Is the United States now a fascist country?

[Struff Bunstridge 0]

GrandMaster Smith, what do you suggest? You seem certain, here and in other threads, that with a little enlightenment, the simple man can throw off these shackles of oppression - what do you propose we do about it? It's no good just shouting about it, that never got anybody anywhere.

 

What are your plans to overthrow those that you believe control every facet of your society? The way you've painted them, it sounds as though they'd be powerful enough to quickly crush anyone who steps out of line. Are we talking bloody uprising, or infiltration from within?

[GrandMaster Smith 761]

 

GrandMaster Smith, what do you suggest? You seem certain, here and in other threads, that with a little enlightenment, the simple man can throw off these shackles of oppression - what do you propose we do about it? It's no good just shouting about it, that never got anybody anywhere.

 

What are your plans to overthrow those that you believe control every facet of your society? The way you've painted them, it sounds as though they'd be powerful enough to quickly crush anyone who steps out of line. Are we talking bloody uprising, or infiltration from within?

Well the shouting about is to spread the word on the subject. In my eyes I see knowledge as power, the more people that come to realization with this the better.

There are more of us than them, and they know that. It's just people are afraid to stand up for themselves. A group of people will stand around with their hands in their pockets while watching an innocent person get beat by police officers.. they shouldn't have that much power over us, they are here to serve us and it's our taxes paying for them.

I have seen so many videos of police brutality of both here and in the UK it makes me sick and it's getting out of hand.

 

Why is it in the homeland security bill they mark specifically Ron Paul supporters, pro-lifers, supporters of the constitution, end time prophecy believers, people against the new world order ect.. as a main threat? They want to have legal power to remove any threat to their agenda, so the rest of the public will blindly accept it.. because they are very deceitful and manipulative. Even as DogDaySunrise said earlier, they believe that the average public is too stupid to understand most the stuff (hmm probably helps with the lacking education they provide in public education?), so even he can understand how they deceive others. They lie to you promising all these changes, they win office, aand nothing changes.. its the same old game with politics, everyone know it yet they all just accept it as they way it is.

 

Like aren't we the ones that are supposed to remove political figures if they pose a threat to us as a whole? Where along the lines did the tables get turned where if the government views us as a threat they are allowed to take us out? Like ffs Obama now has the power to assassinate any American citizen he views a threat, he can indefinitely detain anyone he views as a threat without having broke a single law..

 

I just feel like everyones gotten so lazy they want to place all the responsibility to the government and let them run things.. Everyones seemed to have forgotten their duty of keeping the greedy and powerful level-headed.

[Struff Bunstridge 0]

That was just more shouting. Police brutality, new world order, deliberate lack of funding for education, political assassinations - what do you want to do about it?

[dog_day_sunrise 2]

 

Cannabis induced delusions? 'I smoke so much weed I can't differ reality from my own imagination' haha I think you have cannabis confused with some sorts of hallucinogens..

I don't think so. You don't need a massive dose of mescaline to start inducing paranoid delusions.

 

 

It does not take someone with half a brain to look out at this world and see something is very, very wrong. It is only too obvious.

What is so obviously wrong with the order of the world then? As far as I can see it, you are essentially blowing a handfull of small coincidences up into one massive conspiracy and that's utterly irrational. The rest is purely subjective, with little real information surrounding it.

 

 

Now you are still thinking very narrow-minded, just because this is the system you were born into and have studied and researched and learned to accept without a second though does not mean it is the only way.. We as a race are capable to so much more, yet thick skulled people still accept these elite who are in control of everything and continue to ruin everything.

I don't feel I've had a narrow-minded approach to my learning- certainly much less so than those who have not studied the subjects I have. My dissertation focused very heavily on the use of covert operations and espionage in both warfare and peacetime; I've researched operations that are so absurd and daring in their execution that they are barely believable; similarly, realising how close the world came to nuclear war during Operation Able Archer- vastly closer by all accounts that over Cuba. However, years of learning have tought me to take nothing at face value, and to accept the quality of information based upon it's sources- something you have been utterly unable to provide effectively. Remember the debate re. 9/11 conspiracy theories? Being able to respond in a measured and educated way to outragous claims is something of a specialitiy of mine (not to blow my own trumpet or anything) and is made vastly easier when the only sources that I need to counter are so unreliable or biased as to be essentially useless.

 

The whole principal surrounding this begs one glaring question- if the most educationally enlightened fail to see that the order of the world is how you describe it, who is right? The small minority who see the order of things one way, or the large majority including the most highly educated who see it another? My personal view would be to side with the interlectual over the sensationalist- not because the senstationalist is bound to be wrong, but because the likelihood of them being wrong is vastly greater. Yes, you could draw comparisons with the religious supression of enlightened science during the 15th-18th century, but in a world where information is so free and readily avaliable, I'm inclined to believe that even the most oppressive government couldn't control the flow of information. Even the regime in Pyongyang fails- and that's with almost no external contact to speak of.

 

 

Is it not questionable that nearly ALL of our presidents are related? .. It's a giant chain of royalty that is kept in the family, just look up the family tree of presidents on wiki or something.

Are we talking full-on genetically related, or related by association? If it's the latter than it's perfectly reasonable for those in powerful positions in the commercial and political world to be extensively intwined- they have the greatest contact with one another. Similarly, power tends to rest with families- if one person in a family reaches a point of great commercial or political power, the same power is likely to have a massive influence on the lives of those directly and indirectly related to them. It's pure logic.

 

 

And obviously these secret societies DO hold alot of power because they seem to have pre-presidents all the time.. you have to be a complete jackass to say that they have no power and people should just ignore them. Alot of people actually don't know about these things and are very surprised when they find out, because unlike you they are able to tell when something isn't right..

Power is something very subjective. I shall give an example- an organsation like the SIS/MI6 or MI5 holds very little direct power; they do not make or dictate policy directly, they do not directly contribute to military operations and there role in the international order is exremely private. However, through the powers of subterfuge and suggestion they hold enormous indirect power- they cannot directly force a certain course of action, but are extremely able at influencing and shaping it. The same is true, to a degree of the so-called secret societies- they cannot directly decide who is to govern the country, but they can make suggestions and use their commercial and political clout to influence decisions. In reality, they are no different to pressure groups- they can wine and dine, give well-respected commerical backing to candidates and use their connections with the media to dig dirt and engage in underhand tactics to damage the reputation of others, but they cannot directly decide who runs the country.

 

 

And I now beginning to understand your such absence of any sort of paranoia, cause you're from the UK. No personal offense meant but the UK is already in a police state getting even worse as time goes by. For any citizen to accept the BS they have going on over there you would HAVE to have all your trust in the government, no other way around it.

And this short statement sums up just how misinformed you are. No personal offence meant. An uncodified constitution and no seperation of power does not a police state make- not by any stretch of the imagination. Just because we aren't the hot-bed of conspiracy does not mean that we are all in bed with the government- personally, I disagree with a number of things they are involved in- I always have, always will. But, coming from the line of work I am engaged in, you come to realise that the hands of even a government like that of the UK (who are judge, jury and executioner as far as controlling the legislative, judiciary and executive powers) are tied- partially by the civil service who despite being accountable to whoever is in power not only enact policy but also advise it, and non-political players like big business or the media who use their monitary or social influence to "persuade" policy.

[Chorup 2]

Seems reasonable to search someone suspected of committing a crime, in particular within an airport. I haven't watched the video but if he was forced to take off his shirt in front of the whole airport then any concern is appropriate. If there is slight belief that the child is committing a crime, then he should be taken to a private search room instead of being humiliated in front of the public.

 

That said, I'm not too sure of the situation in America, but from some of the comments it seems pretty similar to what is now starting to happen in Australia.

 

The state I live in, Victoria, is now being dubbed as the 'nanny-state' due to an overabundance of laws being introduced to assist in public safety. Although some are ridiculous, most do serve their purpose.

For example, knife crime has seen a significant increase within Victoria over the last few years and is popular amongst teens in particular. Nowadays you hear of a stabbing every few days, which is often fueled by drug or alcohol consumption. Any type of knife is relatively easy to get your hands on, in comparison with a firearm, which has also contributed to an increase in knife crime.

 

On to my main point, I would rather give up some of my liberties (for example being searched by police at a train station), then having no confidence that anything is being done to stop this rapid fluctuation in knife crime. A few minor inconveniences may be a nuisance at the time, but even if only 1 weapon is seized from a search of 50 people, that could also consequently result in a life being saved.

 

Most teens that carry a knife have no intention to use it. You could almost say it is a new 'trend,' but all it takes is a few nut cases to exchange a few words and next minute the homicide squad is on their way to the crime scene.

It may seem that I'm exaggerating, and I hope I am, but a 0 tolerance policy would definitely be beneficial in Melbourne. New York City/NJ can vouch for such a policy as it used to be a no go zone at night time.

 

The same applies to any public area, including airports. If there is any concern whatsoever, it is better to be safe than sorry. I admit that searching minors may be a bit overboard, especially in a western country, however in this day and age you can never be so sure.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Chorup

[Ari Gold 1,359]

Seems reasonable to search someone suspected of committing a crime, in particular within an airport. I haven't watched the video but if he was forced to take off his shirt in front of the whole airport then any concern is appropriate. If there is slight belief that the child is committing a crime, then he should be taken to a private search room instead of being humiliated in front of the public.

 

That said, I'm not too sure of the situation in America, but from some of the comments it seems pretty similar to what is now starting to happen in Australia.

 

The state I live in, Victoria, is now being dubbed as the 'nanny-state' due to an overabundance of laws being introduced to assist in public safety. Although some are ridiculous, most do serve their purpose.

For example, knife crime has seen a significant increase within Victoria over the last few years and is popular amongst teens in particular. Nowadays you hear of a stabbing every few days, which is often fueled by drug or alcohol consumption. Any type of knife is relatively easy to get your hands on, in comparison with a firearm, which has also contributed to an increase in knife crime.

 

On to my main point, I would rather give up some of my liberties (for example being searched by police at a train station), then having no confidence that anything is being done to stop this rapid fluctuation in knife crime. A few minor inconveniences may be a nuisance at the time, but even if only 1 weapon is seized from a search of 50 people, that could also consequently result in a life being saved.

 

Most teens that carry a knife have no intention to use it. You could almost say it is a new 'trend,' but all it takes is a few nut cases to exchange a few words and next minute the homicide squad is on their way to the crime scene.

It may seem that I'm exaggerating, and I hope I am, but a 0 tolerance policy would definitely be beneficial in Melbourne. New York City/NJ can vouch for such a policy as it used to be a no go zone at night time.

 

The same applies to any public area, including airports. If there is any concern whatsoever, it is better to be safe than sorry. I admit that searching minors may be a bit overboard, especially in a western country, however in this day and age you can never be so sure.

This. Although, I personally believe that the lack of common sense amongst Victorian police officers is quite alarming. Nine times out of ten, you'll be able to do at least 30km/h over the speed limit for a small period of time on a semi-busy road without ever seeing a police car, yet if you happen to take a leak in a secluded alley in the city due to a disgusting lack of public facilities in the CBD, all of a sudden some cop comes up and gives you a $150 fine. Not to mention the fact that you get a $150 fine for putting your feet on seats on a train... I mean, I don't see the need of putting feet on myself, but is a fine really necessary? It's not going to curb anything at all.

 

To be fair though, for most things, the police are pretty spot on. Although, all Melbourne needs is just more of a police presence on city streets at all times, everywhere in the city, you know, so they can actually do their job. I don't understand why they unleash all these police blitzes you hear them initiating in the CBD, when they have the manpower to do that every single night of the year... but I suppose that'll anger the unions too much. Bureaucracy and political correctness is the biggest bain on Australian society. /rant

 

Sorry to go off on a tangent and off-topic.

[Chorup 2]

Seems reasonable to search someone suspected of committing a crime, in particular within an airport. I haven't watched the video but if he was forced to take off his shirt in front of the whole airport then any concern is appropriate. If there is slight belief that the child is committing a crime, then he should be taken to a private search room instead of being humiliated in front of the public.

 

That said, I'm not too sure of the situation in America, but from some of the comments it seems pretty similar to what is now starting to happen in Australia.

 

The state I live in, Victoria, is now being dubbed as the 'nanny-state' due to an overabundance of laws being introduced to assist in public safety. Although some are ridiculous, most do serve their purpose.

For example, knife crime has seen a significant increase within Victoria over the last few years and is popular amongst teens in particular. Nowadays you hear of a stabbing every few days, which is often fueled by drug or alcohol consumption. Any type of knife is relatively easy to get your hands on, in comparison with a firearm, which has also contributed to an increase in knife crime.

 

On to my main point, I would rather give up some of my liberties (for example being searched by police at a train station), then having no confidence that anything is being done to stop this rapid fluctuation in knife crime. A few minor inconveniences may be a nuisance at the time, but even if only 1 weapon is seized from a search of 50 people, that could also consequently result in a life being saved.

 

Most teens that carry a knife have no intention to use it. You could almost say it is a new 'trend,' but all it takes is a few nut cases to exchange a few words and next minute the homicide squad is on their way to the crime scene.

It may seem that I'm exaggerating, and I hope I am, but a 0 tolerance policy would definitely be beneficial in Melbourne. New York City/NJ can vouch for such a policy as it used to be a no go zone at night time.

 

The same applies to any public area, including airports. If there is any concern whatsoever, it is better to be safe than sorry. I admit that searching minors may be a bit overboard, especially in a western country, however in this day and age you can never be so sure.

This. Although, I personally believe that the lack of common sense amongst Victorian police officers is quite alarming. Nine times out of ten, you'll be able to do at least 30km/h over the speed limit for a small period of time on a semi-busy road without ever seeing a police car, yet if you happen to take a leak in a secluded alley in the city due to a disgusting lack of public facilities in the CBD, all of a sudden some cop comes up and gives you a $150 fine. Not to mention the fact that you get a $150 fine for putting your feet on seats on a train... I mean, I don't see the need of putting feet on myself, but is a fine really necessary? It's not going to curb anything at all.

 

To be fair though, for most things, the police are pretty spot on. Although, all Melbourne needs is just more of a police presence on city streets at all times, everywhere in the city, you know, so they can actually do their job. I don't understand why they unleash all these police blitzes you hear them initiating in the CBD, when they have the manpower to do that every single night of the year... but I suppose that'll anger the unions too much. Bureaucracy and political correctness is the biggest bain on Australian society. /rant

 

Sorry to go off on a tangent and off-topic.

The problem is that their priorities are all wrong. Why waste resources on speed cameras and such, when that officer could be deployed into the city hotspots instead of sitting drinking coffee and eating donuts. It is ridiculous to what extents they go to fine drivers, and in my opinion is it just a massive hoax to generate revenue. Fair enough 30km/h over the speed limit is reason to raise concerns, but being fined for driving only a few km over the limit is bullsh*t. Speed can kill, but in most cases it wont. Drugs and alcohol are more of a problem.

 

A lack of police presence in the city is what needs to be adressed primarily. The manpower is there, so why have so many officers working behind a desk. Their job is to protect the public and ensure order is maintained in their area of jurisdiction. The city streets need to be cleaned of all the lurking scum, and focusing on trivial things is not the right move here. Don't get me wrong, road safety is very important, in fact someone from my school died in a tragic accident these holidays, but speeding wasn't the cause. Police need to focus on the reality, that being knife crime, bashings , etc. Emphasis on road safety should be increasingly focused through education.

 

I know this is even more off topic, but my dad was almost booked years ago for not wearing his seatbelt 10m from our house. We had just left and he has a habit for putting his seatbelt on as he takes off.

As this happened, some person in the city was probably being bashed. As you said, political correctness and public opinion has the government in a stranglehold. Their priorities are all wrong, but these days everything has become a business and a vote is probably worth more than someones well-being.

 

Sorry for being off-topic as well, but in a sense it is related to the structure of society in the modern world.

[Ari Gold 1,359]

Couldn't have said it better myself. Conservative governments are generally better at efficiently using money and at maintaining law and order, so I've got faith in Bailieu, to be honest (though I have a feeling you're Labor).