Yeah...I'm still stuck on spricket24's massive talents.
Yeah...I'm still stuck on spricket24's massive talents.
PH Cannady
Correlate Systems
Did you see her post on Zombies...fantastic stuff!Originally Posted by Presley Cannady
Not Proven, by design, and stuck there for eternity. When the soap opera watching alcoholics that comprise our Congress embargoed for decades the records in the JFK transfer-of-power-case, they condemned us to never actually knowing.
I just saw a report that says there are still 51,000 documents to the JFK assassination that have still never been released.
My personal opinion is Oswald was definitely the shooter and the only shooter but that doesn't mean there wasn't a conspiracy, of course it doesn't mean there was either.
Just a thought (and it's probably fitting to this thread):
Should a component of official national defence policy be the defence against inappropriate foreign influence on the government?
A foreign power (be it a government, trade association, multinational corporation) can subvert a government with lobbyism, bribing and disinformation.
The result could be (especially in the case of small and poor nations) a form of indirect rule, at least in regard to certain policies.
Here are two (real world?) examples:
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/03...ables-rev.html
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com...e_word_in_msm/
I think we all know the 'questionable' effect of multinational corporations on many Third World governments as additional examples.
The National defence policy's purpose is to protect - not only people and property, but also sovereignty. The protection of sovereignty against subversion somehow sounds like a national defence policy task to me.
After all, it's pointless to defend against a foreign army if the foreign power doesn't need its military to take over your country!
(That would be an extreme example of the problem, of course.)
That's hardly something specific to "third world" countries. The "West" suffers as much if not more subtly. It would also help if "democratic" governments were representative of their citizens rather than foreign interests. The US Congress for instance is more responsive to "special" interest groups (foreign and domestic) than they are to the "greater good" or the "general will". Given that in the US since the sixties there are no longer, broadly speaking, Americans but now (in Arthur Schlesinger's words) only hyphenated-Americans ("African", Italian, Arab, Latin, &c) it's unsurprising that they are pandered to and pander (or curry favour) to gain advnatgnes of whatever kind for their "home" countries (AIPAC is an example but NOT thet only one). The UK, or frmer UK government (does the UK still exist?) is going down that slippery slope too with "politics" in the "Westminster village" often trumping or even setting the agenda for parliament instead of what's good for all citizens (although we are now, I am relaibly informed, no longer citizens but consumers!). Fifth-columnists and other foreign nations who claim to be British and thus should obviously prioritise on our own people) now get to sway government opinion. For instance, peddling a "sanitised" Islam in order to creat a favourable political climate and opinion from those supposedly "in the know" so as to affect foreign policy in a way advantageous to foreigners.
G-d! Sounds like a conspiracy.....
Last edited by Tukhachevskii; 12-04-2010 at 05:27 AM.
I am continually surprised at the number of people who do not understand that.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks