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's a Dud

page: 7
29
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don’t think it does either. So what?

Tell that to Donald Trump.


Tell it to the news, who are supposed to speak truth to power and point out injustice.

The news agrees with me that the memo not only doesn't impugn Robert Mueller, but it is lacking in substance to prove anything.


I know. Like you, they are unconcerned about the implications of the memo, and any potential violations. I’m not sure why that is the case but I’m guessing Trump hatred has something to do with it.

No. From what I'm reading they are VERY concerned about the implications of the memo. They just aren't going to believe it at face value like you guys are desperately doing because there is no evidence corroborating the claims within.

Also, they consider the memo to be a big joke because the memo actually proves that Carter Page was under surveillance prior to the dossier.


Of course they think it is a big joke. Then again, the federal prosecutor who saw the underlying evidence and helped to draft the memo says otherwise.

The people who wrote the memo didn't even fully read the underlying intelligence.


PROVE THAT.




posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan



Multiple agencies repeatedly using the same phrasing over and over again is evidence, whether you see it as such or not.


I'll ask you the same question I did the OP. How many news agencies have to be on record using a specific word or phrase for it to count as propaganda?

Using a specific word, especially when it is correct, is not indicative of propaganda in and of itself and usage of the same words/phrases is going to happen naturally.

Also, calling the memo a dud does not change any facts in regards to the investigation or the eventual outcome, whatever that may be. So I'm not sure this "propaganda" effort serves any purpose.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Devin Nunes admits he didn't view the underlying intelligence his memo was based on


The House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes admitted on Friday that he did not view the underlying intelligence on which he based a memo that accuses the FBI and the Justice Department of improperly surveilling Trump associates during the 2016 election.

Hours after the memo came out on Friday, Nunes gave an interview on Fox News during which anchor Bret Baier asked him if he wrote the memo. "Yes," Nunes replied, saying other Republican lawmakers, like House Oversight Committee chair Trey Gowdy, also contributed.

"Did you read the actual FISA applications," Baier asked, referring to the documents that the memo cites in part as evidence of improper conduct by US law-enforcement officials.

"No, I didn't," Nunes said, before adding that Gowdy was part of a designated group that reviewed the intelligence, took notes, and reported it back to committee members.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

LOL, so nobody else was involved in the MEMO? Jesus, you must have convinced yourself you are right to avoid the mental breakdown thats ahead.

Trey Gowdy. Look him up.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan



Multiple agencies repeatedly using the same phrasing over and over again is evidence, whether you see it as such or not.


I'll ask you the same question I did the OP. How many news agencies have to be on record using a specific word or phrase for it to count as propaganda?

Using a specific word, especially when it is correct, is not indicative of propaganda in and of itself and usage of the same words/phrases is going to happen naturally.

Also, calling the memo a dud does not change any facts in regards to the investigation or the eventual outcome, whatever that may be. So I'm not sure this "propaganda" effort serves any purpose.





posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: introvert

Its not proof. You are right. Its evidence.


Evidence of what?

I've seen no evidence presented that would suggest the use of the word is a coordinated propaganda effort. Literally, the OP only shows that some news outlets used the same descriptive word.


LOL, it's only things that have been found and listed on paper. Gowdy was involved in writing it and knows what evidence was used to formulate it. Everyone can blubber on and on about what they think, and other than looking really SILLY later, none of it will matter. We all need to wait for the investigation and it's results. Just like the one about Trump fondling Putin's gnads.


I am glad to wait for the results. But I fail to see how your post has anything to do with what I said.

I'm talking about the media and propaganda. Not sure what Gowdy and Trumps gnads have to do with that.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:37 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

First off, you find NO issues with the idea that the man who has been shilling this memo for the last month+ hasn't even read the intelligence that he is questioning?

Second off, you don't know how much Gowdy contributed.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Cool video bro.

I stand by my point, but I fail to see what your's is.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: network dude

First off, you find NO issues with the idea that the man who has been shilling this memo for the last month+ hasn't even read the intelligence that he is questioning?

Second off, you don't know how much Gowdy contributed.


second off, you don't either, but he did say he was very involved in the drafting of the memo, so until proven different, I'll take his word over yours.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

You didn't answer my question.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: introvert

Its not proof. You are right. Its evidence.


Evidence of what?

I've seen no evidence presented that would suggest the use of the word is a coordinated propaganda effort. Literally, the OP only shows that some news outlets used the same descriptive word.


LOL, it's only things that have been found and listed on paper. Gowdy was involved in writing it and knows what evidence was used to formulate it. Everyone can blubber on and on about what they think, and other than looking really SILLY later, none of it will matter. We all need to wait for the investigation and it's results. Just like the one about Trump fondling Putin's gnads.


I am glad to wait for the results. But I fail to see how your post has anything to do with what I said.

I'm talking about the media and propaganda. Not sure what Gowdy and Trumps gnads have to do with that.



my only point is that lots of things have been said, and they have been said by some trustworthy people, so to ignore it might be a bad idea. But you do whatever you must to sleep at night. And my video was more of a joke that if you don't know the MSM is controlled, you might not be paying attention.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Eat your #! And stop being so provocative again, you silly offender in the non-forgetting internetz!

Also, in related news - a new podcast from J. Scahill:


REPUBLICANS SAY THE deep state spied on Trump’s team. The Democrats back the FBI. Both support the very program the Nunes memo claims was used to spy on Carter Page. This week on Intercepted: Former State Department official Peter van Buren and civil liberties advocate Julian Sanchez offer provocative analysis on warrantless surveillance, the Nunes memo, and the FBI’s role in the 2016 election. Jeremy blasts the use of former CIA and NSA officials as news analysts and the hypocrisy surrounding the FISA debate. In 1953, CIA scientist Frank Olson jumped to his death from a Manhattan hotel after an '___' experiment gone wrong. But is that the real story? Academy Award winner Errol Morris and actor Peter Sarsgaard talk about their new hybrid-documentary series Wormwood and present their case that Olson was murdered by the CIA. Yemen continues to burn in the fires of a U.S.-fueled Saudi bombing campaign, as cholera and famine spread. How did the world allow it to get so bad and who is really responsible? An in-depth discussion with Yemeni analyst Nadwa al Dawsari detailing the key events of the past 20 years that have led to the current hell in Yemen.

theintercept.com...

That dud, thoroughly dissected.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: network dude

You didn't answer my question.


Nunes might well be a total idiot. And while that would be a lovely tangent to run off with to detract from the facts, he is irrelevant, other than his involvement in the memo. SO my opinion of him just doesn't matter. I am concerned by the accusations made, and it worries me that if they are true, the IC has kind of run amok. It makes me wonder why people like you would let party politics play a role in weather or not that is the case.

But if you feel that the FBI illegally spying on American citizens is cool, I guess you were also a big fan of the Patriot Act. Though I don't remember you cheering that one on.

How many here are fighting to restore the good name of Richard Nixon? (you do realize that if this plays out, you are kind of doing just that)



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: network dude

You didn't answer my question.


Nunes might well be a total idiot. And while that would be a lovely tangent to run off with to detract from the facts, he is irrelevant, other than his involvement in the memo. SO my opinion of him just doesn't matter. I am concerned by the accusations made, and it worries me that if they are true, the IC has kind of run amok. It makes me wonder why people like you would let party politics play a role in weather or not that is the case.

To me, when you are shilling a document based on other documentation that you haven't read, you've just shot ALL your credibility in the foot. Since the memo is a bunch of wild claims and accusations this makes the memo more doubtful of its veracity. This has nothing to do with party politics either and everything to do with trust. I don't trust Nunes. He's a partisan bootlicker to an extreme degree. Hell, so is Gowdy after that huge vendetta he ran against Hillary Clinton during the Obama years. Good thing Gowdy is retiring this year.

I also feel like attempting to railroad an investigation while in the middle of said investigation is obstruction of justice. If the investigation is being conducted improperly then that is what appeals courts are for.


But if you feel that the FBI illegally spying on American citizens is cool, I guess you were also a big fan of the Patriot Act. Though I don't remember you cheering that one on.

Nice empirical statement you are making here.


How many here are fighting to restore the good name of Richard Nixon? (you do realize that if this plays out, you are kind of doing just that)

Another great empirical statement you are making here. Man for someone who told me he doesn't like making these sorts of statements, you are on a roll. Almost like you are a liar or something.
edit on 7-2-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

you don't really understand what an "empirical statement" is do you?



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:57 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude



my only point is that lots of things have been said, and they have been said by some trustworthy people, so to ignore it might be a bad idea.


I've not said anything that would indicate I am ignoring it. Again, not sure what that has to do with me.



But you do whatever you must to sleep at night.


Ok.



And my video was more of a joke that if you don't know the MSM is controlled, you might not be paying attention.


Controlled by whom?

Perhaps they care controlled by people that use their 1st amendment rights how they so choose.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:57 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Sorry you're right. I misspoke. Your statements weren't empirical they were just dumb.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

So you are telling me that the phrase "nothing burger" is so pervasive in American society that it is likely to show up in several stories?

Really?

RE: how many outlets have to repeat for it to be propaganda....just 1. Just 1 needs to be the mouthpiece for the daily talking points about a topic. More outlets is simply more propaganda.

Now, to examine your assertion...if i search news articles using the same 2 phrases, i don't find either being used more often than once every couple of months:

1/1/1900 to 12/31/2017: "A dud"

1/1/19 00 to 12/31/2017: "Nothing Burger"

So while what you say may sound reasonable....im not finding evidence to support it.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude




Nunes might well be a total idiot. And while that would be a lovely tangent to run off with to detract from the facts, he is irrelevant, other than his involvement in the memo.


He circulated flyers to get this new surveillance law crap passed while he what... claims a breach of your constitutional rights with the same kind of alleged surveillance on Trump?

Sure. We should discard that not to detract from the facts... errr. No, yes! We surely are the droids they are looking for and the internetz doesn't forget. Let's simply ignore all context and rally at this red banner of authority now, as someone unfolded that cloak for us in the mids of this storm of daggers.



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan



So you are telling me that the phrase "nothing burger" is so pervasive in American society that it is likely to show up in several stories? Really?


I said no such thing. "Nothing burger" is a very specific phrase. "Dud" is not and it is reasonable to say it would be used more often.



RE: how many outlets have to repeat for it to be propaganda....just 1. Just 1 needs to be the mouthpiece for the daily talking points about a topic. More outlets is simply more propaganda.


Ok. So it appears that we are setting the precedent that anything and everything can be considered propaganda, depending upon the opinion of each individual.



So while what you say may sound reasonable....im not finding evidence to support it.


Do you disagree that the term "dud" is a commonly-used term?



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join