PDA

View Full Version : APP - Globalism: The Enemy Of Our Freedom



Canceled2
12-12-2009, 06:18 PM
A friend of mine's father is the author:
______________________________________________


I immigrated to America 45 years ago. Born in Bavaria, Germany in 1928, I was subject to Hitler’s National Socialistic education system as I grew up. My father was a farmer when the Gestapo arrested him in 1942. He was not Jewish but anti-Nazi. He suffered for three years in the concentration camp of Dachau and barely survived it. Fortunately, the American army rescued him in 1945. My fate was much different but equally as evil. At the age of 16, I was forced by those Nationalistic Socialists (Nazi’s) to fight a war I didn’t understand. I survived that war and two additional years as a POW in a Gulag in Siberia. During that time, I lived under Communism in Russia and was forced to attend regular socialistic brainwashing classes. The Communists tried to recruit young boys like me to become part of what they called “The Peoples Movement.” I will never forget the day a KGB man told us that in the next millennium we would have “world wide socialism”. He declared that communism and National Socialism do not work because these systems will always have other nations as an enemy. That is why he stated that we must have “global unity”, the only way to solve the problems of humanity. He declared that Socialists would infiltrate the capitalist countries through their news media, entertainment industries, educational system, and legal system. He predicted that all it will take is a few generations. My thought was “Hitler all over again!”

He said these things in 1947. I did not believe it could happen then, but with the way of the world today and the attitudes that are prevailing right here in America, I submit that these Socialists have indeed infiltrated America. There is a talk radio host that calls them the “enemy within” and I could not agree more.

When I use the term “enemy of our freedom”, I mean the approaching world socialism or “global unity” as its proponents call it now. This worldwide movement is the result of Socialists and former Communists and National Socialists (left over Nazis) who are working together towards world socialism. The largest obstacle has been the West and America in particular. With its free system of capitalism and rule as a Democratic Republic, it has remained too powerful for complete domination. In a true Democratic Republic, the government is dependent on its citizens. In socialism, people are dependent on their government. I know. I have lived both.

Previous to, but most obviously after the end of WWII, these “World Socialists” have succeeded in infiltrating capitalist nations and in so doing they have changed the governments of most European countries. They have also succeeded in many other nations around the globe such as China, South Africa, and North Korea. To a lesser degree, they have also affected America. Here, they do not call themselves Socialists because that might scare some people in this country. Instead, they call themselves “Liberals” and their movement “The New World Order”. While most Americans are comfortable with the term “Liberal”, my intimate familiarity with their language declares them to be World Socialists!

They sell all the right ideas: equality, health, and peace. What they mean, however, is “let the state worry about these issues. You are to simply be a worker and contributor to the state.” To them,” equality” really means that you may not have more than your neighbor has, “health” means that the state will determine what kind of medical attention you need (after all, they are paying for it), and “peace” will be yours as long as you do as they say. Is this freedom? No! This is slavery! Can they sell this type of propaganda to us in the open? No again! They must infiltrate and change the way our young people think. They must encourage our youth to challenge their cultural heritage, causing unrest and rebellion to the status quo of our nation’s morals and standards. They are succeeding, but we do not have to let them continue in their success. Our Constitution provides the weapons to stop them. Behind many that lead this movement is a deep contempt for America and her free system. They believe that Capitalism is the evil responsible for all wars and famine, and yet their own history of corruption and brutality that has been the cause of numerous wars, murder, suffering, and famines seems to escape them. If we had a news media that would have treated President Roosevelt the way we allow our media to treat President Bush, we would all be speaking German today and goose-stepping to Hitler and his successors. I am not asking that we gag the press, but as a people we should stop tolerating their sensationalizing and slanting of information and insist they simply report the news and let us make up our own minds! Of course, that is exactly what the socialists don’t want. They despise a free-minded, self-governing people who refuse to be recipients of their propaganda machines.

Many politicians today are not truly our representatives, but men and women with a Socialist agenda who are dictating what is “good” for the people instead of the other way around. The Socialists are trying more than ever to pitch their sell of a “better world” and are abusing our own democratic system to that end. The socialist “Think Tank” works well. They have successfully taken control of the Democratic Party and have changed its goals. They make promises to the masses for universal health-care and free welfare programs paid for by the hard working citizens whom they say “owe them” a free ride. Trust me, Socialists have never cared about the individual and history proves this point. It has always been the Democratic free systems (capitalist) of private ownership which has truly improved people’s lives. Today, when you listen to these Socialists (Liberals), they sound like they are the only true Democrats while everyone else is “Right Wing” or “Extremist.” This results from having learned well from their past failures and their skill in using language and emotion to sway the people.

I am often dismayed at how lethargic many Americans seem to be about what is going on, but then I remember that most Americans have not lived the real Socialist dream and like frogs being slowly boiled alive, the realization may come too late.

Many of these Global Socialists are also atheists and are convinced that to realize their goal of world socialism they must accomplish these changes:

1. Abolishment of all religions and cultures that are not in alignment with a socialistic world order. They think that religion and certain cultures are a “dumbing down of the people”. They believe that it keeps people in the dark ages and interferes with modernism. They contend that the best way to abolish religion is to incite wars between them. Consider the support that Islam is receiving from the Socialists at this time. Odd, to say the least, since Islam is dogmatically the most anti-socialistic religion of them all. 2. Removal of patriotism. The abolishment of American patriotism in particular is very important to the Globalists. They begin by labeling patriotic Americans as “extremists and inhumane capitalists” and go on to tell us that patriotism is counter-productive to world peace. They will hide the fact that their system has a Fascist component. That will be revealed when they force us to bow and scrape to their one-world order, or else! 3. Create a relative morality where the ideas of commitment and family are re-defined. In their system, there are no moral absolutes. After all, if God is dead, then who has the right to impinge a moral standard? The Liberals of infiltrated Hollywood have for years pushed an amoral standard and our youth and society are paying the price! 4. A classless society. To accomplish this, Socialists are working both sides of the aisle. They are telling the poor and often minority races that they are “entitled” to the wealth of the predominantly rich white because they have kept them in slavery. The more affluent who have worked hard and earned their money are being told to feel guilt for their “greediness” and that they must share the fruits of their labor with the poor. How many times have brutal revolutions been fed this meal so that those seeking to usurp the wealthy could employ the downtrodden to do their dirty work in order to then dominate the very poor they claimed to care about? Russia, France, and Italy are examples, and may we never forget how Hitler used the wealth of the Jews to incite their slaughter!

No, I am not an activist of any kind or a right-wing extremist as the Liberals call it. All I hope for is an America that remains sovereign and free for future generations. I am merely an old man, and maybe I don’t know how to communicate my experiences in a convincing way, but believe me, putting a picture of an American flag in the back of your car window is not enough. We need to vote responsibly and show our love of country. We need to vote for people who defend our constitution, and not interpret it for their own agendas.

I escaped Siberia in 1947 at the age of 19 and walked over 5000 miles through many countries including Iran and Iraq. I met poor Moslems in Kurdistan. They were not anti-Christian then, and they saved my life. I walked for a year to get home, hungering for a freedom that helped sustain me in prison, a freedom I could no longer find in my homeland. Today, Socialists who call themselves “Social Democrats” now control all of Europe. Do you ever wonder where all those National Socialists (Nazis) and SS men went?

I immigrated to America in 1959 because it was the only country in the world that had a constitution guaranteeing the freedom of an "individual”. I have worked hard all my life. I became a patriotic American citizen in 1965 and have lived the American Dream. I raise my flag every day out of love and respect for this great nation, gave up my native tongue for English and will forever defend the capitalist system of free enterprise through hard work! Our American constitution is a treasure worth fighting to defend. American patriotism is not just a mere fancy to those of us who have seen and lived the hopeless ideals of socialism, or lost a loved one because of it. Socialism, and its cousins Communism and Fascism, will always fail to deliver because they depend on the state instead of the individual. Ultimately, this leads the state to impose its will, even by force, upon the will of the individual.

Thomas Jefferson said “no other country could destroy America; it can only be done from within”. I say “This country has been successful and free for more than 200 years, let’s keep it that way”.

G.F.X.

apple0154
12-12-2009, 08:47 PM
(Article)They sell all the right ideas: equality, health, and peace. What they mean, however, is “let the state worry about these issues. You are to simply be a worker and contributor to the state.” To them,” equality” really means that you may not have more than your neighbor has, “health” means that the state will determine what kind of medical attention you need (after all, they are paying for it), and “peace” will be yours as long as you do as they say.(End)

No, what they mean is the individual has not solved these problems so another course of action is necessary.

No, “equality” does not mean you can not have more than your neighbour. Equality means you can not sit by while your neighbour suffers an illness and can not afford health care while you whine about how no one ever worked as hard as you did.

No, “health” does not mean the State will determine what medical attention ones needs. It means medical personnel will deliver the necessary care and the government will pay the individuals. If anyone took the time to Google they would see countries like Canada, countries with universal health care, do not decide what care will be given nor which doctor will provide it.

As for “peace”, yes, people will be at peace knowing they aren’t thrown to the capitalistic wolves.

Equality. Health. Peace. We do know the lies and propaganda spread about universal health care are exactly that, lies! That can be easily determined by a quick Google on Canada’s health care. Health care that has been in force for the last (40) forty years.

That doesn’t lend much credibility to your equality and peace arguments.

(Article) Can they sell this type of propaganda to us in the open? No again! They must infiltrate and change the way our young people think. They must encourage our youth to challenge their cultural heritage, causing unrest and rebellion to the status quo of our nation’s morals and standards. (End)

You bet they must! Just like the heroes who stood up and said, “Hell no! We won’t go!” during the Viet Nam War’s systematic massacre of our youth brought on by disgusting, repulsive, war- mongering, fat asses in leather chairs.

A war brought on by a lie! The Gulf Of Tolkin Incident.

(Article) No, I am not an activist of any kind or a right-wing extremist as the Liberals call it. All I hope for is an America that remains sovereign and free for future generations. I am merely an old man, and maybe I don’t know how to communicate my experiences in a convincing way,….(End)

We have seen what your generation has done. Maybe not you, personally, but the people who espouse freedom and the “American Way” that you so gloriously defend.

Whether it’s the Gulf of Tolkin or the mushroom cloud from Iraq we’ve seen what you defend. Whether it’s a guy sleeping in a cardboard box under a bridge or a young, family man going to work in pain because he doesn’t want to use the family’s food money for a doctor’s visit we know what your vision of freedom is.

Thank-you, but no thank-you. We’ve heard the lies, be them concerning war or health care. People, like myself, have lived them. People, like myself, know they were lies and now the rest of the citizens will be shown so they can see for themselves.

You bet they must change what our young people were taught. The lies. The deceit. The death and destruction. The carnage has to stop and to be blunt it is offensive to see an old man support such hideousness just because he was fortunate enough to enjoy a good life.



///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


A friend of mine's father is the author:
______________________________________________


I immigrated to America 45 years ago. Born in Bavaria, Germany in 1928, I was subject to Hitler’s National Socialistic education system as I grew up. My father was a farmer when the Gestapo arrested him in 1942. He was not Jewish but anti-Nazi. He suffered for three years in the concentration camp of Dachau and barely survived it. Fortunately, the American army rescued him in 1945. My fate was much different but equally as evil. At the age of 16, I was forced by those Nationalistic Socialists (Nazi’s) to fight a war I didn’t understand. I survived that war and two additional years as a POW in a Gulag in Siberia. During that time, I lived under Communism in Russia and was forced to attend regular socialistic brainwashing classes. The Communists tried to recruit young boys like me to become part of what they called “The Peoples Movement.” I will never forget the day a KGB man told us that in the next millennium we would have “world wide socialism”. He declared that communism and National Socialism do not work because these systems will always have other nations as an enemy. That is why he stated that we must have “global unity”, the only way to solve the problems of humanity. He declared that Socialists would infiltrate the capitalist countries through their news media, entertainment industries, educational system, and legal system. He predicted that all it will take is a few generations. My thought was “Hitler all over again!”

He said these things in 1947. I did not believe it could happen then, but with the way of the world today and the attitudes that are prevailing right here in America, I submit that these Socialists have indeed infiltrated America. There is a talk radio host that calls them the “enemy within” and I could not agree more.

When I use the term “enemy of our freedom”, I mean the approaching world socialism or “global unity” as its proponents call it now. This worldwide movement is the result of Socialists and former Communists and National Socialists (left over Nazis) who are working together towards world socialism. The largest obstacle has been the West and America in particular. With its free system of capitalism and rule as a Democratic Republic, it has remained too powerful for complete domination. In a true Democratic Republic, the government is dependent on its citizens. In socialism, people are dependent on their government. I know. I have lived both.

Previous to, but most obviously after the end of WWII, these “World Socialists” have succeeded in infiltrating capitalist nations and in so doing they have changed the governments of most European countries. They have also succeeded in many other nations around the globe such as China, South Africa, and North Korea. To a lesser degree, they have also affected America. Here, they do not call themselves Socialists because that might scare some people in this country. Instead, they call themselves “Liberals” and their movement “The New World Order”. While most Americans are comfortable with the term “Liberal”, my intimate familiarity with their language declares them to be World Socialists!

They sell all the right ideas: equality, health, and peace. What they mean, however, is “let the state worry about these issues. You are to simply be a worker and contributor to the state.” To them,” equality” really means that you may not have more than your neighbor has, “health” means that the state will determine what kind of medical attention you need (after all, they are paying for it), and “peace” will be yours as long as you do as they say. Is this freedom? No! This is slavery! Can they sell this type of propaganda to us in the open? No again! They must infiltrate and change the way our young people think. They must encourage our youth to challenge their cultural heritage, causing unrest and rebellion to the status quo of our nation’s morals and standards. They are succeeding, but we do not have to let them continue in their success. Our Constitution provides the weapons to stop them. Behind many that lead this movement is a deep contempt for America and her free system. They believe that Capitalism is the evil responsible for all wars and famine, and yet their own history of corruption and brutality that has been the cause of numerous wars, murder, suffering, and famines seems to escape them. If we had a news media that would have treated President Roosevelt the way we allow our media to treat President Bush, we would all be speaking German today and goose-stepping to Hitler and his successors. I am not asking that we gag the press, but as a people we should stop tolerating their sensationalizing and slanting of information and insist they simply report the news and let us make up our own minds! Of course, that is exactly what the socialists don’t want. They despise a free-minded, self-governing people who refuse to be recipients of their propaganda machines.

Many politicians today are not truly our representatives, but men and women with a Socialist agenda who are dictating what is “good” for the people instead of the other way around. The Socialists are trying more than ever to pitch their sell of a “better world” and are abusing our own democratic system to that end. The socialist “Think Tank” works well. They have successfully taken control of the Democratic Party and have changed its goals. They make promises to the masses for universal health-care and free welfare programs paid for by the hard working citizens whom they say “owe them” a free ride. Trust me, Socialists have never cared about the individual and history proves this point. It has always been the Democratic free systems (capitalist) of private ownership which has truly improved people’s lives. Today, when you listen to these Socialists (Liberals), they sound like they are the only true Democrats while everyone else is “Right Wing” or “Extremist.” This results from having learned well from their past failures and their skill in using language and emotion to sway the people.

I am often dismayed at how lethargic many Americans seem to be about what is going on, but then I remember that most Americans have not lived the real Socialist dream and like frogs being slowly boiled alive, the realization may come too late.

Many of these Global Socialists are also atheists and are convinced that to realize their goal of world socialism they must accomplish these changes:

1. Abolishment of all religions and cultures that are not in alignment with a socialistic world order. They think that religion and certain cultures are a “dumbing down of the people”. They believe that it keeps people in the dark ages and interferes with modernism. They contend that the best way to abolish religion is to incite wars between them. Consider the support that Islam is receiving from the Socialists at this time. Odd, to say the least, since Islam is dogmatically the most anti-socialistic religion of them all. 2. Removal of patriotism. The abolishment of American patriotism in particular is very important to the Globalists. They begin by labeling patriotic Americans as “extremists and inhumane capitalists” and go on to tell us that patriotism is counter-productive to world peace. They will hide the fact that their system has a Fascist component. That will be revealed when they force us to bow and scrape to their one-world order, or else! 3. Create a relative morality where the ideas of commitment and family are re-defined. In their system, there are no moral absolutes. After all, if God is dead, then who has the right to impinge a moral standard? The Liberals of infiltrated Hollywood have for years pushed an amoral standard and our youth and society are paying the price! 4. A classless society. To accomplish this, Socialists are working both sides of the aisle. They are telling the poor and often minority races that they are “entitled” to the wealth of the predominantly rich white because they have kept them in slavery. The more affluent who have worked hard and earned their money are being told to feel guilt for their “greediness” and that they must share the fruits of their labor with the poor. How many times have brutal revolutions been fed this meal so that those seeking to usurp the wealthy could employ the downtrodden to do their dirty work in order to then dominate the very poor they claimed to care about? Russia, France, and Italy are examples, and may we never forget how Hitler used the wealth of the Jews to incite their slaughter!

No, I am not an activist of any kind or a right-wing extremist as the Liberals call it. All I hope for is an America that remains sovereign and free for future generations. I am merely an old man, and maybe I don’t know how to communicate my experiences in a convincing way, but believe me, putting a picture of an American flag in the back of your car window is not enough. We need to vote responsibly and show our love of country. We need to vote for people who defend our constitution, and not interpret it for their own agendas.

I escaped Siberia in 1947 at the age of 19 and walked over 5000 miles through many countries including Iran and Iraq. I met poor Moslems in Kurdistan. They were not anti-Christian then, and they saved my life. I walked for a year to get home, hungering for a freedom that helped sustain me in prison, a freedom I could no longer find in my homeland. Today, Socialists who call themselves “Social Democrats” now control all of Europe. Do you ever wonder where all those National Socialists (Nazis) and SS men went?

I immigrated to America in 1959 because it was the only country in the world that had a constitution guaranteeing the freedom of an "individual”. I have worked hard all my life. I became a patriotic American citizen in 1965 and have lived the American Dream. I raise my flag every day out of love and respect for this great nation, gave up my native tongue for English and will forever defend the capitalist system of free enterprise through hard work! Our American constitution is a treasure worth fighting to defend. American patriotism is not just a mere fancy to those of us who have seen and lived the hopeless ideals of socialism, or lost a loved one because of it. Socialism, and its cousins Communism and Fascism, will always fail to deliver because they depend on the state instead of the individual. Ultimately, this leads the state to impose its will, even by force, upon the will of the individual.

Thomas Jefferson said “no other country could destroy America; it can only be done from within”. I say “This country has been successful and free for more than 200 years, let’s keep it that way”.

G.F.X.

Canceled2
12-12-2009, 09:45 PM
He lived it ...you have not. That makes him the expert and you the circle jerk. :)

apple0154
12-12-2009, 09:56 PM
He lived it ...you have not. That makes him the expert and you the circle jerk. :)

I love that word "expert". Remember, "X" stands for the unknown so we have an "unknown spurt". :)

Sure, he lived it. I bet he worked harder than anyone else, sacrificed more than everyone else, lived a more moral and just life than anyone else.....

Heard it all before.

Good Luck
12-12-2009, 10:56 PM
No, what they mean is the individual has not solved these problems so another course of action is necessary.
Yes, that is EXACTLY the central complaint against the movement that modern liberalism has chosen to follow. Perfectly put in a nutshell the sheer unadulterated arrogance of the socialist mind. You no longer trust individualism. Individuals are incapable of solving problems for themselves, so the state must step in and do it for them, whether they want the "help" the state has to offer, or not.


No, “equality” does not mean you can not have more than your neighbour. Equality means you can not sit by while your neighbour suffers an illness and can not afford health care while you whine about how no one ever worked as hard as you did.
Equality means that no individual has opportunity denied them, nor opportunity enhanced for them through oppressive or selective actions of the state against or for any particular grouping of peoples. Any other definition is wishful thinking that is impossible to put into practice.


No, “health” does not mean the State will determine what medical attention ones needs. It means medical personnel will deliver the necessary care and the government will pay the individuals. If anyone took the time to Google they would see countries like Canada, countries with universal health care, do not decide what care will be given nor which doctor will provide it.
This is where the biggest lie of the universal care proponents comes into play. While it is true that the doctors and their patients will decide the course of treatment (they do so now, the denial of which is another lie told by the liberals), the government WILL be deciding which courses of treatment will be paid for, and which will not. If you universal care proponents think such a system is going to give carte blanche payments to any and all treatments under any circumstance dictated by a physician, you REALLY need to consider investing in the major development project I have going in some SE swamp lands.

The government IS going to decide what will and will not be paid for. Functionally it will be NO different that an insurance company deciding the same. (It's not like insurance companies have the authority to DENY a treatment - they can only refuse to pay for it.) The difference will be that instead of a bunch of profit minded bean counters deciding which treatments will be paid and which will be refused, it will be a bunch of job-elevating government bureaucrats, backed by politicians whose only real concern is the next election.

I'll take the profit minded bean counters. At least they realize an insurance company with too poor a reputation will lose profits. When the bean counters' motives are politically driven, who knows WHAT they will decide. Though the recent government backing - at the hue and cry of the entire medical field - of a study recommending a reduction in breast cancer screening should be a strong indicator which way thing lie with government in charge of what will be paid for.


As for “peace”, yes, people will be at peace knowing they aren’t thrown to the capitalistic wolves.
What a bunch of fucking mindless drivel. While unfettered capitalism has its drawbacks, we have not been under a true capitalistic system since before FDR took office. What we have been living under is a bastardized melding of corporate oligarchy to support the powerful, and socialist derived institute of forced dependency for those needing help.


Equality. Health. Peace. We do know the lies and propaganda spread about universal health care are exactly that, lies! That can be easily determined by a quick Google on Canada’s health care. Health care that has been in force for the last (40) forty years.

That doesn’t lend much credibility to your equality and peace arguments.

A war brought on by a lie! The Gulf Of Tolkin Incident.
Again, you don't have a fucking clue what equality means. You want every one to be a bunch of mindless state driven drones, and call that equality. THough I guess everyone except the power elite being in the same government boot heel is KIND of equal.

There is a reason equality and health are addressed separately. Why do you insist on lumping them back together, other than the fact that you insist on calling equality what it is not?

Yes, there are many lies told about universal health care. A bit less than half of them are told in opposition.

And, remind me, because the stainless steel ass I have from taking a bullet over there sometimes confuses me. Which party, led by which political philosophy, was behind the Vietnam fiasco? Which political movement heavily involved with the self-same "liberal" economic policy was responsible for the reprehensible treatment our returning soldiers received upon returning from that slime infested rat hole? You want to talk about Vietnam as an example of peace/anti-peace double standards, go look in the fucking mirror. The people doing the "hell no, I won't go" chants that you idolize were the same people voting for the ASSHOLES that SENT US THERE! They were also the same ones leading the social movement to treat us like dirt when we came back, and voted for the assholes and the anti-military (including military health care) budget cuts that made treating us like dirt official government fiscal policy.


We have seen what your generation has done. Maybe not you, personally, but the people who espouse freedom and the “American Way” that you so gloriously defend.

Whether it’s the Gulf of Tolkin or the mushroom cloud from Iraq we’ve seen what you defend. Whether it’s a guy sleeping in a cardboard box under a bridge or a young, family man going to work in pain because he doesn’t want to use the family’s food money for a doctor’s visit we know what your vision of freedom is.

Thank-you, but no thank-you. We’ve heard the lies, be them concerning war or health care. People, like myself, have lived them. People, like myself, know they were lies and now the rest of the citizens will be shown so they can see for themselves.
Yea, you've heard lies, alright. And you eat them like popcorn, and regurgitate them faithfully under trite phrases like "capitalistic wolves". The generation preceding yours (an assumption derived from the phrase "your generation") did some good, and made mistakes. MOST of those mistakes were in trying to follow the idiocy of economic socialism with out compromising liberty. Too bad you, as well as they, can;t see the truth that if you want government control of the economy, you have to control ALL aspects of the economy or it WILL run away from you. trying to control only parts of the economy while letting others run free is like trying to only control some parts of an ecology. It's going to run amok.

Unfortunately, controlling all aspects of the economy includes controlling those who contribute to the economy. Thanks, but I'll risk the "capitalistic wolves" and retain my liberties. Being one of the (relatively) few who know what poor REALLY is, I also know it was and is better being poor and free, than a "equal" cog in the socialist state.


You bet they must change what our young people were taught. The lies. The deceit. The death and destruction. The carnage has to stop and to be blunt it is offensive to see an old man support such hideousness just because he was fortunate enough to enjoy a good life. Indeed. Look at the primary lesson of the socialist. Leading the good life is due to fortune. Hard, diligent, unflagging effort has nothing to do with it. Not to mention that the VAST majority of people we have labeled as "poor" do not know the meaning of the word. No wonder you support program after program after program whose intent and design is to minimally improve the economic status while forcing dependency and punishing initiative, thus assuring the "recipients" stay at the economic level government wants them to be.

Can things be better? Sure, as nothing is ever perfect. Submission to the state because "individuals haven't solved these problems" is, however, the WRONG answer if we want to remain a society dedicated to liberty.


He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, will lose both, and deserves neither.

Canceled2
12-13-2009, 12:54 AM
I love that word "expert". Remember, "X" stands for the unknown so we have an "unknown spurt". :)

Sure, he lived it. I bet he worked harder than anyone else, sacrificed more than everyone else, lived a more moral and just life than anyone else.....

Heard it all before.

When you're an ass...you really put on the dog.

"X" is his middle initial. Correctly written it would be G, FX. Last, first, middle.

apple0154
12-13-2009, 07:59 AM
Yes, that is EXACTLY the central complaint against the movement that modern liberalism has chosen to follow. Perfectly put in a nutshell the sheer unadulterated arrogance of the socialist mind. You no longer trust individualism. Individuals are incapable of solving problems for themselves, so the state must step in and do it for them, whether they want the "help" the state has to offer, or not.

How does the individual know the circumstances of others? They don’t and some individuals are not only greedy but use information about others for their own gain.

How is one to obtain help if privacy has to be protected? People tend to form “clicks”. Who voluntarily helps the outcast in a small village?


Equality means that no individual has opportunity denied them, nor opportunity enhanced for them through oppressive or selective actions of the state against or for any particular grouping of peoples. Any other definition is wishful thinking that is impossible to put into practice.

There isn’t anything impossible to put into practice. “The State”, or authority, is nothing more that a random selection of citizens including racists, bigots, homophobes, the greedy, the bitter……..you name it.

That is why programs are necessary on a national level. Equality can not be properly exercised on a local level due to regional prejudices.


This is where the biggest lie of the universal care proponents comes into play. While it is true that the doctors and their patients will decide the course of treatment (they do so now, the denial of which is another lie told by the liberals), the government WILL be deciding which courses of treatment will be paid for, and which will not. If you universal care proponents think such a system is going to give carte blanche payments to any and all treatments under any circumstance dictated by a physician, you REALLY need to consider investing in the major development project I have going in some SE swamp lands.

We come back to equality. Everyone is entitled to the same care under a universal plan. Most insurance companies have exclusions. For example, if one engages in certain risky activities or if they have pre-existing conditions.

The ironic thing is people want the government to interfere with insurance companies to eliminate pre-existing conditions restrictions. Hello??? If the government has to improve insurance company operations maybe the government is more capable of running medical insurance to being with?


While unfettered capitalism has its drawbacks, we have not been under a true capitalistic system since before FDR took office. What we have been living under is a bastardized melding of corporate oligarchy to support the powerful, and socialist derived institute of forced dependency for those needing help.

What we have been under is nothing short of subliminal suggestions coupled with outright lies about how our fellow man is a lazy bum and anyone who doesn’t “make it” doesn’t deserve a decent life.

Our training to be competitive through things like sports in school is taken to the absurd in society. While the football teams will go for pizza after a game and a player on one team may help a student on the opposing team with academic work competitiveness becomes cutthroat as we enter society. The competitiveness stays and the co-operation disappears and that’s exactly what the “powers that be” want. They don’t want co-operation among society members because that brings strength.


Unfortunately, controlling all aspects of the economy includes controlling those who contribute to the economy. Thanks, but I'll risk the "capitalistic wolves" and retain my liberties. Being one of the (relatively) few who know what poor REALLY is, I also know it was and is better being poor and free, than a "equal" cog in the socialist state.

Another misconception or outright lie from those who know better. Helping people has little to do with controlling those who contribute to the economy and that’s where people deliberately throw out threats of socialism.

Make money any way you want. Do what you want. The people who want you to help are not overly concerned about how you make your money or how you live your life. Just contribute to the help of others.

Don’t confuse helping others with Socialism. One has nothing to do with the other.


Indeed. Look at the primary lesson of the socialist. Leading the good life is due to fortune. Hard, diligent, unflagging effort has nothing to do with it. Not to mention that the VAST majority of people we have labeled as "poor" do not know the meaning of the word. No wonder you support program after program after program whose intent and design is to minimally improve the economic status while forcing dependency and punishing initiative, thus assuring the "recipients" stay at the economic level government wants them to be.

Again, no one is trying to enforce dependency. Happy, healthy people do not aspire to be on government programs. The implication is absurd.

Yes, many people did work hard for what they have and many others got breaks. The child brought up in the ghetto or on the wrong side of the tracks didn't have a father who knows the hiring manager at the large company in town.

There are many “injustices” and they can’t all be addressed but helping people financially can be addressed without interfering in the lives of the helper. It’s not about losing ones freedom. It’s not about government control. It’s about greed. Contribute to the less fortunate and then disappear and do whatever you want. There is no submission involved. In fact, most would prefer if the contributor did contribute and then go away. :lol:


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


Yes, that is EXACTLY the central complaint against the movement that modern liberalism has chosen to follow. Perfectly put in a nutshell the sheer unadulterated arrogance of the socialist mind. You no longer trust individualism. Individuals are incapable of solving problems for themselves, so the state must step in and do it for them, whether they want the "help" the state has to offer, or not.


Equality means that no individual has opportunity denied them, nor opportunity enhanced for them through oppressive or selective actions of the state against or for any particular grouping of peoples. Any other definition is wishful thinking that is impossible to put into practice.


This is where the biggest lie of the universal care proponents comes into play. While it is true that the doctors and their patients will decide the course of treatment (they do so now, the denial of which is another lie told by the liberals), the government WILL be deciding which courses of treatment will be paid for, and which will not. If you universal care proponents think such a system is going to give carte blanche payments to any and all treatments under any circumstance dictated by a physician, you REALLY need to consider investing in the major development project I have going in some SE swamp lands.

The government IS going to decide what will and will not be paid for. Functionally it will be NO different that an insurance company deciding the same. (It's not like insurance companies have the authority to DENY a treatment - they can only refuse to pay for it.) The difference will be that instead of a bunch of profit minded bean counters deciding which treatments will be paid and which will be refused, it will be a bunch of job-elevating government bureaucrats, backed by politicians whose only real concern is the next election.

I'll take the profit minded bean counters. At least they realize an insurance company with too poor a reputation will lose profits. When the bean counters' motives are politically driven, who knows WHAT they will decide. Though the recent government backing - at the hue and cry of the entire medical field - of a study recommending a reduction in breast cancer screening should be a strong indicator which way thing lie with government in charge of what will be paid for.


What a bunch of fucking mindless drivel. While unfettered capitalism has its drawbacks, we have not been under a true capitalistic system since before FDR took office. What we have been living under is a bastardized melding of corporate oligarchy to support the powerful, and socialist derived institute of forced dependency for those needing help.


Again, you don't have a fucking clue what equality means. You want every one to be a bunch of mindless state driven drones, and call that equality. THough I guess everyone except the power elite being in the same government boot heel is KIND of equal.

There is a reason equality and health are addressed separately. Why do you insist on lumping them back together, other than the fact that you insist on calling equality what it is not?

Yes, there are many lies told about universal health care. A bit less than half of them are told in opposition.

And, remind me, because the stainless steel ass I have from taking a bullet over there sometimes confuses me. Which party, led by which political philosophy, was behind the Vietnam fiasco? Which political movement heavily involved with the self-same "liberal" economic policy was responsible for the reprehensible treatment our returning soldiers received upon returning from that slime infested rat hole? You want to talk about Vietnam as an example of peace/anti-peace double standards, go look in the fucking mirror. The people doing the "hell no, I won't go" chants that you idolize were the same people voting for the ASSHOLES that SENT US THERE! They were also the same ones leading the social movement to treat us like dirt when we came back, and voted for the assholes and the anti-military (including military health care) budget cuts that made treating us like dirt official government fiscal policy.


Yea, you've heard lies, alright. And you eat them like popcorn, and regurgitate them faithfully under trite phrases like "capitalistic wolves". The generation preceding yours (an assumption derived from the phrase "your generation") did some good, and made mistakes. MOST of those mistakes were in trying to follow the idiocy of economic socialism with out compromising liberty. Too bad you, as well as they, can;t see the truth that if you want government control of the economy, you have to control ALL aspects of the economy or it WILL run away from you. trying to control only parts of the economy while letting others run free is like trying to only control some parts of an ecology. It's going to run amok.

Unfortunately, controlling all aspects of the economy includes controlling those who contribute to the economy. Thanks, but I'll risk the "capitalistic wolves" and retain my liberties. Being one of the (relatively) few who know what poor REALLY is, I also know it was and is better being poor and free, than a "equal" cog in the socialist state.

Indeed. Look at the primary lesson of the socialist. Leading the good life is due to fortune. Hard, diligent, unflagging effort has nothing to do with it. Not to mention that the VAST majority of people we have labeled as "poor" do not know the meaning of the word. No wonder you support program after program after program whose intent and design is to minimally improve the economic status while forcing dependency and punishing initiative, thus assuring the "recipients" stay at the economic level government wants them to be.

Can things be better? Sure, as nothing is ever perfect. Submission to the state because "individuals haven't solved these problems" is, however, the WRONG answer if we want to remain a society dedicated to liberty.

apple0154
12-13-2009, 08:05 AM
When you're an ass...you really put on the dog.

"X" is his middle initial. Correctly written it would be G, FX. Last, first, middle.

I know the correct way. First name, last. Last name, first. Middle initial at the end.

George Carlin explained all that when recanting the story about the heart attack victim filling out the form at emergency. :D

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 08:26 AM
There is no submission involved.


Of course there is submission is involved. If you don't pay what the government wants you to pay. You go to jail.

Why does lefty goodness always boil down to statist totalitarianism?

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 08:32 AM
Individuals can't be trusted because they don't have all the information about others?

And the government can be trusted because it has all the information?


So you just flat out don't agree with the constitution and it's orientation towards individual empowerment?

apple0154
12-13-2009, 08:42 AM
Individuals can't be trusted because they don't have all the information about others?

And the government can be trusted because it has all the information?


So you just flat out don't agree with the constitution and it's orientation towards individual empowerment?

Not quite sure what you're referring to as far as empowering the individual.

Helping an individual is empowering them. Similar to what agencies do that help victims of family abuse. They help the individual by empowering them.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 08:45 AM
Not quite sure what you're referring to as far as empowering the individual.


The Bill of RIghts.



Helping an individual is empowering them. Similar to what agencies do that help victims of family abuse. They help the individual by empowering them.

And individuals can help other individuals too. We don't need an authoritarian "more knowledgeable" state.

The bureacratic elitism you seem to favor is exactly what keeps bureacrats detached. The state becomes their method of personal power, and all their arguments become perverted, as their selfishness and egotism increase exponentially with their power.

power corrupts.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

evince
12-13-2009, 08:49 AM
Do you invision that one day the people of the world will agree on what kind of government works best?

Do you invision a time some day in the far future that the worlds countries all work together to improve their commom home?

Do you invision the world lasting long enough for this to ever happen?

apple0154
12-13-2009, 08:50 AM
Of course there is submission is involved. If you don't pay what the government wants you to pay. You go to jail.

Why does lefty goodness always boil down to statist totalitarianism?

Why do people associate contributing to the help of others with Socialism? It is the Right who want to dictate how people should live. All the Left asks is for one to contribute financially and then go about their lives as they see fit.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 08:53 AM
Do you invision that one day the people of the world will agree on what kind of government works best?

No. It will always be split along the lines of totalitarianism versus freedom. The elites will always be totalitarian.



Do you invision a time some day in the far future that the worlds countries all work together to improve their commom home?

we do to an extent. But allowing a global government to dictate energy usage has nothing to do with improvement and all to do with totalitarian power.



Do you invision the world lasting long enough for this to ever happen?

It has lasted long enough for international cooperation.

Cooperation is not playing favorites, and restricting western economies based on a misguied notion of social justice.

evince
12-13-2009, 08:56 AM
They want the church to do it and the church (all of them) cant handle it .

They have irrational fear of teh government.

Somehow when it comes to people who form a government they are evil.

But Oh boy people are hired to run a Corporation well those folks are like angels.

Its irrational and it starting to become very clear to the world.

evince
12-13-2009, 09:02 AM
No. It will always be split along the lines of totalitarianism versus freedom. The elites will always be totalitarian.
There will always be humans who will seek this power to abuse it but what if we manage to come to a time when the various governments figure out a clear type of government with a clear set of rules that keeps these types away from the wheels of power.

we do to an extent. But allowing a global government to dictate energy usage has nothing to do with improvement and all to do with totalitarian power.
You missed the point of the question, you twisted it into something different with your own fear.

It has lasted long enough for international cooperation.

Cooperation is not playing favorites, and restricting western economies based on a misguied notion of social justice.



This is tantamount to saying "this new cooperation better give me what I want and fuck the other guys needs'.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 09:04 AM
They want the church to do it and the church (all of them) cant handle it .

They have irrational fear of teh government.

Somehow when it comes to people who form a government they are evil.

But Oh boy people are hired to run a Corporation well those folks are like angels.

Its irrational and it starting to become very clear to the world.

Im an atheist and im anti new world order.

The fear of government is warranted. The biggest murderes in human history are governments.

Asshole CEOs are assholes too. And they gain alot of their power through corrupt governnance, which you somehow believe is incorruptible.

Globalism is dead. Only fascists like you want it, on the left and right. Normal people are rejecting both paths to fascism.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 09:04 AM
globalism so far:

http://www.gregpalast.com/the-globalizer-who-came-in-from-the-cold/

Each nation's economy is individually analyzed, then, says Stiglitz, the Bank hands every minister the same exact four-step program.

Step One is Privatization - which Stiglitz said could more accurately be called, 'Briberization.' Rather than object to the sell-offs of state industries, he said national leaders - using the World Bank's demands to silence local critics - happily flogged their electricity and water companies. "You could see their eyes widen" at the prospect of 10% commissions paid to Swiss bank accounts for simply shaving a few billion off the sale price of national assets.

And the US government knew it, charges Stiglitz, at least in the case of the biggest 'briberization' of all, the 1995 Russian sell-off. "The US Treasury view was this was great as we wanted Yeltsin re-elected. We don't care if it's a corrupt election. We want the money to go to Yeltzin" via kick-backs for his campaign.

Stiglitz is no conspiracy nutter ranting about Black Helicopters. The man was inside the game, a member of Bill Clinton's cabinet as Chairman of the President's council of economic advisors.

Most ill-making for Stiglitz is that the US-backed oligarchs stripped Russia's industrial assets, with the effect that the corruption scheme cut national output nearly in half causing depression and starvation.

After briberization, Step Two of the IMF/World Bank one-size-fits-all rescue-your-economy plan is 'Capital Market Liberalization.' In theory, capital market deregulation allows investment capital to flow in and out. Unfortunately, as in Indonesia and Brazil, the money simply flowed out and out. Stiglitz calls this the "Hot Money" cycle. Cash comes in for speculation in real estate and currency, then flees at the first whiff of trouble. A nation's reserves can drain in days, hours. And when that happens, to seduce speculators into returning a nation's own capital funds, the IMF demands these nations raise interest rates to 30%, 50% and 80%.

"The result was predictable," said Stiglitz of the Hot Money tidal waves in Asia and Latin America. Higher interest rates demolished property values, savaged industrial production and drained national treasuries.

At this point, the IMF drags the gasping nation to Step Three: Market-Based Pricing, a fancy term for raising prices on food, water and cooking gas. This leads, predictably, to Step-Three-and-a-Half: what Stiglitz calls, "The IMF riot."

The IMF riot is painfully predictable. When a nation is, "down and out, [the IMF] takes advantage and squeezes the last pound of blood out of them. They turn up the heat until, finally, the whole cauldron blows up," as when the IMF eliminated food and fuel subsidies for the poor in Indonesia in 1998. Indonesia exploded into riots, but there are other examples - the Bolivian riots over water prices last year and this February, the riots in Ecuador over the rise in cooking gas prices imposed by the World Bank. You'd almost get the impression that the riot is written into the plan.

And it is. What Stiglitz did not know is that, while in the States, BBC and The Observer obtained several documents from inside the World Bank, stamped over with those pesky warnings, "confidential," "restricted," "not to be disclosed." Let's get back to one: the "Interim Country Assistance Strategy" for Ecuador, in it the Bank several times states - with cold accuracy - that they expected their plans to spark, "social unrest," to use their bureaucratic term for a nation in flames.

That's not surprising. The secret report notes that the plan to make the US dollar Ecuador's currency has pushed 51% of the population below the poverty line. The World Bank "Assistance" plan simply calls for facing down civil strife and suffering with, "political resolve" - and still higher prices.

The IMF riots (and by riots I mean peaceful demonstrations dispersed by bullets, tanks and teargas) cause new panicked flights of capital and government bankruptcies. This economic arson has it's bright side - for foreign corporations, who can then pick off remaining assets, such as the odd mining concession or port, at fire sale prices.

Stiglitz notes that the IMF and World Bank are not heartless adherents to market economics. At the same time the IMF stopped Indonesia 'subsidizing' food purchases, "when the banks need a bail-out, intervention (in the market) is welcome." The IMF scrounged up tens of billions of dollars to save Indonesia's financiers and, by extension, the US and European banks from which they had borrowed.

A pattern emerges. There are lots of losers in this system but one clear winner: the Western banks and US Treasury, making the big bucks off this crazy new international capital churn. Stiglitz told me about his unhappy meeting, early in his World Bank tenure, with Ethopia's new president in the nation's first democratic election. The World Bank and IMF had ordered Ethiopia to divert aid money to its reserve account at the US Treasury, which pays a pitiful 4% return, while the nation borrowed US dollars at 12% to feed its population. The new president begged Stiglitz to let him use the aid money to rebuild the nation. But no, the loot went straight off to the US Treasury's vault in Washington.

Now we arrive at Step Four of what the IMF and World Bank call their "poverty reduction strategy": Free Trade. This is free trade by the rules of the World Trade Organization and World Bank, Stiglitz the insider likens free trade WTO-style to the Opium Wars. "That too was about opening markets," he said. As in the 19th century, Europeans and Americans today are kicking down the barriers to sales in Asia, Latin American and Africa, while barricading our own markets against Third World agriculture.

In the Opium Wars, the West used military blockades to force open markets for their unbalanced trade. Today, the World Bank can order a financial blockade just as effective - and sometimes just as deadly.

Stiglitz is particularly emotional over the WTO's intellectual property rights treaty (it goes by the acronym TRIPS, more on that in the next chapters). It is here, says the economist, that the new global order has "condemned people to death" by imposing impossible tariffs and tributes to pay to pharmaceutical companies for branded medicines. "They don't care," said the professor of the corporations and bank loans he worked with, "if people live or die."

By the way, don't be confused by the mix in this discussion of the IMF, World Bank and WTO. They are interchangeable masks of a single governance system. They have locked themselves together by what are unpleasantly called, "triggers." Taking a World Bank loan for a school 'triggers' a requirement to accept every 'conditionality' - they average 111 per nation - laid down by both the World Bank and IMF. In fact, said Stiglitz the IMF requires nations to accept trade policies more punitive than the official WTO rules.

Stiglitz greatest concern is that World Bank plans, devised in secrecy and driven by an absolutist ideology, are never open for discourse or dissent. Despite the West's push for elections throughout the developing world, the so-called Poverty Reduction Programs "undermine democracy."

And they don't work. Black Africa's productivity under the guiding hand of IMF structural "assistance" has gone to hell in a handbag. Did any nation avoid this fate? Yes, said Stiglitz, identifying Botswana. Their trick? "They told the IMF to go packing."

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 09:15 AM
This plan is being perpetrated against the u.s.

apple0154
12-13-2009, 09:15 AM
The Bill of RIghts.

How does helping people contravene the Bill of Rights?


And individuals can help other individuals too. We don't need an authoritarian "more knowledgeable" state.

Yes, we do because individuals do not know who requires help. Also, individuals tend to help those like themselves and ignore those who hold opposing opinions and/or lifestyles.

If that wasn't the case then social programs would never have come into existence. There would be no need for SS or welfare or unemployment or any other program.

Similar to countries that have universal medical. Every country started out with a "pay or suffer" system and those that changed never reverted.

Society has changed. People don't even know their neighbor let alone the majority of people in the community. Years ago, everyone knew everyone else because people didn't move around like they do today. People knew who needed help in their community. That's not the case today.


The bureacratic elitism you seem to favor is exactly what keeps bureacrats detached. The state becomes their method of personal power, and all their arguments become perverted, as their selfishness and egotism increase exponentially with their power.

The job of the bureaucrat is subject to the political party in power. This so-called "absolute power" is for four years. Hardly "absolute".

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 09:16 AM
This is tantamount to saying "this new cooperation better give me what I want and fuck the other guys needs'.

umm. NO it's not. You can't read good.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 09:18 AM
How does helping people contravene the Bill of Rights?




It doesn't. But totalitarianism does.



Yes, we do because individuals do not know who requires help. Also, individuals tend to help those like themselves and ignore those who hold opposing opinions and/or lifestyles.

If that wasn't the case then social programs would never have come into existence. There would be no need for SS or welfare or unemployment or any other program.

Similar to countries that have universal medical. Every country started out with a "pay or suffer" system and those that changed never reverted.

Society has changed. People don't even know their neighbor let alone the majority of people in the community. Years ago, everyone knew everyone else because people didn't move around like they do today. People knew who needed help in their community. That's not the case today.



The job of the bureaucrat is subject to the political party in power. This so-called "absolute power" is for four years. Hardly "absolute".

But people who claim to be helping need more poor people to justify their intervention and their very existence. SO their solutions only induce more dependancy.

apple0154
12-13-2009, 09:20 AM
Do you invision that one day the people of the world will agree on what kind of government works best?

Do you invision a time some day in the far future that the worlds countries all work together to improve their commom home?

Do you invision the world lasting long enough for this to ever happen?

Recall Regan's speech?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag44dRO8LEA"

People will always have different ideas on how to accomplish harmony but accomplish it we must.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 09:21 AM
See. these two stupid as fuck bitches think people in government are of a completely different moral fiber.

There are assholes in all walks of life. And our structures are set up by the elites to promote selfishness cruelty, and the dehumanization of others, even if they put flowery language around it.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 09:22 AM
Recall Regan's speech? YouTube- Regan's ALIEN speech to UN (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag44dRO8LEA)

People will always have different ideas on how to accomplish harmony but accomplish it we must.

Empty rhetoric about unity and harmony are the calling card of the fascist totalitarian.

it's just a nice sounding word for suppression of dissent.

evince
12-13-2009, 09:26 AM
Im an atheist and im anti new world order.

The fear of government is warranted. The biggest murderes in human history are governments.

Asshole CEOs are assholes too. And they gain alot of their power through corrupt governnance, which you somehow believe is incorruptible.

Globalism is dead. Only fascists like you want it, on the left and right. Normal people are rejecting both paths to fascism.

There is another word you fear iirrationally "Globalism".


Think about what that means you are fighting.

You dont want the world to come together on any issue.

You fear people.

The rub is we are all people.

Is there any government or economic endevor that is automatically free of coruption? NO

If man attempts to manage the world powers in a way that will be structured in such a way that the average human can just go on automatic and not have to participate to stay free ,will it work? NO

However mankind manages to come together will have to include the constant participation and oversight of all the people.

This is the key.

You will not be able to fight back the worlds natural tendency to build bridges to each other with cooperation and joint efforts.

The real rational mind will insist that these conections be as democratic as possible.

To simply flail against all efforts as if they are evil is futile and infantile.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 09:29 AM
There is another word you fear iirrationally "Globalism".


Think about what that means you are fighting.

You dont want the world to come together on any issue.

You fear people.

The rub is we are all people.

Is there any government or economic endevor that is automatically free of coruption? NO

In what ever way man attempts to manage the world powers that will be structured in such a way that the average human can just go on automatic and not have to participate to stay free? NO

However mankind manages to come together will have to include the constant participation and oversight of all the people.

This is the key.

You will not be able to fight back the worlds natural tendency to build bridges to each other with cooperation and joint efforts.

The real rational mind will insist that these conections be as democratic as possible.

To simply flail against all efforts as if they are evil is futile and infantile.

You ignore who is impelementing globalization and how they are doing it.

I would be happy if the world came together on issues of freedom and real prosperity. But we're only coming together under the yoke of a nihilist and cruel scheme of fiat currency based totalitarianism and destruction.

evince
12-13-2009, 09:33 AM
Dont fight the effort then dude, fight the people who are trying to USE this historical march for power gain.

When you rage against globalism you completely turn off the vast amount of people in this world that KNOW its our future.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 09:36 AM
Dont fight the effort then dude, fight the people who are trying to USE this historical march for power gain.


The whole march is theirs. Ever larger and more powerful government structures are not necessary for my view of human improvement.



When you rage against globalism you completely turn off the vast amount of people in this world that KNOW its our future.

It's not our future. Your belief that it is somehow inevitable is part of your brainwash.

We should celebrate our differences right?

Globalists should be turned off. turned off and deprogrammed from their ideology of tyranny.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 09:48 AM
There will always be humans who will seek this power to abuse it but what if we manage to come to a time when the various governments figure out a clear type of government with a clear set of rules that keeps these types away from the wheels of power.


Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

These types are created by totalitarianism itself. if governments are less powerful narciccisstic psychopaths will not be able to use them for their ends. Then they will be confined to exercise their criminality in the streets, like the other thugs.

evince
12-13-2009, 09:54 AM
The whole march is theirs. Ever larger and more powerful government structures are not necessary for my view of human improvement.
And you are wrong, it is good government that has improved the lives of billions throughout the ages

It's not our future. Your belief that it is somehow inevitable is part of your brainwash.No you fool it is a dream that mankind can worlk together to solve our shared problems like intelligent beings

We should celebrate our differences right?
Then celebrate the differances yourself and quit hating everything and everyone who differs from you.
Globalists should be turned off. turned off and deprogrammed from their ideology of tyranny.

"Globalists" is the name you gave the monster that haunts your personal nightmares. To most of the worlds population it is not a curse word. Yes there are powers who would love to use the worlds inevitable coming together for a power grap but that does not mean the world should not come together.

It will march towards that and those who help guide it in such a way as to truely improve the world and the lot of the vast majority of it inhabitants are to be praised for their efforts.

You on the other hand stand at the side of the road and scream at everyone traveling it instead of screaming at just those who are evil.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 09:59 AM
"Globalists" is the name you gave the monster that haunts your personal nightmares. To most of the worlds population it is not a curse word. Yes there are powers who would love to use the worlds inevitable coming together for a power grap but that does not mean the world should not come together.

It will march towards that and those who help guide it in such a way as to truely improve the world and the lot of the vast majority of it inhabitants are to be praised for their efforts.

You on the other hand stand at the side of the road and scream at everyone traveling it instead of screaming at just those who are evil.

My personal nightmares?

No globalization is the master plan of all fascist policy making centers.

I wish it were a dream.

So you';re going to go after after the Wold bank, IMF and how they operate?


http://www.gregpalast.com/the-globalizer-who-came-in-from-the-cold/


Each nation's economy is individually analyzed, then, says Stiglitz, the Bank hands every minister the same exact four-step program.

Step One is Privatization - which Stiglitz said could more accurately be called, 'Briberization.' Rather than object to the sell-offs of state industries, he said national leaders - using the World Bank's demands to silence local critics - happily flogged their electricity and water companies. "You could see their eyes widen" at the prospect of 10% commissions paid to Swiss bank accounts for simply shaving a few billion off the sale price of national assets.

And the US government knew it, charges Stiglitz, at least in the case of the biggest 'briberization' of all, the 1995 Russian sell-off. "The US Treasury view was this was great as we wanted Yeltsin re-elected. We don't care if it's a corrupt election. We want the money to go to Yeltzin" via kick-backs for his campaign.

Stiglitz is no conspiracy nutter ranting about Black Helicopters. The man was inside the game, a member of Bill Clinton's cabinet as Chairman of the President's council of economic advisors.

Most ill-making for Stiglitz is that the US-backed oligarchs stripped Russia's industrial assets, with the effect that the corruption scheme cut national output nearly in half causing depression and starvation.

After briberization, Step Two of the IMF/World Bank one-size-fits-all rescue-your-economy plan is 'Capital Market Liberalization.' In theory, capital market deregulation allows investment capital to flow in and out. Unfortunately, as in Indonesia and Brazil, the money simply flowed out and out. Stiglitz calls this the "Hot Money" cycle. Cash comes in for speculation in real estate and currency, then flees at the first whiff of trouble. A nation's reserves can drain in days, hours. And when that happens, to seduce speculators into returning a nation's own capital funds, the IMF demands these nations raise interest rates to 30%, 50% and 80%.

"The result was predictable," said Stiglitz of the Hot Money tidal waves in Asia and Latin America. Higher interest rates demolished property values, savaged industrial production and drained national treasuries.

At this point, the IMF drags the gasping nation to Step Three: Market-Based Pricing, a fancy term for raising prices on food, water and cooking gas. This leads, predictably, to Step-Three-and-a-Half: what Stiglitz calls, "The IMF riot."

The IMF riot is painfully predictable. When a nation is, "down and out, [the IMF] takes advantage and squeezes the last pound of blood out of them. They turn up the heat until, finally, the whole cauldron blows up," as when the IMF eliminated food and fuel subsidies for the poor in Indonesia in 1998. Indonesia exploded into riots, but there are other examples - the Bolivian riots over water prices last year and this February, the riots in Ecuador over the rise in cooking gas prices imposed by the World Bank. You'd almost get the impression that the riot is written into the plan.

And it is. What Stiglitz did not know is that, while in the States, BBC and The Observer obtained several documents from inside the World Bank, stamped over with those pesky warnings, "confidential," "restricted," "not to be disclosed." Let's get back to one: the "Interim Country Assistance Strategy" for Ecuador, in it the Bank several times states - with cold accuracy - that they expected their plans to spark, "social unrest," to use their bureaucratic term for a nation in flames.

That's not surprising. The secret report notes that the plan to make the US dollar Ecuador's currency has pushed 51% of the population below the poverty line. The World Bank "Assistance" plan simply calls for facing down civil strife and suffering with, "political resolve" - and still higher prices.

The IMF riots (and by riots I mean peaceful demonstrations dispersed by bullets, tanks and teargas) cause new panicked flights of capital and government bankruptcies. This economic arson has it's bright side - for foreign corporations, who can then pick off remaining assets, such as the odd mining concession or port, at fire sale prices.

Stiglitz notes that the IMF and World Bank are not heartless adherents to market economics. At the same time the IMF stopped Indonesia 'subsidizing' food purchases, "when the banks need a bail-out, intervention (in the market) is welcome." The IMF scrounged up tens of billions of dollars to save Indonesia's financiers and, by extension, the US and European banks from which they had borrowed.

A pattern emerges. There are lots of losers in this system but one clear winner: the Western banks and US Treasury, making the big bucks off this crazy new international capital churn. Stiglitz told me about his unhappy meeting, early in his World Bank tenure, with Ethopia's new president in the nation's first democratic election. The World Bank and IMF had ordered Ethiopia to divert aid money to its reserve account at the US Treasury, which pays a pitiful 4% return, while the nation borrowed US dollars at 12% to feed its population. The new president begged Stiglitz to let him use the aid money to rebuild the nation. But no, the loot went straight off to the US Treasury's vault in Washington.

Now we arrive at Step Four of what the IMF and World Bank call their "poverty reduction strategy": Free Trade. This is free trade by the rules of the World Trade Organization and World Bank, Stiglitz the insider likens free trade WTO-style to the Opium Wars. "That too was about opening markets," he said. As in the 19th century, Europeans and Americans today are kicking down the barriers to sales in Asia, Latin American and Africa, while barricading our own markets against Third World agriculture.

In the Opium Wars, the West used military blockades to force open markets for their unbalanced trade. Today, the World Bank can order a financial blockade just as effective - and sometimes just as deadly.

Stiglitz is particularly emotional over the WTO's intellectual property rights treaty (it goes by the acronym TRIPS, more on that in the next chapters). It is here, says the economist, that the new global order has "condemned people to death" by imposing impossible tariffs and tributes to pay to pharmaceutical companies for branded medicines. "They don't care," said the professor of the corporations and bank loans he worked with, "if people live or die."

By the way, don't be confused by the mix in this discussion of the IMF, World Bank and WTO. They are interchangeable masks of a single governance system. They have locked themselves together by what are unpleasantly called, "triggers." Taking a World Bank loan for a school 'triggers' a requirement to accept every 'conditionality' - they average 111 per nation - laid down by both the World Bank and IMF. In fact, said Stiglitz the IMF requires nations to accept trade policies more punitive than the official WTO rules.

Stiglitz greatest concern is that World Bank plans, devised in secrecy and driven by an absolutist ideology, are never open for discourse or dissent. Despite the West's push for elections throughout the developing world, the so-called Poverty Reduction Programs "undermine democracy."

And they don't work. Black Africa's productivity under the guiding hand of IMF structural "assistance" has gone to hell in a handbag. Did any nation avoid this fate? Yes, said Stiglitz, identifying Botswana. Their trick? "They told the IMF to go packing."

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 10:00 AM
You on the other hand stand at the side of the road and scream at everyone traveling it instead of screaming at just those who are evil.


Actually, the road was built by the evil, and they chose the destination. Anyone on it is either a fool or a conspirator with evil.

apple0154
12-13-2009, 10:15 AM
But people who claim to be helping need more poor people to justify their intervention and their very existence. SO their solutions only induce more dependancy.

The constant addition of government agencies is due to the begrudging nature of some people. That's the reason for the dragged out medical plan talks going on now.

Take a broken leg. A medical plan may cover the cast and the doctor's time.

The patient is fitted with a cast and discharged. How are they supposed to get around? Where are the crutches?

Ohhhh, that's another government agency because some folks who were involved in drawing up the government medical plan didn't want crutches included.

So, a "crutch agency" is born and it supplies crutches and wheel chairs to people who injured their legs.

Now the patient has crutches but being their first time they can not manipulate them sufficiently to use public transport. So, how do they get home?

Ohhh. there's another government agency that supplies medi-car transportation (vans with tail-gate lifts and seats designed for the handicapped.)

That's why we see agency after agency springing up. I understand people getting fed up. Another bureaucracy when everything should be included.

It's the same thing with supplemental pensions and all the other government programs that target specific groups of people. The solution is a guaranteed minimum income.

Unemployment, welfare, disability, programs for blacks, programs for immigrants, subsidies depending on where one lives......more money is spent on qualifying people than actually helping them. Why? Because people are so God-d%$# jealous someone may be getting something for nothing. They are the ones, through their need to scrutinize and examine, who add unnecessary costs to government programs.

A guaranteed minimum income can be combined with income tax. If one loses their job and has zero income one month then they receive assistance. When they file their income tax and it's found they lied throw them in jail!

It's not complicated but some folks want to offer as little assistance as possible. They want to find ways NOT to help. That's the problem.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 10:19 AM
The constant addition of government agencies is due to the begrudging nature of some people. That's the reason for the dragged out medical plan talks going on now.

Take a broken leg. A medical plan may cover the cast and the doctor's time.

The patient is fitted with a cast and discharged. How are they supposed to get around? Where are the crutches?

Ohhhh, that's another government agency because some folks who were involved in drawing up the government medical plan didn't want crutches included.

So, a "crutch agency" is born and it supplies crutches and wheel chairs to people who injured their legs.

Now the patient has crutches but being their first time they can not manipulate them sufficiently to use public transport. So, how do they get home?

Ohhh. there's another government agency that supplies medi-car transportation (vans with tail-gate lifts and seats designed for the handicapped.)

That's why we see agency after agency springing up. I understand people getting fed up. Another bureaucracy when everything should be included.

It's the same thing with supplemental pensions and all the other government programs that target specific groups of people. The solution is a guaranteed minimum income.

Unemployment, welfare, disability, programs for blacks, programs for immigrants, subsidies depending on where one lives......more money is spent on qualifying people than actually helping them. Why? Because people are so God-d%$# jealous someone may be getting something for nothing. They are the ones, through their need to scrutinize and examine, who add unnecessary costs to government programs.

A guaranteed minimum income can be combined with income tax. If one loses their job and has zero income one month then they receive assistance. When they file their income tax and it's found they lied throw them in jail!

It's not complicated but some folks want to offer as little assistance as possible. They want to find ways NOT to help. That's the problem.

So. Basically you;re impatient with incremental takeover of society.

Full totalitarianism now!

Consolidation and reducting redundancies only save money to a point.

After a while the anti-consumer forces of monopoly supplant any savings made through consolidation.

apple0154
12-13-2009, 10:19 AM
Empty rhetoric about unity and harmony are the calling card of the fascist totalitarian.

it's just a nice sounding word for suppression of dissent.

Hey, dissent all you like but keep helping. :)

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 10:20 AM
Hey, dissent all you like but keep helping. :)

Oh, I will~:)

apple0154
12-13-2009, 10:26 AM
The whole march is theirs. Ever larger and more powerful government structures are not necessary for my view of human improvement.

It's not our future. Your belief that it is somehow inevitable is part of your brainwash.

We should celebrate our differences right?

Globalists should be turned off. turned off and deprogrammed from their ideology of tyranny.

Then why have countries or states or towns? Do you think people would have better lives without town councils or governments planning roads and services?

Afghanistan is a good example of people not coming together, living in little tribes without government.

apple0154
12-13-2009, 10:29 AM
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

These types are created by totalitarianism itself. if governments are less powerful narciccisstic psychopaths will not be able to use them for their ends. Then they will be confined to exercise their criminality in the streets, like the other thugs.

Ahh, so you are for equality among thugs. :cof1:

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 10:38 AM
Ahh, so you are for equality among thugs. :cof1:

I just don't think our government should be powerful enough for them to implement their destruction on the rest of us.

How is that prevented?

limited government.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 10:39 AM
Then why have countries or states or towns? Do you think people would have better lives without town councils or governments planning roads and services?

Afghanistan is a good example of people not coming together, living in little tribes without government.

Some coordination is necessary.

Afgahanistan is fine with how it is.

It's the New World Order zealots that have a problem with it.

apple0154
12-13-2009, 10:41 AM
So. Basically you;re impatient with incremental takeover of society.

Full totalitarianism now!

Consolidation and reducting redundancies only save money to a point.

After a while the anti-consumer forces of monopoly supplant any savings made through consolidation.

I want a government/political system suitable for the 21st century. As Obama said we've had enough old, tired, worn-out ideas from yesteryear.

apple0154
12-13-2009, 10:42 AM
I just don't think our government should be powerful enough for them to implement their destruction on the rest of us.

How is that prevented?

limited government.

Or a change in government.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 10:42 AM
I want a government/political system suitable for the 21st century. As Obama said we've had enough old, tired, worn-out ideas from yesteryear.

Wow. How vague and meaningless you are.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 10:43 AM
Or a change in government.

A change to a totalitarian government is less prone to abuse?

apple0154
12-13-2009, 10:46 AM
Some coordination is necessary.

Afgahanistan is fine with how it is.

It's the New World Order zealots that have a problem with it.

I have no problem with Afghanistan being the way it is but I don't want to live like that. It's nice to be able to move across country and know the same basic laws apply. It will be even better when countries get together and have similar laws.

apple0154
12-13-2009, 10:47 AM
Wow. How vague and meaningless you are.

Nothing vague and meaningless about it. The Repubs understood Obama very well when he said those words.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 10:47 AM
I have no problem with Afghanistan being the way it is but I don't want to live like that. It's nice to be able to move across country and know the same basic laws apply. It will be even better when countries get together and have similar laws.

You don't have to live like afghanis.

Don't you think you should allow them to choose their own way of life? Or should your notions be forced on them?

apple0154
12-13-2009, 10:48 AM
A change to a totalitarian government is less prone to abuse?

If one government is corrupt then change governments on voting day.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 10:49 AM
Nothing vague and meaningless about it. The Repubs understood Obama very well when he said those words.

Yes. It's vague and meaningless.

A government suited for the 21 st century?

What does that mean?

apple0154
12-13-2009, 10:50 AM
You don't have to live like afghanis.

Don't you think you should allow them to choose their own way of life? Or should your notions be forced on them?

I think they should be allowed to choose their own way of life. I also think if the majority of people in a country want to co-ordinate their laws with other countries, great!

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 10:50 AM
Totalitarianism is old. not new.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 10:52 AM
I think they should be allowed to choose their own way of life. I also think if the majority of people in a country want to co-ordinate their laws with other countries, great!

What if it's just an authority figure signing treaties opposed to the will of the people?

apple0154
12-13-2009, 10:53 AM
Yes. It's vague and meaningless.

A government suited for the 21 st century?

What does that mean?

Basically, that means more co-operation between citizens and between countries. Get rid of the dog-eat-dog, every-man-for-himself mentality.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 10:55 AM
Basically, that means more co-operation between citizens and between countries. Get rid of the dog-eat-dog, every-man-for-himself mentality.

No. what you're talking about is elites of all nations forming into a monolithic global power structure, so they can focus on their real enemies, their own citizens.

There will still be war. It will just be a war in all nations, against free thought, dissent, and anyone who opposes the New World Order.

apple0154
12-13-2009, 10:58 AM
What if it's just an authority figure signing treaties opposed to the will of the people?

I definitely believe the will of the people comes first, however, does the average person have enough information to make an informed decision?

Just look at the lies about universal medical. Not one country has reverted to the old system of "pay or suffer" and every country started out that way.

Death panels. Killing grandpa. If it wasn't so serious it would be laughable.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 11:01 AM
I definitely believe the will of the people comes first, however, does the average person have enough information to make an informed decision?

Just look at the lies about universal medical. Not one country has reverted to the old system of "pay or suffer" and every country started out that way.

Death panels. Killing grandpa. If it wasn't so serious it would be laughable.

And it's back to your elitism. Your hate core.

There will be rationing aka "death panels".

We already had a 'death panel' try to reduce the number of mammograms women can get. Remember that?

apple0154
12-13-2009, 11:04 AM
No. what you're talking about is elites of all nations forming into a monolithic global power structure, so they can focus on their real enemies, their own citizens.

There will still be war. It will just be a war in all nations, against free thought, dissent, and anyone who opposes the New World Order.

Try and be specific. A war against what, exactly? People refusing to help others? People angry because their government is there to help them with programs for the needy?

What will the dissent be against? Why would free thought be penalized as long as one didn't break the law?

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 11:06 AM
Try and be specific. A war against what, exactly? People refusing to help others? People angry because their government is there to help them with programs for the needy?

What will the dissent be against? Why would free thought be penalized as long as one didn't break the law?

I was specific.

I'll repost:

It will just be a war in all nations, against free thought, dissent, and anyone who opposes the New World Order.

apple0154
12-13-2009, 11:09 AM
And it's back to your elitism. Your hate core.

There will be rationing aka "death panels".

We already had a 'death panel' try to reduce the number of mammograms women can get. Remember that?

From what I remember women had been told to get unnecessary mammograms. The starting age was too young and the radiation was unnecessary. That's why they wanted to reduce the numbers.

On that note it's lunch time here. I enjoyed the rapport.

Back in a while.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 11:12 AM
From what I remember women had been told to get unnecessary mammograms. The starting age was too young and the radiation was unnecessary. That's why they wanted to reduce the numbers.

On that note it's lunch time here. I enjoyed the rapport.

Back in a while.



Theoretically, getting mammograms as early and often as possible provide the most protection.

Raising the age and reducing the frequency will necessarily lead to more cancer.

The death panels are manned by corrupt scientists and doctors.

evince
12-13-2009, 11:16 AM
You don't have to live like afghanis.

Don't you think you should allow them to choose their own way of life? Or should your notions be forced on them?

And their lack of government and control over their country ended up getting our buildings bombed.

evince
12-13-2009, 11:19 AM
Theoretically, getting mammograms as early and often as possible provide the most protection.

Raising the age and reducing the frequency will necessarily lead to more cancer.

The death panels are manned by corrupt scientists and doctors.

And it also causes thousands of unnessesary operations.

Women used as money spouts because they have insurance and the hospital can make money from scaring them into unnneeded opperations to remove harmless masses from their breasts.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 11:20 AM
And it also causes thousands of unnessesary operations.

Women used as money spouts because they have insurance and the hospital can make money from scaring them into unnneeded opperations to remove harmless masses from their breasts.

Is that your determination that all those operations were unnecessary?

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 11:23 AM
And their lack of government and control over their country ended up getting our buildings bombed.

So you're a neocon warmonger now?

evince
12-13-2009, 11:56 AM
If you notice and follow politics you will realize that 90% of the US and a huge % of the world had no problem with the US going into Afghanistan.

It was Iraq that was the war of agression.

Canceled2
12-13-2009, 11:59 AM
And it also causes thousands of unnessesary operations.

Women used as money spouts because they have insurance and the hospital can make money from scaring them into unnneeded opperations to remove harmless masses from their breasts.

What stupid unadulterated nonsense! I have personally known 2 women in their 40's and one in her 30's who were diagnosed with breast cancer. The two older women, 41, and 49, had their cancer found during a screening. The 41 year old died after 2 years of surgeries and treatment. The woman in her 30's had a lumpectomy and no chemo or radiation, but has to have annual screenings. Early detection is key to surviving BC.

evince
12-13-2009, 12:01 PM
What stupid unadulterated nonsense! I have personally known 2 women in their 40's and one in her 30's who were diagnosed with breast cancer. The two older women, 41, and 49, had their cancer found during a screening. The 41 year old died after 2 years of surgeries and treatment. The woman in her 30's had a lumpectomy and no chemo or radiation, but has to have annual screenings. Early detection is key to surviving BC.

This was not desided on personal info , it was decided on all the facts and the best medical procedure for keeping people healthy.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 12:06 PM
This was not desided on personal info , it was decided on all the facts and the best medical procedure for keeping people healthy.

It was decided by corrupt doctors encouraged by bureacrats to pervert science to cut costs for the state.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 12:07 PM
If you notice and follow politics you will realize that 90% of the US and a huge % of the world had no problem with the US going into Afghanistan.

It was Iraq that was the war of agression.

oh ok. The two wars are TOTALLY DIFFERENT. :rolleyes:

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 12:09 PM
How do we know evince and apple are merely typing in propaganda and idiocy?

Their fingers are moving.

ZappasGuitar
12-13-2009, 12:56 PM
It was decided by corrupt doctors encouraged by bureacrats to pervert science to cut costs for the state.

And you can prove this how, exactly?

Becaues until you've got hard EVIDENCE that can back up your allegation, it's just more anecdotal fearmongering.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 12:57 PM
And you can prove this how, exactly?

Becaues until you've got hard EVIDENCE that can back up your allegation, it's just more anecdotal fearmongering.


Do you think these recommendations will cut costs for the state?

christiefan915
12-13-2009, 01:05 PM
(Article)They sell all the right ideas: equality, health, and peace. What they mean, however, is “let the state worry about these issues. You are to simply be a worker and contributor to the state.” To them,” equality” really means that you may not have more than your neighbor has, “health” means that the state will determine what kind of medical attention you need (after all, they are paying for it), and “peace” will be yours as long as you do as they say.(End)

No, what they mean is the individual has not solved these problems so another course of action is necessary.

No, “equality” does not mean you can not have more than your neighbour. Equality means you can not sit by while your neighbour suffers an illness and can not afford health care while you whine about how no one ever worked as hard as you did.

No, “health” does not mean the State will determine what medical attention ones needs. It means medical personnel will deliver the necessary care and the government will pay the individuals. If anyone took the time to Google they would see countries like Canada, countries with universal health care, do not decide what care will be given nor which doctor will provide it.

As for “peace”, yes, people will be at peace knowing they aren’t thrown to the capitalistic wolves.

Equality. Health. Peace. We do know the lies and propaganda spread about universal health care are exactly that, lies! That can be easily determined by a quick Google on Canada’s health care. Health care that has been in force for the last (40) forty years.

That doesn’t lend much credibility to your equality and peace arguments.

(Article) Can they sell this type of propaganda to us in the open? No again! They must infiltrate and change the way our young people think. They must encourage our youth to challenge their cultural heritage, causing unrest and rebellion to the status quo of our nation’s morals and standards. (End)

You bet they must! Just like the heroes who stood up and said, “Hell no! We won’t go!” during the Viet Nam War’s systematic massacre of our youth brought on by disgusting, repulsive, war- mongering, fat asses in leather chairs.

A war brought on by a lie! The Gulf Of Tolkin Incident.

(Article) No, I am not an activist of any kind or a right-wing extremist as the Liberals call it. All I hope for is an America that remains sovereign and free for future generations. I am merely an old man, and maybe I don’t know how to communicate my experiences in a convincing way,….(End)

We have seen what your generation has done. Maybe not you, personally, but the people who espouse freedom and the “American Way” that you so gloriously defend.

Whether it’s the Gulf of Tolkin or the mushroom cloud from Iraq we’ve seen what you defend. Whether it’s a guy sleeping in a cardboard box under a bridge or a young, family man going to work in pain because he doesn’t want to use the family’s food money for a doctor’s visit we know what your vision of freedom is.

Thank-you, but no thank-you. We’ve heard the lies, be them concerning war or health care. People, like myself, have lived them. People, like myself, know they were lies and now the rest of the citizens will be shown so they can see for themselves.

You bet they must change what our young people were taught. The lies. The deceit. The death and destruction. The carnage has to stop and to be blunt it is offensive to see an old man support such hideousness just because he was fortunate enough to enjoy a good life.



///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

:good4u: :hand: :hand:

ZappasGuitar
12-13-2009, 01:21 PM
Do you think these recommendations will cut costs for the state?

I don't know what your educational background was, but I didn't spend my college years studying human physiology so I'm going to take the advice of those with more expertise in the field.

However, if you've got some pertinent information I don't have that might change my mind, I'm all ears.

Hermes Thoth
12-13-2009, 02:04 PM
I don't know what your educational background was, but I didn't spend my college years studying human physiology so I'm going to take the advice of those with more expertise in the field.

However, if you've got some pertinent information I don't have that might change my mind, I'm all ears.

But you know that more tests = more costs. As a consumer you understand that when there's less of something, the costs are less, right?

Don Quixote
12-14-2009, 02:52 AM
capitalism, communism and socialism do not work

a hybrid of capitalism and socialism may work

while a lot of people have an opinion as to what will work, nobody knows what will work because we have not found a system that has lasted long enough to be a test case

ps as for being forced to go to war, we have and all volunteer military and our elected representatives decide when and where that military will be used

our federal system works better than the individual states in most cases

perhaps we can use different states as test laboratories - the problem is that each state has a somewhat different need and requires a different solution

well folks, any suggestions

Hermes Thoth
12-14-2009, 05:16 AM
capitalism, communism and socialism do not work

a hybrid of capitalism and socialism may work

while a lot of people have an opinion as to what will work, nobody knows what will work because we have not found a system that has lasted long enough to be a test case

ps as for being forced to go to war, we have and all volunteer military and our elected representatives decide when and where that military will be used

our federal system works better than the individual states in most cases

perhaps we can use different states as test laboratories - the problem is that each state has a somewhat different need and requires a different solution

well folks, any suggestions


Yes. Your blend of socialism and capitalism is called fascism. It blows.

I suggest you stop being a moron.

Canceled2
12-14-2009, 06:09 PM
This was not desided on personal info , it was decided on all the facts and the best medical procedure for keeping people healthy.

No it wasn't! Every medical org has come out against the suggestion because evidence shows that early detection HAS saved lives. Early detection can also result in saved costs since most breast cancers if caught early require less aggressive treatments.

Don Quixote
12-14-2009, 07:09 PM
Yes. Your blend of socialism and capitalism is called fascism. It blows.

I suggest you stop being a moron.

?

how can socialism be considered fascist

as for afghanistan, i would be happy to get out if we can find a way to keep it from becoming a safe place for aq/taliban to go after pakistan's nuke materials and weapons

we are already supporting pakistan with funding against aq/taliban

if that were sufficient i would be happier but i do not think it will be

forcing aq/taliban into a two front war is better, however, the mountains that they hide in really suck for fighting

oat, afghanistan is good training for our special forces and marines...

Good Luck
12-14-2009, 11:19 PM
This was not desided on personal info , it was decided on all the facts and the best medical procedure for keeping people healthy.
Do you always just blindly accept anything the government tells you, as long as there is a jackass symbol in front of it?

One the age recommendation being increased to 50:
From: www.breastcancer.org
For women in their 40s (you know, the age group your beloved government decided does not need screening) 1 in 69 will develop breast cancer. With over 200 million women in the United States, that means almost 350 thousand women will develop breast cancer while in their 40s. That's 350 THOUSAND WOMEN whom the government has decided to write off with their all-too-convenient new guidelines for breast cancer screening.

On frequency of screening:
According to the American Cancer Society, a difference of 6 months in detection, on average, increases the survival rate by a factor of 3. So a woman whose cancer is detected 6 months earlier, say due ot having an annual screening instead of every other year, has 3 times the chance of surviving her cancer. A palpable tumor (can be felt) is, on average, 5 months older than a tumor detectable by mammogram.

So waiting for non-mammogram detection methods (ie: those 40 year olds the government wants to fuck) will increase their chance of dying from breast cancer by a factor of 3 at minimum. At the same time, doubling the period between mammograms will more than double the chance that a detectable cancer will exist for 6 months or more, aslo tripling the chance of a cancer death from those cancers detected later rather than sooner.

The average mammogram does not involve enough radiation to make even .1% difference in risk of either breast or any other type of cancer, or any other type of radiation induced health problems. So the difference between 40 mammograms between the ages of 40 and 80, or 15 mammograms results in less than 3 percent lifetime increase in radiation induced health problems, while increasing vastly the ability to detect breast cancer early, thus vastly increasing the ability to treat and survive the cancer.

The conclusion is there is the significant advantages to early detection, of which the mammogram is the best current tool, FAR outweigh the risks inherent in exposure to xray radiation. (ie: you and your new government recommendation are full of SHIT trying to claim it is based on balance of risk.)

Looking at the costs of annual screening starting at 40 yo, if every woman got her mammogram as suggested, that would be about 58 million mammograms per year according to the 2000 census. Now if they start at 50 instead of 40, and get one every other year, that drops to 23 million mammograms per year, less that half the number and less than half the costs.

The idea that this new study is in any way concerned with the risk vs. benefit of mammograms - a relationship that has been intensely studied for decades with no changes in basic statistics - is absolutely ludicrous. Add in the timing, when the government is within a few votes of having a BIG sya in which treatments and/or screening processes are to be paid for, and it becomes clear (at least to those without their heads up the donkey's ass) what the intent of this bogus study is.

In short, the only thing your precious government is concerned with is the expense of 40 mammograms for a woman between the ages of 40 and 80, compared to 15.

Taichiliberal
12-15-2009, 12:03 AM
(Article)They sell all the right ideas: equality, health, and peace. What they mean, however, is “let the state worry about these issues. You are to simply be a worker and contributor to the state.” To them,” equality” really means that you may not have more than your neighbor has, “health” means that the state will determine what kind of medical attention you need (after all, they are paying for it), and “peace” will be yours as long as you do as they say.(End)

No, what they mean is the individual has not solved these problems so another course of action is necessary.

No, “equality” does not mean you can not have more than your neighbour. Equality means you can not sit by while your neighbour suffers an illness and can not afford health care while you whine about how no one ever worked as hard as you did.

No, “health” does not mean the State will determine what medical attention ones needs. It means medical personnel will deliver the necessary care and the government will pay the individuals. If anyone took the time to Google they would see countries like Canada, countries with universal health care, do not decide what care will be given nor which doctor will provide it.

As for “peace”, yes, people will be at peace knowing they aren’t thrown to the capitalistic wolves.

Equality. Health. Peace. We do know the lies and propaganda spread about universal health care are exactly that, lies! That can be easily determined by a quick Google on Canada’s health care. Health care that has been in force for the last (40) forty years.

That doesn’t lend much credibility to your equality and peace arguments.

(Article) Can they sell this type of propaganda to us in the open? No again! They must infiltrate and change the way our young people think. They must encourage our youth to challenge their cultural heritage, causing unrest and rebellion to the status quo of our nation’s morals and standards. (End)

You bet they must! Just like the heroes who stood up and said, “Hell no! We won’t go!” during the Viet Nam War’s systematic massacre of our youth brought on by disgusting, repulsive, war- mongering, fat asses in leather chairs.

A war brought on by a lie! The Gulf Of Tolkin Incident.

(Article) No, I am not an activist of any kind or a right-wing extremist as the Liberals call it. All I hope for is an America that remains sovereign and free for future generations. I am merely an old man, and maybe I don’t know how to communicate my experiences in a convincing way,….(End)

We have seen what your generation has done. Maybe not you, personally, but the people who espouse freedom and the “American Way” that you so gloriously defend.

Whether it’s the Gulf of Tolkin or the mushroom cloud from Iraq we’ve seen what you defend. Whether it’s a guy sleeping in a cardboard box under a bridge or a young, family man going to work in pain because he doesn’t want to use the family’s food money for a doctor’s visit we know what your vision of freedom is.

Thank-you, but no thank-you. We’ve heard the lies, be them concerning war or health care. People, like myself, have lived them. People, like myself, know they were lies and now the rest of the citizens will be shown so they can see for themselves.

You bet they must change what our young people were taught. The lies. The deceit. The death and destruction. The carnage has to stop and to be blunt it is offensive to see an old man support such hideousness just because he was fortunate enough to enjoy a good life.



///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


It's sad that the guy went through all that BS and learned nothing. Something should have clued him into the FACT that the "socialism" expoused by the Nazi's was quite different from the "socialism" expoused by the Soviet Union.....both of which were totally out of sync with the "socialism" practiced in countries such as England and Sweden.

Your deconstruction of this guy's wrong headed thinking will unfortunately fall on willfully deaf neocon ears.

Minister of Truth
12-15-2009, 12:06 AM
Fair Trade is retarded.

Good Luck
12-15-2009, 12:41 AM
a hybrid of capitalism and socialism may work
Sorry, but no. The problem with socialism in any variety is it requires government control. It requires the centralized control only available to the law making body of a society (ie: government) because, in the end, what any type of economy does is determine the distribution of limited goods and services among the population. To distribute a limited resource according to a principle of economic equality (socialism) the only means is through legal interference (government).

But you cannot control only certain aspects of the economy while letting others go their own way. For instance, we are about to engage in the experiment to control the economics of health care. Yet even the most enthusiastically optimist admits it is going to cost large amounts of money. But instead of taxing (which they only don't propose because they'd be tossed out of office BEFORE the next election) the necessary funds are to be taken from people via a variety of new federal regulations intent on making the healthy pay for the sick (which is how the capitalist version of health insurance works, except your involvement is voluntary instead of compulsory.) See, right there is a prime example of how socialism ends up increasing federal controls in other areas (personal freedom) to shift the distribution of the targeted market.

Add to that the planned direct interference with the private insurance industry (If you are an insurance company, you gotta get the federal government's stamp of approval for people to switch their old plan to yours.) There is another place government ends up controlling in order to provide a "hybrid" of socialized/capitalistic health care system. The fact that individuals, too, must get government permission to change their carrier, and that's two controls placed on the individual and one on the market itself, just off the top, in the overall plan to "improve" the health care market.

Theoretically, pure socialism can work. But it can only work at the cost of absolute control over every aspect of the economy. That means we would, by necessity, be the state's property, our abilities to be calculated into the machine, determined as early in our lives as possible so as to maximize the states ability to educate and train us in that career which the state determines is best for us and for society. Absolute economic security - at the price of absolute dependency and commitment to the state.

There is a sad fact in the area of human interactions. Security and liberty are mutually exclusive conditions. To achieve the purity of one, you must give up the other. Absolute security means zero freedom. Absolute freedom means zero security. The question, then, becomes where do we strike a balance between the two? How much liberty are people willing to trade for security - especially the vagaries and intangible status of economic security?

For me, I can handle being poor. I've was there right up to the day I joined the Marine Corps. As often as not, we were adding straw to dish rag soup to make it more filling. It was not the most pleasant way to grow up. OTOH, I can think of worse ways - ways I see people forced into in our modern, government-centric "help" systems. Growing up poor, we had on thing no government program can ever "give" to people: the irreplaceable satisfaction of being responsible for our own selves at all times. A full belly on the government's dime cannot replace the feeling of self worth derived from a half-full belly earned by one's own efforts. Liberty is more than just being able to make your own decisions. It is also the satisfaction of benefiting from your own efforts, however small it may be.

Hermes Thoth
12-15-2009, 06:43 AM
Fair Trade is retarded.

But what you call 'free trade' is merely globalization zealotry, a concerted effort to subjugate the sovereignty of nations to the authority of multinational corporations and global quazi legal entities.

They say they are defending business innovation by stifling onerous regulation, but allowing slave labor to supplant the efforts of free workers is merely a race to the bottom. Treaties need to have human rights preconditions. Laying off westerners is no innovation western governments should enable with fascistic collusion. This open hostility to their own citizenry renders the legitimacy of their leadership null and void.

Topspin
12-15-2009, 06:44 AM
The illuminati likes globalization, it's good for the rich

Hermes Thoth
12-15-2009, 06:45 AM
The illuminati likes globalization, it's good for the rich

yep. and paybacks a bitch.

Topspin
12-15-2009, 08:08 AM
yep. and paybacks a bitch.

when's it coming in 100yrs?

Hermes Thoth
12-15-2009, 08:11 AM
when's it coming in 100yrs?

Just sleep with one eye open, dipshit.

Topspin
12-15-2009, 08:22 AM
Just sleep with one eye open, dipshit.

why your afraid of your own shadow, you surely aren't coming for me. Now that boss that's about to lay you off, maybe he should worry.

Hermes Thoth
12-15-2009, 09:00 AM
why your afraid of your own shadow, you surely aren't coming for me. Now that boss that's about to lay you off, maybe he should worry.

Rest in peace.

Topspin
12-15-2009, 09:03 AM
Rest in peace.

I'll be there inspite of your nightlight and make your already bad dreams much worse. Ching

Hermes Thoth
12-15-2009, 09:40 AM
I'll be there inspite of your nightlight and make your already bad dreams much worse. Ching

enjoy your hate spiral.

Topspin
12-15-2009, 09:45 AM
enjoy your hate spiral.

I'm a peaceloving Rich Hippy, your the hater.

Now go get laid off again.

Hermes Thoth
12-15-2009, 09:49 AM
I'm a peaceloving Rich Hippy, your the hater.

Now go get laid off again.

Hippies were against the military industrial complex. You're just a fascist in denial.

Topspin
12-15-2009, 10:30 AM
Hippies were against the military industrial complex. You're just a fascist in denial.

Assclown, there is no board member who is more anti military complex than me you fool.
I have two sons fighting age and have been railing against the wars for years. YOU ARE that dumb

Hermes Thoth
12-15-2009, 10:51 AM
Assclown, there is no board member who is more anti military complex than me you fool.
I have two sons fighting age and have been railing against the wars for years. YOU ARE that dumb

yet the source of their unlimited power is the fiat currency you love so much.:good4u:

Topspin
12-15-2009, 01:12 PM
yet the source of their unlimited power is the fiat currency you love so much.:good4u:

I do love being Rich, I just hate the war machine at the same time. The world is not as black and white as you think you simpleton.

Hermes Thoth
12-15-2009, 01:16 PM
I do love being Rich, I just hate the war machine at the same time. The world is not as black and white as you think you simpleton.

Being an evil asshole isn't a complex decision. It's just a bad one. Congratulations on your greed and inhumanity.

Topspin
12-15-2009, 01:32 PM
Being an evil asshole isn't a complex decision. It's just a bad one. Congratulations on your greed and inhumanity.

Being poor is even easier, congrats on your decision.

Question who gets hotter chicks rich guys or 4x layoff victims poor dudes like you? BAM!!!!!!

Hermes Thoth
12-15-2009, 01:40 PM
Being poor is even easier, congrats on your decision.

Question who gets hotter chicks rich guys or 4x layoff victims poor dudes like you? BAM!!!!!!

Sniff my righteousness.

Topspin
12-15-2009, 01:47 PM
Sniff my righteousness.

Smells like virginhood,

Hermes Thoth
12-15-2009, 01:51 PM
Smells like virginhood,

Stay there while I cut one, ape face.

Topspin
12-15-2009, 02:04 PM
Stay there while I cut one, ape face.

Is that what your boss usually does as he hands you the pink slip poor boy?

Hermes Thoth
12-15-2009, 02:42 PM
Is that what your boss usually does as he hands you the pink slip poor boy?

My employment has no relevance to your stupidity.

Topspin
12-15-2009, 02:55 PM
My employment has no relevance to your stupidity.

it has everything to do with you being poor however

Hermes Thoth
12-15-2009, 03:37 PM
it has everything to do with you being poor however

What does?

apple0154
12-15-2009, 08:15 PM
It's so nice to see chatting and getting along.

Hermes Thoth
12-16-2009, 06:10 AM
It's so nice to see chatting and getting along.

If you like this, you should try sticking your head in an oven.

Topspin
12-16-2009, 06:43 AM
What does?

your enslavement to the illuminati/mason's:pke:

Hermes Thoth
12-16-2009, 06:59 AM
your enslavement to the illuminati/mason's:pke:

has to do with what?

Topspin
12-16-2009, 07:11 AM
has to do with what?

With you sucking off your boss to keep your job.:321:

Hermes Thoth
12-16-2009, 07:42 AM
With you sucking off your boss to keep your job.:321:

Now you're talking about yourself.

Topspin
12-16-2009, 07:52 AM
Now you're talking about yourself.

you shouldn't be ashamed, a lot of people are losing jobs and you've lost three. Ya gotta do what you gotta do when your poor asstool.

Hermes Thoth
12-16-2009, 08:36 AM
you shouldn't be ashamed, a lot of people are losing jobs and you've lost three. Ya gotta do what you gotta do when your poor asstool.

I'm not sure what you're referring to.

Topspin
12-16-2009, 08:48 AM
I'm not sure what you're referring to.

IT guys get lost all the time:321: