|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Nov 20, 2021 6:29:43 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Apr 28, 2022 6:23:19 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Apr 28, 2022 18:13:53 GMT -8
Well, since you mention Pravda..Russian disinformation media really digs Tucker Carlson. trumpy also digs putin. Would you like to read some tweets praising the mother and baby killer by trumpy? |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on Apr 28, 2022 19:23:35 GMT -8
There will always be a fight between the government and opposition groups over information and the policing of thought. This existed during the cold war when communists in America were jailed for their beliefs. Government organizations are responsible for the dissemination of information, through agencies that have been established to create 'de facto' truths. The FDA and EPA are two good examples. The information that they spread is assumed by most to be factual, even if this is not the case. This isn't a liberal/conservative thing either, it cuts both ways. Government agencies are often compromised by revolving door politics that gives corporations too much influence in the manufacturing of truths that best fit their narratives. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Apr 29, 2022 9:23:32 GMT -8
There will always be a fight between the government and opposition groups over information and the policing of thought. This existed during the cold war when communists in America were jailed for their beliefs. Government organizations are responsible for the dissemination of information, through agencies that have been established to create 'de facto' truths. The FDA and EPA are two good examples. The information that they spread is assumed by most to be factual, even if this is not the case. This isn't a liberal/conservative thing either, it cuts both ways. Government agencies are often compromised by revolving door politics that gives corporations too much influence in the manufacturing of truths that best fit their narratives. We have all survived an entire lifetime of outright lies, lies of omission, half truths, exaggerations, logic taken to illogical extremes, baseless claims, etc, etc, and this has been happening since humans could utter words. All modes of communications are guilty (~tabloids, magazines, news (papers, shows) movies, books, TV shows, TV commercials, political ads, documentaries, internet memes, billboards, sign-spinners, social media posters, fact checkers, (this list could go on ad nauseum)). And while most of these outlets are commercial or private in nature, our Government has been one of the major perpetrators of offering "information" as they see fit (from all political spectrums, just as you have pointed out). As for the purveyors of this Government information, that is why we have elections - to pick who we want offering that "information". The point isn't that all organizations (both Gov and Commercial) or individuals have spun their own truths (or lies as others would claim), it is that we now have people that would want Government to have the power to squelch the free speech rights of some yet retain the right of unfettered free speech for themselves. The desire to have the Government punish or censor your speech is the real problem. It is, in fact, unconstitutional. IMO no argument that says we must allow Government to censor us for our own good is valid (and spare me the yelling "Fire" in a Movie Theater false equivalent). In the recent past, the Commercial outlets that have censored free speech seemingly just offer you the opportunity to start your own outlet if you didn't like their rules. So now that the natural reaction to that arrogance has occurred (See Twitter, Truth Social, Rumble, etc), the desire by some for Government to step in and rule the "Truth" is telling. The premise is strictly an exercise in people hoping to protect or forward politically partisan advantages and nothing more. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on Apr 29, 2022 11:19:55 GMT -8
There will always be a fight between the government and opposition groups over information and the policing of thought. This existed during the cold war when communists in America were jailed for their beliefs. Government organizations are responsible for the dissemination of information, through agencies that have been established to create 'de facto' truths. The FDA and EPA are two good examples. The information that they spread is assumed by most to be factual, even if this is not the case. This isn't a liberal/conservative thing either, it cuts both ways. Government agencies are often compromised by revolving door politics that gives corporations too much influence in the manufacturing of truths that best fit their narratives. We have all survived an entire lifetime of outright lies, lies of omission, half truths, exaggerations, logic taken to illogical extremes, baseless claims, etc, etc, and this has been happening since humans could utter words. All modes of communications are guilty (~tabloids, magazines, news (papers, shows) movies, books, TV shows, TV commercials, political ads, documentaries, internet memes, billboards, sign-spinners, social media posters, fact checkers, (this list could go on ad nauseum)). And while most of these outlets are commercial or private in nature, our Government has been one of the major perpetrators of offering "information" as they see fit (from all political spectrums, just as you have pointed out). As for the purveyors of this Government information, that is why we have elections - to pick who we want offering that "information". The point isn't that all organizations (both Gov and Commercial) or individuals have spun their own truths (or lies as others would claim), it is that we now have people that would want Government to have the power to squelch the free speech rights of some yet retain the right of unfettered free speech for themselves. The desire to have the Government punish or censor your speech is the real problem. It is, in fact, unconstitutional. IMO no argument that says we must allow Government to censor us for our own good is valid (and spare me the yelling "Fire" in a Movie Theater false equivalent). In the recent past, the Commercial outlets that have censored free speech seemingly just offer you the opportunity to start your own outlet if you didn't like their rules. So now that the natural reaction to that arrogance has occurred (See Twitter, Truth Social, Rumble, etc), the desire by some for Government to step in and rule the "Truth" is telling. The premise is strictly an exercise in people hoping to protect or forward politically partisan advantages and nothing more. Well I do think that alternative sources of information have been amplified by social media and the internet. Governments see this amplification as threatening their control over people (and yes, information does exert control and conformance over populations of people). I'm cautiously optimistic that Musk's acquisition of Twitter will help to reverse this trend of government (and corporate) overreach. People deserve (and are granted) the right to free speech constitutionally. |
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Apr 30, 2022 15:13:49 GMT -8
We have all survived an entire lifetime of outright lies, lies of omission, half truths, exaggerations, logic taken to illogical extremes, baseless claims, etc, etc, and this has been happening since humans could utter words. All modes of communications are guilty (~tabloids, magazines, news (papers, shows) movies, books, TV shows, TV commercials, political ads, documentaries, internet memes, billboards, sign-spinners, social media posters, fact checkers, (this list could go on ad nauseum)). And while most of these outlets are commercial or private in nature, our Government has been one of the major perpetrators of offering "information" as they see fit (from all political spectrums, just as you have pointed out). As for the purveyors of this Government information, that is why we have elections - to pick who we want offering that "information". The point isn't that all organizations (both Gov and Commercial) or individuals have spun their own truths (or lies as others would claim), it is that we now have people that would want Government to have the power to squelch the free speech rights of some yet retain the right of unfettered free speech for themselves. The desire to have the Government punish or censor your speech is the real problem. It is, in fact, unconstitutional. IMO no argument that says we must allow Government to censor us for our own good is valid (and spare me the yelling "Fire" in a Movie Theater false equivalent). In the recent past, the Commercial outlets that have censored free speech seemingly just offer you the opportunity to start your own outlet if you didn't like their rules. So now that the natural reaction to that arrogance has occurred (See Twitter, Truth Social, Rumble, etc), the desire by some for Government to step in and rule the "Truth" is telling. The premise is strictly an exercise in people hoping to protect or forward politically partisan advantages and nothing more. Well I do think that alternative sources of information have been amplified by social media and the internet. Governments see this amplification as threatening their control over people (and yes, information does exert control and conformance over populations of people). I'm cautiously optimistic that Musk's acquisition of Twitter will help to reverse this trend of government (and corporate) overreach. People deserve (and are granted) the right to free speech constitutionally. I don't know. Vast segments of the US population are dumb as a rock, and easy to manipulate. FOX News would have you beleive that Hunter Biden is a bigger threat to America than Vladimir Putin. That's one possibly unstable madman sitting on the ability (with no internal controls we know about) to blow the whole f****** World up!! What leads for their viewers and readers is Hunter Biden, AOC, the Woke, CRT etc. How bout the Colorado River about to drop below levels to be able to produce energy, or deliver water to millions on the SW? That story might get buried down with bass fishing or NASCAR. When Homo sapiens sapiens goes down...we will have worked hard to get there. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Apr 30, 2022 18:11:13 GMT -8
Well, when some profess outrage because of an inability to teach 1st graders about gender fluidity and then endorse policies that enable widespread deaths of our fellow Americans from fentanyl overdoses, that aid and abet human trafficking, that enrich and empower Mexican Cartels, that usher thousands and thousands of "getaways" into our country having no idea of their potential threat to public health, crime or terror, and impair our Government's ability to provide safety and a safety net for those US citizens already here (as millions of the newly arrived impoverished people granted asylum take precedent), you can easily tell who has a brain and who is simply obedient to the narrative they are spoon fed from their progressive overlords. Fox news indeed. I doubt they even understand the questions given to Mayorkis. As it was, Mayorkis simply lied or gave responses to questions not asked. It was absolutely surreal. How does one lay down for that/this? But, but Orange man bad  |
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on May 1, 2022 5:30:39 GMT -8
Well, when some profess outrage because of an inability to teach 1st graders about gender fluidity and then endorse policies that enable widespread deaths of our fellow Americans from fentanyl overdoses, that aid and abet human trafficking, that enrich and empower Mexican Cartels, that usher thousands and thousands of "getaways" into our country having no idea of their potential threat to public health, crime or terror, and impair our Government's ability to provide safety and a safety net for those US citizens already here (as millions of the newly arrived impoverished people granted asylum take precedent), you can easily tell who has a brain and who is simply obedient to the narrative they are spoon fed from their progressive overlords. Fox news indeed. I doubt they even understand the questions given to Mayorkis. As it was, Mayorkis simply lied or gave responses to questions not asked. It was absolutely surreal. How does one lay down for that/this? But, but Orange man bad haha, "fentanyl deaths of our fellow Americans" I thought it was Biden allowing fentanyl across the border on purpose to kill right wing voters? That's what JD Vance (running for senate) is saying on the campaign trail. What he's saying is the MAGA' s are too dumb not to take fentanyl. Of course he's got MTG and Goetz stumping for him. All trump backed whack jobs. trump backs Herbster as well, he's only got 7 credible women saying he's a lecherous creep. trump only picks "the best people". Regarding the orange man, he's easily the most vile person to gain power in America in my life time. Many people agree with that. Assbite still can't bring himself to say anything bad about putin...while he'actively killing thousands, including women and children. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on May 1, 2022 10:25:23 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on May 1, 2022 11:12:58 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on May 1, 2022 13:35:19 GMT -8
Your middle name is "Disinformation". |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on May 1, 2022 18:42:02 GMT -8
Solutions to Fentanyl overdoses include: a Legalization of narcotics (cuts the cartel off at the knees economically as well) b. Free drug testing that is available nationwide, and is anonymous/non-incriminating c. Micro-etching on pharmaceutical narcotics, that is visible only under a microscope (Fentanyl is pressed into pills that have the same stamps as oxycontin pills, so they think that's what they are buying, and then people take them and OD) I don't see either party fixing the problem. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecmusician on May 2, 2022 15:18:48 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on May 2, 2022 17:35:10 GMT -8
Suspect this won't be as popular with the "woke" crowd, but this is legitimately terrifying.
|
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on May 14, 2022 13:15:05 GMT -8
Well, Foxnews.com certainly doesn't have a problem with freedom of thought. Check out the comments on today's mass shooting at a store that happened to have mostly black customers today. By the way, the shooter who killed 10 was white and dressed in camo. You can see the many comments referring to the 13%, the N's, they should have never let them in from Africa etc. www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-police-mass-shooting-buffalo-grocery-storeSo, I have 2 questions. Why would Foxnews leave those up there? Number 2, if the Right is always saying that people say they are racist, and say its not true... what do these comments mean? |
|
