Resignation Anniversaries
Damn, I hate being played for a sucker. Like many Americans, I voted for a bunch of Democrats back in 2004 and ‘06 because I was damnfool enough to believe them when they said “America
The telecom immunity bill passed the Senate yesterday, and if it’s ratified into law then the fourth amendment effectively becomes obsolete, especially the whole “hooray forAmerica
interviewed the two of them about telecom immunity and the money bomb with help from her new research assistant: me. (This is a much better set-up than my last job over the Internet, where my boss turned out to be one of those spambot writers whose links plague comment boards all over the Web.)
The telecom immunity bill passed the Senate yesterday, and if it’s ratified into law then the fourth amendment effectively becomes obsolete, especially the whole “hooray for
It’s enough to make you wistful for the Golden Age of Richard Nixon. When he got caught doing illegal surveillance stuff he had to resign rather than get Congress to pass a law saying he retroactively did nothing wrong.
Nixon resigned on August 8, 1974. Next month, on the 34th anniversary of that day, the Strangebedfellows alliance and the Accountability Now PAC will be collecting pledged donations in a one-day “moneybomb” campaign coordinated by Trevor Lyman and Rick Williams, previously known as the brains behind the Ron Paul money bomb.
posted by Jennifer Abel at 9:47 AM
42 Comments:
I like the idea of Strangebedfellows, but I can’t bring myself to work up any enthusiasm for this moneybomb... the necessity for it fills me with disgust. Why do individual Americans have to hold a fundraiser to buy off our elected representatives to get them to defend the Constitution they swore to preserve? Is this what our nation is about? Paying politicians vast sums merely to perform their sworn duty?
I appreciate that somebody is doing something about this FISA catastrophe, but I can’t help feeling that paying these Senators to carry out AccountabilityNowPAC's will (although it be just) simply validates their choice to offer their services to the highest donor, even at the expense of Constitutionally enumerated civil liberties. They do not have that choice—not legitimately. And I don’t want them to think that they do by paying them to refrain from eviscerating the Bill of Rights.
Why do individual Americans have to hold a fundraiser to buy off our elected representatives to get them to defend the Constitution they swore to preserve?
That's the last question we asked in the interview. I agree we shouldn't have to bribe Congressmen just to do their damned jobs; problem is, I don't see any other chance of getting this abomination of a surveillance bill voted down.
Why stop it? Telling the average American about such things makes them yawn. Most don't understand much less care. Let this abomination go and after enough people get hurt by it their tune will change.
Sometimes people need to feel it in their bones before they will bother wanting it changed.
Except that isn't what happens, CL: Americans just acclimate to whatever the government does and accept it as "normal," while opposition is viewed as "stupid." I've seen people seriously argue there's no need to worry about the government spying on us because "You're not that interesting." Behold! Concern for civil liberties repackaged as "everybody wants a piece of me" narcissism!
Very true. But why fight so hard to save people from themselves? You can tilt windmills all you want but in the end those Princesses you think you are saving are happily drinking tea with the dragon and have no interest in being saved.
If the govt spies on us, I say clog the system. Use an e-mail tag line with "bomb, Israel and Thursday" in it, just make sure it says something like "Last Thursday I saw the band Israel, they were the bomb dude." It will still clog a data point until a human clears it. Waste their time for fun and enjoyment.
A buddy of mine likes to pick up the phone and say random words like that to screw with any wiretaps. Sure it makes for an odd first few moments of conversation but on the other hand it does get rid of telemarketers.
Very true. But why fight so hard to save people from themselves?
I'm fighting to save myself. I can't emigrate to another country (I lack the money, and "writing sarcastic news stories" isn't one of those vital skills that put potential emigrants to the top of the list anyway), and if the US slides into a pit of tyranny, I'm screwed.
A buddy of mine likes to pick up the phone and say random words like that to screw with any wiretaps. Sure it makes for an odd first few moments of conversation but on the other hand it does get rid of telemarketers.
I once used to answer the phone with, "City morgue. You stab 'em, we slab 'em." Got a few laughs anyway. Except for the telemarketers - they just continued on with their spiel. Now it's all recordings that don't respond.
if the US slides into a pit of tyranny, I'm screwed.
With the reputation that you would have for holding libertarian views? Oh yeah - big time.
Look at it this way Jennifer, the majority of your fellow Americans WANT to see this kind of warm fuzzy tyranny. They were raised in benevolent paternalistic dictatorships where "father knew best". When they get out in the big scary world they flip out. No one is there to keep the boogie man away. So of course they want that kind of security that the dictator promises.
You are out there fighting for your own freedom in a world filled with people who want to be told what to do. You are outnumbered many to few. Sure you wont be outclassed, but as Stalin said "quantity has a quality all it's own."
I'm not saying "give up and wear the chains". I'm saying find ways to be free in an unfree world or else you will waste your energy and wealth fighting hopeless battle after hopeless battle.
I'm saying find ways to be free in an unfree world or else you will waste your energy and wealth fighting hopeless battle after hopeless battle.
Not hopeless. A slim hope to be sure, but it's there.
It's not some anti-liberty cabal of media and government you are up against here. It is the majority of the American people who want to see tyranny in this country that you are squaring off against. Slim hope? More like no hope.
A lot of people in the liberty movement get what I like to call the "Tom Paine Delusion". They think that it was the writings of Tom Paine that arose the passions of the colonists to overthrow British rule. In fact the passions were there already, he just put words to the existing feelings that the colonists had and did a good job of pointing all their anger in one direction.
No amount of great writing or amazing public speaking will create a desire for less government in the hearts of people who simply do not want such a thing. They want more and more government because they don't want the responsibilities that true individual liberty will bring.
But of course it is your life and if you want to waste it on Quixotic quests then by all means tilt that windmill.
Still, there are reasons for hope, CL. More and more Americans -- middle-class white Americans, to be specific -- are realizing that the "Officer Friendly" model of cop is a thing of the past; it's not just hippies and minorities who have reason to fear and despise the cops anymore. Especially the younger, more Net-savvy generation; you can't go more than a day or two without a new YouTube posting of some donut-sucker abusing his authority because he doesn't realize he's being caught on tape.
Likewise, the honor students getting expelled for "drug possession" because they had aspirin in their backpack, or for "weapons possession" due to a plastic butter knife, are also realizing two important lessons: "Authority is often stupid" and "authority is NOT my friend."
And the economy is tanking, which is unpleasant in multiple ways but makes it less likely people will ignore civil-liberties issues because they can anesthetize themselves with some fun new electronic bauble.
The meme may shift. But it wont be because we SAY anything. It will be because people get screwed over enough to MAKE them see how bad authority can be. Give it time and maybe then it will be time for a new age Tom Paine to come along and give words to the angst the people feel and a new revolution can start. But until then, it's all windmill tilting.
Jennifer, Jennifer, Jennifer ....
You are really Caveman too?
I mean really. This dialogue between you two cannot be real.
Very inventive, though I am sure that someone has used the technique before. ; )
I first suspected the spelling nazi - too convenient of a character - especially playing off of Bubba.
- Tom
Sorry to undress you like that in public, sweetheart.
But maybe the only people watching are me and your invisible friends ... I mean characters.
I am who I say I am. And I was curious to speak to a real, live journalist who actually has broached the completely taboo subject of 9/11.
But that's your choice. You can use the legal cite to find and contact me (ask a real lawyer if you need to - I am sure you can find one - or call the Supreme Court library - they are very helpful). And use your professional name (in the event it is different from your real name) when you call.
I really am just curious and completely harmless. In addition to the law degree, I have degrees in physics and philosophy from a top 10 University.
I don't usually do blogs - too easy to waste time, as I have done here.
So I will sign off. If you choose not to follow-up, have a nice life.
- Tom
So, you are the high dollar lawyer who once was a law clerk to Honorable James Reinhard of the Missouri Court of Appeals? Methinks he overpaid you if your analytical skills came to the conclusion that Jennifer and I are one in the same.
The only reason I wont tell you who I am is because I don't want you coming over in an angry snit and burning down my trailer. Looser conspiracy theorists like yourself are often easily angered and have been known to cross several states to do dirty deeds to people who tell them inconvenient truths to them.
Jennifer, Jennifer, Jennifer ....
You are really Caveman too? .......
I first suspected the spelling nazi - too convenient of a character - especially playing off of Bubba.
Oh my goodness graciousness! I tell you - I am liking this blog just so too very much. So most amusing, if you please. I wonder if we can be having some jumping corn like is served in the American cinemas? That would be tasting so most delicious. I am thanking you so most very much. :-)
I really am just curious and completely harmless. In addition to the law degree, I have degrees in physics and philosophy from a top 10 University.
Hah Hah Hah! Thas rite, lidl gal, y'all can trus lidl ol hormliss me. Ah taks purty an's edjimakatdid. An ah gots me a jurb as won dem loryurs makin barls a munny. Gol durn, ah eebin lib up dar 'n kuddynextakut, too. 'Sides...ah haint neery so orny as dat dar Nikky feller...nah. An ah'm not kreepi, nuthur. Well...not nere's kreepi as he wuz. Shucks...fellurs asx gals out ober da innurnet alla time n dey don no em.
Looser conspiracy theorists
There is only one "o" in loser, CL. Some guys can't spell any better than an engineer. ;-)
Spelling Nazi, as I've said before, I'm Ron Jeremy. Spelling isn't my strong suit, I've got other skills.
as I've said before, I'm Ron Jeremy.
Yah, dats hit! Dats da tikkut! Shore.
"A man with a B.A. from Rice University and who was an Associate Editor of Washington University Law Quarterly can't be so bad with grammar and spelling, the ADD is a lame excuse. You don't see me trying to claim my sleep apnea is responsible for using later instead of latter."
I knew you could identify me - Jennifer. Obviously Caveman could not do it. ; )
And you are right - the mild ADD alone would not account for the poor writing. I would say that it is more the small boxes (and as I wrote that I just noticed you can expand them - showing my inexperience with blog sites); that and starting up and stopping upon being interrupted, and my use of informal, conversational grammar when emailing. I am accustomed to composing on 20+ inch I-Mac screens in Word and had little patience in going back and forth from the "preview" screen to the little boxes again.
I can understand a woman's concern regarding contacting men via internet. You are cute enough but my interest is entirely intellectual - I am not wanting for attractive women. I could give you a very attractive reporter at the Wall Street Journal as a reference in terms of my professionalism in dealing with women - she is working on one of my cases right now.
Looser conspiracy theorists like yourself are often easily angered
It's "loser" - funny that's one of my common typos. Though it is usually lose v. loose, for me.
I don't do anger. Did I respond with anger to all the insults? I won't give you any of my views unless you ask for them. I was just interested in your experience of addressing the issue as a reporter.
I would have sprung for Max's Oyster Bar or place of your preference, but if that is intimidating (or unacceptable to your beau, husband, significant other) we could do email instead. With all the other info you have tracked down on me (and published about me - I guess we can call it even for my exposing your pseudonyms) you should have my email as well. If my personal email is not listed on your information source - it's my initials tpw@ [and the rest you have].
It was my intention that I was done blogging here. But I listened to the following interview of a Congressman this morning that is pertinent to both my interests and your expressed concerns regarding the police, freedom, libertarianism and Constitutional protections.
Ok - can't give that link right now, because I was interrupted and am currently unconnected to the internet in a Dunkin Donuts a block away from my apartment. Now if I were really an unstable conspiracist, I would have an absolute field day with this. The morning after I give out my address on this site, a fire alarm goes off in my building. No biggie. I have been through a dozen of these and have learned to ignore them. It's usually someone's microwave kicking out too much smoke, and after all, steel framed buildings do not collapse due to fire. ; )
But this time, 10 minutes into the alarm there is pounding at my door. Now this is truly ironical and coincidental - Jennifer - given that you have just instructed me as to how to properly handle this situation. I am embarrassed to say that given my utter surprise and the kind faces and smiles of the firemen, I forgot your admonitions, collected a few things and walked out. On the way out -- I asked, what is the problem? Answer with smile: "Uh ... we don't know." So I head towards the staircase, as the recorded female voice accompanying the alarm reminds me not to use the elevators. The fireman - "Oh, you can use the elevators." I alter my direction towards the elevators thinking to myself "If I can use the elevators, then why the hell am I being asked to leave my apartment?" Perhaps appreciating the irony of his statement, he corrects himself "Oh, uh ... , maybe you better use the stairs." Then the fireman points to one of the other corner apartments on my floor and asks if anyone lives in there. Ah... but I am sure that is was a coincidence - I mean I did not say last night which corner apartment was mine. Now if you think that I am making this up, this is another fact check that a good reporter could perform and confirm. After all, you did call NIST. [Also TV crew showed up - so maybe just watch it.]
Outside, many firemen completely unconcerned, lingering about. Again I ask what is going on - this time of one of the building reps -- "Something in the lower level of the garage." A steel and concrete structure with 30 yards separation from my building. Okay. I asked the Rep -- "Why did a fireman pound on my door?" "They pounded on your door?" "Yes" "Oh, they are just being careful." And I did not bother to ask her "And this is different from the other 12 alarms - how?"
Ok after leaving DD and long chats with fellow displaced residents standing around outside, I am back in. So now that link, which was the entire original purpose of the post:
http://www.911truth.org/911truthmedia/KucinichCallJuly08.mp3
Now politicians addressing this issue is as rare as reporters doing so, but if you take the time to listen to it, it sounds like a reasonable discussion, but maybe that's just me. You might appreciate the discussion of passive acceptance of increasingly intrusive police presence.
That is all. If you are interested in anything further, email me. Don't be embarrassed regarding the pseudonyms. I did it once on a site for my favorite sports team, when I wanted to keep up on the info, but no longer wanted to participate in discussions. (It was a site where you could see who was logged on.) Also, it allows you to present a Socratic-like discussion to your audience (interesting technique) and to insult your bloggers without them knowing it's you - I like that.
- Tom
Ps. Writing is easier by expanding the box.
Pps. And if are looking for work, I could pay you to proof my book (and for editorial suggestions) before I send it to publisher.
America's Most Crooked Profession
- Wall Street's Fleecing of Main Street -
Ppps. One more comment, I am sorry for not responding to your response to my question regarding Matrix. It was very poorly written by you and showed no understanding of Wachowski Brothers (who are brilliant), and I was all set to write you off. But, as perhaps we both have learned, if we make judgments based upon one (or more) pieces of sloppy writing, doesn't that require that we hold ourselves to the same standard, and is that something we really want?
Cheers
Are you hitting on me? Dude, I'm not even a chick. Oh, right. Your brilliant legal analytical mind has led you to the conclusion that I am Jennifer.
I don't think you are worth that six figure salary you imagine you earn. More likely you are worth the unemployment check you are getting that allows you to hang out at a Dunkin Donuts with a WiFi Hot Spot for hours on end to compose your long winded replies.
Jennifer, Jennifer, Jennifer ....
You are really Caveman too? .......
I first suspected the spelling nazi - too convenient of a character - especially playing off of Bubba.
(snikur, snikur) Aw shucks, son. Ah tink yall dun bin fooled by dat dar smert farrat critter o'hern dat shes alla time ravin on about. Slicker n snot on doorkynob, dat lidl sumbich be sumtime. Dang!
No, Tom, I'm not Caveman Lawyer. I see no need to post under a false name anywhere, let alone on my own blog.
Understood. ; )
(Maybe just someone close enough that you two can finish each other's sentences.)
I did intend to bow out, as I said.
But then I came across a few things of which I was not previously aware.
Your piece: The Thought Crime Law
I just thought I'd tell you that it's the best thing I've read of yours, though I have not read that much, and so I suspect you've done better work still.
I'd say your interest in getting a legislator to speak about a piece of legislation they voted for is similar to my interest in getting a reporter to speak about a story they covered. I am sure that it was not your intention to become angry with the legislators or make the interviews about your views, consistent with my intentions in asking a reporter about a story that has in consecutive years made the Top 25 List of censored stories by the highly respected, longstanding Project Censored.
I also did not know that the Tribune Co.'s domination of the print media extended all the way down to the Hartford Advocate. Nor that you left the Advocate in a "clean house" move by the Company.
Regarding your back and forth with Caveman above - yours is the correct position.
On that score, I refer you to a quote from the Preface of Project Censored's "Censored2008" edition: "The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."
Keep writing and good luck.
- Tom
Tom, if that's your real name, once again you put that alleged keen legal intellect to the job and you think that I am someone "close enough that you two can finish each other's sentences."
Wrong again.
I found out about Jennifer's blog from another blog "Gravity Lens" which unfortunately is no longer posting. I've never met Jennifer and I don't even live on the east coast.
Methinks you must be that unemployed dock worker named Lou as your logical thinking skills are no where near what a high power ambulance chaser would need.
And Methinks thou dost protest too much. ; )
But actually I did not want to leave without providing to you a link to help you deal with your Black Helicopters' obsession:
http://boston911truth.org/site/
Note the letters written in reply to the Boston Globe Article on Black Helicopters. One is written by an acquaintance of the Boston Globe writer, and another is written by a mental health therapist, the latter of which is particularly useful in addressing your psychobabble analysis of people who are not in lock step with the government's propaganda.
I love it when in the face of facts and legitimate questions, government shills respond by questioning the dissenter's patriotism or mental health.
And yet you outright concede that Big Brother is right around the corner and that this is what the American people really want. You need to get your story straight in order to pull your credibility our of the dumpster.
- Tom
Yeah Lou, if it's on the internet it HAS to be true...
Wind up your tinfoil hats folks, Uncle Lou the unemployed dock worker is going to tell us all some fairy tales for the paranoid.
There is only one "o" in loser, CL. Some guys can't spell any better than an engineer. ;-)
Hey now!
A side note, wtf is this about? Billy Beck back in town again or something? The hazards of having way too much going on to read blogs, then stumbling by for the first time in too long.
Well Moose, it seems that this guy Lou thinks hes some high powered lawyer from out east and that we here ought to be overwhelmed that he takes so much time out from his busy schedule of defending the defenseless against the powerful bankers to tell us fairy tales for the paranoid.
That's the long and short of it. Nice to meet you BTW.
Just read through this again.
It's not some anti-liberty cabal of media and government you are up against here. It is the majority of the American people who want to see tyranny in this country that you are squaring off against.
You know Caveman - that's as about as dumb a thing as one can write.
And I believe you and Jennifer. I no longer think you are the same person, but this argument between the two you does appear to be very contrived. And that's evident, in part, because Jennifer is defending freedom and liberty with such an incredibly myopic and naive focus.
And Caveman rebuts that naivete by saying it is the American people who are engineering this!? What a load of crap. This is a stacked, contrived argument designed to go nowhere. Designed to create an acceptance of the inevitability of tyranny and the futility of opposition, by willingly failing to define the real problem in a way that it could be understood and effectively opposed.
JENNIFER -- IF YOU ARE SERIOUS ABOUT LIBERTY AND FREEDOM, and I have no reason to believe that you are, then get your focus off the lowly police. The police are pawns and so far down the food chain of getting at the problem that it is just stupid to make them your focus. And I doubt that you are that stupid.
And here is another reason it does not appear that you are serious about your concern for liberty and freedom - you let Caveman get away with his ridiculous arguments, without even making an effort at a serious rebuttal.
Caveman -- in the entire history of the World, without exception -- tyrants have imposed tyranny upon the oppressed. The oppressed have never engineered the tyranny. They may get duped and outwitted, but they do not design it. They are the victims of it.
Admit it Caveman - you are all in favor of this oncoming tyranny and you know exactly how it is evolving. You can draw dozens of parallels to Nazi Germany or Orwell's 1984 and Big Brother. The tyranny uses scapegoat threats like "terrorism" and the bogeyman to impress the people of a massive and false threat to their security and the need for an omnipresent and omnipotent government security apparatus. And this tried and true method of imposing tyranny uses a compliant media as a propaganda tool to accomplish these goals.
This approach of imposing tyranny has been successfully adopted innumerable times throughout history and you make the statement that this is not what is going on here, though the facts all suggest otherwise. Instead you contrive a counter theory that has never happened before and is ridiculous on its face, which is that the victims of the mounting tyranny are engineering it.
Either you are a moron Caveman or you are part of the propaganda. Either way - you are a POS.
And Jennifer - you really do appear to be a fraud.
You two are not the only game in town. There are lots of examples of contrived and controlled debates out there that are designed to serve as a distraction to the real problem.
What a joke.
- Tom
Tom, is it really that difficult for you to believe that one whose opinion differs from yours can be sincere? How sad.
Oh Jennifer, it's not about differing opinions. Differing opinions result in debate. And the complete absence of debate is the story.
If you are sincere, you are incredibly naive.
I gave you credit for raising the issue of the Thought Crime Bill, because I had not heard about it. Of course that was because it was not covered in the mainstream media and, of course, you could not find a politician to speak about it. Strange - don't you think?
But you addressed it. You covered it in what is suppose to be the non-MSM.
But I have since did some checking of my own. A little research - took no time at all. Watching video of the hearings on the Bill. And you miss the guts of the story. I don't know how you do it, if not by design or ... I guess you get could be very inexperienced and naive.
But it seems to be your signature. Raising the non-MSM issues and then missing the story. By all means - have an opinion. Identify the real issues - cover the real story - and start a real debate.
As for tolerance of opposing opinions - talk to CL.
- Tom
If you are sincere, you are incredibly naive.
Says the man who thinks Americans should have more faith in the good intentions of their police officers.
As for tolerance of opposing opinions - talk to CL.
This isn't his blog; it's mine. And if I didn't tolerate opposing opinions here, your thousand-word-long "Cops are great hey I'm rich wanna go out to dinner sometime?" comments would've long since been flushed down the memory hole.
"I'm rich wanna go out to dinner sometime?"
Well ... you see there - there is one thing we agree upon. Such a meeting would be a waste of time.
I really wanted to give to you the benefit of the doubt - all evidence to the contrary. (You used the phrase "9/11 deniers" !!!??????). That is so transparent.
You are either a "useful idiot" (how about some evidence of that high IQ you assert) or you are corrupt.
The police? The police? Are you serious???
There are only three possibilities for your blaming the police -- you are really, really stupid -- or really, really naive -- or you are really, really corrupt.
I'll leave that to you.
Focusing upon the police in terms of the Orwellian Big Brother, tyrannical State that is at our doorsteps is the equivalent of blaming the average American GI for what is going on in Iraq. I mean really -- I don't believe you can be that stupid.
Shall we blame the foot soldier on the ground -or Cheney and Co.? What do you think - Ms. High IQ?
- Tom
But why not let CL reply for you?
You two are a tag team - are you not?
Ps.
BTW Jen.
I am not rich. As I said during a recent negotiation, "If I cared about money - I'd have money." There are many, many, many easier ways to obtain money than going into law. I went into law because I have a passion for justice.
I would hope that journalists would have like passions - alas - it is the exception and not the rule.
- Tom
But why not let CL reply for you? You two are a tag team - are you not?
No, we're not. Nor are we the same person. And I am not interested in setting you straight in that regard, anymore than I want to waste time explaining why the theme of Taxi Driver is not "Jodie Foster will fall in love with you if you assassinate the president." Such things are obvious to anyone who isn't a nutcase.
jennifer -
I hate to burst your bubble in your imagining that I might be obsessed with you, but this has never been about you. As best as I can tell, you are an unemployed, frumpy- appearing wannabe journalist. No Jodie Foster. No Maureen Dowd.
You are behind the discussion here. I already stated that it would be a waste of time to speak to you.
I had thought perhaps you were sincere in touching upon taboo media subjects. I even thought that this may have gotten you fired from a low-tier, free paper. (I have since discovered that the Tribune is firing everyone due to cash shortages.) My interest was obtaining information about the media - not you.
Now that I have studied your writing, however, it is obvious that you are part of the controlled debate - whether wittingly or unwittingly - it does not matter. The biggest threat to our freedom and our liberty and the biggest threat of the onset of Big Brother and Tyranny in this country is not the police. It is the total absence of a diligent, honest and free press. In this country at least - the pen is mightier than the sword.
To the extent that you were or are part of the media -- you are part of the problem. You are part of the deception of the American people. You are part of the illusion of a free and diligent press - in the same manner that Democrats v. Republicans represent the illusion of democratic choice for the people.
The police cannot bring forth big brother and tyranny. The illusion of political choice and a free press, however, can do so. You are part of that illusion and therefore you are part of the very problems you rail against. Just like the politicians are part of the very problems they rail against.
If you are aware of this - you are corrupt. If you really cannot see this, you are not worthy of having it explained to you by me.
So you can spare me your Hinkley analogy and I'll spare you an education on the historic and current relative dangers of the police and a corrupt media and how you, as part of a corrupt media, are more dangerous than the police.
- Tom
Tom, if you'd like to continue commenting about your lack of interest in me and/or my writing, please move it up to the most recent blog post; this thread's old enough to officially count as dead.
Thanks for the invitation - Jennifer, but I'll pass. If I wanted to comment on the Economist Article, I'd do so on the Article's own site. But that would be a waste of time too.
The topic is very, very relevant to Big Brother, but for those who are sincere about this problem, as well as those who are not, it is much too advanced a topic to kick around on a blog.
It's like skipping from Big Brother 101, 102 ... to advanced graduate studies.
But here are a few basics. This economic problem is not an accident - it is by design and a few decades in the making, using systems in place much longer.
The people are being manipulated into inviting Big Brother into their lives.
If "the terrorists" have the ability to kill you in your homes (which they don't - an illusion), the people will not only accept a police state - they will believe they chose it and voted it in.
When the "economy" makes them hungry and homeless - they will again hand over their freedom in exchange for bread and shelter, and again with the belief they chose it and voted it in.
It is in the nature of the people (at least in this country) to resist tyranny and will do so if they believe it is being imposed upon them. But if you can trick them into believing they have exercised free choice and selected it - that is the ultimate tyranny. The only real protection the people have is a vigorous free press to inform them. The seduction, control and corruption of the media will be the death blow if the tyrants win. And the only real hope is the internet, which Big Brother is working hard to subdue.
I saw this commercial sitting with my 7 year old while he watched Nick. Look how they are teaching our children the difference between monarchy, theocracy, military dictatorship and democracy.
http://www.nick.com/kpp/
There are three vertical boxes - click the second one entitled "next."
The message: You live in a democracy and are free, (as opposed to the antiquated forms of tyranny).
- Tom
Thanks for the invitation - Jennifer, but I'll pass. If I wanted to comment on the Economist Article, I'd do so on the Article's own site. But that would be a waste of time too.
Well, Tommy, apparently you didn't think it a waste of time to go post some more of your nutcase conspiracy comments about 911 over at The Advocate site of the article Jennifer wrote about same. Even though that thread had been dead for months you saw fit to post to it as recently as June 29th of this year. Just a bit obsessed, wouldn't you say?
So who really, really was responsible for 911? Was it the Cabal, or the Illuminati, or the "International Zionist Conspiracy," or the Jewish Bankers? How about the Trilateral Commission or the CFR? Was it Cheney and Bush or could it have been Hillary and Algore? Or was it the Lizard People from space?
Ya know, Paw allwuz sayed how ah shooda bin won ob dem dare haid shrinker fellurs. Ah shur do wisht ah had "dawn" dat, cuz ah cuda maid m'self barls of munny, wat wid all y'all dee-stirbbed peepul out yondar dar. Dang it, ah cuda maid ebin mor n wun dem loryur doods, by jingos! Lol!!!
Post a Comment
<< Home