29
   

Rising fascism in the US

 
 
Lash
 
  -1  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 08:57 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Whenever news sources are completely blocked, it should serve as a Red Flag.

It is better to allow citizens to see what’s being written and offer competing opinions, evidenced facts, and data because shutting citizens off from news sources is suspect.

Journalists, agencies, individuals, and countries who bring damning truths to light are discredited by lies, heavily attacked with vicious, relentless propaganda. The most powerful psyop masters in the world know how to make people like you defend their work.

Dreadfully effective.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 09:01 am
@Lash,
It's not a news source it's a propaganda outlet.

That's why Fox News is banned over here, although nobody watched it.

You want to drown out the truth with lies.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  -1  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 09:20 am
10, maybe 15 years ago on these pages, most people agreed that the best world order would be multipolar. Putin agrees. I agree.

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/world/putin-says-formation-of-multipolar-world-irreversible/2627320

The US is engaged in a proxy war at great expense to Ukrainians, Europeans, Russians, and likely additional victims whose situations are currently being suppressed by our political spy community, in order to maintain a failing grasp on our criminally acquired hegemony.

Sigh. Sadness on all sides, but see what’s in front of you.
___________________

Excerpt:

The Russian president on Thursday called "irreversible" the formation of a multipolar world, saying the domination of one country or a group of countries on the global stage is “dangerous.”

Addressing the participants of the St. Petersburg International Legal Forum, Vladimir Putin said: “Russia supports this process, and its position is that this democratic, more just world order should be based on mutual respect, trust, and the generally accepted principles of international law and the UN Charter.”

“A multipolar system of international relations is now being formed. It is an irreversible process; it is happening before our eyes and is objective in nature,” Putin told this year’s plenary session, themed “Law in a Multipolar World.”

He disagreed with the idea of the law's incapability to adequately respond to the problems and challenges of today.

“Crises happen not because the law is faulty, but because of attempts to replace the law with dictate, and international standards with the national jurisdiction of certain states or groups of states in a deliberate refusal to follow essential legal principles – justice, conscientiousness, equality and humanity. These are not just legal ideals, but values that reflect the diversity of our civilization,” he said.

According to Putin, some states are not ready to accept losing their supremacy on the international stage and are striving to preserve the unjust unipolar model.

“Under the guise of what they call order based on rules, and other questionable concepts, they try to control and direct global processes at their own discretion, and hold to a course of creating closed blocs and coalitions that make decisions for the benefit of one country, the United States of America,” he said.

He added that "the natural rights of others" in international relations are being ignored, the fundamental principle of indivisibility of security is being used selectively, and unilateral, illegitimate sanctions reached an unprecedented scale.


‘Russia open to constructive dialogue’

Russia remains open to constructive dialogue, including on ensuring strategic stability, preserving agreements on the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and improving the situation in arms control, he stressed.

Crucial issues like the climate agenda, fighting famine, providing stability in food and energy markets, and fair rules in international trade and competition need joint efforts, he noted.

“All of these areas require appropriate and flexible legal regulation and meticulous cooperation. With this approach, we could avoid crises such as the current one in Donbas that is happening to protect its residents from genocide – and there can be no other definition for the Kyiv regime’s actions than a crime against humanity,” he said.

Putin promised that Russia will continue to create "a more democratic and just world where the rights of all peoples are guaranteed and mankind’s cultural and civilizational diversity is preserved."

"I am confident that by consistently following international law and joining our efforts, it is possible to resolve the most difficult problems that the world is facing and to provide for the stable, sustainable and progressive development of all states. Both practicing lawyers and jurists can and should bring a significant contribution to the recreation of the authority of law, strengthening its legal institutions and rebuilding trust in international relations," he said.

revelette1
 
  1  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 09:23 am
Quote:
In one of the 49 tweets posted by Shellenberger on December 19, 2022, one even suggested that a financial motive may have influenced Twitter's decision-making.

Referring to an email between Twitter executives, Shellenberger tweeted: "The FBI's influence campaign may have been helped by the fact that it was paying Twitter millions of dollars for its staff time."

The email, purportedly sent to former Twitter official Jim Baker, said: "Jim, FYI, in 2019 SCALE instituted a reimbursement program for our legal process response from the FBI.

"Prior to the start of the program, Twitter chose not to collect under this statutory right of reimbursement for the time spent processing requests from the FBI.

"l am happy to report we have collected $3,415,323 since October 2019! This money
is used by LP for things like the TTR and other LE-related projects (LE training, tooling,
etc.)."

The email was sent in February 2021, four months after the release of the New York Post's first exposé of the Hunter Biden laptop details.

Shellenberger's speculative suggestion—that the FBI's "influence campaign may have been helped" by the millions of dollars it paid—was interpreted as fact by some observers.

Many public figures, including Elon Musk, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH), Donald Trump Jr., and Fox News Host Sean Hannity, all tweeted messages claiming summarily that the FBI paid Twitter to censor content.

Quoting Shellenberger's thread, Elon Musk tweeted that "government paid Twitter millions of dollars to censor info from the public" in a post receiving more than 440,000 engagements in two days.

As Shellenberger highlights, and as Newsweek has previously stated, the FBI was in contact with Twitter and social media companies in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election.

The bureau and other agencies warned these companies of potential misinformation campaigns that could disrupt the election, citing fears of interference from foreign actors.

However, the claim that the FBI effectively paid Twitter to censor content, based on the available evidence, is misleading.

Firstly, the Shellenberger thread does not provide sufficient evidence of a quid pro quo relationship between the FBI and Twitter, only the contact that the bureau had with the social media company and a "reimbursement" mentioned separately.

The thrust of Shellenberger's tweets is that communications between the FBI and Twitter around the time of the Hunter Biden story (and the warnings it received prior to its publication) could be interpreted as an attempt to influence the company to suppress the story.

This, combined with the money the company was said to have received, ultimately leads Shellenberger to suggest that the "FBI's influence campaign" was made successful through financial incentives.

However, there are also details that show executives at Twitter were not unduly pressured by the bureau either.

Even one of Shellenberger's tweets states that former Twitter official Yoel Roth told the FBI, after it asked the company to change data sharing arrangements, that it would need to use "normal search warrant" processes to do so.

Later in the thread, Shellenberger suggests Roth had sided with security advice, attaching an email from him that detailed some of the company's response to the Hunter Biden story, recommending warning + deamplification."

The email also stated that the "key factor informing our approach is consensus from experts monitoring election security and disinformation."



NW
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  -2  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 09:51 am
Newsweek is deep in the bag for DNC/FBI.
Frank Apisa
 
  4  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 10:30 am
People like Lash are the true danger to freedom and democracy in America. They are the bottom-feeders spreading their venom as far and wide as they can. Luckily, most Americans recognize them for what they are...and pay little attention to their bullshit.

revelette1
 
  3  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 11:05 am
@Lash,
https://cdn.vectorstock.com/i/1000x1000/45/59/falling-alice-vector-11134559.webp
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 11:30 am
@Lash,
Lash wrote:
Whenever news sources are completely blocked, it should serve as a Red Flag.
RT was blocked by the German media regulator, a lot earlier than the EU-wide ban.
RT DE did not have a licence, at least not for Germany. They had also simply not applied for one here. Because this would hardly have been possible, since according to the principle of state neutrality, broadcasters financed, hosted or owned entirely by the state are not permitted in Germany.

By the way: the Russian government ordered the closure of the Moscow office of Deutsche Welle (DW) and revoked the accreditations of DW staff in Russia.
Red flag?
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 11:31 am
@Walter Hinteler,
On a completely different level, the EU's ban on all RT offerings and the state-run Russian radio and news portal Sputnik is ongoing. The European Commission decided on this at the end of February after the attack on Ukraine as part of the sanctions against Russia. The ban covers not only the broadcasters themselves, including RT Deutsch, but also technical service providers - i.e. internet platforms such as Youtube, pay-TV broadcasters or cable TV services such as Sky, Vodafone or Kabel Deutschland. They are banned from broadcasting RT or Sputnik content "or enabling, facilitating or otherwise contributing to its broadcast, including by means of transmission or distribution by cable, satellite, IP-TV, internet service providers, internet video-sharing platforms or applications, whether new or pre-installed", the EU's Official Journal of 2 March states. In addition, all broadcasting licences or authorisations as well as transmission and distribution agreements will be suspended - at least as long as the war lasts.

For unlike RT DE, the English-language RT channel RT UK, for example, had an official licence to broadcast in the UK. But this is no longer of any use to it either.

However, it remains controversial whether such broadcasting bans make sense.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  -2  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 12:05 pm
And the other shoe drops.
The CIA was involved, actively pressuring Twitter (and other named news media and other social media) to identify domestic dissenters to their narrative as Russians.

Everyone who wants to know the truth can now see.

Disgusting.

57 tweets linked to primary documents of evidence
Matt Taibbi

As we knew, the Russian boogeyman was created to cover US crimes.
Covid next.

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1606701397109796866?s=46&t=TqUosHnSb9I6DYUKLo9FuQ
Lash
 
  -1  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 12:34 pm
Item 34. with copy of the primary document.
Twitter Staff being pressed to make connections to Russia.

34. “Found no links to Russia,” says one analyst, but suggests he could “brainstorm” to “find a stronger connection.”

—————————

The misinformation was never Russian. It was always the US’ spy agencies, fabricating cover to protect DNC corruption as they worked together to throw and overturn an election. I knew it.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 12:53 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
Luckily, most Americans recognize them for what they are...and pay little attention to their bullshit.
Many people are actually intelligent enough to recognise disinformation, distorted facts and fake news as such.

But when sensationalism and naivety are coupled with prejudice and limited knowledge ...

0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  -1  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 01:20 pm
@hightor,
Why do you feel your source is more honest than any other source? It's been proven repeatedly that some of the media is in the government's pockets. I don't think your source is precisely trustworthy.

But, you enjoy your nothingburger. Keep eating them and you will starve eventually.
McGentrix
 
  0  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 01:24 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

People like Lash are the true danger to freedom and democracy in America. They are the bottom-feeders spreading their venom as far and wide as they can. Luckily, most Americans recognize them for what they are...and pay little attention to their bullshit.


what an idiotic thing to say, Frank. You should be embarrassed of yourself.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 01:27 pm
@Frank Apisa,
The only person who should be ashamed 8s the creep who lionises the sexual assault of children.
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  2  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 03:50 pm
@Lash,
Quote:
It is astonishing that you think you can speak to this subject when you haven’t even read the primary documents associated with the subject. Many of your errors and miscalculations would be cleared up if you had.
Anyone can speak on the subject of biased reporting, because biased reporting has consistent traits that can be observed/articulated. Same for people who consent to believing in biased reports - they do/don't do/don't ask things that allows them to buy into the biased report.

If you can actually/specifically articulate anything wrong with what I said - feel free to do so, rather than throw vaguities out there. And this time, please try and address what I actually said - your previous attempt continually addressed things I didn't say.
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  2  
Sat 24 Dec, 2022 04:22 pm
@Lash,
Quote:
The CIA was involved, actively pressuring Twitter (and other named news media and other social media) to identify domestic dissenters to their narrative as Russians.
What I read from your link was a couple of CIA agents came along to the Foreign Influence Task Force meetings, which included Social Media platforms (with worldwide reach) + concerns of Foreign influence in the elections. Wouldn't a CIA presence be virtually mandatory in such a taskforce?

And 'finding it odd that the FBI frame it in terms of breach of Twitter Policy' ? That's not odd at all. There is likely no law allowing the FBI to direct them to moderate/remove the tweet, or if there is a law allowing such - it is so cumbersome that the FBI has chosen to go via TOS policy breaches. Neither case is unusual. This is how I expect it would work in a world where Twitter still needs to abide by the law + its own policies.

Again, this is the problem with biased reporting - they don't give you the information you need to make an informed decision, and just leave it open to a persons pre-existing beliefs to skew how the person interprets it. Proper explanation is boring. It is a very clever way to make people want to read their tweets more.
hightor
 
  4  
Sun 25 Dec, 2022 05:13 am
@McGentrix,
Quote:
Why do you feel your source is more honest than any other source?

That's not the point.
Quote:
It's been proven repeatedly that some of the media is in the government's pockets.

It's been proven repeatedly that some of the media spread misinformation (Hannity on the election, for example) and it's been shown repeatedly that some reporters like to spin the facts of stories to fit them into a particular narrative.
Quote:
I don't think your source is precisely trustworthy.

Except that it refers the same facts – it simply presents them in a way which demonstrates that the actors involved may have had different motivations than those alleged by some reporters.
Quote:
Keep eating them and you will starve eventually.

Okay, and you keep ingesting the crap fed to you by conspiratards and see how far you get – the Durham Report, Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, the Red Wave. I think I'd prefer starvation to a steady diet of disinformation and paranoia.

0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Sun 25 Dec, 2022 05:20 am
@vikorr,
Apparently the fact that the government followed the law and paid the media organizations for the costs of information retrieval is seen as "fascism". But forcing a private company to violate its terms of use and print lies is seen as the essence of democracy.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  4  
Sun 25 Dec, 2022 05:25 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

People like Lash are the true danger to freedom and democracy in America. They are the bottom-feeders spreading their venom as far and wide as they can. Luckily, most Americans recognize them for what they are...and pay little attention to their bullshit.


what an idiotic thing to say, Frank. You should be embarrassed of yourself.


It was not idiotic, McG...it was truthful.

No embarrassment for me at all.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.16 seconds on 11/29/2024 at 05:52:55