Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Jade Helm Conspiracy Non-TerroristsFollow

#177 May 05 2018 at 3:56 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
539 posts
Been around for 15ish years. Read the forum now and then. Don't log in very often. I enjoy the discussions and I remember this thread. Thanks for asking.
#178 May 05 2018 at 4:00 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,750 posts
This answer is acceptable! Thank you for contributing, it is more than I can lay claim to!
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#179 May 05 2018 at 7:55 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
21,003 posts
I think this may be the solution to the dying forum, not new blood, but zombie posters.

By the five elements of Zanzabar, I summon thee Saboruto!

Edited, May 5th 2018 8:55pm by Allegory
#180 May 05 2018 at 8:13 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,750 posts
In the name of LobsterJohnson, Usagi, Imperial Ninja, Hallertau Nee Soracloud, and PikkoPots, I feed your spirits into the forum, granting it further life and zeal!
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#181 May 05 2018 at 8:24 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,273 posts
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
In the name of LobsterJohnson, Usagi, Imperial Ninja, Hallertau Nee Soracloud, and PikkoPots, I feed your spirits into the forum, granting it further life and zeal!


____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#182 May 07 2018 at 7:03 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,640 posts
Chicken arise!
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#183 May 07 2018 at 10:07 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Ooo hey some freshly recycled hell on a Monday.

Excellent.

Smiley: popcorn
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#184 May 08 2018 at 4:40 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,380 posts
Necro aside, is this really a "news" thing? I'm particularly amused by the article labeling of Abbot as somehow connected to Trump. In 2015. Before his candidacy had really even started, and nearly a year before he won the GOP nomination. Um... Someone trying really really really hard to fit a square peg in a round hole maybe?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#185 May 08 2018 at 10:11 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
21,003 posts
Gbaji wrote:
I'm particularly amused by the article labeling of Abbot as somehow connected to Trump. In 2015. Before his candidacy had really even started, and nearly a year before he won the GOP nomination.

Then you're amused at your own invention. The article didn't label Abbot as connected to Trump, the article quoted Manny Garcia as calling Abbott a Trump Republican, which he is as they have mutually expressed support for each other. I don't know what your time traveling nonsense is about, were you perhaps checking out the latest doctor who episode and got the two mixed up?

Edited, May 8th 2018 11:12pm by Allegory
#186 May 08 2018 at 11:13 PM Rating: Good
***
1,088 posts
gbaji, you just got called out. Don't even bother responding, your credibility just got destroyed.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
#187 May 09 2018 at 6:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Kavekkk wrote:
gbaji, you just got called out. Don't even bother responding, your credibility just got destroyed.

Are you a time traveler from the distant past?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#188 May 09 2018 at 8:14 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,640 posts
One time, this guy handed me a picture of him, he said "Here's a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture is of you when you were younger. "Here's a picture of me when I'm older." "You son-of-a-bitch! How'd you pull that off? Lemme see that camera ... What's it look like?"
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#189 May 09 2018 at 7:20 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,380 posts
Allegory wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
I'm particularly amused by the article labeling of Abbot as somehow connected to Trump. In 2015. Before his candidacy had really even started, and nearly a year before he won the GOP nomination.

Then you're amused at your own invention. The article didn't label Abbot as connected to Trump, the article quoted Manny Garcia as calling Abbott a Trump Republican...


This is a distinction without a difference. The person (people, in this case) who wrote the article chose to include this quote in the article. Let's mention Russians manipulating public opinion, tie that to the alt-right, make sure to tie the Governor to Trump, and then insinuate that this directly led to "Russian meddling" in the 2016 election. And you really don't get the point of all of this? It certainly isn't about retelling something that happened over 2 years ago, and that has no impact on anything at all right now. It's 100% about using this as a means to gin up the perception of "Russian collusion".

Abbott could be described in many ways, and likely was by numerous sources that were contacted for this story. They chose to put that quote in, and I'm certain it wasn't at all random or accidental. Heck. Why do you suppose Addikeys choose to post a link to the article in the first place. It's because of the claim that the Russians were behind it, right? So yeah, the decision to include a quote that mentioned someone who wasn't even remotely involved in the events of the time which are supposed to be the thrust of the article, but just happens to be a target for Russian collusion now, isn't a coincidence. Hence why I commented on it.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#190 May 09 2018 at 7:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Why do you suppose Addikeys choose to post a link to the article in the first place. It's because of the claim that the Russians were behind it, right? [...] but just happens to be a target for Russian collusion now, isn't a coincidence. Hence why I commented on it.

I realize that you don't get your news from anywhere and think ignorance is a virtue but the whole Russian Troll/Twitter-Bot/Facebook thing is larger than just Trump.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#191 May 09 2018 at 7:56 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
21,003 posts
Gbaji wrote:
This is a distinction without a difference.

No, it really is different. When you are quoting someone, you are not necessarily advocating for their ideas. Just as when you quoted me you didn't agree with my comment.

The article quoted numerous people. It quoted Hayden, the former CIA and NSA director who made the announcement. It quoted Abbott, the governor who the made the decision and is the subject matter of the article. It quoted a prominent Republican, former governor Rick Perry. It quoted a prominent Democrat, the deputy executive director of the Texas Democratic Party. Seems to me they quoted all the relevant people involved and then got political takes from both sides.

Your complaint is made all the more trivial because you aren't complaining that any of this isn't true. You're complaining that they chose to report a truth that is politically inconvenient for you. And it in doing so you've drawn more attention to the issue that it would have otherwise earned. I was content to make third rate jokes about the wholly original topic of the forum dying, but now you've drawn me into discussing a topic you think doesn't merit discussion.
#192 May 09 2018 at 8:09 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,380 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Why do you suppose Addikeys choose to post a link to the article in the first place. It's because of the claim that the Russians were behind it, right? [...] but just happens to be a target for Russian collusion now, isn't a coincidence. Hence why I commented on it.

I realize that you don't get your news from anywhere and think ignorance is a virtue but the whole Russian Troll/Twitter-Bot/Facebook thing is larger than just Trump.


Really? And yet, virtually every news source makes a concerted effort to tie it to Trump in some way. Just like this one did.

No. I get that the Russians have been "meddling" in our political processes for decades. I've posted about this many times. Specifically in the context that "this stuff has been going on all along, yet, only when Trump comes along suddenly it's a national emergency that must be dealt with right now!!!. I'm the one who's been saying that if this is really about Russian meddling as a whole (or... gasp!... foreign meddling as a whole), why are we only focusing on the 2016 election, and whether or not the Trump campaign, or someone near it, or associated with Trump, at any point in the past or future (apparently) had a conversation or relationship with anyone from Russia.

Remember when I pointed out that the much talked about intelligence report on Russian influence in our elections included a ton of historical information going back decades, and mostly talked about Russian propaganda funneled through their Russian Times online media? Remember when I pointed out that the same report listed the topics covered and positions advocated for, and how they resemble the planks in the Democratic Party platform? Remember when I pointed out how at least one prominent liberal radio pundit was payed by said Russian propaganda outlet to promote these positions?

Remember how your response to all of this wasn't "Wow. That's interesting that this whole Russian meddling thing is far bigger than the Trump campaign"? Remember how your response was actually to ignore what I said, and instead just insist that I hadn't actually read the intelligence report at all?

Yeah. I remember that. So yeah, I don't put a lot of stock in you saying this is "larger than the Trump campaign", when you have been more or less ignoring anything and everything that doesn't tie directly to the Trump campaign. Yes. I know that. Do you? More importantly, are you actually willing to discuss any aspect of foreign governments influencing us that *isn't* tied to Trump or the GOP? Unless you are, then your statement is meaningless.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#193 May 09 2018 at 8:30 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,380 posts
Allegory wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
This is a distinction without a difference.

No, it really is different. When you are quoting someone, you are not necessarily advocating for their ideas. Just as when you quoted me you didn't agree with my comment.


A quote in an article is intended to either support something being asserted in the article, or refute it. It's not rocket science to figure out which is which in this case. The article is clearly about Russian involvement in the Jade Helm issue. It's in the freaking title.

Quote:
The article quoted numerous people. It quoted Hayden, the former CIA and NSA director who made the announcement. It quoted Abbott, the governor who the made the decision and is the subject matter of the article. It quoted a prominent Republican, former governor Rick Perry. It quoted a prominent Democrat, the deputy executive director of the Texas Democratic Party. Seems to me they quoted all the relevant people involved and then got political takes from both sides.


Um... It quoted Hayden, making the assertion which the article is about: Russian meddling in the Jade Helm issue. It did not quote Abbott about this assertion though. It quoted statements Abbott made back during the event itself. The purpose of that quote wasn't to give Abbott's "side" on the assertion, but to provide information to the reader about what the asserted Russian meddling caused to happen (Abbott's statement about the Jade Helm operation made back in 2015). Similarly, the quote from Rick Perry is *not* in response to the assertion being made either. It's an historical quotes from the time period of the original events, and only about those events. Then we get the quote from the Democrat, but this one is about the current assertion, and adds the connection to Trump.

There are only two sources of quotes that actually have to do with the assertion. One by Hayden, making the assertion regarding Russian meddling leading to the Jade Helm scare. And another by the Texas Democratic party guy commenting on said assertion and tying it to Trump (well, Abbott to Trump, but the objective is just to mention Trump in an article about Russian meddling).

If you thought the quotes in this article were actually evenly balanced, you thought completely wrong.

Quote:
Your complaint is made all the more trivial because you aren't complaining that any of this isn't true.


Um. Yes I am. This quote:

“It doesn’t take an intelligence expert to see that Trump Republican Greg Abbott calling the Texas National Guard on the U.S. Military was downright idiocy,”

Is completely fallacious. Whatever support Abbott may have later given to Trump, he was not a "Trump Republican" when he did the action being talked about in this quote. He's applying a label to an action that occurred long before the label could legitimately be applied (even if it is accurate today). The clear point of calling Abbott a "Trump Republican" is to connect Trump to Abbott's actions during Jade Helm. And in an article where the point is to assert that said actions were the result of Russian influence, it's hard to not realize the real objective is to reinforce the connection between Trump and "Russian meddling".


Quote:
You're complaining that they chose to report a truth that is politically inconvenient for you.


No. I'm complaining because it's politically false. Abbott was not a "Trump Republican" when he called the Texas [State] Guard on the US Military. Pay attention to the freaking tense in the statement. Again, one has to assume that in the course of interviewing Garcia, the authors had a number of quotes they could have included in this article. They chose this one. Why do you suppose they did that? To get a quote of Abbott being called an idiot? I doubt it. It's because he mentioned Trump. That's seriously it.

Quote:
And it in doing so you've drawn more attention to the issue that it would have otherwise earned. I was content to make third rate jokes about the wholly original topic of the forum dying, but now you've drawn me into discussing a topic you think doesn't merit discussion.


Silly me. I'lll "draw attention" to bad/biased media reporting whenever I see it. This is one of those examples. The fact that either can't see it or are refusing to see it only reinforce why it's so important to point out this kind of poor journalism whenever it occurs.

What made you think I don't think this topic merits discussion? I do think so. The difference is that I think that the "topic" is media bias and manipulating the words in an article to create or support false narratives, presumably in an effort to influence public perception. It's not like I'm afraid that more people will read this article or something. I want people to do this, because most journalists are a bit better at hiding their associative writing. This is a great example of someone doing this that should be quite apparent to anyone reading it.

Well, anyone without blinders on, anyway.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#194 May 09 2018 at 9:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Why do you suppose Addikeys choose to post a link to the article in the first place. It's because of the claim that the Russians were behind it, right? [...] but just happens to be a target for Russian collusion now, isn't a coincidence. Hence why I commented on it.

I realize that you don't get your news from anywhere and think ignorance is a virtue but the whole Russian Troll/Twitter-Bot/Facebook thing is larger than just Trump.
No. I get that the Russians have been "meddling" in our political processes for decades.

Uh huh. And yet here you are just sure as sugar that Addikeys MUST have thought it was because of Trump, yadda yadda...
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#195 May 09 2018 at 10:27 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
539 posts
Given the right-wing hysteria that fomented when those annual military exercises were approaching, coupled with the very relevant ongoing Russia investigation, it was interesting to see some additional context so long after the fact. Questions such as "why was the right so riled up" and "who was behind that propaganda" seems apropos given the political machinations over the past few years. Since none of those allegations came to fruition, I find it scary that hostile foreign powers like Russia can have such an influence on so many in our country and we may have no idea. This is just another example, Trump's questionable rise to power notwithstanding.
#196 May 09 2018 at 10:33 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
21,003 posts
You know, you can totally have the "Trump Republican" thing. We'll disregard their mutually expressed support for each other. We'll say Abbott is just an ordinary Republican. A republican who played into the hand of a foreign government that has systematically worked to weaken the U.S. which it did through no small part by taking advantage of conservative paranoia and gullibility.
#197 May 10 2018 at 12:13 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
3,750 posts
Allegory wrote:
You know, you can totally have the "Trump Republican" thing. We'll disregard their mutually expressed support for each other. We'll say Abbott is just an ordinary Republican. A republican who played into the hand of a foreign government that has systematically worked to weaken the U.S. which it did through no small part by taking advantage of conservative paranoia and gbajibility.

FTFY
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#198 May 10 2018 at 10:31 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,640 posts
gbaji wrote:
The difference is that I think that the "topic" is media bias and manipulating the words in an article to create or support false narratives, presumably in an effort to influence public perception.
They get paid for what you do for free.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#199 May 10 2018 at 5:53 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,380 posts
Addikeys wrote:
Given the right-wing hysteria that fomented when those annual military exercises were approaching, coupled with the very relevant ongoing Russia investigation, it was interesting to see some additional context so long after the fact. Questions such as "why was the right so riled up" and "who was behind that propaganda" seems apropos given the political machinations over the past few years.


Sure. And other questions might be "what other areas of our social conversations/outrage have also been created or exaggerated by foreign sources"? Have you considered that it's not likely that the Russians are *only* pushing false media narratives over the internet to "paranoid conservatives"? As long as there are people who respond emotionally to social media sources, without checking those sources, and without taking a bit of time to analyze the likelihood of the conspiracy theories being espoused, we'll be vulnerable to this sort of thing. It's something that really isn't avoidable in a society with free speech and something like the internet that allows for massive dissemination of speech.


Quote:
Since none of those allegations came to fruition, I find it scary that hostile foreign powers like Russia can have such an influence on so many in our country and we may have no idea. This is just another example, Trump's questionable rise to power notwithstanding.


Again though, as Joph observed earlier (but doesn't seem to be fairly applying), this goes well beyond Trump and the previous election cycle. This is something that outside sources (and inside ones) have been doing for years. Decades if we look at larger methods, but with the rise of social media, the ability to latch on to an idea or opinion and the appear to support it with massive numbers of tweet, posts, etc from false accounts is pretty trivially easy to do. I suspect that any socially sensitive area is a likely target for this kind of thing. So yeah, Clinton stumbling gets enhanced with social media speculations about her health. Trumps financial past gets a similar treatment. It would not surprise me if a number of the posts that the liberal leaning folks on this forum have made were "joined in" by similar methods from foreign sources. Remember the whole "OMG! Trump was friends with this guy who raped a 13 year old"? You don't think that Russian bots retweeted that a gazillion times? Pretty much anything that is sensational in nature will be subject to this.

The wrong response to this is to also turn it into a "my side versus their side" issue. That's just playing into their game. The correct response is to have a healthy dose of skepticism about any such stories, doubly so if they are sensational in nature, and call for an emotional response rather than a rational one. And yeah "The military is going to declare martial law and arrest us all!" is sensational. But so is "Starbucks habitually racially discriminates against blacks". Want to bet that there hasn't also been bots tweeting that story as well? Or others in a similar vein? How much of the whole "let's tear down statues of confederate soldiers" do you suppose was fueled by the same methods? Anything that pits "sides" against each other in our culture is a fair target for this right?

Assuming they're on any "side" is failing to grasp the real situation. I'm going to channel **** and say that the only way to win is not to play. Sadly, no matter how many sane and rational folks try to wave off these sorts of things, there always seem to be far more who immediately jump on the current sensational story. Again, as long as that's the case, this tactic will work.

Edited, May 10th 2018 5:02pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#200 May 10 2018 at 5:59 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,380 posts
Wait!? WOPR is censored? I can't make a freaking War Games reference now? Sheesh!

Oh. But to follow my train of thought. Has it occurred to some of you that the current investigation of Trump is a "win" for the Russians as well? They manipulated an entire "side" our our country, including tons of media outlets into buying into a conspiracy theory of Manchurian Candidate nature, and managed to get an investigation launched which has hampered us far more than anything else they've done.

Don't look at this as directional. Their objective is to disrupt our system. And it looks like they found very fertile ground in this case. It's probably not a bad idea to look in the mirror when you start assuming it's just foolish paranoid conservatives who fall for this kind of thing. Foolishness doesn't just follow partisan lines.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#201 May 10 2018 at 6:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Has it occurred to some of you that the current investigation of Trump is a "win" for the Russians as well?

Sure. For instance, the Russians have manipulated the GOP into convincing a significant portion of the US population that our nation's premiere law enforcement agency is actually a "Deep State" puppet regime bent on tearing down the government. An act and mindset that will have ramifications for years to come.

Which, one would think, would make investigating and hopefully identifying and stopping this sort of thing much more important.

Edited, May 11th 2018 12:38pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 0 All times are in CDT