Was the Bush Administration Fascist?

Karl Rove

Karl Roves stated goal was to take over and have a majority for 40 years, and I think he used fascist tactics of the culture wars by dehumanizing others and putting down minority's and fear mongering. Alot of deception has gone on during the the Bush years and fear mongering.In history I believe it will be written these were not our best times.

I pray justice comes upon his head.

My Opinion on this Political Board

 

Do y'all remember back in the 2000 campaign how Rove and Bush used the tactic of questioning McCain's patriotism and attacked his time as a POW. Rove did and will always use dirty tactics ... the big LIE is one of the tactics he loves.

 

No thread on fascism would ever be complete without a link to Aaron Russo's film...

America Freedom To Fascism

 

In this instance, I share you opinion completely! :thumbs:

Rove is something alright; I'm surprised Christians applaud his methods.

 

I highly recommend that everyone here watch that film.

Poncho, I also look forward to your compilation later this week regarding how the Bush/Cheney administration (an the Neo-cons in general) compares with the characteristics of fascism you described. I have a busy week coming up, but I may try to chime in with some observations of my own.

 

I have only seen so much hate and innuendo spewed by other forums where the love of Christ was not even a small issue. I ask my fellow Christians to stick to facts and not the spread of rumors. Otherwise all this talk is just down right evil.

 

Bush Is Not a Fascist. Maybe He is a Methodist....

Bush is not a Fascist. He is not even a Baptist. I believe he is of the Methodist faith.

Actually, I wrote that line to get you're attention. Please, those of you who wring your brains out to hold to the theory that Bush was the mastermind behind 9/11, do yourself a favor. Bush did not blow up the towers to get approval to invade Iraq. Your theory on 9/11 is the most ridiculous use of mental gymnastics I've ever heard, and believe me, I've heard a lot of stories from patients that I've counseled over the years.

Give your brains a rest, and accept the fact that the Islamics hate us enough to have planned and implemented this attack.

Pastor Paul:type:

 

I don't see where BB accused Bush of "blowing up the towers" in his statement RD2. He simply made an observation. Hitler used the Reichstag fire to stir up fear, anxiety and nationalistic ferver among the german people while scapegoating communists.

The Bush neocon administration used 9/11 in an eerily similar fashion to stir up anxiety, fear and nationalistic ferver amongst the American people while scapegoating muslims. One doesn't have to be much of a "theorist" to observe what's being done right in front of their nose everyday for the last eight years.

Besides 9/11 was the pretext for a much much larger agenda than just invading Iraq. The real agenda is to control all of Eurasia, Iraq is just one stepping stone to that end but you all would know that if you'd give your own brains a rest and turn off the propaganda boxes and read a few books written by the "policy makers" like Brzezinski.

Sorry y'all my brain is hurting from information overload right now.

 

I agree, the comparisons are eerily similar.

In case folks missed it, I wanted to highlight this part of the quote you posted:

Which leads to your comment..

Indeed. The Agenda of the Neocon produced Project for the New American Century is unfolding before our eyes, and 9/11 (as awful as it was) is being used as the excuse to implement it.

 

"For America, The chief geopolitical prize is Eurasia. For half a millennium, world affairs were dominated by Eurasian powers and peoples who fought with one another for regional domination and reached out for global power. Now a non-Eurasian power is preeminent in Eurasia - and America's global primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively it's preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained." Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard -- PG 30.

"It follows that America's primary interest is to help ensure that no single power comes to control this geopolitical space and that the *global community* has unhindered financial and economic access to it." (p148)

ZB goes on to say..."Geopolitical pluralism will become an enduring reality only when a network of pipline and transportation routes links the region directly to the major centers of global econmic activity via the Mediterranean and Arabian Seas, as well as overland."

He continues on page 149...

"Hence, Russian efforts to monopolize access need to be opposed as inimical to regional stability."

And what have we been hearing in the corporate media about Russia lately?

It's not just the agenda of a few neocons although they've certainly done their part. Trying to frame the debate around the neocons and Iraq imho is to miss the bigger picture and put all the blame on the "cast" while ignoring the "producers".

Anyway here's an update on my headache, er research into Bush/Fascism. As of today I'm still compiling tons of material. Tracking the merger of corporate and government power is imo by far the hardest part and the most time consuming.

I'll probably have to settle for the short version if I'm going to be able to post on it this weekend. But I will try to open the door for anyone who may wish to look into it further.

** Other euphemisms for the "Global Community", "International Community", "New International Order", "New Economic Order", "Global Elite", "Transnational Elite". "Multinational Elite", "International Power Elite", "Autocracy", "Oligarchy", "New World Order"...NWO for short.

 

He didn't say anything about invading Iraq. He talked about continuing the No-Fly zones. And he said it would take a new Pearl Harbor before Americans would support the major expenditures required to rebuild the military after the end of the Cold War.

It was too late at that point. The war had already begun, and the Talibs had already rejected two calls to hand over Bin Laden.

 

It strikes me that this list describes the current Russia much better than the US.

To wit: Russia has nationalized all of it's energy-related companies, and has returned to a centralized economic planning. Nationalism & Militarism? the Russian people are ecstatic over having crushed a neighboring country's tiny armed forces. Information control? The Russian state now almost completely controls the press and entertainment. A Russian comic who made jokes about Putin recently was literally airbrushed out of a show, with only his legs appearing in one scene! Cronyism? Putin and about 6000 former KGB officers now control the country at the national and local levels. Every characteristic that you are applying to Bush and the US government is right there on steroids.

 

That all may be but the question raised in this thread is whether the Bush administration was fascist. Comparing Russia to "the list" sounds like a good topic for another thread though.

 

That same week, Bush had demanded that the Taliban turn over bin Laden. But the Taliban, reported CNN, "refus[ed] to hand over bin Laden without proof or evidence that he was involved in last week's attacks on the United States." The Bush administration, saying "[t]here is already an indictment of Osama bin Laden" [for the attacks in Tanzania, Kenya, and elsewhere]," rejected the demand for evidence with regard to 9/11.11

The task of providing such evidence was taken up by British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who on October 4 made public a document entitled "Responsibility for the Terrorist Atrocities in the United States." Listing "clear conclusions reached by the government," it stated: "Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, the terrorist network which he heads, planned and carried out the atrocities on 11 September 2001."12

Blair's report, however, began by saying: "This document does not purport to provide a prosecutable case against Osama Bin Laden in a court of law." This weakness was noted the next day by the BBC, which said: "There is no direct evidence in the public domain linking Osama Bin Laden to the 11 September attacks. At best the evidence is circumstantial."13

After the US had attacked Afghanistan, a senior Taliban official said: "We have asked for proof of Osama's involvement, but they have refused. Why?"14 The answer to this question may be suggested by the fact that, to this day, the FBI's "Most Wanted Terrorist" webpage on bin Laden, while listing him as wanted for bombings in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, makes no mention of 9/11.15 SOURCE...

Do know what any of this has to do with the topic of the thread.

 

Well, you could say the Bush administration is a horse, and probably find common attributes to bolster your argument. It would be a more useful exercise, for instance, comparing horses to mules and noting similarities. But whatever.

 

Yep. Truthers think that if Bush had allowed Bin Laden to go on trial, it would have proved that Bush was responsible for 9/11.

 

Which said calls would be commendable if 1) he weren't in Pakistan or 2) we were "chasing" him there.

FWIW, I'm not a truther.

 

Well, Bin Laden's escape to Pakistan is described HERE. The rest is just spinning webs.

Not a Truther, only devil's advocate?

 

Um..... Okay. Which justifies inaction regarding Pakistan how? This is like my saying that the police should take in Mr. X and you're responding how he evaded the police before so the situation is somehow, shall we say, resolved?

When the devil is logical, and in this case he is more so than yourself, yes.

Btw, I'll concede that the OP is overreaching. The true criticism is that Bush moved us closer to fascism: he didn't give us actual fascism. My chief complaint with the administration is that they've inspired a tone of optimism with international welfare and frankly that's about as conservative as it is based on precedent.