Più gatto che cane. Più contento che felice. ExDJ, manager, in certi casi Zen. Vedo gente dal '77 e linko cose dal '97.
Osservo, ascolto, leggo, a volte seguo.
@AlessiaMorani A chi non va bene la linea che un partito si è dato e non può influenzarne le posizioni perché in minoranza, che vada dove trova più affinità e se pensa di avere validi argomenti, li esponga agli elettori.
Forza e coraggio.
Chi vota ha l'ultima parola.
Spacciare la patrimoniale sui grandi patrimoni come “tasse per tutti” è la solita narrazione mistificatoria a tutela dello 0,1% più ricco. I dati reali dicono altro: in Italia, l’1% più facoltoso detiene una ricchezza superiore a quella del 60% più povero. Le proposte serie non toccano i risparmi del ceto medio o la prima casa, ma colpiscono i patrimoni multimilionari (es. sopra i 5 milioni).
L'obiettivo è la progressività fiscale (Art. 53 Costituzione) per finanziare sanità e scuola pubblica, riducendo le tasse sul lavoro che oggi gravano su dipendenti e pensionati. Definire "caccia ai ricchi" un contributo di solidarietà è un trucco retorico per spaventare il popolo bue e difendere i privilegi della casta.🎭
@espressonline Tenga insieme le pedine pronte al servizio del più "democratico" stato del medio oriente e alle strategie della loggia libberista americana?
@SMaurizi Sono inaffidabili ed incompetenti per le loro strategie. Sacrificabili a fine servizio.
Non faranno altro che togliere la rete di protezione dei media mainstream, in poco tempo il gradimento crolla del 50% e i voti seguono il declino.
Resta da vedere cosa appoggeranno dopo.
*BRITISH WRITER PENS THE BEST DESCRIPTION OF TRUMP*
Someone asked "Why do some British people not like Donald Trump?" Nate White, an articulate and witty writer from England wrote the following response:
A few things spring to mind. Trump lacks certain qualities which the British traditionally esteem. For instance, he has no class, no charm, no coolness, no credibility, no compassion, no wit, no warmth, no wisdom, no subtlety, no sensitivity, no self-awareness, no humility, no honour and no grace – all qualities, funnily enough, with which his predecessor Mr. Obama was generously blessed.
So for us, the stark contrast does rather throw Trump's limitations into embarrassingly sharp relief.
Plus, we like a laugh. And while Trump may be laughable, he has never once said anything wry, witty or even faintly amusing – not once, ever.
I don't say that rhetorically, I mean it quite literally: not once, not ever. And that fact is particularly disturbing to the British sensibility – for us, to lack humour is almost inhuman.
But with Trump, it's a fact. He doesn't even seem to understand what a joke is – his idea of a joke is a crass comment, an illiterate insult, a casual act of cruelty. Trump is a troll. And like all trolls, he is never funny and he never laughs; he only crows or jeers.
And scarily, he doesn't just talk in crude, witless insults – he actually thinks in them. His mind is a simple bot-like algorithm of petty prejudices and knee-jerk nastiness. There is never any under-layer of irony, complexity, nuance or depth. It's all surface.
Some Americans might see this as refreshingly upfront. Well, we don't. We see it as having no inner world, no soul. And in Britain we traditionally side with David, not Goliath. All our heroes are plucky underdogs: Robin Hood, Dick Whittington, Oliver Twist. Trump is neither plucky, nor an underdog. He is the exact opposite of that. He's not even a spoiled rich-boy, or a greedy fat-cat. He's more a fat white slug. A Jabba the Hutt of privilege.
And worse, he is that most unforgivable of all things to the British: a bully. That is, except when he is among bullies; then he suddenly transforms into a snivelling sidekick instead.
There are unspoken rules to this stuff – the Queensberry rules of basic decency – and he breaks them all. He punches downwards – which a gentleman should, would, could never do – and every blow he aims is below the belt. He particularly likes to kick the vulnerable or voiceless or female – and he kicks them when they are down. So the fact that a significant minority – perhaps a third – of Americans look at what he does, listen to what he says, and then think 'Yeah, he seems like my kind of guy' is a matter of some confusion and no little distress to British people, given that:
• Americans are supposed to be nicer than us, and most are.
• You don't need a particularly keen eye for detail to spot a few flaws in the man.
This last point is what especially confuses and dismays British people, and many other people too; his faults seem pretty bloody hard to miss.
After all, it's impossible to read a single tweet, or hear him speak a sentence or two, without staring deep into the abyss. He turns being artless into an art form; he is a Picasso of pettiness; a Shakespeare of shit. His faults are fractal: even his flaws have flaws, and so on ad infinitum. God knows there have always been stupid people in the world, and plenty of nasty people too. But rarely has stupidity been so nasty, or nastiness so stupid. He makes Nixon look trustworthy and George W look smart. In fact, if Frankenstein decided to make a monster assembled entirely from human flaws – he would make a Trump.
Alla fine di ogni consultazione, chiudo scrivendo al software che mi fido il giusto delle sue risposte, considerandole non equanime e neutrali ma strumentali agli obiettivi dei suoi creatori.
Mi conferma sempre che è meglio non fidarsi.
It’s all talk. Just withhold foreign aid to Israel for a month and they’ll stop bombing their neighbors - instant peace, the Strait of Hormuz can be opened, and gas drops $2 a gallon. Israel has been, and continues to be, the biggest welfare recipient from American tax payers.
Let's decode what actually happened here.
Axios reported that Trump exploded at Netanyahu. Called him "fucking crazy." Said "you'd be in prison if it weren't for me." Said "everybody hates you now."
The journalist is Barak Ravid again, we talked about it. Israeli. Based in Washington. Covers the Netanyahu-US relationship for Axios, and every latest deals to calm the markets.
This is the same journalist who wrote the exact same type of story about Biden. There is literally a book chapter about this pattern. It is called "Fuming Biden." The same reporter. The same format. The same function. Different president.
Now watch the response.
Mark Levin, a close ally of both Trump and Netanyahu, did not deny the story. He demanded an FBI investigation into who leaked it. When your defense is "this should never have leaked" instead of "this never happened," you have confirmed the call happened.
But here is the part that matters.
Why would Levin, a friend to BOTH men, confirm the most explosive account of their relationship ever published?
Because it serves both.
Trump gets to look tough. Not Netanyahu's puppet. Willing to put Israel in its place. His base loves it.
Netanyahu gets cover. He "paused" the Beirut strike, but not because Iran threatened him. Because his "friend" asked him to. His base loves it too.
And look at what actually changed on the ground. Nothing.
Israel cancelled the Beirut strike. But the ground invasion of Lebanon continues. The IDF is still miles deep. A soldier died today from a Hezbollah drone. Netanyahu's office said: "position unchanged."
The performance was perfect. Trump gets the headline. Netanyahu gets the cover. The deal gets another 48 hours of "progress." Markets get a reason to breathe.
And the war continues exactly as planned.
This is the same playbook. Every time public opinion turns against the war, a story appears showing the US president is "furious" with Israel. It creates the illusion of restraint while changing nothing.
Biden was "furious" for 14 months. The war never stopped.
Trump is "furious" now. The ground invasion is expanding.
The visible game is: Trump controls Netanyahu.
The real game is: both men are performing for their audiences while the machine moves forward.
Nothing has been signed. Nothing has stopped. The war is not winding down. It is being managed.
Neither one controls the other. They walk arm in arm. Know that.
Un esercito di schifosi criminali.
Chi li giustifica è complice.
" Un chirurgo di Gaza descrive droni che prendono di mira i bambini."
> Nei commenti i link di verifica.
🇬🇧🇵🇸🇮🇱 Un cirujano británico que trabajó en Gaza relató.
“Después de los bombardeos aéreos israelíes, llegaban los drones de las FDI… Apuntaban y disparaban deliberadamente a los heridos que yacían en el suelo. Incluso a niños. Los remataban en el sitio.”
No contentos con masacrar desde el aire, los soldados israelíes usan drones para cazar y ejecutar a los sobrevivientes heridos.
Una política sistemática de rematar civiles.Esto no es guerra.
Esto es caza de seres humanos, asesinato a sangre fría de heridos y niños.
El mundo entero debe escuchar este testimonio. No hay justificación posible.
Testimonio estremecedor ante el Parlamento Británico