|
Post by trubble on Jan 21, 2009 21:54:27 GMT
From the OP:
To be petty, it's not just America. And to be even more petty, sons and daughters of statesmen seem to get, if not an automatic ticket, at least a VIP ticket when seeking office, but that's not just America either. Then, of course, there's an even more petty point about who holds the purse strings, are the same elite group choosing the candidate every time? But these are all minor, maybe miniscule, in the global scene.
Before yesterday, I hadn't given consideration to how precious peaceful transfer of power was. I was aware of it, I lumped it all in with democracy, but I never stopped to think that, because even when democracy exists in a country it often exists with constant struggle and threat, the countries where there is a truly peaceful and co-operative passing of the baton should be praised for such a great achievement. And evangelise. And be emulated.
I thought the speakers yesterday spoke very eloquently on the subject and very righteously.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 22, 2009 11:51:30 GMT
How unlike the rest of the world America is.
I hadn't picked that line up. What a crock!
America is very like other former British colonies such as Australia, Canada, NZ, etc. It is like the stable nations of Western Europe. The nations of Eastern Europe are increasingly becoming like THE NORM, of which America is part.
On another MB someone wrote something like 'the world could learn from America's national unity, people standing shoulder to shoulder in the cold, embracing, cheering'.
A poster called Electric Hermit replied; "Sounds like Edinburgh's Hogmanay Party".
Which I thought was spot on.
Don't get me wrong, I think Obama's great. I think his election is historic. But I don't see it as evidence of America being better or more unique and special than any other nation on earth.
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinette on Jan 22, 2009 11:52:02 GMT
FYI, for those of you who want NOTHING to do with things specific to the anti-Christ, you need to know that SAVIOR (Obama) belongs to at least 1 group that's PUSHING (and always has) for a 1 world government. His wife belongs to at least 1 of these groups also. This is a big reason I'll never support him, as long as he belongs to this type of group. His FISA betrayal and his being against impeaching Dubya were enough for me BESIDES his involvement in 1 world government stuff. There's also the scum he associates with (Brzenski is an example). I want to expose these things as they're NOT getting exposed ENOUGH or at all when it comes to mainstream media. That's interesting, could you name the groups and how you know it? If it is so I would like to read about it. I haven't heard any of this before. Btw, I like Obama. I like his method of uniting to solve problems, I like that he wants to work with his adversaries and to walk forward together where there are points of similarity - plenty of time to discuss the differences during the walk. But that doesn't mean I don't want to know if there is something more sinister to be wary of. The group is called the Council on Foreign Relations. I'll be glad to post links for you when I have time. THANK YOU for having an open mind, by the way!
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinette on Jan 22, 2009 13:24:30 GMT
FYI, for those of you who want NOTHING to do with things specific to the anti-Christ, you need to know that SAVIOR (Obama) belongs to at least 1 group that's PUSHING (and always has) for a 1 world government. His wife belongs to at least 1 of these groups also. This is a big reason I'll never support him, as long as he belongs to this type of group. His FISA betrayal and his being against impeaching Dubya were enough for me BESIDES his involvement in 1 world government stuff. There's also the scum he associates with (Brzenski is an example). I want to expose these things as they're NOT getting exposed ENOUGH or at all when it comes to mainstream media. That's interesting, could you name the groups and how you know it? If it is so I would like to read about it. I haven't heard any of this before. Btw, I like Obama. I like his method of uniting to solve problems, I like that he wants to work with his adversaries and to walk forward together where there are points of similarity - plenty of time to discuss the differences during the walk. But that doesn't mean I don't want to know if there is something more sinister to be wary of. www.cfr.org/bios/11603/barack_obama.htmlwww.esoterictube.com/president-barack-obama-and-the-council-on-foreign-relations-aka-cfr.htmlHistory of Council on Foreign Relations, SEE bombshell #2: www.infowars.com/?p=3601 -NOTE this is from a MAINSTREAM strongly Democrat-leaning website. These things are being exposed MORE (thank God!) thanks to the Internet! When it comes to these things, the mainstream media (which is MOSTLY controlled/funded, etc., by the richest families in the world, corporations, etc.) has purposely NOT exposed them ENOUGH.
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Jan 22, 2009 13:33:37 GMT
Thanks, I 'll have a look. I googled the CFR and it looks very much like they are not particularly sinister but I will read your links and keep my mind open. It is open but I am going to be very surprised if I find anything. from the CFR site: "The Council on Foreign Relations is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries. Founded in 1921, the Council takes no institutional positions on matters of policy." from esoterictube: "Obama has been a member of the CFR for quite some time, a secretive group of men and women in dark suits who plan and conspire to gain control over the entire world, it’s economy and it’s inhabiting people." It is sounding a little far fetched. Especially as the cfr site doesn't seem very secretive. from infowars: "It is only to the extent that they are a force in politics that I have any interest at all. Through my involvement in the entertainment industry and academic associations I have known more than a few in the ruling class (mostly their offspring) and I can tell you unequivocally that they are not all evil, Bohemian Grove is not a cult but a fancy camping trip, and that almost all the conspiracy theories you will find on the interenet are wrong. There is, as far as I know, no Illuminati or any other such bullshit. And this is not the X-Files. What we have is pluralism meets feudalism with a hefty amount of mafia thrown in. The ruling class in the early 20th Century, as it is now, was not monolithic. And in spite of their working together to bring about one globalized order, they often compete and work against each other, just like any other political bloc. It is imperative to understand, this is not a conspiracy. It was in its conception. And the powerful certainly conspire and collude daily. But "globalization" is a movement, not too unlike the progressive movement. The difference is the globalists have literally trillions of dollars, euros, and pounds to throw around on their campaign." Now this bit, I get! I have seen the type of manoeverings described on this site for myself. I have been involved in a governmental 'task force' from almost its first seed where I met the same two or three faces again and again, popping up in the most unusual areas and seemingly to have unelected and unbelievable power and sway. No initiatives from the various grass roots campaigns and general public have been even minuted, much less incorporated, every committee set up has been for the purpose of pushing forward a hidden agenda and I have been able to pinpoint a number of so called 'initiatives' be passed into legislation that have come directly from the same small handful of individuals. I am forced to see that that is how government truly works. I am also forced to believe that one of the individuals that I researched, believing that there must be a hidden sinister element to his unwarranted power, has an agenda, for sure! and it is not the same as the public agenda, yet it is not actually sinister. It's a sincere belief that free trade frees us all, that greater co-operation between business and countries will produce a financially viable and peaceful world, and that what he is doing will of course benefit his wealthy friends but will also benefit every citizen. I am forced to believe that these people are not evil. They are just wrong because they bypass real democracy. They do that because real democracy is a very slow system and not one of their projects would happen if they were to try it.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 22, 2009 14:05:51 GMT
I'm not sure about the way he talked to the Muslims; there is no hand extending with these fanatics that are terrorists and he might as just as well realize he will have to make war on them and exterminate them. Extend a hand and you'll more than likely get it chopped off. pretty much, especially to garbage that you know beyond a doubt will do it
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 22, 2009 14:10:20 GMT
We all have our pet hates. I've been accused of being obsessed with hatred of the Clintons and there's some truth in that claim. As for Islam, believe me, Muslims are as individual as anyone else and Muslim countries vary from the liberal ones like Turkey to the barbarically primitive like Somalia, with most somewhere in between. Sometimes you have to try to reach some sort of deal with your enemies. After all, to beat Hitler we had to ally ourselves with Stalin who was hardly an advert for good government, let alone tolerance, compassion and stuff like that. and the result of that was what? try, forty years of berlin airlifts, missles in cuba, hungary, and on, and on, and on. there is NEVER an intelligent reason to negotiate with an enemy. the ONLY rational response it to exterminate your enemy. appeasement of evil does nothing but create more evil
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Jan 22, 2009 15:25:30 GMT
Also, I bet there wasn't 1 word about SAVIOR'S buddy and advisor Zbiegniev Brzenski (I don't care to take the time to check if I'm spelling the filth's name right), that WONDERFUL GUY who helped set up Al-Queda and supported Pol Pot in the 70's. This BUDDY literally BRAGS about helping set up Al-Queda in 1 of his books. You mean Brzezinski? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zbigniew_BrzezinskiHe did a lot of things and Obama is just one of a million people who listen to him. But he's not a sinister hidden element in America, surely!
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinette on Jan 22, 2009 15:37:24 GMT
Also, I bet there wasn't 1 word about SAVIOR'S buddy and advisor Zbiegniev Brzenski (I don't care to take the time to check if I'm spelling the filth's name right), that WONDERFUL GUY who helped set up Al-Queda and supported Pol Pot in the 70's. This BUDDY literally BRAGS about helping set up Al-Queda in 1 of his books. You mean Brzezinski? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zbigniew_BrzezinskiHe did a lot of things and Obama is just one of a million people who listen to him. But he's not a sinister hidden element in America, surely! Have you checked out his part in forming Al-Queda and also his support of Pol Pot? If you like, I can post links. Wikipedia doesn't cover these issues completely as I've looked at the page for him also.
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Jan 22, 2009 15:58:06 GMT
Yes, but it was always my understanding that these were government backed secret strategies at the time.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jan 22, 2009 16:22:55 GMT
We all have our pet hates. I've been accused of being obsessed with hatred of the Clintons and there's some truth in that claim. As for Islam, believe me, Muslims are as individual as anyone else and Muslim countries vary from the liberal ones like Turkey to the barbarically primitive like Somalia, with most somewhere in between. Sometimes you have to try to reach some sort of deal with your enemies. After all, to beat Hitler we had to ally ourselves with Stalin who was hardly an advert for good government, let alone tolerance, compassion and stuff like that. and the result of that was what? try, forty years of berlin airlifts, missles in cuba, hungary, and on, and on, and on. there is NEVER an intelligent reason to negotiate with an enemy. the ONLY rational response it to exterminate your enemy. appeasement of evil does nothing but create more evil So what was the alternative, Jim? We HAD to ally with Stalin to beat Hitler - or should we just have let him walk all over us.
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinette on Jan 22, 2009 17:56:31 GMT
Yes, but it was always my understanding that these were government backed secret strategies at the time. Does this mean they were ANY LESS EVIL AND WRONG?
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinette on Jan 22, 2009 17:59:18 GMT
We all have our pet hates. I've been accused of being obsessed with hatred of the Clintons and there's some truth in that claim. As for Islam, believe me, Muslims are as individual as anyone else and Muslim countries vary from the liberal ones like Turkey to the barbarically primitive like Somalia, with most somewhere in between. Sometimes you have to try to reach some sort of deal with your enemies. After all, to beat Hitler we had to ally ourselves with Stalin who was hardly an advert for good government, let alone tolerance, compassion and stuff like that. and the result of that was what? try, forty years of berlin airlifts, missles in cuba, hungary, and on, and on, and on. there is NEVER an intelligent reason to negotiate with an enemy. the ONLY rational response it to exterminate your enemy. appeasement of evil does nothing but create more evil I agree 100%. Was there any reason the US couldn't have intervened in Russia also? Stalin was NO better than Hitler. I'm sick and tired of the US NOT intervening when people are being killed left and right. Cambodia in the 70's is another horrible example of how NOT intervening leads to more evil being done.
|
|
|
Post by mcgruff on Jan 22, 2009 18:25:58 GMT
Laura it may also interest you to know that United States knew of the Nazis killing the jews during the Holocaust and didn't nothing about it instead of bombing the railroads during World War II to prevent those taken prisoner from being burned up They bomed cities thus allowing more innocents to be killed
jeff
|
|
|
Post by chefmate51 on Jan 22, 2009 18:38:14 GMT
and the result of that was what? try, forty years of berlin airlifts, missles in cuba, hungary, and on, and on, and on. there is NEVER an intelligent reason to negotiate with an enemy. the ONLY rational response it to exterminate your enemy. appeasement of evil does nothing but create more evil I agree 100%. Was there any reason the US couldn't have intervened in Russia also? Stalin was NO better than Hitler. I'm sick and tired of the US NOT intervening when people are being killed left and right. Cambodia in the 70's is another horrible example of how NOT intervening leads to more evil being done. Then when we intervene people bitch like the Iraq war. We are NOT the worlds cops.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 22, 2009 23:16:17 GMT
I agree 100%. Was there any reason the US couldn't have intervened in Russia also? Stalin was NO better than Hitler. I'm sick and tired of the US NOT intervening when people are being killed left and right. Cambodia in the 70's is another horrible example of how NOT intervening leads to more evil being done. Then when we intervene people bitch like the Iraq war. We are NOT the worlds cops. you never listened to ronnie or dumbya, did you?
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 22, 2009 23:19:42 GMT
and the result of that was what? try, forty years of berlin airlifts, missles in cuba, hungary, and on, and on, and on. there is NEVER an intelligent reason to negotiate with an enemy. the ONLY rational response it to exterminate your enemy. appeasement of evil does nothing but create more evil So what was the alternative, Jim? We HAD to ally with Stalin to beat Hitler - or should we just have let him walk all over us. well, if chamberlain whispered in adolf's ear that he should wait until spring to invade russia, the soviet union would have ceased to exist. as it was, hitler had spread the german army so thin, russia, africa, everywhere else, that we would still have kicked his azz, and wallah, no soviet union or cold war, or nazis.
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Jan 23, 2009 0:56:33 GMT
Yes, but it was always my understanding that these were government backed secret strategies at the time. Does this mean they were ANY LESS EVIL AND WRONG? What it means is that the entire government of the time is to be held responsible and not just one man. If you wish Obama to be free of any taint of these acts then you will have to ask him not to be in government at all.
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Jan 23, 2009 0:57:16 GMT
I agree 100%. Was there any reason the US couldn't have intervened in Russia also? Stalin was NO better than Hitler. I'm sick and tired of the US NOT intervening when people are being killed left and right. Cambodia in the 70's is another horrible example of how NOT intervening leads to more evil being done. Then when we intervene people bitch like the Iraq war. We are NOT the worlds cops. I think that was their bitch or point.
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinette on Jan 23, 2009 11:49:27 GMT
Does this mean they were ANY LESS EVIL AND WRONG? What it means is that the entire government of the time is to be held responsible and not just one man. If you wish Obama to be free of any taint of these acts then you will have to ask him not to be in government at all. To be honest, I wish Obama was NEVER in ANY kind of power position based on all I found out about him when researching the candidates before this last election!
|
|