Jump to content

General Political Thoughts Thread


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

duck duck go is a joke and google came out of darpa

 

that whole big tech arena is controlled by the cabal and is coming out of the intelligence agencies

 

Give us a list of all the search engines, and VPN's if you don't mind, that you think make you invisible and un-trackable then.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why some people hate the church is because it is upholding morality. This is why some people, like the sabbateans, are so desperate to destroy christianity so that they can takedown the prevailing morality system of the west; for example it appears that the shooter in nashville who just shot some christians was transgender:

 

However, later in life, it’s unclear if Hale identified as female. Hale’s LinkedIn account, which has since been removed, said Hale used the pronouns “he” and “him.” A friend of Hale’s, Averianna Patton, said Hale messaged her shortly before the shooting and signed the message “Audrey (Aiden).” Hale’s website, which has since been taken down, linked to an Instagram account where Hale used the name Aiden.

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/details-nashville-shooters-gender-identity-sow-confusion-disinformatio-rcna77424

 

so what is it that some people want to achieve by removing christian morality:

Non-binary author Lucas Rijneveld's controversial novel about a paedophile who grooms a 14-year-old girl leaves critics 'sickened' - but they still hail the International Booker Prize winner a literary talent

By Jessica Taylor For Mailonline

Published: 05:49 EST, 14 February 2024 | Updated: 05:50 EST, 14 February 2024

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-13081871/Non-binary-author-Lucas-Rijnevelds-controversial-novel-paedophile-grooms-14-year-old-girl-leaves-critics-sickened-hail-International-Booker-Prize-winner-literary-talent.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

that sounds a bit creepy

 

Your avoiding.

 

I use what I said to go poking around parts of the internet that perhaps we shouldn't. It does give enough protection to do so. But then, I'm not trading in people, so I don't worry much. 

 

I'm not dumb enough to think I can't be tracked or that there are completely foolproof methods.

 

And I'm not dumb enough to think there is a literal Satan's Net watching me 24/7 either.

 

 

Edited by pi3141
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, pi3141 said:

And I'm not dumb enough to think there is a literal Satan's Net watching me 24/7 either.

Government Funds AI Tools For Whole-Of-Internet Surveillance And Censorship

Posted By: Debbie Lerman via Brownstone Institute

February 14, 2024

Internet-wide surveillance and censorship, enabled by the unimaginably vast computational power of artificial intelligence (AI), is here.

This is not a futuristic dystopia. It’s happening now.

Government agencies are working with universities and nonprofits to use AI tools to surveil and censor content on the Internet.

This is not political or partisan. This is not about any particular opinion or idea.

What’s happening is that a tool powerful enough to surveil everything that’s said and done on the Internet (or large portions of it) is becoming available to the government to monitor all of us, all the time. And, based on that monitoring, the government – and any organization or company the government partners with – can then use the same tool to suppress, silence, and shut down whatever speech it doesn’t like.

But that’s not all. Using the same tool, the government and its public-private, “non-governmental” partners (think, for example: the World Health Organization, or Monsanto) can also shut down any activity that is linked to the Internet. Banking, buying, selling, teaching, learning, entertaining, connecting to each other – if the government-controlled AI does not like what you (or your kids!) say in a tweet or an email, it can shut down all of that for you.

Yes, we’ve seen this on a very local and politicized scale with, for example, the Canadian truckers.

But if we thought this type of activity could not, or would not, happen on a national (or even scarier – global) scale, we need to wake up right now and realize it’s happening, and it might not be stoppable.

New Documents Show Government-Funded AI Intended for Online Censorship

The US House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government was formed in January 2023 “to investigate matters related to the collection, analysis, dissemination, and use of information on US citizens by executive branch agencies, including whether such efforts are illegal, unconstitutional, or otherwise unethical.”

Unfortunately, the work of the committee is viewed, even by its own members, as largely political: Conservative lawmakers are investigating what they perceive to be the silencing of conservative voices by liberal-leaning government agencies.

Nevertheless, in its investigations, this committee has uncovered some astonishing documents related to government attempts to censor the speech of American citizens.

These documents have crucial and terrifying all-of-society implications.

In the Subcommittee’s interim report, dated February 5, 2024, documents show that academic and nonprofit groups are pitching a government agency on a plan to use AI “misinformation services” to censor content on internet platforms.

Specifically, the University of Michigan is explaining to the National Science Foundation (NSF) that the AI-powered tools funded by the NSF can be used to help social media platforms perform censorship activities without having to actually make the decisions on what should be censored.

Here’s how the relationship is visualized in the Subcommittee’s report:

Screen-Shot-2024-02-10-at-12.50.00-PM-80

Here’s a specific quote presented in the Subcommittee’s report. It comes from “Speaker’s notes from the University of Michigan’s first pitch to the National Science Foundation (NSF) about its NSF-funded, AI-powered WiseDex tool.” The notes are on file with the committee.

Our misinformation service helps policy makers at platforms who want to…push responsibility for difficult judgments to someone outside the company…by externalizing the difficult responsibility of censorship.

This is an extraordinary statement on so many levels:

  1. It explicitly equates “misinformation service” with censorship.

This is a crucial equation, because governments worldwide are pretending to combat harmful misinformation when in fact they are passing massive censorship bills. The WEF declared “misinformation and disinformation” the “most severe global risks” in the next two years, which presumably means their biggest efforts will go toward censorship.

When a government contractor explicitly states that it is selling a “misinformation service” that helps online platforms “externalize censorship” – the two terms are acknowledged as being interchangeable.

https://www.technocracy.news/government-funds-ai-tools-for-whole-of-internet-surveillance-and-censorship/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Macnamara said:

why some people hate the church is because it is upholding morality. This is why some people, like the sabbateans, are so desperate to destroy christianity so that they can takedown the prevailing morality system of the west; for example it appears that the shooter in nashville who just shot some christians was transgender:

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/details-nashville-shooters-gender-identity-sow-confusion-disinformatio-rcna77424

 

so what is it that some people want to achieve by removing christian morality:

Non-binary author Lucas Rijneveld's controversial novel about a paedophile who grooms a 14-year-old girl leaves critics 'sickened' - but they still hail the International Booker Prize winner a literary talent

 

West Virginia: Drag Queen Teacher Arrested on Child S*xual Abuse Charges

By Pamela Geller - on February 7, 2024

Poland’s New Left-Wing Government Says They’re Going to Imprison People for Complaining About Sexual Deviants

February 14, 2024 8:06 pm by CWR

by Chris Black

This was highly predictable.

The Poles made a deal with the devil to fight their stupid “I hate my daddy” war against Russia, and now they’re going to pay all the consequences for that.

This law probably won’t go through this time around.

But it’s there, on the table, and in the realm of public discussion, meaning that it will remain there, and it will eventually be forced through, and Christians will face prosecution as they do in other countries in Europe.

Donald Tusk’s new left-wing government in Poland is introducing a new draconian hate speech law that could see those who claim there are only two genders criminalized and jailed.

Barely a month into office, the Ministry of Justice has prepared a draft amendment to the country’s Penal Code to include dissent against gender identity and sexual orientation in hate speech violations.

It would mean that individuals who oppose the progressive gender ideology, or Catholics who insist that marriage can only be a union between a man and a woman in the eyes of God could be convicted of a criminal offense.

“We already have the project practically completed. Now it will be sent for inter-ministerial consultations,” Secretary of State at the Ministry of Justice Krzysztof Śmiszek told Radio TOK FM.

https://citizenwatchreport.com/polands-new-left-wing-government-says-theyre-going-to-imprison-people-for-complaining-about-sexual-deviants/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Macnamara said:

Government Funds AI Tools For Whole-Of-Internet Surveillance And Censorship

Posted By: Debbie Lerman via Brownstone Institute

February 14, 2024

Internet-wide surveillance and censorship, enabled by the unimaginably vast computational power of artificial intelligence (AI), is here.

This is not a futuristic dystopia. It’s happening now.

Government agencies are working with universities and nonprofits to use AI tools to surveil and censor content on the Internet.

This is not political or partisan. This is not about any particular opinion or idea.

What’s happening is that a tool powerful enough to surveil everything that’s said and done on the Internet (or large portions of it) is becoming available to the government to monitor all of us, all the time. And, based on that monitoring, the government – and any organization or company the government partners with – can then use the same tool to suppress, silence, and shut down whatever speech it doesn’t like.

But that’s not all. Using the same tool, the government and its public-private, “non-governmental” partners (think, for example: the World Health Organization, or Monsanto) can also shut down any activity that is linked to the Internet. Banking, buying, selling, teaching, learning, entertaining, connecting to each other – if the government-controlled AI does not like what you (or your kids!) say in a tweet or an email, it can shut down all of that for you.

Yes, we’ve seen this on a very local and politicized scale with, for example, the Canadian truckers.

But if we thought this type of activity could not, or would not, happen on a national (or even scarier – global) scale, we need to wake up right now and realize it’s happening, and it might not be stoppable.

New Documents Show Government-Funded AI Intended for Online Censorship

The US House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government was formed in January 2023 “to investigate matters related to the collection, analysis, dissemination, and use of information on US citizens by executive branch agencies, including whether such efforts are illegal, unconstitutional, or otherwise unethical.”

Unfortunately, the work of the committee is viewed, even by its own members, as largely political: Conservative lawmakers are investigating what they perceive to be the silencing of conservative voices by liberal-leaning government agencies.

Nevertheless, in its investigations, this committee has uncovered some astonishing documents related to government attempts to censor the speech of American citizens.

These documents have crucial and terrifying all-of-society implications.

In the Subcommittee’s interim report, dated February 5, 2024, documents show that academic and nonprofit groups are pitching a government agency on a plan to use AI “misinformation services” to censor content on internet platforms.

Specifically, the University of Michigan is explaining to the National Science Foundation (NSF) that the AI-powered tools funded by the NSF can be used to help social media platforms perform censorship activities without having to actually make the decisions on what should be censored.

Here’s how the relationship is visualized in the Subcommittee’s report:

Screen-Shot-2024-02-10-at-12.50.00-PM-80

Here’s a specific quote presented in the Subcommittee’s report. It comes from “Speaker’s notes from the University of Michigan’s first pitch to the National Science Foundation (NSF) about its NSF-funded, AI-powered WiseDex tool.” The notes are on file with the committee.

Our misinformation service helps policy makers at platforms who want to…push responsibility for difficult judgments to someone outside the company…by externalizing the difficult responsibility of censorship.

This is an extraordinary statement on so many levels:

  1. It explicitly equates “misinformation service” with censorship.

This is a crucial equation, because governments worldwide are pretending to combat harmful misinformation when in fact they are passing massive censorship bills. The WEF declared “misinformation and disinformation” the “most severe global risks” in the next two years, which presumably means their biggest efforts will go toward censorship.

When a government contractor explicitly states that it is selling a “misinformation service” that helps online platforms “externalize censorship” – the two terms are acknowledged as being interchangeable.

https://www.technocracy.news/government-funds-ai-tools-for-whole-of-internet-surveillance-and-censorship/

 

 

So why do you believe it makes a difference which search engine we use?

 

It's all traceable, I said that previously.

 

Christ you like circular arguments and putting words in peoples mouths before telling them why they are wrong.

 

You might as well just talk to yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

You might as well just talk to yourself.

 

i'm telling you what the agenda is. On this thread and other threads across the forum

 

I'm explaining clearly what's going on, who is doing it and why and i'm constantly sharing evidence to support what i say

 

you can argue until you are blue in the face but it won't change reality. What i'm explaining to you is reality which is why i keep being proven right by events

 

Events are like a giant TICK mark against my past comments. A crazy or deluded person can't do what i do because if you are crazy or deluded then you are detached from reality. But reality keeps on according with what i say. I don't know how much more that needs to happen before you realise this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you delegate to someone else a right which you don't have? For example, if you don't have the right to steal from someone else, can you give the right to do so to someone else? The answer is self-evident: No, you can't. If it's bad for you to do it, you can't make it good for someone else to do it. If it's immoral for you to do something, how could you possibly have the ability to make it moral for someone else to do it?

 

Can two people delegate a right that neither of them has? For example, if two of you want to steal from someone else (but neither of you has the right), can you give a third person the right to do it? Again, the answer is pretty obvious: No, the number of people who want to do something immoral doesn't make it into something moral.

 

If people cannot delegate rights they don't have, where did "government" get the right to do what it does? Sure, a few "laws" are just the (natural, or some would say god given) rights we all have, such as the right to self defence. But consider how many so-called "laws" are things which you and I would never dream of doing on our own, because we know we don't have the (moral) right.

 

For example, do you personally have the right to demand money from your neighbour, just because you want it? Do you have the right to imprison him if he refuses? If you don't personally have the right to do any of that, how did those in "government" (people just like you and me) get the right to do it? Who gave it to them? The question is simple. From whom did they get the right? Based on the self-evident answers, they didn't get the right from you, or from any of your neighbours (none of whom have the right themselves). So, where did it come from? A piece of paper with some words on it? A voting booth? If we mere mortals didn't give them the right (and we didn't, we can't), who or what did?

 

This is one of the many reasons why the belief in ''government'' is not based on reason but rather it's based on a faith-based indoctrinated belief.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2021 at 6:15 PM, EnigmaticWorld said:

Just made a new account on Twitter, mainly to follow tech and surveillance developments. My second follower is from some Moldbug dark enlightment dude. What the hell is that? It's hard to just be normal trad nationalist these days without folks trying to channel you into some weird pipeline. If it's not the NazBols it's some other weird esoteric shit.                                   

Do you know anything about this twitter thing. I'm putting up my conspiracy theory stuff and just getting a few views, while a silly video of some guy walking his dog gets thousands. How do they get so many views

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Piers Corbyn is looking for financial pledges (not actual payment at the moment) this week for his London mayoral campaign. 

 

PLEDGE NOW! #PiersCorbyn #Corbyn4Mayor warns of Food and Radio Frequency Radiation (RFR) now being extended  to induce illness and death in the WEF DEPOPULATION AGENDA  "Disease X" and explains the importance of his standing as London Mayor to raise this - and END ALL ULEZ and take decisive steps to end London's housing crisis. THIS election campaign with Piers standing  will be be a turning point to BREAK THE CIRCUS of the mainsteam parties and their fake opposition sidekicks the genocide backing Reclaim and Reform (and GBNews and #Together).  NOW PLEASE YOU PHONE PIERS TO PLEDGE SUPPORT 07958713320 or email [email protected] PLEDGE NOW how much you will pay when we have enough pledges to raise £25,000 that is 25 of £1000 or 250 of £100 or 1000 of £25 PLEASE JUST DO IT NOW. THIS WILL MAKE A REAL DIFFERENCE. ALSO PUT MONEY IN NOW TO THIS AND OTHER CAMPAIGNING via the PayPal button by any card payment on TheUnitedFront.uk THIS IS A THE CIRCUS GAME CHANGER YOUVE BEEN WAITING FOR! PLEDGE NOW! And pay something too NOW. THANK YOU. DO IT,THEN Pass it on - especially look for BIG DONORS. We will update with progress firstly over the coming 7 days.

Edited by Grumpy Grapes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2024 at 5:56 AM, bamboozooka said:

proof the sheep will never break free from 2 party politics

 

f8d0a36d-79e3-41eb-8f96-c13d9108ba1f.png

 

39b79f41-5530-421e-9408-2d9dde6ed968.png

 

Past the two parties? There are no ''parties,'' just people like you and me. As pointed out, you can't delegate rights you do not have or make immoral acts moral. The self-evident truth is that no election, no legislation, or other pseudo-religious political rituals can bestow upon anyone the (moral) right to rule another.

Edited by dumbcritic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2024 at 6:14 AM, jack121 said:

Do you know anything about this twitter thing. I'm putting up my conspiracy theory stuff and just getting a few views, while a silly video of some guy walking his dog gets thousands. How do they get so many views

 

Its (in part) the algorithm.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/10/2024 at 11:17 PM, pi3141 said:

@EnigmaticWorld

 

Its funny about communism and class, cos although I don't agree with the Communism, I don't know enough about current communism to comment on the Russians being sold a lemon as you seem to suggest, but we have seen in the modern world, except maybe in the case of the Vatican State, communism is an awful thing, but some say Jesus was a communist.

 

Here's a Link - 

 

Christian communism


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Christian communism is a theological view that the teachings of Jesus compel Christians to support religious communism. Although there is no universal agreement on the exact dates when communistic ideas and practices in Christianity began, many Christian communists argue that evidence from the Bible suggests that the first Christians, including the Apostles in the New Testament, established their own small communist society in the years following Jesus' death and resurrection.[1] Many advocates of Christian communism and other communists, including Karl Kautsky, argue that it was taught by Jesus and practised by the apostles themselves.[2] This is generally confirmed by historians.[3]

 

Link - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism

 

 

So if we follow Jesus - we're Communist's!

 

And if we support the Vatican State, we're supporting Communism!

 

Mussolini established the Vatican State, so if we're supporting the Vatican, we're also endorsing fascism!

 

Lol.

 

Funny how these things work out.

 

 

 

 

 

Ok, Vlad. My shock is imagined once again.

 

I get on with a lot of TradCaths, but I'm not Catholic. That being said, I would post infographics on the Noahide nutcases in muh Vatican that have been doing the bidding of Jacob, but something tells me that you wouldn't even be interested, and my days are numbered here. You win this one because censorship is on your side, even in the so-called alt media.

 

*proceeds to read Death and Legacy of Kautsky*

Bloody hell, I think I'm going to noooootice!

 

notice.jpg

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2024 at 8:41 AM, pi3141 said:

Like Racism. You know some people still don't agree with mixed marriages, so unfortunately we do still have racism in society.

 

That's not racism. Racism would be forcing or shaming people into mixing when studies show that people clearly have in-group preferences. Will you shame other groups for their in-group biases or just white folks?

 

And in regards to your other naive MLK-like statement about people being judged by their skin, well, it's the left that mostly does that. If skin colour was the only thing that made us different then the world would probably be a better place, but it's not. Is it racist to not want to live around 13 do 60 levels of violence? No, that's just common sense (or it should be) and wanting better for your loved ones. It's not my fault if certain people disproportionately commit more violent crime and are more rapey. I can't do anything about that. They made it clear that they don't want any white saviours, remember?

 

Start with the cultural rot in society. Who is overrepresented in dressing young minorities up like thugs, putting drugs and guns in their hands, and then parading them on TV like they're minstrels? No need to answer as I understand the forum rules, but I'm sure you get my point.  And I dare you to try to gaslight me on this, as this is why I got out of the hip hop industry.

 

 

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, bamboozooka said:

sunak sets the police against the people

 

Protests descending into mob rule, PM warns police

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68429902

 

He wants more robust police responses that he says are needed to protect politicians and democratic processes.

 

starting to sound like biden and pelosi

 

Every gang has its enforcers There Are No Good Cops - Foundation for Economic Education (fee.org)

 

 

uvowv8cosiax.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2024 at 9:00 AM, Macnamara said:

Professor Tony Martin on documented Jewish role in the Trans Altantic Slave Trade of Africans

 

 

What's the truth about the links between the British Royal Family and the slave trade? 

 

Profitable links between British royals and the slave trade began during the reign of Elizabeth I in the 16th century.

 

The Tudor Queen was connected to Sir John Hawkins, who as a vice-admiral had helped defeat the Spanish Armada.

 

Later, in 1562, he shipped a cargo of slaves across the Atlantic. He traded the 300 Africans he had captured in Sierra Leone for pearls and sugar.

 

His missions were so lucrative that Queen Elizabeth I sponsored his subsequent journeys and provided ships, supplies and guns. She also gave him a unique coat of arms bearing a bound slave,’ according to Royal Museums Greenwich, which includes the National Maritime Museum.

 

Hawkins’ trips began a grisly period in which millions of captured men, women and children were taken from West Africa to work in England’s American colonies in the most horrific conditions.

 

The charter issued by Charles II in 1663 represents the moment at which the transatlantic slave trade officially began, with royal approval, according to the British Library which has the manuscript in its collection.

 

The charter granted the Company of Royal Adventurers of England Trading Into Africa a monopoly in the transportation of people from the west coast of Africa to the English colonies in the Americas.

 

The company’s successor, the Royal African Company, was founded in 1672 by Charles II and his brother James, Duke of York, who later became King James II.

 

It held the English monopoly until 1698, when the slave trade became open to private traders.

 

Slave trader Edward Colston – whose statue in Bristol was toppled in 2020 by Black Lives Matter activists – transferred a large amount of shares in the Royal African Company, of which he was then the deputy governor, to William III when he became king in 1689. 

 

Queen Anne held 22.5 per cent of stock in the South Sea Company, which was granted a monopoly to supply African slaves to the Spanish-held Americas in 1713.

Her successors, George I and George II, were governors and shareholders of the South Sea Company.

 

George III, usually remembered for going mad and losing the American colonies, was the first British monarch to have argued against the slave trade.

 

Link - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11947667/amp/Whats-truth-links-British-Royal-Family-slave-trade.html

 

 

 

I know Mac, your gonna tell me the British Royal Family have always been Jewish, so it was still the Jews that started the Transatlantic Slave Trade.

 

I know you ignore actual facts that don't support your world view.

 

Lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2024 at 7:31 AM, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Ok, Vlad. My shock is imagined once again.

 

You win this one because censorship is on your side, even in the so-called alt media.

 

*proceeds to read Death and Legacy of Kautsky*

Bloody hell, I think I'm going to noooootice!

 

 

 

Yeah, privilege has it's perks!  But I guess that's a redundant statement!

 

Their "victory" is HOLLOW. 

 

They can run around all over the place and say anything they want, they can project their own demonstrated evils against anyone or anything that disputes or threatens their privileged positions with impunity. They have "The Law" on their side.

 

Just like the covid-dupes, running around with this righteous condemnation against those that would not comply with the insanity, they were backed by the force of government...what a power trip huh? They could play little enforcers, little dictators against their "stupid", "crazy", "dangerous" neighbors.

 

That's how they twist shit around and get a population to go along with or turn a blind eye to the elimination of "problem people".

 

But under their system, the definition of "problem people" is ever expanding and ever changing, so it won't really matter who it is...they have quotas to fill...

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...