Elon Musk

[west didsblue]

Finally - your "kompromat" argument - such as it is - fails to explain why Starlink - a Musk-owned company - would continue to supply vital Internet connectivity to Ukraine in spite of its ongoing war against Russia. Dude! - there's zero chance that Starlink would continue to provide Internet service to Ukraine if some sort of effective Russian kompromat against Musk existed.

Whilst Starlink is a Musk controlled company (he owns just under half), it has depended on government handouts and contracts to get where it is, and the US government is still its biggest customer. The government therefore presumably has significant influence in getting them to provide the service to Ukraine.

I have no evidence of this but it wouldn’t surprise me if Ukraine’s military communications via Starlink somehow find their way to Russia.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

Musk is a wrong’un. If you seek to defend him in any way shape or form the odds are you’re a wrong’un as well.

Agree with the wrong'un. He's a ****.

On the other hand, the truth FUCKING MATTERS.

Let substantiated, provable claims against Musk carry the way.

At the same time, I, among others, stand ready to challenge unsubstantiated claims either for or against my personal preferences; otherwise, there's zero chance of knowing truth from falsehood.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

I have no evidence of this but it wouldn’t surprise me if Ukraine’s military communications via Starlink somehow find their way to Russia.

While this is possible, it's pure speculation. That you've stated you have no evidence for this is credit to you.

Next step - if what you suppose - Starlink communications are available to Russia - then what follows from your supposition. You'll quickly realize that your supposition - via critical thinking - is most likely false.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Whilst Starlink is a Musk controlled company (he owns just under half), it has depended on government handouts and contracts to get where it is, and the US government is still its biggest customer. The government therefore presumably has significant influence in getting them to provide the service to Ukraine.

I have no evidence of this but it wouldn’t surprise me if Ukraine’s military communications via Starlink somehow find their way to Russia.

I think his comments, especially about Starlink operations in Ukraine not occurring if Musk was a Russian asset, shows a substantial ignorance of how covert warfare works. Which calls in to question his entire belligerent take regarding Musk not being a Russian asset.

If you want to be taken seriously in a covert warfare and security threat debate, you need to have basic understanding of the subject.

 

[SWP's back]

While this is possible, it's pure speculation. That you've stated you have no evidence for this is credit to you.

Next step - if what you suppose - Starlink communications are available to Russia - then what follows from your supposition. You'll quickly realize that your supposition - via critical thinking - is most likely false.

Weird hill to die on.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

Very little of what you have just said actually makes sense when any sort of scrutiny is applied, including the farcical assertion that Starlink would not operate in Ukraine if Musk was a Russian asset, which shows you really have no idea how covert information warfare works. Captured assets being employed in hostile territory is literally the bread and butter of covert operations; see the Israeli pager bombings and the current us of X across the world for recent examples. Starlink operating in Ukraine would be a huge advantage for Putin, as he could have access to data and communications, without Ukraine being aware of that.

I think it is clear, given you refuse to acknowledge statements you have made are patently false (“little-to-no-downsides” being just one that makes absolutely no sense), reject credible reports supporting my claims, and just want to shout ignorant nonsense, that you just don’t want to admit you are (or could be) wrong, and instead want to double down.

And if you genuinely think various intelligence agencies (and the Pentagon) are not monitoring and/or investigating Musk’s connections and increasing interactions with Putin, in violation of sanctions and his security clearance, then I have a bit of historical infrastructure in the tristate area that I would love to sell you.

I think it is safe to say we should probably put each other on ignore at this point.

If you wish to abandon contact with me - so be it.

Your entire post above smacks more of the same - belittle - however you can - any voice in opposition to your posts.

I'm on your side - politically.

But at the same time, I give you zero license to engage in unfounded conspiracy - which is what you've done.

That you throw into the mix, ad hominem, as an appeal to your position - just lessens your credibility.

Put me on ignore if you will - I won't put you on ignore, however. Your questionable claims - even in support of my beliefs - need to be challenged - otherwise - you and I are no better than MAGA, for which truth does not matter a whit.

I challenge you because I do not believe that you've made the case that your claims are truthful - my challenge is completely independent of my own political leanings.

If we can't establish fact, then we can't make rational decisions. Your recent posts about Russian kompromat against Musk do not at all make the threshold of "fact." Your claims may ultimately prove true - I do not rule this out - but at present, I've no reason to believe your claims, exactly as I've no reason to believe that Earth is 1000 years old - both claims seem to be 100% FUCKING FLASE.

 

[west didsblue]

If you wish to abandon contact with me - so be it.

Your entire post above smacks more of the same - belittle - however you can - any voice in opposition to your posts.

I'm on your side - politically.

But at the same time, I give you zero license to engage in unfounded conspiracy - which is what you've done.

That you throw into the mix, ad hominem, as an appeal to your position - just lessens your credibility.

Put me on ignore if you will - I won't put you on ignore, however. Your questionable claims - even in support of my beliefs - need to be challenged - otherwise - you and I are no better than MAGA, for which truth does not matter a whit.

I challenge you because I do not believe that you've made the case that your claims are truthful - my challenge is completely independent of my own political leanings.

If we can't establish fact, then we can't make rational decisions. Your recent posts about Russian kompromat against Musk do not at all make the threshold of "fact." Your claims may ultimately prove true - I do not rule this out - but at present, I've no reason to believe your claims, exactly as I've no reason to believe that Earth is 1000 years old - both claims seem to be 100% FUCKING FLASE.

The fact that Musk has reportedly had regular contact with Putin makes speculation about his intentions and the reasons for it a reasonable thing to discuss and speculate on, and is no way comparable to idiotic conspiracy theories that are totally irrational which is what you’re trying to suggest.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

The fact that Musk has reportedly had regular contact with Putin makes speculation about his intentions and the reasons for it a reasonable thing to discuss and speculate on, and is no way comparable to idiotic conspiracy theories that are totally irrational which is what you’re trying to suggest.

Speculation is fine. Sebastian Blue, however, has elevated Musk's reported interactions with Putin (which are not in dispute) as proof-positive of kompromat. And at that point, Sebastian Blue is a conspiracist, as he makes such claim with zero proof, and, most importantly, with zero backing of the free press. If Musk were actually an obvious pawn of Putin - there would be numerous free press articles about this; moreover, there would be all sorts of legal actions against him from Congress as well as independent actors which would garner even more press.

Again - speculation is fine.

But what Sebastian Blue has done is to lay down what he believes to be unassailable facts. Not a fan of this, but if enough evidence supports this position, well, I guess, somewhat OK.

Instead, there's zero evidence that Russia has komprat against Musk - and, at least for now, I don't think they have.

Whereas, Musk's interactions with Russia seem to be entirely reasonable, if you think that he doesn't care much about anything other than promoting his business.

#Occam's Razor
#Critical Thinking

 

[west didsblue]

Next step - if what you suppose - Starlink communications are available to Russia - then what follows from your supposition. You'll quickly realize that your supposition - via critical thinking - is most likely false.

I don’t see why, but there’s little point pursuing this because the possibilities are endless.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

I don’t see why, but there’s little point pursuing this because the possibilities are endless.

Disagree.
Which makes any absolute statement - such as Sebastian Blue's claim of kompromat against Musk - subject to scrutiny. Where's the proof? How do you account for subsequent actions by Musk?

As defenders of Democracy, we should challenge all claims, even if convenient, if evidence is lacking - "show your proof," if you have doubts.

I've no horse in this race - if Sebastian Blue can support his claim of Russian kompromat against Musk, then I'm willing to take on board new knowledge of this fact.

So far, all I've got is a statement form SB that I do not know what "kompromat" means and a bunch of posts stating that Musk is probably a security risk (with which I agree).

 

[west didsblue]

Agree.
Which makes any absolute statement - such as Sebastian Blue's claim of kompromat against Musk - questionable. Where's the proof? How do you account for subsequent actions by Musk?

Maybe you can point to where he asserted it as fact. All I can find is speculation and some reasons that suggest there’s a good chance the speculation may be true.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Agree.
Which makes any absolute statement - such as Sebastian Blue's claim of kompromat against Musk - questionable. Where's the proof? How do you account for subsequent actions by Musk?

The more you post, the more you show your ignorance to both what has actually been reported to have occurred (and continues to occur), and how covert warfare works more generally.

You are making assertions that make absolutely no sense in the context of the subject of discussion.

Which I think is your desperation to muddy the waters to cover the fact you have made nonsensical or false assertions and refuse to acknowledge it.

By the way, I never made any claims that what I was saying is unassailable fact. I have said that security analysts have absolutely posited that Musk is a Russian asset, as that has, for a fact, occurred. For everything else, I have provided articles to support my stance, and my personal analysis based on fairly ardent reading of credible, fact-based reporting on Musk and his ties to Putin.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

The more you post, the more you show your ignorance to both what has actually been reported to have occurred (and continues to occur), and how covert warfare works more generally.

You are making assertions that make absolutely no sense in the context of the subject of discussion.

Which I think is your desperation to muddy the waters to cover the fact you have made nonsensical or false assertions and refuse to acknowledge it.

By the way, I never made any claims that what I was saying is unassailable fact. I have said that security analysts have absolutely posited that Musk is a Russian asset, as that has, for a fact, occurred. For everything else, I have provided articles to support my stance, and my personal analysis based on fairly ardent reading of credible, fact-based reporting on Musk and his ties to Putin.

Dude - take a break. You're a fucking conspiracy theorist who needs to be called out. You're spouting unsubstantiated claims as if they were unassailable fact.

I'm open to changing my opinion of your claims if you are able to provide credible substationation.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Dude - take a break. You're a fucking conspiracy theorist who needs to be called out. You're spouting unsubstantiated claims as if they were unassailable fact.

I'm open to changing my opinion of your claims if you are able to provide credible substationation.

You seemingly also don’t know what “unassailable fact” means if you think I have claimed that anywhere.

Or how to spell “substantiation”.

You are embarrassing yourself at this point and I agree with @SWP's back, this is a very strange hill to die on.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

You seemingly also don’t know what “unassailable fact” means if you think I have claimed that anywhere.

Or how to spell “substantiation”.

You are embarrassing yourself at this point and I agree with @SWP's back, his is a very strange hill to die on.

Jesus christ.

WTF is the matter with you?

You're fucking worse than Musk or Trump - completely incapable of engaging in rational discourse - you are absolutely right no matter what.

Meanwhile, where's the fucking proof of kompromat against Musk?

Where's the evidence against - that as a businessman - Musk has a big interest in not pissing of the ruler of Russia who may buy his products - and that this, combined with his current hatred of Dems, - is completely - and convincingly - enough to explain his actions.

You go on and on and on and on with your fucking condescential attitude - never for an instant entertaining the all-to-obvious fact that you are likely wrong.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Jesus christ.

And you are religious nutter, as well.

Great.

Anyway, put me on ignore if you want to die on this hill (or cross on this hill, as it were), before the mods come round to ask us to take it to PMs.

 

[SWP's back]

Maybe you can point to where he asserted it as fact. All I can find is speculation and some reasons that suggest there’s a good chance the speculation may be true.

I was thinking the very same thing. It’s very odd.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

I was thinking the very same thing. It’s very odd.

Evidence of child abuse, both of his own children and other minors is the prevailing theory.

But apart from the “why”, many security analysts do believe he is likely a Putin asset.

It is strange that you reject that as impossible, especially given mounting evidence of close connections in violation of his security clearances and sanctions.

And you can at least admit your assertion that there is “little-to-no downsides” for him was false?

Evidence of child abuse stated as fact.

I next posit that while this claim may be true, how is it that Russia holds this as kompromat? Why aren't Democratic governments pursing this as a criminal charge against Musk? Where's the evidence? And further - what news organization has gone on record with these charges - b/c I see none.

From there, some sort of insane conspiracy theory ensues.

Later I point out the importance of Starlink - a Musk-owned enterprise - as playing a vital role for communication in war-torn Ukraine. I ask how - in the face of supposed kompromat - do you explain this? No response from SB.

Into the mix, SB assails my character - I'm supposedly an idiot who does not know what "kompromat means" etc.

Surely, the hallmark of a losing argument, is that you immediately resort to ad hominem when challenged.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Evidence of child abuse stated as fact.

I next posit that while this claim may be true, how is it that Russia holds this as kompromat? Why aren't governments pursing this as a criminal charge against Musk? Where's the evidence?

From there, some sort of insane conspiracy theory ensues.

Please quote where I said the evidence of child abuse was a fact.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

Please quote where I said the evidence of child abuse was a fact.

I apologize to you. You in fact state that the child abuse thing was a possibility.

And yet - when challenged on this - you somehow managed to escalate this into an attack on my intelligence alongside a rejection of the obvious, Occam's Razor interpretation. Musk is a **** who hates Dems, who wants to further his business, and of course, as a a consequence, has no problem, attempting to curry favor with the likes of Putin and Xi Jinping.

There may be kompromat into the mix - but it's extremely unlikely as no widely respected news outlet has reported that this is the case (other than the click-bait- "what if" headlines) - and moreover - the US intelligence would be ridiculously stupid not to ferret-out such kompromat - or unbelievably involved in a conspiracy of silence under a Democratic president to burry such evidence.

Yet, you press on.