How can we take it back?
- Thread starter Skarekrow
- Start date
U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders
· August 20 ·
What an outrage.
While millions of workers have seen a decline in their wages and health care benefits, CEOs of major corporations earn extremely high compensation packages and often receive unbelievable "golden parachutes" when they leave their companies.
Petition To Label George Soros A "Domestic Terrorist" Has 80,000 Signatures
by Tyler Durden
Sep 1, 2017 4:15 PM
In less than two weeks, a WhiteHouse.gov petition demanding that billionaire investor George Soros be declared a “domestic terrorist,” and that authorities seize his multibillion-dollar fortune, has garnered nearly enough signatures to force the Trump administration to issue a formal response.
The petition, which has attracted 80,000 signatures so far - just 20,000 shy of the 100,000-signature threshold where a response would be required – accuses Soros of being guilty of sedition by financing groups that help support violent Antifa counter-protesters and other dangerous leftist groups.
Last week, we reported that a similar petition, this one asking that President Donald Trump declare Antifa to be a terrorist group, had reached the threshold. The petition is still awaiting a formal response, but in one promising development, Politico reported today that the Department of Homeland Security had described the group’s actions as “domestic terrorist violence” in private memos.
[...]
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...soros-domestic-terrorist-has-80000-signatures
I have no doubt that George Soros should be investigated.
He crashed the Swedish Krona and the British Pound in 1992. Why was he allowed to do that? No democratic country should be exposed to megalomania by speculators. [I sorely do not know why he was invited to Sweden in 1998. David Icke stuff?]
"In 1992, Soros became famous in Sweden after an extensive currency speculation affair against the Swedish krona, which subsequently triggered a mass shift of deposits to other currencies for fears of the krona's collapse. In 1998, six years thereafter, Soros was invited to Sweden. In addition to a dinner with the Royal family, a meeting with Swedish magnate Peter Wallenberg and a lecture at the School of Economics, he also held a lecture to at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)."
https://sputniknews.com/politics/201610141046339185-sweden-soros-loyalty/
The crash of the Swedish krona is one reason why Sweden became a member of the EU in 1995.
What good has this membership done to us? Before membership in the EU, cows were free to graze in the meadows as free animals. After joining, cows had to wear those silly plastic tags in their ears.
by Tyler Durden
Sep 1, 2017 4:15 PM
In less than two weeks, a WhiteHouse.gov petition demanding that billionaire investor George Soros be declared a “domestic terrorist,” and that authorities seize his multibillion-dollar fortune, has garnered nearly enough signatures to force the Trump administration to issue a formal response.
The petition, which has attracted 80,000 signatures so far - just 20,000 shy of the 100,000-signature threshold where a response would be required – accuses Soros of being guilty of sedition by financing groups that help support violent Antifa counter-protesters and other dangerous leftist groups.
Last week, we reported that a similar petition, this one asking that President Donald Trump declare Antifa to be a terrorist group, had reached the threshold. The petition is still awaiting a formal response, but in one promising development, Politico reported today that the Department of Homeland Security had described the group’s actions as “domestic terrorist violence” in private memos.
[...]
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...soros-domestic-terrorist-has-80000-signatures
I have no doubt that George Soros should be investigated.
He crashed the Swedish Krona and the British Pound in 1992. Why was he allowed to do that? No democratic country should be exposed to megalomania by speculators. [I sorely do not know why he was invited to Sweden in 1998. David Icke stuff?]
"In 1992, Soros became famous in Sweden after an extensive currency speculation affair against the Swedish krona, which subsequently triggered a mass shift of deposits to other currencies for fears of the krona's collapse. In 1998, six years thereafter, Soros was invited to Sweden. In addition to a dinner with the Royal family, a meeting with Swedish magnate Peter Wallenberg and a lecture at the School of Economics, he also held a lecture to at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)."
https://sputniknews.com/politics/201610141046339185-sweden-soros-loyalty/
The crash of the Swedish krona is one reason why Sweden became a member of the EU in 1995.
What good has this membership done to us? Before membership in the EU, cows were free to graze in the meadows as free animals. After joining, cows had to wear those silly plastic tags in their ears.
Petition To Label George Soros A "Domestic Terrorist" Has 80,000 Signatures
by Tyler Durden
Sep 1, 2017 4:15 PM
In less than two weeks, a WhiteHouse.gov petition demanding that billionaire investor George Soros be declared a “domestic terrorist,” and that authorities seize his multibillion-dollar fortune, has garnered nearly enough signatures to force the Trump administration to issue a formal response.
The petition, which has attracted 80,000 signatures so far - just 20,000 shy of the 100,000-signature threshold where a response would be required – accuses Soros of being guilty of sedition by financing groups that help support violent Antifa counter-protesters and other dangerous leftist groups.
Last week, we reported that a similar petition, this one asking that President Donald Trump declare Antifa to be a terrorist group, had reached the threshold. The petition is still awaiting a formal response, but in one promising development, Politico reported today that the Department of Homeland Security had described the group’s actions as “domestic terrorist violence” in private memos.
[...]
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...soros-domestic-terrorist-has-80000-signatures
I have no doubt that George Soros should be investigated.
He crashed the Swedish Krona and the British Pound in 1992. Why was he allowed to do that? No democratic country should be exposed to megalomania by speculators. [I sorely do not know why he was invited to Sweden in 1998. David Icke stuff?]
"In 1992, Soros became famous in Sweden after an extensive currency speculation affair against the Swedish krona, which subsequently triggered a mass shift of deposits to other currencies for fears of the krona's collapse. In 1998, six years thereafter, Soros was invited to Sweden. In addition to a dinner with the Royal family, a meeting with Swedish magnate Peter Wallenberg and a lecture at the School of Economics, he also held a lecture to at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)."
https://sputniknews.com/politics/201610141046339185-sweden-soros-loyalty/
The crash of the Swedish krona is one reason why Sweden became a member of the EU in 1995.
What good has this membership done to us? Before membership in the EU, cows were free to graze in the meadows as free animals. After joining, cows had to wear those silly plastic tags in their ears.
I wish them all the luck.
It would probably be faster just to wait for him to die.
Where are my socks? - Blackadder the Third - BBC Comedy Greats
George was innocent. It was his servant, Blackadder.
All those lost socks required higher taxes for replacement.
- Sep 28, 2008
- 41,409
- 247,120
- 4,281
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 954 so/sx
Nice thanks!
I listened to half and will finish it up later!
- Sep 28, 2008
- 41,409
- 247,120
- 4,281
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 954 so/sx
Glad you are enjoying it. I sort of springboarded off of @ImaginaryBloke 's video on psychopaths which is also pretty good, but I've gotten that information in more condensed forms previously, still a great talk tho.
Here is a shorter video on the psychopathic mindset.
Several decades ago, Eisenhower warned the American public about the dangers of the military-industrial complex. A couple of years later JFK talked about the mafia mindset of secret societies. Both of these events are known.
What is not so known is that Monty Python also warned the public about the mafia mindset of the military-industrial complex.
Army Protection Racket - Monty Python's Flying Circus
I notice a lot of negativity in this thread. Even moreso, a lot of blame.
We are "taking back" the oil and water that cools the earth's surface at such an alarming rate. I don't see anyone fixing or putting back a coolant from where it comes from. Well, maybe tainted water here and there that equates to their waste.
Make something that has no need for oil. Look at the rivers in Nigeria and see what happens when people try to "take it back". Invent something. Use your time trying to fix the problem.
If you destroy something without having something in place to run things, all you will see is mass destruction or military rule. See thou hurt not the oil and the wine.
We are "taking back" the oil and water that cools the earth's surface at such an alarming rate. I don't see anyone fixing or putting back a coolant from where it comes from. Well, maybe tainted water here and there that equates to their waste.
Make something that has no need for oil. Look at the rivers in Nigeria and see what happens when people try to "take it back". Invent something. Use your time trying to fix the problem.
If you destroy something without having something in place to run things, all you will see is mass destruction or military rule. See thou hurt not the oil and the wine.
Okaaay.
The negativity is your perception and opinion, dually noted.
There is a lot of negativity in the world, I refuse to ignore the reality of now just because it can be uncomfortable or frustrating to read.
And there are people responsible for making our world a worse place...so yes, there is blame, when blame is appropriate.
If they don’t want to be looked upon with distain by society, then maybe they shouldn’t actively work to create more destruction, hate, separation, and monetary fleecing.
I agree that we have the technology available (as well as a willing local workforce) to almost completely eliminate fossil fuels.
But profits and lobbyists talk.
We and not Nigeria.
And how do you know what I do with my “free time”?
You don’t know if I volunteer, which I used to recently until my arthritis has crippled me more.
Why do you assume that I don’t, or haven't contributed to my world?
Also I do invent things...I create art that I sell for hundreds of dollars a piece sometimes.
It not much, but it’s the best I can do right now physically.
I have touched the lives and saved the lives of more people than I can count while as paramedic or in surgery, not to mention serving my country in the Coast Guard and being a Father to a child who isn’t mine but I have raised since age 2 (now almost 14) and even though his Mom and I divorced, I continue to love him and treat him as my own flesh and blood - if I were still physically able I would still be working in the medical field, I don’t need your judgment of me as a "non-contributor" to society (it’s insulting) - what do you do Sir to improve your world?
When and if I can improve my back pain I will go back to volunteering somehow.
So far, so good....but it’s slow going.
How is your back btw?
"If you destroy something without having something in place to run things, all you will see is mass destruction or military rule.”
Like repealing the ACA without a replacement.
This is exactly how I view the Trump administration, the destruction of health regulations, EPA protections, personal protections, and voting rights.
Right now I am using my time to get healthy and out of so much pain so I can do more with my life and time....so I can be the best person I can for my SO and my Son - those are the most important things in my life at this time.
I don’t appreciate your assumptions and judgement of me, what I do or don’t do with my time, and the things you have no idea about going on in my life.
Last edited:
America’s secret role in the Rwandan genocide
The violence that shocked the world in 1994 did not come from nowhere. While the CIA looked on, its allies in the Ugandan government helped to spread terror and fuel ethnic hatred
by Helen C Epstein
Tuesday 12 September 2017 06.00 BST
Between April and July 1994, hundreds of thousands of Rwandans were murdered in the most rapid genocide ever recorded. The killers used simple tools – machetes, clubs and other blunt objects, or herded people into buildings and set them aflame with kerosene. Most of the victims were of minority Tutsi ethnicity; most of the killers belonged to the majority Hutus.
The Rwanda genocide has been compared to the Nazi Holocaust in its surreal brutality. But there is a fundamental difference between these two atrocities. No Jewish army posed a threat to Germany. Hitler targeted the Jews and other weak groups solely because of his own demented beliefs and the prevailing prejudices of the time. The Rwandan Hutu génocidaires, as the people who killed during the genocide were known, were also motivated by irrational beliefs and prejudices, but the powder keg contained another important ingredient: terror. Three and a half years before the genocide, a rebel army of mainly Rwandan Tutsi exiles known as the Rwandan Patriotic Front, or RPF, had invaded Rwanda and set up camps in the northern mountains. They had been armed and trained by neighbouring Uganda, which continued to supply them throughout the ensuing civil war, in violation of the UN charter, Organisation of African Unity rules, various Rwandan ceasefire and peace agreements, and the repeated promises of the Ugandan president, Yoweri Museveni.
During this period, officials at the US embassy in Kampala knew that weapons were crossing the border, and the CIA knew that the rebels’ growing military strength was escalating ethnic tensions within Rwanda to such a degree that hundreds of thousands of Rwandans might die in widespread ethnic violence. However, Washington not only ignored Uganda’s assistance to the Rwandan rebels, it also ramped up military and development aid to Museveni and then hailed him as a peacemaker once the genocide was underway.
[...]
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/sep/12/americas-secret-role-in-the-rwandan-genocide
Did the CIA know about it all along? Was it planned?
#ConspiracyStuff
The violence that shocked the world in 1994 did not come from nowhere. While the CIA looked on, its allies in the Ugandan government helped to spread terror and fuel ethnic hatred
by Helen C Epstein
Tuesday 12 September 2017 06.00 BST
Between April and July 1994, hundreds of thousands of Rwandans were murdered in the most rapid genocide ever recorded. The killers used simple tools – machetes, clubs and other blunt objects, or herded people into buildings and set them aflame with kerosene. Most of the victims were of minority Tutsi ethnicity; most of the killers belonged to the majority Hutus.
The Rwanda genocide has been compared to the Nazi Holocaust in its surreal brutality. But there is a fundamental difference between these two atrocities. No Jewish army posed a threat to Germany. Hitler targeted the Jews and other weak groups solely because of his own demented beliefs and the prevailing prejudices of the time. The Rwandan Hutu génocidaires, as the people who killed during the genocide were known, were also motivated by irrational beliefs and prejudices, but the powder keg contained another important ingredient: terror. Three and a half years before the genocide, a rebel army of mainly Rwandan Tutsi exiles known as the Rwandan Patriotic Front, or RPF, had invaded Rwanda and set up camps in the northern mountains. They had been armed and trained by neighbouring Uganda, which continued to supply them throughout the ensuing civil war, in violation of the UN charter, Organisation of African Unity rules, various Rwandan ceasefire and peace agreements, and the repeated promises of the Ugandan president, Yoweri Museveni.
During this period, officials at the US embassy in Kampala knew that weapons were crossing the border, and the CIA knew that the rebels’ growing military strength was escalating ethnic tensions within Rwanda to such a degree that hundreds of thousands of Rwandans might die in widespread ethnic violence. However, Washington not only ignored Uganda’s assistance to the Rwandan rebels, it also ramped up military and development aid to Museveni and then hailed him as a peacemaker once the genocide was underway.
[...]
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/sep/12/americas-secret-role-in-the-rwandan-genocide
Did the CIA know about it all along? Was it planned?
#ConspiracyStuff
Published on
Thursday, September 14, 2017
Common Dreams
Dems Not Backing Medicare for All Get Twice as Much Industry Cash as Co-Sponsors
New analysis shows that while Sanders himself gets zero from health insurance industry, co-sponsors of his bill receive half as much as those who remain on the sideline
Julia Conley, staff writer
Sanders announced his Medicare for All bill on Wednesday, surrounded by co-sponsors including Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.). (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
A close look at the finances of 31 members of the Senate Democratic caucus who have yet to publicly back Sen. Bernie Sanders's Medicare for All bill shows they have received significantly more financial contributions from the health insurance industry than those who did sign on as co-sponsors ahead of its introduction on Wednesday. An analysis by the government watchdog MapLight, released Thursday, found that senators who didn't back the bill received an average of $55,000 in industry donations since 2010, more than twice the average amount received by the bill's 16 co-sponsors.
Sanders is the only senator who's received $0 in donations from the health insurance industry, which would eventually become obsolete under the senator's plan to make government the single payer of the nation's healthcare costs—the same kind of system that exists in other high-income nations, with better health outcomes and lower costs according to the independent foundation The Commonwealth Fund.
[...]
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2...-all-get-twice-much-industry-cash-co-sponsors
The less money you get in bribes, the more reliable you are to your voters.
Thursday, September 14, 2017
Common Dreams
Dems Not Backing Medicare for All Get Twice as Much Industry Cash as Co-Sponsors
New analysis shows that while Sanders himself gets zero from health insurance industry, co-sponsors of his bill receive half as much as those who remain on the sideline
Julia Conley, staff writer
Sanders announced his Medicare for All bill on Wednesday, surrounded by co-sponsors including Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.). (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
A close look at the finances of 31 members of the Senate Democratic caucus who have yet to publicly back Sen. Bernie Sanders's Medicare for All bill shows they have received significantly more financial contributions from the health insurance industry than those who did sign on as co-sponsors ahead of its introduction on Wednesday. An analysis by the government watchdog MapLight, released Thursday, found that senators who didn't back the bill received an average of $55,000 in industry donations since 2010, more than twice the average amount received by the bill's 16 co-sponsors.
Sanders is the only senator who's received $0 in donations from the health insurance industry, which would eventually become obsolete under the senator's plan to make government the single payer of the nation's healthcare costs—the same kind of system that exists in other high-income nations, with better health outcomes and lower costs according to the independent foundation The Commonwealth Fund.
[...]
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2...-all-get-twice-much-industry-cash-co-sponsors
The less money you get in bribes, the more reliable you are to your voters.
Watch As Amazon Deletes Hundreds Of One-Star Reviews Of Hillary Clinton's New Book
by Tyler Durden
Sep 13, 2017 5:26 PM
In what many have dubbed a flagrant intervention by Amazon itself to seemingly boost the rating of Hillary Clinton's new book "What Happened", the Telegraph first reported, and subsequently many others observed first hand, that Amazon has been monitoring and deleting 1-star reviews of Hillary Clinton's new book "which was greeted with a torrent of criticism on the day it was released."
[...]
And for those who find such intervention hard to believe, here is what Amazon's intervention looks like chronologically on Wednesday.
First, courtesy of the way back machine, here is the rating breakdown as of 10:31am:
... As of 14:55pm
... and what it looks like right now: over 97% of the reviews are now 5 star, with over 1,000 reviews deleted. As of 5:30pm, of the 445 total review, 438 reviews were positive, and 7 (as of 5:30pm_ were critical. The latter number inexplicably keeps doing down.
To be sure, one can claim that neither the 1-star nor the 5-star reviews are legitimate, and were merely a partisan effort seeking to amass an either extremely negative or positive view of Clinton's book, however Amazon's decision to engage in a wholesale deletion of what appears to be uniformly low ratings will likely raise at least a few eyebrows.
Readers can observe the historical changes to Amazon's "What Happened" page on their own thanks to the Way Back Machine.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...ds-one-star-reviews-hillary-clintons-new-book
Interesting.
I ought to get a bunch of bot accounts. All sudden I get like a million likes for writing the most trivial of things.
by Tyler Durden
Sep 13, 2017 5:26 PM
In what many have dubbed a flagrant intervention by Amazon itself to seemingly boost the rating of Hillary Clinton's new book "What Happened", the Telegraph first reported, and subsequently many others observed first hand, that Amazon has been monitoring and deleting 1-star reviews of Hillary Clinton's new book "which was greeted with a torrent of criticism on the day it was released."
[...]
And for those who find such intervention hard to believe, here is what Amazon's intervention looks like chronologically on Wednesday.
First, courtesy of the way back machine, here is the rating breakdown as of 10:31am:
... As of 14:55pm
... and what it looks like right now: over 97% of the reviews are now 5 star, with over 1,000 reviews deleted. As of 5:30pm, of the 445 total review, 438 reviews were positive, and 7 (as of 5:30pm_ were critical. The latter number inexplicably keeps doing down.
To be sure, one can claim that neither the 1-star nor the 5-star reviews are legitimate, and were merely a partisan effort seeking to amass an either extremely negative or positive view of Clinton's book, however Amazon's decision to engage in a wholesale deletion of what appears to be uniformly low ratings will likely raise at least a few eyebrows.
Readers can observe the historical changes to Amazon's "What Happened" page on their own thanks to the Way Back Machine.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...ds-one-star-reviews-hillary-clintons-new-book
Interesting.
I ought to get a bunch of bot accounts. All sudden I get like a million likes for writing the most trivial of things.
Published on
Thursday, September 14, 2017
Common Dreams
Dems Not Backing Medicare for All Get Twice as Much Industry Cash as Co-Sponsors
New analysis shows that while Sanders himself gets zero from health insurance industry, co-sponsors of his bill receive half as much as those who remain on the sideline
Julia Conley, staff writer
Sanders announced his Medicare for All bill on Wednesday, surrounded by co-sponsors including Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.). (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
A close look at the finances of 31 members of the Senate Democratic caucus who have yet to publicly back Sen. Bernie Sanders's Medicare for All bill shows they have received significantly more financial contributions from the health insurance industry than those who did sign on as co-sponsors ahead of its introduction on Wednesday. An analysis by the government watchdog MapLight, released Thursday, found that senators who didn't back the bill received an average of $55,000 in industry donations since 2010, more than twice the average amount received by the bill's 16 co-sponsors.
Sanders is the only senator who's received $0 in donations from the health insurance industry, which would eventually become obsolete under the senator's plan to make government the single payer of the nation's healthcare costs—the same kind of system that exists in other high-income nations, with better health outcomes and lower costs according to the independent foundation The Commonwealth Fund.
[...]
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2...-all-get-twice-much-industry-cash-co-sponsors
The less money you get in bribes, the more reliable you are to your voters.
Big surprise.
Here’s the money spent on lobbying in 2017 so far...
US Chamber of Commerce $39,960,000
National Assn of Realtors $21,132,697
Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America $14,227,500
American Medical Assn $12,455,000
Blue Cross/Blue Shield $12,299,100
American Hospital Assn $10,625,050
Alphabet Inc $9,450,000
AT&T Inc $8,780,000
Boeing Co $8,760,000
Dow Chemical $7,690,000
National Assn of Broadcasters $7,630,000
Comcast Corp $7,480,000
Lockheed Martin $7,432,900
National Retail Federation $7,310,000
Northrop Grumman $6,820,000
Verizon Communications $6,730,000
Amgen Inc $6,620,000
Southern Co $6,540,000
Amazon.com $6,230,000
Exxon Mobil $6,070,000
Big Phama for some reason still is charging the consumer here in the US unacceptable amounts of money for their products - I wonder why looking at the amount they donate.
Same goes for the hospitals and the health insurance companies.
And this is what is public..this doesn’t count vacations or other perks.
Until we get a handle on the out of control lobbying/legal bribery, profits will continue to come before people in the US.
Hillary Almost Proposed "A Universal Basic Income" In 2016; Now The Idea Is Catching On Among Grassroots Democrats
by Tyler Durden
Sep 14, 2017 9:25 PM
Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,
Should you get free money from the U.S. government every month simply for being alive?
That may sound like a crazy idea to many of us, but the truth is that this will likely be one of the biggest political issues in the 2020 presidential election.
At this point, 40 percent of all Americans already “prefer socialism to capitalism”, and the concept of a “universal basic income” is starting to catch fire among grassroots Democrats.
Many liberals are convinced that the time has come to fight for the right to “a minimum standard of living”, and one study by a “left-leaning” group found that giving every adult in the country $1,000 each month would increase the size of the U.S. economy by more than 2 trillion dollars…
[...]
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...-income-2016-now-idea-catching-among-grassroo
Hhhmmm, the 'liberal disease' is spreading. But if the high-income were not cheating their taxes , then would not deficit be lower and the impression be different.
by Tyler Durden
Sep 14, 2017 9:25 PM
Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,
Should you get free money from the U.S. government every month simply for being alive?
That may sound like a crazy idea to many of us, but the truth is that this will likely be one of the biggest political issues in the 2020 presidential election.
At this point, 40 percent of all Americans already “prefer socialism to capitalism”, and the concept of a “universal basic income” is starting to catch fire among grassroots Democrats.
Many liberals are convinced that the time has come to fight for the right to “a minimum standard of living”, and one study by a “left-leaning” group found that giving every adult in the country $1,000 each month would increase the size of the U.S. economy by more than 2 trillion dollars…
[...]
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...-income-2016-now-idea-catching-among-grassroo
Hhhmmm, the 'liberal disease' is spreading. But if the high-income were not cheating their taxes , then would not deficit be lower and the impression be different.