fortune gems free game
Garcia's 16 help McNeese beat Illinois State 76-68We live in Orwellian times. The deceitful and antisemitic reporting on the Israeli military campaign in Gaza is a glaring example of the gaslighting endemic in parts of the media, academia, and political discourse across the Western world. This article builds on themes from my earlier piece, Gaslighting and Projection of Orwellian Proportion, to challenge whether this gaslighting stops at Israel and the Israeli Defense Forces—or if it is simply the most visible and egregious example of a broader manipulation. The distinction between persuasion and manipulation, in my judgment, lies in intent. Persuasion seeks to inform and inspire with philanthropic motives, aiming to foster understanding and thoughtful action. Manipulation, by contrast, operates with malign intent, seeking to deceive and control. The reporting on Israel exemplifies manipulation, where distortion and bias have sown mistrust and misunderstanding. This raises broader concerns about the narratives promoted by certain media outlets, academics, and political actors—a pattern suggesting deeper systemic agendas. To better understand this phenomenon, it’s worth looking back, as it becomes increasingly clear that this manipulation has been at play for some time. Consider Menachem Begin and Ronald Reagan, two leaders whose legacies are now widely celebrated but who faced relentless vilification during their time in office. Before his election as Israel’s Prime Minister, Begin was labelled a threat to democracy. David Ben Gurion refused even to mention him by name, referring to him dismissively as “the man in the basement.” Yet Begin achieved what many thought impossible: a peace treaty with Egypt, Israel’s greatest adversary at the time. Similarly, Reagan was dismissed as a “Hollywood actor turned politician,” caricatured by critics as reckless and simplistic. Despite this, he ended the Cold War without firing a shot, revitalised the American economy, and restored confidence in democratic values. The parallels with contemporary figures like Peter Dutton are striking. Leaders such as Australia’s Opposition Leader are frequently castigated as “far right” by media, academia, and political opponents. But this raises an essential question: is Dutton truly far right, or simply far right of those who now find themselves firmly entrenched on the far left? The same voices vilifying Israel and the IDF—sections of the ABC, certain academics, union agitators, and partisan journalists—are often those driving divisive narratives in other domains. Their coordination raises doubts about their trustworthiness and intent. If their approach to Israel is rooted in deception, can their messaging in other areas be trusted? Take nuclear energy policy, for example—a subject outside my area of professional expertise, but one that deserves scrutiny. Across the globe, nuclear energy is increasingly seen as a critical component of a sustainable energy future. France generates over 70% of its electricity from nuclear power, making it a leader in low-carbon energy. Canada, too, has embraced nuclear energy as part of its strategy to reduce emissions, with prominent progressive figures like Prime Minister Justin Trudeau advocating for its inclusion in achieving net-zero goals. Even in Australia, former Prime Minister Bob Hawke—a revered Labor leader and iconic figure of progressivism—advocated for nuclear power as a forward-thinking solution to the nation’s energy challenges. He argued that Australia’s vast uranium reserves offered an unparalleled opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and ensure energy security while boosting economic growth. Contrast this with the Albanese Government. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Energy Minister Chris Bowen have consistently dismissed nuclear energy as a viable option, citing high costs and long lead times. Bowen recently called nuclear power “the most expensive form of energy,” a claim that critics argue overlooks advancements in technology and the broader economic benefits of a diversified energy portfolio. This shift also extends to foreign policy. For decades, there was bipartisan support for Israel’s right to exist in peace and security, with successive Australian governments maintaining a steady alliance with Israel. Recent actions by the Albanese Government, including changes in Australia’s voting patterns at the United Nations, have been perceived by some as a departure from this bipartisan tradition. Critics argue that these moves align Australia with divisive UN resolutions that undermine Israel’s legitimacy, reflecting a broader pivot from the consensus-driven foreign policy of earlier decades. Occam’s Razor, the principle that the simplest explanation is often the correct one, offers insight here. The simplest explanation for the consistent distortion in reporting, policymaking, and public discourse is that much of the left in politics, media, and academia has been overtaken by social Marxists. Social Marxism applies Marxist principles to cultural and social structures rather than economic systems. It divides the world into oppressors and the oppressed, prioritising identity politics and victimhood narratives over truth and shared values. This framework not only explains the distorted reporting on Israel but sheds light on the broader decay in public discourse across the Western world. The connection between manipulation in media and social Marxism becomes clear when one examines how narratives are framed. The same individuals and institutions that distort facts about Israel often exhibit a broader agenda: discrediting traditional values, stifling evidence-based debate, and championing divisive ideologies. Ronald Reagan once warned, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” This cautionary statement resonates deeply in today’s context, where ideological rigidity and social Marxism threaten to erode democratic resilience. Leadership in such times requires clarity, integrity, and the courage to stand against prevailing tides of manipulation and deceit. Throughout my military career, I learned the importance of valuing actions over rhetoric. Words can be empty vessels, but actions reveal true intent. This principle guided me as I observed sycophants who sought to curry favour through flattery while pursuing self-serving motives. The lesson was clear: substance always outweighs superficiality. This perspective informed my reaction to the recent U.S. Presidential election, when I observed a highly educated Australian Jew catastrophise over the election of the 47th President of the United States of America and its implications for reproductive rights. My own stance on this issue is “pro-choice,” yet I found the hyperventilation unwarranted, especially given the administration’s stated policy of keeping abortions “safe, legal, and rare.” This episode revealed a deeper trend: a political platform so weak that the only strategy left was to vilify the alternative. Convincing the public that the alternative is worse is a hallmark of far-left politics, which relies on division and fear rather than constructive solutions. As I approach the conclusion of this article, I find it necessary to share my assessment: I, like many Australians, have at times been influenced by narratives shaped by social Marxists masquerading as educated and learned progressives. However, I have since begun to see through this manipulation. I encourage readers to take a moment of introspection—to reflect on some of the beliefs you may hold as incontrovertible truths. Who are the voices shaping these narratives, and what are their intentions? Because the same people who lecture us incessantly about genocide and apartheid are often the ones championing other causes, perceptions, and ideologies that I can no longer accept at face value. Abraham Lincoln wisely noted, “You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.” To this, I would add the enduring adage: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” Together, these sentiments remind us that discernment is not just a virtue but a necessity, especially in these Orwellian times. The reporting on Israel has taught me a vital lesson: to scrutinise, question, and seek truth—even when it challenges long-held beliefs. In these consequential times, clarity and integrity are not luxuries; they are imperatives. We have agency, and we must put a stop to this madness in 2025.It’s official: Dodgers sign Blake Snell for 5 years, $182 millionElon Musk throws weight behind German far right party
A courtroom of relief: FBI recovers funds for victims of scammed bankerTHE MOJ: It's Thanksgiving down south, and the Canucks aren't looking free and clearVasko's 4 TDs power Coastal Carolina past Georgia State 48-27 to become bowl eligible
Debate over foreign workers in tech shows MAGA tensions3 Great Dividend Stocks to Buy Right Now for $33 or Less
Elon Musk throws weight behind German far right partyPurdue Fort Wayne defeats Green Bay 83-67
The Spurs Have Found Their Jrue Holiday
None
Bilawal wonders why fish only cut Pakistan's internet cablesRaccoon attacks baby in Idaho home
None
The joy is back – how ‘top fixer’ Joe Schmidt has transformed Australia
Amazon Slashes the Price on the New Apple iPad Pro Tablet with OLED and M4 Chip for Black FridayMark Wahlberg, 53, and wife Rhea Durham, 46, show off sizzling beach bodies in Barbados
ATLANTA (AP) — Ethan Vasko threw three touchdown passes and ran for a fourth as Coastal Carolina became bowl eligible by beating Georgia State 48-27 for its sixth win of the season in the regular season finale on Saturday. The Chanticleers evened their season record at 6-6 with the win and finished 3-5 in the Sun Belt East. The loss leaves Georgia State (3-9) with just one win in eight conference games. Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
Minnesota will try to bounce back from two straight losses when it hosts Bethune-Cookman on Sunday afternoon in Minneapolis. The Golden Gophers (5-3) are coming off a 57-51 loss against Wake Forest on Friday, which followed a 68-66 overtime loss against Wichita State on Thursday. Both games took place at the ESPN Events Invitational in Lake Buena Vista, Fla. Minnesota coach Ben Johnson cited inconsistency on offense as the main reason for his team's recent skid. "We're painfully figuring that out," Johnson said. "I thought our defense, though, (Thursday and Friday) has proven this is a top-40 or top-30 defense. We've got to be able to show up with offense and free throws." Golden Gophers starter Lu'Cye Patterson said he and his teammates remain confident in their potential as the Big Ten conference season approaches. "We just have to keep doing what we're supposed to do and keep our level of defensive play up," Patterson said. "It's going to win us a lot of games. The offense is going to come." Bethune-Cookman (2-5) will try to play spoiler on the road. The Wildcats have split their past two games as they beat North Dakota 79-67 on Tuesday and lost to Gardner-Webb 79-64 on Wednesday, both games played in the Cancun Challenge in Cancun, Mexico. Four players for Bethune-Cookman scored in double digits in their most recent game. Reggie Ward Jr. and Daniel Rouzan led the way with 14 points apiece, Trey Thomas scored 13 and Brayon Freeman chipped in 10. Bethune-Cookman is coached by Reggie Theus, who enjoyed a long NBA career and coached the Sacramento Kings for parts of two seasons. Theus said the Wildcats were in better position to compete this season compared with a season ago. "We've got a lot of depth, and we have age and experience," Theus said. "One of the biggest differences in our team is that we have great size now, where last year we were pretty small." Dawson Garcia leads Minnesota with 18.6 points and 7.3 rebounds per game. Patterson is next with 10.1 points per contest. Bethune-Cookman is led by Freeman, who is averaging 15.9 points per game. Thomas (11.7 points per game) and Ward Jr. (11.0) also are scoring in double digits. --Field Level MediaJonah Goldberg Among elites across the ideological spectrum, there's one point of unifying agreement: Americans are bitterly divided. What if that's wrong? What if elites are the ones who are bitterly divided while most Americans are fairly unified? History rarely lines up perfectly with the calendar (the "sixties" didn't really start until the decade was almost over). But politically, the 21st century neatly began in 2000, when the election ended in a tie and the color coding of electoral maps became enshrined as a kind of permanent tribal color war of "red vs. blue." Elite understanding of politics has been stuck in this framework ever since. Politicians and voters have leaned into this alleged political reality, making it seem all the more real in the process. I loathe the phrase "perception is reality," but in politics it has the reifying power of self-fulfilling prophecy. Like rival noble families in medieval Europe, elites have been vying for power and dominance on the arrogant assumption that their subjects share their concern for who rules rather than what the rulers can deliver. In 2018, the group More in Common published a massive report on the "hidden tribes" of American politics. The wealthiest and whitest groups were "devoted conservatives" (6%) and "progressive activists" (8%). These tribes dominate the media, the parties and higher education, and they dictate the competing narratives of red vs. blue, particularly on cable news and social media. Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of Americans resided in, or were adjacent to, the "exhausted majority." These people, however, "have no narrative," as David Brooks wrote at the time. "They have no coherent philosophic worldview to organize their thinking and compel action." Lacking a narrative might seem like a very postmodern problem, but in a postmodern elite culture, postmodern problems are real problems. Listen now and subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Stitcher | RSS Feed | SoundStack | All Of Our Podcasts It's worth noting that red vs. blue America didn't emerge ex nihilo. The 1990s were a time when the economy and government seemed to be working, at home and abroad. As a result, elites leaned into the narcissism of small differences to gain political and cultural advantage. They remain obsessed with competing, often apocalyptic, narratives. That leaves out most Americans. The gladiatorial combatants of cable news, editorial pages and academia, and their superfan spectators, can afford these fights. Members of the exhausted majority are more interested in mere competence. I think that's the hidden unity elites are missing. This is why we keep throwing incumbent parties out of power: They get elected promising competence but get derailed -- or seduced -- by fan service to, or trolling of, the elites who dominate the national conversation. There's a difference between competence and expertise. One of the most profound political changes in recent years has been the separation of notions of credentialed expertise from real-world competence. This isn't a new theme in American life, but the pandemic and the lurch toward identity politics amplified distrust of experts in unprecedented ways. This is a particular problem for the left because it is far more invested in credentialism than the right. Indeed, some progressives are suddenly realizing they invested too much in the authority of experts and too little in the ability of experts to provide what people want from government, such as affordable housing, decent education and low crime. The New York Times' Ezra Klein says he's tired of defending the authority of government institutions. Rather, "I want them to work." One of the reasons progressives find Trump so offensive is his absolute inability to speak the language of expertise -- which is full of coded elite shibboleths. But Trump veritably shouts the language of competence. I don't mean he is actually competent at governing. But he is effectively blunt about calling leaders, experts and elites -- of both parties -- stupid, ineffective, weak and incompetent. He lost in 2020 because voters didn't believe he was actually good at governing. He won in 2024 because the exhausted majority concluded the Biden administration was bad at it. Nostalgia for the low-inflation pre-pandemic economy was enough to convince voters that Trumpian drama is the tolerable price to pay for a good economy. About 3 out of 4 Americans who experienced "severe hardship" because of inflation voted for Trump. The genius of Trump's most effective ad -- "Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you" -- was that it was simultaneously culture-war red meat and an argument that Harris was more concerned about boutique elite concerns than everyday ones. If Trump can actually deliver competent government, he could make the Republican Party the majority party for a generation. For myriad reasons, that's an if so big it's visible from space. But the opportunity is there -- and has been there all along.
— BIRTH NAME: — BORN: at the Wise Clinic in Plains, Georgia, the first U.S. president born in a hospital. He would become the first president to live for . — EDUCATION: Plains High School, Plains, Georgia, 1939-1941; Georgia Southwestern College, Americus, Georgia, 1941-1942; Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, 1942-1943; U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland, 1943-1946 (class of 1947); Union College, Schenectady, New York, 1952-1953. — PRESIDENCY: Sworn-in as 39th president of the United States at the age of 52 years, 3 months and 20 days on Jan. 20, 1977, after defeating President Gerald R. Ford in the 1976 general election. Left office on Jan. 20, 1981, following 1980 general election loss to Ronald Reagan. — POST-PRESIDENCY: Launched The Carter Center in 1982. Began volunteering at Habitat for Humanity in 1984. Awarded Nobel Peace Prize in 2002. Taught for 37 years at Emory University, where in 2019, at age 94. — OTHER ELECTED OFFICES: Georgia state senator, 1963-1967; Georgia governor, 1971-1975. — OTHER OCCUPATIONS: Served in U.S. Navy, achieved rank of lieutenant, 1946-53; Farmer, warehouseman, Plains, Georgia, 1953-77. — FAMILY: Wife, , married July 7, 1946 until her death Nov. 19, 2023. They had three sons, John William (Jack), James Earl III (Chip), Donnel Jeffrey (Jeff); a daughter, Amy Lynn; and 11 living grandchildren and 14 great-grandchildren. ___ Source: Jimmy Carter Library & Museum The Associated Press