Events
Publications
Latest imagesPress Cutting
Page 2 of 3
Page 2 of 3 • 
1, 2, 3
Re: Press Cutting
by Regoč 26/11/2016, 16:09
Ako je starija, prikopčaj noviju ovamo. A vidim da se tema i širi. Zapravo, što je tema?
Regoč- Posts : 35954
2015-08-21
Re: Press Cutting
by Regoč 26/11/2016, 16:11
Neka pati koga smeta,
Trump je na vrhu svieta.
Trump je na vrhu svieta.
_________________
Regoč-
Posts : 35954
2015-08-21
Age : 106
Lokacija: : Doma
Re: Press Cutting
by Winter is coming 26/11/2016, 16:11
tema je Fidel Castro 
_________________
И показа ми чисту реку воде живота, бистру као кристал, која излажаше од престола Божијег и Јагњетовог.
Winter is coming-
Posts : 9181
2014-04-14
Re: Press Cutting
by Winter is coming 26/11/2016, 16:12
bome sad bi mogli potpuno ukinuti sankcije Kubi,mada ne vidim kako bi to ovima pomoglo,bar mi turisti mogli doci bez smetnji tamo,mogu i ovako ali ne direktnoRegoč wrote:Neka pati koga smeta,
Trump je na vrhu svieta.
_________________
И показа ми чисту реку воде живота, бистру као кристал, која излажаше од престола Божијег и Јагњетовог.
Winter is coming-
Posts : 9181
2014-04-14
Re: Press Cutting
by Guest 26/11/2016, 16:25
wha?kic wrote:
oprosti ali gluposti se perpetuiraju, Bannon je pro-Izrael to je očito ko slon u sobi, kakav antisemit..
Guest- Guest
Re: Press Cutting
by Winter is coming 26/11/2016, 16:29
Himna religiji mira? dobar taj krek majku mu
_________________
И показа ми чисту реку воде живота, бистру као кристал, која излажаше од престола Божијег и Јагњетовог.
Winter is coming-
Posts : 9181
2014-04-14
Re: Press Cutting
by Guest 26/11/2016, 16:31
tema je sve sto u malo slobodnog vremena koje imam izdvojim kao (meni) zanimljivoWinter is coming wrote:tema je Fidel Castro
Guest- Guest
Re: Press Cutting
by Guest 26/11/2016, 16:33
Neka pati koga smeta.Regoč wrote:Ako je starija, prikopčaj noviju ovamo. A vidim da se tema i širi. Zapravo, što je tema?
Guest- Guest
Re: Press Cutting
by Guest 27/11/2016, 04:53
nikad blogom!kic wrote:
ova je starija, a možda bude mini-blog xD
news digest, rather. very skewed, of course. and random too.
Guest- Guest
Re: Press Cutting
by Guest 27/11/2016, 05:00
Trump election: Clinton campaign joins Wisconsin vote recount
A lawyer for Hillary Clinton's campaign says it will participate in a recount of US election votes in Wisconsin.
The recount was initiated by Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein, who is also seeking recounts in Michigan and Pennsylvania, citing "statistical anomalies".
Results would need to be overturned in all three states to alter the outcome of the election.
Donald Trump, who narrowly won Wisconsin, called the move a "scam".
The president-elect said it was a way for Dr Stein - who is funding the recount through public donations - to "fill her coffers with money".
"The results of this election should be respected instead of being challenged and abused," he said.
The Clinton campaign's general counsel, Marc Elias, said the Clinton team and outside experts had been "conducting an extensive review of election results, searching for any signs that the voting process had been tampered with".
He said there was no evidence to conclude the election was sabotaged, but "we have an obligation to the more than 64 million Americans who cast ballots for Hillary Clinton to participate in ongoing proceedings to ensure that an accurate vote count will be reported".
Mr Elias noted that the number of votes separating Mr Trump and Mrs Clinton in the closest of the three states - Michigan - "well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount".
However, he said the campaign would join in "on principle" in the Midwestern states if Dr Stein follows through on her promise.
The Green Party nominee reportedly wants to be sure computer hackers did not skew the poll in favour of Mr Trump.
Concerns over possible Russian interference had been expressed in the run-up to the vote.
The US government has said Russian state actors were behind hacks on the Democratic National Committee.
In a statement on Friday, the Wisconsin Elections Commission said it had received two recount petitions from the Jill Stein campaign and from Rocky Roque De La Fuente, a businessman who ran unsuccessfully to be the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee.
Administrator Michael Haas said the count would begin in the week after Dr Stein's campaign paid the fee, which the commission was still calculating.
Is US system a 'disaster for democracy'?
Why US fears Russia is hacking election
US election results
Dr Stein's campaign needs to raise millions of dollars to cover the fees for the vote recount in all three states.
Her website says over $5.8m (£4.65m) has already been raised toward a $7m target. It says this is enough to fund the recounts in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
John Bonifaz and J Alex Halderman, voting rights lawyers who urged candidates to request recounts, have said the "physical evidence" that could signal a cyber-attack needs to be closely analysed.
But Mr Halderman said the fact that the results in the three states were different from what polls predicted was "probably not" down to hacking.
The deadline for the petition for the recount in Wisconsin was Friday, while Pennsylvania's deadline is Monday, and Michigan's is Wednesday.
Michigan is yet to declare its final results.
Wisconsin provides only 10 votes in the crucial electoral college that gave Mr Trump victory in the 8 November election.
Wins there for Mrs Clinton, as well as in Michigan (16 electoral votes) and Pennsylvania (20 electoral votes), would have clinched the presidency for the Democrat.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38118852
A lawyer for Hillary Clinton's campaign says it will participate in a recount of US election votes in Wisconsin.
The recount was initiated by Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein, who is also seeking recounts in Michigan and Pennsylvania, citing "statistical anomalies".
Results would need to be overturned in all three states to alter the outcome of the election.
Donald Trump, who narrowly won Wisconsin, called the move a "scam".
The president-elect said it was a way for Dr Stein - who is funding the recount through public donations - to "fill her coffers with money".
"The results of this election should be respected instead of being challenged and abused," he said.
'Obligation'
The Clinton campaign's general counsel, Marc Elias, said the Clinton team and outside experts had been "conducting an extensive review of election results, searching for any signs that the voting process had been tampered with".
He said there was no evidence to conclude the election was sabotaged, but "we have an obligation to the more than 64 million Americans who cast ballots for Hillary Clinton to participate in ongoing proceedings to ensure that an accurate vote count will be reported".
Mr Elias noted that the number of votes separating Mr Trump and Mrs Clinton in the closest of the three states - Michigan - "well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount".
However, he said the campaign would join in "on principle" in the Midwestern states if Dr Stein follows through on her promise.
The Green Party nominee reportedly wants to be sure computer hackers did not skew the poll in favour of Mr Trump.
Concerns over possible Russian interference had been expressed in the run-up to the vote.
The US government has said Russian state actors were behind hacks on the Democratic National Committee.
In a statement on Friday, the Wisconsin Elections Commission said it had received two recount petitions from the Jill Stein campaign and from Rocky Roque De La Fuente, a businessman who ran unsuccessfully to be the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee.
Administrator Michael Haas said the count would begin in the week after Dr Stein's campaign paid the fee, which the commission was still calculating.
Is US system a 'disaster for democracy'?
Why US fears Russia is hacking election
US election results
Dr Stein's campaign needs to raise millions of dollars to cover the fees for the vote recount in all three states.
Her website says over $5.8m (£4.65m) has already been raised toward a $7m target. It says this is enough to fund the recounts in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
John Bonifaz and J Alex Halderman, voting rights lawyers who urged candidates to request recounts, have said the "physical evidence" that could signal a cyber-attack needs to be closely analysed.
But Mr Halderman said the fact that the results in the three states were different from what polls predicted was "probably not" down to hacking.
The deadline for the petition for the recount in Wisconsin was Friday, while Pennsylvania's deadline is Monday, and Michigan's is Wednesday.
Michigan is yet to declare its final results.
Wisconsin provides only 10 votes in the crucial electoral college that gave Mr Trump victory in the 8 November election.
Wins there for Mrs Clinton, as well as in Michigan (16 electoral votes) and Pennsylvania (20 electoral votes), would have clinched the presidency for the Democrat.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38118852
Guest- Guest
Re: Press Cutting
by Guest 27/11/2016, 05:24
The Wall Street man who gave it up to chronicle life in US
In 2012, Chris Arnade turned his back on a 20-year career as a Wall Street trader and set off with his camera to chronicle the often overlooked underbelly of modern America.
He met many Donald Trump supporters along the way - and he shares some of their stories with BBC Newsnight.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38076688
In 2012, Chris Arnade turned his back on a 20-year career as a Wall Street trader and set off with his camera to chronicle the often overlooked underbelly of modern America.
He met many Donald Trump supporters along the way - and he shares some of their stories with BBC Newsnight.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38076688
Guest- Guest
Re: Press Cutting
by Guest 29/11/2016, 14:00
Can eating more than six bananas at once kill you?
It's sometimes said that eating a lot of bananas at once could be dangerous - it has even been suggested that eating more than six in one sitting could kill you. Can this really be true?
Bananas are one of the world's most popular fruits, stuffed with vitamins and minerals. On the face of it they are good for you, so why do some people think they could be fatal?
One well-known figure who has spread this idea around is Karl Pilkington, the grumpy friend of comedian Ricky Gervais.
"Before when you were talking about bananas... I had that fact, about if you eat more than six, it can kill you," he said in one of his conversations with Gervais and fellow comedian Stephen Merchant.
"It is a fact. Potassium levels are dangerously high if you have six bananas... I saw a bowl of bananas. There's six bananas there. You know why there's only six? Seven would be dangerous."
So how dangerous is potassium? Actually, it is crucial for survival and can be found "within every single cell of the body," says Catherine Collins, a dietitian at St George's Hospital in London.
"We use it to help generate an electrical charge which helps the cell function properly. It helps keep your heart rate steady, it helps trigger insulin release from the pancreas to help control blood sugars, and more importantly keeps blood pressure in check."
On the other hand, if the level of potassium in the body is too low or too high it can result in an irregular heartbeat, stomach pain, nausea and diarrhoea. Potassium chloride is even one of the chemicals used in lethal injections in the US, as extremely high doses can cause cardiac arrest.
But for a healthy person, "it would be impossible to overdose on bananas," says Collins. "You would probably need around 400 bananas a day to build up the kind of potassium levels that would cause your heart to stop beating... Bananas are not dangerous - and in fact they are, and always have been, very good for you."
Adults should consume about 3,500mg of potassium per day, according to the UK's National Health Service. The average banana, weighing 125g, contains 450mg of potassium, meaning a healthy person can consume at least seven-and-half bananas before reaching the recommended level.
There are some people who should steer clear of foods that are high in potassium though, warns Collins - those with kidney disease.
"These patients have a very low kidney function which can potentially see a build-up of harmful potassium levels in their blood stream because they can't get rid of the mineral when they pass urine," she says. "So in theory it is possible for someone with kidney disease to die of a high blood potassium level if they decided to consume lots of different food types rich in the mineral."
She once had a patient on dialysis who had a heart attack after eating too many tomatoes - another fruit rich in potassium. His kidneys had already stopped working so he was unable to get rid of the excess.
Another thing that could cause some to worry about bananas is radiation.
Like many foods, bananas naturally contain some radioactive isotopes - enough for the US-based think tank, Nuclear Threat Initiative, to warn that they can trigger sensors used at US ports to detect smuggled nuclear material.
A typical banana contains 0.1 microsieverts of radiation. To put that in context, a typical CT scan in a hospital exposes humans to between 10 and 15 millisieverts - about 100,000 times more.
"The levels of radioactivity are negligible," says Collins. "Bananas are not as radioactive as Brazil nuts and they are safe to eat in moderation."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34225517
It's sometimes said that eating a lot of bananas at once could be dangerous - it has even been suggested that eating more than six in one sitting could kill you. Can this really be true?
Bananas are one of the world's most popular fruits, stuffed with vitamins and minerals. On the face of it they are good for you, so why do some people think they could be fatal?
One well-known figure who has spread this idea around is Karl Pilkington, the grumpy friend of comedian Ricky Gervais.
"Before when you were talking about bananas... I had that fact, about if you eat more than six, it can kill you," he said in one of his conversations with Gervais and fellow comedian Stephen Merchant.
"It is a fact. Potassium levels are dangerously high if you have six bananas... I saw a bowl of bananas. There's six bananas there. You know why there's only six? Seven would be dangerous."
So how dangerous is potassium? Actually, it is crucial for survival and can be found "within every single cell of the body," says Catherine Collins, a dietitian at St George's Hospital in London.
"We use it to help generate an electrical charge which helps the cell function properly. It helps keep your heart rate steady, it helps trigger insulin release from the pancreas to help control blood sugars, and more importantly keeps blood pressure in check."
On the other hand, if the level of potassium in the body is too low or too high it can result in an irregular heartbeat, stomach pain, nausea and diarrhoea. Potassium chloride is even one of the chemicals used in lethal injections in the US, as extremely high doses can cause cardiac arrest.
But for a healthy person, "it would be impossible to overdose on bananas," says Collins. "You would probably need around 400 bananas a day to build up the kind of potassium levels that would cause your heart to stop beating... Bananas are not dangerous - and in fact they are, and always have been, very good for you."
Adults should consume about 3,500mg of potassium per day, according to the UK's National Health Service. The average banana, weighing 125g, contains 450mg of potassium, meaning a healthy person can consume at least seven-and-half bananas before reaching the recommended level.
There are some people who should steer clear of foods that are high in potassium though, warns Collins - those with kidney disease.
"These patients have a very low kidney function which can potentially see a build-up of harmful potassium levels in their blood stream because they can't get rid of the mineral when they pass urine," she says. "So in theory it is possible for someone with kidney disease to die of a high blood potassium level if they decided to consume lots of different food types rich in the mineral."
She once had a patient on dialysis who had a heart attack after eating too many tomatoes - another fruit rich in potassium. His kidneys had already stopped working so he was unable to get rid of the excess.
Another thing that could cause some to worry about bananas is radiation.
Like many foods, bananas naturally contain some radioactive isotopes - enough for the US-based think tank, Nuclear Threat Initiative, to warn that they can trigger sensors used at US ports to detect smuggled nuclear material.
A typical banana contains 0.1 microsieverts of radiation. To put that in context, a typical CT scan in a hospital exposes humans to between 10 and 15 millisieverts - about 100,000 times more.
"The levels of radioactivity are negligible," says Collins. "Bananas are not as radioactive as Brazil nuts and they are safe to eat in moderation."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34225517
Guest- Guest
Re: Press Cutting
by marcellus 29/11/2016, 14:02
kic wrote:
oprosti ali gluposti se perpetuiraju, Bannon je pro-Izrael to je očito ko slon u sobi, kakav antisemit..
točno, breitbart je kompletno pro židovski
_________________
marcellus- Posts : 46005
2014-04-16
Re: Press Cutting
by Guest 29/11/2016, 14:04
marcellus wrote:kic wrote:
oprosti ali gluposti se perpetuiraju, Bannon je pro-Izrael to je očito ko slon u sobi, kakav antisemit..
točno, breitbart je kompletno pro židovski
Guest- Guest
Re: Press Cutting
by Winter is coming 29/11/2016, 14:09
ja sam maksimalno pojeo 4 tj popio,samljeo ih i popio,probaj i ti,nemoj 4 probaj 3 i vidjeces da poslije dobijes snagu da moš kobli rep iščupat
_________________
И показа ми чисту реку воде живота, бистру као кристал, која излажаше од престола Божијег и Јагњетовог.
Winter is coming-
Posts : 9181
2014-04-14
Re: Press Cutting
by Guest 29/11/2016, 14:19
Post-truth politics
Art of the lie
Politicians have always lied. Does it matter if they leave the truth behind entirely?
CONSIDER how far Donald Trump is estranged from fact. He inhabits a fantastical realm where Barack Obama’s birth certificate was faked, the president founded Islamic State (IS), the Clintons are killers and the father of a rival was with Lee Harvey Oswald before he shot John F. Kennedy.
Mr Trump is the leading exponent of “post-truth” politics—a reliance on assertions that “feel true” but have no basis in fact. His brazenness is not punished, but taken as evidence of his willingness to stand up to elite power. And he is not alone. Members of Poland’s government assert that a previous president, who died in a plane crash, was assassinated by Russia. Turkish politicians claim the perpetrators of the recent bungled coup were acting on orders issued by the CIA. The successful campaign for Britain to leave the European Union warned of the hordes of immigrants that would result from Turkey’s imminent accession to the union.
If, like this newspaper, you believe that politics should be based on evidence, this is worrying. Strong democracies can draw on inbuilt defences against post-truth. Authoritarian countries are more vulnerable.
Lord of the lies
That politicians sometimes peddle lies is not news: think of Ronald Reagan’s fib that his administration had not traded weapons with Iran in order to secure the release of hostages and to fund the efforts of rebels in Nicaragua. Dictators and democrats seeking to deflect blame for their own incompetence have always manipulated the truth; sore losers have always accused the other lot of lying.
But post-truth politics is more than just an invention of whingeing elites who have been outflanked. The term picks out the heart of what is new: that truth is not falsified, or contested, but of secondary importance. Once, the purpose of political lying was to create a false view of the world. The lies of men like Mr Trump do not work like that. They are not intended to convince the elites, whom their target voters neither trust nor like, but to reinforce prejudices.
Feelings, not facts, are what matter in this sort of campaigning. Their opponents’ disbelief validates the us-versus-them mindset that outsider candidates thrive on. And if your opponents focus on trying to show your facts are wrong, they have to fight on the ground you have chosen. The more Remain campaigners attacked the Leave campaign’s exaggerated claim that EU membership cost Britain £350m ($468m) a week, the longer they kept the magnitude of those costs in the spotlight.
Post-truth politics has many parents. Some are noble. The questioning of institutions and received wisdom is a democratic virtue. A sceptical lack of deference towards leaders is the first step to reform. The collapse of communism was hastened because brave people were prepared to challenge the official propaganda.
But corrosive forces are also at play. One is anger. Many voters feel let down and left behind, while the elites who are in charge have thrived. They are scornful of the self-serving technocrats who said that the euro would improve their lives and that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Popular trust in expert opinion and established institutions has tumbled across Western democracies.
Post-truth has also been abetted by the evolution of the media (see Briefing). The fragmentation of news sources has created an atomised world in which lies, rumour and gossip spread with alarming speed. Lies that are widely shared online within a network, whose members trust each other more than they trust any mainstream-media source, can quickly take on the appearance of truth. Presented with evidence that contradicts a belief that is dearly held, people have a tendency to ditch the facts first. Well-intentioned journalistic practices bear blame too. The pursuit of “fairness” in reporting often creates phoney balance at the expense of truth. NASA scientist says Mars is probably uninhabited; Professor Snooks says it is teeming with aliens. It’s really a matter of opinion.
When politics is like pro-wrestling, society pays the cost. Mr Trump’s insistence that Mr Obama founded IS precludes a serious debate over how to deal with violent extremists. Policy is complicated, yet post-truth politics damns complexity as the sleight of hand experts use to bamboozle everyone else. Hence Hillary Clinton’s proposals on paid parental leave go unexamined (see article) and the case for trade liberalisation is drowned out by “common sense” demands for protection.
It is tempting to think that, when policies sold on dodgy prospectuses start to fail, lied-to supporters might see the error of their ways. The worst part of post-truth politics, though, is that this self-correction cannot be relied on. When lies make the political system dysfunctional, its poor results can feed the alienation and lack of trust in institutions that make the post-truth play possible in the first place.
Pro-truthers stand and be counted
To counter this, mainstream politicians need to find a language of rebuttal (being called “pro-truth” might be a start). Humility and the acknowledgment of past hubris would help. The truth has powerful forces on its side. Any politician who makes contradictory promises to different audiences will soon be exposed on Facebook or YouTube. If an official lies about attending a particular meeting or seeking a campaign donation, a trail of e-mails may catch him out.
Democracies have institutions to help, too. Independent legal systems have mechanisms to establish truth (indeed, Melania Trump has turned to the law to seek redress for lies about her past). So, in their way, do the independent bodies created to inform policy—especially those that draw on science.
If Mr Trump loses in November, post-truth will seem less menacing, though he has been too successful for it to go away. The deeper worry is for countries like Russia and Turkey, where autocrats use the techniques of post-truth to silence opponents. Cast adrift on an ocean of lies, the people there will have nothing to cling to. For them the novelty of post-truth may lead back to old-fashioned oppression.
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21706525-politicians-have-always-lied-does-it-matter-if-they-leave-truth-behind-entirely-art
Art of the lie
Politicians have always lied. Does it matter if they leave the truth behind entirely?
CONSIDER how far Donald Trump is estranged from fact. He inhabits a fantastical realm where Barack Obama’s birth certificate was faked, the president founded Islamic State (IS), the Clintons are killers and the father of a rival was with Lee Harvey Oswald before he shot John F. Kennedy.
Mr Trump is the leading exponent of “post-truth” politics—a reliance on assertions that “feel true” but have no basis in fact. His brazenness is not punished, but taken as evidence of his willingness to stand up to elite power. And he is not alone. Members of Poland’s government assert that a previous president, who died in a plane crash, was assassinated by Russia. Turkish politicians claim the perpetrators of the recent bungled coup were acting on orders issued by the CIA. The successful campaign for Britain to leave the European Union warned of the hordes of immigrants that would result from Turkey’s imminent accession to the union.
If, like this newspaper, you believe that politics should be based on evidence, this is worrying. Strong democracies can draw on inbuilt defences against post-truth. Authoritarian countries are more vulnerable.
Lord of the lies
That politicians sometimes peddle lies is not news: think of Ronald Reagan’s fib that his administration had not traded weapons with Iran in order to secure the release of hostages and to fund the efforts of rebels in Nicaragua. Dictators and democrats seeking to deflect blame for their own incompetence have always manipulated the truth; sore losers have always accused the other lot of lying.
But post-truth politics is more than just an invention of whingeing elites who have been outflanked. The term picks out the heart of what is new: that truth is not falsified, or contested, but of secondary importance. Once, the purpose of political lying was to create a false view of the world. The lies of men like Mr Trump do not work like that. They are not intended to convince the elites, whom their target voters neither trust nor like, but to reinforce prejudices.
Feelings, not facts, are what matter in this sort of campaigning. Their opponents’ disbelief validates the us-versus-them mindset that outsider candidates thrive on. And if your opponents focus on trying to show your facts are wrong, they have to fight on the ground you have chosen. The more Remain campaigners attacked the Leave campaign’s exaggerated claim that EU membership cost Britain £350m ($468m) a week, the longer they kept the magnitude of those costs in the spotlight.
Post-truth politics has many parents. Some are noble. The questioning of institutions and received wisdom is a democratic virtue. A sceptical lack of deference towards leaders is the first step to reform. The collapse of communism was hastened because brave people were prepared to challenge the official propaganda.
But corrosive forces are also at play. One is anger. Many voters feel let down and left behind, while the elites who are in charge have thrived. They are scornful of the self-serving technocrats who said that the euro would improve their lives and that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Popular trust in expert opinion and established institutions has tumbled across Western democracies.
Post-truth has also been abetted by the evolution of the media (see Briefing). The fragmentation of news sources has created an atomised world in which lies, rumour and gossip spread with alarming speed. Lies that are widely shared online within a network, whose members trust each other more than they trust any mainstream-media source, can quickly take on the appearance of truth. Presented with evidence that contradicts a belief that is dearly held, people have a tendency to ditch the facts first. Well-intentioned journalistic practices bear blame too. The pursuit of “fairness” in reporting often creates phoney balance at the expense of truth. NASA scientist says Mars is probably uninhabited; Professor Snooks says it is teeming with aliens. It’s really a matter of opinion.
When politics is like pro-wrestling, society pays the cost. Mr Trump’s insistence that Mr Obama founded IS precludes a serious debate over how to deal with violent extremists. Policy is complicated, yet post-truth politics damns complexity as the sleight of hand experts use to bamboozle everyone else. Hence Hillary Clinton’s proposals on paid parental leave go unexamined (see article) and the case for trade liberalisation is drowned out by “common sense” demands for protection.
It is tempting to think that, when policies sold on dodgy prospectuses start to fail, lied-to supporters might see the error of their ways. The worst part of post-truth politics, though, is that this self-correction cannot be relied on. When lies make the political system dysfunctional, its poor results can feed the alienation and lack of trust in institutions that make the post-truth play possible in the first place.
Pro-truthers stand and be counted
To counter this, mainstream politicians need to find a language of rebuttal (being called “pro-truth” might be a start). Humility and the acknowledgment of past hubris would help. The truth has powerful forces on its side. Any politician who makes contradictory promises to different audiences will soon be exposed on Facebook or YouTube. If an official lies about attending a particular meeting or seeking a campaign donation, a trail of e-mails may catch him out.
Democracies have institutions to help, too. Independent legal systems have mechanisms to establish truth (indeed, Melania Trump has turned to the law to seek redress for lies about her past). So, in their way, do the independent bodies created to inform policy—especially those that draw on science.
If Mr Trump loses in November, post-truth will seem less menacing, though he has been too successful for it to go away. The deeper worry is for countries like Russia and Turkey, where autocrats use the techniques of post-truth to silence opponents. Cast adrift on an ocean of lies, the people there will have nothing to cling to. For them the novelty of post-truth may lead back to old-fashioned oppression.
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21706525-politicians-have-always-lied-does-it-matter-if-they-leave-truth-behind-entirely-art
Last edited by Victor&Victoria on 29/11/2016, 14:22; edited 1 time in total
Guest- Guest
Re: Press Cutting
by Regoč 29/11/2016, 14:21
I ja kažem. Neka pati koga smeta što je Castro mrtav.Victor&Victoria wrote:Neka pati koga smeta.Regoč wrote:Ako je starija, prikopčaj noviju ovamo. A vidim da se tema i širi. Zapravo, što je tema?
_________________
Regoč-
Posts : 35954
2015-08-21
Age : 106
Lokacija: : Doma
Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Similar topics» kic sazvao press konferenciju
» Ostojić sazvao hitnu press konferenciju u 11 sati
» Godišnji press "Kruga 666": Ovo će biti godina konstantnih blokada
» "Ubijeni" ruski novinar pojavio se na press konferenciji, živ je i zdrav
» Sinčić sazvao press konferenciju zbog "lažne skupštine ŽZ-a"
» Ostojić sazvao hitnu press konferenciju u 11 sati
» Godišnji press "Kruga 666": Ovo će biti godina konstantnih blokada
» "Ubijeni" ruski novinar pojavio se na press konferenciji, živ je i zdrav
» Sinčić sazvao press konferenciju zbog "lažne skupštine ŽZ-a"
Page 2 of 3
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum