Dr Robert Bowman was an USA Airforce Lieutenant Commander of 101 combat missions for his country.He has a PHD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering.Dr Bowman noticed a radical shift in US foreign policy with the Reagan administration when they saw the policy of pre-emptive wars as a solution to US security.We now see today the folly of such policies.

see http://www.thepatriots.us/left_and_right_together.html

Dr Bowman says we must demand that Govt;
(1)follows the Constitution
(2) honours the truth
(3) serves the people

In the light of the move Globalistion,our Govt here has also failed us.Even more disturbing is that we do not have formal constitution that delineates the freedoms and rights of the individual.

Dr Bowman,"There is no longer Republican or Democrat,conservative or liberal,left or right.There are only we the patriots,speaking the truth and taking back our country."

Do we Australians have enough wisdom and courage to do likewise?

Do we Australians have enough wisdom and courage to do likewise?
Arjay,
I sincerely hope so but evidence suggests otherwise. Sorry !

The question is not can we debate an answer here but rather does the general population really want to know? I would suggest no. I don't find that i get much encouragement as i travel around, most people believe the fear campaigns that drive the pre-emptive mentality and by doing so create self fulfilling prophecies.
War is money and that money drives an economy that is crumbling under it's own weight. I am talking of the US. Here in Australia we are so convinced that unless we stay tight to the yanks and do as we are told the asians will come and get us. This attitude has made us a very poor friend to the US, the type that let's their best mate drive drunk. Our blind faith in the US system of globalisation and manipulation of world affairs has left our society paranoid and jumping at shadows.
If their really is a way forward for us here in this country then we need to find some intestinal fortitude and start voting in a way that will really hurt the government and opposition, but while we keep returning polls that show we are scared that a few boat people constitute a major security risk and that China are trying to invade because they offer aid without a condescending tone then the governments of all colours will continue to feed on our fear.

Such things begin with 'one'.... I'm up for it :)

but.. I sense Arjay ... you vision might be a bit different from mine.

You are a bit toooo deep into conspiracy lala land for me.. and that's something as I'm quite a Beck/Oreilly fan :)

This is how the lunatic left treat Orielly.. amazing stuff.

1/ Oreilly makes assertion "But our US troops committed war crimes..and perpetrated a massacre at Malmedy during the battle of the bulge.. slaughtering German soldiers who had surrended.

2/ Keith Olberman of 'Countdown' show goes to great pains of mocking Orielly.. showing clearly that it was the reverse that actually happened.. it was SS soldiers who gunned down American troops who had surrendered.

Olberman waxes eloquent and long.. wallowing in his own arrogant swill, pandering to his salivationg "gocha orielly" audience with harping that Orielly was not only wrong once..BUT TWICE at different times on the same issue....

PAUSE.... dig...dig... dig a bit more..and VOILA.. we come up with....THIS!

In his book called "The Other Price of Hitler's War: German Military & Civilian Losses Resulting from WW 2," author Martin Sorge wrote the following regarding the events that took place after the massacre:

"It was in the wake of the Malmedy incident at Chegnogne that on New Year's Day 1945 some 60 German POWs were shot in cold blood by their American guards. The guilt went unpunished. It was felt that the basis for their action was orders that no prisoners were to be taken."

CONCLUSION.
a) yes.. there WAS a 'German SS massacre of Americans'
b) Yes..there WAS also a massacre of Germans by Americans..

Orielly is 100% CORRRRRRRECT!

Oooooo...I can't wait for the video version showing Olbermann in full flight.. like he's just eaten tweeey and Granny didn't see... only to have it fly back in his own liberal face with the above :)

Given that on any subject different views will be strongly held.
Given that each side will believe they have right on their side.
I think the west should bury deeply every thought of letting minority's control our actions.
We know it is wrong to torture prisoners,and that it is wrong to cut the heads of screaming prisoners.
We understand [well some do] Afghanistan and Iraq have been costly mistakes.
But one side says get out now the other warns it may be our streets that see human bombs if we come home.
The Americans have even more voices shouting advice ,even more views, I am content not to look there for our answers.
EVERY view has Merritt and it may be the minority one that wins, but without doubt PC is just one way of getting control from those things we should save our country.

Interesting article Arjay but one of the problems with the term 'patriot' is that anyone can subscribe to it. Patriotism can encompass a number of ideological viewpoints all believing their stance is the patriotic one eg. racism is often defended as patriotic as is fighting unwinnable or illegal wars.

The world patriot is often misused.

I agree with the premise of your topic and that is those who 'serve' us often act as would-be-dictators making decisions at the behest of global and corporate interests.

Many elected representatives I think believe this kowtowing to vested interests is in the people's best interests often falling victim to fear ie. "what if" they ignored the self-interests of corporations and jobs were lost. This is evident in the fear mongering with the mining tax in Australia.

Others may be corrupted or mislead, either way the interests of the people are often not served.

I note though that Bowman supports the right to bear arms (gun ownership) despite this being one of the biggest problems in the US - what about a vote to let the people decide if he is so interested in "serving the people".

Bowman makes some good comments about foreign debt, trade and better care for veterans which are all worthy but I wonder if his desire to serve Americans will outweigh the rights of other nations in trade relationships. Does his form of patriotism mean lesser rights for foreigners or other nations in serving the best interests of the American people.

I don't know the answer but I would be careful first in championing someone without scrutinising exactly what his agenda might be.