Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
Its a waste because they don't have any effect other than sucking on the taxpayer faucet. And, peace (war) is determined by the executive branch, not a think tank.
The Great Awakening
- Thread starter Thread starter Hempy McNoodle
- Start date Start date
the executive branch (luckily) cannot declare war, that's congress.
and just because they themselves cannot arrest congress for doing so, i fail to see how they have "no effect"
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
So, I listened to most of the show yesterday.
1. No mention of the JFK files or their content. The release provides context for everything that she did report on (undermines everything), but no mention. This is the biggest news story of this century and encompasses most other stories such as 9/11. Her lack of coverage was very expected (because it undermines her propaganda).
Deceptive/Evil (complicit?)
2. Most of the show focused on the admin's border policy and ICE. The point of view of the admin or proponents of deportations was not covered, nor was the constitutional arguments of the admin. Instead the show was used to spread stochastic terrorism to stop a made up fascist threat. Guests repeated over and over that everything is unconstitutional (a deceptive outright lie) and that this is a dictatorship. The Biden admin was not treated the same way when they defied courts.
Deceptive/Evil
3. Same thing with the coverage of DOGE.
The show is nothing but extremist propaganda meant to cause hatred disguised as 'resistance.'
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
There are some exceptions to this.
What effect has the department of peace (or, whatever its called) had, in your mind?
Captain Red Eye
Well-known member
The peace I'm seeking doesn't rely on shifting the meanings of words depending on who is doing the action and tries to look at the bigger picture.
I understand that the present paradigm features euphemisms and calling things what they aren't.
I don't fall under the spell of that and call things what they are. Nation States are not peace makers, in the big picture. It is literally impossible for them to be across the board "peace makers".
Peace is impossible when the operational means of the so-called peace makers relies on breaking the peace against their own subjects for their existence. Those "hostilities" still exist even if they've become normalized. It's a fact that nation states are not derived from peaceful means nor are they held together by peaceful means.
Instead of calling agreements between two nonpeaceful entities, "peace", I think a different word should be used. Maybe "truce". It doesn't seem right to use the word peace in the same context with two parties which both are not based in peace.
Every nation state is nonpeaceful at the onset. For them to really be about "peace" that would have to change. They can agree not to attack each other, just like gangs can make truces too.
Peace is when there are agreements made by people that aren't involved in forcing their will on other people. Truces can made between peace violators, but "peace" cannot be delivered or agreed to if the involved entities themselves are not peaceful.
A truce to not steal or attack each others subjects/slaves or turf is really a form of imposed order. They still agree that each other can subjugate their own subject / serfs. Until that changes, there isn't a state of peace.
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
Captain Red Eye
Well-known member
Are you under the impression that stolen money can be used to bring peace?
Can you explain how that can happen? Please be precise.
Captain Red Eye
Well-known member
It probably lined some pockets with money that was derived from nonpeaceful means.
Irony level = very high.
Captain Red Eye
Well-known member
Next the people burning those cars will wonder why their own car insurance rates have risen.
not just tesla but all billionaires
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
I think peace is a state of harmonious existence. I think it maybe you that needs to find a new word for what you are talking about. I think you are talking about 'freedom,' maybe. Because under your very high standard, peace cannot exist if there are multiple interests involved. Therefore, everyone must be eliminated until there is just one person left on this earth.
Captain Red Eye
Well-known member
If there are multiple interests involved, it helps to refer to logical principles to determine who has the rightful say over the situation. Once that is determined, it's easier to determine who is the entity breaking the peace.
I am not opposed to defensive force. I'm just saying an entity based in offensive force, which is every nation state, is not capable of bringing peace, since they themselves are not peaceful.
Also, multiple interests need not devolve into conflict where everyone dies, the option of minding our own business and/or maintaining neutrality is an underused possibility. Universal peace is not likely, but it becomes less likely when governing systems themselves are based in breaking the peace. Logic.
Peace is a state where people are not under duress or subject to anothers will against their wishes while not trying to subjugate others themselves.
Nation states do not honor that, therefore they cannot bring "peace" which was my original point. Not harshing on you sir, I'm harshing on the appropriation of language and using euphemisms to describe things to obscure the reality of what really happens.
i mean... thanks for following up, but jee fuckin whizz hahahaha
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
Food for thought. I appreciate your view.If there are multiple interests involved, it helps to refer to logical principles to determine who has the rightful say over the situation. Once that is determined, it's easier to determine who is the entity breaking the peace.
I am not opposed to defensive force. I'm just saying an entity based in offensive force, which is every nation state, is not capable of bringing peace, since they themselves are not peaceful.
Also, multiple interests need not devolve into conflict where everyone dies, the option of minding our own business and/or maintaining neutrality is an underused possibility. Universal peace is not likely, but it becomes less likely when governing systems themselves are based in breaking the peace. Logic.
Peace is a state where people are not under duress or subject to anothers will against their wishes while not trying to subjugate others themselves.
Nation states do not honor that, therefore they cannot bring "peace" which was my original point. Not harshing on you sir, I'm harshing on the appropriation of language and using euphemisms to describe things to obscure the reality of what really happens.
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
I only caught a portion of todays show. But, as expected, no mention of the JFK files.
The segment that I caught was focused on Trump's lawsuites against the media for defamation and election interference. Both cases were deceptively misrepresented with lies.
In the defimation case against ABC, the guest from New York Times misquoted What George Stephanipolos said and instead said that he said what Trump's spokeswoman corrected him with.
For the CBS case, in which '60 Minutes' replaced Kamalas answer with a totally different answer from a different question, the guest claimed that since we now have the full unedited version, we can see there's no problem in the editing. When, it is in fact the exact opposite. The full unedited version shows that it was very deceptively edited. Amy Goodman seemingly agreed and did not challenge.
Has Amy Goodman ever had a guest on whom would represent the Trump admins point of view?
Another guest, yesterday implied that Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act was unconstitutional because it is old and not normally used and therefore he is a rogue fascist dictator.
Deceptive, evil lies meant to keep her audience angry and stupid.
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
Is this true?
Hempy McNoodle
Well-known member
Non- citizens don't have constitutional rights.
That is not correct. All people legally entering the US are included in constitutional rights, no matter their citizenship - sounds like Trump crap.
