Relotius Case: Fraudulent Reporting in Spiegel

121 posts in this topic

On 1/22/2019, 9:05:46, WiccaChica said:

I know of literally no conservative or right winger that supports the KKK.

Besides the point, but in 2019, gee, shocker. If it weren't obviously toxic to do so, some surely would.

 

You just can't bring yourself to say in plain English that KKK are a conservative identity politics group. They were and are (legacy) more influential than a bunch of juvenile misfits on a hippie college campus. Maybe the latter will get there, but not just yet. And there was no widespread support for the incident except by other fringe loonies. By mainstream sources, it was generally seen as embarrassment at best. 

 

Quote

 I said they are shunned by the establishment.

How convenient for your argumentation that The Establishment™ somehow doesn't include conservatives. :rolleyes: Is that really what you believe?

 

Quote

Face it; most of the media and academia swing left and as do NGOs and the US Supreme Court did so until very recently.

Face it; most of the police and Wall Street swing right and as do NGOs and the US supreme court.

 

Congress normally doesn't allow SCOTUS justices who are openly partisan, but that doesn't mean they are totally apolitical. Due to the inherit power of a lifelong appointment, the political leanings of justices have literally ALWAYS been a factor. For obvious reasons, presidents hope their choices conform to their goals (once on the bench, no particular loyalty is either owed or enforceable). And it's not really Dem/Rep or Right/Left in the American legal universe. I'm not sure where you're getting this false, bizarro universe idea that the SCOTUS has been left wing (by any modern standards) at any time in the past several decades.

 

Quote

Where did I defend the KKK? That's bollocks. And I'm not talking about the 1960s. I'm talking about today. The KKK has no power today but the SJW outrage mobs on Twitter and Facebook do and they do influence their targets using intimidation.

You defend the KKK as much as I defend the WaPo. That's your own logic, so what's wrong with it?  


Mobs are a sad symptom of human nature, preceding and transcending politics. There's little that unique about "SJW outrage mobs", apart from the adjectives themselves. 

 

Quote

If you're about to define identity politics as pretty much all politics then my point would be that the left are all about race/gender/religion-baiting. Every time there is an interaction involving a white person with a non-white person or a person from a minority religion, it must mean something or there must be some hidden racism. The left has done a lot to stir up racism and yet they accuse conservatives of being racist.

That is not my definition, though many types of politics could become identity politics. Identity politics is not exclusively about race or gender, those are just more obvious. Your folly, due to your dogmatism, is to cast this as unique to Leftists™. Conservatives clearly engage in this too. You've declared yourself on Team Red, and seem to believe they can do no wrong. 

 

Quote

You can think what you like but the left and cultural Marxists are quite strong on campus in the USA as they are in England.

A British millennial who's never even been to the US and repeats almost verbatim the talking points of the  American conservative blogosphere... Imagine that. Power of the internet, eh?

 

They are loud, but I wouldn't confuse that with strong. Their influence is widely over-stated, though I do certainly agree with the dangers of tampering with academic freedom.

 

Quote

You can call me a conspiracy theorist all you like

It's telling that you don't deny it.

 

Quote

but I've given you several examples of fake news and dishonesty in the MSM

You've given a couple loaded examples, drenched with your own partisan language, to present a naive "Leftist™ Elitist Conspiracy Bad, Right Underdog Heroes Good". (Nevermind that Republicans currently control the US and Tories currently control the UK -- it's a cabal of elitist Leftists™ who are pulling all the strings.)

 

Quote

and you've chosen to stick your head in the sand

Quite rich coming from someone so dogmatic she cannot even plainly acknowledge the KKK as a conservative identity politics group without trying to move goalposts, and instead defends them as being better than a bunch of disorganized juvenile SJWs.

 

Quote

and engage in logic chopping.

Have you considered that you simply aren't convincing? 

 

Quote

Joker just posted another example where the MSM didn't bother to fact check and presented a false narrative. You can say this is sloppy journalism but

It's not a false narrative, it's an incomplete narrative. It is certainly sloppy journalism, as I've already written about. But that's where the easy money is these days, 1 hour news cycles, twitter-rage headline grabbers, click-bait, etc. This very obviously includes popular conservative newsmedia, with no shortage of examples. These days, journalistic ethics aren't rewarded or valued as much (nor even believed in, as by our dour baltic friend with the mind of an ATM).

 

The barriers to entry in journalism are also vastly reduced. I've already said it: Wow, anybody can be the media! But on the other hand, geez, anybody can be the media.

 

Quote

the fact of the matter is that it happens much too often for it to be a coincidence.

I've already explained (a strong reason) why in earlier posts, as have others at the beginning of this thread. I honestly don't feel like repeating myself any more. One can only engage in so much fruitless internet arguments with strangers in a lifetime, don't you think? At the start, I had assumed you might be more open-minded, but that was clearly wrong. Your position is staunchly ideological, and yes, tinged (if not soaked) with conspiracy theory. I don't see much reason to continue here. 

 

Quote

Russians and Chinese have access to foreign media via Internet. They can access Facebook, Youtube, Twitter or other social media. You should have said North Korea.

What an absurd statement.

 

Unless they speak English (or whatever else), it's quite difficult. Why would they feel a need? There, there is virtually no domestic media not subject to strong-arming and censorship from the state, and is basically direct state propaganda. VPNs are heavily restricted (they've realized it's bad for business to ban them completely). In Russia, VPNs are overseen by the FSB. China controls them in a more technocratic way. Have you never heard of the Great Firewall? The simple fact is that most citizens of these countries don't read foreign media. Even expat Chinese and Russians often stick to sources from home. How much Turkish, Chinese or Russian newsmedia do you consume? You have internet access, so why not? 

 

The internet in many places is strongly filtered (here too, in some respects). It's slightly worse in China than Russia, but both are near the bottom of the list. North Korea is literally the bottom. So in your world, a Chinese "re-education" prison is fine because you're not drinking a cup of starch-soup a day in a North Korean hard-labour torture camp? Just listen to yourself. You're delusional if you think these are anywhere near your average Western country in term of media control.

 

https://rsf.org/en/ranking

 

Quite shameful of you to blithely dismiss actions of authoritarian governments (and miss a chance to swipe at communists! -- what kind of "conservative" are you!?). This kind of dodge from someone who pretends to champion liberty... It's amazing the twisted pretzel logic you will adopt because you've latched on to an ideology and are literally incapable of any criticism of it. No, not your Team Red heroes, never, it's the others, the Leftists™ who are Identitarian Ideologue Puppetmasters! Whatever credibility you might have had is... poof.

 

Quote

You've ignored Wikipedia's definition of fake news but here it is again.

Still waiting for you to prove intent against Zimmerman. Yawn.

 

On 1/22/2019, 10:09:06, J0ker said:

Yes some outlets have apologized but this seems to be a frequent tactic: create fake news, incite a lynch mob and then apologize after the damage is already done. Just look at some of these Twitter reactions, calling for these kids to be doxxed and even killed:

It's tough being a teenager these days. Not only is it harder to test out being an adult and make mistakes without cameras everywhere, but there's a permanent digital record of it too.

 

As I'm sure you know, doxxing entered the mainstream via 4chan, who normally targeted what they viewed as libtards, SJWs, feminazis, or otherwise troll-worthy lulz-worthy subjects. It's highly disingenuous for the pot to call the kettle black. How many retractions and apologies have the conservative/righty populist media issued over the years? Not many.

 

You no doubt condemn Pizza Gate, right?

 

Tweets are not good evidence, because you can literally find anyone, blue checkmark or not, who tweets whatever it is you're looking for. That's why vox pop stories were always considered quick and cheap, and why stories today claiming something based on 5 or 6 twitter comments are still low quality. Is this really indicative of widespread belief? Well, prove it.

 

It is hilarious to see conservative media/blogosphere get out the bullhorn and itself get into fits of rage about some asinine tweets by some or another other outraged morons. Echo chambers gonna echo. Again, this sort of thing is what traditional media are competing against, fighting for eyeballs.

 

Quote

Rich is relative.   

Yes indeed. You and I both probably belong to the global 1%, despite the fact we are not billionaires or millionaires.

 

Quote

Look at the yearly NRA budget and compare it to Mike Bloomberg's net worth.

So what? That alone means little.

 

Quote

If it is not a money issue, then the majority of the US Congress is sympathetic to the gun owner identity group.

Is that really your logic, Tsarina Arithmetic? Money obviously makes a difference, but in this case, ultimately, other things matter too (if you fetishize money above all else, as you do, you will not understand this). 

 

Try reading my first sentence again.

 

Quote

The idea that the NRA buys Congress is a joke to anyone who actually looks at the numbers. 

No lobby seriously hopes to influence all of Congress. No need to try when you can be successful in other (additional) ways. You seem to have a caricaturized view of lobby groups. The NRA are not the largest lobby, but they are successful enough at what they do. That's all that really matters. It's not a pissing contest.

 

Quote

So are the NRA lobbyists really so compelling and charming?    More so than the Hollywood low lifes who pretend to care about the topic?    I am guessing the latter would be more fun, richer, and throw better parties than the gun lobby.

Depends how much you like guns, doesn't it?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, alderhill said:

As I'm sure you know, doxxing entered the mainstream via 4chan, who normally targeted what they viewed as libtards, SJWs, feminazis, or otherwise troll-worthy lulz-worthy subjects. It's highly disingenuous for the pot to call the kettle black. How many retractions and apologies have the conservative/righty populist media issued over the years? Not many.

You're using a classic Whataboutist argument here.  You're talking about 4chan, which cannot be considered mainstream media, but the argument is about mainstream media networks like CNN, MSNBC etc.  What somebody writes on an internet forum cannot be held to the same standard as something released by a major news network.

 

2 hours ago, alderhill said:

Tweets are not good evidence, because you can literally find anyone, blue checkmark or not, who tweets whatever it is you're looking for. That's why vox pop stories were always considered quick and cheap, and why stories today claiming something based on 5 or 6 twitter comments are still low quality. Is this really indicative of widespread belief? Well, prove it.

Tweets are good evidence of what kind of reaction a certain story, particularly a falsified one from a MSM, entails.  Although I think Twitter can be toxic, I don't think it's the main problem here.  The problem was that certain "trustworthy" news sources spat out a false narrative, not just incomplete but clearly false, which caused Twitter outrage.  Had the MSM done their homework better, this never would have become a story.  The message is clear:  certain news sources, despite what Microsoft Newsguard wants you to believe, simply aren't trustworthy anymore.

 

2 hours ago, alderhill said:

It is hilarious to see conservative media/blogosphere get out the bullhorn and itself get into fits of rage about some asinine tweets by some or another other outraged morons. Echo chambers gonna echo. Again, this sort of thing is what traditional media are competing against, fighting for eyeballs.

Dude your really losing it here and taking this way too personally.  I've read your debate with WiccaChica and balticus and though you seemed to be calm and composed at the beginning you've started to slip and now you're saying some things that outright false and deliberately misinterpreted.  For example you claim that WiccaChica is defending the KKK and authoritarian regimes which is utter nonsense.  You're using whataboutist arguments and you're also saying that the KKK are more influential on university campuses than the left is which is absurd. 

 

Before you try to pull the same argument on me, you should know that I went to elementary school, high school and university in Canada and traveled quite frequently to the States.  If you want to have a reasonable discussion bring it on but you're going to use the same false statements against me as you did against WiccaChica or balticus then you have lost all credibility.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

J0ker gaining majority control of Twitter was vitally important to the Storm. One of the biggest stakeholders was Saudi Prince Al Waleed, the backer of Barack Obama Presently it is that weirdo Jack Dorsey but I think he has been neutralised. Ever wonder how that lovely Arab spring trashed all rival Arab states to the Saudi regime but they remained intact? Twitter was the main info system used.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, alderhill said:

Besides the point, but in 2019, gee, shocker. If it weren't obviously toxic to do so, some surely would.

Some surely would? Like 1 in 100 maybe? You're just speculating. Once again I know of no conservatives that support the KKK. Do you?

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

You just can't bring yourself to say in plain English that KKK are a conservative identity politics group.

You are ignoring the KKK's history; much of it which was tied to the Democratic party. You're also ignoring that the Democrats used to be the party of the white working class, many who supported the KKK in the south. If you're going to call the KKK conservatives would you also say that the Nazis were left-wing because their name contained socialist in it?

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

They were and are (legacy) more influential than a bunch of juvenile misfits on a hippie college campus. Maybe the latter will get there, but not just yet. And there was no widespread support for the incident except by other fringe loonies. By mainstream sources, it was generally seen as embarrassment at best.

No they are not. The KKK has no influence on campus whatsoever. I have given you two examples where a radical left-wing idea was tolerated and even supported by the university administration and can give you more. When was the last time a KKK rally was held at a state college campus and was supported by the university?

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

How convenient for your argumentation that The Establishment™ somehow doesn't include conservatives. :rolleyes: Is that really what you believe?

The establishment is mostly left leaning: the media, academia, NGOs and big tech all swing left. The so-called centre goes further and further to the left as time progresses. An example is the idea of illegal immigration. 10 years ago nobody talked about open borders and now a significant fraction of the Democratic party likes the idea. They don't say it openly but any attempt to enforce existing immigration laws is attacked as being racist.

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

Face it; most of the police and Wall Street swing right and as do NGOs and the US supreme court.

Police - Yes they swing right

Wall Street - Not really they are generally globalist and have donated more to Hillary Clinton than to Trump

NGO - Wrong they mostly swing left

SCOTUS - They were left-leaning for decades and is only until recently that the tide began to turn

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

Congress normally doesn't allow SCOTUS justices who are openly partisan, but that doesn't mean they are totally apolitical.

You mean like Sonia Sotomayor, who once stated that the SCOTUS was where policy was made? Your assertion sounds nice in theory but in practice each congressman/woman prefers a SCOTUS who will interpret the constitution according to his/her agenda.

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

You defend the KKK as much as I defend the WaPo. That's your own logic, so what's wrong with it? 

Where do you get this bullshit? You said the WaPo was more credible than the Washington Times and I said that the KKK has no influence on campus compared to the leftist outrage mobs. Once again if you are going to make intentionally false accusation please tell me when was the last time a state university supported a KKK rally on campus?

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

That is not my definition, though many types of politics could become identity politics. Identity politics is not exclusively about race or gender, those are just more obvious. Your folly, due to your dogmatism, is to cast this as unique to Leftists™. Conservatives clearly engage in this too. You've declared yourself on Team Red, and seem to believe they can do no wrong.

When was the last time a mainstream conservative said something along the lines of excluding some students and staff on campus because of their skin colour?  The mainstream left also supports Black Lives Matter. Although this organization has a wonderful message in theory and the issue of police brutality must be addressed, some of their leaders' actions and words have been outright racist. In your own country a BLM leader, Yusra Khogali, tweeted "Plz Allah give me the strength not to kill/cuss these men and white folks here today". Why didn't other BLM members condemn her tweet and say this is not what the org stands for? How do you fight racism with more racism? And these are the type of people the left are supporting?

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

A British millennial who's never even been to the US and repeats almost verbatim the talking points of the  American conservative blogosphere... Imagine that. Power of the internet, eh?

Where did you get the information that I have neither been nor lived in the US. You are making some pretty convenient assumptions.

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

It's telling that you don't deny it.

Why would I deny it when you are simply making up lies about me? If you want to talk about conspiracy theories, let's start with the Russians. They are everywhere and influence everything that doesn't go according to plan. Correct?

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

You've given a couple loaded examples, drenched with your own partisan language, to present a naive "Leftist™ Elitist Conspiracy Bad, Right Underdog Heroes Good". (Nevermind that Republicans currently control the US and Tories currently control the UK -- it's a cabal of elitist Leftists™ who are pulling all the strings.)

I've given you several pieces of evidence even though you offered me nothing. And yet you choose to bury your head in the sand like some sort of ostrich. Also do you really believe that Theresa May is a Tory in anything other than name?

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

Quite rich coming from someone so dogmatic she cannot even plainly acknowledge the KKK as a conservative identity politics group without trying to move goalposts, and instead defends them as being better than a bunch of disorganized juvenile SJWs.

You accuse me of moving goal posts but you are making utter lies about me by saying that I'm defending the KKK.

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

Have you considered that you simply aren't convincing?

Let's ignore the fact that more people in this conversation agree with me than with you and that I have presented evidence for my claims whereas you have none. Let's just look at the fact that you have to resort to lies about me to prove your point. Where did I defend the KKK as being better than a bunch of "juvenile" SJWs? I simply mentioned that the latter is more influential on campus.

 

10 hours ago, alderhill said:

It's not a false narrative, it's an incomplete narrative. It is certainly sloppy journalism, as I've already written about. But that's where the easy money is these days, 1 hour news cycles, twitter-rage headline grabbers, click-bait, etc. This very obviously includes popular conservative newsmedia, with no shortage of examples. These days, journalistic ethics aren't rewarded or valued as much (nor even believed in, as by our dour baltic friend with the mind of an ATM).

It is a false narrative and you know it. The MSM said that the lads surrounded the Native American elder and didn't let him move whereas the longer video showed that he approached them. One narrative showed the lads as aggressors and Mr. Phillips as the victim which is what most MSM networks wanted and the latter showed the lads being racially abused by a black supremacist group and then simply being observers when they were approached. Quite a difference?

 

11 hours ago, alderhill said:

I've already explained (a strong reason) why in earlier posts, as have others at the beginning of this thread. I honestly don't feel like repeating myself any more. One can only engage in so much fruitless internet arguments with strangers in a lifetime, don't you think? At the start, I had assumed you might be more open-minded, but that was clearly wrong. Your position is staunchly ideological, and yes, tinged (if not soaked) with conspiracy theory. I don't see much reason to continue here.

Your explanation is flawed and ignores the laws of probability. Why do these viral stories that end up being wrong almost always swing in the direction of the narrative that the network is trying to tell? You seem frustrated in not being able to explain this.

 

11 hours ago, alderhill said:

Unless they speak English (or whatever else),

Many of them do. Most international business is conducted in English.

 

11 hours ago, alderhill said:

VPNs are heavily restricted (they've realized it's bad for business to ban them completely). In Russia, VPNs are overseen by the FSB. China controls them in a more technocratic way. Have you never heard of the Great Firewall?

I'm in IT security and I know that many of the popular VPNs (ExpressVPN, NordVPN, IPVanish, Torguard, HideMyAss) function in Russia and China. You simply have to connect to a none Russian/Chinese server. And I actually found some content with a Russian IP address on YouTube which was restricted in the EU. Not bad huh?

 

However in many cases there is no need for VPN. I ran a quick test using Russian servers (can't speak for North Korea) and was able to gain access to CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, Guardian, NYTimes, WSJ and a few other Western newspapers online (none being restricted). There's also TOR. Do an experiment: connect to a Russian or Chinese IP address via VPN and see if you can access TOR. I have found that both TOR through VPN and VPN through TOR work in both countries. You also use VPN over VPN.

 

11 hours ago, alderhill said:

How much Turkish, Chinese or Russian newsmedia do you consume? You have internet access, so why not? 
 

If it's about something with regards to Russia and China and it's in English why not?

 

11 hours ago, alderhill said:

Quite shameful of you to blithely dismiss actions of authoritarian governments (and miss a chance to swipe at communists! -- what kind of "conservative" are you!?). This kind of dodge from someone who pretends to champion liberty... It's amazing the twisted pretzel logic you will adopt because you've latched on to an ideology and are literally incapable of any criticism of it. No, not your Team Red heroes, never, it's the others, the Leftists™ who are Identitarian Ideologue Puppetmasters! Whatever credibility you might have had is... poof.

Now you're growing more and more frustrated. It's quite amusing actually how many lies you have to come up with in order to prove your point. Tell me where do I dismiss the actions of these authoritarian governments? I thought we were talking about Internet access not engaging some sort of virtue signalling competition as to who can come up with the best insults for Russia and China.

 

11 hours ago, alderhill said:

Still waiting for you to prove intent against Zimmerman. Yawn.

Can you prove what I'm thinking right now and what my motives are? Didn't think so. But that's besides the point as this fits Wikipedia's definition of fake news because the tape misled the public and MSNBC did briefly benefit politically. Here's my previous point that you didn't address

 

Quote

Did they admit their mistake before or after they were caught? Also it's funny the mistake was in tune with the views of the network. Yes I know this is circumstantial evidence but it happens much too often. You're not going to convince anybody that it was an honest mistake.

 

So are you going to reply back with the attempt of discussing these issues or will you continue to make up lies and imply that I'm a racist by claiming that I defend the KKK?

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wicca dear - the KKK as far as I am aware were actually Democrats, not right wingers. There's an entire rabbit hole of the American Civil War I'm not fully aware of though.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, J0ker said:

You're using a classic Whataboutist argument here.  You're talking about 4chan, which cannot be considered mainstream media, but the argument is about mainstream media networks like CNN, MSNBC etc.  What somebody writes on an internet forum cannot be held to the same standard as something released by a major news network.

No, I'm telling you where doxxing started, in case there is any attempt to pin it on Leftists™ (as has been happening in this thread: everything bad is Leftist™!). This is why each individual needs to have high standards. When something is tolerated or done on a small scale, it will eventually be so on a large scale. It's wrong to call for violence against anyone, much less minors, whatever their supposed transgression. The problem is that some people can't take a joke, and some people don't mean it as a joke. Whatever the solution, I prefer a hands off approach.

 

7 hours ago, J0ker said:

Tweets are good evidence of what kind of reaction a certain story, particularly a falsified one from a MSM, entails.  Although I think Twitter can be toxic, I don't think it's the main problem here.  The problem was that certain "trustworthy" news sources spat out a false narrative, not just incomplete but clearly false, which caused Twitter outrage. 

I do think it's the nature of Twitter, and of online communication in general. It's easy to spew bile at anonymous screen-names, and talk to people in a way which you would (probably) never do in person.

 

This while internet communication thing is, what? 20 years old now? Social media even newer. I think we're still sorting it out.

 

7 hours ago, J0ker said:

Had the MSM done their homework better, this never would have become a story.

Agreed. Unfortunately, they are forced to compete with high-turnover news cycles. Fewer and fewer people pay for long-form investigative journalism. It's a quicker buck to muck-rake, and it makes people feel they're at the cutting edge of "happenings" when their favourite reality-recycler tells them about it first.

 

7 hours ago, J0ker said:

The message is clear:  certain news sources, despite what Microsoft Newsguard wants you to believe, simply aren't trustworthy anymore.

Some never were trustworthy.

 

7 hours ago, J0ker said:

outright false and deliberately misinterpreted.  For example you claim that WiccaChica is defending the KKK and authoritarian regimes which is utter nonsense.  You're using whataboutist arguments and

Just giving them a taste of their own medicine. I'm glad you can see it's utter nonsense, though.

 

7 hours ago, J0ker said:

you're also saying that the KKK are more influential on university campuses than the left is which is absurd. 

Pulling a Cathy Newman now?

 

Nowhere did I say KKK are more influential on campuses, nor was that was the argument. Of course it would be absurd. Read from the beginning (if you can stomach it). WiccaChica claims that some radical fringe SJWs are more influential (where exactly was never specified, presumably on society "in general") than the KKK ever were -- now THAT is absurd. If she cares to make a clarification, she is welcome to do so. The KKK and white supremacist racist identity politics were far more influential than any SJW kiddos on their insulated safe space campus environment. There is a danger there though, I'd agree.

 

Further, the KKK and the Left™ are not equivalents.

 

7 hours ago, J0ker said:

Before you try to pull the same argument on me, you should know that I went to elementary school, high school and university in Canada and traveled quite frequently to the States.  If you want to have a reasonable discussion bring it on but you're going to use the same false statements against me as you did against WiccaChica or balticus then you have lost all credibility.

Actually, I'm winding this down, but thanks for the offer.

 

6 minutes ago, jeremytwo said:

Wicca dear - the KKK as far as I am aware were actually Democrats, not right wingers. There's an entire rabbit hole of the American Civil War I'm not fully aware of though.

That's been covered earlier ITT. It is gross historical revisionism to claim the KKK were Democrats (a popular speech point of certain conservatives, hoping their audiences are too dumb to know any better).  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

20 hours ago, alderhill said:

Face it; most of the police and Wall Street swing right and as do NGOs and the US supreme court.

 

Wall Street and the finance sector in general contribute more to Democrats than Republicans.    Manufacturing and resource sectors lean Republican.   Finance and media lean toward the Democrats.

 

That is US Politics 101, but to be fair, most Democratic Party supporters still have not come to terms with the fact that since the 1990s, they have clearly been Wall Street's go to party.   

 

You can look at campaign contributions to see which party is favored by Wall Street.   Do you have any reasons to support the idea that NGOs swing right?

 

20 hours ago, alderhill said:

You defend the KKK as much as I defend the WaPo. That's your own logic, so what's wrong with it?  

 

Apples and bananas.   WC and I both claim the KKK (while abhorent) is irrelevant.   You claim that the WaPo journalistic standards are better than other publications.    Is English your second language behind French by chance?

 

 

 

20 hours ago, alderhill said:

It's tough being a teenager these days. Not only is it harder to test out being an adult and make mistakes without cameras everywhere, but there's a permanent digital record of it too.

 

It is tough being a media outlet these days.    Even though it is not necessary to apologize after pushing false narratives demonizing a group of school kids and glorifying a serial grifter, the public, people who became journalists or PR specialists probably feel a bit filthy when they finish their workday.  

 

20 hours ago, alderhill said:

 

As I'm sure you know, doxxing entered the mainstream via 4chan, 

 

There is one person on this site who posts stuff from 4chan, 8chan, qchan, whatever.   I believe it is a pied piper organization and that a storm, dynamite revelation, next shoe to drop, next domino to dominate is as much of a waste of time as believing for more than 2 years that the FBI is going to haul Trump away in handcuffs and Mueller is just waiting to play his hand.  (in the mean time, Trump will probably appoint his third SCOTUS)

 

20 hours ago, alderhill said:

Is that really your logic, Tsarina Arithmetic? Money obviously makes a difference, but in this case, ultimately, other things matter too (if you fetishize money above all else, as you do, you will not understand this). 

 

No lobby seriously hopes to influence all of Congress. No need to try when you can be successful in other (additional) ways. You seem to have a caricaturized view of lobby groups. The NRA are not the largest lobby, but they are successful enough at what they do. That's all that really matters. It's not a pissing contest.

 

You are so confused that you are contradicting your original assertions and regurgitating the points i made as if they are your own.   Hilarious.

 

My argument has consistently been that money is not the issue and the people who "fetishize" money have not done the simple calculations which would reduce their claim to the absurd.  

 

There are actually people who believe in the second amendment in the US independent of how much $ the NRA gives them.  

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, WiccaChica said:

Some surely would? Like 1 in 100 maybe? You're just speculating. Once again I know of no conservatives that support the KKK. Do you?

Have you already forgotten the points you made? That's the problem when you simply react to what's in front of your nose, rather than have a coherent argument to make. Each time, your past argument shifts.

 

The argument was that conservatives don't do identity politics, which is patently false. You're (still) trying to move the goalposts by shifting it to "conservatives today", and now apparently to "conservatives today, and on campus". These were not constraints from the beginning. By trying to make it one now, you are moving the goalposts. You've dug yourself in a hole, and still trying to dig your way out.

 

Quote

You are ignoring the KKK's history; much of it which was tied to the Democratic party.

We've already discussed this ITT, and why that is a gross simplification. Read back. 

 

The "KKK are Democrats" thing is literal "fake news", and anyone seriously arguing it is showing how little they understand history, on several fronts. That includes you, right now.  

 

Quote

The KKK has no influence on campus whatsoever.

That was never the argument.

 

Quote

I have given you two examples where a radical left-wing idea was tolerated and even supported by the university administration and can give you more.

Do you even understand the evidence you're using? Evergreen College is a special case, like really special. It's their MO. Have you ever even listened to Bret Weinstein? Likening this to all universities is clearly false.

 

Quote

The establishment is mostly left leaning: the media, academia, NGOs and big tech all swing left.

Nope. That's the kool-aid you've drunk, but that doesn't make it true. You will have to prove it if you want to claim this.

 

Seeing murky enemies everywhere is a sign of mental illness, you know that right? 

 

Quote

The so-called centre goes further and further to the left as time progresses. An example is the idea of illegal immigration. 10 years ago nobody talked about open borders and

Someone with such a shaky grasp of how time progresses ("KKK are Democrats!") shouldn't be making arguments about what people thought in the past. Really, stop before you embarrass yourself further. 

 

Quote

now a significant fraction of the Democratic party likes the idea.

Prove it.

 

Quote

They don't say it openly

How very convenient for your line of reasoning. 

 

Quote

but any attempt to enforce existing immigration laws is attacked as being racist.

There you go exaggerating again. Simply not true. People are deported every day and you never hear about it.

 

Quote

SCOTUS - They were left-leaning for decades and is only until recently that the tide began to turn

Just plain NOPE. I'm not sure where you're getting this info from, but it's mistaken.

 

Quote

in practice each congressman/woman prefers a SCOTUS who will interpret the constitution according to his/her agenda.

Yea, that's what I said. SCOTUS appointments have always had an element of politics to them. But in the legal universe, it's not really about right or left, nor in the way you think about it.

 

Quote

When was the last time a mainstream conservative said something along the lines of excluding some students and staff on campus because of their skin colour? 

Are you implying that the Evergreen college protesters were somehow mainstream? False equivalency again.

 

Quote

In your own country a BLM leader, Yusra Khogali, tweeted "Plz Allah give me the strength not to kill/cuss these men and white folks here today".

Yup, she's nuts. 

 

Quote

Why didn't other BLM members condemn her tweet and say this is not what the org stands for?

Better to ask them. They're the identity politics group, after all. 

 

Quote

And these are the type of people the left are supporting?

No. Your problem, still, is that you're a dogmatic ideologue. Anything you don't like is Leftist™ and anything Leftist™ you don't like. Having such a starkly binary view of the world is not good for you. It's also just wrong most of the time. You're trying to bang a square peg into a round hole.

 

Quote

Where did you get the information that I have neither been nor lived in the US.

Feel free to correct me at any time. 

 

Nothing you say I haven't already heard from various conservative blogosphere or so-called IDW (not that it's conservative), etc. Do you have any original ideas?

 

Quote

You are making some pretty convenient assumptions.

Then you must feel in good company. :) 

 

Quote

They are everywhere and influence everything that doesn't go according to plan. Correct?

Nah, but they do try. Their foreign intelligence strategy involves an active campaign of dezinformatsiya. That's how it is in 2019. Though Russia still does fly-by-night poison dart operations, it's more effective to focus on disrupting the digitized lived we've come to live. Russian meddling is more active where it's more likely to work, particularly within Russia itself, or the former commie states of Eastern Europe. 

 

Of course, Western intelligence do this too in their own way.

 

Quote

I've given you several pieces of evidence even though you offered me nothing.

Your conspiracy theory is yours to prove. 

 

Quote

Let's ignore the fact that more people in this conversation agree with me than with you

Oooooops, but there you said it anyway.

 

I'm not bothered, truth is not a popularity contest. If you need the ego boost, take it. Frankly, I don't think any thread newbies are willing to slog through the miles of muck at this stage. I tire of it myself, because as I said, it's by now pretty clear that you're an ideologue incapable of arguing in good faith. Those who agree with you seem to be of a similar conspiracy theorist bent. Yet others are probably wondering why I'm feeding the trolls. 

 

Quote

I simply mentioned that the latter is more influential on campus.

No, you did not simply claim that, you did not say "on campus", and the focus was not specifically "on campus" either. 

 

Are the KKK an example of conservative identity politics "in general"? Yes or no? It's quite easy. That was the argument from the beginning.

 

Quote

It is a false narrative and you know it.

All narratives are subjective. Narratives make the medicine go down in a more delightful way, but it's the facts that matter.

 

So, it was not factual, because it was an incomplete "narrative", based on sloppy journalism, and a greater desire to feed instant-gratification machines and push advertising revenue, etc. You're assuming they knew what the facts were, but instead chose to lie, and so did it on purpose, with a mischievous hand rub all the while. Prove it. Well you can't, because it doesn't work like that. You believe this was intentional deceit in service of a larger conspiracy theory aim to ... _____________ (fill in you conspiracy theory here). 

 

I don't agree, I think reality is more complex.

 

Quote

Why do these viral stories that end up being wrong almost always swing in the direction of the narrative that the network is trying to tell?

It's obvious, and pretty mundane. Why do conservative media's narratives do the same?

 

Quote

You seem frustrated in not being able to explain this.

I assure you, I'm not "frustrated" by anything here. Not sure why you keep using that word. I find it something between amusing and incredible (that people actually believe this kind of tinfoil hat stuff). 

 

Quote

Many of them do. Most international business is conducted in English.

Middle/upper classes can usually speak some English, many involved in trade management or tourism will usually know (some) English as well. Those two things tend to overlap. That's about it. It's sort of popular among younger people, poor education systems notwithstanding. English is not widespread among the general populace from my experiences.

 

Quote

I'm in IT security and I know that many of the popular VPNs (ExpressVPN, NordVPN, IPVanish, Torguard, HideMyAss) function in Russia and China.

As I said, it is realized that blocking them entirely is bad for business. They're mostly used by expats and managers of business. 

 

Quote

You simply have to connect to a none Russian/Chinese server. And I actually found some content with a Russian IP address on YouTube which was restricted in the EU. Not bad huh?

Great, I've done that too. Doesn't refute anything I said.

 

Quote

However in many cases there is no need for VPN. I ran a quick test using Russian servers (can't speak for North Korea) and was able to gain access to CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, Guardian, NYTimes, WSJ and a few other Western newspapers online (none being restricted).

Gosh, you really are thick sometimes. We're not talking about Western newsmedia in these countries, we're talking about the domestic situation as comparable to here. Now find independent Russian or Chinese or Turkish media. Start a blog or youtube channel criticizing Putin, Erdogan or Xi, (IN THOSE COUNTRIES, obvs.) and see what happens. 

 

Russia's attempts to crackdown on VPNs and other "uncontrollable" internet techs, as well as try to introduce its own Great Firewall equivalent are not a secret. 

 

Silence on China? Says it all. 

 

Quote

If it's about something with regards to Russia and China and it's in English why not?

Not an answer. I'm not asking about hypotheticals, I'm asking: do you. I don't expect an honest answer from you, but the likely answer is no. There you go. 

 

Quote

Tell me where do I dismiss the actions of these authoritarian governments?

You rail against Leftist™ control of newsmedia, as if you have no freedom, but when presented with actual censorious authoritarian elitist states, you wave it off because you can still access NYTimes using your VPN while sitting pretty in Germany. Either you're ignoring a mountain of evidence out of deceit, or you are truly ignorant. You'll be happy to know, I assume the latter.

 

Keep digging yourself out of your hole. 

 

Quote

Can you prove what I'm thinking right now and what my motives are? Didn't think so.

If not, then I wouldn't be able to prove defamation. That's how it works. What makes you think you know better than the entire Common Law legal system? (I can already guess your answer... It begins with an L and ends with a ™.)

 

Quote

Here's my previous point that you didn't address

I asked you a long time ago to provide criticism of conservative newsmedia. I also asked if you were capable of it. Crickets chirped. 

 

Hard to apologize for things before you're aware of making a mistake. Luckily Newsbusters and Breitbart were on the case! B) I've said what I have to say on the Zimmerman case. NBC says it was an accident. While I expect them to say that, I also see no convincing evidence (from you or elsewhere) to make me think otherwise.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, WiccaChica said:

Some surely would? Like 1 in 100 maybe? You're just speculating. Once again I know of no conservatives that support the KKK. Do you?

 

You are ignoring the KKK's history; much of it which was tied to the Democratic party. You're also ignoring that the Democrats used to be the party of the white working class, many who supported the KKK in the south. If you're going to call the KKK conservatives would you also say that the Nazis were left-wing because their name contained socialist in it?

 

No they are not. The KKK has no influence on campus whatsoever. I have given you two examples where a radical left-wing idea was tolerated and even supported by the university administration and can give you more. When was the last time a KKK rally was held at a state college campus and was supported by the university?

 

The establishment is mostly left leaning: the media, academia, NGOs and big tech all swing left. The so-called centre goes further and further to the left as time progresses. An example is the idea of illegal immigration. 10 years ago nobody talked about open borders and now a significant fraction of the Democratic party likes the idea. They don't say it openly but any attempt to enforce existing immigration laws is attacked as being racist.

 

Police - Yes they swing right

Wall Street - Not really they are generally globalist and have donated more to Hillary Clinton than to Trump

NGO - Wrong they mostly swing left

SCOTUS - They were left-leaning for decades and is only until recently that the tide began to turn

 

You mean like Sonia Sotomayor, who once stated that the SCOTUS was where policy was made? Your assertion sounds nice in theory but in practice each congressman/woman prefers a SCOTUS who will interpret the constitution according to his/her agenda.

 

Where do you get this bullshit? You said the WaPo was more credible than the Washington Times and I said that the KKK has no influence on campus compared to the leftist outrage mobs. Once again if you are going to make intentionally false accusation please tell me when was the last time a state university supported a KKK rally on campus?

 

When was the last time a mainstream conservative said something along the lines of excluding some students and staff on campus because of their skin colour?  The mainstream left also supports Black Lives Matter. Although this organization has a wonderful message in theory and the issue of police brutality must be addressed, some of their leaders' actions and words have been outright racist. In your own country a BLM leader, Yusra Khogali, tweeted "Plz Allah give me the strength not to kill/cuss these men and white folks here today". Why didn't other BLM members condemn her tweet and say this is not what the org stands for? How do you fight racism with more racism? And these are the type of people the left are supporting?

 

Where did you get the information that I have neither been nor lived in the US. You are making some pretty convenient assumptions.

 

Why would I deny it when you are simply making up lies about me? If you want to talk about conspiracy theories, let's start with the Russians. They are everywhere and influence everything that doesn't go according to plan. Correct?

 

I've given you several pieces of evidence even though you offered me nothing. And yet you choose to bury your head in the sand like some sort of ostrich. Also do you really believe that Theresa May is a Tory in anything other than name?

 

You accuse me of moving goal posts but you are making utter lies about me by saying that I'm defending the KKK.

 

Let's ignore the fact that more people in this conversation agree with me than with you and that I have presented evidence for my claims whereas you have none. Let's just look at the fact that you have to resort to lies about me to prove your point. Where did I defend the KKK as being better than a bunch of "juvenile" SJWs? I simply mentioned that the latter is more influential on campus.

 

It is a false narrative and you know it. The MSM said that the lads surrounded the Native American elder and didn't let him move whereas the longer video showed that he approached them. One narrative showed the lads as aggressors and Mr. Phillips as the victim which is what most MSM networks wanted and the latter showed the lads being racially abused by a black supremacist group and then simply being observers when they were approached. Quite a difference?

 

Your explanation is flawed and ignores the laws of probability. Why do these viral stories that end up being wrong almost always swing in the direction of the narrative that the network is trying to tell? You seem frustrated in not being able to explain this.

 

Many of them do. Most international business is conducted in English.

 

I'm in IT security and I know that many of the popular VPNs (ExpressVPN, NordVPN, IPVanish, Torguard, HideMyAss) function in Russia and China. You simply have to connect to a none Russian/Chinese server. And I actually found some content with a Russian IP address on YouTube which was restricted in the EU. Not bad huh?

 

However in many cases there is no need for VPN. I ran a quick test using Russian servers (can't speak for North Korea) and was able to gain access to CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, Guardian, NYTimes, WSJ and a few other Western newspapers online (none being restricted). There's also TOR. Do an experiment: connect to a Russian or Chinese IP address via VPN and see if you can access TOR. I have found that both TOR through VPN and VPN through TOR work in both countries. You also use VPN over VPN.

 

If it's about something with regards to Russia and China and it's in English why not?

 

Now you're growing more and more frustrated. It's quite amusing actually how many lies you have to come up with in order to prove your point. Tell me where do I dismiss the actions of these authoritarian governments? I thought we were talking about Internet access not engaging some sort of virtue signalling competition as to who can come up with the best insults for Russia and China.

 

Can you prove what I'm thinking right now and what my motives are? Didn't think so. But that's besides the point as this fits Wikipedia's definition of fake news because the tape misled the public and MSNBC did briefly benefit politically. Here's my previous point that you didn't address

 

 

So are you going to reply back with the attempt of discussing these issues or will you continue to make up lies and imply that I'm a racist by claiming that I defend the KKK?

 

Apropos of nothing whatsoever, it's quite the coincidence how similar your arguments and posting style (not to mention your purported language skills) are to a certain member of this forum who claims to be quite the trickster.

 

5c4db6b922008_2s5kjf1.jpg.77c28b37b06d8f

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, El Jeffo said:

a certain member of this forum who claims to be quite the trickster.

 

Roger Stone is on TT???

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, El Jeffo said:

Apropos of nothing whatsoever, it's quite the coincidence how similar your arguments and posting style (not to mention your purported language skills) are to a certain member of this forum who claims to be quite the trickster.

 

 

 

Ooooohhh!!!    More forum intrigue.   Bots, double-posters and tricksters everywhere.     There is a hidden agenda behind every post and userid.     LMAO

 

 

 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, balticus said:

 

Ooooohhh!!!    More forum intrigue.   Bots, double-posters and tricksters everywhere.     There is a hidden agenda behind every post and userid.     LMAO

 

 

 

 

Shut up, SA. Nobody's buying the old shit you're selling.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, fraufruit said:

 

Roger Stone is on TT???

If I meant Stone, I'd have said "ratfucker".

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, El Jeffo said:

Shut up, SA. Nobody's buying the old shit you're selling.

You are not really paranoid if everyone is plotting against you.    LMAO

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, balticus said:

You are not really paranoid if everyone is plotting against you.    LMAO

And you're not a sockpuppet just because someone has their hand up your ass.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, El Jeffo said:

And you're not a sockpuppet just because someone has their hand up your ass.

 

If I encounter someone who wants to know what it's like to have their head or someone's hand up their a$$, I will send them your way so they can benefit from your profound experience.    

 

Smooch.   

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2019, 1:48:43, El Jeffo said:

Apropos of nothing whatsoever, it's quite the coincidence how similar your arguments and posting style (not to mention your purported language skills) are to a certain member of this forum who claims to be quite the trickster.

 

5c4db6b922008_2s5kjf1.jpg.77c28b37b06d8f

Paranoid?

 

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, El Jeffo said:

No, astute. 

You seemed like a nice fellow when you answered my initial questions on the forum but if you're going to be a jerk I won't bother pursuing this matter.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Have you already forgotten the points you made? That's the problem when you simply react to what's in front of your nose, rather than have a coherent argument to make. Each time, your past argument shifts.

 

The argument was that conservatives don't do identity politics, which is patently false. You're (still) trying to move the goalposts by shifting it to "conservatives today", and now apparently to "conservatives today, and on campus". These were not constraints from the beginning. By trying to make it one now, you are moving the goalposts. You've dug yourself in a hole, and still trying to dig your way out.

Quite the contrary. You had to resort to making false statements about me in order to prove your point.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

We've already discussed this ITT, and why that is a gross simplification. Read back. 

 

The "KKK are Democrats" thing is literal "fake news", and anyone seriously arguing it is showing how little they understand history, on several fronts. That includes you, right now.  

 

You did it again. You've deliberately misquoted me. I mention that the KKK had ties to the Democratic and you quoted it as me saying "the KKK are Democrats". And you talk about "moving goalposts".

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Do you even understand the evidence you're using? Evergreen College is a special case, like really special. It's their MO. Have you ever even listened to Bret Weinstein? Likening this to all universities is clearly false.

More moving goalposts. I've given you two examples and now you claim that I don't understand the evidence that I'm using.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

That was never the argument.

Let me rephrase. The KKK have negligible influence on anything in the present era.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Nope. That's the kool-aid you've drunk, but that doesn't make it true. You will have to prove it if you want to claim this.

 

 

 

What good would proof do when you would outright dismiss it?

 

Quote

Seeing murky enemies everywhere is a sign of mental illness, you know that right? 

I might say the same thing for you.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Someone with such a shaky grasp of how time progresses ("KKK are Democrats!") shouldn't be making arguments about what people thought in the past. Really, stop before you embarrass yourself further.

More misquotations...

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Prove it.

I don't know why I bother.

 

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/illegal-immigration-democrats-open-borders/

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Just plain NOPE. I'm not sure where you're getting this info from, but it's mistaken.

Just plain YES. The SCOTUS' decisions have been sliding progressively leftwards for decades. Some of those decisions I agree with and others not.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Are you implying that the Evergreen college protesters were somehow mainstream? False equivalency again.

I have posted two examples and would give you more if I was convinced it would be worthwhile. So yes this is becoming more and more mainstream.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

No. Your problem, still, is that you're a dogmatic ideologue. Anything you don't like is Leftist™ and anything Leftist™ you don't like. Having such a starkly binary view of the world is not good for you. It's also just wrong most of the time. You're trying to bang a square peg into a round hole.

That's false. There are "Leftist™" points of view that I agree with (LGBTQ rights, decriminalization of abortion, opposition to the church's influence in politics). Your problem, still, is that your arguments thrive on false assumptions, untrue statements and dismissal of evidence.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Feel free to correct me at any time. 

 

Nothing you say I haven't already heard from various conservative blogosphere or so-called IDW (not that it's conservative), etc. Do you have any original ideas?

 

Corrected.

 

My opinions are my own whether they be left leaning or right leaning. What I don't do is make dishonest statements about the person I'm talking to.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Your conspiracy theory is yours to prove.

I'm not talking about any conspiracy theories. That's the subject that you brought up. However I'll wait on the MSM to prove how the Russians are everywhere.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Yet others are probably wondering why I'm feeding the trolls.

There we have it. I'm a troll then? Conspiracy theory maybe?

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Are the KKK an example of conservative identity politics "in general"? Yes or no? It's quite easy. That was the argument from the beginning.

The KKK have more in common with the "Left™" than with conservatives. The KKK believes white people should have special privileges and the "Left™" supports positive discrimination. Mainstream conservatives, however, do not believe in racial discrimination negative or "positive".

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

All narratives are subjective. Narratives make the medicine go down in a more delightful way, but it's the facts that matter.

 

So, it was not factual, because it was an incomplete "narrative", based on sloppy journalism, and a greater desire to feed instant-gratification machines and push advertising revenue, etc. You're assuming they knew what the facts were, but instead chose to lie, and so did it on purpose, with a mischievous hand rub all the while. Prove it. Well you can't, because it doesn't work like that. You believe this was intentional deceit in service of a larger conspiracy theory aim to ... _____________ (fill in you conspiracy theory here). 

 

I don't agree, I think reality is more complex.

It is the facts that matter and the fact is that the public was misled with false information. Fake news. False narrative. Call it what you will.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

It's obvious, and pretty mundane. Why do conservative media's narratives do the same?

So you agree that it was no accident that this story was steered in a certain direction? Just as long as I agree that the conservatives do the same?

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

I assure you, I'm not "frustrated" by anything here. Not sure why you keep using that word. I find it something between amusing and incredible (that people actually believe this kind of tinfoil hat stuff).

It seems you are. False statements about me, misquotations and calling me thick. You can do better.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

As I said, it is realized that blocking them entirely is bad for business. They're mostly used by expats and managers of business.

To the best of my knowledge there are no technical restrictions on Russian nationals accessing any of those VPNs. In other words any Russian should be able to use them.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Great, I've done that too. Doesn't refute anything I said.

My point was that foreign media outlets can be accessed from Russia even without a VPN.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Gosh, you really are thick sometimes. We're not talking about Western newsmedia in these countries, we're talking about the domestic situation as comparable to here. Now find independent Russian or Chinese or Turkish media. Start a blog or youtube channel criticizing Putin, Erdogan or Xi, (IN THOSE COUNTRIES, obvs.) and see what happens. 

 

Russia's attempts to crackdown on VPNs and other "uncontrollable" internet techs, as well as try to introduce its own Great Firewall equivalent are not a secret. 

 

Thanks for calling me thick but I'm on the thinner side actually.

 

In any case you are guilty of moving goalposts right now. This was what I said.

Quote

Russians and Chinese have access to foreign media via Internet.

So we are talking about accessing Western newsmedia from these countries.

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

You rail against Leftist™ control of newsmedia, as if you have no freedom, but when presented with actual censorious authoritarian elitist states, you wave it off because you can still access NYTimes using your VPN while sitting pretty in Germany. Either you're ignoring a mountain of evidence out of deceit, or you are truly ignorant. You'll be happy to know, I assume the latter.

 

Keep digging yourself out of your hole.

The subject of our discussion was whether or not Western media creates fake news, not Russia or China. Saying that those countries score low on the freedom index is trivial so why would I repeat it? In North Korea people who didn't cry hard enough after Kim's death were detained. Notice what you're doing? You are criticizing me for not criticizing Russia and China hard enough. You've also told a lie about how I dismiss the actions of these governments. So is it really me who's digging a hole?

 

On 1/27/2019, 12:05:23, alderhill said:

Hard to apologize for things before you're aware of making a mistake. Luckily Newsbusters and Breitbart were on the case! B) I've said what I have to say on the Zimmerman case. NBC says it was an accident. While I expect them to say that, I also see no convincing evidence (from you or elsewhere) to make me think otherwise.

What mistake was that? Whatever it was. I didn't make dishonest statements about you.

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now