Just tank the economy and they will come!
Marine Corps could have too many Marines
Posted July 10th, 2009 by Jeff Schogol in Stripes Central
The Marine Corps could be a victim of its own success in recruiting and retaining Marines.
The Corps has exceeded its monthly recruiting goal every month this fiscal year, making 114 percent of its June quota with 4,155 new recruits.
The problem is, the Corps is currently above its authorized active-duty end strength of 202,000.
“As of today, 10 July, the Marine Corps' active duty strength is 203,768,” Corps spokeswoman Maj. Shawn Haney said in an e-mail. “Keep in mind that it is the summer season which will mean a lot of flux between now and the end of the FY.”
Last month Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway said recruiters have had to curtail their efforts in part due to its success retaining Marines.
“We can – without any additional authority – go up to about 204,000; I have told our people, don’t do that, okay; let’s show some management skill here, regulate this thing,” he said. “A little past 202 [thousand] is okay, but not much because we don’t have the money really to go beyond 202,000.”
The Corps has also slashed the number of Military Occupational Specialties that rate a re-enlistment bonus in fiscal 2010.
Meanwhile, the Navy and Air Force both met their monthly recruiting goals for June, and the Army made 103 percent of its goal with 6,207 new recruits.
As of the end of May, the Army was about 1,000 above its authorized end strength with 547,981 active-duty soldiers, said Army spokeswoman Toni DeLancey.
Monday, July 13, 2009
And On That Day, You Will Reap It!
God I love this scene. Change the characters around a bit and this is what I wish for more than anything!
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
New Blog to the Ever Growing Roll
http://www.armedwithknowledge.blogspot.com/
Looks like a good blog to have around revolutionaries such as ourselves. Check it out, it's on my blog roll and we hope you enjoy it!
Monday, July 6, 2009
Support and Encouragement
I'm sure you've probably seen the "Farce of July" story on sites like Kentuckyanna True News and Western Voices, and I won't duplicate it here. I notice when I talk with people about our Mestizo problem, I hear a lot of comments like "they should speak English" or "they should assimilate". That is not the revolutionary attitude to take.
Posters like this:
And This:
Should be spread far and wide in the enemy neighborhoods, with patriotic callings to all Mestizos to rise up now and drive out the white devils!
While posters like this
And this
Should be spread in our White communities with the appropriate propaganda.
The key is separation. We must have it. We will have it.
Remember:
Posters like this:
And This:
Should be spread far and wide in the enemy neighborhoods, with patriotic callings to all Mestizos to rise up now and drive out the white devils!
While posters like this
And this
Should be spread in our White communities with the appropriate propaganda.
The key is separation. We must have it. We will have it.
Remember:
As Regards 'Patriotism'
by Mark Twain
In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot. Mark Twain’s Notebook, 1905
IT IS AGREED, in this country, that if a man can arrange his religion so that it perfectly satisfies his conscience, it is not incumbent upon him to care whether the arrangement is satisfactory to anyone else or not.
In Austria and some other countries this is not the case. There the state arranges a man’s religion for him, he has no voice in it himself.
Patriotism is merely a religion -- love of country, worship of country, devotion to the country’s flag and honor and welfare.
In absolute monarchies it is furnished from the throne, cut and dried, to the subject; in England and America it is furnished, cut and dried, to the citizen by the politician and the newspaper.
The newspaper-and-politician-manufactured patriot often gags in private over his dose; but he takes it, and keeps it on his stomach the best he can. Blessed are the meek.
Sometimes, in the beginning of an insane shabby political upheaval, he is strongly moved to revolt, but he doesn’t do it -- he knows better. He knows that his maker would find out -- the maker of his patriotism, the windy and incoherent six-dollar subeditor of his village newspaper -- and would bray out in print and call him a traitor. And how dreadful that would be. It makes him tuck his tail between his legs and shiver. We all know -- the reader knows it quite well -- that two or three years ago nine-tenths of the human tails in England and America performed just that act. Which is to say, nine-tenths of the patriots in England and America turned traitor to keep from being called traitor. Isn’t it true? You know it to be true. Isn’t it curious?
Yet it was not a thing to be very seriously ashamed of. A man can seldom -- very, very seldom -- fight a winning fight against his training; the odds are too heavy. For many a year -- perhaps always -- the training of the two nations had been dead against independence in political thought, persistently inhospitable toward patriotism manufactured on a man’s own premises, patriotism reasoned out in the man’s own head and fire-assayed and tested and proved in his own conscience. The resulting patriotism was a shopworn product procured at second hand. The patriot did not know just how or when or where he got his opinions, neither did he care, so long as he was with what seemed the majority -- which was the main thing, the safe thing, the comfortable thing. Does the reader believe he knows three men who have actual reasons for their pattern of patriotism -- and can furnish them? Let him not examine, unless he wants to be disappointed. He will be likely to find that his men got their patriotism at the public trough, and had no hand in its preparation themselves.
Training does wonderful things. It moved the people of this country to oppose the Mexican War; then moved them to fall in with what they supposed was the opinion of the majority -- majority patriotism is the customary patriotism -- and go down there and fight. Before the Civil War it made the North indifferent to slavery and friendly to the slave interest; in that interest it made Massachusetts hostile to the American flag, and she would not allow it to be hoisted on her State house -- in her eyes it was the flag of a faction. Then by and by, training swung Massachusetts the other way, and she went raging South to fight under that very flag and against that aforetime protected interest of hers.
There is nothing that training cannot do. Nothing is above its reach or below it. It can turn bad morals to good, good morals to bad; it can destroy principles, it can recreate them; it can debase angels to men and lift men to angelship. And it can do any one of these miracles in a year -- even in six months.
Then men can be trained to manufacture their own patriotism. They can be trained to labor it out in their own heads and hearts and in the privacy and independence of their own premises. It can train them to stop taking it by command, as the Austrian takes his religion. .
.
.
(1.) Ed. note: Twain was referring to the Boer War and the Phillipine 'Insurrection' -- both colonial wars of imperial aggression against native peoples in South Africa and Asia fought around the turn of the previous century. Twain was a member of the "Anti-Imperialist League" formed to protest against the colonialization of the Phillipines after the Spanish-American War.
In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot. Mark Twain’s Notebook, 1905
IT IS AGREED, in this country, that if a man can arrange his religion so that it perfectly satisfies his conscience, it is not incumbent upon him to care whether the arrangement is satisfactory to anyone else or not.
In Austria and some other countries this is not the case. There the state arranges a man’s religion for him, he has no voice in it himself.
Patriotism is merely a religion -- love of country, worship of country, devotion to the country’s flag and honor and welfare.
In absolute monarchies it is furnished from the throne, cut and dried, to the subject; in England and America it is furnished, cut and dried, to the citizen by the politician and the newspaper.
The newspaper-and-politician-manufactured patriot often gags in private over his dose; but he takes it, and keeps it on his stomach the best he can. Blessed are the meek.
Sometimes, in the beginning of an insane shabby political upheaval, he is strongly moved to revolt, but he doesn’t do it -- he knows better. He knows that his maker would find out -- the maker of his patriotism, the windy and incoherent six-dollar subeditor of his village newspaper -- and would bray out in print and call him a traitor. And how dreadful that would be. It makes him tuck his tail between his legs and shiver. We all know -- the reader knows it quite well -- that two or three years ago nine-tenths of the human tails in England and America performed just that act. Which is to say, nine-tenths of the patriots in England and America turned traitor to keep from being called traitor. Isn’t it true? You know it to be true. Isn’t it curious?
Yet it was not a thing to be very seriously ashamed of. A man can seldom -- very, very seldom -- fight a winning fight against his training; the odds are too heavy. For many a year -- perhaps always -- the training of the two nations had been dead against independence in political thought, persistently inhospitable toward patriotism manufactured on a man’s own premises, patriotism reasoned out in the man’s own head and fire-assayed and tested and proved in his own conscience. The resulting patriotism was a shopworn product procured at second hand. The patriot did not know just how or when or where he got his opinions, neither did he care, so long as he was with what seemed the majority -- which was the main thing, the safe thing, the comfortable thing. Does the reader believe he knows three men who have actual reasons for their pattern of patriotism -- and can furnish them? Let him not examine, unless he wants to be disappointed. He will be likely to find that his men got their patriotism at the public trough, and had no hand in its preparation themselves.
Training does wonderful things. It moved the people of this country to oppose the Mexican War; then moved them to fall in with what they supposed was the opinion of the majority -- majority patriotism is the customary patriotism -- and go down there and fight. Before the Civil War it made the North indifferent to slavery and friendly to the slave interest; in that interest it made Massachusetts hostile to the American flag, and she would not allow it to be hoisted on her State house -- in her eyes it was the flag of a faction. Then by and by, training swung Massachusetts the other way, and she went raging South to fight under that very flag and against that aforetime protected interest of hers.
There is nothing that training cannot do. Nothing is above its reach or below it. It can turn bad morals to good, good morals to bad; it can destroy principles, it can recreate them; it can debase angels to men and lift men to angelship. And it can do any one of these miracles in a year -- even in six months.
Then men can be trained to manufacture their own patriotism. They can be trained to labor it out in their own heads and hearts and in the privacy and independence of their own premises. It can train them to stop taking it by command, as the Austrian takes his religion. .
.
.
(1.) Ed. note: Twain was referring to the Boer War and the Phillipine 'Insurrection' -- both colonial wars of imperial aggression against native peoples in South Africa and Asia fought around the turn of the previous century. Twain was a member of the "Anti-Imperialist League" formed to protest against the colonialization of the Phillipines after the Spanish-American War.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)