In todays news...

[Ant]

U.S. and Canada Reach an Agreement on Turning Away Asylum Seekers
The deal allows both countries to turn away people who cross their borders without authorization at a time when migration has surged.


https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/23/us/p ... XydYXeGzKc

Racists, gammons, statue defending NAZIS!!!!!!!

[Horse]

The context is of course "the Great Reset". Klaus describes it in many wonderful terms but basically the "fourth industrial revolution" will be a world ruled by global corporations. Yeah, proper conspiracy nutter theories. Better tell that to all those billionaires who keep saying that's still their plan...

Told you

And, IIRC, by 2030?

[Potter]

I'm not a fan of Youtube nutter videos, we've got this one featuring JD (who I can't stand and won't click on) and there was one the other day from the left-wing swivel-eyed contingent featuring a very sickly looking bloke in a hoody ranting about Brexit and the Tories from his mums spare room. viewtopic.php?p=225886#p225886

Basically chaps, if it's on Youtube or Twitter and it is in any way politically charged, then it's more than likely suspect information that you should step back from and find a better news outlet.

[Potter]

Btw, I had to laugh at the BBC line - "The decision to lift rates to 4.25% from 4% came after the inflation rate rose unexpectedly last month."
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-65048756

So come on, own up, which idiot was it that was surprised when inflation rose again?

It is literally nightmarish to have these people in charge, are they blind?
I shouldn't complain because I can make money from seeing what these clowns apparently don't, but it's literally gross misconduct by the people running monetary policy.

[Dodgy69]

It's OK, the futures bright, 2.9% by year end, he said in his budget.

[Screwdriver]

I'm not a fan of Youtube nutter videos, we've got this one featuring JD (who I can't stand and won't click on) and there was one the other day from the left-wing swivel-eyed contingent featuring a very sickly looking bloke in a hoody ranting about Brexit and the Tories from his mums spare room. viewtopic.php?p=225886#p225886

Basically chaps, if it's on Youtube or Twitter and it is in any way politically charged, then it's more than likely suspect information that you should step back from and find a better news outlet.

I couldn't agree more. Even with some of my own "look at this" videos, they are rarely fully informed or balanced and often include a nonsense segment which expresses an extreme view but that is an inditement of our current world of extreme polarisation.

The vast majority of mainstream media and social media is left wing, liberal, bollocks so if a story breaks say, regarding the Hunter Biden laptop, it will only appear on right wing media. In order to follow such a story you might be forced to watch more extreme nonsense.

The trick with YouTube is never to blindly believe anything but only use it as a sort of guide to uncover the occasional nugget of information. Information which you might be able to search for and find on less extreme channels.

Sadly that is increasingly difficult when each "side" attempts to redress the "balance" with weighted hyperbole (and outright lies) to push the point home. What pisses me off more is when a channel or "influencer" is heavily censored, shadow banned or their opinions denounced with rhetoric. That just makes me even more determined to chase the story up and try to assemble some factual evidence.

[Ant]

The vast majority of mainstream media and social media is left wing, liberal, bollocks so if a story breaks say, regarding the Hunter Biden laptop, it will only appear on right wing media. In order to follow such a story you might be forced to watch more extreme nonsense.

And that's even the case with the BBC, people think it's entirely an outfit for the Conservatives, but it does pump out a lot of left wing stuff. As you say, one would need to refer to something a little more real world to find out about some other things going on. Such as breaking the news of most of the boat migrants being Albanian crime gangs was never going to be in the lefty news, you'd have to have seen it in the Daily Mail, but the lefties hate the Mail.

[Potter]

I do sympathise, anything that isn't current left-wing popular news is 'Nazi', even Stalin apparently

[Hoonercat]

I do sympathise, anything that isn't current left-wing popular news is 'Nazi', even Stalin apparently

Someone's feeling bored

[mangocrazy]

I want to see photos of Potter's yacht. I reckon it's a trawler, really...

[Hoonercat]

The vast majority of mainstream media and social media is left wing, liberal, bollocks so if a story breaks say, regarding the Hunter Biden laptop, it will only appear on right wing media. In order to follow such a story you might be forced to watch more extreme nonsense.

And that's even the case with the BBC, people think it's entirely an outfit for the Conservatives, but it does pump out a lot of left wing stuff. As you say, one would need to refer to something a little more real world to find out about some other things going on. Such as breaking the news of most of the boat migrants being Albanian crime gangs was never going to be in the lefty news, you'd have to have seen it in the Daily Mail, but the lefties hate the Mail.

Maybe because it's bollocks. From gov.uk

In 2022, almost half of small boat arrivals were from these 2 nationalities - Albanians (28%) and Afghans (20%), as shown in Figure 4

I guess the 'lefties' just aren't as gullible as you

[Hoonercat]

No. It's not my video, it is an opinion piece that makes some contentious observations which include a section regarding unwanted migration, assuming a general poll of the respective national population would rather it wasn't happening.

I found it interesting that lets say "government sponsored" migration has been weaponised in the past to achieve political aims as described in the video; Stalin, Mau Tse Tung, Pol Pot etc. I don't know how true that analogy is so I offer it here for discussion.

Would you rather talk about me instead?

He states

Let's bring this back to the Netherlands. There's a clear replacement strategy going on. That's what Stalin did with the Holodoor, right?

You think there's a discussion to be had as to whether the Dutch govt's policy is similar to the policy of a man who starved 4 million Ukraines to death, along with imprisoning tens of thousands of intellectuals as a means of stopping Ukraine developing their own sense of national indentity?

What Lineker did was despicable, to compare the UK government to Nazi Germany is insulting to those of us who understand the full horror of that period. Those who do not understand just how trite and insulting such a comparison is can just fuck right off in my book. Godwins rule should apply whether the name Hitler is spelled out or not.

That's a good call. I don't know is the answer. The video I link to makes that observation and I don't know if it is "true" that Stalin/Mau/PolPot targeted the farmers. If it is true then there is a comparison to be made yes.

Stalin took control of Ukraine farms, imposed impossible quotas and left large parts of Ukraine to starve, while it's grain was both shipped off to Russia and sold abroad. The result was that almost 4 million Ukraines starved to death and hundreds of thousands were forcibly deported, only to be replaced those with a more 'Russian' mindset (mainly from Russia and Belarus).

The Dutch want to cut nitrogen emmisions and part of this process means cutting back on livestock. Some farms will not be able to continue to operate and they will be wil be compensated, there are also plans to provide financial assistance to some farmers to move their business to less affected areas of the Netherlands. I'm struggling to see any comparison other than both involving farms.

Part of the Dutch government’s new plan is a drastic reduction of livestock by one-third over the next eight years. It wants to reach that goal by either buying out farmers, relocating farms that are close to vulnerable natural areas, or making farms more sustainable

The premise of bald bloke's appears to be that there will be a huge megacity and Chinese imigrants will be shipped in something something something (I lost interest). There's no megacity, he's just made that up.

The scheme is similar to any number of regional alliances across Europe, like that of the Hanseatic Cities or the Danube Cultural Cluster, which promote greater infrastructure connections and collaboration between people and administrations.

[Screwdriver]

Stalin took control of Ukraine farms, imposed impossible quotas and left large parts of Ukraine to starve, while it's grain was both shipped off to Russia and sold abroad. The result was that almost 4 million Ukraines starved to death and hundreds of thousands were forcibly deported, only to be replaced those with a more 'Russian' mindset (mainly from Russia and Belarus).

The Dutch want to cut nitrogen emmisions and part of this process means cutting back on livestock. Some farms will not be able to continue to operate and they will be wil be compensated, there are also plans to provide financial assistance to some farmers to move their business to less affected areas of the Netherlands. I'm struggling to see any comparison other than both involving farms.

Part of the Dutch government’s new plan is a drastic reduction of livestock by one-third over the next eight years. It wants to reach that goal by either buying out farmers, relocating farms that are close to vulnerable natural areas, or making farms more sustainable

The premise of bald bloke's appears to be that there will be a huge megacity and Chinese imigrants will be shipped in something something something (I lost interest). There's no megacity, he's just made that up.

The scheme is similar to any number of regional alliances across Europe, like that of the Hanseatic Cities or the Danube Cultural Cluster, which promote greater infrastructure connections and collaboration between people and administrations.

Well, yes, they both involve farms. So you ask yourself what is actually wrong with Dutch farming compared to any other country. The suggestion is that Dutch farms are actually right up there with the best in the world when you compare pollution with output. If these privately owned farms go out of business due to over-regulation, one assumes the shortfall in production will have to be made up elsewhere. We all still need to eat Tulips so where will the reduction in farmed products be taken up? And by whom? Will "they" be subject to the same stringent regulations?

Or is it part of the plan to reduce livestock and stop you and I from eating steak? Perhaps we should eat bugs as Klaus Schwab suggests. I know for a fact it won't stop the rest of the multibillionaires munching their way through several kg of Wagu beef (I once was asked to help prepare an itinerary for Davos, I can assure you, insects were NOT on the menu).

As for Tristate City, yes that does look far fetched as a proposal (though it has some truth to it: https://www.tristatecity.nl). The bloke at the end of the video, yes, bit of a fanatic. He certainly has travelled (so he claims) - but sometimes you only see what you're looking for so I take his opinion with a pinch of salt. Again, as I literally just said above, sometimes with these opinion pieces, you have to take the good with the bad when you're looking at sources outside the mainstream.

"Some farms will not be able to continue to operate". You're happy with that as a political ambition? And as for the compensation, how do you compensate a multi generation farming family? If they don't accept your offer, there will be a compulsory purchase. Looks like a land grab to me and it looks like they're using the excuse of "excess nitrogen" to pull it off.

The entire comparison is only that seizing farmland has been a tactic used by authoritarian states in the (recent) past to achieve political aims. If this is a plan to seize farmland, then the comparison stands and only time will tell. It is certainly something to be wary of. I don't accept I have to eat less beef for the sake of the planet. If it was up to me, I'd start higher up the tree with massively overpolluting global corporations or stop Bill Gates from selling his fertiliser into developing countries but since they're making the rules, I shan't hold my breath.

[Hoonercat]

It's a problem that the Dutch have been aware of for decades, but successive govt's have kicked it down the road and it's now reached a point where drastic measures are required. AFAIK, intensive livestock farming is the main culprit, too much livestock concentrated in certain areas. In 1950 the Netherlands had 410,000 producers, that number is curently 55,000 but production has increased substantially (eg 1.9 million pigs produced in 1950, to 13 million currently). It's a small country with a human population of 17.5 million, and a combined total of 17 million pigs and cows. It's not sustainable.

[Yambo]

Well, yes, they both involve farms.

Zimbabwe used to be called the breadbasket of Africa. Its well documented slide into poverty and failure also involved farms.

It wasn't part of the great reset though.

[Screwdriver]

It's a problem that the Dutch have been aware of for decades, but successive govt's have kicked it down the road and it's now reached a point where drastic measures are required. AFAIK, intensive livestock farming is the main culprit, too much livestock concentrated in certain areas. In 1950 the Netherlands had 410,000 producers, that number is curently 55,000 but production has increased substantially (eg 1.9 million pigs produced in 1950, to 13 million currently). It's a small country with a human population of 17.5 million, and a combined total of 17 million pigs and cows. It's not sustainable.

On the face of it that sounds eminently plausible to suggest that too high a concentration in one place is "a bad thing". But like EV cars, if the plan is just to shift that concentration elsewhere, where is the net benefit? Apart from a shit ton of cheap farmland for Bill Gates and his ilk.

Or perhaps "we" should just accept that meat production is bad for the environment and start eating more insects as the WEF suggests. I suppose it wouldn't be anything to do with the uptick in so called "synthetic biology" (fake meat) that our oligarchs are getting into...

On occasions like this it is best to step back and take a wider look at the big picture. Considering the harm we as a species are doing to our planet, would kicking out generations of Dutch farmers be that high on the list? Maybe we should think about stopping the rampant destruction of say, the Amazon rainforest first. The problem is, there's no money in that whereas the low hanging fruit like this is easy money - for the super rich. All they have to do is persuade a few corrupt politician and they're quids in. Can't make money by not chopping down trees.

[Screwdriver]

Well, yes, they both involve farms.

Zimbabwe used to be called the breadbasket of Africa. Its well documented slide into poverty and failure also involved farms.

It wasn't part of the great reset though.

My response is taken out of context. It doesn't just "involve" farms. It is a move being made by the government to reduce the ability of farmers to be able to farm. If they don't sell up to <whoever> (yes Bill, I'm looking at you!) then we'll just take it anyway.

It could easily be seen as a cynical use of "climate change" or "omg, nitrogen" to ease the transition of ALL properties into the rightful hands of the rich and powerful. There's no "legal" mechanism for these corporates to land grab so backdoor methods like this should set alarm bells jangling. Not just because it's difficult to believe things will get better for humanity when all of our food is being produced by some giant global corporation but because we have seen this tactic used by authoritarian states before.

Yes some of those authoritarian states were obviously evil and despicable, it occurs to me that in this "end game" of corporate globalisation, it might not be so obvious.

[mangocrazy]

Or perhaps "we" should just accept that meat production is bad for the environment and start eating more insects as the WEF suggests. I suppose it wouldn't be anything to do with the uptick in so called "synthetic biology" (fake meat) that our oligarchs are getting into...

Meat production is bad for the environment, no question about it. It's also a major contributor to the rise in CO2 and methane levels in the atmosphere, both of which are greenhouse gases.

But you already know this. The only sustainable way to feed the planet is via plant-based foods. It's not a part of the 'great reset', it's just simple maths. It's not a conspiracy, it's the only viable way for humans to continue to inhabit this increasingly overcrowded and over-stressed planet.

The big problem is getting people to accept this and change their eating habits. I accept that I need to change my eating habits but I do really like a juicy steak or a leg of lamb.

[Horse]

Well, yes, they both involve farms.

Zimbabwe used to be called the breadbasket of Africa. Its well documented slide into poverty and failure also involved farms.

It wasn't part of the great reset though.

If they don't sell up to <whoever> (yes Bill, I'm looking at you!) then we'll just take it anyway.

.... in this "end game" of corporate globalisation

I'm on ignore, but reality check for anyone else.

About 97% of American farms are small and medium-sized family-owned operations.

[Screwdriver]

I'm on ignore, but reality check for anyone else.

Sorry to disappoint but you're actually on manual ignore.

Until/unless you have anything interesting to say rather than the usual ignorant quips or snide comments about me, you're not worth the attention you crave.