American Fascism: Identifying the cause in the response to Occupy

reply to post by petrus4

You wouldn't even have your opinion (assuming you're a US citizen) if men and woman hadn't sacrificed their lives in WWII to preserve our freedoms and fight the forces of evil abroad.

The difference between the military and other organizations is existential. Without a military, we wouldn't be here. Without hospitals, we would be more hurt. Without schools, less educated. Without FEMA, less prepared for disasters. And so on. But none of that's existential. Yet the fate of our entire country can be decided by the stroke of a dictator's pen. That's the difference.

Bottom line, our military always has been and always will be crucial to our survival.

reply to post by Kali74


Discuss? Yes, but the more I hear from the Occupy movement, the more I am dismayed by the spins being put on old political philosophies which hold little relevance to twenty-first century life. I don't disagree that the current system is broken, but believe the answer lies with each of us on a personal level of accountability to living a 'virtuous' life. The financial crisis we now face has meant we are all asking questions about what right thing to do is. We were all 'shocked' out of a credit-based system of living with no cushions for us to come crashing back down on. Still reeling from this, people are aware that the status quo can't continue, but the way we live our lives can change. They are more fluid and adaptable than nation states.

I'll say this straight, and keep it short ...

The occupy are very much like the nazis ... nothing like the commies.

In the mind of the occupy movement, the bankers are the problem. As the jews, more or less own the banks ... they are blaming the jews, indirectly if not directly, for the economic problems of the world. Very much like the people in Germany, in WWII.

Along with them, you see soldiers ... claiming pride in their service. But none of these people, are marshing against G.W Bush or Dick Cheney.

No, they're blaming the bankers ... and therefore, the jews.

reply to post by bjarneorn


I'm sorry but what a load of crap. Banks are largely to blame for the world economic crisis and there is no denying that, it doesn't matter who the hell owns them and last I was aware Jewish people do not own all the banks. Should we do nothing about the problem just because SOME Jewish people might own SOME of the banks? Hope banksters develop a people over profit mentality?

reply to post by Kali74

Blaming banks for all our problems is akin to blaming forks for obesity.

Banks play by rules.

Who writes those rules?

(a little hint)
It rhymes with shmoliticians.

reply to post by beezzer




You know beezz some people simply refuse to view the whole package. Sure I'll agree the banks need to be reigned in but as you have pointed out, explained and sassed those in "Goberment" need to be held accountable.

Trying to explain that to those with blinders on is nearly impossible IMO.

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by petrus4

 

You wouldn't even have your opinion (assuming you're a US citizen) if men and woman hadn't sacrificed their lives in WWII to preserve our freedoms and fight the forces of evil abroad.

The difference between the military and other organizations is existential. Without a military, we wouldn't be here. Without hospitals, we would be more hurt. Without schools, less educated. Without FEMA, less prepared for disasters. And so on. But none of that's existential. Yet the fate of our entire country can be decided by the stroke of a dictator's pen. That's the difference.

Bottom line, our military always has been and always will be crucial to our survival.

edit on 4-6-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

That gave me a real chill - but I'm pretty sure not in the way you intended

You do know he's a comedian - right? And that there ain't nobody gonna follow him into battle for real?

Apparently he also does Homer Simpson :-)

Also - there's a difference between having a military and having too much of a military

There's also a difference between honorable and dishonorable - but I suppose that thought is wasted here

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
You do know he's a comedian - right?

Source?


George C Scott was an academy award winning actor who portrayed George S. Patton.

reply to post by SLAYER69

Has produced a number of highly acclaimed videos that can be found on youtube. The most recognized, features his incredible imitation of George C. Scott as George S. Patton in a speech about modern warfare. With millions of views, it was shown in the situation room at the White House and has been featured on both Radio and TV, worldwide.

www.imdb.com...

:-)

I loved the movie - with George

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


He was also a US Marine...

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Spiramirabilis

 

He was also a US Marine...

and?

:-)

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by petrus4

 

You wouldn't even have your opinion (assuming you're a US citizen) if men and woman hadn't sacrificed their lives in WWII to preserve our freedoms and fight the forces of evil abroad.

Time to deny some more ignorance.

WW2 was funded by the same people on both sides. If you don't believe me, look it up.

IBM and the Holocaust.
Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler
Eight Signs the Illuminati Orchestrated WW2

I'd also recommend reading Read Symphony, which mentions the entire Capitalism/Communism conflict being a giant bait and switch. The cabal intended to play Hitler and Communist Russia off against each other, but they weren't counting on Stalin.

The long and the short of it is that the American military doesn't defend anyone's freedom. It never has, and my guess is it never will. It gets directed by the banking cartels and the corporations. The military goes and does what they did to Iraq, and Wall Street either bankrolls both the American army and the opposition, or they get extremely rich redevelopment contracts, as Halliburton did in Iraq.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Kali74

 

Blaming banks for all our problems is akin to blaming forks for obesity.

Banks play by rules.

Who writes those rules?

(a little hint)
It rhymes with shmoliticians.

Blaming the banks is what they have done since the days of Teddy Roosevelt the same recycled rhetoric over and over again thinking somehow some way the next generation will buy it.

The same ideology that led to the anti trust laws,regulations,the financial reforms that have been the largest creators of their so called perceived "problem".

Hmmmm.... it's always amusing to me when i hear someone say that they aren't being mind controlled but anyone who disagrees with "me" is.

Yet they don't realize that they too, are conforming to their own group.

They should learn to deprogram themselves before they try to "deprogram" other people.

That is to say, deprogramming means "teaching" others how to think just like them.

Round and round we go where it stops nobody knows.

We must all conform you know.

We must all be part of a group.

For only the right group has the one true way of independent thinking.

And not those dastardly atheist who are so powerful they won't let anybody else have any independent thought.

reply to post by Americanist


Thank you for posting the reality of what really went on and what people are still giving praise and worship too. The pendulum is on its way back and no one has a right to say a word.

Freakin hilarious. WW2 origins were very similar to the occupy movement.
All orchestrated by Hitler through the NAZI party.
Once they came into power, they then took the law into their own hands.
en.wikipedia.org...'s_rise_to_power

Text
September 1919 [1] when Hitler joined the political party that was[2] known as the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (abbreviated as DAP, and later commonly referred to as the Nazi Party). This political party was formed and developed during the post-World War I era. It was anti-Marxist and was opposed to the democratic post-war government of the Weimar Republic and the Treaty of Versailles; and it advocated extreme nationalism and Pan-Germanism as well as virulent anti-Semitism. Hitler's "rise" can be considered to have ended in March 1933, after the Reichstag adopted the Enabling Act of 1933 in that month; President Paul von Hindenburg had already appointed Hitler as Chancellor on January 30, 1933 after a series of parliamentary elections and associated backstairs intrigues. The Enabling Act — when used ruthlessly and with authority — virtually assured that Hitler could thereafter constitutionally exercise dictatorial power without legal objection.

By early 1920 the DAP had swelled to over 101 members, and Hitler received his membership card as member number 555 (the group started the counting at number 500).[24]

Hitler's considerable talents were appreciated by the party leadership and in early 1920's he was named as its head of propaganda. Hitler's actions began to transform the party. On 20 February, the party added National Socialist (Nationalsozialistische) to its name and became the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP).[25]

Four days later Drexler, Feder and Hitler announced the party's 25-point program (see National Socialist Program).
In the few months between the end of 1922 and the beginning of 1923, Hitler formed two organizations that would grow to have huge significance. The first was the Jungsturm and Jugendbund, which would later become the Hitler Youth. The other was the Stabswache, the first incarnation of what would later become the Schutzstaffeln (SS).

After the putsch the party was banned in Bavaria, but it participated in 1924's two elections by proxy as the National Socialist Freedom Movement. In the German election, May 1924 the party gained seats in the Reichstag, with 6.55% (1,918,329) voting for the Movement. In the German election, December 1924 the National Socialist Freedom Movement (NSFB) (Combination of the Deutschvölkische Freiheitspartei (DVFP) and the Nazi Party (NSDAP)) lost 18 seats, only holding on to 14 seats, with 3% (907,242) of the electorate voting for Hitler's party
An unprecedented amount of money was thrown behind the campaign. Well over one million pamphlets were produced and distributed; sixty trucks were commandeered for use in Berlin alone. In areas where NSDAP campaigning was less rigorous, the total was as low as 9%. The Great Depression was also a factor in Hitler's electoral success. Against this legal backdrop, the SA began its first major anti-Jewish action on 13 October 1930 when groups of brownshirts smashed the windows of Jewish-owned stores at Potsdamer Platz.

Germans who opposed Nazism failing to unite against it, Hitler soon moved to consolidate absolute power

reply to post by petrus4


I hate to tell you, but America is not becoming militant and violent because of video games. We have always been that way and only recently have people "gotten soft" so to speak. The violence in pop culture is actually a by product of our history, not visa versa.

America has always needed an enemy or it turns on itself. I have a feeling the rest of the world is more or less the same way.

reply to post by beezzer

Blaming banks for all our problems is akin to blaming forks for obesity.

Did I say it was solely on banks? (Hint) Nope.

Banks play by rules.

I'll have whatever you're having.

Who writes those rules? (a little hint) It rhymes with shmoliticians.

Yes, after what? Money gets "donated" or lucrative jobs promised after office.

You still mad that I called you out on your last thread? Any bunny with integrity would have admitted the article was a lie. No carrot for you.

reply to post by SLAYER69

Some people? You read enough of my posts to know that all I ever do is talk about Banks? I'm flattered. If it's dead horses you're looking for try looking in your own barn. We do hold politicians accountable too, try diversifying your reading or you know...going to the source instead of having some idiot wing-nut blogger dictate your opinions for you.

reply to post by neo96

Who is they? I speak for myself thank-you. Funny how the second those regulations relaxed the SHTF.

Only 3 of you this time? Fiiiiiiiine...I'll keep one hand tied behind my back.

reply to post by petrus4


Relax, its just part of a study.

Someone said earlier that Occupy stands against "success". Sigh. You know the world is hopeless when success is not contributing to society, but financially crippling the many with mortgage (death-grip) scams and insurance fraud.

How about we change the definition of success to "contributing to the welfare of the human race, not just over privileged capitalists who suffer from delusions of grandeur".