Re: [CTRL] Give back the church bells
-Caveat Lector- Bob- I was considering dropping out of this listserve. But this one posting makes it worth staying on!! It makes the 18,000 messages worth it!! This is one damm good piece of information!! This posting deserves a sign saying READ ME!! It is shocking and sickening, but no surprise any more. The United States has been stolen right out from under our noses. We each passing generation, it goes further and further under. When will we see what is happening?! Crimes never go unnoticed, do they? The fact that they took the bells, ha! The sword is now turned inward, they set in motion their downfall. -Original Message- From: Conspiracy Theory Research List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bob Stokes Sent: Friday, September 03, 1999 11:36 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [CTRL] Give back the church bells -Caveat Lector- www.WorldNetDaily.com FRIDAY SEPTEMBER 03 1999 Give back the church bells Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. As long as we're on the subject, let's talk about another U.S. government attack on a church. One hundred years ago, during its war on Spain, the U.S. invaded the Philippines, sprayed bullets far and wide, and put the entire country under martial law. The result was costly for the U.S. -- it created a habit of imperialist aggression that is still with us today. And it was also costly for the Philippines: an entire generation suffered from the violence associated with a brutal occupation, or the resulting disease and political turmoil. Now to the church. In Balangiga, the U.S. Army made slaves of the residents and turned the place into a work camp. With indefatigable spirit, the local residents decided not to take it anymore. Church bells of the local Catholic parish began to ring, signaling a revolt, and 45 U.S. soldiers died. In response, the American commander gave orders to murder "everyone in sight," which they promptly did. The result: as many as 50,000 dead Filipinos, among whom were women and children. A bit on the disproportionate side perhaps? Indeed, but like the FBI at Waco, the U.S. military in the Philippines had only one end in mind: total victory. Adding insult to massacre, the U.S. Army then stole the church bells and took them to Warren Air Force base in Cheyenne, Wyo., where they hang today. But now the parish in the Philippines wants them back, as a symbol that all this is just ancient history. They even rebuilt the belfry at the parish in anticipation of the bells' return. But as we've seen in the Waco case, the U.S. government is notoriously unwilling to admit error, particularly bloody, egregious error. Hence, so far, the bells are not forthcoming, despite the attempt on the part of many groups to intervene and put an end to the parading of religious objects as war loot. No, instead Congress has passed a resolution forbidding the return of war booty without its authorization. In case you think the Filipinos are making an unjust demand, consider the context. There was no justification for either the U.S. presence in the Philippines or the violence with which the U.S. carried it out. At stake was little more than a militarized trade dispute between Spain and the U.S., while Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines were caught in the crossfire. An American officer testified in a letter to the Philadelphia Ledger on Nov. 11, 1901: "Our men have been relentless, have killed to exterminate men, women, and children, prisoners and captives, active insurgents and suspected people, from lads of ten up, an idea prevailing that the Filipino was little better than a dog." And this gentlemen was writing in defense of the war! Or consider this letter written before the invasion by another officer: "There is no use in mincing words We exterminated the American Indians, and I guess most of us are proud of it, or, at least believe that the end justified the means; and we must have no scruples about exterminating this other race standing in the way of progress and enlightenment, if it is necessary." Neither was this merely the attitude of a few recalcitrant soldiers. Using religion as his cover, President William McKinley later justified his behavior in similar terms. As he told a delegation of Methodist clergymen: "I went down on my knees and prayed to Almighty God for light and guidance ... and one night late it came to me this way We could not leave (the Philippines) to themselves -- they were unfit for self-government -- and they would soon have anarchy and misrule over there worse than Spain's was. ... There was nothing left for us to do but take them all and educate the Filipinos, and uplift and Christianize them." Recall that the Philippines was largely Catholic, which the Protestant ruling elite in this country did not consider to be a Christian religion. And what better way to treat these supposed non-Christians than to starve and kill them? In a similar way, the Branch Dav
[CTRL] Give back the church bells
-Caveat Lector- www.WorldNetDaily.com FRIDAY SEPTEMBER 03 1999 Give back the church bells Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. As long as we're on the subject, let's talk about another U.S. government attack on a church. One hundred years ago, during its war on Spain, the U.S. invaded the Philippines, sprayed bullets far and wide, and put the entire country under martial law. The result was costly for the U.S. -- it created a habit of imperialist aggression that is still with us today. And it was also costly for the Philippines: an entire generation suffered from the violence associated with a brutal occupation, or the resulting disease and political turmoil. Now to the church. In Balangiga, the U.S. Army made slaves of the residents and turned the place into a work camp. With indefatigable spirit, the local residents decided not to take it anymore. Church bells of the local Catholic parish began to ring, signaling a revolt, and 45 U.S. soldiers died. In response, the American commander gave orders to murder "everyone in sight," which they promptly did. The result: as many as 50,000 dead Filipinos, among whom were women and children. A bit on the disproportionate side perhaps? Indeed, but like the FBI at Waco, the U.S. military in the Philippines had only one end in mind: total victory. Adding insult to massacre, the U.S. Army then stole the church bells and took them to Warren Air Force base in Cheyenne, Wyo., where they hang today. But now the parish in the Philippines wants them back, as a symbol that all this is just ancient history. They even rebuilt the belfry at the parish in anticipation of the bells' return. But as we've seen in the Waco case, the U.S. government is notoriously unwilling to admit error, particularly bloody, egregious error. Hence, so far, the bells are not forthcoming, despite the attempt on the part of many groups to intervene and put an end to the parading of religious objects as war loot. No, instead Congress has passed a resolution forbidding the return of war booty without its authorization. In case you think the Filipinos are making an unjust demand, consider the context. There was no justification for either the U.S. presence in the Philippines or the violence with which the U.S. carried it out. At stake was little more than a militarized trade dispute between Spain and the U.S., while Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines were caught in the crossfire. An American officer testified in a letter to the Philadelphia Ledger on Nov. 11, 1901: "Our men have been relentless, have killed to exterminate men, women, and children, prisoners and captives, active insurgents and suspected people, from lads of ten up, an idea prevailing that the Filipino was little better than a dog." And this gentlemen was writing in defense of the war! Or consider this letter written before the invasion by another officer: "There is no use in mincing words We exterminated the American Indians, and I guess most of us are proud of it, or, at least believe that the end justified the means; and we must have no scruples about exterminating this other race standing in the way of progress and enlightenment, if it is necessary." Neither was this merely the attitude of a few recalcitrant soldiers. Using religion as his cover, President William McKinley later justified his behavior in similar terms. As he told a delegation of Methodist clergymen: "I went down on my knees and prayed to Almighty God for light and guidance ... and one night late it came to me this way We could not leave (the Philippines) to themselves -- they were unfit for self-government -- and they would soon have anarchy and misrule over there worse than Spain's was. ... There was nothing left for us to do but take them all and educate the Filipinos, and uplift and Christianize them." Recall that the Philippines was largely Catholic, which the Protestant ruling elite in this country did not consider to be a Christian religion. And what better way to treat these supposed non-Christians than to starve and kill them? In a similar way, the Branch Davidians were considered to be a dangerous and uncivilized cult that needed to be either mainstreamed or exterminated. They resisted and suffered, as so many before them have suffered. The costs to the Filipinos, reports Joseph Stromberg in his essay in the collection, "The Costs of War," were immense. Fully 50,000 died in combat, and another 220,000 civilians died from gunfire, starvation, and the effects of concentration camps. The oppression continued for most of the first half of the century, in which the U.S. continued to enforce its rule over the country, at the behest of large U.S. corporations doing business there. Why was the U.S. doing all this? The short answer is that the government wanted to expand its power and that of its connected interests, regardless of the costs. Why did the U.S. kill so many? The people resisted. Why did the Army steal the bells? Arrogance: the