United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Security Stops Middle Schoolers From Singing The National Anthem At 9/11 Memorial
Source:
From The Trenches/Daily Sheeple
URL Source: http://www.fromthetrenchesworldrepo ... -anthem-at-911-memorial/158950
Published: Apr 27, 2016
Author: Melissa Dykes
Post Date: 2016-04-27 08:49:58 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 12733
Comments: 70
This is the epitome of modern Orwellian America. A group of 51 middle schoolers from North Carolina traveled all the way to the 9/11 memorial and decided to sing the national anthem. They were stopped — from singing the national anthem at the 9/11 memorial — halfway through by 9/11 memorial security because, well, it seems they didn’t have the proper permit. “You have to stop. This is considered a public demonstration!” one of the guards of one of Disneyland of American false flag monuments with a $60 million/year operating budget shouted at kids who don’t understand how misplaced their patriotism has become in modern America. Even though the teacher had previously asked a security guard for verbal permission, that was not good enough. The teacher was supposed to apply for a permit, pay $35 in fees, and wait the requisite ten days so the kids would be granted the permission by the memorial staff to sing the national anthem. The punchline? Waynesville Middle School principal Trevor Putnam reportedly said the whole incident was a great lesson in civics, NOT because they could have discussed the First Amendment or destruction of the Bill of Rights, but then he could ask the kids “Why are there limits put in place in public forums?” Why indeed. Delivered by The Daily Sheeple Contributed by Melissa Dykes of The Daily Sheeple. Melissa Dykes is a writer, researcher, and analyst for The Daily Sheepleand a co-creator of Truthstream Media with Aaron Dykes, a site that offers teleprompter-free, unscripted analysis of The Matrix we find ourselves living in. Melissa also co-founded Nutritional Anarchy with Daisy Luther of The Organic Prepper, a site focused on resistance through food self-sufficiency. Wake the flock up!
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-29) not displayed.
.
.
.
#30. To: Gatlin (#13)
Very odd and confused comment: --- We live in a country where, --- arbitrary decisions from individuals choose - what -- we can do, or not do? Are you 'all there'? -- As in cogent? I'd say you're crazy as a loon.
True ... and this needs to change.
I'd say that you don't know what you are talking about ... as usual. It is no insult to be called crazy as a loon. If loons could hire a lawyer, they could sue for defamation of character anyone who uses the phrase “crazy as a loon. They are, in fact, very smart birds and have done very well in the never- ending struggle for existence with nature and man.
Then apparently we agree that immoral laws should not be obeyed. In which case, the bible ref is of no relevance. Of course, as a US Air Force officer, I was permitted under Section 16c(1)(c) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to refuse to follow a general order or regulation that was contrary to the Constitution, the laws of the United States, or lawful superior orders or for some other reason is beyond the authority of the official issuing it. I could say that there is no "significant" bearing upon the point at hand. But, I could not rule out it being germane so as to imply "a fitness" for or appropriateness to the point.
Very odd and confused comment: --- We live in a country where, --- arbitrary decisions from individuals choose - what -- we can do, or not do? Are you 'all there'? -- As in cogent? I'd say you're crazy as a loon. Even our Presidents, as individuals, cannot make such arbitrary decisions. But perhaps you could cite an example, proving you're not Looney.
Time their to take with love If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Of course, as a US Air Force officer, I was permitted under Section 16c(1)(c) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to refuse to follow a general order or regulation that was contrary to the Constitution, the laws of the United States, or lawful superior orders or for some other reason is beyond the authority of the official issuing it. ---- I could say that there is no "significant" bearing upon the point at hand. ----- But, I could not rule out it being germane so as to imply "a fitness" for or appropriateness to the point. ----- Gatlin Here again we see your 'Looney' reasoning, unbecoming to an officer in the US Air Force. IF (big if) you indeed were ever an officer, or even in the air force.
Man, that's a low blow. I'm sure tater will show us his DD214.
I have no problem believing that you and tpaine know how to blow low ...
Here again we see your 'Looney' reasoning, unbecoming to an officer in the US Air Force. IF (big if) you indeed were ever an officer, or even in the air force. Gatty and I did this once before at LP, and he didn't show shit. I hear he has a good falsetto when he sings for Trump tho..
heterophobiasts gender freaks love ps toolcoolconservative pss canary psss obomba bernie willie green free If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Well, I don't blame him. I pulled out my DD214 about six years ago when I applied for a cemetery reservation. Other than that, it stays in my black box.
Ahem ... #91. To: tpaine (#80) #93. To: Goldi-Lox (#91)
Check ...
Have a link? A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.
Gatty and I did this once before at LP, and he didn't show shit. All I had when I signed up with VA heath care was my little pocket DD214. --- Surprisingly they pulled up a full sized copy in no time flat. --- Good luck if you as an individual try to get any more info out of records tho.
#91. To: tpaine (#80) #93. To: Goldi-Lox (#91)
#93. To: Goldi-Lox (#91) I [Goldi] have all of Gatlin's personal info. Wonderful. Glad to hear he's an honest man who is who he says he is … tpaine, tongue in cheek... What did you expect me to say to a sick woman who was ready to ban me? Never did find out how much it cost you to get her to post that.. Got honesty?
I would have at one time expected you to be truthful and honorable. But I no longer hold that expectation, since you have been blatantly exposed as a liar. I now find it difficult and near impossible to associate with or post to anyone with such low character.
Never did find out how much it cost you to get her to post that.. Got honesty? And I you, but that all changed when you took advantage of a dying confused old man, harrowup, and a dying woman, as above... All you exposed was your ability to get Goldie to say she had your info.. SHE DID NOT VERIFY THAT YOU WERE AN OFFICER IN OUR ARMED SERVICES. Associate? How weird. -- But sure, don't post if that turns you on. --- You'll once again join the fine company of clowns who can't rationally debate, and hide behind the bozo.
No, Deckard has made it abundantly clear that only a Paultard is capable of deciding that. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
I'm sure tater will show us his DD214. Basic training, North Korean Air Force. Spud scouts. Now, that is a GOOD one!
Seems to me that Romans 13 lays out the legitimate functions of government. Anything else maybe isn't legitimate government.
Have a link? I watched it live on TV ... He was good and make his points clear. Some gave him Hell afterwards because he mispronounced a couple of words. The little mouthy shit behind the podium in the news room led the charge ... as though he should say anything after Obama mispronounced "corpsman." You may remember that instead of pronouncing "korman" ... he called it "corpseman." The only thing I observed is that someone need to tell Trump to hold his hands still. He can be animated in the board room, but it is distracting when he continually waved his hands on TV. Just my opinion. I am sure you can find a transcript or a video on the Web ...
Paul lays it out this way: Nowhere do I find where Paul said one could pick and choose which laws they want to follow or disobey, with one exception. He did say that you could resist government authority and the law could be disobeyed if they did not follow God’s law. Am I right on wrong on this? Paul doesn’t go into specifics and what he does not say, and I think we all believe … is that if the government officials who are servants of God screw things up, then they should be removed from office. I fully expect that removal will start from the top down under Trump. GO TRUMP!!!
Deckard has made it abundantly clear that only a Paultard is capable of deciding that. Of course we can count on you to join with Gatlin and happily turn in all of your firearms when a law is passed making them illegal and also turning in those "lawbreakers" who do not willingly submit to the state and turn in their own firearms. The "law is the law", right? See - that's your problem, you and Gatlin. You do not know the difference between a moral and an immoral law. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Amen I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
I have already addressed this in a couple of posts, which you cowardly ran away from. Should We Obey Authority … No Matter What? The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is coordinating with Christian ministers nationwide so that –if the government imposes MARTIAL LAW – the ministers will urge their flocks to OBEY the government. A number of Christian leaders say that Christians must obey the government … no matter what. For example, Robert Deffinbaugh – pastor at Community Bible Chapel in Richardson, Texas – says: Whether the government be totalitarian or democratic, the Christian’s obligation to submit to it is the same. This is not an unrealistic or abstract concept. After all, most churches in Nazi-era Germany supported the Nazis. The German clergy used the same rationale to support Hitler that many American churches are using today to demand obedience to authority … Romans 13:1-7 ***** Your urging Christians to lay down like sheep and obey government "no matter what" is blasphemous. In reality, Christian (and Jewish) leaders throughout history have explained that we must disobey tyrannical governments. The Book of Maccabees – an ancient Jewish book purporting to document the events which Chanukah celebrates – apparently says: Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God. Gordan Runyan – pastor of Immanuel Baptist Church – points out numerous instances in the Bible of men and women who disobeyed their government rulers, and were rewarded by God and praised as holy. Indeed, the Bible mentions “justice” more than almost any other topic. The Bible demands that we do justice and to stand up to ANYONE — including the rich or powerful — who do injustice or oppress the people. Baptist minister Chuck Baldwin writes: Did John the Baptist violate God’s principle of submission to authority when he publicly scolded King Herod for his infidelity? Did Simon Peter and the other Apostles violate God’s principle of submission to authority when they refused to stop preaching on the streets of Jerusalem? Did Paul violate God’s principle of submission to authority when he refused to obey those authorities who demanded that he abandon his missionary work? In fact, Paul spent almost as much time in jail as he did out of jail. Remember that every apostle of Christ (except John) was killed by hostile civil authorities opposed to their endeavors. Christians throughout church history were imprisoned, tortured, or killed by civil authorities of all stripes for refusing to submit to their various laws and prohibitions. Did all of these Christian martyrs violate God’s principle of submission to authority? So, even the great prophets, apostles, and writers of the Bible (including the writer of Romans Chapter 13) understood that human authority – even civil authority – is limited. Any government that is a “terror to good works” is acting beyond its authority and must be resisted. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much The "law is the law", right? See - that's your problem, you and Gatlin. You do not know the difference between a moral and an immoral law. Look, dipshit, if anyone comes for my guns, as a government action, and as a rule of law of confiscation, then those coming to my residence will get the bullets first. If I do something illegal and there is a warrant for my arrest or I'm breaking laws inside my home... I'm surely not going to kill cops and then act stupid and portray myself as an innocent citizen and I don't know why my pitbull was shot for trying to chew off an officers arm. Big difference between a mass government confiscation as a rule of law and being told you can't sing at a monument by a tool bag that was told he was wrong after his employers found out what he did. Spin your YELLA BULLSHIT somewhere else. Don't waste my time, Paultard. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Wasn't it the law in Nazi Germany that Jews had to be gassed. Just following orders. Wasn't it the law in the United States that slavery was permitted. Doesn't the Bible say not to murder people like the Germans did it World War II. Doesn't the Bible say that taking men and enslaving them is wrong. I know that there was slavery in the Bible. It was more of indentured servants than the slavery that was in America.
Uh that isn't in the Bible.
Chapter 13 1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. 8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. 9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. 11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. 12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light. 13 Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying. 14 But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.
Uh that isn't in the Bible. Well... nah, I'm gonna skip this one.
Wasn't it the law in Nazi Germany that Jews had to be gassed. Just following orders. I will only take one of these, all others have the same relative answer. Paul said that if the law (orders) conflicted with God's law, then it should not be obeyed. The law (order) should not have been followed by Christians ... The “I was just following orders” defense to charges of military atrocity and human rights violations were rejected in the Nuremberg trals, held by the Allies after WWII. This was a landmark decision in international law, as the denial of the superior orders defense confirms that responsibility runs to the individual even when the individual was acting on their orders.
So should we honor gay marriage? It's the "law"? Or obey god and not commit adultry. Or claim that two men are married and that it is right and we should obey it because it is the "law"?
I didn't read the last part of your original quote. Ok.
Obey God, of course ... need you ask? I would think not.
It was still a work in progress and I made an add on while I was thinking about it. Sorry if I messed you up. I don't believe we are apart on this. I say that if "it" violates God's law, then don't do it. If it doesn't violate God's law and you don't like it, then it is your personal choice to violate the law (as in civil disobedience) but be prepared to accept the consequences. How far one will go for a principle is a personal choice.
Thanks. I reviewed this before I started to post about it. You posting it here is good for those too lazy to look it up.
We live in a country where the Rule of Law is the legal principle that law should govern, as opposed to being governed by arbitrary decisions from individuals to do what they choose we can do, or not do.
--- "We live in a country ---- opposed to being governed by arbitrary decisions from individuals to do what they choose we can do, or not do." ---
#31. To: tpaine (#30)
We live in a country where, --- arbitrary decisions from individuals choose - what -- we can do, or not do?
#32. To: tpaine (#30)
I'd say you're crazy as a loon.
#33. To: Pinguinite (#28)
(Edited)
I only asked you to cite an example where quoting the Bible justifies obeying a law that is immoral … since I have never heard anyone do that.
#34. To: Gatlin (#31)
Gatlin (#13) --- We live in a country where the Rule of Law is the legal principle that law should govern, as opposed to being governed by arbitrary decisions from individuals to do what they choose we can do, or not do.
True ... and this needs to change.
#35. To: Deckard (#0)
(Edited)
to
send
the
thought
minders
minions
another
country
of
their
liking
choosing
the
pc
facebooter
un
too
them
boris
#36. To: Gatlin (#33)
Pinguinite (#28) (Edited) -- I only asked you to cite an example where quoting the Bible justifies obeying a law that is immoral … since I have never heard anyone do that.
#37. To: tpaine (#36)
IF (big if) you indeed were ever an officer, or even in the air force.
#38. To: Fred Mertz (#37)
(Edited)
Man, that's a low blow.
#39. To: Fred Mertz, Y'ALL (#37)
Man, that's a low blow. --- I'm sure tater will show us his DD214.
#40. To: Gatlin, toolconservative (#38)
benders
boris
too
hack
attack
trolls
outed
all
the
freaks
will
out
the
die
hards
especially
trains
#41. To: tpaine (#39)
#42. To: tpaine, Fred Mertz, Y'ALL (#39)
(Edited)
Gatty and I did this once before at LP, and he didn't show shit.
#70. To: tpaine, Goldi-Lox (#68)
So? When will you meet the terms of the challenge? I'm still waiting.
You are not waiting on me, the terms have long since been complied with to Goldi.
Gatlin posted on 2014-05-15
I have all of Gatlin's personal info.
But no one else can have access to it.
So, what's your point?
To make us jump thru your hoops?
Just a pain in the ass.
Yes.
That'd be you.
Goldi-Lox posted on 2014-05-18
I [Goldi] have all of Gatlin's personal info.
Wonderful. Glad to hear he's an honest man who is who he says he is …
[Boldness Added]
tpaine posted on 2014-05-18
#43. To: BorisY (#40)
#44. To: Gatlin (#19)
I was listening to Trump's speech.
#45. To: Fred Mertz (#41)
Man, that's a low blow. --- I'm sure tater will show us his DD214.
Well, I don't blame him. ---- I pulled out my DD214 about six years ago when I applied for a cemetery reservation. --- Other than that, it stays in my black box.
#46. To: tpaine, Fred Mertz (#45)
(Edited)
Gatty and I did this once before at LP, and he didn't show shit.
#70. To: tpaine, Goldi-Lox (#68)
So? When will you meet the terms of the challenge? I'm still waiting.
You are not waiting on me, the terms have long since been complied with to Goldi.
Gatlin posted on 2014-05-15
I have all of Gatlin's personal info.
But no one else can have access to it.
So, what's your point?
To make us jump thru your hoops?
Just a pain in the ass.
Yes.
That'd be you.
Goldi-Lox posted on 2014-05-18
I [Goldi] have all of Gatlin's personal info.
Wonderful. Glad to hear he's an honest man who is who he says he is …
tpaine posted on 2014-05-18
#47. To: Gatlin (#42)
To: tpaine (#80) I have all of Gatlin's personal info. But no one else can have access to it. So, what's your point? To make us jump thru your hoops? Just a pain in the ass. Yes. That'd be you. Goldi-Lox posted on 2014-05-18
#48. To: tpaine, Fred Mertz (#47)
What did you expect me to say ...
#49. To: Gatlin (#48)
I would have at one time expected you to be truthful and honorable.
But I no longer hold that expectation, since you have been blatantly exposed as a liar.
I now find it difficult and near impossible to associate with or post to anyone with such low character.
#50. To: Gatlin (#17)
Does Romans 13 say that YOU can decide which government and what laws are legitimate?
#51. To: Fred Mertz, tater (#37)
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#52. To: GrandIsland (#50)
#53. To: GrandIsland, Gatlin, pinguinite, vicomte13 (#50)
#54. To: ConservingFreedom (#44)
I was listening to Trump's speech.
#55. To: A K A Stone, GrandIsland, pinguinite, vicomte13 (#53)
(Edited)
Seems to me that Romans 13 lays out the legitimate functions of government. Anything else maybe isn't legitimate government.
“First (13:1) Paul states that every person is to be subject to the governing authorities, because God is the sovereign who ordains all human governments. Then (13:2) he draws the implication: If you resist government authority, which God has established, you are opposing God Himself and you’ll come under judgment. Then (13:3-4) Paul explains that the purpose of civil government is to protect law-abiding citizens and punish law-breakers. As such, the government is acting as a minister of God in avenging wrong. Thus (13:5) there are two reasons to be in subjection to the government: Fear of punishment and conscience before God, who has ordained the government. Finally (13:6-7), Paul applies it by showing why we should pay taxes, namely, because government officials are servants of God. Thus they deserve our taxes as well as our respect.”
#56. To: GrandIsland, Gatlin (#50)
Does Romans 13 say that YOU can decide which government and what laws are legitimate?
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#57. To: Gatlin (#55)
GO TRUMP!!!
#58. To: Gatlin, A K A Stone (#55)
Nowhere do I find where Paul said one could pick and choose which laws they want to follow or disobey, with one exception. He did say that you could resist government authority and the law could be disobeyed if they did not follow God’s law. Am I right on wrong on this?
The Bible Urges Us to CHALLENGE – Not Obey – Bad Government
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#59. To: Gatlin, hondo68, Fred Mertz (#58)
Gatlin - "Bow down to your corrupt rulers."
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#60. To: Deckard (#56)
(Edited)
#61. To: Gatlin (#55)
Nowhere do I find where Paul said one could pick and choose which laws they want to follow or disobey,
#62. To: Deckard (#58)
Book of Maccabees
#63. To: Gatlin (#55)
#64. To: A K A Stone (#62)
Book of Maccabees
#65. To: A K A Stone (#61)
Nowhere do I find where Paul said one could pick and choose which laws they want to follow or disobey,
#66. To: Gatlin (#63)
9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery,
#67. To: Gatlin (#65)
#68. To: A K A Stone (#66)
(Edited)
#69. To: A K A Stone (#67)
I didn't read the last part of your original quote. Ok.
#70. To: A K A Stone (#63)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]