THE DERAILING ROOM

A place to relax and socialize - to muse, think aloud and suggest
ICfreely
Member
Posts: 829
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread post by ICfreely » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:29 pm

The field of medicine, has been littered with disinformation for many decades now, and it's hard, also for me many times, to see which is which. But as time passes, things become clearer just as with 9/11.


Give it some time, dear patrix, and you will eventually come to realize that everything I did was for your own good. Time is on my side and soon you will learn how to catch this pebble from my palm, grasshoppa.
I am going to kindly request that this topic be dropped for now. If it (i.e. “Engineering Disease”) was still open for discussion, then the topic wouldn’t be locked. And we aren’t going to unlock it simply because Admin action was IGNORED in the Chatbox. That’s not how this works.
Say no more, dear SCS. I trust your judgment in toto. Mum’s the word.

patrix
Member
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: Einstein and other gods of science

Unread post by patrix » Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:25 am

ICfreely wrote: Now I’m no “Einstein” but that sounds like a bunch of weird zionce to me. Could it be that maybe, just maybe, the body's use of glucose (in areas of inflammations, tumors, etc.) is indicative of the importance of glucose in the healing process? It's a wonder how people managed to live long healthy lives prior to this “marvelous” medical technology.
Fascinating thought Dear ICreely. That glucose could be important in the healing process. So your hypothesis is then that it should be beneficial to consume glucose? This clarification is important to me because as you know since you claim to be knowledgeable in medicine, the body can make glucose in a process called glycogenesis. Carbohydrates (including glucose) are in fact non essential to the body since it can produce the glucose that it needs out of fat and protein.

I find this hypothesis of yours very unlikely however (if it suggests consuming glucose) and it completely goes against the now growing understanding within medicine that it is in fact excessive carbohydrate intake (including glucose) that drives inflammation and many diseases including cancer.

Apologies for bringing up medicine in this thread, but I couldn't help myself commenting the radical idea ICFreely put forward here.

And I'm no Einstein either which I'm proud of. :)

ICfreely
Member
Posts: 829
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Einstein and other gods of science

Unread post by ICfreely » Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:20 pm

And I'm no Einstein either which I'm proud of. :)


Well I’m glad we can finally agree on something.
Fascinating thought Dear ICreely. That glucose could be important in the healing process.
Why thank you, my dear partix. It’s just a thought though.



Your Honor, may I have permission to treat Mr. Patrix as a hostile witness?


So your hypothesis is then that it should be beneficial to consume glucose?
I never said that, so please refrain from putting words into my mouth.
…since you claim to be knowledgeable in medicine…
Nice try, patrix, but I believe I’ve already addressed your straw man fallacy.
… while you avoid to say anything on the actual research even though you claim authority on medical knowledge.
If I gave you the impression that I’m an authority on medical knowledge, then I apologize. Rest assured I’m not an authority on any form of knowledge.
Speaking of St. Seyfried’s actual research:
Dr. Gonzalez Dismantles the Ketogenic Diet For Cancer
...
So, what evidence does Dr. Seyfried himself provide to prove his point that the best diet for all cancer patients, whatever the type, is the ketogenic, high fat, no carb diet? Well, very little. Certainly the 400 plus pages of elaborate biochemistry and theory are impressive and informative. But in terms of practicalities, that is, results with actual human patients diagnosed with cancer, there is next to no evidence.

Dr. Seyfried does include a chapter toward the book’s end entitled “Case Studies and Personal Experiences in using the Ketogenic Diet for Cancer Management.” Here, Dr. Seyfried provides a description of a pilot study, written by the investigators themselves, discussing the use of the ketogenic diet in children with inoperable brain cancer. However, the authors admit the study was intended only to evaluate the diet’s tolerability and effect on glucose metabolism as determined by PET scanning, not treatment benefit or survival.

As the authors write, “the protocol was not designed to reverse tumor growth or treat specific types of cancer.” The researchers also acknowledge the patient numbers were too small to allow for meaningful statistical evaluation, even for the avowed purposes. Overall, the discussion centers on the practicalities of implementing the diet and the results of the PET scans.
...
-Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez, MD

This article originally appeared on Natural Health 365.

https://www.chrisbeatcancer.com/dr-gonz ... or-cancer/
In my previous post, I pointed out the limitations, if not uselessness, of PET scans vis-à-vis “cancer.” As usual, in your zealous attempt to defend your guru, you jump to false (positive) conclusions. Moreover, the late Nicholas Gonzalez provided plenty of detailed criticism of St. Seyfried’s research in the above article that you’ve obviously decided to ignore.
So if a researcher comes along with evidence that glucose, the main energy we can get from plants, is promoting or rather feeding cancer, this will be disregarded.
If you understood the machinations behind PET scans, you’d realize that his so called evidence falls in line with oncological orthodoxy. That there’s nothing “groundbreaking” about it.
I find this hypothesis of yours very unlikely however (if it suggests consuming glucose) and it completely goes against the now growing understanding within medicine that it is in fact excessive carbohydrate intake (including glucose) that drives inflammation and many diseases including cancer.
I for one, refuse to avoid consuming, in moderation, sugar (glucose) especially fruits (fructose) because of the now growing (like a malignant tumor) [mis]understanding within allopathic medicine.

I’m afraid my diagnosis (Terminal Seyfriedosis) still stands. Under the informed consent principle you have every right to refuse my recommended course of treatment (Thomasectomy).
Apologies for bringing up medicine in this thread, but I couldn't help myself commenting the radical idea ICFreely put forward here.
Apology accepted, dear parix. But seeing as your disease is contagious I’m going to have to kindly ask you to refrain from infecting this thread with Seyfriedosis. Diet dogma debates should be addressed at a future space-time in the “Engineering Nutrition” thread and quarantined therein. If not, then the bailiff will be forced to remove us from (and lock) this thread as well.

SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
Posts: 656
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: Einstein and other gods of science

Unread post by SacredCowSlayer » Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:32 pm

My final thought (on how to deal with this) before I move this post (and the two previous ones) to the Derailing Room.

Image

I’m officially declaring you guys (vital and invaluable Members- both of you) at an impasse.*

Edit: * Never mind. Keep going. You’re obviously going to anyway.

ICfreely
Member
Posts: 829
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread post by ICfreely » Mon Jan 21, 2019 3:20 am

Alright my dear friends. I edited the post above (to remove the comment about glucose, which apparently restarted the whole thing. . . again) that I myself approved and posted upon the request of ICfreely.
I plead no contest to entrapment (of patrix) with that glucose sentence. But the fact of the matter is that FDG uptake is detected:

1- In areas of active inflammation or infection
2- In multiple nonspecific infectious/ inflammatory processes
3- In areas of post surgical changes (prior biopsies, sites of catheter insertions, and sites of other drainage tube insertions)
4- In lesions, post radiation therapy and insulin injections

In other words, anywhere in the body where there’s healing going on higher levels of glucose metabolism is detected.

It’s true that patrix and I have reached an impasse. However, I have in good faith answered all of his questions to the best of my ability and in turn he hasn’t answered mine (which I believe is misguided at best and intellectually dishonest at worst). How/why he gets away with it is beyond me. This is analogous to letting CF's collective 9/11 research grind to a halt for the sake of keeping the peace with one solitary contributor who constantly promotes Judy Wood.

Patrix has thwarted my "Engineering Disease" efforts in a similar fashion that Selene was thwarting my "Dinosaur" efforts. Except that Selene didn't direct plethora of ad hominems and straw mans at me like he has (and continues to) every time I post on a medical related issue.

I know what I've contributed and what he's contributed and at the risk of coming off arrogant; sorry but there's no comparison. I'm out of his league!

I respect your decision but refuse to self-censor for the sake of not hurting someone’s feelings that are rooted in false pre-determined beliefs. There are other aspects of my findings that will inevitably conflict with St. Seyfried. But I’ll refrain from elaborating any further for the sake of “keeping the peace.” Feel free to remove my last Einstein post altogether. No skin off my nose.

patrix
Member
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Unread post by patrix » Tue Jan 22, 2019 10:32 am

ICfreely » January 21st, 2019, 4:20 am wrote:
I plead no contest to entrapment (of patrix) with that glucose sentence. But the fact of the matter is that FDG uptake is detected:
“FDG” for the uninitiated is a type of sugar that can be injected and it’s uptake detected in areas of the body. And with this method is has been concluded as ICfreely points out that cancer tumors and areas of inflammation has a high sugar uptake. This phenomenon is known since the early 20th century and is called the Warburg effect.

But let’s not confuse correlation with causation shall we? This error has already been made when it comes to heart disease and because of it millions of heart patients are avoiding fat and consuming drugs - Statins that chemically inhibits one of our body’s essential functions – The cholesterol synthesis. It was hypothesized that because cholesterol is abundant in the plaques that can be observed in heart disease, it is reasonable to assume high cholesterol levels in the blood contributes to the disease and that it’s therefore a good idea to avoid saturated fats (that increases blood cholesterol) and in some cases chemically inhibit the cholesterol synthesis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_hypothesis

In later years it has been established through independent research that high blood cholesterol does not have any cause in heart disease http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol/

If you had read any of the research you seem to so passionately despise ICfreely, you would have seen that your “discovery” is a well known phenomena and that it is more likely that excessive sugar fuels infections, instead of helping with them. A correlation mistaken as an causation in other words.

I think it’s safe to say we have different viewpoints on medicine ICfreely. You paint modern medicine in black and I agree with that view. Vaccines, AIDS and Cancer for example are horrible hoaxes that are used to create disease. BUT, and here lies our difference, I don’t think any conventional doctors or researchers are “in on it” except a very few initiated. This is mostly controlled by the invisible hand that is our monetary system. If you get a “bad” idea for example that cholesterol has anything to do with heart disease, you get grants and media and perhaps even a Nobel Prize. If you get a “good” idea and somehow get your research funded anyway, you get no more grants and no attention. It also seems to me that you have a “mystical” view on medicine. Nothing can be clearly understood but some clay from the river Ganges might help… It don’t share that view. Medicine and the processes in our body can be understood and with that knowledge the “Engineering of disease” can be undone. At least on a personal level. And as I have come back to many times, my research and personal experience points to that excessive intake of carbohydrates and processed vegetable oils contributes to disease, among them cancer. And because of that we should limit our intake of those and increase our intake of animal fats and protein.

And I don’t think I damage the “Engineering disease” subject by sharing that insight or pointing out pseudoscience, flawed conclusions and good conventional research that's been tucked away. No more than a “No planer” hurts the 911truth movement…

All the best /Patrik

SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
Posts: 656
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: SacredCowPieSlinger

Unread post by SacredCowSlayer » Tue Jan 22, 2019 1:56 pm

I have relegated my own utterly naive and pointless (previous, but now rescinded) request (about the “Engineering Disease” topic) to the Garbage Bin.

What a waste of time on my part.


Boy do I feel stupid. Like this: (just when I thought I found a good balance.)


Image

By all means, please carry on with this- if you must.

Image

Maybe I’ll open a mini-forum here called Foodsforum.

It would probably be a smashing “success.” In fact, what a perfect opportunity to drop all the painstaking work of vetting new members.


Silly me. . . I think I’ll shove a pie in my own face.


First topic: “Engineering a Looped Food Fight”

Image

Image

The sign below may be read as “SCS kindly asks our members to blablabla,” and then:

Image

Repeat liberally as desired. Just remember, a good ol’ fashioned food fight sounds pretty fun until you realize you’ve had it in your own living room.

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6784
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Unread post by simonshack » Tue Jan 22, 2019 5:23 pm

*

:lol: :lol: :lol: Love that custard / creampie-fight analogy, dear SCS !

Reminds of that final scene which, we're told, was (infamously) cut out of Stanley Kubrick's DOCTOR STRANGELOVE movie.

Image
https://www.bfi.org.uk/sites/bfi.org.uk ... k=q2-v8I8b

Image
https://www.bfi.org.uk/sites/bfi.org.uk ... k=VHDm2-BQ

At one point in the scene, a custard pie strikes the American President smack in the face - and a General cries out:

“Gentlemen, our beloved president has been infamously struck down by a pie in the prime of his life!"

As the story goes, the scene was eventually scrapped by Kubrick - due to the "unfortunate & coincidental timing" of the movie's originally-planned release date (November, 22 1963)...
"But after test screening the film on or around the 22 November 1963 – the day of John F. Kennedy’s assassination – the scene was taken out, Kubrick having decided “it was too farcical and not consistent with the satiric tone of the rest of the film.” That line of dialogue about the president being struck down in the prime of his life was a little too close to the bone, too."
https://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/new ... -pie-fight
You may thus hopefully forgive me for suspecting that the "JFK assassination" was nothing more than a pre-planned psyop (or, if you will, a gigantic custard pie thrown in the faces of all this world's inhabitants) and that Kubrick was in on it.

Here's an old post of mine - with further (creamy) details about this DOCTOR STRANGELOVE affair :
viewtopic.php?p=2382583#p2382583

SacredCowSlayer
Administrator
Posts: 656
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: THE DERAILING/ Food Fight ROOM

Unread post by SacredCowSlayer » Tue Jan 22, 2019 5:26 pm

LOL Simon! That’s hysterical!

Thank you for the co(s)mic relief. :lol:

Altair
Member
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 2:05 pm

Re: The PR of Secret Societies

Unread post by Altair » Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:29 am

[Post moved to the DR by SCS]

BTW, doesn't the Denver Airport runway layout look familiar?
Image

michiganj
Administrator
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:17 pm

Re: Vaccinations: The Medical, Legal, and Social Implication

Unread post by michiganj » Fri Mar 29, 2019 11:43 pm

ICfreely » March 28th, 2019, 11:20 pm wrote:
Bill Nye is scientism personified! He and his ilk are, under the guise of “science,” trying to usher in a Global Scientocracy founded on pseudo-science. They, in fact, are the true “anti-science” minded ones that they accuse their skeptics of being. That’s the irony of it all.

For the record:

1) I don't believe in astrology or tarot cards and have no reason to believe that Tupac or Elvis are still alive.
2) I do believe that the "moon landings" were staged.
3) I don't believe in the efficacy of ANY vaccines.
4) I haven't the slightest clue what "Climate Change" is.
Well put dear ICfreely! I absolutely 100% agree!
What makes me uncomfortable is the FACT that the IPCC started out promoting alarmist "Global Cooling" nonsense. Claiming that sun-blocking pollution would lead to a new "Ice Age" by the year 2000. That obviously never came to fruition. So they casually shifted to "Global Warming" which they claim is also due to pollution and will lead to rising ocean water levels. When the Climategate $chitt hit the fan in 2010 they settled on "Climate Change."
I remember that "Ice Age" BS they were promoting years back. :lol:

Mr Wizard debunks ice caps melting will cause the shores to flood

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKiq5EwkzDg

I think George Carlin said it best -
“We’re so self-important. Everybody’s going to save something now. “Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save those snails.” And the greatest arrogance of all: save the planet. Save the planet, we don’t even know how to take care of ourselves yet. I’m tired of this shit. I’m tired of f-ing Earth Day. I’m tired of these self-righteous environmentalists, these white, bourgeois liberals who think the only thing wrong with this country is that there aren’t enough bicycle paths. People trying to make the world safe for Volvos. Besides, environmentalists don’t give a shit about the planet. Not in the abstract they don’t. You know what they’re interested in? A clean place to live. Their own habitat. They’re worried that some day in the future they might be personally inconvenienced. Narrow, unenlightened self-interest doesn’t impress me.

The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles … hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worldwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages … And we think some plastic bags and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference? The planet isn’t going anywhere. WE are!

We’re going away. Pack your shit, folks. We’re going away. And we won’t leave much of a trace, either. Maybe a little Styrofoam … The planet’ll be here and we’ll be long gone. Just another failed mutation. Just another closed-end biological mistake. An evolutionary cul-de-sac. The planet’ll shake us off like a bad case of fleas.

The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we’re gone, and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself, ’cause that’s what it does. It’s a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed. And if it’s true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: the earth plus plastic. The earth doesn’t share our prejudice toward plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place. It wanted plastic for itself. Didn’t know how to make it. Needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old egocentric philosophical question, “Why are we here?”

Plastic… asshole.”

― George Carlin
Admin note: (michiganj) Off topic post moved to Derailing Room.

patrix
Member
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: Vaccinations: The Medical, Legal, and Social Implication

Unread post by patrix » Sat Mar 30, 2019 8:02 am

>Mr Wizard debunks ice caps melting will cause the shores to flood

Off topic here but this only goes for ice in the sea. The sea level could still rise if enough ice situated on land melts. Anatartica and Greenland has a lot of ice on land. Not saying the stupid current carbon scare is real or anything.

pov603
Member
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:02 pm

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Unread post by pov603 » Sun Mar 31, 2019 7:23 am

Thanks for the “Mr Wizard” vid!
Love the George Carlin extracts too, pure class!

Mansur
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 9:22 pm

Re: Thoughts on Christianity

Unread post by Mansur » Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:14 pm

[Admin Note: Post moved to the Derailing Room by SCS on August 7, 2019.]

That the change in the CF tag from “media fakery” to “mass deception” was not a fortunate one seems in this thread apparent. The deceptions in religious matters throughout history are, I think, outside the scope of this forum. To confuse them with current media sensations (conspiracy theories with “historical perspectives”) would make the discussion utterly senseless.*

And in such a way, neither the question of modern deceptions can enter into the discussion seriously nor that of faith i.e. a personal relation to a given religion or to its symbols. The latter having, again, I think, no legitimate place in this forum - or in any “forum” whatsoever. Let me say clearly: one’s faith, in the same way as one’s conscience, or the content of it, is not a public issue, not a social question. (Or are we going to be deceived by the mass?)
ICfreely » August 6th, 2019, 6:13 am wrote: What’s the difference between the religious and “scientific” forms of determinism? Is there a difference?
The “determination" issues or doctrines (“God’s Will towards man”, a.k.a. “Predestination”, or “Election of Grace” in Christendom**) in religions and traditions have long-long stories, in Europe during the time called Reformation it was highly controversial and somewhat bloody, and they do not show, as to my knowledge which I confess makes no one an authority, any resemblance to modern scientific theories (in Marxism already “existence determines consciousness”), or at least no more than, let’s say, ancient astrology “the science of the stars” would when compared with today’s scientific astronomy - the latter having absolutely nothing in view about human destiny on Earth.

(It would be interesting, however, to discuss on similarities and parallels, even overlapping and borrowings actually, between present-day “astrology”, or other “esoterism”, and the modern scientific theories and fantasies, - in another thread.)


* The “mass” has no meaning at all but in industrialized countries where the ever growing industrialization created the “thing” itself (or both emerged at the same time, who knows, but it would be another discussion).

** And there is no way to treat “free will” in an intelligent manner detached from them.

Mansur
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 9:22 pm

Re: Engineering Racism

Unread post by Mansur » Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:46 pm

[Admin Note: Moved to the DR by SCS on August 25, 2019.]
ICfreely » August 12th, 2019, 1:58 am wrote:

With all due respect to Mr. Frantzman, I think the dehumanizing anti-Semitic rhetoric he speaks of is caused by anti-Gentilism.
Anti-Gentilism Causes Antisemitism
by Taxi

The first bullet of hate was fired by the Jews.

Some three thousand years ago, the ancient desert followers of Moses who lived in Babylonia had amassed and collated their 600 year old oral folklore, before studiously recording it on scrolls and slabs. This collection of ancient Jewish writings is commonly known as the Babylonian Talmud. And this very Talmud, according to Jewish history, not only represents the primary source for Jewish theology and law, it also continues to be the centerpiece of Jewish cultural life. Jewish Babylonian writers of the Talmud at the time had indeed galvanized, labored and penned away: unanimously agreeing on the content of all its chapters. They’d all signed on their religious mission-statement that notably also included declaring eternal war on all Gentiles. This genocidal, tribal decree found in the Talmud is the first recorded case of Jewish Anti-Gentilism. It took place a good several millennia before even the concept of Antisemitism was invented. Ancient Jews had actually put this historic and dark Anti-Gentile declaration down in writing some two thousand years before pogroms and the religious persecution of Jews were ever recorded. We actually presently know of the genocidal inclinations of the Jews from their own ancient Talmudic writings: fairly well hidden from the eyes of Gentiles for thousands of years till the advent of the internet clearly revealed the Jewish ill-intention towards all Gentiles.

https://platosguns.com/2018/08/29/anti- ... isemitism/

I'm not trying to scapegoat or incite hatred towards "the Jews." Here's a little constructive criticism:

If Jews were to stop indoctrinating their children with fear-based trauma that causes anti-Gentilism, then perhaps anti-Semitism would be eradicated once and for all.
It would be interesting to know about the interpretation of this new ‘anti-genteelism causes antisemitism’ theory, for example, of the ‘Mein Kampf,’ or of the nature and businesses of the entire Nazi propaganda machine, - so maybe that we could put the theory in some historical perspective. Because it is to be feared if it existed it would be rather mainstream.

Could the tons and megatons of antisemite websites and blogs of nowadays, on the other hand, be accounted for by some spontaneous and irrational reactions to Jewish self-praise, however huge and shameless and harmful it is? (Certainly, there must exist, in some media corner, an ‘anti-semitism causes -and maybe justifies- anti-genteelism’ theory as well.) The ‘if you love/hate me I will love/hate you too’ is a kindergarten logic and wisdom and though we see adults using them there is no possibility anymore to believe in their naiveté.

One of the main pillars, I think, modern political/ideological Israel has been founded upon, is the general belief that there is in the world such a thing as 'antisemitism.' And because modern antisemitism is, in my opinion, a creation of modern antisemitic propaganda, so as such it always entails the question: is the thing real? (As with the 9/11 conspiracy theories: every one of them is based on the reliability of the media coverage. There seems no way leading out of the box, - you have to become a denier.)

[It doesn't matter how much they talk in media-propaganda sources about the Talmud being ‘sacrosanct for the Jews’, a single and random glance at the book itself will make to the inquirer known what the Talmud says about the Sacred Book and, maybe, what a study of it would imply.]

But even if this theory, or any other pro or contra, were somehow true, is it not that the thing we call politics is the basest level imaginable where a problem could just sink and where there is no more any solution possible at all, yet to where every such theory would like to refer its plan for solution?

I do not think that propaganda activity is intended to arouse any emotion; - it’s just a kind of propaganda’s propaganda. On the contrary. Any feeling or emotion has its own duration and consistency that cannot be predicted in advance (or at least it would require a serious adept in art, art in the old traditional sense, and you perhaps needn’t being so great an admirer of propaganda assuming such thing). Rather, the plan or goal so to speak is that people should not feel or think at all. Such a human mass or mash, which neither feels nor thinks, is the material modern politics needs - and is using already to whatever it wants.

Post Reply