US Politics Thread

[Username Required]

So Self was intending to imply that the witness sounded like Goebbels, and is now complaining that someone else is making him sound like Goebbels...

Just because he quoted Goebbels!

The irony.

no mate. I laid out the entire situation. It's not complicated. Not at all.

A normal good faith response to all this would be...

"Phew, I'm glad to hear it, no one wants an officer in the U.S. military, especially one in a combat MOS, to be a crypto-Nazi!".

This is about one man and the insinuation he is a Nazi-sympathizer. It's got fuck all to do with anything other than that. The evidence that purports to demonstrate malignity when taken in toto shows the exact opposite.

 

[BobKowalski]

ha ha ha you're a fucking loon

Somewhat odd response. I quoted part of your post where you stated Self was familiar with Goebbels work and had quoted him previously. I agreed with you and wondered if it was perhaps a hobby of his and maybe he collected Nazi memorabilia? The collected speeches of Goebbels perhaps.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I didn’t mention Nazi’s. I simply pointed out that the rogues gallery of disinformation purveyors cited in your post were never likely to support a board appointed to tackle disinformation.

Disgusting post.


What’s with the apostrophe?!

 

[Username Required]

I didn’t mention Nazi’s. I simply pointed out that the rogues gallery of disinformation purveyors cited in your post were never likely to support a board appointed to tackle disinformation.

I see.

Other criticism came from progressive and civil libertarian voices; Benjamin Hart, writing in New York Magazine's Intelligencer, said that "presenting anyone from the government as an arbiter of truth in 2022 — much less defining 'disinformation' in a way that more than 40 percent of the population would agree with — seemed doomed from the get-go."

Lev Golinkin, writing in the progressive magazine The Nation, highlighted Jankowicz's previous association with the fact-checking organization StopFake, which Golinkin accused of defending the Ukrainian Azov Battalion and S14 groups, the latter of which is known for its violent attacks against Romani people.

Progressive news organizations Common Dreams and Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) criticized mainstream media coverage of the board, saying that it ignored left-wing criticism of the board and past human rights abuses and violence by the DHS and other agencies under the DHS, including violence against immigrants, Muslims, Black Lives Matter protestors, and other activists.

Joe Lancaster, editor of the libertarian magazine Reason, called the board a potential threat to free speech, and also highlighted Jankowicz's comments regarding the Biden laptop story.

Techdirt argued that "The biggest problem with [the board] is that it is impossible, right now, to even know whether it's a good idea or not, because it is so unclear what this board is intended to do." and that "its name does not inspire confidence."

Ayaan Hirsi Ali of UnHerd compared the board to Woodrow Wilson's Sedition Act of 1918, which convicted 877 people who dissented against the U.S. government.

Kevin Goldberg, a specialist in the First Amendment at the non-partisan Freedom Forum, said that it was "wrong and concerning" that a government agency with enforcement powers created in response to 9/11 would become involved in decisions surrounding speech.

 

[BobKowalski]

Disgusting post.


What’s with the apostrophe?!

It crept up on my blindside and inserted itself without my noticing. Sneaky little bastard. The apostrophe that is.

 

[BobKowalski]

I see.

Other criticism came from progressive and civil libertarian voices; Benjamin Hart, writing in New York Magazine's Intelligencer, said that "presenting anyone from the government as an arbiter of truth in 2022 — much less defining 'disinformation' in a way that more than 40 percent of the population would agree with — seemed doomed from the get-go."

Lev Golinkin, writing in the progressive magazine The Nation, highlighted Jankowicz's previous association with the fact-checking organization StopFake, which Golinkin accused of defending the Ukrainian Azov Battalion and S14 groups, the latter of which is known for its violent attacks against Romani people.

Progressive news organizations Common Dreams and Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) criticized mainstream media coverage of the board, saying that it ignored left-wing criticism of the board and past human rights abuses and violence by the DHS and other agencies under the DHS, including violence against immigrants, Muslims, Black Lives Matter protestors, and other activists.

Joe Lancaster, editor of the libertarian magazine Reason, called the board a potential threat to free speech, and also highlighted Jankowicz's comments regarding the Biden laptop story.

Techdirt argued that "The biggest problem with [the board] is that it is impossible, right now, to even know whether it's a good idea or not, because it is so unclear what this board is intended to do." and that "its name does not inspire confidence."

Ayaan Hirsi Ali of UnHerd compared the board to Woodrow Wilson's Sedition Act of 1918, which convicted 877 people who dissented against the U.S. government.

Kevin Goldberg, a specialist in the First Amendment at the non-partisan Freedom Forum, said that it was "wrong and concerning" that a government agency with enforcement powers created in response to 9/11 would become involved in decisions surrounding speech.

I know. I too read the Wiki article that you have copied verbatim. You appear to be labouring under the misapprehension that I support the setting up of this board under Govt Dept oversight. I do not. I merely pointed out that the Rogues Gallery of liars and gaslighters you initially referenced where never likely to support this board and its work.

The argument against the board is obvious as such a board under the control of a malignant fascist like Trump would be subverted to his agenda, so best not set up such a board in the first place. Of course Trump can set one up and call it the Committee of Truth and the Rogues Gallery would praise the Committee and support its work. No doubt Mr Self will be first in the queue with the praise - probably using a Goebbels quote or two given he is fond of referencing his work.

 

[Vic]

no mate. I laid out the entire situation. It's not complicated. Not at all.

A normal good faith response to all this would be...

"Phew, I'm glad to hear it, no one wants an officer in the U.S. military, especially one in a combat MOS, to be a crypto-Nazi!".

This is about one man and the insinuation he is a Nazi-sympathizer. It's got fuck all to do with anything other than that. The evidence that purports to demonstrate malignity when taken in toto shows the exact opposite.

Well, his response to a mass shooting on his patch was to call for thoughts and prayers (rather than gun control); to suggestions that prayers weren't enough of a response, he said that came from people that don't believe in an almighty god who is absolutely in control of our lives.

So God's in control of Self's quotes about Goebbels, and being misunderstood.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

I see.

Other criticism came from progressive and civil libertarian voices; Benjamin Hart, writing in New York Magazine's Intelligencer, said that "presenting anyone from the government as an arbiter of truth in 2022 — much less defining 'disinformation' in a way that more than 40 percent of the population would agree with — seemed doomed from the get-go."

Lev Golinkin, writing in the progressive magazine The Nation, highlighted Jankowicz's previous association with the fact-checking organization StopFake, which Golinkin accused of defending the Ukrainian Azov Battalion and S14 groups, the latter of which is known for its violent attacks against Romani people.

Progressive news organizations Common Dreams and Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) criticized mainstream media coverage of the board, saying that it ignored left-wing criticism of the board and past human rights abuses and violence by the DHS and other agencies under the DHS, including violence against immigrants, Muslims, Black Lives Matter protestors, and other activists.

Joe Lancaster, editor of the libertarian magazine Reason, called the board a potential threat to free speech, and also highlighted Jankowicz's comments regarding the Biden laptop story.

Techdirt argued that "The biggest problem with [the board] is that it is impossible, right now, to even know whether it's a good idea or not, because it is so unclear what this board is intended to do." and that "its name does not inspire confidence."

Ayaan Hirsi Ali of UnHerd compared the board to Woodrow Wilson's Sedition Act of 1918, which convicted 877 people who dissented against the U.S. government.

Kevin Goldberg, a specialist in the First Amendment at the non-partisan Freedom Forum, said that it was "wrong and concerning" that a government agency with enforcement powers created in response to 9/11 would become involved in decisions surrounding speech.

If you're going to copy and paste from elsewhere, post a link to the source, or at least name it.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

It crept up on my blindside and inserted itself without my noticing. Sneaky little bastard. The apostrophe that is.

The apostrophe is so important.

Frank Zappa devoted a whole album to it.

Once upon a time
Somebody say to me
(This is a dog talkin' now)
What is your Conceptual Continuity?
Well, I told him right then (Fido said)
It should be easy to see
The crux of the biscuit is the apostrophe.


Profound!

 

[Username Required]

If you're going to copy and paste from elsewhere, post a link to the source, or at least name it.

Sorry.

Disinformation Governance Board - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[TinFoilHat]

I see Dax and his other accounts have jumped in to tell us there's no such thing as Fascism taking place in the good old U S of A.

 

[Dax777]

“Self seems pretty familiar with Nazism, he's quoted Goebbels before”

Yes, Self does seem to have intimately acquainted himself with the workings of the Nazi state and Goebbels. Perhaps it is a hobby of his? Does he collect Nazi memorabilia?

You have to be well versed in Socialist speak and conduct to spot what the socialist in your country are doing.

Some people like to call others Nazis. Other people just show you how you are acting like one. Self is the latter.

 

[Dax777]

I see Dax and his other accounts have jumped in to tell us there's no such thing as Fascism taking place in the good old U S of A.

Well, this is an Alternative fact. :)

 

[Username Required]

Well, his response to a mass shooting on his patch was to call for thoughts and prayers (rather than gun control); to suggestions that prayers weren't enough of a response, he said that came from people that don't believe in an almighty god who is absolutely in control of our lives.

So God's in control of Self's quotes about Goebbels, and being misunderstood.

Vic he's not my cup of tea. He's a four-square type protestant Republican from west Texas. I'm a Latin Mass sympathizing Catholic Independent from eastern Massachusetts. We're both Army veterans though. He, an officer, myself, enlisted. I saw the Master Parachutists Badge on his lapel in that Instagram post, I wanted to determine for myself the truth, not because he's a Republican, but because of what is implied by Master.

The insinuation was made that an officer in the U.S. Army with an admirable record is sympathetic to Nazism because he clearly has some knowledge of the methods used does not pass the straight-face test. I need evidence to convict. In any case, both times that he does use "Nazi quotes" he uses them negatively. Some evidence.

What is this grand unheard-of knowledge about the Nazis this Republican partisan possesses? This deep deep knowledge about means and methods that only a Professor or a Democrat partisan can legitimately and safely have? In reality the evidence shows nothing more than a bullet-point, flash-card level of knowledge, something off a Netflix documentary.

I've said twice I think that this Republican partisan's use of "Nazi quotes" to discredit Democrat Partisans was hyperbolic. I think you can make your point without accusing people who are also trying to balance conflicting interests of being Nazi-like.

People like speculating. Perhaps he does have some knowledge of the subject-matter over and above that of the average joe.

His father was in the Army in 1953 (Korea) when he was born. Did his dad serve during WW2? Wonder what he heard from his dad about the Nazis, Japs etc.? Maybe nothing. Maybe he watched a few war films growing up, I know the US made quite a few, I've seen many myself, who hasn't? West Point, I find it inconceivable that as part of indoctrination he was not subject to classes on comparative political systems and those classes were inherently normative, not merely descriptive. I'm just spit-balling here...he would have studied Clausewitz. Right? Stuff like that. Guderian. Infantry tactics too developed between the wars. He'd be more than aware of the wider context of course. Perhaps there was an elective offered at West Point when he was there..."Nazi Messaging and the Descent to Total War" and he thought, oh, yeah, that's sounds interesting...he also has a Masters in International Relations so maybe he studied Versailles, the falling-apart of the League of Nations, the rise of the NSDAP-Italy-Japan axis etc it's all speculation maybe he did a bit of Goebbels-specific research whilst at USC doing his Masters. It's also possible he's just a guy who has read a few books just because.

 

[Dax777]

no mate. I laid out the entire situation. It's not complicated. Not at all.

A normal good faith response to all this would be...

"Phew, I'm glad to hear it, no one wants an officer in the U.S. military, especially one in a combat MOS, to be a crypto-Nazi!".

This is about one man and the insinuation he is a Nazi-sympathizer. It's got fuck all to do with anything other than that. The evidence that purports to demonstrate malignity when taken in toto shows the exact opposite.

Awwww! Bless your heart. You are looking for good faith in the cesspool?


You wont find it mate. Team sports over here. P
So pick a team and act like a fanatic. That's how it works in here.

 

[Kinkladze 1]

Vic he's not my cup of tea. He's a four-square type protestant Republican from west Texas. I'm a Latin Mass sympathizing Catholic Independent from eastern Massachusetts. We're both Army veterans though. He, an officer, myself, enlisted. I saw the Master Parachutists Badge on his lapel in that Instagram post, I wanted to determine for myself the truth, not because he's a Republican, but because of what is implied by Master.

The insinuation was made that an officer in the U.S. Army with an admirable record is sympathetic to Nazism because he clearly has some knowledge of the methods used does not pass the straight-face test. I need evidence to convict. In any case, both times that he does use "Nazi quotes" he uses them negatively. Some evidence.

What is this grand unheard-of knowledge about the Nazis this Republican partisan possesses? This deep deep knowledge about means and methods that only a Professor or a Democrat partisan can legitimately and safely have? In reality the evidence shows nothing more than a bullet-point, flash-card level of knowledge, something off a Netflix documentary.

I've said twice I think that this Republican partisan's use of "Nazi quotes" to discredit Democrat Partisans was hyperbolic. I think you can make your point without accusing people who are also trying to balance conflicting interests of being Nazi-like.

People like speculating. Perhaps he does have some knowledge of the subject-matter over and above that of the average joe.

His father was in the Army in 1953 (Korea) when he was born. Did his dad serve during WW2? Wonder what he heard from his dad about the Nazis, Japs etc.? Maybe nothing. Maybe he watched a few war films growing up, I know the US made quite a few, I've seen many myself, who hasn't? West Point, I find it inconceivable that as part of indoctrination he was not subject to classes on comparative political systems and those classes were inherently normative, not merely descriptive. I'm just spit-balling here...he would have studied Clausewitz. Right? Stuff like that. Guderian. Infantry tactics too developed between the wars. He'd be more than aware of the wider context of course. Perhaps there was an elective offered at West Point when he was there..."Nazi Messaging and the Descent to Total War" and he thought, oh, yeah, that's sounds interesting...he also has a Masters in International Relations so maybe he studied Versailles, the falling-apart of the League of Nations, the rise of the NSDAP-Italy-Japan axis etc it's all speculation maybe he did a bit of Goebbels-specific research whilst at USC doing his Masters. It's also possible he's just a guy who has read a few books just because.

The ramblings of a madman. Seek help.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

Awwww! Bless your heart. You are looking for good faith in the cesspool?


You wont find it mate. Team sports over here. P
So pick a team and act like a fanatic. That's how it works in here.

You know yourself.
It beats answering simple straight questions.
A bit like any Trump representative when asked about tariffs or ICE methodology or an Israeli government rep when asked about occupation in the West Bank or the blockade of aid into Gaza.

It’s deflection and look over there.
What else can you expect in here, we’ve all been conditioned.
Haven’t we?

 

[Uncle Wally One Ball]

Vic he's not my cup of tea. He's a four-square type protestant Republican from west Texas. I'm a Latin Mass sympathizing Catholic Independent from eastern Massachusetts.

Stopped reading at that point. What the earthly fuck does any of that mean or matter. Americans are hilarious

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Stopped reading at that point. What the earthly fuck does any of that mean or matter. Americans are hilarious

Well, I get the gist of the distinction, especially as they're 1,500 miles apart. FFS Mancs think those from Stoke have six fingers and four teeth and that's a 40 minute train ride! :)

 

[Dax777]

You know yourself.
It beats answering simple straight questions.
A bit like any Trump representative when asked about tariffs or ICE methodology or an Israeli government rep when asked about occupation in the West Bank or the blockade of aid into Gaza.

It’s deflection and look over there.
What else can you expect in here, we’ve all been conditioned.
Haven’t we?

Well, not all us. Username Required clearly isn't conditioned. Doesn't do much to help him though.

Look at the responses to his well reasoned point.

I stopped reading. Please add citations. You need help. Etc.