It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
So you think those trade deals can go hand in hand with democratic liberties?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/11/30/what-do-trumps-latest-cabinet-nominees-have-in-common-theyre-all-major-donors-to-his-campaign/?utm_term=.abfc058052d1#comments
Includes a reminder that Trump does threaten people. I am sure plenty of threats are unknown to the public.
The Ricketts' financial support for Trump was a dramatic reversal from the primaries, when Joe and Marlene Ricketts gave more than $5.5 million to Our Principles PAC, a super PAC that ran a slew of hard-hitting ads against Trump. Their financial backing for the group prompted Trump to threaten to expose secrets about the family, which owns the Chicago Cubs, tweeting that they “better be careful, they have a lot to hide!”
http://www.cjr.org/first_person/ed_ou_border_standing_rock.php
Corporations are not people. Corporations are business entities, CREATED SPECIFICALLY TO BYPASS THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITIZENSHIP. I will believe a Corporation is entitled to the rights of citizenship when one is put in jail for breaking the law.
And some thoughts on how people can work to stop the hate, racism:
http://time.com/4583843/stop-hate-influencers/
It is not very long; I'll just post the text here: (as usual, bolding/underlining is mine)
Intimidation and harassment have spiked throughout the country following the recent election. Women, people of color, immigrants, Muslims, Jews and LGBTQ folks, including many of our own students, report palpable fear.
On Nov. 13, a man threatened to set fire to a University of Michigan student if she did not remove her hijab. On Nov. 16, a man in Sarasota, Florida reported being physically attacked by a person who said, “You know my new president says we can kill all you f-ggots now.” On Nov. 17, a Puerto Rican family’s car was vandalized in West Springfield, Mass., with the words “Trump” and “Go home” scratched into the car, and there have been multiple reports of immigrants being told to “go back where you came from.” The Southern Poverty Law Center collected more than 400 reports of “hateful intimidation and harassment in less than a week following election day.
How do we stop this violence? Looking in from the outside and reporting events after they occur is not enough. We must understand the perpetrators’ motivations.
We often think that perpetrators simply mimic the hateful speech and actions of others. In doing so, we discount the effects that community or peer pressure can bring to bear. In fact, research shows that potential perpetrators of hate crimes and bullying are actually quite conscious of the degree to which their community supports or condemns their actions.
For example, research has found that when a person hears others tell racist or sexist jokes, his or her tolerance for gender or racial discrimination increases. At an extreme level, it can encourage genocide: David Yanagizawa-Drott has shown that inflammatory messages played on a hate radio station, aimed at motivating Hutus to murder their Tutsi neighbors in Rwanda, had a greater effect when people in surrounding neighborhoods were also exposed to the same radio messages. In other words, hate radio alone did not increase individual hatred or violence; rather hate radio coupled with widespread exposure resulted in greater community support for violence.
Potential perpetrators do not simply “imitate” Trump but rather are encouraged to act by the fact that he garnered so many votes and supporters. They infer that they have a better chance of escaping social and legal sanction than before.
To stop hateful actions, potential perpetrators must be convinced that those in their community are opposed to this behavior. Who can best communicate this opposition?
Kevin Munger recently found that white males who racially harass others on Twitter reduced their use of slurs when another white male with a large number of followers admonished them with a tweet (black males, and white males with few followers, were not as successful). In schools, Elizabeth Levy Paluck, Hana Shepherd and Peter Aronow showed that students who receive the lion’s share of attention in student social networks have an outsized influence over school social norms: when they stand up against bullying and student-on-student harassment, student conflict drops by up to 30%.
These studies suggest that some people are better than others at delegitimizing hatred and violence. These “elite influencers” are more likely to come from a community considered important by a potential perpetrator—whether their racial community or their friendship group. Also, these influencers are more likely to be higher status—connected to many people within those networks.
But whether or not you are an elite influencer in your own community, evidence shows that the old-fashioned strength-in-numbers approach also works. Large numbers of people who assert values of inclusiveness and tolerance in a big, public way can change minds and behavior. Large media events or assemblies that create “common knowledge” of these values, that show each member of the community that every other member shares these values, are the most successful.
For example, a public service announcement during the Super Bowl that encourages people to report domestic violence is more successful in deterring domestic violence than an ad in a magazine; a potential perpetrator infers that the millions watching the Super Bowl find domestic violence unacceptable and are more likely to stand against and report offenders.
A recent study also showed that people who watched a political speech in the company of a crowd (in this case, a speech by U.S. House Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-CT, on the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act), are more persuaded by the speech. Listening together, as opposed to watching alone or watching a video viewed by others at different times, is more effective because when communities synchronize their attention, people process the message in a deeper and more serious manner.
The alternative, in which communities do not collectively bear witness to and support anti-hate speech, is a scenario in which potential perpetrators will feel more and more emboldened.
Schools, universities and localities cannot just play defense and wait for their members to be victimized. Potential perpetrators must clearly understand that everyone around them, regardless of their political views, believes that hate is unacceptable. Elite influencers in every community can help to broadcast this message. Standing with them, there is strength in numbers, and as individuals and communities, we need to come together to speak as loudly and publicly as possible.
Real journalists must be controlled- there nothing worse for fascism than the truth exported to the masses it tries to keep ignorant.
And thank you, @BeatlesSansEarmuffs, for bringing that person to our attention. Yes, I had read that. It is a good example of an individual not staying silent, taking a stand, being supportive in his community.
General Petraeus, one of the people on Trump's list for Secretary of State, still has to check in with his probation officer. He was convicted. A pardon from Trump could clear him once Trump is in office. The pardon needs to happen at the beginning so Petraeus could actually fulfill the position, without having to continue to check in with his probation officer and face things like his computer and office being searched without a warrant.
Good old Pogo ... I remember this as a teen ... ;)
Woody Guthrie -
This is a genuine concern, a huge worry. Look at Trump's administrative picks and what the old guard Republicans want to push through. We cannot go by what he has said, on any matter really.
People believe false Facebook stories more than traditional news reporting. Lies gets 'clicks', attention, "go viral", and hammer home/stir up hate. Tell the people who are hurting or feeling neglected what they want to hear and amplify those feelings. Not positive reassurance, just stirring conflict.
From I can tell, no easy answer to combat this. Facts do need to be reported loudly, more strongly, across the board (all of media).
Sure, all politicians color the truth at times and worse. But this election cycle has been far, far worse and extreme. If this were a traditional Republican candidate, I would have have issues with some policies but not worried about so many important things for my country.
and
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/donald-trump-mike-pence-carrier-jobs-indiana
I guess we can expect Trump to keep making "deals" and publicizing himself exactly as he has done all along in business and the entertainment world. Basically, no change.
"I just did this for America!" etc. on twitter. And yet the truth is not what he says. Even if he made an accurate statement, the way he is blowing his own horn - oh, and holding rallies again - will not change. For me, this is a sorry way for our president to act - I mean simply his demeanor, his actions, his words. Just my opinion - I know all politicians blow their own horn. But not like this. And that is aside from what he is actually doing. But the more important matter is what he actually does/does not do, of course. Those ripple effects from his actions so far are not healthy for our country, again just saying my opinion on how he acts (look what has sprung up since the election).
Please really keep an eye on what is happening to the press. Plus what they say, how they say it, what they leave out - that, too. But also very much how they are treated, when they are denied access, Trump's refusal to have a traveling press corps, refusal to have press conferences, etc. Our rights will be changed for sure, if certain people have their way. A free press is so very important.
False info regarding scientific claims (climate change in particular) via Brietbart
https://thinkprogress.org/the-house-science-committee-is-spreading-fake-news-bad-science-and-basically-crap-515c6c899fa0#.650m7knnf
In part says:
The article is not particularly surprising, coming from Breitbart. The site, now notorious as a platform for white nationalism, has a history of pushing anti-global warming propaganda and of gleeful attacks on climate scientists and their work.
Breitbart was formerly headed by President-elect Trump’s current Chief Strategist Steve Bannon, himself a spirited climate science denier. Bannon, while head of the site, said on his daily radio show that the Pope’s concerns about climate change amounted to “hysteria.”
Posts on the site have called climate scientists, including those employed at the government agencies NASA, GISS, and NOAA “talentless low-lives who cannot be trusted,” and “abject liars.” The same editor of the site who wrote Tuesday’s article wrote in 2014 about his joy in calling climate advocates “eco Nazis,” “eco fascists,” and “scum-sucking slime balls.”
Breitbart is not a reputable news source. As a site that pushes climate denier propaganda and ridicules scientists, it is particularly not a reputable news source on climate science. In spreading the article, the House Science Committee is validating and spreading dangerous misinformation.
Trump's choice to lead the EPA denies climate change is real.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/11/11/meet-the-man-trump-is-relying-on-to-unravel-obamas-environmental-legacy/?utm_term=.0891823d83b1
In part says:
Ebell, who is not a scientist, has long questioned the overwhelming scientific consensus that human activity is fueling unprecedented global warming. He also has staunchly opposed what he calls energy rationing, instead arguing that the United States should unleash the full power of coal, oil and gas to fuel economic growth and job creation.
All that makes him an ideal ambassador for Trump, who has repeatedly called the notion of man-made climate change a “hoax.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/us/politics/trump-kicks-off-thank-you-tour-reveling-in-crowd-and-campaign-themes.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=b-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
This hardly seems like a president elect trying to unite people. He is continuing to sow anger and hatred; divisions. Why? Please think about that. Why would he continue this line of divisiveness and anger? Because it got people riled up enough, united in their fever pitch to trash and system and risk everything on a huge change? Because it got him elected and he sees no reason to change his stance at all.
Meanwhile, Pence is taking almost daily security intel briefings. (Not Trump, who has spurned them. He gets his security info "elsewhere" according to his spokesperson.)
Pence. Maybe think about that, too. One figurehead as president, one doing the hard work behind the scenes. But Trump is the one who will have executive power.
Please really keep an eye on what is happening to the press. Plus what they say, how they say it, what they leave out - that, too. But also very much how they are treated, when they are denied access, Trump's refusal to have a traveling press corps, refusal to have press conferences, etc. Our rights will be changed for sure, if certain people have their way. A free press is so very important.
Free press? Really? Do you really believe, there is such a thing? I thought, by now, people would at least have understood, that press is reporting, what they are told from the few, who own ALL mjor press channels. The main stream media will NEVER, once again - NEVER - report, what is truly going on in most subjects. They are simply not allowed to do so. But search the net and you will find journalists and others, who are sick of the lies, on private and independant channels, who try their best to bring some light into the darkness of lies.
Clashes - WHO did the clashes? Do they report, that the natives were NOTHING but peaceful? No, of course not.
But Standing Rock is not over yet. 1000 veterans are marching. Fingers crossed its not closed or they give up their plans. haha - fat chance. What's nature in comparison to big fat bucks, eh? But we will see.
No main stream media will be allowed to report in agreement with the protestors. This article is as far as it goes.
This is a good post with very valid points.