Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Slagle who wrote (64809)	6/9/2005 3:45:13 PM
From: Joe S Pack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

I think this orderly and peaceful place notion of your depends on what color you were wearing on your skin. Your portrayal of extreme social upheaval by itself is extreme. Of course with the current mood of sheeple in US, watergate looks like a trivial one. Current crooks (I mean republicrates) are much more corrupt and diabolical than Nixon and such events now will not be given any space on these corporate controlled so called "free press". >>>>> elmatador, Re: "Deep Throat" I think I can explain the Nixon enigma as I see it in a paragraph or two. Nixon wasn't some monster, crook or extremist as his distractors have tried to claim. To understand Nixon a person really needs to have been a college student here in the 1960's. It was wild and this place was literally coming apart at the seams as out of control students rioted and burned down dormitories and planted bombs in classrooms. The Blacks in the big cities, Detroit, Philly, LA rioted, shot policemen and burned down whole neighborhoods. You had a "youth rebellion" with rampant drug use that was very much greater than the cocaine epidemic that came later. The main reason that things got so badly out of control is that New Deal judges and legislation took the power away from the local police and courts and nothing was established to replace it. Before these New Deal era innovations if a riot broke out the police would simply shoot the ringleaders and disperse those who survived. The courts would rule in favor of the police and that would be the end of the matter. The US was a very peaceful and orderly place. But by the 1960's all this had changed and a person could get away with almost anything. Organize a big riot and the local police were powerless to stop it. The nations elders were in a state of shock at all of this by 1968 and Nixon was elected on a "law and order" platform. But Nixon couldn't do anything about it either and his approach was to go after the root of the problem which he accurately identified as being the hard left anti-war elements of the Democrat party. Hence all the illegal spying and break-ins, conducted by his henchmen and without his knowledge for the most part. Nixon, in other words, was driven by all the riots and civil disorder to go to extremes and this led to his downfall. The New Deal practice that allowed all sorts of criminal behavior has been reversed. Now, if a person starts a riot and any damage is done then he will spend the rest of his days working to pay for the damage caused by the riot he started. Now, if a person organizes a peaceful "protest march" and any one of the marchers gets out of hand and destroys something the organizer will be held responsible for the damage. Not as effective as the old method of just shooting the ringleaders but it works. Slagle <<<<<