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.
It pertains to the memo, but directed at those that would want to read about such a thing.
I did. Pretty simple concept as well. Not my problem if you see things (propaganda) where it doesn't exist.
The text of the memo was crap as well. Proved nothing whatsoever.
Ok. What is the magic number it passed to become propaganda?
originally posted by: introvert
originally posted by: M5xaz
originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: introvert
Why did you call it an 'event'? How many others have used the same term? Are you listening to propaganda? Can't you think for yourself?
I used the term event. Is it parroted throughout the media? Can you not see the difference?
Just being against Trump is not identity politics. Jesus, you're regurgitating phrases you don't even know what it means.
Yes, indeed it is.
It's cute how you really want to discredit my stance that the verbiage used is of no concern. Deflection need not apply.
JinMi,
Don't worry too much about Introvert.
Rarely responds with facts, references or citations to any post
Pulls stuff out of her ass and deflects
If JinMi's argument was worth a damn, he wouldn't have to have backup from someone such as yourself to step in with the ad hom logical fallacies to encourage them.
originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: M5xaz
When did I ever dispute that? All I'm saying is that letting that idea cloud your judgement about your own side isn't doing you any favors. I'm sure you feel just a strongly about Democrats as others do about Trump, that extremism is making people ignore both sides of the story and only listen to theirs.
I would say don't fall into the trap but it seems you already have. Both sides are corrupt, don't let bias blind you from that fact.
Prove your point ?
Yes, I prove you do not know what deflect means:
The Grassley memo, which you obviously have not heard of, let alone read, provides new information not in the original memo and confirms coordination between the extended Clinton circle and the Obama administration in the effort to damage then-candidate Trump.
In case you don't know, and clearly you don't, political candidates in normal democracies have no say in drafting FISA intercepts against their opponents.
originally posted by: introvert
originally posted by: M5xaz
originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: introvert
Why did you call it an 'event'? How many others have used the same term? Are you listening to propaganda? Can't you think for yourself?
I used the term event. Is it parroted throughout the media? Can you not see the difference?
Just being against Trump is not identity politics. Jesus, you're regurgitating phrases you don't even know what it means.
Yes, indeed it is.
It's cute how you really want to discredit my stance that the verbiage used is of no concern. Deflection need not apply.
JinMi,
Don't worry too much about Introvert.
Rarely responds with facts, references or citations to any post
Pulls stuff out of her ass and deflects
If JinMi's argument was worth a damn, he wouldn't have to have backup from someone such as yourself to step in with the ad hom logical fallacies to encourage them.
What about those that would want to read about it from an unbiased source? Only those whom align with the same views need apply? However, if you see this as simple reporting, then their job has been done, and well I might add.
Except you didn't.
Unlike your posts here, it verified may suspicions that the factions of the FBI were weaponized against political opponents. Today, further corroborating proof. I will grant you this. Factual evidence of what passed in front of the FISA judges has yet to be seen in full.
So 'nothing whatsoever' is an outright lie.
1 actually.
We all prefer to stick to facts, but when you start with ad homs, be prepared that people will respond in kind:
JinMi's arguments are very good.
In your fantasy, while providing ZERO facts or references, you imagine yourself more knowledgeable than: - the Congressional Intel committee - The Grassley memo - the Nunes meno
Are we talking about biases or propaganda? Those are two separate things and you cannot conflate the two.
I did, actually. I gave you a simple explanation. Whether or not you want to accept it or not and create a conspiracy where none exist is not my problem.
So it needed further corroboration? See. I told you it was a dud. The media was right.
Perhaps you do not know what the definition of "lie" is.
But you said 2 or 3 could easily be dismissed. Are you backtracking now?
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: M5xaz
LOL!!! In terms of press/news/media they are married. For the record, I'm not the one who conflated the two terms. See the OP for those who are.
I love it when we can see eye to eye.
Perhaps, however my posts aren't any indication.
Not at all. Felt the need to provide corroborating evidence to the manipulation and propaganda that I claimed. It's a much better option than simply taking my word for it.......
Hmmm. That's a tough one. How about something not like Zimbabwe or Venezuela. Most normal democracies have a FISA-like court system for national security issues, like Canada for example. Except the Canadian system has not been corrupted for political purposes, at least not yet.
And yes, you did claim to be more knowledgeable than the Nunes and Grassley memo, by calling them propaganda without any supporting information to defend your claim of propaganda.
Given you are asking these basic questions, it is quite obvious you have ZERO knowledge to contribute to this thread, just BS and deflection.
No. Biases and the use of propaganda techniques are two separate things. You do not get to resort to discussing biases when you cannot defend your claim on their use of propaganda.
I'm glad you love it. I'd love it if you could come up with some sort of valid argument to refute my assertion. Can you prove this was deliberate propaganda, or is it based on your "feels"?
Neither are mine, so I'm not sure why you posted that statement.
At this point we are just going in circles. You're not making much sense, you're contradicting yourself and I'm beginning to think your backup is drunk.
Last I checked, you didn't have the ability nor authority to tell me what I can or can not do.
In this case, the use of propaganda is clear.
The fact that you would dismiss it because using the same terminology ad nauseum is of no consequence to you is not at all my problem. The bias is also fairly clear in the same terminology. Deal with it.
See the OP and the term 'dud' that is used across multiple differing news sources. Can you come up with a valid argument against? Na, just fling out half handed insults, we know you you roll!
The subject of the memo in the OP and the documents released today fly in the face of your claim that 'nothing whatsoever' was proved is a lie.
I'll take this as your resignation from the argument. When you can form a real argument without resort to same ol' introvert tactics, lemme know.
originally posted by: carewemust
ONLY the Special Counsel that the White House signed-off on yesterday can help us now.
Jeff Sessions is our (the USA's) only hope!