Freedom

[Cathy]

THE NEO-CON DREAM WORLD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUth7CbmAiE

[Dharma]

THE NEO-CON DREAM WORLD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUth7CbmAiE

Ron Paul seems to be the ONLY candidate who acknowledges the neo-con plan. :roll:
Great find, Cathy!

[Wuptdo]

FYI, this is a scene from the movie "Brazil."

IMHO, this is exactly the kind of America that Herr Hillary & Friends dream of.

Wuptdo B-)

[Cathy]

FYI, this is a scene from the movie "Brazil."

IMHO, this is exactly the kind of America that Herr Hillary & Friends dream of.

Wuptdo B-)

I agree with you that the thought of Hillary as President is a scary one, Wup. Real worrisome....

But Giuliani is pretty darn scary too!
http://harpers.org/archive/2007/08/hbc-90001040

http://acdalliance.org/browse/issues/%22War+on+Terror%22

America would be bombing Iran within days of his swearing in.
AND FOR WHAT REALLY??????

A liberal Democrat who is fiercly partisan asked me who I would vote for if it was between Hillary or Rudy. I couldn't vote for either.

I don't want to be faced with that choice.
We all need Ron Paul on the ticket for a real choice instead of a choice between awful and worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPlPT4bncq8

[Cathy]

Predictions

by Congressman Ron Paul, MD

Our government intervention in the economy and in the private affairs of citizens, and the internal affairs of foreign countries, leads to uncertainty and many unintended consequences. Here are some of the consequences about which we should be concerned.

read it all here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul29.html

I have no timetable for these predictions, but just in case, keep them around and look at them in 5 to 10 years. Let us hope and pray that I am wrong on all accounts. If so, I will be very pleased.

April 26, 2002

Dr. Ron Paul

Hmmm....was he right or wrong?

[dhyatt]

Predictions

by Congressman Ron Paul, MD

Our government intervention in the economy and in the private affairs of citizens, and the internal affairs of foreign countries, leads to uncertainty and many unintended consequences. Here are some of the consequences about which we should be concerned.

read it all here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul29.html

I have no timetable for these predictions, but just in case, keep them around and look at them in 5 to 10 years. Let us hope and pray that I am wrong on all accounts. If so, I will be very pleased.

April 26, 2002

Dr. Ron Paul

Hmmm....was he right or wrong?

Mostly wrong - so far. Unfortunately, the few he got correct (so far) have proven to be serious problems.

[Dharma]

IMHO, this is exactly the kind of America that Herr Hillary & Friends dream of.

Hillary is not responsible for this, Wup.

ACLU: DoD sought citizens’ bank records
The Associated Press
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/10/ap_pentagonbankrecords_071014/

Background: http://www.talkleft.com/story/2005/11/06/460/91178

[DarylB]

IMHO, this is exactly the kind of America that Herr Hillary & Friends dream of.

Hillary is not responsible for this, Wup.

ACLU: DoD sought citizens’ bank records
The Associated Press
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/10/ap_pentagonbankrecords_071014/

Background: http://www.talkleft.com/story/2005/11/06/460/91178

....And the next thing we'll be hearing from Dharma? The WTC "implosion theory" was so they could get all the personal bank records and get out without notice... it was all just a bank records heist, and it's somewhere in the PNAC document.....

b-( :drunken:

[chaboard]

IMHO, this is exactly the kind of America that Herr Hillary & Friends dream of.

Hillary is not responsible for this, Wup.

ACLU: DoD sought citizens’ bank records
The Associated Press
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/10/ap_pentagonbankrecords_071014/

Background: http://www.talkleft.com/story/2005/11/06/460/91178

And Hillary is sure as hell not responsible for this:
White House Forbids Telecom Companies From Telling Congress About Surveillance Activity (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2007/10/telecoms_barred_from_disclosin.php)

And forget that BS "9/11 changed everything" crap - Bush's anti-American felonies began long before that day:

"However, last week a Colorado court unsealed documents in the case of former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio, who was convicted of insider trading in April. Nacchio, who is appealing his conviction, maintains the National Security Agency asked Qwest to allow it to conduct electronic surveillance without a court order in February 2001, six months before the Sept. 11 attacks."

[DarylB]

Hillary is not responsible for this, either, I suppose?

http://members.aol.com/orwell1950/fost3.jpg
Vincent Foster

[chaboard]

Hillary is not responsible for this, either, I suppose?

http://members.aol.com/orwell1950/fost3.jpg
Vincent Foster

Your tinfoil is showing.

[Dharma]

IMHO, this is exactly the kind of America that Herr Hillary & Friends dream of.

Hillary is not responsible for this, Wup.

ACLU: DoD sought citizens’ bank records
The Associated Press
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/10/ap_pentagonbankrecords_071014/

Background: http://www.talkleft.com/story/2005/11/06/460/91178

....And the next thing we'll be hearing from Dharma? The WTC "implosion theory" was so they could get all the personal bank records and get out without notice... it was all just a bank records heist, and it's somewhere in the PNAC document.....

Daryl,
Are you implying that the Department of Defense DID NOT secretly issue hundreds of national security letters (NSLs) to obtain private and sensitive records of people within the United States without court approval???

Are you calling this a conspiracy theory even after Chaboard and I provided you with resources and links to the stories? I guess a report by the Associated Press isn't good enough? Ohh wait....I remember now, it has to be reported by Fox and Rush before you allow it to penetrate as truth.... :roll:

Here's a link to the documents. Decide for yourself.
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nationalsecurityletters/32088res20071006.html

[dhyatt]

[snip]

Here's a link to the documents. Decide for yourself.
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nationalsecurityletters/32088res20071006.html

What I want to know is what they're doing with the info. Based on yesterday's N&O front page article about a blogger right here in North Carolina actively promoting jihad while belittling our troops and claiming he wants to be a martyr, I can't believe the current administration is doing very much. There are all these claims of spying and several attention-grabbing accounts of journalists being told to shut up (mostly related to business issues and consumer fraud, not Iraq) but I can't point to a single case of an American - in America - being dragged out of their home and "disappeared". And in this day and age I can't believe that it could happen without being reported anywhere. So what are they doing with the info?

Is is possible that our government is simply keeping an eye out for terrorists and doing their best to thwart them before they can attack? I know it sounds simplistic but that seems like the best explanation to me.

[Rich]

Is is possible that our government is simply keeping an eye out for terrorists and doing their best to thwart them before they can attack? I know it sounds simplistic but that seems like the best explanation to me.While I don't disagree that this is likely true in the majority of cases, I also think that the idea of giving away our rights and trusting our government to do the right thing is distinctly un-American. That isn't the way our nation is setup. It is antithetical to the very foundation of limited government where personal rights come first, government power second.

If we trust the government to do the right thing, then we wouldn't need protections against unreasonable search and seizure or a guarantee of a jury trial. The government would do the right thing and only take what is right, and would be able to decide, without a jury, what is wrong. Obviously this is less cut-and-dry, but I just think that the idea that we can trust our government to only use a power for the right reasons isn't one that has a lot of historical precedence driving validity.

[dhyatt]

Is is possible that our government is simply keeping an eye out for terrorists and doing their best to thwart them before they can attack? I know it sounds simplistic but that seems like the best explanation to me.While I don't disagree that this is likely true in the majority of cases, I also think that the idea of giving away our rights and trusting our government to do the right thing is distinctly un-American. That isn't the way our nation is setup. It is antithetical to the very foundation of limited government where personal rights come first, government power second.

If we trust the government to do the right thing, then we wouldn't need protections against unreasonable search and seizure or a guarantee of a jury trial. The government would do the right thing and only take what is right, and would be able to decide, without a jury, what is wrong. Obviously this is less cut-and-dry, but I just think that the idea that we can trust our government to only use a power for the right reasons isn't one that has a lot of historical precedence driving validity.

That's the real question, isn't it? Where is the balance between freedom and security? And what forces tend to push that balance in one direction or another? Clearly, there are times when freedom suffers at the hands of security and vice-versa. So it all boils down to where the tipping point is and whether or not you trust the guys in charge. Assuming the Dems win the White House next year and security issues remain pretty much the same, will freedoms thought taken by the current administration be restored or will the new administration simply be deemed more trustworthy by the ones complaining now? If Joe Six-Pack and Joe Merlot are both so fed up with government, why do we keep electing the same sops to Congress year after year?

My opinion?

Most Americans are fat, dumb, and happy. We don't pay attention to much of anything unless or until it hits us in the pocketbook or one of our close friends or family is directly affected in a negative way by some inane government policy. We don't know any history - political, cultural, religious, archaeological, or otherwise - so few of us have a basis for informed opinions. Even those of us who do our homework have gotten so caught up in partisan left vs. right games that we are reluctant to acknowledge the obvious truths that lay mostly in the middle of the road. It is never the "we" that are left or right, it's always the "them" that are off-center. As long as political debate comes down to nothing more than which team can best take care of you, I don't see anything changing....

[Rich]

Most Americans are fat, dumb, and happy. We don't pay attention to much of anything unless or until it hits us in the pocketbook or one of our close friends or family is directly affected in a negative way by some inane government policy. We don't know any history - political, cultural, religious, archaeological, or otherwise - so few of us have a basis for informed opinions. Even those of us who do our homework have gotten so caught up in partisan left vs. right games that we are reluctant to acknowledge the obvious truths that lay mostly in the middle of the road. It is never the "we" that are left or right, it's always the "them" that are off-center. As long as political debate comes down to nothing more than which team can best take care of you, I don't see anything changing....Well said (http://www.carypolitics.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=40862#40862). We have become very much a reactionary society, and my previously stated belief that this nations holds individual rights first, government power second, is incompatible with that attitude. If something is to come first, it cannot, by definition, be reactionary.

[Dharma]

So it all boils down to where the tipping point is and whether or not you trust the guys in charge. Assuming the Dems win the White House next year and security issues remain pretty much the same, will freedoms thought taken by the current administration be restored or will the new administration simply be deemed more trustworthy by the ones complaining now?

No!

If you go back all the way to the beginning, can you find an administration that has done more damage to the founding principles of this nation? The general rule is that it is far easier to give up freedoms than to get them back. My favorite question to Republicans who think VP Cheney and the Bush regime are a good thing is “Will you feel comfortable when Hillary Clinton has these same expanded powers?”

I WILL NOT - EVER!!!

Those of us complaining are paying attention and genuinely worried about the direction our nation is headed. There seems to be a disconnect as people still believe that it can't happen here. Do you think we're somehow different or smarter than the peoples under Mussilini or any other dictator? The people of Germany were asked many years after WWII what they were thinking and their answers were very similar. They said they didn't think it could happen in their country and/or they didn't know it was happening.

Read this website and tell me if you think it's all just far left propaganda.
http://www.netrootsmass.net/Hugh/Bush_list.html

[francejamie]

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

[DarylB]

Hillary is not responsible for this, either, I suppose?

http://members.aol.com/orwell1950/fost3.jpg
Vincent Foster

Your tinfoil is showing.

Go ahead, wrap yourself in "tinfoil", it's great for roasting....

Here are a few facts that require explanation...

Vince & Hillary had been partners together at the rose law firm, and allegations of an ongoing affair had persisted from the Little Rock days to the White House.

On July 20th, 1993, between the time of 3:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m., Vincent Foster died of a small-caliber gunshot wound to his head, at the hand of another. The bullet entered his head from the upper portion of the right side of his neck, under the jaw line, passed upward through the body of the tongue, pierced his brain and struck the skull approximately three inches below the top of the head, fracturing it. The bullet remained in his head. Blood drained from the entrance wound in the neck onto his right collar and shoulder and was absorbed down onto his right shirtsleeve. Blood also accumulated in his mouth.



In 1996 Hillary Clinton was accused by the Senate Special Whitewater Committee of ordering the removal of potentially damaging files (related to Whitewater or other matters) from Foster’s office on the night of his death.

Foster was the designated keeper Clinton’s files on Arkansas deals and had indicated in a written memo that “Whitewater is a can of worms that you should NOT open!” File:vince foster whitewater.html

Secret Service agent Henry O’ Neill said he watched as Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff, Margaret Williams, carried boxes of papers out of VinceFoster’s office before the Park Police showed up to seal it.

1996 - Hillary Clinton’s Rose law firm billing records, sought for two years by congressional investigators and the special prosecutor are found in the book room of the personal residence at the White House. Clinton say she has no idea how they got there.

The billing records found in Hillary Clinton’s book room were a copy of an original version printed out from the Rose Firm computer in 1992, right before the computer file itself was deleted. Webb Hubbell has testified that he recalls reviewing a copy of the billing records in response to press inquiries during the 1992 Presidential campaign. Hubbell says that he then passed the records on to Vince Foster who was, as far as Hubbell knew, the last person to have the records.

Investigators believe the book room copy was indeed Vince Foster’s. The copy contains notations, in red ink, that are Foster’s handwriting. These notations appear to be directed toward Hillary Clinton, including questions about some of the individual billings. Investigators believe this suggests that, at some point, this copy was passed from Vince Foster to Hillary Clinton for her review.

In addition, investigators had the FBI conduct fingerprint analysis of the billing records. The fingerprints of Vince Foster and Hillary Clinton were found.

And of tremendous curiosity is how he manged to fire a .22 caliber bullet from a .38 caliber revolver, in what has been described a "suicide".

Hillary clinton, the OJ Simpson of the Democratic party..... I wonder when she'll be writing her new book, "If I did it..."

Here's a little testamony to mull over as well... tinfoil ineed!


CLARKE: (Laughs). They won't be saying that. This is the Medical Examiner for Northern Virginia, who covered up . . . 'national security'? They might say that but I don't think they will get away with it. We'll find out a lot. But the astounding stuff is what we already know. Let me continue on with the autopsy.

There is also testimony that Dr. Beyer did not photograph the entrance wound -- that portion of the soft palate that allegedly had the entrance wound. Why would he not photograph that? In addition, he reported that on the soft palate there were very large amounts of what he called "gunpowder debris." He said it was "grossly present," meaning it could be seen with the naked eye. He described it as "large quantities of powder debris." He sent his 5 slides containing 13 sections of the soft palate to the Virginia Department of Forensic Sciences. They issued a report saying there was no ball-shaped gunpowder identified on any of those tissue samples.

QUESTION: When did you learn of the existence of this report?

CLARKE: Somebody told me about it nearly a year ago. This is a very interesting thing. The finding of powder debris on the soft palate by Dr. Beyer is the absolute cornerstone of the entire official conclusion of suicide in the park.

QUESTION: That Vince Foster stuck a gun in his mouth and pulled the trigger?

CLARKE: Right. That is the cornerstone of the official conclusion. Now, this Virginia Department of Forensic Science report said that no ball-shaped gunpowder -- and ball-shaped gunpowder is the type of powder allegedly found by Beyer -- was found. The FBI laboratory issued a report on May 9 or 10 of 1994, which said no ball-shaped gunpowder was identified on the tissue samples when the Office of the Northern Virginia Medical Examiner examined them. And they didn't really have an explanation. In June, about a month later, they issued another lab report saying the tissue samples had been prepared in such a way as not to be conducive to retaining unconsumed gunpowder particles. In other words, it had been put in something -- formaldehyde or something - - which made it disappear.

That's a lie. That didn't happen. Depending on the type of ball smokeless powder, the solvents, in order to destroy it, would have to be either ether or nitroglycerin. People just don't use that to preserve tissue samples. So Beyer was lying. And remember, that's the cornerstone of the entire conclusion.

When we look at everything we've just talked about, the only word we have about this entrance and exit wound is from Dr. Beyer. You would think out of 25 witnesses before the autopsy -- an autopsy which is screwy from the start -- there would be some record of the entrance or exit wound other than the neck wound, if it existed. It did not exist until you get to the autopsy, and Dr. Beyer falsified his autopsy.

QUESTION: Ambrose Evans-Pritchard claimed he was shown a photograph of the neck wound, correct?

CLARKE: Correct. Ambrose told me that; I've asked him.

QUESTION: Have you been able to track down this photo?

CLARKE: No.

QUESTION: Where do you think the photo might be?

CLARKE: I don't know.

QUESTION: Do you know who the last person would have been to have it?

CLARKE: I have a couple of suspects. He was shown the photograph, so you have to ask yourself who showed it to him.

QUESTION: Haut?

CLARKE: No, no. I think it was XXXXX [redacted by request].

QUESTION: Who else have you added to your list of defendants?

CLARKE: After "John Doe Pathologist," next is Robert F. Bryant. At the time of Mr. Foster's death, Bryant was Special Agent in Charge of the FBI's Washington Metropolitan Field Office. He has since been promoted to Deputy Director, FBI. On Friday, July 23, 1993, three days after the death, he sent a Teletype to then Acting Director of the FBI, Floyd Clark. Clark was the Acting Director because Sessions had been fired a week before. Accuracy in Media got this Teletype, which is heavily redacted, through a Freedom of Information lawsuit. What it shows is that Bryant was sending it to confirm telephone conversations that took place on the 21st, the day after the death. He says something like, "This is to confirm our conversation wherein the preliminary results of the autopsy are that there was a .38 caliber gunshot wound with no exit wound."

QUESTION: He said no exit wound?

CLARKE: He confirmed the conversation with Floyd Clark in which he said there was no exit wound. On August 10th, about 17 days after he sent the Teletype, he appeared at a joint Park Police/FBI press conference to announce the FBI's finding of suicide in the park. He told everyone there a very thorough investigation showed it was a suicide in the park. His having done that constitutes his participation in the conspiracy. He is telling the American people, the press, that it was suicide in the park. Seventeen days earlier he confirmed his guilty knowledge of no exit wound. And this is the Special Agent in charge of the Washington D. C. Metropolitan Field Office.

QUESTION: What did Dr. Beyer's report say about an exit wound?

CLARKE: He said it was 1 x 1.5 inch, which is about the size of a half-dollar. Remember, it wasn't there earlier; John Rolla could have put his finger through something the size of a half-dollar. But that's what Beyer said. He said he put a probe through the head, and there is a record of one of the Park Police officers having seen the probe going in through the mouth and coming out through the back of the head.

QUESTION: Did the Park Police officer sign a statement that he saw that?

CLARKE: No, but I believe that he did see that. But that Park Police officer didn't get there until after Beyer had done God knows what to the body. He's reported as having removed the tongue and portions of the soft palate before the officers got there. I think he inserted the probe before the officers got there. They walked in and saw the probe, then he took it out.

QUESTION: So you think he may have drilled a hole in the back of the head to be able to put the probe through?

CLARKE: I think the bullet went up through Mr. Foster's tongue into the top of his head, and fractured his head. So Rolla said "I felt a mushy spot, I thought the head was fractured, and I thought the bullet was still in the head." He's right on all three counts is what I think.

QUESTION: OK, Bryant is also named because in his memo to . . .

CLARKE: There is a record of his active participation in the cover-up.

QUESTION: Who else besides Bryant are you naming?

CLARKE: There's Scott Jeffrey Bickett. Scott bashed Patrick's car in with a tire iron the night before his second FBI interview. One of the appendices at the back of Evans-Pritchard's "The Secret Life of Bill Clinton" is a computer printout of Scott Jeffrey Bickett, showing that he was employed by the Department of Defense. [3] He holds what is called an "active SCI" security clearance. SCI stands for "Sensitive Compartmented Information." That's a top U.S. government security clearance. So this malicious attack on Patrick's car, which Bickett later confessed to . . .

QUESTION: He did? To whom did he confess?

CLARKE: Coincidentally, to the U.S. Park Police who were handling the case. They said they couldn't trace the license plate number. Luckily, there was a limousine driver not too far away who witnessed the whole thing, who wrote it down.

QUESTION: Did he tell them why he bashed the car?

CLARKE: No. So, the Park Police showed up and the limo driver gave the license number to both the Park Police and to Patrick. A week went by and they said they couldn't find the guy. So a private investigator was hired on October 18, 1995, and he found Bickett in one day. The Park Police then interviewed Bickett and he confessed. This incident was pretty damned coincidental. It was the night before Patrick's second interview. Patrick had two interviews. The first one was April 15, 1994, when FBI agent Larry Monroe was leaning on him trying to get him to admit the car he saw in the Fort Marcy Park parking lot was Vince Foster's car. Patrick had another interview about 3 weeks later. The incident where his car was bashed in was the night before the second interview. He actually had a confrontation with this guy, Scott Bickett.


Either they were trying to give Patrick a hint, or they were trying to shake him up. His car was a 1974 refurbished Peugeot. It was just beautiful. It was Patrick's only possession. They bashed the **** out of it right in front of the Vietnam Memorial. Patrick and his girlfriend were showing another couple the memorial.

QUESTION: When did you learn of Bickett?

CLARKE: When Evans-Pritchard's book came out.

QUESTION: Why did you not name Bickett as a defendant to begin with?

CLARKE: Because we filed suit a year before that book came out. The next new defendant I call "John Doe FBI Laboratory Technician." I'll tell you briefly some of the things they hid. Remember, Beyer supposedly found ball shaped smokeless powder on the body. Well, Remington manufactured the cartridges found in the official death gun. They were .38 HVL, which stands for high velocity ammunition. Remington has never used ball smokeless powder in the manufacture of that ammunition.

QUESTION: So the supposed finding of the ball shaped powder on the soft palate by Beyer is impossible in any event?

CLARKE: I think Foster had ball powder on him, but none of it was in the mouth.

QUESTION: Does the presence of this particular type of powder give you any indication what the murder weapon actually was?

CLARKE: Yes. It's used by Winchester .22's, a small caliber gun.

QUESTION: Whoa!!

[dhyatt]

So it all boils down to where the tipping point is and whether or not you trust the guys in charge. Assuming the Dems win the White House next year and security issues remain pretty much the same, will freedoms thought taken by the current administration be restored or will the new administration simply be deemed more trustworthy by the ones complaining now?

No!

If you go back all the way to the beginning, can you find an administration that has done more damage to the founding principles of this nation? The general rule is that it is far easier to give up freedoms than to get them back. My favorite question to Republicans who think VP Cheney and the Bush regime are a good thing is “Will you feel comfortable when Hillary Clinton has these same expanded powers?”

I WILL NOT - EVER!!!

Those of us complaining are paying attention and genuinely worried about the direction our nation is headed. There seems to be a disconnect as people still believe that it can't happen here. Do you think we're somehow different or smarter than the peoples under Mussilini or any other dictator? The people of Germany were asked many years after WWII what they were thinking and their answers were very similar. They said they didn't think it could happen in their country and/or they didn't know it was happening.

Read this website and tell me if you think it's all just far left propaganda.
http://www.netrootsmass.net/Hugh/Bush_list.html

Given the title "Bush Scandals List" and the fact that fewer than 20 out of 263 listed have anything to do with Bush, I'd say "Yes - it's far left propaganda." I'll go through them one by one when I have a spare week.

WRT "Do you think we're somehow different or smarter than the peoples under Mussilini or any other dictator?" Yes - I do think we are smarter and we have a much more open society than existed then. When / if I start seeing true censorship of the news (like some in Congress are attempting to do with Rush), then I'll be worried. Until then, not so much.

I'm more concerned about pressure by media giants and some big businesses to conceal dangers to consumers than I am about Bush establishing a dictatorship. I've said it before, he's running out of time. Of course, I tend to believe that when things don't make sense to me, there's some piece of information I'm not privy to. That's why I do this website, some day I'll have all the information I need to make sound decisions on all the contentious issues of the day :-)

[Dharma]

Here are a few facts that require explanation...

Vince & Hillary had been partners together at the rose law firm, and allegations of an ongoing affair had persisted from the Little Rock days to the White House.

blah, blah, blah.....

And you call me a conspiracy theorist???

I provided you a webpage with PROVEN FACTS about what this administration has done and your answer is to compare it with the Vince Foster debacle??? Daryl, you care more about your party than you do this country - otherwise you'd make an effort to try to comprehend what some people are pointing out.

[Dharma]

WRT "Do you think we're somehow different or smarter than the peoples under Mussilini or any other dictator?" Yes - I do think we are smarter and we have a much more open society than existed then. When / if I start seeing true censorship of the news (like some in Congress are attempting to do with Rush), then I'll be worried. Until then, not so much.

Yet there are endless conversations about how dumb the average person and voter is. The problem is that people believe what they want to believe. If this were Bill Clinton and there was a webpage with all the very same scandals, ask yourself how they would make you feel. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be happy.

As for Rush, I think the incident is over and has been for a month. But I do find it odd how there's a huge stink over MoveOn.com putting an ad in the paper saying "General Be-Trayus" yet Rush can call anybody disagreeing with the Iraq War a "phoney soldier" (and there are a lot of them, including - as of yesterday - General Sanchez). Why is the right allowed to slam a 12 year-old kid for going on a radio address and telling folks why SCHIP worked for him? One of yours, Michelle Malkin, showed up at their house and taunted the family! Simply because they gave testimoney about why SCHIP worked for them??

HATE is the lowest common denominator!

It should be your moment of cleansing clarity when you stand back and say nothing when your party goes bonkers yet you cry because Congress had a conversation about Rush Limbaugh's latest antics.

I can give you hundreds of times when pertinent news was not reported but I don't have a week to go through and cite them all. :wink:

[dhyatt]

Here are a few facts that require explanation...

Vince & Hillary had been partners together at the rose law firm, and allegations of an ongoing affair had persisted from the Little Rock days to the White House.

blah, blah, blah.....

And you call me a conspiracy theorist???

I provided you a webpage with PROVEN FACTS about what this administration has done and your answer is to compare it with the Vince Foster debacle??? Daryl, you care more about your party than you do this country - otherwise you'd make an effort to try to comprehend what some people are pointing out.

Oh, I don't know... I think item #254 from Hugh's list and the Vince Foster mystery make for an excellent comparison :-)


254. Charles Riechers while awaiting White House confirmation to the post of principal deputy to the assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition was provided a job for two months through a defense contractor for which he was paid $26,788 and for which he admits he did no work (although he did attend the Christmas party). The defense contractor which so obligingly hired Riechers is Commonwealth Research Institute (CRI) which (ironically on at least a couple of levels) is registered along with its parent company Concurrent Technologies with the IRS as a tax-exempt charity. So let's see, we have fraud, misappropriation of funds, violation of hiring guidelines, and sweetheart relationships with dubious actors, just what we need in a procurement officer overseeing $30 billion in Air Force contracts.

....On October 15, 2007 Riechers was found dead an apparent suicide.

Of course, in th Foster case there is unequivocal evidence that Hillary & Vince worked together. There is no evidence that Bush even knew who Riechers was...

[DarylB]

Here are a few facts that require explanation...

Vince & Hillary had been partners together at the rose law firm, and allegations of an ongoing affair had persisted from the Little Rock days to the White House.

blah, blah, blah.....

And you call me a conspiracy theorist???

I provided you a webpage with PROVEN FACTS about what this administration has done and your answer is to compare it with the Vince Foster debacle??? Daryl, you care more about your party than you do this country - otherwise you'd make an effort to try to comprehend what some people are pointing out.

It's not a comparison at all, it's a statment of facts about the current frontrunner from the Democratic Party for the office of President of the United States of America. And we won't een go into the Al Sharpton's, or Jesse Jacksons, or other various taints and scandals. Bush has committed no crimes. Hillary and hubby have, and because of that, I fear for the future more than you know.

[Dharma]

It's not a comparison at all, it's a statment of facts about the current frontrunner from the Democratic Party for the office of President of the United States of America. And we won't een go into the Al Sharpton's, or Jesse Jacksons, or other various taints and scandals. Bush has committed no crimes. Hillary and hubby have, and because of that, I fear for the future more than you know.

Okay then we agree. I don't like any of the Dem's you mentioned either.

But to say Bush has committed no crimes is comical. You really have your head in the sand if you believe that.
Party before country, right?

[dhyatt]

It's not a comparison at all, it's a statment of facts about the current frontrunner from the Democratic Party for the office of President of the United States of America. And we won't een go into the Al Sharpton's, or Jesse Jacksons, or other various taints and scandals. Bush has committed no crimes. Hillary and hubby have, and because of that, I fear for the future more than you know.

Okay then we agree. I don't like any of the Dem's you mentioned either.

But to say Bush has committed no crimes is comical. You really have your head in the sand if you believe that.
Party before country, right?

You know what I think about all the presidential candidates - of both parties? I think they all suck :-/ And the same holds true for the House & Senate.

Intelligent, attractive, honest, compassionate, moral, has relevant experience, knows how to deliver a speech. I guess it's too much to ask....

[Dharma]

You know what I think about all the presidential candidates - of both parties? I think they all suck :-/ And the same holds true for the House & Senate.

Intelligent, attractive, honest, compassionate, moral, has relevant experience, knows how to deliver a speech. I guess it's too much to ask....

I'm glad we can find common ground. There isn't ONE that makes me feel they have the ability to take us on the right direction. Now, there's one who isn't running I'd like to see....

See Tsuga's post on another thread. :-D

[DarylB]

It's not a comparison at all, it's a statment of facts about the current frontrunner from the Democratic Party for the office of President of the United States of America. And we won't een go into the Al Sharpton's, or Jesse Jacksons, or other various taints and scandals. Bush has committed no crimes. Hillary and hubby have, and because of that, I fear for the future more than you know.

Okay then we agree. I don't like any of the Dem's you mentioned either.

But to say Bush has committed no crimes is comical. You really have your head in the sand if you believe that.
Party before country, right?

Bush has operated as the Commander in Chief, and as such we count the death and destruction in other countries as Defense. That's not to say we agree with his calls on it, any more than we agreed with Clinton, or Reagan, or George Washington in their handling of Quadaffi's tent, or Manuel Noriega's Panama, or the British at Valley Forge, or any other action in which we operate as a country. But to actively conspire in the death of another for personal gain is another matter, and to further that aim by conspiring for the purpose of hiding evidence of other crimes, and to hide the damning evidence through the twisting and ruin of our legal system is contrary to the most basic tenets of our country and our society. If we are ever to ensure that we don't fall into the path of following another Mussolini or Hitler, we have to identify those who operate by those same rules as they did, and we have to avoid making that mistake of lumping them in woth those with whom we simply disagree. That is where the Clintons fall into an indefensible category that is far different from anything that any other US leaders have ever been involved in.

[Dharma]

Bush has operated as the Commander in Chief, and as such we count the death and destruction in other countries as Defense.

So, lying about reasons for war does not make him responsible for the deaths of 3800 US solders and nearly 1 million Iraqis BUT the death of Vince Foster is more important?

Seriously, I've read as many stories about unexplained deaths surrounding GW Bush AND his father but since they hold about as much water as your CONTINUED reposts of the Vince Foster death, I stay away from them.

And I would appeciate it if you'd stop giving me grief because I point out the PNAC on a regular basis. You mention Vince Foster ad nausuem and I don't see how it's important in the matters of the day or why you post about it on nearly every thread you can find when you want to change the subject back to Hillary's possible indiscretions. When Hillary puts up a website telling you what her plans are for this country in the next 8 years and they involve continual wars and imperialism, we'll talk. :wink:

[francejamie]

It's not a comparison at all, it's a statment of facts about the current frontrunner from the Democratic Party for the office of President of the United States of America. And we won't een go into the Al Sharpton's, or Jesse Jacksons, or other various taints and scandals. Bush has committed no crimes. Hillary and hubby have, and because of that, I fear for the future more than you know.

What do you call clear violation of the FISA act by not getting warrants?

[johnb]

Jeebus Don, after engaging in this discussion with conspiracy nuts you'll need a cerebral enema to cleans your mind of the foolishness.

Just drink the Kook-Aid, "Bush is guilty of stuff that didn't even occur."

[chaboard]

[
But to actively conspire in the death of another for personal gain is another matter, and to further that aim by conspiring for the purpose of hiding evidence of other crimes, and to hide the damning evidence through the twisting and ruin of our legal system is contrary to the most basic tenets of our country and our society. If we are ever to ensure that we don't fall into the path of following another Mussolini or Hitler, we have to identify those who operate by those same rules as they did, and we have to avoid making that mistake of lumping them in woth those with whom we simply disagree. That is where the Clintons fall into an indefensible category that is far different from anything that any other US leaders have ever been involved in.

Only if you're totally batsh* insane. You know, they gave a pure partisan hack over $70 million, unlimited subpoena power and a staff of bulldogs with the sole purpose to dig up something (Anything!) on the Clintons. It was the most thoroughly investigated administration in the history of the planet....and they never even found even *one* case of on-the-job corruption or criminal activity. Not one. (Compare to Dubya's administration - which already has multiple felony convictions in the highest circles. Or Reagan's, where over 60 high officials were indicted, convicted or pardoned for criminal activity).

Specifically, that partisan Republican hack with unlimited budget and prosecutorial power spent over three years investigating the death of Vince Foster and came to the exact same conclusion that the 5 earlier investigations conducted by the Park Police, the DoJ, the FBI, the Congress and the previous Independent Counsel (Fiske) came to. Namely, that you, DarylB are a total tinfoil crackpot nutjob divorced from reality.

As to "twisting and ruin of our legal system" and violation of the "most basic tenets of our country and our society", the current administration stands heads and shoulders above any and all comers. The suspension of habeus, the ongoing attempts to destroy power explicitly granted to Congress, the direct attempt to turn the entire Departmnt of Justice into an arm of the Republican party, the flagrant contempt for the Fourth amendment, the arrogance to believe that even outing covert agents during wartime is ok if it serves the partisan political goals....the list of Bush/Cheney frontal assaults on the principles America stands for is seemingly endless. They make Richard M. Nixon look like a freakin patriot by comparison, fer chrissaks.

[dhyatt]

[snip]

It was the most thoroughly investigated administration in the history of the planet....and they never even found even *one* case of on-the-job corruption or criminal activity. Not one. (Compare to Dubya's administration - which already has multiple felony convictions in the highest circles. Or Reagan's, where over 60 high officials were indicted, convicted or pardoned for criminal activity).

[snip]

I'm afraid you're suffering from a bit of selective (partisan perhaps?) memory. To wit:

- Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47
- Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33
- Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61
- Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122

I don't know about you but it seems to me that there's enough corruption to go around regardless of who's in power at the time.

[francejamie]

Only if you're totally batsh* insane. You know, they gave a pure partisan hack over $70 million, unlimited subpoena power and a staff of bulldogs with the sole purpose to dig up something (Anything!) on the Clintons. It was the most thoroughly investigated administration in the history of the planet....and they never even found even *one* case of on-the-job corruption or criminal activity. Not one. (Compare to Dubya's administration - which already has multiple felony convictions in the highest circles. Or Reagan's, where over 60 high officials were indicted, convicted or pardoned for criminal activity).

Specifically, that partisan Republican hack with unlimited budget and prosecutorial power spent over three years investigating the death of Vince Foster and came to the exact same conclusion that the 5 earlier investigations conducted by the Park Police, the DoJ, the FBI, the Congress and the previous Independent Counsel (Fiske) came to. Namely, that you, DarylB are a total tinfoil crackpot nutjob divorced from reality.

As to "twisting and ruin of our legal system" and violation of the "most basic tenets of our country and our society", the current administration stands heads and shoulders above any and all comers. The suspension of habeus, the ongoing attempts to destroy power explicitly granted to Congress, the direct attempt to turn the entire Departmnt of Justice into an arm of the Republican party, the flagrant contempt for the Fourth amendment, the arrogance to believe that even outing covert agents during wartime is ok if it serves the partisan political goals....the list of Bush/Cheney frontal assaults on the principles America stands for is seemingly endless. They make Richard M. Nixon look like a freakin patriot by comparison, fer chrissaks.

Well put!

:wav:

[Dharma]

What I want to know is what they're doing with the info.
<snip>Is is possible that our government is simply keeping an eye out for terrorists and doing their best to thwart them before they can attack? I know it sounds simplistic but that seems like the best explanation to me.

Yeah....keeping an eye out for terrorists.....dudes in rock bands...this guys who writes anti-Bush songs is a terrorist??? When you listen to Rush all day, you never hear the real stories....


Homeland Security Confiscates Rocker's Songs
by Jeff Dinelli

In a truly bizarre story of our national security apparatus hard at work, guitarist/songwriter Chris Walla's hard drive, containing the masters of songs that were to make up his new album, was confiscated at the Canadian border by U.S. Homeland Security agents and sent to the department's computer-forensics division with no explanation.

Walla, whose main gig is guitarist for the rock band Death Cab For Cutie, has written a batch of politically-themed songs detailing issues such as Iraq and Hurricane Katrina, for a solo album four years in the works. "And now I couldn't even venture a guess as to where it is, or what it's doing there. I mean, I can't just call their customer-service center and ask about my drive. There's nothing I can do. I don't know if we can hire an attorney ... is there a black-hole attorney? You can't take a black hole to court."

What this has to do with protecting us from terrorism is your guess as well as mine. Putting aside the incredulous issue of attempting to silence a musician, there's no indication Walla was planning anything politically overt as Neil Young or Steve Earle, let alone anarchist bands like Rage Against The Machine. "While it really is a political record, it's also intensely personal, and it's not like, political in a way where I hope to change anyone's mind, because I've been doing my political-rock homework for a few years now, trying to decode what works and what doesn't," Walla said. "Basically, it was my hope that I would be able to write a bunch of songs about the **** that I think about pretty much every day. But there aren't any character assassinations or indictments on the record."

What in the world is going on here? Does this frighten anyone as much as it does me? Are there other anti-war voices being stifled in such a way? Is this a first step towards literally stopping free speech regarding this administration's policies?

[Cathy]

The Power Behind the Power revealed-
PBS.ORG gives us the inside info on "Cheney's Law":

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/cheney/view/main.html

Does this sit well with your understanding of the American ideals of protecting individual freedom to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

Or are you ready to surrender these for a vague promise of protection from "unknown unknowns"?

[chaboard]

[snip]

It was the most thoroughly investigated administration in the history of the planet....and they never even found even *one* case of on-the-job corruption or criminal activity. Not one. (Compare to Dubya's administration - which already has multiple felony convictions in the highest circles. Or Reagan's, where over 60 high officials were indicted, convicted or pardoned for criminal activity).

[snip]

I'm afraid you're suffering from a bit of selective (partisan perhaps?) memory. To wit:

- Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47
- Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33
- Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61
- Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122

I don't know about you but it seems to me that there's enough corruption to go around regardless of who's in power at the time.

Name two that meet the criteria I spoke of - convicted or pardoned of crimes or corruption related to their duties. I've posed that challenge on many, many online forums and it always gets VERRY quiet. One guy once managed to name one. I won't give away that one so that you have a fighting chance.

I bet 80% of your list is people who were **never** part of the Administration (Susan MacDougal is on it, right?) *at all**.
And the bulk of the rest will be people convicted of things done outside their period of service (Cisneros is on it, right?) or things that were entirely personal. $75 million will turn up a lot of personal dirt anywhere. But it couldn't find even a trace of official corruption. Because it wasn't there.

And again, I'll point out that that's in marked contrast to EVERY elected Republican administration of my lifetime (I'm assuming Ike was clean and Ford didn't have a lot of time) - every **** one of which was riddled with crime and corruption IN THE COURSE OF OFFICIAL DUTIES.

[dhyatt]

What I want to know is what they're doing with the info.
<snip>Is is possible that our government is simply keeping an eye out for terrorists and doing their best to thwart them before they can attack? I know it sounds simplistic but that seems like the best explanation to me.

Yeah....keeping an eye out for terrorists.....dudes in rock bands...this guys who writes anti-Bush songs is a terrorist??? When you listen to Rush all day, you never hear the real stories....


Homeland Security Confiscates Rocker's Songs
by Jeff Dinelli

In a truly bizarre story of our national security apparatus hard at work, guitarist/songwriter Chris Walla's hard drive, containing the masters of songs that were to make up his new album, was confiscated at the Canadian border by U.S. Homeland Security agents and sent to the department's computer-forensics division with no explanation.

Walla, whose main gig is guitarist for the rock band Death Cab For Cutie, has written a batch of politically-themed songs detailing issues such as Iraq and Hurricane Katrina, for a solo album four years in the works. "And now I couldn't even venture a guess as to where it is, or what it's doing there. I mean, I can't just call their customer-service center and ask about my drive. There's nothing I can do. I don't know if we can hire an attorney ... is there a black-hole attorney? You can't take a black hole to court."

What this has to do with protecting us from terrorism is your guess as well as mine. Putting aside the incredulous issue of attempting to silence a musician, there's no indication Walla was planning anything politically overt as Neil Young or Steve Earle, let alone anarchist bands like Rage Against The Machine. "While it really is a political record, it's also intensely personal, and it's not like, political in a way where I hope to change anyone's mind, because I've been doing my political-rock homework for a few years now, trying to decode what works and what doesn't," Walla said. "Basically, it was my hope that I would be able to write a bunch of songs about the s*** that I think about pretty much every day. But there aren't any character assassinations or indictments on the record."

What in the world is going on here? Does this frighten anyone as much as it does me? Are there other anti-war voices being stifled in such a way? Is this a first step towards literally stopping free speech regarding this administration's policies?

Assuming I can take this at face value, then it would constitute (for me) the first clear evidence that Homeland Security is simply out of control and that the line between freedom and security has been breached in a way that I can't support. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I would hope if there's more to the story making it somehow understandable, that someone will post an update. As for the "Rush" dig, I can guarantee you he wouldn't approve if the story cited is indeed the whole story.

[Cathy]

Fascist America, in 10 easy steps


From Hitler to Pinochet and beyond, history shows there are certain steps that any would-be dictator must take to destroy constitutional freedoms. And, argues Naomi Wolf, George Bush and his administration seem to be taking them all

Tuesday April 24, 2007
The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html)

Colbert: Naomi Wolf and Fascism in America (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doKkduuY-M4)

[Dharma]

Fascist America, in 10 easy steps


From Hitler to Pinochet and beyond, history shows there are certain steps that any would-be dictator must take to destroy constitutional freedoms. And, argues Naomi Wolf, George Bush and his administration seem to be taking them all

Tuesday April 24, 2007
The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html)

Colbert: Naomi Wolf and Fascism in America (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doKkduuY-M4)

Thanks Kathy. I just finished reading this book. It's clear it's happening but what to do?

I'm hoping your post will encourage others to read it as well. :book:

There's more. Just watch the first 2 minutes. If it strikes you, watch the whole thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjALf12PAWc&NR=1

Naomi Wolf says:

Because Americans like me were born in freedom, we have a hard time even considering that it is possible for us to become as unfree - domestically - as many other nations. Because we no longer learn much about our rights or our system of government - the task of being aware of the constitution has been outsourced from citizens' ownership to being the domain of professionals such as lawyers and professors - we scarcely recognise the checks and balances that the founders put in place, even as they are being systematically dismantled. Because we don't learn much about European history, the setting up of a department of "homeland" security - remember who else was keen on the word "homeland" - didn't raise the alarm bells it might have.

[francejamie]

Colbert: Naomi Wolf and Fascism in America (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doKkduuY-M4)

Thanks Kathy. I just finished reading this book. It's clear it's happening but what to do?

I'm hoping your post will encourage others to read it as well. :book:

There's more. Just watch the first 2 minutes. If it strikes you, watch the whole thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjALf12PAWc&NR=1

Naomi Wolf says:

Because Americans like me were born in freedom, we have a hard time even considering that it is possible for us to become as unfree - domestically - as many other nations. Because we no longer learn much about our rights or our system of government - the task of being aware of the constitution has been outsourced from citizens' ownership to being the domain of professionals such as lawyers and professors - we scarcely recognise the checks and balances that the founders put in place, even as they are being systematically dismantled. Because we don't learn much about European history, the setting up of a department of "homeland" security - remember who else was keen on the word "homeland" - didn't raise the alarm bells it might have.[/quote]


That was a fascinating talk. I don't know what to do about it, either.

[Chana]

Wow. I am heading out to buy the book now. One thing she may be overlooking (the book may go into more detail than the speech), is the use of a scapegoat. The focus on illegal immigration at this point in time is no coincidence. Everyone should take the time to watch the video, no matter what your political leanings are. And vote with your brain.

[Cathy]

What can we do?

#1. Make a concious decision that whenever you are faced with giving the government more power (or money) to dictate what citizens can do, or dictate what they HAVE to do,.....JUST SAY NO!

No more money for and no more rules from the government. From your local government to the Federal government.

#2. Stop voting with partisan loyalty in mind and start voting for the man or woman with principles.
Demand that the candidates HAVE principles and not just rhetoric and sound bites.

That may seem like a scary proposition or a futile one, but it's overdue.
Real freedom will seem scary to those of us who have grown accustom to the "safety nets" and "nanny state" we have today.

Time to wake up America... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYNWJQvLwIE)

Cathy

[Chana]

Cathy - Powerful video.

[Dharma]

Wow. I am heading out to buy the book now. One thing she may be overlooking (the book may go into more detail than the speech), is the use of a scapegoat. The focus on illegal immigration at this point in time is no coincidence.

You're correct Chana. This was not addressed in Naomi Wolf's book but you are right on the money. People like Bobo have been brainwashed into being fascist foot soldiers.

[Dharma]

then it would constitute (for me) the first clear evidence that Homeland Security is simply out of control and that the line between freedom and security has been breached in a way that I can't support. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I would hope if there's more to the story making it somehow understandable, that someone will post an update. As for the "Rush" dig, I can guarantee you he wouldn't approve if the story cited is indeed the whole story.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_rob_kall_071007_fbi_puts_antiwar_pro.htm


FBI Puts Antiwar Protesters on Criminal Database; Canada Uses It To Ban
Protesters From Entry

http://www.opednews.com
Two well-respected US peace activists, CODEPINK and Global Exchange
cofounder Medea Benjamin and retired Colonel and diplomat Ann Wright, were
denied entry into Canada On October third. The two women were headed to
Toronto to discuss peace and security issues at the invitation of the
Toronto Stop the War Coalition. At the Buffalo-Niagara Falls Bridge they
were detained, questioned and denied entry.

"In my case, the border guard pulled up a file showing that I had been
arrested at the US Mission to the UN where, on International Women's Day, a
group of us had tried to deliver a peace petition signed by 152,000 women
around the world," says Benjamin. "For this, the Canadians labeled me a
criminal and refused to allow me in the country."

"The FBI's placing of peace activists on an international criminal database
is blatant political intimidation of US citizens opposed to Bush
administration policies," says Colonel Wright, who was also Deputy US
Ambassador in four countries. "The Canadian government should certainly not
accept this FBI database as the criteria for entering the country." Both
Wright and Benjamin plan to request their files from the FBI through the
Freedom of Information Act and demand that arrests for peaceful, non-violent
actions be expunged from international records. "It's outrageous that Canada
is turning away peacemakers protesting a war that does not have the support
of either US or Canadian citizens," says Benjamin.

"In the past, Canada has always welcomed peace activists with open arms.
This new policy, obviously a creature of the Bush administration, is
shocking and we in the US and Canada must insist that it be overturned. Four
members of the Canadian Parliament--Peggy Nash, Libby Davies, Paul Dewar and
Peter Julian-- expressed outrage that the peace activists were barred from
Canada and vow to change this policy.

<snip>

Wright added, "The fact that the FBI has put us on this list. The
NationalCrime Information Center Computerized Index is a form of political
intimidation. The list is supposed to be for felony and serious misdemeanor
offenses. :evil:

"We don't qualify-- it's for sex offenders, foreign fugitives, gang violence
and terrorist organizations, people who are on parole, a list of eight
categories all together.

"It is very disturbing. We've asked our congressional representatives to
investigate this."

According to Wright, there was almost no coverage of this in the US, except
for an AP release. In Canada, Toronto's Globe and Mail and several other
newspapers and three Canadian TV stations covered it.

Shall I post everytime I read about one of the acts of fascism, Hyatt? :-''
This fills several on the 10 easy steps to fascism list.

5. Harass citizens' groups
6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release
7. Target key individuals
8. Control the press
9. Dissent equals treason
10. Suspend the rule of law

[dhyatt]

[snip]
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_rob_kall_071007_fbi_puts_antiwar_pro.htm

FBI Puts Antiwar Protesters on Criminal Database; Canada Uses It To Ban Protesters From Entry

[snip]

Shall I post everytime I read about one of the acts of fascism, Hyatt? :-''

Unfortunately, the oped piece is way short on facts other than they were stopped by Canadians. There are allegations by Col Wright that they were on the FBI NCIS list and when reading through the criteria used to construct the list (here (http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fbi/is/ncic.htm)), it's seems possible. But the way I read it, they would either have to be labeled terrorists (unlikely IMO) or they are currently on parole (more likely IMO) after being arrested at the U.N. I will reserve judgment until I know a) if they are on the NCIS list, and b) under what category.

[Cathy]

NSPD/51- Prudent Planning for "Catastrophic Emergencies" ? (http://postmanpatel.blogspot.com/2007/05/nspd51-prudent-planning-for.html)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

[Cathy]

Ron Paul : When in the course of human events...
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AFfdB5OzlyQ&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AFfdB5OzlyQ&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[Cathy]

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WOu8KhDYciE&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WOu8KhDYciE&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[Cathy]

July 12, 2008: Ron Paul Revolution March on Washington D.C.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI-anYSs5yw

http://www.revolutionmarch.com/