Let's review:
Gov't screwed it up and is to blame for all our woes.
Gov't should be held responsible for fixing everything.
Gov't owns or controls corporations.
Gov't doesn't care about the people because the real money comes from corporations.
Corporations own the gov't.
Corporations can't be trusted because they're greedy & need government oversight.
People can't protect themselves from themselves and need government to protect them.
People in general are stupid and easily swayed by corporate-owned media.
The corporate-owned media is too liberally biased, except in cases where it's too conservative.
The military is a wonderful, loveable, bunch of murdering, torturing gang of imperialist occupiers of weak defenseless nations.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Does that about cover it?
.
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Wow ACC....guess that DOES cover it....keep smiling !
A smile is a window on your face to show your heart is home
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Good post, though it does leave me in the dark about what side of the field you are on. So a few questions.
Are people ultimately responsible for their own actions?
Is there such a thing as society?
Should you judge a society's values by seeing how it treats its weakest members?
At what point does liberty become irresponsibility?
Is it possible for governments to make everyone happy?
Should we bother trying to reach for utopian values?
Do goverments have the right to tax people?
Are we manipulated by the media, or is it just that we couldn't be bothered thinking things out for ourselves?
At what point does a governments concern for the well being of its citizens (i.e. smoking, seatbelts, flu vaccinations, liqour liscencing) become an infringment on civil liberties?
Is there anything that businesses should be involved with or concerned about other than being a business?
Is it fair that we should critize our goverments over issues like climate change, oil wars, or third world poverty, while we have no intention ourselves of doing anything meaningful or hard to alleviate such problems?
Are Western values universal for all people or just specific to us?
Who is going to win the world Cup and could you care less?
Are people ultimately responsible for their own actions?
Is there such a thing as society?
Should you judge a society's values by seeing how it treats its weakest members?
At what point does liberty become irresponsibility?
Is it possible for governments to make everyone happy?
Should we bother trying to reach for utopian values?
Do goverments have the right to tax people?
Are we manipulated by the media, or is it just that we couldn't be bothered thinking things out for ourselves?
At what point does a governments concern for the well being of its citizens (i.e. smoking, seatbelts, flu vaccinations, liqour liscencing) become an infringment on civil liberties?
Is there anything that businesses should be involved with or concerned about other than being a business?
Is it fair that we should critize our goverments over issues like climate change, oil wars, or third world poverty, while we have no intention ourselves of doing anything meaningful or hard to alleviate such problems?
Are Western values universal for all people or just specific to us?
Who is going to win the world Cup and could you care less?
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
postede by accountable
Let's review:
Gov't screwed it up and is to blame for all our woes
you elected them
Gov't should be held responsible for fixing everything.
The government should be told what people expect it to do, if they **** it up hold them accountable:yh_rotfl (sorry couldn't resist)
Gov't owns or controls corporations.
No but when corporations start to ignore laws designed to protect the people they need to be slapped down
Gov't doesn't care about the people because the real money comes from corporations.
If the government don't care it's your fault you elected them
Corporations own the gov't.
You are in trouble in that case.
Corporations can't be trusted because they're greedy & need government oversight.
]Trusted to do what?
People can't protect themselves from themselves and need government to protect them.
People live by the rule of law, govt should enforce the law and protect the weak from the criminal strong.
People in general are stupid and easily swayed by corporate-owned media.
Lack of education then.
The corporate-owned media is too liberally biased, except in cases where it's too conservative.
Liberal-adjective 1 willing to respect and accept behaviour or opinions different from one’s own. 2 (of a society, law, etc.) favourable to individual rights and freedoms.
You live in a liberal democracy, maybe you should move to a communist country or a theocracy like Iran.
The military is a wonderful, loveable, bunch of murdering, torturing gang of imperialist occupiers of weak defenseless nations.
Are they representative of the general population would you say?:sneaky:
Maybe you should found an American equivalent of the monster raving loony party, think of the slogans you could have-"not much good for party politics but we know how to party."
So why do you feel so disconnected from the political process-or am I reading too much in to this?
Let's review:
Gov't screwed it up and is to blame for all our woes
you elected them
Gov't should be held responsible for fixing everything.
The government should be told what people expect it to do, if they **** it up hold them accountable:yh_rotfl (sorry couldn't resist)
Gov't owns or controls corporations.
No but when corporations start to ignore laws designed to protect the people they need to be slapped down
Gov't doesn't care about the people because the real money comes from corporations.
If the government don't care it's your fault you elected them
Corporations own the gov't.
You are in trouble in that case.
Corporations can't be trusted because they're greedy & need government oversight.
]Trusted to do what?
People can't protect themselves from themselves and need government to protect them.
People live by the rule of law, govt should enforce the law and protect the weak from the criminal strong.
People in general are stupid and easily swayed by corporate-owned media.
Lack of education then.
The corporate-owned media is too liberally biased, except in cases where it's too conservative.
Liberal-adjective 1 willing to respect and accept behaviour or opinions different from one’s own. 2 (of a society, law, etc.) favourable to individual rights and freedoms.
You live in a liberal democracy, maybe you should move to a communist country or a theocracy like Iran.
The military is a wonderful, loveable, bunch of murdering, torturing gang of imperialist occupiers of weak defenseless nations.
Are they representative of the general population would you say?:sneaky:
Maybe you should found an American equivalent of the monster raving loony party, think of the slogans you could have-"not much good for party politics but we know how to party."
So why do you feel so disconnected from the political process-or am I reading too much in to this?
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Why is it that if someone doesn't agree with the current President and his agenda, one must be a communist?
Sandi
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Right seeing as I posed them, I should say what I think.
Are people ultimately responsible for their own actions? Yes, no question.
Is there such a thing as society? Yes, I know coz I live in one.
Should you judge a society's values by seeing how it treats its weakest members? Frankly, Yes. Its the one thing where the U.S. really lets itself down.
At what point does liberty become irresponsibility? Far Rider gave a good answer to this so I will use his definition.
Is it possible for governments to make everyone happy? No.
Should we bother trying to reach for utopian values? No.
Do goverments have the right to tax people? Yes, as long as they represent those people properly.
Are we manipulated by the media, or is it just that we couldn't be bothered thinking things out for ourselves? We get the telly and media we ask for, no more no less.
At what point does a governments concern for the well being of its citizens (i.e. smoking, seatbelts, flu vaccinations, liqour liscencing) become an infringment on civil liberties? When things get idealogical.
Is there anything that businesses should be involved with or concerned about other than being a business? No, but being responsible toward the society from which you generate a profit is a sound business strategy.
Is it fair that we should critize our goverments over issues like climate change, oil wars, or third world poverty, while we have no intention ourselves of doing anything meaningful or hard to alleviate such problems? Not really is it?.
Are Western values universal for all people or just specific to us? I don't know, but I would choose them above all the others.
Who is going to win the world Cup and could you care less? Germany, again.[/QUOTE]
Are people ultimately responsible for their own actions? Yes, no question.
Is there such a thing as society? Yes, I know coz I live in one.
Should you judge a society's values by seeing how it treats its weakest members? Frankly, Yes. Its the one thing where the U.S. really lets itself down.
At what point does liberty become irresponsibility? Far Rider gave a good answer to this so I will use his definition.
Is it possible for governments to make everyone happy? No.
Should we bother trying to reach for utopian values? No.
Do goverments have the right to tax people? Yes, as long as they represent those people properly.
Are we manipulated by the media, or is it just that we couldn't be bothered thinking things out for ourselves? We get the telly and media we ask for, no more no less.
At what point does a governments concern for the well being of its citizens (i.e. smoking, seatbelts, flu vaccinations, liqour liscencing) become an infringment on civil liberties? When things get idealogical.
Is there anything that businesses should be involved with or concerned about other than being a business? No, but being responsible toward the society from which you generate a profit is a sound business strategy.
Is it fair that we should critize our goverments over issues like climate change, oil wars, or third world poverty, while we have no intention ourselves of doing anything meaningful or hard to alleviate such problems? Not really is it?.
Are Western values universal for all people or just specific to us? I don't know, but I would choose them above all the others.
Who is going to win the world Cup and could you care less? Germany, again.[/QUOTE]
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
ArnoldLayne wrote:
You had to go and spoil it didnt you . I was right with you nodding in agreement untill the one about the world cup. Put me right off me tea that 'as :rolleyes:
Well, you did well against the argies the other night, and you have the best group of players probably since at least 1990, or maybe even further, but you know you're getting knocked out at the semi's on penalties. :-1
You had to go and spoil it didnt you . I was right with you nodding in agreement untill the one about the world cup. Put me right off me tea that 'as :rolleyes:
Well, you did well against the argies the other night, and you have the best group of players probably since at least 1990, or maybe even further, but you know you're getting knocked out at the semi's on penalties. :-1
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Answer from a 'whatever'....don't expect any intellectual stuff :yh_rotfl
Gov't screwed it up and is to blame for all our woes.
Occasionally
Gov't should be held responsible for fixing everything.
PEOPLE should take responsibility for the things within their control
Gov't owns or controls corporations.
Pass
Gov't doesn't care about the people because the real money comes from corporations.
Disagree
Corporations own the gov't.
Disagree
Corporations can't be trusted because they're greedy & need government oversight.
Some are
People can't protect themselves from themselves and need government to protect them.
Not true...but some people think it is
People in general are stupid and easily swayed by corporate-owned media.
A few people are stupid and therefore DO get swayed by c.o.m.
The corporate-owned media is too liberally biased, except in cases where it's too conservative.
Ugh ??
The military is a wonderful, loveable, bunch of murdering, torturing gang of imperialist occupiers of weak defenseless nations.
The majority of the military should be respected for the difficult job they do...weak defenceless nations ?? who ? where ? weak defenceless populations...yes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Does that about cover it?
Probably not...but it's been a long day...Thanks for getting me thinking.
Gov't screwed it up and is to blame for all our woes.
Occasionally
Gov't should be held responsible for fixing everything.
PEOPLE should take responsibility for the things within their control
Gov't owns or controls corporations.
Pass
Gov't doesn't care about the people because the real money comes from corporations.
Disagree
Corporations own the gov't.
Disagree
Corporations can't be trusted because they're greedy & need government oversight.
Some are
People can't protect themselves from themselves and need government to protect them.
Not true...but some people think it is
People in general are stupid and easily swayed by corporate-owned media.
A few people are stupid and therefore DO get swayed by c.o.m.
The corporate-owned media is too liberally biased, except in cases where it's too conservative.
Ugh ??
The military is a wonderful, loveable, bunch of murdering, torturing gang of imperialist occupiers of weak defenseless nations.
The majority of the military should be respected for the difficult job they do...weak defenceless nations ?? who ? where ? weak defenceless populations...yes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Does that about cover it?
Probably not...but it's been a long day...Thanks for getting me thinking.
A smile is a window on your face to show your heart is home
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
[quote=Galbally]Good post, though it does leave me in the dark about what side of the field you are on. So a few questions.
Are people ultimately responsible for their own actions?
Absolutely.
Is there such a thing as society?
Absolutely.
Should you judge a society's values by seeing how it treats its weakest members?
Absolutely. Begs the question of who is considered weak and who is considered simply unsuccessful, doesn't it?
At what point does liberty become irresponsibility?
Never. Liberty is handled responsibly or irresponsibly. Liberty is never irresponsible.
Is it possible for governments to make everyone happy?
No. Neither is it government's job to make anyone happy, healthy, wealthy, or anything else. Government's job is to stand guard while citizens make themselves whatever is within their own power.
Should we bother trying to reach for utopian values?
Absolutely. The ideal is a worthy, if unreachable, goal.
Do goverments have the right to tax people?
Absolutely not. Citizens have a right to decide as a voting body how much of their own hard-earned money they wish to give.
Are we manipulated by the media, or is it just that we couldn't be bothered thinking things out for ourselves?
Manipulated people allow themselves to be manipulated. They also have the power to prevent said manipulation.
At what point does a governments concern for the well being of its citizens (i.e. smoking, seatbelts, flu vaccinations, liqour liscencing) become an infringment on civil liberties?
Immediately.
Is there anything that businesses should be involved with or concerned about other than being a business?
Should? Sure, lots of stuff. Must? Nope. It's good business to show concern.
Is it fair that we should critize our goverments over issues like climate change, oil wars, or third world poverty, while we have no intention ourselves of doing anything meaningful or hard to alleviate such problems?
No.
Are Western values universal for all people or just specific to us?
People value what they value. I have no right to force my values on you. You have no right to expect me to accept your values. I do have a right to try to convince you to adopt my values, though you don't have to listen. You also have a right to try to convince me to accept your values, though I may remain adamant.
Who is going to win the world Cup and could you care less?
Sorry. I'm not interested in any athletic cup.
Are people ultimately responsible for their own actions?
Absolutely.
Is there such a thing as society?
Absolutely.
Should you judge a society's values by seeing how it treats its weakest members?
Absolutely. Begs the question of who is considered weak and who is considered simply unsuccessful, doesn't it?
At what point does liberty become irresponsibility?
Never. Liberty is handled responsibly or irresponsibly. Liberty is never irresponsible.
Is it possible for governments to make everyone happy?
No. Neither is it government's job to make anyone happy, healthy, wealthy, or anything else. Government's job is to stand guard while citizens make themselves whatever is within their own power.
Should we bother trying to reach for utopian values?
Absolutely. The ideal is a worthy, if unreachable, goal.
Do goverments have the right to tax people?
Absolutely not. Citizens have a right to decide as a voting body how much of their own hard-earned money they wish to give.
Are we manipulated by the media, or is it just that we couldn't be bothered thinking things out for ourselves?
Manipulated people allow themselves to be manipulated. They also have the power to prevent said manipulation.
At what point does a governments concern for the well being of its citizens (i.e. smoking, seatbelts, flu vaccinations, liqour liscencing) become an infringment on civil liberties?
Immediately.
Is there anything that businesses should be involved with or concerned about other than being a business?
Should? Sure, lots of stuff. Must? Nope. It's good business to show concern.
Is it fair that we should critize our goverments over issues like climate change, oil wars, or third world poverty, while we have no intention ourselves of doing anything meaningful or hard to alleviate such problems?
No.
Are Western values universal for all people or just specific to us?
People value what they value. I have no right to force my values on you. You have no right to expect me to accept your values. I do have a right to try to convince you to adopt my values, though you don't have to listen. You also have a right to try to convince me to accept your values, though I may remain adamant.
Who is going to win the world Cup and could you care less?
Sorry. I'm not interested in any athletic cup.
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
This is an interesting thread, and I think even though only a few have posted, it outlines the subtle differences in the philosophical approach to society between Europe and the States, I don't think the differences are that great, its in the degree to which certain ideas are taken (such as role of government, the absoluteness of peronal liberty, etc etc) that the differences are. This type of stuff always fascinates me for some reason. I though accountables thread was good and demonstrates the libertarianism inate in the best American political thought. Though I would disagree with the idea of "utopianism" being incorporated into government as such things are unachieveable and usually invovle getting rid of the people who don't share the same vision of perfect society, though setting high standards for a society are good and proper. I suppose that's really a semantic argument. Anyway, enough of the intellectual crap and back to whats really important, the World Cup, or I suppose the "World" Series if your from the States or Canada, (is that the baseball or American Football, oh wait the Football is the Superbowl isn't it) or if your Australian or Kiwi then its the Rugby I suppose. And if you are from any other country then just state your preference (not that anyone will notice).
On a related matter, what do you call the Basketball final in the U.S.? (the World Hoop?) and whats the other big game, is it Ice Hocky, or is that just up north?
On a related matter, what do you call the Basketball final in the U.S.? (the World Hoop?) and whats the other big game, is it Ice Hocky, or is that just up north?
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
SnoozeControl wrote: I must be a pinko commie, but I tend to agree with a lot of that.
I'll bet you agree with roughly half.
I'll bet you agree with roughly half.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
LilacDragon wrote: Why is it that if someone doesn't agree with the current President and his agenda, one must be a communist?I didn't mention the current President or his agenda, but it's interesting that you read that into my post.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Far Rider wrote: Same here, its interesting to see what makes other people tick!!!! Thanks ACC!
Glad to be of service :yh_bigsmi
the original post was just a snide way of pointing out that people complain about everything political. It was just a rock I threw in the water to see what kind of splash it would make. Here's my take in general (only valid for USA):
Government: The priorities are upside down. The fed should be subordinate to the states in most issues. It's job should be to protect us from foreign lands and arbitrate any issues the states can't work. Far too much power is centralized in that Land of Oz. All that extra-constitutional activity the federal gov't is currently involved in should go to the states. Change the constitution if you want to give them more power.
Politicians: The worst thing about politics. Can't trust them as far as I can throw them, and it's probably illegal to use a catapult. Never forget that a politician's #1 priority is to get re-elected, and everything is a tool to be used as required in that pursuit, including truth.
Corporations: The most (possibly only) honest institution we have is the corporation. They are in business to make money. They make money by giving their customers what their customers want. If they use good business practices, they do well. The more focused they are on very long-term sustainability, the more good they do for the country. Happy employees who feel valued are more loyal and productive. The short-sighted companies are the ones who abuse workers, cook the books, etc. In short, they have a politician's mentality.
Corporate/Government relationship: There should be none. Business no longer needs government help for international trade. Corporations are not citizens and should have no say at all in how the government is run. It is unconscionable that the gov't is using Eminent Domain to steal private property for corporate use. The relationship should not exist.
The Media (specifically news media): They are corporations. This little detail seems to slip by many people. The word "news" has a foggy definition at best, so when deciding what news is more worthy to publish/broadcast, they use the corporation's reason for existence as a guide. They give their customers what the customers watch/read most. Their decisions are our fault.
The Military: The very small percentage of Americans willing to literally give their lives for the American ideal are sacrosanct. If you don't like what the machine does, change the driver. In short, Lilac and I agree, if only on this point. :-6
People (US citizens): People forget that they are the ones in charge. We collectively sit behind the steering wheel with our hands in our pockets. Our success is in our hands, not the government's. Responsibility we place with government is responsibility given to politicians (see their #1 priority). If we stop looking around for someone else to be responsible, we can soar to heights never imagined. This was why the WWII generation was our greatest generation. They didn't have government programs to take care of them.
Glad to be of service :yh_bigsmi
the original post was just a snide way of pointing out that people complain about everything political. It was just a rock I threw in the water to see what kind of splash it would make. Here's my take in general (only valid for USA):
Government: The priorities are upside down. The fed should be subordinate to the states in most issues. It's job should be to protect us from foreign lands and arbitrate any issues the states can't work. Far too much power is centralized in that Land of Oz. All that extra-constitutional activity the federal gov't is currently involved in should go to the states. Change the constitution if you want to give them more power.
Politicians: The worst thing about politics. Can't trust them as far as I can throw them, and it's probably illegal to use a catapult. Never forget that a politician's #1 priority is to get re-elected, and everything is a tool to be used as required in that pursuit, including truth.
Corporations: The most (possibly only) honest institution we have is the corporation. They are in business to make money. They make money by giving their customers what their customers want. If they use good business practices, they do well. The more focused they are on very long-term sustainability, the more good they do for the country. Happy employees who feel valued are more loyal and productive. The short-sighted companies are the ones who abuse workers, cook the books, etc. In short, they have a politician's mentality.
Corporate/Government relationship: There should be none. Business no longer needs government help for international trade. Corporations are not citizens and should have no say at all in how the government is run. It is unconscionable that the gov't is using Eminent Domain to steal private property for corporate use. The relationship should not exist.
The Media (specifically news media): They are corporations. This little detail seems to slip by many people. The word "news" has a foggy definition at best, so when deciding what news is more worthy to publish/broadcast, they use the corporation's reason for existence as a guide. They give their customers what the customers watch/read most. Their decisions are our fault.
The Military: The very small percentage of Americans willing to literally give their lives for the American ideal are sacrosanct. If you don't like what the machine does, change the driver. In short, Lilac and I agree, if only on this point. :-6
People (US citizens): People forget that they are the ones in charge. We collectively sit behind the steering wheel with our hands in our pockets. Our success is in our hands, not the government's. Responsibility we place with government is responsibility given to politicians (see their #1 priority). If we stop looking around for someone else to be responsible, we can soar to heights never imagined. This was why the WWII generation was our greatest generation. They didn't have government programs to take care of them.
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
The Military: The very small percentage of Americans willing to literally give their lives for the American ideal are sacrosanct. If you don't like what the machine does, change the driver. In short, Lilac and I agree, if only on this point.
Actually, I agree with most of your last post. Although, in your original post in this thread, what you said about the military had me seeing red and wishing I could smack someone upside the head with my cast iron skillet. Sorry, but at the moment, I am a bit rabid about my defense of our soldiers.
Actually, I agree with most of your last post. Although, in your original post in this thread, what you said about the military had me seeing red and wishing I could smack someone upside the head with my cast iron skillet. Sorry, but at the moment, I am a bit rabid about my defense of our soldiers.
Sandi
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
LilacDragon wrote: Actually, I agree with most of your last post. Although, in your original post in this thread, what you said about the military had me seeing red and wishing I could smack someone upside the head with my cast iron skillet. Sorry, but at the moment, I am a bit rabid about my defense of our soldiers.That was the purpose of the post. Come on! Let it fly! It's cathartic. :-6
-
capt_buzzard
- Posts: 5557
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 12:00 pm
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Make way for a new Hitler in Europe after 2007
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
capt_buzzard wrote: Make way for a new Hitler in Europe after 2007Why? :yh_glasse
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Accountable wrote: Glad to be of service
the original post was just a snide way of pointing out that people complain about everything political. It was just a rock I threw in the water to see what kind of splash it would make. Here's my take in general (only valid for USA):
Government: The priorities are upside down. The fed should be subordinate to the states in most issues. It's job should be to protect us from foreign lands and arbitrate any issues the states can't work. Far too much power is centralized in that Land of Oz. All that extra-constitutional activity the federal gov't is currently involved in should go to the states. Change the constitution if you want to give them more power.
Politicians: The worst thing about politics. Can't trust them as far as I can throw them, and it's probably illegal to use a catapult. Never forget that a politician's #1 priority is to get re-elected, and everything is a tool to be used as required in that pursuit, including truth.
Corporations: The most (possibly only) honest institution we have is the corporation. They are in business to make money. They make money by giving their customers what their customers want. If they use good business practices, they do well. The more focused they are on very long-term sustainability, the more good they do for the country. Happy employees who feel valued are more loyal and productive. The short-sighted companies are the ones who abuse workers, cook the books, etc. In short, they have a politician's mentality.
Corporate/Government relationship: There should be none. Business no longer needs government help for international trade. Corporations are not citizens and should have no say at all in how the government is run. It is unconscionable that the gov't is using Eminent Domain to steal private property for corporate use. The relationship should not exist.
The Media (specifically news media): They are corporations. This little detail seems to slip by many people. The word "news" has a foggy definition at best, so when deciding what news is more worthy to publish/broadcast, they use the corporation's reason for existence as a guide. They give their customers what the customers watch/read most. Their decisions are our fault.
The Military: The very small percentage of Americans willing to literally give their lives for the American ideal are sacrosanct. If you don't like what the machine does, change the driver. In short, Lilac and I agree, if only on this point.
People (US citizens): People forget that they are the ones in charge. We collectively sit behind the steering wheel with our hands in our pockets. Our success is in our hands, not the government's. Responsibility we place with government is responsibility given to politicians (see their #1 priority). If we stop looking around for someone else to be responsible, we can soar to heights never imagined. This was why the WWII generation was our greatest generation. They didn't have government programs to take care of them.
I would call that view ...............Libertarian.
lib·er·tar·i·an
n.1. One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.
2. One who believes in free will.
And I see nuttin wrong with it.
In fact I R one......
the original post was just a snide way of pointing out that people complain about everything political. It was just a rock I threw in the water to see what kind of splash it would make. Here's my take in general (only valid for USA):
Government: The priorities are upside down. The fed should be subordinate to the states in most issues. It's job should be to protect us from foreign lands and arbitrate any issues the states can't work. Far too much power is centralized in that Land of Oz. All that extra-constitutional activity the federal gov't is currently involved in should go to the states. Change the constitution if you want to give them more power.
Politicians: The worst thing about politics. Can't trust them as far as I can throw them, and it's probably illegal to use a catapult. Never forget that a politician's #1 priority is to get re-elected, and everything is a tool to be used as required in that pursuit, including truth.
Corporations: The most (possibly only) honest institution we have is the corporation. They are in business to make money. They make money by giving their customers what their customers want. If they use good business practices, they do well. The more focused they are on very long-term sustainability, the more good they do for the country. Happy employees who feel valued are more loyal and productive. The short-sighted companies are the ones who abuse workers, cook the books, etc. In short, they have a politician's mentality.
Corporate/Government relationship: There should be none. Business no longer needs government help for international trade. Corporations are not citizens and should have no say at all in how the government is run. It is unconscionable that the gov't is using Eminent Domain to steal private property for corporate use. The relationship should not exist.
The Media (specifically news media): They are corporations. This little detail seems to slip by many people. The word "news" has a foggy definition at best, so when deciding what news is more worthy to publish/broadcast, they use the corporation's reason for existence as a guide. They give their customers what the customers watch/read most. Their decisions are our fault.
The Military: The very small percentage of Americans willing to literally give their lives for the American ideal are sacrosanct. If you don't like what the machine does, change the driver. In short, Lilac and I agree, if only on this point.
People (US citizens): People forget that they are the ones in charge. We collectively sit behind the steering wheel with our hands in our pockets. Our success is in our hands, not the government's. Responsibility we place with government is responsibility given to politicians (see their #1 priority). If we stop looking around for someone else to be responsible, we can soar to heights never imagined. This was why the WWII generation was our greatest generation. They didn't have government programs to take care of them.
I would call that view ...............Libertarian.
lib·er·tar·i·an
n.1. One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.
2. One who believes in free will.
And I see nuttin wrong with it.
In fact I R one......
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
BTS wrote: I would call that view ...............Libertarian.
lib·er·tar·i·an
n.1. One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.
2. One who believes in free will.
And I see nuttin wrong with it.
In fact I R one......
I think so too. Spot thinks I'm an anarchist. Actually, they're pretty close in definition.
lib·er·tar·i·an
n.1. One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.
2. One who believes in free will.
And I see nuttin wrong with it.
In fact I R one......
I think so too. Spot thinks I'm an anarchist. Actually, they're pretty close in definition.
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Accountable wrote: I think so too. Spot thinks I'm an anarchist. Actually, they're pretty close in definition.
Well sorta close................butttt way different results in my way of thinking.
I think man does need some sort of laws or we would go way overboard.
I found this (below) and all I have to say is this "Was not this the idea of the Hippie communes that are NO LONGER in existence? They ended up at each others throats, some worked hard, most did not."
I do not see a anti capitalist society making it.
Anarchism is a political theory which advocates the creation of anarchy, a society based on the maxim of "no rulers." To achieve this, "n common with all socialists, the anarchists hold that the private ownership of land, capital, and machinery has had its time; that it is condemned to disappear: and that all requisites for production must, and will, become the common property of society, and be managed in common by the producers of wealth. And. . . they maintain that the ideal of the political organisation of society is a condition of things where the functions of government are reduced to minimum. . . [and] that the ultimate aim of society is the reduction of the functions of government to nil -- that is, to a society without government, to an-archy"
Pehaps this would be a interesting thread to kick off?
Well sorta close................butttt way different results in my way of thinking.
I think man does need some sort of laws or we would go way overboard.
I found this (below) and all I have to say is this "Was not this the idea of the Hippie communes that are NO LONGER in existence? They ended up at each others throats, some worked hard, most did not."
I do not see a anti capitalist society making it.
Anarchism is a political theory which advocates the creation of anarchy, a society based on the maxim of "no rulers." To achieve this, "n common with all socialists, the anarchists hold that the private ownership of land, capital, and machinery has had its time; that it is condemned to disappear: and that all requisites for production must, and will, become the common property of society, and be managed in common by the producers of wealth. And. . . they maintain that the ideal of the political organisation of society is a condition of things where the functions of government are reduced to minimum. . . [and] that the ultimate aim of society is the reduction of the functions of government to nil -- that is, to a society without government, to an-archy"
Pehaps this would be a interesting thread to kick off?
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
posted by BTS
Anarchism is a political theory which advocates the creation of anarchy, a society based on the maxim of "no rulers." To achieve this, "n common with all socialists, the anarchists hold that the private ownership of land, capital, and machinery has had its time; that it is condemned to disappear: and that all requisites for production must, and will, become the common property of society, and be managed in common by the producers of wealth. And. . . they maintain that the ideal of the political organisation of society is a condition of things where the functions of government are reduced to minimum. . . [and] that the ultimate aim of society is the reduction of the functions of government to nil -- that is, to a society without government, to an-archy"
But who decides there are no rulers? Who is going to clean the toilets and what do you do if someone thinks it beneath him (has to be really unless you can pee upwards). Anarchism is a political theory much beloved of middle class intellectuuals, who like hippies, have the wherewithal to drop out knowing they can always crawl back to safety. Subsistence living is only wonderful when viewed from afar and generally speaking they don't think they will be the ones cleaning the toilets, but they will empathise and respect the poor sucker who is.
Doesn't work in reality because the communists organise and bet the crap out of them.
Since we are all capitalist at heart meybe we should start at the source of it all.
The father of capitalism Adam Smith.
Adam Smith is often seen as the founding father of economics. He developed much of the theory about markets that we regard as standard theory now. In fact he could be seen as being to blame for much of the content of current economics courses!
For a short version.
http://www.btinternet.com/~glynhughes/s ... /smith.htm
If you want the unabridged version.
http://www.adamsmith.org/smith/won-b1-c1.htm
Irrelevant in this day and age you might think but the debate about the role of government rumbles on and on and has done since the first stane age man or woman turned round and asked whose turn it was to get the firewood.
How do you annoy a socialist/communist/capitalist or whatever? Quote from books most of them have never bothered reading or even thinking about. Communists I generally find the most entertaining since most of them make up statistics etc as they go along when arguing (too strong a word debating perhaps) with them make up your own, as many of them are impressed by their own intelligence it doesn't occur to them that you might be making it up as well. Do you ahve communists and socialists in America, bit like hen's teeth I thought.
In 1949 the US State Department included the following definition in its' official classification of a 'Communist' :
"...anyone who belives that the government has a direct responsibility for the welfare of its' people."
[Source: 'A CHOMSKY READER' by Noam Chomsky, M.I.T.]
Oh dear, no police then. or sanitation, street lighting...:sneaky:
Anarchism is a political theory which advocates the creation of anarchy, a society based on the maxim of "no rulers." To achieve this, "n common with all socialists, the anarchists hold that the private ownership of land, capital, and machinery has had its time; that it is condemned to disappear: and that all requisites for production must, and will, become the common property of society, and be managed in common by the producers of wealth. And. . . they maintain that the ideal of the political organisation of society is a condition of things where the functions of government are reduced to minimum. . . [and] that the ultimate aim of society is the reduction of the functions of government to nil -- that is, to a society without government, to an-archy"
But who decides there are no rulers? Who is going to clean the toilets and what do you do if someone thinks it beneath him (has to be really unless you can pee upwards). Anarchism is a political theory much beloved of middle class intellectuuals, who like hippies, have the wherewithal to drop out knowing they can always crawl back to safety. Subsistence living is only wonderful when viewed from afar and generally speaking they don't think they will be the ones cleaning the toilets, but they will empathise and respect the poor sucker who is.
Doesn't work in reality because the communists organise and bet the crap out of them.
Since we are all capitalist at heart meybe we should start at the source of it all.
The father of capitalism Adam Smith.
Adam Smith is often seen as the founding father of economics. He developed much of the theory about markets that we regard as standard theory now. In fact he could be seen as being to blame for much of the content of current economics courses!
For a short version.
http://www.btinternet.com/~glynhughes/s ... /smith.htm
If you want the unabridged version.
http://www.adamsmith.org/smith/won-b1-c1.htm
Irrelevant in this day and age you might think but the debate about the role of government rumbles on and on and has done since the first stane age man or woman turned round and asked whose turn it was to get the firewood.
How do you annoy a socialist/communist/capitalist or whatever? Quote from books most of them have never bothered reading or even thinking about. Communists I generally find the most entertaining since most of them make up statistics etc as they go along when arguing (too strong a word debating perhaps) with them make up your own, as many of them are impressed by their own intelligence it doesn't occur to them that you might be making it up as well. Do you ahve communists and socialists in America, bit like hen's teeth I thought.
In 1949 the US State Department included the following definition in its' official classification of a 'Communist' :
"...anyone who belives that the government has a direct responsibility for the welfare of its' people."
[Source: 'A CHOMSKY READER' by Noam Chomsky, M.I.T.]
Oh dear, no police then. or sanitation, street lighting...:sneaky:
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Anarchism is an idea espoused by juvenille intellectuals who are unable to come to terms with the realities of other people's true desires or the nature of human social organization. It is the ultimate political delusion in that it contends that all rules are evil and that people left to their own devices will somehow be able to work, eat, sleep together in harmony. It is, interestingly, an idea of the lesuired intellectual class of European society in the 19th century, who were so abstracted in their thinking that they let idealism overcome all common sense. There are still many people who believe this hopelessly idiotic notion to have merit. They are sorely mistaken.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
I often wonder what would have happened to the USA if we had kept on the road planned by our Constitutional forefathers without the interference of Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt.
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
posted by accountable
I often wonder what would have happened to the USA if we had kept on the road planned by our Constitutional forefathers without the interference of Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt.
Well no votes for women, or the majority of the male population come to that, slavery would still be around. i don't claim a great deal of knowledge to honest, but did "we the people" not in effect mean everybody like us?
I often wonder what would have happened to the USA if we had kept on the road planned by our Constitutional forefathers without the interference of Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt.
Well no votes for women, or the majority of the male population come to that, slavery would still be around. i don't claim a great deal of knowledge to honest, but did "we the people" not in effect mean everybody like us?
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
gmc wrote: posted by accountable
Well no votes for women, or the majority of the male population come to that, slavery would still be around. i don't claim a great deal of knowledge to honest, but did "we the people" not in effect mean everybody like us?You really think Lincoln's way was the only way to stop slavery, and that slavery would still be around even today? Come off it! Same for the woman's vote.
And I don't understand the last question. Can you expand?
Well no votes for women, or the majority of the male population come to that, slavery would still be around. i don't claim a great deal of knowledge to honest, but did "we the people" not in effect mean everybody like us?You really think Lincoln's way was the only way to stop slavery, and that slavery would still be around even today? Come off it! Same for the woman's vote.
And I don't understand the last question. Can you expand?
-
nvalleyvee
- Posts: 5191
- Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:57 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Galbally wrote: Anarchism is an idea espoused by juvenille intellectuals who are unable to come to terms with the realities of other people's true desires or the nature of human social organization. It is the ultimate political delusion in that it contends that all rules are evil and that people left to their own devices will somehow be able to work, eat, sleep together in harmony. It is, interestingly, an idea of the lesuired intellectual class of European society in the 19th century, who were so abstracted in their thinking that they let idealism overcome all common sense. There are still many people who believe this hopelessly idiotic notion to have merit. They are sorely mistaken.
I have to agree with you and not on a political place.......my daughter "carved" the anarchy symbol on her leg no more than 6 years ago. I sub for HS students and they still have that anarchy symbol going on in their lives. What are these kids thinking???? They don't have ANY idea of what happens outside of their HS. I think it must be akin to what we thought during VietNam. The real problem I have is that our children - the mass majority of them - will NEVER know what it's like to be in a war. We lost 68,000 people in VietNam -----a little over 2,000 in the war on terrorism. OK - I agree I got lost in my own thought.
I have to agree with you and not on a political place.......my daughter "carved" the anarchy symbol on her leg no more than 6 years ago. I sub for HS students and they still have that anarchy symbol going on in their lives. What are these kids thinking???? They don't have ANY idea of what happens outside of their HS. I think it must be akin to what we thought during VietNam. The real problem I have is that our children - the mass majority of them - will NEVER know what it's like to be in a war. We lost 68,000 people in VietNam -----a little over 2,000 in the war on terrorism. OK - I agree I got lost in my own thought.
The growth of knowledge depends entirely on disagreement..........Karl R. Popper
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
posted by accountable
You really think Lincoln's way was the only way to stop slavery, and that slavery would still be around even today? Come off it! Same for the woman's vote.
And I don't understand the last question. Can you expand?
Like i said i don't claim to know much about it but my understanding that it was not all men accorded the vote-no women and indians and coloured peoples couldn't vote. Also was there not also a property and religious qualification involved or did it vary from state to state? Did the execution not vary widely from the wording?
As to slavery, if it became uneconomic it would have probably ended. Or is that too cynical a viewpoint?
Did slavery not become an issue and reason for fighting only after the war started or was it at the heart of the arguement? I'm fascinated by history but the US in the 19th century has never really caught my interest but my lack of knowledge irritates me.
You really think Lincoln's way was the only way to stop slavery, and that slavery would still be around even today? Come off it! Same for the woman's vote.
And I don't understand the last question. Can you expand?
Like i said i don't claim to know much about it but my understanding that it was not all men accorded the vote-no women and indians and coloured peoples couldn't vote. Also was there not also a property and religious qualification involved or did it vary from state to state? Did the execution not vary widely from the wording?
As to slavery, if it became uneconomic it would have probably ended. Or is that too cynical a viewpoint?
Did slavery not become an issue and reason for fighting only after the war started or was it at the heart of the arguement? I'm fascinated by history but the US in the 19th century has never really caught my interest but my lack of knowledge irritates me.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
gmc wrote: Like i said i don't claim to know much about it but my understanding that it was not all men accorded the vote-no women and indians and coloured peoples couldn't vote. Also was there not also a property and religious qualification involved or did it vary from state to state? Did the execution not vary widely from the wording?
As to slavery, if it became uneconomic it would have probably ended. Or is that too cynical a viewpoint?
Did slavery not become an issue and reason for fighting only after the war started or was it at the heart of the arguement? I'm fascinated by history but the US in the 19th century has never really caught my interest but my lack of knowledge irritates me.As I understand it - Chonsi, set me straight please - The War Between the States was a war about states' rights. Until that time, states were not completely subordinate to the federal gov't. My (admittedly undereducated) interpretation of the federal gov't's role up to that point was very similar to that of the current UN, which is why I'm foursquare against the UN. Lincoln violated the Constitution - the one he swore to support and defend - by suspending habeas corpus and establishing/allowing martial law and military tribunals where civil courts were still functioning.
Cynical or not, I agree slavery was an economic issue, and it would have been gone by now through more civilized and legal means without losing thousands of American lives. The Industrial Revolution would have ended it. The process was already underway.
Lots of good info here.
The Emancipation Proclamation was not the utopian document kids learn about in school. It was a tactic of war, nothing more. from http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featur ... clamation/:
"Despite this expansive wording, the Emancipation Proclamation was limited in many ways. It applied only to states that had seceded from the Union, leaving slavery untouched in the loyal border states. It also expressly exempted parts of the Confederacy that had already come under Northern control. Most important, the freedom it promised depended upon Union military victory."
Never forget Lincoln was a politician, first and foremost, focused on personal power and his place in history. Most of the social advances of American society began as moral, ethical, and/or legal violations by power-hungry politicians bent on establishing their own imortality.
As to slavery, if it became uneconomic it would have probably ended. Or is that too cynical a viewpoint?
Did slavery not become an issue and reason for fighting only after the war started or was it at the heart of the arguement? I'm fascinated by history but the US in the 19th century has never really caught my interest but my lack of knowledge irritates me.As I understand it - Chonsi, set me straight please - The War Between the States was a war about states' rights. Until that time, states were not completely subordinate to the federal gov't. My (admittedly undereducated) interpretation of the federal gov't's role up to that point was very similar to that of the current UN, which is why I'm foursquare against the UN. Lincoln violated the Constitution - the one he swore to support and defend - by suspending habeas corpus and establishing/allowing martial law and military tribunals where civil courts were still functioning.
Cynical or not, I agree slavery was an economic issue, and it would have been gone by now through more civilized and legal means without losing thousands of American lives. The Industrial Revolution would have ended it. The process was already underway.
Lots of good info here.
The Emancipation Proclamation was not the utopian document kids learn about in school. It was a tactic of war, nothing more. from http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featur ... clamation/:
"Despite this expansive wording, the Emancipation Proclamation was limited in many ways. It applied only to states that had seceded from the Union, leaving slavery untouched in the loyal border states. It also expressly exempted parts of the Confederacy that had already come under Northern control. Most important, the freedom it promised depended upon Union military victory."
Never forget Lincoln was a politician, first and foremost, focused on personal power and his place in history. Most of the social advances of American society began as moral, ethical, and/or legal violations by power-hungry politicians bent on establishing their own imortality.
-
ComfortablyNumb
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 6:35 pm
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
THE AMERICAN RESISTANCE - THE TIME HAS ARRIVED
By: Ted Lang
The time has arrived – a designation must be assigned to the increasing number of Americans who are fed up and terrified by the unbelievable and staggering criminal acts perpetrated both domestically and internationally by the Bush gang. Bush and his GOP are targeting and immediately attacking any and all inspirations of accurate journalistic reporting of administration wrongdoing, proving all the more how despotic American government has become.
Only days ago, the Washington Post broke the story of secret prisons abroad, and what was the reaction on Capitol Hill? Republican Senate Majority Leader, Bill Frist, was angered not by the illegal activity and the disgrace it brings upon America, but offered instead: "My concern is with leaks of information that jeopardize your safety and security – period. That is a legitimate concern." If this isn’t a clear case of a simpleton shooting the messenger, I don’t know what is!
The volatility and unpredictable dangers of our totally out-of-control and dangerous government should be more than obvious. The more the American people learn about the mass murder of innocent civilians by internationally-banned weapons of destruction and death, and also of the secret prisons and their torture chambers authorized by these criminals, the more desperate they, the criminals, will become and the greater the harm they will inflict upon our nation and the world. In this regard, the real media, the Internet or alternative media [AM], are both a blessing and a potential expeditor of more disastrous Bush crimes against humanity.
In addition to being a hindrance to the Bushevik regime in terms of slowing down the planned bombings of Syria and Iraq to further the annexation of the entire Middle East into the American Empire, time is beginning to run out for Bush and his cabal of international war criminals. The Internet keeps exposing their planned and intended crimes beforehand. How many people educated by the AM are there? But the AM is out there alone, and without any modicum of support from the corporate establishment mainstream media [MSM]. In spite of the Post’s "insensitivity" in reporting the truth about illegal American government activities, the "national security" excuse is once again being invoked by government traitors anytime a MSM editor makes the mistake of accurately reporting an item of news that brings criticism of the emperor’s acts of genocide, torture and napalm and white phosphorus secret mass murders.
It is for these reasons that BOTH the MSM and the AM, the Internet, will fail to provide any more serious obstacles to Bush’s plans for world conquest. The only chance America and the world have left is the American Resistance. Bush must be impeached, but that will only happen if Democrats persevere in the 2006 Mid-Term elections. That’s too far away time-wise to be of any help right now. The only solution ensuring the safety of humanity against Bush is for Patrick J. Fitzgerald to initiate massive indictments immediately!
The possible indictments of war criminals Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld over the next two weeks will be of immense help in stopping the Bush war machine. Should this happen, of secondary importance will be the classification and codification of Bush regime atrocities setting him up for the post 2006 Mid-Term election impeachment proceedings. This is where the American Resistance will play an important role.
So who and what comprise the "American Resistance?" Clearly, they are not American voters – American voters are, for the most part, uninformed as to precisely what’s going on behind the closed doors of their secret government. Voting never occurs at a time when it can be employed to make a difference. Naturally, the key contributory factor to the ignorance of Americans as to what is really going on has been the news blackouts by the MSM. These blackouts are largely consensual on the part of the "Big Eight" Zionist media magnates who thrill to the massive advantage Bush’s insanity provides for Israel. Additionally, as coined by former Alabama Governor, George Wallace, "There isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between Republicans and Democrats."
Adding to the inefficacy of the ballot box when needed to affect change is the growing evidence that elections are now being fixed by the political parties. There is nothing new about vote manipulation – Cook County dirty tricks involving voters’ ballots and votes by dead people, as well as "hanging chads" in Florida, have demonstrated the truth of this observation. But now we have electronic balloting, which has no auditable paper trail. Voting is demonstrably futile; that is, unless it is overwhelmingly a landslide and intended to remove incumbents to facilitate the impeachment of a much-hated criminal president that has lied and has killed and maimed so many.
And once in public office, what of their oath to that office, and accountability to the people, once campaigning politicians assume public office upon their electoral victories? What about their responsibilities to their constituents? Government accountability is yet another American pipe dream – elected politicians remain so, continuing as politicians serving themselves and their party via cash spoils from lobbyists and large corporate interest groups. America’s leading industry nowadays is war and the manufacture and deployment of its killing machines.
America has, for all purposes and intents, no First Amendment media, no voter impact, no control over self-serving politicians and their parties, and lacks also any alternative approach for throttling dangerous American out-of-control government.
The American Resistance is that small but growing group of informed Americans who oppose domestic police state tyranny as well as the international acts of mass murder and torture now being exported internationally by the United States and its war-making industry. And leading the American Resistance, are those TRUE American Patriots who have risked, and who are willing to risk, everything to help set the American people free. The Bush regime has wordsmithed and put into place all the legislation required to legitimize the brutal military enforcement of total subservience to the American political State.
The American Resistance gains prominence through the words and actions of Cindy Sheehan; she had earned the right to complain. The American Resistance gains strength by the TRUE patriotism displayed by LT COL Karen Kwiatkowski, BG Generals Janis Karpinsky and Rick Baccus, FBI Agents Kenneth Williams and Coleen Rowley, FBI linguist Sibel Edmonds, former Secretary and Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neill and Paul Craig Roberts, Richard Clark, and many others that can be added to this list. What distinguishes these leaders as creators of the American Resistance?
Actually, for the most part, these are ordinary, everyday 9-to-5 people. In spite of their employment with the FBI, Agents Williams, Rowley and translator Edmonds had lackluster jobs until thrust into the limelight by the criminal machinations of the Bush war machine. What distinguishes them most, however, is that they are newsmakers and therefore virtually immune to media manipulation. Consider the total blackout of Cindy Sheehan’s Washington DC peace demonstration. The MSM had counted on the blackout as being the death knell for the resistance to the Bush regime; but just the opposite happened! Look at Bush’s declining poll numbers! And this in spite of the monumental total blackout and MSM spike effort! This is what is causing hesitation as concerns the planned military strikes on Syria and Iran. How much clout does the AM have?
The leaders of the American Resistance realize this simple approach: once the American people know what the Bush war criminals did, it won’t be long for a thundering and screeching cacophony of public outrage to launch the beginnings of Bush’s total downfall and impeachment.
The key is in informing the public. The majority of Americans don’t know about the Downing Street Memo, all the important aspects of the Plame-CIA leak, the AIPAC spy scandal, the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty covered up by the Johnson administration, the Pentagon Papers, or even the unnecessary wars engaged in by our military to include the Civil War, Spanish American War, World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam and now Iraq. The only reason these wars have been singled out is because extensive evidence has been recently uncovered justifying this observation. Even the American Revolution can be shown to have been unnecessary.
America will never be informed by the MSM. The MSM is the tool being deployed to shape both public opinion as well as public ignorance. It is the leaders of the American Resistance, and the many denizens of the objective alternative media, that will bring knowledge and understanding to the people. Cindy Sheehan is an example. She created news even the mighty MSM couldn’t spike and hide. And more news-making leaders are emerging. And slowly, ever so slowly, elements of the mainstream media are beginning to understand the life-and-death struggle that free America is now engaged in with the real axis of evil: the political State, its compliant and totally dominated press, and the virtual absence of public awareness.
http://www.etherzone.com/2005/lang111805.shtml
[snapback]30231[/snapback]
By: Ted Lang
The time has arrived – a designation must be assigned to the increasing number of Americans who are fed up and terrified by the unbelievable and staggering criminal acts perpetrated both domestically and internationally by the Bush gang. Bush and his GOP are targeting and immediately attacking any and all inspirations of accurate journalistic reporting of administration wrongdoing, proving all the more how despotic American government has become.
Only days ago, the Washington Post broke the story of secret prisons abroad, and what was the reaction on Capitol Hill? Republican Senate Majority Leader, Bill Frist, was angered not by the illegal activity and the disgrace it brings upon America, but offered instead: "My concern is with leaks of information that jeopardize your safety and security – period. That is a legitimate concern." If this isn’t a clear case of a simpleton shooting the messenger, I don’t know what is!
The volatility and unpredictable dangers of our totally out-of-control and dangerous government should be more than obvious. The more the American people learn about the mass murder of innocent civilians by internationally-banned weapons of destruction and death, and also of the secret prisons and their torture chambers authorized by these criminals, the more desperate they, the criminals, will become and the greater the harm they will inflict upon our nation and the world. In this regard, the real media, the Internet or alternative media [AM], are both a blessing and a potential expeditor of more disastrous Bush crimes against humanity.
In addition to being a hindrance to the Bushevik regime in terms of slowing down the planned bombings of Syria and Iraq to further the annexation of the entire Middle East into the American Empire, time is beginning to run out for Bush and his cabal of international war criminals. The Internet keeps exposing their planned and intended crimes beforehand. How many people educated by the AM are there? But the AM is out there alone, and without any modicum of support from the corporate establishment mainstream media [MSM]. In spite of the Post’s "insensitivity" in reporting the truth about illegal American government activities, the "national security" excuse is once again being invoked by government traitors anytime a MSM editor makes the mistake of accurately reporting an item of news that brings criticism of the emperor’s acts of genocide, torture and napalm and white phosphorus secret mass murders.
It is for these reasons that BOTH the MSM and the AM, the Internet, will fail to provide any more serious obstacles to Bush’s plans for world conquest. The only chance America and the world have left is the American Resistance. Bush must be impeached, but that will only happen if Democrats persevere in the 2006 Mid-Term elections. That’s too far away time-wise to be of any help right now. The only solution ensuring the safety of humanity against Bush is for Patrick J. Fitzgerald to initiate massive indictments immediately!
The possible indictments of war criminals Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld over the next two weeks will be of immense help in stopping the Bush war machine. Should this happen, of secondary importance will be the classification and codification of Bush regime atrocities setting him up for the post 2006 Mid-Term election impeachment proceedings. This is where the American Resistance will play an important role.
So who and what comprise the "American Resistance?" Clearly, they are not American voters – American voters are, for the most part, uninformed as to precisely what’s going on behind the closed doors of their secret government. Voting never occurs at a time when it can be employed to make a difference. Naturally, the key contributory factor to the ignorance of Americans as to what is really going on has been the news blackouts by the MSM. These blackouts are largely consensual on the part of the "Big Eight" Zionist media magnates who thrill to the massive advantage Bush’s insanity provides for Israel. Additionally, as coined by former Alabama Governor, George Wallace, "There isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between Republicans and Democrats."
Adding to the inefficacy of the ballot box when needed to affect change is the growing evidence that elections are now being fixed by the political parties. There is nothing new about vote manipulation – Cook County dirty tricks involving voters’ ballots and votes by dead people, as well as "hanging chads" in Florida, have demonstrated the truth of this observation. But now we have electronic balloting, which has no auditable paper trail. Voting is demonstrably futile; that is, unless it is overwhelmingly a landslide and intended to remove incumbents to facilitate the impeachment of a much-hated criminal president that has lied and has killed and maimed so many.
And once in public office, what of their oath to that office, and accountability to the people, once campaigning politicians assume public office upon their electoral victories? What about their responsibilities to their constituents? Government accountability is yet another American pipe dream – elected politicians remain so, continuing as politicians serving themselves and their party via cash spoils from lobbyists and large corporate interest groups. America’s leading industry nowadays is war and the manufacture and deployment of its killing machines.
America has, for all purposes and intents, no First Amendment media, no voter impact, no control over self-serving politicians and their parties, and lacks also any alternative approach for throttling dangerous American out-of-control government.
The American Resistance is that small but growing group of informed Americans who oppose domestic police state tyranny as well as the international acts of mass murder and torture now being exported internationally by the United States and its war-making industry. And leading the American Resistance, are those TRUE American Patriots who have risked, and who are willing to risk, everything to help set the American people free. The Bush regime has wordsmithed and put into place all the legislation required to legitimize the brutal military enforcement of total subservience to the American political State.
The American Resistance gains prominence through the words and actions of Cindy Sheehan; she had earned the right to complain. The American Resistance gains strength by the TRUE patriotism displayed by LT COL Karen Kwiatkowski, BG Generals Janis Karpinsky and Rick Baccus, FBI Agents Kenneth Williams and Coleen Rowley, FBI linguist Sibel Edmonds, former Secretary and Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neill and Paul Craig Roberts, Richard Clark, and many others that can be added to this list. What distinguishes these leaders as creators of the American Resistance?
Actually, for the most part, these are ordinary, everyday 9-to-5 people. In spite of their employment with the FBI, Agents Williams, Rowley and translator Edmonds had lackluster jobs until thrust into the limelight by the criminal machinations of the Bush war machine. What distinguishes them most, however, is that they are newsmakers and therefore virtually immune to media manipulation. Consider the total blackout of Cindy Sheehan’s Washington DC peace demonstration. The MSM had counted on the blackout as being the death knell for the resistance to the Bush regime; but just the opposite happened! Look at Bush’s declining poll numbers! And this in spite of the monumental total blackout and MSM spike effort! This is what is causing hesitation as concerns the planned military strikes on Syria and Iran. How much clout does the AM have?
The leaders of the American Resistance realize this simple approach: once the American people know what the Bush war criminals did, it won’t be long for a thundering and screeching cacophony of public outrage to launch the beginnings of Bush’s total downfall and impeachment.
The key is in informing the public. The majority of Americans don’t know about the Downing Street Memo, all the important aspects of the Plame-CIA leak, the AIPAC spy scandal, the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty covered up by the Johnson administration, the Pentagon Papers, or even the unnecessary wars engaged in by our military to include the Civil War, Spanish American War, World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam and now Iraq. The only reason these wars have been singled out is because extensive evidence has been recently uncovered justifying this observation. Even the American Revolution can be shown to have been unnecessary.
America will never be informed by the MSM. The MSM is the tool being deployed to shape both public opinion as well as public ignorance. It is the leaders of the American Resistance, and the many denizens of the objective alternative media, that will bring knowledge and understanding to the people. Cindy Sheehan is an example. She created news even the mighty MSM couldn’t spike and hide. And more news-making leaders are emerging. And slowly, ever so slowly, elements of the mainstream media are beginning to understand the life-and-death struggle that free America is now engaged in with the real axis of evil: the political State, its compliant and totally dominated press, and the virtual absence of public awareness.
http://www.etherzone.com/2005/lang111805.shtml
[snapback]30231[/snapback]
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
I take it you agree with every word?
ComfortablyNumb wrote: THE AMERICAN RESISTANCE - THE TIME HAS ARRIVED
By: Ted Lang
The time has arrived – a designation must be assigned to the increasing number of Americans who are fed up and terrified by the unbelievable and staggering criminal acts perpetrated both domestically and internationally by the Bush gang. Bush and his GOP are targeting and immediately attacking any and all inspirations of accurate journalistic reporting of administration wrongdoing, proving all the more how despotic American government has become.
Only days ago, the Washington Post broke the story of secret prisons abroad, and what was the reaction on Capitol Hill? Republican Senate Majority Leader, Bill Frist, was angered not by the illegal activity and the disgrace it brings upon America, but offered instead: "My concern is with leaks of information that jeopardize your safety and security – period. That is a legitimate concern." If this isn’t a clear case of a simpleton shooting the messenger, I don’t know what is! I missed this story. I'll have to research.
ComfortablyNumb wrote: The volatility and unpredictable dangers of our totally out-of-control and dangerous government should be more than obvious. The more the American people learn about the mass murder of innocent civilians by internationally-banned weapons of destruction and death, and also of the secret prisons and their torture chambers authorized by these criminals, the more desperate they, the criminals, will become and the greater the harm they will inflict upon our nation and the world. In this regard, the real media, the Internet or alternative media [AM], are both a blessing and a potential expeditor of more disastrous Bush crimes against humanity. What "internationally-banned weapons of destruction"?
ComfortablyNumb wrote: In addition to being a hindrance to the Bushevik regime in terms of slowing down the planned bombings of Syria and Iraq to further the annexation of the entire Middle East into the American Empire, time is beginning to run out for Bush and his cabal of international war criminals. The Internet keeps exposing their planned and intended crimes beforehand. How many people educated by the AM are there? But the AM is out there alone, and without any modicum of support from the corporate establishment mainstream media [MSM]. In spite of the Post’s "insensitivity" in reporting the truth about illegal American governm[...blah blah blah ok I'm bored]
http://www.etherzone.com/2005/lang111805.shtml
[snapback]30231[/snapback]
Who is Ted Lang?
ComfortablyNumb wrote: THE AMERICAN RESISTANCE - THE TIME HAS ARRIVED
By: Ted Lang
The time has arrived – a designation must be assigned to the increasing number of Americans who are fed up and terrified by the unbelievable and staggering criminal acts perpetrated both domestically and internationally by the Bush gang. Bush and his GOP are targeting and immediately attacking any and all inspirations of accurate journalistic reporting of administration wrongdoing, proving all the more how despotic American government has become.
Only days ago, the Washington Post broke the story of secret prisons abroad, and what was the reaction on Capitol Hill? Republican Senate Majority Leader, Bill Frist, was angered not by the illegal activity and the disgrace it brings upon America, but offered instead: "My concern is with leaks of information that jeopardize your safety and security – period. That is a legitimate concern." If this isn’t a clear case of a simpleton shooting the messenger, I don’t know what is! I missed this story. I'll have to research.
ComfortablyNumb wrote: The volatility and unpredictable dangers of our totally out-of-control and dangerous government should be more than obvious. The more the American people learn about the mass murder of innocent civilians by internationally-banned weapons of destruction and death, and also of the secret prisons and their torture chambers authorized by these criminals, the more desperate they, the criminals, will become and the greater the harm they will inflict upon our nation and the world. In this regard, the real media, the Internet or alternative media [AM], are both a blessing and a potential expeditor of more disastrous Bush crimes against humanity. What "internationally-banned weapons of destruction"?
ComfortablyNumb wrote: In addition to being a hindrance to the Bushevik regime in terms of slowing down the planned bombings of Syria and Iraq to further the annexation of the entire Middle East into the American Empire, time is beginning to run out for Bush and his cabal of international war criminals. The Internet keeps exposing their planned and intended crimes beforehand. How many people educated by the AM are there? But the AM is out there alone, and without any modicum of support from the corporate establishment mainstream media [MSM]. In spite of the Post’s "insensitivity" in reporting the truth about illegal American governm[...blah blah blah ok I'm bored]
http://www.etherzone.com/2005/lang111805.shtml
[snapback]30231[/snapback]
Who is Ted Lang?
-
ComfortablyNumb
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 6:35 pm
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
I hate to break this to you guys but your media doesn't tell you everything (or maybe anything when it comes to Bush's antics).
By now maybe they've broken the story of using phospherous bombs and napalm in Iraq, detaining journalists, and bringing people out of their homes under a white flag and then gunning them down.
They've stopped issuing casualty figures and some of the press aren't allowed to investigate anything. The Downing Street Memo disproves the WMO reasons Bush gave for going in in the first place.
Interestingly, the agreement signed by U.S, Russia and others about weather control weapons forbids use in a foreign country but not in your own! So theoretically Bush can seed a hurricane to make it bigger and steer it where he wants. Pretty major weather y'all been having since 'eminent domain' put land grab on the agenda.
It's all about the benjamins! Repeat after me "Impeach!"
By now maybe they've broken the story of using phospherous bombs and napalm in Iraq, detaining journalists, and bringing people out of their homes under a white flag and then gunning them down.
They've stopped issuing casualty figures and some of the press aren't allowed to investigate anything. The Downing Street Memo disproves the WMO reasons Bush gave for going in in the first place.
Interestingly, the agreement signed by U.S, Russia and others about weather control weapons forbids use in a foreign country but not in your own! So theoretically Bush can seed a hurricane to make it bigger and steer it where he wants. Pretty major weather y'all been having since 'eminent domain' put land grab on the agenda.
It's all about the benjamins! Repeat after me "Impeach!"
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
:yh_rotfl I didn't see a flag in your ID block (or whatever that bit on the left is called). What planet are you from?ComfortablyNumb wrote: I hate to break this to you guys but your media doesn't tell you everything (or maybe anything when it comes to Bush's antics).that's why we're here. To hear from friends in other nations so we can balance the ratings-hungry news guys in the US. Strange that I haven't heard this from anybody but you. Where's your information coming from? Who is Ted Lang?
ComfortablyNumb wrote: By now maybe they've broken the story of using phospherous bombs and napalm in Iraq, detaining journalists, and bringing people out of their homes under a white flag and then gunning them down.Be careful tossing out unfounded accusations like that about my military brothers. You'd better have some proof to back that tripe up!
ComfortablyNumb wrote: They've stopped issuing casualty figures and some of the press aren't allowed to investigate anything. The Downing Street Memo disproves the WMO reasons Bush gave for going in in the first place. Which "some"? And I think BTS gave a good reasoning for the real reason of invading Iraq.
ComfortablyNumb wrote: Interestingly, the agreement signed by U.S, Russia and others about weather control weapons forbids use in a foreign country but not in your own! So theoretically Bush can seed a hurricane to make it bigger and steer it where he wants. Pretty major weather y'all been having since 'eminent domain' put land grab on the agenda.
It's all about the benjamins! Repeat after me "Impeach!"
Haven't heard about the remote-control attack-hurricane drones. Do you have a link?
ComfortablyNumb wrote: By now maybe they've broken the story of using phospherous bombs and napalm in Iraq, detaining journalists, and bringing people out of their homes under a white flag and then gunning them down.Be careful tossing out unfounded accusations like that about my military brothers. You'd better have some proof to back that tripe up!
ComfortablyNumb wrote: They've stopped issuing casualty figures and some of the press aren't allowed to investigate anything. The Downing Street Memo disproves the WMO reasons Bush gave for going in in the first place. Which "some"? And I think BTS gave a good reasoning for the real reason of invading Iraq.
ComfortablyNumb wrote: Interestingly, the agreement signed by U.S, Russia and others about weather control weapons forbids use in a foreign country but not in your own! So theoretically Bush can seed a hurricane to make it bigger and steer it where he wants. Pretty major weather y'all been having since 'eminent domain' put land grab on the agenda.
It's all about the benjamins! Repeat after me "Impeach!"
Haven't heard about the remote-control attack-hurricane drones. Do you have a link?
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Boring...........................
though I did hear that Mr. Bush wanted to bomb the headquarters of the Al Jazerra (spelling, whatever, its arabic) news network. Unfortunatly its in Quatar, which is a U.S. ally in the "War on bad stuff", and bombing independent news companies filled with non-combatant journalists (though admittedly shifty arab types) based in friendly nations is still a bit too mad even for the Pentagon so Blair, being the nice middle-class English do-gooder that he is, persueded him to hold back for a bit. This really is a great war, the best since the war of the Austrian sucession if you ask me.
The source by the way is a British civil service memo leaked by some skulking Labour Party backbencher who is only interested in getting Blair, so I think it may have some truth in it.
In fact come to think of it a British news program did a live interview with Frank Gaffeny who was a senior advisor to president Reagan, who's atti"dude" was that this was probably untrue and that even if it was there was no problem as Al Jazerraasalammohamad jihad was a T.V. station that was in the business of portraying anti-war and anti American news stories, when told that as the BBC occasionally ran stories that could be considered anti-war or anti-bush administration could the BBC be expecting a few swift cruise missiles up its world service any day now? Mr Gaffney declined to comment on this point. Like I said, its a great war, all round.
though I did hear that Mr. Bush wanted to bomb the headquarters of the Al Jazerra (spelling, whatever, its arabic) news network. Unfortunatly its in Quatar, which is a U.S. ally in the "War on bad stuff", and bombing independent news companies filled with non-combatant journalists (though admittedly shifty arab types) based in friendly nations is still a bit too mad even for the Pentagon so Blair, being the nice middle-class English do-gooder that he is, persueded him to hold back for a bit. This really is a great war, the best since the war of the Austrian sucession if you ask me.
The source by the way is a British civil service memo leaked by some skulking Labour Party backbencher who is only interested in getting Blair, so I think it may have some truth in it.
In fact come to think of it a British news program did a live interview with Frank Gaffeny who was a senior advisor to president Reagan, who's atti"dude" was that this was probably untrue and that even if it was there was no problem as Al Jazerraasalammohamad jihad was a T.V. station that was in the business of portraying anti-war and anti American news stories, when told that as the BBC occasionally ran stories that could be considered anti-war or anti-bush administration could the BBC be expecting a few swift cruise missiles up its world service any day now? Mr Gaffney declined to comment on this point. Like I said, its a great war, all round.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Not mapalm but they have used phosphorous
http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/sto ... 48,00.html
The first account they unearthed in a magazine published by the US army. In the March 2005 edition of Field Artillery, officers from the 2nd Infantry's fire support element boast about their role in the attack on Falluja in November last year: "White Phosphorous. WP proved to be an effective and versatile munition. We used it for screening missions at two breeches and, later in the fight, as a potent psychological weapon against the insurgents in trench lines and spider holes when we could not get effects on them with HE [high explosive]. We fired 'shake and bake' missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE to take them out."
Article continues
The second, in California's North County Times, was by a reporter embedded with the marines in the April 2004 siege of Falluja. "'Gun up!' Millikin yelled ... grabbing a white phosphorus round from a nearby ammo can and holding it over the tube. 'Fire!' Bogert yelled, as Millikin dropped it. The boom kicked dust around the pit as they ran through the drill again and again, sending a mixture of burning white phosphorus and high explosives they call 'shake'n'bake' into... buildings where insurgents have been spotted all week."
Can't say i would blame the soldiers, if you can kill your enemy without going near them so much the better. maybe the biggest con in all this is the idea perpetrated by politicians that you can have a "nice" war where nobody gets killed or wounded and only the baddies suffer. cartoon violence for a television age with no consequences for those involved.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/sto ... 48,00.html
Under the front-page headline "Bush plot to bomb his ally", the Daily Mirror reported that the US president last year planned to attack the Arabic television station al-Jazeera, which has its headquarters in Doha, the capital of Qatar, where US and British bombers were based.
Tony Blair's Monty python approach to the press freedom-"Don't mention the war"
They have now assured that the media are all talking about the gagging order and that they will have to publish the memo to dispel the rumours one way or another. The spin put on it was that GW didn't know Qatar was one of his allies and thought it was in Iraq. It's the gagging order that is now causing the stooshie. Don't know about the american press but if you tell ours not to talk about something at the very least they will go on about the fact they are not being allowed to talk about it and what are the govt trying to hide.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/sto ... 48,00.html
The first account they unearthed in a magazine published by the US army. In the March 2005 edition of Field Artillery, officers from the 2nd Infantry's fire support element boast about their role in the attack on Falluja in November last year: "White Phosphorous. WP proved to be an effective and versatile munition. We used it for screening missions at two breeches and, later in the fight, as a potent psychological weapon against the insurgents in trench lines and spider holes when we could not get effects on them with HE [high explosive]. We fired 'shake and bake' missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE to take them out."
Article continues
The second, in California's North County Times, was by a reporter embedded with the marines in the April 2004 siege of Falluja. "'Gun up!' Millikin yelled ... grabbing a white phosphorus round from a nearby ammo can and holding it over the tube. 'Fire!' Bogert yelled, as Millikin dropped it. The boom kicked dust around the pit as they ran through the drill again and again, sending a mixture of burning white phosphorus and high explosives they call 'shake'n'bake' into... buildings where insurgents have been spotted all week."
Can't say i would blame the soldiers, if you can kill your enemy without going near them so much the better. maybe the biggest con in all this is the idea perpetrated by politicians that you can have a "nice" war where nobody gets killed or wounded and only the baddies suffer. cartoon violence for a television age with no consequences for those involved.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/sto ... 48,00.html
Under the front-page headline "Bush plot to bomb his ally", the Daily Mirror reported that the US president last year planned to attack the Arabic television station al-Jazeera, which has its headquarters in Doha, the capital of Qatar, where US and British bombers were based.
Tony Blair's Monty python approach to the press freedom-"Don't mention the war"
They have now assured that the media are all talking about the gagging order and that they will have to publish the memo to dispel the rumours one way or another. The spin put on it was that GW didn't know Qatar was one of his allies and thought it was in Iraq. It's the gagging order that is now causing the stooshie. Don't know about the american press but if you tell ours not to talk about something at the very least they will go on about the fact they are not being allowed to talk about it and what are the govt trying to hide.
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Far Rider wrote: why blow it up? all ya need is one EA6B Prowler jamming its transmission 24/7... eazy pezy...
I don't know why, it will all come out anyway, as the person who leaked the memo is going to face a court case in Britain for breaking the official secrets act, which is punishable by being banished to a parisian night club for 8 years. Anyway, the main thing is that this memo will come out in court, so we can all see what messers Bush and Co were planning for the Satellite Arab ingrates who had the cheek to a start a gulf style Fox News Network.
I don't know why, it will all come out anyway, as the person who leaked the memo is going to face a court case in Britain for breaking the official secrets act, which is punishable by being banished to a parisian night club for 8 years. Anyway, the main thing is that this memo will come out in court, so we can all see what messers Bush and Co were planning for the Satellite Arab ingrates who had the cheek to a start a gulf style Fox News Network.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
-
ComfortablyNumb
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 6:35 pm
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Far Rider wrote: Napalm... God I love that smell!
Youre off your rocker if you think weve used napalm in Iraq.
Weather control weapons ROFLMAO:wah:
If weather control makes you laugh, you obviously don't live in a tornado/cyclone area.
'THE UN CONVENTION ON THE PROHIBITION OF MILITARY OR
ANY OTHER HOSTILE USE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MODIFICATION
TECHNIQUES
UN Convention
Recognizing that scientific and technical advances may
open new possibilities with respect to modification of
the environment,
Recognizing, however, that military or any other
hostile use of such techniques could have effects
extremely harmful to human welfare,
Desiring to prohibit effectively military or any other
hostile use of environmental modification techniques
in order to eliminate the dangers to mankind from such
use, and affirming their willingness to work towards
the achievement of this objective,
It is the understanding of the Committee that the
following examples are illustrative of phenomena that
could be caused by the use of environmental
modification techniques as defined in Article II of
the Convention: earthquakes, tsunamis; an upset in the
ecological balance of a region; changes in weather
patterns (clouds, precipitation, cyclones of various
types and tornadic storms); changes in climate
patterns; changes in ocean currents; changes in the
state of the ozone layer; and changes in the state of
the ionosphere.'
http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/enmod/text/environ2.htm
'Bill S517
11 (a) IN GENERAL.--There is established within the
12 Treasury of the United States the Weather
Modification
13 Research and Development Fund, which shall consist
of
14 amounts appropriated pursuant to subsection (B) or
re-
15 ceived by the Board under subsection ©.
http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:wTw ... .517&hl=en
'It comes as no surprise, therefore, that speculation
is pointing to the prospect of the weather being
doctored to induce drought conditions across Southern
Africa in a bid to arm-twist the region to capitulate
to the whims of the world’s superpowers.
While it seems incredible to imagine that weather can
be modified it has been scientifically proven that
weather conditions in selected localities can be
influenced through the same technology used in cloud
seeding or through even more sophisticated weather
modification methods.'
http://www.zimbabweherald.com/index.php ... 2005-06-28
'Scientists are developing techniques aimed at taming
the power of the world's most devastating storms. The
project, backed by funds from Nasa, would involve
seeding clouds, coating seas with biodegradable
'slicks' and even beaming microwave radiation from
orbiting power stations to slow or even halt
hurricanes.'
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/internat ... 63,00.html
'Those who doubt that Katrina, or any other hurricane,
could be stoppedâ€â€or createdâ€â€can find substantiation in
a long-forgotten article by Chen May Yee in the Nov.
13, 1997, issue of The Wall Street Journal.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/h ... ather.html
Youre off your rocker if you think weve used napalm in Iraq.
Weather control weapons ROFLMAO:wah:
If weather control makes you laugh, you obviously don't live in a tornado/cyclone area.
'THE UN CONVENTION ON THE PROHIBITION OF MILITARY OR
ANY OTHER HOSTILE USE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MODIFICATION
TECHNIQUES
UN Convention
Recognizing that scientific and technical advances may
open new possibilities with respect to modification of
the environment,
Recognizing, however, that military or any other
hostile use of such techniques could have effects
extremely harmful to human welfare,
Desiring to prohibit effectively military or any other
hostile use of environmental modification techniques
in order to eliminate the dangers to mankind from such
use, and affirming their willingness to work towards
the achievement of this objective,
It is the understanding of the Committee that the
following examples are illustrative of phenomena that
could be caused by the use of environmental
modification techniques as defined in Article II of
the Convention: earthquakes, tsunamis; an upset in the
ecological balance of a region; changes in weather
patterns (clouds, precipitation, cyclones of various
types and tornadic storms); changes in climate
patterns; changes in ocean currents; changes in the
state of the ozone layer; and changes in the state of
the ionosphere.'
http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/enmod/text/environ2.htm
'Bill S517
11 (a) IN GENERAL.--There is established within the
12 Treasury of the United States the Weather
Modification
13 Research and Development Fund, which shall consist
of
14 amounts appropriated pursuant to subsection (B) or
re-
15 ceived by the Board under subsection ©.
http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:wTw ... .517&hl=en
'It comes as no surprise, therefore, that speculation
is pointing to the prospect of the weather being
doctored to induce drought conditions across Southern
Africa in a bid to arm-twist the region to capitulate
to the whims of the world’s superpowers.
While it seems incredible to imagine that weather can
be modified it has been scientifically proven that
weather conditions in selected localities can be
influenced through the same technology used in cloud
seeding or through even more sophisticated weather
modification methods.'
http://www.zimbabweherald.com/index.php ... 2005-06-28
'Scientists are developing techniques aimed at taming
the power of the world's most devastating storms. The
project, backed by funds from Nasa, would involve
seeding clouds, coating seas with biodegradable
'slicks' and even beaming microwave radiation from
orbiting power stations to slow or even halt
hurricanes.'
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/internat ... 63,00.html
'Those who doubt that Katrina, or any other hurricane,
could be stoppedâ€â€or createdâ€â€can find substantiation in
a long-forgotten article by Chen May Yee in the Nov.
13, 1997, issue of The Wall Street Journal.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/h ... ather.html
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
I would just say, that as a scientist, controlling the weather is way, way, way, beyond any capabilities that I am aware of. What we are really worried about is the fact that we have no control over the weather and the climate seems to be changing quite dramatically, So I actually hope that they do have these so called weather weapons, I have a feeling we may need them.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Galbally wrote: I would just say, that as a scientist, controlling the weather is way, way, way, beyond any capabilities that I am aware of. What we are really worried about is the fact that we have no control over the weather and the climate seems to be changing quite dramatically, So I actually hope that they do have these so called weather weapons, I have a feeling we may need them.Didn't you read?!? The weather is just fine, if left to itself. Bush and his winged monkeys are creating super-hurricanes and steering them over predominately democrat voting districts in Florida. This is, of course, after using federal funding to reinforce the homes of registered republicans so they won't have to evacuate. The democrats and other undesirables are then evacuated to other states - states where they aren't registered to vote and would still be in the minority even if they were smart enough to overcome that major obstacle. THEN, you see, the Bush imperialistic machine can guarantee republican control of the government and the complicit military. By warming the globe, Bush can hold snow hostage, bringing the Swiss to their knees in no time. He can reach his evil destruction all the way across the globe, using some of the less desirable nations for torture and genocide training as they go. He will be unstoppable as he attains complete global control then places his race above all others. This was naturally the last wish of his daddy's godfather, Adolf Hitler.
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Accountable wrote: Didn't you read?!? The weather is just fine, if left to itself. Bush and his winged monkeys are creating super-hurricanes and steering them over predominately democrat voting districts in Florida. This is, of course, after using federal funding to reinforce the homes of registered republicans so they won't have to evacuate. The democrats and other undesirables are then evacuated to other states - states where they aren't registered to vote and would still be in the minority even if they were smart enough to overcome that major obstacle. THEN, you see, the Bush imperialistic machine can guarantee republican control of the government and the complicit military. By warming the globe, Bush can hold snow hostage, bringing the Swiss to their knees in no time. He can reach his evil destruction all the way across the globe, using some of the less desirable nations for torture and genocide training as they go. He will be unstoppable as he attains complete global control then places his race above all others. This was naturally the last wish of his daddy's godfather, Adolf Hitler.
Oh I see, well thats my own fault for talking these consipiracy nuts at their word. I would tend to think that despite his failings, Mr. Bush is not actually the anti-christ, though some people seem happy to beleive that for some reason. Though I wouldn't put it past him to try and Bomb the Al-Jihad-Falalffel network. Anyway, wasn't this supposed to be about socialism or something?
Oh I see, well thats my own fault for talking these consipiracy nuts at their word. I would tend to think that despite his failings, Mr. Bush is not actually the anti-christ, though some people seem happy to beleive that for some reason. Though I wouldn't put it past him to try and Bomb the Al-Jihad-Falalffel network. Anyway, wasn't this supposed to be about socialism or something?
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Calling all Socialist, Communists, whatever
Galbally wrote: Oh I see, well thats my own fault for talking these consipiracy nuts at their word. I would tend to think that despite his failings, Mr. Bush is not actually the anti-christ, though some people seem happy to beleive that for some reason. Though I wouldn't put it past him to try and Bomb the Al-Jihad-Falalffel network. Anyway, wasn't this supposed to be about socialism or something?Socialism, political hypocrisy, Frank-huricane-stein, a whole cornucopia (sp?)! We're right on target!