Read 4362 times

  • L I
  • Waygook Lord

    • 6781

    • October 03, 2011, 01:50:58 pm
Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #100 on: June 05, 2021, 08:10:27 am »
Russians started a rumor that Biden stole the Democratic primary from Sanders, too. Some people believed that as well.



  • fka
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1090

    • September 05, 2019, 06:37:44 pm
    • Seoul
Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #101 on: June 05, 2021, 09:48:44 am »
The old Soviet Union had their spies and folks operating in America from the 1930's and beyond planting propaganda.  Their Marxist ideas got slowly planted into society.  Why were so many boomers especially at the college level so bat shit crazy?  They had bad ideas planted in their head.  Pro Communist.  Many grew up especially after years of bad economic growth mid 70's to mid 80's.  But a handful kept their Commie ideals and went into academia.  The next generation of school kids got the garbage planted into their minds.  It took on a life of it's own after Communism in Russia was no more.  Garbage in garbage out.  Some of the Millennials are now bat shit crazy due to this. 

As for Russia, except for hacking, they are largely contained.  Sanctions after 2014 and more under Trump have had their effect.  Russia has recently cut it's defense budget a lot.  Most of their military equipment is outdated Soviet leftover junk. 

The head got cut off the snake (Soviet Union) but the babies it hatched (Marxist teachers) have taken on a life of their own. 


American academia would gain so much more credibility if teachers and professors spent their time on Waygook.org sharing Newsmax clips and enthusing about Trump's "reinstatement" as President.


Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #102 on: June 05, 2021, 12:30:12 pm »
Many conspiracy theories started by the Russians went viral. Like Seth Rich. And that Clinton stole the election from Sanders. Which didn't happen. She got more votes. Something of which the conspiracy theorists were unaware.
That was started by the Russians? Do you have any provenance for that?


  • L I
  • Waygook Lord

    • 6781

    • October 03, 2011, 01:50:58 pm
Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #103 on: June 05, 2021, 12:45:03 pm »
It was the SVR, the Russian intelligence agency, that planted the conspiracy theory about Seth Rich from the get-go.

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/11/740608323/the-origins-of-the-seth-rich-conspiracy-theory

It wasn't just those bulletins from the SVR; what we found is that RT and Sputnik, the Russian government-owned TV stations and radio stations, ramped up the story, broadcast multiple stories about Seth Rich. And most importantly, the Internet Research Agency - that's that shadowy outfit, the troll farm in St. Petersburg that was actively involved in the manipulation of social media during the 2016 campaign - they were tweeting and retweeting about Seth Rich relentlessly, more than 2,000 times by our count.



  • L I
  • Waygook Lord

    • 6781

    • October 03, 2011, 01:50:58 pm
Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #104 on: June 05, 2021, 12:50:27 pm »
Russia's effort to convince supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders to vote for President Donald Trump over former Secretary Hillary Clinton was more expansive than previously known, according to a new study.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/bernie-sanders-central-to-russias-pro-trump-2016-strategy-study-2019-4%3famp

Special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian election interference had already revealed that Kremlin-linked trolls were ordered to write social media posts not only in opposition to Clinton but in support of Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump.


Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #105 on: June 05, 2021, 12:52:20 pm »
Russia's effort to convince supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders to vote for President Donald Trump over former Secretary Hillary Clinton was more expansive than previously known, according to a new study.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/bernie-sanders-central-to-russias-pro-trump-2016-strategy-study-2019-4%3famp

Special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian election interference had already revealed that Kremlin-linked trolls were ordered to write social media posts not only in opposition to Clinton but in support of Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump.
In other words, that guy in the stadium booed louder than was previously thought.

There's still no link to effect nor them starting these rumors.


  • L I
  • Waygook Lord

    • 6781

    • October 03, 2011, 01:50:58 pm
Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #106 on: June 05, 2021, 12:54:50 pm »

Russia hacked DNC emails. Claimed the emails showed the election was stolen- which is quite the interpretation. Russian ally Wikileaks promoted the story.

How about Seth Rich?

Joe Rogan was putting out the conspiracy theory as fact, sincerely believing it, and thatís the number one podcast in the world. Millions of listeners.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2021, 01:09:36 pm by L I »


  • L I
  • Waygook Lord

    • 6781

    • October 03, 2011, 01:50:58 pm
Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #107 on: June 05, 2021, 01:03:31 pm »
The Russian started rumor seems believable... until you consider he was walking home through a ghetto hood drunk at 4am. Inebriation via alcohol impairs judgement / inflates confidence so he tried to fight off the mugger rather than hand over his wallet.


Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #108 on: June 06, 2021, 11:50:06 pm »
Russia hacked DNC emails. Claimed the emails showed the election was stolen- which is quite the interpretation. Russian ally Wikileaks promoted the story.

How about Seth Rich?

Joe Rogan was putting out the conspiracy theory as fact, sincerely believing it, and thatís the number one podcast in the world. Millions of listeners.
Publishing hacked or leaked emails is not propaganda if they are authentic documents.

Where is the provenance for Russia being the genesis of the Seth Rich theory?


  • gogators!
  • The Legend

    • 4981

    • March 16, 2016, 04:35:48 pm
    • Seoul
Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #109 on: June 07, 2021, 03:41:43 am »
You know you can pay people to write a book/report and bamboozle people into making something look big and scary, right? Just because you are easily tricked and fall for such crap, doesn't make it true.

Also, you know the effectiveness of Cambridge Analytica's stuff has been questioned, yes? If anything, they were a bunch of snake-oil salesmen making money off of political campaigns.

Again, please post these sophisticated ads they used. DID ANY OF THEM GO VIRAL? No.

You know what did go viral? Hillary's limp ass being dragged into a van at Ground Zero.
Yes, they went viral. Again, I've posted links to this in the past that show how disinformation posts or ad were re-posted and viewed by  hundreds of thousands of people.

Those Facebooks posts targeted a specific population, one that was not involved in the political process. It is those people who unexpectedly, at least by the pollsters, came out to vote and helped trump win the electoral college. 

Your disdain of actual expertise is nothing new. For weeks you defended the captain and crew of the Sewol for not doing what all the experts said they should have done--get the passengers on deck where they could be rescued.

If you are comfortable remaining ignorant, that's your business. But something about it bothers you enough to feel compelled to slander and slur those who've gone to the trouble of informing themselves.


  • L I
  • Waygook Lord

    • 6781

    • October 03, 2011, 01:50:58 pm
Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #110 on: June 07, 2021, 06:02:27 am »
Where is the provenance for Russia being the genesis of the Seth Rich theory?

Didnít you see it? It was posted earlier in this thread.
___________________ ___________________ _________________

It was the SVR, the Russian intelligence agency, that planted the conspiracy theory about Seth Rich from the get-go.

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/11/740608323/the-origins-of-the-seth-rich-conspiracy-theory

It wasn't just those bulletins from the SVR; what we found is that RT and Sputnik, the Russian government-owned TV stations and radio stations, ramped up the story, broadcast multiple stories about Seth Rich. And most importantly, the Internet Research Agency - that's that shadowy outfit, the troll farm in St. Petersburg that was actively involved in the manipulation of social media during the 2016 campaign - they were tweeting and retweeting about Seth Rich relentlessly, more than 2,000 times by our count.



Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #111 on: June 07, 2021, 09:50:05 am »
LI: facts

Martin: that's not what happened, do you have any proof?

LI: here's some more facts that prove the facts

Martin: let's change the subject


Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #112 on: June 07, 2021, 10:02:26 am »
Michael Isikoff is a questionable source considering his role in promoting the Russia smear and later walk-back and his links
https://apnews.com/article/b40bb54f4bc829849daaa98624dba031

Also, this theory is a case of convergent evolution.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/enterthefray/la-ol-seth-rich-conspiracy-fox-news-20190710-story.html

And it's quite likely the Russian link really had nothing at all to do with it. Of course Isikoff could have reported all of this if he really cared about the truth and providing the full story, but he omitted it. And gullible saps like you fell for it.

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2pnVCkgLGAUJ:https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/07/09/dont-blame-seth-rich-conspiracy-russians-blame-americans/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=jp

« Last Edit: June 07, 2021, 10:04:35 am by Mr.DeMartino »


Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #113 on: June 07, 2021, 10:26:01 am »
Yes, they went viral. Again, I've posted links to this in the past that show how disinformation posts or ad were re-posted and viewed by  hundreds of thousands of people.
No they didn't. You, because you do not understand the difference between "being viewed" and going viral.

When they say those ads were "viewed", what they are talking about is "impressions." Any time an ad pops up on your facebook or youtube or twitter or a webpage for even a microsecond, it's considered an "impression" and "viewed". What do most people do? Just scroll past them. The way you measure something going viral is by the number of "likes" and the number of "shares" or "retweets" or "comments". None of these ads had it.

Again, if these ads are so famous, why haven't you linked any? It's because they aren't famous. You know they aren't famous. And you know if you did link them and tried to claim they were viral, you would be laughed at.

Quote
Those Facebooks posts targeted a specific population, one that was not involved in the political process. It is those people who unexpectedly, at least by the pollsters, came out to vote and helped trump win the electoral college.
Correlation does not equal causation.  You don't think them turning out had something to do with the fact that DONALD TRUMP, DONALD FRICKIN TRUMP, was one of the candidates and he became the contender by coming out and saying shit that no normal politician was willing to say in a manner no politician would dare to? The fact that his campaign directly targeted disenchanted working class and rural whites with his message?

Or do you seriously believe it was because of some Russian facebook post of Trump high-fiving Jesus that got 56 likes and 8 shares?

Quote
For weeks you defended the captain and crew of the Sewol for not doing what all the experts said they should have done--get the passengers on deck where they could be rescued.
No, that's not what I said. I am sorry you are too stupid to read nuanced arguments and process them appropriately. I specifically went through a list of things the captain was accused of doing wrong, found him guilty on most, not guilty on a couple. As far as the decision not to get everyone on top immediately there were the concerns of making the vessel top heavy, the degree of list and concerns over children falling into the water. And the speed with which it went from "mild list that might not be a big problem" to "Abandon ship" happened rather quickly and at that point it basically prevented any effective evacuation due to the degree of the list.

Of course your response to this wasn't to debate and discuss it and go over the conclusions it was "Hahaha, SR thinks he's a captain and lol at his timeline"- in other words, I triggered cognitive dissonance: Clearly you hadn't thought of those factors before and once brought forth, they did make logical sense. However you couldn't handle that, so instead of at the bare minimum of rationally debating it, you just responded with insult that didn't even address the points- a clear sign of cognitive dissonance.

You're making your conclusion in hindsight, with the benefit of time, as the person not in charge, in a calm situation, and with no accountability. It's a really easy decision to make at that point. It's not always easy in the moment. The fact that you think it is an easy decision in the moment shows how incompetent you are and how poorly you grasp the situation.

Quote
But something about it bothers you enough to feel compelled to slander and slur those who've gone to the trouble of informing themselves.
As was shown above, YOU and your ilk are the ones that have not informed themselves. YOU are the gullible saps, just like those Trumpers that gobble up every bit of RW nonsense. You, as has been said, are the other side of the same coin: People so wrapped up in "team" and personal animus that you don't think. You just cheer.

You engage in one-step information- You get information from one source that you enjoy and that becomes your opinion. It is similar to your behavior in Korea- Your first reaction to something is what your opinion is. Nothing will change your mind after. Is that how a smart person thinks or a stupid person?


  • gogators!
  • The Legend

    • 4981

    • March 16, 2016, 04:35:48 pm
    • Seoul
Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #114 on: June 07, 2021, 11:07:51 pm »
No they didn't. You, because you do not understand the difference between "being viewed" and going viral.

When they say those ads were "viewed", what they are talking about is "impressions." Any time an ad pops up on your facebook or youtube or twitter or a webpage for even a microsecond, it's considered an "impression" and "viewed". What do most people do? Just scroll past them. The way you measure something going viral is by the number of "likes" and the number of "shares" or "retweets" or "comments". None of these ads had it.

Again, if these ads are so famous, why haven't you linked any? It's because they aren't famous. You know they aren't famous. And you know if you did link them and tried to claim they were viral, you would be laughed at.
Correlation does not equal causation.  You don't think them turning out had something to do with the fact that DONALD TRUMP, DONALD FRICKIN TRUMP, was one of the candidates and he became the contender by coming out and saying shit that no normal politician was willing to say in a manner no politician would dare to? The fact that his campaign directly targeted disenchanted working class and rural whites with his message?

Or do you seriously believe it was because of some Russian facebook post of Trump high-fiving Jesus that got 56 likes and 8 shares?
No, that's not what I said. I am sorry you are too stupid to read nuanced arguments and process them appropriately. I specifically went through a list of things the captain was accused of doing wrong, found him guilty on most, not guilty on a couple. As far as the decision not to get everyone on top immediately there were the concerns of making the vessel top heavy, the degree of list and concerns over children falling into the water. And the speed with which it went from "mild list that might not be a big problem" to "Abandon ship" happened rather quickly and at that point it basically prevented any effective evacuation due to the degree of the list.

Of course your response to this wasn't to debate and discuss it and go over the conclusions it was "Hahaha, SR thinks he's a captain and lol at his timeline"- in other words, I triggered cognitive dissonance: Clearly you hadn't thought of those factors before and once brought forth, they did make logical sense. However you couldn't handle that, so instead of at the bare minimum of rationally debating it, you just responded with insult that didn't even address the points- a clear sign of cognitive dissonance.

You're making your conclusion in hindsight, with the benefit of time, as the person not in charge, in a calm situation, and with no accountability. It's a really easy decision to make at that point. It's not always easy in the moment. The fact that you think it is an easy decision in the moment shows how incompetent you are and how poorly you grasp the situation.
As was shown above, YOU and your ilk are the ones that have not informed themselves. YOU are the gullible saps, just like those Trumpers that gobble up every bit of RW nonsense. You, as has been said, are the other side of the same coin: People so wrapped up in "team" and personal animus that you don't think. You just cheer.

You engage in one-step information- You get information from one source that you enjoy and that becomes your opinion. It is similar to your behavior in Korea- Your first reaction to something is what your opinion is. Nothing will change your mind after. Is that how a smart person thinks or a stupid person?
No. I've done a lot more reading on this than you appear to have done.

As for someone not changing their mind, that description fits you to a T. Your defense of your defense of the actions taken on the Sewol prove that.


Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #115 on: June 08, 2021, 05:41:04 am »
No. I've done a lot more reading on this than you appear to have done.

As for someone not changing their mind, that description fits you to a T. Your defense of your defense of the actions taken on the Sewol prove that.
gogators! You are confusing reading opinion pieces and pseudo news pieces that all echo each other with thinking. You were reading them for the purposes of reinforcement of your own beliefs, not analyzing them.

If you really were thinking, why didn't you notice any of the flaws in their arguments and conclusions? Why in your mind are they all impeccable? Because you weren't thinking.

As for Sewol, only a peawit would think I was defending him. When you declare someone guilty of negligence on points 1, 2, 4, and 6, but not on points 3 and 5, you aren't defending them. Moat people understand this. You don't. The problem isn't with me, it's with you either not being able to understand this due to intellectual deficiency, or understanding it but just allowing personal animus to override everything.

Anyways, can you actually debate and offer points and sources or use logic, rather than drive-by comments declaring yourself the victor?


  • gogators!
  • The Legend

    • 4981

    • March 16, 2016, 04:35:48 pm
    • Seoul
Re: The bromance that wasn't
« Reply #116 on: June 08, 2021, 09:12:41 am »
gogators! You are confusing reading opinion pieces and pseudo news pieces that all echo each other with thinking. You were reading them for the purposes of reinforcement of your own beliefs, not analyzing them.

If you really were thinking, why didn't you notice any of the flaws in their arguments and conclusions? Why in your mind are they all impeccable? Because you weren't thinking.

As for Sewol, only a peawit would think I was defending him. When you declare someone guilty of negligence on points 1, 2, 4, and 6, but not on points 3 and 5, you aren't defending them. Moat people understand this. You don't. The problem isn't with me, it's with you either not being able to understand this due to intellectual deficiency, or understanding it but just allowing personal animus to override everything.

Anyways, can you actually debate and offer points and sources or use logic, rather than drive-by comments declaring yourself the victor?

Sorry, dude. As my previous links demonstrating, the articles and books I was referring to were well-researched. They were not opinion pieces. I was reading to educate myself about what was actually happening in the world.

You defended the captain of the Sewol from the get go and continued on for page after page, never wavering in your argument that he and the crew has added correctly and that you would have done exactly the same thing. Insults won't change that.

I don't know who told you that this was a debating contest. It's not. I'm merely pointing out the disinformation and lies that you post and when posting contemporaneously with the issue at hand, posting links and quotations that shed some light.

BTW, this thread was about trump's approach to foreign affairs--"beautiful, beautiful letters" and how it was a colossal failure. Yes, I stole the colossal part from one of your posts.