Page 19 of 23 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 229

Thread: Please read my free internet book 'Britain faces the threat of Anglocide'

  1. #181
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    124

    Default


    Whenever we Westerners see television and the newspapers report on the situation in some country, we always have to be aware our feelings might be being manipulated. The TV and newspaper makers might want us to think positively or negatively of the government of that country, for reasons they keep to themselves. If they want to influence our opinion, they can achieve that. We should not underestimate their creative and intellectual power to do so, and likewise, we should not overestimate our ability to see through and withstand manipulation. Making TV reports and writing newspaper articles is a specialist profession that only a minute part of the population masters, and it involves tons of tricks of the trade most people don’t know anything about.

    Let me give you a fictitious example. Imagine two countries, called Petia and Qudia. They are comparable in size and population, and their political and economic status in the world is also comparable. Both nations are governed by rulers who hold strong convictions. So far for the similarities, but let’s now look at two differences. The ideas of the Petian rulers are in some respects conflicting with the ideas of the rulers in Qudia. The second difference: in Petia, 24% of the people is very unhappy with their government. In Qudia, 12% of the inhabitants is very unhappy with their government.

    These differences are already existing for years. It’s the kind of non-prominent information that finds its way to the Western newspapers every now and then, somewhere on page 6. So those Westerners who want to be well-informed and who therefore read a lot and attentively follow the news, have this information stored somewhere in the back of their heads. Yet the many Westerners who don’t follow the news very attentively, won’t know about the differences in discord in Petia and Qudia.

    Now, one day, for whatever political reason, the media want the general public in the West to think that there is great political dissatisfaction in Qudia, rather than in Petia. The media can then cast doubt on the reliability of the poll figures, or on the integrity of the pollsters in Qudia. Casting doubt on someone’s integrity is a very easy thing to do. If the reporter for instance casually mentions that the director of Qudia’s main polling agency ‘never skips the annual barbecue party of the Qudian Home Secretary’, you already heard something that suggests the director and the minister might be in league with one another.

    What however will have more effect than casting doubts, is playing at the emotions of the viewers. So the media will send report teams to Qudia, and these teams will look for people who belong to the very unhappy 12% and film and interview them. The media teams will be rather choosy while selecting the people for the broadcast. They will look for people who know how to word their grievances clearly and poignantly. They will look for attractive women. They will look for people who make a sympathetic first impression (that’s namely the only impression the viewers will get). They will look for people who by the way they talk seem to share familiar values. In short, they will look for ‘12-percenters’ with whom the viewers will easily identify with. They will look for people that are easy to like. And after the editing is done, this is what the TV might show about the Qudians, before the studio presenter discusses matters with the guests:

    They’ll show an old man, kindly petting his dog. We see the man gaze at the sunset on the horizon. He is in a reflective mood and we, the viewers, get also a bit in a reflective mood because of it. He says: ‘God has given me a lot to be grateful for. A lovely wife, healthy children, work that I liked to do. Yet every evening I pray for a change of government.’

    They will show a woman, sitting near a window, softly crying. Yesterday, her husband has been arrested, ‘allegedly on the suspicion of subversive activities’ the narrator says in a tone of voice, as if he notices something smelly. The camera swings to the right and we see her young child, upset, looking with big eyes at its mother.

    The media report will also tell us about disturbed Qudians, living in the West. They will show young Qudians, who chained themselves to the fence around their country’s embassy in Washington, London or Paris, surrounded by banners saying ‘Regime change in Qudia NOW!!!!’. The police cut the chains and push the protesters in a van. One of them turns around and shouts desparately, right before the van doors close: ‘Why is the world looking the other way?

    This kind of one-sided reporting will go on and on. Therefore, the unhappy Qudians will find their way to the talks people have about politics, at their work, in the pub, over the garden fence. Most people will get the feeling there is something very wrong in Qudia. An inner conflict will of course emerge in the Westerner who knows that the dissatisfaction in Petia is twice as much. When he tells that to the people around him, he will almost feel as if he is saying something bad. Those he is talking to, will look at him with a sense of disbelief, of confusion, of amusement perhaps, as if they suspect him to be ill-informed. One night, such a well-informed Westerner is privileged to have been invited to a TV debate, and he is looking forward to the chance to draw people’s attention to the much worse situation in Petia. Yet he will be surprised by a series of thorny questions that ridicule or smear those suffering Petians he hoped to be an advocate for. In short, the few who know better, will feel put in the defensive, in the mood of emotional mass mobilization over the misery in Qudia.

    Had the media been reporting objectively, they would of course simply have sticked to the facts about both countries, and tried to find out how the ideas and ways of the Petian and the Qudian rulers are originating or contributing to the ‘unhappiness rates’ of both peoples respectively, with the greater focus on Petia.

    While watching the news, we are not only thinking with our heads, but with our hearts too. I believe most Westerners have a compassionate reflex. We wish to see good prevail in the world, and we are blessed people for it, but unfortunately, that makes us vulnerable for emotional manipulation by the media in all the political issues the same media don’t tell us enough facts about. People are (logically) more touched by the injustice and sorrow they get to see, than by the injustice and sorrow they don’t get to see, even if the latter are much greater.

    So if TV and newspaper editors want to disinform the general public about a certain country, they can do it, because they know: ‘Twelve percent? Twenty-four percent? Who cares? They’re just statistics. And in terms of impact on the public opinion, statistics will always lose from the close-up of a crying child.’

    The whole issue has great political importance, because the less misunderstandings arise between the nations, the better peace and harmony in the world are being served.

    It goes without saying that malevolent broadcasting like the above will always take place under the banner of ‘freedom of the press’.

    Richard




    Previously on this thread: see page 17 for an outline of the contents

    Britain faces the threat of Anglocide
    Long live the Jews, down with Torahism

    Please read my free internet book on www.ibcpp.org.uk

  2. #182
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    124

    Default



    In addition to my post of the 18th of February – yesterday, the doctors of HRH Prince Johan Friso made it clear he is in a very bad condition. I feel sorry for him, the Royal Family and his friends, and I wish them all the necessary strength to cope with the saddening new reality.

    Richard

  3. #183
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    124

    Default



    On February the 13th, the website version of the Daily Mail had an article headlined:

    Vladimir Putin ridiculed after demanding Russians have more sex to halt declining population

    I would like to ask you to Google and open that article under another tab, because this post is a comment on it, and on ideas related with it.

    First, a look at the facts. A nation is facing the problem of a declining population. That is a very serious issue. Politics knows few problems that are more serious. So worrying about that very serious problem, the government leader of that country is proposing some measures to stop and hopefully reverse the decline. He is actually doing there what he feels he should do, what his duty calls him to do. After all, sensible and responsible leadership of a nation means: looking ahead, and taking the measures in the present in order to serve the interests of the country in the future. (We, the Dutch, actually have a saying, ‘Regeren is vooruitzien’, that translates as ‘Governing is looking ahead’)

    The Mail Online editors however are looking at this from a different angle, judging by what the article is telling us, and, at least as important, by what it is not telling us:

    1. The Mail Online is omitting a fact of huge importance. Since a) Russia is counting 142 million inhabitants, and since b) the Russians are a people with a healthy sense of patriotism and since c) Prime Minister Putin repeatedly gained majority votes in the past twelve years, Mr Putin’s proposals will undoubtedly find a sympathetic ear with literally tens of millions of Russians. That fact is however not even mentioned once, and not even one of these millions of Russians is quoted.

    2. The Mail Online is repeatedly trying to make its readers laugh over Mr Putin’s campaign pledges. It starts right away in the headline. It’s in Russia’s longterm interest to have larger families, but by their choice of words, the Mail Online is making something rancid of it. At the end of the article, three quotes from internet forums are given. The first person quoted uses the same kind of rancid wording as the editor of the headline. The second person unfoundedly accuses Mr Putin of self-overestimation. The third person strangely suggests that Mr Putin is ignorant of the existence of women who don’t want (more) children. It’s clear to my mind that the Russian PM is thinking of the millions of Russian women who would love to have more children, if only it were affordable, but these women aren’t mentioned in the article either, let alone quoted.

    3. The editors of the article are indirectly making propaganda for massive immigration. How? The director of the Demographic Institute in Moscow is quoted. He ‘can’t imagine any boost of the population without massive immigration’. Yet, massive immigration will make Russia less Russian, just like it is making Europe less European, decade after decade. You don't have to be an expert in demographics to understand that stimulating family life is the solution for enlarging a population, without massive immigration. It's not mentioned in the article.

    Mr Putin’s campaign pledges could have inspired the Mail Online to go ask the main parties in the UK some critical questions over their failing – if not absent - demographic policies. Instead, they try to mock his, and they handpicked four negative quotes that serve the mockery.

    Another word about the headline. The headline is the most important element of any newspaper article. Newspaper readers scan most of the headlines, but they will only read a limited number of the articles in full. So if they don’t read the full copy, it’s only the headline that will influence their thinking. Now, remarkably, you can’t detect an untruth in this headline. At least three Russians are ridiculing Mr Putin over this, so a headline telling that ‘Vladimir Putin is ridiculed’ seems to be correct, grammaticly. Yet it isn’t telling the truth. It’s only telling a part of the truth, given the unmentioned millions of Russians with more positive views I paid attention to in the above. And telling only a part of the truth can be as confusing as telling an untruth – perhaps it’s even nastier, because an untruth can get unmasked, whereas the ill intention behind telling only a part of the truth, the ill intention to present the readers a distorted view on the world, can remain in the dark forever.

    A fair article would have shown the broader picture of Russian opinions about this issue, and it would have featured a far more balanced headline like:

    Vladimir Putin’s proposals for larger families to halt declining population well-received by many Russians

    To sum up, the Mail Online is distorting reality in order to down-image Mr Putin and to try and make its readers laugh over an ambition that would in fact also be an excellent idea for us in Europe, with our ageing population.

    By the way, the Daily Mail and the Mail Online are silent about essential issues like a certain genocidal doctrine and the abuse of the freedom of the press for conducting psychological warfare, just as silent as the other Western media are. Please also see chapter 5.11.18 in part 1 of the main text.

    CNN Text once quoted HM Queen Elizabeth II as to have said: ‘True patriotism doesn't exclude an understanding of the patriotism of others’. A wise remark. I mean, I am a Dutch patriot, but I can vividly imagine the Russians wish to see their nation flourish too.

    Richard



    Previously on this thread: see page 17 for an outline of the contents

    Britain faces the threat of Anglocide
    Long live the Jews, down with Torahism
    Please read my free internet book on www.ibcpp.org.uk

  4. #184
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    124

    Default


    Correction:

    In my post of yesterday, in the section beginning with ‘Another word about the headline’, it says:

    (…) Now, remarkably, you can’t detect an untruth in this headline. At least three Russians are ridiculing Mr Putin over this, so a headline telling that ‘Vladimir Putin is ridiculed’ seems to be correct, grammaticly. Yet it isn’t telling the truth. It’s only telling a part of the truth, given the unmentioned millions of Russians with more positive views I paid attention to in the above. (…)

    What I meant to say was:

    (…) Now, remarkably, you can’t detect an untruth in this headline’s claim that Mr Putin is ridiculed. They can write that, because yes, there are at least three people ridiculing him. However, the headline’s claim doesn’t cover the truth. By no means. It’s only telling a part of the truth, given the unmentioned millions of Russians with more positive views I paid attention to in the above. (…)

    Richard

  5. #185
    Uber Member Bwana_Mutungi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the mind
    Posts
    4,607

    Default

    ProF Solzhy has a vacancy in his Lab for a someone like RS. The duo could perform wonders with the combined levels of 'intelligence'........
    Racist or Fascist views should not be allowed free rein in our Society

  6. #186
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    124

    Default



    For years now, we are being told that “the West is fearing that Iran is secretly developing a nuclear weapon, although Tehran is denying that”. If the West is indeed afraid of that, I don’t find it hard to explain why. It’s because the Western media are saying so for years, and that’s rubbing off on public opinion of course.


    We are also being told that “because of the Holocaust, Israel is determined not to take any risk of a threat to its existence”. Perfectly understandable. In an interview for Dutch TV, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu said that they have idiotic ideas in Iran, that its rulers are not thinking rationally. He has a point there. Iran’s President Ahmadinejad would like to see the State of Israel move to Europe, and he is on film telling that his admirers saw a halo above his head while he was addressing the UN general assembly, a couple of years ago. Next thing you know Mr Ahmadinejad will think himself being the Mahdi, the Deliverer where many Muslims believe in.

    Yet, irrational delusions about one’s significance for mankind are just as problematic as the Jewish doctrine of supremacy and genocide I never hear Mr Netanyahu talk about, let alone express concerns over. So it’s at that point where I begin to understand Iran’s side of the story.


    There are some aspects to this issue that are not or seldomly mentioned, but they should:

    1. In whichever direction Tehran is looking, it sees either countries with nuclear weapons, or it sees countries host US troops that might have nuclear weapons, and Tehran always has to reckon with the possible vicinity of nuclear-armed US submarines in the region. So if Iran is indeed developing a nuclear weapon, it can rightfully argue it’s doing so to set the nuclear balance straight.

    2. Iran was forced to fight a gruesome war from 1980 to 1988, after it was attacked by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, that had good relations with America at the time. Iran can therefore rightfully argue it must have a deterrent. “We live in a tough neighbourhood. No mercy for the weak. No second opportunity for those who can’t defend themselves”, Israel’s Minister of Defence Ehud Barak told the BBC in November. He said it to explain for Israel’s stern attitude in the security issues of the region, but he can’t then blame Iran for thinking along the same line.

    3. Iran might develop a nuclear weapon in secrecy, ‘our’ old media always say alarmingly. Well, of course they would do it in secrecy. All nations have to be careful with their defence secrets. The Israelis didn’t exactly build their atomic arsenal in a Big Brother house either.

    4. Confronted with the possibility of an attack by Iran on Israel, Hillary Clinton, who is now the US Secretary of State, told the interviewer America would “obliterate” Iran. So Iran’s rulers will always be aware, whether they have a nuclear weapon or not, that any major aggressive move against Israel might catastrophicly backfire on their own country.

    5. Suppose, Iran gives in to what Israel is demanding in this. Who will then guarantee Iran that Israel’s next demand won’t be that Iran abstain from having certain types of bombers or missiles, or superheavy non-nuclear bombs? Politics on this level, over such issues, is as hard as rock. The one who gives in too soon, or who gives in for too feeble a countergesture, will be viewed as weak, certainly by Torahists, and being perceived as weak can get Iran in other problems.

    6. An additional problem to the tensions between Israel and Iran is that, for all their differences, both Torahism and Islam are worshipping gods that recommend the deception of non-Torahists and non-Muslims respectively. I always felt this is also troubling that excuse for a dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians.

    7. The whole situation reminds me of 1979 Western Europe. After it had emerged that the Soviet Union had renewed medium range missiles, aimed at the Western European countries, NATO took a double decision to counter this: the alliance placed new missiles itself on the one hand, yet on the other hand successfully offered the Soviet Union to begin negotiations to remove missiles on both sides. It seems to me that Middle East parties should make a similar move, in the interest of de-nuclearizing the entire region.

    Did reading this post discomfort you in any way? I hope so. Because, if it did, it’s because the things I’ve been telling you, don’t fit in the usual perspective, from which the old media force you to look at things. In fact, what the West needs, is an overall massive shake-up of seemingly normal ideas and perceptions, not on the Israel-Iran subject only.

    Richard


    Previously on this thread: see page 17 for an outline of the contents


    Britain faces the threat of Anglocide
    Long live the Jews, down with Torahism
    Please read my free internet book on
    www.ibcpp.org.uk





  7. #187
    Trusted Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Pembrokeshire
    Posts
    1,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bwana_Mutungi View Post
    ProF Solzhy has a vacancy in his Lab for a someone like RS. The duo could perform wonders with the combined levels of 'intelligence'........
    Richard
    I suspect Bwana Mutungi was formerly Prof Solzy's Lab Assistant and has been fired for failing the IQ Test for the minimal IQ necessary to aid in the production of the Prof's Great Works. His last post is just "sour grapes" and was probably made from a Dole Office computer..............
    Meet the New Boss........same as the Old Boss.

    ---Truth is hate for those who hate the Truth.

  8. #188
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    124

    Default


    Two thousand years ago, in Israel, the most extraordinary of all men, Yeshua - I believe I was mistaken to call him Yehoshua in my earlier writings - saw a world that He knew was angering God, a world burdened by the brutal militaristic powerplay of the Romans, a world burdened by the treacherousness, cunning and greed of the prominent among his fellow Jews – gee, what other era is this reminding me of? – and, foreseeing the loneliness, humiliation and agony it would lead Him to, Yeshua knowingly chose a path at the end of which He had to sacrifice Himself, He, sinless and guiltless, in an awe-inspiring and inimitable gesture to reconcile God with His sinful creation: mankind. When you realize that, materially speaking, God was then as invisible as He is now in 2012, Christ’s self-sacrifice on the cross becomes all the more impressive.

    Being a member of that sinful creation, I understand the significance of Easter better than I did when I wrote my main text, but I keep having trouble accepting the physical resurrection of Christ. I once had a talk about this with a woman handing out evangelizing leaflets on the Scheveningen boulevard. I told her that what I learned God and Christ had done and said, had amply made me realize the irreplaceable value of Christianity, despite my disbelief Yeshua physicly rose from the grave. She then said: “All what it takes is the childlike acceptance that He actually did.” It hasn’t (yet) convinced me, but I was touched by her phrase “the childlike acceptance”. We aren’t half grown up enough to fathom all of life’s mysteries, are we?

    However, Christ’s spiritual resurrection and His Spirit’s presence to this day and beyond, that I am sure of. It’s always there to help people’s “better bit” within themselves conquer their poor bit, their primitive side, and it’s always there to offer people hope and a clear outlook on relief and mercy, in even the most oppressing of worldly circumstances.

    I wish you a good Easter.

    Richard




    Previously on this thread: see page 17 for an outline of the contents

    Britain faces the threat of Anglocide
    Long live the Jews, down with Torahism
    Please read my free internet book on www.ibcpp.org.uk

  9. #189
    Trusted Member Marilyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    29,289

    Default

    Happy Easter Richard...

  10. #190
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    124

    Default



    Marilyn, I did have a good Easter, thank you. You too, hopefully. I noticed you ended your post by three full stops. In my own texts, I also use repeated full stops to end a sentence, every now and then. It’s a nice little technique writers use to suggest a salient extra, to wordlessly bring about a shared awareness with kindred spirits of something significant, or inconsistent, or grotesque, to name a few possibilities. Now, to come back to your three full stops, did you also want to suggest something?

    Richard

Page 19 of 23 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •