Welcome to the Free Talk Live bulletin board system!
This board is closed to new users and new posts.  Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years.  Details here.
185859 Posts in 9829 Topics by 1371 Members
Latest Member: cjt26
Home Help
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  General
| | |-+  A document in support and encouragment of liberty
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: A document in support and encouragment of liberty  (Read 1125 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RayLiotto

  • Guest
A document in support and encouragment of liberty
« on: September 01, 2006, 01:03:20 AM »

Hi there. Trying to produce more stuff like this that people can print off and distribute. A good place to do such things is outside train stations because people like having something to read. I always see them taking these crummy free ad and gossip papers and leaving them lying around everywhere. Surely there are alot of people interested in something more informative.
anyway revisions, better formatting and all that would be appreciated!

Quoted sources: Wikipedia.org

Marinus Van Der Lubb

Van der Lubbe was born in Oegstgeest in South Holland. His parents were divorced and he was forced to live with his half-sister's family after his mother died when he was 12 years old. In his youth, van der Lubbe worked as a bricklayer. He was nicknamed Dempsey after the boxer Jack Dempsey, because of his great strength. At his work, van der Lubbe came in contact with the labour movement; in 1925, he joined the Dutch Communist Party (CPH)."

In 1926, he was injured at work, getting cement in his eyes, which left him in the hospital for a few months and almost blinded him. The injury forced him to quit his work, so he was unemployed with a pension of only 7.44 guilders a week. Not being able to live off of this, he was forced to take occasional jobs. After a few conficts with his sister, van der Lubbe moved to Leiden in 1927. There he learned to speak some German and founded the Lenin house, where he organized political meetings. He had a history of taking responsibility for things he had not done. While working for the Tielmann factory a strike broke out. Van der Lubbe claimed to the management to be one of the ringleaders and offered to accept any punishment as long as no one else was victimised, even though he was clearly too inexperienced to have been seriously involved.

During the trial he seemed to be concerned only with establishing his own sole responsibility and was almost hostile to any attempts to get him off. Van der Lubbe planned to emigrate to the Soviet Union, but lacked the funds to do so. He was active among the unemployed workers' movement until, in 1931, he fell into disagreement with the CPH and instead approached the IKG (Internationalist Communist Group). In order to become active in the local opposition against Nazism, he went to Germany in 1933.

Basically a worker standing up for rights with the support of the only organisations of the time willing to protest together and represent the concerns of workers. This was a time when Occupational Health & Safety is compared to today's standards non-existant. Absolutly no reason to fault a person.

He felt strongly about helping his fellow struggling people who are just at risk of terrible injury and poverty as he was. So strongly he was willing to stand up and take responsbility for his cause he had not spearheaded but to express solidarity and sacrifice for his friends.

Following these pursuits for the betterment of his fellow workers and people he goes to Germany to join the resistance to Nazism. Unfortunately enabling him to be an easy target for a regime we know were willing to commit insanely evil acts as an industry. How would implicating an immigrant, Communist and conducting a propaganda trial and execution help the Nazi's in their twisted goals?

Russia and Communism in Europe was a incredibly powerful force of the day. Before the Reichstag fire and the show trial of Van Der Lubb, A Nazi Germany willing to start a war with their Communist neighbours and opponents would still not have enough share in the support of it's people. Unless they could rally popular opinion against the enemies they want the people to be willing to fight.
It wasn't Marinus Van Der Lubb the Nazis wanted the people to hate, it was Communists and labour movements and immigrants/foreigners. Even though it was the Nazis themselves manipulating and orchestrating this intentional propaganda.
Despite the climate of fear, people are lulled into a false sense of security by their ill-founded beliefs and more and more are susceptible to this rise in apparent naivety and suggestability. They feel insulted and attacked due to their inability or difficulty to understand the good nature of the criticism. And thier difficulty to process the confusion caused by being unable to consider an alternative without the dominant influence of their prideful ego that associates all questioning of its supposed superiority as a direct offense.
There are proven and gravely serious risks to naivety, suggestability, the will of a prideful ego entrenched in a self-obsession and defining ones self by subtly-forced views as true identity. These ideas of identity are supported by ongoing fact twisting, fact omission and alarmist (more like false-alarmist) opinion columns of people who also lay claim to this identity. Whilst the real free press are harshly oppressed and lose their market to the whims of a now staggeringly bias and hostile public.
The Nazis did not come to power overnight, they created the opportunity and support for winning the support in a long campaign to disintegrate the morals of its workers, lawyers, doctors armed forces and farmers they needed to maintain their rise to and wielding of power. They created that opportunity by the systematic eroding and corrupting of the institutions in place and widely able to lobby against the infiltration of tyranny and fascism. They attacked people's sensibilities and rationalities with self-inflicted terrorist acts, propaganda and incitement against falsely accused people they portrayed as enemies due to the acts of an individual. The accounts of such individuals acts that were subject to the orchestration and the discretion of details controlled by the Nazis. This is clearly evident and historically agreed by Marinus Van Der Lubb's case involving the Reichstag fire.
They generated a predominant culture of fear and hatred amongst the people, causing undue scrutiny and crime against their fellow man.
It worked in the Nazi design to have the population support the unjust persecution of their percieved enemies. And to further instill ill-founded but growing sentiment in the moderate of their population to accept the forsaking of their morality to fight "the bad guy". And so total state and public consent becomes immoral and corrupt so much so that people persecuted unjustly according race, culture, religious or political views no matter how young, old, innocent, guilty deserve it.
In a climate of such inhumanity any criticism of the Nazis is blindly and antagonistically refuted with irrational and misconcieved arguments eventually causing those meant to tow the line to question why they are doing so to be revealed and removed and the rest to fall in line.
The antagonisers have inhibited themselves from researching the fair claims of reasonable and rational thinkers presented in the  criticisms and the evidence that supports it. Instead they use the only knowledge they have been provided in the constant repitition of the propaganda. They dismiss all contrary opinion, despite it's validity and fair assessment by educated peers uninhibited by the irrationality of their pride, stigma and emotion to confront, discover and process the facts for themselves. Doubters are labelled as being "unpatriotic", "disloyal", "enemy of the state", "sympathetic to enemies". Their constant pursuit of persecution and advancement of related propaganda keeps fresh in people's minds the imaginary threat. More and more are desensitised to everyday injustices and terrified about speaking one word of dissent that could condone them to the same fate as the persecuted.
The fate of all this of course was a nation of incredible self-obsessions, believing with all faith in their superiority over others... A sinfully proud nation led ultimately by the inhuman ulterior motives of master con-men and their desire to rule unopposed. A nation who could only see the truth for what it was when their military complex had been defeated on every front and sensibility allowed to reamerge. Their rights and integrity taken back when the grasp of the thiefs and the tyrants they santioned and empowered are released. When this stranglehold was lifted they were able to swallow the pride. Pride they believed to be so sweet on the outside but the core of which was unimaginably bitter. The truth began to shine out about how extensive, complicated and supported the con against them was and they were forced to swallow that bitter pill.

The parallels and warnings this example of history that are there for us to learn from all manner of sources in readily accessible ways provided to us by information technology. The obvious subtle-censorship, the risk questioning the agenda brings to career and life, the irrational dismissal of scholarly debate is there too along with many more widely ignored acts of selling out our values and fellow man to the interests of those concerned only with their ability to carry out an elitist agenda able to some day grant them ultimate power.

It is vitally important to our society and others in the present to confront these issues as I am in no doubt we are seeing these great cons being played out, affecting and risking our lives and freedom. For the sake of the aspirations and liberties in support of and aspiring to the betterment and of free and honest functioning people we must unite and protest reguarly. The Bush admin is now trying to define the enemy as "Islamofascism" even though these claims are unfounded. That is just one atom in the tip of one of the colossal icebergs . It is the duty of clear and perceptive people on our ship to counter the fog set before us and change course immediatly to safe waters.
They can spout this notion of other's fascism to a population they think unable of self criticism, proper investigation and the realisation of hypocrisy, and they can disassociate themselves from their own fascism and claim instead only a foreign enemy intent on total eradication of America and it's allies could be capable of such things. The Nazis too had allied nations full of people likely to be opposed to what Hitler was doing.
These figureheads in similar places of authority are telling us we must live in perpetual fear of an enemy in our midst (and abroad) who's attacks upon us were actually fabricated, misconstrued and irrelevant to a wider and on-going risk of actual threat from those thought guilty by race, colour, nationality and falsely claimed association.
What they don't want us to realise is that they are the fascists and they are attempting to erode our defences of liberty and moral, transparent institution. The shadow agenda is blindly evident to me and not only me it is proven millions of people are also discovering and strongly supporting with absolute faith the credibility of their knowledge. I am with total faith and zero doubt sure of it by simply reading on what my own country's media do and don't report and the official government documents relating those the matters of "intelligence", "terrorism" and they are licensed to keep in the absolute dark. I am simply someone who considers myself able to be critical, rational and not motivated by the spoils of materialism, vote pandering, the need to obscure black world affairs and the darkest secrets of intelligence agencies. These intelligence agencies (the CIA) even publish declassified reports implicating their willingness to consider and carry out "false flag" operations in countries where provoking a situation that would involve America gaining opportunity to sway the population into supporting (by way of orchestrated events) their assaults, occupation and exploitation of a country.

What is fascism? What are it's signs and characteristics are commonly defined?

Wikipedia.org encyclopedia offers some explanation:

Fascism is also typified by totalitarian attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life: political, social, cultural, and economic. The fascist state regulates and controls (as opposed to nationalizing) the means of production. Fascism exalts the nation, state, or race as superior to the individuals, institutions, or groups composing it. Fascism uses explicit populist rhetoric; calls for a heroic mass effort to restore past greatness; and demands loyalty to a single leader, often to the point of a cult of personality.
Fascism attracted political support from diverse sectors of the population, including big business, farmers and landowners, nationalists, and reactionaries, disaffected World War I veterans, intellectuals such as Gabriele D'Annunzio, Curzio Malaparte, Carl Schmitt and Martin Heidegger to name a few, conservatives and small businessmen, and the poor to whom they promised work and bread. In countries such as Romania and Hungary (and to a lesser extent in other states), Fascism had a strong base of support among the working classes and extremely poor peasants. The broad appeal of support for Fascism makes it different from other totalitarian states.

Wikipedia.org goes on to quote former Colombia University Professor Robert O. Paxton:

"Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion."
Paxton further defines fascism's essence as:

"1. a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond reach of traditional solutions; 2. belief one’s group is the victim, justifying any action without legal or moral limits; 3. need for authority by a natural leader above the law, relying on the superiority of his instincts; 4. right of the chosen people to dominate others without legal or moral restraint; 5. fear of foreign `contamination."
Something else of relevance are the definitions of a police state (also sourced from Wikipedia for convenience)
"Because there are different valid political perspectives as to what an appropriate balance is between individual freedom and national security, there are no definitive objective standards to determine whether a term "police state" applies to a particular nation at any given point in time. Thus, it is difficult to evaluate objectively the truth of allegations that a nation is, or is becoming, a police state. One way to view the concept of police state and free state as a teetor-totter (see-saw), where any law focused on removing liberty is seen as moving toward a police state, and any law which limits government oversight is seen as moving toward a free state. Most western nations are held as examples of a balance between the two."

"The best-known literary treatment of the police state is George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, which describes Britain under a totalitarian régime that continuously invokes (and feeds) a perpetual war as a pretext for subjecting the people to mass surveillance, policing, and modification of language and the way people think in order to make dissent not only swiftly punished, but also grammatically and logically impossible to conceive and express. The state destroys not only the literal freedom after action and thought meant by expressions like "freedom of thought", but also literal freedom of thought."

Let the truth be sought, known and shared! Resist any attempt to slowly and silently erode our pillars of defence. Protest and strike and act in solidarity with all who do. Do not allow them to reap the harvest of our labour in the end-game we are being led to. After they have even taken our tools we will be fighting unarmed against tanks and planes. The soul they want you to sacrifice for the identity they wish you to carry can be, and must be saved. The true identity we must aspire to as nations are the guarding of our institutional pillars of freedom, the demands of immediate government accountability and transparency and foreign policies not determined by the obligations of elitists and shadow agendas but by the sincerness for peace for all right now, not peace for the few and enslavement for the rest a bit later.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  General
| | |-+  A document in support and encouragment of liberty

// ]]>

Page created in 0.021 seconds with 29 queries.