'We're at war':CIR weaponizes Morgan Freeman in anti-Moscow hysteria

So Morgan Freeman has been "weaponized" now?



Nothing in todays world insists upon itself like conservative ideology.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

No. As I explicitly stated, I am arguing that your accusations " relies on the assumption that bots and fake social media accounts can influence anything, let alone democratic elections.".

Fake social media accounts have been demonstrated driving people to "fake news" sites such as "True Pundit." You might remember this one from True Pundit:

Assange Included on Obama's "KILLER TUESDAY" List

How many millions of people in the United States believe that Hillary Clinton said, "can't we just drone strike this guy" in reference to Julian Assange? It was repeated on Fox, it was repeated on social media, on right-wing media, it was repeated by members of the Trump campaign — hell, it was retweeted by WikiLeaks — and it was completely made up.

Here's another one that was popular:

BREAKING: Comey Tells FBI to Prepare for Raids

And another from the week of the election that people sucked down:

NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails

I believe that is the fake news story that Lt. Gen Michael Flynn, disgraced former National Security Advisor, tweeted a link to, encouraging his followers to read it.

Would you like some more direct examples? How about shady social media accounts directly influencing members of ATS? Search "0Hour1" and look at all the people clamoring to not only believe, but spread disinformation originating with tweets from somebody they knew absolutely nothing about.

Kremlin response

Hollywood actor Morgan Freeman’s two-minute video he filmed for the non-profit 'Committee to Investigate Russia' (CIR), claiming that Moscow meddled in the US election, can hardly be taken seriously, the Kremlin said.

--snip--

Peskov urged people not to take such statements seriously, as they “are not based on real facts and are purely emotional.”

Maria Zakharova, the spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry, said she believed that Freeman’s role in the clip is similar to that of former US Secretary of State Colin Powell. During a UN Security Council session in 2003, Powell infamously used a model of a vial, which, he said, was similar to those used by Saddam Hussein’s government to store biological weapons. The claim was proven false when no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq by invading US forces.

“We’ll find out who stands behind this story faster than we learned about the contents of the vial,” Zakharova said in Facebook post.

She also cited the recent CNN story confirming that Paul Manafort, former chief of staff of the Trump election campaign, had been subjected to surveillance both before and after the election.

“Do you see Russia’s role here? Right – to legitimize illegal actions. Without this external factor it would be a new Watergate, but with this ‘foreign meddling’ the story was sent along the alley of national security,” she said.

“The finale will be spectacular. Can’t wait to see it.”

Freeman, who once lent his voice to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, also provided voiceovers for several commercials, including for USA CORPS, Save the Children's "Be a Mentor" program, Visa card and Turkish Airlines.

link

Spot on, imho.

Oh noo! I quoted RT, and i agree with them. I must be a KGB shill!

If anything, America should ally with Russia. There is much terrorism to be eradicated in the world. Neither can do it alone.

originally posted by: underwerks
So Morgan Freeman has been "weaponized"

Lol...that's probably about as accurate as anything stated here. There really is a deep state, Virginia, and they are active as hay-ul across the board right now.

Freeman should do a "Driving Ms. Daisy-esque" Antfa infomercial next with Hillary as Ms. Daisy.

a reply to: theantediluvian

That's an influence, I concede, but I'm not sure that fake social media accounts influencing people to post on a conspiracy website constitutes much of an influence in the general affairs of a country, its elections, or democracy.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

In the past regimes have toppled because operatives were in the right place at the right time. Who's to say that in the modern world the internet can't be the right place?

Just to clarify what seems to be a left leaning position on things (not all left people)

Trump rnc speech or un speech discussing dangers of North korea, iran, Islamic terror, inner city violence etc. is dark and dangerous.

Hollywood Hillary or other dems saying we are war with russia, or suggesting no fly zones in syria, etc. is a bright a hopeful message.

Am I getting this right?

originally posted by: warpeace
If anything, America should ally with Russia. There is much terrorism to be eradicated in the world. Neither can do it alone.

Serious? You joined to add that nugget? Have you considered just how much of that terrorism is actually a proxy war being fought between the US and Russia?
Of course you have.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

In the past regimes have toppled because operatives were in the right place at the right time. Who's to say that in the modern world the internet can't be the right place?

Out of curiosity, who influenced you personally to spread this conspiracy?

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Even if your accusations are true, all of it relies on the assumption that bots and fake social media accounts can influence anything, let alone democratic elections. That's where your little fantasy world comes into play.

Are you arguing that people aren't influenced by social media or that they're only influenced by social media if the accounts involved are real?

Is trying to influence opinions via social media illegal, or even immoral? As with discussions here, each is trying to "win", or convince the other that your idea is the most correct, or if you and your ego can stand it, you can realize the error of your thinking and change your opinion based on others comments.

So I guess the big question is, if Russia spent lots of time and effort trying to convince others via social media to Vote Trump!, other than promoting a candidate you don't like, what was the crime?

(And please don't be a douche and somehow turn that into me being a stooge for Russia or a "Putin lover".)

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

What conspiracy would that be? At the very start of this thread I stated flat out who can know that Russian propaganda had any effect on the election. However I don't disregard the possibility that the internet used in conjunction with other avenues could easily lead to influencing a population.

Just look at what happened with MH17. RT and other Russian state media outlets pushed the claim that MH17 was shot down by a Ukrainian piloted Su-25. There was no evidence to support this claim and all the experts were claiming BUK. This laid the groundwork.

Then you started seeing random accounts pop up on YouTube from "experts" no one had ever heard of that the holes in MH17 were definitely machine gun fire. You had a guy post online (with no proof) that he was an air traffic controller that saw this other plane on radar. You had a guy claim to be one of the Ukrainian pilots that was involved in the incident saying that the Russian narrative was right. You had new posters coming on to sites like ATS toeing the Kremlin line.

Then when the official report came out saying that it was indeed a BUK all these "experts," and "pilots," and posters just disappeared. And yet to this day there are plenty of people that continue to believe the Su-25 theory without any kind of evidence because the combination of media coverage and online propaganda was enough to convince them that it was the truth.

It isn't a conspiracy. Governments (the US and Russia included) are trying to influence or destabilize other countries and one of the chief ways they've been doing this recently is through the internet. Why would you think they wouldn't use such a powerful tool in this way?

a reply to: network dude

So you don't have any problem with a government setting up sock puppet accounts with the sole goal of influencing a foreign populace to do something that may not be in their best interest?

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: network dude

So you don't have any problem with a government setting up sock puppet accounts with the sole goal of influencing a foreign populace to do something that may not be in their best interest?

Do you still beat your wife?

Dood, please, being that guy so blatantly really makes you look douchey. Did I say anything like that, or did I ask a valid question? Take all the time you like to answer.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: network dude

So you don't have any problem with a government setting up sock puppet accounts with the sole goal of influencing a foreign populace to do something that may not be in their best interest?

Your outcry are totally misplaced. So lets say that Russia did try, using social media, to influence the US election?
Is it not ok for Russia to take care of their own interest, as the US does?

If i was a world leader, and the most powerful military country are about to elect a person which hates my nation, ofcourse I would try to influence the election too.

And its not like the US have been doing the exact same bullcrap for decades, they accuse Russia of?

The United States has been involved in a number of overseas interventions throughout its history. There have been two dominant schools of thought in America about foreign policy, namely interventionism and isolationism which either encourage or discourage foreign intervention respectively.

Overseas interventions of the United States

originally posted by: kloejen
So lets say that Russia did try, using social media, to influence the US election?
Is it not ok for Russia to take care of their own interest, as the US does?
If i was a world leader, and the most powerful military country are about to elect a person which hates my nation, of course I would try to influence the election too.

OK...so what would you call those Americans who may have worked with the Russians to further those aims?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Wrong. It is based upon data I have been compiling. Try making your own observations. I can't sy anything more specific without violating T&C.

a reply to: kloejen

So you think it is okay for the United States to influence politics in Ukraine? Cool.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I never said they wouldn't use such a tool. What I said was using such a tool is not an attack on an election, a country or democracy. If an attack like this can be averted by simply reading something other than twitter, I don't think that constitutes as anything like how the media and politicians are selling it. It is the subsequent atrocity propaganda, not fake social media accounts, that will influence the public to do and support stupid ideas.

a reply to: DJW001

Wrong. It is based upon data I have been compiling. Try making your own observations. I can't sy anything more specific without violating T&C.

And I'm sure you haven't suppressed any evidence to the contrary.