Starker on 4/7/2019 at 18:32
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
I'm Dude that study you linked me shows trust in the press at 30%.
Way to prove me right. That's At the high end of the general ballpark which is between 20-30%
Columbia Journalism covered that and their conclusion was “Trust in media was down. Again.”
(
https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/trust-in-media-down.php)
Learn to read, once and for all. 30 percent is the trust among Republicans. The very same Republicans who are on a steady diet of talk radio and Fox News and being told constantly how untrustworthy the media is. For Democrats, it's much higher. For the general population, it was 55% in the survey I linked to. And the poll Columbia Journalism references only confirmed what the Poynter Media Trust Survey said, that trust had been declining over the decade, but has rebounded recently. Finally, as I said, it doesn't matter how many people believe something, it doesn't therefore make it true.
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
“For journalists do good work”. You're deliberately and dishonestly conflating journalism with large, corporate backed, American outlets and implying that it's synonymous with left leaning corporate journalism.
You're the one who's deliberately and dishonestly using isolated incidents to smear the media, going as far as to portray a homeless hacker as a mainstream journalist. I'm still waiting, btw, to hear what major publications he was reporting for.
As I said, again and again, journalists are not perfect or infallible. They do make mistakes. That does not diminish from the excellent work they produce as a whole. And the Mueller Report was a complete vindication in the face of the relentless smear campaign they have been under in the US. So many things journalists had been reporting and so many things they'd been accused of fabricating turned out to be completely true. Like the fact that Lord Dampnut ordered McGahn to fire Mueller, which was first reported by the NYT and called fake news. And there were many more such stories that the Mueller Report confirmed were completely true.
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
“The Pulliter Prize winning Journalist in Question was Glenn Greenwald, who incidentally had been extremely critical of recent reporting and has documented numerous blatant lies on the part of establishment press.
As I said, quote me where I questioned the article you were referring to. Glenn Greenwald does have his own problems, including complete blinkers when it comes to Russia, but I don't think I have ever put anything he reported about the NSA in doubt. Go on, prove me wrong and quote me.
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
“You also don't seem to understand what “Deep state” means. The term existed before Trump and is just a catch all phrase referring to the bevy of unelected and unaccountable agencies in the government. It doesn't mean “People who are out to get Trump”. You don't need to worry that you're a kook for believing that: roughly 80% of Americans agree that a deep state exists so long as you don't call it a “deep state”, and instead just ask them whether the definition is an accurate description of affairs
Career civil servants have always existed and there is no reason to believe there is a sinister conspiracy behind it beyond your typical Yes, Minister stuff.
Also, it's not just a catch-all phrase. It's pretty much used in conjunction with "Obama holdovers" and to suggest there are people working against Lord Dampnut in secret as a sort of a shadow government.
Also, what does unelected even mean here? Quite obviously not everyone in the government can be elected and it's pure nonsense to even suggest it. Not to mention the expansion of the secret agencies took place with the explicit approval of the elected officials and the wrongdoings likewise were shielded by them.
Tony_Tarantula on 11/7/2019 at 13:36
If the term "Deep State" just means that, then why the hell did it exist before Trump even announced his candidacy?
Again you can't stop yourself from the dishonest conflations. "Civil Servants" aren't the same thing as what we're actually talking about. Literally nobody pictures some county clerk when they say "Deep State". They're figuring some shady FBI or CIA official doing shady shit like MKULTRA. Or the NSA spying on literally everyone with backdoor access to every email sent (which, if I recall correctly, you vehemently denied and when presented with documents claimed they were "fake" despite them coming directly from the document dump)
Quote:
Not to mention the expansion of the secret agencies took place with the explicit approval of the elected officials and the wrongdoings likewise were shielded by them.
Which happened largely under Bush, and the shielding of such wrongdoing was spearheaded by a president you borderline worship.
*****
Actual reason I came here:
Facebook changed their policy to ALLOW death threats.
I shit you not. Feel free to brows the policy (linked) for the actual text: (
https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/credible_violence/)
Quote:
“Do not post: Threats that could lead to death (and other forms of high-severity violence) of any target(s) where threat is defined as any of the following:
Statements of intent to commit high-severity violence; or
Calls for high-severity violence (
unless the target is an organization or individual covered in the Dangerous Individuals and Organizations policy)....”
Basically, if someone at Facebook deems you as a "hate" person then it's allowed for people to make death threats and organize violence against you.
You all need to be VERY careful what you wish for. Contrary to what most of you all believe a civil war is almost a guaranteed defeat for the left. I can explain why but what is actually likely to happen in that scenario is millions of deaths by starvation and the US is split between a far right dictatorship and territories occupied by other governments. Simply logistics involved make it almost impossible for the left/government alliance to win any civil conflict, so those of you all who secretly want this are being extremely foolish.
Trance on 11/7/2019 at 15:10
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
Actual reason I came here:
Facebook changed their policy to ALLOW death threats.
I shit you not. Feel free to brows the policy (linked) for the actual text: (
https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/credible_violence/)
Quote:
“Do not post: Threats that could lead to death (and other forms of high-severity violence) of any target(s) where threat is defined as any of the following:
Statements of intent to commit high-severity violence; or
Calls for high-severity violence (unless the target is an organization or individual covered in the Dangerous Individuals and Organizations policy)….”
Your link
literally doesn't say what you quoted.
Inline Image:
https://i.imgur.com/aShI9DO.pngYou're incredible, Tony. In so many ways.
Starker on 11/7/2019 at 15:37
It did exist in the form Tony described for a short while, but it was meant to cover such things as calling for terrorists to be bombed and demanding the death penalty for murderers, not for any of the nonsense Tony was spouting.
As for the Turner Diaries crap, go home, Tony, you're drunk.
And as for Deep State, for once and for all, learn to read, Tony. I literally said the opposite, that it's not just a catch-all term, but has also acquired a very specific meaning over the couple of years in the right wing echo chambers.
froghawk on 11/7/2019 at 17:27
Bahaha this guy actually thinks there's some contigent of the far left that wants align itself with the state? Does he even know what we actually stand for? If anything, our extreme fringe wants to team up with working class republicans and lead a populist uprising against the state.
Renzatic on 11/7/2019 at 18:29
Quote Posted by Trance
Your link
literally doesn't say what you quoted.
The problem is that you're all suffering from cognitive dissonance driven by your confirmation biases to refuse anything that sounds outside your leftist echo chamber.
BUT ORANGE MAN BAD AMIRITE OLOL :joke::joke::joke::joke::angel::angel::angel::eww::eww::erm::devil::cheeky:
Starker on 11/7/2019 at 18:46
Quote Posted by froghawk
Bahaha this guy actually thinks there's some contigent of the far left that wants align itself with the state? Does he even know what we actually stand for? If anything, our extreme fringe wants to team up with working class republicans and lead a populist uprising against the state.
Not to mention there's a bit of a leap from Facebook posting ambiguously worded community standards to government-backed antifa death squads bursting down the doors of conservatives in an all-out civil war.
Renzatic on 11/7/2019 at 19:03
All point A's can go straight to point Z so long as you believe in yourself.
june gloom on 12/7/2019 at 02:35
You know I have to commend you guys for giving Tony the time of day. I used to think TTLG would be better off with the likes of him banned, but to be honest you're probably preventing a mass shooting by keeping him busy. Keep up the good work.
Starker on 12/7/2019 at 04:40
Returning to the topic once again, the great right-wing philosopher Lord Dampnut recently laid out his views on what does and doesn't constitute free speech:
Quote:
(
https://www.mediaite.com/news/trump-says-its-not-free-speech-to-write-bad-about-something-good-thats-dangerous-speech/)
He talked about how Silicon Valley is admired for their technology and how smart they are, but that they don't “using that brilliance” fairly. “They have to do that.”
“And we don't want to stifle anything, we certainly don't want to stifle free speech. But that's no longer free speech,” said Trump. “See I don't think that the mainstream media is free speech either, because it's so crooked, it's so dishonest.”
“So to me, free speech is not when you see something good and then you purposely write bad, to me that's very dangerous speech, and you become angry at it,” said Trump. “But that's not free speech.”
In a nutshell, the media should stop covering fake news, such as government corruption and incompetence, and start covering real news, such as the Democratic Party being run by satanic pedophile cannibals.