Say hello to the i-Patriot Act

Status
Not open for further replies.
ICANN is fighting to break away from US Government when it JPA is due for re-negotiation. There has been a long-standing rumor about ICANN Shifting its base from US to Switzerland -- maybe it will come true some day!

Peter Thrush is a very smart lawyer from New Zealand and he isn't bowing down to US Government as of now and cleaning up the shit scattered by Vin Cert at ICANN. Let's hope he keeps his stand.
 


GWB is not to blame.
When McCain wins, he won't be to blame either...

They are politicians, just pawns in a much larger and grander scheme of things. Think about it from a more realistic perspective... How would a temporary (max 8yrs) leader benefit from control and power when the agencies and departments are the ones who spend their entire careers at the receiving end instead?

Is there a hidden agenda? YES. I have seen proof of it when I was consulting down in Washington DC last August.

Is there a super secret agency/dept behind it? Not really. Its a collective thing I think.

Can we fight it? Yeah, people will always fight 'big brother' and I applaud them for it.

Can these freedom fighters win? Doubtful. I say doubtful, because believe it or not... WE as a collective country, are funding them with our tax dollars. So by you funding your 'enemy' (who just so happens to rule in the lands you live in) you're just adding fuel to the fire. Their fire, in which you are going to be burned in.

The way I see things like this is that we all need to pick a side. You're either on the beneficiary end or the uphill/nearly impossible battle end. Its a bloody battle any way you cut it.

But let's be honest... posts/threads, articles, news stories, blogs, whatever type of coverage you choose, won't make a god damn difference.

One. Big. Clusterfuck.
 
But let's be honest... posts/threads, articles, news stories, blogs, whatever type of coverage you choose, won't make a god damn difference.

Well said.

To quote Robert Greene (of 48 laws of power fame) when talking about Machiavelli --

Some want to rule, others to be ruled. This is a concept that is a kind of constant subtext in the work. Even in a republic, which the Discourses is about, the majority of people want someone to do the work for them, to lead them. They are willing to sign over the governing of their city or nation to someone, in exchange for being left alone. Their energies are tied to maintaining what they have.

This concept goes much further and in interesting directions. In Machiavelli's world, people are not victims. When someone is conned out of their money, it is because they were stupid, because they did not possess the energy to be prudent, or to get what they had back. People want to be conned. On another level, those who suffer under some form of tyranny inevitably have gotten the kind of government they want or deserve. They are unconsciously implicated in the process. No one, in Machiavelli's universe is some passive actor who is acted upon and injured. There is a degree of will involved.

This is a controversial aspect to his philosophy, but one I have long ascribed to. For instance, when many on the left critique America or the Reagan or Bush administrations, they begin from this position that the powers above are actively and consciously oppressing the majority of people. We are the victims of their injustice. These thinkers' attention is focused on the corruption above--whether it is suspect foreign policy, coziness with corporate America, etc. In Machiavelli's eyes, attention should equally be focused below, on those who turn their eye away from what is going on, who ask to be lead, who want economic abundance and do not care too deeply about how it occurs. The con artist and the conned are entwined, colluding partners.

I often turn this in another direction. Instead of crying about Karl Rove and the Republicans stealing this election, or duping the public, I look at the incredibly inept campaigns being run by Gore or Kerry, and the confusion among the Democratic leadership. The Democrats were not victims, but active participants in their own defeat, brought down by incompetence. This way of looking at things makes you active and alert; you are responsible for the bad that occurs to you, and so you can always turn it around. The ruled can want to rule instead. Nothing stays the same.

^^ This is a philosophy I too subscribe to.
 
GWB is not to blame.
When McCain wins, he won't be to blame either...

They are politicians, just pawns in a much larger and grander scheme of things.

Got that right. Nowadays, politicians aren't the ones in control; thinktank members are running the show. Most of these people anonymous f$cks who are on power trips. That's some scary shit, there.

Eisenhower warned of something like this happening in his Military-Industrial Complex Speech.
 
Things like the Patriot Act sit around in someone's desk draw waiting for shit like 9/11 to happen, so they can pull it out.
Damn, you think they could even TYPE that damn thing in the 20days between September 11th and it passing on October 1st?

That is a damn scary truth. There are rich idiots with powerful friends all basically sitting around, thinking of how to keep the Average Joe and Jane stuck between a rock and a hard place. Really, it's time to wipe the slate clean, get rid of these lallygagging do-nothing-but-give-themselves-raises Congress members out, and start holding our politicians accountable to us, the American citizens.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.