-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
top of the heap to third world status in one generation
- Thread starter Gry
- Start date
Elmer Bud, you & Gry have brought up several good points here. i too have never understood why Russia has gotten a pass in many history books on this subject. and you almost NEVER read about other countries (including US) turning away jewish refugees in the days leading up to WWII. fucking revisionist historians...
Inside the UAE’s secret hacking team of America mercenaries Ex-NSA operatives reveal how they helped spy on targets for the Arab monarchy — dissidents, rival leaders and journalists.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-spying-raven/
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-spying-raven/
EvergreenState
Active member
It is no wonder that Canadians feel that the US is full of neo- nazis and white supremicists, based on how the media purposely played up that story during the Clinton campaign. The whole message of the Clinton campaign and the nearly unanimous media support of her campaign, was to try to manipulate the citizens into believeing that anyone who disagreed with her was a nazi, a racist, a islamaphobe, a transphobe etc. etc.
I would say that the percentage of neo-nazi's in this country is about .000001 percent of the population. Of course when small groups of them got together and protested, the media covered it with huge stories and made it seem like there was this huge uprising of neo-nazis.
Ater watching the media manipulate the people for over 50 years, it's very easy to see what they are doing and why they are doing it. Sadly the majority of people are seriously lacking in awareness and are very easily manipulated.
I traveled this country extensively, lived in 8 major cities-3 in the southern part of the country, grew up in a rural area and have lived in 2 other rural areas in the past ten years and never met, heard of or seen any neo-nazi groups or individuals. I have worked and associated with all economic groups and I've never heard anyone ever mention anything about such groups; and people love to dish out gossip and tell stories about what is going on in and around their communities.
In all my years I seldom heard, maybe a couple of stories about a single neo-nazi or a small group protesting , any stories in the media or elsewhere about neo-nazis. Then suddenly, during the Clinton campaign, damn near everyone was a neo-nazi. I would say 99% of those media stories were clear and obvious, to all but the political zealots, blatant manipulation. The media, the obvious mouthpiece for the Clinton campaign, were trying to guilt and shame anyone who didn't agree with her by putting these awful labels of neo-nazi, racists etc. etc.on them.
The nicest, kindest, most generous and compassionate people you'd ever want to meet, people who have gone to far greater lengths than the vast majority of people, to help disadvantaged people of all races and beliefs, were labeled as these dispicable, awful racists people because they saw Clinton for what she really was and would not vote for her.
There have been so many books written on how the immense power of the media is used to manipulate people into buying a bunch of junk they don't need, into voting for people who intend to hurt them and into believing anything they want you to believe. I suggest people search out these books.
Here is part of a story from a site called PsychCentral:
Media Manipulation of the Masses: How the Media Psychologically Manipulates
I have endeavored to share just some of the tactics of psychological manipulation of mass thinking. Most reading this will easily recognize these. I don’t claim to provide an exhaustive list.
Guilt by Association
All that is necessary to destroy a person’s character publicly is to take that person and overtly or covertly associate them to something the masses will reject. Never mind if it is true or not, simply to question it or make the association is sufficient.
One example that comes to mind is a very clever twist I saw used by a famous newspaper. At the time, a political leader, greatly disliked by the editors of a newspaper, was portrayed in a very interesting way. They put an article and his photo strategically in very close proximity to a picture of a circus clown that was part of some other story. I thought to myself, “Now that tactic wins the prize!” It was very subtle and very subconscious in approach. The ultimate message was, “This person is a clown, therefore laugh at him and consider him non-credible like you would with a clown.”
Another very typical way of using this same tactic is to connect, even if it is through intricate stratagem, the person to some law-breaking, shady, person, organization, or action. Even if it is not true, it will leave a dark cloud of doubt in the mind of the person receiving the information. That is why slander is so effective in destroying enemies. The media will never come out and admit that they do this. They are accountable to no one, much like some sort of immaculate and narcissistic god.
Just a Little Poison
The next way the media tries to manipulate minds is through, what is called, the verisimilitude. Now that is a real mouthful. It means that something is “very similar” to something else. In this case, it is mixing a little poison or a lie with the truth. It is possible to ingest into your body gallons of healthy food. If you simply mix a small amount of extremely powerful poison with it, you would be dead soon. If we graduate the amount of poison into smaller dosages we can do the same over time, at a much slower rate but getting the same results… your demise.
All the media has to do, in order to destroy a person, is to slowly administer lies (poison) about a person mixed in with good things. Eventually, they destroy their enemy and they come out looking like choir boys; clean and glistening.
I would say that the percentage of neo-nazi's in this country is about .000001 percent of the population. Of course when small groups of them got together and protested, the media covered it with huge stories and made it seem like there was this huge uprising of neo-nazis.
Ater watching the media manipulate the people for over 50 years, it's very easy to see what they are doing and why they are doing it. Sadly the majority of people are seriously lacking in awareness and are very easily manipulated.
I traveled this country extensively, lived in 8 major cities-3 in the southern part of the country, grew up in a rural area and have lived in 2 other rural areas in the past ten years and never met, heard of or seen any neo-nazi groups or individuals. I have worked and associated with all economic groups and I've never heard anyone ever mention anything about such groups; and people love to dish out gossip and tell stories about what is going on in and around their communities.
In all my years I seldom heard, maybe a couple of stories about a single neo-nazi or a small group protesting , any stories in the media or elsewhere about neo-nazis. Then suddenly, during the Clinton campaign, damn near everyone was a neo-nazi. I would say 99% of those media stories were clear and obvious, to all but the political zealots, blatant manipulation. The media, the obvious mouthpiece for the Clinton campaign, were trying to guilt and shame anyone who didn't agree with her by putting these awful labels of neo-nazi, racists etc. etc.on them.
The nicest, kindest, most generous and compassionate people you'd ever want to meet, people who have gone to far greater lengths than the vast majority of people, to help disadvantaged people of all races and beliefs, were labeled as these dispicable, awful racists people because they saw Clinton for what she really was and would not vote for her.
There have been so many books written on how the immense power of the media is used to manipulate people into buying a bunch of junk they don't need, into voting for people who intend to hurt them and into believing anything they want you to believe. I suggest people search out these books.
Here is part of a story from a site called PsychCentral:
Media Manipulation of the Masses: How the Media Psychologically Manipulates
I have endeavored to share just some of the tactics of psychological manipulation of mass thinking. Most reading this will easily recognize these. I don’t claim to provide an exhaustive list.
Guilt by Association
All that is necessary to destroy a person’s character publicly is to take that person and overtly or covertly associate them to something the masses will reject. Never mind if it is true or not, simply to question it or make the association is sufficient.
One example that comes to mind is a very clever twist I saw used by a famous newspaper. At the time, a political leader, greatly disliked by the editors of a newspaper, was portrayed in a very interesting way. They put an article and his photo strategically in very close proximity to a picture of a circus clown that was part of some other story. I thought to myself, “Now that tactic wins the prize!” It was very subtle and very subconscious in approach. The ultimate message was, “This person is a clown, therefore laugh at him and consider him non-credible like you would with a clown.”
Another very typical way of using this same tactic is to connect, even if it is through intricate stratagem, the person to some law-breaking, shady, person, organization, or action. Even if it is not true, it will leave a dark cloud of doubt in the mind of the person receiving the information. That is why slander is so effective in destroying enemies. The media will never come out and admit that they do this. They are accountable to no one, much like some sort of immaculate and narcissistic god.
Just a Little Poison
The next way the media tries to manipulate minds is through, what is called, the verisimilitude. Now that is a real mouthful. It means that something is “very similar” to something else. In this case, it is mixing a little poison or a lie with the truth. It is possible to ingest into your body gallons of healthy food. If you simply mix a small amount of extremely powerful poison with it, you would be dead soon. If we graduate the amount of poison into smaller dosages we can do the same over time, at a much slower rate but getting the same results… your demise.
All the media has to do, in order to destroy a person, is to slowly administer lies (poison) about a person mixed in with good things. Eventually, they destroy their enemy and they come out looking like choir boys; clean and glistening.
TychoMonolyth
Boreal Curing
How many Chinese were killed in WW2? 80 to 100 million. 20 million Russians. It boggles the mind.
Takes a special tactic to only assign 50% blame to the Charlottesville White Nationalists.
Apparently worth a thank you on Twitter from David Duke himself
Reminds me of a paraphrase from Andrew Gillum,
“I’m not saying your a racist, but the racists think you are a racist”
Apparently worth a thank you on Twitter from David Duke himself
Reminds me of a paraphrase from Andrew Gillum,
“I’m not saying your a racist, but the racists think you are a racist”
Did you listen to the governor? Or what they tried to pass?
Did you hear about New York's new law????
Sick fucking people who should get the same treatment of the baby...brain sucked out and then dissected.
Congressman Mark Green (TN-07)
Like a scene from a dystopian science fiction movie, an elected official took to the airwaves and casually defended infanticide this week.
The story begins when Kathy Tran, a Virginia delegate, admitted in an appalling testimony that her abortion bill would allow a full-term child to be aborted – even when the mother was in her 40thweek of pregnancy and in active labor.
Amidst the backlash, Virginia Governor Northam tried to reassure its opponents that if a child survived an abortion, “the infant would be kept comfortable. [And] the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue.”
Killing a baby once born is infanticide. Plain and simple.
Will the media hold him accountable for it? Or anyone in the Democratic Party?
No, don’t expect it. Because this isn’t the first time Democrats have held an extreme position on abortion.
Last January, 183 House Democrats voted against federal protections for abortion survivors. Another way to say it: 183 House Democrats voted to allow infants to die after they were born.
This is way outside the mainstream. New polling released this month shows 63% of Americans would ban abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy. 92% of Republicans and 61% of Democrats want “significant restrictions” on abortion. The United States is only 1 in 7 countries worldwide that even allow abortions in the late term – 20 weeks or later. Joining us at the bottom of the 198 countries worldwide are notorious human rights offenders like China and North Korea.
There is also an argument to be made, as many have, that Hillary Clinton lost the election to Donald Trump due to her extreme position on abortion. During the third presidential debate, Trump denounced partial-birth abortion, explaining the process in stomach-churning detail. In her response, Hillary Clinton gave a ‘robotic, ghoulish response defending the practice.’
Democrats now have a choice – are they going to defend Northam? Or will they, as they have called on Republicans to do over and over again, decry the extremism in their own ranks?
It would be smart for Democrats to change their message on abortion. They can start by joining Republicans in support of the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, a bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks gestational age.
Science tells us that babies begin feeling pain around 20 weeks. And children begin becoming viable – able to live outside the womb – around 20 weeks. Take, for example, Micah Pickering. Born at 20 weeks gestational age, Micah Pickering was born extremely early but is now six years old, enrolled in school and living a full life with two loving parents.
We need to start asking Democrats – are they really comfortable snuffing out the lives of babies like Micah?
And to help ask that question, we need the media’s help.
But so far, the media seems more interested in holding water for Democrats than asking tough questions. To the media that will harrumph at that line – how can pro-lifers trust the media when they ignore important stories like the one unfolding in Virginia or the annual March for Life? How can pro-lifers trust the media to be arbiters of the truth when they fall for the shameful Democrat lie that David Daleiden’s videos were ‘heavily edited?’
Now, more than ever, the American people need clarification – where exactly does the Democratic party stand on the issue of abortion? Who will help us ask that question?
Like a scene from a dystopian science fiction movie, an elected official took to the airwaves and casually defended infanticide this week.
The story begins when Kathy Tran, a Virginia delegate, admitted in an appalling testimony that her abortion bill would allow a full-term child to be aborted – even when the mother was in her 40thweek of pregnancy and in active labor.
Amidst the backlash, Virginia Governor Northam tried to reassure its opponents that if a child survived an abortion, “the infant would be kept comfortable. [And] the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue.”
Killing a baby once born is infanticide. Plain and simple.
Will the media hold him accountable for it? Or anyone in the Democratic Party?
No, don’t expect it. Because this isn’t the first time Democrats have held an extreme position on abortion.
Last January, 183 House Democrats voted against federal protections for abortion survivors. Another way to say it: 183 House Democrats voted to allow infants to die after they were born.
This is way outside the mainstream. New polling released this month shows 63% of Americans would ban abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy. 92% of Republicans and 61% of Democrats want “significant restrictions” on abortion. The United States is only 1 in 7 countries worldwide that even allow abortions in the late term – 20 weeks or later. Joining us at the bottom of the 198 countries worldwide are notorious human rights offenders like China and North Korea.
There is also an argument to be made, as many have, that Hillary Clinton lost the election to Donald Trump due to her extreme position on abortion. During the third presidential debate, Trump denounced partial-birth abortion, explaining the process in stomach-churning detail. In her response, Hillary Clinton gave a ‘robotic, ghoulish response defending the practice.’
Democrats now have a choice – are they going to defend Northam? Or will they, as they have called on Republicans to do over and over again, decry the extremism in their own ranks?
It would be smart for Democrats to change their message on abortion. They can start by joining Republicans in support of the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, a bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks gestational age.
Science tells us that babies begin feeling pain around 20 weeks. And children begin becoming viable – able to live outside the womb – around 20 weeks. Take, for example, Micah Pickering. Born at 20 weeks gestational age, Micah Pickering was born extremely early but is now six years old, enrolled in school and living a full life with two loving parents.
We need to start asking Democrats – are they really comfortable snuffing out the lives of babies like Micah?
And to help ask that question, we need the media’s help.
But so far, the media seems more interested in holding water for Democrats than asking tough questions. To the media that will harrumph at that line – how can pro-lifers trust the media when they ignore important stories like the one unfolding in Virginia or the annual March for Life? How can pro-lifers trust the media to be arbiters of the truth when they fall for the shameful Democrat lie that David Daleiden’s videos were ‘heavily edited?’
Now, more than ever, the American people need clarification – where exactly does the Democratic party stand on the issue of abortion? Who will help us ask that question?
Malato
Member
I'm a democrat but I agree with you, our party is going to far left for me and the right has gone insane. I suppose at heart I'm an independent but I have to register for a party to vote during the caucuses. My biggest fear is the dems are gonna decide on a candidate to far to the left and loose. Biden is perfect to go at Trump, I like beto and Tulsi as well. But this socialist wing and social justice warriors are loosing alot of blue collar dems like me.
There is a reason they call what we live in a system.
Systems perpetuate themselves, and ours is a champ at it.
Either we find the courage to make a change, or we are going
to be consumed by our system, which won't care which party is at
the helm as it does so.
To think that salvation will be come from the darkest part
of our system contradicts everything I learned.
Don't like playing seer, but will make an exemption, with the full knowledge that carefully selected cases are pending.
So, here we go:
Roe vs Wade remains intact, until after the election. Logic being that to do otherwise would assure a democratic victory in 2020.
Irrespective of who wins, shortly after the election, the court will take down the right to abortion completely.
If dems are in the White House, new and stronger law will be implemented through congress immediately.
If republicans are in the White House, the pressure will be a curse for them.
I expect the former to be the case.
I look forward to a time when a national health care system provides birth control, along with genetic screening that should have the effect of being able to greatly reduce the need for such a procedure in many heartbreaking cases.
So, here we go:
Roe vs Wade remains intact, until after the election. Logic being that to do otherwise would assure a democratic victory in 2020.
Irrespective of who wins, shortly after the election, the court will take down the right to abortion completely.
If dems are in the White House, new and stronger law will be implemented through congress immediately.
If republicans are in the White House, the pressure will be a curse for them.
I expect the former to be the case.
I look forward to a time when a national health care system provides birth control, along with genetic screening that should have the effect of being able to greatly reduce the need for such a procedure in many heartbreaking cases.
Gry, do you think it's to much to ask if people to buy a pack of condoms?
I mean seriously that minor level of personal responsibility is to much to ask of people. Our society has no standards if that's the case. If people can't do this minor thing for themselves, how do we expect people to contribute anything to society?
Some conservative commentators are saying that the NY abortion law will wind up in the courts. Democrats will use the make up of the supreme court and the potential repeal of Roe as a central issue in 2020.
It's so sad that people any people, are ok with this. When a woman is in physical danger in late stage pregnancy, the protocol is to deliver the baby. Whether the baby is aborted it still has to be delivered. Their is literally no difference except whether they kill the baby first.
NY will literally be killing a living child outside of the womb. If the abortion is unsuccessful. All the safe, legal, and rare argument has been tossed aside. Their are people in this world who celebrate their abortion. That says so much about the state of the world we live in.
8 states now allow some form of 3rd trimester abortion. Most have restrictions, and are handled on a case by case basis. That being said New York only requires a threat to the health of the mother. Not the life of the mother. This is a sickness of the soul .
How long before people who are currently living become as equally inconvenient as an unwanted child?When will society decide that grandma is stuck in a nursing home, because we don't want take care of her at home? Then she has no "quality of life " in a nursing home, better stop her suffering.
How long before we are trying to force doctors to do this against their religious beliefs?
I don't agree third trimester and would not want to be the judge deciding when a clump of cells becomes a being, but the at conception is too far right for me. At conception is a religious perspective over a scientific one.
As for the elderly, we warehouse our elderly. If they go to a nursing home and get shaken by the ankles for every last penny, then what? Many elderly live with unbearable conditions and it sucks that someone must impose their belief in miracles and create laws to make people like this continue to suffer when they really just want to pull the plug. It's should be their own choice when to call it game over.
If we had the same culture we had 50 years ago, grand ma wouldn't be in a nursing home. She would be at home or with a family member. People now can't be inconvenienced, with taking care of sick family members. Hell, they can't be inconvenienced with buying contraception.
My concern isn't when a person decides that they don't want to live. My concern is when others decide for grandma that she is suffering and should be "relieved of the suffering." Even 10 years ago, no rational person would thought that a child who is out of the mothers body could be killed, yet here we are.
It's the definition of slippery slope. Any life has value, and that clump of cells is eventually going to become a person. I have an Autistic child, how long until his life has no value. You know, since he isn't a "perfect person". He's perfect to me and my family. Down Syndrome kids are routinely aborted, many countries brag that they have almost eliminated down syndrome, in reality they have eliminated down syndrome people, not down syndrome.
I know you are a rational person and I am not trying to make you out to be a monster. I just want people to think about where this shit leads.
St. Phatty
Active member
The only religious belief most American doctors have is
worship of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
No, I do not think that is too much to ask at all.
Would dearly love to see a massive and ongoing advertising campaign urging it.
Rockefeller medicine, immoral prior to the moment of conception.
