Fascist America, in 10 Easy Steps

[quote]Curodd wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Utter horse crap. I like her description of our government controlling the press.

A (single) blogger was arrested. Wow!

Agreed. Weak arguement here. Comparing reference to ‘Homeland’ is rediculous. And from what’s out and reported on today, Bush, in no way controls the media.

Really, where are the weak arguments, point them out and give counter arguments then. …
[/quote]

They are all weak and inaccurate arguments that could be applied universally. They could be (and were) applied to wartime admins like Wilson’s, FDR’s, Johnson’s, Nixon’s and peace time admins including Clinton’s.

We are not turning into a fascist country. This column is so pathetic it does not warrant my time dissecting it point by point.

Perhaps you would be better off trying to see how the administrations I listed above all took the same steps and then think about how it is possible we are not a fascist country.

[quote]Curodd wrote:
Really, where are the weak arguments, point them out and give counter arguments then. [/quote]

  1. The extremist muslims DID attack us and declare war on us. Being that they infiltrated us, hijacked planes and crashed them into buildings means they are a real threat who can easily infiltrate and attack us.

Compare this to the Communists and Jews in Nazi Germany who were scapegoats and victims and an imaginary threat. Even the burning of the Reichstag was an inside job.

2.Gulags? We are at war. What would you like them to do with prisoners of war? I do not see them rounding up political dissenters and shipping them bu the trainload to concentration camps.

  1. Guards? Ever see any brownshirts in your neighborhoods? The guards they sent to help the Katrina victims could not even stop looting.

  2. Wiretapping? They used wiretapping to bring down the mob, isn’t a war on terrorists similar to a war on organized crime? Shouldn’t we use the same methods.

  3. The ACLU is still a powerful lobby in this country.

I’m done. someone else take over if ya want.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Utter horse crap. I like her description of our government controlling the press.

A (single) blogger was arrested. Wow!

Agreed. Weak arguement here. Comparing reference to ‘Homeland’ is rediculous. And from what’s out and reported on today, Bush, in no way controls the media.

Really, where are the weak arguments, point them out and give counter arguments then. …

They are all weak and inaccurate arguments that could be applied universally. They could be (and were) applied to wartime admins like Wilson’s, FDR’s, Johnson’s, Nixon’s and peace time admins including Clinton’s.

We are not turning into a fascist country. This column is so pathetic it does not warrant my time dissecting it point by point.

Perhaps you would be better off trying to see how the administrations I listed above all took the same steps and then think about how it is possible we are not a fascist country.

[/quote]

Dr lawrence britt says lists 14 points of fascism. America demonstrates every one of them. Im not saying it is or isnt(obviously it isnt currently) but to believe your totally above it is a bit rediculous in my point of view. Obviously any country does turn into a fascist regime over night. I think its a simple cause of americans believing the exception is not the rule. They see something and simply turn a blind eye saying oh that probably deosnt happen that often. When there is just as likely a chance that the exception IS the rule and that your being mislead. Think what you want, but i just dont work in absolutes, merely if something is possible or not. Believing totally and blindly in an administration is akin to believing totally and blindy to a religion. When you take any critism with closed ears and a made mind, your apt to not see whats happening. this is what makes it much easier to simply look from afar and analyze. at least imho

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Curodd wrote:
Really, where are the weak arguments, point them out and give counter arguments then.

  1. The extremist muslims DID attack us and declare war on us. Being that they infiltrated us, hijacked planes and crashed them into buildings means they are a real threat who can easily infiltrate and attack us.

Compare this to the Communists and Jews in Nazi Germany who were scapegoats and victims and an imaginary threat. Even the burning of the Reichstag was an inside job.

2.Gulags? We are at war. What would you like them to do with prisoners of war? I do not see them rounding up political dissenters and shipping them bu the trainload to concentration camps.

  1. Guards? Ever see any brownshirts in your neighborhoods? The guards they sent to help the Katrina victims could not even stop looting.

  2. Wiretapping? They used wiretapping to bring down the mob, isn’t a war on terrorists similar to a war on organized crime? Shouldn’t we use the same methods.

  3. The ACLU is still a powerful lobby in this country.

I’m done. someone else take over if ya want.[/quote]

  1. Some might agree some might not. I think its just as likely that it was set up by the american government its self to allow them reason to invade a country for no reason. Oh ya bin laden was suppose to be there wasnt he. Or WMDs. fuck i guess they were just 0 for 2. Im sure hitler was just as good at convincing his people that the Reichstag fires were done from an outside source. Combo with the building imploding, and video footage of fireman saying there were bombs in the bottem of the building and random èxperts`showing up on the scene, and i think you have some room for debate.

2 your arguemnt is weak. You dont see it therefore it deosnt happen. you in fact agree with the article that these gulags do in fact exist and give an argument of well what are we suppose to do. When the term political prisoner can be extended as far as it is, i do not like the idea of prisons that are in essense black holes. There is never a need to allow isolated, long term
prison sentences without a court date. that is fairly simple

  1. i agree this was a weak argument in the article.

  2. If i kill a person 10 years ago to solve an issue, does that mean that killing is always the answer. I dont believe so, privacy is privacy regardless of war times or not. Invasion of privacy is a tool of fascism, plain and simple. not the only one but one none the less.

[quote]Curodd wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Utter horse crap. I like her description of our government controlling the press.

A (single) blogger was arrested. Wow!

Agreed. Weak arguement here. Comparing reference to ‘Homeland’ is rediculous. And from what’s out and reported on today, Bush, in no way controls the media.

Really, where are the weak arguments, point them out and give counter arguments then. …

They are all weak and inaccurate arguments that could be applied universally. They could be (and were) applied to wartime admins like Wilson’s, FDR’s, Johnson’s, Nixon’s and peace time admins including Clinton’s.

We are not turning into a fascist country. This column is so pathetic it does not warrant my time dissecting it point by point.

Perhaps you would be better off trying to see how the administrations I listed above all took the same steps and then think about how it is possible we are not a fascist country.

Dr lawrence britt says lists 14 points of fascism. America demonstrates every one of them. Im not saying it is or isnt(obviously it isnt currently) but to believe your totally above it is a bit rediculous in my point of view. Obviously any country does turn into a fascist regime over night. I think its a simple cause of americans believing the exception is not the rule. They see something and simply turn a blind eye saying oh that probably deosnt happen that often. When there is just as likely a chance that the exception IS the rule and that your being mislead. Think what you want, but i just dont work in absolutes, merely if something is possible or not. Believing totally and blindly in an administration is akin to believing totally and blindy to a religion. When you take any critism with closed ears and a made mind, your apt to not see whats happening. this is what makes it much easier to simply look from afar and analyze. at least imho
[/quote]

No one is turning a blind eye to anything. Americans fight for their rights everyday.

No one blindly follows any admin although MANY people blindly attack opposition admins.

[quote]Curodd wrote:

  1. Some might agree some might not. I think its just as likely that it was set up by the american government its self to allow them reason to invade a country for no reason. …[/quote]

Then you are irrational.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:

  1. Some might agree some might not. I think its just as likely that it was set up by the american government its self to allow them reason to invade a country for no reason. …

Then you are irrational.[/quote]

yes, if i dont believe as you do, im irrational.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Utter horse crap. I like her description of our government controlling the press.

A (single) blogger was arrested. Wow!

Agreed. Weak arguement here. Comparing reference to ‘Homeland’ is rediculous. And from what’s out and reported on today, Bush, in no way controls the media.

Really, where are the weak arguments, point them out and give counter arguments then. …

They are all weak and inaccurate arguments that could be applied universally. They could be (and were) applied to wartime admins like Wilson’s, FDR’s, Johnson’s, Nixon’s and peace time admins including Clinton’s.

We are not turning into a fascist country. This column is so pathetic it does not warrant my time dissecting it point by point.

Perhaps you would be better off trying to see how the administrations I listed above all took the same steps and then think about how it is possible we are not a fascist country.

Dr lawrence britt says lists 14 points of fascism. America demonstrates every one of them. Im not saying it is or isnt(obviously it isnt currently) but to believe your totally above it is a bit rediculous in my point of view. Obviously any country does turn into a fascist regime over night. I think its a simple cause of americans believing the exception is not the rule. They see something and simply turn a blind eye saying oh that probably deosnt happen that often. When there is just as likely a chance that the exception IS the rule and that your being mislead. Think what you want, but i just dont work in absolutes, merely if something is possible or not. Believing totally and blindly in an administration is akin to believing totally and blindy to a religion. When you take any critism with closed ears and a made mind, your apt to not see whats happening. this is what makes it much easier to simply look from afar and analyze. at least imho

No one is turning a blind eye to anything. Americans fight for their rights everyday.

No one blindly follows any admin although MANY people blindly attack opposition admins. [/quote]

  1. Yes, people are. if they see something on the news about mishandling of prisoners in iraq etc, some people sit and just say well fuck the government will handle that. That is in essence turning a blind eye. You cant say no one in this context.

  2. Yes people do blindly follow. alot of people in your country dont even vote. That right there is blindly following. Again you cant say no one in this context.

[quote]Curodd wrote:

  1. Some might agree some might not. I think its just as likely that it was set up by the american government its self to allow them reason to invade a country for no reason. Oh ya bin laden was suppose to be there wasnt he. Or WMDs. fuck i guess they were just 0 for 2. Im sure hitler was just as good at convincing his people that the Reichstag fires were done from an outside source. Combo with the building imploding, and video footage of fireman saying there were bombs in the bottem of the building and random èxperts`showing up on the scene, and i think you have some room for debate.

2 your arguemnt is weak. You dont see it therefore it deosnt happen. you in fact agree with the article that these gulags do in fact exist and give an argument of well what are we suppose to do. When the term political prisoner can be extended as far as it is, i do not like the idea of prisons that are in essense black holes. There is never a need to allow isolated, long term
prison sentences without a court date. that is fairly simple

  1. i agree this was a weak argument in the article.

  2. If i kill a person 10 years ago to solve an issue, does that mean that killing is always the answer. I dont believe so, privacy is privacy regardless of war times or not. Invasion of privacy is a tool of fascism, plain and simple. not the only one but one none the less.[/quote]

  3. If you do not believe al-Qaeda attacked us, then you belive conspiracy theories and there’s not any point in arguing with you about this one. Until they can prove otherwise or catch Bin Laden, I believe that ME terrorists attacked us on 9-11.

  4. But they are not arresting protesters in mass like in real dictatorships. My buddy went to Washington DC to a huge ass Bush protest and lived to tell about it. I can go outside and yell Bush is an a-hole, and will not get arrested for it.

  5. who said anything about killing? I said we should develop anti-terrorist measures like we used against the mob. Britian was battling it’s share of terrorists over the years, would you say they are a fascist dictatorship?

  6. I do not see any TV or radio stations closing because they are against Bush and the war. The only thing closing TV and radio stations these days, quite frankly, is deregulation and the incompetence of the FCC.

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Curodd wrote:

  1. Some might agree some might not. I think its just as likely that it was set up by the american government its self to allow them reason to invade a country for no reason. Oh ya bin laden was suppose to be there wasnt he. Or WMDs. fuck i guess they were just 0 for 2. Im sure hitler was just as good at convincing his people that the Reichstag fires were done from an outside source. Combo with the building imploding, and video footage of fireman saying there were bombs in the bottem of the building and random èxperts`showing up on the scene, and i think you have some room for debate.

2 your arguemnt is weak. You dont see it therefore it deosnt happen. you in fact agree with the article that these gulags do in fact exist and give an argument of well what are we suppose to do. When the term political prisoner can be extended as far as it is, i do not like the idea of prisons that are in essense black holes. There is never a need to allow isolated, long term
prison sentences without a court date. that is fairly simple

  1. i agree this was a weak argument in the article.

  2. If i kill a person 10 years ago to solve an issue, does that mean that killing is always the answer. I dont believe so, privacy is privacy regardless of war times or not. Invasion of privacy is a tool of fascism, plain and simple. not the only one but one none the less.

  3. If you do not believe al-Qaeda attacked us, then you belive conspiracy theories and there’s not any point in arguing with you about this one. Until they can prove otherwise or catch Bin Laden, I believe that ME terrorists attacked us on 9-11.

  4. But they are not arresting protesters in mass like in real dictatorships. My buddy went to Washington DC to a huge ass Bush protest and lived to tell about it. I can go outside and yell Bush is an a-hole, and will not get arrested for it.

  5. who said anything about killing? I said we should develop anti-terrorist measures like we used against the mob. Britian was battling it’s share of terrorists over the years, would you say they are a fascist dictatorship?

  6. I do not see any TV or radio stations closing because they are against Bush and the war. The only thing closing TV and radio stations these days, quite frankly, is deregulation and the incompetence of the FCC.[/quote]

  7. I wouldnt say `believe`` , I accept it as a possible scenerio.

2.Why arrest in mass, that is obvious to everyone what your doing. Why not just cut the snake off at the head.

  1. Killing was the anology. My basic point was, doing something wrong in the past deosnt exempt it from being wrong in the future or indicate that it is morally sound. Wire tapping the mob is quite different then the possible wiretapping and anyone and everyone. And with the comment on the british, sharing one thing in common with a fascist regime deosnt make you that. Sharing 10… perhaps

  2. I dont have enough knowledge to argue or comment on this point.

  1. and 4. Great, if they can catch the al-qaeda leadership and terror plotters in this country and abroad without mass deportations of all muslims to concentration camps then I can not complain too much about it.

If someone was planning on killing you, and got turned into the police by an accomplice, would you care if this person were arrested and put away? Even if he did not commit the murder but was planning to?

[quote]Curodd wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:

  1. Some might agree some might not. I think its just as likely that it was set up by the american government its self to allow them reason to invade a country for no reason. …

Then you are irrational.

yes, if i dont believe as you do, im irrational.

[/quote]

In the face of the huge mountain of evidence indicating that radical Islamic terrorists attacked the WTC you think it is just as likely that the US government did it?

That makes you irrational and remarkably ill informed. You have the gall to make these accusations and you imply other people are blind.

Take your foolishness elsewhere. We have enough of your kind here that spread lies and hate.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:

  1. Some might agree some might not. I think its just as likely that it was set up by the american government its self to allow them reason to invade a country for no reason. …

Then you are irrational.

yes, if i dont believe as you do, im irrational.

In the face of the huge mountain of evidence indicating that radical Islamic terrorists attacked the WTC you think it is just as likely that the US government did it?

That makes you irrational and remarkably ill informed. You have the gall to make these accusations and you imply other people are blind.

Take your foolishness elsewhere. We have enough of your kind here that spread lies and hate.[/quote]

There is just as much evidence the other way. You argue like your in grade 6. Agree with me or leave, the fact that you cant see it as a mere possibilty just demonstrates to me that your illogical. I.E I believe in god, that does not mean that i can deny the fact there is a chance he does not exist. That would be irrational. so i admit there is a possibility he doesnt. I pick the same stance on this. What i seem to have is an ability to comment on a subject without getting steamed to the point of insults. You appear to lack this ability. But im sure with your vast amount of knowledge you have the absolute answer so for now i will just agree that you are right since thats obviously the only answer you present.

I have read a great deal of conspiracy theories.

What do you believe? That the crews and passengers of all the planes were taken to unknown locations and killed.

And they used remote control guidance systems to fly the planes into the towers minus the one which was shot down by jet fighters who were obviously not in on the plan.

Then they fired a missile at the pentagon, use hidden explosives to take down the twin towers.

They just knew a crazy terrorist kinpin like ol’ Bin Laden, a CIA agent, would take the credit for the attack.

Is that easier to believe than 9-11 was the result of a terrorist attack perpetrated by middle eastern muslim terrorists?

Why is it that the government HAS to be involved in this some way? To also justify your belief in a fascist dictatorship in this country?

[quote]Curodd wrote:

There is just as much evidence the other way. You argue like your in grade 6.

[/quote]

And you seem to have the grammar of someone who flunked the 6th grade. Ba-zing!

mike

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
Curodd wrote:

There is just as much evidence the other way. You argue like your in grade 6.

And you seem to have the grammar of someone who flunked the 6th grade. Ba-zing!

mike[/quote]

haha ad hominem fallacy? haha attack the arguer and not the argument. Intelligent though. I am usually on my computer doing alot of different things, i could give two fucks if my grammer is correct…but since your an expert, tell me if this is spelled right

u r a fucin dike

ill take my mark out of 5 :slight_smile:

[quote]Curodd wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:

  1. Some might agree some might not. I think its just as likely that it was set up by the american government its self to allow them reason to invade a country for no reason. …

Then you are irrational.

yes, if i dont believe as you do, im irrational.

In the face of the huge mountain of evidence indicating that radical Islamic terrorists attacked the WTC you think it is just as likely that the US government did it?

That makes you irrational and remarkably ill informed. You have the gall to make these accusations and you imply other people are blind.

Take your foolishness elsewhere. We have enough of your kind here that spread lies and hate.

There is just as much evidence the other way.
[/quote]

No there isn’t. There is a bunch of bullshit the other way. It has been discredited over and over and over and over.

The only people that still believe it and repeat it are idiots or are insane.

You have tried to blame one of the worst atrocities in my lifetime on someone else. The fact you cannot see how wrong this is speaks very poorly on you.

This is not a difference of opinion, this is you proving yourself to be irrational. As such I treat you as an irrational person, not a rational person with whom I disagree.

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
I have read a great deal of conspiracy theories.

What do you believe? That the crews and passengers of all the planes were taken to unknown locations and killed.

And they used remote control guidance systems to fly the planes into the towers minus the one which was shot down by jet fighters who were obviously not in on the plan.

Then they fired a missile at the pentagon, use hidden explosives to take down the twin towers.

They just knew a crazy terrorist kinpin like ol’ Bin Laden, a CIA agent, would take the credit for the attack.

Is that easier to believe than 9-11 was the result of a terrorist attack perpetrated by middle eastern muslim terrorists?

Why is it that the government HAS to be involved in this some way? To also justify your belief in a fascist dictatorship in this country?[/quote]

well im not sure many people who believe it was a conspiracy believe thats the way it went down. For the american governemnt to be behind it deosnt mean that the planes werent real, the people werent on them, and that they didnt fly into the towers. They could have helped with plans, ignored documents saying that this might happen(hmmm i think they might have done this), planted bombs in the building, which coinsidently imploded like a demolition, Theres video footage of fire fighters saying get away theres still bombs at the bottom. Video footage of a man on the bottom floor who was trapped in the elevator when i bomb went off etc. Im not even saying that its what happened, im saying its possible. Very possible.

Ps Why did your government make it immpossible to watch loose change?

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Curodd wrote:

  1. Some might agree some might not. I think its just as likely that it was set up by the american government its self to allow them reason to invade a country for no reason. …

Then you are irrational.

yes, if i dont believe as you do, im irrational.

In the face of the huge mountain of evidence indicating that radical Islamic terrorists attacked the WTC you think it is just as likely that the US government did it?

That makes you irrational and remarkably ill informed. You have the gall to make these accusations and you imply other people are blind.

Take your foolishness elsewhere. We have enough of your kind here that spread lies and hate.

There is just as much evidence the other way.

No there isn’t. There is a bunch of bullshit the other way. It has been discredited over and over and over and over.

The only people that still believe it and repeat it are idiots or are insane.

You argue like your in grade 6. Agree with me or leave, the fact that you cant see it as a mere possibilty just demonstrates to me that your illogical. I.E I believe in god, that does not mean that i can deny the fact there is a chance he does not exist. That would be irrational. so i admit there is a possibility he doesnt. I pick the same stance on this. What i seem to have is an ability to comment on a subject without getting steamed to the point of insults. You appear to lack this ability. But im sure with your vast amount of knowledge you have the absolute answer so for now i will just agree that you are right since thats obviously the only answer you present.

You have tried to blame one of the worst atrocities in my lifetime on someone else. The fact you cannot see how wrong this is speaks very poorly on you.

This is not a difference of opinion, this is you proving yourself to be irrational. As such I treat you as an irrational person, not a rational person with whom I disagree.[/quote]

lol again i said its possible. I dont blindly follow your government, your allowed. I look at everything out there, information as well as compairsons, then rule out what i dont think is possible. Sorry i think this is possible. The fact that you seem to work in absolutes just shows me you are quite close minded. But you know its a war that is pretty sensless when little brother canada wont even help out. Theres britain and who else supporting the war? whatever. But honestly your lack if ability to simply discuss a matter is interesting. I wonder how old you are, and if your older then I then that is downright sad.

[quote]Curodd wrote:
…lol again i said its possible. …[/quote]

No, you said it was just as likely the US government did it. I must assume you are fourteen years old or so because you have no idea how serious this issue is.

I have read all the bullshit and seen the loose change video. It is all crap. Believe what you want but I will call your bullshit when you post crap like this.