http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/graphics/goering-quote.jpe

I've seen that quote several times, are you trying to make a point?

If so, why not make your point, instead of just posting something old to read?

The article itself even states that this tactic can be used by ANY political party, so again,
What is the point?

snopes.com: Hermann Goering (http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.asp)


Oh? But I see you got the point. It just took you three sentences of dancing to get there, but you did. You acknowledged subject matter and reference, "this tactic could be used by ANY political party." So why does the Republican party choose this tactic, when the Democrats for all their faults choose not?? That old flimsy transparent patriotism card. The Republicans have worn it out.

BTW you thought this was not old?? You said,"Socialists, Communists, Marxists, Fascists, or any other term you want to use with the same basic meaning, is EXACTLY what the Democratic Party is all about." Please! That rhetoric is so stale Ronald Reagan knew it was outdated during his campaigns. Both parties have been slinging terms like these at each other for decades.

Yeah obviously that was the way Churchill and Roosevelt fooled their nations into war.

This theory works not only for war but for just about anything. Substitute a different word for War and it still works. I personally liked "Mad Cow Disease".

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f3/Hsas-chart.jpg

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/graphics/goering-quote.jpe
The is obviously a very narrow view out there by some people. Babram claims that "So why does the Republican party choose this tactic, when the Democrats for all their faults choose not???" Do you not realize that it was the Democrats that got us involved in most of the wars in this great countries history. LBJ - Vietnam (Democrat), Truman - Korean War (Democrat), FDR - WWII (Democrat), Wilson - WWI (Democrat). Before slinging blanket statements we should be sure to weigh the facts of history.

Do you not realize that it was the Democrats that got us involved in most of the wars in this great countries history. LBJ - Vietnam (Democrat), Truman - Korean War (Democrat), FDR - WWII (Democrat), Wilson - WWI (Democrat). Before slinging blanket statements we should be sure to weigh the facts of history.


Huh? Two things going on here. Actually I said, "Both parties have been slinging terms like these at each other for decades." I should had said the Democrats used to bombard Ronald Reagan, as the Republicans are currently attempting to do with Barack Obama. Yes, I take responsibility for this needed clarification. But did you think that LBJ, Truman, FDR, and Wilson are candidates for the upcoming presidency? They are all dead, it's 2008, and Dubya's current personal project, otherwise known as the Iraqi war, is a costly disaster. Let's learn from the past, but not live in it. Number two, which is the relative subject of today and point, generally speaking though Democrats do not directly require Republicans patriotism credentials, but Republicans have made calling out Democrats patriotism tantamount to their campaign agenda the past decade. I'm not wearing my American flag lapel pin. Whoop-tee-do! BTW it's not a narrow view, it originated with Caesar and it works to damn well. That nazi "Hermann Goering" was speaking directly about making the masses persuaded to war, not made cow disease. Please.

PS. I'm a registered Indendepent that's voting for Obama.

Tom, nobody with an IQ above room temperature would confuse George "Dubya" Bush for Churchill or Roosevelt.

Ok so let me get this straight. You mock me by saying that LBJ, Truman, FDR, and Wilson are dead an not a candidate for president. But in the same breath you speak of George Bush? Knock Knock... Bush isn't on the ballet either, or did you miss that one?

I can't stand it when children whine and I can't' stand it anymore when adults whine. What Bush has done is going to be his legacy and Americas issue to deal with for many years to come. I will flat out agree that Bush is an idiot and that he wanted to finish daddy's war, but the question is where do we go from here?

I just don't get how you can say that one candidates patriotism doesn't matter? And it is not about the pin, the pin is just one piece of a pattern that has been forming for years. Let's see his pastor of how many years? 20+ spewing "god dXXn America" are you going to tell me this was an isolated incident? No, he has been listening to this anti-American banter for years and never opposed it until it started to make him look bad.

Nope. I'll try and make this clear as possible. Our current situation is in part because of George W. Bush, which you admit is an idiot, and he fully endorses John McCain. I never said our candidates were not patriotic. I find them both to be very patriotic. I'm saying generally speaking, both Republicans and Democrats are patriotic alike. BTW I've thought "damn America" on several occasions in regards to our president and congress for their knucklehead decisions and actions. But neither Wright, Obama's ex-pastor now retired, or Hagee, whom has made several bigoted remarks although McCain sought the guys support (and has since dropped his endorsement), are running for president. I try not to involve myself with the side shows of the campaign circus unless there are discriminate falsehoods being made. Granted, we all have different perimeters as to what issues are relative or most important. But it's simply a false charge that either one of the candidates are not patriotic (or the vast majority of their supporters).

The question is ;was Iraq a necessary war? We disagree on that and will not persuade each other to change opinion. I guess history will decide. Comparing President Bush to Nazi Germany's leaders is a cheap shot .

The question is ;was Iraq a necessary war. Actually I think it's more related to the tactics used to control the population - and Bush's administration's tactics fit the quote.

Sorry Tom, Canada never used scare tactics to control the population like the US does. When the posters came the world war was underway: Menu - Victory Bonding - Exhibitions - Library and Archives Canada (http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/victory-bonding/050701_e.html)

In the case of Bush's administration the scare tactics and use of FUD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear%2C_uncertainty_and_doubt) is used to allow the admin to reach their goals which seems to include a great loss of privacy and freedom for the general public.

Canada never used scare tactics to control the population like the US does.When the posters came the world war was underway


Yes when President Bush began to mobilize the war had already been thrust upon us.



Canadians were physically and psychologically unprepared for war in 1939 - inadequate military preparations were matched by a psychological reticence. The country had just begun to recover from the trauma of a severe ten-year Depression which had strained the its religious, social and political institutions and bred widespread cynicism and anger. Because of this, Canadians were reticent to assume the responsibilities and sacrifices they knew would be demanded by the war. Although they were aware of the deteriorating situation in Europe, many Canadians continued to hope that a full-scale conflict could be averted.


This lack of preparation and enthusiasm, coupled with the nation-wide large-scale sacrifices required of the war made it imperative that the government mobilize public opinion to support the war effort and defuse discontent. After a shaky and indecisive start, the government, through the Bureau of Public Information and later the Wartime Information Board (WIB), undertook an extensive propaganda campaign "to dampen cynicism" and stimulate support for the war. Posters quickly became an essential element in this programme, in part because of their physical properties: they were relatively inexpensive to produce; they could be created, printed and distributed in a relatively short period of time; and they enjoyed a broad, sustained exposure.

Relying on posters' impact, immediacy, emotional appeal and sustained exposure, federal government ministries and agencies, under the guidance of the WIB, produced approximately 700 propaganda posters that were printed in a wide variety of sizes that appeared on everything from billboards, shop windows and theaters, to buses and streetcars and even matchbox covers. Because of their variety and distribution system, posters saturated the nation's cities and towns, and quickly became familiar to most Canadians.
The popularity of posters as a propaganda tool, however, was also a consequence of the manner in which they sent their messages. By using images as a form of visual shorthand, they implied much more than was actually stated or shown. As one of the poster artists pointed out years later, successful posters made this shorthand graphic through "vigorous composition, eloquent colour, an unambiguous theme [and] impassioned execution," and in that way they communicated complex, highly emotional messages "in the blink of an eye." And the powerful messages they transmitted tend to be instantly internalized rather than analyzed. Because of this, the posters had a strikingly immediate impact on people's values, attitudes and aspirations.

Canadian WWII Propaganda Posters (http://www.airmuseum.ca/postscan.html)
What I'm saying is that all nations rally the people to support the war in similar manner. All We really disagree on is the cause of the war itself.

Actually you're changing the subject. The subject is about telling the country they are being attacked and denouncing the pacifists for lack of patriotism.
This is indeed being done.

We weren't attacked ?

http://images14.fotki.com/v221/photos/2/292835/1608389/2ndplaneapproaches02-vi.jpg

YEAR = 2001 !

And ? Of course the measures that were taken happened AFTER 9-11-2001 .
Should we let our guard down until next time ?

Tom- Are you deliberately trying to confuse the 9/11 attack by Osama Bin Laden of Afghanistan for Dubya's goat otherwise known as Saddam Hussein and Iraq? Afghanistan was haven for the Taliban/Al Qaeda that originated the plotted attack against the US. OBL is the terrorist most responsible for master minding 9/11 and is in the back of cave somewhere, probably Pakistan or Syria, sipping lemonade. Iraq was ran by a dictator that murdered his own people and refused our nuclear inspectors access, and violated fly zones. Hussein was then brought to justice and put to death for crimes against humanity, while the Iraqi people run amuck among civil unrest and daily violence even today. And now they are conditioned to become welfare recipients of the US government via hard working Americans.

I guess it is just a difference of opinion and we will have to agree to disagree. Yes I think Bush is an idiot, the man says the stupidest things. With that said one would think he wouldn't have the mental capacity to con the public into being scared. Iraq was over WMD, which Iraq did have at one time, but come to find out they didn't have upon our arrival. Once we toppled Saddam, the rodents came out of the wood work and started fighting with our troops over there. Which I would prefer to us fighting them here. As much as everyone hates Georgie boy, there has not been another major attack since 9-11. The bottom line is that we a neck deep into this and where do we go from here? Even the golden boy Obama who said we would be out in like 18 months once he was elected now has changed his tune. We need to stay strong, support our troops and bring them home safe in a organized and rational manner.

Greg-

I don't think many would disagree with the war in Afghanistan. I do support Dubya's decision on Afghanistan and always have. I would had been sorely disappointed with our drugstore cowboy president had he sat on his hands. Going after OBL was justifiable to not only Americans, but the world. Iraq is a whole other ball game though. Dubya's big mistake was troop deployment. If he would had just bombed the hillsides, government buildings, and military installations, most would had been satisfied to let the Iraqis figure out what to do with their tyrant government. Iraq is not going to become the 51st state of the United States, one year from now or a hundred.

As for WMD's or the lack of, our government is well aware of other countries that are in the same category as Iraq and actually further advanced. John McCain thinks the war, at least in part, is about oil: YouTube - John McCain admits Iraq War was over oil (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0GWoxbMs1k). Personally I think Dubya just needed any excuse after being blindsided by OBL so he took his frustration out on Saddam Hussein and Iraq.

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/graphics/goering-quote.jpe


Same could be said for "Global warming"


Common people don't want taxes on carbon and to revert to a pre industrial society.

All you have to do is tell them that the world is going to end at some point in the future due to "global warming" and denounce those that don't "believe" it.

Unfortunately the only thing that nazi was focused on was warming my people up in ovens.

Unfortunantly -soo true.

Bobby again we have to agree to disagree on Iraq . You see it as a singular event and I see it as a front in a larger struggle.

I really wish that Iraq was over oil. If it was do you think we would be paying over 4 bucks at the pumps? We didn't bomb the snot out of them because, much to my displeasure, the US was trying to fight a politically correct fight if at all possible. Minimize civilian casualties, stabilize the country, etc. The problem is that the Iraqi army is not the problem. We toppled them pretty easily, it is the insurgents that have come to bring the fight to us. Many with sympathetic views to Bin Laden and Islamic jihad. That is the rope that binds Iraq to Afghanistan. That's why I believe they are the same fight (War on Terror) just different fronts. As far as becoming the 51st state... what are your thoughts on allies or having military bases abroad? Bringing back to the origin of this thread... we never made Germany a state now did we? But we have bases there and have built relationships over the years. We have to play for the long game.

I hear you! All I see and feel now is inflation, and higher pricing on food and gas. But according to McCain, it is, at least in part is about oil. Speculation over the oil the first time around certainly did us no good under George Herbert Walker Bush either. I recall lots of media coverage, Iraqis glad to surrender so they could eat a decent meal, and General Schwarzkopf riding in parades.

On the insurgents issue, you are basically saying the same thing that Obama mentioned, in that due to the Iraqi war it has brought forth the insurgents. Again troop deployment was Dubya's miscalculation. The standard argument is the terror links between Afghanistan and Iraq. Again my lack of support with Dubya on Iraq is how he went about the war. Much of the public doesn't understand that Al Qaeda alone has set up shops in at least five countries, not to mention numerous other terrorist organizations (to many to list) scattered throughout the world in other countries. We could be deploying troops for the next hundred years and never stay in our on backyard. If we follow that path of continued links then we might as well start up a mandatory draft and prepare to kiss generations of our American children good-bye.

Now in WWII Hitler (Germany) was the aggressor and on conquest for world Aryan domination having already attacked several countries and in rapid destabilizing Europe. Bases were required afterwards. Some would argue the duration and others our overstay. Hell! For that matter when it comes to us being the welfare country, we put Japan back together so well they turned around and manged to manufacture cars that beat our technology and quality. So much so that as Americans we purchase their products before our own. Saddam basically was in competition with other terrorist groups that would dare cross paths with his regime in his own country. Under his government genocide occurred, and that coupled with his earlier escalations of conflicts of war with Iran. BTW as a side note, we should had permitted Israel to retaliate against him. When it comes to getting hands dirty they do a much smarter job, usually lower maintenance, and much more effective. Anyway Dubya mistakenly altered Iraq in a way that our costs, as hardworking Americans, and the consequences for whomever is in control in the White House will be undoubtedly burdened in a spectrum of ways.

A very haunting quote, Babram.

This is the exact strategy the Bush Administration used to frighten, dominate and control the uneducated members of the US electorate in order to prosecute its War of Adventurism on Iraq... and the fiasco that was the Bush Administration.

No one should forget this... this is from the playbook of one of the most famous and successful Fascists, Goerring. Fascism like *Bush promoted*... the military uniforms and paraphernalia rather than patriotic ideals, the govt and big business in a joint effort of enrichment against middle class needs, attempts to consolidate power (by overiding Constitutional rights) in the hands of a single executive, attacking free press and setting up alternate propaganda news...

I get tired of exposing right wing no-nothing jerks and their motives for the evil that they are, but I'll never give up. :)

Choux, you don't leave much room to the left side of the road for us that drive down the middle, why don't you tell us what you really feel about Republicans... jeez you scare me.

Getting back to the discussion at hand... With thee insurgents going to fight in Iraq... GOOD. I would rather them fight over there the on my doorstep. With our wide open borders, no thanks to Bush, McCain, or Obama they wouldn't have had much to worry about to get into the country and turning American cities into the Gaza strip. No thanks.
I don't know if you realize this or not, but you don't have to worry about the Republicans getting elected this year. McCain is not a Republican. He is a watered down Democrat with many of the similar opinions as Obama, just packaged differently.

So, now we complain because our government is trying to keep us aware and protect us? OK. Let's all just put our heads back in the sand as if the terrorists don't exist and didn't attack us. AND as if we haven't had many, many threats and arrests since then, of others who wanted to attack us. How soon we forget what it's all about and then pass on silly platitudes as if our lives mean nothing.

Ugly stuff happens when people aren't looking. Remember the Nazi's? I don't think their victims expected what happened to them.

Six Years After 9/11: Are We Safe Yet? (http://www.heritage.org/research/HomelandDefense/wm1609.cfm)

"America is better prepared to deal with the threat of transnational terrorism than it was before 9/11. The government has uncovered and thwarted at least 16 terrorist conspiracies in the United States and helped disrupt major plots aimed at America or U.S. persons in Canada, Britain, and, most recently, Germany.

Many of the most important tools for protecting homeland security were in place before 9/11: intelligence activities, information-sharing, counterterrorism, and law enforcement investigations and cooperation. However, the United States and its friends and allies now take these tasks much more seriously than they did before 9/11. Terrorists may be taking the offensive in other parts of the world—but there is no question that they find America and its allies are "harder" targets than they were in 2001."


The standard argument is the terrorist links between Afghanistan and Iraq, usually in reference to Al Qeada. Again my lack of support with Dubya on Iraq is how he went about the war. Much of the public doesn't understand that Al Qaeda alone has set up shops in at least five countries, not to mention numerous other terrorist organizations scattered throughout the world in other countries. We could be deploying troops for the next hundred years and never stay in our on backyard. If we follow that path of continued links then we might as well start up a mandatory draft and prepare to kiss generations of our American children good-bye.


Groups currently designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations

Abu Nidal Organization (ANO) (International, Palestinian)
Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) (Philippines)
Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade (Palestinian)
Al-Shabaab (Somalia)
Ansar al-Islam (Iraqi Kurdistan)
Armed Islamic Group (GIA) (Algeria)
Asbat an-Ansar (Lebanon)
Aum Shinrikyo (Japan)
Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA) (Spain, France)
Communist Party of the Philippines/New People's Army (CPP/NPA) (Philippines)
Continuity Irish Republican Army (Northern Ireland)
Gama'a al-Islamiyya (Egypt)
HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement) (Palestinian)
Harakat ul-Jihad-i-Islami/Bangladesh (HUJI-B) (Bangladesh)
Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM) (Kashmir, India)
Hizballah (Party of God) (Lebanon)
Islamic Jihad Group (Syria)
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) (Uzbekistan)
Jaish-e-Mohammed (Army of Mohammed) (JEM) (Kashmir, India)
Jemaah Islamiya organization (JI) (South East Asia)
Al-Jihad (Egyptian Islamic Jihad) (Egyptian Islamic Jihad) (Egypt)
Kahane Chai (Kach) (Israel)
Kongra-Gel (formerly Kurdistan Workers' Party) (KGK, formerly PKK, KADEK, Kongra-Gel) (Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Syria)
Lashkar-e Tayyiba (Army of the Righteous) (LT) (Kashmir)
Lashkar I Jhangvi (Pakistan)
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) (Sri Lanka)
Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) (Libya)
Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group (GICM) (Morocco)
Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) (Iran)
National Liberation Army (ELN) (Colombia)
Palestine Liberation Front (PLF) (Palestinian)
Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) (Palestinian)
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) (Palestinian)
PFLP-General Command (PFLP-GC) (Palestinian)
Tanzim Qa'idat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (QJBR) (al-Qaida in Iraq) (formerly Jama'at al-Tawhid wa'al-Jihad, JTJ, al-Zarqawi Network) (Iraq)
Al-Qa'ida (Global)
Al-Qa'ida in the Islamic Maghreb (formerly GSPC) (The Maghreb)
Real IRA (Northern Ireland)
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) (Colombia)
Revolutionary Nuclei (formerly ELA) (Greece)
Revolutionary Organization 17 November (Greece)
Revolutionary People's Liberation Party/Front (DHKP/C) (Turkey)
Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso, SL) (Peru)
United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) (Colombia)

which only proves we need a leader who will take action

We need an intelligent leader that takes practical correcting action.


rather than ignore and let us all die at the hands of a terrorist group.

Actually we are all more likely to die at the hands of one of our own large city gang members, in an automobile wreck, or natural health related issues... heaven forbid.


We may have not been attacked on 9-11 if President Clinton had listened when he was told about Bin Laden

The point about taking threats seriously, and using the tools that for the most part were already available prior to 9/11, is a good one. It would had helped cut down on the opportunities and likelihood. Between Bill Clinton's extracurricular activity with women, and G. Dubya's dumbfounded surprised look the day he was interrupted telling children's stories, neither were doing their jobs.

Department of Homeland Security | Preserving our Freedoms, Protecting America (http://www.dhs.gov/index.shtm) an umbrella for numerous agencies in cooperation w/international agencies, that already existed before, are now drinking their coffee, staying awake, taking matters seriously, and more likely on the same page. People should know that at one time the FBI and CIA didn't even want to share information between each other. Since the 9/11 attack our paid employees have "uncovered and thwarted at least 16 terrorist conspiracies in the United States and helped disrupt major plots aimed at America or U.S. persons in Canada, Britain, and, most recently, Germany."

I know it's a joke, but don't you think it's a stretch to say that Clinton's passion for ugly women and Bush's (was he actually reading? That's a new skill set) time with the kiddies took them away from keeping us safe?

As far as your list of terrorists, very few of them are attacking US! Yes they are considered terrorist organizations by the USA, mostly to strangle hold their finances.

They are all on the list for good reasons. Attacks? At least not in the public national visibility. Mostly intermittent cooperation between each other, and financing. But generally speaking, I agree. Keep in mind though that we also have our own home grown idiots.


Here's an unofficial list including the US:

USCFL - Complete List of Terrorist and Insurgency Groups Worldwide (http://www.freelebanon.org/articles/a167.htm)