16 Apr 22
@metal-brain saidNot paying attention to real news sites much are you?
You do.
Russiagate was started by a false rumor, yet you believe with no evidence that Trump conspired with Russia to steel the 2016 election from Hitlery.
People in glass houses should not throw stones.
When Global Research is all you know, you don't know anything.
Ever actually read the Mueller Report?
Probably not, the LaRouche movement probably won't let you.
16 Apr 22
@metal-brain saidMy point here, MB, was not to point out that right and left wing media is biased. My point was to stimulate some self-reflection. Critical thinking. For example, when you post something from an obscure website and then ask the forum to "prove it wrong", have you even thought about it? Did you consider the source? Do you trust the source? Do you know that the source posted that story in order to make money off you clicking on that story?
What he said went completely over your head. It is evident because you resorted to partisan bias which is what he warned people about. What did he say about the right AND the left wing? He didn't say ONLY the right wing is being manipulated.
You continue to be manipulated. Resistance is futile until you both stop your partisan idiocy, not just the right. Or you could ...[text shortened]... t really left wingers and become a socialist. Both major political parties are too far to the right.
@the-gravedigger saidLOL.
Tend to agree with you. But your no.2 point 'engage with real people.'
Where do we find such creatures ?
There are real people that you can interact with in virtual spaces. That's what facebook was originally intended for before Russian bots took over.
Say you read an article about CRT in schools and it makes you angry. Well, does anyone you know have kids in public school? Are any of them witnessing what the big bad internet says that teachers are doing to kids? I've talked to my friend who attended a recent school board meeting and she said that there was someone who raised concerns about CRT in school but they did not have any examples or know any kids who went to the school. Huh?
Just ask someone you know who actually exists. It can be in person or online. If you and no one you know are affected by an issue then why are you so worked up about it? Why are
16 Apr 22
@wildgrass saidI provide my sources.
My point here, MB, was not to point out that right and left wing media is biased. My point was to stimulate some self-reflection. Critical thinking. For example, when you post something from an obscure website and then ask the forum to "prove it wrong", have you even thought about it? Did you consider the source? Do you trust the source? Do you know that the source posted that story in order to make money off you clicking on that story?
Take the Pfizer coverup of ADE thread I created for example. I posted a link that referenced an Infowars article. Infowars posted their source, the Pfizer documents themselves. So I posted the Pfizer documents repeatedly to prove attacking the source was groundless since the original source was provided.
Prove it wrong instead of trying to shoot the messenger. Infowars provided the Pfizer documents. You have to prove the Pfizer documents wrong, not slander the messenger.
First you prove the documents say something different that Infowars claimed if you can, then you shoot the messenger for misrepresenting the documents. If you cannot prove it then shut up and quit trying to do it backwards.
@metal-brain saidBefore you post, consider that the messenger is being paid for his services, and that he gets paid more if he tells you provocative, controversial things that will prompt you to post the link to facebook and RHP.
I provide my sources.
Take the Pfizer coverup of ADE thread I created for example. I posted a link that referenced an Infowars article. Infowars posted their source, the Pfizer documents themselves. So I posted the Pfizer documents repeatedly to prove attacking the source was groundless since the original source was provided.
Prove it wrong instead of trying to sho ...[text shortened]... srepresenting the documents. If you cannot prove it then shut up and quit trying to do it backwards.
Before you post, consider that the messenger does not relay all the info there is to know on a topic. "Doing research" on the internet requires you to seek out alternate hypothesis on your own. Without that, it ain't research.
It might be correct (the Pfizer coverup thing), but also consider not asking RHP forum to do all the hard work. Include in your post...
What about the Pfizer documents proves the story is right?
What contradictory information exists that might disprove what's written in the article and why DON'T you believe it?
Assuming the data and interpretation is correct by the provocateurs over at InfoWars, is there an alternate explanation? What would that be and why is it less likely?
16 Apr 22
@wildgrass saidYou are one of those guys that hates free speech, right?
Before you post, consider that the messenger is being paid for his services, and that he gets paid more if he tells you provocative, controversial things that will prompt you to post the link to facebook and RHP.
Before you post, consider that the messenger does not relay all the info there is to know on a topic. "Doing research" on the internet requires you to seek out ...[text shortened]... s over at InfoWars, is there an alternate explanation? What would that be and why is it less likely?
https://rumble.com/v115vec-041522-4-musk-buys-twitter.html
But yet you complain that we are being manipulated. The truth is you welcome the manipulation. You are against free speech. That means you are pro manipulation. You support exactly what you are complaining about.
Hypocrite!
16 Apr 22
@Metal-Brain
In other words comrade, you REFUSE to answer his charges.
You are one of the most biased SOB's here AND a Putin lover.
How much would it take for you to move to Moscow where your work will REALLY be appreciated?
You think Putin's government is ten times better than the US ever will be BECAUSE YOU ARE A LITERAL TRAITOR TO THE US.
16 Apr 22
@sonhouse saidWho is "he"? What charges?
@Metal-Brain
In other words comrade, you REFUSE to answer his charges.
You are one of the most biased SOB's here AND a Putin lover.
How much would it take for you to move to Moscow where your work will REALLY be appreciated?
You think Putin's government is ten times better than the US ever will be BECAUSE YOU ARE A LITERAL TRAITOR TO THE US.
16 Apr 22
@metal-brain saidNo, that is not what well-informed people believe. You twist the narrative, although this has been explained many times. Two independent investigations, including a senate intelligence committee chaired by a Rep., found evidence of Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Evidence which stood up in court.
You do.
Russiagate was started by a false rumor, yet you believe with no evidence that Trump conspired with Russia to steel the 2016 election from Hitlery.
People in glass houses should not throw stones.
What was not proven was that Trump colluded in this. Russian meddling was proven, Trump collusion was not. They are two distinct issues.
@moonbus saidYou are not well informed. The investigation was started by a false rumor and no evidence of Russian meddling in the 2016 election was found, just false allegations. There was no evidence and still is not. You were fed a false narrative.
No, that is not what well-informed people believe. You twist the narrative, although this has been explained many times. Two independent investigations, including a senate intelligence committee chaired by a Rep., found evidence of Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Evidence which stood up in court.
What was not proven was that Trump colluded in this. Russian meddling was proven, Trump collusion was not. They are two distinct issues.
There was no evidence Russia hacked the DNC. I realize that after lying about it for so long to you and the rest of Americans you have a hard time accepting the truth, but Crowdstrike admitted it under oath and under threat of perjury if they didn't tell the truth.
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/05/13/hidden_over_2_years_dem_cyber-firms_sworn_testimony_it_had_no_proof_of_russian_hack_of_dnc_123596.html
RT advertising on Facebook is not election interference either. Anybody can do that. There is no evidence at all. You were lied to, but ironically there is evidence of it in Ukraine.
https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/new-york-times-ukraine-court-rules-manafort-disclosure-caused-meddling-in-us-election.html
17 Apr 22
@Metal-Brain
You don't even DENY hating the US and continue to work for the destruction of the US.
@metal-brain saidYou could start a thread on free speech, but that's not this thread.
You are one of those guys that hates free speech, right?
https://rumble.com/v115vec-041522-4-musk-buys-twitter.html
But yet you complain that we are being manipulated. The truth is you welcome the manipulation. You are against free speech. That means you are pro manipulation. You support exactly what you are complaining about.
Hypocrite!
There should be an assumption that everything you read on websites (like rumble.com) was put there to manipulate you. Please act accordingly and with some critical thinking before blindly copy/pasting links.
The only possible exceptions might be public news (which relies on direct donations) or subscription-based services. The financial incentives for these sources of information are aligned with truthful reporting.
20 Apr 22
@metal-brain saidBelow is a link to the Senate Intelligence Committee report. I know you won't read it, but someone else might.
You are not well informed. The investigation was started by a false rumor and no evidence of Russian meddling in the 2016 election was found, just false allegations. There was no evidence and still is not. You were fed a false narrative.
There was no evidence Russia hacked the DNC. I realize that after lying about it for so long to you and the rest of Americans you hav ...[text shortened]... -politics/new-york-times-ukraine-court-rules-manafort-disclosure-caused-meddling-in-us-election.html
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/publications/report-select-committee-intelligence-united-states-senate-russian-active-measures
I quote from the report:
“The Committee found no reason to dispute the Intelligence Community’s conclusions" [regarding Russian meddling in the 2016 election].
“One of the ICA’s most important conclusions was that Russia’s aggressive interference efforts should be considered ‘the new normal.’ That warning has been borne out by the events of the last three years, as Russia and its imitators increasingly use information warfare to sow societal chaos and discord. With the 2020 presidential election approaching, it’s more important than ever that we remain vigilant against the threat of interference from hostile foreign actors.”
“The ICA summarizing intelligence concerning the 2016 election represented the kind of unbiased and professional work we expect and require from the Intelligence Community. The ICA correctly found the Russians interfered in our 2016 election to hurt Secretary Clinton and help the candidacy of Donald Trump. Our review of the highly classified ICA and underlying intelligence found that this and other conclusions were well-supported. There is certainly no reason to doubt that the Russians’ success in 2016 is leading them to try again in 2020, and we must not be caught unprepared.”
20 Apr 22
@moonbus saidIt was a bipartisan report, too. Somehow it never made it to the conservative side of mainstream media, and if it ain't mentioned of FoxNews then half of America doesn't know about it.
Below is a link to the Senate Intelligence Committee report. I know you won't read it, but someone else might.
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/publications/report-select-committee-intelligence-united-states-senate-russian-active-measures
I quote from the report:
“The Committee found no reason to dispute the Intelligence Community’s conclusions" [regarding Russi ...[text shortened]... ssians’ success in 2016 is leading them to try again in 2020, and we must not be caught unprepared.”
@wildgrass saidIt was indeed a bi-partisan report which not only confirmed the conclusions of the Mueller Report, but gathered additional evidence of more widespread meddling than the Mueller Report was intended to. Yet many in America still don't believe it, preferring rather to keep repeating Trump's mantra, that he personally was "totally exonerated" and equating this with "there was no Russian influence."
It was a bipartisan report, too. Somehow it never made it to the conservative side of mainstream media, and if it ain't mentioned of FoxNews then half of America doesn't know about it.
If FoxNews and Tucker Carlson choose to ignore this, that is their prerogative, but it still does not excuse the American pubic for being wilfully mis-informed about its own government. The information is available to anyone who cares enough to look for it. America is not a police state where investigative reports are kept secret. It's the top listing at any search engine if you type in "senate intelligence committee report 2016 election" --how complacent must the American public be to not know this?