Politics & Stuff

[cosmicway 1,333]

23 minutes ago, Warning_Hazard said:

Dude your last paragraph is laughable.

Without nato all of europe is a russian prison, They may even take ukraine at this rate!

We will deploy an Astute if the spanish tried!

the spanish are another prime example of why loads hate eu, shouldn't be in it. EU is the EU because mighty england with some american reinforcement smashed all the grabs!

Now im here reading a greek rip into internal affairs clutching at straws insulting 17+ million people.

You maybe happy to live in a new reich but we said nahhh!

 

Brexit will be dead before Easter.
If Mayhem goes for "hard brexit" then the people will be forced to eat from the dustbins and they are going to chase her and Bojo with clubs.
As for the postwar NATO aber naturalich it stood between us and the USSR and the NATO alliance as well as EU originated as a Greek-British affair, because Winston in those days was in favour of a "United States of Europe" - going further than modern day Europeanists.
The rest were not involved (French-Dutch-Belgians-Danes ...) because even if they wanted, the axis was occupying them.
But what happened in our time, after the fall of the USSR ?
The fanatical and illiterate brexiteers seeing that the imminent danger was gone, came out of their closets and started attacking the EU.
They did not want to reform and improve the EU, they wanted to destroy it and make Europe return to barbarism.
Fortunately it's such a gigantic nonsense and the entire scheme is about to flop before it begins.

[Warning_Hazard 156]

30 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

 

Brexit will be dead before Easter.
If Mayhem goes for "hard brexit" then the people will be forced to eat from the dustbins and they are going to chase her and Bojo with clubs.
As for the postwar NATO aber naturalich it stood between us and the USSR and the NATO alliance as well as EU originated as a Greek-British affair, because Winston in those days was in favour of a "United States of Europe" - going further than modern day Europeanists.
The rest were not involved (French-Dutch-Belgians-Danes ...) because even if they wanted, the axis was occupying them.
But what happened in our time, after the fall of the USSR ?
The fanatical and illiterate brexiteers seeing that the imminent danger was gone, came out of their closets and started attacking the EU.
They did not want to reform and improve the EU, they wanted to destroy it and make Europe return to barbarism.
Fortunately it's such a gigantic nonsense and the entire scheme is about to flop before it begins.

fell asleep half way through!

[Warning_Hazard 156]

31 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

 

Brexit will be dead before Easter.
If Mayhem goes for "hard brexit" then the people will be forced to eat from the dustbins and they are going to chase her and Bojo with clubs.
As for the postwar NATO aber naturalich it stood between us and the USSR and the NATO alliance as well as EU originated as a Greek-British affair, because Winston in those days was in favour of a "United States of Europe" - going further than modern day Europeanists.
The rest were not involved (French-Dutch-Belgians-Danes ...) because even if they wanted, the axis was occupying them.
But what happened in our time, after the fall of the USSR ?
The fanatical and illiterate brexiteers seeing that the imminent danger was gone, came out of their closets and started attacking the EU.
They did not want to reform and improve the EU, they wanted to destroy it and make Europe return to barbarism.
Fortunately it's such a gigantic nonsense and the entire scheme is about to flop before it begins.

fell asleep half way through!

WE are where we are.

England will be fine, Europe? Who knows. 

[cosmicway 1,333]

Just now, Warning_Hazard said:

fell asleep half way through!

WE are where we are.

England will be fine, Europe? Who knows. 

Scotland will be fine, that's for sure.
England will be like Venezuela - but they will have eaten the brexiteers by then so England too will be fine.

[Warning_Hazard 156]

Just now, cosmicway said:

Scotland will be fine, that's for sure.
England will be like Venezuela - but they will have eaten the brexiteers by then so England too will be fine.

lmao

ill just go tell that to all my greek mates who own all sorts!

scotland cant go independent at all

no money to defend like greece 

xx

[cosmicway 1,333]

15 minutes ago, Warning_Hazard said:

lmao

ill just go tell that to all my greek mates who own all sorts!

scotland cant go independent at all

no money to defend like greece 

xx

 

The Scots voted by 55 to 45 in favour of union.
Now I 'm looking for Scots who are pro-europe and formerly pro-union.
You are looking for Scots who are anti-europe and formerly pro-indy.
Make a bet.

[Warning_Hazard 156]

31 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

 

The Scots voted by 55 to 45 in favour of union.
Now I 'm looking for Scots who are pro-europe and formerly pro-union.
You are looking for Scots who are anti-europe and formerly pro-indy.
Make a bet.

For Christ sake geez!!

You don't know how I voted lol.

Scotland will not get anywhere independently. If you believe that you've already been suckered.

They will be relying just like you lot on good old English mite. And with that, they will shake them down for every penny. I spent loads of time in lossemouth! Sound like you're a Celtic brother living in Greece!! Dodgy money! Blatantly haha

[Vesper 30,085]

4 hours ago, Warning_Hazard said:

BS

Gibraltar is england's mate unless they vote to want spain which they wont.

a greek chattin crap about brexit!

greece i mean wow. lovely place been santorini  but a greek chiming in on europe makes me laugh

eu dismantled the entire nation!

nhs will be fine

my gf is a doctor ffs

nhs under strain from rife over population never was designed for 70-80m

same with jobs

less people less issues

polak nurses lmao

you mean knocked up polish birds abusing free nhs pregnancies

they fly here have babies for free then fly home mrs witnessed it for years

europe take this piss as well as other countries to the max

germany rinsed poland twice ww2 and economically. i work with some poles they hate germans for ripping out loads of big factorys and tell me its why they here ffs lol

I actually agree almost completely with this

I would add the Tories have stripped funding from NHS as well

but I think you are spot on about the rest

'the banksters RAPED Greece, from Goldman Sachs on down in the private sector over into the public and quango sphere with the ECB, BIS, IMF, etc

Germany has completely bollocksed them twice in last 80 years now

[cosmicway 1,333]

3 minutes ago, Warning_Hazard said:

For Christ sake geez!!

You don't know how I voted lol.

Scotland will not get anywhere independently. If you believe that you've already been suckered.

They will be relying just like you lot on good old English mite. And with that, they will shake them down for every penny. I spent loads of time in lossemouth! Sound like you're a Celtic brother living in Greece!! Dodgy money! Blatantly haha

The Scots are boiling mad.
You are talking out of your a**.
All the brexiteers should be taken to a wild island and placed in a potato sack with a cat.

[Warning_Hazard 156]

Just now, Vesper said:

I actually agree almost completely with this

I would add the Tories have stripped funding from NHS as well

but I think you are spot on about the rest

'the banksters RAPED Greece, from Goldman Sachs on down in the private sector over into the public and quango sphere with the ECB, BIS, IMF, etc

Germany has completely bollocksed them twice in last 80 years now

Didn't read chatting crap as usual lol. Greece borrowed and borrowed until they sank. You love conspiracys lol. The whole world is doooomed I tell ya doooomed. Lmao. Europe currently bricking it because America's had enough. Guardian reporting how Europeans all over shaking. Bad NATO baddd yet look literally crying about troops leaving. Yawn

[Warning_Hazard 156]

9 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

The Scots are boiling mad.
You are talking out of your a**.
All the brexiteers should be taken to a wild island and placed in a potato sack with a cat.

Hahaha. Duck the brave hearts. They do not have enough money at all to run their own military. This indy women doctor tried arguing with me until her argument fell apart when I got into the details of military expense and production of aircraft and navy assets. They'd be buying it all from bae!! An astute sub Costs 1.5bn alone. No crew no engineers etc Was funny to see a staunch indy scot women doctor go silent and disappear into the night esp after claiming 2.5bn would be enough. Perfect exexample of crappy identify politics and lack of real world knwlegede talking about stuff she had no knowledge about, Reminds me of a few here haha xx

[Sideshow Luiz 2,310]

5 minutes ago, Warning_Hazard said:

Didn't read chatting crap as usual lol. Greece borrowed and borrowed until they sank. You love conspiracys lol. The whole world is doooomed I tell ya doooomed. Lmao. Europe currently bricking it because America's had enough. Guardian reporting how Europeans all over shaking. Bad NATO baddd yet look literally crying about troops leaving. Yawn

Dude.  She said she agreed with you.  Then the response is "chatting crap as usual".  If you're not going to read it, don't quote it.  

[Warning_Hazard 156]

6 minutes ago, Sideshow Luiz said:

Dude.  She said she agreed with you.  Then the response is "chatting crap as usual".  If you're not going to read it, don't quote it.  

Meh. Europeans giving me stick for having values and not wanting anything to do with European politics etc grinds my gears. Exactly why people want out lol. Cake and eat it comes to mind with it all. Now people will tell me that's what brexit is. Nope. Lol I'm probably not going to respond because I'd rather agree to disagree with everyone and watch everyone cry when they don't get what they want. Cheers bud

[cosmicway 1,333]

9 minutes ago, Warning_Hazard said:

Hahaha. Duck the brave hearts. They do not have enough money at all to run their own military. This indy women doctor tried arguing with me until her argument fell apart when I got into the details of military expense and production of aircraft and navy assets. They'd be buying it all from bae!! An astute sub Costs 1.5bn alone. No crew no engineers etc Was funny to see a staunch indy scot women doctor go silent and disappear into the night esp after claiming 2.5bn would be enough. Perfect exexample of crappy identify politics and lack of real world knwlegede talking about stuff she had no knowledge about, Reminds me of a few here haha xx

Who cares about the military ? Certainly not the Scots.
British military is in any case only for parades nowadays. Back in 2003 it took the British two months to occupy Basra when the Americans were having a party crossing the desert and entering Baghdad.
The British are good code breakers, i 'd give them that, but as for military ... it is I 'm afraid only the USA and from the other side Vladimir (Mayhe's new boyfriend as it happens).
The brexiteers are vindictive people however. Noboy likes them, including the Americans and the commonwealth countries.

[Vesper 30,085]

36 minutes ago, Warning_Hazard said:

Didn't read chatting crap as usual lol. Greece borrowed and borrowed until they sank. You love conspiracys lol. The whole world is doooomed I tell ya doooomed. Lmao. Europe currently bricking it because America's had enough. Guardian reporting how Europeans all over shaking. Bad NATO baddd yet look literally crying about troops leaving. Yawn

What is your malfunction?

I post a nice reply AGREEING with your post and you go back to fucking having a go!

I also NEVER went after you for your military service NOR DID I EVER attack your family. Those accusations you posited to another poster about me were pure lies.

You constantly use ad hominem and also fall back to bog standard smears ( for example falsely labelling anything you disagree with as a conspiracy theory) whilst at the same time never once factually disproving anything you take issue with. 

WEAK!

Tactics straight out the old CIA playbook (they popularised the term conspiracy theorists in the late 1960's (1967) to try and slander and discredit anything (starting with the Warren Report on the JFK assassination) that exposes or challenges the systemically controlling power structure's malfeasance and mayhem.

 

In 1967, the CIA Created the Label "Conspiracy Theorists" ... to Attack Anyone Who Challenges the "Official" Narrative

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-23/1967-he-cia-created-phrase-conspiracy-theorists-and-ways-attack-anyone-who-challenge

Conspiracy Theorists USED TO Be Accepted As Normal

Democracy and free market capitalism were founded on conspiracy theories.

The Magna Carta, the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and other  founding Western documents were based on conspiracy theories. Greek democracy and free market capitalism were also based on conspiracy theories.

But those were the bad old days …Things have now changed.

The CIA Coined the Term Conspiracy Theorist In 1967

That all changed in the 1960s.

Specifically, in April 1967, the CIA wrote a dispatch which coined the term “conspiracy theories” … and recommended methods for discrediting such theories.  The dispatch was marked “psych” –  short for “psychological operations” or disinformation –  and “CS” for the CIA’s “Clandestine Services” unit.

The dispatch was produced in responses to a Freedom of Information Act request by the New York Times in 1976.

The dispatch states:

2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization.

***

The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.

3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the [conspiracy] question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:

a. To discuss the publicity problem with and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors) , pointing out that the [official investigation of the relevant event] made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by …  propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.

b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories.

***

4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:

a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider.

***

b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual witnesses (which are less reliable and more divergent–and hence offer more hand-holds for criticism) …

***

c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, etc.

***

d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other.

***

f. As to charges that the Commission’s report was a rush job, it emerged three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out new criticisms.

g. Such vague accusations as that “more than ten people have died mysteriously” can always be explained in some natural way ….

5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission’s Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to addto their account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics.

 

 

Summarizing the tactics which the CIA dispatch recommended:

In other words, the CIA’s clandestine services unit created the arguments for attacking conspiracy theories as unreliable in the 1960s as part of its psychological warfare operations.

But Aren’t Conspiracy Theories – In Fact – Nuts?

Forget Western history and CIA dispatches … aren’t conspiracy theorists nutty?

In fact, conspiracies are so common that judges are trained to look at conspiracy allegations as just another legal claim to be disproven or proven based on the specific evidence:

Federal and all 50 state’s codes include specific statutes addressing conspiracy, and providing the punishment for people who commit conspiracies.

But let’s examine what the people trained to weigh evidence and reach conclusions think about “conspiracies”. Let’s look at what American judges think.

Searching Westlaw, one of the 2 primary legal research networks which attorneys and judges use to research the law, I searched for court decisions including the word “Conspiracy”. This is such a common term in lawsuits that it overwhelmed Westlaw.

Specifically, I got the following message:

“Your query has been intercepted because it may retrieve a large number of documents.”

From experience, I know that this means that there were potentially millions or many hundreds of thousands of cases which use the term. There were so many cases, that Westlaw could not even start processing the request.

So I searched again, using the phrase “Guilty of Conspiracy”. I hoped that this would not only narrow my search sufficiently that Westlaw could handle it, but would give me cases where the judge actually found the defendant guilty of a conspiracy. This pulled up exactly 10,000 cases — which is the maximum number of results which Westlaw can give at one time. In other words, there were more than 10,000 cases using the phrase “Guilty of Conspiracy” (maybe there’s a way to change my settings to get more than 10,000 results, but I haven’t found it yet).

Moreover, as any attorney can confirm, usually only appeal court decisions are published in the Westlaw database. In other words, trial court decisions are rarely published; the only decisions normally published are those of the courts which hear appeals of the trial. Because only a very small fraction of the cases which go to trial are appealed, this logically means that the number of guilty verdicts in conspiracy cases at trial must be much, much larger than 10,000.

Moreover, “Guilty of Conspiracy” is only one of many possible search phrases to use to find cases where the defendant was found guilty of a lawsuit for conspiracy. Searching on Google, I got 3,170,000 results (as of yesterday) under the term “Guilty of Conspiracy”, 669,000 results for the search term “Convictions for Conspiracy”, and 743,000 results for “Convicted for Conspiracy”.

Of course, many types of conspiracies are called other things altogether. For example, a long-accepted legal doctrine makes it illegal for two or more companies to conspire to fix prices, which is called “Price Fixing” (1,180,000 results).

Given the above, I would extrapolate that there have been hundreds of thousands of convictions for criminal or civil conspiracy in the United States.

Finally, many crimes go unreported or unsolved, and the perpetrators are never caught. Therefore, the actual number of conspiracies committed in the U.S. must be even higher.

In other words, conspiracies are committed all the time in the U.S., and many of the conspirators are caught and found guilty by American courts. Remember, Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme was a conspiracy theory.

Indeed, conspiracy is a very well-recognized crime in American law, taught to every first-year law school student as part of their basic curriculum. Telling a judge that someone has a “conspiracy theory” would be like telling him that someone is claiming that he trespassed on their property, or committed assault, or stole his car. It is a fundamental legal concept.

Obviously, many conspiracy allegations are false (if you see a judge at a dinner party, ask him to tell you some of the crazy conspiracy allegations which were made in his court). Obviously, people will either win or lose in court depending on whether or not they can prove their claim with the available evidence. But not all allegations of trespass, assault, or theft are true, either.

Proving a claim of conspiracy is no different from proving any other legal claim, and the mere label “conspiracy” is taken no less seriously by judges.

It’s not only Madoff. The heads of Enron were found guilty of conspiracy, as was the head of Adelphia. Numerous lower-level government officials have been found guilty of conspiracy. See this, this, this, this and this.

SNIP

 

MUCH MORE AT THE TOP LINK