What is sad is that you are clueless to what Fascism is. The only difference between NAZI Fascism and Soviet Communism is that while Communism owns everything, in Fascism they just CONTROL everything. And that is just what you progressives want. to be abe to tell businesses what to do, who to buy room, who to sell to, what price to pay, who you can employee, etc.Creeping Fascism: Lessons From the Past
by Ray McGovern CIA Ret. http://tinyurl.com/33mpdr
There are few things as odd as the calm, superior indifference with which I and those like me watched the beginnings of the Nazi revolution in Germany, as if from a box at the theater Perhaps the only comparably odd thing is the way that now, years later .
These are the words of Sebastian Haffner (pen name for Raimund Pretzel), who as a young lawyer in Berlin during the 1930s experienced the Nazi takeover and wrote a first-hand account. His children found the manuscript when he died in 1999 and published it the following year as Geschichte eines Deutschen(The Story of a German). The book became an immediate bestseller and has been translated into 20 languages-in English as Defying Hitler.
I recently learned from his daughter Sarah, an artist in Berlin, that today is the 100th anniversary of Haffners birth. She had seen an earlier article in which I quoted her father and emailed to ask me to write some more about the book and the comparison to Bushs America this is almost unbelievable.
More about Haffner below. Lets set the stage first by recapping some of what has been going on that may have resonance for readers familiar with the Nazi ascendancy, noting how odd it is that the frontal attack on our Constitutional rights is met with such calm, superior indifference.
Goebbels Would be Proud
It has been two years since top New York Times officials decided to let the rest of us in on the fact that the George W. Bush administration had been eavesdropping on American citizens without the court warrants required by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978. The Times had learned of this well before the election in 2004 and acquiesced to White House entreaties to suppress the damaging information.
George W. Bush: A CIA Analysis
by Ray McGovern CIA Ret. August 22, 2007 http://tinyurl.com/2hpqtq
It is as though I'm back as an analyst at the CIA, trying to estimate the chances of an attack on Iran. The putative attacker, though, happens to be our own president.
It is precisely the work we analysts used to do. And, while it is still a bit jarring to be turning our analytical tools on the U.S. leadership, it is by no means entirely new. For, of necessity, we Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) have been doing that for almost six years now ever since 9/11, when "everything changed."
Of necessity? Yes, because, with very few exceptions, American journalists lose their jobs if they expose things like fraudulent wars.
The craft of CIA analysis was designed to be an all-source operation, meaning that we analysts were responsible and held accountable for assimilating information from all sources and coming to judgments on what it all meant. We used information of all kinds, from the most sophisticated technical collection platforms to spies to open media.
Here I have to reveal a trade secret, which punctures the mystique of intelligence analysis. Generally speaking, 80 percent of the information one needs to form judgments on key intelligence targets or issues is available in open media.
Obama is a classic Fascist!