OF THE
TIMES
"The purpose of GLADIO was to attack civilians, the people - women, children, innocent people, unknown people, far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force the public to turn to the State and demand greater security. Under a strategy of tension, you 'destabilize in order to stabilize', to create tension within society and promote conservative, reactionary social and political tendencies."
~ Italian neo-fascist whose prosecution led to the discovery of NATO's 'Gladio' networks across Western Europe
That's the same CSIS which carried out these two violent attacks against the Canadian people: [Link] [Link]
A geomagnetic storm isn't the same as a solar flare. Comparing this to the Carrington Event is Apples to Oranges. It did look awfully pretty...
A man of morals, ethics and principles !
Individually Motivated Violent Extremists... What, West Bank Israeli settlers? Sorry Turdeau but I don't have to 'like' or 'accept' anything you...
Québec Judge authorizes class actions against facebook youtube comments censorship. [Link]
To submit an article for publication, see our Submission Guidelines
Reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views of the volunteers, editors, and directors of SOTT.net or the Quantum Future Group.
Some icons on this site were created by: Afterglow, Aha-Soft, AntialiasFactory, artdesigner.lv, Artura, DailyOverview, Everaldo, GraphicsFuel, IconFactory, Iconka, IconShock, Icons-Land, i-love-icons, KDE-look.org, Klukeart, mugenb16, Map Icons Collection, PetshopBoxStudio, VisualPharm, wbeiruti, WebIconset
Powered by PikaJS 🐁 and In·Site
Original content © 2002-2024 by Sott.net/Signs of the Times. See: FAIR USE NOTICE
Good to know, and it could apply in similar non-job situations as well, if it's really accurate as presented. Another example of "Saying No", a la "When the Body Says No"? It would be interesting to see, however, an objective measure of how this affected their job prospects, since a subjective assessment could be biased. It may be that some forms of protest are superior. And also, what of "crucial conversations"? Of course you just can't reason with some "people" (psychos), but I wonder if that same anger could be used in a constructive way rather than passive-agressive.
An intervention study would be interesting, to rule out that this isn't more due to temperament or something like that, but I wonder about the ethics of suggesting people be more passive-agressive toward their employers. (Although, with an abusive employer, I'm sure at least one or two might jump at the idea.)