A fascist America, in 10 easy steps

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Useful Info, Apr 25, 2007.

  1. Useful Info

    Useful Info Guest

    To make a police state you need to follow just 10 steps.
    Bush/Cheney have pursued each of them.

    Read the full story via
    http://Muvy.org
     
    Useful Info, Apr 25, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Useful Info

    Rod Speed Guest

    Useful Info <> wrote

    > To make a police state you need to follow just 10 steps.


    You wouldnt know what a police state was if it bit you on your lard arse, child.

    > Bush/Cheney have pursued each of them.


    Pig ignorant lie.

    > Read the full story via
    > http://Muvy.org


    No thank, its just completely mindless pig ignorant shit/lies.
     
    Rod Speed, Apr 25, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Useful Info

    asdf Guest

    "Rod Speed" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Useful Info <> wrote
    >
    >> To make a police state you need to follow just 10 steps.

    >
    > You wouldnt know what a police state was if it bit you on your lard arse,
    > child.
    >
    >> Bush/Cheney have pursued each of them.

    >
    > Pig ignorant lie.
    >
    >> Read the full story via
    >> http://Muvy.org

    >
    > No thank, its just completely mindless pig ignorant shit/lies.


    .... a self fulfilling prophesy :))
     
    asdf, Apr 26, 2007
    #3
  4. Perhaps you should read it. I am afraid that it just may be over your
    power of comprehension, however.
     
    kswymford@.com, Apr 26, 2007
    #4
  5. Useful Info

    Rod Speed Guest

    Useful Info <> wrote
    > Rod Speed wrote
    >> kswymford@.com wrote


    >>> To make a police state you need to follow just 10 steps.


    >> You wouldnt know what a police state was if it bit you on your lard arse, child.


    >>> Bush/Cheney have pursued each of them.


    >> Pig ignorant lie.


    >>> Read the full story via
    >>> http://Muvy.org


    >> No thank, its just completely mindless pig ignorant shit/lies.


    > Perhaps you should read it.


    No point when it makes that stupid claim about the US currently.

    And I certainly wouldnt produce any click revenue for the OP anyway.

    > I am afraid that it just may be over your power of comprehension, however.


    Pathetic.
     
    Rod Speed, Apr 26, 2007
    #5
  6. In article <4630b9a3$0$9942$>, kswymford@.com wrote:
    > Perhaps you should read it. I am afraid that it just may be over your
    >power of comprehension, however.


    Browser technology is security weak; I don't like going to sites I
    don't trust, like those run by paranoid conspiracy nuts. Not much
    into giving you a click count, either.


    --
    Christopher Mattern

    NOTICE
    Thank you for noticing this new notice
    Your noticing it has been noted
    And will be reported to the authorities
     
    Chris Mattern, Apr 26, 2007
    #6
  7. Useful Info

    edonline Guest

    "Chris Mattern" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <4630b9a3$0$9942$>, kswymford@.com
    > wrote:
    >> Perhaps you should read it. I am afraid that it just may be over your
    >>power of comprehension, however.

    >
    > Browser technology is security weak; I don't like going to sites I
    > don't trust, like those run by paranoid conspiracy nuts. Not much
    > into giving you a click count, either.
    >
    >


    FWIW, the piece had been printed in a few news sources, such as the
    Guardian. no worries about giving someone's personal blog or website any
    clicks.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html
     
    edonline, Apr 26, 2007
    #7
  8. In article <>, edonline wrote:
    >
    >"Chris Mattern" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> In article <4630b9a3$0$9942$>, kswymford@.com
    >> wrote:
    >>> Perhaps you should read it. I am afraid that it just may be over your
    >>>power of comprehension, however.

    >>
    >> Browser technology is security weak; I don't like going to sites I
    >> don't trust, like those run by paranoid conspiracy nuts. Not much
    >> into giving you a click count, either.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >FWIW, the piece had been printed in a few news sources, such as the
    >Guardian. no worries about giving someone's personal blog or website any
    >clicks.
    >
    >http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html
    >

    Nope, doesn't work.

    No number 2. Guantanamo is not a gulag. At best, even Naomi can
    only argue that it *will become* a gulag, and I don't see that
    happening. They're actually trying to dismantle the place; it's
    become too much of a PR disaster.

    No number 3. She really reaches here. Neither security companies
    or Republican poll watchers even begin to qualify as the new
    Brownshirts.

    Very weak number 5. She gives no evidence of real harrassment
    of citizen's groups, only some evidence of surveillance.

    No number 6. She gives absolutely no evidence of arbitrary
    detention on any scale, only two isolated incidents, at
    least one of which isn't even an arbitrary detention since
    authorities apparently at one point honestly believed Yee
    was guilty; they brought charges. The case fell apart,
    yes. There was good amount of incompetence to go around,
    but I don't see any intention to arbitrarily detain Yee.

    Makes claims for number 7, but except for the firing of
    eight US attorneys, offers no evidence or even any details.

    No number 8. If Bush is trying to control the press, all
    I can say is he should demand his money back, since he's
    not getting it done. Even Naomi admits he can't do it.

    No number 10. Bush shows a disturbing tendency to want to
    weasel out of laws he doesn't like, but the fact is there
    still rule of law here. I firmly believe that if real
    evidence surfaced that Bush actually broke the law,
    there would be an impeachment.

    In the end, even Naomi admits there can't be a fascist
    takeover like Hitler or Mussolini here. Instead, she
    says, it'll be done another way. So why is she even
    trying to draw analogies to Hitler and Mussolini when
    she herself says it wouldn't happen that way? Why not
    draw analogies with where it *did* happen the way she says?
    Oh, yeah, that's right, there aren't any. Besides,
    proclaiming Bush as the new Hitler is *so* much better
    for making good headlines. Makes the left feel so
    warm and fuzzy inside.

    --
    Christopher Mattern

    NOTICE
    Thank you for noticing this new notice
    Your noticing it has been noted
    And will be reported to the authorities
     
    Chris Mattern, Apr 26, 2007
    #8
  9. Useful Info

    Guest

    In article <>,
    (Chris Mattern) wrote:

    > Neither security companies or Republican poll watchers even begin to
    > qualify as the new Brownshirts.


    Heh. Google "Blackwater".
     
    , Apr 27, 2007
    #9
  10. Useful Info

    asdf Guest

    <kswymford@.com> wrote in message
    news:4630b9a3$0$9942$...
    > Perhaps you should read it. I am afraid that it just may be over your
    > power of comprehension, however.


    I doubt it.
     
    asdf, Apr 27, 2007
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Gokul
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    277
    Gokul
    Mar 17, 2008
  2. Gokul
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    355
    Gokul
    Mar 17, 2008
  3. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    318
  4. Terry Reedy
    Replies:
    66
    Views:
    376
    Charles Hixson
    Oct 9, 2013
  5. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    137
    Steven D'Aprano
    Oct 2, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page