posted on May, 30 2004 @ 04:35 PM
sorry but we like freedom. not your oppresive government BS.
I'm sorry? Opressive
government? Your leader George Bush is at this moment trying to pass through congress a bill (Patriot II I believe) which
will allow him to close down all other political parties and charities such as Greenpeace because they could be seen as anti-american. That's not
opressive is it? I suppose in a free country, people are mauled by police dogs, sprayed with water cannons or shot on the street because
they protest against the actions of their government and opressive laws (I can name many examples in the last half a century) and in a free country a
president manages to come to power even though he lost the election (Yes, I'm talking about George W Bush again). In the last 50 years, I can name no
such instances (the protests in Northern Ireland in which people were shot were because the crowd were using violence) which would allow anyone to
call Britain's government (opressive government indeed!) opressive. If it IS opressive (which some could say it has been recently) it is far from
because it is liberal
, Tony Blair's government is acting more right wing than the conservatives, though arguably it is officially
It's communist, a thing the U.S. has fought from its beginning. And we r turning into that.. sick.. thing because of liberals.
For your information, the first countries to oppose communism were France and Britain, supporting the white Russians in the Russian Civil War. On the
other hand, many AMERICAN financiers (such as Rockerfellar) actually ASSISTED Lenin's communist revolutionaries for reasons which are made clear
elsewhere on the site (Secret Societies and New World Order being the most obvious). America didn't begin to ACTIVELY fight communism until at least
the end of 1945 when relations with the USSR started to turn frosty. It was at THAT point that America began to ACTIVELY oppose communism. Britain and
France on the other hand had been doing it from 1919.
I am interested to find out why people who are interested in better rights and therefore LIBERTY (hence LIBERAL) are seen as opressive and
? Just because people want to give better rights to women and ethnic minorities, better quality of life and oppertunities (such as
healthcare) to all does not make them sick. I think most would agree that a world where only the rich can buy healthcare, and so anyone who doesn't
happen to have the skills to be rich (and it would be impossible for EVERYONE to be rich, wouldn't it) would be slightly more sick
world assisted by liberalism. I hope you have the intellectual capacity to understand the irony of your statements, I do doubt it seeing as you have
already married communism and liberalism (a communist society probably being the least similar thing to a truelly liberal society) so 'conclusively'