[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

So in absolute monarhies and empires such as Imperial France, Rome, and England you could speak your mind about, I don't know, the royal or imperal family? Because I thought if that were to happen you'd face hanging, beheading, firing squad, indentured servitude, or any number of executions or imprisonments. Just as it did in France (I would look up your beloved Louis XIV and how he revoked the Edict of Nantes, fora start, because he did revoke several religious rights held by Protestants before he ruled), England (for one, look up Queen Elizabeth I's policy towards Ireland), Rome (need I remind you of the Emperors Nero and Caligula?), and for good measure Japan (Tokugawa Ieyasu, for one, who ordered the executions of his own wife and son), and Belgium (look up the accounts of the horrors of their Congo colony).

Guess what? Dictatorships rarely, if ever, allow their subjects to speak out against them. They control with an iron fist their subjects and if that doesn't work, they kill their subjects with an iron sword. "Submit or die" is the catchphrase of all dictatorships, from the empires and kingdoms of antiquity, through the absolute monarchies of Europe and Asia, to the fascist and communist states of the modern era. Those who spoke out against their rulers, whether Nero, Elizabeth, Louis, or Hitler either went to some form of prison or were killed on the spot. That doesn't sound like freedom to me...

steve2592

Did you not even read my post? If you're not going to read what I write, then this is all just pointless. I said they didn't have civic freedom in those monarchies, which means they couldn't speak out against the government, yet they still had personal freedom to do as they wished about their daily lives. So in every sense, people were partially free and partially enslaved in these monarchies.

Secondly, I'm not enamored with King Louis XIV at all, but it's the truth that he is considered to be the greatest ruler France has ever had, after-all it was the people who named him the Sun-God. You don't get that kind of title by being a mass murderer like Hitler Sure, he and many other Kings and Queens had blood on their hands but so have all of our Presidents who've kept slaves, wiped out entire nations of Native Americans, planted flags on stolen land, ect, all in the name of freedom and liberty.

how can you say he was the greatest ruler of France? He himself doubted his ruling abilities. "Do not follow the bad example which I have set you; I have often undertaken war too lightly and have sustained it for vanity. Do not imitate me, but be a peaceful prince, and may you apply yourself principally to the alleviation of the burdens of your subjects". he said this to Louis XV before he was to take the throne.

I said he is "considered" the greatest ruler of France.

For the people that think the government is behind it, show me the evidence. Secondly, if the government really wanted to fan the flames of fear, they'd do something more substantial than this. Some loser terrorist fails to make an improvised explosive device and suddenly it's the government behind it? If the government was behind it, that plane would be gone.

sonicare

The government may not have been behind this one, but had the plane actually gone down or blew up a building, then I might be inclined to blame the government. As for evidence, I have none -- it's pure speculation on my part, but that doesn't matter to me because I'm not seeking to convince you that I'm right. I just stated my opinion, that's all.

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

Of course you can be partially free and partially enslaved, just look at any monarchy that has ever existed, any dictatorship. Do you know who is considered the greatest French leader? King Louis XIV, and his nickname was the Sun-God. Under his rule, France became the most powerful civilization on the planet. He was really the left-hand of God, the Pope being the right, yet the French people could still do as they wished, just as we can. However, they didn't have much civic freedom. This is also true for the British Empire, and it's true for the Roman Empire.

Your argument deals with absolutes, whereas mine deals with reality, in that things aren't black and white.

tycoonmike

So in absolute monarhies and empires such as Imperial France, Rome, and England you could speak your mind about, I don't know, the royal or imperal family? Because I thought if that were to happen you'd face hanging, beheading, firing squad, indentured servitude, or any number of executions or imprisonments. Just as it did in France (I would look up your beloved Louis XIV and how he revoked the Edict of Nantes, fora start, because he did revoke several religious rights held by Protestants before he ruled), England (for one, look up Queen Elizabeth I's policy towards Ireland), Rome (need I remind you of the Emperors Nero and Caligula?), and for good measure Japan (Tokugawa Ieyasu, for one, who ordered the executions of his own wife and son), and Belgium (look up the accounts of the horrors of their Congo colony).

Guess what? Dictatorships rarely, if ever, allow their subjects to speak out against them. They control with an iron fist their subjects and if that doesn't work, they kill their subjects with an iron sword. "Submit or die" is the catchphrase of all dictatorships, from the empires and kingdoms of antiquity, through the absolute monarchies of Europe and Asia, to the fascist and communist states of the modern era. Those who spoke out against their rulers, whether Nero, Elizabeth, Louis, or Hitler either went to some form of prison or were killed on the spot. That doesn't sound like freedom to me...

Did you not even read my post? If you're not going to read what I write, then this is all just pointless. I said they didn't have civic freedom in those monarchies, which means they couldn't speak out against the government, yet they still had personal freedom to do as they wished about their daily lives. So in every sense, people were partially free and partially enslaved in these monarchies.

Secondly, I'm not enamored with King Louis XIV at all, but it's the truth that he is considered to be the greatest ruler France has ever had, after-all it was the people who named him the Sun-God. You don't get that kind of title by being a mass murderer like Hitler Sure, he and many other Kings and Queens had blood on their hands but so have all of our Presidents who've kept slaves, wiped out entire nations of Native Americans, planted flags on stolen land, ect, all in the name of freedom and liberty.

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

Welcome to your very own trial by fire...

At the same time you're saying our government isn't like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union you're saying they orchestrated terrorist attacks to justify becoming a pseudo-police state. Which is it? Are we a bastion of freedom or an Orwellian police state? Tyrants have done these things, as have actual terrorists. How about the first World Trade Center bombing? Was that done by a covert ops group deep within the US government? Or perhaps the bombing of the USS Cole was orchestrated by a jealous Army general trying to get back at the Navy? Like it or not, terrorist groups do operate and are diametrically opposed to the United States and all it supposedly stands for.

A word of advice, seeing as how you are so, shall we say, young: conspiracy theories will not get you far on this website. If you want to question them as so many theorists question the government, then do so but don't pass them off as fact when there are far simpler explainations to be had.

tycoonmike

I said our government isn't the same as Nazi Germany or the USSR currently, neither were any of those countries the same as the Orwellian police-state depicted in 1984. I also don't subscribe to the ignorant ideaology that the U.S. can be described as one of just two things, with very debatable connotations. It is possible that the United States is in the beginning stages of tyranny, which would not fit the two terms you have just provided.

Secondly, because the last sentence at the end of your first paragraph is the object of disagreement, it's ignorant to place it forth as fact, when it is conjecture and opinion, just as mine our.

So you can be partially free and partially enslaved? I thought the two couldn't be compromised with, either you're one or the other. Tyranny is enslavement, freedom is, well, freedom. There's no third direction, either you're enslaved, whether by yourgovernment, your society,or yourown mind,or you're free. In that sense, would you care to explain how one can be both free and a slave?

Of course you can be partially free and partially enslaved, just look at any monarchy that has ever existed, any dictatorship. Do you know who is considered the greatest French leader? King Louis XIV, and his nickname was the Sun-God. Under his rule, France became the most powerful civilization on the planet. He was really the left-hand of God, the Pope being the right, yet the French people could still do as they wished, just as we can. However, they didn't have much civic freedom. This is also true for the British Empire, and it's true for the Roman Empire.

Your argument deals with absolutes, whereas mine deals with reality, in that things aren't black and white.

I used to be an avid believer in the US never landed on the moon conspiracy. But after reading a long book on the technology used to get there and how it was developed by Von Braun since WW2 i realised that it was true. Man had landed on the moon. My advice to TheAbbeFaria: Look into the subject from both sides. Iantheone

How do you know I haven't? Just because I have formed my own opinion, it doesn't mean that I haven't looked at the subject from different angles before forming it, or that I am not doing it now by debating the subject. ;)

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

Why would this government begin to make the same mistakes as Germany and the USSR did by making it clear to the public that they are in total control and the public isn't? But I'm not saying our government is just like Nazi Germany or the USSR currently. I chose that example to put things in perspective that tyrants have done these things.

tycoonmike

Welcome to your very own trial by fire...

At the same time you're saying our government isn't like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union you're saying they orchestrated terrorist attacks to justify becoming a pseudo-police state. Which is it? Are we a bastion of freedom or an Orwellian police state? Tyrants have done these things, as have actual terrorists. How about the first World Trade Center bombing? Was that done by a covert ops group deep within the US government? Or perhaps the bombing of the USS Cole was orchestrated by a jealous Army general trying to get back at the Navy? Like it or not, terrorist groups do operate and are diametrically opposed to the United States and all it supposedly stands for.

A word of advice, seeing as how you are so, shall we say, young: conspiracy theories will not get you far on this website. If you want to question them as so many theorists question the government, then do so but don't pass them off as fact when there are far simpler explainations to be had.

I said our government isn't the same as Nazi Germany or the USSR currently, neither were any of those countries the same as the Orwellian police-state depicted in 1984. I also don't subscribe to the ignorant ideaology that the U.S. can be described as one of just two things, with very debatable connotations. It is possible that the United States is in the beginning stages of tyranny, which would not fit the two terms you have just provided.

Secondly, because the last sentence at the end of your first paragraph is the object of disagreement, it's ignorant to place it forth as fact, when it is conjecture and opinion, just as mine our.

I feel this is going to be a bad thread for TheAbbeFariaLogan1616

I could not care less. I have better things to do than worry about what some strangers think of my opinions. I know I'm not the only one who thinks this, and some people in respectable positions share my opinions, and I'm not even sure how much that matters. I'm not an Alex Jones fan or anything, so maybe that counts for something.

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]I never said we were under the same type of tyrannical regime as the Germans saw under Hitler or the Russians saw under Stalin. He asked why our government would want to murder its own citizens, and I gave him recent examples of where countries murdered their own citizens to illustrate why our government is doing the same with these coordinated terrorist attacks.

Chaos_HL21

But your comparison failed, one if this is a big evil goverment how come there are anti-war protests, people speaking out against the evil goverment doing the evil thing you are talking about. Wouldn't they meet with 'Accidents". Or they could pull a Wilson and make it illegal to speak out against the goverment like in the early 1900s during WW1.

Take off that tin foil.

That sucks.thusaha

Why does it suck. The attack failed and no one was killed, I think only the terrorist was hurt too.

Why would this government begin to make the same mistakes as Germany and the USSR did by making it clear to the public that they are in total control and the public isn't? But I'm not saying our government is just like Nazi Germany or the USSR currently. I chose that example to put things in perspective that tyrants have done these things.

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

[QUOTE="JoelEnRegalia"] The idiocy of some people never ceases to amaze me. Give me one reason why the US would attempt to murder their own citizens.Theokhoth

The same reason the Reichstag was set on fire to increase state control and weed out the communists -- to secure more power. Both Hitler and Stalin were known to kill their own citizens, especially if they openly denied the state.

Sweet, but where's the "America" part come in? Why are you still alive and not gunned down by our evil government for standing up for liberty and--*SSNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOORRRT* I can't even finish! :lol:

I never said we were under the same type of tyrannical regime as the Germans saw under Hitler or the Russians saw under Stalin. He asked why our government would want to murder its own citizens, and I gave him recent examples of where countries murdered their own citizens to illustrate why our government is doing the same with these coordinated terrorist attacks.

Saw about this on the news, haven't heard much about it though. I saw the 'breaking news report' on Sky News. Really crazy, glad everyone is okay though... [QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

Just another "attempted terrorist attack" coordinated by our government. I find it hard to believe that a group of rebels on the run from the strongest nation in the world, fighting with antique weapons, and living a meager existence in mountains, are really doing the attacks that have been falsly attributed to them. When we invade New Guinea, we'll probably start seeing terrorists in loin-clothes, wearing white face paint, carrying bows. :roll:

JoelEnRegalia

The same reason the Reichstag was set on fire to increase state control and weed out the communists -- to secure more power. Both Hitler and Stalin were known to kill their own citizens, especially if they openly denied the state.