mattp Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 Gosh Matt, you should watch/listen to the video. She didn't say one thing bout Chavez, Birkenstocks or abortions. ... Check out that video. Then let's discuss it, reasonably. Gosh, ChucK. I DID watch the video. Well ... not the whole thing but I watched most of it as I cooked breakfast and got ready to go to work yesterday. I did not mean to imply comment on the video, but on what I would expect to be the reaction from JayB, KK, and Fairweather. They are pretty consistent on this stuff. As to Cocoa's complaint: I agree that there are certain parts of her presentation I find less then 100% compelling. I DO however believe that this administration has used fear mongering in the manner that she described - at least in general terms. Clearly, for example, they told us that we had to take out Saddam or we'd find confirmation of his weaponry in the form of a mushroom cloud over New York (cue Peter Puget with the tired old "imminent" v. "gathering" threat argument). Maybe I was in the other room putting toothpaste on my toothbrush at that moment, but I didn't hear her saying that there were no sleeper cells posing a threat to the U.S. so much as saying that the Administration has lied about them and their response to them in a manner designed to inflate our fear and cause us to forgo challenges to an imposition on our civil rights. I didn't hear that message in this speech, but to me she loses greater credibility in where she hash previously suggested that Bush and Co are not going to relinquish the throne next year. From where I sit, it looks like "they" are doing just fine on the power-control-facism front and "they" don't need to do something as blatant as that. I'm not quite saying that Bush and pals are merely pawns, but from the point of view of those who stand to get rich or lose money on all of this, for those in power seats in the military-industrial board rooms, and even for prospects for one political party over the other for the next dozen years, I doubt it makes as much difference as we might hope it would who gets elected next year. Either way, we are not likely to pull out troops out of Iraq in a big hurry, the oil companies are still going to have the Whitehouse serving them, and I doubt military contractors are going to suffer much. I'd be quite surprised if we had slid so far down the Facist slippery slope that they thought now was the time to make such a dramatic move as openly suspending the Constitution. Quote
Bug Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 MattP, No. C+. Sorry. Bush is not the dictator we need to worry about. Facism is far more wide spread than that and these people are brilliant. She pointed out the the Fed Prosecutoras that were fired were all in swing states. This is similar to the process of electioneering in Florida and the tazing of the Floridian student. She went on to say that the next president can be hand picked by the Party. (Juilianni is swaggering around like he has already won.) (I chose not to call it the Republican Party because that has been and will again be an honorable party.) This is about controlling the elections not about keeping a specific person in office. Yes Bush may try to suspend the constitution but he/they know it cannot last long. Just long enough to put more apparatus in place. Quote
JayB Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 Matt: I think that SC's point was that you do an equal disservice when you exaggerate or mischaracterize the threats posed by a given administration for political gain. Were you saluting the Black-Helicopter/Patriot-Movement folks for their valuable contribution to the national political discourse when they were suggesting that Waco, Ruby-Ridge, etc were mere preludes to a Clinton orchestrated takeover by the UN/One-World-Government? Somewhere mixed in with the wild-eyed, crazy-ass gibberish were some points that may have been worth considering with regards to the power of the state under any administration, but they were completely lost amongst the aformentioned crazy-ass shit that no one in their right mind would actually give any credence to - and they wound up completely discrediting any argument that they were attempting to advance, and compromising any non-crazy-ass cause that they wished to further. Swap the Birkenstocks and beads for boots and bandoliers and I think you'd be surprised at how well you fit in with the folks in the fortified compounds. Quote
joblo7 Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 Matt: I think that SC's point was that you do an equal disservice when you exaggerate or mischaracterize the threats posed by a given administration for political gain. Were you saluting the Black-Helicopter/Patriot-Movement folks for their valuable contribution to the national political discourse when they were suggesting that Waco, Ruby-Ridge, etc were mere preludes to a Clinton orchestrated takeover by the UN/One-World-Government? Somewhere mixed in with the wild-eyed, crazy-ass gibberish were some points that may have been worth considering with regards to the power of the state under any administration, but they were completely lost amongst the aformentioned crazy-ass shit that no one in their right mind would actually give any credence to - and they wound up completely discrediting any argument that they were attempting to advance, and compromising any non-crazy-ass cause that they wished to further. Swap the Birkenstocks and beads for boots and bandoliers and I think you'd be surprised at how well you fit in with the folks in the fortified compounds. fucking up 3000 of your fellow citizens for gain is some crazy-ass-shit. pointing it out is sane-as-pie shit. Quote
mattp Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 Matt: I think that SC's point was that you do an equal disservice when you exaggerate or mischaracterize the threats posed by a given administration for political gain. I think I clearly stated that I agree with this argument, JayB. I don't think, as you may, that our President and his men have undertaken most of this war against terror in good faith. I also think it is pretty clear that on this fear-mongering business it is THIS Administration much more than their critics who've been over the top. Quote
joblo7 Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 create terrorism and then fight it with terror. THE WAR WITH TERROR. meanwhile change laws and amass power and fortune. Quote
joblo7 Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 exactly what naomi's video is talking 'bout. with the dirt added. Quote
joblo7 Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 Gosh Matt, you should watch/listen to the video. She didn't say one thing bout Chavez, Birkenstocks or abortions. ... Check out that video. Then let's discuss it, reasonably. Gosh, I'm not quite saying that Bush and pals are merely pawns, but from the point of view of those who stand to get rich or lose money on all of this, for those in power seats in the military-industrial board rooms, and even for prospects for one political party over the other for the next dozen years, I doubt it makes as much difference as we might hope it would who gets elected next year. Either way, we are not likely to pull out troops out of Iraq in a big hurry, the oil companies are still going to have the Whitehouse serving them, and I doubt military contractors are going to suffer much. I'd be quite surprised if we had slid so far down the Facist slippery slope that they thought now was the time to make such a dramatic move as openly suspending the Constitution. well, as long as nobody objects to their hijacking of this country,they dont have to do anything.the elections are rigged, congress is rigged, cia is rigged, pentagon,media, rigged. why worry, and they dont. they go about their nasty shit like nobody knows or cares.anything comes up, they shoot it down in 'mainstream media' and relegate truth to 'alternative'/'liberal' channels/papers/authors/speakers etc. the mere fact that they can renovate with planes and get a war out of it speaks volumes of the centralisation of power .and of the gullibility of joe public. Quote
joblo7 Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 you are riggin the post count!!! no fair...... Quote
joblo7 Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 it would be sad if this little video did not affect change. Quote
Bug Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 you are riggin the post count!!! no fair...... You are an enemy of the state. Prepare to be dissiminated to waiting organ recipients. Quote
Bug Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 it would be sad if this little video did not affect change. Truth was the first casualty. As Goebels put it, "People are more easily taken by a big lie than by a small lie." Quote
joblo7 Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 waiting organ recipients............. ummmmmmmmmmm waiting organ recipients............. Quote
Bug Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 It is a huge blow to admit to being taken by a big lie. Most will follow the big lie to the bloody end. Or to quote Ananda Coomaraswamy, "If you convince a man that you are right, he will likely believe that he was wrong." Quote
joblo7 Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 "The Bigger the Lie, the More the People will Believe it" - Adolf Hitler Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 KKKK is rigged. Damn straight. I'm rigged with guns and a serious package. Quote
Bug Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 Keep em loaded brotha. They're comin fer bothvus Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.