Categories Government

7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
I don't normally do threads like this but I did want to provide some deeper thoughts on the below and why having a video game based on a real world war crime from the same people that received CIA funding isn't the best idea.

This will go pretty in depth FYI.


The core reason why I'm doing this thread is because:

1. It's clear the developers are marketing the game a certain way.

2. This is based on something that actually happened, a war crime no less. I don't have issues with shooter games in general ofc.

Firstly, It's important to acknowledge that the Iraq war was an illegal war, based on lies, a desire for regime change and control of resources in the region.

These were lies that people believed and still believe to this day.

It's also important to mention that the action taken by these aggressors is the reason there was a battle in Fallujah in the first place. People became resistance fighters because they were left with nothing but death and destruction all around them after the illegal invasion.

This is where one of the first red flags comes up.

The game is very much from an American point of view, as shown in the description.

When it mentions Iraqi civilians, it doesn't talk about them as victims, but mentions them as being pro US, fighting alongside them.
So, just before Christmas, Government what it called a "response" to this New York Times account of cronyism in pandemic spending.

And I said, when that "response" - which you can read here
https://t.co/gLEJzuqoAx - was published that every single notional rebuttal by Government of a claim made by the New York Times was false, misleading or both.

And it's time for me to make good.

Here's the first "rebuttal" by Government to the New York Times' claim that: "The government handed out thousands of contracts to fight the virus, some of them in a secretive V.I.P. lane."


A number of points might be made.

(1) Government cannot say the NYT got it wrong. (2) the NAO found the VIP lane (later renamed the high-priority lane) "sat alongside" the normal lane. And I have shown elsewhere VIP contracts were handled by different teams all the way through.


(3) Although Govt says "offers of support raised by Opposition MPs were dealt with expeditiously" the NAO report does not record any referrals made by an Opposition MP leading to a contract - and the Government response telling does not say any did.
Whatever the analyses, I'll never understand the efforts, taxpayers money & substantial pain to come to make the disunited or broken apart UK, face so many more difficulties in trading with its neighbours; even within its own territory & to be so much poorer & less secure

with fewer rights for Brits in their own country & across the EU/EEA.
And that there is not a lot more official opposition/media attention & anger about it
.
Even more so when I read the following from 2010 by the "Taxpayers Alliance"

@bakerstherald Thanks for bringing this to my attention when the MSM - for whatever reason - is so noticably reticent to expose these would be quickly evolving (sounds better/less sinister)


From 2010
"As long as anyone can remember, Britain's old industrial heartlands have been a disaster area. Once they'd lost their traditional industries like steel and shipbuilding, something very bad happened to them - they seemed to lose the will to live. And as we've blogged

many times (eg here), despite decades of political promises and billions of tax-funded support, they have never managed to leave the high dependency unit. For example, when last sighted - in 2007-08 at the height of the biggest economic boom the world has ever seen -
THREAD: One can choose to worship
-One god
-1000 gods
-no god
One can reject their faith of birth & adopt a new one.

This is LIBERTY of THOUGHT, EXPRESSION, BELIEF & FAITH that Constitution gives everyone. This Ordinance takes away this liberty & says 'aise kaise?!' [1/n]


Before we go on, remember that conversion does not mean that one stops being an Indian citizen or that they become 'lesser' Indians for some reason. This law thinks that freedom of religion is antithetical to India's identity, which'd be funny if it weren't dangerous [2/n]

The Ordinance defines mass conversion as 'two or more people converting', which means if spouses convert together it is a crime. This is a picture of Babasaheb at Deekshabhoomi, leading conversion of a 'mass' from Hinduism to Buddhism. The Ordinance makes this a crime [3/n]


This law creates the concept of a 'convertor' which is an absurd idea. Many people convert to religion by independent study or by learning about other religions. This wrongly presumes that every conversion is a product of some conspiracy. [4/n]


Section 3 also prohibits anyone who "convinces" a person to convert. What if a person says that "I believe in Islam, for these specific reasons" & someone is convinced by these reasons? For anyone who respects independent thinking & free choice this cannot be a crime. [5/n]