Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Conspiracies & Cover-ups
Brave New Freedom
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Judge Bean" data-source="post: 21065" data-attributes="member: 42"><p><strong>Re: Brave New Freedom</strong></p><p></p><p><em>"We are liars; the government has lied in our name, but not on our behalf. Either way, we are still responsible for the lies. The soldiers in combat are paying for them?they pay the highest price. They are sacrificing themselves for us, right now as we speak."</em></p><p> </p><p></p><p>There is another kind of lie: a threat, especially in response to a threat. Let me explain my thoughts on this.</p><p> </p><p>The political climate favored by this government (called by Bush "my government") is one of fear, which finds its emotional correlation in risk. The mechanical and economic apparatus of society is being actively converted to militarism, which both fuels and feeds off of a culture of risk and threat.</p><p> </p><p>Popular art begins to indulge in images of official violence and outlawry, reflecting the general atmosphere. In this way, the authorities who seek to benefit from a propagandized public can exploit images and narratives already thriving in the culture and sanction them as semi-official. </p><p> </p><p>Some clothes worn by young men nowadays cannot clearly be identified as civilian; and so with their recreational activities, such as arcade games.</p><p> </p><p>And so with the vehicles all over the freeways: there is an semiofficial endorsement of the Hummer by the Governor of California (a living "action figure" whose movie career glorified a character who is neither completely civilian nor military), and the Hummer is apparently the primary infantry vehicle in Iraq.</p><p> </p><p>To maintain the climate of risk and threat, the government must continually issue warnings. These warnings have as a pretext the safety of the public, but the safety of the American public is, as stated, in a constant state of risk, and the actual meaning of the warnings is a warning to the enemy-- in fact, a counterthreat meant to sustain the effect of the original, alien threat.</p><p> </p><p>The counterthreat can be wheeled out at any time at the convenience of the authorities to reawaken the terror.</p><p> </p><p>Yet, as you may see, it is a lie. The danger remains at the same level as before 9/11, and Americans continue under the same potential risk of danger from terrorist attack as they did on September 10, 2001. </p><p> </p><p>In fact, the argument might be made that the danger is now greater, since the authentic nature of the enemy, his location, and his capabilities have all been obscured by heavy electioneering propaganda and deliberately fudged "intelligence."</p><p> </p><p>You can keep the American people in a state of fear by lying to them, and using the lies to undermine their way of life and expectations of lawful rules and process. </p><p> </p><p>Other countries can be terrorized by starvation, genocide, invasion, "benign neglect," and "economic sanctions," but the best way to scare Americans is to challenge their native rights. When you go after their rights, you're telling them that there is a threat to America so serious that the government has had to compromise their freedom to preserve their freedom. </p><p> </p><p>Under a few very restricted circumstances, we will acquiesce in the contradiction, such as when every other house on the block upwind is in flames.</p><p> </p><p>But you may see that a threat is a lie for other reasons, too: in many cases, the threat stands in for the job of an actual injury or attack, and may be more effective. That's how terrorism got its name.</p><p> </p><p>Another lie: If "America is safer now," according to Bush, then why do we need to continue the Patriot Act? </p><p> </p><p>Why do we need to continue to threaten other countries to do what we tell them to do or else? </p><p> </p><p>Why do we need to threaten judges and Senators to do what Bush wants them to? </p><p> </p><p>Why do we need to threaten Iraq not to have "political turbulence," as Rumsfeld just now did?</p><p> </p><p>A definition of democracy: <em>Political Turbulence.</em></p><p> </p><p>A definition of tyranny: <em>Rule by Fear</em>.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Judge Bean, post: 21065, member: 42"] [b]Re: Brave New Freedom[/b] [i]"We are liars; the government has lied in our name, but not on our behalf. Either way, we are still responsible for the lies. The soldiers in combat are paying for them?they pay the highest price. They are sacrificing themselves for us, right now as we speak."[/i] There is another kind of lie: a threat, especially in response to a threat. Let me explain my thoughts on this. The political climate favored by this government (called by Bush "my government") is one of fear, which finds its emotional correlation in risk. The mechanical and economic apparatus of society is being actively converted to militarism, which both fuels and feeds off of a culture of risk and threat. Popular art begins to indulge in images of official violence and outlawry, reflecting the general atmosphere. In this way, the authorities who seek to benefit from a propagandized public can exploit images and narratives already thriving in the culture and sanction them as semi-official. Some clothes worn by young men nowadays cannot clearly be identified as civilian; and so with their recreational activities, such as arcade games. And so with the vehicles all over the freeways: there is an semiofficial endorsement of the Hummer by the Governor of California (a living "action figure" whose movie career glorified a character who is neither completely civilian nor military), and the Hummer is apparently the primary infantry vehicle in Iraq. To maintain the climate of risk and threat, the government must continually issue warnings. These warnings have as a pretext the safety of the public, but the safety of the American public is, as stated, in a constant state of risk, and the actual meaning of the warnings is a warning to the enemy-- in fact, a counterthreat meant to sustain the effect of the original, alien threat. The counterthreat can be wheeled out at any time at the convenience of the authorities to reawaken the terror. Yet, as you may see, it is a lie. The danger remains at the same level as before 9/11, and Americans continue under the same potential risk of danger from terrorist attack as they did on September 10, 2001. In fact, the argument might be made that the danger is now greater, since the authentic nature of the enemy, his location, and his capabilities have all been obscured by heavy electioneering propaganda and deliberately fudged "intelligence." You can keep the American people in a state of fear by lying to them, and using the lies to undermine their way of life and expectations of lawful rules and process. Other countries can be terrorized by starvation, genocide, invasion, "benign neglect," and "economic sanctions," but the best way to scare Americans is to challenge their native rights. When you go after their rights, you're telling them that there is a threat to America so serious that the government has had to compromise their freedom to preserve their freedom. Under a few very restricted circumstances, we will acquiesce in the contradiction, such as when every other house on the block upwind is in flames. But you may see that a threat is a lie for other reasons, too: in many cases, the threat stands in for the job of an actual injury or attack, and may be more effective. That's how terrorism got its name. Another lie: If "America is safer now," according to Bush, then why do we need to continue the Patriot Act? Why do we need to continue to threaten other countries to do what we tell them to do or else? Why do we need to threaten judges and Senators to do what Bush wants them to? Why do we need to threaten Iraq not to have "political turbulence," as Rumsfeld just now did? A definition of democracy: [i]Political Turbulence.[/i] A definition of tyranny: [i]Rule by Fear[/i]. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Conspiracies & Cover-ups
Brave New Freedom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top