For all Citizens of the USA

Good find, This video gives me hope & just wish that all americas would be like Jerome Corsi. How come a megaloman like Bush is still alive today ? back then they would've shot him dead!!!

Thx again.
 
When you've successfully achieved dictatorship the concept of "political suicide" is a null force. Corsi has a really good point - that we should be extremely wary. He's also right about the "emergency control" strategy being a particularly old one, and it's tried and true. It's worked for all sorts of folks in all sorts of eras.

If you've seen the film Jesus Camp you might be more inclined to believe in the despotic motivations of this insane directive. There are a hell of a lot more evangelical moonbats in the US than most people are aware, and they have this nasty habit of brainwashing their children about Bush's supreme goodness. If you feel like watching 8 year olds "speaking in tongues" and worshiping cardboard cutouts of W, I suggest you see the movie. If you don't remember, a couple other folks have used armies of children in the past - Pol Pot, Hilter Youth, various suprematist movements in Africa, guerilla movements in Sri Lanka and South America (Columbia currently, but mosty notably Nicaragua in the past), just to name the major ones. A truly powerful film to watch about the Nicaraguan child-soldiers is Werner Herzog's Ballad of the Little Soldier.

I'm not saying this is a sure thing, but it's certainly a scary proposition.
 
some mofo would cap his ass if he tries that. however, if he wanted to remain in power, all he needs is to stage a fake war on US soil.

still, this is nicely paving the way for when the Fall comes...
 
citizenkhan said:
When you've successfully achieved dictatorship the concept of "political suicide" is a null force. Corsi has a really good point - that we should be extremely wary. He's also right about the "emergency control" strategy being a particularly old one, and it's tried and true. It's worked for all sorts of folks in all sorts of eras.

If you've seen the film Jesus Camp you might be more inclined to believe in the despotic motivations of this insane directive. There are a hell of a lot more evangelical moonbats in the US than most people are aware, and they have this nasty habit of brainwashing their children about Bush's supreme goodness. If you feel like watching 8 year olds "speaking in tongues" and worshiping cardboard cutouts of W, I suggest you see the movie. If you don't remember, a couple other folks have used armies of children in the past - Pol Pot, Hilter Youth, various suprematist movements in Africa, guerilla movements in Sri Lanka and South America (Columbia currently, but mosty notably Nicaragua in the past), just to name the major ones. A truly powerful film to watch about the Nicaraguan child-soldiers is Werner Herzog's Ballad of the Little Soldier.

I'm not saying this is a sure thing, but it's certainly a scary proposition.
Again: don't be silly. Trying to establish a dictatorship in the USA is bound to fail, that just isn't going to work.

What the evangelicals will do, instead of trying to instate a dictator, is try to control the government from behind the scenes. They don't need George Bush there, they just need someone who agrees with them there.
 
Don't worry. The Enclave will keep Bush in check... er... did I say Enclave? No no.. I meant.. um... Batcave.. yeah. Batman will protect us.
 
What the evangelicals will do, instead of trying to instate a dictator, is try to control the government from behind the scenes. They don't need George Bush there, they just need someone who agrees with them there.

Oh, you mean someone like Senator Brownback? I think he'd make a great dictator. Evangelicals aren't about being "behind the scenes," as Brownback makes evident. Or President Bush, for that matter. And don't call me "silly" for entertaining a possibility. There's nothing silly about that directive.
 
Isn't this the very same type of law that allowed Hitler to become a dictator?

It's a very frightening fact that Bush gets more and more power on his religious hands, and being a dictator on that, sure adds to it. But I think people will somehow put an end to it; the (american) capitalist ideal, with the people as the nations true rulers, must exceed beliefs, right?

Also, funny thing that the anchor finds his information on Wikipedia. Teh internet rulz.
 
citizenkhan said:
Oh, you mean someone like Senator Brownback? I think he'd make a great dictator. Evangelicals aren't about being "behind the scenes," as Brownback makes evident. Or President Bush, for that matter. And don't call me "silly" for entertaining a possibility. There's nothing silly about that directive.
There is if you consider the history and constituents of the USA. There's no way anyone could become a dictator in the USA, unless things *drastically* changed.

As for evangelicals not acting behind the scenes, give me a break. Yes, there are evangelicals who are thoroughly in view. But most of the evangelicals exert power through the Republican Party, and work within the system. They don't work to establish a dictatorship, but to establish a majority rule in their favour. A dictatorship wouldn't serve them in any way, because there would be way too much national opposition to it.
That whole 'firearms for everyone' deal exists *exactly* so that no one can go dictator on their ass, and a lot of people in the USA know this and would be only too glad to act accordingly.

Zaron said:
Isn't this the very same type of law that allowed Hitler to become a dictator?
OMG Hitler exploited something IT MUST BE TERRIBLY EVIL!!!!
Also, only in part. Hitler's actual ascension to dictatorship was relatively complicated and comprised a lot more than just the abuse of one law. It included, amongst other things, forcibly excluding part of the elected members of parliament from voting.

Zaron said:
Also, funny thing that the anchor finds his information on Wikipedia. Teh internet rulz.
This only goes to show the anchor's/programme's silliness. No self-respecting journalist would use Wikipedia itself as a source.
 
Interesting and slightly frightening video. However, I tend to, no matter how negative he seems to be about others opinions, agree with Ziltoid on this one. A dictatorship, or even a grab for one, seems to be an incredibly difficult proposition in this country. While I don't think it is fully because of firearms, it certainly has a good part to do with it.

What I do find insidious about this is how easily such a bill passes without the knowledge of the general public. God knows what bills a dangerously crazy president (some arguably can say such a man is there now) can pass, bypassing our entire democratic system and doing what he/she wills. A bit frightening if you ask me.
 
OMG Hitler exploited something IT MUST BE TERRIBLY EVIL!!!!
Also, only in part. Hitler's actual ascension to dictatorship was relatively complicated and comprised a lot more than just the abuse of one law. It included, amongst other things, forcibly excluding part of the elected members of parliament from voting.

Well, he is known as one of the most evil men throughout history, but I get your point; I also try to abuse the system as often as I can.

Well, obviously there is more than *one* factor turning a country to a dictatorship, but still, abusing one thing leads to another.

This only goes to show the anchor's/programme's silliness. No self-respecting journalist would use Wikipedia itself as a source.

...which exactly is my point proven. No self-respecting person does, for that matter, use Wikipedia as their (only) source.
 
I thank you Lost Metal. Every American should watch that and I'm sure the Journalism/History/Law Students here will be particularly excited.

As much as it should worry me that the President would want such overly extensive emergency powers I'm sure that as long as one member of his security knows why America has been such a great place to live and why it was the first to rebel then the President would be assassinated quite fast if he were to pull such a thing.

Maybe Bush got the idea from Episode 3?

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller
 
interesting topic but even if bush woud pull it off USA has a system agains that and by system i mean lots of guns with wich civil liberties and rights can be defended against a nut jobs who woud try to opress the people.
 
As I understand it, the US was shaped and formed as a counterpart to the rule of King George III (the third) in Britain who decided nearly everything in Britain in the 1770's. And that's why the founding fathers decided to make a senate, a house, a president, and a Supreme Court, which all should reign together, in a system of check and balances.

It was never intended to be that way that the President could or even should get all the power to reign --- no matter what.

As for Hitler's raise to power -- this is somewhat similar to it, but the difference is that Hitler had his SA-goons stirring up trouble, which Hitler then promised to go away. This he did. He also, after becoming Reichskansler in 1933, gradually made it so that He had all the power...

As I understand it, Bush now has the ability to call for martial law in crises, disasters and catastrophies, for instance in cases like
Hurricane Katrina. Didn't Eisenhower do the same thing in the 1950's when he applied? the National Guard in Alabama? Or was it the State Governor that called for Martial Law??

The point that troubles me, though, is that the President can interpret almost any unrest and unsatisfaction with the Pres. or the state --- as a national disaster... as the terms used to describe this are very broad indeed...

And that's (very) frighthening...
 
aries369 said:
As I understand it, the US was shaped and formed as a counterpart to the rule of King George III (the third) in Britain who decided nearly everything in Britain in the 1770's. And that's why the founding fathers decided to make a senate, a house, a president, and a Supreme Court, which all should reign together, in a system of check and balances.

It was never intended to be that way that the President could or even should get all the power to reign --- no matter what.

As for Hitler's raise to power -- this is somewhat similar to it, but the difference is that Hitler had his SA-goons stirring up trouble, which Hitler then promised to go away. This he did. He also, after becoming Reichskansler in 1933, gradually made it so that He had all the power...

As I understand it, Bush now has the ability to call for martial law in crises, disasters and catastrophies, for instance in cases like
Hurricane Katrina. Didn't Eisenhower do the same thing in the 1950's when he applied? the National Guard in Alabama? Or was it the State Governor that called for Martial Law??

The point that troubles me, though, is that the President can interpret almost any unrest and unsatisfaction with the Pres. or the state --- as a national disaster... as the terms used to describe this are very broad indeed...

And that's (very) frighthening...

There is no such thing as an uncorruptable government.
 
Also, only in part. Hitler's actual ascension to dictatorship was relatively complicated and comprised a lot more than just the abuse of one law. It included, amongst other things, forcibly excluding part of the elected members of parliament from voting.

Ziltoid, I agree with you that the ascension of a dictator in this country is highly unlikely. But unless we entertain the idea of that very thing, the approximately 150 million firearms in this country will be completely useless; we'll see them laid by, unloaded, while despotism slides into place. It's hard to predict what form a contemporary revolution would take, and equally hard to fathom what would ignite it. Our population has become so passive that the idea of revolution is laughable. If you think folks like Bush aren't overjoyed by that passivity, you've got another thing coming.

But wouldn't revolution be romantic? Almost as good as roaming the wasteland with a 12-guage and a gasmask.
 
Back
Top