'Fascism, Anyone?' article points out some scary signs!! !

Page 4 of 9 [ 144 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 9  Next

Grievous
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 3 Oct 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 256
Location: Minnesota

24 Oct 2005, 11:02 pm

Ante wrote:
There's no discernible difference between terrorism and legal war: both cost lives for political reasons. Differences in political opinions are necessary for progress. Therefore terrorism is just as necessary as warfare, if not more so.


Scoff. The wholesale slaughter of innocent civilians is necessary? Please tell me you are joking. By war, I mean one distinct side vs. another. The terrorists vs. the US and UK would be an example. If we did not defend ourselves, the terrorists would walk all over us. You fail to make essential distinctions in your logic by making it all political without considering other reasons.



RobertN
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 934
Location: Cambridge, UK

25 Oct 2005, 7:19 am

ljbouchard wrote:
Robert,

Do you have evidence that Sean and Eamonn said that. If so, please present it. If you do not have evidence, please refrain from baiting other users.

Thank You

As Mod


There is evidence, but with Sean having made over 2000 posts, I don't have time to look for it. Ask Eamonn if he remembers Sean telling both of us that we would be taken away by the secret police if we continued our anti-corporate, anti-US sentiment.

Perhaps Sean has deleted the post(s) in question!! :?



RobertN
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 934
Location: Cambridge, UK

25 Oct 2005, 10:24 am

Yes, I've now found the link:

http://www.wrongplanet.net/modules.php? ... h&start=45

Sean first of all threatened Eamonn with assassination, and then me on the next page when I backed Eamonn up on his Revolution.



vetivert
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,768

25 Oct 2005, 10:35 am

robert, i've read the thread in the link you posted.

sean did not threaten anyone with assassination. he merely made a point that he thought eamonn would be assassinated first, as leader of his very own socialist revolution, and then that you might be, if you took over that leadership.

i do not interpret it as a serious threat. if you still think it was, then please inform the Mods and let us handle it, rather than getting yourself into schtuck for retaliating.

thank you.

Vivi
(as Mod)



RobertN
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 934
Location: Cambridge, UK

25 Oct 2005, 11:10 am

Perhaps it was just a joke Vivi, but I do think Sean is trying to scare people (lets face it, aspies are very gullable). He doesn't like the thought of a revolution against his precious America, so he wants to stifle dissent. I know that he will not assassinate me (he may want to :wink: ! !), but threatening people saying they are likely to get assassinated if they oppose the administration is a form of censorship of free speech - something the US constitution should uphold!!



eamonn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jul 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,301
Location: Scotland

25 Oct 2005, 3:08 pm

Kick his ass Seabass!



Namiko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jun 2005
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,433

25 Oct 2005, 6:44 pm

Grievous wrote:
Warfare and terrorism are two seperate things. I agree that warfare is sometimes hideous, but it is also neccessary in the world we live in.


I agree with what Grevious said. I wish none of that stuff would happen, but it seems like it has to. It's the way the world is, and the world that we live in is messed up.

RobertN, yes the Constitution does grant freedom of speech (first amendment in the Bill of Rights), but it also isn't very nice to openly criticize and plot to overthrow the government - for any reason.


_________________
Itaque incipet.
All that glitters is not gold but at least it contains free electrons.


kevv729
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Sep 2005
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,872
Location: SOUTH DAKOTA

25 Oct 2005, 7:41 pm

This is what Sean said to eamonn
"You would get assassinated first! Most likely by or at least with the blessing of your own government."

This is what Sean said to RobertN
"Your government would probably have you assassinated too, or at least allow it to happen."

I don't think RobertN that Sean was trying to scare anybody. If You had Your Revolution maybe even Your Own Government would assassinate You or at least allow it to happen. That might happen if Your Government was Scared of You.

I think Sean was being very pointed in his opinion, of what might happen You see.

This could happen even if someone had a revolution against their own government and most likely has in the past and could happen in future too.


_________________
Come on My children lets All get Along Okay.


duncvis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,642
Location: The valleys of green and grey

25 Oct 2005, 8:57 pm

Namiko wrote:
RobertN, yes the Constitution does grant freedom of speech (first amendment in the Bill of Rights), but it also isn't very nice to openly criticize and plot to overthrow the government - for any reason.


I don't think there is anything wrong with working to overthrow a government, if it has become self-serving, cruel and corrupt. As for open criticism, I would see it as your DUTY as a free citizen to hold those who claim to govern in your interests accountable - and to oppose their plans. They don't have a right to rule us, it is a privilege granted them by the existing legal system. The individual should have the right to challenge the legitimacy of the state.


_________________
I'm usually smarter than this.

www.last.fm/user/nursethescreams <<my last.fm thingy

FOR THE HORDE!


Sean
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,505

26 Oct 2005, 12:22 am

RobertN, I never said I was going to assasinate you and I'm not going to assasinate you, but I won't be the least bit suprised if someone else (with no connection to me) does if you try to press forward with your little revolution. There are too many people with too much to lose for them to risk you succeeding.



lenny77
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 6 Oct 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 74
Location: Hamburg, Germany, Europe, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way, Universe, ???

26 Oct 2005, 4:52 am

sean:
i wonder if those "someone else" people would hold up the same political ideas as you do.
people like you: offenders in mind, hanger-ons and inconsiderate sympathizers for the "idea" made the fascist "Drittes Reich" in germany possible.
after war these people said " Ich hab doch nichts gemacht!! !"means "I didnt do anything!!"
we know the end of the story do we?



Sean
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,505

26 Oct 2005, 5:22 am

lenny77 wrote:
sean:
i wonder if those "someone else" people would hold up the same political ideas as you do.
people like you: offenders in mind, hanger-ons and inconsiderate sympathizers for the "idea" made the fascist "Drittes Reich" in germany possible.
after war these people said " Ich hab doch nichts gemacht!! !"means "I didnt do anything!!"
we know the end of the story do we?

Did the allies or the German government ever find the bodies of those that did try to make a difference?



lenny77
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 6 Oct 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 74
Location: Hamburg, Germany, Europe, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way, Universe, ???

26 Oct 2005, 6:07 am

Sean wrote:
lenny77 wrote:
sean:
i wonder if those "someone else" people would hold up the same political ideas as you do.
people like you: offenders in mind, hanger-ons and inconsiderate sympathizers for the "idea" made the fascist "Drittes Reich" in germany possible.
after war these people said " Ich hab doch nichts gemacht!! !"means "I didnt do anything!!"
we know the end of the story do we?

Did the allies or the German government ever find the bodies of those that did try to make a difference?


i'm talking about the situation before 1933, not after!! and even then resistance was possible and successful. not successful enough though :roll:

i tell you one word: FEAR
if fear becomes the major factor in a society, the turn-over to a fascist state will come sooner or later.

and i see a lot of fear in the western world and especially in the "United States of Angst"
without fear there wont be a war against terror in countries like iraq which wasnt related to islamist terrorism until hussein was deprived of his power.



RobertN
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 934
Location: Cambridge, UK

26 Oct 2005, 8:38 am

Namiko wrote:
Grievous wrote:
Warfare and terrorism are two seperate things. I agree that warfare is sometimes hideous, but it is also neccessary in the world we live in.


I agree with what Grevious said. I wish none of that stuff would happen, but it seems like it has to. It's the way the world is, and the world that we live in is messed up.

RobertN, yes the Constitution does grant freedom of speech (first amendment in the Bill of Rights), but it also isn't very nice to openly criticize and plot to overthrow the government - for any reason.


I thought you were a Christian - where are your ethics, woman??

It isn't very nice!! ! oh, well it isn't very nice to introduce draconian legislation, remove healthcare for the poor, and fight a bloody war in the Middle East is it??

Some people don't have a clue!! 8O . Join the real world, woman!!

Lenny, I agree with your sentiments here, and duncvis. Holding the government to account is your DUTY as a responsible citizen.

I am not in the business of being nice to George Bush. I want that idiot out of office before I can say uncle!! !! !



Klytus
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jul 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 259

26 Oct 2005, 3:45 pm

lenny77 wrote:
i see a lot of fear in the western world and especially in the "United States of Angst"
without fear there wont be a war against terror in countries like iraq which wasnt related to islamist terrorism until hussein was deprived of his power.


I believe Iraq was involved in terrorism before the war. The evidence is often downplayed by the media, or not mentioned at all (at least in Britain).
Here's a good article though:

Quote:
From http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/ar ... 01300.html

Those non-existent Saddam/al Qaeda links
July 01, 2005

Stephen Hayes, whose book The Connection detailed the links that are said not to have taken place between Saddam and al Qaeda, returns to the fray. Marvelling at the bare-faced lies of CNN which has been stating that there were no links -- and that the 9/11 Commission said so, when it said explicitly that there were -- he adds a few more examples of the contacts:

Quote:
'In 1992 the Iraqi Intelligence services compiled a list of its assets. On page 14 of the document, marked "Top Secret" and dated March 28, 1992, is the name of Osama bin Laden, who is reported to have a "good relationship" with the Iraqi intelligence section in Syria. The Defense Intelligence Agency has possession of the document and has assessed that it is accurate. In 1993, Saddam Hussein and bin Laden reached an "understanding" that Islamic radicals would refrain from attacking the Iraqi regime in exchange for unspecified assistance, including weapons development.

'This understanding, which was included in the Clinton administration's indictment of bin Laden in the spring of 1998, has been corroborated by numerous Iraqis and al Qaeda terrorists now in U.S. custody. In 1994, Faruq Hijazi, then deputy director of Iraqi Intelligence, met face-to-face with bin Laden. Bin Laden requested anti-ship limpet mines and training camps in Iraq. Hijazi has detailed the meeting in a custodial interview with U.S. interrogators. In 1995, according to internal Iraqi intelligence documents first reported by the New York Times on June 25, 2004, a "former director of operations for Iraqi Intelligence Directorate 4 met with Mr. bin Laden on Feb. 19." When bin Laden left Sudan in 1996, the document states, Iraqi intelligence sough "other channels through which to handle the relationship, in light of his current location." That same year, Hussein agreed to a request from bin Laden to broadcast anti-Saudi propaganda on Iraqi state television. In 1997, al Qaeda sent an emissary with the nom de guerre Abdullah al Iraqi to Iraq for training on weapons of mass destruction. Colin Powell cited this evidence in his presentation at the UN on February 5, 2003. The Senate Intelligence Committee has concluded that Powell's presentation on Iraq and terrorism was "reasonable."

'In 1998, according to documents unearthed in Iraq's Intelligence headquarters in April 2003, al Qaeda sent a "trusted confidante" of bin Laden to Baghdad for 16 days of meetings beginning March 5. Iraqi intelligence paid for his stay in Room 414 of the Mansur al Melia hotel and expressed hope that the envoy would serve as the liaison between Iraqi intelligence and bin Laden. The DIA has assessed those documents as authentic. In 1999, a CIA Counterterrorism Center analysis reported on April 13 that four intelligence reports indicate Saddam Hussein has given bin Laden a standing offer of safe haven in Iraq. The CTC report is included in the Senate Intelligence Committee's review on prewar intelligence.

'In 2000, Saudi Arabia went on kingdom-wide alert after learning that Iraq had agreed to help al Qaeda attack U.S. and British interests on the peninsula. In 2001, satellite images show large numbers of al Qaeda terrorists displaced after the war in Afghanistan relocating to camps in northern Iraq financed, in part, by the Hussein regime. In 2002, a report from the National Security Agency in October reveals that Iraq agreed to provide safe haven, financing and weapons to al Qaeda members relocating in northern Iraq. In 2003, on February 14, the Philippine government ousted Hisham Hussein, the second secretary of the Iraqi embassy in Manila, for his involvement in al Qaeda-related terrorist activites. Andrea Domingo, head of Immigration for the Philippine government, told reporters that "studying the movements and activities" of Iraqi intelligence assets in the country, including radical Islamists, revealed an "established network" of terrorists headed by Hussein.'



It is simply astounding that virtually none of this has ever been reported in Britain. Isn't there anyone in the British mainstream media, not one single proper journalist or editor who is prepared to start putting this material into the public domain?



HarryofSheringham
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 25 Oct 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 72
Location: Norfolk, England

26 Oct 2005, 4:49 pm

Well as another Brit I agree the evidence is often downplayed. However this is largely because there is no evidence of Saddam supporting terrorism. Saddam was a secular dictator in a Muslim country. He wouldnt sponsor Islamic terrorism as it would have been more than happy to bring him down.