Some topics on our frontpage got filled with talk about American politics. I’ll move the political replies to this topic.
World War 3 was made much less likely when Trump was elected over Hillary. There is a group of powerful people in the US, such as John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Hillary Clinton, and Barrack Obama, who seem to be actively attempting to provoke a war with Russia. Trump is opposing them, both Republicans and Democrats.
Now, an argument could be made that he is being provocative toward China. However, even Obama was refusing to allow China to build islands and then use them to intimidate shipping or neighboring countries. I think there are indeed tense times ahead between China and U.S., but those would have occurred with any president after China started down this road of island building. I believe that in the end, countries that have extensive trade are unlikely to go to war, which makes provocation of Russia, which we don’t have extensive trade with, more dangerous than standing our ground with China.
If you watch the biased CNN (elite) news network, take for granted you’ll get a high dose of manipulated information.
Also take into account that he has Peter Thiel, a huge bitcoin fan, in his transition team.
We still have to see what the real direction of trump will be, but he has shown to be a president of lightning speed complying action.
Will be interesting to see how he develops on privacy issues.
Trump is fantastic for SAFE because he has people running for the serverless hills. Right now there are people all over the world starting to have some of the thoughts David Irvine had 15 to 20 years ago. They are thinking the net is broke but realizing their desperate dependence on it and looking for a way out. That’s a far cry from the uphill battle about why would you do all that slicing and dicing of bits. Trump is the use case!
Also I personally agree with Tom Carlson about Hillary and the war risk she presented, and still don’t support Trump but can’t help but see an upside. Scumpeter said its the children of wealthy capitalists who tear down capitalism and replace it with bottom up socialism in rebellion against their parents. But there is one group even more destructive to elite power. That is the rejected plutocrat which Trump is in spades- its a mutual hate society between him and other plutocrats. I think they find him a crass deficient upstart and his contempt for them was fomented in his core business of trying to pamper them in hospitality. He’s exiled, excommunicated. He is the second coming of F.D.R., the mosted hated of all among elites on the right. You see Franklen was bitter to the end about being denied enterance into the Porcellion capitalist pig society at Harvard and you see Franklen had a disability and was in a chair. He threatened a wealth ceiling and got progressive taxation, the greatest check ever on elite power. He was in full rebellion against his own leisure class the way I think we will see Trump go when it becomes even more apparent that elites won’t let up on him.
He is already going after the sex rings which is messing with the mutual dirt that holds the whole illuminist mess together. He is resigned but raging about his ostracism, he’s been publically shamed the way Franklen was. An ostracised elite who becomes king sides with the poor. Seen that movie.
Infowars is for the insane. Please don’t take this advice seriously anyone.
Alex Jones doesn’t keep listeners by telling sensible facts, just like CNN won’t purposefully alienate leftists. He may have had a couple of half true stories at some point, maybe, but it’s his business to spew crazy to whomever will consume or believe it!
My cousin literally believes in EVERY conspiracy theory there is. You name it! The annunaki, reptile people, chemtrails, blah blah blah. He calls, searching “are vaccines killing us?” etc, In google, “research”. It is seriously insane. Coincidentally he loves trump and has this very real social problem of not knowing when he is being rude or offensive. Not sure if those two things may be related.
If anything positive comes from this dimwitted “leader” it could only be a coincidence or as @warren suggests and an act of rebellion against his own class.
Dude?? Be a little respectful, thank you.
It is all about fact checking to see what is and what is not real. Alex Jones, Breitbart, Paul Watson etc do a great job on that.
Having Ron Paul on your show on a regular bases, i think you have some legitimacy. Oh no, i forgot Ron Paul is an old senile man…
If its sponsored media (sponsored in any form even so called listener sponsored) its going to be fake, or spin, censorship, drown out propaganda based. If its got ads its going to be fake. If its for profit, it will be fake. Media based on a conflict of interest, any conflict, right down to its charter is going to be lie based.
There is for now Paul Jay’s Real Nes Network. Its mainly video. I haven’t paid much attention to it but seems to be a better approach.
I have to disagree with you.
Infowars just like Paul Jay’s are viewer/listener sponsored, through sales of products and premium services. I think that is the best way to go since a single follower can not bias the opinion, after all the follower was attracted to your opinion in the first place and was willing to support you by paying a monthly fee or purchasing a product from your store.
Breitbart accepts both viewer/listener and advertiser support, but they have seen their advertisers walk-out for speaking out their truth, showing they are not for sale.
What makes this new internet media so great is that they take journalism back to the ways it has to be: having a conservative, liberal etc opinion on true facts, no take things out of context to serve the opinion of your supporters (advertisers/owners).
Well paul claims they take no corporate, advertiser, sponsor support. I know kind of makes the funding model interesting. Would have to be blind subscription or donation.
But sponsored news is the reason lobbying works because politicians face sponsor based media enclosure-lockout- capture by the same sponsors who fund them so we get purchased law and superstitious media around even potential sponsor interests- where I think that should result in loss of all assets and life in prison without the possibilty of parole. Its so bad that sponsors actually preselect our representatives and fund both sides because of conflict sold out media- which by the way is never left (people don’t know what left is anymore.) And reps spend all their time grubbing money. Where what we should say to media firms is money is not speech and corporations have no rights and take money for anything political and lose your charter and face life in prison without parole. Really we ought to just ban for profit news media. Let it be open source- also ban its copyright at least for news media. Even though with search we don’t need ads or ad powered search we need the free speech doctrine back-. commercial speech is valueable but its last in line and no puffing or pressure sell ever and no involuntary capture of attention or trying to sell kids. But then in my opinion busineses have no rights not even against other businesses, rather see everyone on the dole than give businesses any power to push people arround. Also I think the concept of employer is idiotic- think the same of’leader’ People whose attitude is you have to do what I say because I have more money need to be exiled until they come their senses. Business exist to serve not be served, the other way around is crime. Better dead than rule be subject to rule by money.
But then with SAFE I think we get the transparency gives our power back and ends the bs of economic royalist heriditary rule by money.
How many of the people who knock RT have actually watched it? At worst, even a broken clock gets it right twice a day. We should be searching for the kernels of truth everywhere we can. Seems a bad idea to pay too much attention to the messenger.
Sorry not trying to hog the thread but prefer RT to the US stuff.
I didn’t say anything about Clinton and not to sure why you felt the need to bring her into the conversation. It’s still early into Drumpf’s presidency, just give it time and watch the show unfold.
I prefer to see as much as I can from all sources and then make my own judgement.
If I am not mistaken he did say she moving toward escalating a conflict with Russia (presumably over Iran.) That was my first issue with her. Second she was moving right of Obama who was moving right of Regan. Her true colors seemed to show with her treatment of Assange and more than anything I think that is what kept her out. I think anonymous removed her like they promised. But with SAFE and other similar systems this is just the beginning.
I corrected my response by placing “I” in the sentence. I was talking about Trump taking the US into WW3 and he brought up Clinton. The election is over and Trump is POTUS, not Clinton and bringing her up with respect to what’s currently going on doesn’t matter, correct?
Sure, but it does in a way. I think Trump got in by accident. If no sabotage of Sanders, or no professed pull to the right or agression on Assange, or pull toward security state, or agression toward Russia or no “we can’t because of Republicans” on the part of Hillary… there would have been no Trump as POTUS. Lost popular vote by 3 million votes, party lost seats in both houses. No mandate but picked a fight with everyone on planet. Own party didn’t want him. No real plan or unity. Not clear on bounds of exec power. People skeptical or hostile and not in the mood to be vitimized more and terrored out. Millenials wilk be 80% of work force in 10 years and are left of Sanders. I think he and his party are hanging by a thread, but he is making protectionist populist noises about limiting the slide of globalism on trade which is good. We’ll see, his 10 points have 7 seemingly solid intents and 3 three that are insane and suicidal. He does seem to be shaking up the establishment. My guess is he makes it 2 years and we can then flush the teaparty and republican party down the toilet. I think what comes after for decades will make Sanders look conservative. I think it will be clear that petrol for fuel, energy and heating is dead. I think it will be over for the right. Alternative would be civil war with same result. Could be wrong but don’t think there is a way to stop the rich right from being seen as parasitic zero or negative contribution with reparations equal to more then their wealth being past due and due immediatly I expect them to be criminalized and their ideology to have about as much credibilty as Nazism. Could be wrong!
I just read this(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/58a19e05e4b0cd37efcfeabb) and I guess Clinton’s not old news. When are these idiots going to learn? I just hope the SAFE Network is going before this and things will start changing for the better.
Completely agree and nominate SAFE for POTUS.