Fox News, Kritol: I Recommend Politics of Fear

I just ran a crossed this clip on youtube and I couldn't believe what I was hearing. Politics of Fear actually being recommended to gain voters! Fear being recommended to gain political ground rather than well just about anything else. Of course I am not naive I understand the history and the use of fear in controlling the US population. Still however to have that message being broadcasted openly and uncontested on a national news network is truly appalling.

I am becoming more and more fearful of what is to come in America and the world. You may think this is a minor deal but I think this is just a taste of what is behind "enemy" lines.

Tell me what you guys think.

Oh, I am not sure if this is a good forum topic area for this kind of thing but I didn't really know where to put it. So Mods feel free to move it as you see fit.

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 1/8/2008 by Triarchic]

reply to post by Triarchic

You know Triachic, I was going to compose a thoughtful post to this thread, but your avatar was so disturbing I just had to pass.

I guess this is one reality that I'm not tough enough to tackle tonight. Being late, I didn't want images of self-immolation running through my dreams.

Good luck!

The last words of Thích Quảng Đức before his self-immolation were documented in a letter he had left:

Before closing my eyes and moving towards the vision of the Buddha, I respectfully plead to President Ngo Dinh Diem to take a mind of compassion towards the people of the nation and implement religious equality to maintain the strength of the homeland eternally. I call the venerables, reverends, members of the sangha and the lay Buddhists to organize in solidarity to make sacrifices to protect Buddhism.

The monk, seventy-three-year-old Thich Quang Duc, sat at a busy downtown intersection and had gasoline poured over him by two fellow monks. As a large crowd of Buddhists and reporters watched, he lit a match and, over the course of a few moments, burned to death while he remained seated in the lotus position. In the words of' David Halberstam, who was at that time filing daily reports on the war with the New York Times,


I was to see that sight again, but once was enough. Flames were coming from a human being; his body was slowly withering and shriveling up, his head blackening and charring. In the air was the smell of burning flesh; human beings burn surprisingly quickly. Behind me I could hear the sobbing of the Vietnamese who were now gathering. I was too shocked to cry, too confused to take notes or ask questions, too bewildered to even think.... As he burned he never moved a muscle, never uttered a sound, his outward composure in sharp contrast to the wailing people around him.


After his funeral, where his remains were finally reduced to ashes, Quang Duc's heart, which had not burned, was retrieved, enshrined, and treated as a sacred relic.

Most of that was copied from various reports on the event.

It is not disturbing. It is amazing and empowering, the courage and control it took for this man to do what he saw fit for his country. To give up ones life for a cause is one of the most honorable things a man can do. So don't say it is disturbing... that is just an insult to an honorable man.

Although using the picture as an avatar is probably just as insulting. But it powerfully and boldly represents an idea. FREEDOM!!!

[edit on 1/8/2008 by Triarchic]

reply to post by Triarchic

Brilliant story.

This works with your topic. It is amazing what a human soul can achieve when it completely conquers fear, and recognizes that there is a divine purpose that is above personal pain and feeling. Quang Duc achieved that. So few of us come close to that higher state.

I am glad you explained this story, and you did it very eloquently.

Now I can rest easily. Thanks for sharing that!

How much fear-mongering do liberals engage in?

A lot. Fear of wars, fear of economic turmoil, fear of loss of civil liberties, etc. How many times did that 'Bush is gonna institute a draft' stuff get passed around before the '04 election? Or how about the 'Barry Goldwater will start a nuclear war!' stuff many moons ago (and before my time).

Both sides are guilty of fear-mongering...in spades. They do it for one reason: it works.

As for the link, sorry, dial-up connection here.

[edit on 26-2-2008 by vor78]

reply to post by vor78


I see your point, I as a libertarian also use fear based tactics when I am trying to persuade hostile people into seeing how I see. But for normal people which is just about every one that I talk to, I don't have to use fear tactics. Logic and basic reasoning along with sound policy should be the rhetoric used in persuasion. I do agree that both sides are quite guilty of fear-mongering but I think it is a problem that needs to be dealt with. Not its use advocated and encouraged on national T.V.

As for the link, it was just Kritol one of Fox New's anchors suggesting Hilary should start using stronger fear based messages. He even seems to suggest making up possible threats as valid reasons why such and such should be etc...

reply to post by Triarchic


Bill Kristol is just a conservative pundit (he's actually just a regular guest on Foxnews; I believe he works for The Weekly Standard) so my guess is that he was just giving her some bad advice, all in the name of politics.

I do agree with you, though, it should be about rational discussion of policy. Unfortunately, both parties in this country are so screwed up that if they discussed what they really stood for, no one would vote for them.
So what we're left with is a bunch of politicians essentially discussing why the other guy is worse than they are.

reply to post by vor78


Oh, Wow, I didn't know he is just a guest... my bad. I never watch Fox News so I didn't know. That is what one gets for just assuming things. Thanks for the info.

Next time I will be more careful with my "facts".

I agree with your second point also, "Both parties in this country are so screwed up that if they discussed what they really stood for... No one would vote for them". Is that not what Ron Paul is doing, discussing what he really stands for? People in this country either don't care about liberty or are just too stupid to see what is being done to them.

While I agree with an awful lot of what Ron Paul says, he has two problems, as far as I can tell. The biggest one is that he just comes across as being...odd. Unfortunately, that leads to his second problem. The media, in turn, treats him like he's a lunatic.

That's unfortunate and unfair, but its ultimately his personality and demeanor that have rendered him unelectable. And that's is yet another problem with our whole electoral process: its more of a popularity contest than a debate of any substance. I have no idea how to solve that one.