"Currants Bw..."

[Letters]

Got an 'AA' new fiver

It's AA50, seen some of those going on EBay for as much as £8.

[Niall_Quinn]

Got an 'AA' new fiver

It's AA50, seen some of those going on EBay for as much as £8.

Plus £4 postage.

[GP]

https://twitter.com/JOE_co_uk/status/798601489371439104

[Letters]

https://twitter.com/JOE_co_uk/status/798601489371439104

That would be funnier were it not so alarmingly close to reality

[Niall_Quinn]

That would be funnier were it not so alarmingly close to reality

It's not even in the long distance vicinity of reality. Just because the media says it, doesn't make it true. In fact, as we have seen from their own internal documents, when the media says it it's propaganda bullshit. What's happening now is anyone who suggests we should take a different stance to Russia is automatically labelled a collaborator. No proof required, no facts tolerated, it's back to McCarthy as if that era had never happened, as if we didn't used to laugh and roll our eyes at the events from that period. Now it's expeditiously fashionable again and such nonsense is treated as sanity. Not a shred of proof either Trump or Farage is in collusion with Putin. Not a shred of evidence to suggest Farage is Trump's puppet. All of this rubbish has been scraped up from the bottom of the barrel so Europhiles could terrorise the British electorate and the criminal elements of the Democratic party in the States could try (and fail) to desperately distract from what was found when their rock was lifted.

So why do you say this is "alarmingly close to reality"? On what do you base this judgement?

[Goonermerree]

Farage is getting his feet under the table so he can run for President in 2020.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

It's not even in the long distance vicinity of reality. Just because the media says it, doesn't make it true. In fact, as we have seen from their own internal documents, when the media says it it's propaganda bullshit. What's happening now is anyone who suggests we should take a different stance to Russia is automatically labelled a collaborator. No proof required, no facts tolerated, it's back to McCarthy as if that era had never happened, as if we didn't used to laugh and roll our eyes at the events from that period. Now it's expeditiously fashionable again and such nonsense is treated as sanity. Not a shred of proof either Trump or Farage is in collusion with Putin. Not a shred of evidence to suggest Farage is Trump's puppet. All of this rubbish has been scraped up from the bottom of the barrel so Europhiles could terrorise the British electorate and the criminal elements of the Democratic party in the States could try (and fail) to desperately distract from what was found when their rock was lifted.

So why do you say this is "alarmingly close to reality"? On what do you base this judgement?

No i just think the burden of proof lies with people who say the relationship should be reset with Russia?....in what way?, and to what advantage? (and no i don't accept to avoid war as a reason because i don't believe there is any prospect of that happening whatever relations between the West and the Russian Federation are like)

[Kano]

No i just think the burden of proof lies with people who say the relationship should be reset with Russia?....in what way?, and to what advantage? (and no i don't accept to avoid war as a reason because i don't believe there is any prospect of that happening whatever relations between the West and the Russian Federation are like)

America's continuing war global machine is enough to point toward the real danger in the world. There is always a new enemy to be found to justify the sustainment of their military budget, manufacturing of weapons and deployment of troops. If drones aren't killing hundreds of innocent people across the world, then there are hundreds of their own troops being killed off. For absolutely no global gain whatsoever, only to sustain their own increasingly unstable financial status.

[Niall_Quinn]

That's a massive post to unpack. I'll address what I can.



We'll agree to disagree on this one. From a moral stand point, there is no sign of redemption for the American people with this vote. How can it when his campaign was built off xenophobia, sexism and racism? It may not bother you much, I don’t actually think he’s that serious about what he’s said, but it’s the voters getting behind him that worry me. We’ve seen and heard from some of the people and groups that back him, so that’s not a sign of progress to me.

Also, he’s pro military, believes in a strong force and although he says he’ll be adopt a more defensive counterpunch approach, we’ve seen how that approach can pan out. The old sledgehammer to an ant approach. See the situation in Gaza. Military action can only be as good as military intelligence, so if fed the wrong info, we’re still going to get the same results. It’s not as if his voters oppose military action anyway, but as you say, Trump has no prior record so we can only judge his action going forward. I doubt we’ll see anything different to what we’ve seen since the 90s.

Yes, we agree to disagree that the campaign was built on racism, sexism and xenophobia. It just wasn't, but whatever. Increasingly it does seem many voters were swayed on the suitability of Clinton to be president, regardless of who she was running against. Obviously we can't interview 60 million people but the post election coverage does seem to have a common strand running through it - trust. Many people didn't trust her and that's a good thing.

Now of course we can listen to the degenerate Obama and his outrageous commentary that showed us precisely what type of person he is behind the smooth talk and the smile. This idea of David Duke endorsing Trump and therefore Trump becoming a white supremacist as a result is very obviously ridiculous. But the left wing media has settled on that as if it has validity. They continue to push this line of the virtuous (themselves of course) and the deplorable (anyone who is not them). Everyone who didn't support them goes into the same pot. This election has done everyone the great favour of revealing the liberal left in all its self-righteous, hypocritical and obscene glory. If Trump and his supporters had behaved like this we'd hear condemnation from the rafters. Instead the liberals give a pass to this casual slander and then seize upon it to build their talking points. We now see the real cause for division in the US is the liberal left. You are either with them or against them and there's no room for negotiation. Morally speaking, they have shown themselves to be repugnant. They may CLAIM to be the champion of equality and justice but their real methods are now laid bare and their post election words and, more importantly, behaviour are every bit as bad as the groups and organisations they despise and attribute to Trump.

Rape Melania? Assassinate Trump? Dear me. These fuckers sound like the KKK.

We're on the same page with that one and the point in bold a definitely agree with but see the opposite of that happening with Trumps votes. It's caused more of a fraction and finger pointing instead of bringing people together. Around 4 of 5 years ago, around the time of Occupy Wall Street and people protesting against austerity, against the bank bailouts, it seemed like people were starting to wake up. Even around the Iraq and Afghanistan wars where people were protesting against the government, whether left or right, conservative or liberal, most people started to see that they were duped by their government and by the mainstream media. It started being about rich vs poor, rich getting richer etc. That’s slowly been chipped away and people are now fragmented. It’s groups of poor people pointing the finger at each other whilst looking to the poster child of corporate greed as some sort of hero. Isn’t that backwards?

I have no doubt that if a major attack were to happen on American again, it wouldn’t take much to convince people to go to war again. It’s not looking good.

I don't think people are nearly as fragmented as the media claims. And I think we'll see that emerge as the fallout from the collapse in media trust develops. Small minorities are claiming to speak for massive majorities and there's no indication they have any authority to do so. In fact their authority has dissolved. Small groups on either side are driving this division, whether it be the politicians with sores on their arses from the amount of time they have sat in comfortable seats, to the laughably intolerant and biased media and through the small groups who will always wind themselves up over the political process.

I really can't see who is "looking to the poster child of corporate greed as some sort of hero"? Trump supporters? They voted what they saw as anti-establishment to the greatest degree possible. This is politics so only scoundrels are admitted. Better to have a scoundrel who can cause a fuss than one who intends to sleep through her whole term in the back seat while Goldman Sachs drives. "Drain the Swamp", not even a Trump slogan originally but one that stuck and resonated. People are demanding action, not more words. Actual policies that are actually enforced and have a real effect on their lives. I suspect Trump will be the most scrutinised president in living memory. If he sits there and does fuck all it will be interesting to see how long people put up with it. Trump marks an act of desperation in many ways. If he's not the change then where are people ever going to find their change? There's nobody left, not anyone who could make it through the election circus anyway. 2020 will be crucial. By that stage either Trump has delivered or the people (all of them) will have another choice to make. Give up and go back to the same old shit and just accept that's the way it has to be, for ever, or finally realise there's nothing in politics for them. We'll all thank Trump if the latter occurs.

Last note, you haven’t really said much about Russia or Assad’s war crime and human rights records. I guess it doesn’t make much of a difference because we can’t really police the world. I really don’t have an answer for how that can be solved. But Trump has gone on record and said Obama should have gone into Syria earlier and attacked Assad with force and he has also said he’d might have chosen to gone in to attack after Assad used chemical weapons. Again, it doesn’t like anything new.

And I won't say much or anything about Assad and Putin's records if it is supposed to be justification for the west's behaviour. You know my stance, get rid of all government because it is inherently immoral and anti-humanitarian. I'm no fan of Assad, Putin or whoever is in charge of the Congo right now. Fuck them all. But in the end it was the US, UK and France who started all this shit. You can go way, way back. Same fuckers with the same policies. The UN has to be transformed into a legitimate body if we want to make progress in any of these conflicts. As it stands the UN is a facilitator for western aggression. Just look at the track record. Weak secretary generals who are always pandering. Politicians and technocrats who are more interested in holding the organisation together rather than using their mandate to establish global security. The UN has failed, failed, failed again so it either should be abolished or forced to commit to its mandate. It comes to the people of the planet to force that change. Since when have we ever had a say on what happens at the UN? Since when have we ever had any sort of influence?

Of course without a real media it's very hard to restrain these international bodies. So that's where we start I think. The mainstream media is struggling for revenues and struggling to remain relevant. Out of the struggle may emerge a legitimate media and we need to encourage that at every opportunity. The modern world turns on consumerism. Where we spend out money is where we have real influence. I (an apparently many other people) stopped consuming the mainstream media a long time ago. But I'd consume it again if it were to every regain a trustworthy status. There's scope here for modern businesses to gain massive commercial advantages by doing the right thing. If people could get organised outside the political process (just ignore that shit) and create mechanisms for supporting law abiding and socially aware organisations whilst withholding support for the abusers then we could see real change. But the politicians and the media will do everything to keep our eyes on them. As long as we are looking at them and engaged with them then nothing can change. And so I go back to the moral underpinnings of a new, non-political movement. A movement by the people, for the people. Directing trillions of dollars a year in a very carefully targeted manner and swamping the donations of the minority to their political mates. This is where change lies. A long and tiring process but one that could eventually lead to the people instructing the UN to do its fucking job.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

America's continuing war global machine is enough to point toward the real danger in the world. There is always a new enemy to be found to justify the sustainment of their military budget, manufacturing of weapons and deployment of troops. If drones aren't killing hundreds of innocent people across the world, then there are hundreds of their own troops being killed off. For absolutely no global gain whatsoever, only to sustain their own increasingly unstable financial status.

Even accepting everything you've said as true, accepting this about America is not the same as necessitating that Russia should get a free pass for doing exactly the same.