http://www.youtube.com/v/...player_embedded&fs=1
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Options |
"Fall Of The Republic" DVD Trailer Alex Jones |
Lead | |
|
have become somewhat of a fan of Alex Jones recently, here is his new DVD trailer, I think hes right on with mass vaccination, etc..
http://www.youtube.com/v/...player_embedded&fs=1 |
|||
MillieNeon |
|||
|
It's ridiculous to blame Obama. Bush set up the situation . . . actually, Republican Phil Graham sponsored the legislation to repeal the Glass-Steagall
(spelling?) act, which is what FDR put in place to regulate banks and financial institutions so a Great Depression wouldn't be repeated. Clinton signed it
on his way out of office (and now he regrets it). During the Bush years, the completion of deregulation and the no-bid contracts to companies like Halliburton
are what caused the mess we're in.
It was handed to Obama, including TARP. Now could Obama do better? Yeah, he could invoke more regulation and restore anti-trust. Because monopoly capitalism is really anti-capitalism, because monopoly capitalism doesn't allow for a really free market. They hoard, corner, insider trade, make fake trades, squash innovation and competition, and a free market can't exist under those conditions. But just trying to get SOME regulation, the Republicans fight him every inch of the way. So don't blame him. Blame the friggin Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats. If you want to back people who are really on our side in Congress, back the progressive Dems. Marcy Kaptur, Anthony Weiner, Alan Grayson, Al Franken . . . to name a few. It was interesting that the trailer used Jesse Ventura, because he backs Obama, so they edited his remarks to fit their scheme. That right there shows me there's something wrong with the trailer. |
|||
Options |
|||
MillieNeon wrote:I'm a fan of Alan Greyson in his actions to end the Federal Reserve, but I do think you are coming off as a bit overprotective of Obama. Sure, it G. W. passed the baton 'perfectly' to Obama for world government, the point of this new DVD is both parties are bought and sold by global banker and the puppet masters that control them, and yes, they control both Bush and Obama. Also, you may give progressive democrats too much trust that they are working on your side also. National Health Care is just as damming to this country, as a war in Iraq or Afghanistan (or, hey look now Iran), which I am fairly sure Alan Grayson backs. As far as Obama, its important to look at who controls him, rather than trying to blame him really, but him becoming (illegally) chairman of the G20 security council, carbon tax and cap and trade are just examples how Obama is a pushing (just as hard or harder than Bush) for one world government and tyranny. A frind of mine is a very big fan of Harry LaRouche, I haven't researched much, but I do trust him that he's a democrat really pushing for the good of this country, and also I am recently a big fan of Ron Paul, who runs as "republican" to just get elected, but in reality is libertarian. Jesse Ventura also I believe is libertarian. I couldn't agree more with you how our "Corporate Communism" is ravaging our economy and drowning free markets, and yes republicans are just as much in these lobbyist than democrats (what what I have heard). Anyways, if you are a bit more familiar with Alex Jones work, the guy behind making this trailer, you would know he gives as little or less respect to Bush than Obama (hes not picking on Obama other than hes our sitting president enabling the current policies), and basically Bush just passed the 'baton' to Obama for NWO and global government. |
|||
MillieNeon |
|||
|
Harry is Lyndon's son, I believe. I've known about the LaRouche thing for over 30 years, and he's not my cup of tea. He's one of those guys
that's so far left in the circle he's touching the far right. I've been a Marxist for a long time, and I'm fairly far left. I know Obama is
still a capitalist, and that Goldman Sachs (who seems to have been the biggest winner of the coup on Wall Street) probably has more control over the financial
world than our own govt. Still, that's no reason to trust LaRouche. I like Ron Paul, to a degree, but I'm not a Libertarian. I believe that a society
should provide for the poor and the weak and the old. I believe people should be guaranteed jobs, education, and health care.
Obama was a community organizer here in Chicago, and I think he would go as far as he can to help the poorer communities. Yes, I do think our presidents are limited at this point in how much they can do. However, I do think Obama makes it perfectly clear that people have to make some noise for what they want. I do not respect all the democrats, and feel that most of congress is a bunch of lap dogs. I think Obama will take it as far as he can, but his biggest contributor is Goldman Sachs. What we really need is for money to be taken out of politics. And strangely, even anchors on CNN are beginning to say that. It will certainly be interesting to see what the Supreme Court's ruling on letting corporations give more money to politics. Sotomayor really is asking some great questions, leaning to why corporations are even considered entities with the same rights as a person. http://www.volokh.com/posts/1253157714.shtml This is crucial. Take away giving corporations the same rights as an individual, and that's a first big step to getting their money out of politics, because they base their argument on saying that not letting them give money is denying the 1st amendment right of free speech to an individual entity. Obama chose Sotomayor . . . But sometimes, I must admit, I kind of feel like we are near when the Roman Republic was at when it disintegrated into the dark ages. |
|||
Options |
|||
|
well I think we are in the same lines of thinking with some areas. Someone posted this video, would you say you agree mostly with what the host is saying?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvCN5ulzjTE&feature=player_embedded Lately I have been using the phrase "Corporate Communism" on my television show. I think it is an especially fitting term when discussing the current landscape in both our banking and health care systems. |
|||
MillieNeon |
|||
|
Under capitalism, it's man against man, under communism it's the other way around. But seriously, look, we have no idea what a real communism, or
socialism for that matter, would look like. And when I say real, I mean as defined by Karl Marx. Because it's never been really tried. The Soviet Union
certainly wasn't socialist. China certainly isn't communist. Every country that has had a so-called socialist or communist revolution has soon devolved
into state control. Just as our own Republic is devolving into control by the rich who have taken many of the controls of govt by owning the politicians.
Unresponsive customer service? That's a lie! Everytime I call customer service, I get an immediate response. Okay so it's a digital voice, but it's immediately responsive. Doesn't get me very far, but it's there telling me to go back to the main menu if I don't like the options. Really tho, I suspect any form of government, any economic system -- socialism, communism, free market capitalism (with the proper regulations to keep the market as free as possible), republics, democracies -- any of those could work quite well if the people in charge have the well being of the citizenry uppermost in their minds and hearts. The real problem isn't the system, it's the greed and lack of regard for the well being of the citizens. So the real problem is, how do we nurture our species so that the priorities of those who are in leadership positions actually give a damn about the people they lead? I think it's an inaccurate analysis to call it corporate communism, because it's not corporate communism. Real corporate communism would mean that workers run and manage their own workplaces. That is certainly not the case today. Nor is it the case that we have free market capitalism. I prefer using the term anti-capitalists for the big corporations. If they are anti-regulations on the market to keep it free, they are anti-capitalist. I think the term anti-capitalist is a better term. Even better is corporate mafia. You call it rules-based capitalism, which is what I mean by regulation. I like to put it like this. If you give a bunch of guys baseballs, bats, gloves, bases and throw them out on a big field, but give them no rules by which to play, you certainly can't expect to see a baseball game. You get some kind of frenzied activity with the brawniest making up the rules that suit them. Same with capitalism. If you take away the regulations, you don't get a free market, fair economy, you get frenzied activity with the financially brawniest making up the rules that suit them. Same with socialism and communism. If you take away the basic rules and centralize all power in the state, you don't get socialism or communism. You get over-controlled totalitarianism, which usually becomes paranoid totalitarianism. Know anything about Malthus? He believed that a society that was improving living conditions of the population tended to become overpopulated, which led to famine, disease, etc. He wasn't big on helping the poor. Social Darwinists also believed that society should go to the "fittest", and of course, they saw themselves as the fittest. I think a lot of CEOs and their pocketed congresspeople really do think the poor should just be allowed to die off, and those who aren't useful to them should die off. A lot of them are big into Ann Rand's Objectivism. But again, the real problem is that revolutions take place then devolve into tyrannies. It's not the system particularly, it's the move to tyranny of almost every system. Yes, I believe political knowledge and action by the citizenry is a most important factor in staving off that tyranny. And perhaps in this day, with the web, cell phones and cell phone videos, the citizenry has a fighting chance of staving off tyranny. Except that the govt can in a flash cut off all access to their major communication technologies if it has a mind to. We live in a rough time. Something is certainly changing. We are either going to really progress and make incredible breakthroughs in the ways we organize ourselves socially and economically, or we are going to fall back into a global tyranny like we've never seen. Personally, I think neither capitalism nor socialism/communism is right for where we are now. We need to evolve a new system. Take the best of all system that we know of, synthesize and evolve something new. By the way, here is a little poem of mine: On the Edge of Extinction It was an interesting experiment the human species tho it couldn't have turned out well. They use 10% of their brains and 100% of their hands. |
|||
MillieNeon |
|||
|
As for nurturing our species, there are tribal examples of the headman being expected to set an example for the rest of the tribe, potlatches to redistribute
wealth, etc. If globalization has the eventual effect of making us one big tribe, perhaps we can utilize some of the best of the primitive social constructs.
|
|||
angomako121234 |
|||
|
i would like to add that we saw many revolutions in the 20th century, and the biggest one might be yet to come.
We haven't really seen a spiritual revolution, a real lifting of the veil kind of revolution,people becoming aware that they are aware,that would be like everyday waking up and going whoah...i wasn;t aware that i am (or am not) aware of that... and so on. i agree with millie that at the end it is up to people who make the system to make something out of the system,cause it is they who are the system. we are the system-our best and our worst,it just reflects us-our belief systems,our perceptions, our intentions, primordial and pre-natal fears and urges,etc. so,until those days come, we are left to our own daily little bits of revelations. |
|||
horzc |
|||
|
Millie, if social/politcal views were romance--and please don't read this in a creepy way, I don't mean that at all--you would be my true love. You
preach it, I'm the choir.
hz |
|||
Options |
|||
MillieNeon wrote: according to my libertarian think tank, they agree this is a great move (although the reasons behind it may differ) http://www.ronpaulforums....rporate+rights+sotomayor plan to get back to you on some of your Marxist ideas sometime soon =] |
|||
MillieNeon |
|||
|
Ah, a libertarian talks about Marxism . . . hmmmm, I already know that discussion. I can walk side-by-side with a libertarian for a while, but they the take a
turn and go down paths I can't walk. I'm not a big Ann Rand fan either.
http://sentineleffect.wordpress.com/2007/07/02/daydream-believers-libertarians-and-healthcare/ For example. However, I have my own strange views that are outside of Marxism and Libertarianism. Marx I only use as a basis for a basic analysis of capitalism. Not a final analysis. Anyway, I personally think that people should have to pass written and/or oral tests before they are given the privilege of voting. And like with driver's licenses, I think they should be re-tested every four or five years to make sure they know what the hell is going on in the country. There would be a website they could use for studying. The website would take a bill or an issue, and spellout several different approaches to that issue, from Marxist to Neocon. Citizens would be required, in their tests, to state what each approach to that issue is. This would insure that a populace somewhat educated on the issues was doing the voting. During each test period, the test would consist of referendums being voted upon next and major issues facing the US at that time. These different approaches to the issues would also be fact-checked to make certain all facts and figures were correct. An educated, activist populace will construct the best country. |
|||
Options |
|||
|
hey everyone. The video is finally released yesterday. Heres a playlist for the full movie on YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJG-Htk3FPc&feature=PlayList&p=32BE34FC63FA0F59&index=0&playnext=1 please watch and let me know what you think! |
|||
dj222 |
|||
|
Thx Options
Hope you are doing ok Deb |
|||
MillieNeon |
|||
|
Hey Options, just want to say I can't watch this for a while. I'm getting paid to do a big writing project, and I really have to stay focused on that
til it's done. Just so you know I wasn't ignoring your post. Did you do this movie? I didn't realize that.
|
|||