Forum Post: Are we being played?
Posted 12 years ago on Jan. 16, 2012, 9:22 p.m. EST by wasdeafonce
(10)
from Carlsbad, CA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Just wondering what the people in control are doing right now. They have to know were coming soon. I know what our government is trying to do to corral us good people and we all know that their time is short, its a simple matter of replacing them. But the real power will still be in control, that is what frightens me, so i would like to prepare for that moment and would like comments on what that moment might look like.
They're sitting around in their Armani suits at their thousand-dollar-a-plate restaurants with their bejeweled trophy wives and laughing at your ludicrous post because they know they have all the money and the resources and all you have is the internet...and they're working on taking that away too.
I've never seen Cheney in a Armani, i have seen him in camo though. Him and his type are what concern me. What happens when we no longer allow these people to profit from war?
They move to Dubai? Maybe if I click my heels together three times...
You are part of the Rebel Alliance, and a Traitor. Take her away! lol
Got to love the original Star Wars.
Don't be afraid - accept that none of us live forever. Just accept it and move on.
The divisions within our government are real. Greeks debated liberal / conservative philosophy millenia ago.
Athens overthrew their kings when too much grain was sold to Phoenicians and the people faced starvation. We're in a similar situation, with a very complex economy.
People from all walks of life see the need for change - the repelicans and their beneficiaries are a small minority. As long as we stay focused, articulate our grievances precisely, we will force a new economic theory and model.
We must - simply rolling back legislation will be insufficient.
We will prevail.
Got to love your unbridled optimism. Can I get a prescription for whatever you're taking?
You want my prescription?
Read a newspaper. Follow the repelican candidates - as far as common sense will allow of course.
It's called rage.
The system is elastic - it just takes a bit of time and focused energy. This day of all days of the year is proof of that.
The Reverend Doctor was a revolutionary.
Yea, and his monument to China proves it! lol Or was that China's monument to him? Well, it's a revolutionary monument, THAT I'm sure of :)
But he had religion too. Would OWS be better off if they Christianized the movement? Never hurts to have God on your side. Can you imagine the outrage when Christians see cross-bearing faithful OWS marchers ruthlessly pepper-sprayed! Just a thought.
There are a few Churches that have reached out to the Occupy Burlington movement.
I'm no Bible thumper, but I believe. Various cultures around the world have developed systems of belief in an attempt to explain, understand, and capitalize on a fundamental aspect of the human condition - we call it spirituality.
I don't think the movement as a whole needs to express any specific religion - at the same time what you suggest does have some merit, in terms of its iconography - I'm not at all sure how such a thing could be accomplished with a leaderless movement.
Doing what is evidently right and just us far more effective than any assertions that might be made.
Right. They'd need their own Martin Luther King. And many OWS members might object to being labeled Christians. Sorry, I've been reading about Joan of Arc lately. Really amazing story...
[Removed]
That is an amazing story . . .
I know the new economic/political model is coming, can't wait. My question is what happens to the powerful and all they command when the shift of consciousness happens?
we'll see . . .
This also leads me to believe they will go to war with iran for money.
Ahhhh.Yeaaaa.
You don't have to accept that Iran has their own Military Industrial Complex - but they do.
Do you mean that they would both profit? I am sorry I am just a little confused.
Mahmoud Ahmedinejad is basically a theocratic quasi-dictator surrounded by a mix of mullahs and thugs who's busy rattling his saber at Israel to distract the populace from the manner in which he took power. Even if he isn't pushing for a nuclear weapon, at the very least he's posturing in such a manner as to indicate that he is so that he can be big and bad and try to drown out critics with testosterone-laced patriotism.
Why? Basically, the Arab Spring almost got underway in Iran two years early in 2009, when Ahmedinejad lost the presidential election to a moderate reformer named Mir Hussein Mousavi. Rather than accept the loss, he instead chose to rewrite the election results and declare himself the victor. The Iranian people were not happy with this, and they hit the streets in numbers reminiscent of the protests in Tahrir Square to complain. Unlike Mubarak, Ahmedinejad was able to crack down hard enough to drive Mousavi underground and hold power, but it left an incredibly bad taste in a lot of people's mouths.
At this point, Iran is splitting apart between old guard conservatives, and a younger, more cosmopolitan generation that's more inclined toward moderation and a certain degree of secularism (and that really doesn't bode well for Ahmedinejad). The fastest and easiest way he sees to resolve the split in his favor is to unite the people around a common enemy (that's pretty much universally true; just look how fast we all rallied around Bush II after 9/11) and to that end he's spoiling for a fight with Israel and the Western world in general.
Ahmedinejad wants the current standoff to blow up just as badly as Netanyahu does, and for roughly the same reasons (Netanyahu's not a dictator but he's hard-right and militant enough that even Meir Dagan, who spent nearly a decade running Mossad, considers him a belligerent idiot and wants Israel to stop needlessly antagonizing the rest of the Western world) and I'm basically praying that we don't wind up with a second Cuban missile crisis on our hands because of it.
I agree with this.
You completely discount the mullahs . . . I didn't think Ahmadinejad could have hijacked the election without them - so that leaves the question: Who is pulling whose strings . . .
I'm sorry for not clarifying; I see Ahmedinejad and the mullahs almost as a single entity; whether he's technically independent of them or not he does appear to be the face of the conservative policies they strongly believe in. I assume that the 2009 election and protests were handled they way they were at the behest of the mullahs (or at least with their blessing) and I assume that Mousavi's platform (which involved taking a good deal of power out of the hands of the mullahs) was part of the reason for the fraud and the subsequent crackdown.
I've been assuming the mullahs are the ones calling the shots - but that's just my assumption
No, Iran will not profit.
But they have their own MIC - and they have their own foreign policy, which they are pursuing.
It is a mistake to discount this fact - many on the left seem to be making this mistake.
I understand now. Thank you
Yea, that's two legless jews and a paki and starving korean. A fkn troika of hell hounds!!!!!!!!!!!!!