Zimbabwe Follows Fascist Policies of the West

As more and more of "allied" countries restrict the rights of their public, more and more countries are stepping up to follow suite.

Zimbabwe passes net bugging law

Zimbabwe's MPs have passed a law to allow the government to monitor e-mails, telephone calls, the internet and postal communications.

Opposition MP David Coltart called it a "fascist piece of legislation" aimed at cracking down on political dissent.

But Communications Minister Christopher Mushowe defended it, saying it was similar to anti-terror laws elsewhere such as in the UK, US and South Africa.

Zimbabwe has had no recent terrorists attacks. If anything they've accused Australia of funding terror. It would seem the propaganda machine has been in effect in order to accelerate these policies.

Image: Zimbabwe.svg From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


[edit on 14-6-2007 by tyranny22]

Will such policies become a world-wide trend?

The Western Alliances pushed for decades to influence other countries to develop Democratic governments throughout the world. Are these democracies slowly becoming Fascist? Does this not follow suite for The New American Century?

[edit on 14-6-2007 by tyranny22]

Gosh, horribleness. This seems to becoming the norm, all in safety's sake...ridiculous.

Originally posted by mnmcandiez
Gosh, horribleness. This seems to becoming the norm, all in safety's sake...ridiculous.

Horrible indeed. It's my fear that eventually all nations (at least with-in globally accepted nations, i.e. U.N. supported) will eventually conform to these Police State-like policies.

Fascist policies of the west? What the heck? Where you actually get the idea that U.S. policies dealing with terrorism is Facist?

Originally posted by deltaboy
Fascist policies of the west? What the heck? Where you actually get the idea that U.S. policies dealing with terrorism is Facist?

Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology that considers individual and other societal interests subordinate to the needs of the state.

A constitutional republic is a state where the head of state and other officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens.

Most national constitutions also guarantee certain rights to the people.

Monitoring my internet, phone, mail, etc. has nothing to do with terrorism. When the government starts to retract rights embedded in our constitution without public approval is when I label them as facist.

I know corporations have nothing to do with terrorism, but they are another reason why I feel our government is leaning more and more toward a Fascist policy.

"Fascism' should be called 'Corporatism' more properly, because it's the perfect merger, of power between the corporation and the State."
—Benito Mussolini

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."
— Franklin D. Roosevelt

Any time I have ever emailed, phoned or used the internet, I have never expected it to be a completely private conversation or post. I don't know how people can! What's fascist about that?

Well isn't the US the model for the rest of the world? I guess now our own government could not dare to call the Zimbabwe government oppressive.

Occurs under the umbrella of fighting terrorism everything is acceptable and for the good of the nations.

Originally posted by closettrekkie
Any time I have ever emailed, phoned or used the internet, I have never expected it to be a completely private conversation or post. I don't know how people can! What's fascist about that?

ECPA
(Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) Signed into law in 1986, the ECPA extends legal protection against wiretapping and other forms of unauthorized interception to e-mail, cellular telephones, pagers, computer transmissions and communications provided by private communication carriers.

Under the Patriot Act, many rights can be abused.

Hypothetical Scenario
Who's to say that I haven't been "flagged" for the threads I've created here on ATS. Once flagged, more monitoring can begin, such as phone taps, internet surveillance, etc. Now, I begin visiting Muslim news sites such as Al Jazeer and another flag is raised. While on the phone someone brings up politics and I go on a rant about the administration and Iraq, normally this would be no big deal, but I've already got two flags, so they flag that conversation as well. 3 flags ... I'm out. Now I've been labeled a domestic threat and full surveillance can begin. Now it's not just communications that's being monitored, it's all aspects of my life: my home, my family, my work.

Guess I shouldn't have been expressing my ideologies so publicly.

[edit on 14-6-2007 by tyranny22]

Records obtained from the immigration courts under the Freedom of Information Act show that only 0.0015 percent of the total number of cases filed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security were terrorism related, despite the fact that the Bush administration has repeatedly asserted that it is the primary focus of the DHS.

A report issued Sunday by independent research group The Transactional Records Action Clearinghouse (TRAC) found that in the last three years there have only been 12 charges of terrorism out of 814,073 cases.

infowars.net...

0.0015 percent !

"The DHS claims it is focused on terrorism. Well that's just not true," David Burnham, a TRAC spokesman told CNN. "Either there's no terrorism, or they're terrible at catching them. Either way it's bad for all of us."

LOL.

In response to the above revelation, a DHS spokesman criticised the TRAC report and said it's compilers didn't understand what Dept. Homeland Security were attempting to achieve. (LOL again).

The DHS spokesperson claimed that as result of DHS's 'clamp down', on all forms of immigration, it was now much more difficult for 'terrorists' to enter the US. (as evidenced, apparently, by only 12 charges from out of 814,000 investigations and it's to be suspected that out of those 12 charges, at least 8 will be quietly dropped).

The absurdity of DHS's claims is demonstrated by the millions of illegal aliens (currently placed variously between 14 and 20 million -- a lot by anyone's count !) who pour into the US each year from ANYwhere they please, for what-EVER purpose they choose, thanks to the open US borders (as evidenced by the current debates re: immigration reform)

So clearly, the US government is not at all concerned about the 'terrorist threats' which they themselves invented and continue to encourage.

Rather, the US government is intent upon stifling dissent re: it's policies within its own populace.

The architects of this insanity are the same monsters who orchestrated the 'anti-Commie' hysteria and Cold War, also the 'commie witch-hunts' and blacklisting in the entertainment industry and arts. They invented Communism. THEY got their rocks off torturing millions of Russians and populations of other Communist countries. They were the ones devising the satanic 'torture' methods in the basements of Europe. They pitted neighbour against neighbour throughout Communist countries; forced ordinary citizens to give false evidence agains their neighbours. They devised the 'holocaust'; the human-soap and human-skin-lampshade fictions.

Now, thanks to greedy and gutless US politicians, they've come to a Cinema Near You ! Now it's US citizens who will be carted off the same blood-washed basements and forced via torture to lie about their neighbours --- all in the name of War on Terra. The same War on Terra that these criminally insane, blood-thirsty, godless scum created, via the insurance scam that was 9-11. Just like that dual-loyalitied Rooseveldt used Pearl Harbour to thrust ordinary Americans into the deliberately created WW2 --- for the enormous profit of the world-boundary architects to enjoy.

Every TIME a system is put in place, be that 'surveillance' of ordinary citizens or the 'rebuilding' and 'supply' of Iraq -- or the provision of uniforms, equipment and supply of US and other troops sent to Iraq, etc. ..... there are contracts awarded and massive profits to be made. Follow the money. All the rest is just a means to that end -- money -- be it wars on terra, wars on drugs, wars on populations, wars for oil, pre-emptive wars, etc. etc.

Same with 'wars on dissidents'.

First you orchestrate fear, anxiety and 'threats'.

Then you insist such threats are real.

You insist these threats must be stamped out.

Then you persecute those who never believed in the authenticity of the threats to begin with.

You pay yourself and your buddies all the way through for the 'terrorist' camps and guards and supplies and 'surveillance techniques and technology', etc.

It was all predictable. Factions now thoroughly entrenched in the highest echelons of US government created 'communism'. They profited from the 'cold war' they nurtured and supported from both sides. They engineered the collapse of Communist states. They profited from the sale of former USSR munitions by selling them to third world nations. They foster numerous 'outbreaks' and wars world-wide, selling arms and 'intelligence' to all sides. The profit from the ransacking OF those third world nations which are handily engrossed in war, in order to steal the lucrative mineral and other rights within those desecrated nations.

And of course ( having collapsed the lucrative 'Cold War' between the US and the USSR) they then created a 'replacement' internal war within the United States --- this time between the US government and the people of the US.

Only question remaining is: do they do all this because they're addicted to other people's money? Or are they simply addicted to the shedding of other people's blood ?

As for Australia 'supporting the fascist policies of the West' :

originally posted in the OP ' Zimbabwe has had no recent terrorists attacks. If anything they've accused Australia of funding terror. It would seem the propaganda machine has been in effect in order to accelerate these policies

The actual situation was as follows:

14th May 2007
TONY EASTLEY: There's bipartisan support for the Federal Government's step to ban the Australian cricket team from touring Zimbabwe.

The Government has decided that to allow the tour to go ahead in September would have been an unacceptable message of support for the brutal Mugabe regime.

The Opposition agrees, but wants Australia to go even further and take steps to refer President Robert Mugabe to the International Criminal Court.
From Canberra, Peta Donald reports.

www.alp.org.au...

Mugabe. He actually persuades me to accept that some things which walk on two legs are not human.

Originally posted by tyranny22

Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology that considers individual and other societal interests subordinate to the needs of the state.

A constitutional republic is a state where the head of state and other officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens.

Most national constitutions also guarantee certain rights to the people.

Monitoring my internet, phone, mail, etc. has nothing to do with terrorism. When the government starts to retract rights embedded in our constitution without public approval is when I label them as facist.

I know corporations have nothing to do with terrorism, but they are another reason why I feel our government is leaning more and more toward a Fascist policy.

Okay lets look at your source.

Fascism has been defunct in the Western world as a major political ideology since the defeat of the Axis powers in World War II. There is considerable stigma attached to the name and to the concept, and it is not uncommon for people to label their political opponents (or authority figures in general) pejoratively as "fascists". However, a small number of openly fascist political groups continue to exist, such as the Italian Fiamma Tricolore.

The term fascism is sometimes but very rarely applied to other authoritarian regimes of the same period, such as those of Imperial Japan under Hideki Tojo, Austria under Engelbert Dollfuss, and Greece under Ioannis Metaxas. Its use for similar, but longer-lived, regimes such as Spain under Francisco Franco and the Estado Novo of António de Oliveira Salazar in Portugal, is widespread among opponents of those regimes, but often disputed by supporters and by some historians. Hitler and Mussolini supported what they believed were fascist policies in the New Deal programs of Franklin Roosevelt in the United States. This trend toward the term being used only by opponents is even more pronounced in the case of more recent anti-communist authoritarian regimes, such as Chile under Augusto Pinochet[citation needed] or Indonesia under Suharto. There are also several instances of labeling political opponents as fascists even if they officially subscribe to socialist doctrines. During 1928-1935 period policy of the communist movement was to describe social democracy as a form of social fascism, and during the Sino-Soviet dispute Chinese officials labeled the Soviet Union under Leonid Brezhnev as fascist.[18] Post-Mao Chinese communists also argue that Mao Zedong's regime in China was a form of fascism.[19]

Wow FDR was a Fascist?

Fascist as epithet
Main article: Fascist (epithet)
The word fascist has become a slur throughout the political spectrum following World War II, and it has been uncommon for political groups to call themselves fascist. In contemporary political discourse, adherents of some political ideologies tend to associate fascism with their enemies, or define it as the opposite of their own views. In the strict sense of the word, Fascism covers movements before WWII, and later movements are described as Neo-fascist.

Some have argued that the term fascist has become hopelessly vague over the years and that it has become little more than a pejorative epithet. George Orwell wrote in 1944:

...the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else... almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’.[23]

The association of fascism with strict discipline has led to the word fascist being used as computer hacker jargon for a feature which is seen as too restrictive. For example: "Our old mainframe computer's operating language was very fascist; it insisted on one space and no more, between instruction parameters."[24]

You can call it Fascist as much as you want but don't expect to see the U.S. govt. go burning books and encouraging attacks on other people in the name of a superior race. Nor have I seen Muslim-Americans put into concentration camps and gas to death.

What did our great Fascist leader Bush said? "Islam is peace?"

I don't remember somebody like Hitler saying something like that for Jews.

U.S. govt. go burning books and encouraging attacks on other people in the name of a superior race.

More than one way to kill a cat, eh?

The US govt. (via those who infiltrated and now actually control and run the US govt. and US) chose a more sophisticated, less noticeable, less open way of doing things.

They appointed a jewish academic whose sole contribution to that point had been the study of jellyfish --- as controller of anthopology. He changed his name to the ancient British surname of 'Montague' and began re-writing history and anthropology. Any academic who protested or disputed was denied tenure and prevented from publishing or speaking out publicly.

Ergo: entire fabricated histories were 'invented'.

True history and truth were purged from the records.

That's how it's done these days, right across the board.

And this new method of book-burning is utilized.

As for what Hitler did or did not say or do to the jews -- lol, how would you know? All you know is what you're told and what you're told complies with the agenda of those who re-wrote and continue to re-write truth and history which is then regurgitated by the jew-controlled whore media.

Which -- if you swallo it and then attempt to convince others of it --- makes you nothing more than a parrot or human recorder/transmitting device.

Originally posted by deltaboy
Wow FDR was a Fascist?

I never said that. I simply used a quote of FDR's to help demonstrate that I'm not the only person that thinks solitary control of state is a Fascist policy.

Also, see NSPD 51 & HSPD 20

Originally posted by deltaboy
You can call it Fascist as much as you want but don't expect to see the U.S. govt. go burning books and encouraging attacks on other people in the name of a superior race. Nor have I seen Muslim-Americans put into concentration camps and gas to death.

What did our great Fascist leader Bush said? "Islam is peace?"

I don't remember somebody like Hitler saying something like that for Jews.

I'm sure Hitler said a lot of things before he started rounding Jewish people up. How did he know what people to put on a train anyhow? It's not like they could have just monitored their online presence like the government can today. I'm sure he sent the Gestapo knocking on their doors very politely and took a survey that included religious preferences. Years later they knew where the Jewish community was when they started the train whistles blowing. This goes back to invasion of privacy and secret police.

Now, I didn't call the administration Nazi's. Rather, I used a common slur of Fascist. But, if you insist on going there ... I must point out that in this day and age why burn book when you can censor the internet, control what's being taught in school, and influence the media.

As far as encouraging attacks on other ethnic races see: War in Iraq

And if that's not enough, check out eugenics and pay close attention to the United States portion:

In more recent times the Combating Autism Act, ratified unanimously by the United States Senate and signed by president George W. Bush, is an example of modern eugenic legislation. The bill contains provisions to support the development of a prenatal diagnosis of autism, which could lead to a reduction in the birth rate of autistic children.

After WWII Eugenics, as you can imagine, became very unpopular worldwide. Many members split off from the Eugenics Society and formed their own little clubs such as The Planned Parenthood organization and still function under names such as these. The Bush family has many ties with eugenics from his association with The Brotherhood of Death. It's so secret that even WE can't talk about it. But, General Draper wasn't afraid to talk about it when he founded the Population Crisis Committee. It just so happens that William H. Draper III, his son, was co-chairman for finance of the Bush-for-President national campaign organization in 1980.

Most people do not care how the trick is done, they just want to to be entertained. Illusions are great to look at, but it's what they cover up that is most surprising.

[edit on 14-6-2007 by tyranny22]

I would think that if our government was truly the awful fascist pig you claim it to be, you wouldn't be here posting right now - you'd have people knocking at your door questioning you.

Not saying I'm thrilled with our government - I don't like the way our country is being run. But I think sometimes these statements can get a bit blown out of proportion.

Originally posted by closettrekkie
I would think that if our government was truly the awful fascist pig you claim it to be, you wouldn't be here posting right now - you'd have people knocking at your door questioning you.

Not saying I'm thrilled with our government - I don't like the way our country is being run. But I think sometimes these statements can get a bit blown out of proportion.

I wouldn't. I'm just one guy posting threads about our government's fascist policy. If I were to organize a demonstration they might knock on my door to question my intentions.

One person can be written off as a kook. But a group of people would gather attention. It would make people ask questions like, "why are they demonstrating?". It would raise awareness and that could be considered a threat.

What's so hard to see about this? Singular control of government has been referred to as a dictatorship:

In contemporary usage, dictatorship refers to an autocratic form of absolute rule by leadership unrestricted by law, constitutions, or other social and political factors within the state.

The president signed a presidential directive to relinquish all power unto him during a time of crisis.

The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government.

This is exactly what Hitler did with the Reichstag Fires. It's what Roman Emperors did to secure control of their senates in times of war.

This combined with the fact that he's altered many facets of our Constitution to suit his own needs for more control of our government, people and the world is clear evidence of fascist policy.

It's not a big deal to be fascist. That's fine. If you put the State above the People, who am I to judge you? That's your opinion. But, don't go around calling yourself something else. If you're ashamed of your stance on government, then change your stance. It's no good to support something you're ashamed of.

If you think all else is second place to the needs of the government then it could be said that you support Fascist Policy.

If you put the People of a Nation above the government that rules then it could be said that your support a Democratic Policy.

okay. I'm willing to bend of this a little.

Since Bush has not fully seized control of our government (he's only put the documentation in to do so) and since he's not fully disregarded the entire Constitution (yet) then I'm willing to say that he cannot be called a Fascist.

I think a better term could be Neo-Fascist since it's a new form akin to the older practices of Fascism.

Of the West? You mean the East doesn't do this?

of course they do. but they're proud of it. they don't hide behind a false label of "Democracy".