Obama Wins Election

[Chriswriter90]

In my opinion he really was the better candidate, I just didn't like his decision to take All of our troops out of Iraq.

It really should be up to the Iraqi people wether or not they need our soldiers' protection anymore.

But this thread should really just focus on Obama and the Election.

[Duke]

I guess outside the U.S., more than 90% would have voted for Obama. He's smart. I'm all for him. There's a lot of hope and expectations put on him. Quite a burden. Time will tell how much he can actually *change*.

On a sidenote, I was really impressed by greatness McCain showed in his little speech when he had to admit he lost. That man has style !

[BTAxis]

Europe is generally much more liberal than conservative Americans, so Democratic candidates tend to be more popular here. I don't know about other parts of the world though.

[Duke]

BTAxis, thx for pointing that out. I may know quite a lot about the other parts of the world, but I still don't know enough.
So I guess the '>90%' was an exaggeration. Bare with me.

Even in Europe, there are areas that can be *very* conservative (eg. Ireland, Poland,...).

Africa would surely vote for Obama, arabian countries probably too. The Aussies I met were all a little less conservative than the US-americans. I know quite a lot about asian countries, but then again, I don't really have a clue how they would vote.

However, 'the world voting for the US-president' is a very hypothetical szenario. Considering that far too many people in this world can't even vote for the president of their own country....

[EchizenR]

Obama is the "change" that is engineered. C'mon, as if any politician that ascends to power does not have the blessing (actually in servitude) to the corporatocracy.

Obama or McCain, two wings of the same bird, two sides of the same coin.

So Obama has taken the helm, it only means more of the same, more tyranny.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5755

But should any of you be too indolent or biased against facts to check that out, here's some of the surprises that Boss Obama is planning:

A "civilian national security force" that rivals the army in strength, (can anyone say Gestapo?). He is going to continue the fraudulent War on (OF) Terror, founded on the lie of 9/11 and the bones of 3,000 Americans. Using that excuse, he is going to continue the War on Terror in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and of course, Americans' liberties are still going to be raped as usual. No mention of the PATRIOT Act whatsoever. None also about the NSA's and FBI's spying. Zip about the expanding Executive Power which gives the President power to take control of the government and use army troops to police America. Of course, nothing is said about preparations for martial law (3 military units have been assigned to "homeland security" (a phrase Hitler also used). I guess Americans are just as gullible as Germans when Hitler made love to them before he turned dictator. Some smooth talking and the masses are all over you.

Two More U.S. Military Units Assigned For Homeland Security
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5733

In The Great Tradition: Obama Is A Hawk
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9338

I'm sick of hearing "change". What does Obama have that signifies change, besides maybe (appearing to have) intelligence, which is naturally attractive, given the 8 years of GWB. His foreign policy advisor is Zbigniew Brezsinki, the man who gave us the original "arc of crisis" in the Middle-East ostensibly to destabilise the Russians (Yeah, right, the Russians which Wall Street funded and built up), he was the SOB that gave us the Mugahedeen, which spawned Bin Laden. By the way, Al Qaeda is a fictitious organisation today. It was a computer-generated codename for Bin Laden's fighters during the CIA-funded guerilla war against the Soviets. Moreover, he is the good friend of yours truly David Rockefeller, whom Brezsinki co-founded the Trilateral Organisation (another globalist organisation) with to promote integration within and between N.America, W.Europe and Asia (Japan) in 1973. If anyone remembers, I quoted Rockefeller as saying "The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

Al Qaeda does not exist and never has
http://english.pravda.ru/mailbox/22/101/397/13821_AlQaeda.html

Besides, Obama is a corporate insider. He's a member of the CFR, the Council on Foreign Relations, which is the de facto foreign policy arm of the US. Almost all presidents since 1921 have come from that elite group, except Bush (I guess he was too stupid). Well, I expect Presidents to be elites, but given that the CFR has globalist roots, an Obama presidency would mean a continuation of the status quo towards erasing national sovereignty and ushering in world government. At the beginning of the 20th Century, the Inquiry was formed to start global integration and WWI was their tool to create the LoN. However that failed and the CFR was formed in New York to advance this goal. WWII was engineered as well and succeeded in creating the first global body, the UN. CFR involvement is clear when you find out that almost all of the UN delagation in San Francisco, 1945, were CFR members. Anyway, his top campaign contributor is Goldman Sachs, which has received $6 billion of taxpayers money to hand out $7 billion in salary bonuses. Great job Obama, continue screwing with the common working people. Like the people before him, his allegiance is to the corporatacracy which explains why he supported the bailout to Wall Street financiers and the fraudulent Federal Reserve, transferring wealth from the poor to the rich again just like what happened during the Great Depression.

"Globalisation thus implies that sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker. States would be wise to weaken sovereignty in order to protect themselves, because they cannot insulate themselves from what goes on elsewhere. Sovereignty is no longer a sanctuary."
–Richard Haas, President of the CFR, 2006

Wake up people, the liberal-conservative/Democrat-Republican/left-right paradigm doesnt exist except to blind people from the one-party global fascist order that is already in place. Mussolini said that "Fascism should be more properly called corporatism because its the merger of state and corporate power." Fascism doesnt only come with jackboots, but also Armani suits.

[Destructavator]

(Not bothering to place all of the previous post in a quote box...)

Yikes.   

That was deep.

Please keep in mind that anyone, meaning anything from just one person to an organization, can publish any opinions, predictions, and even "facts" on the net, regardless of how obscure the logic it was based upon, regardless of if it really does make sense or is "totally out there."  Further, anyone can discuss such things and snowball it even beyond that.

Allow me to quote Will Wheaton from an old part of the FAQ from his personal website (not sure if it is still there or not, and I admit this might not be an exact quote as it is from memory):

  "...I heard that-"

  "Yeah, I heard that too, and since it was posted on the Internet, it must be true, right?"



I have to agree with the statement those two lines mean.

I don't mean to turn you off when I say this EchizenR, but, dude, are you one of those "survivor" guys who keeps a hidden cache somewhere in their basement or home filled with assault weapons, grenade launchers, and other nasty stuff just in case everything hits the fan and anarchy happens?

[BTAxis]

Heh, that thought had struck me as well.

I don't bother reading posts like that, for what it's worth. Not going to agree with it anyway and I don't feel like arguing either.

[EchizenR]

You see, that is what I meant by "crimestop". And also, a deep egoistic refusal to be proven wrong. On the contrary, I would love to be proven wrong, I would like to believe that governments work for the best interest of their people. I would love to be wrong about an one world government New World Order. But as it is, the facts prove otherwise.

Please point out the obscurity of my logic. It would make my day to know that the world isnt as messed up as it is. Also, unlike you, I like to be proven wrong because it allows me to be elevated to a higher level of understanding. Thats learning.

In America where 4 corporations have a stranglehold on information, the Internet allows an alternative viewpoint to be presented. Information that has not been filtered by the corporatocracy. Corporations, via legalised bribery called lobbying control governmental policy, not the sheeple that engages in a ritual known as voting every 4 years. I'm not asking anyone to be illogical here. Think about it, for a politician that depends on business interests throughout his political career, would you think he would sacrifice the acceptance of such an establishment to fight for the rights and well-being of the people, whose opinion he only has to win every 4 years?

So what would you constitute as logic, if my post was the work of a raving lunatic? Even if I made sense, since this is the Internet, it automatically becomes inaccurate? Except for that link about Al-Qaeda, which is an opinionated piece (and could be disregarded if you're that sceptical, but doesnt change the fact that Bin Laden was funded by the CIA during the 1980s), the rest of the links are news articles, which are not empty claims. Let me quote what Obama said about his "civilian national security force":

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=69601

Now, it seems that people have a penchant for ignoring things that don't agree with their worldview. Assuming you support Obama and was irked by my post, and/or, ignored what I posted, have you ever thought "Do I actually know this to be false? Or I am conditioned to think that way?" It seems that people are scared to be proven wrong and are not willing to challenge preconceived ideas.

I don't believe that people are so solipsistic that facts do not exist just because they are ignored. If your notion of "facts" is so imaginery, what forms the basis of truth?

I would like to point out that every year since 1954, 125 of the world's most powerful business and political elites have met in secret under armed guard for a meeting. The Bilderberg Group, if anyone is familiar with that. For most of the 20th Century, the mainstream media has been silent on its existence, total black-out, and only in recent times have the alternative media covered its meetings. This year, it was held in the US, total media black-out. In 2007, it was held in Turkey and fortunately there were several small demonstrations. It suffices to say, it exists. What goes on inside is speculation, but that just begs the question, "What does really go on inside when the world's most powerful people meet in secret?"

Is anyone going to deny the existence of the Bilderberg Group and say I'm a nutcase, before checking it out first? Just because I'm putting an argument that you're never heard of before or ridicule as impossible, does that mean that I am crazy?

By the way, Destructavator, I'm sure you know what the 2nd Amendment says. In a time when police brutality is at the high it is today, what with toys like tasers and so-called "non-lethal" EM weaponry, it only makes sense to arm oneself. I'm sure that was what the Founding Fathers meant it to be, to protect the people against tyranny.

[Darkpriest667]

Every industrialized country in the world even China has universal healthcae...

Now hopefully through obama the united states can join those countries..

Im a conservative republican that has fought in wars.. I voted for obama...

Eizchener there is a corporatocracy... however... without those corporations youd still be a serf :-)

[EchizenR]

Without the corporatocracy, Humanity has the chance to create a substantially better society. While Exxon and BP just made $14.8 billion and $10 billion in profits during the 3rd quarter of 2008, half the world lives without electricity. This is coming 2 years after MIT published a report that states with current technology, we could extract 4,000 years of geothermal energy. Clean, renewable and unlimited. Tell me, what would happen to those profits if geothermal energy was utilised to lift the Third World out of poverty? With an abundance of energy, just like air, it cannot be charged anymore, and would also allow an unlimited supply of clean water. And thats not including wind, tidal, wave and solar (for which there is now a 100% efficient solar panel, while consumer types are only 14-20%). If only 1 hour of sunlight at noon is harnessed, the earth could be powered for an entire year. However, the obstacle which energy corporations create is to restrict the utilisation of batteries which store solar energy. While they hold the patents, energy independence will continue to be elusive. Is this not a deliberate attempt to hinder technological advancement in order to continue making profits?

1 billion and likely more people go hungry everyday, 35000 children die of hunger everyday. While in 2006, the FAO admitted in its report, "The State of Food Insecurity in the World Today" that global food production is able to feed every single person on the planet and could still produce more. But, Big Agro like Monsato and Cargil are pushing GMOs that not only have a lower yield, but they destroy the livelihoods of small farmers because the GM seeds are 1000% more expensive than traditional seeds and cannot be reused because of "terminator" technology. While GMOs, and related insecticides are needed to grow their crops, these corporations will continue to make obscene profits while small farmers are plunged deeper and deeper into debt. Today, 1000 farmers commit suicide in India every month because of the enormous debt which growing GMOs bring. Furthermore, the distribution of food is horribly uneven; in order to feed paying customers like us, Big Agro divert most food to developed countries leaving Third World nations to starve even with food aid.

It is the existence of these exploitative corporations that perpetrates misery worldwide. How are those people not serfs, when corporations seek to make profits by placing it above human concern? In the US, 910000 jobs have been lost since the beginning of 2008 due to the offshoring craze. Even with record profits, companies still seek to relocate, depriving blue collar workers of a livelihood. Worst, banks have just robbed the American people of a trillion dollars, with support of yours truly Obama, not to make loans to the people, but to give out huge salary bonuses and acquire insolvent companies and using the money to clear their debts. Is this even human?

[Winter]

EchizenR, the reason why people don't want to hear what you have to say has nothing to do with the content of your statements, but the way you make them. If you want to know why: it's because the tone of your posts makes you look like a complete and utter whackjob.

Regards,
Winter

[EchizenR]

EchizenR, the reason why people don't want to hear what you have to say has nothing to do with the content of your statements, but the way you make them. If you want to know why: it's because the tone of your posts makes you look like a complete and utter whackjob.

Regards,
Winter

May I know what about my tone makes me look like "a complete and utter whackjob"? And why? Even if I sound like one, does it mean that everything I present is fraudulent? Has it come down to this? That people will only believe something if it has the "spin" that Fox News can put on a news story? Not offended, just want to know where my 'mistake' is in. If you doubt the validity of my previous posts, I'll gladly furnish you with the sources.

[BTAxis]

You see, that is what I meant by "crimestop". And also, a deep egoistic refusal to be proven wrong. On the contrary, I would love to be proven wrong, I would like to believe that governments work for the best interest of their people. I would love to be wrong about an one world government New World Order. But as it is, the facts prove otherwise.

Didn't read the rest. I just want to say that what you call crimestop and a refusal to be proven wrong, I call common sense. Conspiracy theories aren't facts. On the off-topic board you've constantly attacked everything remotely related to government, commerce or other forms of establishment, as well as made a case for aliens zooming around on Earth. And you really believe in it too. It's paranoid. The fact that you can quote all those sources is testament to it. I get the impression that you spend a large part of your free time looking for "proof" that justifies your beliefs, which is fine, but you'll excuse me for not joining you in it.

[EchizenR]

Didn't read the rest. I just want to say that what you call crimestop and a refusal to be proven wrong, I call common sense. Conspiracy theories aren't facts. On the off-topic board you've constantly attacked everything remotely related to government, commerce or other forms of establishment, as well as made a case for aliens zooming around on Earth. And you really believe in it too. It's paranoid. The fact that you can quote all those sources is testament to it. I get the impression that you spend a large part of your free time looking for "proof" that justifies your beliefs, which is fine, but you'll excuse me for not joining you in it.

Wait...so if something is labelled as a "conspiracy theory" or even feels like one, you automatically switch off?

Its not called paranoia. Paranoia is when the belief is beyond logic or facts. Can you really disregard the sources for my "beliefs"? "Conspiracy theory aren't facts." Precisely, the official account of the 9/11 attacks is a big conspiracy theory: 19 arab Muslim hijackers directed by Bin Laden took over 4 airplanes and crashed 3 of them. The 9/11 truth movement just tries to put forward an alternative explaination that is better backed by the evidence than the official theory. But for some reason, they seem to be ridiculed by people. In fact, the FBI doesn't regard the 9/11 attacks as being committed by Bin Laden because there isn't enough proof. Whatever "proof" you claimed "justifies [my] beliefs" is actually the inverse. Doesnt the things you perceive (assuming this is the so-called "proof") shape one's belief? I don't go out of the way to find proof that backs my beliefs, as people learn new things, they change their perceptions. Aren't you just dismissing people because their beliefs challenge yours or because you think you know it all?

Do you really think that one can come up with a particular worldview first, then go on the net to find substantiating information? You might, but I don't. There was a time when I believed that governments work for the best interests of their people and that there was no such things as conspiracies. But as I learned, I changed my worldview as a response to new information.

By the way, about the alien issue, it seems I earned your scorn by bringing in faith. You can bash Christianity for all you want, whatever I said about aliens, it was not due to any particularly strong belief of mine, but rather an attempt to relate to the topic. I admit I know almost nothing about the alien phenomena and do not read into the issue.

And what is wrong with attacking the establishment? If its mere assertions, then you got a case. But as it is, I've pointed out the deliberate suffering caused by these institutions which can be easily verified. I don't think that "they're coming to get me". I believe that these inhumane actions are being perpetrated because not enough people are aware of it and so, I'm merely trying to inform people. It is due to sheer reticence that tyranny is being pushed onto the American people. Do you call the PATRIOT Act, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 or the FISA Amendment Act sheer conspiratorial ravings? This is not an extreme belief that is immovable. As I said, if there's anything to refute it, I'll gladly take a look because I'm willing to learn. As in systems in Nature, Human beings are Emergent, they change over time. Are you one of those people who hold a fixed view of the world their whole life? I don't think so.

[BTAxis]

I said I wasn't going to argue, so I'll try to keep my reply short. I stand by my opinion I gave before. I don't believe in the things you're trying to "inform me about" and I have no intention of seriously listening to them. This isn't because I don't want to be proven wrong (I don't think I'm "right" in that sense) or because I have unwavering faith in the establishment. I just choose to reject the views you're trying to propagate.

I won't deny that the system is imperfect and unjust at times, but I will not take conspiracy theories seriously, especially ones of the 9/11 calibre. Assuming any governmential body is able to deceive their citizens on that scale is well outside the realm of the reasonable and any "proof" to that effect is based on happenstance, conjecture and paranioa a will to see it as such.

And one more thing. I'm not "dismissing" anybody. If I was you'd be banned now.