It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why is the government much less evil now?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 04:05 AM
link   
The US government seems to have become less evil since the start of the 21st century. We haven't had any wars since the new administration has gotten in power, these are only, military conflicts. Before, in the past, our nation would attack other more powerful nations, and would send people off to war, without any given reason. It's more of the same now, but, the government isn't doing the same experiments on civilians, because of the freedom of information act papers that were once classified information have been released to the public and we can see what the government has done, and we don't have a big enemy to worry about. We are better off fighting Al-quaeda than we are with fighting a government like the Soviet Union. These terrorists that we fight today don't really have a government since they haven't taken over any countries (yet). So, we don't have to worry about them mobilizing, all we have to do, is to contain them. They are really much weaker than other enemies we fought before, so, our government doesn't feel the need to create unnecessary experiments on civilians, as they have in the past.


I don't get why people are hating on Bush. I understand that Bush has made silly mistakes, but, he isn't as bad as those other guys, like, look at his father. His father was basically an NWO spokesperson, and Bush, isn't even speaking about the NWO.

Perhaps the people of our nation have changed? I guess I could say that the civil rights movement in the 60s could have changed government policy forever. Maybe it sent a shock to the government telling them to wake up.

We need more secular and social revolutions to take place before we can get the government to stop being corrupt. At the moment, the government is much less evil now, and there seems to be a number of reasons for that. Why is that so?




posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 05:25 AM
link   
?? i'm keen to see the reply's to this one....

personally im not in the US, but from what i can tell not a great deal has changed?

Fighting terrorists is a never ending war than can never be won as it is like fighting thin air, for every one killed another 10 rise up in the place, afterall this was how the CIA trained them to work....

basically your childrens children will be paying in years to come while the owners of the military industrial complex get richer and richer...

all in all, not good!

but then im in the UK and our country has just as many problems so who am i to speak...

Cheers
Dazzler



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 07:45 AM
link   
Not evil anymore?



I beleive Bush should be canonized. The man of high morals has brought nothing but peace on Earth and goodwill to man. At last we are free of the evil.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Maverickhunter
 


Uhhh, I dont think a year has gone by without some kind of US intervention both direct or indirect. Saying that the US government is "less evil" because the US has not been involved in a largescale war ignores countless counter insurgencies, counter revolutions, and all the proxy fighting going on.

Besides mixing euphemisms, you seem to have forgotten the US lead NATO incursion in Yugoslavia, something that was very much a war. What about the Gulf war? Your memory of history is shortsighted.

Not to mention the increasing global drug trade, something elements of the US government are quite active in promoting.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 10:07 AM
link   
Looking at your location I see you are over the rainbow and have to agree

after Vietnam in the 60-70's we had Gulf war 1 and now we have Gulf war 2 and we are still in the middle of this one, not to mention the whole War on Terror (ha) if you don't think these are real wars you should go and talk to the families of the nearly 4000 (3902 DOD confirmed) dead soldiers from the U.S.

at any rate I would dig a little deeper we have not changed for the better we have only gotten more aggressive and outwardly so..


Respectfully
GEO



[edit on 1/2/2008 by geocom]



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 10:34 AM
link   
I'd beg to differ, in fact, if anything, things are more corrupt. Just the fact that this administration has done whatever it could to impower the Executive branch, destroying any semblance of answerablity or allowing any system of checks and balances, says enough to me. This is a subtle crime, but probably the most dire of anything we face.

We haven't had any wars because we dance about the word, because Congress has always been hesitant to declare war, so we circumvent it with labeling.


Before, in the past, our nation would attack other more powerful nations, and would send people off to war, without any given reason


Again, I'd have to say, rather the opposite. To declare war, one needs a solid reason, either idealistic or otherwise, to gather behind and gain the support that one would need to have congress approve a war. This is why we dared attack nations that were significant opponents, risking lives and our safety - we felt we had a real,solid reason to do so.


...but, the government isn't doing the same experiments on civilians, because of the freedom of information act papers that were once classified information have been released to the public and we can see what the government has done,...


It's true, we have more regulations on human experiments, but it has nothing to do with the freedom of information act.

Though it is also true that the FIA does help us keep our government accountable, however, again, things are rather opposite of what you say. Things are not better, but worse, since this administration is reclassifying things to deny access to these, and worse, claiming executive priviledge on many other documents that are not classified in order to deny the public access. Bush also used an Executive Order to keep all papers from previous presidents from the public, which some, including myself, think that trying to reverse an act of congress with an EO is illegal.


We are better off fighting Al-quaeda than we are with fighting a government like the Soviet Union.


We are NOT better off. Fighting against guerilla soldiers is the messiest sort of war.


So, we don't have to worry about them mobilizing, all we have to do, is to contain them


But...they are already mobilized. They're in many countries, in small secretive groups. If we could contain them, this would be over already. But we cannot even find them for the most part.


I don't get why people are hating on Bush. I understand that Bush has made silly mistakes, but, he isn't as bad as those other guys, like, look at his father. His father was basically an NWO spokesperson, and Bush, isn't even speaking about the NWO


This administration has done more than make mistakes. What has happened is that they have taken us down a road, both of action and idealology, that will take us many years, if not generations, to turn back from.

And just because Bush isn't giving speeches that mention a New World Order, means nothing. He's in power because of his father, and his father's cronies. He stands supported by their network.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 10:43 AM
link   
To the OP:
I hope the weather on your lovely planet is good...
I'd like to know what you're smoking, must be some awesome stuff!

Needless to say, I couldn't disagree with you more.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by forestlady
 

Do you have any actual reason to disagree with me or are you disagreeing with me because other people in the thread are disagreeing with me and you don't know why so you assume that I am on drugs?

Anyways, here's what I think.

While there have been confrontations with us and other governments in the past we have had different actions taken with this President than more other Presidents. Other Presidents were far more evil than Bush. Look at Bill Clinton, I don't care if I am insulting anyone by saying that the President that everyone likes is bad, but, I mean, when he was around he deceived a lot of people into thinking world peace was possible. That sounds like an NWO objective to me. Is George W Bush doing that? Clearly not. But, with Bush in office, Bush has managed to stall the government's efforts on manifest destiny to a NWO by means of the war in Iraq. The war in Iraq has preoccupied the government's foreign policy and now we face an enemy in Iraq that we didn't foresee and we're figuring out how to deal with the enemy. In other nations around the world, Al-quaeada isn't as successful as they are in Iraq. That's why they are easier to contain. That's why I think they are easier to contain, mainly, because, they don't have the same power that the Soviets had. Imagine if the terrorists acquired the same nuclear weapons technology of the Soviets and or the Russians of today. We would be brought down to our knees and fall and the world would be at peril. More of our problems with this enemy doesn't lie within combat it relies on intelligence. We've prevented major attacks on our home soil from ocurring again since the incident on 9-11 and that's something we have to be proud of ourself for. If Bush really is that evil, and Bush is behind 9-11, and Bush did terrorism, and Bush is working with the terrorists, making psychological experiments at Guantanamo bay, and, like, all of those other places, don't you think we would have heard about different special projects like we have from other Presidents in the past?

There is still a load of information that we can find on the FOIA that's not related to different Presidents. Like for instance, we can find out what a government agency is up to through a document search on the FOIA.

People can say all they want, that other Presidents before weren't as bad, and Bush has done more evil acts with limiting our freedom for favor of security, and crap like that. Bush is more prone to making mistakes than actually initializing bills into law that make it so obvious that we are moving to facism. The reason George W Bush hasn't implimented the same policies that his father did are because George W Bush has a lot of opposition to him, and, so, Bush had to change his ways a bit, since now Democrats are in charge of Congress, things are different. That means Bush hasn't been able to do a lot of the things he wanted- like impose new measures from the Patriot Act, etc, etc. Bush isn't as evil as other Presidents. The gulf war II is only one war, and, Bush is only there because of the UN, so it isn't a question as to why we went to war, and it wasn't our President's fault, and the UN probably would have went there on the basis that Iraq was refusing to comply with them anyways.

Bush is very interesting to discuss from different points of view My opinion on the matter is that Bush isn't evil, he's misguided, therefore our government isn't evil, it's misguided as well. Would you rather have a misguided idiot like Bush as President or someone that's able to implement their policies even if people disagree with them/hate them?



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 01:30 AM
link   
just thinking here...

"if i wanted to rule the world..i would not want to be the faceman...i would rather have total power, with another, to be my face so mine would not be scarred...yes and set it so that no face can stay on too long, a new face is always good for a new image.
But deep down, im still the same, and my children, i'll be sure of it, will follow my footsteps, to keep this position of delusional power to mine own.
And of course, never forget, things are easier when you have slaves doing it all for you, and what better slave, than one who thinks he is free."

Just a thought
Hoped you all liked it



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 01:43 AM
link   

MaverickHunter
Clearly not. But, with Bush in office, Bush has managed to stall the government's efforts on manifest destiny to a NWO by means of the war in Iraq. The war in Iraq has preoccupied the government's foreign policy and now we face an enemy in Iraq that we didn't foresee and we're figuring out how to deal with the enemy. In other nations around the world, Al-quaeada isn't as successful as they are in Iraq. That's why they are easier to contain. That's why I think they are easier to contain, mainly, because, they don't have the same power that the Soviets had.


How does invading a country, destroying its infrastructure, training and selectively placing U.S. friendly values and politicians, building multiple bases and an embassy larger than the Vatican in a middle eastern oil rich country NOT manifest destiny? And there were plans to go into Iraq long before 9/11.

Al-Qaeda doesn't seem as successful elsewhere because we aren't there. If they want to attack Americans they just go to where we are. They aren't "successful" in other places because they don't need to be there.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 01:44 AM
link   
Ever hear the saying..."The calm before the storm"?



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maverickhunter
reply to post by forestlady
 

Do you have any actual reason to disagree with me or are you disagreeing with me because other people in the thread are disagreeing with me and you don't know why so you assume that I am on drugs?

Why did you focus on her posts and not the others that raised vaild points and flaws within your reasoning?



While there have been confrontations with us and other governments in the past we have had different actions taken with this President than more other Presidents. Other Presidents were far more evil than Bush.

My belief is that regardless of the administration, the same policies are initialized and enforced. The US National Security State will continue to invade, encircle and crush any regime that threatens the perogitives of Multi-national Corporate Finance Capital.



Look at Bill Clinton, I don't care if I am insulting anyone by saying that the President that everyone likes is bad, but, I mean, when he was around he deceived a lot of people into thinking world peace was possible.

Not insulting me, I want Mr. Clinton, his policy makers, and the heads of NATO brought up on charges for crimes against humanity and crimes against the US people.

As for the whole world peace issue, Bush does the same thing. The reason hes fighting terrorism worldwide is for "stability"

Of course, the smart observer will see this is far from the truth.



That sounds like an NWO objective to me. Is George W Bush doing that? Clearly not.

I dont believe in the NWO, so I guess I wont comment further on this point.



But, with Bush in office, Bush has managed to stall the government's efforts on manifest destiny to a NWO by means of the war in Iraq.

So, you believe bush is doing everyone a favor by stalling the NWO, by launching an invaision of 2 countries, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians, thousands of US soldiers, spending trillions of tax dollars, allowing Non-competitive bidding on defense and rebuilding contracts (something that allows runaway spending in the billions)? That is the most short sighted thing I have ever read.

The purpose of those invasions was not to slow the progress of the NWO, it was to 1) crush an opposing economic order, and 2) create investment opportunities for Multi-national Corporate Finance Capital.



The war in Iraq has preoccupied the government's foreign policy and now we face an enemy in Iraq that we didn't foresee and we're figuring out how to deal with the enemy.

The US government knows very well what type of enemy they would be fighting, they have fought them many times before (and created a bunch in the process.) The US government has been the foremost supporter of proxy/mercinary/terrorist forces in the world. Using these groups to fight and die for the overall goals of US interventionist policy.



In other nations around the world, Al-quaeada isn't as successful as they are in Iraq. That's why they are easier to contain.


You really believe AQ is just some jackoffs in caves dont you?



Imagine if the terrorists acquired the same nuclear weapons technology of the Soviets and or the Russians of today. We would be brought down to our knees and fall and the world would be at peril.

And imagine if the US administration didnt have to worry about the political fallout of using Nukes during incursions.



More of our problems with this enemy doesn't lie within combat it relies on intelligence.


Intelligence isnt picking up and RPG or AK-101 and knocking off troops at the greenzone checkpoint.



We've prevented major attacks on our home soil from ocurring again since the incident on 9-11 and that's something we have to be proud of ourself for.

Really? Which ones?



If Bush really is that evil, and Bush is behind 9-11, and Bush did terrorism, and Bush is working with the terrorists, making psychological experiments at Guantanamo bay, and, like, all of those other places, don't you think we would have heard about different special projects like we have from other Presidents in the past?


Unless a wistleblower comes forward, no, we wouldnt hear a damn thing about such instances. The purpose of black ops is to stay under the radar They are funded wholly by cash hidden in slush funds and have no accountablilty to congress of the US government.



There is still a load of information that we can find on the FOIA that's not related to different Presidents. Like for instance, we can find out what a government agency is up to through a document search on the FOIA.

Derrr, FOIA only applies to de-classified material. Your not going to get notes from the wartable just before bush went into Afghanistan.



People can say all they want, that other Presidents before weren't as bad,

Very few presidents have actually stood for the people. Most stand for Multi-national conglomerates.




and Bush has done more evil acts with limiting our freedom for favor of security, and crap like that.


Im glad you regard your freedom as crap. Maybe you'd like to enlist in the USMC so you can lose it all at once?



Bush is more prone to making mistakes than actually initializing bills into law that make it so obvious that we are moving to facism.


So everything he has done to circumvent the US constitution was just a mistake? Man talk about not learning from his mistakes.

Really now, I can see making a few blunders here and there, but how many times can someone mess up before you start noticing a pattern?



The reason George W Bush hasn't implimented the same policies that his father did are because George W Bush has a lot of opposition to him,


Uhhh, which policies has George Sr implimented that Jr hasnt? Dont forget, there was no opposition against him untill last year.



and, so, Bush had to change his ways a bit, since now Democrats are in charge of Congress, things are different.


No there not. Congress has done nothing to stop and reverse what bush has done.



Bush isn't as evil as other Presidents.



They're all bad, just to varing degree's



The gulf war II is only one war, and,


You've already forgot about Afghanistan. And those are only the conflicts listed as wars. There are still many more conflicts that the US is involved in that go on unnoticed.



Bush is only there because of the UN, so it isn't a question as to why we went to war, and it wasn't our President's fault, and the UN probably would have went there on the basis that Iraq was refusing to comply with them anyways.


What the hell are you talking about? The UN would not support an invasion of Iraq because Iraq gave complete complaince! Man, propaganda works well on some.



Bush is very interesting to discuss from different points of view My opinion on the matter is that Bush isn't evil, he's misguided, therefore our government isn't evil, it's misguided as well.

How can someone remain so misguided after 8 years in office? He must never look back at his "mistakes".

heres what I think, bush isnt misguided, he is keenly aware of what his policies will do and he is keenly aware of the class perogitives his policies support. With that in mind, his actions arent misguided, they are cold, calculated, and vicious.



Would you rather have a misguided idiot like Bush as President or someone that's able to implement their policies even if people disagree with them/hate them?

I would rather have a competent president that stands for the people.


A word of advice, get out in the world. Read some independant reports on whats going on in the world. Your current view is very narrow and short sighted.

[edit on 3-1-2008 by InSpiteOf]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join