Politics & Stuff

[KEVINAA 129]

Igor Kirillov

 

[Vesper 30,232]

Our Top Story

[robsblubot 3,595]

1 hour ago, Vesper said:

Our Top Story

I think they've been underestimating the video game industry; or maybe it's a cry to get some of their "smart" money eh... but nbc certainly did try. 🤦‍♂️ even though the game he played is... let's say... unrealistic.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ironic-suspect-unitedhealthcare-slaying-played-video-game-killer-rcna183550

Edited December 17, 2024 by robsblubot

[Vesper 30,232]

This faces up as some seriously fucked up shite.

You will not knock this out in one night. This is some heavy duty reading.

Methodology is discussed and there are plenty of charts and graphs to help you visually understand. It's an amaziing job: one that supports suspicions that this election may have been manipulated.

 

https://smartelections.substack.com/p/the-press-release

 

Electors Voted Today

We thought it was a fitting day to send out a press release about our Study of the Drop-off Factor in the 2024 Presidential Election, along with the questions that the study raises about the election results. Below is the full press release. We hope you will share this widely. Share it with local, state and national media. Share it online. Share it with your friends, family and networks. It is a thorough and clear presentation of the issue designed to stimulate thought and conversation.

If we don’t talk about these issues, it will be much harder to solve them. The first step is to have the courage to express our doubts.

Drop-off By State & By County

Today we also released the state drop-off bar charts showing the drop-off as measured by raw number of votes and percentages in each state. If you’re not familiar with the drop-off phenomenon, it’s worth taking 10 minutes and reading our previous post on this.

What is drop-off? We measure the difference between the votes for the President and the next down-ballot race, both in raw numbers and in percentages for each major party (Democrat and Republican). Why measure this? READ OUR PRESS RELEASE!

Ohio is notable, with a 10% Republican drop-off and the Democratic Presidential candidate in negative territory, getting 4.63% less votes than the Democratic Senate candidate.

If you’d like to see the county by county data for a particular state there is a link on our website, below each state bar chart. That takes you to the spreadsheet for that state.

The spreadsheet shows you the drop-off by county for the entire state. The election results that the data refers to are in separate tabs on each spreadsheet.

Review the detailed Ohio drop-off analysis by county.

 

Review the detailed New York drop-off analysis by county.

 

 

Review the detailed Montana drop-off analysis by county. Harris is almost 20% behind the Democratic Senate Candidate, Senator Tester, among Democratic voters.

Please link & credit when you share.

If you share our data, please link back to our work and credit the source.

Link either to our website, or the Substack post where you got the data:

Source: SMARTelections.us

Source: SMART Elections Substack

Please credit our work by copying and pasting this text:

Analysis by the SMART Elections Data Team. All rights reserved. ©2024 SMARTelections.us #SEDATA

That allows people to know the source of the data, have more confidence in it, and gives them the opportunity to get involved in improving our elections.

Here is the Full Press Release

Drop-off factor in Election Data Raises Questions About 2024 Election Results

December 17, 2024 | Source: SMARTelections.us

View in browser

New York, New York - - As electors in each state are voting for President and Vice President today, SMART Elections, a nonpartisan organization focused on security and public oversight of U.S. elections, is releasing a comprehensive analysis of the 2024 Presidential election phenomenon commonly referred to as “drop-off”. The detailed study includes six swing and eleven non-swing states and confirms what has been widely discussed on social media, Substacks, Reddit forums and among political advocates on both the left and right: in six of the seven swing states, and in all but four of the non-swing states they examined, there are considerably more votes for the Republican presidential candidate than for the next down-ballot race. The study calls this pattern “drop-off” and tracks the percentage of the drop-off and the number of votes involved, county by county, in all 17 states. The analysis for each state is available at SMARTelections.us

Drop-off: Democratic vs. Republican

By contrast, there is no large drop-off between the Democratic presidential candidate and the next down-ballot race. On the SMART Elections Substack, they post, “Instead, on the Democratic side, we find an opposite phenomenon. There are a large number of votes for the Democratic Senate candidate (or major down-ballot race) where there is no vote for the Democratic presidential candidate (Harris).”

Drop-off Leaves Democrats and Republicans Both Asking Questions

In a press conference on December 11th, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries called attention to the strange drop-off phenomenon. He opened the press conference by saying, “The elections are over and the American people have spoken. Former President Trump will be the next President of the United States of America.” However, Jeffries ended his press conference on a different note, pointing out the odd contrast that in five of the seven swing states where election results show Donald Trump as the victor, the Senate races and sometimes the majority of down-ballot races were swept by Democrats. “What happened in the other five?” he demanded. (24:24) “In North Carolina,” he continued, “notwithstanding the fact that Donald Trump won at the presidential level, Democrats won the Governor’s race, the Lieutenant Governor’s race, the Attorney General race, the Secretary of State race, and the State Supreme Court, in North Carolina, on that very same day that Donald Trump won the presidential election.”

Republicans have also taken note of the drop-off figures, wondering conversely why the large Republican vote for president is somehow not reflected in their Senate and other down-ballot races.

Number of Votes Involved is Larger Than Margin of Victory

The number of votes contained in these drop-off margins are startling. In five of the six swing states that are included in the analysis, the margin of drop-off votes is greater than the margin of victory.

• Arizona

  • Drop-off margin = 267,956

  • Margin of victory = 187,382

  • Drop-off is 80,574 votes more than the margin of victory

• Michigan

  • Drop-off margin = 99,109

  • Margin of victory = 80,103

  • Drop-off is 19,006 votes more than the margin of victory

• Nevada

  • Drop-off margin = 70,067

  • Margin of victory = 46,008

  • Drop-off is 24,059 votes more than the margin of victory

• North Carolina

  • Drop-off margin = 341,949

  • Margin of victory = 183,047

  • Drop-off is 158,902 votes more than the margin of victory

• Wisconsin

  • Drop-off margin = 58,178

  • Margin of victory = 29,397

  • Drop-off is 28,781 votes more than the margin of victory

Methodology of the Study

In order to accomplish the analysis, SMART Elections assembled a team of data scientists to gather and analyze 2024 election results. The team meticulously extracted and cross-checked election data. Each analysis was done independently by two separate data analysts. The results were then compared and confirmed to be identical before publishing. In most states the analysis compares presidential votes to Senate votes in the same party. When there is no Senate race, the Attorney General or Governor’s race was used in the comparison instead.

Different Demographics, Similar Drop-off

The most unusual aspect of the drop-off is its consistency. Statistical oddities are usually explained by specific demographic realities. Certain populations with their idiosyncratic voting behavior patterns create specific data sets that can be unique. However, with regard to the drop-off numbers, states with vastly different demographics are exhibiting the same patterns. Arizona and North Carolina would seem to be quite removed from each other demographically. However, Harris has 6% fewer votes than the next down-ballot race in both states.

Causes of the Drop-off Remains a Mystery

What specifically is causing the drop-off is unclear. Possible explanations include:

• Democratic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. supporters may have supported Trump in the presidential race due to Kennedy’s endorsement, but voted with the Democratic Party on down-ballot races.

• Pro-Palestinian voters, especially young voters, may have chosen not to vote for president, or split their ticket.

• Split-ticket voters may have chosen to cast a ballot for Trump while voting for down-ballot Democratic candidates.

• New Republican voters were possibly excited for Trump and not other candidates.

• Racial and gender bias against Vice President Harris may have contributed to her low numbers.

• All of these may have been factors in the election results.

Some Explanations Don’t Add Up

The numbers for some of these explanations do not pan out. For example, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s poll numbers in Nevada, according to FiveThirtyEight, had fallen to 5% by late August when he dropped out and endorsed Trump.

The SMART Elections Data Team has calculated the drop-off by political party, but it can easily be calculated for all voters as well. The Republican drop-off was approximately 5% of all presidential voters (1,484,840 votes) in Nevada. Kennedy withdrew from the ballot in Nevada and threw his support to Trump in late August. In theory, the 5% of Nevada drop-off (calculated from the number above of all presidential voters) could be a result of Kennedy voters supporting Trump and then voting Democratic in the down-ballot races. But it is highly implausible that Trump received 100% of Kennedy’s 5% support and that 100% of those voters then voted for a split ticket.

By comparison, a study by Yale, Harvard, Columbia and MIT scholars found split-ticket voting by Democrats in 2020 was 1%.

Furthermore, there was not a single state where Kennedy actually received 5% of the vote. In states where he remained on the ballot, he generally received less than 1% of the vote. Nationally he received 0.5%.

The number of young people voting in 2024 is also insufficient to solely account for the drop-off. Exit poll data from the National Election Pool found that voters ages 18 to 29 made up just 14% of all ballots in the 2024 election. According to the same exit polls, Trump had 46% support among those young voters. So Trump’s 46% of the 14% of young voters equals a 6.4% conservative voting block nationwide. Using Nevada again as an example, in this case, we’ll compare the percentage of these young conservative Trump voters to the 9.87% Republican drop-off in Nevada. Clearly, a 6.4% voting block cannot create a 9.87% drop-off effect.

If Harris’ negative support in some states is due to young people, angered by her position on Gaza, not voting for president; then why in Michigan, with its high Muslim population and active don’t vote for president campaign, is her drop-off still positive—even normal— (0.87%)? But in Montana, a state with a much smaller pro-Gaza movement (100 - 150 protestors at this rally), Harris’ drop-off rate is negative -19%.

Possibly, some combination of the various explanations have combined to create these drop-off numbers, but the consistency of the drop-off across a vast array of demographic landscapes remains surprising.

Error or Manipulation Cannot Be Ruled Out

The possibility that the drop-off is connected to some type of error or manipulation cannot be ruled out. There is no concrete evidence of foul play, and Vice President Harris chose not to request recounts, but public confidence would benefit from further scrutiny of the election results.

SMART Elections recommends that all states conduct a transparent, public review of voting machine source code, audit logs, ballots, voter sign-in files, and election records, such as poll tapes, to generate confidence in the election results. This type of robust investigation would go a long way to reassure voters, especially if the process was open and inclusive. Co-founder and Executive Director Lulu Friesdat says, “Voters don’t want to wonder if their votes are counted correctly. They want to know.”

There are a number of well-established vulnerabilities to the U.S. voting machines in this election.

• The hard-wired password to Dominion’s voting machines was well known and even published on t-shirts. Dominion is one of the two major U.S. voting machine vendors.

• The Dominion password and alleged exploits were advertised prominently on an internet forum.

• On November 18th, @RedBear331 with the handle “Hacking Democracy” makes multiple claims of accessing voting machine totals:

  • “What did we do? Added, switched, & deleted votes with SQL. No logs. No trails. Democracy? More like democracy, unplugged.”

  • “🚨 SQL Democracy – Mission Accomplished 🚨Democracy Suite EMS relies on duct tape & a backdoor password: "dvscorp08!" .This hardcoded "security" + SQL commands = Trump's victory. We started in AZ, GA, PA... but didn’t stop there.Your democracy is a house of cards. 🐻”

  • “SQL database from a local EMS system (now Patriot County). Hardcoded backdoor password: "dvscorp08!", still live in systems across the country. Default Super Admin account Detailed exploit guide to replicate our methods. Screenshots of tampered registries”

• A 2023 letter from top election security experts warned the Department of Justice that the majority of voting software used in the U.S. had been stolen and released on the internet. “The conspirators sought and obtained copies of voting system software from both Dominion Voting Systems and Election Systems & Software (ES&S), which together count over 70% of U.S. votes.” The experts convey urgency, even a sense of panic, saying, “democracy is literally on the ballot.” The letter was covered by PBS.

• A more recent 2024 letter also to the Department of Justice by security advocates requests that “the Department of Justice (DOJ) initiate an investigation into the 2024 presidential election in light of reports of bomb threats, voter intimidation, voting system theft, documented "back doors" in that equipment that can be used to maliciously alter the results, and related concerns.”

Citing a Public Affairs Council study, Friesdat says, “Prior to the 2024 election, only 37% of Americans told researchers they believed the election would be both honest and open. The percentage of voters with complete confidence is likely even less now.”

SMART Elections is an innovative nonpartisan project. We advocate for improved election security and better public oversight. We want the public to have complete confidence in election results.

Media Contact:

Lulu Friesdat

Co-founder & Executive Director, SMART Elections

[email protected]

 

[cosmicway 1,333]

10 hours ago, Vesper said:

This faces up as some seriously fucked up shite.

You will not knock this out in one night. This is some heavy duty reading.

Methodology is discussed and there are plenty of charts and graphs to help you visually understand. It's an amaziing job: one that supports suspicions that this election may have been manipulated.

 

https://smartelections.substack.com/p/the-press-release

 

Electors Voted Today

We thought it was a fitting day to send out a press release about our Study of the Drop-off Factor in the 2024 Presidential Election, along with the questions that the study raises about the election results. Below is the full press release. We hope you will share this widely. Share it with local, state and national media. Share it online. Share it with your friends, family and networks. It is a thorough and clear presentation of the issue designed to stimulate thought and conversation.

If we don’t talk about these issues, it will be much harder to solve them. The first step is to have the courage to express our doubts.

Drop-off By State & By County

Today we also released the state drop-off bar charts showing the drop-off as measured by raw number of votes and percentages in each state. If you’re not familiar with the drop-off phenomenon, it’s worth taking 10 minutes and reading our previous post on this.

What is drop-off? We measure the difference between the votes for the President and the next down-ballot race, both in raw numbers and in percentages for each major party (Democrat and Republican). Why measure this? READ OUR PRESS RELEASE!

Ohio is notable, with a 10% Republican drop-off and the Democratic Presidential candidate in negative territory, getting 4.63% less votes than the Democratic Senate candidate.

If you’d like to see the county by county data for a particular state there is a link on our website, below each state bar chart. That takes you to the spreadsheet for that state.

The spreadsheet shows you the drop-off by county for the entire state. The election results that the data refers to are in separate tabs on each spreadsheet.

Review the detailed Ohio drop-off analysis by county.

 

Review the detailed New York drop-off analysis by county.

 

 

Review the detailed Montana drop-off analysis by county. Harris is almost 20% behind the Democratic Senate Candidate, Senator Tester, among Democratic voters.

Please link & credit when you share.

If you share our data, please link back to our work and credit the source.

Link either to our website, or the Substack post where you got the data:

Source: SMARTelections.us

Source: SMART Elections Substack

Please credit our work by copying and pasting this text:

Analysis by the SMART Elections Data Team. All rights reserved. ©2024 SMARTelections.us #SEDATA

That allows people to know the source of the data, have more confidence in it, and gives them the opportunity to get involved in improving our elections.

Here is the Full Press Release

Drop-off factor in Election Data Raises Questions About 2024 Election Results

December 17, 2024 | Source: SMARTelections.us

View in browser

New York, New York - - As electors in each state are voting for President and Vice President today, SMART Elections, a nonpartisan organization focused on security and public oversight of U.S. elections, is releasing a comprehensive analysis of the 2024 Presidential election phenomenon commonly referred to as “drop-off”. The detailed study includes six swing and eleven non-swing states and confirms what has been widely discussed on social media, Substacks, Reddit forums and among political advocates on both the left and right: in six of the seven swing states, and in all but four of the non-swing states they examined, there are considerably more votes for the Republican presidential candidate than for the next down-ballot race. The study calls this pattern “drop-off” and tracks the percentage of the drop-off and the number of votes involved, county by county, in all 17 states. The analysis for each state is available at SMARTelections.us

Drop-off: Democratic vs. Republican

By contrast, there is no large drop-off between the Democratic presidential candidate and the next down-ballot race. On the SMART Elections Substack, they post, “Instead, on the Democratic side, we find an opposite phenomenon. There are a large number of votes for the Democratic Senate candidate (or major down-ballot race) where there is no vote for the Democratic presidential candidate (Harris).”

Drop-off Leaves Democrats and Republicans Both Asking Questions

In a press conference on December 11th, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries called attention to the strange drop-off phenomenon. He opened the press conference by saying, “The elections are over and the American people have spoken. Former President Trump will be the next President of the United States of America.” However, Jeffries ended his press conference on a different note, pointing out the odd contrast that in five of the seven swing states where election results show Donald Trump as the victor, the Senate races and sometimes the majority of down-ballot races were swept by Democrats. “What happened in the other five?” he demanded. (24:24) “In North Carolina,” he continued, “notwithstanding the fact that Donald Trump won at the presidential level, Democrats won the Governor’s race, the Lieutenant Governor’s race, the Attorney General race, the Secretary of State race, and the State Supreme Court, in North Carolina, on that very same day that Donald Trump won the presidential election.”

Republicans have also taken note of the drop-off figures, wondering conversely why the large Republican vote for president is somehow not reflected in their Senate and other down-ballot races.

Number of Votes Involved is Larger Than Margin of Victory

The number of votes contained in these drop-off margins are startling. In five of the six swing states that are included in the analysis, the margin of drop-off votes is greater than the margin of victory.

• Arizona

  • Drop-off margin = 267,956

  • Margin of victory = 187,382

  • Drop-off is 80,574 votes more than the margin of victory

• Michigan

  • Drop-off margin = 99,109

  • Margin of victory = 80,103

  • Drop-off is 19,006 votes more than the margin of victory

• Nevada

  • Drop-off margin = 70,067

  • Margin of victory = 46,008

  • Drop-off is 24,059 votes more than the margin of victory

• North Carolina

  • Drop-off margin = 341,949

  • Margin of victory = 183,047

  • Drop-off is 158,902 votes more than the margin of victory

• Wisconsin

  • Drop-off margin = 58,178

  • Margin of victory = 29,397

  • Drop-off is 28,781 votes more than the margin of victory

Methodology of the Study

In order to accomplish the analysis, SMART Elections assembled a team of data scientists to gather and analyze 2024 election results. The team meticulously extracted and cross-checked election data. Each analysis was done independently by two separate data analysts. The results were then compared and confirmed to be identical before publishing. In most states the analysis compares presidential votes to Senate votes in the same party. When there is no Senate race, the Attorney General or Governor’s race was used in the comparison instead.

Different Demographics, Similar Drop-off

The most unusual aspect of the drop-off is its consistency. Statistical oddities are usually explained by specific demographic realities. Certain populations with their idiosyncratic voting behavior patterns create specific data sets that can be unique. However, with regard to the drop-off numbers, states with vastly different demographics are exhibiting the same patterns. Arizona and North Carolina would seem to be quite removed from each other demographically. However, Harris has 6% fewer votes than the next down-ballot race in both states.

Causes of the Drop-off Remains a Mystery

What specifically is causing the drop-off is unclear. Possible explanations include:

• Democratic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. supporters may have supported Trump in the presidential race due to Kennedy’s endorsement, but voted with the Democratic Party on down-ballot races.

• Pro-Palestinian voters, especially young voters, may have chosen not to vote for president, or split their ticket.

• Split-ticket voters may have chosen to cast a ballot for Trump while voting for down-ballot Democratic candidates.

• New Republican voters were possibly excited for Trump and not other candidates.

• Racial and gender bias against Vice President Harris may have contributed to her low numbers.

• All of these may have been factors in the election results.

Some Explanations Don’t Add Up

The numbers for some of these explanations do not pan out. For example, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s poll numbers in Nevada, according to FiveThirtyEight, had fallen to 5% by late August when he dropped out and endorsed Trump.

The SMART Elections Data Team has calculated the drop-off by political party, but it can easily be calculated for all voters as well. The Republican drop-off was approximately 5% of all presidential voters (1,484,840 votes) in Nevada. Kennedy withdrew from the ballot in Nevada and threw his support to Trump in late August. In theory, the 5% of Nevada drop-off (calculated from the number above of all presidential voters) could be a result of Kennedy voters supporting Trump and then voting Democratic in the down-ballot races. But it is highly implausible that Trump received 100% of Kennedy’s 5% support and that 100% of those voters then voted for a split ticket.

By comparison, a study by Yale, Harvard, Columbia and MIT scholars found split-ticket voting by Democrats in 2020 was 1%.

Furthermore, there was not a single state where Kennedy actually received 5% of the vote. In states where he remained on the ballot, he generally received less than 1% of the vote. Nationally he received 0.5%.

The number of young people voting in 2024 is also insufficient to solely account for the drop-off. Exit poll data from the National Election Pool found that voters ages 18 to 29 made up just 14% of all ballots in the 2024 election. According to the same exit polls, Trump had 46% support among those young voters. So Trump’s 46% of the 14% of young voters equals a 6.4% conservative voting block nationwide. Using Nevada again as an example, in this case, we’ll compare the percentage of these young conservative Trump voters to the 9.87% Republican drop-off in Nevada. Clearly, a 6.4% voting block cannot create a 9.87% drop-off effect.

If Harris’ negative support in some states is due to young people, angered by her position on Gaza, not voting for president; then why in Michigan, with its high Muslim population and active don’t vote for president campaign, is her drop-off still positive—even normal— (0.87%)? But in Montana, a state with a much smaller pro-Gaza movement (100 - 150 protestors at this rally), Harris’ drop-off rate is negative -19%.

Possibly, some combination of the various explanations have combined to create these drop-off numbers, but the consistency of the drop-off across a vast array of demographic landscapes remains surprising.

Error or Manipulation Cannot Be Ruled Out

The possibility that the drop-off is connected to some type of error or manipulation cannot be ruled out. There is no concrete evidence of foul play, and Vice President Harris chose not to request recounts, but public confidence would benefit from further scrutiny of the election results.

SMART Elections recommends that all states conduct a transparent, public review of voting machine source code, audit logs, ballots, voter sign-in files, and election records, such as poll tapes, to generate confidence in the election results. This type of robust investigation would go a long way to reassure voters, especially if the process was open and inclusive. Co-founder and Executive Director Lulu Friesdat says, “Voters don’t want to wonder if their votes are counted correctly. They want to know.”

There are a number of well-established vulnerabilities to the U.S. voting machines in this election.

• The hard-wired password to Dominion’s voting machines was well known and even published on t-shirts. Dominion is one of the two major U.S. voting machine vendors.

• The Dominion password and alleged exploits were advertised prominently on an internet forum.

• On November 18th, @RedBear331 with the handle “Hacking Democracy” makes multiple claims of accessing voting machine totals:

  • “What did we do? Added, switched, & deleted votes with SQL. No logs. No trails. Democracy? More like democracy, unplugged.”

  • “🚨 SQL Democracy – Mission Accomplished 🚨Democracy Suite EMS relies on duct tape & a backdoor password: "dvscorp08!" .This hardcoded "security" + SQL commands = Trump's victory. We started in AZ, GA, PA... but didn’t stop there.Your democracy is a house of cards. 🐻”

  • “SQL database from a local EMS system (now Patriot County). Hardcoded backdoor password: "dvscorp08!", still live in systems across the country. Default Super Admin account Detailed exploit guide to replicate our methods. Screenshots of tampered registries”

• A 2023 letter from top election security experts warned the Department of Justice that the majority of voting software used in the U.S. had been stolen and released on the internet. “The conspirators sought and obtained copies of voting system software from both Dominion Voting Systems and Election Systems & Software (ES&S), which together count over 70% of U.S. votes.” The experts convey urgency, even a sense of panic, saying, “democracy is literally on the ballot.” The letter was covered by PBS.

• A more recent 2024 letter also to the Department of Justice by security advocates requests that “the Department of Justice (DOJ) initiate an investigation into the 2024 presidential election in light of reports of bomb threats, voter intimidation, voting system theft, documented "back doors" in that equipment that can be used to maliciously alter the results, and related concerns.”

Citing a Public Affairs Council study, Friesdat says, “Prior to the 2024 election, only 37% of Americans told researchers they believed the election would be both honest and open. The percentage of voters with complete confidence is likely even less now.”

SMART Elections is an innovative nonpartisan project. We advocate for improved election security and better public oversight. We want the public to have complete confidence in election results.

Media Contact:

Lulu Friesdat

Co-founder & Executive Director, SMART Elections

[email protected]

 

Here is my verdict:

October 7 Putin plot: Judging by the demonstrations, there was militant reaction by the pro-Palestinians and they abstained.
"Money exists" Trump propaganda: The all-time weapon of opposition parties. Phoney stuff but works.
Woke agenda: The dem party were identified as wokes and gays.

I tend to discount the illegals and the wall, since republican propaganda is in any case always preoccupied with immigration.

These things made people either abstain or switch to Trump, who had previously managed to hijack the GOP.
Since we are talking about 2-3% differences this is enough.

The big thing is that the reps decided to opt for a crazy candidate and that's worrying. Here we are not talking about 2-3% differences but about big numbers.
The same is true of France, UK and other countries. Even for Greece. We now have about 20% of loonies. Not the Golden Dawn who have gone down to 1% according to the polls, but 20% loonies-antivaxers-antiimmigrant-UFOlogists ...
 

[Fulham Broadway 17,335]

Farage Plots Takeover of the UK with Elon Musk

Farage used to head up UKIP UK Independence Party before Reform.

Farages stick was 'no foreign interference in UK politics'. 

Now he is to get $100m from South African visa abuser Elon Musk to hijack the UK and become Prime Minister. 

If it’s illegal for Russia to interfere with uk politics why is it not illegal for other countries/individuals ?

 

[Fulham Broadway 17,335]

 

EU nation to teach all children to use firearms amid fears of Russian invasion

Children are learning how to assemble and use weapons (Picture: DW)

An EU nation has made it mandatory for schoolchildren to take part in firearms training

Poland has taken the dramatic step in response to fears of a potential attack from Russia.

Children aged 13 and above are now taking lessons on how to assemble and operate weapons including assault rifles.

Reuters

[robsblubot 3,595]

Interesting discussion An Uncomfortable Conversation With Josh Szeps: Media Silos, Disagreeing With Grace, Protecting Liberal which touches a lot of points mentioned in this thread. Requires apple account signup, but could be avail on yt too (did not look).

[Fulham Broadway 17,335]

America helped prepare Syria's rebels weeks before they launched coup

 

US special forces warned Syrian rebels to 'be ready' weeks before fighters launched the large-scale coup that toppled former President Bashar al-Assad's regime, it has emerged. Capt Bashar al-Mashadani, a Revolutionary Commando Army (RCA) commander, told The Telegraph that Washington advised an attack against the Assad regime was imminent and helped the RCA strengthen its ranks.

Reuters

 

- what with that and Israel patching up and hospitalising Al Quaeda and ISIS fighters then sending them back with better weapons, another Zionist land grab was in place

[Fulham Broadway 17,335]

'Afd - the only solution for Germany'

Musks latest tweet on his X

Throughout history the rich and their billionaire media owners always encourage right wingers. Why is that ?

[cosmicway 1,333]

8 hours ago, Fulham Broadway said:

'Afd - the only solution for Germany'

Musks latest tweet on his X

Throughout history the rich and their billionaire media owners always encourage right wingers. Why is that ?

A natural process.
The liberals allow free economy and free education so many people can become rich - a downside for the already rich.
The socialists impose taxes - again a downside.
The commies are even more dangerous.

The right wingers are also supported by the left who are splitting the vote. This is bigger encouragement than that offered by Musk, Daily Mail etc.
The idea is this: Right wing government is unstable but they will destroy the political centre. Then through the use of terrorist tactics we prevail and kill everybody.

Edited December 20, 2024 by cosmicway

[Vesper 30,232]

brutal............... 🖤

 

 

[Vesper 30,232]

8 hours ago, Fulham Broadway said:

solution for Germany

words that usually do not end well when in the same sentence

see

die Endlösung

for historical proof of this

[Vesper 30,232]

9 hours ago, Fulham Broadway said:

'Afd - the only solution for Germany'

Musks latest tweet on his X

Throughout history the rich and their billionaire media owners always encourage right wingers. Why is that ?

Secret plan against Germany

It was the meeting that nobody was ever meant to find out about. Back in November, high-ranking politicians from Germany’s far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party, neo-Nazis, and sympathetic businesspeople gathered in a hotel near Potsdam. Their agenda? Nothing less than the fine tuning of a plan for the forced deportations of millions of people currently living in Germany.

https://correctiv.org/en/top-stories/2024/01/15/secret-plan-against-germany/

This article is also available in Turkish, Arabic and German. Versions in French and Russian can be found at partner media sites The Insider and Mediapart.

Bit by bit, the brightly lit dining hall of a countryside hotel near Potsdam fills with people. There are about two dozen of them, a mix of AfD members, followers of the Identitarian movement and members of nationalist student fraternities (Burschenschaft). People from the middle classes – doctors, lawyers, politicians and entrepreneurs – are also among the participants. Even two members of Germany’s centre-right Christian Democratic Party (CDU) have come along, both part of their party’s grassroots conservative ‘Values Union’ association (WerteUnion).

A detailed profile of one of the hotel’s owners has only recently been published in Die Zeit, detailing her close ties to right-wing circles.

There are two men behind the invitations to this event. The first is in his late 60s and has been involved in the far-right scene in Germany for most of his life. His name is Gernot Mörig, a former dentist from Düsseldorf. The other is Hans Christian Limmer, a well-known investor in the catering sector. Limmer was behind the success of the German discounter bakery chain BackWerk, and today is a shareholder in the trendy German burger chain Hans im Glück. Unlike Mörig, Limmer is not at the event himself, but nevertheless plays a role as wealthy facilitator.

Prologue: Behind the scenes

The 25^th of November. It is a gloomy Saturday morning, shortly before nine o’clock. Snow is settling on the cars parked in the courtyard. The events that will occur today at the hotel Landhaus Adlon will seem like a dystopian drama. Only they’re real. And they will show what can happen when the frontmen of right-wing extremist ideas, representatives of the AfD and wealthy sympathisers come together. Their shared goal is the forced deportations of people from Germany based on a set of racist criteria, regardless of whether or not they have German citizenship.

The meeting was meant to remain secret at all costs. Communications between the organisers and guests took place strictly via letters. However, copies of these letters were leaked to CORRECTIV, and we took pictures. Our undercover reporter checked into the hotel under a false name and was on site with a camera. He was able to film in front, behind and even inside the hotel. Exactly what went on in the meetings, and who was there, comes from our first-hand report. Greenpeace had also been researching the meeting and provided us with important photos and copies of documents. Our reporter spoke to several AfD members at the hotel, and further sources have confirmed their statements to us.

And so we could reconstruct the events at the hotel.

It was much more than a coming together of right-wing ideologues. Some are incredibly rich. Others have a lot of influence within the AfD. One of them turns out to play a key role in this story. At the hotel, he boasted that he spoke for the AfD party board. He’s Alice Weidel’s personal aide.

With only ten months to go until the regional elections in the German states of Thuringia, Saxony and Brandenburg, this meeting has shown that racist attitudes extend into the highest echelons of the AfD party. And it doesn’t stop with attitudes; certain politicians want to put their racist ideas into action, despite the fact the AfD firmly denies that it is a right-wing extremist party.

These revelations could be highly incriminating for the AfD, given the context of recent debates about whether the party should be banned as a threat to the country’s democracy. At the same time, it gives a sinister glimpse into what could happen should the AfD ever come to power.

The plans that were drafted on this weekend in Potsdam are nothing less than a fierce attack on the German constitution itself.

The People

AFD

Roland Hartwig, personal aide to party leader Alice Weidel
Gerrit Huy, MP
Ulrich Siegmund, parliamentary group leader for Saxony-Anhalt
Tim Krause, chair of the district party in Potsdam

THE MÖRIG CLAN

Gernot Mörig, a retired dentist from Düsseldorf
Arne Friedrich Mörig, Gernot Mörig’s son
Astrid Mörig, Gernot Mörig’s wife

NEO-NAZIS

Martin Sellner, Austrian far-right activist
Mario Müller, a convicted violent offender
An unnamed young “Identitarian”

HOSTS

Wilhelm Wilderink
Martina Mathilda Huss

FURTHER ORGANISATIONS

Simone Baum, chair of the ‘Values Union Association’ (Werteunion) in North Rhine-Westphalia
Michaela Schneider, vice-chair of the ‘Values Union Association’ (Werteunion) in North Rhine-Westphalia
Ulrich Vosgerau, former member of the board of trustees for the Desiderius Erasmus Foundation

Other

Alexander von Bismarck
Silke Schröder, chair of the ‘German Language Association’
Henning Pless, far-right, esoteric practitioner of alternative medicine
An IT businessman and die-hard Nazi
An Austrian neurosurgeon
Two Hotel employees

Act 1, Scene 1: A lakeside hotel

The large 1920s hotel lies on the outskirts of Potsdam. It has a tiled roof and view onto the nearby lake Lehnitz. The first guests arrive on Friday evening. A white 4×4 from Lower Saxony rolls up, a song by the band Frei.Wild blaring out of the window: Wir, wir, wir, wir schaffen Deutschland (We, we, we, we’re creating Germany).

More guests arrive the next morning. Inside the hotel, they head across the parquet floor towards a white table set with around thirty plates, each with a folded napkin. Many of them have received personal invitations containing all the relevant information about the event. The invitations, from the “Düsseldorf Forum”, as the group is calling itself, talk of an “exclusive network” and a “minimum donation” of €5,000. Raising funds is a “core task of our group”, they state. And they are actively pursuing this goal, it seems, by soliciting money from wealthy businesspeople who want to support far-right alliances in secret.  “We need patriots who are ready to act and individuals who will support their activities financially”, it says in the invitation. Once at the meeting, the event organisers would announce a “neutral bank account”, or the donation could also be paid in cash, readers were assured.

But what are the donations for?

The purpose of the donations is hinted at in the invitations, which are signed by the organisers Mörig, the dentist, and Limmer, the former Backwerk shareholder. In another copy of the invitation seen by CORRECTIV, Mörig talks of “an overall concept in the sense of a masterplan”. The masterplan will be presented, he proudly announces, by “none other” than Martin Sellner, the long-standing leader of the far-right Identitarian movement. Anyone who attended this weekend in the hotel knew what it would be about.

Act 1, Scene 2: A masterplan to rid the country of immigrants

Sellner, author and a leading figure in the European New Right, is the first speaker of the day. In Mörig’s introduction, the audience are told that Sellner has “the masterplan”, which centres around one key idea: “re-migration”.

It’s Sellner’s idea of re-migration that should be the focus point of this gathering, Mörig says. Everything else – covid restrictions and vaccinations, the issues of Ukraine and Israel – are all bones of contention on the right. Their stance on re-migration, however, is what unites them. Mörig thinks it will be decisive in the question of “whether or not we in the West will survive.”

The majority of presentations and discussions held today will focus on this concept.

Now Sellner takes the floor. In his speech he details what re-migration would mean in Germany. There are three target groups of migrants, he explains, who should be extradited from the country  – or, as he puts it, “foreigners” who should undergo  “reversed settlement”. They are: asylum seekers, non-Germans with residency rights, and “non-assimilated” German citizens. It is the latter that, in his view, would pose the biggest “challenge”. In other words, Sellner’s plan would divide German residents into those who would be able to live peacefully in Germany and those for whom this basic human right would no longer apply.

The scenarios sketched out in this hotel room in Potsdam all essentially boil down to one thing: people in Germany should be forcibly extradited if they have the wrong skin colour, the wrong parents, or aren’t sufficiently “assimilated” into German culture according to the standards of people like Sellner. Even if they have German citizenship.

It’s a scenario that would contravene the citizenship rights and principle of equality between citizens which are a bedrock of the German constitution.

The far-right concept of ‘re-migration’

 

Act 1, Scene 3: No objections from the AfD, despite recent public discussion to ban the party on grounds of extremism

Many supportive questions follow this speech. There are no objections to the “masterplan” in principle, only concerns about its feasibility.

Silke Schröder, a property developer and board member of the right-leaning Verein Deutsche Sprache (German Language Association), wonders how re-migration would work in practice. Surely if a person has the “appropriate” passport it would be ” impossible”, wouldn’t it?

For Sellner, this is just a detail. A “high level of pressure” will be exerted on people to adapt, he says, via “customised laws”. Re-migration won’t happen overnight; it is “a project that will take decades”.

There is certainly no opposition to the idea from the AfD members in the room. On the contrary, MP Gerrit Huy emphasised that she had been pursuing this goal for years.

Huy claimed that she had presented the party with a “re-migration concept” when she first joined seven years ago. Plans for re-migration were the reason the party no longer opposed the government’s plan to lift the ban on dual citizenship, she said, “because then you can take away the German one, and they still have one left”. Huy’s statements suggest that immigrants with a German passport have the potential to be lured into a trap.

The AfD parliamentary group leader for Saxony-Anhalt, Ulrich Siegmund, is also in the room. It is he who will, later on in the day’s proceedings, appeal for donations. He has considerable influence within the AfD; the party is currently polling in first place in Saxony-Anhalt. His sales pitch, very much in keeping with the “masterplan” of Sellner, details his ideas to change the image of German streets. Foreign restaurants would be put under pressure. Living in Saxony-Anhalt should be made “as unattractive as possible for this clientele.” And that could be accomplished very, very easily, he claims. His comments could have consequences for the region’s upcoming elections.

Buoyed by their recent surge in popularity, the AfD is feeling optimistic. The general shift to the right in the country has given the party a boost. It is currently ahead in the polls on over 30% in several states including Saxony and Thuringia – well ahead of the CDU, SPD and the Greens. However, the party is also under pressure. The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Bundesverfassungsschutz), Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, has classified the AfD’s branches in Thuringia, Saxony-Anhalt and Saxony as right-wing extremist groups. More recently, it classified the North Rhine-Westphalian AfD youth wing Junge Alternative as a suspected extremist group. The reasons given were its proximity to the Identitarian movement, its “ethno-nationalist” views, and its “contempt for people with an immigrant background”.

The debate about whether the AfD should be banned is gaining increasing momentum. A petition calling for a party ban has gained over 400,000 signatures, and CDU MP Marco Wanderwitz is currently gathering support in the Bundestag (German parliament) to call for a motion to ban the party.

The AfD itself, however, still insists that it is a democratic force. “The AfD is a political party under the rule of law, and thus pledges its unequivocal allegiance to the German nation which includes all those with German citizenship,” it claims on its website. Immigrants with German citizenship are “just as German as the descendants of a family that has lived in Germany for centuries”.  “For us, there are no first and second-class citizens,” they go on.

The statements by AfD politicians at the Potsdam meeting suggest very different beliefs. Here, protected from the public eye, they have no problem proclaiming their racist ideals. In fact, there were no significant differences between their views and those of the far-right ideologues.

Act 1, Scene 4: A Nazi Utopia

Outside, the snow is turning to slush. But inside the hotel spirits are high. Gernot Mörig is telling guests how he is normally a rather pessimistic type, but today he is feeling hopeful. And that’s thanks in part to Sellner’s “masterplan”.

The masterplan even includes a destination to “move people to”, a so-called “model state” in North Africa, that would apparently provide space for up to two million people. There would even be educational and sport offers there. And anyone who lobbies on behalf of refugees could join them there, Sellner added.

Sellner’s concept is eerily reminiscent of the Nazi’s 1940 plan to deport four million Jews to the island of Madagascar. It is unclear whether Sellner had this historical parallel in mind when devising his plan. It may also be mere coincidence that the organisers of the event chose a location less than 8 kilometres away from the villa where the Wannsee Conference took place – the meeting where the Nazis coordinated the systematic extermination of the Jews.

Back in the hotel, Sellner turns to another inflammatory topic for the far-right, the problem of the so-called “ethnic vote”. He’s even registered the term as a domain name. According to Sellner, the problem is “not just that foreigners live here. They also vote here.” “Ethnic voting” means that immigrants are likely to vote for “immigration-friendly” parties.

Sellner’s arguments are not only attempts to delegitimise elections, they also treat German nationals as foreigners in their own country. According to the German office for national statistics (Statistisches Bundesamt), 20.2 million Germans have a ” history of immigration “, meaning that they or their parents immigrated to Germany since 1950.

The events in the Potsdam hotel make clear how the strategies of various far-right actors and organisations intertwine. Sellner provides the ideas, the AfD politicians take them on and bring them to the party. Others in the background take care of the networking and bringing in wealthy sympathisers and supporters from the conservative middle-classes. And the debates always revolve around one question: How can a homogonous ethnic community be achieved in Germany?

Act 2, Scene 1: Influencers to help roll out the masterplan

Discussion now turns to the practical details, the steps that need to be taken. Mörig wants to select a committee of experts to fine tune the details of this plan for mass deportations. These experts will ensure the masterplan is executed “ethically, legally, and efficiently”, so that the racially motivated forced displacement of people has the guise of a legal migration policy. Mörig already has a candidate for the committee in mind: Hans-Georg Maaßen, the former head of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Bundesverfassungsschutz), Germany’s domestic intelligence agency.

Maaßen’s name comes up a number of times over the over course of the weekend. According to several reports, he’s due to announce the launch of his own political association in January. The attendees of the Potsdam meeting already know all about it. Although they mention the new group on several occasions, they don’t seem to take it too seriously. They are more concerned with their own plans, and how they will be realised when, in Mörig’s words, “a patriotic force has come to power in this country.”

The group’s focus now turns to how the idea of re-migration can be turned into a political strategy. Sellner says that “metapolitical and pre-political power” must be built up in order to “change public opinion”. An active political frontline must be ready to support the incoming right-wing government in Germany after the election.

And part of this support, as is made clear during the presentations and speeches, has to be financial. There is talk of influencers, propaganda, campaigns, and university projects. The tools to establish a right-wing anti-establishment climate. And ultimately the tools to weaken Germany’s democracy by questioning elections, discrediting the constitutional court, suppressing opposing views and censoring public service broadcasting.

Act 2, Scene 2: As if the balance of power had already tipped

One speaker follows the next, the talks last around an hour each. Halfway through lunch is served, the waitress seems irritated by the large number of guests she has to accommodate.

In the afternoon, it’s Ulrich Vosgerau’s turn to speak. He is a lawyer and was a member of the board of trustees of the AfD-affiliated Desiderius Erasmus Foundation, and is currently representing the AfD in the German Constitutional Court in a dispute over the foundation’s funding.

He talks about postal votes, legal processes, the secrecy of the ballot, and his concerns about voters of Turkish origin who, he claims, are unable to form an independent opinion. Vosgerau suggests drafting a letter which would cast doubt on the legitimacy of elections. His speech is met with applause.

Vosgerau and others speak as if the balance of power has already tipped in their favour. They clearly believe they are on the verge of a breakthrough. Mario Müller, a member of the Identitarian movement and violent offender with a number of convictions to his name, is currently serving as a research assistant to the AfD MP Jan Wenzel Schmidt. In his speech, Müller also talks as if victory were already in sight.

Act 3, Scene 1: The Mörig Clan

The hotel’s lattice windows offer glimpses of the attendees of this secret meeting. The large dining hall exudes a atmosphere of old-fashioned splendour, a harpsicord in one corner, a grandfather clock in another. Many of the guests are in suit and tie.

Things seem to be going well and plans have been worked out, or at least outlined. But everything hangs on funding, a fact Gernot Mörig is well aware of. In the 1970s, Mörig was head of the ‘League of Patriotic Youth’ (Bund Heimattreuer Jugend), a far-right youth organisation promoting Nazi ‘blood-and-soil’ ideology. A splinter group, the ‘Young German Patriots’ (Heimattreue deutsche Jugend) was banned in 2009 because of its neo-Nazi agenda. The group was so right-wing, in fact, that Andreas Kalbitz, former leader of the AfD in Brandenburg, was expelled from the party when it was discovered that he had been a guest at one of their camps.

It was Mörig who selected the guests and set the agenda for this secret meeting. It was he who wrote about the “masterplan” in his invitations and asked for donations from those invited. During the event he asks guests to “discreetly” hand over their cash donations to his wife. Later, he explains that the money he collects will be used to support smaller organisations, like Martin Sellner’s.

This means that every guest who donated money did so in the full knowledge that they were funding the Identitarian movement and Sellner himself. But Mörig is about to ask for even more.

He presents the attendees with a list of supporters who allegedly want to donate money or have already done so, including individuals not present at the event. Christian Goldschagg, founder of the gym chain Fit-Plus and former shareholder in the Süddeutscher publishing house; Klaus Nordmann, a middle-class businessman from North Rhine-Westphalia and major AfD donor; Alexander von Bismarck, for example, who attracted attention with his understanding of Russia and a bizarre campaign last year, is also sitting in the room. Mörig is forthcoming with names. He brags about those who have already donated “high four-figure sums” and those who have promised to do so. Previously, the donations were channelled through his banker brother-in-law’s private account, but he now has plans for a more professional solution. Those who feel more comfortable doing so can leave a cash donation with his wife, but “by the next meeting we will probably also have an unregistered association” through which bank transfers can be made, he tells the guests.

Act 3, Scene 2: AfD politician solicits millions in direct donations

Ulrich Siegmund, the AfD parliamentary group leader for Saxony-Anhalt, is also in need of money. He is already thinking about the upcoming elections and the campaign adverts he wants to send out, preferably directly into peoples’ letterboxes. He wants every voter to be written to at least once. Traditional radio and television advertising will also be necessary. And he needs money “additional to what is provided by the party” – an additional €1.37m to be precise. This could be an attempt to bypass the official party funds by channelling money directly to him. The AfD already has several donation scandals to its name.

Official party donations are “of course by far the safest way” to donate, says Siegmund. “Nevertheless,” there are other “absolutely legal ways to make donations.” He suggests going through “agencies” and “third parties”. Guests are invited to come and discuss the options with him separately in order to find “the best option for each individual.”

Act 3, Scene 3: Alice Weidel’s right-hand man

The fact that parts of the AfD have close ties with neo-Nazis and the New Right is nothing new. Until now, however, the party has blamed the problem on regional and local branches.

But a senior AfD politician was in attendance at this meeting with right-wing extremists in Potsdam. His name is Roland Hartwig, a former AfD MP now serving as personal aide to the party’s leader, Alice Weidel. According to several AfD government insiders, Hartwig is the “unofficial general secretary of the party,” someone who holds significant sway on the party’s highest levels of decision-making.

Hartwig professes to being a big fan of Sellner’s new book, which he is “greatly enjoying”. He also talks of the “masterplan” and then goes on to say that the AfD is currently drafting a prototype of a lawsuit against German public broadcasters. This is in addition to a campaign he says they are planning which will show how overfunded the broadcasters are.

Mörig’s son also has a plan to present at the conference. It fits in nicely with Sellner’s ideas. Arne Friedrich Mörig wants to set up an agency for right-wing influencers. Hartwig mentions the possibility that the AfD could co-finance the agency. This would enable them to influence elections, Hartwig points out, especially via young people. “The generation that has to change the political game is already there”, the says, and the AfD plans to target young people on platforms such as TikTok and YouTube with content that will normalise the party’s ideas.

According to Hartwig, the next step in this project will now be to present the plan to the AfD’s national party board, and to convince the party that it will benefit from an investment in Mörig’s influencer agency.

Towards the end, Hartwig makes a pivotal statement: “The new Party Board, which has now been in office for a year and a half, is open to this issue. We are therefore prepared to take money in hand and pursue issues that do not directly benefit the party alone.”

Hartwig gives the distinct impression that he is acting as an intermediary for the AfD’s party board, tasked with communicating the content of this meeting to them. He had not responded to our questions about the meeting at the time of going to press.

Epilogue

The following evening everything is quiet. The hotel seems almost completely deserted. Only the flickering of a TV screen can be seen through the window of one of the suites.

What have we learnt from this meeting?

That there is a retired dentist who has a conspiratorial network of fellow far-right extremists. That representatives of the AfD were willing to meet with radical right-wing activists and neo-Nazis. That they have a ‘masterplan’ to deport German citizens because of their ‘ethnicity’ – a plan which would undermine Articles 3, 6 and 21 of the German constitution. And that there are a number of wealthy potential donors for this project. We’ve learnt that there is an expert in German constitutional law who has sketched out legal methods to systematically cast doubt on democratic elections. That there’s an AfD politician who wants to organise election donations that would bypass the party. And that there is a hotel owner in Potsdam who earned some money to cover his costs.

Update 21.01.: An earlier version stated that Alexander von Bismarck was a descendant of Otto von Bismarck. We have corrected this.

Update 27.02.: We have deleted a statement by Ulrich Vosgerau on the probability of success of sample letters in an election petition. The background to this is a ruling by the Hamburg Regional Court in which Vosgerau lost by two-thirds. This detail is what remains of this otherwise dismissive decision.

Update 27.02.: In the epilogue we had shortened the sentence “a “master plan” for the expulsion of German citizens” on the day of publication, 10.01., for editorial reasons, but this shortening has unintentionally not yet been made clear. Thank you for pointing this out!

Update 27.02.: In the list of persons, we have classified Silke Schröder under “Other” instead of “Further organizations”. Since the “Verein Deutsche Sprache” had clearly distanced itself from the former board member Schröder after publication and she had resigned directly, we consider it right to list her as a person under “Other”.

[cosmicway 1,333]

I don't know about Germany, yet, but France is certain to fall to the front nationale.
This was the work of the commies who elevated the front nationale into prominence.

Edited December 20, 2024 by cosmicway

[Fulham Broadway 17,335]

1 hour ago, cosmicway said:

A natural process.
The liberals allow free economy and free education so many people can become rich - a downside for the already rich.
The socialists impose taxes - again a downside.
The commies are even more dangerous.

The right wingers are also supported by the left who are splitting the vote. This is bigger encouragement than that offered by Musk, Daily Mail etc.
The idea is this: Right wing government is unstable but they will destroy the political centre. Then through the use of terrorist tactics we prevail and kill everybody.

Not sure about that. The rich (billionaires) know their only threat comes from the left and social democrats. So they get their otherbillionaires, the ones that own the corporate media to back the far right, and divide people. 

The billionaire media owners and their editor lickspittles condemn the left and 'migrants' as the 'problem'. Scaring people like you that they are all ' Commies'. People fall for it every time.

[cosmicway 1,333]

1 hour ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Not sure about that. The rich (billionaires) know their only threat comes from the left and social democrats. So they get their otherbillionaires, the ones that own the corporate media to back the far right, and divide people. 

The billionaire media owners and their editor lickspittles condemn the left and 'migrants' as the 'problem'. Scaring people like you that they are all ' Commies'. People fall for it every time.

First of all I am a nutcase.
As if I don't know the commies like false coins.

Anyway publications is not where the problem begins.
There is always some clever guy who will jump into the publication business and make money out of supporting extremism.
It's not that they always succeed though, sometimes they fail.
The truth is there are always people who are attracted to the extreme right.
In the fifties-sixties it was the activities of the communists that made common people into right wingers, now it is racism. 
Did you as a schoolboy read Mary Shelley's "uncle Tom's hut" ? You did and probably identified with Tom.
But just as many or nearly just as many identify with the villain of the story, Legree. It's a fact.

[Fernando 6,585]

35 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Not sure about that. The rich (billionaires) know their only threat comes from the left and social democrats. So they get their otherbillionaires, the ones that own the corporate media to back the far right, and divide people. 

The billionaire media owners and their editor lickspittles condemn the left and 'migrants' as the 'problem'. Scaring people like you that they are all ' Commies'. People fall for it every time.

The blame the migrant happens in a lot of countries. 

In Ecuador they blame the Venezuelans for all the problems. 

In Panama for a while it was the Colombians and now the Venezuelans. 

In Dominican Republic, it's the Haitians. 

Etc etc etc. A lot of countries say this. 

Edited December 20, 2024 by Fernando

[cosmicway 1,333]

7 minutes ago, Fernando said:

The blame the migrant happens in a lot of countries. 

In Ecuador they blame the Venezuelans for all the problems. 

In Panama for a while it was the Colombians and now the Venezuelans. 

In Dominican Republic, it's the Haitians. 

Etc etc etc. A lot of countries say this. 

They actually do.
In Greece in the twenties-thirties they were blaming the refugees from Anatolia who were also Greeks !
The destruction of Smyrna by the Turks in 1922. They burned the city, tortured the bishop to death, the famous scientist Karatheodory escaped by pretending he was German.
I remember -vaguely- when I was little kid people saying "don't go there - it's a refugee neighbourhood", meaning the Greek refugees from Anatolia.
Then in the sixties this kind of thing died.

Edited December 20, 2024 by cosmicway

[Vesper 30,232]

52 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

First of all you are a nutcase.

ludicrous to call @Fulham Broadway a nutcase, especially coming from you, m8

👎🏽