September 5, 2018 at 9:18 am #42709Raúl Ilargi MeijerKeymaster
Henri Matisse Luxury, calm and pleasure 1904 • JP Morgan Warns Next Crisis To Have Flash Crashes And Social Unrest (CNBC) • Share Buybacks Boos
[See the full post at: Debt Rattle September 5 2018]September 5, 2018 at 9:44 am #42710NassimParticipant
More MSM excerpts plus pithy ironic comments.
Here is a bit of more spicy stuff:
Let’s start with Israel and Lebanon. How are things between Israel and Lebanon since 2006 to date, in 2018? It is clear that Israel is deterred (from any aggression against Lebanon). This Israel who, all his life, was attacking Lebanon for the most trivial reasons –its planes were bombing the south, the Bekaa, the North, Mount Lebanon, even the heart of the capital. You all remember the situation before 1982 and after 1982. But things have changed, and Israel does no such thing today. And it’s not because of good manners (allegedly acquired by) Israel, but thanks to the (deterrent) equation imposed by the Resistance.
Today, Israel, since 2007 to date, continually rebuilds and refounds itself in the light of its (2006) defeat and of the consequences of this defeat. They reviewed their combat doctrine, their military strategies and tactics –each time a new Chief of staff takes office, he writes a new strategy for the Israeli army–, their structure, the training of their forces, they have reconsidered their facilities and equipment and weapons, they continually hold maneuvers since 2006 and until yesterday, yesterday, there were maneuvers in the north.
Why? Why all these maneuvers, these reconsiderations, etc.? Because they consider that in Lebanon, there is a force that worries them (greatly), and that is to them, in their words, a “great threat” the “main threat”, and they are preparing to face it (at their best). (Throughout its history), when did we find Israel behaving this way towards Lebanon? (Never before 2006).
Israel hides itself behind the walls (it erected at the border) with Lebanon. They work constantly on their home front, and set out their fears at this level. Today, in every action –and I am not revealing secrets, even their media speak of it–, Israel considers (the risks of strikes against) the electricity, gas, oil, its gas facilities, the colonies, the depth, etc., because they know that in front of them, there is a serious, powerful and capable enemy. And I will conclude on this in a decisive sentence.
It takes no genius to realise that the map of the Middle East is going to revert to something close to what it was 100 years ago. Where the Jews will go, I have no idea. It is not the problem of the people of the region. It is a problem for those who imposed them on the region. All those British aristocrats and prime ministers who were in their pay have a lot to answer for.
It is really quite amazing to watch the Jews claiming control of the British Labour party as though they represent what remains of the British working class.September 5, 2018 at 9:50 am #42711NassimParticipant
Here is the NYT delivering moral support to mostly foreign terrorists – because that is what Israel wants.September 5, 2018 at 12:07 pm #42712Dr. DParticipant
“The White House did not provide any evidence to support the president’s complaints…”
I’ve seen this journalistic ‘aside’ in several articles, which is unusual. The journalist is reporting evidence of what is, then stops to point out, it isn’t. Except it is, again, fake news. The President took screen shots of Google search and posted them with his comments. Is that somehow not evidence now? No doubt the gentleman (or in his case, ‘man) who has direct access to the highest secrets and clearance is promoting “conspiracy theories”. Because that’s what we say about the person who can and does directly read all those secrets we can’t: he doesn’t read them, he doesn’t know what he’s talking about, and he knows less than a 1st year reporter from Buzzfeed, who’s going to tell him how it is, I kid you not. Many times now saying the man with highest clearance doesn’t know, but they, a reporter in San Bernardino, does. That Vice reporter knows the inner workings of DARPA and DJT doesn’t. Hey, he can be liar, and often is, but I don’t think he can credibly be a conspiracy theorist, because he’ll just call down the NSA and say, “deliver the records.’ How far we’ve come. So if it’s this looking-glass, when is the word used now and why?
In any case, that leaves BBC and NYT saying “presented no evidence of this foolishness” when the 40 million on his Twitter feed saw the screen pic of the bent results. And that’s aside from how it couldn’t be more obvious, except that each side is saying it’s them, instead of recognizing that they’re equally ecstatic to bend and suppress the Progressives, because their goal is the status quo at all costs. For instance:
“We do not shadow ban. You are always able to see the tweets from accounts you follow (although you may have to do more work to find them, like go directly to their profile). And we certainly don’t shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology.” -Twitter
So when a person is undiscoverable even by a direct name search, that’s not shadowbanning. Got it.
Says Olinda Hassan, a Policy Manager for Twitter’s Trust and Safety:
“Yeah. That’s something we’re working on. It’s something we’re working on. We’re trying to get the shitty people to not show up. It’s a product thing we’re working on right now.”
Who decides who’s ‘shitty’? Read on.
“Twitter Content Review Agent Mo Nora explains that Twitter doesn’t have an official written policy that targets conservative speech, but rather they were following “unwritten rules from the top”:
“A lot of unwritten rules, and being that we’re in San Francisco, we’re in California, very liberal, a very blue state. You had to be… I mean as a company you can’t really say it because it would make you look bad, but behind closed doors are lots of rules…There was, I would say… Twitter was probably about 90% Anti-Trump, maybe 99% Anti-Trump.”
Pranay Singh says Twitter digs into your profile to determine whether or not you’re a “redneck” and therefore worthy of being banned:
“Yeah you look for Trump, or America, and you have like five thousand keywords to describe a redneck. Then you look and parse all the messages, all the pictures, and then you look for stuff that matches that stuff.” When asked if the majority of the algorithms are targeted against conservative or liberal users of Twitter, Singh said, “I would say majority of it are for Republicans.”
“[I] Must admit that when some [Republican] sources have complained about this to me I mocked them to their face as conspiracy theorists,” said Axios’ Jonathan Swan. He said the Vice report had caused him to rethink the issue.”
But that’s not evidence according to NYT and BBC. How about this?
Twitter head Jack Dorsey said, “We do not look at content with regards to political viewpoint or ideology… I think we need to constantly show that we are not adding our own bias, which I fully admit is left, is more left-leaning,”
So his bias, which is doesn’t have, is a bias he has that doesn’t matter that he has it. Not like his engineers and staff are voluminously quoted as admitting overwhelming bias and banning, as reported by anti-conservative outlets like Vice and Buzzfeed or anything.
Hey BBC, you know what we call that? “Censoring conservative news outlets in its search results.”
(P.S. plus Progressives who are antiwar or not corporatist enough)
While this example is Twitter and not Google, Google is both worse and easier to prove. Recently a report showed they could swing segments of voters 12%, far over the margins of error, and it was reported today that they in fact did this in Russia, for (yet another) example of election tampering. I know this is Breitbart, but it’s just screen shots, did you really think BBC or NYT would assemble this?
Wow, what a coincidence, right in the middle of an election. But I’m sure the search results for DJT were just as universally laudable, right?
Yup, no evidence here. And there’s no fake news. The guy with access to all, plus posting screen shots any one of us can duplicate, is just an unhinged conspiracy theorist. OMG, why do they report such false stuff that they force me to defend him/it? Nobody wants that.September 5, 2018 at 12:22 pm #42713Dr. DParticipant
Brexit Gone Wild: What a prefect excuse to install that Totalitarianism you always wanted.
Never let a crisis go to waste: create one on purpose instead.September 5, 2018 at 1:04 pm #42714V. ArnoldParticipant
We’ll see…September 5, 2018 at 3:20 pm #42718seychellesParticipant
Social unrest not seen in the U.S. in half a century. That’s how J.P. Morgan Chase’s head quant, Marko Kolanovic, envisions the next financial crisis.
Well, certain situations (upcoming mid-term elections) ethically require certain actions. Self-serving engineered actions by the folks who always know what’s best for us.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.