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.

 

The internet has the power to overthrow zionist neocons !!

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 12:26 PM
link   
I think that the internet has the power to overthrow neocons. there are many internet bloggers and articles by objective intellectuals such as Scott Ritter, Robert Fisk, James Petras, Paul Craig Roberts, Noam Chomsky, Chris Hedges, Normal Solomon, Paul Joseph Watson, Alex Jones, Seymor Hershz, Tariq Ali, and many, many, many more American and international intellectuals which have written many articles about the non-existance nuclear bombs and dangerous weapons in Iraq, and about that Iraq didn't have any thing to do with 9/11. But i think that the problem with America is that America has been ruled by the ultra-right wing, and US government itself wether ruled by the Democratic Party or Republican Party are ultra-right wing extremists, and we have to realize that ultra-right wing governments ignore all truths, all facts, and live in a metaphysical, esoteric, mystical reality very disconnected from science, truth and evidence-based facts. Spain and many other countries are different, the population of other countries are real fortunate to protect themselves from tyrants with science and facts, but science and facts don't work in America. I read an article by Spanish intellectual Ignacio Ramonet, which said that the social-democrat Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero (Spain's president) rose to power with the help of the internet bloggers and articles, in which spanish people digested quickly the reality of Aznar's fascism, started to despise Aznar's fascist measures, divorced themselves totally from Aznar and his support for the illegal criminal Iraq war and supported the social-democrat Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, a much better president for the people of Spain. But I think that the cause of why Europeans are smarter than americans in politics doesn't have any thing to do with IQs or personal education. the real cause is that europeans have a lot more access to information and knowledge than most americans. I say this, because John Mccain (A Bush clone) still has 41%, i mean where does the 41% of John Mccain comes from. 41% of US voting population is about 45 million people supporting Mccain, so there must be something really wrong in the adult US voting population. Like Michael Rivero from www.whatreallyhappened.com... who said that US congress ignored internet objective articles and bloggers on the US government's lies for invading Iraq: "Guys? Congress AUTHORIZED the Iraq war, remember? The Congress, with their huge staffs and huge budgets, all missed (or ignored) the obvious signs of deception that bloggers operating on spare change (thanks again for all the donations yesterday) were reporting on and voted through an authorization for the invasion of Iraq. THEN, Congress failed to revoke that authorization when it became obvious that Bush had lied in his letter activating that authorization."




posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 12:29 PM
link   
I dont think the neocons can be considered Zionist, I believe that most of them are anti-semitic.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Your avatar is a picture of an enemy of the United States of America.

From your post I am wondering if you too are an enemy of my country.

Well enough of that let's get on with your supposition that the Internet has the power to overthrow neocons.

The Internet is only as powerful as the powers that be allow it to be. Yes the Internet is a powerful voice. However it is not a respecter of ideologies. There are very few subjects that cannot and are not broached here.

When the Internet becomes a problem to the PTB it will be made not a problem. Even then there will be many of us that will do everything possible to continue to spread the truth to the people by whatever means necessary.

May I ask in what country you reside? If not in Spain maybe that would be a better place for you to be.




posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 01:46 PM
link   
Dear right winger, loyal to fascists in the US government:

hmmmm, i think you are a blind sheep brainwashed by the mainstream capitalist media. i am sorry but you are very biased and i suspect a lot of mind control by CNN, and FOX in you !!

Where the hell did you learn that Chavez is an enemy of America? in CNN in FOX? can you prove me that Hugo Chavez is an enemy of the USA? And who gives the authority to Bush, US government and the mainstream jewish owned media to label Chavez as an enemy of USA?

The real enemy of humanity is US government and Bush, and not Chavez !!

Just because US government is a terrorist organization, doesn't mean that other governments are.

So wake up and smell the fascism my friend

for more good information on waking up from your brainwashing go to the following websites:

www.axisoflogic.com...

www.dissidentvoice.org...

www.whatreallyhappened.com...

www.marxist.com...

and STOP BUYING THE LIES OF CNN, FOX and mainstream media, because i sense a lot of mainstream media brainwashing in your statements

nanovapor


reply to post by dizziedame
 



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 01:57 PM
link   
I applaud your passion, miguided as it is, IMO.

Are you advocating "overthrowing" of the entire "right-wing" spectrum within our government, the radio waves which are dominated by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, internet and print political commentators? And what of those pesky Zionists?

And which right-wing Democrats were you referring to?

I'm a little confused as to what exactly you want to do...shall we kill all of these folks? Censor them? Throw the bums out of office? Change the first amendment to insure they never have a voice again?

I'm not familiar with the political scene in Spain, but I seriously doubt it is void of any conservative-leaning representatives (it IS a representative government, isn't it?).

And, as dizziedame pointed out, your avatar only adds fuel to your angry post, which appears to be your first.

May you find inner peace amongst the turmoil.

Peace.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 02:03 PM
link   
I am talking about overthrowing the fascist system of USA, the whole fascist system (Both parties included) and installing a real democracy. You know a real demo-cracy for the people, a workers popular government.

Yeah that's right, reforming and toppling the whole power structures of USA.

But for that we need a third political movement. The problem is that Americans are very divided, egocentrically divided, and with a nation so divided like this it is real hard to reach any solution. Americans are very skeptical of any change and of any new knowledge. Americans are married with CNN and FOX.

And it's real hard to divorce people from CNN and FOX (2 evil TV stations)

So again, i am talking about changing this country from the current oligarchical fascist system to a democracy, a real democracy for all americans

nanovapor



reply to post by DavidsNite
 



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 02:07 PM
link   
By the way the reason that americans don't know that they are being controlled by zionist capitalist indoctrination is because they have no way of recognizing it. they watch tv, movies and read the papers and think that surely what they are seeing and reading must be the truth because it is "american." they have no idea who fabricates what they see and read, and most tellingly, they have little or no curiosity about it.

nanovapor




Originally posted by DavidsNite
I applaud your passion, miguided as it is, IMO.

Are you advocating "overthrowing" of the entire "right-wing" spectrum within our government, the radio waves which are dominated by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, internet and print political commentators? And what of those pesky Zionists?

And which right-wing Democrats were you referring to?

I'm a little confused as to what exactly you want to do...shall we kill all of these folks? Censor them? Throw the bums out of office? Change the first amendment to insure they never have a voice again?

I'm not familiar with the political scene in Spain, but I seriously doubt it is void of any conservative-leaning representatives (it IS a representative government, isn't it?).

And, as dizziedame pointed out, your avatar only adds fuel to your angry post, which appears to be your first.

May you find inner peace amongst the turmoil.

Peace.




posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by nanovapor
 


Democracy like in USSR? Or N.Korea?
If i have to choose between "fascist" current US and "democratic workers of the world unite" future US - i will go for the first choice.
Oh and why you think that it is necessary to remove current two parties in order to introduce yours? Let the public decide, internet is not Jewish owned media (at least as far as i am aware.) so you have your media outlet, ideas are also much more appealing then those of "fascists". Just do not mention that it was applied before,at what cost and especially how it ended.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 02:11 PM
link   
what americans don't seem to know but will hurt them is the way that they are being played by the zionist power structure. this is primarily because though naturally averse to and "foreign" influence american consciousness has been shaped and molded by zionist indoctrination for decades. look no further than hollywood where the dumbing down of america originated and marches on unabated. but americans can no more extricate themselves from idiotic hollywood movies than they can extricate themselves from junk food. they simply demand more of the same fodder. they are hopeless. one of the behaviors americans have learned from their blessed media is to posture and pretend. americans are all about attitude and bluster as depicted on their television. they imitate tv like chimps. sorry, i am insulting chimps.

nanovapor



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 02:19 PM
link   
I mean a real democracy, not North Korea. North Korea is a state-capitalist burocratic centralized system almost like USA, and USSR. I mean a real people's democracy, a direct-democracy, a participative-democracy. Other intellectuals like Heinz Deterich label it as 'Socialism of the XXI Century' which is better than USSR socialism.

Just read about Venezuela's 21st Century Socialism, so you can understand what i mean in this page: www.venezuelanalysis.com...

Venezuela is a popular supported Democracy. In fact according to latest polls Venezuela is supported by 74% of its people.

Just because you love Bush, and US fascism, doesn't mean all americans like the current US fascism regime. In fact according to latest polls only 24% of Americans support the current US government, Bush and his wars.

So which is doing better as a political system? Venezuela supported by 73% or US Bushist fascism with 24% support? After all USA is not the land of the free and brave right now. But the home of the enslaved. Enslaved by a Cabal, by a hoarde of neocons. Who have destroyed USA and the world !!

It is safe to assume that right now Venezuela is the home of the free and brave, with liberty, justice and happiness for all

nanovapor



Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
reply to post by nanovapor
 


Democracy like in USSR? Or N.Korea?
If i have to choose between "fascist" current US and "democratic workers of the world unite" future US - i will go for the first choice.
Oh and why you think that it is necessary to remove current two parties in order to introduce yours? Let the public decide, internet is not Jewish owned media (at least as far as i am aware.) so you have your media outlet, ideas are also much more appealing then those of "fascists". Just do not mention that it was applied before,at what cost and especially how it ended.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Chavez has 75% of support by its people, and Bush 24% by its people (Note those 24% who support and love Bush are right-wing evangelical lunatics who go to church on weekdays and on sundays to pray to Bush)

nanovapor



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Ok, the monkeys and I promise to turn off Fox and CNN for a while.



In all seriousness though, you've clarified your position a little better, and now it's clear that you believe the U.S. should be more like the Venezuelan model. I find this notion intriguing, and will do some research.

You are absolutely correct that the current POTUS, and his administration enjoy less than a 25% favorabiliity rating. The Congress, even less.

In this revelotionary "third" party that you advocate, would freedom of the press, and freedom of religion still be guaranteed? Would the Constitution still be recognized?



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by dizziedame
Your avatar is a picture of an enemy of the United States of America.

From your post I am wondering if you too are an enemy of my country.

Well enough of that let's get on with your supposition that the Internet has the power to overthrow neocons.

The Internet is only as powerful as the powers that be allow it to be. Yes the Internet is a powerful voice. However it is not a respecter of ideologies. There are very few subjects that cannot and are not broached here.

When the Internet becomes a problem to the PTB it will be made not a problem. Even then there will be many of us that will do everything possible to continue to spread the truth to the people by whatever means necessary.

May I ask in what country you reside? If not in Spain maybe that would be a better place for you to be.



So something is my enemy because moronic jingoistic rightwingers say it is? No.

I agree with this guy, nice to see a Socialist at above top secret



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by nanovapor
 


Intellectuals they may be. Objective? That would depend upon by what criteria you judge objectivity by.

If your criteria is America is never right, and it's opponents always right, then yes I'd agree with your assessment of their objectivity...

If objectivity means actually looking at an issue from as many sides as it takes to truly understand an issue, then no, those folks, smart as they may indeed be, do not fit the definition of objectivity. Not by any stretch of the imagination, save perhaps a few misguided folks who can't be bothered to look at an issue from more than one side.

Wanting to change the world, what a marvelous and noble concept...save that not all change is good...to make good change one has to understand all sides to an issue that needs changing. Looking at only the side you agree with leaves you with a rather myopic view of things...

Even us monkeys know that...

Another thing, what's with all the name calling? Can we not have a civil conversation about politics without personalities coming into it?

HEY THAT'S MY BANANA...pardon me, the monkey house beckons...





[edit on 6/20/2008 by seagull]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 01:02 AM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 



Amen to that brother. There`s not much more that can be said.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 02:05 AM
link   
*sigh* Do they even teach in schools anymore?

The United States is *****NOT**** a "democracy". We never have been. We never wanted to be.

The U.S. is a REPUBLIC

I believe it was Thomas Jefferson who said "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch. A Republic is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote."

Here's another quote. "Our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." (John Adams) The whole world doesn't need the form of government we have. Indeed, it would be detrimental to most of them.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 02:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chancealot
*sigh* Do they even teach in schools anymore?

The United States is *****NOT**** a "democracy". We never have been. We never wanted to be.

The U.S. is a REPUBLIC

I believe it was Thomas Jefferson who said "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch. A Republic is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote."

Here's another quote. "Our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." (John Adams) The whole world doesn't need the form of government we have. Indeed, it would be detrimental to most of them.






I don`t know about you chancealot, but this thing I have heard for so many years from our government saying that we need to be a role model for other countries, so they can be just like us. is for the birds. I agree with what you say, very much so. We WERE a republic at one time, but when you have big companies running your government and making all the calls, it doesn`t take long for things to change from a republic to a democracy. Why on earth would we want other countries to have the same problems we have. Humm, and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands. It doesn`t say, and to the democracy for which it stands.

[edit on 20-6-2008 by FiatLux]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 05:05 AM
link   
Oh yea, one other thing. If the internet can do this, so can TV, so can movies, so can books. How is it that just one form of communication can do all of what you say that it can do, and not the rest?



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 02:33 PM
link   
For a definition of the many kinds of democracies see here:
en.wikipedia.org...

I keep hearing democracy being described as mob rule, but republics are somehow better. Really? Is a republic a type of democracy?
Absolutely.

In the field of political science, which examines types of governments and how they behave, democracy is the label applied to countries which:
* have regular, free, and fair elections which decide the political control of the country.
* have near-universal adult suffrage (adults can vote, regardless of race, gender, or political/religious views).
* have protections for the citizens to speak, protest, and assemble.
* have press freedoms, and access to media, even for opponents to the government.
* follow the rule of law, where even political leaders must follow the law.
* governments are free to act without coercion from unelected actors (like the military, bureaucracy, or the like)

There are other criteria, too, depending on whom you ask, but that's a general framework. The term polyarchy also describes a country that follows these principles. Elections are not sufficient to democracy to most political scientists: Uzbekistan has elections, but they are neither free nor fair, and the people do not have the right to freely criticize or protest government policy.

A DIRECT democracy is a democracy where all issues are subject to the direct vote of the people, rather than through representatives (a government run by ballot initiatives, in other words). No country today practices direct democracy -- it only exists on small scales.

Thus, all democratic countries today are representative democracies. That is, the people elect representatives, with the winners running the government to carry out the will of the people, within the framework of law, precedent, and a written or unwritten constitution.


answers.yahoo.com...


The US is a democracy, though apparently currently hijacked by coorperations. Very few countries called democracies are currently run by mob rule. There are better systems though than here in North America where you run a few contenders and winner take all.

Sweden seems to have discussions about the direction they want their democracy to go, which I find interesting. All countries should have regular discussions amongst the people in an organized participatory way such as this as democracy should be an evolving thing.
www.idea.int...

By the way Finland is a Republic as well and it has far more services to its people, while maintaining a high standard of living and a strong economy:

Considering that Finland has developed from an agrarian outpost to its present position as a beacon of high technology, the economy is quite a success story.

virtual.finland.fi...


Finland's economy is 74.8 percent free, according to our 2008 assessment, which makes it the world's 16th freest economy. Its overall score is 0.6 percentage point higher than last year. Finland is ranked 9th out of 41 countries in the European region, and its overall score is well above the regional average.

www.heritage.org...


Finnish Residence-based Social Security

If you are a resident in Finland you are entitled to social security provided by the Social Insurance Institution, KELA.

A KELA card, entitling the owner to coverage under the Finnish residence-based social security scheme must be applied for from KELA. Download the application here (pdf)

The application should be submitted to the applicant’s KELA office in his or her home municipality. The applicant will then be given a written decision on the matter, which can be appealed. If the decision is positive a KELA card will also be sent to the applicant. Individual benefits may be applied for by using separate forms.

Finnish Social Security Benefits

If a person is regarded as a resident they are entitled to apply for the following KELA benefits in the same way as Finns:

* family allowance
* student financial aid
* maternity allowance
* sickness allowance
* cash benefits for parents
* reimbursement of medical expenses
* unemployment benefit / allowance (non-earnings related)
o See also: If you become unemployed
* labour market subsidy
* child care subsidies
* disability allowance
* rehabilitation and rehabilitation allowance
* national pension (non-earnings related)
* family pension (non-earnings related)
* pensioner’s housing allowance
* general housing allowance
* private day-care and child home care allowance
* school transportation subsidy

www.expat-finland.com...


Finland most competitive economy

Finland is the most competitive economy in the world, according to the World Economic Forum.

The Fins beat the US to hold on to their top place in this year's Global Competitiveness Report 2004-2005. The top two were followed by Sweden, Taiwan, Denmark and Norway consecutively.

"The Nordic countries are characterized by excellent macroeconomic management overall – they are all running budget surpluses – they have extremely low levels of corruption, with their firms operating in a legal environment in which there is widespread respect for contracts and the rule of law, and their private sectors are on the forefront of technological innovation," said our chief economist, Augusto Lopez-Claros

www.forumblog.org...


Tax rates applicable to resident individuals (of Finland):

Income tax on capital income (i.e. investment income) 28% paid to State.

Income tax on earned income paid to the local town or city (15% to 20%), paid to the church (1% to 2%) and paid to the State according to the progressive scale shown below. In addition, there is a social security charge called 'the health insurance contribution of the insured' paid by individuals (ca. 2%).

Finland has abolished net wealth tax in 2006.

www.nordisketax.net.../suo/eng/i07.asp&c=suo&l=eng&s=1&w=3&m=02


There are many examples of countries that actually enforce their constitutions and provide SUBSTANTIVE equality amongst the people, who do not actually pay significantly more in taxes, but enjoy a higher standard of living. From all the studies done it costs more to be mean. ie. prisons.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   
In BC, Gordon Campbell introduced a referendum to vote on BC-STV, which would have changed our voting to a proportional representation, away from the winner take all strategy.


"Women usually win more seats on PR councils than on councils elected by older rules. The U.S. and England, for example, use the ancient plurality rule and only about 10% of their reps are women. In contrast, the oldest democracies in Europe use PR rules adopted in the Twentieth Century and 30% of their reps are women. Nations that use both rules elect more women by PR than by plurality.

Why? Because most parties nominate some women in each PR district to attract particular voters. And a PR party that offers an all-male slate of nominees looks corruptly sexist. But 1 man campaigning in each one-winner district does not look as sexist. A PR party's slate may also reveal any ethnic or religious bias.

Women in some countries considered starting their own parties. Under plurality rules, new parties divide the side and lead to certain defeat. But PR gives seats to a new party supported by a large minority. This reasonable threat forced the old liberal parties to decide that political experience was not as important as gender balance. They dropped some experienced men to make room for women on their lists of nominees. And they won. They are now incumbents with experience, power and allies. "

www.accuratedemocracy.com...

Its a really informative site actually. Democracies are not written in stone, and our winner take all is the least democratic. For example, our premier was elected with a majority government on only around 40% of the vote, both in his riding and in the province, due to a left split between ndp and green. So he rules 60% who didn't vote for him as a nwo agent.

I voted yes and the referendum. It was interesting, because even without an incredible amount of information given, 57% of the population voted yes. But naturally it required exactly 60 % to pass.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join