Friday History Lesson
-
Just like Bush's "Patriot Act" is similar to the "Enabling Act" of Hitler's according to paranoid people on the left.... for example
History is repeating itself right before our very eyes. The current administration is following the blueprint conceived by Hitler only three-quarters of a century ago … and it’s working.
In the 1930s, the new Reichstag, or German Parliament, met in Berlin to consider passage of a deceitful act that would end democracy in that country and establish Adolf Hitler as dictator. It was given an innocuous title of, “Law for Removing the Distress of the People and the Reich” but became known as the “Enabling Act.” Today, we have the equivalent in America known as the “Patriot Act.” As the quote above reminds us, we can foresee the future by learning from the past. But we must be willing to not only be vigilant about our freedoms, but to take action to defend them. Is America willing to stand up to the tyranny of its own government? So far, even our spineless Congress has withered under the lies, propaganda, intimidation, and fear of the Bush Administration. It very well may be too late.
Let’s compare Hitler’s “Enabling Act” and Bush’s “Patriot Act” and see what similarities exist between the two and peek into the road in which America is traveling under this “good ole boy, just one of us” leader.
ENABLING ACT: March 23, 1933, Germany’s new Parliament met to consider the harmless sounding Enabling Act. Governments with covert agendas always give deceiving bills titles that make the people think it is in their best interest.
PATRIOT ACT: Only five days after 9-11, a draft of the flag-waving bill known as the Patriot Act was rammed through Congress and passed within weeks, supposedly in the “best interest” of American citizens.
ENABLING ACT: Nazi storm troopers surrounded the building in which the vote was to take place and even lined the aisles of the voting chamber, staring menacingly at anyone who disagreed with Hitler’s wishes.
PATRIOT ACT: Ashcroft told the Senate Judiciary Committee that if they weren’t “with us, you’re against us,” and declared anyone who disputed Bush’s wishes as “unpatriotic,” which intimidated Congress into passing the ill-named act.
ENABLING ACT: Hitler made a speech before the vote assuring the Reichstag that he would use “restraint.” History, of course, proves otherwise.
PATRIOT ACT: Bush promised America the expanded powers would be used only to fight terrorists and not include innocent citizens. That promise immediately went by the wayside.
ENABLING ACT: The Nazis secretly created a crisis to make the new law seem necessary in order to restore stability by burning the seat of German government themselves, which caused mass panic. They then blamed the event on the Communists and claimed they needed the new law to fight this evil.
PATRIOT ACT: The events of 9-11 created the crisis needed to pass the freedom eliminating Patriot Act. Emerging evidence points to the fact the Bush Administration may have known, or even been part of drafting, the tragedy so that the Patriot Act could be justified and enacted, giving the president and his secretive cabinet vastly expanded power. It is certainly suspicious that a bill the size of the Patriot Act, which would require massive time and research to prepare, was ready in five short days after the event. Some speculate the bill was already drafted prior to 9-11 and presented to Congress as necessary to “fight terrorism.” As we have since seen, the expanded powers have been enormously abused by including innocent American citizens and vast circumventing of the U.S. Constitution.
Both the Enabling Act and the Patriot Act have legally torn down the democratic process and paved the way for takeover of each respective country. Out of cowardice and fear, the Reichstag became a cheerleader for Hitler, much as Congress has become for Bush.
Can you spell d-i-c-t-a-t-o-r boys and girls???
See, it's just as silly when I put things up like this comparing Bush's policy to that of Hitlers.
-
Oh, this is just a forward I got. I thought it was interesting enough to share. It is surprising that many people seem to figure this is somehow related to Obama.
Clearly, Hitler and Obama aren't the same. For one, Obama never got put in jail for all of his subversive activity.
-
The comparison of the enabling act to the patriot act assumes a government culpability in 9/11. It is immediately thrown the fuck out on account of stupidity.
I hate being put in a position of defending Bush or the patriot act since both suck, but don't be dumber than both of them.
-
tjamz;246785 wrote:
Just like Bush's "Patriot Act" is similar to the "Enabling Act" of Hitler's according to paranoid people on the left.... for exampleSee, it's just as silly when I put things up like this comparing Bush's policy to that of Hitlers.
Similar...but not the same.
-
thrash;246786 wrote:
The comparison of the enabling act to the patriot act assumes a government culpability in 9/11. It is immediately thrown the fuck out on account of stupidity.I hate being put in a position of defending Bush or the patriot act since both suck, but don't be dumber than both of them.
No shit? Isn't that what I said about it looking silly about posting it up?
I at least prefaced mine by saying it was silly/ridiculous, you on the other hand seem hell bent on convincing the world (or at least fargostreet) that Obama is the anti-christ who is out to enslave/kill anyone who is in his way.
Maybe you are right...or maybe you are the antichrist...you are likable, very educated and extremely critical of the current direction of government. You have the ability sway others opinions into following lock-step with you. None of us know anything about you or your past. You have gained popularity on this website through non-tradional means. Instead of proposing unity, you encourage rebellion of the current government, going so far as saying you would move to Alaska should they successfully secede from the Union.
See how easy it is to make assumptions about people with whom you don't agree?
This ad paid for by "Fuck the anti-christ", Chuck Schwan CEO.
tjamz does not believe that thrash is the anti-christ or is in any way affiliated with a an organization intending to overthrow the US Gov't. This post is merely a parody put forth to illicit smiles, giggles, and LAWLZ from the interweb community
-
-
thrash;246796 wrote:
I never said I'd move to Canada. They are much worse than here. Hate-speech "courts" scare the weewee out of me.If you know of a ND-secession group that's looking to create something like Galt's Gulch here in ND, I'm interested in joining though
im down, can northern MN come with too?
-
thrash;246796 wrote:
I never said I'd move to Canada.Sorry...meant to say Alaska...don't know why I typed Canada.
-
As far as secession goes...I don't think we'd lose the second go-round. And before the idiots have a field day with that comment, study up on the American Civil War and discover the truth as to why The South lost.
integra_gsr98;246584 wrote:
I lost all my guns in a boating accident.I left all mine in a sugarbeet field in Grand Forks.
-Peter
1991 240SX
-
Afsil80;246841 wrote:
As far as secession goes...I don't think we'd lose the second go-round. And before the idiots have a field day with that comment, study up on the American Civil War and discover the truth as to why The South lost.I left all mine in a sugarbeet field in Grand Forks.
Their troops were FAR better than Union troops but the Union was able to destroy their economic livelyhood and thus basically strangle them into submission...
-
The South definitely had better commanders/officers, but the sheer number of Union troops and the superior methods of transporting goods (and the availability of raw materials in general) made it increasingly difficult for the South to win
-
One of the policy decisions I'd make if my say mattered is that the various state NG's could never be commanded by a federal authority... they answer to the state and that's it. Furthermore, it would be illegal to deploy them beyond US national borders.
I'd sign up for the guard if I knew I'd never be deployed overseas and never have to answer to the feds (as opposed to the governor). I'm willing to fight pretty hard to defend my home. Not as excited about going to the other side of the world to shoot at people.
-
well put thrash
-
thrash;246907 wrote:
One of the policy decisions I'd make if my say mattered is that the various state NG's could never be commanded by a federal authority... they answer to the state and that's it. Furthermore, it would be illegal to deploy them beyond US national borders.I'd sign up for the guard if I knew I'd never be deployed overseas and never have to answer to the feds (as opposed to the governor). I'm willing to fight pretty hard to defend my home. Not as excited about going to the other side of the world to shoot at people.
But, when the National Guard DOES go overseas, they collect a Federal paycheck ON TOP of their State paycheck.
It's referred to as 'double dipping' since they are collecting the same check twice. That's why I always tell people going in to either go 100% active, or go Guard.
-Peter
1991 240SX
-
The issue isn't about getting paid, it's about not having to do something you didn't sign up for.
As long as there's the possibility of a protracted overseas deployment, I won't signup for the NG. I very breifly thought about going AF reservist after 9/11 but wussed out.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login