I was a terrorized cold war child, I was scared all the time of this happening. Now I know that the Soviet Union wasn't any more agressive than NATO and they weren't out to take over the world. I realize there's even more danger from nukes nowadays but at least I have perspective on it now. I realize this whole thing is just senseless hatred and greed.
Just think,this could have happened here in the U.S. just a few days ago from the time of this posting.The Iranians tried to kill the Saudi Diplomat by a terrorist bomb plot.It was thwarted however.But it could have happened and escalated into a major if not a World War.It still might.The only thing stopping it would be the Pee on pussy President we have at this time.YOU ALL KNOW HIS NAME!
@walleyrt69: "Just think,this could have happened here in the U.S. just a few days ago from the time of this posting.The Iranians tried to kill the Saudi Diplomat by a terrorist bomb plot.It was thwarted however.But it could have happened and escalated into a major if not a World War."
No it wouldn't have.And are you suggesting that Obama stopping WWIII would've been a BAD thing?
Americans - I mean U.S.Americans - would be better off if their country fractured into smaller nations as their ancestors fought for in the 1770s. The USSR broke up and so will america one day.
@5thcenturyad well, it did in a way during the civil war, the north and the south. But about 7/8ths of the politicos in office probably have hardly even glimpsed at The Constitution of the United States or the Bill of Rights since they were in school, and that is what is tearing the country apart.
@sr71ablackbird "tearing the country apart"???? Sounds good to me. As i said, the USA is just too big. The ancient Greeks understood this. Democracy only works if the polity is small enough: idealy a population a million or less. Though by ancient Greek standards 1 million was huge.
@5thcenturyad well, that there is a problem, because the United States is NOT a democracy, it's a constitutionally-limited republic, democracy eventually leads to anarchy.
@sr71ablackbird I never suggested that the USA is a true democracy. Democracy is merely an ideal and would only work in an ideal society i.e. a society that is culturally and racially homogenous. I hope that such societies will exist oneday, or maybe I'm just being too optimistic.
@5thcenturyad Democracy: A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic--negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether is be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagoguism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy
@sr71ablackbird: Actually it's both combined: a constitutional democratic republic. Yes, that's right. a DEMOCRATIC republic, not a banana republic(Pinochet's Chile), or a plutocratic republic(like the C.S.A.), but a democratic republic.
@JohnnyDart76 kiddo, you need to do your history more, and NOT just that crap that they teach you in high-school & college textbooks, there is NO such thing as a democratic repbublic, because that completely defeats it's own purpose. They are 2 different forms of government all together. Leave it to public schools to teach you crap like that !!!!
@JohnnyDart76 Article IV Section 4, of the Constitution "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion", the word Democracy is not mentioned in the Constitution at all. Madison warned us of the dangers of democracies with this quote, along with more warnings from others...
@sr71ablackbird: They didn't need to mention democracy directly, it was clearly implied that this was supposed to be a democratic republic(as far as I know, that particular term hadn't been coined yet anyway or it probably would have been used.), in which all citizens could (eventually) participate and not just the gentry or landowners(as was the case in Britain and other nations).
@JohnnyDart76 first of all, you need to find out the difference between a so-called democracy & a constitutionally-limited republic, the difference is between the two is that of night and day. If you get a chance, there is an army training manual that was ordered destroyed right after WWI by FDR, it's called TM-2500 that will clearly show you the difference between a constituionally-limited republic and a so-called `democracy'.
@sr71ablackbird: "you need to find out the difference between a so-called democracy & a constitutionally-limited republic"
The thing you don't seem to get is that it's a constitutionally limited DEMOCRATIC republic. You cannot eliminate one part of the system and claim that it is still intact....I'm sorry, but it's obvious you've been suckered in by rightist propaganda.
@JohnnyDart76 and of course it was NEVER mentioned, because they knew what a `democracy' was, it eventually leads to anarchy. That is why there was NEVER any mention of it because they experienced the same over in england, that is one of the reasons that they moved here to begin with. Kiddo, you really need to start doing you real history more, not just that blatant b/s that they taught you in school.
@JohnnyDart76 "Hence it is that democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and in general have been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths... A republic, by which I mean a government in which a scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect and promises the cure for which we are seeking." James Madison, Federalist Papers No. 10 (1787).
@sr71ablackbird: Let me rephrase the old saying: The unrestrained Republic is a pair of bigger animals dominating smaller ones. Democracy(Liberty cannot truly exist without these values, btw!)is the smaller animals keeping them in check, by force, if necessary(2nd Amendment).
@sr71ablackbird: And think about this. South Africa was a non-democratic republic. But was it free? No. Pinochet's Chile was also a non-democratic republic. But were they free? The answer is no here as well. China, even, is a non-democratic republic, with a 'constitution'(theirs is largely a sham, btw). They, too, have no liberty, as it is instead run by corporations, for corporations, basically.
@sr71ablackbird: And there are probably dozens of other countries, whether in the historical record or the present day, that I could bring up, like Mussolini's Italy, or Cromwell's England, Stalin's Russia, or today's Iran.
Isn't it funny that the non-democratic republics are almost always the ones that are most prone to tyranny?
@JohnnyDart76 first of all, kiddo, you need to know the difference between a so-called `democracy' and a constitutionally-limited republic, when you find that out, get back to me. Hint as to where it's at, TM-2500 published back on 30 November 1928 and shortly after that,ordered destroyed by FDR.
@sr71ablackbird: *Sigh*. Honestly, I don't know whether you're being an asshole and trolling, or if you really are this deluded. Even Wikipedia says it combines the two systems, as it has both terms listed for the United States entry.
@sr71ablackbird: Or, to put it this way: "the United States relies on representative democracy, but [its] system of government is much more complex than that. [It is] not a simple representative democracy, but a constitutional republic in which majority rule is tempered by minority rights protected by law."(Basically, meaning it is both a constitutional republic AND a representative democracy), as quoted from John M. Scheb's 'An Introduction to the Legal System'.
@JohnnyDart76 "God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion . the tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. it is it's natural manure". Thomas Jefferson in a letter to William Smith (1755-1816)
@JohnnyDart76 “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” Thomas Jefferson
@JohnnyDart76 “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” John Adams (start doing you real history, pal !!!! )
@JohnnyDart76 think again pal, you need to start reading the federalist papers, those are historical documents as well. i bet they never taught you that in P.S. did they ? i know that they did not teach me that when i was in there, that was when i was young and naive, i had to learn about the federalist papers myself. so , if not more than half of anything that they teach you in a public school is a blatant lie.
@5thcenturyad WHY DEMOCRACIES FAIL - A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of Government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a Dictatorship.
@Arwrologist I know that, but the original drafters of it did not include it in there because if you look at it carefully, it was signed before they put the Bill of Rights in, that is why whenThomas Jefferson looked at it & so to speeak said, 'hey, there's something wrong here', that's why he indoctrinated it in the first 10 Amendments.
@sr71ablackbird Your correct. Jefferson was screaming for these rights to be included from the beginning. Most said these rights were self evident and need NOT be written down. Thank God Jefferson was relentless in his pursuit to have these rights added. Most of these Rights were already in the Constitutions of the 13 colony's/state's long before the first convention. Have you heard of The Appleseed Project? Watch the featured video on my Channel. & go to RWVA dot ORG Thanks man.
Closing all banks and halting all banking transactions? WHO THE FUCK IS THE PRESIDENT!?!? Even OL' DUBYA wouldn't be that stupid!!! Not only because of the lunacy of that decision, it would bring the US to it's knees in a matter of days. Just print more fucking money!!! Your already bringing the dollar to hyperinflation and eventual collapse anyway.
Wow! Funny that it talks about a banking crisis :-) Not exactly analogus to what happened in 2008-present but this was nevertheless a nice call so many years ago. Didn't predict that the USSR wouldn't be here either but I enjoy this movie in general :-) Thanks for posting this!
i have to ask.. the financial shock of the 30s, was primarily caused by speculators, as well as monopolies and other things.. the shock of the 70s and in particular the South American debt crisis, was caused by, in part, cartels, and in cases the derivatives market, in essence, futures and hedging.. the 2007-8 crisis, was caused by derivative market movements as well.. so i ask.. have we learnt a thing ? NO...
In a situation like this TV wouls still be the primary source of information. The internet is an amazing tool but it's natural to be with your family watching the events unfold on TV.
By the way, this is cool. I just watched another (World War III - The Movie) that was pretty good. Do you know of any more movies like this? Both in style and subject matter (WWIII/USSR invasion of USA/Nuclear War/etc).
The sad thing about seeing movies like this and Special Bulletin is that it shows how far the quality of news reporting has slid. Believe it or not there was a time when REAL reporters reported REAL news and interviewed REAL policy makers(Instead of pundits) without the obvious political bias of Fox News or MSNBC or the whimsy of CNN North America. Ted Koppel wrote an OP-Ed in The Wash. Post(11-21-10) about this.
WOW! Did they ever underestimate the fed's willingness to print money! Listening to a "crisis" over billions of dollars is somewhat quaint in the world of trillion dollar bailouts and trillion dollar "quantitative easing" that we live in!
@mikefan09 If I understand it correctly, calling it "looking glass" (a mirror) refers to its status as a duplicate of Air Force one - it's not the real Air Force One, it's a duplicate, hence the sort of flawed reference to it as a 'mirror image' of the real plane, if you will.
I have always been fascinated by this movie. What would happen if a nuclear war would break out? Still amazing after all these years. Now HBO should release this on DVD if they still have it. I would be amognst the first to get it
@waggeo99 A boatload of people would not "Get" the ending sadly so the DVD will fail but if it is let loose just to online sites as part of catalog of old stuff going out it might happen I guess.
The ending isnt images of nukes going off. To many people who diddnt live in the time of the soviet union dominating headlines. They will find it simply boring sadly.
@pbonney The announcer says it's based off of military war games, so no. Not really. The military is supposed to try to predict certain things, based on the way the trends develop. It's possible that the think tank behind the scenario thought it up, positive it would be a problem for the USA. They still do things like this, only (unfortunately) they don't broadcast it as a series of mock news broadcasts.
@bluevidcam No, "Special Bulletin" was different. It was about the issue of nuclear terrorism with a tugboat loaded with a nuclear bomb in Charleston, S.C.
Man I would hate to have automatic deposit (time 02:57-04:09).
There is something to be said for being payed in cash. All started by the failure of a few countries defaulting on loans to the U.S. in this scenario.
@bulldogger Was "Special Bulletin" the one with the nuclear explosion in like South Carolina? Also thanks for uploading this. I don't know why I find these things so fascinating but I do. They're kind of like artifacts from an alternate history. Can you suggest any more like this (and "Special Bulletin" and "World War III")?
@MiniKirk Special Bulletin took place in Charleston, SC. For other very good WW3 movies, try Day After, Threads, When The Wind Blows, The War Games, and World War III (both the TV movie and the newer foreign version). I personally like Rocket Attack USA. I don't think it as bad as its rep. :) An overlooked one is Panic In Year Zero!. Don't let its horrible name put you off. It's quite a good drama film, despite having a couple early '60s clichés in there.
@DefconWarningSystem Just curious..noticed your comments..have you been into all-things "Nuclear War" (arms, SIOP, simulations, etc..) for most of your life? I am just asking because I have ABSOLUTELY. Quite a few of my friends (all born in the 70s) are the same way. Good movies you mentioned. "Threads" was AWESOME (the attack-warning RED just makes your adrenaline almost intoxicating), Day After was good but too clean and neat, and WWIII with Rock Hudson/David Seoul is really a favorite of mine
I watched this when it was first released on HBO. i am married to a retired AF enlisted guy. We were assigned to a remote AF radar site in the wilds of Minnosota. This is still in the middle of the "cold war" and we were assigned to a place that was our country's first line of defense. I grew up in DC, remember bits and pieces of the Cuban missile crisis. This movie hit to the heart of what my hubby's mission was. Thank you thank ;you! Been looking for this for ages! Still hits home.
Well, admittedly, our current crisis isn't as bad as what is depicted here but, it's still a banking/economic crisis and has been going on for a couple of years now. It wouldn't be a stretch to imagine terrorists taking advantage of it.
500 people could raid a public bank and steal every bit of money in there. A "manual" withdraw. Something close to this may happen. In 10 years or so, Iran and N. Korea (if they hold together) will have ICBM technology capable of reaching the US. This will cause Isreal to freak. Something will happen and a nuke will hit Isreal. It most likely will cascade from there. Putin's russia is turning back into the Soviet Union. He wants the old regime back.
That won't happen for a couple of reasons. Israel will attack Iran on their own BEFORE Iran has the capability to nuke them. Plus, Russia and China see North Korea as a good way of distracting the West. They don't want an actual war between them. If North Korea would actually launch a nuke, Russia and China would have no choice but to sit back and let the US bomb the crap out of North Korea. For all of Russia's bluster, they really don't have the power to go eyeball to eyeball with the US.
@Ragnarok691: I seriously doubt that, tbh. Putin's already out of power, and the election of Obama has really helped to start repairing the U.S.'s reputation worldwide........we may be a bit of a way off, but we still have a chance. And N.K.? They couldn't build a bottle-rocket correctly, much less an ICBM. And then there's Iran. The mullahs may be holding together, but more and more Iranians are REALLY wanting the Islamist bastards OUT of power.
@FTRArchives Yep, the Arab Spring. A wonderfull, overdue development and one the West should keep well out of, unless they WANT our help. Hopefully Obama can restore US relations with Russia back to Reagen-Gorbachev levels, Dubya and Putin pissed their predecessors' hard work away.
You do realize that calling people names achieves nothing? You might be 100% right, everything you say is correct and cannot be disputed but the moment you call somebody names your argument becomes invalid.
I agree, I haven't gotten involved in the discussion, but name calling doesn't win an argument, it just shows frustration and lack of confidence in being able to communicate your thoughts efficiently.
Yeah you're a smart guy, Germany was the aggressor(twice), We didn't engage with Nationally with Spain, however Communist American did, Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, Afghanistan kept Osama Bin laden, Somalia was a humaitarian assist, North Vietnam infiltrated South Vietnam, North Korea Fully invaded South Korea. Now if you want to look at your friends the good ol' Ural Soviet, They invaded a few countries and spread their ideaology, Hungary, Poland, Germany, Poland, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Albania
Oh I wasn't done just yet, Romania, Finland, Georgia, North Korea, North Vietnam, Mozambique, Angola, Ethiopia, China and Japan. Then their were the business partners, Cuba, Nicaragua, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Uganda, Nigeria, India, The Burmese Military Dictatorship and the list goes on and on and on. So the Soviets were never the Aggressors? They were never the instigators? Read up on historical accounts and find out what life was like under Stalin and Lenin.
Germany did intend on Military action against the U.S., In both Wold Wars. The Kaiser wanted the Mexican Military to attack the U.S. Southern Border. Somalia and Korea were UN operations, also North Korea was a communist country attacking a republic, Same in Vietnam. You never heard of the Sino-Soviet Split and Border War of the late 50's?
And you're saying that American involvment varying in reason have nothing to do with the argument because it supports a conclusion you don't like.
You never heard of the Hungarian Revolt, the Prague Revolt the Berlin Crises? The Chinese Invasion of Vietnam in 79?, The Soviet-Afghan War? Or how about countless bush wars in South America and Africa, like the Tanzanian-Ugandan War of 78, the Ecuadorian-Peruvian Wars, the Chaco War, the South African Border War, the Ethiopian-Eritrean War? Were those wars of aggression from one side to another? Is America the only country that ''wages wars of aggression''?
You still do not understand. If your argument is about ho America intervenes in wars that aren't our own, then it's obvious someone else has already started aggression on someone else. If you're not arguing any justifications for actions taken in the past, then what was the point of posting your original comment? And I asked if you realized that Operations after World War 2 almost completely were interoperable with the UN. I suspect you are pro-UN?
Japan declared war on the US first, the Government found out after the attack on pearl,thats a fact,the US never attacked any German ships prier to Germany's declaration of war on the US, the US was sending aid to the British before America entered the war
Have you ever opened a history book? So Adolf Hitler can invade Poland, Denmark, Norway, France, Belguim, Russia, bomb the crap out of England and murder millions and the US is the aggressor how? Please tell me becuase I would love to know. One of the biggest criticisms of the US during WW II is that it didn't act FAST enough! "Appeasment only makes the aggressor more aggressive." ? Have you ever heard that before? I'm guessing not.
The South America defaults = The EU defaults & Saudi Arabia = Syria. GET IT
Thejeter5770 2 weeks ago
turn on captions, go to 9:10
cautionthisissparta 3 weeks ago
Por favor si alguien lo tiene doblado al español o con subtítulos en ese idioma.
lzc987 1 month ago
humanity is fucked.
We have NOTHING positive to look forward to, and its own our goddamn fault.
tradernorton05 1 month ago
3 billion dollars, what a joke, how old is this movie?
mitomke 1 month ago
@mitomke October 14 /1984
lzc987 1 month ago
@mitomke October 14 /1984
lzc987 1 month ago
Wow bank crisis, instability in the middle east. Western interests versus Eastern interests? this show is looking familiar
MrROTD 1 month ago 3
I was a terrorized cold war child, I was scared all the time of this happening. Now I know that the Soviet Union wasn't any more agressive than NATO and they weren't out to take over the world. I realize there's even more danger from nukes nowadays but at least I have perspective on it now. I realize this whole thing is just senseless hatred and greed.
MrROTD 1 month ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Art is imitating life... Except this is going to happen in 2012.
IrenaPrude 2 months ago
Wow...life imitates art...Iran threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz. And where is the real-life USS Nimitz today?
riceboy1701e 2 months ago
@riceboy1701e Real Life USS Nimitz is currently in Bremerton undergoing a refit....
chrismscotland2009 2 months ago
@chrismscotland2009 understood. Roger that.
riceboy1701e 2 weeks ago
"JUST THE WAY IT IS" COMPOSED AND WRITTEN BY NANCY LEE KELLY
A PIANO COMPOSITION TALKING ABOUT "SEA GLASS." THAT'S RIGHT HEAR
TODAY IS THE NEWSROOM REPORTING THE LONG EXTENDED COMPOSITION!
THE PIANIST IS NOT A LOBBIST SHE IS A HOBBIST AND SHE WILL GO WHEREVER
SHE IS NEEDED TO COLLABORTE TO THE "COUNTOWN OF THE LOOKING GLASS."
IN HOPE THAT THE RUMOR OF A COLD WORLD WAR THREE EVENT," THAT'S RIGHT
THAT IS HER FIGHT AND THAT'S WHAT SHE IS FIGHTING FOR! ART, MUSIC AND
LOVE NOT WAR!
mothersbaby1 3 months ago
OMG, the reporter Michael Boyle is a very young Scott Glen
ClearSmashDrop 3 months ago
@ChaosDynamics: Maybe in the '80s. But not now, the Cold War has been over for 20 years now.
JohnnyDart76 3 months ago
this is eerily like prophecy ! Almost to the letter! Just look at the M.E. right NOW !
colliecandle 3 months ago
people!people! You cant fight in here!this is the war room
fardaypu 4 months ago 5
Just think,this could have happened here in the U.S. just a few days ago from the time of this posting.The Iranians tried to kill the Saudi Diplomat by a terrorist bomb plot.It was thwarted however.But it could have happened and escalated into a major if not a World War.It still might.The only thing stopping it would be the Pee on pussy President we have at this time.YOU ALL KNOW HIS NAME!
walleyrt69 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@walleyrt69: "Just think,this could have happened here in the U.S. just a few days ago from the time of this posting.The Iranians tried to kill the Saudi Diplomat by a terrorist bomb plot.It was thwarted however.But it could have happened and escalated into a major if not a World War."
No it wouldn't have.And are you suggesting that Obama stopping WWIII would've been a BAD thing?
JohnnyDart76 3 months ago
..banks closing, leads to money shortage, leads to being unable to afford food. leads to food riots. leads to civil disorder, leads to anarchy.
kurlobe 6 months ago
@kurlobe give or take a few other steps which are more military in nature, , thats basically how it goes for civilian life.
kurlobe 6 months ago
Americans - I mean U.S.Americans - would be better off if their country fractured into smaller nations as their ancestors fought for in the 1770s. The USSR broke up and so will america one day.
5thcenturyad 6 months ago
@5thcenturyad well, it did in a way during the civil war, the north and the south. But about 7/8ths of the politicos in office probably have hardly even glimpsed at The Constitution of the United States or the Bill of Rights since they were in school, and that is what is tearing the country apart.
sr71ablackbird 4 months ago
@sr71ablackbird "tearing the country apart"???? Sounds good to me. As i said, the USA is just too big. The ancient Greeks understood this. Democracy only works if the polity is small enough: idealy a population a million or less. Though by ancient Greek standards 1 million was huge.
5thcenturyad 4 months ago
@5thcenturyad well, that there is a problem, because the United States is NOT a democracy, it's a constitutionally-limited republic, democracy eventually leads to anarchy.
sr71ablackbird 4 months ago
@sr71ablackbird I never suggested that the USA is a true democracy. Democracy is merely an ideal and would only work in an ideal society i.e. a society that is culturally and racially homogenous. I hope that such societies will exist oneday, or maybe I'm just being too optimistic.
5thcenturyad 4 months ago
@5thcenturyad Democracy: A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic--negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether is be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagoguism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy
sr71ablackbird 4 months ago
@sr71ablackbird: Actually it's both combined: a constitutional democratic republic. Yes, that's right. a DEMOCRATIC republic, not a banana republic(Pinochet's Chile), or a plutocratic republic(like the C.S.A.), but a democratic republic.
JohnnyDart76 3 months ago
@JohnnyDart76 kiddo, you need to do your history more, and NOT just that crap that they teach you in high-school & college textbooks, there is NO such thing as a democratic repbublic, because that completely defeats it's own purpose. They are 2 different forms of government all together. Leave it to public schools to teach you crap like that !!!!
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
@sr71ablackbird: I'm afraid the P.S.es got this one right, bubba.
JohnnyDart76 3 months ago
Comment removed
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
@JohnnyDart76 Article IV Section 4, of the Constitution "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion", the word Democracy is not mentioned in the Constitution at all. Madison warned us of the dangers of democracies with this quote, along with more warnings from others...
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
@sr71ablackbird: They didn't need to mention democracy directly, it was clearly implied that this was supposed to be a democratic republic(as far as I know, that particular term hadn't been coined yet anyway or it probably would have been used.), in which all citizens could (eventually) participate and not just the gentry or landowners(as was the case in Britain and other nations).
JohnnyDart76 3 months ago
@JohnnyDart76 first of all, you need to find out the difference between a so-called democracy & a constitutionally-limited republic, the difference is between the two is that of night and day. If you get a chance, there is an army training manual that was ordered destroyed right after WWI by FDR, it's called TM-2500 that will clearly show you the difference between a constituionally-limited republic and a so-called `democracy'.
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
@sr71ablackbird: "you need to find out the difference between a so-called democracy & a constitutionally-limited republic"
The thing you don't seem to get is that it's a constitutionally limited DEMOCRATIC republic. You cannot eliminate one part of the system and claim that it is still intact....I'm sorry, but it's obvious you've been suckered in by rightist propaganda.
JohnnyDart76 3 months ago
Comment removed
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
Comment removed
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JohnnyDart76 and of course it was NEVER mentioned, because they knew what a `democracy' was, it eventually leads to anarchy. That is why there was NEVER any mention of it because they experienced the same over in england, that is one of the reasons that they moved here to begin with. Kiddo, you really need to start doing you real history more, not just that blatant b/s that they taught you in school.
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
@JohnnyDart76 "Hence it is that democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and in general have been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths... A republic, by which I mean a government in which a scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect and promises the cure for which we are seeking." James Madison, Federalist Papers No. 10 (1787).
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
@JohnnyDart76 "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" Ben Franklin
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
@sr71ablackbird: Let me rephrase the old saying: The unrestrained Republic is a pair of bigger animals dominating smaller ones. Democracy(Liberty cannot truly exist without these values, btw!)is the smaller animals keeping them in check, by force, if necessary(2nd Amendment).
JohnnyDart76 3 months ago
@sr71ablackbird: And think about this. South Africa was a non-democratic republic. But was it free? No. Pinochet's Chile was also a non-democratic republic. But were they free? The answer is no here as well. China, even, is a non-democratic republic, with a 'constitution'(theirs is largely a sham, btw). They, too, have no liberty, as it is instead run by corporations, for corporations, basically.
JohnnyDart76 3 months ago
@sr71ablackbird: And there are probably dozens of other countries, whether in the historical record or the present day, that I could bring up, like Mussolini's Italy, or Cromwell's England, Stalin's Russia, or today's Iran.
Isn't it funny that the non-democratic republics are almost always the ones that are most prone to tyranny?
JohnnyDart76 3 months ago
@JohnnyDart76 first of all, kiddo, you need to know the difference between a so-called `democracy' and a constitutionally-limited republic, when you find that out, get back to me. Hint as to where it's at, TM-2500 published back on 30 November 1928 and shortly after that,ordered destroyed by FDR.
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
@sr71ablackbird: *Sigh*. Honestly, I don't know whether you're being an asshole and trolling, or if you really are this deluded. Even Wikipedia says it combines the two systems, as it has both terms listed for the United States entry.
JohnnyDart76 3 months ago
@JohnnyDart76 and you depend on wikipedia for history ? ...lol....
sr71ablackbird 2 months ago
@JohnnyDart76 and you depend on wikipedia for history ? ...lol... if you depend on wikipedia for history, i feel for you pal !!! ..lol..
sr71ablackbird 2 months ago
@sr71ablackbird: Or, to put it this way: "the United States relies on representative democracy, but [its] system of government is much more complex than that. [It is] not a simple representative democracy, but a constitutional republic in which majority rule is tempered by minority rights protected by law."(Basically, meaning it is both a constitutional republic AND a representative democracy), as quoted from John M. Scheb's 'An Introduction to the Legal System'.
JohnnyDart76 3 months ago
@JohnnyDart76 there's also a difference between `legality' and lawfulness, legality consists of paying money.
sr71ablackbird 2 months ago
@sr71ablackbird: I should also mention that no Google search results came up for TM-2500 pertaining to your discussion.......please, try again. =)
JohnnyDart76 3 months ago
@JohnnyDart76 typo there, try the following .... Training Manual No. 2000-25 it's in both .pdf and .rtf format.
sr71ablackbird 2 months ago
Comment removed
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JohnnyDart76 "God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion . the tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. it is it's natural manure". Thomas Jefferson in a letter to William Smith (1755-1816)
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
@JohnnyDart76 “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” Thomas Jefferson
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
@JohnnyDart76 “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” John Adams (start doing you real history, pal !!!! )
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JohnnyDart76 think again pal, you need to start reading the federalist papers, those are historical documents as well. i bet they never taught you that in P.S. did they ? i know that they did not teach me that when i was in there, that was when i was young and naive, i had to learn about the federalist papers myself. so , if not more than half of anything that they teach you in a public school is a blatant lie.
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
@5thcenturyad WHY DEMOCRACIES FAIL - A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of Government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a Dictatorship.
sr71ablackbird 4 months ago
@sr71ablackbird The Bill of Rights IS the Constitution. They are the first 10 Amendments.
Arwrologist 4 months ago
@Arwrologist I know that, but the original drafters of it did not include it in there because if you look at it carefully, it was signed before they put the Bill of Rights in, that is why whenThomas Jefferson looked at it & so to speeak said, 'hey, there's something wrong here', that's why he indoctrinated it in the first 10 Amendments.
sr71ablackbird 3 months ago
@sr71ablackbird Your correct. Jefferson was screaming for these rights to be included from the beginning. Most said these rights were self evident and need NOT be written down. Thank God Jefferson was relentless in his pursuit to have these rights added. Most of these Rights were already in the Constitutions of the 13 colony's/state's long before the first convention. Have you heard of The Appleseed Project? Watch the featured video on my Channel. & go to RWVA dot ORG Thanks man.
Arwrologist 3 months ago
Personally, I would not have picked Scott Glenn because he is to well known of an actor.
rprince418 6 months ago
Closing all banks and halting all banking transactions? WHO THE FUCK IS THE PRESIDENT!?!? Even OL' DUBYA wouldn't be that stupid!!! Not only because of the lunacy of that decision, it would bring the US to it's knees in a matter of days. Just print more fucking money!!! Your already bringing the dollar to hyperinflation and eventual collapse anyway.
RainbowManification 7 months ago
I wanna a parody of this! WOULD MAKE IT FUNNNY! AS FUNNY AS FUNNY CAN FUUNY BE! :) :) SMILES WITH HAPPY HAPPY JOY JOY! :)
jmitterii2 7 months ago
Wow! Funny that it talks about a banking crisis :-) Not exactly analogus to what happened in 2008-present but this was nevertheless a nice call so many years ago. Didn't predict that the USSR wouldn't be here either but I enjoy this movie in general :-) Thanks for posting this!
ChristopherSaindon 8 months ago in playlist Looking Glass
This movie is more like our times than when it was made. Sort of like a look of our future, now our present time,
alifromnm1 8 months ago
i have to ask.. the financial shock of the 30s, was primarily caused by speculators, as well as monopolies and other things.. the shock of the 70s and in particular the South American debt crisis, was caused by, in part, cartels, and in cases the derivatives market, in essence, futures and hedging.. the 2007-8 crisis, was caused by derivative market movements as well.. so i ask.. have we learnt a thing ? NO...
teddythebenny 10 months ago
reminds me 1898..
teddythebenny 10 months ago
Bank crisis - Check
Middle East crisis - Check
We're almost there already.
CynicalVision 11 months ago
@CynicalVision
We will survive and prosper. But there will be bumps along the way!
kellystone84 10 months ago
Wow! This sounds like the world we live today, 2011.
37stepp 11 months ago
@37stepp
War....war never changes.
CynicalVision 11 months ago
and there HAVE been protest ARE ROCKING Oman abeit not a seriusly as Libya,Bahrain,or Yeman
ManTexDal 1 year ago
Scott Glenn. SNAZZY.
eddievhfan1984 1 year ago
ohh, eric severide:(
rip.
i grew up listening to his commentaries and current event.
jen8933 1 year ago
The other interesting thing is that the crisis that starts everything is a banking crisis. Sound familiar?
seethetrain 1 year ago
This one is every bit as good as The Day After or Threads. It's especially scary because back then TV news was the primary source of information.
seethetrain 1 year ago
@seethetrain
In a situation like this TV wouls still be the primary source of information. The internet is an amazing tool but it's natural to be with your family watching the events unfold on TV.
CynicalVision 11 months ago
By the way, this is cool. I just watched another (World War III - The Movie) that was pretty good. Do you know of any more movies like this? Both in style and subject matter (WWIII/USSR invasion of USA/Nuclear War/etc).
MiniKirk 1 year ago
The sad thing about seeing movies like this and Special Bulletin is that it shows how far the quality of news reporting has slid. Believe it or not there was a time when REAL reporters reported REAL news and interviewed REAL policy makers(Instead of pundits) without the obvious political bias of Fox News or MSNBC or the whimsy of CNN North America. Ted Koppel wrote an OP-Ed in The Wash. Post(11-21-10) about this.
airdriver 1 year ago
WOW! Did they ever underestimate the fed's willingness to print money! Listening to a "crisis" over billions of dollars is somewhat quaint in the world of trillion dollar bailouts and trillion dollar "quantitative easing" that we live in!
christo930 1 year ago
why do they call it looking glass? and whose alice? i know someone is coded as alice, the president?
mikefan09 1 year ago
@mikefan09 If I understand it correctly, calling it "looking glass" (a mirror) refers to its status as a duplicate of Air Force one - it's not the real Air Force One, it's a duplicate, hence the sort of flawed reference to it as a 'mirror image' of the real plane, if you will.
jjobie 1 year ago
This is a fracking soap-opera!
aberdown 1 year ago
This is academy award winning compared to The Dawns Early Light.
aberdown 1 year ago
I have always been fascinated by this movie. What would happen if a nuclear war would break out? Still amazing after all these years. Now HBO should release this on DVD if they still have it. I would be amognst the first to get it
waggeo99 1 year ago
@waggeo99 A boatload of people would not "Get" the ending sadly so the DVD will fail but if it is let loose just to online sites as part of catalog of old stuff going out it might happen I guess.
The ending isnt images of nukes going off. To many people who diddnt live in the time of the soviet union dominating headlines. They will find it simply boring sadly.
Zachstar2000 1 year ago
Isn't it ironic that we're facing a form of banking crisis even at this time.
pbonney 1 year ago
@pbonney The announcer says it's based off of military war games, so no. Not really. The military is supposed to try to predict certain things, based on the way the trends develop. It's possible that the think tank behind the scenario thought it up, positive it would be a problem for the USA. They still do things like this, only (unfortunately) they don't broadcast it as a series of mock news broadcasts.
MiniKirk 1 year ago
@bluevidcam No, "Special Bulletin" was different. It was about the issue of nuclear terrorism with a tugboat loaded with a nuclear bomb in Charleston, S.C.
bossbob 1 year ago
@bluevidcam Where can I find that ('Special Bulletin') on YT??
ironhorzmn 1 year ago
Wow! I had NO IDEA that nuclear war could be so boooooring.
RicheBright 1 year ago
This movie is B.S.
Like anyone has ever SMOKED in a BAR.
Gee.
ChristophDollis 1 year ago
Man I would hate to have automatic deposit (time 02:57-04:09).
There is something to be said for being payed in cash. All started by the failure of a few countries defaulting on loans to the U.S. in this scenario.
NickMueh 1 year ago
@NickMueh A bank closure means in and out usually. So I doubt the money would be sent to a closed bank.
Zachstar2000 1 year ago
what a crock south america forms a debtors cartel hahaha ,
plenty2see 1 year ago
@plenty2see You do realise this is a movie, not reality, dont you? Artistic license is granted in the making of movies; or didnt you know that?
ralucagymnast 1 year ago
It's different, but similar.
bulldogger 2 years ago 2
@bulldogger Was "Special Bulletin" the one with the nuclear explosion in like South Carolina? Also thanks for uploading this. I don't know why I find these things so fascinating but I do. They're kind of like artifacts from an alternate history. Can you suggest any more like this (and "Special Bulletin" and "World War III")?
MiniKirk 6 months ago
@MiniKirk Special Bulletin took place in Charleston, SC. For other very good WW3 movies, try Day After, Threads, When The Wind Blows, The War Games, and World War III (both the TV movie and the newer foreign version). I personally like Rocket Attack USA. I don't think it as bad as its rep. :) An overlooked one is Panic In Year Zero!. Don't let its horrible name put you off. It's quite a good drama film, despite having a couple early '60s clichés in there.
DefconWarningSystem 5 months ago
@DefconWarningSystem Just curious..noticed your comments..have you been into all-things "Nuclear War" (arms, SIOP, simulations, etc..) for most of your life? I am just asking because I have ABSOLUTELY. Quite a few of my friends (all born in the 70s) are the same way. Good movies you mentioned. "Threads" was AWESOME (the attack-warning RED just makes your adrenaline almost intoxicating), Day After was good but too clean and neat, and WWIII with Rock Hudson/David Seoul is really a favorite of mine
ChristopherSaindon 5 months ago in playlist Looking Glass
@ChristopherSaindon
> have you been into all-things "Nuclear War" (arms, SIOP, simulations, etc..) for most of your life?
I grew up during the 70's/80's, so nuclear war was always there.
DefconWarningSystem 5 months ago
one of the crazy asides from this is the $ amounts sound so low after all we have gone through.........
3 billion...chump change..........
skybirdbird 2 years ago
That's Patrick Watson
habsmeister09 2 years ago
I watched this when it was first released on HBO. i am married to a retired AF enlisted guy. We were assigned to a remote AF radar site in the wilds of Minnosota. This is still in the middle of the "cold war" and we were assigned to a place that was our country's first line of defense. I grew up in DC, remember bits and pieces of the Cuban missile crisis. This movie hit to the heart of what my hubby's mission was. Thank you thank ;you! Been looking for this for ages! Still hits home.
JTpaintball70 2 years ago
thank you for your husbands service, and to you for being a servicemembers family member...ya'll pay just as much a price as they do.
makthnife 2 years ago
Nice! Scott Glenn at 2:14 ...damn he looks young.
He played Donald Rumsfeld in the film, "W"
SuperOmnicron 2 years ago
Well, admittedly, our current crisis isn't as bad as what is depicted here but, it's still a banking/economic crisis and has been going on for a couple of years now. It wouldn't be a stretch to imagine terrorists taking advantage of it.
PaulUmbarger 2 years ago 2
02:18 - The reporter mentions a banking crisis in the U.S. Kind of creepy that we'd be going through one now.
PaulUmbarger 2 years ago
Indeed it is...perhaps an omen of some sort.
TurgeonFan77132 2 years ago
Btw, it is documented that Eric Sevareid was a strong sympathizer of the Soviet human rights abuses.
geoffck6969 2 years ago
500 people could raid a public bank and steal every bit of money in there. A "manual" withdraw. Something close to this may happen. In 10 years or so, Iran and N. Korea (if they hold together) will have ICBM technology capable of reaching the US. This will cause Isreal to freak. Something will happen and a nuke will hit Isreal. It most likely will cascade from there. Putin's russia is turning back into the Soviet Union. He wants the old regime back.
Ragnarok691 2 years ago
That won't happen for a couple of reasons. Israel will attack Iran on their own BEFORE Iran has the capability to nuke them. Plus, Russia and China see North Korea as a good way of distracting the West. They don't want an actual war between them. If North Korea would actually launch a nuke, Russia and China would have no choice but to sit back and let the US bomb the crap out of North Korea. For all of Russia's bluster, they really don't have the power to go eyeball to eyeball with the US.
scudFDL 2 years ago 3
@Ragnarok691: I seriously doubt that, tbh. Putin's already out of power, and the election of Obama has really helped to start repairing the U.S.'s reputation worldwide........we may be a bit of a way off, but we still have a chance. And N.K.? They couldn't build a bottle-rocket correctly, much less an ICBM. And then there's Iran. The mullahs may be holding together, but more and more Iranians are REALLY wanting the Islamist bastards OUT of power.
FTRArchives 10 months ago
@FTRArchives Yep, the Arab Spring. A wonderfull, overdue development and one the West should keep well out of, unless they WANT our help. Hopefully Obama can restore US relations with Russia back to Reagen-Gorbachev levels, Dubya and Putin pissed their predecessors' hard work away.
richievegas01 10 months ago
No problem.
bulldogger 2 years ago
Nope, he died in 1992.
johnnyafairbanks 2 years ago
You do realize that calling people names achieves nothing? You might be 100% right, everything you say is correct and cannot be disputed but the moment you call somebody names your argument becomes invalid.
Just friendly suggestion.
dreed100 2 years ago 10
I agree, I haven't gotten involved in the discussion, but name calling doesn't win an argument, it just shows frustration and lack of confidence in being able to communicate your thoughts efficiently.
bulldogger 2 years ago 2
It'd be redundant to call you a jingoist.
scottkarana 2 years ago
Ever hear of the "Western Betrayal"? We didn't exactly leave many Eastern European countries with any choice but living under the heel of the Reds.
scottkarana 2 years ago
When was USA NOT an aggressor?
Iraq
Afghanistan
Somalia
Iraq
Vietnam
Korea
Germany (twice)
Spain
I guess besides Japan during WWII USA was always an aggressor (whether for good cause or not is not the point) attacking others first.
dreed100 2 years ago
Yeah you're a smart guy, Germany was the aggressor(twice), We didn't engage with Nationally with Spain, however Communist American did, Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, Afghanistan kept Osama Bin laden, Somalia was a humaitarian assist, North Vietnam infiltrated South Vietnam, North Korea Fully invaded South Korea. Now if you want to look at your friends the good ol' Ural Soviet, They invaded a few countries and spread their ideaology, Hungary, Poland, Germany, Poland, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Albania
usmm05 2 years ago
Oh I wasn't done just yet, Romania, Finland, Georgia, North Korea, North Vietnam, Mozambique, Angola, Ethiopia, China and Japan. Then their were the business partners, Cuba, Nicaragua, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Uganda, Nigeria, India, The Burmese Military Dictatorship and the list goes on and on and on. So the Soviets were never the Aggressors? They were never the instigators? Read up on historical accounts and find out what life was like under Stalin and Lenin.
usmm05 2 years ago
Read my post. I don't discuss reason but mention the fact that most of the time USA was the one who attacked first.
Germany did not want war with America.
Somalia? Internal struggle. USA aggressor.
Vietnam, Korea: internal conflict, USA gets involved THEN Soviet and Chinese get involved directly.
Fact is: USA is the aggressor in practically every conflict they were in. Whether it was to protect allied nations, to send humanitarian help.
matters not in this argument.
This is the fact.
dreed100 2 years ago
Germany did intend on Military action against the U.S., In both Wold Wars. The Kaiser wanted the Mexican Military to attack the U.S. Southern Border. Somalia and Korea were UN operations, also North Korea was a communist country attacking a republic, Same in Vietnam. You never heard of the Sino-Soviet Split and Border War of the late 50's?
And you're saying that American involvment varying in reason have nothing to do with the argument because it supports a conclusion you don't like.
usmm05 2 years ago
You never heard of the Hungarian Revolt, the Prague Revolt the Berlin Crises? The Chinese Invasion of Vietnam in 79?, The Soviet-Afghan War? Or how about countless bush wars in South America and Africa, like the Tanzanian-Ugandan War of 78, the Ecuadorian-Peruvian Wars, the Chaco War, the South African Border War, the Ethiopian-Eritrean War? Were those wars of aggression from one side to another? Is America the only country that ''wages wars of aggression''?
usmm05 2 years ago
Man. You still don't understand.
Def. of aggressor: "One who starts a hostile action"
USA attacked almost always first. Meaning: it was the aggressor so geoffck1969 should not be surprised that USA was portrayed in such way.
I have never said that America is the only country that 'wages wars of aggression' nor I discussed the reasons behind USA aggressions.
dreed100 2 years ago
You still do not understand. If your argument is about ho America intervenes in wars that aren't our own, then it's obvious someone else has already started aggression on someone else. If you're not arguing any justifications for actions taken in the past, then what was the point of posting your original comment? And I asked if you realized that Operations after World War 2 almost completely were interoperable with the UN. I suspect you are pro-UN?
usmm05 2 years ago
Going to battle in the name of righteousness is not "aggression" sir.
geoffck6969 2 years ago
then i recommend checking a dictionary for what term 'aggression' means
dreed100 2 years ago
germany declared war on the us on 12-8-41. there is your fact.
gjelpd001 2 years ago 2
yes. and you declared war on japan first.
yet: japan was the aggressor not you
and same goes for Germany.
USA had been attacking German ships and supporting its enemies for long time.
this is your fact.
dreed100 2 years ago
Japan declared war on the US first, the Government found out after the attack on pearl,thats a fact,the US never attacked any German ships prier to Germany's declaration of war on the US, the US was sending aid to the British before America entered the war
GOODFELLAS74 2 years ago
Have you ever opened a history book? So Adolf Hitler can invade Poland, Denmark, Norway, France, Belguim, Russia, bomb the crap out of England and murder millions and the US is the aggressor how? Please tell me becuase I would love to know. One of the biggest criticisms of the US during WW II is that it didn't act FAST enough! "Appeasment only makes the aggressor more aggressive." ? Have you ever heard that before? I'm guessing not.
scudFDL 2 years ago 20
@scudFDL You can act 2 times too slow, but you can also act 100.000 times too strong an 100 times too fast. Hence the criticism.
krbosak 7 months ago
you left off Grenada
and Nicaragua
ManTexDal 1 year ago
thanks for putting this vid on
I was hoping someone would do it...
THANK YOU
MuzixMon2 3 years ago
$3 *billion* is a "bank crisis"? Wow. We should be so lucky today if our banking crisis was that small.
snidelywhiplash 3 years ago 2
Yeah a whole THREE banks failed!!! Compared to what, about fifty now? Three billion dollars is peanuts with what we're facing now!
scudFDL 2 years ago