GG Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 Who said I take them at face value? I know it's hard, but try to stop infecting your own assumptions on me before commenting and the conversations will go much smoother. You posted an article that represents a critical opinion of the legal system under the TPP. The article includes a false narrative about Chevron & Ecuador. You did not offer any commentary about your views about the article, which would lead any reasonable person to assume that you support the article's viewpoint. Which happens to be in line with your multitude of posts taking TPP out of context. So, for the 1,000th time that you complain that people misinterpret your views, despite contrary evidence, please explain them.
DC Tom Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THE NATIONAL MEDIA, when Louisiana’s devastating floods barely register as a story? Well for one thing, there’s no political angle to beat up Republicans, when the state’s governor is a Democrat, and so is the president. . There's plenty of coverage. But the point on bias is accurate - Louisiana is seeing Katrina-level devastation, but no one seems particularly concerned about the paucity of the official response.
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 There's plenty of coverage. But the point on bias is accurate - Louisiana is seeing Katrina-level devastation, but no one seems particularly concerned about the paucity of the official response. George Bush caused Katrina because he hates black people. This flooding is an act of God. Duh
Deranged Rhino Posted August 16, 2016 Author Posted August 16, 2016 You posted an article that represents a critical opinion of the legal system under the TPP. Incorrect. I posted the leaked documents with a preface by Assange and clarified the difference between the two for people to have all the information and primary documents. The article includes a false narrative about Chevron & Ecuador. You did not offer any commentary about your views about the article, which would lead any reasonable person to assume that you support the article's viewpoint. That's lazy and like I said, making a bad assumption. I offered primary source material without comment. Which happens to be in line with your multitude of posts taking TPP out of context. So, for the 1,000th time that you complain that people misinterpret your views, despite contrary evidence, please explain them. I don't complain that people misinterpret my views. I complain that you quite often do, as you're doing now.
GG Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 Incorrect. I posted the leaked documents with a preface by Assange and clarified the difference between the two for people to have all the information and primary documents. That's lazy and like I said, making a bad assumption. I offered primary source material without comment. I don't complain that people misinterpret my views. I complain that you quite often do, as you're doing now. Primary source material is the TPP draft, not a Wikileaks account of it. As for your views being constantly misinterpreted, maybe it's because 99% of your source material is Wikileaks, RT& Intercept, without much qualification on the source or challenging the viewpoint of the articles? It would be like B-Man claiming that he isn't a right winger, because all he does is post articles.
Deranged Rhino Posted August 16, 2016 Author Posted August 16, 2016 Primary source material is the TPP draft, not a Wikileaks account of it. As for your views being constantly misinterpreted, maybe it's because 99% of your source material is Wikileaks, RT& Intercept, without much qualification on the source or challenging the viewpoint of the articles? It would be like B-Man claiming that he isn't a right winger, because all he does is post articles. Like I said, you got me all wrong. I rarely, if ever, post RT without qualifying it as such and even then it's only when the subject isn't being covered in the western media. WikiLeaks is in the news a lot, not talking about them or the information they're releasing would be ignoring a huge part of what I'm most interested in: the ongoing power struggle clearly happening behind the scenes on a global stage. The authenticity of the documents they've leaked thus far has proven to be 100% accurate, so ignoring them is willfully turning a blind eye to literally mountains of crucial information. You may have issues with Assange, I know I do, but that doesn't mean we should ignore their leaks. The Intercept is a legit news outlet and one of the only ones to cover certain topics I'm drawn to. I know you hate GG and think they're anti-American, but that's an extremist view of their articles. When I post any article without comment -- which I do quite often -- it's because I either am saving that article for later for my own use or hoping it'll stir up some conversations from folks with opinions other than my own. I like to do this by letting the articles or primary sources speak for themselves. Offering commentary before those discussions begin skew the organic development of that conversation and results in an echo chamber. So, try harder to make less assumptions about me and deal with the issues presented. I genuinely do enjoy our back and forth even when we (often) disagree on certain topics. It's never personal, but you do make a lot of assumptions about me and my intentions that just aren't true -- even after I clarify. Read more. Judge less.
GG Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 Like I said, you got me all wrong. I rarely, if ever, post RT without qualifying it as such and even then it's only when the subject isn't being covered in the western media. WikiLeaks is in the news a lot, not talking about them or the information they're releasing would be ignoring a huge part of what I'm most interested in: the ongoing power struggle clearly happening behind the scenes on a global stage. The authenticity of the documents they've leaked thus far has proven to be 100% accurate, so ignoring them is willfully turning a blind eye to literally mountains of crucial information. You may have issues with Assange, I know I do, but that doesn't mean we should ignore their leaks. The Intercept is a legit news outlet and one of the only ones to cover certain topics I'm drawn to. I know you hate GG and think they're anti-American, but that's an extremist view of their articles. When I post any article without comment -- which I do quite often -- it's because I either am saving that article for later for my own use or hoping it'll stir up some conversations from folks with opinions other than my own. I like to do this by letting the articles or primary sources speak for themselves. Offering commentary before those discussions begin skew the organic development of that conversation and results in an echo chamber. So, try harder to make less assumptions about me and deal with the issues presented. I genuinely do enjoy our back and forth even when we (often) disagree on certain topics. It's never personal, but you do make a lot of assumptions about me and my intentions that just aren't true -- even after I clarify. Read more. Judge less. Then why don't you start a separate thread of Greggy's personal interests that have nothing to do with existing topics. Because, you know, if you put a Putin apologist article in a Putin thread, people may actually think that you are a Putin apologist.
Deranged Rhino Posted August 16, 2016 Author Posted August 16, 2016 Then why don't you start a separate thread of Greggy's personal interests that have nothing to do with existing topics. Um... I do. You're posting in one now. Because, you know, if you put a Putin apologist article in a Putin thread, people may actually think that you are a Putin apologist. Not people who actually pay attention. Just the ones who have preconceived assumptions about me. And those sorts of people are operating from a place of ignorance and can think what they want.
GG Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 Not people who actually pay attention. Just the ones who have preconceived assumptions about me. And those sorts of people are operating from a place of ignorance and can think what they want. A perfect example is the equivocation in the Putin thread. Apparently to you, Putin's complete elimination of independent news & media, including murdering of uncooperative journalists, is the same thing as US politicians feeding stories to press outlets that are friendly to them. But I know, that's not really who you are.
Deranged Rhino Posted August 16, 2016 Author Posted August 16, 2016 A perfect example is the equivocation in the Putin thread. Apparently to you, Putin's complete elimination of independent news & media, including murdering of uncooperative journalists, is the same thing as US politicians feeding stories to press outlets that are friendly to them. But I know, that's not really who you are. Michael Hastings says hello... ...or would if he hadn't been murdered.
GG Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 Michael Hastings says hello... ...or would if he hadn't been murdered. Yup, that's an exact same situation as what's happening in Russia. I D E N T I C A L
Deranged Rhino Posted August 16, 2016 Author Posted August 16, 2016 Yup, that's an exact same situation as what's happening in Russia. I D E N T I C A L Putin's complete elimination of independent news & media, including murdering of uncooperative journalists, is the same thing as US politicians feeding stories to press outlets that are friendly to them. Again, you're putting things on me I didn't say. I didn't say the treatment of the press in both countries was identical, just that you act as if the US press has free reign. Then you said all the west does is feed stories to friendly press outlets which is absurdly naive. Like I said, Michael Hastings says hello. Or would if he hadn't been murdered by elements within the government. Who's really the "useful idiot"? The one who believes blindly that everything Russia does is inherently bad while everything the US does is good, or the one who questions the entire narrative? I'm going to say it's the former, especially when the former also believes regime change is simply "wishing for a better life" for others.
GG Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 Again, you're putting things on me I didn't say. I didn't say the treatment of the press in both countries was identical, just that you act as if the US press has free reign. Then you said all the west does is feed stories to friendly press outlets which is absurdly naive. Like I said, Michael Hastings says hello. Or would if he hadn't been murdered by elements within the government. Who's really the "useful idiot"? The one who believes blindly that everything Russia does is inherently bad while everything the US does is good, or the one who questions the entire narrative? I'm going to say it's the former, especially when the former also believes regime change is simply "wishing for a better life" for others. Welcome back to the equivocation. Where have I claimed that everything that US does is good? It doesn't. But it's not helping your case that every time you want to compare US actions to another country, you happen to pick the place that's intentionally starved and killed tens of millions of people, and is still responsible for sowing strife all over the world with its fanatical backwards worldview, steeped in its inbred inferiority complex. This should be an interesting game. Please point to the instances where Russia (and we really should be talking about USSR, since that's Vlad's ultimate goal) has been a net positive contributor to the world. I'll give you a head start - they sacrificed millions of lives to stop Hitler, and ....
/dev/null Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 I'll give you a head start - they sacrificed millions of lives to stop Hitler, and .... The Nazi rocket scientists the Russians captured put an object into space before the Nazi rocket scientists the Americans captured did
B-Man Posted August 17, 2016 Posted August 17, 2016 ANSWERING THE STUPID QUESTIONS: Would racism exist if there had been no US slavery? The answer, of course, is yes. When Gunnar Myrdal wrote about racism in his An American Dilemma, it wasn’t the racism that made Jim Crow an American dilemma — it was the racism set against a founding document that declared that all men are created equal. Racism is everywhere, and anyone who has traveled abroad and paid attention knows that it’s worse most other places than it is here in the United States. (And that includes Africa itself, of course, where ethnic differences that untutored Americans can’t even see — it’s like some ancient Star Trek episode — are of burning importance). But the reason why so many commentators have to pretend that America is uniquely bad — and even teach college students that slavery was a uniquely American institution, invented by the Founders — is that otherwise they’d lose out on a lucrative hustle. https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/241453/
Deranged Rhino Posted August 17, 2016 Author Posted August 17, 2016 Welcome back to the equivocation. Where have I claimed that everything that US does is good? It doesn't. It's annoying when people assign positions to you that you don't take, isn't it? Tough to have a real conversation that way. But, your actual position is good to hear. But it's not helping your case that every time you want to compare US actions to another country, you happen to pick the place that's intentionally starved and killed tens of millions of people, and is still responsible for sowing strife all over the world with its fanatical backwards worldview, steeped in its inbred inferiority complex. , You're doing it again. The bolded is not something I do often at all. When we're talking about US and Russian relations, then yes I do compare the US to Russia because that's the topic. I've never been running around here propping up Russia as some sort of aspirational beacon. That's just fantasy. You still have it in your head I'm a Putin apologist just because my standard position is to doubt the narrative we're spoon fed by our mainstream/corporate media. That's not my position in any of these threads and never has been. This should be an interesting game. Please point to the instances where Russia (and we really should be talking about USSR, since that's Vlad's ultimate goal) has been a net positive contributor to the world. I'll give you a head start - they sacrificed millions of lives to stop Hitler, and .... You still got me all wrong. I'm not trying to argue, and never have been arguing, Russia > USA. I'm certainly not arguing for USSR/Communism > Democracy. So that game is a bit pointless -- and you say the bolded as if it's trivial.
B-Man Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 (edited) Newspaper BEGS Obama to cut vacation short and visit Baton Rouge Look, Louisiana, Obama never interrupts his vacation unless it's impo- oh. http://cnn.it/2bA5u0B . . Edited August 18, 2016 by B-Man
B-Man Posted August 19, 2016 Posted August 19, 2016 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-flood-of-2016-southeast-louisiana-the-consequences_us_57b47ffae4b0b3bb4b088bcd?
DC Tom Posted August 19, 2016 Posted August 19, 2016 Newspaper BEGS Obama to cut vacation short and visit Baton Rouge Look, Louisiana, Obama never interrupts his vacation unless it's impo- oh. http://cnn.it/2bA5u0B . . It's an ongoing disaster. The President should stay the hell away. But if they REALLY want him to show up, just have a cop shoot a black man.
Recommended Posts