Get Ready... Change Is Upon Us

[new_life]

From speaking to someone who knows a high up member of the security services, they are working night and day to prevent another atrocity in a UK major city, many such plots are foiled and the web traffic is used to convict them.  A crazy far right nutter killed a peace loving member of parliament earlier this year, its a real shame such powers couldn't of stopped such a horrible tragedy. 
 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38012499

Yes the bill is wide ranging and powerful, yes it doesn't make me feel comfortable, call me naive, but I'm resigned to it being necessary for fighting terrorism in the world we sadly now live in.

[cmartenson (Chris Martenson)]

@ScubaRoo

From speaking to someone who knows a high up member of the security services, they are working night and day to prevent another atrocity in a UK major city, many such plots are foiled and the web traffic is used to convict them.  A crazy far right nutter killed a peace loving member of parliament earlier this year, its a real shame such powers couldn't of stopped such a horrible tragedy. 

 Jo Cox murder trial: Witness spoke of 'hell' in 999 call - BBC News

Yes the bill is wide ranging and powerful, yes it doesn't make me feel comfortable, call me naive, but I'm resigned to it being necessary for fighting terrorism in the world we sadly now live in.

…and i would feel better if such laws came with attached provisions outlining especially harsh laws if/when the act is misused to abuse an innocent person, exact revenge against a rival or ex-partner, or for purely political aims or gains.

You know, because humans are humans.

[mememonkey]

If there is any doubt about the mainstream media's and their controlling interests intentions, this week has shown they are not going quietly into the night.  Beyond the initiatives to begin internet censoring of "Fake News" sites which all happen to have a conservative pro trump POV and in addition to doubling down on the false narratives legitimizing the Snowflake Revolution against the "New Hitler" Trump,   we now see the following transparent attempt to trigger some impassioned nutjob to assassinate Trump. 
The rational here was the talking point about the importance of the Press always having access to (not being ditched by) the the President elect.  and the example … the Hinckley assassination attempt of Reagan.  Makes for a great visual as the talking heads yammer on about Trump.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVgR_O5jL_8&feature=youtu.be

 

They are playing with fire.   I don't see this ending well.

 

Where I have I seen this before??   Wasn't this attempted with the Prime minister of Malaysia?

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_PnuXelvWA

Disclaimer Notice: this second video is a fictional scenario  Despite the uncanny parallels to CNN  m.o.

mememonkey

 

[new_life]

Chris
You might find this a good read (inc. the comments)

  https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/30/government-data-collection-citizens-acceptance-global-rights-privacy-free-speech

referenced from the comments to the article above

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/3662a707-0af9-3149-963f-47bea720b460

 

[snydeman]

@sand_puppy

I find that fiction is an awesome way to imagine how things might go.

Really good stories involve a bright intuitive author reading the currents and imagining into a possible future.  It lets us "live into" various scenarios.  We learn.

This is true, and I'm not saying there isn't value in reading such stories. However, the danger in reading into potential future outcomes too deeply from fictional accounts is that sometimes a person can react as if a scenario is unfolding as they imagined just because of one or two coincidental similarities with the fictional story that they've read. Like imagining an argument between you and a loved one, the danger is that you'll hear your loved one say something that is remotely on the pre-imagined "script" in your mind, and begin filling in blanks with incorrect responses before you can be certain things are actually playing out as you imagined they would play out. To use your chess example, sometimes playing out the moves too many times in your head means you can be duped into ignoring the real situation playing out on the board and be led into checkmate.

 

I'm also not saying I won't read these kinds of posts and stories - seeing how other people see things is helpful for many of the reasons you stated - but rather that I won't put actual value on them until evidence shows that things truly are coming to pass exactly as laid out. And, yes, I'll admit that if I waltz into a website that sports several confederate icons, I'm already going to be on guard for certain biases. But I'll still read it, recognizing it for what it is.

 

Plus, in the era of "fake news" and "biased news," many citizens seem to be falling into the trap of believing everything they read, as well as everything they think. So, yeah. We need to be on guard here against that.

 

[snydeman]

@mememonkey

They are playing with fire.   I don't see this ending well.

mememonkey

Well, if its any consolation, I'm having trouble seeing any way any of this can play out well. I would have said the same thing had Clinton won, though.

[rector]

I too was shocked, shocked, to see a confederate flag!  The horror. . .

[tim-ladson-2 (Tim Ladson)]

Tom,
A great addition to the range of possible scenarios. I agree with s_p, it makes us contemplate the unthinkable and thus widens our understanding of how some other people think.

Forewarned is forearmed.

"May the odds be ever in your favor".

Tim.    

[arthur-robey-2 (Arthur Robey)]

A paratrooper is a profession. It is not a philosophy.
A mortarman is a profession. It is not a philosophy.

A terrorist is a profession.  It is not a philosophy. 

He has an objective and he approaches his task professionally. His objective is to terrorize the Civilian population.

His allies are the press and round-eyed innocents. He gets good grades if he can reduce the population to a quivering huddle of sheep corralled into a corner with the minimum amount of blood loss and expense. But good grades are a secondary consideration, it takes what it takes. 

Note. The emotionally fragile youth are a big plus. A cardboard cut out of Donald and a loud noise should do the trick.

He has only a minimal interest in the "whys and what-fors". All that is beyond his payscale. His bosses would consider such questioning to be grounds for fireing. (Ask me how I know.)

It would appear that terrorists have achieved all their objectives in the West. Any sign of bravery by the sheep would be met with more terrorism. And the hyperventilating media would there to help.

Appear afraid, but keep your own council. 

[snydeman]

@Rector

I too was shocked, shocked, to see a confederate flag!  The horror. . .

I didn't say "shocked," nor imply it, but if you wish to put words into my mouth you may. I take the aggregate of symbols, such as the confederate soldier and flag (and other images and icons on a site) and I can start to construct a general understanding of its likely bias. I am shocked, however, if we are starting to take "fictional accounts" and positing them as likely or probable truths and outcomes here at Peak Prosperity. A dangerous mind-game, that is.

 

As for the confederate flag itself, I'm not fond of it, mostly because lots of people like to mistakenly claim it as a symbol of a fight for states-rights while denying it also stood for a system that enslaved other humans (and, I might add, impoverished many poor white southern farmers- ironic, that). I get it as a symbol of standing up against authority and all, but I'd hope we could find something to represent that same ideal without all of the other baggage that comes with it. It's well within their rights to have whatever symbolism they wish to have on their site, of course, but I also find it helpful to use such obvious symbolism as a sign of the probable bias I will find there. I am occasionally surprised and incorrect in my assumptions, but not often.

 

Oh, and I also take issue with people not realizing it wasn't the official confederate flag at the outset of the conflict (I want to say it was adopted in late '63, but don't quote me on that exact date) but that's just my historian being a nit-picker.

 

-Snydeman

 

[cmartenson (Chris Martenson)]

@Snydeman

@Rector

I too was shocked, shocked, to see a confederate flag!  The horror. . .

(…)

I am shocked, however, if we are starting to take "fictional accounts" and positing them as likely or probable truths and outcomes here at Peak Prosperity. A dangerous mind-game, that is.

(…)

I said plausible, as in that being a reasonable or valid explanation of the way power and covert operations are run.  I likes how the story noted the levers of power and articulated each of the keys to power in its telling.  The media, the judicial, military and enforcement keys were all included.

That makes a better plot than when someone leaves out obvious keys and doesn't explain where they are or what they are up to.  It's a plot hole.

Example of the use of plausible:  It's plausible that we might someday have a Native American President.

Or, that plot is plausible.

In these cases it means believable, but says nothing of the outcomes being probable or likely, and in the case of a plot line of a fictional story nothing about truth is ever really implied.  .  

I'm not aware of anyone posting that story as likely or probable truths.

Let me know if I missed something.   

[snydeman]

@cmartenson

I said plausible, as in that being a reasonable or valid explanation of the way power and covert operations are run.  I likes how the story noted the levers of power and articulated each of the keys to power in its telling.  The media, the judicial, military and enforcement keys were all included.

That makes a better plot than when someone leaves out obvious keys and doesn't explain where they are or what they are up to.  It's a plot hole.

Example of the use of plausible:  It's plausible that we might someday have a Native American President.

Or, that plot is plausible.

In these cases it means believable, but says nothing of the outcomes being probable or likely, and in the case of a plot line of a fictional story nothing about truth is ever really implied.  .  

I'm not aware of anyone posting that story as likely or probable truths.

Let me know if I missed something.   

A very valid and critical distinction, and although I wasn't referring merely to what you were saying when I was responding - I sensed the flow of the conversation was lending too much credibility to what was a fictional account - I may have just as easily read too far into what you and others were saying. I sense a ground swell of far right support emerging in my society overall, but whether this is truly happening, is just mainstream media trying to bend me to this conclusion, or is me just suffering from flight/fight overload, I can't say. Either way, I didn't catch the essence of what you were saying because I missed the context of the word plausible as you meant it, and probably put words in your mouth you weren't saying. Mea culpa. I've been on this site and seen what you've said long enough to know better.

 

I think I need to unplug for a few weeks, tickle my kids, and go dig in the dirt in my garden. I'm too scared and I need to regain some semblance of balance and level-headedness.

 

Someone poke me when Daniel Quinn comes on.

[locksmithuk]

 

@ScubaRoo

 

Yes the bill is wide ranging and powerful, yes it doesn't make me feel comfortable, call me naive, but I'm resigned to it being necessary for fighting terrorism in the world we sadly now live in.

 

Far, far, far too little public debate is encouraged or condoned about WHY "terrorism" exists, and who the real "terrorists" are. I use quotation marks in the same way that Chris often does when he talks about "markets". 

 

The point where we start examining & debating this issue - I mean REALLY examining it - and we stop assuming that the preference of others living in faraway dusty Arab places is to harm us should be the point at which every Western citizen stops in his/her tracks.

 

I can't see that that debate will ever be anything but taboo whilst the likes of CNN & ABC still pollute the airwaves, whipping up the public's support for militaristic bullying. There are few better examples of this reticence than the physically wary demeanour of the magnificent Louis CK in the following clip. View it from the start for the best context, but the crux of my point is to be found at the 1:40 mark. Watch his wariness shortly afterwards. I suggest that he knows the answer to the terrorism question, and it's a pity that there aren't more like him.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFwBH2fb2E0

[markm]

@locksmithuk

 

@ScubaRoo

 

Yes the bill is wide ranging and powerful, yes it doesn't make me feel comfortable, call me naive, but I'm resigned to it being necessary for fighting terrorism in the world we sadly now live in.

 

Far, far, far too little public debate is encouraged or condoned about WHY "terrorism" exists, and who the real "terrorists" are. I use quotation marks in the same way that Chris often does when he talks about "markets". 

 

The point where we start examining & debating this issue - I mean REALLY examining it - and we stop assuming that the preference of others living in faraway dusty Arab places is to harm us should be the point at which every Western citizen stops in his/her tracks.

 

I can't see that that debate will ever be anything but taboo whilst the likes of CNN & ABC still pollute the airwaves, whipping up the public's support for militaristic bullying. There are few better examples of this reticence than the physically wary demeanour of the magnificent Louis CK in the following clip. View it from the start for the best context, but the crux of my point is to be found at the 1:40 mark. Watch his wariness shortly afterwards. I suggest that he knows the answer to the terrorism question, and it's a pity that there aren't more like him.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFwBH2fb2E0

But maybe…there are reasons other than the ones we are force fed by the mainstream media. Nah, of course not.

[rector]

Another way to manage "terrorism" in the UK is to STOP trying to change the demographics of the country at a 10% per year clip through immigration from the ME.  If you import enough people from of different culture into your country - you will get the environment they were running from.  Since this is so obvious, the current situation in the UK has been designed.  They are dead men walking.
Rector

[markm]

@cmartenson

@thc0655

How about this as a likely scenario (one of several):

https://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2012/09/11/what-i-saw-at-the-coup/

Pursuant to your tale posted above, which was interesting by the way, plausible…it's hard to see this next news story as not fitting in to that tale of government overreach and hubris:

The UK has just passed a massive expansion in surveillance powers, which critics have called "terrifying" and "dangerous."

The new law, dubbed the "snoopers' charter," was introduced by then-home secretary Theresa May in 2012, and took two attempts to get passed into law following breakdowns in the previous coalition government.

Four years and a general election later – May is now prime minister – the bill was finalized and passed on Wednesday by both parliamentary houses. Civil liberties groups have long criticized the bill, with some arguing that the law will let the UK government "document everything we do online."

It's no wonder, because it basically does. The law will force internet providers to record every internet customer's top-level web history in real-time for up to a year, which can be accessed by numerous government departments; force companies to decrypt data on demand – though the government has never been that clear on exactly how it forces foreign firms to do that that; and even disclose any new security features in products before they launch.

Not only that, the law also gives the intelligence agencies the power to hack into computers and devices of citizens (known as equipment interference), although some protected professions – such as journalists and medical staff – are layered with marginally better protections. In other words, it's the "most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy," according to Jim Killock, director of the Open Rights Group.

(Source) 

This is not a fantasy tale by some novelist, this is reality.  You might ask yourself just how the UK slipped this far down this rabbit hole,. but you'd be better pressed to ask how long it is before your own country joins them.  This is the direction of the Deep State.

This is what Trump should combat if he's to have any sort of real impact at all.  But I rather doubt he will or can.  

At any rate, the UK has just voted Stasi-like powers to its security apparatus (not that they didn't already have it, now it's just 'legal').

 

The thin end of the wedge was inserted some time ago. The hammer strikes will continue.

[arthur-robey-2 (Arthur Robey)]

a Native American President.

Now there is something that aligns with my values.

It is interesting, don't you think, that this has not happened?

[locksmithuk]

@locksmithuk

 

@ScubaRoo

 

Yes the bill is wide ranging and powerful, yes it doesn't make me feel comfortable, call me naive, but I'm resigned to it being necessary for fighting terrorism in the world we sadly now live in.

 

Far, far, far too little public debate is encouraged or condoned about WHY "terrorism" exists, and who the real "terrorists" are. I use quotation marks in the same way that Chris often does when he talks about "markets". 

 

The point where we start examining & debating this issue - I mean REALLY examining it - and we stop assuming that the preference of others living in faraway dusty Arab places is to harm us should be the point at which every Western citizen stops in his/her tracks.

 

I can't see that that debate will ever be anything but taboo whilst the likes of CNN & ABC still pollute the airwaves, whipping up the public's support for militaristic bullying. There are few better examples of this reticence than the physically wary demeanour of the magnificent Louis CK in the following clip. View it from the start for the best context, but the crux of my point is to be found at the 1:40 mark. Watch his wariness shortly afterwards. I suggest that he knows the answer to the terrorism question, and it's a pity that there aren't more like him.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFwBH2fb2E0

 

Oops, I meant "… at the 2.12 mark. Watch his wariness shortly afterwards".

 

My reading skills are obviously not what they used to be.

[david-phillips-2 (David Phillips)]

Sorry to be bothersome.  Once I discovered the influence Putin and his political advisor Dugin have over Donald Trump I felt that I needed to make people aware of what is really going on, as opposed to what we are being told as Trump keeps us guessing.

 

It's easy to see for yourself once you start looking at the Russian CNN, RT News.

https://www.rt.com/news/

It shows the real news that the rest of the world sees, not the misinformation campaign that the people in the US have been feed for decades.  

 

I was watching one show where they were making fun of the American news and that the American were getting ready to discover just how misled they have been.

 

Here is an interview on RT News with Michael Flynn, Trump's top pick for Intelligence advisor.  

Click here to watch the 45 minute interview

• Why is a former US General and Trump's future Intelligence advisor criticising Obama on Russian TV and making deals with Putin, while the Republicans are constantly berating Obama for not being tough enough with Putin on American TV?

• The conservatives would be screaming treason if a liberal were on Russian TV and openly making deals with Putin.

• And why is Russian TV so intelligent while American TV is so misleading?  

 

Check out this RT News article written by Vladimir Putin himself.

https://www.ft.com/content/033783f2-7a51-11e6-ae24-f193b105145e

 

 

 

Take a look at RT News story about the Trump and Putin's phone call.

https://www.rt.com/news/367268-putin-trump-meeting-date/

What does making “Russia great again” and “America great again” really mean to these people?

Is it a dog whistle for  "white" again?

 

The Russians know a lot of things the Americans don't.  The truth isn’t hidden from their people like it is in the United States.  All of these things are openly discussed including the thoughts of Alexander Dugin, Putin's political advisor and leader of the Eurasian fascists movement.  When you start reading through his material it's clear who is calling the shots.

https://4threvolutionarywar.wordpress.com/

 

In Dugin's Directives he describes in more detail what is to happen next.  http://katehon.com/directives/donald-trumps-victory

• Dugin says the unipolar world is about to end and a new multipolar world about to begin.

• He describes two Americas, a globalist United States of America, and Trump America where there is a resounding no to globalist and liberal ideologies.

• He calls for the collapse of all news networks and in another piece the Federal Reserve.

• He reveals who Trump really supports and who he doesn't (Christians).

• And says that internal strife will reduce America to the same position as everyone else.

 

In his latest directive "Drain the Swamp" he sets up his next dog whistle, "swamp" which means get rid of globalist.  http://katehon.com/directives/donald-trump-swamp-and-fire

 

He wants a Nuremberg Trial for liberals and calls for an end to the Federal Reserve so that humanity can return to mercantilism.  

 

He is calling for a world of fire now, so that a new world can emerge from the ashes with Putin and Trump in two opposite corners of the planet.

 

Do you see what I am seeing now and that there is need for alarm?  Trump is selling out America and its people to Putin’s growing fascist movement!  We better call him out on it before it's too late and the white supremacists start reeking havoc like Dugin is directing them to do.  If we don't, the United States of America is doomed by the internal strife that Trump promised Bannon, and a new Trump America will emerge.

 

What kind of promises has Trump made to Bannon?

Shouldn't Bannon be making promises to Trump?

 

The American press is just now starting to catch onto Trump’s treachery with the Democratic investigation  http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/17/politics/house-oversight-democrat-investigate-russia/index.html

We need to help expose how Russia is involved with Trump’s election and what Putin is asking him to do before he voted into office by the Electoral College on December 18th.

 

 

[david-phillips-2 (David Phillips)]

It can be stopped when enough people discover what's at stake and speak out.  The electoral college members will hear.  I think the turning point is with the conservative Christians.  Once they discover that they're going to get screwed too, their masses will go after him like a witch hunt.