User Controls
THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty's
-
2021-11-29 at 3:47 AM UTC
Originally posted by Technologist That’s not torture by our definition. Again, that is how a jail is set up. Most inmates are not housed in jails.
You might want to look into the Geneva Convention.
Originally posted by Technologist How do you know they weren’t punished? Did the FBI tell you?
So if the FBI kicked in your door and shot your dog, and it'd happened to several of your neighbours, you'd be fine with them telling you "It's an internal matter ma'am, don't worry about it"? Even though it keeps happening?
Originally posted by Technologist No clue how much anyone spent, I don’t work for the russsian govt.
You claim your point is supported by the Mueller investigation so I'd like you to tell me what they actually found. -
2021-11-29 at 3:48 AM UTC
-
2021-11-29 at 3:51 AM UTCFurther, since you're so stuck on Russia spending money to affect the outcome of elections, I'd like you to consider the broader context and tell me how much countries like israel or the Gulf states spend every year.
-
2021-11-29 at 3:52 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra You might want to look into the Geneva Convention.
No need.So if the FBI kicked in your door and shot your dog, and it'd happened to several of your neighbours, you'd be fine with them telling you "It's an internal matter ma'am, don't worry about it"? Even though it keeps happening?
Just because you don’t know what came of these issues doesn’t mean they weren’t dealt with.You claim your point is supported by the Mueller investigation so I'd like you to tell me what they actually found.
I watched him say there was a systemic targeted social media campaign when he testified before congress. I trust my own eyes. I know you conspiracy nuts don’t want me to, but too fucking bad😁 -
2021-11-29 at 3:54 AM UTC
-
2021-11-29 at 3:55 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra Further, since you're so stuck on Russia spending money to affect the outcome of elections, I'd like you to consider the broader context and tell me how much countries like israel or the Gulf states spend every year.
Oh, I believe many countries have weaponized social media. For ages govts have tried to influence other countries elections. It’s just a lot easier now with social media. -
2021-11-29 at 3:56 AM UTC
Originally posted by Technologist No need.
The US is a signatory to it, but it's not enforceable at this time. Again, just go with "I am OK with torture".
Originally posted by Technologist Just because you don’t know what came of these issues doesn’t mean they weren’t dealt with.
So you would be fine with the FBI telling you "don't worry we've dealt with it internally" as they continually victimise you? No need for oversight or anything, you trust them that much?
Originally posted by Technologist I watched him say there was a systemic targeted social media campaign when he testified before congress. I trust my own eyes. I know you conspiracy nuts don’t want me to, but too fucking bad😁
"I trust my own eyes" is a phrase used when you actually see something happen, not when you see the man on TV talking.
So you actually have no idea what's in the Mueller report? -
2021-11-29 at 3:58 AM UTC
Originally posted by Technologist Oh, I believe many countries have weaponized social media. For ages govts have tried to influence other countries elections. It’s just a lot easier now with social media.
As a ratio, how much money do you think Russia spent on influencing the 2016 US elections vs. israel.
1:1,000?
1:100,000?
1:1,000,000? -
2021-11-29 at 4:02 AM UTCGoodnight aldra. We will never see eye to eye on these issues. I’m not gonna sit here and bang my head against a wall.
Off to bed. Big day tomorrow. -
2021-11-29 at 4:03 AM UTCI remember the st Petersburg "troll farm" was called "the internet research agency" or something really stupid sounding so I figured it was true because if they were making it up they would come up with a better name. All the algorithms they ran and data they crunched to see the "reach" of the campaign was clearly work tbey should be doing with other actors and organizations too.
There's no such thing as the grassroots anymore, it's been astroturfed down and you have to pay to play. Maybe the Russian social media campaign was concerted and deliberate but it had no greater "reach" than many of the other organizations infecting social media for their benefit -
2021-11-29 at 4:04 AM UTC
-
2021-11-29 at 4:05 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sudo I remember the st Petersburg "troll farm" was called "the internet research agency" or something really stupid sounding so I figured it was true because if they were making it up they would come up with a better name. All the algorithms they ran and data they crunched to see the "reach" of the campaign was clearly work tbey should be doing with other actors and organizations too.
There's no such thing as the grassroots anymore, it's been astroturfed down and you have to pay to play. Maybe the Russian social media campaign was concerted and deliberate but it had no greater "reach" than many of the other organizations infecting social media for their benefit
http://thesaker.is/a-brief-history-of-the-kremlin-trolls/
it was never a real thing -
2021-11-29 at 4:11 AM UTCI am paid by the Canadian government to troll Americans into supporting pro canadian trade deals.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2021-11-29 at 4:14 AM UTC
-
2021-11-29 at 6:13 PM UTCproof what we do matters and when done right it cant be ignored
-
2021-11-29 at 10:33 PM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2021-11-29 at 10:37 PM UTC
Originally posted by POLECAT proof what we do matters and when done right it cant be ignored
It just boils down to the tyrants are handing their mega-corporation buddies exemptions, just like they hand themselves exemptions. All the little people will still be forced to inject the concoctions. For me, it's either everyone is free or no one is free. There should never be a double standard. -
2021-11-29 at 11:04 PM UTCto be I think if you want to be free thats ok and if you wanna be a commie cuck to the government well if you still love america and are willing to leave the people alone that believe they are free they can stay but if they hate america and the free ones living here following the constitution well they have to be deported
-
2021-11-29 at 11:09 PM UTC
Originally posted by aldra http://thesaker.is/a-brief-history-of-the-kremlin-trolls/
it was never a real thing
I read some of it last night and it was interesting but hardly conclusive, more just opened the door saying it could have been faked. The troll farms part of the Mueller report was really the only part of it I read so i should contrast -
2021-11-30 at 7:04 AM UTCTL/DR
Business Insider
Former spy chief said Trump was 'fact-free' and would 'fly off on tangents' during intel briefings, book says
rpickrell@businessinsider.com (Ryan Pickrell,Sonam Sheth)
Trump was "fact-free" and would often "fly off on tangents" during intel briefings, a new book says.
The former DNI said Trump got distracted so often that an hour of discussion amounted to "eight or nine minutes of real intelligence."
The book says Trump's transition was the hardest in the intel community's experience with briefing presidents.
As president-elect, Donald Trump was "fact-free" and would often "fly off on tangents" during intelligence briefings, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said in a book written by a former CIA officer and recently published by the CIA's Center for the Study of Intelligence.
John Helgerson, the author of the book and the CIA inspector general from 2002 until he retired in 2009, writes that for the intelligence community, "the Trump transition was far and away the most difficult in its historical experience with briefing new presidents."
Helgerson, whose book "Getting to Know the President" was first published in 1996 and has since been updated to include information on later presidents, said the only possible comparison could be Richard Nixon, who distrusted the intelligence community. But "rather than shut the IC out, Trump engaged with it, but attacked it publicly," he added, referring to the intelligence community.
Helgerson writes in his book that James Clapper, who was the director of national intelligence during the transition period, felt that behind the scenes, Trump could be "courteous, affable, and complimentary of the IC." The book says that during one of his early briefings, Trump said that "the nasty things" he was saying in public about the intelligence community did not apply to the briefers.
Trump received presidential briefings about twice a week and is said to have received fewer briefings than other new presidents, who were often briefed daily. But Trump devoted more time to his briefings — about 40 to 60 minutes.
That said, Trump was widely known to veer off course and get distracted during his briefings. In the early days of his presidency, he told officials that he wanted briefings to be shorter and full of "killer graphics," The Washington Post previously reported.
Trump's lack of attentiveness prompted briefers to overhaul their playbook and instead structure his daily briefs to include more graphics, charts, and tables, The New York Times previously reported. National security officials also sprinkled Trump's own name into his briefings as part of their effort to get him to pay more attention, Reuters reported. At one point, they began simplifying his briefings to focus on a single key point to get through to him, "A Warning," a book by the former Trump administration official Miles Taylor, says.
"He doesn't really read anything," one of Trump's former briefers said, according to Helgerson's book. Clapper apparently agreed, saying, "Trump doesn't read much."
"Trump's style," Helgerson writes, "was to listen to the key points, discuss them with some care, then lead the discussion to related issues and others further afield."
Clapper said that during the intelligence briefings, Trump had a tendency to "fly off on tangents" in such a way that "there might be eight or nine minutes of real intelligence in an hour's discussion," the book says.
There were other challenges as well for the officials tasked with putting together the presidential briefings, the book says. "The irreconcilable difference, in Clapper's view, was that the IC worked with evidence," Helgerson writes, adding that Trump "was 'fact-free' — evidence doesn't cut it with him."
Helgerson's book says that Trump "digested the key points offered by the briefers, asked questions, engaged in discussion, made his own priority interests known, and used the information as a basis for discussions with his policy advisers."
"The system worked, but it struggled," Helgerson writes.
One former briefer, Beth Sanner, said that while Trump did not read the presidential daily briefings, he would bring other things to the conversations.
Helgerson, citing an interview Sanner did with the Center for the Study of Intelligence earlier this year, writes that while intelligence briefings continued even after the 2020 presidential election, no additional briefings were scheduled after the January 6 riot at the US Capitol.
