Are You "Right-Wing Fringe", or "Left-Wing Fringe" and How Will They Push You

page: 6
19
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 

You could probably say I'm so far "left" I ended up on the "right".

I don't think "right vs left" is the real battle though. I think "libertarian vs authoritarian" is the real issue, but "right vs left" keeps us occupied. I don't think I'm really at risk of being manipulated to jump into the fray for either side, I'll just sit around and run my mouth about how both sides are authoritarian.

While I do consider myself a libertarian, it is not a political ideology for me, but more of a life philosophy. I don't know what to do about the government and political issues, but I think the authoritarian philosophy is dominant even in our personal lives. Nothing can be done (imo) to change our political system until we change our personal philosophy.

I think all perspectives are equal and important in keeping a balance, finding a happy medium in our policies. People don't seem to want to see it that way, instead they want to choose a side and try to help their side win... but the basis there is to impose your ideas on others, which to me is authoritarian in nature.

Personally, I'd like to put Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich together, lock them in a room and tell them to figure out what we could do to make things better. Cuz I don't know what to do, and they are the only experienced politicians that I'm compelled to trust... if they can compromise.

But yeah, people who are fanatical about anything seem to be easier to manipulate.

edit: spelling/grammar


[edit on 8/25/2009 by eMachine]




posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by eMachine
 



But yeah, people who are fanatical about anything seem to be easier to manipulate.


This is exactly what I see these idiots doing to people around America, and possibly the rest of the world.

I guess in the big scheme of things when the Government cannot get off their butt to do things, they have to manipulate people into action for plausible deniability.

It sickens me that they see themselves above the law when it comes to this, although at the same time someone who is manipulated into a heinous action must not see the larger picture of being a patsy.

I have studied the J.F.K./Oswald scenario all of my life and would never allow myself to become a patsy since I will always question things.

My friend who I have known for fourteen years says I ask too many questions so I am not someon easy to control and I say that is a good thing because I am no blind follower.

I'm a strong and healthy leader and I will ask questions, that's what leaders do.

[edit on 26-8-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 



I can understand Your story and I have pretty much lived it too. The funny thing is those same people end up being total loosers whom screw up their pathetic lives and then when You succeed they expect You to pick up the pieces. I guess thats a typical Democrat for You... I am very right wing and it has nothing to do with money. When I was younger I had to work in high school because I had no other choice unlike most kids in school. I worked a full 40 hour a week job plus overtime as a student and I hated taxes then and I hate them now. The funny thing is I pay way more in taxes now probably about 3X what I made then and I still hated taxes.

I always believed in justice. I have also always believed that the man whom made his money honestly should keep 100% of his money. I guess I am weird or maybe I am just looking around me unlike most Americans. I am not happy with this country and to be honest I have never been happy with this country. I do believe the founding fathers rebelled due to taxes and created a document that protected us from the government and people like me from the majority.

Now We have a society that enjoys watching the government violate peoples God given rights. You have some people that have no problems with the government busting down someones door and hauling them away for a victimless crime. You have some people that have no problems with the government taking someone else hard earned money because they are so called rich and they don't deserve it anyway because I couldn't get ahead so why should they? This is some of the reasons why I am not happy and lets not bring in the fact that the government always represents big interests and likes killing brown people for money....


So all in all it doesn't really matter if the government is right wing or left they will still infringe upon our rights and will continue down the same road of government expansion at the expense of the people. As far as I am concerned they are at war with the people and should not be treated with respect like most people believe. I have no problems with people yelling at the crooks during the town hall meetings and if I had some say so it would go further then yelling *** Tar & feathers *** but then again I have no say so....



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by jkm1864
 


I can see where you're coming from very much.

Yes, "infringeing" upon our rights, by pushing the "right-wing fringe" and "left-wing fringe", what a choice they have made, in order to "infringe" them must manipulate the fringe itself.

Oh the irony of their complicit and tacit actions.

Complicit in illegal actions, and tacit in an immoral verbal pact.

By making their choice and pushing their evil agenda they are undoing themselves.

Far too many people have figured out the plot.

[edit on 27-8-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas
This thread is asking if you are "right-wing fringe" or "left-wing fringe".


I'm both depending on what topic we're on and who I'm talking about it with.


[...] but instead that maybe, possibly, you might have been manipulated into an action because of your beliefs through your political ideology.


It's entirely possible. I'd like to think I'm not easily manipulated, but I can't claim to be impervious to it. We all have our buttons that can be pushed and it's entirely possible that the right series of buttons has finally been pushed. Whether it was done intentionally or not is another matter though.

I would think that if there were some group dedicated to manipulating the public at large, or even just trying to manipulate a specific section of the public, they would run the very large risk of inadvertently affecting those who weren't targeted in such a way as to make that group catch on and foul everything up. (That was one heck of a huge sentence..)


Are you so far one way or another, that your convictions themselves, will get you convicted through action of reaction that you literally pigeonhole yourself into a corner that you are easily driven by a group of extremists, who want you commit a heinous action, because they think they know you so well that they can drive you?


I sure hope not. There are few things that could actually cause me to do anything that could be termed heinous and they'd have to be pushing me pretty hard to get me to that point. They might get me angry about something, but I'm too much of a pacifist to do anything violent because of that anger. So the most they'll get from me is to get me talking (a lot) about whatever it is that has angered me.


Think about it for a moment if you will, that possibly Lee Harvey Oswald was in fact driven to what he supposedly and allegedly did with the assassination of J.F.K.

Or was possibly Timothy McVeigh pushed into an action because of his political leanings, that he was reacting in opposition to how he normally would have acted, and fell slap dab into the middle of a trap.


Is it possible? Sure, most things are. I haven't seen anything that would lead me to believe that it was probable in either of their cases though.

I had an essay to write for my Criminal Justice class last week asking something similar. The question asked whether I agree with the Social Problems Perspective or the Social Responsibility Perspective. The former being that people aren't truly responsible for their actions and that it is society's job to prevent circumstances that would cause people to commit crimes. The latter holds that people are indeed responsible for their own actions, it is their choice whether they commit a crime, and that it is not society's fault if people make bad choices. I tend to agree with the latter perspective.

Ultimately each person makes their own choices and is responsible for their own actions. While it's possible for someone to nudge you in the direction of assassinating someone or blowing up a building, you are the only person who can decide whether you actually do it. So while it's possible that people like McVeigh and Oswald are nudged in the direction they go by outside forces, when it came down to the moment of truth they choose whether they actually do it or not.

Personal story to give an example: My house has a basement. The very first summer after we moved in, the basement flooded and not knowing it was prone to doing so I had stored things down there in cardboard boxes. When it flooded I lost around $5000 worth of belongings and photos that can't ever be replaced.

So I called the insurance company to see if the damages to the basement and the loss of property were covered. I was informed that since it flooded because of rain it wasn't, but if I had burned my kitchen down and the firemen had flooded it putting out the fire or if I had ran my car into the house and burst a water line it would be. First thought that went through my head was I'd just burn the kitchen down next time.

The very next summer it flooded again even though we thought we'd fixed the problem. Fortunately I hadn't left anything down there after it had flooded the first time that couldn't be washed and salvaged. I had considered setting the kitchen on fire or running into it with the car so the damage would be covered, but I chose not to. I'm still angry that it wasn't covered and it's been five years, but I made a choice not to commit a crime (arson, insurance fraud, take your pick).

Point of that long and possibly irrelevant story being that I had the choice of committing a crime because I was angry, and I likely could have gotten away with it. Hard to prove that a grease fire on the stove was planned. But I chose not to do it. McVeigh, Oswald, and people that think about doing things similar also have that choice. They can take their anger and turn it to something constructive, or they can let that anger control them and go out and blow something up. So even if those two were pushed in the directions they went, they are the ones responsible for actually doing it.


Beware of people who know far too many things about you when you do not share things in public settings, as they may in fact be someone who is trying to provoke you into an action.


It's good advice to beware people who know too much about you that they shouldn't know regardless of the situation. Generally it's not a good thing if you run into someone like that.


Is this what drives these potential groups to sabotage someone's way of life?


There are a lot of people in this world who seem to thrive on drama. They have to have it around them. If there isn't any drama going on these people will stir some up just to see what happens. I'm convinced that some of these people use the realm of politics to sate their drama needs. It wouldn't explain the motivations of everyone, but it certainly would account for some of the people who are constantly trying to stir the pot and get people up in arms over one thing or another.



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 


Bravo, well said, and bravo, Jenna.

You gave a classic answer that I wanted to get from people, and while some of them were great and awesome answers, yours made the kind of point I was trying to illustrate and which is given in the movie Minority Report.

You, have the final decisions, no one else does, no one.

While I realize there are several movies that I utilized to outline the original post, for those who had gone through my entire thread will notice I shared a rather long-winded story where I was put through a set of circumstances where most people would have panicked, broken, or worse yet, killed someone. As I was running along in my own time of crisis with those neighborhood bullies, my thoughts were not on their death or demise, it was on how to get out of it without actually killing them and or getting myself killed in the process in such a way that I would never have to deal with them again.

I succeeded, they did not, and I am much better today because of it.

While I concur with you, Jenna, that Oswald and McVeigh are certainly screwed as far as evidence completely exonerating them of their crimes, I still however say that the evidence is there because of a total lack of evidence to fully lay to rest the suspicions of a conspiracy of a conglomerate behind the scenes because the sheer magnitude of the events as well as the benefits of the outcomes, a President being killed and stopping Executive Order 11110, and a Federal Facility being blown up and budgets being increased as well as "security" issues changing through different laws, the benefits of illicit and illegal activities by our own Government far outweigh in my mind the "lone nut" committing the crimes all by themselves.

You will notice that in cases like Oswald, McVeigh, and even September 11th, no one was terminated from their positions of employ for "dropping the ball" and losing to the "lone nut" or "terrorists", and this to me is evidenciary of both complicit and tacit cover-up of the facts, suppression of information, and as well it demonstrates to the public that the Government can do any damn thing it wants, because they are in fact, the Government.

So, by a lack of evidence, I say this is evidence itself of the conspiracy.

This is of course why the American people will never fully trust the Government.

Everywhere I have ever gone in my entire life J.F.K., the OKC Bombing, and September 11th tragedy have come up, and in each and every single discussion the vast majority of those people had concurred with me that the Government had involvement, whether in omitting vital facts, assisting in the actions, or the entire cover-up of events in some way, shape, or form.

I see a larger pattern within the pattern of society, sort of like the conspiracy within a conspiracy in the Iran/Contra scandal and Oliver North being given up as the scapegoat by President Reagan, while Ronald Reagan may not have had all the facts of the events unfolding over in Iran and down in Nicaragua, he sure as Hell knew enough to get North a pardon if he so chose to enact and execute Executive Privilege as a means to the process to save both lives overseas on two different continents as well as saving the tax-paying citizens millions of dollars for a sham trial.

You see to me there are groups out there that will do exactly as I have outlined in my original post, because Government does want a certain sense of deniability when it comes to certain types of events, as exampled by my previous statement with Oliver North, his boss Admiral John Poindexter, and ex-President Ronald Reagan.

The fact of the matter is however, just how willing they are to commit more crimes in establishing something for them to gain an advantage, to make then in essence bring their black box operations to a close and leave people alone.

There are people out there smarter than those black box operators...

...and they do know the right choices, and the wrong choices...

...and they will do anything to remain alive, even if it means making no choices.


False Flag Operator, Become Sheep-Dipped Or Wolf-Dipped, and Become A Puppet Dictator?

[edit on 29-9-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


Thank you!


Oddly enough I was thinking about Minority Report when I was typing that post. Specifically the part where she (I can't remember the characters name) tells Cruise's character that he can leave, he still has time, and that he can change it. I like that particular scene because it's true. Up until we actually do something, regardless of what it is, we have the ability to stop. Everyone does.

To be honest, I have not done much reading on McVeigh, Oswald, or the related theories about them. I did a little reading on Oswald a few years ago, but I don't have much knowledge on the circumstances surrounding their actions aside from who they are and what happened. I'll have to do some reading on them before I can give anything remotely similar to an intelligent response about them. So I'll have to get back to you on that point.


As far as no one being terminated afterward goes, I do have to agree that it seems quite odd that no one was held responsible for dropping the ball. I find it hard to believe that there wasn't even so much as a hint that either of those events were going to happen. Someone had to have at least had an idea that something was going to happen. Maybe not exactly what it was, but someone knew something yet did nothing to prevent either event from occurring. That in itself does suggest that someone high up allowed JFK to be shot and allowed the bomb to go off.



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 


You are most likely thinking of Agatha, the precog, the female psychic that Cruise's character kidnaps, or possibly the retired professor, Dr Iris Hineman, who invented "pre-crime".

Minority Report : Look for cast and characters

The three precog's names are Agatha, after the mystery novelist, Agatha Christie, Arthur, after the mystery/sleuth writer Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and Dashiell, after the mystery write Dashiell Hammet.

Those are the two women most focused on, other than Chief John Anderton's (Tom Cruise) wife.

Yes, this was along the lines of what I was thinking when I began this thread, but I was trying to utilize the examples of more realistic movies at first as prime examples of what is possibly going on, because Hollywood follows the news, and the news follows the Government, and the Government is supposed to follow these "nut cases" that commit these heinous events.

My original post, as well as the subsequent ones, and this one, have all circulated around the choice ultimately being up to the individual, not any one else.

If someone was stupid enough to let someone influence them into this course of action they are either not very intelligent, or easily mislead, and deserve the Darwin Award.

The Darwin Award, while it might sound like I am being cruel I am not, is for those people who sought to do something, ultimately stupid as Hell, and removed themselves from the gene pool.

I am a man who knows when he is being pushed by someone, and I will push back, in whatever way is necessary to get my point across, usually using my brain well enough to not have to resort to violence, but as a last resort.


Original Quote by SKL :

Over, Under, Around, or Through, never let anyone stand in the way of your dreams, including yourself.



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


Yep, that's the one I was thinking of. Agatha. I could see her face but I just couldn't get the name to come to me. And I admit I was too lazy to look it up.


While not the most realistic of movies, yet anyway, Minority Report does pretty much serve as a perfect example of someone who is being set up and pushed into committing a crime. And Cruise's character serves as a perfect example of someone who's being set up and pushed into something they ordinarily wouldn't do yet ultimately makes the choice not to do it.

If you're cruel for bringing up the Darwin Awards, then I'm cruel for laughing over the stupid things people do to end up deserving one. Or winning one, however you want to look at it.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


Yep, that's the one I was thinking of. Agatha. I could see her face but I just couldn't get the name to come to me. And I admit I was too lazy to look it up.


While not the most realistic of movies, yet anyway, Minority Report does pretty much serve as a perfect example of someone who is being set up and pushed into committing a crime. And Cruise's character serves as a perfect example of someone who's being set up and pushed into something they ordinarily wouldn't do yet ultimately makes the choice not to do it.

If you're cruel for bringing up the Darwin Awards, then I'm cruel for laughing over the stupid things people do to end up deserving one. Or winning one, however you want to look at it.


Well, since we're on the topic of Minority Report, a friend of mine, a self-proclaimed "psychic" told me that the director, producer, and as well Hollywood sought out "futurists", people who see where technology and society is heading, were consulted for this movie, and this type of environment is exactly where they saw it heading, not necessarily with the "being set up" issues, but with "pre-crime", the modes of transportation, the flashes of retinal scanners, the entire and complete works.

As stated previously, the movie was running in my mind while preparing this thread, but as well my own history of my particular experiences, my thoughts on Arlington Road and Executive Action, and a host of other things in where I see our beloved Government, Law Enforcement, and military pushing society, against our will.

Have you ever seen the episode of X-Files called Pusher?

In the series, a man calld Robert Patrick Modell, is able to "push" his thoughts onto other people, thereby influencing their actions, and while they are exaggerating this particular methodology by Hollywood standards, this is exactly what the media can and has done in our past with respect psychically driving us towards certain types of actions, the same can be done with individuals, as exampled by the move Arlington Road, and the same scenario has been hypothesized to have happened to Theodore Kaczynski, by the F.B.I.

In the book, Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare, the author outlines in a small dose, of how he was driven to his actions, by usurpers of the mind, people who wished him to commit certain actions.


Amazon Review :

From 007 to 2001, from Dealey Plaza to the Apollo Moon Flight, from the barrel of a Bulldog .44 to the corridors of the pyramids of Sirius; from the secret symbolism of Jack the Ripper to the public symbolism of the first atomic bomb blast, this work illuminates the crimes and command ideology of the masonic Cryptocracy, where ground zero meets the zero hour in a bestial crucible of ritual murder, human alchemy and demonic invasion.

Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare takes the reader to the core of a cosmic cryptogram, a dark Oz where the ancient fables become modern memes for the psychological contagion and devastation of humanity, and where the stratagem the author terms "Revelation of the Method" becomes the key to the finale of the mysteries of the ages.


Not that this is in any way making excuses for Ted Kaczynski, nor is it making a direct accusation against the F.B.I., because it pure speculation by my part of only quoting what the author has explained, but Kaczynski had to first have already have had a mentality towards detonating bombs as well as being inclined towards violence to begin with before he was driven, if in fact he was, towards those heinous actions which now have him locked in ADX Florence.

I will say this though, after having read on Kaczynski, read the Pschological Warfare book, and having watched Arlington Road, if that is in fact what he was put through it makes me understand why exactly he did what he did, and while I can understand it, I do not condone it in any way whatsoever, but neither do I condone the actions of the people who pushed him to commit those actions, if that is in fact what they did do, because to me it equals bullies pushing someone to an extreme where no man or woman should ever be pushed, against their will.

Back to that particular episode of X-Files, as well as the series of them focusing on Robert Patrick Modell, the creator of X-Files, utilized both the episode, as well as his name, to demonstrate just how effective this process is, because of the actor Robert Patrick, who played in such hit movie as Terminator 2, Last Action Hero, and The Faculty (my favorite is him being in the television show, The Unit), where they utilized his first and middle name, with "Robert Patrick Modell" to give you the "model", or "modell" of how it works.

As for the Darwin Awards, they actually made a movie surrounding that, and I have never laughed so hard in my life, and I will provide you with a link, here.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas
Well, since we're on the topic of Minority Report, a friend of mine, a self-proclaimed "psychic" told me that the director, producer, and as well Hollywood sought out "futurists", people who see where technology and society is heading, were consulted for this movie, and this type of environment is exactly where they saw it heading, not necessarily with the "being set up" issues, but with "pre-crime", the modes of transportation, the flashes of retinal scanners, the entire and complete works.


I wouldn't be surprised. There are already retinal scanners for security stuff, it's only a matter of time before some store decides it'd be a great thing to use in-store to recognize customers and make suggestions on purchases. And pre-crime may very well be coming fairly soon.


Not that this is in any way making excuses for Ted Kaczynski, nor is it making a direct accusation against the F.B.I., because it pure speculation by my part of only quoting what the author has explained, but Kaczynski had to first have already have had a mentality towards detonating bombs as well as being inclined towards violence to begin with before he was driven, if in fact he was, towards those heinous actions which now have him locked in ADX Florence.


I never did watch the X-Files very much, maybe a few episodes during it's entire run on television. That episode sounds pretty good though.

They can try to push, but it still comes down to personal responsibility. Hypothetically speaking, if Kaczynski was pushed into his actions by the FBI the final responsibility is still on him. As you said, he had to have already been inclined towards those actions. I'm a firm believer that no one can make you do something you don't want to do. They may be able to talk you further down the path towards doing something, but the initial desire to do it comes from within yourself and the line you cross between thoughts and action can't be crossed by anyone but you.


As for the Darwin Awards, they actually made a movie surrounding that, and I have never laughed so hard in my life, and I will provide you with a link, here.


I didn't know they'd made a movie. I'll have to find and rent it though. The previews look pretty funny.



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 


Speaking of retinal scanners, I remember a news story that was a Breaking Alternative News article, that mentioned Guantanamo Bay "terrorists" were fighting via passive means being tested with those very devices.

It is often surprising the things you can learn watching television, as it often mirrors real life more so than anyone can possibly realize. This being the example of the movie Arlington Road and both Ted Kaczynski and Timothy McVeigh.

Yes, ultimately, the decision is up to the person who is instigated, but as well it is up to those within Law Enforcement, Government, and the Intelligence Communities as well to not try to force someone via deniability and agent provocateur means to commit a heinous action to begin with.

Responsibility, ultimately, is in the hands of both parties, neithe are right nor wrong, but both are to blame if other people are injured in the process, because ultimately both parties started a feud based on their own preconceived perceptions and sometimes these are either incorrect, misinterpreted, or a fallacy to begin with.

Again, I am not stating I am necessarily correct here, and that this is what happened, I am of course speculating, but the potential for it sure is ther based on various other incidents within our countries past and throughout history we find that our Government has, can, and will do almost anything, just to force their control down our throats and I find it disturbing and troubling because these are the people who are supposed to protect and serve us, not intimidate and scare us.

Provocateur Cops Caught Disguised As Anarchists At G20

That Law Enforcement would send agent provocateurs into a crowd to instigate violence to me is tantamount to treason against our very Constitution itself. I fail to remember the Contitutional Amendment that covers that particular acitivity to ensure that people are protected, or any other laws that are set in place to protect the people, so how is an illegal act going to assist in protecting us exactly?

The Creature from Jekyll Island : A Second Look at the Federal Reserve

The book the thread above is based upon should be taught in every school across America because it shows just how corrupt people in power were and still are in that they will go to any length to make money, drag us into a war, or utilize society as a weapon against itself through Divide and Conquer.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Feb, 19 2010 @ 04:27 PM
link   
www.youtube.com...

Well honestly I'm screwed beyond belief.


At the point I am being set up for something OK....

I have my own little plan for eventuality

I have a list of people going to hell before I go. I have to say it this way. The conditions named by you indicate for the scenario Im the patsy on the run, correct.

Well there is a beautiful scene in WANTED the comic book. Mr.Rictus and his gang have taken over. It where wesely hears future or the cop say something about him running.

Who said anything about running.

Win or lose at this point the only way out is with brains and firepower. Odds are against me so, who said I was running.

Like I said if they turn me into a pasty Im gonna give them a reason.

Author's Note said scenario is based on me getting entangled in a conspiracy and being set up as the patsy.

Youll know its me SKL, ill make sure when they catch me I give you a shout out


Yall have to come visit me in jail. Ill give SKL the exclusive interview rights



posted on Feb, 19 2010 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Now assuming, Im not caught. I know how to hide quiet well. The only thing keeping me here is my honor right now. I gave my word, with the condition as long as I am safe.

It will be a chase for at least ten years. If you work for
CPS and surf this site, please understand its all business nothing personal


Its been a long time since I played hide and seek. I know they will spend billions of dollars on the hunt but I only have to make it to the ninety day mark.

Its a number quoted by someone over events till they lose their shock and boredom sets in on the general population.

You are correct proper pre-planning prevents piss poor performance

As to my national leanings

In my old age (im younger then you) I have to save this. The government that governs best governs least.

I am finding myself in sympathy with the libertarians views.

If everyone carried guns there would be a lot less crimes. Especially after about two years.

Guns are the great equalizer. Ask the dead burglar, or the dead rapist, or the dead crooked government offical, wait thats right there dead....

Let me see with no taxes that means.... I get to keep what I earn...

*pulls out soap box*

The only way to guarantee freedom is to truly give it to all and permanently revoke the right of any government to limit the said freedom.

I have a dream of America at her greatness. What she was supposed to be. The Great Dream of True freedom for all. I see a day when America stands as the shining light of freedom against tyranny. All the beings on her shore enjoying life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. No government telling her citizens what to eat, no government telling her citizens what to do, and no government mugging her own citizens of their resources.

In conclusion I will pass on a word of wisdom.

Do you know why government will never get rid of poverty?

Easy, it is its greatest creation.




posted on Feb, 20 2010 @ 07:32 AM
link   
When I was in my late teens and early 20's I was a hippie. Live and let live and who was I to judge and all of that. In my late 20's I was a yuppie to use an old and outdated term. I cant think of a better one so this will do. Now that I'm in my 30's I've cast off what I believe is the fundamental flaws of both ends of the spectrum while I believe retaining the best of both. I think that has steeled me into a staunch libertarian.

I believe in the power of the individual mind fear collective group think and decisions made on Zeitgeist.

I believe that I am center right leaning in my ideology and have found my home there. I believe that they're are no new social or political ideas and everything that can be done right or wrong has been done in the past. I look to the past for examples of the present and future to lay the foundation of my decision making process.

[edit on 20-2-2010 by Thirty_Foot_Smurf]



posted on Feb, 20 2010 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by eMachine
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 

You could probably say I'm so far "left" I ended up on the "right".

I don't think "right vs left" is the real battle though. I think "libertarian vs authoritarian" is the real issue, but "right vs left" keeps us occupied.


I am in the same boat and have come with another party of my own lol. I call myself a social libertarian. I believe only in small government that takes actions only on issues that can apply to everyone. And when the government takes an action such as providing a benefit using the peoples money it should always be applied to all people equally without qualifying for anything. If the government wants to provide food, than anyone that wants it whether rich or poor should be able to get their fair share. If government wants to provide health care everyone should get it no questions. If the government was to give certain industries or people or groups certain privileges I say stay out of it and let the states worry about those matters. If the government wants to protect civil rights then it applies to everyone, not specific groups.

I say let the government take care of only those things that effect us all.



posted on Feb, 20 2010 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 


You have an interesting perspective I'll say.

My thoughts on the topic are to not get entangled nor embroiled in the nonsense to begin with, and when people begin playing games to get you tied into them, do not play back, ignore them, and make sure to distance yourself.

As the saying goes it takes two to Tango, and no one can force you to dance.

And by that I mean if someone tries to trick you into an action, you can outsmart them.


Originally posted by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
When I was in my late teens and early 20's I was a hippie. Live and let live and who was I to judge and all of that. In my late 20's I was a yuppie to use an old and outdated term. I cant think of a better one so this will do. Now that I'm in my 30's I've cast off what I believe is the fundamental flaws of both ends of the spectrum while I believe retaining the best of both. I think that has steeled me into a staunch libertarian.


I can respect your thoughts and stance.

I am neither "left-wing" nor am I "right-wing".

I refuse to support any political party and I am a stout registered Independent.


Originally posted by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
I believe in the power of the individual mind fear collective group think and decisions made on Zeitgeist.


Zeitgeist is a good movie and explains quite a bit but it is a simplified story.

I prefer getting to the meat and bones of the engineering behind the scenes.

In other words, I want to know every detail, so I know what to expect.

You will like this thread as it is about the book of the same name.

The Creature from Jekyll Island : A Second Look at the Federal Reserve


Originally posted by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
I believe that I am center right leaning in my ideology and have found my home there. I believe that they're are no new social or political ideas and everything that can be done right or wrong has been done in the past. I look to the past for examples of the present and future to lay the foundation of my decision making process.

[edit on 20-2-2010 by Thirty_Foot_Smurf]


Glad to hear from you.



Originally posted by ExPostFacto

Originally posted by eMachine
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 

You could probably say I'm so far "left" I ended up on the "right".

I don't think "right vs left" is the real battle though. I think "libertarian vs authoritarian" is the real issue, but "right vs left" keeps us occupied.


I am in the same boat and have come with another party of my own lol. I call myself a social libertarian. I believe only in small government that takes actions only on issues that can apply to everyone. And when the government takes an action such as providing a benefit using the peoples money it should always be applied to all people equally without qualifying for anything. If the government wants to provide food, than anyone that wants it whether rich or poor should be able to get their fair share. If government wants to provide health care everyone should get it no questions. If the government was to give certain industries or people or groups certain privileges I say stay out of it and let the states worry about those matters. If the government wants to protect civil rights then it applies to everyone, not specific groups.

I say let the government take care of only those things that effect us all.


I could not agree with you more however how do we keep Government in check?

What I mean to say is that if they are willing to commit treason via a "False-Flag Operation", or even push someone into an illegal action, which is still committing the illegal action via a proxy, giving them deniability, then how do we limit them, and or catch them in the act or prior to it?

Limiting a Government who is willing to commit treason via proxy is difficult.

Not impossible, only difficult, and therein lies the crux of the situation.

Their commission of treason via proxy is still treason and must be stopped at all costs.

But, we cannot commit treason to stop treason, because then we become as duplicitous and treasonous, if not as much of a hypocrite as them.

Like the now late and idiotic Andrew Joseph Stack III could have been pushed.

Andrew Joseph Stack III : A Hopeful for the Darwin Awards

What if what he did was similar to Timothy McVeigh and he was shoved into it?

It still makes him an idiot in my book albeit one who was influenced by idiots.

To me, if someone commits an act via proxy, treason or otherwise, it does not excuse neither the proxy individual, nor the group pushing the proxy individual.

It just makes it a plausible deniability situation and difficult but not impossible to prove.

[edit on 20-2-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


The only thing I can say to your question of the false flag attacks is that a lot of things have to change to make it work. There are so many issues involved we almost need to strip everything back to the original constitution then rebuild laws in the the direction we deem necessary to have a more wonderful life. I believe in the concept of KISS (Keep it simple stupid). The Constitution is a great foundation that has been corrupted by executive branch powers transferred off from the legislative branch. Judicial branches need another focus entirely...they need the ability to say that a law is just not productive to the ends of pursuing happiness and should be allowed to overturn it.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Well what you have left out is humanisam and human decency. I may be a dreamer but I am left wing but I would not support killing people who have done me nothing or being manipulated to do something against our human race.

various politicos, both Left and right have tried to manipulate us.

I am not for it.

T



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ExPostFacto
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


The only thing I can say to your question of the false flag attacks is that a lot of things have to change to make it work. There are so many issues involved we almost need to strip everything back to the original constitution then rebuild laws in the the direction we deem necessary to have a more wonderful life. I believe in the concept of KISS (Keep it simple stupid). The Constitution is a great foundation that has been corrupted by executive branch powers transferred off from the legislative branch. Judicial branches need another focus entirely...they need the ability to say that a law is just not productive to the ends of pursuing happiness and should be allowed to overturn it.


I can concur with what you're thinking but the problem comes not from Government itself.

It is the people within it and their lack of ethics, lack of morals, and lack of humanity.

They believe they have the right to do any damn thing they want because they have money.

People, not necessarily you and I, will do anything and everything to get power.

People, not necessarily you and I, will do anything and everything to maintain that power.

Even cold-hearted, cold-blooded, and calculated murder on a grand scale.

This makes those people willing to commit a "False-Flag Operation" mass murderers.

The men ordering them believe they have the right to choose this when they do not.

Their view is so skewed because of their inbred and incestuous thought processes that give them this belief because it comes from those all powerful elite families who interbreed with each other, and their lack of ethics because of the same diseases that run rampant in AKC animals when inbreeding is done.

When animals are interbred, sex within the same animal's family, their brains do not stop growing and the skull is not capable of containing it, and this should not be mistaken for having larger brains meaning they are smarter, but that it is a deformation of the physical body, through chemical imbalance.

This is the same disease or chemical imbalance that infects those power elite families.


Originally posted by Tiger5
Well what you have left out is humanisam and human decency. I may be a dreamer but I am left wing but I would not support killing people who have done me nothing or being manipulated to do something against our human race.

various politicos, both Left and right have tried to manipulate us.

I am not for it.

T


Well, I agree with you about leaving it out, but not that is was without purpose.

Those who would push people into actions, a False-Flag Operation, or just an illegal action have zero humanism and zero human decency, they are nothing less than bullies, with an agenda, to make someone else commit a treasonous action.

Treason Via Proxy : It Takes Two To Tango, Refuse To Dance, and Stop the False Flag Operation

Because they are cowards to begin with and they have no ethics, no morals, and no humanity.

[edit on 21-2-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]





top topics
 
19
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join