The NSDAP chief of propoganda would have been almost envious of the sheer scale of propaganda that is fed to us today, in terms of the volumes of people that Western Government's, primarily that of the US and UK, can deceive and minsinform, in one go. And let's face it we are. Misinformed and deceived. If you like the feeling of being lied to and manipulated, stop right here, there is no more value in you reading - and good luck with it, by the way. If you resent being treated like a puppet, and dislike being misinformed, then perhaps you feel as I do - angry and passionate that it is allowed to happen. Iraq was the testing ground of how much they could deceive and misinform, and get away with it. Post Iraq, they know they can misinform enough stooges about anything, and the same stooges will all be like nodding dogs. Look at the Bin Laden thing. What a farce. The White House must literally have been laughing at you, given the number of times they altered the story of what happened, and alterered it significantly. It is safe to conclude that since they altered it so many times, ALL of their versions could probably be dismissed. After all, would you put any trust in a court witness who give five or six different accounts of what happened? Or would you dimiss all of what they said as untrustworthy? Then we have the Lockerbie bomber thing. I happen to think this man was a fall guy, if you take a bit of time to read the evidence, you see so many HUGE anamolies. But that is another story. Does no one else find it odd, that after all the outcry over the fact that two years on, he is still alive, and just a week after he had apparently gone underground, that SUDDENLY, up he pops again, and is NOW at deaths door? All seems very staged to me. Which brings me to Gadaffi. I do not think for a second that France and Britain are in this out of concern for Libyans, that is utter BS, on so many levels. Now, I believe that Gadaffi has decanted to Algeria, they say. I said from the first day that it would likely end with him doing this very thing. And that was probably an exit strategy that privately suited, or was at least expected, all along, by our Gov's. Jack
The world is full of easily-manipulated and gullible fools. The proagandists feed off their hysteria and inability to see behind lurid headlines.
Of course. And this is the flaw of a democracy, such as it is. It entitles anyone over a given age the same vote as anyone else. Which all sounds nice and fair. Until you consider that one of them knows nothing about domestic or international affairs, and consumes large amounts of soaps as their TV entertainment, and the other could be a political scientist. In practice, there are sadly more of the former than there are of the latter. The problem with these ignorant masses is that even in a democratic system, they are easily manipulated into endorsing terrible acts. We have seen this. Yet is it any wonder? Someone once said we get the politicians and Goverments that we deserve, and there is much wisdom in those words. If you have masses who are as above, then what other possible result can there be,by electing people, for all the wrong reasons, and often in blind faith? It can only result in failure, and often even terrible actions, which is what we have often seen, again and again. Politics needs so shaken to the ground, that afterwards, it would barely resemble the stuff that goes on now, and for the better. Instead of having parties that were full of career politicians, and people who were insincere, or acting on behalf of corporations over the people, the vote would really be something worth being able to give, as you would be voting within a cleaned up and revamped political arena, and one that was free of many of the things that contaminate politics, at this moment. But I also believe that it should be less a right, and more something worthy, that you show you can earn. It's not that I would base the right to vote on status, finances, or academic intelligence. I would base it on some sort of measurement of a person's grasp of what it is they may be voting for, and what that stands for. Together with a grasp of domestic affairs, as those directly impact on everyone in the nation, and even a rundamentary grasp of international affairs. After all, enough ignorant masses being fooled to vote in a malevolent enough group, could have terrible consequences. And as we are agreed, they would be more predisposed to doing so. It is not that anyone would be discluded, as such, we just need to ensure that the quality of voter rises with the mentioned rise in standard of politics. But you would not let someone just take car on the motorway, without having a licence, at least I hope not. The test is there to ensure that the person has a grasp of the roads, and of the car, as failure to do that may result in disaster. It is the same with this. Giving a vote to just anyone is potentially dangerous. It is not Draconian, as all I am suggesting is that people show they have some idea of what they are talking about, even on everyday matters. Jack
Unfortunately there are some places in this world where all of the people are fooled all of the time.
Then I think they almost must want to be fooled, if you see what I mean? Sometimes masses will incline toward a thing, even if that thing has no basis in fact, and zero evidence, therefore is likely a nonsense. We see this, for example, with those that believe in psychics, and their so called skills of getting in touch with the 'dead'. For me, there is zero evidence to support this, and masses of evidence to show that it is usually exposed as a trick and a ruse. Yet, every day, millions go to readings, right across the country, educated and supposedly intelligent people, putting their reason and rationale to one side, just so that everything fits into their belief system that has no proof. They cannot afford to think, and most certainly cannot afford to question their own belief system, nor can they apply logic. That would be like putting salt onto ice, it would melt the self delusion.
Good point Jack N., It is good to see that there are intelligent people out there that don't buy in to the BS propaganda that broadcast medial moguls spew. Those low life immoral broadcast media will sell off their mamas just to hoard more money for their greedy selves. Too bad majority of the fools in the USA, and the world, are too ignorant to see that they are being led by the collar to become dummbed up consumers that will follow any band wagoneer who excites them. In those who buy into the media propaganda end up screwing themselves and taking us down the political toilet with them.
I have a personal saying. It's neither the truth, nor a lie, until you have seen it yourself. Thats why I perefer sites, that include links to support non-common sense facts.
And so it goes that Rick Perry will lead this nation on the path to Banana Republicdome. Riding high on the shoulders of delusional bible thumping idiots who have been duped into thinking he is on their side. Idiots who think tax cuts can sustain an economy without a healthy trade policy and strong educational system. Idiots who believe that middle easterners hate our freedom. Idiots who believe that the U.S runs on anything close to resembling a free market. Idiots who believe that the War on Drugs and Terrorism can be won at the end of a gun Well said Jack. This country is done.. has been done for the past 20 years. This corrupted shell of what it once was is about to collapse. We have only ourselves to blame because we empowered the criminals in our government.
i like that. ie... either you can witness fact or not So let me ask you a favor by simply answering yes or no to a few questions; Did you see bush claim saddam had weapons of mass destruction and tell the world that was why the USA must take him down? When the war with iraq was over, did they find any? Should the USA be required to apologize? Should the USA (my government) be required to have proof before putting my brethren into another war, from today forth?
Thanks. I think the real issue is, something said at a certain time, did not produce the results it was supposed to. Nobody can see the future, what they thought at that time would work, they tried and failed. It's easier to crab about something that's passed, than something in front of you right now.
The recent riots in London and other cities were by the BBC, called the England riots, throughout the period of rioting. There were instances I've been told occurring in Wales too, in Cardiff, Merthyr Tydfil and Newport, not on the scale of such in England but a form of rioting non the less. However despite this fact, the BBC didn't even mention a single occurrence happening in Wales, not even the regional BBC news mentioned a wink about such incidents... Also RT (Russia Today) depicted a story about a WW2 veteran in his 80's being jailed for 6 months for recording a court session, because he claims he couldn't hear what was being said so he'd record it and then listen to it in his own time to get a grasp on the situation within the court. I couldn't find a peep about this story on the BBC news site or such. Since the start of the Iraqi war, Afghan engagements and now the Libyan situation, the BBC has covered the whole situation like a hawk, speaking more about the situation than any other news story, yet they only appear to cover what suites government agenda, they also put spin on the stories they show, always hinting that Gaddafi is to blame for it all... Even making the fact he was about to attack Benghazi was terrible and a bloodbath may ensue, now the roles are reversed there's no reporting of a blood bath only of rebels giving ultimatums. Growing up I had a lot of respect for the BBC news, I thought it was superior to other news broadcasters, but I'm past that now, I see agendas, not free unbiased reporting. What's worse I have to pay a TV licence fee each year to these clowns, who's channels make up less than 10% of the channels available to me.
