Sense of Urgancy .....

[EmptyTimCup]

The utility of terror was multifaceted, but among its chief benefits was its tendency to maintain a permanent sense of crisis. Crisis is routinely identified as a core mechanism of Fascism because it short circuits debate and Democratic deliberation. Hence all fascistic movements commit considerable energy to prolonging a heightened state of emergency.

- Liberal Fascism pg 42 - 43



Saul Alinsky: Never waste a good crisis ....

 

[ImnoMensa]

- Liberal Fascism pg 42 - 43



Saul Alinsky: Never waste a good crisis ....

Yeah: Now after bailing out Wall Street Obama is attacking it.

I guess that makes sense to somebody.

 

[EmptyTimCup]

 

[PsyOps]

The utility of terror was multifaceted, but among its chief benefits was its tendency to maintain a permanent sense of crisis. Crisis is routinely identified as a core mechanism of Fascism because it short circuits debate and Democratic deliberation. Hence all fascistic movements commit considerable energy to prolonging a heightened state of emergency.

- Liberal Fascism pg 42 - 43



Saul Alinsky: Never waste a good crisis ....

It is just as easily argued that Bush kept us in an interminable state of crisis and fear. It really should concern us all that both parties seem to play on our fears in order to promulgate their agendas.

 

[vraiblonde]

It is just as easily argued that Bush kept us in an interminable state of crisis and fear.

He did? I thought that was the Islamofascists that did that.

I was not afraid when Bush was president. Now I am ####ing terrified.

 

[PsyOps]

He did? I thought that was the Islamofascists that did that.

I was not afraid when Bush was president. Now I am ####ing terrified.

911 > Islamofascism > Iraq ties to terrorism > WMD > Mushroom cloud > etc...

Use fear to justify an unjustifiable war.

 

[vraiblonde]

911 > Islamofascism > Iraq ties to terrorism > WMD > Mushroom cloud > etc...

Use fear to justify an unjustifiable war.

Well, I disagree that it was unjustified. I'd been waiting through two presidents for one of them to pull the trigger on Saddam. That's one of the things I think Bush did right, and it was about damn time.

 

[aps45819]

WMD >...

Use fear to justify an unjustifiable war.

Another person that thinks the guy that used WMDs against Iran and the Kurds didn't actually have any WMDs

 

[EmptyTimCup]

It is just as easily argued that Bush kept us in an interminable state of crisis and fear. It really should concern us all that both parties seem to play on our fears in order to promulgate their agendas.

Why Yes, Yes they Do .....


the US Gobberment has been sliding towards Fascism for many years, we have already had our 1st Fascist President, long before WWII and Italy had theirs ....


Woodrow Wilson .... I'll dig up some quotes from Wilson and post them later this week

 

[PsyOps]

Well, I disagree that it was unjustified. I'd been waiting through two presidents for one of them to pull the trigger on Saddam. That's one of the things I think Bush did right, and it was about damn time.

Unjustified as in the timing of it, not in terms of whether Saddam had it coming. As it's been argued endlessly here, Iraq took our eye off the Afghan ball.

I was glad when we finally made the move; I was (and still am) incensed that the intel was so poor that all the justification to go to war with Iraq (WMD) turned out to be wrong.

My real point is, though, both sides use fear to promote their agenda at the expense of our ignorance.

 

[PsyOps]

Another person that thinks the guy that used WMDs against Iran and the Kurds didn't actually have any WMDs

Simple question... Where are they?

I'm not saying Saddam didn't have them; but they certainly weren't there when we invaded. The intel was wrong.

 

[vraiblonde]

Simple question... Where are they?

I'm not saying Saddam didn't have them; but they certainly weren't there when we invaded. The intel was wrong.

They weren't there when we invaded because that ####tard Bush threatened for weeks prior to and let them know we were coming. CW says they were relocated to Syria, and who knows what happened to them from there.

Anyone who insists that there never were any WMD simply because they weren't there when we invaded is just stupid. We know he had them at one point because he used them on the Kurds. Duh. Then Saddam's punk kid (may he rest in pieces) actually publicly stated they had them, and would use them on the US. Double duh.

While there may not have been a direct link between Saddam and bin Laden, to say that the Iraqi government was not engaging in terrorism is simply ignorant. If nothing else, they definitely terrorized the living #### out of their citizens.

 

[EmptyTimCup]

It is just as easily argued that Bush kept us in an interminable state of crisis and fear. It really should concern us all that both parties seem to play on our fears in order to promulgate their agendas.

did bush really beat a louder drum, than we have had on global warming

we gotta do something now Al Goreacle going around telling inconvenient lies to prop up is Carbon Credit Business Obama ... we must do something about Health Care people are dieing .... if it is so urgent, then why wait 4 yrs for it to kick in .... seems like it isn't so urgent after all


It was more than just out Intelligence Agencies that though Sadam had WMD's .... and for weeks trucks rolled across the border into Syria before the invasion ....

 

[EmptyTimCup]

The intel was wrong.

Oh like that's never happened before ..........



like the OJ trial ... will we ever really know

 

[bcp]

As far as why Bush went into Iraq. This is what he said on September 11th 2001 just two days after the attack on the Twin Towers.

The search is under way for those who are behind these evil acts. I've directed the full resources for our intelligence and law enforcement communities to find those responsible and bring them to justice. We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.

A good number of the al Qaeda leaders were captured in Iraq.
It would appear that al Qaeda was in fact operating from within the borders of Iraq with the blessing of Saddam.
As promised in his September 11 speech, President Bush did go in and attack Iraq in an attempt to break up and capture al Qaeda leaders.
When the first strikes started, everyone cheered, but when it was realized that this was not going to be the short term cake walk that was originally described, people lost their stomach for the war even though terrorist leadership was being found and dealt with. Unfortunately, by this time it was too late to just walk out.
In order to leave, the Iraqi government had to be able and willing to keep al Qaeda out of business, at least in their country.
The problem with the American public is that we dont know exactly what is going on, we dont have all the intel available to the President. And this is why obama promised to end the Iraq war within 6 months or whatever it was, and why once he was privilaged to read the data, he realized that it was not possible to just walk away.
The continued effort in Iraq by the obama administration is one thing that he can be applauded for.
Weapons of Mass Destruction or not, President Bush did promise to bring the war to any country found harboring the terrorists. And he did.

The U.S. command said Wednesday the highest-ranking Iraqi in the leadership of al Qaeda in Iraq has been arrested, adding that information from him indicates the group's foreign-based leadership wields considerable influence over the Iraqi chapter.

Khaled Abdul-Fattah Dawoud Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, also known as Abu Shahid, was captured in Mosul on July 4, said Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner, a military spokesman.

"Al-Mashhadani is believed to be the most senior Iraqi in the al Qaeda in Iraq network," Bergner said. He said al-Mashhadani was a close associate of Abu Ayub al-Masri, the Egyptian-born head of al Qaeda in Iraq.

Bergner said al-Mashhadani served as an intermediary between al-Masri and Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri.

"In fact, communication between the senior al Qaeda leadership and al-Masri frequently went through al-Mashhadani," Bergner said. He added: "There is a clear connection between al Qaeda in Iraq and al Qaeda senior leadership outside Iraq."

 

[aps45819]

Simple question... Where are they?

I'm not saying Saddam didn't have them; but they certainly weren't there when we invaded. The intel was wrong.

They weren't there when we invaded because that ####tard Bush threatened for weeks prior to and let them know we were coming. CW says they were relocated to Syria, and who knows what happened to them from there.

I believe that in his recent book, Karl Rove has claimed responsibility for not publicizing the moving of the weapons into Syria.
The Intel wasn't wrong, it just wasn't released to the public

 

[EmptyTimCup]

I am bumping this and quoting a thread from Tilted ....

From a letter sent by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to a national association of health insurers:

It has come to my attention that several health insurer carriers are sending letters to their enrollees falsely blaming premium increases for 2011 on the patient protections in the Affordable Care Act. I urge you to inform your members that there will be zero tolerance for this type of misinformation and unjustified rate increases.

...

According to our analysis and those of some industry and academic experts, any potential premium impact from the new consumer protections and increased quality provisions under the Affordable Care Act will be minimal. We estimate that that the effect will be no more than one to two percent. This is consistent with estimates from the Urban Institute (1 to 2 percent) and Mercer consultants (2.3 percent) as well as some insurers’ estimates. Pennsylvania’s Highmark, for example, estimates the effect of the legislation on premiums from 1.14 to 2 percent. Moreover, the trends in health costs, independent of the legislation, have slowed. Employers’ premiums for family coverage increased by only 3 percent in 2010 – a significant drop from previous years.

...

Given the importance of the new protections and the facts about their impact on costs, I ask for your help in stopping misinformation and scare tactics about the Affordable Care Act. Moreover, I want AHIP’s members to be put on notice: the Administration, in partnership with states, will not tolerate unjustified rate hikes in the name of consumer protections.

Already, my Department has provided 46 states with resources to strengthen the review and transparency of proposed premiums. Later this fall, we will issue a regulation that will require state or federal review of all potentially unreasonable rate increases filed by health insurers, with the justification for increases posted publicly for consumers and employers. We will also keep track of insurers with a record of unjustified rate increases: those plans may be excluded from health insurance Exchanges in 2014. Simply stated, we will not stand idly by as insurers blame their premium hikes and increased profits on the requirement that they provide consumers with basic protections.

You will agree with our analysis of the effects of this wonderful health care reform (whether its sincere or just politically expedient) OR ELSE! Further, if you do dare to disagree with it, you better keep quiet about it OR ELSE!

If this is indeed an expression of genuine concern about potentially misleading or fraudulent business practices, why are the insurers being 'put on notice' by the Department of HHS rather than the Federal Trade Commission?

I've often been one of the first to defend this Administration when, in my opinion, it's been unfairly accused of Gestapo-esque (or otherwise inappropriate) tactics, but this rings very much Gestapo-esque to me.

how do you feel about that Urgancy Now ........

 

[preselector]

Well, I disagree that it was unjustified. I'd been waiting through two presidents for one of them to pull the trigger on Saddam. That's one of the things I think Bush did right, and it was about damn time.

Saddam was a evil POS but he provided a pretty good check of Iraq.

After he was captured, Saddam said he was bluffing about having WMD because he was afraid of an Iraqi invasion in retaliation for the earlier Iran-Iraq war.

The WMD Saddam might or might not have had is irrelevant in any event because it was nerve gas, used against the Kurds and Iraqis, and he didn't have the delivery systems to put us at risk. Nerve gas is bulky, easy to detect, and hard to smuggle across boarders.

While I don't think we should directly support evil dictators, nor overthrow a government to put an evil dictator in place as we did the Shah of Iran, I don't mind leaving one in place to provide a check against a sworn enemy. The Iranians hate us. The Iraqis didn't.

I can't help but wonder if the Iranians would be nearing completion of nuclear weapons if Saddam was still around to bedevil them.