TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Welcome to 1984
Pages (2): « 1 [2]
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka How could the US have been founded by Neo-Nazis when the first generation of Nazi's was still 150 years off??   |
Replace neo-nazi with Southern Baptist and you're in buisness. | quote: |
| Originally posted by DigiNut Or the constitution! |
| quote: |
| Good point about deists as well - everybody is quick to scream "Christianity" as soon as they hear or see the word "God", but I think that in those times almost everybody was a member of some deistic religion, and the notion of atheism would have just been strange and unheard of. Thus a lot of those references to "God" really are independent of any specific religion, and in fact back then it was probably thought of as quite secular. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by arctic Somewhat off topic - but have you ever read "The Age Of Reason' by Paine? In my mind it's one of the most important pieces of literature ever written with regards to deism/atheism/agnosticism, and gives an interesting insight into how some deists back then viewed Christianity and it's practices. I don't know if atheism would have been entirely unheard of, but there certainly wouldn't have been as many atheists and humanists as there are today. |
| quote: |
| Lastly - what do you mean by "those references to God"? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by arctic Somewhat off topic - but have you ever read "The Age Of Reason' by Paine? In my mind it's one of the most important pieces of literature ever written with regards to deism/atheism/agnosticism, and gives an interesting insight into how some deists back then viewed Christianity and it's practices. I don't know if atheism would have been entirely unheard of, but there certainly wouldn't have been as many atheists and humanists as there are today. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider Funny you should mention Paine ... anyway, here's the link renegade originally posted with regards to the founding fathers. http://www.infidels.org/library/mod..._till/myth.html |
MY OPINION SO DO NOT FLAME ME!!!! 
The way I see it, the Western governments is deriding civil liberties in an attempt to stop us being "free". ID Cards, CCTV in every building and street, countless records of me kept by various government departments & corporations, my life is a mouseclick away. The more advnaced we get the easier it is to keep tabs on us.
Since the advent of the communication age (which I class as when the Internet became the global force it is today), people have been able to discuss topics & look a information they could have never done so freely and easily as before. This scares the government. People thiking is not what any government wants, fact. They want workers to keep the capatalistic system ticking onwards. Don't believe me? look at the decline of science and other thinking subjects in UK universities and the rise of courses such as design and law. Both pamper to a Western society and require no radical independant thought outside of the sphere of society. Television pampers for the modern man, Reality TV, soap operas, sitcoms. There are relatively few "clever" programmes on TV and those that are usually deal with current events, not radical thinking or boundary research which causes people to question their existence in society.
So what can the government do? A war on terror that's what. A terrorist atatck is "inetivable" on UK soil we are told day after day. ID Cards, restrictions on people's freedoms, barbaric laws which would have seen normal in a fascist dictatorship such as ares without charge & arbiatrary imprisionment are now allowed under Anti terror legislation. Most people will consider this loss of freedom a small price to pay for security, but I personally see it as a a to subjugate the population, the government can no longer throw us off out common land and starve us but they can ensure population loyalty just as Hitler did with laws which are there to protect us which are really there to control us.
BTW i've never read any orwell, after this i'm off to teh library tomorrow to get some out 
she makes me like bush.
this resembles that bush resume:|
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DigiNut Haven't - what's the author's thesis? |
| quote: |
| http://www.ushistory.org/paine/ His career turned to journalism while in Philadelphia, and suddenly, Thomas Paine became very important. In 1776, he published Common Sense, a strong defense of American Independence from England. He joined the Continental Army and wasn't a success as a soldier, but he produced The Crisis (1776-83), which helped inspire the Army. This pamphlet was so popular that as a percentage of the population, it was read by more people than today watch the Superbowl. |
| quote: |
| Pledge of allegiance, for example. Obviously not the constitution itself. |
| quote: |
| "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Funny, I read that article a few weeks ago. What a fantastic read, BTW. Infidels.org has some killer info. like that. |
It's well worth taking a look at them if you're ever looking through their library/book reviews etc.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by arctic As you can see, no references to god. This was how the pledge remained until 1954, when congress decided to insert the words "under god", basically to assist in the fight against what they termed 'godless communism'. There are number of organizations who run campaigns to restore the pledge to it's original state (au.org is one such group). There's also a guy by the name of Dr. Michael Newdow has a case before the supreme court at present, but sadly in the religion-charged atmosphere in the US at present he doesn't have much of a chance of winning. Apparently the pledge was ruled unconstitutional two years back, but the implementation of the decision was adjourned for some reason. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by mps242 I disagree with you on this one. I would bet money that the "under god" bit of the pledge will be ruled unconstitutional. It might even be a 6/3 or 7/2 (hopefully) decision.... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 You underestimate the power of the ultraconservative Justices like Scalia, Rhenquist, and Thomas. I really think these guys will pull out at all stops to persuade the moderate conservative Justices. As much as I'd like to see this phrase be deleted for obvious logical reasons, I'm not optimistic enough to realize the power of the "dark side" fundies on the ultra-conservatives. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 You underestimate the power of the ultraconservative Justices like Scalia, Rhenquist, and Thomas. I really think these guys will pull out at all stops to persuade the moderate conservative Justices. As much as I'd like to see this phrase be deleted for obvious logical reasons, I'm not optimistic enough to realize the power of the "dark side" fundies on the ultra-conservatives. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by mps242 Well remember, Scalia recused himself on this case (thus my #'s were fucked up) I think it will come down 5/3 or 6/2 (although a 4/4 decision would be fine as it wouldn't overrule the 9th circuit). With no scalia I really think it will be thomas and rhenquist that vote to uphold "Under God," but it will be tough for them to argue with the fact that this isn't mere acknowlegdement of our religious history, but is instead a PLEDGE to be UNDER GOD... Frankly, I'll be devastated if somehow a 5/3 majority comes together to rule Under God is ok... The past year has had a slew of good decisions coming from the court, I'd hate to see them fuck it up on this one... |
With regards to the impeding ruling, I certainly hope that it will be ruled unconstitutional - but quite frankly with religious nutters like Scalia on the bench, I'm not entirely sure what's going to happen. We'll just have to wait and see I suppose.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by anuneventrade [font=comic sans ms]I think it is being forgotten by many people that the usage of the words "under God" were actually not added into the pledge until 1954. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by arctic Well, actually - half of my last post was devoted to the pledge and the adding of 'under god'. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka It's becoming more apparent to me that both sides like to label the other side as "Ultra" or "Extreme", when in fact they are nothing close to "Ultra-right". It is becoming a political game to try and convince your supporters that your views are merely 'moderate' or 'centrist', when in actuality you are just as far from the center as the person you are criticising. Ultra-conservative to me would be someone like Pat Buchanan or David Duke. Come on, Opus. |
| quote: |
| P.S. there is no "Republican Attack Machine", Kerry is doing just fine digging his own grave these days. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 As if.... Seriously, don't cha think Fox News/Anything owned by Murdoch/Limbaugh/all conservative talk shows/Drudge Report/etc. have just a tad bit of doing in this? If not, I think you're being just a slight bit naive. I'll address more of this in Kerry's VP thread later. |
| quote: |
| BUSH ANSWERS EVERY QUESTION --- WITHOUT HELP So yesterday President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney met with the 9/11 Commission. This meeting was held in the Oval Office and no recording was made of what took place. The president answered every question, and was not stopped at any point by the White House counsel. All sides (so far) are praising the session and commission members have said the president was candid and forthcoming. The questions and the answers that have leaked have been pretty predictable...mostly about the August 6th PDB memo and the administration's response to the attacks. If the media, Democrats in Congress and The Poodle thought they were going to get anything out of this to nail Bush on, they're sorely mistaken. Better luck next time, though. The media is most certainly disappointed as well. There was one pretty unbelievable development in all this. The 9/11 Commission pressed for weeks and weeks to meet with the president and the vice-president. It absolutely had to happen, we were told, for them to complete their report. It was a very important priority. So with that as a backdrop, once they get their meeting in the Oval Office with the president, what do two of the Democrats on the commission do? They leave early! Vice chairman Lee Hamilton left the White House 70 minutes early, saying that he had a meeting with the Canadian Prime Minister. Bob Kerrey also left in the middle of the questioning, because he had a previous commitment to meet with Senator Pete Domenici on Capitol Hill. Why did they leave early? They left early because they weren't drawing any blood. They left early because the president was performing above all expectations. They left early because their agenda was not to gather information, but to embarrass the president. So .. .if your agenda isn't being met, leave! Unbelievable. These two men were appointed to a committee to investigate the historic 9/11 attacks on America, and they can't even clear their schedules to meet with the president of the United States. ANOTHER 9/11 FAMILY MEMBER HEARD FROM Last night I was sitting in a little room at the NBC studios here in Atlanta. I was there to appear on CNBC's 8:00 news program to discuss the ABC Nightline death watch show scheduled for tonight. While waiting and listening I heard an interview with a mother of a man killed in the 9/11 attacks. Now ... this may sound just a wee bit insensitive, but losing a family member in the 9/11 attacks doesn't suddenly make you a brilliant commentator on matters of national security. This woman (sorry, I forgot her name) was discussing the appearance of Bush and Cheney before the 9/11 commission members. She was upset that Bush and Cheney weren't under oath, and particularly upset that there wasn't a transcript of their testimony made available to the public. Hey ... what's your name ... the reason that there is no transcript released is because top secret details of our war on terror were discussed. What do you want, lady? Do you want our intelligence operations to be jeopardized just to make you feel better? I heard you say you wanted to emulate the Jersey Girls .. those four anti-Bush activists who have been playing on their status as 9/11 family members to engage in partisan attacks on the president. Well ... intellectually, you fit right in. SLIME ON THE PODIUM This is almost too good to be true. John Kerry granted an interview to Black Entertainment Television and, wouldn't you just know it, one of the questions was about whether Al Sharpton would be a speaker at the Democratic National Convention. The Poodle's response? "If he wants to do it, I'd like him to do it. I think he'd do a terrific job. I think he'll add something...there's no plea necessary. It's my invitation." There's no way in hell Sharpton, who has never found a camera he didn't like, will turn down the invitation. You can bet he'll be there this summer to give his speech. Actually .. .this is good news. Sharpton's appearance at the Democratic convention will give us an opportunity to highlight the moral decadence of the Democratic party. Sharpton is a lying pig, though they embrace him. Never has the saying "you're known by the company you keep" been more true. Well .. here's an idea for Republicans. Start now demanding that Al Sharpton use this time at the Democratic National Convention to engage in the Democrats favorite form of moral exhibitionism! He can issue a few apologies! Maybe Sharpton can use this speech to apologize to Steve Pagones. Sharpton accused Pagones, a prosecutor, of raping Tawana Brawley. Pagones later sued Sharpton and was awarded $345,000. Sharpton has yet to apologize for his role in the Brawley affair, and his unfounded and slanderous accusations against Pagones and others. While Sharpton's on a roll, maybe he can apologize to the family of Yankel Rosenbaum. Rosenbaum was surrounded and stabbed to death by a Brooklyn mob shouting "kill the Jews." The crowd had been whipped into a frenzy by Al Sharpton railing against "diamond merchants" with "the blood of innocent babies" on their hands. What was this all about? A young black child was killed in a traffic accident. A Jew was driving the car that killed him. Sharpton can finish by apologizing to the families of the seven employees of Freddy's Fashion Mart in Harlem. Freddy's, you see, was owned by a white Jew. The owner of Freddy's rents his space from a black landlord. He then rents a small portion of his space to a music store owned by a black man. The black landlord raises the rent on Freddy's Fashion Mart. This means that the owner of Freddy's, the white Jew, must raise the rent on the black man who owns the record store. Enter Al Sharpton. Sharpton starts leading demonstrations. He screams to the crowd that "We will not stand by and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business." Sharpton's mob starts yelling "Burn down the Jew store!" and "We're going to see that this cracker suffers." A protester enters the store. He warns all black customers to get out and then shoots four employees point-blank, then sets a fire. Seven employees dead. Sharpton owes them an apology. The problem here, of course, is that demanding apologies is a Democratic sport, not a Republican one. Well .. why can't you Republicans take a play out of the Democratic book now! Get on the record .. .demand Sharpton's apologies. See if you get any media coverage. Yeah, right. INTEMPERATE THOUGHTS Those pictures of American soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners? You do know that it was other American soldiers who took those pictures and turned them over to authorities, don't you? The media will concentrate, though, on the bad apples, not the good ones. You know that Jamie Gorelick is a member of the 9/11 Commission. You also probably know that she was an Assistant Attorney General in the Clinton Administration And .. you might know that she is the Clinton official who wrote that memo that pretty much eliminated any possibility that the CIA and the FBI would cooperate and share intelligence on terrorism. But .. do you know why Gorelick wrote this memo? Simple. To protect Clinton from an investigation into Chinese involvement in his campaign finance scandal. Boortz the Horse is not running in the Kentucky Derby this weekend. Drat. I'm thinking vast left-wing conspiracy. Speaking of the Derby. Believe me, after 35 years of talk radio, I've heard some ridiculous things. Yesterday I heard one that almost topped the list. Some mindless idiot was saying that Jockey's have a "Constitutional right" to put advertisements on their silks at the Derby. I'm not sure who this asshat was ... must have been some sort of a union rep. Air America ... lefty talk radio .... lost two executives this week. CEO Mark Walsh and Executive Vice President for Programming Dave Logan are gone. Air America president Jon Sinton says the departures were "as expected." As expected by whom? Do you think Walsh and Logan expected it? I hear a toilet flushing somewhere. THE DIVISIVE POODLE Speaking of race, the Kerry campaign is coming under fire from some Democrats and advocacy groups who are upset about the lack of minority representation in the upper levels of The Poodle's campaign. It's so much fun when Democrats turn on their own, isn't it? It turns out Kerry's inner circle is mostly white. Some are complaining about the lack of diversity, but check out who is coming to his defense. None other than the Congressional Black Caucus, whose leader, Jesse Jackson, Jr. said the criticism was unfounded. His reason? "I am concerned about diversity, but more importantly I am concerned about the experience in that diversity - senior policy people who know people from one end of the country to another." In other words, we aren't really concerned about race....we just want somebody that's knowledgeable and has connections. Can you imagine if a Republican tried to get away with that? They wouldn't...and the first people to be jumping up and down screaming if they said something like that would be the Congressional Black Caucus. You know it's true. |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.