"Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks
User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15640
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Jimbo » 17 Sep 2018, 10:52

Just wondering, which is more reliable to you non skeptics: The Daily Mail or 911 Blogger or any of the others in the plethora of alternative news sites.
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Dor-Relip Hotels and Bathings
hounds people off the board
Posts: 19574
Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 23:21
Location: selling a self-detonating James Last CD to a Copenhagen thrift store

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Dor-Relip Hotels and Bathings » 17 Sep 2018, 10:57

Oh shut up
Darkness_Fish wrote:This is a big fucking mess of absolute shit from the off.

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15640
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Jimbo » 17 Sep 2018, 10:59

BOXO wrote:Oh shut up


Ah, a Sun reader!
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Copehead
BCB Cup Stalinist
Posts: 24174
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:51
Location: at sea

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Copehead » 17 Sep 2018, 11:02

Jimbo wrote:Just wondering, which is more reliable to you non skeptics: The Daily Mail or 911 Blogger or any of the others in the plethora of alternative news sites.


They all have agendas and most are shit.

I think you can only try and read news from a diverse number of sites and try and bare in mind what their agenda is.

The BBC is fairly reliable outside of UK politics for instance but has increasingly become a government mouth piece. Balance with RT but realise RT is a Kremlin mouthpiece. Al Jezeera is pretty reliable on some things, you get a different perspective as long as it hasn't got anything to do with Qatar.

Some of the big US papers are still pretty good at journalism, the Guardian is as long as you steer well clear of its hatred of anything to the left to Gordon Brown, it has always been a liberal newspaper never a left wing paper.

The Canary will give you a biased left wing view as will Skwakbox. The Spectator will tell you what wife beating, superannuated crypto-fascists think.

The UK press is one loud far right megaphone these days, it represents the views of its oligarch owners. The Mirror is anti-tory but pretty anti-Corbyn too.

If you want pro-Corbyn media you have to go to individual writers rather than sites or papers.

What I do is subscribe to loads of twitter feeds from a variety of stand points and just browse it a couple of times a day to see what is happening and then I read the Guardian for news, not comment, and entertainment.

Modern politicians, with the enthusiastic support of the Russian Kleptocracy have tried hard to destroy any notion of objective truth in politics, and they have succeeded.
Nazi Punks, Nazi Punks, Nazi Punks, Fuck Off

Image

Bear baiting & dog fights a speciality.

User avatar
Copehead
BCB Cup Stalinist
Posts: 24174
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:51
Location: at sea

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Copehead » 17 Sep 2018, 11:03

Jimbo wrote:
BOXO wrote:Oh shut up


Ah, a Sun reader!



:lol:
Nazi Punks, Nazi Punks, Nazi Punks, Fuck Off

Image

Bear baiting & dog fights a speciality.

caramba
Posts: 498
Joined: 25 Aug 2016, 17:12

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby caramba » 17 Sep 2018, 11:28

Copehead wrote:
Jimbo wrote:
BOXO wrote:Oh shut up


Ah, a Sun reader!



:lol:


I thought Sun 'readers' had the paper read to them each day
Last edited by caramba on 19 Sep 2018, 08:58, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15640
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Jimbo » 17 Sep 2018, 17:54

Lynch Mob Mentality

14 Sep, 2018 in Uncategorized by craig | View Comments

I was caught in a twitterstorm of hatred yesterday, much of it led by mainstream media journalists like David Aaronovitch and Dan Hodges, for daring to suggest that the basic elements of Boshirov and Petrov’s story do in fact stack up. What became very plain quite quickly was that none of these people had any grasp of the detail of the suspects’ full twenty minute interview, but had just seen the short clips or quotes as presented by British corporate and state media.

As I explained in my last post, what first gave me some sympathy for the Russians’ story and drew me to look at it closer, was the raft of social media claims that there was no snow in Salisbury that weekend and Stonehenge had not been closed. In fact, Stonehenge was indeed closed on 3 March by heavy snow, as confirmed by English Heritage. So the story that they came to Salisbury on 3 March but could not go to Stonehenge because of heavy snow did stand up, contrary to almost the entire twittersphere.

Once there was some pushback of truth about this on social media, people started triumphantly posting the CCTV images from 4 March to prove that there was no snow lying in Central Salisbury on 4 March. But nobody ever said there was snow on 4 March – in fact Borisov and Petrov specifically stated that they learnt there was a thaw so they went back. However when they got there, they encountered heavy sleet and got drenched through. That accords precisely with the photographic evidence in which they are plainly drenched through.

Another extraordinary meme that causes hilarity on twitter is that Russians might be deterred by snow or cold weather.

Well, Russians are human beings just like us. They cope with cold weather at home because they have the right clothes. Boshirov and Petrov refer continually in the interview to cold, wet feet and again this is borne out by the photographic evidence – they were wearing sneakers unsuitable to the freak weather conditions that were prevalent in Salisbury on 3 and 4 March. They are indeed soaked through in the pictures, just as they said in the interview.

Russians are no more immune to cold and wet than you are.

Twitter is replete with claims that they were strange tourists, to be visiting a housing estate. No evidence has been produced anywhere that shows them on any housing estate. They were seen on CCTV camera walking up the A36 by the Shell station, some 400 yards from the Skripals’ house, which would require three turnings to get to that – turnings nobody saw them take (and they were on the wrong side of the road for the first turning, even though it would be very close). No evidence has been mentioned which puts them at the Skripals’ House.

Finally, it is everywhere asserted that it is very strange that Russians would take a weekend break holiday, and that if they did they could not possibly be interested in architecture or history. This is a simple expression of anti-Russian racism. Plainly before their interview – about which they were understandably nervous – they prepared what they were going to say, including checking up on what it was they expected to see in Salisbury because they realised they would very obviously be asked why they went. Because their answer was prepared does not make it untrue.

That literally people thousands of people have taken to twitter to mock that it is hilariously improbable that tourists might want to visit Salisbury Cathedral and Stonehenge, is a plain example of the irrationality that can overtake people when gripped by mob hatred.

I am astonished by the hatred that has been unleashed. The story of Gerry Conlon might, you would hope, give us pause as to presuming the guilt of somebody who just happened to be of the “enemy” nationality, in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Despite the mocking mob, there is nothing inherently improbable in the tale told by the two men. What matters is whether they can be connected to the novichok, and here the safety of the identification of the microscopic traces of novichok allegedly found in their hotel bedroom is key. I am no scientist, but I have been told by someone who is, that if the particle(s) were as the police state so small as to be harmless to humans, they would be too small for mass spectrometry analysis and almost certainly could not be firmly identified other than as an organophosphate. Perhaps someone qualified might care to comment.

The hotel room novichok is the key question in this case.

Were I Vladimir Putin, I would persuade Boshirov and Petrov voluntarily to come to the UK and stand trial, on condition that it was a genuinely fair trial before a jury in which the entire proceedings, and all of the evidence, was open and public, and the Skripals and Pablo Miller might be called as witnesses and cross-examined. I have no doubt that the British government’s desire for justice would suddenly move into rapid retreat if their bluff was called in this way.

As for me, when I see a howling mob rushing to judgement and making at least some claims which are utterly unfounded, and when I see that mob fueled and egged on by information from the security services propagated by exactly the same mainstream media journalists who propagandised the lies about Iraqi WMD, I see it as my job to stand in the way of the mob and to ask cool questions. If that makes them hate me, then I must be having some impact.

So I ask this question again – and nobody so far has attempted to give me an answer. At what time did the Skripals touch their doorknob? Boshirov and Petrov arrived in Salisbury at 11.48 and could not have painted the doorknob before noon. The Skripals had left their house at 09.15, with their mobile phones switched off so they could not be geo-located. Their car was caught on CCTV on three cameras heading out of Salisbury to the North East. At 13.15 it was again caught on camera heading back in to the town centre from the North West.

How had the Skripals managed to get back to their home, and touch the door handle, in the hour between noon and 1pm, without being caught on any of the CCTV cameras that caught them going out and caught the Russian visitors so extensively? After this remarkably invisible journey, what time did they touch the door handle?

I am not going to begin to accept the guilt of Boshirov and Petrov until somebody answers that question. Dan Hodges? David Aaronovitch? Theresa May? Anybody?
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
bobzilla77
Posts: 15962
Joined: 23 Jun 2006, 02:56
Location: Dilute! Dilute! OK!

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby bobzilla77 » 19 Sep 2018, 00:53

Wait, Russian is now a "race"?!
Jimbo wrote:I guess I am over Graham Nash's politics. Hopelessly naive by the standards I've molded for myself these days.

User avatar
TG
Posts: 3737
Joined: 30 May 2006, 23:41
Location: Boss Angeles

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby TG » 19 Sep 2018, 00:59

bobzilla77 wrote:Wait, Russian is now a "race"?!


You might need to be rushin’ to win a race. Does that count for anything?


I’m sorry. Really. I’m very sorry.
Jeff K wrote:Not at all. I love TG. I might be the only one on BCB who does but I don't care.

User avatar
zoomboogity
Shakin' All Over
Posts: 5278
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 07:42
Location: Screwball Cultural Center

Re: *JIMBO TALKS SHITE*

Postby zoomboogity » 19 Sep 2018, 01:47

Copehead wrote:try looking in places with a little more credibility than the Daily mail


It's a steady job...
Image

"Quite."

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15640
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Jimbo » 20 Sep 2018, 11:17

In a drunken rant last night I lamented how uncritically the mainstream media reports the news. I find story after story on the internet where "alternative" news sites shoot holes into official narratives but still the mainstream media sees no holes and carries on like they aren't standing in a roomful of elephants. The same goes for some of my rivals on this page who deny the possibility of World War three, especially when it comes to how they so wrongly perceive the RUSSIA! narrative. Huh? War with Russia? Look at Carter Paige's hat, man!

Jesus wept. (Thanks Yomp!)


Hold the Front Page: The Reporters are Missing

September 19, 2018

So much of mainstream journalism has descended to the level of a cult-like formula of bias, hearsay and omission. Subjectivism is all; slogans and outrage are proof enough. What matters is “perception,” says John Pilger.

By John Pilger

Special to Consortium News

The death of Robert Parry earlier this year felt like a farewell to the age of the reporter. Parry was “a trailblazer for independent journalism”, wrote Seymour Hersh, with whom he shared much in common.

Hersh revealed the My Lai massacre in Vietnam and the secret bombing of Cambodia, Parry exposed Iran-Contra, a drugs and gun-running conspiracy that led to the White House. In 2016, they separately produced compelling evidence that the Assad government in Syria had not used chemical weapons. They were not forgiven.

Driven from the “mainstream”, Hersh must publish his work outside the United States. Parry set up his own independent news website Consortium News, where, in a final piece following a stroke, he referred to journalism’s veneration of “approved opinions” while “unapproved evidence is brushed aside or disparaged regardless of its quality.”

Although journalism was always a loose extension of establishment power, something has changed in recent years. Dissent tolerated when I joined a national newspaper in Britain in the 1960s has regressed to a metaphoric underground as liberal capitalism moves towards a form of corporate dictatorship. This is a seismic shift, with journalists policing the new “groupthink”, as Parry called it, dispensing its myths and distractions, pursuing its enemies.

Witness the witch-hunts against refugees and immigrants, the willful abandonment by the “MeToo” zealots of our oldest freedom, presumption of innocence, the anti-Russia racism and anti-Brexit hysteria, the growing anti-China campaign and the suppression of a warning of world war.

With many if not most independent journalists barred or ejected from the “mainstream”, a corner of the Internet has become a vital source of disclosure and evidence-based analysis: true journalism sites such as wikileaks.org, consortiumnews.com, wsws.org, truthdig.com, globalresearch.org, counterpunch.org and informationclearinghouse.com are required reading for those trying to make sense of a world in which science and technology advance wondrously while political and economic life in the fearful “democracies” regress behind a media facade of narcissistic spectacle.

In Britain, just one website offers consistently independent media criticism. This is the remarkable Media Lens — remarkable partly because its founders and editors as well as its only writers, David Edwards and David Cromwell, since 2001 have concentrated their gaze not on the usual suspects, the Tory press, but the paragons of reputable liberal journalism: the BBC, The Guardian, Channel 4 News.

Their method is simple. Meticulous in their research, they are respectful and polite when they ask why a journalist why he or she produced such a one-sided report, or failed to disclose essential facts or promoted discredited myths.

The replies they receive are often defensive, at times abusive; some are hysterical, as if they have pushed back a screen on a protected species.

I would say Media Lens has shattered a silence about corporate journalism. Like Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman in Manufacturing Consent, they represent a Fifth Estate that deconstructs and demystifies the media’s power.

What is especially interesting about them is that neither is a journalist. David Edwards is a former teacher, David Cromwell is an oceanographer. Yet, their understanding of the morality of journalism — a term rarely used; let’s call it true objectivity — is a bracing quality of their online Media Lens dispatches.

I think their work is heroic and I would place a copy of their just published book, Propaganda Blitz, in every journalism school that services the corporate system, as they all do.

Take the chapter, Dismantling the National Health Service, in which Edwards and Cromwell describe the critical part played by journalists in the crisis facing Britain’s pioneering health service.

The NHS crisis is the product of a political and media construct known as “austerity”, with its deceitful, weasel language of “efficiency savings” (the BBC term for slashing public expenditure) and “hard choices” (the willful destruction of the premises of civilized life in modern Britain).

“Austerity” is an invention. Britain is a rich country with a debt owed by its crooked banks, not its people. The resources that would comfortably fund the National Health Service have been stolen in broad daylight by the few allowed to avoid and evade billions in taxes.

Using a vocabulary of corporate euphemisms, the publicly-funded Health Service is being deliberately run down by free market fanatics, to justify its selling-off. The Labour Party of Jeremy Corbyn may appear to oppose this, but is it? The answer is very likely no. Little of any of this is alluded to in the media, let alone explained.

Edwards and Cromwell have dissected the 2012 Health and Social Care Act, whose innocuous title belies its dire consequences. Unknown to most of the population, the Act ends the legal obligation of British governments to provide universal free health care: the bedrock on which the NHS was set up following the Second World War. Private companies can now insinuate themselves into the NHS, piece by piece.

Where, asks Edwards and Cromwell, was the BBC while this momentous Bill was making its way through Parliament? With a statutory commitment to “providing a breadth of view” and to properly inform the public of “matters of public policy,” the BBC never spelt out the threat posed to one of the nation’s most cherished institutions. A BBC headline said: “Bill which gives power to GPs passes.” This was pure state propaganda.

There is a striking similarity with the BBC’s coverage of Prime Minister Tony Blair’s lawless invasion of Iraq in 2003, which left a million dead and many more dispossessed. A study by the University of Wales, Cardiff, found that the BBC reflected the government line “overwhelmingly” while relegating reports of civilian suffering. A Media Tenor study placed the BBC at the bottom of a league of western broadcasters in the time they gave to opponents of the invasion. The corporation’s much-vaunted “principle” of impartiality was never a consideration.

One of the most telling chapters in Propaganda Blitz describes the smear campaigns mounted by journalists against dissenters, political mavericks and whistleblowers. The Guardian’s campaign against the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is the most disturbing. Assange, whose epic WikiLeaks disclosures brought fame, journalism prizes and largesse to The Guardian, was abandoned when he was no longer useful. He was then subjected to a vituperative – and cowardly — onslaught of a kind I have rarely known.

With not a penny going to WikiLeaks, a hyped Guardian book led to a lucrative Hollywood movie deal. The book’s authors, Luke Harding and David Leigh, gratuitously described Assange as a “damaged personality” and “callous.” They also disclosed the secret password he had given the paper in confidence, which was designed to protect a digital file containing the U.S. embassy cables.

With Assange now trapped in the Ecuadorean embassy, Harding, standing among the police outside, gloated on his blog that “Scotland Yard may get the last laugh.”

The Guardian columnist Suzanne Moore wrote, “I bet Assange is stuffing himself full of flattened guinea pigs. He really is the most massive turd.”

Moore, who describes herself as a feminist, later complained that, after attacking Assange, she had suffered “vile abuse.” Edwards and Cromwell wrote to her: “That’s a real shame, sorry to hear that. But how would you describe calling someone ‘the most massive turd’? Vile abuse?”

Moore replied that no, she would not, adding, “I would advise you to stop being so bloody patronizing.” Her former Guardian colleague James Ball wrote, “It’s difficult to imagine what Ecuador’s London embassy smells like more than five and a half years after Julian Assange moved in.”

Such slow-witted viciousness appeared in a newspaper described by its editor, Katharine Viner, as “thoughtful and progressive.” What is the root of this vindictiveness? Is it jealousy, a perverse recognition that Assange has achieved more journalistic firsts than his snipers can claim in a lifetime? Is it that he refuses to be “one of us” and shames those who have long sold out the independence of journalism?

Journalism students should study this to understand that the source of “fake news” is not only trollism, or the likes of Fox News, or Donald Trump, but a journalism self-anointed with a false respectability: a liberal journalism that claims to challenge corrupt state power but, in reality, courts and protects it, and colludes with it. The amorality of the years of Tony Blair, whom The Guardian has failed to rehabilitate, is its echo.

“[It is] an age in which people yearn for new ideas and fresh alternatives,” wrote Katharine Viner. Her political writer Jonathan Freedland dismissed the yearning of young people who supported the modest policies of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn as “a form of narcissism.”

“How did this man ….,” brayed the Guardian‘s Zoe Williams, “get on the ballot in the first place?” A choir of the paper’s precocious windbags joined in, thereafter queuing to fall on their blunt swords when Corbyn came close to winning the 2017 general election in spite of the media.

Complex stories are reported to a cult-like formula of bias, hearsay and omission: Brexit, Venezuela, Russia, Syria. On Syria, only the investigations of a group of independent journalists have countered this, revealing the network of Anglo-American backing of jihadists in Syria, including those related to ISIS.

Supported by a “psyops” campaign funded by the British Foreign Office and the U.S. Agency for International Development, the aim is to hoodwink the Western public and speed the overthrow of the government in Damascus, regardless of the medieval alternative and the risk of war with Russia.

The Syria Campaign, set up by a New York PR agency called Purpose, funds a group known as the White Helmets, who claim falsely to be “Syria Civil Defense” and are seen uncritically on TV news and social media, apparently rescuing the victims of bombing, which they film and edit themselves, though viewers are unlikely to be told this. George Clooney is a fan.

The White Helmets are appendages to the jihadists with whom they share addresses. Their media-smart uniforms and equipment are supplied by their Western paymasters. That their exploits are not questioned by major news organizations is an indication of how deep the influence of state-backed PR now runs in the media. As Robert Fisk noted recently, no “mainstream” reporter reports Syria.

In what is known as a hatchet job, a Guardian reporter based in San Francisco, Olivia Solon, who has never visited Syria, was allowed to smear the substantiated investigative work of journalists Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett on the White Helmets as “propagated online by a network of anti-imperialist activists, conspiracy theorists and trolls with the support of the Russian government.”

This abuse was published without permitting a single correction, let alone a right-of-reply. The Guardian Comment page was blocked, as Edwards and Cromwell document. I saw the list of questions Solon sent to Beeley, which reads like a McCarthyite charge sheet — “Have you ever been invited to North Korea?”

So much of the mainstream has descended to this level. Subjectivism is all; slogans and outrage are proof enough. What matters is the “perception.”

When he was U.S. commander in Afghanistan, General David Petraeus declared what he called “a war of perception… conducted continuously using the news media.” What really mattered was not the facts but the way the story played in the United States. The undeclared enemy was, as always, an informed and critical public at home.

Nothing has changed. In the 1970s, I met Leni Riefenstahl, Hitler’s film-maker, whose propaganda mesmerized the German public.

She told me the “messages” of her films were dependent not on “orders from above”, but on the “submissive void” of an uninformed public.

“Did that include the liberal, educated bourgeoisie?” I asked.

“Everyone,” she said. “Propaganda always wins, if you allow it.”

Propaganda Blitz by David Edwards and David Cromwell is published by Pluto Press.

John Pilger is an Australian-British journalist based in London. Pilger’s Web site is: http://www.johnpilger.com. His latest film, “The Coming War on China,” is available in the U.S. from http://www.bullfrogfilms.com
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15640
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Jimbo » 21 Sep 2018, 03:30

Total Cost of Wars Since 2001

$4,624,178,786,608
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Copehead
BCB Cup Stalinist
Posts: 24174
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:51
Location: at sea

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Copehead » 21 Sep 2018, 08:28

Jimbo wrote:Total Cost of Wars Since 2001

$4,624,178,786,608


and 65 cents
Nazi Punks, Nazi Punks, Nazi Punks, Fuck Off

Image

Bear baiting & dog fights a speciality.

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15640
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Jimbo » 21 Sep 2018, 12:54

In John Steinbeck’s The Pearl, there are jewelry buyers set up around a fishing community which are all owned by the same plutocrat, but they all pretend to be in competition with one another. When the story’s protagonist discovers an enormous and valuable pearl and goes to sell it, they all gather round and individually bid far less than it is worth in order to trick him into giving it away for almost nothing. US politics is pretty much the same; two mainstream parties owned by the same political class, engaged in a staged bidding war for votes to give the illusion of competition.

In reality, the US political system is like the unplugged video game remote that kids give their baby brother so he stops whining that he wants a turn to play. No matter who they vote for they get an Orwellian warmongering government which exists solely to advance the agendas of a plutocratic class which has no loyalties to any nation; the only difference is sometimes that government is pretending to care about women and minorities and sometimes it’s pretending to care about white men. In reality, all the jewelers work for the same plutocrat, and that video game remote won’t impact the outcome of the game no matter how many buttons you push.
Caitlin Johnstone
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15640
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Jimbo » 21 Sep 2018, 17:31

Apologies to those of you who find me obnoxious but I keep having my mind blown by revelations. It's stuff I'd want to share with a friend, i.e., "Did you hear that Russia-gate is utter bullshit?" And the friend who is an attentive and curious friend says, "Do tell." But the sad fact is even my real best friend doesn't want to hear my bullshit because he is not particularly attentive nor curious, but he is nonetheless still my best friend. But here on BCB, as long as I am not barred, I will use this chance to vent, to say my piece, to say what is blowing my mind and hopefully some of you will appreciate what I'm putting down.

That said, holy shit, The New York Times does it again! According to the Moon of Alabama blog the Times wrote a 199 paragraph article titled The Plot to Subvert an Election - Unraveling the Russia Story So Far, a very comprehensive summary of the Russia-Trump story and in paragraph five they write

Image

That is an expected bit from the official story. Your average Hillary supporter will not find any disagreement there. A mountain of evidence? Sure.

But then waaaay down in paragraph 183 is this

Image

Trump is right? No public evidence?

Gyoinggg!

A mountain of evidence vs none. Hmm.

It is called burying the lede. This could be the fucking headline: NO PUBLIC EVIDENCE HAS EMERGED. In one way it is laudable they allow a crack of truth into the article but if you are out to get Trump why bother? According to MOA he figures the Times calculates how many readers will last till paragraph 183. Paragraph five, no problem. Even with a link to the Times story I couldn't be bothered. 199 paragraphs? Sheeeeit.

The takeaway is that there is no public evidence - so far - of Trump colluding, conspiring or canoodling with the Russians. The New York Times says so.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 38634
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: ~84 bpm

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Count Machuki » 22 Sep 2018, 16:49

Jimbo wrote:
Count Machuki wrote:Right. Parody of a parody.
I guess your shit is just too high concept for me, there, Jimbo.


I apologize for saying "fuck you." That was harsh and I feel badly for saying it. What I will say instead is that I wish you'd open your eyes a little wider and allow yourself to see a bigger political picture than the left-right, blue-red sort of game you seem to like playing. I'm not crazy or a loon. There really are unelected forces at work in America and throughout the world who are trampling on your freedoms and democracy while leading you and I closer and closer to war. History shows us that this is so and you owe it to yourself to learn about them and be aware.

My self=parody was quite clever, if I say so myself, because I added some truth to it and that is the concept of "divide and conquer." That there are divisions in society such as the two political parties, one supposedly conservative and the other liberal is not because some people see free health care while the other sees freeloaders. No, everyone wants free health care but there are assholes out there who are fucking with all of our our minds, dividing and conquering and getting rich. That's the conspiracy, man! As I have shown in my postings time after time the mainstream media are liars, fake news, especially when it comes to truthful articles about corruption among the rich and powerful. Jimmy Dore has a new video about the record breaking poisonous red tide in Florida and Jimmy plays a CBS news story which says so. At the end of the report Jimmy notes how the the reporter fails to say the cause of the red tide, which. with a little research, shows it's fertilizer run-off from big agriculture. CBS won't say that. Rick Scott the governor won't say it either. CBS's owners are in bed with Rick Scott and there, again, is the conspiracy.

Again, sorry for my rude words but you do need to open your eyes a little wider.


I dabbled with conspiracy stuff when I was a kid, man. I read Behold a Pale Horse, I followed up on stuff from the Illuminatus books, all that shit. I know there are plenty of non-textbook things happening in the world. Fine. I hate The Man, too. Thing is half those conspiracies just read like impotent, hateful people imagining reasons that things aren't the way they think they should be. I stopped messing with that stuff when I realized that the self-published fever dreams of people who had bad 1960s were nothing to base a real life on. If that what it takes to get you through the day, fine, knock yourself out. But do us a favor and don't assume that someone's a babe in the woods because they don't think 9-11 was an inside job or that a shadowy cabal is influencing the pop charts.

Dismissing your response in advance,

CM
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15640
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Jimbo » 22 Sep 2018, 23:45



Medea Benjamin Shows America What Real Resistance Looks Like

A think tank is an organization wherein highly-paid academics pour their collective brainpower into coming up with convincing arguments that it would be good and smart to do something evil and stupid….


https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/mede ... 1adef84a8a
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15640
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Jimbo » 04 Oct 2018, 06:30

Surely none of you buy the Skripal story any longer. By that token you must surely also realize what an incurious lap dog media we have. Where are the hard questions on the Skripal matter? They're on the internet not on your TVs.

https://en.news-front.info/2018/09/28/s ... al-agents/

“Alexander, so what, in your opinion, happened in Salisbury?”
“There’s a lot of stupidity on stupidity.”
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15640
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby Jimbo » 12 Oct 2018, 04:03

Time to celebrate! A mainstream media outlet, The Independent, has allowed an actual Skripal skeptic to have a say.

The Skripal case has troubled me since the first news broke in March. It is not the improbability of what was reported to have happened – improbable things are the stuff of news. It is rather the mixture of utter certainty, unsubstantiated claims and glaring information gaps that is so disconcerting, from the immediate rush by UK officials to blame the Russian state, to the way the main figures in this drama have simply vanished, and now to the contradictions that have gained blithe, and almost universal, acceptance.

Bellingcat ... has never, so far as I am aware, reached any conclusion – whether on the downing of the Malaysian plane over eastern Ukraine, or chemical weapons use in Syria, or now, with the Skripals – that is in any way inconvenient to the UK or US authorities.

... I find the evidence and the explanations so far offered by our own side in what is becoming an all-out information war both deficient and scandalously short on credibility – and so, I suggest, should you.


https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/sk ... 77161.html
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
The Modernist
2018 BCB Cup Champ!
Posts: 12846
Joined: 13 Apr 2014, 20:42

Re: "Me Jimbo. Me know truth."

Postby The Modernist » 12 Oct 2018, 07:45

They've got the guys on film walking to the house. No evidence would be enough for you Jimbo as you've already decided what you think.