Comments on: Why on earth…

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:50:45 +0000

Blert, Alinsky was writing in the context of non violent infiltration and light violence.

Death is a far better power and weapon than ridicule, pound for pound.

By: blert

blert — Fri, 21 Mar 2014 04:23:08 +0000

Didn’t Saul Alinsky write that ridicule was a most potent weapon?

“* RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”

There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. ”

^^^^

http://www.bestofbeck.com/wp/activism/saul-alinskys-12-rules-for-radicals

By: Richard Saunders

Richard Saunders — Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:18:19 +0000

Beverly, that was onew of the funniest things I’ve seen in a long, long time! Thanks!

By: Beverly

Beverly — Thu, 20 Mar 2014 04:40:55 +0000

Let’s just call it a lighthearted look at leadership! I dunno about you, but I sure could use the laugh. (The bit when Uhura got up cracked me up too.)

By: rickl

rickl — Thu, 20 Mar 2014 01:58:05 +0000

That was hilarious, Beverly. Carol has got Shatner down cold.

I never saw that one before.

By: n.n

n.n — Thu, 20 Mar 2014 01:37:27 +0000

Not only do the Americans and Europeans lack economic leverage, but they also lack a moral basis for their arguments. All in, Americans and Europeans are feckless Dodos, both economically and morally.

By: Eric

Eric — Thu, 20 Mar 2014 01:23:24 +0000

DonS,

Actually, no one proposed nor voted for war with Iraq outright. What they voted for was the implementation of the credible threat of regime change to bring about Iraq’s full compliance with the terms of the cease fire and resolutions. From there, whether we went to war with Iraq was up to Saddam and, in the event Saddam failed his ‘final chance’ to comply, whether the threat of regime change was credible.

He did, and it was.

Operation Iraqi Freedom had some of the best developed legal, policy, and precedent grounds in US military history, developed scrupulously by 3 presidents over a decade-plus. The bulk of the development was by President Clinton.

Regarding the 2002 vote, during the 1990s, Congress passed multiple laws pushing forward the Iraq enforcement. That means, in 2002, they voted consistently with the US’s decade-plus course with Iraq, not only based on what Bush said. In fact, Bush’s case against Saddam was, with some cosmetic updating, Clinton’s case against Saddam.

Yet despite that the truth was in the open and long established with over a decade in the public eye, propaganda displaced the truth. The most cynical spectacle was of Clinton officials who worked on the Iraq enforcement promulgating the false narrative.

With reluctance, I’ve come to conclude that We the People weren’t just tricked. We chose the lie. After 60+ years, we chose to give up as leader of the free world.

By: Beverly

Beverly — Thu, 20 Mar 2014 00:59:04 +0000

I dunno, this seems in the spirit of the occasion, appropriate to the Zeitgeist or something… Carol Burnett & Co. do a Star Trek parody:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-WBKah3uwg

😉

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Wed, 19 Mar 2014 23:50:31 +0000

The vulnerability of propagandists is that they can’t overcome Death with propaganda.

Most Americans have never taken psychological resistance or interrogation resistance training. That’s a problem that can be easily solved with certain systems.

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Wed, 19 Mar 2014 23:49:04 +0000

The Dems also didn’t want Saddam, their ally, to go down since CNN would lose their exclusives.

The Dems also didn’t want what the Marines did to Fallujah II to happen to Detroit or Chicago. Saddam dying is regretable. Detroit being taken over by counter insurgency units that fight the Left… that’s dangerous.