2
v8power 2 points ago +2 / -0

No worries!

My observations of Trump aren't really due to "digging." Extracting oneself from the political circus and stopping the binary thinking of supporting a political team is more important. The details are then obvious.

Like you say, all we can do is watch what actions the politicians take (or don't take).

2
v8power 2 points ago +2 / -0

I didn't expect you'd have the answer - just wanted to point out nobody is asking the question as well as how seemingly easy it is to get the info (with funds).

Apparently, similar data can even be purchased from cell phone tower operators without data directly from the phone.


Regarding Trump, he made some bold claims about election fraud but never released any direct proof. That's interesting.

He also called supporters to DC for J6. The end result was less Republicans challenged the electors, a bunch of people got locked up, some people died, impeachment #2, a recent Committee, a year of Democrats pounding the story, and potentially years more pounding by Democrats to come. He recently suggested pardoning some of the prisoners in 2025 if he runs and wins the Presidency in 2024. That means he literally expects a number of them to remain jailed for 3 more years. This all speaks a lot, too.

I'm not sure that suggests he's a pawn, but something is going on.

2
v8power 2 points ago +2 / -0

OK, but what's the source of the data? Was it data collected directly from Google/Apple or a third party that made an app that collected such data?

1
v8power 1 point ago +1 / -0

Those are some great questions. My answers are kind of long-winded, and yes, I can show you a conspiracy to create an online echo chamber by the Democrats that has been insidiously scrubbed from the Internet in some sickening ways.

Yes, please do!

That is the deception!

You're right that the Daily Beast writer could have been greatly inflating his effect, but I have another example: Q could have started as one person on 4chan, so it seems true that one person could fool millions of conservatives online and get away with it.

I wasn't suggesting that conservatives are easier to dupe than liberals, though. It just seems that online communities formed to help maintain a monopoly of fooling liberals (e.g. left-leaning fact checkers).

Another example of this monopoly is Google: Dr. Robert Epstein claims Google search results in 2016 and 2020 were biased toward liberal candidates.

Here's Dr. Epstein clearly saying he found bias: https://www.foxnews.com/transcript/dr-robert-epstein-on-googles-ability-to-affect-the-outcome-of-elections

And, here's an online "fact check" claiming it was just theoretical (while referring to Epstein as "Mr." instead of "Dr."): https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/19/us/politics/google-votes-election-trump.html

1
v8power 1 point ago +1 / -0

So, in sum, debate each topic separately, don’t assume because they disagree with you in X that their opinion is invalid on Y.

That's all good, but consider the person who consistently makes arguments with which you don't agree. With each subsequent "bad" argument, aren't you increasingly more likely to avoid engaging the next topic with that person?

2
v8power 2 points ago +4 / -2

To add numbers to this...

From https://www.engineeringclicks.com/melting-point-of-steel/

[The Twin Towers used] ASTM A36 structural steel, which has a melting point of 1510 OC (2750 OF). If you’re looking for the jet fuel flame temperature, it’s about 1000 OC, not enough to melt the steel but enough to weaken it substantially.

From https://www.infra-metals.com/resources/astm-structural-steel-standards/

A36 steel can maintain its strength at temperatures ranging up to 650°F [343°C].

2
v8power 2 points ago +2 / -0

The term fake news should be limited to organizations that pretend to be journalistic in order to make the information they publish appear more credible.

That was my use of "Fake News." The definition I use is "news that deceives." ...regardless of it appearing "journalistic" or not. That covers traditional news organizations as well as alternatives.

From the article you linked:

The mainstream news may not always be accurate on everything but there is a lot of it and they get the main points right. For conservatives there is no trusted media.

It sounds like conservatives are easier to fool en masse by one person on the Internet whereas MSM has a monopoly on fooling liberals (including an army of liberal fact-checkers to squash misinformation).

That kind of framing just blows my mind and raises a bunch of questions:

Why does MSM focus on controlling what liberals think? Is it easier or harder to do? Is it important to control the narrative to liberals for some reason? Did it just work out that way like some gigantic echo chamber?

2
v8power 2 points ago +2 / -0

Adams had something very powerful to say ... about getting framing out first

Yeah.

I also liked Adams' "two movies one screen" concept, which describes how biases can get two people to form polar opposite ideas of what they just saw.

Combining the two, you can see how Fake News could divide people.

Later in the movie, we're given an example of how two groups got past that by dumping the middle man (Fake News) and talking with one another.

1
v8power 1 point ago +1 / -0

the main message came from an extraterrestrial race

ET knows his stuff!

https://youtu.be/mGA_uH0-n28?t=35

Thanks, ET!

2
v8power 2 points ago +2 / -0

I liked the documentary, too.

I'm somewhat suspicious of this packaged group of "new media" stars being promoted.

I think Cernovich would agree as he showed his own reporting using "fake news" tactics in the film.

What I took away is that it's our responsibility to question/process multiple sources instead of being a pure consumer of one source.

3
v8power 3 points ago +3 / -0

In the context of showing such a film to someone who believes the news represents truth (with minor exceptions), perhaps it's best to start off a bit slower than jumping right into COVID and election subjects.

1
v8power 1 point ago +1 / -0

What do the Russian sheeple think of the Ukraine spectacle? Do they care? Or do they just worry more about catching COVID or not?

2
v8power 2 points ago +2 / -0

It appears Flynn doesn't want to associate his name with them rather than the other way around because they explicitly seem to want it. Going to this page, we see they link to an article Flynn wrote on a different site:

https://flagofficers4america.com/resources

Archived in case it changes: https://web.archive.org/web/20211218215251/https://flagofficers4america.com/resources

It seems rather like a scam since they title the link as a "General Flynn Exclusive" leaving it up to the reader to assume if it was "exclusive" to them or not.

I just happened to notice that they also have an article attributed to "Retired General B.B. Bell." Of course, it also links off site. So, I checked their letters for "Bell" and didn't find that he signed them, either. Big surprise.

Was this whole thing set up to get personal information from retired generals (at the very least their email address) or just scam the public or both?

2
v8power 2 points ago +2 / -0

I showed where Flynn made statements with the same action (e.g. vote for Trump, Milley resign) or was at least in line with what was in the letters. Any other ideas as to why he may not have signed?

1
v8power 1 point ago +1 / -0

I just saw this: https://twitter.com/MaxAbrahms/status/1481400456257708035

How are the Ukraine and COVID topics playing out in Russia right now (trying to figure out how to process that propaganda)?

1
v8power 1 point ago +1 / -0

The pre-election letter only had one action: vote for Trump. Here he is recommending that action in an op-ed. He could have added his name.

The potentially most dangerous suggestion in the one letter asks for sanctions against China. But here is Flynn at an anti-CCP event saying we're at war. I'll give you that maybe he personally didn't agree with sanctions, but "at war" is kind of a level beyond, no?

Regarding Afghanistan, here he is saying the following after specifically calling out General Austin:

After Afghanistan, I believe we can no longer rely on neocon senior military leaders...

Here he is in a video asking for Milley to resign not even related to the Afghanistan debacle.

It seems he's not far off from the recommended action of the letter.

Something isn't adding up.

0
v8power 0 points ago +1 / -1

Because he is running a psy op.

Why does participating in a psy op prevent one from signing the letters when he goes on speaking tours to say similar things?

His daddy was on Council of Foreign Relations.

A quick search didn't yield any success on verifying this. Where did you learn this?

4
v8power 4 points ago +5 / -1

Damn! Talk about a Kodak moment.

Well, he is just like Assange and Snowden: nothing to hide, apparently.

2
v8power 2 points ago +2 / -0

The COVID numbers are going to get so high over the next couple weeks, we'll be done afterwards.

It's reported a number of elected Dems have announced retirement.

1
v8power 1 point ago +1 / -0
  1. The pandemic will be over in a couple weeks.
  2. Republicans win majority in both Houses this year.
view more: Next ›