|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Jun 9th, 2003 07:13 PM | |
| Vibecrewangel |
Bush I'm not saying that we should be beholden to the rest of the world. However, we should remember that we are all on the same hunk of rock. At one time Germany was hated by much of the rest of the world. Now we are. The difference is we are bigger and stronger. And we are not affraid to flex out muscles. |
| Jun 1st, 2003 05:00 AM | |
| Vibecrewangel |
:) Bump for me.......must find more time....... And LOL 'talian |
| May 27th, 2003 03:06 AM | |
| ItalianStereotype |
LOOK AT WANG, HE THINKS HE'S PEOPLE! 
|
| May 27th, 2003 02:25 AM | |
| Wang |
fuckin retards! hey whats the deal with the ways dubya got into da white ass if u can cheat like u imply then y not eh? i believe ridding iraq from saddam was a good deed even if there was other countrys in need. u can only do 1 thing at a time and hes already starting to pressure the other culprits to give up their nukes and bios. i think thats very smart and he had to have learnt something in college to become a presitdent of the usa u know.i thought when i clicked on this link that it would be half full of ass ramming donkey raping hippies and i was SOOOOOO right. congrats to the intelligent people here who disagreed. contradict that punks |
| May 23rd, 2003 07:57 PM | |
| The_Rorschach |
"Though I agree with you that a nationalistic foreign policy does apply to all countries, a reckless one does not. I think this comparison for the most part is being made to show how both had/have little to no concern for what the rest of the world thinks of their actions. Let's just hope we don't step on the wrong foreign toes. Or too many of them" That is just it though Vibe. . .When is it that we suddenly became beholden to the entire world? These countiess are not our peers, they are not equals, they are not even friends. We are a sovereign nation,. sovereign, and people seem to have forgotten that. They call the world today a global community. Thats a misnomer. There is nothing communal about the world. They are not friends and neighbours who we see on sunday afternoon barbeques, they are treacherous allies and outright foes. We gave Prague to Stalin in order to placate the "global community" and I'll be damned if the US makes concessions to the petty tyrants of Peace time and time again. I'm not saying might makes right, but I am saying that there is no country out there that is expected to meet the high standards put on the US. Rememeber France and the Atoll bombings? Remember North Korea and their manufactoring of fissionable material? Remember Russia and a Afghanistan? Remember China and Taiwan? The list goes on and on. We are no more reckless than anyone else. |
| May 23rd, 2003 06:19 PM | |
| Vibecrewangel |
Blah Sorry Ror..... Things have been hectic. Putting together the budget for the department next year. God I hate accounting.......it's why I'm not an accountant. Well for most of the year anyway...... " 3. Like Hitler, Bush went on to pursue a reckless ultra-nationalist foreign policy without the mandate of the electorate." Though I agree with you that a nationalistic foreign policy does apply to all countries, a reckless one does not. I think this comparison for the most part is being made to show how both had/have little to no concern for what the rest of the world thinks of their actions. Let's just hope we don't step on the wrong foreign toes. Or too many of them. "4. Like Hitler, Bush has accordingly improved his popularity ratings, especially with veterans and conservative Republicans, by mounting an aggressive public relations campaign against foreign enemies. Just as Hitler cited international communism to justify Germany's military buildup, Bush uses Al Qaeda and the Axis of Evil to justify our current military buildup." I have to concede to you on this one. Though just because it can be applied to a broader base does not mean that the comparison at hand is invalid. I hadn't thought about this before, but I think that more people were honestly patriotic during the cold war than they are now. I see a lot of lip service. But actual love and respect for this country doesn't seem as strong or as real. Maybe it's just me. "5. Like Hitler, Bush promotes militarism while in the midst of a major economic recession (or depression). He uses war preparations to help subsidize defense industries (Halliburton, Bechtel, etc.) and presumably the rest of the economy on a trickle-down basis. " It's all you on this one Ror. I tried to find something....anything to counter you and support this statement. I couldn't. |
| May 22nd, 2003 01:40 PM | |
| Vibecrewangel |
tired Ror - Me no forget...... Busy. Will try to get to this over the weekend. |
| May 15th, 2003 07:59 PM | |
| The_Rorschach |
" 3. Like Hitler, Bush went on to pursue a reckless ultra-nationalist foreign policy without the mandate of the electorate." Alright, maybe I'm just getting lazy, but while the language in this is aggressive and seeminly meaningful, number three is likke more than a subjective opinion presented as fact. "Ultra-Nationalist" is not a real description. Nationalism is defined as "Devotion to the interests or culture of one's nation," and is therefore already an extreme. But without that descriptor, you are left with a "nationalistic foreign policy" which would be no different from any other country's foreign policy basis. Now, he goes on to say 'without the mandate of the electorate," and that is rather clever, because he conveniently fails to mention congressional support, trying to say that though he has federal bipartisan persmission, the 'people' themselves did not ask for his measures. But name a country where the "electorate," or civic population, actually does have that strong of a voice in their government's policy making. I guess what I'm trying to say is, this is such a simplistic and easy generalization to make, it really could apply to just about every country which ever existed and their leaders. "4. Like Hitler, Bush has accordingly improved his popularity ratings, especially with veterans and conservative Republicans, by mounting an aggressive public relations campaign against foreign enemies. Just as Hitler cited international communism to justify Germany's military buildup, Bush uses Al Qaeda and the Axis of Evil to justify our current military buildup. Right, same as number 3. No real suprises here. It's pretty ambiguous really, because that is what most governments do - They incite patriotism and conjure bogeymen to justify their own existance. If he is afraid of this military build up, he must have been shitting himself in the street every day from 1959 to 1988. It's a wonder he hasn't died of apoplexy really. "5. Like Hitler, Bush promotes militarism while in the midst of a major economic recession (or depression). He uses war preparations to help subsidize defense industries (Halliburton, Bechtel, etc.) and presumably the rest of the economy on a trickle-down basis. " Yeah. . .This is NOT a major recession, or depression. It's a cyclical economic spiral. Major describes the Oklahoma Dust Bowl. The Great Depression. There is no comparing our current economic hardship with what Germany went through in the 20's and 30's. If you'll remember correctly, we began collecting the money they owed us as repairation immediately following the Great Depression. We sent an already poor country into a state which 'poverty stricken' does not begin to even encompass. Hitler's war machine was the sole hope of their economic salvation. Bush has upped military spending, but it still does not rival what the budget restraints were during the cold war years, nor is it with any imperialistic aim. Furthermore, Hilter neved had a Trickle Down Economics theory. Maybe I'm just splitting hairs, but none of these are all that outrageous, and its only the language he uses which makes them sound provative and somehow menacing. I know I'm splitting hairs, but really, when making comparisons, one should consider the context, which this guy fails to do time and time again. |
| May 14th, 2003 10:56 AM | |
| Vibecrewangel |
Finals :: giggle :: Take your time. :D |
| May 14th, 2003 02:18 AM | |
| The_Rorschach |
Sorry. I didn't catch that  I'll try number 3 tomorrow, btu I have two more finals so it might have to wait til Thursday |
| May 14th, 2003 01:32 AM | |
| Vibecrewangel |
Used That I absolutely agree with. I think I mentioned that in the begining of my last post. By my own standard of "the reason why" it totally falls apart. Though the liberties being curtailed are similar and I believe that is the intent of this particular comparison. Walter - I'll double check, but I don't think so. |
| May 14th, 2003 01:19 AM | |
| The_Rorschach |
"Like Hitler, Bush began to curtail civil liberties in response to a well-publicized national outrage, in Hitler's case the Reichstag fire, in Bush's case the 9-11 catastrophe. " The policies are similar, in some respect, but the question was regarding both taking advantage of the situation to impliment precedents which abused civil liberties. In one case, the situation was orchestrated, in another, it was used. There is a difference. |
| May 13th, 2003 10:16 PM | |
| Zebra 3 |
The Enabling & Patriot Acts  - Does either act have a sunset clause, meaning that these new government powers would automatically end after a certain time or event?
|
| May 13th, 2003 07:22 PM | |
| Vibecrewangel |
Ugh I'm back.....for the most part.....family....ish. Okay, here goes. It's sort of long..... 2. Like Hitler, Bush began to curtail civil liberties in response to a well-publicized national outrage, in Hitler's case the Reichstag fire, in Bush's case the 9-11 catastrophe. First, I believe Van der Lubbe was working for the Nazi party. He was just a patsy who ended up losing his head. Literally. This is indeed a major difference in the Hitler / Bush debate. Hitler, most likely planned the fire. I do not believe Bush planned the 9/11 attacks. Though Hindenburg signed the law, he was coerced by Hitler along with Papen. The curtailing of civil liberties however is where the similarities begin. Bear in mind the Enabling Act of 1933 was supposed to be a temporary measure to protect the democracy of Germany from the Communist Threat. The Enabling Act allows "Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed." And here is the long part….. The Patriot Act allows The Patriot Act grants the executive branch unprecedented, and largely unchecked, surveillance powers, including the enhanced ability to track email and Internet usage, conduct sneak-and-peek searches, obtain sensitive personal records, monitor financial transactions, and conduct nationwide roving wiretaps. The Patriot Act permits law enforcement agencies to circumvent the Fourth Amendment's requirement of probable cause when conducting wiretaps and searches that have, as a 'significant purpose,' the gathering of foreign intelligence. Law enforcement is still required under this provision to obtain a warrant to enter, but it no longer has to give you the timely notice which both the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Fourth Amendment require. The only justification law enforcement now needs to enter without notice is that notice might "seriously jeopardize an investigation or unduly delay a trial." Under Section 216 of the Act, law enforcement now not only has the authority to intercept transmissions from people suspected of terrorist activity, but also from people under investigation for other crimes as well. This authority now contains no constitutional safeguards. Judges are now required to issue blank warrants without reference to a location or jurisdiction, as long as law enforcement certifies that the surveillance is "relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation." The Act doesn't stop there. Section 216 of the Act extends this low threshold of proof beyond the mere "trapping and tracing" of telephone numbers. It extends it to tracing your emails and internet activities. Section 411 of the Patriot Act purportedly defines foreign terrorist organizations. However, as the ACLU points out, this provision "permits designation [of] foreign and domestic groups," since the provision defines these groups as "any political, social or other similar group whose public endorsement of acts of terrorist activity" - which, of course, under the Section 802 could mean lawful protest - which "the Secretary of State has determined undermines United States efforts to reduce or eliminate terrorist activities." Under Section 412, any immigrant who innocently supports the activities of a designated terrorist organization could be deported or indefinitely detained. Again, the government can detain or deport an immigrant who provides lawful assistance to groups that are not even designated as terrorist organizations. Criminal investigations and foreign intelligence investigations have historically, and with good reason, been kept separate in our country. The USA Patriot Act blurs the dividing line between these two areas of law, undermining procedural protections inherent in criminal law. Under the USA Patriot Act, the boundaries between these two territories of law are breached. An immediate and direct consequence of this breach is an immediate and direct loss of constitutional protections for both American citizens and immigrants. The Patriot Act puts the CIA back in the business of spying on Americans. Section 203 of the Act allows law enforcement to share with intelligence agencies -- including the FBI, CIA, NSA, INS, Secret Service, and Department of Defense -- sensitive information gathered during a criminal investigation. The types of information that could be shared include information revealed to a grand jury (previously prohibited by law), telephone and internet intercepts obtained without court order and without restrictions on the subsequent use of the intercepted information, and any other "foreign intelligence" information obtained as part of a criminal investigation This, alone, is reason enough to amend the Act. As the ACLU says: "The USA Patriot Act would tear down [procedural] safeguards and once again permit the CIA to create dossiers on constitutionally protected activities of Americans and eliminate judicial review of such practices.” There is a lot more, but I think my point is made as well. An interesting difference…where Hitler was upfront about what he was doing, the Patriot Act seems more low key. In some ways that could make it more dangerous. Ignorance of the law is no excuse and all. |
| May 12th, 2003 10:52 AM | |
| Vibecrewangel |
Hey I promise to continue with this when I have a moment. Have had some family stuff come up that needs to be dealt with. I'll be lurking. 
|
| May 11th, 2003 12:16 AM | |
| Abcdxxxx | i don't like bush but he's not on the level of Hitler's genocidal "final solution". very few of the specific points listed in that article were the actions that made Hitler so infamous. it seems there's this constant need "to understand" and recognize the building elements of events like WWII/The Holocaust that some lose sight of the big picture. |
| May 10th, 2003 12:30 PM | |
| kellychaos | Hitler is to Nietzche as Jerry Falwell is to the Bible. Granted, some of Nietzche points were extreme but, on the whole, his published works are both insightful and even inspiring. It's a shame that they've been attached in history to the likes of Hitler to be bastardized into unrecognizability. Basically, he used only part of the sentiment in Nietzche works towards his own ends. Sadly, those parts are what many people will remember about Nietzche. |
| May 9th, 2003 09:56 PM | |
| Zebra 3 |
People & Leaders [center:472def79ce]  [/center:472def79ce]"Naturally, the common people don't want war, but after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patrotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country." - Hermann Goering, Hitler's Reich-Marshall at the Nuremberg Trials after WWII |
| May 8th, 2003 04:13 PM | |
| The_Rorschach |
I like it too. This is far afield, but speaking of that class, my instructor, "Pohaku" Tom Stone, is supposed to be hosting something on Comedy Central this summer -unless he was totally bullshitting us last night, and I was too drunk to pick up on it. "2. Like Hitler, Bush began to curtail civil liberties in response to a well-publicized national outrage, in Hitler's case the Reichstag fire, in Bush's case the 9-11 catastrophe." The day following the yhe Reichstag fire of '33, Hindenburg signed into law -in a format akin to an Executive Order- a declaration of the current state of emergency, which not merely limited certain lberties, but actually curtailed basic rights of the German people. Hitler, who produced 'proof' that Communists were behind the terrorist act -such as Van der Lubbe's admission-, managed to get newspapers and radio transmissions censored - Meetings between individuals were allowed only at certain places and times, limited in order to keep the chances conspiracy in check. All forms of private corrspondance were allowed to be read by government officials at any times, uncluding letters and phone calls. The Law stayed in force until 1945. Now, when one carefully scrutinizes the information available concerning the Fire, it becomes obvious that Van der Lubbe could not have committed the act alone, as he says. Huge amounts of pertol were utilized in setting the blaze, and the fire department wrote a report saying in some places the fire resisted ever attempt to put it out. One man with a tin of kerosine and a handful of matches COULD NOT have set it himself, which leaves us with two theories: One- Hitler was right, there was a conspiracy of Communists and Van der Lubbe was protecting his allies; or Two- Van der Lubbe was lying, and was working for the Nazi party, perpetrating an act which would give Hitler just the clout and power he needed to subvert his enemies. We all know about September 11, we all know who drafted, wrote and passed the Patriot Act(s). Neither were Executive Orders. If I need to elaborate, I will, but I think we can safely say number 2 is a fanciful account of what truly transpired. |
| May 8th, 2003 11:03 AM | |
| Vibecrewangel |
PIGGY Congrats Ror. I love Hawaii. If I could afford to live there I would go and never look back. Bush / Hitler - I guess it would come down to how you interpret "forced" |
| May 8th, 2003 03:52 AM | |
| The_Rorschach |
Yeah. Scored 100% on the one taken today. Hawaiian Studies, getting to know the historical and cultural background. Interesting stuff. Dug an I'mu, cooked a pig, dug the shit up and served, twenty hour project. Tried awa for the first time too. good shit. Puts you on your ass. Not alchohol. Sime kind of root. =-=-=-=-==- E D IT =-=-===- Even if it was given to Bush too, assertion that both were "forced to engage in political maneuvering in order to gain office" is still false. |
| May 7th, 2003 05:17 PM | |
| AChimp |
|
| May 7th, 2003 09:46 AM | |
| mburbank |
"I have looked at this situation from all angles." -I'm sorry, I find that a fairly incredible statement. if this is the truth cn you summarize any arguments of sides other than your own? |
| May 7th, 2003 02:19 AM | |
| Vibecrewangel |
Hitler Italian - Good luck on the finals!!!! I'm sure you'll do fine. You is a smart guy and stuff. I welcome your input on this topic if Ror and I haven't covered it all by the time you get back. As I do with Ror, I like discussing / debating things with you. I have to actually work when I do. I sure can't bull-no-shit with either of you. It's why I usually stick to topics I know well. :D This time I posted something I know a bit about, but was more political than I am used too. Now I actually have to look things up to make sure what I remember is correct. Darn you both, darn you to heck! :P BTW - I really don't see any valid comparisons between Hitler and Bush. But I chose this side for the sake of the post and the follow-up so I am stuck with it. "grumble grumble grumble" Thought I'd make sure I made that perfectly clear before people got too emotional over this topic. Oh and Ror....do you have finals too? I thought I saw that earlier in this thread. And Mod.....YES YES YES |
| May 7th, 2003 01:12 AM | |
| Miss Modular | I think it's time to post that Jesus/Hitler Guinness ad again. |
| This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | |
