Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Hap on March 23, 2007, 03:09:06 PM
-
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/the_road_to_serfdom.html
From Real Clear Politics.
He's the gist to help you decide if you want to read it or no.
Some Brit students published a satire of the Islamic uproar on the year's anniversary of the Mohammed cartoon in their college newspaper.
They got into some hot water with the local Muhammadans and had to hide to save their skin.
Then, the university folk bore down on them.
The author goes on to talk about George Soros' anti-Israeli efforts. An article he recently wrote.
Some bad stuff about American policical radicals . . . and generally that things are pretty bleak.
Good read. Not a happy one.
Regards,
hap
-
Interesting read.............
I've seen the name of billionaire George Soros before.
This person SEEMS to be footing the bill for anti-gunners as well.
IMHO this person appears to be anti-freedom, anti-liberty, go new world order type person!
From what I've read about this person, I would have to say, NOT one of my favorite people.
-
That book is the biggest load of bull I've ever read. It's written from the point of view of an ex soviet who has been so seduced by capitalism that he tends to extremism in the opposite direction. Free markets for everybody! YAY! Let's have the wall street crash and the exploitation of the people from the Oklahoma dust bowl all over again!
Or in modern terms...Enron.
:oh...different article! ... sawwry!
oh bah..
Ravs
-
Never trust an AH BBS poster with less than 4000 posts.
N00Bs
Mac
-
I am a noob!
Sort of .... latter day noob.
Ravs
-
its disturbing, Hap. i will never understand American Jews' lack of support for Israel...
-
Ah yes... Israel...that champion of democracy and free speech...
:edit: read the article now...it looks like zionism with a liberal democracy coating. I'm always suspcious of websites that label themselves 'Real Clear Politics' Because we all know there is nothing of the kind.
Ravs
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
its disturbing, Hap. i will never understand American Jews' lack of support for Israel...
The answer lies in the American Jews proclivity to buy German automobiles.
-
But you ignore the fact that this is the MO of the "religion of peace" or as I like to call them the "religion of perpetual outrage."
Ignore them too long and they will be the ones pulling the strings as the "silent majority" feels guilty.
-
Originally posted by ravells I'm always suspcious of websites that label themselves 'Real Clear Politics' Because we all know there is nothing of the kind.
Ravs [/B]
I guess I've been reading RCP for maybe a month. None of the essays seem like outright flake jobs. They present differing points of view, but not belligerantly like the politics shows on TV do.
Or maybe that's the advantage of the printed word compared to the box with lights and wires?
hap
-
george sorros is the commie behind move on dot org. His hand is in every gun control effort in the states.. he of course has armed bodyguards wherever he goes.
He is a socialist of the highest order in that he thinks that a everyone but a few should be equal in poverty. He of course is too important to live by the rules he would impose on the new socialists. He can be trusted with billions because his heart is in the right place. The rest of us are evil if we have one penny more than the poorest amoung us.
lazs
-
Lasz, he made his billions out of the free market economy...which I think you support, no?
Ravs
-
Soros is a great guy.
Now comes Peretz's coup de grace. On December 20, 1998, there appeared this exchange between Soros and Steve Kroft on "60 Minutes":
Kroft: "You're a Hungarian Jew …"
Soros: "Mm-hmm."
Kroft: "... who escaped the Holocaust …"
Soros: "Mm-hmm."
Kroft: "... by posing as a Christian."
Soros: "Right."
Kroft: "And you watched lots of people get shipped off to the death camps."
Soros: "Right. I was 14 years old. And I would say that that's when my character was made."
Kroft: "In what way?"
Soros: "That one should think ahead. One should understand that—and anticipate events and when, when one is threatened. It was a tremendous threat of evil. I mean, it was a—a very personal threat of evil."
Kroft: "My understanding is that you went … went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews."
Soros: "Yes, that's right. Yes."
Kroft: "I mean, that's—that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?"
Soros: "Not, not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don't … you don't see the connection. But it was—it created no—no problem at all."
Kroft: "No feeling of guilt?"
Soros: "No."
Kroft: "For example, that, 'I'm Jewish, and here I am, watching these people go. I could just as easily be these, I should be there.' None of that?"
Soros: "Well, of course, ... I could be on the other side or I could be the one from whom the thing is being taken away. But there was no sense that I shouldn't be there, because that was—well, actually, in a funny way, it's just like in the markets—that is I weren't there—of course, I wasn't doing it, but somebody else would—would—would be taking it away anyhow. And it was the—whether I was there or not, I was only a spectator, the property was being taken away. So the—I had no role in taking away that property. So I had no sense of guilt."
-
Absolutely disgusting...
He keeps using "One" as a pronoun.
-
Originally posted by ravells
Lasz, he made his billions out of the free market economy...which I think you support, no?
Ravs
He was also a major investor in the Carlyle group (SP) as an IPO. You remenber them....they were featured in F911 by moore to help bring down the Bush family by linking them with OBL.
Just as evil as the rest.
-
I support free enterprise yes. I support his right to make all the money he can legally make.
I even support his right to have an opinion and to support any cause he wants.
I think that he is a disgusting hypocrite tho. I think that he is one of the elite liberals who wants socialism for everyone else but wants to run the show himself. I believe he fears guns because he wants tyranny and socialism.
I believe that when he was 14 he discovered that good people suffer but those who lie and survive get ahead and he has not changed a bit. He is a very dishonest man with a disgusting past, present and... most likely... future.
lazs
-
Lasz: I can't believe that someone with that much money wants socialism - he'd have to give it all away! As for gun control, I think it's a bit far fetched to think that the reason he wants gun control is because he's afraid he'll get shot. I found this comment curious, Lasz:
He is a socialist of the highest order in that he thinks that a everyone but a few should be equal in poverty. He of course is too important to live by the rules he would impose on the new socialists. He can be trusted with billions because his heart is in the right place. The rest of us are evil if we have one penny more than the poorest amoung us.
I'd have thought you would have loved the guy in that (apart from his view on gun control) he stands as a success story of a libertine political state. He sees what he wants and he takes it. A socialist? Hardly...this from wikipedia:
His support for the Solidarity labor movement in Poland, as well as the Czechoslovakian human rights organization Charter 77, contributed to ending Soviet Union political dominance in those countries.[1] His funding and organization of Georgia's Rose Revolution was considered by Russian and Western observers to have been crucial to its success, although Soros said his role has been "greatly exaggerated."
Toad: I'm not saying I like the guy form the sound of that interview he's a sociopath and a total a-hole (at least from that perspective) although he has done some laudable things if the wiki entry is right. His lack of feelings of guilt make him eminently well qualified to thrive and survive in a libertine world where there is little legal restriction and the strongest and most callous can use their money and powers to make yet more money. But people are complicated creatures - perhaps he's now had a Paulian moment.
Hap: Thanks, I'll take another look at the site. I confess I only browsed very briefly through it but the title put me off.
Ravs
-
Originally posted by ravells
I can't believe that someone with that much money wants socialism - he'd have to give it all away!
under socialism everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others.
in the USSR the party elite rode in limos and had vacation homes on the black sea and shopped in stores reserved for them.
in Cuba the party elite has new mercedes limos and the people have 1955 chevys and donkeys.
-
Originally posted by john9001
under socialism everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others.
in the USSR the party elite rode in limos and had vacation homes on the black sea and shopped in stores reserved for them.
in Cuba the party elite has new mercedes limos and the people have 1955 chevys and donkeys.
I think you're mistaking communism with socialism... USSR/Cuba/China = Communist while the UK/DDR/Denmark/Sweden/Norway/Holland etc are predominantly socialist. Essentially capitalism with a sense of social responsibility... and not the great looming threat that many would pretend it to be. But with all things, vigilance is key :)
But hey, that's just my opinion. *shrugs*
-
The UN wants a prohibition on the transfer of firearms to "non state actors", which just means that those only entitled to firearms would be governments, or those approved by governments. If this were adopted it would be a violation of international law to supply arms to any, and every people resisting tyranny and genocide.
It's an apparent contradiction that Soros, raving capitalist that he is, wants the same thing. But I think his motives, as lazs already pointed out are purely self interest. It would be a hell of a lot easier for western interests that have commercial deals with despotic and corrupt third world governments if they didn't have the problem of the downtrodden, dirt poor, armed locals, screwing up their sweet deals.
-
Originally posted by DYNAMITE
I think you're mistaking communism with socialism... USSR/Cuba/China = Communist while the UK/DDR/Denmark/Sweden/Norway/Holland etc are predominantly socialist.
wasn't the DDR East Germany? BRD was West... still BRD now...
-
Originally posted by ravells
...an ex soviet who has been so seduced by capitalism that he tends to extremism in the opposite direction. Free markets for everybody! YAY!
I think it's Grunherz! :lol
-
ravs.. you are kidding right? The man is a socialist of the highest order. Stalin got more wealth and.... Power... the top men would be more powerful than ever. Power and money are the same to them.
He is a socialist so far as everyone else is concerned. He would not have to give up a thing and he knows it. The top socialists in a society are more powerful and, in real terms, more wealthy than any capitalist. I can't believe you don't know that.
sorros is scum.. he funds some of the worst machines out there. Ones like move on dot org. He has no scruples.
I have nothing against him getting all the wealth he can legally accumulate. Nothing wrong with that... he is simply a very sick and twisted man tho.. It probly had something to do with his youth...more likely... his personality had something to do with how he acted as a youth.
I don't think he would have any trouble today waving at us as we were sent to the ovens.
lazs
-
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Gunthr
its disturbing, Hap. i will never understand American Jews' lack of support for Israel...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The answer lies in the American Jews proclivity to buy German automobiles.
Lazer, its close to the truth. Sean Penn's father, Leo Penn, was a member of the American Communist Party before WWII, and an activist. Then, when Hitler began persecuting jews in Germany and trodding on the rights of sovereign countries, Leo Penn and other hollywood jews in the communist party, who took their orders directly from the Soviets, were activists AGAINST taking action against Hitler because of the Ribbentrop Pact ( a non-aggession pact) signed by Russia and Germany. Leo Penn's party bosses in Russia didn't want the USA to fight Germany.
Of course, as soon as Hitler broke the pact by attacking Russia, Leo Penn got his marching orders from Russia to begin supporting action against Hitler, and that is exactly what occurred.
History repeats itself, and we have Sean Penn, the son of the Communist, vomiting his blame America first agenda where ever he can, with huge support among his hollywood acolytes and the Democrats, urging neutrality in the war on terror.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Penn
-
Sorry Lasz, I said that in all seriousness. Your view on 'perfect society' is just this close to socialism...that's the irony...because in your own way, you're an extremist. Your views do not attend for anyone elses, only your own and perhaps a very few other wakos (women should be at the cooker etc.) . Let's take your last post....for Stalin....say substititute ....[insert your capitalist hero here]...it's the same - what you don't appear to realise is that regardless of any perfect society built there are going to be George Sororoses.... Soros said he didn't feel guilt about what he did in WW2 when he was 14....and that is why I thought you had a bond with him. You find him vile because he sold out his people but at the same time you find it perfecty acceptable to advocate a society where half the human race arn't allowed to vote. ..and it's simply this...you both have your point of view and you both don't care what the majority think (for which read other people) think about it. That's fine, but I see more of you and George Soros in common than apart.
sorry Lasz, I respect your points of view immensely but even you have to see that you're an extremist in your own way because you're incapable of recognisisng other points of view.
Ravs
-
Of course I am an extremist.. I freely admit it.
I am an individualist. I believe that the sole role of government is to protect the individual rights of it's citizens.
I have no respect for anyones opinion that includes taking away my personal rights for the "good of the whole".
You can have your opinions but if you try to act on them then you are the enemy.
sorros could exist in my government.. he could rant all he wanted but he could change nothing because the things he wants could not be voted on. If he tried to force it on us then the government or militia would stop him... or you for that matter.
It goes for both sides.. I don't want anyone telling me what guns or drugs or porn I can own. I don't want anyone telling two consenting adults what they can do with each other any more than I want someone threatening me with jail or death if I don't pay taxes to support someone I don't even know.
Yes.. I am an extremist. I would be much more happy with a very small government.
lazs
-
Well...we could talk about this forever (although thank you for your honesty), but I think 'Freedom' is a state of mind rather than the purported reality any political belief happens to sell.
I'll just leave you with this: most human beings seem to have a desire to self organise and it's from that desire that authority begins. The only way I can see your perfect world ever occuring is if there were much fewer people on the planet who were widely dispersed. The closest I've seen to your vision are villiages in nothern Pakistan - free gun owenership, women not allowed to vote (although you'd have to make a concession to the religious claptrap).
Ravs
-
obviously it is a matter of degree. If you wish to live in some crap hole large city then you would be more at the mercy of your neighbors and in a much more stressful and less free life style..
women are particularly suited to this. men are not.. The cities would be able to make laws that restricted people so far as acts that could be proven to affect others around them... you couldn't burn garbage on your property for instance. the smoke would affect others.
It is simple really and not as complex as you pretend... You could not tell me I couldn't do drugs or have a gun or that I needed to wear a helmet on a bike for instance... you could tell me that I couldn't ride drunk or drugged or... that I couldn't shoot someone down in the street for no good reason.
We are well past these simple principals. There is no example that you can give me that is a "gray" area... it is black and white... simple.. the individuals rights should always prevail and government should protect the individual.
Give me an example of a law against individualism that is just.
So in that respect... freedom is not hard to define.. freedom is the ability to be an individual and to have that right defended by your government.
Too many have complicated this simple premiss in order to gain power. They have created "gray" areas that women can relate to.
lazs