Actually it appears there is a grand realignment going on; here in the U.$., anyways. Now the deep state sides with the democrats. It used to be you could point to the right for that alignment. Suddenly the pro-war party is the democrats and the anti-war party is the republicans. Well, this anti-war stance has always been marginalized both ways, so they’ve always gotten their way. Still, with Trump the most anti-war president that the country has seen in recent history, and Obama’s regime fitting tightly in line with Bush and Reagan… there I think lays the key. These upsets were on Obama’s watch. The poison pill that some gulped down, and others are still struggling with getting down, occurred on Obama’s watch. Bernie Sanders arose on Obama’s watch. Donald Trump on Obama’s watch. Black lives matter on Obama’s watch. Color revolutions overseas and uncountably many on Obama’s watch. He played inside the system and to what end? Hopefully we’ll find out soon.
Here’s a 1 minute and 16 second clip from the KGB. It’s explained in a brief intro where I time stamped this video. Either you are part of this deliberate attempt to confuse and humilate, or you are a victim of it. And by you, I mean potentially anyone in America.
Excellent piece from Pilger. How do we finally-finally-finally wake up the geopolitically clueless, research-averse,
MSM’ed masses?
JOHN PILGER: Silencing the Lambs — How Propaganda Works
Leni Riefenstahl said her epic films glorifying the Nazis depended on a “submissive void” in the German public. This is how propaganda is done.
In the 1970s, I met one of Hitler’s leading propagandists, Leni Riefenstahl, whose epic films glorified the Nazis. We happened to be staying at the same lodge in Kenya, where she was on a photography assignment, having escaped the fate of other friends of the Fuhrer.
She told me that the “patriotic messages” of her films were dependent not on “orders from above” but on what she called the “submissive void” of the German public.
Did that include the liberal, educated bourgeoisie? I asked. “Yes, especially them,” she said.
I think of this as I look around at the propaganda now consuming Western societies.
It’s not the people. Listen to the whole video above. He talks about the famous experiment where 8 people are planted, part of the study, they say that the correct answer is not the correct answer, they pick the wrong answer. The one person who is being studied goes with the crowd, because that’s what humans do. It’s a survival mechanism. It’s our instinct. Propaganda takes advantage of that. You are going with the crowd sunny boy.
What is the deep state?
What is your evidence for this?
ROFLMAO! No he was not and is not. He was ready to push that button. Either that or sleep with Putin. What I’m saying is, the Magats and their leader are pro-war. They’d even commit violence and overthrow our government. My evidence is the Jan 6th violence done by the dotard’s people and he encouraged it. Even Posh Pawley (Josh Hawley, who is a rep in my state [barf], in case you don’t get it) was encouraging the violence on Jan 6.
Actually, Bernie Sanders has been around since the 60s and has done many things over the years.
They do matter.
As a slogan not as a policy
That’s exactly the point. Are you saying anything or just posting to get a response?
It doesnt matter if its not implemented
And how would black people implement these policies?
What policies???
You brought up policy, troll.
You asked how to implement. Cant tell you if you dont state which one
You’re done here. You contribute nothing
I read this a long time ago so I could discuss this topic
https://blacklivesmatter.com/blm-demands/
If you’re having trouble navigating
https://impact.blacklivesmatter.com/policy/
What I want to recommend is a method for people to develop a metric on their media sources.
I don’t think we should trust any of them at this point, though my trust has redeveloped around a very few, none of which are mainstream.
There are so many details to trouble over that we cannot research them all. I suggest just a few details to provide a litmus test on what may be your favorite media source by habit. For instance, if you believe that the Russians blew up NordStream2, I think you’ve fallen for fake news. The Steele dossier is a stronger rule partly because it has recessed into the past. By either of these two cruxes so many large media organizations fail the test. I don’t know that it helps if in five years they come around, either. At that point though possibly media accountability can work. As media consumers this practice of media accountability is our job; not the job of another phony fact checking organization which further muddies the waters.
As far as I can tell Putin has kept honesty and integrity throughout the Ukraine conflict, whereas the U.$. has leveraged lie after lie in its workings. Sadly, this means that the information war is already won by Putin in the long run. I believe there was a time in the past when the lies of the American government were carefully built and used as a means to tip things in their favor, whereas the current method actually exposes the desperation with which we are acting. The very quality of the lies can and should take a flavor on our tounge; after all we are steeped in them now.
Maybe you could recommend how to develop these metrics, instead of simply stating “the U$ has leveraged lie…” Here’s an easy one, well, first, a country doesn’t lie, people in the country lie. We have over 500 elected people in Washington and they have a variety of opinions, they can’t all be telling the truth, but which ones? Then look at the list of well known news sources, same thing. You allude to a source but don’t name it, there are millions of other sources.
Here’s an easy metric. When something happens, how do those “sources” respond? Do they base words on the facts available? At first, facts might not be easy to come by, do they acknowledge that? Then, when facts start to point in a certain direction, do they change their story to match the facts, or do they use a random piece of data to make a case for something that points the fingers away from themselves?
Take Putin, when Alexei Navalny was poisoned, he blamed others, changed his story more than once, and said it didn’t happen. It’s a little harder to do this research after the fact, you have to compile quotes, but it’s all out there, from multiple sources, including official Russian ones.
Gee, I’d hate to be your family member and be even part Black. You have no idea what “Black Lives Matter” means or is. maybe you should go to blacklivesmatter.com and learn something. While you’re at it, also check out NAACP.org You might learn something.
His robotic, trolling posts don’t indicate he knows anything other than it’s a name of something. Unfortunately, that’s probably the same for most of America. He pointed out that their policies were not the policies of this country, at least I assume that’s what he meant. I wonder what he even means by that.
The logic seems like, if the organization exists, they should be accomplishing something, that is, their goals should be getting translated into legislation and then policy. That is a valid way to judge the effectiveness of an organization, but it also ignores the 500 years of power structures and institutionalization that have been built to prevent those goals. Just that the group exists and isn’t being fire-bombed is progress.
This is very true.
This is the U.S. It could mean one thing to Joe Smoe and another to Jane Doe.
BLM is both an organization and a movement, but that doesn’t mean their goal are going to get translated into legislation or policy. It took forever for the NAACP to get the Civil Rights Movement going and eventually making change in government, education, etc. Separate but equal is not equal. The same with the Women’s movements for the ERA. Even today there are states that haven’t pass the ERA. Illinois was the first state, or one of the first states, to pass the ERA and that was in 1972. Still, today, women’s rights are being rolled back, as well as minority rights too. The U.S. is going backwards, not forward.
I certainly agree that proving a poisoning is going to be a very challenging case. As well we have to consider the possibility that the poisoning was done intentionally such that the subject survives, so as to raise the character of the subject to the masses. Likewise with the Skrupals and the novichock(sp?) incident. The idea that the KGB don’t know how to kill somebody seems a bit thin.
But your claims about a diversity of opinions really don’t hold true as I see it. We who understand that the two parties are a bit of a farce to begin with; that the deep state is running the show; that they’ve got everybody’s arm in a twist; including the medias’: this is where I land. Every source in lockstep is what I see.
Status quo is a thing, you see?