Welcome to the php ebenezer's messageboard
see bottom for more info


back to main board collapse thread
Manners and civilisation. (01/08/22 18:57:32) Reply
    It is striking how leading persons or representatives of tyrannies/ dictatorships/ theocracies or other big-time criminal systems use threats and abusive language when challenged.

    I'd say: when they resort to such foul language, they convince me that they are lying criminals. We have lots of examples in Russian behaviour during the last century. But the Chinese too: the origin of the SARS-COV-2. The abusive language used by the Chinese authorities in responding to questions convince me that the virus was of laboratory origin. The other day I read that they allegedly found the virus in the sewer from one specific market area at the start of the spread of the virus, and thus allegedly disproving the lab hypothesis. I'd say: They have plenty of time to falsify evidence.

    ANyway: Just look at the words used, and it will be easy to distinguish between civilised human beings and animals lookinh like people, but just faking it.

Terminology and equivalence (07/08/22 18:24:12) Reply
    I have seen comments labelling Nancy Pelosi as a warmonger because she visited Taiwan contrary to and in disregard of threats from the mainland police and surveillance state. According to the comments: It was only expectable and reasonable that Xi became angry and ordered missiles sent over her and blockade of marine traffic with massive shooting in nearby waters.

    Pelosi is not a warmonger. Giving her such a label is equivalent to blaming a rape victim because she wore a short skirt, or high heels or a low-neck top - one or more of these. Or because she was out alone and drank alcohol. Or walked home in a dark alley. Or took a pirate taxi.

    People in the know say that rape usually isn't about sex. It is about power.
    INdusing fear in others, by military or sexual assault: It is sadism.

    So I have found one more label for Xi and his gangs.

Naval exercise in Taiwan's coastal waters (09/08/22 07:05:20) Reply
    To me it looks like a blockade. Cyberattacks. Missiles. Large number of warships with daily use of artillery in all shipping routes and outside of harbours.

    My bet is that it will go on indefinitely, with a goal of starving Taiwan's economy. If such a blockade is to be broken, it can only be by massive presence of US Navy - with the associated dangers.

    This will be Xi's way of diverting the Chinese people's attention from his own crimes - Hong Kong, Xinjiang, Tibet - and his own failures: the housing bubble, the huge unpayable debts, and the zero-Covid strategy fuelled by ineffective old-fashioned vaccines.

    We need to be aware: All criticism of Taiwan, Europe and USA is sourced from the chinese communist party or affiliates, just as all criticism of Ukraine, Europe and USA is sourced from the russian lie factories.

    Not one single word of truth will appear - any elements of truth will all be twisted perversely.

Ending it? I would not think so. (09/08/22 15:41:29) Reply
    I have not seen an end date to the - so far bloodless - aggression in Taiwan's waters.

    I reckon it would be face losing for Xi to end it. With such threats and such amassing of aggressive hardware it could be taken as cowardice to just go back home and call off the invasion. And cowardice is dangerous for dictators.

    I'd say: We ain't seen nothing yet.

Amnesty International and Wikileaks (09/08/22 08:51:33) Reply
    is one example of an organisation taken over by russian disinformation peddlers, by focussing on alleged errors in the Army of Ukraine, while ignoring the russian massacres, mass torturing, kidnappings, deportations and widespread attacks on civilian infrastructure.

    In this context I think we could look back on Wikileaks. Initially they seemed to be the good guys, leaking information that served as justifiable criticism of western societies. But then they let themselves be dragged over to the dark side, effectively as a medium for russian sabotage of democratic processes.

    I think more than these organisations are targeted by the disinformants - including universities.

Right and wrong (09/08/22 09:37:01) Reply
    These terms have been vilified for many years in the mainstream media and among intellectuals. I admit that I too am skeptical of the terms because of their absoluteness. (It is easy to attribute those terms to the utterances of religious purists and others who have undergone brainwashing - in politics, business or science. So the terms need a statistical refurbishment. )

    This skepticism has been abused by the enemy to make people believe that because something is not 100 percent good (but only 75-95% good), then it is equivalent to something being only 0.5% good, or even 100 percent evil. I don't need to give recent examples.

    So, when using these terms, there are unspoken percentages. Shades of grey. It's like printing: If you look at a print with a microscope (x50-100 will probably be sufficent), you will see that there is not complete coverage, even with massive black - when seen with the naked eye.

come again

messageboard's PHP script is a courtesy of Laurent

 This board has been visited 254144 timesCurrent time is 11/08/22 11:41:15