From wiki:
"Fascism (pronounced/fæzm/) is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2][3][4] Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy.[5][6] Fascism was originally founded by Italian national syndicalists in World War I who combined left-wing and right-wing political views, but it gravitated to the political right in the early 1920s.[7][8] Scholars generally consider fascism to be on the far right of the conventional left-right political spectrum.[9][10][11][12][13][14]
Fascists believe that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong.[15] They claim that culture is created by the collective national society and its state, that cultural ideas are what give individuals identity, and thus they reject individualism.[15] Viewing the nation as an integrated collective community, they see pluralism as a dysfunctional aspect of society, and justify a totalitarian state as a means to represent the nation in its entirety.[16][17]
They advocate the creation of a single-party state.[18] Fascists reject and resist the autonomy of cultural or ethnic groups who are not considered part of the fascists' nation and who refuse to assimilate or are unable to be assimilated.[19] They consider attempts to create such autonomy as an affront and a threat to the nation.[19] Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the fascist state and the fascist movement.[20] They identify violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality.[21]
America isn't even close to fascist. America is like most advanced nations, just with more global influence. People love to kick America right now, it's just the "in" thing to do. You know Italy was fascist for a while, right? Would you like to compare the two? Maybe if the tea-party takes control and the rest of us moved to Canada you'd have a point.
Korea and Vietnam were not fuckups. You think South Korea is unhappy the North was kept out? Vietnam was a shitty war, but it was much like Korea only the South fell. Not everyone was happy with the Soviet's expanding influence. It really was a battle of "ok" vs "pretty freaking bad". It's been 20 years now since the Berlin Wall fell, but I think too many people today are forgetting that the Red Scare was real. Now, there were certainly overreactions by the US. And playing "enemy of my enemy" is not a nice game to play, though in some cases I think it was justified. But in the end Soviet style communism was spreading not through want of the people but through force and false promises of pretty brutal governments.
I thought it said "watchlist" by the US Government, and "blacklisted" by Australia? But of course your post is all about the US.
Shouldn't the US Government put an organization that strives to disclose classified information on a watchlist? I mean, it makes sense to me. You might agree with making the leaks, but divulging someone's secrets isn't trying to make friends.
Right but as the GP mentioned, just because something is easily available doesn't mean it's easily affordable. And that isn't because it shouldn't be affordable, it's because there are factors that make it such.
I work with a below the knee amputee and his prosthetic is one notch above a peg leg. And he has rather decent insurance.
So I could see this being a great device we should try and make available for anyone that would need it, but will end up getting to like.01% of those that need it.
That doesn't mean I'm saying this is a horrible project, but the external factors after production will likely make this live changing device out of reach for many.
Considering the growth of light pollution, the easiest way to visualize what constellations will look like in 50k years is to picture a giant purple sky that's slightly pinkish at the horizons.
I don't like the word turbulent there. It's more abundant at the equator due to constant low pressure. You might want to say it storms the most there, but that's not really the water cycle being turbulent. It's usually fairly predictable there.
Look at the mess South America made for itself. The US gets involved in places and in ways I don't always like. But don't blame the US for making a mess in a mess. It was scared of the mess and took sides. The "red scare" didn't warrant some of the actions, but it did warrant action.
You want to put blame on South America, the USSA takes the most, and while the US wasn't perfect it was a hell of a lot better then the alternative.
Well, then your post isn't honest. He's on a dead or alive list, nothing more. If they're able to take him alive he'll get a trial. And if not, he's gonna end up dead. Just like 1000's of the English did at the orders of our forefathers you're ignorantly relating to.
Which is fine since your post doesn't honestly summarize the situation. He's on a dead or alive list and is not currently on US soil.
Due process is great. And I have 100% faith that if I were to steal a jelly bean I would not end up on such a list. I do not trust the politicians, I think they're corrupt. But I trust the system to protect me because I don't see it often fail.
Call me when there isn't spirited debate in this country on the ability to put a known terrorist, who does want to take down the US government and has helped kill US civilians in the past, on a capture dead or alive list.
But see, in this great country that zealots like you continually crap on, we don't just nuke the whole of the Middle East or even get an asshole like that on a capture/kill list without debate. What a great nation I live in.
No way. Impossible. And no way anyone associated with wikileaks would be against his showmanship and partisanship. They're in for the fame, not the freedom of information.
Don't confuse "I don't take them literally" with "they aren't meant to be taken literally".
Especially since they were and still are by many.
We could argue that the intent of "some" parts were parable even though they were taken literally. The intent is hard to discern. The Four Gospels and the Pauline epistles were certainly taken literally from the start (not that they all started at the same time) and without authorship issues of the epistles it's pretty obvious they were exactly meant to be taken literally. The Pentateuch has been taken literally despite it obviously (to modern criticism) being fictitious.
We went into Kuwait because they were invaded and because we didn't want Saddam to have their oil that we wanted. Shocking!!!! A country we were on friendly terms with and that has something we want with getting protected. OMGZ!!!!
And really. "class out". If you think a typo on the interweb is a big deal you should stop right there and not respond. Your points aren't very interesting and are rather naive.
You know, the same general terms you threw around like "life in Iraq wasn't anywhere nearly as bad as the Western press dictated". I was specifically talking about South Western media, but whatever. Really, I was using your generalization, and I was there in 07.
Or other great crap you wrote like "a "brutal dictator" to us is a "king" to others. And the West, given its lack of wisdom and total inability to govern itself with any degree of humanity, has no business marching about trumpeting who should and should not be allowed to exist in the modern world."
Really, I don't remember the last time we executed a woman for having sex, or whipped her for being in public without covering her face.
Can you name some Western atrocities? Sure. No place is perfect. But the utter lack of common sense from people like you is appalling. I love the Pakistani's buring American flags and screaming death to Christians because someone might burn the Quaran. If everyone wants to be whipped because they didn't cover up, I'm all for letting them be whipped. But I'm all for reaching out to those that don't want to cover up or be whipped.
What doesn't work? Removing regimes? It does work sometimes and sometimes it doesn't. In Germany and Japan you had an educated population that already had expectations of a certain lifestyle and went back to it right away. In Iraq/Afghanistan you really didn't.
To say Afghanistan is only improving because of the drug trade isn't fair. To say Iraq is chaos today compared to before isn't fair. Are more people dying today then before from unnatural causes? Is it the whole country? Or just the preferred middle? The north and south are definitely more secure and more prosperous then before. And measuring the long term results after only a few years isn't fair either. Compare Germany in 1955 to Germany of 1965. Large difference.
Well, OK if we're citing differences. Vietnam was a conflict based around the North's desire to take over the south and the US's desire to contain communism.
Afghanistan is a pretty obvious case of the US being attacked by the controlling regime. Shockingly to you the economy and freedoms in Afghanistan have improved since the US occupation.
And Iraq is a case of their leader puffing his chest to a cowboy. And they technically had a standing army. And who knows how that's going to turn out. Well, except for the Kurds where it's already improved drastically?
So what was your point? That Vietnam was the US/French trying to stop an invasion by the North? That Iraq had a standing army? Or that the quality of life in Afghanistan/Kurdistan has improved?
Wait, so now the first war was artificially manufactured? Let me guess, in your one talk to an Iraqi that gave you you great worldview it got mentioned that Saddam was allowed to take over Kuwait just so we could go kick him out. I'm sure it's one of those regurgitated false-factoids you're going to bring out.
But hey, at least you're not throwing stones from a class house by claiming you live in reality. Oh wait....You are.
I've been to Iraq. It really is worse then is reported.
And I live much better, in terms of freemdom and quality of life, then Iraq does.
I guess all those quality of life studies and freedom indexes are just fabricated crap too. Because you know, you one time talked to someone so it's all make believe.
If you talked to a Sunni living in Baghdad under Saddam I could see it not being so bad.
The reasons are pretty clear. Saddam purposefully let the world believe he had huge stockpiles of chemical weapons and WMD's to keep Iran at bay because he was fearful of Iran crossing the borders.
Coupled with a gung-ho president wanting to finish his father's legacy and that's why we went in.
And please, keep in mind that the world not going into Iraq is a bit of a black eye. Iraq was a country run by a brutal dictator. Leave the hyperbole at the door before talking about American tyranny. Bush went in for poor reasons, reasons Iraq wanted them to believe (and just never expected they would come). But countries like Iraq should not be allowed to exist in the modern world. And for that matter there's dozens of other countries we have all turned our back on and their citizens are forced to live in fear and ignorance of a brutal government.
He's publicized the (edited) leaks with catchy names meant to help the viewer make up their mind. He's strongly focused on exposing US secrets not the friendly Russians or Iranians or anyone else (and actually I know there are other nations exposed, but not with the same fever as the US gets). He's a showman looking for attention.
If it's not 100% obvious he's making a side show of this I don't know how to help you. Wikipedia is a classic example of believing in a cause. Wikileaks, well especially this guy, is a classic example of someone using a cause. If he just leaked information without the sensationalism I would buy into what he's doing. But it is very clear he has an agenda besides just caring that information wants to be free.
Slashdot Mirror
From wiki: /fæzm/) is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2][3][4] Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy.[5][6] Fascism was originally founded by Italian national syndicalists in World War I who combined left-wing and right-wing political views, but it gravitated to the political right in the early 1920s.[7][8] Scholars generally consider fascism to be on the far right of the conventional left-right political spectrum.[9][10][11][12][13][14]
Fascists believe that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong.[15] They claim that culture is created by the collective national society and its state, that cultural ideas are what give individuals identity, and thus they reject individualism.[15] Viewing the nation as an integrated collective community, they see pluralism as a dysfunctional aspect of society, and justify a totalitarian state as a means to represent the nation in its entirety.[16][17]
They advocate the creation of a single-party state.[18] Fascists reject and resist the autonomy of cultural or ethnic groups who are not considered part of the fascists' nation and who refuse to assimilate or are unable to be assimilated.[19] They consider attempts to create such autonomy as an affront and a threat to the nation.[19] Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the fascist state and the fascist movement.[20] They identify violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality.[21]
"Fascism (pronounced
America isn't even close to fascist. America is like most advanced nations, just with more global influence. People love to kick America right now, it's just the "in" thing to do. You know Italy was fascist for a while, right? Would you like to compare the two? Maybe if the tea-party takes control and the rest of us moved to Canada you'd have a point.
Korea and Vietnam were not fuckups. You think South Korea is unhappy the North was kept out? Vietnam was a shitty war, but it was much like Korea only the South fell. Not everyone was happy with the Soviet's expanding influence. It really was a battle of "ok" vs "pretty freaking bad". It's been 20 years now since the Berlin Wall fell, but I think too many people today are forgetting that the Red Scare was real. Now, there were certainly overreactions by the US. And playing "enemy of my enemy" is not a nice game to play, though in some cases I think it was justified. But in the end Soviet style communism was spreading not through want of the people but through force and false promises of pretty brutal governments.
I thought it said "watchlist" by the US Government, and "blacklisted" by Australia? But of course your post is all about the US.
Shouldn't the US Government put an organization that strives to disclose classified information on a watchlist? I mean, it makes sense to me. You might agree with making the leaks, but divulging someone's secrets isn't trying to make friends.
Right but as the GP mentioned, just because something is easily available doesn't mean it's easily affordable. And that isn't because it shouldn't be affordable, it's because there are factors that make it such. .01% of those that need it.
I work with a below the knee amputee and his prosthetic is one notch above a peg leg. And he has rather decent insurance.
So I could see this being a great device we should try and make available for anyone that would need it, but will end up getting to like
That doesn't mean I'm saying this is a horrible project, but the external factors after production will likely make this live changing device out of reach for many.
Considering the growth of light pollution, the easiest way to visualize what constellations will look like in 50k years is to picture a giant purple sky that's slightly pinkish at the horizons.
He isn't being targeted for assassination. He's on a "get him however you can" list.
I don't like the word turbulent there. It's more abundant at the equator due to constant low pressure. You might want to say it storms the most there, but that's not really the water cycle being turbulent. It's usually fairly predictable there.
Oh, btw way, the fool that deals with formality when the guns already pointed at your head, is a fool.
Look at the mess South America made for itself. The US gets involved in places and in ways I don't always like. But don't blame the US for making a mess in a mess. It was scared of the mess and took sides. The "red scare" didn't warrant some of the actions, but it did warrant action.
You want to put blame on South America, the USSA takes the most, and while the US wasn't perfect it was a hell of a lot better then the alternative.
Well, then your post isn't honest. He's on a dead or alive list, nothing more. If they're able to take him alive he'll get a trial. And if not, he's gonna end up dead. Just like 1000's of the English did at the orders of our forefathers you're ignorantly relating to.
Which is fine since your post doesn't honestly summarize the situation. He's on a dead or alive list and is not currently on US soil.
Due process is great. And I have 100% faith that if I were to steal a jelly bean I would not end up on such a list. I do not trust the politicians, I think they're corrupt. But I trust the system to protect me because I don't see it often fail.
How naive. Should the US Government ignore him like you do?
You do realize he has actively helped kill Americans, right? If he was on a police list would that be OK? Because that happens all the time.
Call me when there isn't spirited debate in this country on the ability to put a known terrorist, who does want to take down the US government and has helped kill US civilians in the past, on a capture dead or alive list.
I agree with taking him out to be honest. He's not a nice guy IMO. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki
But see, in this great country that zealots like you continually crap on, we don't just nuke the whole of the Middle East or even get an asshole like that on a capture/kill list without debate. What a great nation I live in.
No way. Impossible. And no way anyone associated with wikileaks would be against his showmanship and partisanship. They're in for the fame, not the freedom of information.
Don't confuse "I don't take them literally" with "they aren't meant to be taken literally".
Especially since they were and still are by many.
We could argue that the intent of "some" parts were parable even though they were taken literally. The intent is hard to discern. The Four Gospels and the Pauline epistles were certainly taken literally from the start (not that they all started at the same time) and without authorship issues of the epistles it's pretty obvious they were exactly meant to be taken literally. The Pentateuch has been taken literally despite it obviously (to modern criticism) being fictitious.
We went into Kuwait because they were invaded and because we didn't want Saddam to have their oil that we wanted. Shocking!!!! A country we were on friendly terms with and that has something we want with getting protected. OMGZ!!!!
And really. "class out". If you think a typo on the interweb is a big deal you should stop right there and not respond. Your points aren't very interesting and are rather naive.
You know, the same general terms you threw around like "life in Iraq wasn't anywhere nearly as bad as the Western press dictated". I was specifically talking about South Western media, but whatever. Really, I was using your generalization, and I was there in 07.
Or other great crap you wrote like "a "brutal dictator" to us is a "king" to others. And the West, given its lack of wisdom and total inability to govern itself with any degree of humanity, has no business marching about trumpeting who should and should not be allowed to exist in the modern world."
Really, I don't remember the last time we executed a woman for having sex, or whipped her for being in public without covering her face.
Can you name some Western atrocities? Sure. No place is perfect. But the utter lack of common sense from people like you is appalling. I love the Pakistani's buring American flags and screaming death to Christians because someone might burn the Quaran. If everyone wants to be whipped because they didn't cover up, I'm all for letting them be whipped. But I'm all for reaching out to those that don't want to cover up or be whipped.
What doesn't work? Removing regimes? It does work sometimes and sometimes it doesn't. In Germany and Japan you had an educated population that already had expectations of a certain lifestyle and went back to it right away. In Iraq/Afghanistan you really didn't.
To say Afghanistan is only improving because of the drug trade isn't fair. To say Iraq is chaos today compared to before isn't fair. Are more people dying today then before from unnatural causes? Is it the whole country? Or just the preferred middle? The north and south are definitely more secure and more prosperous then before. And measuring the long term results after only a few years isn't fair either. Compare Germany in 1955 to Germany of 1965. Large difference.
Well, OK if we're citing differences. Vietnam was a conflict based around the North's desire to take over the south and the US's desire to contain communism.
Afghanistan is a pretty obvious case of the US being attacked by the controlling regime. Shockingly to you the economy and freedoms in Afghanistan have improved since the US occupation.
And Iraq is a case of their leader puffing his chest to a cowboy. And they technically had a standing army. And who knows how that's going to turn out. Well, except for the Kurds where it's already improved drastically?
So what was your point? That Vietnam was the US/French trying to stop an invasion by the North? That Iraq had a standing army? Or that the quality of life in Afghanistan/Kurdistan has improved?
Wait, so now the first war was artificially manufactured? Let me guess, in your one talk to an Iraqi that gave you you great worldview it got mentioned that Saddam was allowed to take over Kuwait just so we could go kick him out. I'm sure it's one of those regurgitated false-factoids you're going to bring out.
But hey, at least you're not throwing stones from a class house by claiming you live in reality. Oh wait....You are.
I've been to Iraq. It really is worse then is reported.
And I live much better, in terms of freemdom and quality of life, then Iraq does.
I guess all those quality of life studies and freedom indexes are just fabricated crap too. Because you know, you one time talked to someone so it's all make believe.
If you talked to a Sunni living in Baghdad under Saddam I could see it not being so bad.
And it didn't work out for Japan or Germany either? They're just poor countries still living under dictators.
The reasons are pretty clear. Saddam purposefully let the world believe he had huge stockpiles of chemical weapons and WMD's to keep Iran at bay because he was fearful of Iran crossing the borders.
Coupled with a gung-ho president wanting to finish his father's legacy and that's why we went in.
And please, keep in mind that the world not going into Iraq is a bit of a black eye. Iraq was a country run by a brutal dictator. Leave the hyperbole at the door before talking about American tyranny. Bush went in for poor reasons, reasons Iraq wanted them to believe (and just never expected they would come). But countries like Iraq should not be allowed to exist in the modern world. And for that matter there's dozens of other countries we have all turned our back on and their citizens are forced to live in fear and ignorance of a brutal government.
LOL. Yes, please go into more of your unproven assassination attempts in the last 50 years. I can name countries to. No, seriously, name the attempts.
/. not 4chan, act educated.
Even the nut job here (http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/CIAtimeline.html) doesn't have all of those.
Look dude. Just because someone spouted off some unproven crap you're wanting to regurgitate doesn't make it true. This is
He's publicized the (edited) leaks with catchy names meant to help the viewer make up their mind. He's strongly focused on exposing US secrets not the friendly Russians or Iranians or anyone else (and actually I know there are other nations exposed, but not with the same fever as the US gets). He's a showman looking for attention.
If it's not 100% obvious he's making a side show of this I don't know how to help you. Wikipedia is a classic example of believing in a cause. Wikileaks, well especially this guy, is a classic example of someone using a cause. If he just leaked information without the sensationalism I would buy into what he's doing. But it is very clear he has an agenda besides just caring that information wants to be free.