[gamblingstats]

"The people behind the “10:10″ campaign, a movement encouraging people to reduce their carbon consumption by 10 percent in 2010, have been forced to pull their controversial new advertisement from the internet after widespread public outcry. The gruesome 4-minute ad depicts global warming skeptics being literally blown to pieces after their tree-hugging friends insist they’re under “no pressure” to modify their carbon consumption."

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/no-p...s-eco-fascism/



Pretty sick huh?

[kucheravka]

Yeah, I saw that vid a few days ago..

It really shows how "peaceful" the eco-libs actually are.

IMO, that video is advocating eco-terrorism and the notion that "non-believers" shouldn't be valued, or treated as equals because they are "a problem" to the movement.

How much more evidence do we need to confirm that leftists ARE the radicals and leftists want to kill you or enslave you so they can have their utopia? because the only people I have seen thus far in these shaky political times committing acts of violence are "LIBERALS."

I cant even begin to tell you how many videos there are of liberals acting out in violence for the liberal [communist] agenda.

www.theblaze.com
www.moonbattery.com

^^Those sites do a pretty good jobs staying up-to-date on recent progressive communist acts of violence caught on tape.

[Adollobdeb]

What do you think of that? Think they're kidding? No, I disagree with your premise. I don't think most of them want to commit genocide.

[Vcwdldva]

Uh-huh, I see. So, you don't believe they embrace a political philosophy that has resulted in the killing of millions of people, or you don't believe nazis killed millions of people, in view of all evidence to the contrary? Or you think they are kidding here?

Which is it?

I dont think there is much of a difference between Nazi's and communists or socialists.

One worships Hitler and the other worships Stalin...... Whats the fucking difference?

One murdered 6 million the other murdered 60-100 million.

Personally, I find Hitler a fucked up individual but I find it bullshit that he gets the bad rap while Stalin is viewed as a hero by some.

[Ygxejxox]

Liberals have no interest in changing "hearts and minds" to their point of view. They would use force, any chance they had. I've never heard a conservative call for censorship of any liberal media outlet, whether it be their talk radio, what little they have or cable but if libs had their way, all conservative outlets would be shut down. College campus is a good example. No opposing views allow. Even conservative college newspapers are shit canned before they can be distributed. Tolerance, my ass, not from the left.

[warrgazur]

PEOPLE OUGHT TO CHOOSE TO HAVE FEWER CHILDREN.

[Fegasderty]

I dont think there is much of a difference between Nazi's and communists or socialists.

One worships Hitler and the other worships Stalin...... Whats the fucking difference? But Hitler and Stalin were not environmentalists, just as environmentalists are not Hitler or Stalin.

[toyboy]

Stalin considered a hero by some here? No way. He's the Jew, remember? And I don't see anyone knocking Hitler on this board. Hear what you want, but what you hear is your own rationalization.

Not here...

The worldview..

[blackjackiisre]

I've never heard a conservative call for censorship of any liberal media outlet, whether it be their talk radio Then you didn't listen very well when Family Guy made fun of Palin.

[Enliseell]

But Hitler and Stalin were not environmentalists, just as environmentalists are not Hitler or Stalin.

Environmentalists in the US/Europe are generally socialists, thats my whole point...

Hell, one of the founders of Greenpeace (Patrick Moore) jumped ship because he claims Greenpeace became infested with communists that were using the group as a front.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...3/ai_19969858/

As Moore sees it, the composition of Greenpeace has changed dramatically since his heyday. He says the fall of communism brought an influx of anti-corporate extremism to the environmental movement because, "suddenly, the international peace movement had a lot less to do. Pro-Soviet groups in the West were discredited. Many of their members moved into the environmental movement, bringing with them their eco-Marxism and pro-Sandinista sentiments.

[ahagotyou]

They don't want the socialism of the USSR, more like that of Switzerland. So it still isn't fair to call them Stalin or Hitler, especially because Stalin and Hitler were single individuals that will never live again.

[sicheAscems]

They don't want the socialism of the USSR, more like that of Switzerland. So it still isn't fair to call them Stalin or Hitler, especially because Stalin and Hitler were single individuals that will never live again.

What are you talking about? the article states that the environmentalists were pro-USSR. Furthermore, all socialism evolves into stricter forms, whether it be a personality cult or textbook Marxism the model WILL fail. With socialism you're walking on eggshells between authoritarian and totalitarian governments.

Also, what do you call Kim Jong Il? hes alive and well, and he patterns himself after Stalin.

[spapsinee]

What are you talking about? the article states that the environmentalists were pro-USSR. Furthermore, all socialism evolves into stricter forms, whether it be a personality cult or textbook Marxism the model WILL fail. With socialism you're walking on eggshells between authoritarian and totalitarian governments.

Also, what do you call Kim Jong Il? hes alive and well, and he patterns himself after Stalin.

Yes, and because the article says it, that means it's true right?

Regardless of what the article says, the vast majority of environmentalists are not pro USSR. This is just reality.

[JacksHH]

Yes, and because the article says it, that means it's true right?

Regardless of what the article says, the vast majority of environmentalists are not pro USSR. This is just reality.

It came out of the mouth of one of the founders of Greenpeace, it was a quote....

At anyrate, I'm going to have to disagree with you and say environmentalists are in fact nothing but textbook socialists who want to kill capitalists. Besides I could care less what type of socialism they "believe" they want, its all bad shit anyways..

Did you not pay attention to the G20 riots??

[ddxbovMQ]

It came out of the mouth of one of the founders of Greenpeace, it was a quote....

At anyrate, I'm going to have to disagree with you and say environmentalists are in fact nothing but textbook socialists who want to kill capitalists. Besides I could care less what type of socialism they "believe" they want, its all bad shit anyways..

Did you not pay attention to the G20 riots??

Actually, I did.

Hundreds of demonstrators protesting the G20 global economic summit in Toronto broke windows and set fire to some police cars, but didn't kill any capitalists.

In support of socialism, yes they are, just not the socialist wasteland you all endorse as Hitler's Germany, or Stalin's USSR.

[lh88gFzI]

Actually, I did.

Hundreds of demonstrators protesting the G20 global economic summit in Toronto broke windows and set fire to some police cars, but didn't kill any capitalists.

In support of socialism, yes they are, just not the socialist wasteland you all endorse as Hitler's Germany, or Stalin's USSR.

But thats the way socialism progresses - it progresses into a wasteland, there is absolutely nothing you can do about that. All it takes is a fucked up leader, a bad global economy or a population boom and socialism goes to shit.

I will admit that socialism [if used responsibly and in benevolent fashion] can be effective in small nations with populations less than 4 million. However it fails in larger nations because it cant sustain the population. Not to mention socialism's premise isn't to grow wealth, its to sustain.

Oh, and make no mistake, these radical socialist sociopaths would have absolutely ZERO problem killing a capitalist or a non-socialist, they just fear prison - the fact that murder is wrong plays absolutely no role in their decision making.

Hell, take a look at the propaganda video in the OP to prove that...

People who have been indoctrinated with fringe ideas are extremely dangerous.

[Impariclainna]

I will admit that socialism [if used responsibly and in benevolent fashion] can be effective in small nations with populations less than 4 million. However it fails in larger nations because it cant sustain the population. First let me give you some credit, this is the most logical argument against the Switzerland style of socialism I've heard yet. Where I break with you, is that I don't think just because it hasn't worked doesn't mean it can't work.

Do I think America should be Socialist? Hell no. However, we should, and do, embrace some of it's tenants. Just because those tenants are shared by socialism, doesn't mean they are automatically wrong.

[marketheal]

Also, the idea that Democrats would put people to death for not adhering to environmental policy is laughable. They won't put someone to death if they chained 2 teenage girls to the bed and burned them alive! What makes you guys think they could put someone to death for this? Cmon!

[refsherne]

First let me give you some credit, this is the most logical argument against the Switzerland style of socialism I've heard yet. Where I break with you, is that I don't think just because it hasn't worked doesn't mean it can't work.

Do I think America should be Socialist? Hell no. However, we should, and do, embrace some of it's tenants. Just because those tenants are shared by socialism, doesn't mean they are automatically wrong.

Socialism can work on small scales, it just so happens the larger the nation the more likely it will fail. But like I said, a bad global economy will fuck it up - as we see in Europe today. Socialism isn't very stable to say the least.

Sure, I understand we're a somewhat mixed economy, however we're approaching the economic event horizon and if things dont change we will become a socialist nation and it will only get more authoritarian from there then eventually we will become totalitarian nation such as a North Korea.

I mean realistically the only possible way to make socialism work is via totalitarianism. Good totalitarianism not personality cult craziness, but at the same time you have to keep your people in check because in socialism its the workforce thats the wealth to the nation, not a free market. So you gotta do everything you can to keep your people in the country and make them work first and foremost. You see, and thats how and why socialism gets brutal and thats why countries like North Korea [or any socialist nation] is pretty much cutoff from the world. Their governments dont want their people to know how fucked up they have it and how free others are, that would just create conflict and people will up rise and leave or overthrow the government.

But yeah, socialism is very unstable and thats why it usually fails at some point or another.

[Unwiseevove]

Socialism as it has been practiced has been very unstable. If it were practiced in the way it was meant to be, where everybody from the Janitor to the president is Middle Class, it be different, who knows.

But you sure seem to have this all figured out, I don't think I can see that far into the future.