It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Alternative facts

page: 5
28
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 05:57 PM
link   
btw - I thought I coined the term "alt-facts." But no. I guess it's just too obvious.



Scott Koch
‏@sekoch06
First it was alt-right and now we have alt-facts. Can't wait for alt-liberty, alt-justice, and alt-freedom! #alternativefacts




lol

Not.




posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Please don't apologize for using CNN as a news source, let's just learn of the ever decreasing relevance it holds as time passes.

Put yourself in Trump's shoes. You'd know that the media is easily steered by the words that come out of the administration... and the ridicule received will only be amplified by the fact that there is no longer anyone else campaigning to point a finger at... all fingers point as Trump. With that in mind and the clearly stated distaste for moronic buzz feed reporting, his words will now be purposely conflicting to feed MSM buzz feed news. While all of the hoopla of who said or feels what goes on in buzz feed sheep lands, what is done in action naturally becomes less of a focus. Now there lies a public outcry over what words are said, when the actual movement of governing moves on less scrutinized.

And, in the future when the public analyzes the way Trump moves the media's conveying news strategies to a more open forum as he states he intends to do... the channels clinging to the buzz feed aspects of recent news (purposely twisted news) will be denied access to the open platform media forum.

Just a different outlook on possible reasons for purposely twisting numerical data so openly here. As much as I do feel the term is ego involved, I do have to give Trump his due credit for being an extremely intelligent mind. Very little to zero of what that man does is not planned.



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Hey, let's just call it extremely reckless without intent, forgive the bloke for his shortcomings and continue to throw 110% unquestioned support behind him - like what more than half of America did for Hillary and the Democrats

Or are there actually 2 sets of (unwritten) rules?



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 06:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: DBCowboy

Hey, let's just call it extremely reckless without intent, forgive the bloke for his shortcomings and continue to throw 110% unquestioned support behind him - like what more than half of America did for Hillary and the Democrats

Or are there actually 2 sets of (unwritten) rules?



Probably best to just see what he does instead of salivating and running around in a panic at insignificant events.
Did you know Trump just reversed the US position on the TPP? Great news eh?



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 06:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: underwerks



Watching the interview in full context makes it even worse. The way she dances around the question proves in itself she knows it was a lie.

She even threatens to have to "reevaluate" the relationship between her and the host for asking her that question and questioning the press secretary.

Really?


I agree. She did dance around the question. So whats the problem?

The press secretary was outright lying and she framed it as "alternative facts".

That's the problem.

Thats not an interpretation of what happened, that's what happened. She knows it as well, judging by how she didn't answer the question by spinning off into other tangents.

The context "alternative facts" is said in means that the Trump administration has their own version of "facts". And their "facts" in this case were verifiably wrong.


That's fair, but that's not the context. The clause is "gave alternative facts to that", or in other words, to the facts already given. Bad choice of words—she might have said "points" and everyone probably wouldn't freak out about it—but then again big deal.

I no less think it proves the press is being vindictive. Look at the coverage.



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: BrokedownChevy
The Packers are ahead at the end of the 3rd quarter and they are absolutely destroying. Period.


Period as in end of sentence?






posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I'll agree with you on this. It will only further obfuscate the already heavily spun facts on both sides.

IMO this was a really stupid argument to have. Crowd size is not relevant to...anything.



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: underwerks



Watching the interview in full context makes it even worse. The way she dances around the question proves in itself she knows it was a lie.

She even threatens to have to "reevaluate" the relationship between her and the host for asking her that question and questioning the press secretary.

Really?


I agree. She did dance around the question. So whats the problem?

The press secretary was outright lying and she framed it as "alternative facts".

That's the problem.

Thats not an interpretation of what happened, that's what happened. She knows it as well, judging by how she didn't answer the question by spinning off into other tangents.

The context "alternative facts" is said in means that the Trump administration has their own version of "facts". And their "facts" in this case were verifiably wrong.


That's fair, but that's not the context. The clause is "gave alternative facts to that", or in other words, to the facts already given. Bad choice of words—she might have said "points" and everyone probably wouldn't freak out about it—but then again big deal.

I no less think it proves the press is being vindictive. Look at the coverage.

That's exactly the context I meant. There are no "alternative facts" to verifiable truth. It was a lie. Nothing more.

Is it wrong to call out politicians when they blatantly lie? Or should everyone stop questioning the government for some reason now because Donald Trump is president?



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 06:46 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

If that's the context then at least use the entire clause.

It's about time everyone started questioning the government. And I doubt it was ever done with this much scrutiny. Never too late I guess. Their utter silence with the past administration only further proves their partisanship.



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 06:51 PM
link   
I guess this is what it's like to live in Orwell's Oceania (for those literate enough to have read Nineteen Eighty-Four).

Most of the time when someone uses "Orwellian" its quite hyperbolic and over-the-top. Not this time. The White House literally wants America to reject photographic evidence as invalid.

The mental gymnastics people have to do in order to buy into this bulls**t narrative is unreal. Say what you will about Obama or even George H. W. Bush -- this has reached an entirely new level.

You know things have gotten bad when you can actually look back on Bush and say, "You know, he wasn't as bad as we thought..."

Alternative facts are for alternative realities.



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 06:53 PM
link   
what were the alternative facts again? I lost track of the argument.



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Kettu

So it's only hyperbolic if it's something you disagree with?



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Simply using the two photos side by side without time stamps on either one, coupled with the zoomed factor is in bad taste.
It poses alternative viewpoints by default.

'09 was zoomed further out so one could not see anyone standing on the platform, while the one from this year was zoomed in well enough to determine noone was standing on the platform at time of photograph.
I have a big screen high def tv so I know what I'm talking about...the pics presented by newscasters.

They think they are always one step ahead of us...making us utilize algebra in order to do our own fact checking.
One way to defeat this is to notice the algebra in the story-line...
If we are expected to simply and faithfully agree with their news stories, they should be upfront and do the algebra for us.
If we have to formulate our own conclusion...we will.






posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Generally we haven't seen blatant examples of Orwellian doublespeak ala "Nineteen Eighty-Four" or even "Animal Farm" like we just witnessed.

You are intentionally grasping at straws to divert the narrative.

A line from Animal Farm comes to mind:



"all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"


This is the type of twisted talk we're seeing, stuff that would fit right at home in these dystopian novels. You could take direct quotes from Trump and Kellyane and swap them out in the aforementioned books. A reader wouldn't be the wiser.

In the past the doublespeak wasn't nearly as forceful or direct. Hence why I said it was usually used in a hyperbolic fashion.



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Kettu

DHS, NSA, Patriot-Act, ACA, The War on Terror and The War on Drugs.

Your now worried because the lie was immediately discernible? I would wager that it has been as obvious now as in the past. The difference is that more people are watching, taking notice and calling out BS.



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Ah, and for all the conservatives...here's your beloved John Galt:



"the noblest act you have ever performed is the act of your mind in the process of grasping that two and two make four".

-Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged (1957)

That is a direct reference to Orwell's earlier published book "Nineteen Eighty-Four" from 1949.

In that book, the famous "2+2=5" line is used:



Orwell's protagonist, Winston Smith, uses the phrase to wonder if the State might declare "two plus two equals five" as a fact; he ponders whether, if everybody believes it, does that make it true?


This is an important question.



...the mathematically false statement that control over physical reality is unimportant; so long as one controls one's own perceptions to what the Party wills, then any corporeal act is possible, in accordance with the principles of doublethink

Wikipedia

Actually, Orwell took this idea from an even earlier source, and had used the idea before. He was well aware of Nazi propaganda. In his earlier book, "Looking Back on the Spanish War" in 1943 Orwell wrote:



Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as "the truth" exists. ... The implied objective of this line of thought is a nightmare world in which the Leader, or some ruling clique, controls not only the future but the past. If the Leader says of such and such an event, "It never happened" – well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five – well, two and two are five. This prospect frightens me much more than bombs.


This type of propaganda and mind control was also used in Soviet Russia as well, in a quite overt way:



That, is a Soviet political poster from 1931:



Propagandist Iakov Guminer supported this campaign with a 1931 poster reading "2+2=5: Arithmetic of a counter-plan plus the enthusiasm of the workers."

Wikipedia

So, you'll excuse me if I continue to support Captain Picard's ascertation that there are only FOUR LIGHTS, despite being told there are five. We should learn from what his character at the end of the episode "Chains of Command" has to say about his time as a prisoner:



"What I didn't put in the report was that at the end he gave me a choice – between a life of comfort or more torture.
All I had to do was to say that I could see five lights when, in fact, there were only four."

"You didn't say it?"

"No! No. But I was going to. I would have told him anything. Anything at all! But more than that, I believed that I could see five lights."

Link

Scary. In the end, the brainwashing had indeed convinced him that there were more lights than truly existed.

That should send shivers up our collective spines as Americans, and we should doggedly fight to retain control over our realities, and reject obvious lies and "alternative facts" that fit best in "alternative realities".

And don't think that a "Well the liberal left..." excuse cuts it! No, it doesn't. Doublespeak is doublespeak whoever says it. Just because this is YOUR political party doesn't excuse you, or let you off the hook. By sidestepping and making excuses for this, you are part of the problem instead of the solution. You are just as culpable.
edit on 22-1-2017 by Kettu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 07:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: underwerks

If that's the context then at least use the entire clause.

It's about time everyone started questioning the government. And I doubt it was ever done with this much scrutiny. Never too late I guess. Their utter silence with the past administration only further proves their partisanship.

People picked apart Obamas entire life down to his birth certificate for 8 years. I fail to see how he wasn't under any similar type of scrutiny.

If the Trump admin didn't lie to the public, there wouldn't be a fire to hold their feet to. The alternative to calling out the Trump admin for obvious lies is to just report what the government says as truth even if its verifiably false.

I don't see how anyone could think that's a good idea.



posted on Jan, 22 2017 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

And, in the end, he relented to the absurd birth certificate ordeal.

Some people don't realize this -- but as someone who does genealogy, Hawaii's birth records aren't available to the public. Trust me, it can be frustrating.

So now the new reality Trump is trying to spin is that "the people" don't care about his tax returns, despite a petition with over 100,000 people signing it. Latest numbers indicate that a large percentage of Americans DO in fact want to see them.

Will Trump's reality distortion field change reality? Will all these tens of thousands of people simply cease to care?

We shall see...



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 01:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Kettu

100,000 people? Wow.

Sounds like most people don't really care that much.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 05:25 AM
link   
I agree, there are no alternative facts. I'm not surprised Trump would condone this, as he often seems to believe things that are at odds with the facts.
edit on 23amMon, 23 Jan 2017 05:26:22 -0600kbamkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
28
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join