The Power Elite driving the conversion of America into a Marxist country.

[Braggi]

On a completely different note:

"...the Power Elite driving the conversion of America into a Marxist country..."

(quote fromThe Contractor)

Only someone who hasn't seen the news in the last ... dozen years would think that. Or ever seen any news.

We are about the farthest thing from a Marxist country.

-Jeff

[The Contractor]

Hello Braggi, you are quite mistaken as America has been steered down 6 roads that clearly identify a country as Marxist and the 6 indicators are in conformity with accepted political doctrine. I've been inside America, and I've been outside of it.

Anyone who buys into the propaganda, misinformation, disinformation, and outright lies put out by the NWO media stooge Rupert Murdock controlled press is none too bright. For instance, everything you are being told about the situation in Afghanistan is blatantly false. I am there now ... have been for a "good minute" as the kids like to say. What you think you know is so far removed from the reality of the matter it's laughable ... ditto for your woefully off the mark take on America and the Marxist conversion. The Contractor

[podfish]

Anyone who buys into the propaganda, misinformation, disinformation, and outright lies put out by the NWO media stooge Rupert Murdock controlled press is none too bright. For instance, everything you are being told about the situation in Afghanistan is blatantly false. I am there now ... .

Anyone who characterizes someone else's thinking as "buying into propaganda" of some purported cabalist is pretty far from being bright himself. You have less way of knowing where his ideas come from than you do of understanding the world that Murdoch and his fellow conspirators live in. I suppose being in a rural third-world country gives you special insight into the secret meetings the world's masters have somewhere in Davos? I guess you're envisioning us as a bunch of suburbanite rubes over here who don't see the strings being pulled.

[theindependenteye]

>>> For instance, everything you are being told about the situation in Afghanistan is blatantly false. I am there now ... have been for a "good minute" as the kids like to say. What you think you know is so far removed from the reality of the matter it's laughable.

Interesting. Tell us what you're doing in Afghanistan (presumably as a contractor), and what you know about the situation there. Also would be interested to know what your interest is in this discussion on Wacco -- we don't generally get participants from quite as far afield.

Cheers--
Conrad

[theindependenteye]

>>>>"...the Power Elite driving the conversion of America into a Marxist country..."

Definition of Marxism, newly revised:
Anything the government does that anyone doesn't like.

[The Contractor]

] Anyone who characterizes someone else's thinking as "buying into propaganda" of some purported cabalist is pretty far from being bright himself.

If ad hominem attack is all you have to offer … why bother? NWO is neither obscure nor esoteric having been openly declared as the central goal on the floor of the US Senate … give your thesaurus a rest.

] You have less way of knowing where his ideas come from than you do of understanding the world that Murdoch and his fellow conspiritors live in.

The proof of your assertion is to be found where?

] I suppose being in a rural third-world country gives you special insight into the secret meetings the world's masters have somewhere in Davos?

Puerile sarcasm is an indication of a defective intellect.

Terribly elitist of you to openly gallivant about on the ethnocentric horse.

] I guess you're envisioning us as a bunch of suburbanite rubes over here who don't see the strings being pulled.

A wholly false belief that reveals the projected demons of “less than” from which you suffer ... you might consider seeking professional help. The Contractor

[The Contractor]

Interesting. Tell us what you're doing in Afghanistan (presumably as a contractor), and what you know about the situation there. Also would be interested to know what your interest is in this discussion on Wacco -- we don't generally get participants from quite as far afield.Cheers--Conrad

"Funny" how you hedge your comment with "presumably" as it gives away your true thinking. I am a Contractor on assignment in this region ... that's all you are entitled to know.

As for my interest in this discussion, what professional sector do you think is being recruited as a containment force in the event the US military cannot be deployed against its own people or outright refuses when orders come down?

[The Contractor]

>>>>"...the Power Elite driving the conversion of America into a Marxist country..."

Definition of Marxism, newly revised:
Anything the government does that anyone doesn't like.

I specifically referenced six indicators; you in turn provided proof positive that you are ill-informed and far more Troll than reasonable discussion participant. Thanks for sharing

[podfish]

If ad hominem attack is all you have to offer … why bother?

good point.

[geomancer]

Troll alert - do not feed!

"Funny" how you hedge your comment with "presumably" as it gives away your true thinking. I am a Contractor on assignment in this region ... that's all you are entitled to know.

As for my interest in this discussion, what professional sector do you think is being recruited as a containment force in the event the US military cannot be deployed against its own people or outright refuses when orders come down?

[Braggi]

Hello Braggi, you are quite mistaken as America has been steered down 6 roads that clearly identify a country as Marxist and the 6 indicators are in conformity with accepted political doctrine. I've been inside America, and I've been outside of it.

Anyone who buys into the propaganda, misinformation, disinformation, and outright lies put out by the NWO media stooge Rupert Murdock controlled press is none too bright. For instance, everything you are being told about the situation in Afghanistan is blatantly false. I am there now ...

Eh, I don't think you've proven yourself a troll, however, your presumption that anyone on this forum is "educated" by Murdock is ... pretty ignorant. I don't and have never watched, listened to or read any "news" outlet owned by Murdock except for a few small excerpts that demonstrate how far removed from reality they are.

So, what do you think I'm being told about Afghanistan that's false?

And what are these six "indicators" we're on the slippery slope to Marxism?

-Jeff

[The Contractor]

Braggi, Rupert owns and operates approximately 70% of the western press and this was your comment ...

Braggi - "Only someone who hasn't seen the news in the last ... dozen years would think that. Or ever seen any news."

You then go on to denounce the press claiming no one on this forum has been educated by it ... which way do you want it?

What have you been told about Afghanistan that is patently false? All of it ... the entire picture painted by the Beltway minions in concert with the conventional military presence is 100% out of synch with the reality of the matter. To date, the overwhelming vast majority of "boots on the ground" perspectives that refute the party line have been quashed. The real reason we have been in Afghanistan for the last 12 years (Operators were on the ground before the first conventional troops landed) has yet to be honestly and openly stated. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with curtailing terrorism.

As for the six indicators I made reference to, first you heckle me and attempt to seize the high ground implying that you are a learned authority with regard to Marxism. Now, you come to me asking me to cite with specificity that to which I alluded. A bit reversed as far as a civil protocol, would you not agree? If you had even a modicum of sincerity you would have first asked for clarification - expansion rather than diss me from jump street.

Notwithstanding the above, I will accommodate you in part. In no particular order of preference I offer you three indicators of a society moving toward Marxism and leave it to you to suss out the other three; you have many from which to choose. I think that is both reasonable and fair of me given your rather cheeky behavior in this discussion to date.

1 – Nationalizing major sectors of the economy … the bailout. 2 – Forced redistribution of wealth, manifestly self-evident. 3 – Discrediting the opposition. A recent Homeland Security Memo sent out to law enforcement officials nation wide cites returning veterans as a potential major threat to security. Not Taliban operators, not al-Qaeda recruiters … returning US veterans.

The three factors I note above are inherent in the formation of every Marxist society to date.

I am not a soldier, I am a liberator ... if you know the origin of my declaration then you know something of my military past and might have a hint at the information and events to which I have been privy ... and in some instances, part.

[podfish]

.. Rupert owns and operates approximately 70% of the western press

quite an assertion. 70% is a big number. It'd be nice to see it backed up.

Braggi - (you) attempt to seize the high ground implying that you are a learned authority with regard to Marxism. ... (and).. diss me from jump street.

I thought he was quite polite. What are you referring to?

but to comment on the points of your argument - what you think defines a Marxist country:

1 – Nationalizing major sectors of the economy … the bailout. 2 – Forced redistribution of wealth, manifestly self-evident. 3 – Discrediting the opposition. A recent Homeland Security Memo sent out to law enforcement officials nation wide cites returning veterans as a potential major threat to security. Not Taliban operators, not al-Qaeda recruiters … returning US veterans.

1. the bailout is far short of any effort towards nationalization. Several countries have nationalized industries. The US has only a couple that might fit the bill: the post office and Amtrak, for example. Not very threatening to the free-market system here.
2. if you mean somehow the US transfers wealth from rich to poor, I think recent numbers disprove that. I think it's self-evident that it goes the other way. Maybe that's what you meant? but if so it doesn't support the thesis that this is a Marxist state. Even if you accept that there is a movement in the US to deprive the rich of their just earnings, it has yet to prove itself very effective.
3. I've yet to see any advocate for anything who doesn't "discredit the opposition". It doesn't seem related to a Marxist ideology. I also don't think that the government has failed to point out the threat of Taliban and al-Qaeda operators - often it seems to be quite generous in identfying those who may fit those categories.

while the three indicators you mention may be a sign of a society going the wrong way, I fail to see the connection to either Karl or his modern-day disciples. If a society is formed along the lines of a particular ideology, there are a tremendous number of systems that conform to those principles. The way businesses are formed and make decisions, the way people are provided with spendable money, the way they are fed, housed, and provided medical care - and the way they are policed - all differ under the various ideological systems.
You also seem to be making an allusion to a recent media fad, where they identified returning soldiers with psychological problems as a possible danger. It's unfortunate and unfair but in essence, it is another manifestation of their shark-week mentality. Something's always gonna kill ya, in their point of view, and they'll find a way to turn almost anything to that message. That's the main way Murdoch comes into this discussion, actually.

[The Contractor]

A rather long post, podfish, so I will reply in part. BTW, I think your characterization of Braggi is both off the mark and irrelevant as I was speaking from a personal position and you are not me. Then again, I often times wonder about the real intentions of those who are so quick to speak in defence of someone quite capable of fending for their self ... pushing an agenda comes to mind.

With regard to Rupert, kindly consider the following holdings:

Film

Twentieth Century Fox
Twentieth Century Fox Español
Twentieth Century Fox International
Twentieth Century Fox Television
Fox Searchlight Pictures
Fox Studios Australia
Fox Studios Baja
Fox Studios Los Angeles
Fox Television Studios
Television

Broadcast/Production assets
20th Century Fox Television
20th Television
bTV
Foxtel
Fox Broadcasting Company
Fox International Channels Italy
Fox Kids (1990-2002)
Fox Sports Australia
Fox Telecolombia
Fox Television Stations
Fox Television Studios
Imedi TV
Latvijas Neatkarīgā Televīzija
MyNetworkTV
STAR TV
TV5 Rīga
Cable Assets
Big Ten Network (49%)
Fox Business Network
Fox College Sports
Fox Movie Channel
Fox News Channel
Fox Soccer Channel
Fox Sports Enterprises
Fox Sports en Español
Fox Sports Net
FUEL TV
FX Networks
Fox Reality
National Geographic Channel
SPEED Channel
SportSouth
LAPTV (Latin America — co-owned with Paramount Pictures/Viacom, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer/MGM Holdings and Universal Studios/NBC Universal)
Telecine (Brazil — co-owned with Globosat Canais, Paramount Pictures, MGM, Universal Studios and DreamWorks);
Direct broadcast satellite Assets
BSkyB (39.1%)
Sky Deutschland (30.5%)
SKY Italia
SKY Network Television (43.65%)
Tata Sky (20%)
Internet

Fox Interactive Media
AmericanIdol.com
AskMen.com
Fox.com
Foxsports.com
GameSpy
Hulu.com
kSolo
IGN
Drownedinsound.com
MySpace
MyNetworktv.com
NewRoo.com
Strategicdatacorp.com
Photobucket.com
Rotten Tomatoes
Scout.com
SpringWidgets
WhatIfSports
Beliefnet
News Digital Media
Slingshot Labs
Magazines and Inserts

InsideOut
donna hay
News America Marketing
SmartSource
The Weekly Standard
Gemstar
Newspapers

News International
United Kingdom
The Sun
News of the World
The Times
Sunday Times
thelondonpaper (a free newspaper)
News Corporation Ltd.
Australia
The Daily Telegraph (Sydney)
The Sunday Telegraph (Sydney)
The Australian (national)
The Weekend Australian (national)
The Advertiser (Adelaide)
Sunday Mail (Adelaide)
The Sunday Times (Perth)
Herald Sun (Melbourne)
Sunday Herald Sun (Melbourne)
mX (Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane)
The Courier-Mail (Brisbane)
The Cairns Post (Cairns, Queensland)
Geelong Advertiser
Gold Coast Bulletin
The Mercury and Sunday Tasmanian (Hobart)
Northern Territory News (Darwin)
The Sunday Territorian (Darwin)
Australian Associated Press (45%)
New Zealand
Sunday Star-Times
Papua New Guinea
Papua New Guinea Post-Courier
Fiji
The Fiji Times
United States
New York Post
The Wall Street Journal
Times Herald Record
The Brooklyn Paper
Dow Jones & Company
Consumer Media Group
The Wall Street Journal - the leading US financial newspaper.
Wall Street Journal Europe
Wall Street Journal Asia
Barron's — weekly financial markets magazine.
Marketwatch - Financial news and information website.
Far Eastern Economic Review
Enterprise Media Group
Dow Jones Newswires - global, real-time news and information provider.
Factiva - provides business news and information together with content delivery tools and services.
Dow Jones Indexes - stock market indexes and indicators, including the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
Dow Jones Financial Information Services — produces databases, electronic media, newsletters, conferences, directories, and other information services on specialised markets and industry sectors.
Betten Financial News — leading Dutch language financial and economic news service.
Local Media Group
Ottaway Community Newspapers - 8 daily and 15 weekly regional newspapers.
STOXX (33%) - joint venture with Deutsche Boerse and SWG Group for the development and distribution of Dow Jones STOXX indices.
Vedomosti (33%) - Russia's leading financial newspaper (joint venture with Financial Times and Independent Media).
SmartMoney (50%)
Books

HarperCollins
HarperCollins India (40%) joint venture with India Today Group
Zondervan Publishing
Youth Specialties — organisation helping youth workers worldwide through training seminars and conventions, resources and the internet.
Inspirio — religious gift production.
Miscellaneous

National Rugby League (NRL) (50%)
Ansett Australia, Until 2000 (50%)
Jamba! - Mobile Entertainment/Mobile Handsets Personalisation/Games.
News Outdoor Group - Largest outdoor advertising company in Eastern Europe with over 70,000 ads including billboards and bus shelters, operating in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, India, Israel, Poland, Romania, Russia (96 cities), Turkey & Ukraine.
Maximedia Israel (67%)
Mosgorreklama (50%) - Russia sign and marketing material manufacturer
Kamera Acikhava Reklamclik (?) - leading outdoor advertising company in Turkey
NDS Group (49%) - DRM and conditional access company.

[The Contractor]

but to comment on the points of your argument - what you think defines a Marxist country:

1. the bailout is far short of any effort towards nationalization. Several countries have nationalized industries. The US has only a couple that might fit the bill: the post office and Amtrak, for example. Not very threatening to the free-market system here.

Amtrak? Seriously? That's as far as your thinking has gone in this matter? That's ancient news and not particularly on point. Here, please allow me to help you a bit:

Government agencies own and manage the public school system, public highways and bridges, dams intended for the reclamation of land for development and for the production of power … and “yes” the government also has management authority for the sale of power, and this is far from an exhaustive listing. To continue would simply be an exercise in cumulative evidence and I do not intend to insult your intelligence.

The public education sector is a huge government acquisition and the imposition of NCLB which ties federal money to subsidize state controlled public education is the most obvious example in support of my assertion. BTW, in the news today it was reported that 10 states fell shy of the NCLB standard and are now targets for government take over. Government control over otherwise private enterprise has been accomplished via loans, direct financing, and laws providing for the government's regulation of corporate activities. In short, the government has nationalized major sectors of the economy by tying them to its purse strings and or demands (regulations).

Hope this helps frame the matter for you.

[podfish]

[/LIST] Amtrak? Seriously? ... Government agencies own and manage the public school system, public highways and bridges, dams intended for the reclamation of land for development and for the production of power …

fair points; thanks for a serious response. My post made light of the large impact the government admittedly does have on all kinds of sectors of the economy. I don't think we're anywhere close to a society where nationalized industries are a threat to independent corporations, but that's not the issue. Also admittedly, the government has huge indirect influence on all kinds of economic activity. Again, not the issue. The claim was we are undergoing a "Marxist conversion". I don't think it's easy to support that.

[podfish]

A rather long post, podfish, so I will reply in part..

and a longish list of his holdings.
I think his domination of the media is a problem. We apparently agree there. I'm objecting to the specificity of 70% (ok, to even a claim that he owns a majority or plurality). He's way too loud, but not loud enough to drown out plenty of others. It's easy enough to dig out a list of his holdings, but hard to quantify them. I don't have the inclination to tabulate them, and I won't pretend that a quick google will back me up when I say I think he controls way under half - actually I would be surprised if he controlled much into the double-digit percentages. There are a lot of big players in the world, and the dominant ones in any area rarely are close to a simple majority.
I was honestly curious as to whether you do have plausible numbers; this isn't a particularly important issue, but it's interesting.

[The Contractor]

the bailout is far short of any effort towards nationalization.

Try an initial $700 billion dollars that ballooned up to 12.5 trillion dollars when finalized. And you are seriously arguing this is minimal?

You might want to research Capps' Law and then come back on here and tell us how minimal the government take over is. I realize it's some 3000 pages in length ... but it is worth the effort. Capp’s Law impacts on about 1/6^th on the economy … try reading it and avoiding the quick fix summary versions as they tend to gap out.

if you mean somehow the US transfers wealth from rich to poor, I think recent numbers disprove that. I think it's self-evident that it goes the other way. Maybe that's what you meant? but if so it doesn't support the thesis that this is a Marxist state. Even if you accept that there is a movement in the US to deprive the rich of their just earnings, it has yet to prove itself very effective.

[Edited in light of podfish's more recent posts] Your opinion directly clashes with the the statements of Don Berwick who spear headed "Health Care Reform" up until November 2011 and I quote “Any healthcare funding plan that is just equitable civilized and humane must, must redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and less fortunate. Excellent health care is by definition redistributional. Britain you chose well.” BTW, Berwick is a Marxist.

[Edited in light of podfish's more recent posts] As a final thought, you might try checking into the military industrial complex as that is a tool government has used to essentially control major allegedly private corporations. Lockheed Martin and Booz Allen Hamilton come to mind. Huge players in heavy electronics and extremely high dollar instruments of destruction. In fact, what is called “The Corridor” which is half way between DC and Baltimore is seeded with “private” corporations that are merely fronts for government owned and controlled enterprises … more than a few Operators have done a stint in one or two of them … same for NSA personnel in certain sections.

Back to the topic ... "No" flag burning is not a good tactic or idea.

[The Contractor]

fair points; thanks for a serious response. My post made light of the large impact the government admittedly does have on all kinds of sectors of the economy. I don't think we're anywhere close to a society where nationalized industries are a threat to independent corporations, but that's not the issue. Also admittedly, the government has huge indirect influence on all kinds of economic activity. Again, not the issue. The claim was we are undergoing a "Marxist conversion". I don't think it's easy to support that.

Fair enough and I now see you are far more serious than pointlessly argumentative. This is a difficult medium to work in as I operate exclusively in a "face to face" environment.

Agreed, not easily supported, however, when you consider the information I have provided to date the markers are there. If you choose to hold to some standard that marginalizes what I consider the obvious, so be it. The imposition of marital law is coming and when it does all these arguments will go away.

["Mad" Miles]

As a onetime student of many and various stripes of "Marxism"; orthodox, heretical and heterogeneous, along with the critiques of Marxism from other ideological positions (not for some twenty years, even complex and weird topics can get repetitive, boring and predictable, I still monitor the feeds for new developments, of which there have been none that are particularly significant) I was at first skeptical of "The Contractors" claim of looming Marxist hegemony in the U.S.

After some of his "clarifications" I see he has identified a new form of and new threat from Marxism! The Marxism of the 1%. Capitalist Marxism. Plutocratic, Kleptocratic, Aristocratic Marxism!! I suppose they organize under the party names of Davos, Bilderberg, Bohemian Club and all the other usual suspects.

If one wants to speak seriously about Marxism, the first step is to define ones terms. Which brand of the multitude of competing and mutually contradictory Marxism(s) is being railed against? One big error on the Right and among Liberals, is to treat all political tendencies influenced by Marx, as one homogeneous being.

A view so ridiculous as to not even be met with derisive laughter. Just a sigh of sad, resigned familiarity. A blatant display of rank ignorance and cant. Or intentional misdirection.

Just because something is popular, does not make it smart, or interesting in any other way. That category error is just silly. This is a topic on which I've been quite vociferous here, on this board, it's all there in the archive.

Here's a hint for future reference. All Marxisms claim to be the political theory in service of the cause of liberating the Working Class. Even if the proponents are lying and/or deluded. Any purported Marxism which is blatantly not in the interest of working people, is pretty much by definition, not anything that can realistically be called Marxism, let alone Marxian in nature. How all that is interpreted within a commitment to benefiting the working class, is where all the conflict among Marxists of the numerous types, arises.

Mr. "The Contractor", in my quick skim of your contributions here, I've noticed this rhetorical trope:

"I've got a big secret, but I'm not telling, and you've gotta guess, cause you'll be sorry, when I turn out to be right and it's too late for you!!!"

Also:

"I'm privy to inside information the nature of which I cannot reveal to all of you ignorant fools who refuse to accept the alarming truths, that I can't tell you about, that are staring you in the face!!!"

And so on. This style is quite familiar. Couched in reactive personal insult and claims of superior skills and displays of rationality, I won't further characterize it. For fear of feeding the flame of ....

By the way, your claim that you're used to only dealing "face to face" while displaying quite developed online "debating" techniques, is also completely disingenuous. They can be found in comment threads and chat rooms across the planet. They constitute a certain specific culture which I will also not characterize as pretty much everyone reading this is already quite familiar with the game.

"Thanks for playing"!

Third hit on a google for: What percentage of global media is owned by Rupert Murdoch?

https://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1406

"The Contractor" is clearly not the John Springer I am acquainted with from West County ropes courses. Thankfully, that John always impresses me with his political and intellectual acumen, and I was confused there for a minute.

[The Contractor]

Thanks for the laugh Mad One. Your transparent attempt to play the high ground while wallowing in the mud of repeated hypocrisy had me laughing so hard I was in tears ... I needed a good laugh today and your vain glorious, self-aggrandizing foray into the realm of pseudo-intellectual diatribe really hit the spot.

[The Contractor]

[QUOTE="Mad" Miles;147622]
As a onetime student of many and various stripes of "Marxism"; orthodox, heretical and heterogeneous, along with the critiques of Marxism from other ideological positions ... [/QUOTE]

Good lord man, get a life. Here's the rebuttal to the error inundated, verbose piffle you pollute the net with for God only knows what reason:

First hit – In the number one position for print media: [URL]https://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart/print[/URL]

Select a chart: [URL="https://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart/main"]The Big Six[/URL]CableTV Print TelecomRadio

TV

Publishing

Film

Online Holdings

Other

2009 revenues: $30.4 billion
News Corporation’s media holdings include: the Fox Broadcasting Company; television and cable networks such as Fox, Fox Business Channel, National Geographic and FX; print publications including the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post andTVGuide; the magazines Barron’s and SmartMoney; book publisher HarperCollins; film production companies 20th Century Fox, Fox Searchlight Pictures and Blue Sky Studios; numerous websites including MarketWatch.com; and non-media holdings including the National Rugby League.
Visit the News Corporation homepage »

Please note that all the media cited are owned by … yepper, good ‘ol Rupert Murdock. Mad Miles is not truly mad; the poor boy is simply confused and easily impressed by small town philosophers one of which apparently bears my name although nowhere near my cumulative life experience, obviously.

[theindependenteye]

>>>]"Funny" how you hedge your comment with "presumably" as it gives away your true thinking.

Sorry you don't like the word "presumably" -- I could have said, "It sounds as if you're a US government contractor in Afghanistan, since you sign yourself as The Contractor and mention being on the scene, but I don't want to automatically assume that's true." But that's kind of a long way of saying it. I could have imagined that someone might sign himself "The Contractor" just to sound ominous, but I wouldn't presume that.

>>>I am a Contractor on assignment in this region ... that's all you are entitled to know. As for my interest in this discussion, what professional sector do you think is being recruited as a containment force in the event the US military cannot be deployed against its own people or outright refuses when orders come down?

So as I understand it, you're being paid by the Federal Government to participate in a project to create this containment force that will be deployed against the rest of us when the time comes. And my tax dollars are part of the bundle that's going to you to do this. And you're warning us against the government you're being paid by, but we're not entitled to know what you're warning us against. But it's really bad.

Thanks--
Conrad

ps- Sorry, I'm not a troll -- wish I had the time for it. I've been on this site a lot longer than you, and my posts are normally pretty mild. I'd make an exception for you, but I've got a pretty short attention span for a certain tone of voice.

[The Contractor]

>>>] I could have imagined that someone might sign himself "The Contractor" just to sound ominous, but I wouldn't presume that.

Nothing particularly "ominous" about being a Contractor ... but signing yourself as "theindependenteye" ... now that's spooky.

>>>]So as I understand it, you're being paid by the Federal Government to participate in a project to create this containment force that will be deployed against the rest of us when the time comes.

Huh? Appears your short attention span extends to your reading comprehension. I stated "professional sector" and not me personally. I wouldn't sign on for anything going against the American people ... you have me confused with a mercenary.

>>>] And my tax dollars are part of the bundle that's going to you to do this. And you're warning us against the government you're being paid by, but we're not entitled to know what you're warning us against. But it's really bad.

Are you intentionally twisting my written words ... or is the above indicative of what passes for reasoning in your world? The US government, which is rapidly moving toward a Marxist platform, plans to use US military forces to quell civil unrest. Bush staged troops in areas identified as potential flash points ... Obama essentially signed away the Bill of Rights. This much is a done deal.

Here's the unknown factor ... will US armed forces fire on their own people engaging in civil disobedience? I'm not talking about weekend glory boys or National Guard wannabes ... will real troops fire on their own people? BTW, this hypothetical was floating around in the SpecOps community at least as early as 1992. If the answer is "no" then the government must resort to other means in order to impose its will on the people.

Presidential candidate Obama stated he would create a civilian force on par with the US military ... why? Since Obama has failed to accomplish this, a reasonable "Plan B" is to recruit and employ existing talent. Contractors tend to be "plug and play" talent as US DoD and DoS contracts are very specific when it comes to verifiable skill sets, experience time ... even the terrain and time frame of experience, e.g., urban environment, mountain terrain, at least 1 year of combat in the last 3 years, etc.

As a final thought; at least in one branch of the military SpecOps community the uniform response to the hypothetical posed above was "No, I will not fire on my own people."

[podfish]

theindependenteye wrote:
>>>] I could have imagined that someone might sign himself "The Contractor" just to sound ominous, ...

Nothing particularly "ominous" about being a Contractor ...

it's the capital 'T' that does it.

[The Contractor]

it's the capital 'T' that does it.

Hehehe ... *ahem* ... RIGHT!