Do you believe that the main stream media is losing its influence?

[ozimoron]

19 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

What did they even do, pose for selfies?  Throw a few papers around?

James Robert Elliott, 24, of Aurora, Illinois, is charged with civil disorder, assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers with a dangerous weapon, and entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon,

 

In the 11 months since Jan. 6, more than 700 individuals have been arrested in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol, including over 220 individuals charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement. The investigation remains ongoing.

 

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/illinois-man-arrested-assault-law-enforcement-during-jan-6-capitol-breach

[LarrySR]

21 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

What did they even do, pose for selfies?  Throw a few papers around?

Scott Palmer a 54-year-old who donned a red “Florida for Trump” hat as he stormed the Capitol, pleaded guilty to assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers using a dangerous weapon. He lobbed a wooden plank and sprayed a fire extinguisher at cops during the Capitol riot was sentenced to 63 months in prison on Friday, the harshest sentence yet for those who took part in the insurrection.
Palmer said he was “really ashamed” and now recognized that “Trump supporters were lied to” by former President Donald Trump. “They kept spitting out the false narrative about a stolen election and how it was ‘our duty’ to stand up to tyranny,”

“Little did I realize that they were the tyrannical ones desperate to hold on to power at any cost even by creating the chaos they knew would happen with such rhetoric.”

 

What a moron. He believed Trump. 

Edited December 22, 2021 by LarrySR

[olfu]

Not losing--lost.

I didnt watch TV for at least 50 years, now as internet took over I consider it propaganda.

[BangkokReady]

3 hours ago, ozimoron said:

One is largely peaceful protesting

The BLM riots were 0% peaceful.

 

3 hours ago, ozimoron said:

For the MSM and everyone except those who would rather bury the story, the former is a transitory newsworthy item while the latter is a huge deal which is sending many to jail and will have huge political ramifications for years to come. It is of great interest to most people and obviously a big story. Don't expect it to go away anytime soon.

Really you're parroting the deceitful attitude of the MSM.

[BangkokReady]

21 minutes ago, LarrySR said:

He lobbed a wooden plank and sprayed a fire extinguisher at cops during the Capitol riot

Sounds tame compared to the BLM riots.

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

Sounds tame compared to the BLM riots.

stop trolling. You're obviously not going to debate in good faith or provide links and evidence to back up your claims.

Edited December 22, 2021 by ozimoron

[BangkokReady]

12 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

stop trolling. You're obviously not going to debate in good faith or provide links and evidence to back up your claims.

Are you saying you didn't follow the BLM riots?  Or you simply focused on biased MSM and turned a blind eye to everything else?

 

There's nothing at all "trolling" about pointing out how tame the January 6th "insurrection" was compared to the BLM riots.  I'm not sure how you don't know that.

[ozimoron]

18 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

Are you saying you didn't follow the BLM riots?  Or you simply focused on biased MSM and turned a blind eye to everything else?

 

There's nothing at all "trolling" about pointing out how tame the January 6th "insurrection" was compared to the BLM riots.  I'm not sure how you don't know that.

What's trolling is making sarcastic comments without ever posting a link to support your argument. Did I mention ever? Who was severely injured or murdered in the BLM "riots"?

Edited December 22, 2021 by ozimoron

[TheScience]

22 hours ago, ozimoron said:

What you have here is an extremist right wing publication attacking fact checkers because they threaten its reputation and readership. They are acting out of pure self interest, nothing to do with the truth. Facebook is hardly an authority on fact checkers either.

 

Facebook is just politicized fraud. It pushes a political agenda for power and money.

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/worlds-most-prestigious-medical-journal-roasts-facebook-over-inaccurate-incompetent

[WaveHunter]

13 hours ago, ozimoron said:

What's trolling is making sarcastic comments without ever posting a link to support your argument. Did I mention ever? Who was severely injured or murdered in the BLM "riots"?

You would do well to stop being so biased and one-sided.  Nothing is "black & white".  How can you possibly say that many of the events associated with BLM protests were benign and peaceful events?

 

While many of the protests were peaceful, demonstrations in some cities escalated to full blown riots, extreme violence and looting!

 

You might not be aware of that if you only follow US mainstream media coverage on CNN or MSNBC but when viewed from international sources it is more than obvious!   See "Widespread unrest as curfews defied across US". BBC News. May 31, 2020".   

 

Many of these riots were incredibly violent, and directed towards innocent bystanders and news reporters.  Many innocent small business owners had their livelihood irreparably  destroyed!

 

The fact is, arson, vandalism, and looting between May 26 and June 8 were tabulated to have caused $1–2 billion in insured damages nationally—the highest recorded damage from civil disorder in U.S. history, surpassing the record set during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.

 

You totally blow your credibility when you only voice your obvious left-leaning bias in all of your posts, and blatantly attack anyone who disagrees with your point of view.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 23, 2021 by WaveHunter

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

You would do well to stop being so biased and one-sided.  Nothing is "black & white".  How can you possibly say that many of the events associated with BLM protests were benign and peaceful events?

 

While many of the protests were peaceful, demonstrations in some cities escalated to full blown riots, extreme violence and looting!  See "Widespread unrest as curfews defied across US". BBC News. May 31, 2020".   Many of these riots were incredibly violent, and directed towards innocent bystanders and news reporters.  Many innocent small business owners had their inventory and buildings destroyed!

 

The fact is, arson, vandalism, and looting between May 26 and June 8 were tabulated to have caused $1–2 billion in insured damages nationally—the highest recorded damage from civil disorder in U.S. history, surpassing the record set during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.

 

You totally blow your credibility when you only voice your obvious left-leaning bias in all of your posts, and blatantly attack anyone who disagrees with your point of view.

If there were very few or no serious charges laid then it's quite straight forward and logical. Prosecutors even criticised the police at Kenosha.  I am not biased, I am data driven, my opinions are formed by facts. The Jan 6 riot on the other hand led to a number of deaths, hundred of injuries and 700 charges. Maybe you should take some of your own advice. My sole motivation on this forum is to push back against lies and bigotry, that's the only reason I post at all.

 

Show me  credible evidence to support your damages claim.

[WaveHunter]

12 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

If there were very few or no serious charges laid then it's quite straight forward and logical. Prosecutors even criticised the police at Kenosha.  I am not biased, I am data driven, my opinions are formed by facts. The Jan 6 riot on the other hand led to a number of deaths, hundred of injuries and 700 charges. Maybe you should take some of your own advice. My sole motivation on this forum is to push back against lies and bigotry, that's the only reason I post at all.

 

Show me  credible evidence to support your damages claim.

Don't ask me to do your homework!  The FACTS are out there for anyone with an open mind and a genuine desire to seek the FULL truth. 

 

I repeat...arson, vandalism, and looting between May 26 and June 8 were tabulated to have caused $1–2 billion in insured damages nationally—the highest recorded damage from civil disorder in U.S. history, surpassing the record set during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.

 

That is a hard, cold statistical fact, not an opinion.

 

Sorry to say this but you seem to be incredibly biased, completely ignore facts that do not fit your narrative, and only cherry pick the ones that do, and then attacking anyone who disagrees with your views, calling them "trolls".

 

Seriously, such polarized views as you express are the problem, both on the Left and the Right.

Edited December 23, 2021 by WaveHunter

[ozimoron]

10 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Don't ask me to do your homework!  The FACTS are out there for anyone with an open mind and a genuine desire to seek the FULL truth. 

 

I repeat...arson, vandalism, and looting between May 26 and June 8 were tabulated to have caused $1–2 billion in insured damages nationally—the highest recorded damage from civil disorder in U.S. history, surpassing the record set during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.

 

Sorry to say this but you seem to be incredibly biased to completely ignore facts that do not fit your narrative, and only cherry pick the ones that do, and then attack anyone who disagrees with your views.

Hilarious, the right wing NEVER produce facts to disprove their lies but bandy around slogans like "Do your Own research" and "Do Your Own Homework". Just risible how anti facts and evidence they are.  The part of lies and conspiracy theories.

 

Never gonna produce links to evidence? Of course not. The facts are certainly out there. I ALWAYS cite them. We all know why you don't.

Edited December 23, 2021 by ozimoron

[WaveHunter]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

Hilarious, the right wing NEVER produce facts to disprove their lies but bandy around slogans like "Do your Own research" and "Do Your Own Homework". Just risible how anti facts and evidence they are.  The part of lies and conspiracy theories.

 

Never gonna produce links to evidence? Of course not.

Classic response (attack) from someone who's pushing a biased narrative.  Well, at least you are true to your colors ????

 

[ozimoron]

Just now, WaveHunter said:

Classic response (attack) from someone who's pushing a biased narrative.  Well, at least you are true to your colors ????

 

I'm not anti Republican, I'm anti liar. You decline every opportunity to prove your claims. Don't blame anybody for not believing you.

Edited December 23, 2021 by ozimoron

[WaveHunter]

11 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I'm not anti Republican, I'm anti liar.

DId I say anything about Republicans or Democrats?  This has nothing to do with Republican vs Democrat. 

 

It has to do with recognizing that the truth is not black & white.  If all you do is push one side of the argument without considering the other, then you are being biased.  Therefore you are not being "anti-liar", you are simply being disingenuous. 

 

Truth requires respecting BOTH sides of an issue and a willingness to debate others with different opinions than yours.  Attacking others who disagree with you (calling them trolls) only makes you a bully.

Edited December 23, 2021 by WaveHunter

[ozimoron]

8 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

DId I say anything about Republicans or Democrats?  This has nothing to do with Republican vs Democrat. 

 

It has to do with recognizing that the truth is not black & white.  If all you do is push one side of the argument without considering the other, then you are being biased.  Therefore you are not being "anti-liar", you are simply being disingenuous.  Attacking others who disagree with you (calling them trolls) makes you a bully.

I consider facts and evidence. Nothing more. Make claims without substantiation and I will call you out for it. Note that I always support my arguments. Why can't you? This would be a much more civil discussion if everybody debated in good faith by producing links to facts.

Edited December 23, 2021 by ozimoron

[WaveHunter]

8 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I consider facts and evidence. Nothing more. Make claims without substantiation and I will call you out for it. Note that I always support my arguments. Why can't you? This would be a much more civil discussion if everybody debated in good faith by producing links to facts.

You have not provided links to facts.  You have only provided links to commentary;  commentary voiced by human beings who can and usually do have personal biases.  Such links are totally meaningless, especially when they are cherry picked to support your personal narrative.

 

I gave you insurance statistics, not links.  If I gave you links, you would attack them as being biased, so I gave you the numbers so that YOU can verify whether what I say is true or not. 

 

It seems pretty obvious that you have a pre-existing narrative and only seek out information that supports it while ignoring information that does not.  That is not how truth is discovered.

Edited December 23, 2021 by WaveHunter

[ozimoron]

9 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

You have not provided links to facts.  You have only provided links to commentary;  commentary voiced by human beings who can and usually do have personal biases.  Such links are totally meaningless, especially when they are cherry picked to support your personal narrative.

 

I gave you insurance statistics, not links.  If I gave you links, you would attack them as being biased, so I gave you the numbers so that YOU can verify whether what I say is true or not. 

 

It seems pretty obvious that you have a pre-existing narrative and only seek out information that supports it while ignoring information that does not.  That is not how truth is discovered.

I have never attacked links if they come from a credible source. The very reason you believe your links will be attacked is because you don't have faith in them to withstand fact checking.  I don't have pre-existing biases. I will attack the left as well as the right for policy failures. It is incumbents upon you to substantiate your own claims, not tell me to waste my time looking for links to non existent data. Really, you should not post of you aren't prepared to substantiate your claims when they are controversial.

[ozimoron]

The kleptocracies and their  loyal sheeple which mainly run our countries want nothing more than to censor or shut down the mainstream media because good investigative journalism is a threat to their corruption and criminality. They want their march to facism to be hidden from public view.

 

It is a standard tactic of would be fascists to silence responsible media and replace it with propaganda. That is what we see in this thread.

Edited December 23, 2021 by ozimoron

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, WaveHunter said:

DId I say anything about Republicans or Democrats?  This has nothing to do with Republican vs Democrat. 

 

It has to do with recognizing that the truth is not black & white.  If all you do is push one side of the argument without considering the other, then you are being biased.  Therefore you are not being "anti-liar", you are simply being disingenuous. 

 

Truth requires respecting BOTH sides of an issue and a willingness to debate others with different opinions than yours.  Attacking others who disagree with you (calling them trolls) only makes you a bully.

The big flaw in your point is that very often different sides are not even close to equivalent in credibility. So for example some conspiracy theory Q addled bozo argues Bill Gates is injecting us with microchips, NO!, batsheit crazy sides like that deserve no respect whatsoever.

Edited December 23, 2021 by Jingthing

[WaveHunter]

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

I have never attacked links if they come from a credible source. The very reason you believe your links will be attacked is because you don't have faith in them to withstand fact checking.  I don't have pre-existing biases. I will attack the left as well as the right for policy failures. It is incumbents upon you to substantiate your own claims, not tell me to waste my time looking for links to non existent data. Really, you should not post of you aren't prepared to substantiate your claims when they are controversial.

First of all, don't profess to tell me what I am thinking!  That's just another tactic that a biased bully often uses to attack someone who's viewpoint differs from theirs.

 

  I link when I think it is necessary, but only to well vetted fact-based studies or statistics, never from sources that are commentary based. 

 

Personally I am always suspicious when someone provides links to substantiate their claim since it is very easy to cherry pick a link that supports any viewpoint!  Anyone seriously interested in truth, will want to do their own Google Search for themselves if they question something that another person claims.

 

In this specific case, I really did not think any sort of vetting was necessary.  ANY well-informed person is well aware of the catastrophic costs directly associated with the arson, looting, and other property damages caused by these rioters! 

 

Again, I am cognisant that many BLM protesters acted responsibly, but many of the rioters did not, and were simply taking advantage of the protests for their own gain! 

 

If you really contest this is so, you are either VERY poorly informed, or you are deliberately ignoring the facts since they do not support your narrative.  Either way, here are some links to help you out.

 

• "How 2020 protests changed insurance forever" appearing in the World Economic Forum (data provided by PCS).
• Facts + Statistics: Civil Disorders
• Insured Losses from Riots Reach ‘Catastrophe’ Levels, May Rival Record
• Vandalism, looting following Floyd death sparks at least $1B in damages nationwide: report

 

Edited December 23, 2021 by WaveHunter

[WaveHunter]

24 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

The big flaw in your point is that very often different sides are not even close to equivalent in credibility. So for example some conspiracy theory Q addled bozo argues Bill Gates is injecting us with microchips, NO!, batsheit crazy sides like that deserve no respect whatsoever.

LOL!  I have no idea what you are trying to say, but I enjoyed your entertaining brain-freeze ????

 

[Jingthing]

Just now, WaveHunter said:

LOL!  I have no idea what you are trying to say, but I enjoyed your entertaining brain-freeze ????

 

Sure you don't.

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

First of all, don't profess to tell me what I am thinking!  That's just another tactic that a biased bully often uses to attack someone who's viewpoint differs from theirs.

 

  I link when I think it is necessary, but only to well vetted fact-based studies or statistics, never from sources that are commentary based. 

 

Personally I am always suspicious when someone provides links to substantiate their claim since it is very easy to cherry pick a link that supports any viewpoint!  Anyone seriously interested in truth, will want to do their own Google Search for themselves if they question something that another person claims.

 

In this specific case, I really did not think any sort of vetting was necessary.  ANY well-informed person is well aware of the catastrophic costs directly associated with the arson, looting, and other property damages caused by these rioters! 

 

Again, I am cognisant that many BLM protesters acted responsibly, but many of the rioters did not, and were simply taking advantage of the protests for their own gain! 

 

If you really contest this is so, you are either VERY poorly informed, or you are deliberately ignoring the facts since they do not support your narrative.  Either way, here are some links to help you out.

 

• "How 2020 protests changed insurance forever" written by the World Economic Forum.
• Facts + Statistics: Civil Disorders
• Insured Losses from Riots Reach ‘Catastrophe’ Levels, May Rival Record
• Vandalism, looting following Floyd death sparks at least $1B in damages nationwide: report

 

My argument was not that the damage didn't occur but that the majority of the protesters were peacefully protesting, a fact which you acknowledge and where the arson and looting did occur the authorities did not turn a blind eye. Nor did the mainstream media ignore them.

[WaveHunter]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

My argument was not that the damage didn't occur but that the majority of the protesters were peacefully protesting, a fact which you acknowledge and where the arson and looting did occur the authorities did not turn a blind eye. Nor did the mainstream media ignore them.

Billions of dollars of damage nationwide was NOT the result of just a few isolated individuals.  It clearly was orchestrated on a nationwide basis.  Authorities were obviously not effective at containing the violence which went on for a number of days, or the BILLIONS of dollars in damage would not have occured.

 

As for mainstream media accurately reporting the events as they unfolded, which is really what this thread is supposed to be all about...are you kidding me?  

 

I was dumbfounded watching a an-site CNN reporter claiming that the protests he was witnessing were "mostly peaceful" while you saw entire blocks of building ablaze in the background, or innocent bystanders and reporters themselves being attacked and injured.

 

The news coverage of these protests was about as far off the mark as it could have been, and this is a recurring situation for news coverage over the last year with all sorts of politically charged events, and that's why the public has finally had enough, as evidenced by the collapsing ratings of the mainstream "news" networks:

 

According to the latest Nielsen ratings in the key demographic of adults 25-54, compared to last year at this time::

• Fox is down by 34%
• MS-NBC is down by 59%
• CNN is down by 77%

If you doubt these numbers, you can read this report from Forbes (based on Nielsen statistics), or google search for yourself.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/markjoyella/2021/12/01/fox-news-easily-wins-november-cable-news-ratings-as-all-networks-see-steep-declines/?sh=717fd1002f14

 

 

 

 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, WaveHunter said:

I was dumbfounded watching a an-site CNN reporter claiming that the protests he was witnessing were "mostly peaceful" while you saw entire blocks of building ablaze in the background, or innocent bystanders and reporters themselves being attacked and injured.

 

5 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Billions of dollars of damage nationwide was NOT the result of just a few isolated individuals.  It clearly was orchestrated on a nationwide basis.  Authorities were obviously not effective at containing the violence which went on for a number of days, or the BILLIONS of dollars in damage would not have occured.

 

As for mainstream media accurately reporting the events as they unfolded, which is really what this thread is supposed to be all about...are you kidding me?  

 

I was dumbfounded watching a an-site CNN reporter claiming that the protests he was witnessing were "mostly peaceful" while you saw entire blocks of building ablaze in the background, or innocent bystanders and reporters themselves being attacked and injured.

 

The news coverage of these protests was about as far off the mark as it could have been, and this is a recurring situation for news coverage over the last year with all sorts of politically charged events, and that's why the public has finally had enough, as evidenced by the collapsing ratings of the mainstream "news" networks:

 

According to the latest Nielsen ratings in the key demographic of adults 25-54, compared to last year at this time::

• Fox is down by 34%
• MS-NBC is down by 59%
• CNN is down by 77%

If you doubt these numbers, you can read this report from Forbes (based on Nielsen statistics), or google search for yourself.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/markjoyella/2021/12/01/fox-news-easily-wins-november-cable-news-ratings-as-all-networks-see-steep-declines/?sh=717fd1002f14

I never made claims that they were nor were not peaceful. I said that they weren't misreported or crimes ignored by the police as alleged. Wiki claims that the protests were mostly peaceful by day at least. You didn't provide links (I'm not shocked) so it's hard to consider the context of the reports.

[Berkshire]

1 hour ago, WaveHunter said:

Anyone seriously interested in truth, will want to do their own Google Search for themselves if they question something that another person claims.

My understanding of the way Google algorithm works is your own biases (i.e., search history) may determine the outcome.  If your regular news source is Breitbart, Infowars, Fox, OAN, Drudge, NY Post, Washington Examiner, etc., the results of your search may tend to lean right.  So if you and I do a Google search on the same topic, our results may be vastly different.

[WaveHunter]

20 hours ago, Berkshire said:

My understanding of the way Google algorithm works is your own biases (i.e., search history) may determine the outcome.  If your regular news source is Breitbart, Infowars, Fox, OAN, Drudge, NY Post, Washington Examiner, etc., the results of your search may tend to lean right.  So if you and I do a Google search on the same topic, our results may be vastly different.

You certainly have a point.  There's much about just how Google manipulates their search engine results that is definitely cause for concern.  It even has a name; search engine manipulation effect (SEME).

 

I do the majority of my searches using Google, but I also use a "TOR" browser and certain "deep web" search engines to see if Google search results are biasing my searches, or even censoring my search results.

 

Anyone who's worried about biased or even censored search engine results should look into using a TOR browser and doing searches via the "deep web".  You can read a wiki about TOR to become familiar with it if you don't already know what it is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(network).

 

Though the deep web has a somewhat notorious reputation (i.e.: the Silk Road), the fact is that 99% of internet traffic occurs on the deep web, so when you only search Google, you are really only searching 1% of what is actually on the internet.

 

And BTW, here in Thailand, search results are heavily manipulated and censored by the government which makes using a TOR browser all the more useful, since one of the main features of a TOR browser is that it routes your IP address through its' network of international servers, so your perceived IP is from another country, and you can select any country you wish.

Edited December 24, 2021 by WaveHunter

[KhunLA]

1 hour ago, WaveHunter said:

I do the majority of my searches using Google, but I also use a "TOR" browser and certain "deep web" search engines to see if Google search results are biasing my searches, or even censoring my search results.

For others, simply use duckduck and you'll get a better, uncensored view of the information hwy.  Use google for shopping, DD for info.