in Viet Nam, three million young American military women and men, rotating in and out, served “in country” in Viet Nam. After the fall of Saigon in April of 1975, Viet Nam became Vietnam, its name morphing into one word instead of two. And it came under communist rule. Of course you already know this.

But what many reading here may not know is that when American troops were deployed “across the pond” to Viet Nam, we were not really going over there to stop communism. We just thought we were, and we believed that we were because at that time, a mere twenty years after our victory in WWII, we trusted what the Federal government told us.  After all, the nation which decided the outcome of WWII was an honorable nation and would never deceive its people over something as serious as a war, right? Young Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines seldom question the morality of a war this nation sends them off to fight, until long afterward. It is as Viet Nam poet Steve Mason once wrote: “Old soldiers with bad gums find out too late whom they really served.”


Chinese Female Soldiers 2009

Chinese Female Soldiers 2009


Americans generally were mesmerized by the nationalism touted from the government-obliging media – America could do no wrong. If suddenly communism reared its ugly head to become America’s new enemy after we had defeated the Nazis and the Japanese, then so be it.

But enough of that. History since the Viet Nam war is clear enough, and it is embarrassing when peered into very deeply.  A government which would deceive a generation and send armies afield against the red communist enemy would later build on that deception in subsequent military activities, such as the deceptions which gave us Gulf War I and II, and Afghanistan. One must ask, how do these “enemies” continue to pop up, generation after generation?

Yet if one supposes that our enemies have been manufactured by secretive operations which hide behind a veil called “national security secrecy”, one is branded by minions of the powers-that-be as a “conspiracy theorist”.

I, being old now and looking back upon Twentieth Century history through wizened eyes, am one such conspiracy theorist, and because I did serve in Viet Nam I cannot overlook some things which escape the scrutiny of Fox News, CNN, and the other networks. The fact that today our government is known to readily sell large packets of the U.S. national debt to the largest communist nation on earth, Red China, gives me pause.  What’s with that, eh? How does a government which sacrificed fifty-eight thousand of America’s finest in a vicious war against communism turn right around and openly sell our national debt to the world’s biggest communist nation? How does this government justify today the Viet Nam war when it permits U.S. corporations to openly offshore America’s manufacturing base to communist China?

What are we to make of GM’s love affair with communist China? Recall the old adage, “What’s good for GM is good for America”. Did you catch this video when it went around the Internet a while back?

*Full screen link:




And of course Wal-Mart is in bed with communist Red China, as we all know.  Much of our manufacturing base has been off-shored to China. Many Chinese communist business interests have bought their way onto U.S. soil.  So it begs the question – why was I really sent to fight in Viet Nam? Obviously this government has a cozy relationship with the largest communist nation on earth, yet it told my generation we should be willing to sacrifice our very lives to fight communism. What gives?

There are, of course, to the patient and persistent, answers to such questions.  In my search for answers I encountered much information which has been conveniently hidden or down-played until the Internet arrived.  I will share a couple of examples.



It is public knowledge that the Rockefeller family donated the land in New York City on which the United Nations international headquarters building stands. The following paragraphs are found here on September 30 2012 _


Quotes from David Rockefeller’s Memoirs (Random House, New York, 2002) Chapter 27, pages 404 and 405. Cited by Dr. Dennis Cuddy:

“My lifetime pursuits as an internationalist might best be summarized by one rather extraordinary day in 1995. October 23 was a busy day at the Council on Foreign Relations. The fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations had drawn almost two hundred heads of government to New York, and many had asked to speak at the Council. but even then the day was unusual for the diversity of the speakers: Jiang Zemin, president of the People’s Republic of China and heir apparent to Deng Xiaoping; Vaclav Havel of the Czech Republic… Yasser Arafat… and, finally, Fidel Castro…. With the exception of Havel, these men had vowed to fight to the death against imperialist America. Now, with the end of the Cold War, they flocked to the center of world capitalism, eager to meet and close deals with American bankers and corporate executives, or at least to be seen with them — even Castro….

“For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure–one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.

“The anti-Rockefeller focus of these otherwise incompatible political positions owes much to Populism. ‘Populists’ believe in conspiracies, and one of the most enduring is that a secret group of international bankers and capitalists, and their minions, control the world’s economy. Because of my name and prominence as the head of the Chase for many years, I have earned the distinction of ‘conspirator in chief’ from some of these people.

“Populists and isolationists ignore the tangible benefits that have resulted from our active international role during the past half-century. Not only was the very real threat posed by Soviet Communism overcome, but there have been fundamental improvements in societies around the world, particularly in the United States, as a result of global trade, improved communications, and the heightened interaction of people from different cultures. Populists rarely mention these positive consequences, nor can they cogently explain how they would have sustained American economic growth and the expansion of our political power without them.”

-end quoted passages-

Those are words written by David Rockefeller in his autobiography. Now let’s look at excerpts from an article he published in the New York Times on August 10, 1973, after taking a publicized trip to China:

From A China Traveler

By David Rockefeller


One is impressed immediately by the sense of national harmony. From the loud patriotic music at the border onward, there is a very real and pervasive dedication to Chairman Mao and Maoist principles. Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high moral and community purpose.


The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history. How extensively China opens up and how the world interprets and reacts to the social innovations and life styles she has developed is certain to have a profound effect on the future of many nations.

-end quoted passages from David Rockefeller’s 1973 New York Times article-

While savoring the accolades Rockefeller lavished upon Chairman Mao, let us remember that Mao was the fat cat who brought communism to China after WWII.  And for a couple of quick glimpses of just one aspect of Mao’s “social experiment”, let us look at the amazing discipline demonstrated by specially trained women in today’s Chinese military. This sort of discipline can produce the perfect war machine, and convert the human being into a trans-humanized robotized mechanism of the state. Isn’t that just what the economic and monetary geniuses of the internationalists’ New World Order want for all of us? In its beautiful and impressive uniformity, it represents the total subjugation of the individual by the state – the ideal goal and achievement of communism.



The Fedgov mantra of the 1960s was that we must fight communism “over there” so we would not have to fight communism “over here”. Have we heard that same mantra repeated for the War on Terror? Did the Fedgov dare trot that old lie out one more time after 9/11/2001? Did Fedgov change the lyrics from “communism” to “terrorism”? Did the American people buy it again? Can the same reader who thinks he can tell me why I was sent to Viet Nam in the 1960s please tell me why our troops were sent to Iraq and Afghanistan a half-century later?



And finally -

As a Marine I ask, head bowed, will the few and the proud beneath deception’s cloud stand above the crowd, extinguish sins Fedgov allowed, in the name of the Oath once vowed?



Semper Fi!

Elias Alias

Placing billboards outside of military bases to remind service members of their oath

Please donate and support Oath Keepers mission, every little bit helps!

 Read More Posts

Comments posted belong to the commenter alone, and are not endorsed by Oath Keepers or the administrators for this site. We will remove offensive, racist, or threatening comments.

22 Responses to “Over There And Over Here: A Letter From The Editor”

Pages: [1] 2 3 » Show All

  1. 1
    Pilgrims Pride Says:

    Written in the best traditions of the Americanists.

    REMEMBER: Before there was a U.S. there was an A.

    The United States is our invention, a creature to serve our purposes not we its.

    God bless!

    The Pilgrim’s Pride

  2. 2
    Austrian Economics is Color Blind Says:

    Ron Paul has rebuffed the Rockefellerite / internationalists’ claim to legitimacy that is based on “tangible benefits”:

    Ron Paul: “This real-estate bubble will burst, as all bubbles do” (part 2)
    (The quote below is from the beginning)

    -Begin excerpt-

    Modern day globalists would like us to believe they invented globalism. Yet, all they are offering is an unprecedented plan for global power, to be placed in the hands of a few powerful special interests.

    Globalism has existed ever since international trade started thousands of years ago. Whether it was during the Byzantine Empire, or the more recent British Empire, it worked rather well when the goal was honest trade and the currency was gold.

    Today, however, world government is the goal. Its tools are fiat money and the international agencies that believe they can plan globally just as many others over the centuries believed they could plan domestically, ignoring the fact that all efforts at socialism have failed.

    The day of reckoning for all this mischief is now at hand. The dollar is weakening in spite of all the arguments for its continued strength. Economic law is overruling political edicts.

    Just how long will the U.S Dollar and the U.S. Taxpayers be able to bail out every failed third world economy and pay the bills for policing the world? The U.S. troops are now in 140 nations around the world.

    The answer is certainly not forever, and probably not much longer, since the world economies are readjusting to the dislocations of the past 30 years of mismanagement and misallocation of capital characteristic of fiat money.

    -End excerpt-

    Any benefits as a result of the internationalists’ efforts happen as a result of their inadvertent conformity to the free market principle of specialization and the division of labor.

    But in a free market, global trade happens on its own, without the need for the state.

    Further, if the collectivists of different countries hadn’t destroyed their own economies with fiat money in the first place, we wouldn’t have had all these wars; And the citizens of different countries would freely trade with each other.

    So … thanks for nothing, Rockefeller (The Fed’s working out great, by the way.)

    More should be said about specialization and the division of labor, because issues of local versus foreign markets, tariffs, etc., logically flow from one’s understanding of it.

    As alluded to, above, the division of labor is a good thing; And, in fact, every trade you make is the result of the division of labor (as well as the result of profit seeking. Always. Every time).

    What logically follows from this, is that global trade, outsourcing (to the extent it doesn’t violate national sovereignty), importing foreign goods, etc. is inherently good. Nobody’s rights are violated, and both parties of a trade between nations benefit.

    And – not that we’re supposed to think in terms of “national economy” – America’s economy is not hurt at all by imports, qua imports. It’s actually a Marxist way of thinking to see America in economic competition with other nations.

    It’s Marxist because it views the economy as a national product, rather than the result of choices made my millions of profit driven individuals using their property as they see fit.

    Please consider these arguments made in favor of the international division of labor, because the “buy local” / “buy America” idea is based on bad economics:

    Defending the Undefendable (Chapter 23: The Importer) by Walter Block
    (This video thoroughly demolishes the various “buy America” arguments)

    Classic Ron Paul – 1988 Campaign Interview (part 2)
    (First part of the video is Ron Paul on the issue of trade deficits)

    Sound money is the key to freedom and prospertity, not protectionism in the form of boycotts and tariffs. A free market can expose the faults of Communism, but not nationalist trade wars; They both come from collectivist thinking, anyway.

  3. 3
    Cal Says:

    “I say to you today that America is not the government, but instead is the people and the land.”

    I say that the people ARE the government. When the people started trusting those they put into office to run things “under our Constitution” is when these problems started. Now the people do not even know the Constitution, Declaration of Independence,the states part in it, the peoples parts in it, what is legal to be done by those serving, what is NOT legal to be done by those serving, etc.

    It is now, and has been, taught in school over decades as a ‘color the flag, Paul Revere’s ride” type of comic book story instead of as the history of our country and the type of government we actually have, a Constitutional Republic.

    The last decade or so, it has been taught and represented everywhere as if the President is the “leader”, runs the USA instead of. Big deals are made over how many points each candidate makes; what agenda they bring with them that “We the people” are to follow; instead of can the candidate do the job following the blueprint of the office as is REQUIRED.

    The US Constitution is the supreme law of our land and ALL laws, bills, etc must be “in pursuance of” (consistent with) it. The Oath is legally binding and does not cease upon the occasions of leaving office or of discharge. Because it does not cease, if they break the solemn legally binding Oath REQUIRED of them to take and keep to be in that position they occupy, then they no longer meet the requirements of that position and MUST be replaced immediately. Yet we let it go.

    Even constitutional lawyers act as if the supreme law of this land means nothing. If they feel that way and will not defend it in the courts, how do they expect the LEO’s, military, etc to understand IT is the law to be enforced; not the illegal domestic enemy stuff passed as a “law”, “bill”, etc.

    If you believe in the Constitution, if you are keeping your oath; then why is it that the courts are not inundated with lawsuits over all this illegal stuff happening? Why are not the justices who ARE keeping their Oaths not getting backed up (like the justice who said that parts of the NDAA were NOT constitutional?)

  4. 4
    Austrian Economics is Color Blind Says:

    Cal @ comment #3:

    You asked why the courts aren’t inundated with lawsuits over all this illegal stuff happening.

    The reason is that our representatives aren’t willing to hold our judges to their oath to the Constitution, and are not even willing to obey the Constitution, themselves. So lawsuits would be pointless.

    It appears those representatives who are deliberately violating their oath must be forcibly removed from office, as argued by the Second Amendment (the scope of which only applies to the relationship of the states to the general government [as is appropriate for a contract between states]; but the principle of which justifies the same policy toward state governments, which policy was expressed in Federalist No. 28).


    1. As comment #1 notes, the whole point of the Constitution was to secure liberty for the peoples of the several sovereign states. So whatever happens, we must be mindful of state sovereignty, and also respect any state’s desire to secede from the Union.

    2. Unfortunately, not only do we have a bunch of Marxist community organizing groups who actually want chaos so they can co-opt it, but many who claim to want to return to the Constitution will inadvertently end up fighting against it because they have bought into a collectivist interpretation of the Constitution, and because they don’t really believe in a fully free market (Which is not the same as anarchism, by the way; Government is needed to settle disputes, and “arbitration services” are a form of government). So, unless enough people come to believe in individual liberty, the use of force will turn out to be counter-productive.

    3. Free speech, even for the Marxist agitators who are not in government, must be protected, if we are to maintain our own freedom. This is why the non-government Marxists can never be a target unless they themselves physically violate our rights. Besides, the free market is intellectually and morally defensible, so we can reach the Marxists.

  5. 5
    Freedom76 Says:

    Two Carrier Groups Are Now Operating In The China Sea Robert Johnson | Oct. 4, 2012


  6. 6
    Freedom76 Says:

    Has China ALREADY Surpassed the U.S. as the World’s Largest Economy? By Washington’s Blog Global Research, April 05, 2012


  7. 7
    Freedom76 Says:

    Published on Oct 9, 2012 by Ben Swann Reality Check explains the petro-dollar and looks at how the national media isn’t telling you that China is actively working to end it


  8. 8
    Freedom76 Says:

    The China-Japan Dispute Isn’t Getting Any Better, And Now Taiwan Is Jumping Into The Fray Mike “Mish” Shedlock, Global Economic Trend Analysis Oct. 10, 2012,


  9. 9
    Cal Says:

    Austrian Economics is Color Blind at comment number 4.

    That is partially true. We have judges that are doing their job and keeping their oath. WE need to support them, starting with the judge who said the NDAA is not Constitutional, and start letting everyone else know that the judge who did Obama’s bidding is a domestic enemy of the USA. Publicly embarrassing him as a lapdog, traitor to his oath, his country, etc.

    WE can use the media to our advantage also. Start with a lawsuit against the head of the FCC, and about 4 immediate layers down – Supreme Court stated in Red Lion v. FCC in 1969: “It is the purpose of the First Amendment to preserve an uninhibited marketplace of ideas in which truth will ultimately prevail, rather than to countenance monopolization of that market, whether it be by the Government itself or a private licensee. It is the right of the public to receive suitable access to social, political, esthetic, moral, and other ideas and experiences which is crucial here. That right may not constitutionally be abridged either by Congress or by the FCC.”

    Cut the snake, sorry – that gives snakes a bad name – scum sucking turd piles off at the head – at the media level now.

    All states have constitutions, a republic form of government, use them and the US Constitution against them. Make a very public list of traitors within each state listing what they support that will hurt the people of that state. Call for prosecutions.

    Prosecute all of those caught in each state committing election fraud. Every state in the 2012 GOP had it committed; vidoes are out, multiple people were witnesses – and no one can prosecute this?

    We also have domestic enemies working within the states to bring our nation down. WE should start holding them to the state constitutions, of which many hold the US Constitution to be the supreme law; and letting those within each state what crimes they have committed: assisting Agenda 21 forward through different disguised agencies, etc.

    Create news centers in each state that is constitutional law abiding, informing the people in each state what is happening within the state that is against the peoples interest. These problems where people are going out and hurting people as a “game” track it back and you will find that Obama is behind it. Let them know exactly how they are being used, and what the outlook is for them personally when the takeover of our legitimate government is completed. They will never be able to be trusted so they will be used and disposed of (my surmise).

    We can fight back, remember if a law, etc is not “in pursuant of” the US Constitution – make people aware. Fight back through the courts, make lists to be publicly posted of where judges did not do their duty as assigned by the Constitution and went against it. More importantly – make public lists of the judges who have done their duty in a climate of treason – make them out to be the heroes and treasures they are so that the people know who to believe in.

    Watergate – a much lesser crime then what is being committed now with Obama, Holder, H. Clinton, and a bunch of other traitors – On July 24, 1974, in United States v. Nixon, the Court, which did not include the recused Justice William Rehnquist, ruled unanimously that claims of executive privilege over the tapes were void.

    Yet we are allowing a person who was put into office dictator like powers instead of pushing for constitutional law as is our right because at this time it is STILL our legitimate government. It is time to start acting like it is.

    We can take our country back legally, but it must be lawyers who start this. I cannot prosecute or I would be already – though I am researching that to. This is not going to be easy, but isn’t it batter them letting them take us over without a whimper? Or letting them force us into battle so that they can say to the people who are still finding their way- see, they are criminals?

  10. 10
    Cal Says:

    Smart meters, another Agenda 21 solution to a problem we did not have. They are being putting in at gunpoint, officers come to make sure they are put on a persons house – where is this legal? Not only are they not healthy for us, but we pay more for electricity so that they can track us.

    If they have not been taken down, go watch the videos on youtube.

    But there is one wherein Santa Cruz, California (surprised?) where the Santa Cruz board kept their oaths:
    setyoufreenews (.com) /2011/12/19/santa-cruz-board-questions-pge-smart-meter-shutoffs-video/
    or here:
    youtube (.com) /watch?v=yIGqz_2uGTs&feature=player_embedded

    We need to get a hold of these people, can we move them into higher state government positions? Can we make it publicly known that they stood up for the people a they are supposed to?

Pages: [1] 2 3 » Show All

Leave a Reply

© 2012 www.oathkeepers.org | Oath Keepers Corp Address: 5130 S. Fort Apache Rd - Las Vegas, NV 89148