joeblast Posted July 19, 2019 (edited) 14 hours ago, Trunk said: You’re parsing my sentence incorrectly. For clarity, Separated the phrases and bolded the portions that apply to (many of) his followers. The many ”feeble minded chumps/devotees” are his “willfully blind” followers. We've told you time and again how you begin everything with the narrative put forth by traitors, and since you refuse to accept that truth, that means every single assessment you have about anything related to any of this is going to be skewed like a funhouse mirror. 14 hours ago, ralis said: Wrong! The other member suggests that Trump has defeated the FBI and CIA, is advocating an overthrow of a major branch of government. That is not Trump's job to destroy the government. What part of what I wrote don't you understand? Wow, now the CIA & FBI are "major branches of the government" Perhaps after that English lesson, you can join us for a civics lesson? 14 hours ago, C T said: I doubt he defeated anything other than some of his supporters' ability to know right from wrong before he came onto the scene. Have to give it to the guy for his knack of muddying the swamp and then act all saviour-like, as if on a vital mission that nobody before him dared assume. That'll keep the rest of his crew busy for a while i guess.... And now a large swathe of his base hopped on the crusade against imagined entities that he daily reminds these people are responsible for all their plight and past misfortunes. Say it often enough and some of it bound to stick. That storyline definitely sells. If he's a businessman, thats 2/5 thinking. Even my young nephew knows that ploy well. "Nobody before him dared assume" - well, the last President to challenge the CIA was shot a few times during a limo ride! Its irony seeing people swayed by ciaMSM propaganda talk about folks' ability to tell right from wrong. Hehehe....imagined entities...keep that popcorn handy, CT 14 hours ago, ralis said: That is an insult/ad hominem. Further, with the extremists that post here and online, I never will give the benefit of the doubt or read between the lines. You write it and are responsible for the content. Words matter! Describing your behavior is not necessarily an ad hominem attack, especially when its just talking about the tactic you use every time your mindset programming has backed you into a corner. (hint: that's also NOT an ad hominem. it would be if I followed it up with somehthing like, "ya jackass!" get it? maybe you need engrish resson too?) 12 hours ago, Trunk said: Spoiler Wow. I think I’ve found a post where I actually *partly* agree with you! I think that most of your assessments of the Dems are off, but we do share some overlapping criticisms of the left. I do think *some* of the Dems are going too far left with some of their approaches to health care and student debt reduction. Not politically viable in this country and only weakens their cause, easy to mischaracterize, is political suicide. I think that the Dems want sensible immigration reform, that doesn’t fit into a simple chant (“build the wall”). I think that the “open border” is a false criticism of Dems. I do think that the Dems should focus more on the economy (Obama did *very* well in rescuing the economy) and campaign finance reform (and some other areas of concern re: cleaning up politics, such as gerrymandering, etc). The earth’s ecosystems are being destroyed from every angle and means. We’re headed towards global environmental dystopia for all foreseeable future generations. The GOP uniformly ignores the problems and speeds the destruction. Dems respect science and want to do many things about it. Unfortunately, the current GOP has followed their leader into an asylum. It’s not the GOP anymore; it’s just a cult, plain and simple. Turns out that a lot of people respond at the level of the National Enquirer, and that’s where djt lives. ... and so it goes. And the masses have not sufficiently learned from history maybe the most elementary lesson: avoid having an egomaniac with violent tendencies run a powerful country. P.s. And what we REALLY need are two (or more) healthy functional parties that can agree on basic facts, communicate and compromise for the better of the whole. We are FAR from a healthy democracy, both in terms of politicians and the national populace. "Can agree on basic facts" becomes a problem when we have a collection of entities proven to pervert and subvert everything they touch having poisoned the well of public knowledge to the point where YOU cant even tell what's real or fake - mission accomplished, CIA.... 11 hours ago, Aetherous said: I think there might be a looming economic crisis around this issue, so it becomes a bigger deal than simply being about handouts. Back to the root of the problem - and I pointed this out in the facebook thread but I'll point it out here too 53 minutes ago, joeblast said: Quote According to Reuters, French finance minister Bruno Le Maire told a news conference on July 18 that the G7 “cannot accept private companies issuing their own currencies without democratic control.” Which is a supreme irony, because CENTRAL BANKS ARE PRIVATE COMPANIES ISSUING THEIR OWN CURRENCIES WITHOUT DEMOCRATIC CONTROL ROTHSCHILD OWNED & CONTROLLED BANKS: Afghanistan: Bank of Afghanistan Albania: Bank of Albania Algeria: Bank of Algeria Argentina: Central Bank of Argentina Armenia: Central Bank of Armenia Aruba: Central Bank of Aruba Australia: Reserve Bank of Australia Austria: Austrian National Bank Azerbaijan: Central Bank of Azerbaijan Republic Bahamas: Central Bank of The Bahamas Bahrain: Central Bank of Bahrain Bangladesh: Bangladesh Bank Barbados: Central Bank of Barbados Belarus: National Bank of the Republic of Belarus Belgium: National Bank of Belgium Belize: Central Bank of Belize Benin: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO) Bermuda: Bermuda Monetary Authority Bhutan: Royal Monetary Authority of Bhutan Bolivia: Central Bank of Bolivia Bosnia: Central Bank of Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana: Bank of Botswana Brazil: Central Bank of Brazil Bulgaria: Bulgarian National Bank Burkina Faso: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO) Burundi: Bank of the Republic of Burundi Cambodia: National Bank of Cambodia Came Roon: Bank of Central African States Canada: Bank of Canada – Banque du Canada Cayman Islands: Cayman Islands Monetary Authority Central African Republic: Bank of Central African States Chad: Bank of Central African States Chile: Central Bank of Chile China: The People’s Bank of China Colombia: Bank of the Republic Comoros: Central Bank of Comoros Congo: Bank of Central African States Costa Rica: Central Bank of Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO) Croatia: Croatian National Bank Cuba: Central Bank of Cuba Cyprus: Central Bank of Cyprus Czech Republic: Czech National Bank Denmark: National Bank of Denmark Dominican Republic: Central Bank of the Dominican Republic East Caribbean area: Eastern Caribbean Central Bank Ecuador: Central Bank of Ecuador Egypt: Central Bank of Egypt El Salvador: Central Reserve Bank of El Salvador Equatorial Guinea: Bank of Central African States Estonia: Bank of Estonia Ethiopia: National Bank of Ethiopia European Union: European Central Bank Fiji: Reserve Bank of Fiji Finland: Bank of Finland France: Bank of France Gabon: Bank of Central African States The Gambia: Central Bank of The Gambia Georgia: National Bank of Georgia Germany: Deutsche Bundesbank Ghana: Bank of Ghana Greece: Bank of Greece Guatemala: Bank of Guatemala Guinea Bissau: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO) Guyana: Bank of Guyana Haiti: Central Bank of Haiti Honduras: Central Bank of Honduras Hong Kong: Hong Kong Monetary Authority Hungary: Magyar Nemzeti Bank Iceland: Central Bank of Iceland India: Reserve Bank of India Indonesia: Bank Indonesia Iran: The Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran Iraq: Central Bank of Iraq Ireland: Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland Israel: Bank of Israel Italy: Bank of Italy Jamaica: Bank of Jamaica Japan: Bank of Japan Jordan: Central Bank of Jordan Kazakhstan: National Bank of Kazakhstan Kenya: Central Bank of Kenya Korea: Bank of Korea Kuwait: Central Bank of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan: National Bank of the Kyrgyz Republic Latvia: Bank of Latvia Lebanon: Central Bank of Lebanon Lesotho: Central Bank of Lesotho Libya: Central Bank of Libya (Their most recent conquest) Uruguay: Central Bank of Uruguay Lithuania: Bank of Lithuania Luxembourg: Central Bank of Luxembourg Macao: Monetary Authority of Macao Macedonia: National Bank of the Republic of Macedonia Madagascar: Central Bank of Madagascar Malawi: Reserve Bank of Malawi Malaysia: Central Bank of Malaysia Mali: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO) Malta: Central Bank of Malta Mauritius: Bank of Mauritius Mexico: Bank of Mexico Moldova: National Bank of Moldova Mongolia: Bank of Mongolia Montenegro: Central Bank of Montenegro Morocco: Bank of Morocco Mozambique: Bank of Mozambique Namibia: Bank of Namibia Nepal: Central Bank of Nepal Netherlands: Netherlands Bank Netherlands Antilles: Bank of the Netherlands Antilles New Zealand: Reserve Bank of New Zealand Nicaragua: Central Bank of Nicaragua Niger: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO) Nigeria: Central Bank of Nigeria Norway: Central Bank of Norway Oman: Central Bank of Oman Pakistan: State Bank of Pakistan Papua New Guinea: Bank of Papua New Guinea Paraguay: Central Bank of Paraguay Peru: Central Reserve Bank of Peru Philip Pines: Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Poland: National Bank of Poland Portugal: Bank of Portugal Qatar: Qatar Central Bank Romania: National Bank of Romania Russia: Central Bank of Russia Rwanda: National Bank of Rwanda San Marino: Central Bank of the Republic of San Marino Samoa: Central Bank of Samoa Saudi Arabia: Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency Senegal: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO) Serbia: National Bank of Serbia Seychelles: Central Bank of Seychelles Sierra Leone: Bank of Sierra Leone Singapore: Monetary Authority of Singapore Slovakia: National Bank of Slovakia Slovenia: Bank of Slovenia Solomon Islands: Central Bank of Solomon Islands South Africa: South African Reserve Bank Spain: Bank of Spain Sri Lanka: Central Bank of Sri Lanka Sudan: Bank of Sudan Surinam: Central Bank of Suriname Swaziland: The Central Bank of Swaziland Sweden: Sveriges Riksbank Switzerland: Swiss National Bank Tajikistan: National Bank of Tajikistan Tanzania: Bank of Tanzania Thailand: Bank of Thailand Togo: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO) Tonga: National Reserve Bank of Tonga Trinidad and Tobago: Central Bank of Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia: Central Bank of Tunisia Turkey: Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey Uganda: Bank of Uganda Ukraine: National Bank of Ukraine United Arab Emirates: Central Bank of United Arab Emirates United Kingdom: Bank of England United States: Federal Reserve, Federal Reserve Bank of New York Vanuatu: Reserve Bank of Vanuatu Venezuela: Central Bank of Venezuela Vietnam: The State Bank of Vietnam Yemen: Central Bank of Yemen Zambia: Bank of Zambia Zimbabwe: Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Does ANYONE here want to attempt to make the argument that this is not a problem for THE ENTIRE WORLD? since I should perhaps spell it out, much of the money used to commit the atrocities was because the central banks own the currency and have inserted their agents into various parts of the great machine, be they in Intelligence, Legislature, Bureaucracy, Judgeship, Executive, in the Corporate world, the Media, Academia... ...ALL of these phenomena (perversions) are outflows of banksterism. These trivial matters about who Trump is trolling are just that - absolutely 100% trivial bullshit. The good guys, with a real leader, are getting it done, and this is why all of the various owned parts of various apparatuses are all shrieking in unison, to try and turn the public against the crew that is the end of their traitorous, monstrous acts. These people have been subverting humanity for a long time, and they have failed to secure their stranglehold upon the people of the Earth But I guess a bunch of yous can catch up with reality once its all over the news, what some of the various parts were actually up to - once your appeals to incredulity can no longer stand up next to reality's headlines. Once you can no longer deny that the clinton foundation was participating in human trafficking, I'm sure you'll perhaps maybe have just a tiny bit softer of a heart towards Trump, because you just couldnt bring yourselves to believe people would be that evil and do such things. Who knows if they'll make Hillary participating in ritual murders public, though. (oh yes she did!) (and what do you think is in the pour for the tunnels in Epstein's Island...maybe go look up Cemex's "coagulant" patent for strengthening concrete...yes cemex was linked to the clinton foundation...and the clinton global initiative was basically the blackmail initiative as its esoteric aim, upgrading the Epstein model! oof...all 100% true....wait until there's just no way it can be denied, lol....now go refer to Trump's dec 2017 executive order about serious human rights abuses and corruption and correlate that to el chapo losing his fortune....) Edited July 19, 2019 by joeblast 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted July 19, 2019 (edited) but of course I didnt post that twice, lol. Edited July 19, 2019 by joeblast 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted July 19, 2019 16 hours ago, Jetsun said: So is anyone who believes in common decency and some level of morality a member of "the left" now? I thought those values are meant to be the the backbone of the Republican Party? Looks like everything has gone backwards or upside down I would agree, and have heard even pundits say this. But as I don't follow strict political ideology, I just read what others say about such things. 15 hours ago, Jetsun said: I'm saying that the Republican Party have sold their soul , they have given up even any attempt at maintaining any principal for a bit of power Also that there is so little room for nuiance that if anyone stands up for basic morality a large proportion of people immediately label them leftist. Not sure the first part is really true. They were a sinking ship 6-8 years ago and looking like they would drift away further... Now it the Dems scrambling to show their soul. I think that is always going to be the ebb and flow of party survival and identity. The second part also seems a little off. Morality is on both sides. It is maybe how one attempts to interject that into their position of power or is it just rhetoric. I think the left is in overdrive while the right can afford to bit (or wag) their tongue. I think it reverses when the opposite party is in power. We'll likely see the right appear in moral over-drive at some time in the future. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted July 19, 2019 14 hours ago, Trunk said: I do think *some* of the Dems are going too far left with some of their approaches to health care and student debt reduction. Not politically viable in this country and only weakens their cause, easy to mischaracterize, is political suicide. I agree and likely the right is using the gang of four as the 'face' of the left and that is a big characterization but a political ploy. I think Pelosi has done a decent job of trying to keep this ship from rocking too much but wonder if the timing of primaries was just bad timing to get unity underfoot. 14 hours ago, Trunk said: I think that the Dems want sensible immigration reform, that doesn’t fit into a simple chant (“build the wall”). I think that the “open border” is a false criticism of Dems. I do think that the Dems should focus more on the economy (Obama did *very* well in rescuing the economy) and campaign finance reform (and some other areas of concern re: cleaning up politics, such as gerrymandering, etc). I would agree on first half and the Dems have voted the last 20 years to improve immigration reform; they just don't want it to appear like Trump did it. They should focus on the economy and well-being issues but hard to poke holes at some of the success going on. Even healthcare is a hard issue for them right now. Biden is talking Obamacare 2.0 where you can keep your doctor... that was the lie of the century and a huge black eye on the whole idea... They need something viable and digestible. I'd work on solutions for the poorest, which I think Obamacare should of started out as... and then expanded. Not sure about O and the economy; most seem better off now. Campaign finance reform. No idea what he did... but he got slapped with the largest campaign finance violation in history. That aside, maybe he did something good overall. 14 hours ago, Trunk said: The earth’s ecosystems are being destroyed from every angle and means. We’re headed towards global environmental dystopia for all foreseeable future generations. The GOP uniformly ignores the problems and speeds the destruction. Dems respect science and want to do many things about it. Do you seriously think man is going to reverse nature? We've been through cooling and warming for millions of years... and it will likely cycle regardless of man. Whether it happens in 1,000 years or 5,000 years doesn't seem to much matter in some way. I think some of the above exaggerates things but I get the points. 14 hours ago, Trunk said: Unfortunately, the current GOP has followed their leader into an asylum. It’s not the GOP anymore; it’s just a cult, plain and simple. Turns out that a lot of people respond at the level of the National Enquirer, and that’s where djt lives. ... and so it goes. And the masses have not sufficiently learned from history maybe the most elementary lesson: avoid having an egomaniac with violent tendencies run a powerful country. P.s. And what we REALLY need are two (or more) healthy functional parties that can agree on basic facts, communicate and compromise for the better of the whole. We are FAR from a healthy democracy, both in terms of politicians and the national populace. Some of the same could be said of the left... Plenty of issues on both sides. This is just a blimp in history that folks will forget in about 5-10 years. But completely agree on functional party stuff. I think both sides are trying to figure that out, whether that seems obvious or not. They need a 5-10 year plan and vision. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted July 19, 2019 (edited) "This is just a blimp in history that folks will forget in about 5-10 years. " Don't really agree with this. There seems to be a fundamental shift in the way that some want the nation to move to and operate from. For example you mentioned Obamacare. It was always about a single-payer system which is why it was designed to fail from the beginning, allowing for the solution to be single payer. Those on the left talk about identity politics and splitting the nation up in two different factions. Alinsky 101 this is exactly what they're doing now and have done in the past administration. It also exposes a deep flaw in the system of how the u.s. is run whereby those from within can actually unserp and corrupt the system. This is done with the full knowledge and complicitness of the mainstream media which is build supposedly as the watchdog for the people. Hopefully the IG report comes out soon, and people are held accountable becomeing subject to the rule of law. If this doesn't happen all I can say is that the US had a good run and was a great idea while it lasted. Most of the rhetoric by those who are called progressives or the left seems to be always about what others can do, not about what they can do. Somehow forgetting "And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country." Edited July 19, 2019 by windwalker 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted July 19, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, dawei said: I agree and likely the right is using the gang of four as the 'face' of the left and that is a big characterization but a political ploy. I think Pelosi has done a decent job of trying to keep this ship from rocking too much but wonder if the timing of primaries was just bad timing to get unity underfoot. I would agree on first half and the Dems have voted the last 20 years to improve immigration reform; they just don't want it to appear like Trump did it. They should focus on the economy and well-being issues but hard to poke holes at some of the success going on. Even healthcare is a hard issue for them right now. Biden is talking Obamacare 2.0 where you can keep your doctor... that was the lie of the century and a huge black eye on the whole idea... They need something viable and digestible. I'd work on solutions for the poorest, which I think Obamacare should of started out as... and then expanded. Not sure about O and the economy; most seem better off now. Campaign finance reform. No idea what he did... but he got slapped with the largest campaign finance violation in history. That aside, maybe he did something good overall. Do you seriously think man is going to reverse nature? We've been through cooling and warming for millions of years... and it will likely cycle regardless of man. Whether it happens in 1,000 years or 5,000 years doesn't seem to much matter in some way. I think some of the above exaggerates things but I get the points. Some of the same could be said of the left... Plenty of issues on both sides. This is just a blimp in history that folks will forget in about 5-10 years. But completely agree on functional party stuff. I think both sides are trying to figure that out, whether that seems obvious or not. They need a 5-10 year plan and vision. Frank Luntz PhD is the political operative propagandist that changed AGW to climate change. Luntz uses focus groups to manipulate public opinion. I won't belabor the point at this time, but it is imperative to understand language and the effect on the mind. Words matter! https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000Q9J0K6/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i0 Edited July 19, 2019 by ralis 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted July 19, 2019 1 hour ago, windwalker said: "This is just a blimp in history that folks will forget in about 5-10 years. " Don't really agree with this. There seems to be a fundamental shift in the way that some want the nation to move to and operate from. For example you mentioned Obamacare. It was always about a single-payer system which is why it was designed to fail from the beginning, allowing for the solution to be single payer. Those on the left talk about identity politics and splitting the nation up in two different factions. Alinsky 101 this is exactly what they're doing now and have done in the past administration. It also exposes a deep flaw in the system of how the u.s. is run whereby those from within can actually unserp and corrupt the system. This is done with the full knowledge and complicitness of the mainstream media which is build supposedly as the watchdog for the people. Hopefully the IG report comes out soon, and people are held accountable becomeing subject to the rule of law. If this doesn't happen all I can say is that the US had a good run and was a great idea while it lasted. Most of the rhetoric by those who are called progressives or the left seems to be always about what others can do, not about what they can do. Somehow forgetting "And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country." I meant they will forget the insanity they called Trump (or the deranged syndrome). I think Trump is creating a shift in a direction we should let play out and even pursue those things that are working. I suspect the RNC will try to eventually get back to their base approach but would be smart to consider what to adopt from the shift as their own on some level. They were somewhat saved from oblivion (if not just in the short run but they own where they are in the long run). I think the Dems are more so at that cross-road and the next election cycle will show where they are heading. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted July 19, 2019 50 minutes ago, ralis said: Frank Luntz PhD is the political operative propagandist that changed AGW to climate change. Luntz uses focus groups to manipulate public opinion. I won't belabor the point at this time, but it is imperative to understand language and the effect on the mind. Words matter! https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000Q9J0K6/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i0 thanks for that video... it was short enough that I did watch it. I didn't know him nor his ideas. Maybe he tried to manipulate public opinion but not sure who he actually reached. There is a climate change thread so hesitant to write too much (maybe it gets moved if we continue)... I don't doubt climate change; it has changed before man and will after man. That life contributes to climate change should be a given too, it is inevitable part of the system. Industrialization and modernization will influence life in various ways. I don't doubt that. So influences and changes are a given. What I am personally unsure of is, whether the system can adopt and accept this in such a way that it is not purely a life driven problem of irreversible proportion. If the system alone can cause warming and cooling, then the system is already known to be irreversible. The question I am left with is: Will the system in some way try to reverse the life influences to maintain its own system equilibrium (which is sometimes in a direction of warming or cooling) or is the life influence stronger than the system. I think there are things that can be done and should be done in regards to our influences and some happen despite the rhetoric that we are not helping it... Coal comes to mind. Recently also saw that the gas emissions standards were relaxed a bit so car manufacturers don't have to hit certain levels too quickly. I'm ok with that. The US is #2 contributor of CO2 but China, India and Japan are on a faster increase over the decades. Asia really needs to step up. But they tend to make 50 year plans. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted July 19, 2019 (edited) Edited July 19, 2019 by windwalker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted July 19, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, dawei said: The US is #2 contributor of CO2 but China, India and Japan are on a faster increase over the decades. Asia really needs to step up. But they tend to make 50 year plans. Disagree, No one is going to get the developing countries to limit anything they feel they need in order to develop. If it is, as in the rainforest some reparations will be paid which is still no guarantee for those living there doing what they need to do to live. They will still cut down and clear the land for farming . As tech gets better, and populations reduce any change induced will tend to be mitigated by those factors.... Asia, will take care of their own as it affects them and is in their interest to do so. Some may forget the "one child policy" Ever wonder why, and where did this policy came from....hint, hint...it wasn't China... note the unintended results of it.. mostly bad... so nope, don't think they'll be in the mood for stepping up as some seem to feel they need to do... Edited July 19, 2019 by windwalker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted July 19, 2019 19 minutes ago, windwalker said: Disagree, No one is going to get the developing countries to limit anything they feel they need in order to develop. If it is, as in the rainforest some reparations will be paid which is still no guarantee for those living there doing what they need to do to live. They will still cut down and clear the land for farming . As tech gets better, and populations reduce any change induced will tend to be mitigated by those factors.... Asia, will take care of their own as it affects them and is in their interest to do so. Some may forget the "one child policy" Ever wonder why, and where did this policy came from....hint, hint...it wasn't China... note the unintended results of it.. mostly bad... so nope, don't think they'll be in the mood for stepping up as some seem to feel they need to do... By saying they need to step up doesn't mean they will. It means one can point their fingers at the US all they want but in the Top 5-6 are countries whose habits may out-do any good the US can do. So I see calls for the US to go radically green as not really a great global solution. The international community will likely need to put pressure on Asia to be part of improvements. Time will tell. One child policy... this ? I would agree many bad outcomes... but Japan is naturally following as their birth rate falls to historic lows... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted July 19, 2019 10 minutes ago, dawei said: One child policy... this ? Quote In 1978, on his first visit to the West, Song Jian, a mathematician employed in calculating the trajectories of missiles, sat down for a beer with a Dutch professor, Geert Jan Olsder, at the Seventh Triennnial World Congress of the International Federation of Automatic Control in Helsinki to discuss “control theory”. Olsder told Song about the book The Limits to Growth, published by a fashionable think-tank called the Club of Rome, which had forecast the imminent collapse of civilisation under the pressure of expanding population and shrinking resources. Quote What caught Song’s attention was the mathematical modelling of population that Olsder did, and on which The Limits to Growth was based. He was unaware that the naive extrapolation embraced by the Club of Rome, and produced by what they called “the computer”, had been greeted with scepticism in the West. Excited at the idea that mathematical models could be used to predict population as well as ballistic missiles, Song went back to China and started publishing the pessimistic prognostications of The Limits to Growth,along with demands that something must be done to slow the birthrate. Interesting how things worked out.... That was then, this is now...China will do whats in her best interest to do.. The policy as been relaxed as far as I know... Knew a couple of people who manged to get around it..as people do concerning policies. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted July 19, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, ralis said: Frank Luntz PhD is the political operative propagandist that changed AGW to climate change. Luntz uses focus groups to manipulate public opinion. I won't belabor the point at this time, but it is imperative to understand language and the effect on the mind. Words matter! https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000Q9J0K6/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i0 Words do matter, because "AGW" is still noise beneath the error bars of measurement - so for the sake of being remotely accurate about what they were talking about, a shift in the political argument needed to be made. (Because like I said over there, the co2 catastrophe conjecture is not falsifiable nor provable and its really just a political argument for tax dollars, pointing at where models with bad assumptions go parabolic as justification for more asset stripping from the populace. Banksterism.) https://longreads.com/2019/07/17/the-martha-stewarting-of-powerful-women They're trying to prepare people. I hope you're prepared, ralis Quote How society disproportionately demonizes women after they’ve bent the same rules that men have always broken. LOOOOOOOOOOOLs.....yeahhhhhh....delehuuuuuuuuuuuuuusion! Edited July 19, 2019 by joeblast Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted July 20, 2019 This quote from U.S. Army Captain G.M. Gilbert applies to this time as well as then. Quote “In my work with the defendants (at the Nuremberg Trails 1945-1949) I was searching for the nature of evil and I now think I have come close to defining it. A lack of empathy. It’s the one characteristic that connects all the defendants, a genuine incapacity to feel with their fellow men. Evil, I think, is the absence of empathy.” Captain G. M. Gilbert, the Army psychologist assigned to watching the defendants at the Nuremberg trails Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted July 20, 2019 Quote "The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (ie the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (ie the standards of thought) no longer exist.” - Hannah Arendt Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Aetherous Posted July 20, 2019 14 minutes ago, ralis said: ...quote about subjects of totalitarian rule... That's so true about MSNBC viewers. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dynasty Posted July 20, 2019 (edited) 45 minutes ago, ralis said: "The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (ie the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (ie the standards of thought) no longer exist.” - Hannah Arendt This quote probably applies to all the people that believe in the Russian Collusion hoax. By the way, whatever happened to that story? It sort of fell off the radar. Wasn't Mueller looking into that or something? I can't keep straight all the left's conspiracy theories. Edited July 20, 2019 by Dynasty 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted July 20, 2019 (edited) 7 hours ago, Dynasty said: This quote probably applies to all the people that believe in the Russian Collusion hoax. By the way, whatever happened to that story? It sort of fell off the radar. Wasn't Mueller looking into that or something? I can't keep straight all the left's conspiracy theories. Honestly I'm surprised ralis even posted in this thread....gonna be funny when he finally figures out that "vast right wing conspiracy" is another "vast set of facts." Almost guaranteed he glances down at his rules for radicals manual and then claims Trump et al are making it up and putting lackeys in the process to pervert justice, lol... In another absolutely racist move, Trump makes a nomination for the first black female general in the armed forces... Anyone catch Trump lifting a faceless (Idontknow)-style sun print off of a tattered American Flag the other day? Symbolism will be their downfall....this is Trump trolling again...but of course nobody makes a big deal over these trollings Because these are ones where Redshits just sit and steam, knowing there is no escape, and to have their media apparatus make a big deal out of it would only draw more attention where it is least wanted. Edited July 20, 2019 by joeblast Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted July 20, 2019 8 hours ago, ralis said: This quote from U.S. Army Captain G.M. Gilbert applies to this time as well as then. keep that in mind as you become informed about Hillary & the Clinton Foundation Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Aetherous Posted July 20, 2019 1 hour ago, joeblast said: Trump lifting a faceless (Idontknow)-style sun print off of a tattered American Flag Any more info on that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lost in Translation Posted July 20, 2019 2 hours ago, joeblast said: "vast right wing conspiracy" is another "vast set of facts." Quote With just one week to go before the 2018 midterm elections, the broadcast networks are heavily spinning their campaign coverage against the Republicans, even as President Trump’s campaign activities have received more airtime than all of the individual Senate, House, and gubernatorial contests combined. Not only was network coverage of Republicans far more hostile (88% negative) than that meted out to Democrats (53% negative), but we found nearly ten times more negative statements about Republicans and President Trump (97) than all of the Democratic candidates combined (10). Quote The massive tilt in this year’s coverage shows that the aggressive bias of 2016 was no one-time fluke, but just more proof that the media have utterly discarded objectivity in favor of activism. https://www.lifenews.com/2018/10/31/media-run-10-times-more-negative-news-stories-about-trump-republicans-than-democrats/ Of course the media are neutral watchdogs. You believe that? I got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted July 20, 2019 53 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said: https://www.lifenews.com/2018/10/31/media-run-10-times-more-negative-news-stories-about-trump-republicans-than-democrats/ Of course the media are neutral watchdogs. You believe that? I got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn... long while back there used to be some that would print it yeah, it all goes back a ways http://www.renegadetribune.com/hidden-in-plain-sight-the-shocking-origins-of-the-jeffrey-epstein-case/ (that one ties bronfman & epstein) http://hiddenmysteries.org/conspiracy/reststory/bronfmanscrime.html hehe, "imagined entities" indeed ah where'd that flagstuff go....I forgot where the flag came from, if there was something significant about where it came from... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trunk Posted July 20, 2019 Gutting science from the dept of agriculture ... Makes sense. Pesky scientists. https://youtu.be/iQkdu6c9g6w 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted July 20, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Trunk said: Gutting science from the dept of agriculture ... Makes sense. Pesky scientists. https://youtu.be/iQkdu6c9g6w lol gutting science gasp omg its decentralization away from washington! that's horrible! (lol) there's a few depts that is happening to....so what's the complaint with doing it with the dept of interior? right, mr madcow cant get on tv and tell people "they're anti science!" lmao its too bad you dont ever try to vet the information you consume... I cant wait to see how madcow's show evolves over the next 6-8 months prof @ cornell U (there's republicans that do this also) Edited July 20, 2019 by joeblast 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lost in Translation Posted July 20, 2019 Just realized something: Kamala Harris accuses Joe Biden of being a racist. Joe Biden was Barack Obama's VP. Barack Obama is black. Did Obama know that Biden was a racist? Did Obama not know that Biden was a racist? Either way is checkmate against Kamala Harris. It's impossible for her to continue this narrative without either admitting the accusation was false or also smearing Obama (one way or another) as part of this accusation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
