The Rabbit Hole
 

Always Look on the Bright Side of Life - Monty Python


This is a place where we can discuss current affairs as well as anything interesting, topical, funny or just totally irreverent. Music and entertainment are welcome too.


All political views are welcome, however un-PC, challenging, controversial or provocative. All I request is that reasoning and/or evidence is provided to support your case in order for a healthy debate to ensue.


Anything goes, within FF rules. No racism or sexism.


Now this is the Law of the Jungle -- as old and as true as the sky;
And the Wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the Wolf that shall break it must die.
As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk the Law runneth forward and back --
For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack

- Rudyard Kipling


21/11/2017
Due to FF sensitivities, please be aware that there should be no more talk on anything to do with Jews.

Acronyms used (by some). Requested by StuEffex, compiled by Devauxt:

HPFM = Hokus pokus fucking magic
ROPO = religion of permanent offence
ICV - Issy cultural violence
FO - Foxtrot Oscar
Jedward - arrogant, duplicitous, sanctimonious, condescending, EU apologist
Lul - Dutch for dick
FUBAR - F***ed up beyond all repair
FIFO - fit in or fcuk off
NFG - No f***ing good
POS - Piece of s**t
RTFM - Read the F***ing manual
RTFC - Read the F***ing chart
STFU - Shut the f*** up
WTF What the f***

Awesome Jen! Thanks for the invite! Finally a place to go to with out having to worry about the PC cops!
Looking forward to learning, exchanging ideas, making new friends or what ever!

Ok here is a classic to kick off what is going to be a totally awesome thread!

well this should be fun somewhere on forex factory you can post without being kicked for no good reason by a asshole

OMG! I can not stop laughing! These guys are drunk on baijo! This has got to be the funniest shit I have seen.

As I remember, Bruce Lee sparring sessions were much more interesting.....

I wish I listened to more music, but I just can't be bothered lol.

Hoping for good discussion.

Hey Verv!

Here is the smoking gun on Hillary's E-mail scandal. This has been recently composited in a timeline. Very interesting read. Tell me what you think! Oh the other interesting development that goes with this release, is the civil unrest that is currently happening in Charlotte NC, and the recent bombings in NY, NJ, and the stabbings in Minnesota, happening simultaneously when this story broke. A lot of people are saying George Sorros is behind creating the distractions.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...t/#more-122054

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-0...-out-state-ids

Oh one thing that is of concern, certainly for me right now is Obama's October deadline for ceding control of the internet to the UN. This has got to be one of the biggest threats to democracy as well as to free speech all over the world that we as a world are facing right now. Can any one imagine the internet being censored by countries such as China, Iran, and Russia? I lived in China for three years, and I know first hand what the internet under Chinese control looks like and in all honesty it SUCKS! Especially from a country like China that regularly seeks to steal intellectual property rights, undermine search engines by slowing it down to a snails pace, impeding commerce, this would be a disaster! Think what this will do to our trading? Seriously folks, this is pretty serious and dangerous and our congress needs to stop this ASAP. All of you need to be talking about this issue, and start informing as many people about it as possible! This is nothing more than a power grab, all led by Obama and the globalist elitists. Just review his speech to the UN, and that should tell you all you need to know who and what Obama stands for.

And I quote:

"Obama Speech to UN General Assembly: Americans Must Give Up their Freedom!
By Onan Coca September 22, 2016

We have to put our money where our mouths are. And we can only realize the promise of this institutions founding to replace the ravages of war with cooperation if powerful nations like my own accept constraints. Sometimes Im criticized in my own country for professing a belief in international norms and multilateral institutions, but Im convinced in the long run giving up some freedom of action, not giving up our ability to protect ourselves or pursue our core interests but binding ourselves to international rules, over the long-term, enhances our security. President Barack Obama

"President Barack Obama may have just delivered the most disturbing speech ever given by a sitting US president.

Obama is a Globalist, an Elitest : with others who share his quest for power and control : Soros, Merkel, Putin, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the leaders in the United Nations General Assembly, they know with control comes power, with power comes wealth.

in a free society, in a True Capitalistic (Constitutional - Conservative) society, ANYONE, with hard work and luck - relying only on one's own efforts - has a "chance" [a possibility] to become educated, wealthy, powerful, successful. In a Socialist Society ( Socialist = Progressive = Globalist ) only the Powerful become Wealthy, they rule others and steal the fruits of their labor, their ideas, their hard work and their luck for the "welfare" of the collective. The Powerful, the Wealthy, the Elite rule, EVERYONE ELSE do as they instruct." ~ Wayne Newkirk

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/poli...103433852.html

....has anyone seen Alice ?

The internet is not a single entity that can be "controlled." It is simply packets of data being sent across communications networks, be they physical, mobile or satellite. How can the UN or Chinese or anyone else control the networks? In the UK, none of it is state owned; the physical infrastructure is run by BTOpenworld and then there are providers using it all seeking to offer the most competitive terms. Similarly with the mobile networks. The UN can't touch that. However some censorship could be imposed which I don't see as a bad thing at all. At the moment any would be jihadist can download instructions from ISIS on how to make bombs, paedos can download their sick images and chat to each other about their various perversions. Censoring certain things would be easy to do and I don't see why it isn't currently in force.

We have CCTV on most streets, GCHQ listens in on whatever they wish to, your ISP has a log of exactly what you've been looking at and probably passes on anything suspicious to GCHQ. Like many Brits I think, I don't see that as an infringement to my freedom of speech or freedom to privacy etc. If you're not doing anything wrong, there is nothing to worry about. In fact, I find it reassuring. Freedom of speech under UK law is quite different to what it means in the US.

Never mind Hillary's eyes; I listened to what she said and I want to ask, how can America afford all that when the national debt is standing at $19 trillion?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...irections.html

I think this may be more suited to the Trump cause. Love this.

Ok to answer some of your questions!

Believe it or not the internet is a US invention and since it's inception the US have been the custodians of guarding free speech world wide that falls under the 1st amendment of the US constitution. What that means in the bigger picture, is that no country has the right to impede or supersede that right to impose restrictions of free speech of any kind to anyone regardless of nationality. That includes protecting you, meaning this decision will affect you. Ceding that power to a sanctioning organization such as the UN which IMHO is almost the same as giving that power to the EU which sets up for giving them the right to do what ever is necessary to impose what ever restrictions they deem fit in order to control free speech, commerce, or impose rules according to their views without any oversight what so ever.

Contrary to popular belief, America doesn't own the Internet. But it does, currently, oversee the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the nonprofit entity that controls the critically important Domain Naming System (DNS), which is responsible for coordinating the domain name hierarchy and IP addressing for the entire Internet. This only confirms that you are correct in your first point. However that being said, this particular decision as a result of Edward Snowden's classified leaks about the US spying on European allies gave Obama the excuse to act by setting out the terms of this particular transaction that is about to happen on October first, right before the US elections. This basically invites the possibility of foreign dictatorships to redefine the internet.

The attorney for Go Daddy Software mentions; "I saw firsthand the immense power ICANN has over the Internet. For example, it could make sweeping decisions related to .com, such as blocking certain viewpoints or countries from owning or even accessing .com domains. Put the wrong people in charge, and all sorts of groups - such as conservatives, Christians and Jews who are targeted in todays politically correct era - could find themselves cut out from much of the Internet. Since the Internet pervades everything we do today in our lives, this would have a chilling effect on the communication and free speech rights of such groups."

A far as your views on censorship, I am a little conflicted as to what that means in a broader picture. First of all. I agree that if you are doing nothing wrong then you should have nothing to worry about, but the fact censoring free speech on the internet by a sanctioning body such as the UN or a private entity without accountability or oversight, is like saying "sure do what ever you want to impose restrictions for the sake of security." Basically what you are suggesting is a very slippery slope at best, and only opens the door as I previously stated as a license to impose what ever restrictions it deems fit. You should know all too well by now Jen that same premise didn't quite work out very well with the EU, in which you voted to divorce from on almost the same principles.

As far s the sanctioning or censoring terrorist groups like Isis, there are already Government agencies who deal with counter terrorism in cyber security, who have the tools and are already set up to address those issues. Why should we free users of the internet have to be asked to give up our free speech rights because of a terrorist organization uses the same free speech rights to propagate their evil? We shouldn't and what you are suggesting sets a very dangerous precedent.

That being said, if this does succeed in going through, the good news is that there are solutions to decentralize domain names that won't be subject to these potential infringements, but there will be an adjustment period and will probably take some time before everybody understands how this can affect them. Of particular concern to me is security and hacking potential such as accounts of trading, and government entities with no accountability. There are other solutions to address these concerns.

This is a plausible explanation into Hillary's health issue that she is trying to cover up.

Also 19 Trillion? Try 22 trillion which will be our debt after Obama leaves office on Jan 20th 2017. Here is an interesting fact: Obama tripling of our debt in his two terms in office will be more than any other US president while in office combined. Also to answer your question on Hillary's proposals, which I am guessing that is what you are referring to, such as imposing a 65% Tax on the Estate Holders, and many other increases in taxes will be DOA as members of congress have already stated they would not vote for it. Also in comparison to Hillary's budget proposals to Trumps, is almost a difference of 6 Trillion dollars. So in other words, we can't afford it! Period! We need to reduce our debt, and Trump has already laid out a plan to address that without having to resort to austerity measures.

That French anthem of Le Miserable really bothers you? Because of the socialist implications?

Yes .

I guess that here in the UK we are used to being watched all the time. We have the most surveillance in the world. I like it. If I'm walking down the street and some crazy nutter decides to jump on me chances are it will be recorded and possibly the police would be over pretty quickly to sort things out. If they want to listen in to my phone calls, look at my texts, emails, internet logs or whatever, good luck to them because I know they are doing the same to everyone else. I feel safer here, that's what it's mostly about.

This is a very good answer concerning freedom of speech; what we're used to compared to yourself:

https://www.quora.com/How-does-freed...-United-States

There are a number of different protocols superimposed upon the basic 'packets of data'. These have to exist to allow the whole system to function.

I am reliably informed by my contact in China that certain sites are regularly (if temporarily) blocked. Most recent surprise was uk.reuters.com, with the accompanying observation "I wonder what they said about China"?

The BBC is regularly blacked-out, every time that some negative comparison or comment is made concerning events in China.

...with all that is written here I would be unsurprised to discover that citizens in China are convinced that Forex Factory has been permanently taken-down.


edit: Here's another site which is probably invisible inside China http://uk.businessinsider.com/bank-o...16-9?r=US&IR=T

Yes and I believe certain sites should be blocked! I can't speak for the Chinese, but here, I think anything that could incite terror should be removed. I know that we have laws that make it an offence as speech, but I am unsure how far they have taken that with regards to the internet, probably not at all. Also there are pedophilia sites which most definitely should be taken down. As a parent with young children I guess my priorities may be different. There is freedom of speech at all costs even if it hurts others or freedom of speech only if it doesn't hurt others, which is what we have in the UK.

Anyway, what's the BOE worried about the Chinese for?