Kerry, In Speech, Accuses White House of Suppressing Dissent

Maybe we each should take the senate candidates in our area and dig up the dirt, it's there if we look.

Or maybe start a campaign to get rid of the old and in with the new. Something has got to change if I recall the stats right the old communist regime had a higher turnover than we do. There I think it was 92% of incumbents return and here in the US it is 96%. At any rate it's clear that these guys just don't worry about their jobs being in jeopardy.

semperfortis, who are these legions of Kerry-Bash Bush people? Would you please provide a definition for the rest of us--since you are so good at labeling the opposition.

I think there is a problem when you easily adopt labels to distance yourself from other points of view. It is this simple fact that such timely questions cannot be discussed civily. I know that you have been focusing on the fact that people who adopt a left-wing disposition are unable or unwilling to allow rightist voices a chance to speak.

However, don't you see that the far right also espouse such means to suppress dissent? Get it through your head. There is no "liberal" press. There is a press which supports the corporation. And Bush has used this press to implement his politics, and to wage a war against people who think differently from his goals. There is not any "liberal" Washington Press Corps. Reporters who get to attend press conferences do not ask either the POTUS or the Press secretary challenging questions about the administration. The only exception to the rule is Helen Thomas.

Which is worse? "Guantanamo By the Bay?" or "Free Speech Zones"? Yes, dissent has been suppressed on both sides, but who is culpable at doing the worst harm to protesters?

Protesters at the Democratic Convention are lucky that they got to see their day in court. Could you say the same for protesters at the Republican Convention?

I'm glad we agree on everyone's right to freedom of speech, and the fact that all politicians rep. and dems. are just as guilty as the other of forgetting who they are really working for, Semperfortis.

But I have to agree with ceci2006 on this, people who are voicing dissent in this country are being abused terribly. And if exercising ones right to freedom of speech means being abused, are we really free?



[edit on 9-5-2006 by goose]

goose, those are the questions that I think about all the time. We can fight about politics all the time depending on which side of the fence we sit. But, in the end when we see any American citizen's action criminalized for speaking out, we should take pause.

If we are truly in a democracy, then all of voices should be heard regardless of the viewpoint we take. But, we have to question is that what the Founding Fathers wanted for us, if we witness such acts by the government as "free speech zones" and "Guantanamo on the Hudson". And furthermore, if we simply sit by and let legislation whittle our rights away to freely express ourselves, are we the Americans that the Founding Fathers envisioned us to be? Or are we simply reflective of other countries that are prone to restrict their citizens' rights to speak about government actions?

[edit on 10-5-2006 by ceci2006]

Originally posted by goose
But I have to agree with ceci2006 on this, people who are voicing dissent in this country are being abused terribly. And if exercising ones right to freedom of speech means being abused, are we really free?

The Minutemen are essentially dissenters. So, they too are being abused:

www.foxnews.com...

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by goose
But I have to agree with ceci2006 on this, people who are voicing dissent in this country are being abused terribly. And if exercising ones right to freedom of speech means being abused, are we really free?

The Minutemen are essentially dissenters. So, they too are being abused:

www.foxnews.com...

I don't agree with our government informing the mexican government of where these minutemen are if the minutemen are on US soil. At the same time I do not agree with the minutemen abusing any of these immigrants either. And that has to be stopped. Being allowed to abuse an immigrant is not dissent, it is a criminal action against another human being.

We can all fight back in our own ways. Once upon a time, I was a Federal bureaucrat. I saw the culture of elitism for myself. Now, I work for myself as an author. I say what's on my mind, and I make my case for reforms. I'm probably more successful than I deserve, but I'll take it.

Individually, our biggest challenge is figuring out what we're good at, and using it to fight back. Some are talkers. Some are painters. Others can write. The dissent they hate so much takes many forms.

Once you figure out how you'll fight back, don't be afraid to be an example. I talk to would-be writers all the time. I try to be an example, even though it gets me a bugged phone and a lot of flak that I could easily live without.

The problem is discerning what is merely dissenting opinion and what is sedition. That distinction is of vital importance and the basis on which one can base his "diverging" opinions on.

Obviously, sedition cannot be allowed to stand and no government in its right mind would tolerate seditionistic forces. Enforcing this doesn’t automatically make the government 'totalitarian'.

The "it is my right to free speech" croc is being deftly used by seditionists to peddle their propaganda and falling back on the very liberties they seek to destroy. Senator Kerry's speech is clearly a manifestation of his deep-set resentment towards Bush administration fueled by the ravings of the seditionists who elected him and his own personal vendetta against the government. It is far from an objective analysis of the state of free speech and civil liberties in this nation.

Originally posted by ceci2006
semperfortis, who are these legions of Kerry-Bash Bush people? Would you please provide a definition for the rest of us--since you are so good at labeling the opposition.

I think there is a problem when you easily adopt labels to distance yourself from other points of view. It is this simple fact that such timely questions cannot be discussed civily. I know that you have been focusing on the fact that people who adopt a left-wing disposition are unable or unwilling to allow rightist voices a chance to speak.

However, don't you see that the far right also espouse such means to suppress dissent? Get it through your head. There is no "liberal" press. There is a press which supports the corporation. And Bush has used this press to implement his politics, and to wage a war against people who think differently from his goals. There is not any "liberal" Washington Press Corps. Reporters who get to attend press conferences do not ask either the POTUS or the Press secretary challenging questions about the administration. The only exception to the rule is Helen Thomas.

Which is worse? "Guantanamo By the Bay?" or "Free Speech Zones"? Yes, dissent has been suppressed on both sides, but who is culpable at doing the worst harm to protesters?

Protesters at the Democratic Convention are lucky that they got to see their day in court. Could you say the same for protesters at the Republican Convention?

ceci Do you really believe the press does not have a left wing agenda??

Let us refer to the "Rules for Radicals" written by Saul Alinsky to guide the '60s left-wing activists who now control the Democratic Party.
1. Pick a target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.

2. Isolate the target from sympathy through direct, personal criticism and ridicule.

3. Never address real issues.

4. Force the target to address irrelevant arguments.

5. Go outside the expertise of the target in order to promote anxiety and uncertainty.

6. Make the target live up to the letter of his own rules and principles.

7. Because it is impossible for a besieged target to live up to every commitment, attack.

8. Paint the target as lying and lacking in credibility.

9. Create anger and fear in the target through irrational ridicule.

10. Keep the pressure on by trying new things as the target masters the old tactics.

11. Push the negatives hard enough to force the target to overreact.

12. Win the public to your side by being perceived as the underdog.

again: From "Mediaresearch.org
www.mediaresearch.org...

"Human Events Online"
www.humaneventsonline.com...

And of course there is always..
The Dan Rather Fiasco, (Lies and forgeries posted on CBS as facts)
Cindy Sheehan (Dishonoring her sons memory, Yes I can say that as I was a soldier in combat)
Jay Bennish comment
on and on and on
I will be gald to supply more links, but as i stated before, I BELIEVE IT IS ON BOTH SIDES!!!!
Yet, I am not so "caught" up in the right/left wing propaganda that I cannot see that.

Oh I get it...in other words do exactly what Bush supporters do to anyone who disagrees with them. Thanks for the claification semperfortis.

The difference is that my post was clarification. See it had links, (those little clicky on things) and names....

Yours was a what? a na na na na boo boo?

It is very easy to SAY, anything. We all feel strongly about different things. But too feel so strongly about something as to deny the truth of what is happening is nothing more than a road to ignorance. To hate Bush so vehemently as to ignore what the Liberals are doing is emotional, not intellectual. On the same note, to hate Libs in a manner as to ignore the problems with the current administration, is inviting a mind set akin to "washing."

A Politician is a politician is a politician. Bush happens to be in the "chair" at the moment and easily targeted. I can accept that. I for one however, will not bury my head in the sand and refuse to see the Liberal slant and indoctrination being attempted by the Drive by Media.

from goose
I don't agree with our government informing the mexican government of where these minutemen are if the minutemen are on US soil. At the same time I do not agree with the minutemen abusing any of these immigrants either. And that has to be stopped. Being allowed to abuse an immigrant is not dissent, it is a criminal action against another human being.

Of course you have proof that the Minutemen are abusing immigrants, don't you? I must have missed seeing those facts. Would you mind re-posting them please?

Thanks.

[edit on 10-5-2006 by jsobecky]

Originally posted by ceci2006
semperfortis, who are these legions of Kerry-Bash Bush people? Would you please provide a definition for the rest of us--since you are so good at labeling the opposition.

In that vein, what about threads with titles such as

Oh How Sweet It is! To be Rich, a Republican and White! Hmm? ?

The accompanying posts in that thread do a lot of labeling, also.

I am positive that I can dig out posts here where every Dem I know has used the term "Republican" in a disparaging tone.

The thought of one Skull and Boneser railing against another Skull and Boneser is just so ridiculously rich ....don't ya think?....I'm sure they'll high five each other over this the next time they are on opposite ends of the same hooker.

Originally posted by Christian IX

Bush is a monkey, and I hope the next people who try to asassinate him succeed.

I'm shocked this has not been removed. If I'm not mistaken you could be imprisoned for that remark. Only a sociopath would make such a comment on a public board. If your in the US, I'd consider moving. I'm pretty sure there are people on this board you would not want to see this statement. If nothing else it puts you near the top of the list of suspects if something were to happen. If your in another country you may still be in deep doodoo.

What happened to the moderators???

As to this thread. Just more bubblegum politics. Chewing the same old crap over and over and over again. IMHO neither Bush nor Kerry are qualified for the positions they hold. If you want a real eye opener take a look at Kerry's record while in government. In particular his attendance of important meetings. This guy has not done a days work since he took office. We need to vote out all of these hacks. The entire Federal Government is infested with these jerks. Which party they belong to means squat. There is not a hairs difference between how the parties conduct themselves. If you think one party is better than another; then you have been blinded by your own prejudice and bought into their brainwashing. As long as they can keep people arguing over which party is right they will never be taken to task. They just love the abortion issue as it keeps everyones minds off of what they are realy up to. I guarantee you that behind closed doors these people are best buddies. They probably have a good laugh at everyone’s expense every time they give one of these nonsense speeches.

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by Christian IX

Bush is a monkey, and I hope the next people who try to asassinate him succeed.

I'm shocked this has not been removed. If I'm not mistaken you could be imprisoned for that remark. Only a sociopath would make such a comment on a public board. If your in the US, I'd consider moving. I'm pretty sure there are people on this board you would not want to see this statement. If nothing else it puts you near the top of the list of suspects if something were to happen. If your in another country you may still be in deep doodoo.

What happened to the moderators???

You are absolutely right. As for the mods, in their defense they sometimes get very busy and it is almost impossible, or unrealistic, to ask them to police every response to every thread.

I totally agree with you that his comment was unacceptable. If I were you, I would contact a mod vs u2u or "suggestion box". Someone will always respond if you do that. Mods for this forum are:

Mirthful Me, Djarums, Nerdling, FredT, intrepid, parrhesia, UM_Gazz, DontTreadOnMe

All are good, conscientious people even if you don't agree with a particular decision, in my experience.

I agree about the mod's. I have no problem with any I have encountered. I can imagine what a chore it is to police this board.

Of al the infinite possibilities in this world a man named John Kerry has to explain to his followers that the media is biased? Are his followers ignorant of this fact? I think he merely wishes to stick it to the Bush mesiah crowd, that's all, he's getting his jab in like a cougar after a rabbit. But Bush is no rabbit and surely since he can attack any gazelle he chooses merely scoffs at the mention of Kerry's name. These people are just two possibilities out of infinite possibilities, why waste any ounce of your time investing energy in helping build the social construction of right and left by acknoledging these two skulls with bones? They are powerless and only serve as examples of people that look outward to someone a "father figure" to take care of them. When we have a real leader in this country we won't have any wars because the world will look with awe towards someone that could do what they could do in this country. Nobody seems capable of setting an example worth following, so is it any wonder the rest of the world either hates us or think we're a joke. The fact that so many people have invested all their energy in duality or good vs. evil, right vs. wrong, left vs. right, science vs. religion, black vs. white, etc. is indicitive of the level of slavery. People don't have the freedom to use any drug they wish to alter consciousness, business take away farm lands so they can take what grows naturally on this planet and sell it back to you and try to make nature against the law. This country is a joke. There once were times when we all could own our own animals and grow our own foods pretty much for free, animals and plants are perfect, yet we still don't get it. WE would rather factory farm these things and then have the gall to call ourselves "civilized"? How much more species supremecist could we ever be? Now this guy want's me to believe that the media is some kind of power? That they can control infinite reality? LOL Imagine if you plugged out of the news say for over a year? How much power would the government have if nobody voted for them? You can have freedom, are you prepared to take the responsibility that comes with that? Sure there are all these people that want us to act or behave a specific way, but they are powerless to stop anyone from doing what they truly desire. Laws only work to enslave you if you agree with them. The original settlers didn't agree with the british and here we are up to today. I really don't understand how anything can have power over anyone if they totally mentally block them out. I hear that's how Bush can be so smug, it's that he ignores the press that doesn't look pretty to him. Well, the easiest way to deflate these people in power is to ignore them no matter how much they want us to listen, give them no audience, no attention and they will deflate themselves. The media doesn't have to do anything, these people know they are using a might makes right principle, maybe everyone else should do the same. There are infinite possibilities in the media, don't think that somebody can actually control everything, that is one possibility in an infinite amount. It can never be just one way, although I do agree these people have hypnotized a vast majority of the public, in the end they will fail in their wars on freedom.

As if Kerry alone does not have enough bad baggage to tote around; think of what the first lady would be like

If John Kerry becomes president, the first lady will have a track record of support for the causes of radical, anti-American groups – including Islamists, terrorist-defense law firms, abortionists and homosexual activists – that, by comparison, would make much of the country nostalgic for the days of Hillary Clinton, a study of her philanthropy patterns by Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin concludes.

One of heiress Teresa Heinz Kerry's favorite charities is the Tides Foundation, a 28-year-old grant-making institution that funds to the tune of hundreds of millions radical groups that, among other things, protest the U.S. invasion of Iraq, demand open U.S. borders, provide the legal defense of suspected terrorists and promote the spread of Islamist ideology in the U.S.

Word Net Daily

Hardly what I would want for a first lady

If he doesn't flip flop and shoot himself down again, I am sure she will shoot her mouth off as she did in the last election to finish him off.

This whole speech is just a primer; get your tinfoil hats out, you are going to need them for protection

[edit on 5/10/2006 by shots]

When all else fails, go to FactCheck.org. Luckily for me, they had an analysis of Mrs. Heinz-Kerry and the "Tides" Foundation. They proved these allegations to be false. The rumors that have been posted above are part of a "whispering campaign" on-line targeting people's e-mail.

The site has done a full check on all the allegations, so read their findings for your own information and make up your mind:

Internet "Whispering Campaigns" Falsely Accuse Teresa Heinz Kerry

False allegations about Kerry's wife have been circulating for months, but the velocity of the Internet "whispering campaign" picked up substantially with the approach of the Fall campaign. One false message claims Teresa Heinz Kerry gave $4 million to a foundation that used the funds to support a list of "radical" groups including one with alleged links to Hamas and another that is said to have offered to provide a lawyer for Saddam Hussein. But public records show otherwise. Heinz Kerry's foundation money was directed to projects such as "Sustainable Pittsburgh," which promotes "smart growth" strategies.

Another widely circulated e-mail claims Kerry and his wife "own" dozens of H.J. Heinz Company factories in Europe and Asia. It accuses Kerry of hypocrisy for denouncing offshoring of US jobs while "making millions off that cheap labor."

That's also false: neither of them own Heinz. Public records show Heinz Kerry isn't an officer of the company, isn't on the company's board of directors, and isn't even close to being the largest shareholder.