The Political Battle Royal

[Vexari]

Can you help simplify this for me?

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=30016847

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=9996443

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=11049499

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=14544239

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=13360787

for starters


saving private ryan


What first impressed me with this movie is the way that the title was advertised in the newspaper ads..

The title was not spelled in all capital letters. Indeed, the title was in all lower case letters as in: “saving private ryan”..

That title in lower case says it all..

There should be no need for the movie review..

This is a situation many of you may applaud. But here goes. I cannot believe that director Steven Spielberg is giving us so much truth..

In this film he is telling you to get out of the democracy..

This is your warning! The plot is simple..

Four brothers are in the United States army during the Second World War. Three of them have been killed in action within several days of each other during the D-Day invasion of France. The remaining fourth brother, Private Ryan, is presumably still alive with the American paratroops scattered somewhere behind enemy lines in France..

The task assigned to eight soldiers is to locate Private Ryan and safely escort him so that he can be returned to his mother in civilian life before he too is killed..

The story is a fiction. It is based in part upon a letter that President Abraham Lincoln sent to a mother who lost all five of her sons in the Civil War..

In the letter, it was stated that no mother ought to have to give up all her offspring to a war. This theme was woven into Saving Private Ryan. But the movie has more depth than merely an antiwar movie or a movie based upon patriotism and bravery in action for one’s country..

Who is “private ryan”?

Is he the title of nobility individual who is a member of the military community during time of war and owes a duty to the military establishment?

Is he the civilian (private capacity) man on the land who has all his unalienable rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness that are granted by God?

This film really asks the deep question as to who private ryan really is and where does he have a duty in life..

The American army invasion forces of World War Two, in the movie, are a metaphor for the Democratic Military government society we live in today..


A Democracy is a military establishment..


One has no “private” capacity while in the military. You are a 24 hour a day and 365 days a year “Private” (rank) soldier always on call. Likewise, in a Democracy, you have no “private” rights..

All the titles to all your belongings belong to the government by legal title. You are left with a mere possessory interest at the pleasure of the Democracy. You live and die for the job. Your life is not your own..


As Spock would say on Star Trek, “The needs of the many out weight the needs of the one..”


In contradistinction to the military existence of a Democracy, the Republic is composed of “private” rights to individuals protected by public laws for the protection of those rights..

These rights set one at liberty to pursue one’s “private” goals and desires. The four Ryan brothers represent the things of the world for the Ryan family. (Four is the number of the world..)

In common law, a family’s Lawful inheritance of property was passed on through a direct male heir of the family. The loss of all male heirs in common law was equated with termination of that families titles in the soil..

If there were daughters, the estate of the family might be passed on to another family. If there were no daughters, then the titles to the land might escheat to the state..

Is the real concern therefore, in this story, that if the last Ryan brother dies, that the family estate and property rights will be lost forever?

Then there will be no “private” Ryans in the future rooted on the soil by the family estate..

Three brothers dying is representative of completion. (3 is completion.) So is this story trying to tell us to get out of the military (Democracy) and into the private Republic before it is too late and we are all civilly dead?

At one point, the squad of eight soldiers looking for Private Ryan are hold up in a bombed out church. They are surrounded by the enemy. It is dark outside. Every so often, flashes of light are entering the dimly lit church where the men are resting..

The flashes are from either a storm outside, or from artillery guns blazing away in the background. Several of the soldiers in the squad are discussing the mission to find Private Ryan and send him home before he can be hurt..

The squad is composed of eight soldiers (symbolic of new beginnings). The soldiers are upset that they should be sent on a mission to save one man..

It is likely that all eight men in the squad will die before they find and save Private Ryan..

The question is asked: “Does it make sense for the military to send eight soldiers into a suicide mission in order to save one man?” And: “I can understand that Private Ryan’s mother has sacrificed three sons already and will be devastated if her fourth son dies also. But what about our mothers? They will also be devastated if we die in trying to save Private Ryan..”

In the flashes of light entering the church (a place for deep spiritual reflection), Captain John Miller, played by Tom Hanks, sets forth a brilliant flash of mental light..

He informs one of the soldiers that the issue is whether “The man is the mission or the mission is the man..”

What is the purpose of an army or a military?

Does it exist merely to exist in itself and to conduct war for profit and gain and honor?

Or is the military a tool used of necessity to protect the “private” rights of the citizens and people of the nation that the army defends from all enemies, foreign and domestic?

If the army is a tool to protect “private” rights of civilians, then is the goal to save “Private Ryan”, the military man, or to protect “private ryan” the man temporarily in the army and to restore him back to a civilian life?

To put the question into a higher prospective today, is the military Democracy a permanent entity where each subject of that Democracy is permanently ensconced in that mode of life and has no unalienable private rights left, or is it time to set aside the military Democracy and to restore the people to the Republic where they are restored to their “private” inheritance?

Are we living to serve the military government today, or is the military government (Democracy) a temporary entity that is going to restore the Republic?


The prologue and epilogue set the framework..

The question is asked..

Do the “private ryans” of the nation have the capacity and understanding to lead a quality “private” life under a Republic if they save themselves..

Or must the nation continue under a Democracy (military government) because there is no understanding and discipline to operate in a “private” capacity?

Eight civilians in the prologue and epilogue are the right number (new beginnings) to answer this question in the affirmative..

The questions posed and the insight prevalent in this film are timely and urgently presented for consideration by those who can grasp their meaning..







I am now quite sure that 'Tragedy and Hope' was suppressed although I do not know why or by whom. ~ Carroll Quigley