Why do you believe that?
No, which is why I doubt I'd ever use it. RT, in contrast, has a long list of awards, which can be seen here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)#Awards_and_nominations
America's ‘Ministry of Truth’ wasn't removed, just rebranded | RT
- Thread starter Scott
- Start date
Why do you believe that?
No, which is why I doubt I'd ever use it. RT, in contrast, has a long list of awards, which can be seen here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)#Awards_and_nominations
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
Believe what? That rejecting the questionable sources is what kills the discussion?
As I have stated, asking for a better source is not what kills it. It might have been extreme to tell you that your sources are shit, but it implies that I have been reading their sources many times, enough for me not to trust them and also implies that I am asking for better sources.
The very first line: RT (formerly Russia Today or Rossiya Segodnya (Russian: Россия Сегодня)) is a Russian state-controlled international news television network funded by the Russian government.
"State-controlled". That is suspect right there.
RT has regularly been described as a major propaganda outlet for the Russian government and its foreign policy. Academics, fact-checkers, and news reporters (including some current and former RT reporters) have identified RT as a purveyor of disinformation and conspiracy theories. UK media regulator Ofcom has repeatedly found RT to have breached its rules on impartiality, including multiple instances in which RT broadcast "materially misleading" content.
See now why I do not trust RT as a source.
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
they are censored. the fbi made facebook and other social media apps censor.
real freedom loving corporations would have told the government to stay in it's lane.
the truth is corporatists ALSO love fascism.
especially libertarians.
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
preemptive battlefield psychological profiling is key in this theater.
don't come with a pea shooter.
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
do you dispute cisa's existence?
shut the fuck up you fucking idiot.
Homepage | CISA
https://www.cisa.gov
CISA Applauds the Beginning of Infrastructure Security Month Declaring Infrastructure Security is National Security: November 1, 2022 ... Find CISA's Free Cybersecurity Services and Tools: RedEye Tool: ... Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency.
About CISA
The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) leads the national effort to understand, manage, and reduce risk to our cyber and physical infrastructure. We connect our stakeholders in industry and government to each other and to resources, analyses, and tools to help them build their own cyber, communications, and physical security and resilience, in turn helping to ensure a ...
Cybersecurity
In light of the risk and potential consequences of cyber events, CISA strengthens the security and resilience of cyberspace, an important homeland security mission. In Early September, CISA released the 2023-2025 CISA Strategic Plan, our first comprehensive strategy since the agency was established in 2018. The Strategic Plan is set against a ...
Infrastructure Security Month
Our American way of life—and the infrastructure that underpins it—is constantly evolving and growing in complexity and connectivity. These systems support the millions of activities that people conduct each day to transact business, communicate with friends and family, maintain health and safety, and more.
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) enhances public safety interoperable communications at all levels of government and conducts extensive, ... CISA released the 2023-2025 CISA Strategic Plan, our first comprehensive strategy since the agency was established in 2018. The Strategic Plan is set against a risk landscape ...
NATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT
Any threat to these sectors could have potentially debilitating national security, economic, and public health or safety consequences. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency's (CISA) works to ensure the security and resiliency of our critical infrastructure. However, in today's digitizing world, as organizations are increasingly ...
MEDIA
Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency. CONTACT SUBSCRIBE ...
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency | USAGov
https://www.usa.gov › federal-agencies › cybersecurity-and-infrastructure-security-agency
Contact the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Main Address: Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, Stop 0380 Department of Homeland Security 245 Murray Lane Washington , DC 20528-0380 Email: central@cisa.gov Toll Free: 1-888-282-0870 (cybersecurity resources) Government branch: Executive Department Sub-Office/Agency/Bureau
LurchAddams
There Can be Only One!
He's confused us with Russia's Pravda.
LurchAddams
There Can be Only One!
Then quit sticking forks in electrical outlets, fool.
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
No I do not.
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
why god why
Why what?
they gaslight themselves to avoid cognitive dissonance with their internalized authority figure abusers.
it's so sad.
I'm personally rather cautious when it comes to ascribing reasons for other people's statements, but I think we can agree that simply dismissing someone else's sources will tend to kill any productive discussion with that party.
preemptive battlefield psychological profiling is key in this theater.
don't come with a pea shooter.
While I can see that an analogy between a political forum and a battlefield can be made, I think it'd be more accurate to think of it more like a debate. I actually try pretty hard to pull my punches and try to see things from the perspective of the other side as much as possible, in the hopes of them doing the same and actually getting some productive discussion going.
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
In order to get a productive discussion going, use valid sources.
Still annoyed at you for insulting my sources here, but I'm glad that you finally decided to address the first article I'd linked to.
As AHZ (AssHatZombie) pointed out, it was censored and called disinformation. Apparently, you've come to the conclusion that because the censorship wasn't completely successful, it was therefore never censored. Not sure how you think that's logically sound. In any case, I'll leave you with the following article detailing the censorship of the issue over at Twitter:
Twitter official behind Hunter Biden laptop censorship leaving company | Washington Examiner
Do you have any evidence to support this conclusion?
How do you explain the following article then:
The 634-page report on Hunter Biden’s laptop — and 459 alleged crimes | New York Post
AProudLefty
Black Kitty Ain't Happy
That doesn't even make any sense. How does one "insult" a source? A source in the form of an article is not a person. Unless, perhaps, you yourself wrote that article.
And I did not "finally" decide to address it. It was YOU who wanted me to address it so I obliged, despite the sources being questionable.
Most of posters here agree that AHZ is not of sound of mind.
Anyway, what made you think "I've come to the conclusion"? An information is either censored or not censored. There is no between. If it is censored, we wouldn't have known the information. If it was an attempt at censorship, it would have been readily obvious to everyone with a half of a brain.
They resigned over disagreement with Elon Musk. That isn't new.
Yoel Roth, Twitter's senior director of trust and safety, also quit, Axios has learned. Musk had been leaning on Roth in the past few days to explain the company's efforts to mitigate harmful content from proliferating on the platform.
https://www.axios.com/2022/11/10/twitter-loses-two-more-top-executives
While the impact may have had a minimal effect, Trump and the GOP still lost. Whatever the attempt was, it failed epically.
Already addressed.
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
Believe it or not, articles are still written by people even if I didn't write the article myself. And no, I didn't write any of the articles I linked to.
I definitely did want you to address it, but it took quite some time to get you to do that. At least you did it though. Many people never do. As to your aspersions concerning my sources, I've yet to see any evidence for them, but if we can focus on the content of my sources rather than your views of them, perhaps we can continue to make progress.
I'm curious how you came to that conclusion. Did you take a poll on what people thought of his soundness of mind here? In any case, his post to groan ratio is better than mine, and mine isn't that bad. I believe that he should try to be more understanding of other people's points of view and refrain from the insults (you know how much I like those), but I think it's clear that me and AHZ have a lot of common views on the subject of censorship.
You're conflating censorship in a given place to absolute censorship everywhere. They're not the same thing.
You misunderstood why I linked to that article. I was pointing out that the mainstream media fully acknowledges that Twitter engaged in censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story.
The author of that article appears to be suggesting that Roth didn't like being leaned on by Musk and this caused him to quit. He doesn't offer any supporting evidence, though.
You've changed your stance from the scandal not having any impact to it "may have had a minimal effect". But far more notable to the discerning eye is that you have yet to provide any evidence that the censorship and malignment of the Hunter Biden laptop story didn't actually change the election results.
You sure you're not shooting yourself in the foot here? We agree on a lot of things. All I'm saying is that it helps to put oneself in the shoes of others. Treat others as you would like to be treated. I imagine that you had the same general idea when you wrote the following:
"Morality is a set of attitudes and behaviors which facilitate voluntary, cooperative and mutually beneficial relationships."
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
ordinarily i would agree, but you don't know what deeply committed liars and obfuscators these degenerates are....
I'm pretty sure you know that I strongly disagree with you here. For those in the audience who'd like to see my discussion with TiE on the subject, I recommend the following thread:
Former Swiss Intelligence Officer blows the whistle on West's Ukraine War Narrative | justplainpolitics.com
I'd say that every party involved in a war loses a lot, other than the ones supplying the weapons. What I'm hoping for is that the U.S. and NATO don't push Russia to what might be called a point of no return. I made a thread on all of this here if you're interested:
Will Our War-for-Profit System Lead to Nuclear Annihilation? | justplainpolitics.com