The ruling powers more and more insist that we believe their truth and no other. They don’t debate what is true. They proclaim it and deny the right of those who oppose them the right to differ. How? Well, more and more we live in age of Big Tech censorship.
Here is a link to Mike Lindell’s “Absolute Truth” film, Mike Lindell to Bannon War Room: “Absolute Truth” Film Was Seen by Over 10 Million People After Friday Release – Five Million Completed the Film (thegatewaypundit.com). Because I have not yet had time to watch the film, I cannot yet endorse what it says. However, I intend to watch it this afternoon. Don’t want to wait any longer than that. Otherwise, Big Tech may erase it.
Want an example. Check the video link here, WHY DO THE POLITICALLY CORRECT COMMUNICATE POORLY? – Citizen Tom.
I welcome comments from people who have actually watched Mike Lindell’s “Absolute Truth” film. Otherwise, please don’t waste everyone’s time.
Citizen Tom 
Now they are finding election fraud in GA. Can you imagine that?
https://www.theepochtimes.com/georgia-election-board-refers-35-voter-fraud-cases-for-prosecution_3693919.html?utm_source=newsnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-02-11-5
@marmoewp
Of course, there is voter fraud! Duh!
https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/
The _relevant_ question to ask, however, is: At what scale? Rampant enough to change the result of an election?
Thank you for agreeing with me. Your questions are exactly what needs to be answered.
The efforts to deny, hide, squelch, intimidate, and disinform those that want the truth and transparency is totally inappropriate in a country that supposedly has free speech.
None of the denials I have read thus far are sufficient for me to have faith in the security and accuracy of the existing voting system and procedures. I would hope all Americans would want those assurances.
I want BIPARTISAN and expert evaluations of how secure and accurate are the results of the existing voting system and procedures and what needs to done to fix them.
Also, a shadow campaign to decide which information is acceptable and true smacks of 1984 and totalitarian. The CCP decides what is acceptable for their subjects to believe. Further, the action was not designed to “free, fair and uncorrupted election,” it was designed to do whatever it took, legal or otherwise, to ensure Trump lost.
‘Cabal’ Formed ‘Shadow Campaign’ To Fortify 2020 Election, Time Reports
A “cabal of powerful people” worked to “fortify” the 2020 election through a “shadow campaign,” according to a Thursday Time Magazine report.
A co-ordinated alliance between activists and “powerful people” in many industries and across political lines sought to protect a free, fair and uncorrupted election, Time reported. The groups influenced states to “change voting systems and laws” and encouraged tech companies to take measures against disinformation.
Laura Quinn, the co-founder of a for-profit voter database company, developed a program designed to track disinformation and halt its spread, according to Time. In her conclusions, she found it necessary to pressure social media companies to vigorously police their platforms for disinformation and immediately remove accounts and posts involving false information.
Flip the names. Make Biden the target. Your perspective would be much different. That in itself illustrates a flawed election process. Our country can do better.
“Thank you for agreeing with me. Your questions are exactly what needs to be answered.”
The thing is, I do not see any indication of the type of voter fraud in the US, that you are thinking of. I do not see evidence or even a hint of a grand scheme. You have found a knife in a cutlery drawer and want to investigate its owner for a murder plot, based on the owners posession of a knife. You do not have a victim, you do not have a time when it happened, you do not have a place where it happened. You have found a knife, and because that knife could be used for murder, you have come the conclusion, that the owner must be a murderer or prove his/her innocence. You can’t even be bothered to check, whether the arguments you are being fed hold up to the slightest tinge of scrutiny – see your Droz fiasco. The cases the Heritage Foundation collected over a couple of decades are a bunch of morons trying to change the vote in some small scale. But hey, that kind of voter fraud exists, therefore it likely exists on a large scale? Is that the kind of argument you are trying to make? I can envision a unicorn. Does that make real unicorns part of the world?
What I have seen in the past, is the GOP realizing that their voter base is shrinking and that they do not have enough appeal in major, growing parts of the US population. So they take to measures to make it harder for groups of people they deem to be likely Democratic voters. Of course, everything is officially done in the name of making the vote secure. Does that make Democrats angels? Of course not.
“Flip the names. Make Biden the target. Your perspective would be much different. That in itself illustrates a flawed election process. Our country can do better.”
YOUR country. I am German. MY country has a LOT of experience, what lies and conspiracy theories can do to a society. It can turn a civilised country into a murder machine. MY ancestors have done it to MY country. Do you know, what is the most frightening thing about it? If I had grown up in that time, and had been fed that poison day-in and day-out, drip, by drip, by drip, I might have just been a meek follower of commonds or I may have become one of the monsters in human skin and shape. You allow people to scream fire in a full cinema at your peril. You allow people to poison hearts at your peril. Silencing people is an extreme measure – I am sorry to say, I think, at times it is warrented.
That being said, I also think companies like Facebook, Google and Twitter have way too much power about what they present to you. That they deplatform all that poison only now, speaks more to their financial interests, than their suddenly newfound courage and morale. There is also pressure from the inside, as their employees start to stand up and say: “This is not what I am willing to work for.”
@Graybeard
Just a warning.
Doug makes primarily emotional arguments. Tiresome, but not much to get excited about.
Marmoewp is a very intelligent German with expertise in science and statistics. Unfortunately, he supports our Liberal Democrats. My guess is that thinks that Democrats will somehow save us from global warming.
Anyway, when he should be looking at your overall argument, marmoewp approach is to find some factoid he can pick apart. Instead of trying to find the forest, he fixates the discussion on a small tree. We usually call them saplings.
None of us perfect. Therefore, none of us ever assembles a perfect set of facts (trees) and formulates a perfect argument (forest). So, don’t let marmoewp intimidate you. Just do what you have been doing and focus on the forest.
Guess what, Tom, yes, Democrats are closer to my political orientation than the Republicans. It happens in a Democracy, that people have different stances. You talk and try to find common ground for the better of the community as a whole.
It is fatal to this kind of beneficial relationship, if people turn off their critical thinking skills on any offered drivel, that happens to suit their political stance. If you and others were applying that kind of critical thinking before posting, I’d be soon out of work here.
@marmoewp
There is a difference between attacking the way others use their “critical thinking skills” and thoughtfully addressing validity of their argument. When we derisively attack another person’s critical thinking skills, we do not convince them of anything except the possibility they are unwelcome.
One point of primary advantages of a friendly debate is that it forces us to wrestle with the facts, test them, and see how they relate to each other. So, I very much appreciate your skill in researching and dissecting facts and testing their validity. It forces me to examine facts of my arguments and how I fit the facts together more carefully. Therefore, I consider your presence here a gift, and I hope you will allow others the same mercy.
@Tom
Thanks for both the compliment and the friendly reminder, that tone matters, both for readers to feel welcome and to have others see the argument and not be distracted by feeling attacked as a person. You are right, I have become a bit abrasive of late. I am sorry for that and will try to do better.