[sfi]

kenberg, on 2016-December-05, 07:27, said:

I tried both "Clinton murders" with the quotation marks and Clinton murders without the quotation marks.

Oddly, Planet Money just published a podcast on the fake news concept yesterday, and used this "story" as the basis of the report. Interesting listening.

Link to podcast

[hrothgar]

Kaitlyn S, on 2016-December-04, 22:10, said:

If you'd like, I'd try an experiment, Give me any hot-button search term and we'll each post our top five links I'll bet mine are alt-right and yours are alt-left.

Kaitlyn, the expression "Alt Right" is a politically correct way to say "Neo - Nazi".

1. If your google feed is has identified that you want to hear a steady stream of alt right memes, then you're a nasty piece of work
2. You are setting up a false equivalence between the "alt right" and Mike's beliefs which you are describing as alt left

[diana_eva]

hrothgar, on 2016-December-05, 07:51, said:

Kaitlyn, the expression "Alt Right" is a politically correct way to say "Neo - Nazi".

1. If your google feed is has identified that you want to hear a steady stream of alt right memes, then you're a nasty piece of work
2. You are setting up a false equivalence between the "alt right" and Mike's beliefs which you are describing as alt left

This is unfair. It's not that much of a big deal to click and read the extremist stuff posted by others in support of their ideas, how can one debate without seeing why they say what they say? Doesn't mean you're a nasty piece yourself it simply means you clicked some of those websites. My own results are mixed, and after going through some of Jon's lists they look downright scary.

Edit: what google thinks I want to know about "clinton murders"


The Clinton Chronicles - The Bill Clinton Murders - YouTube
https://www.youtube....h?v=BPX1G--iE3Q
STRANGE DEATHS CONNECTED TO THE CLINTON CRIME FAMILY So what did Bill Clinton do, when he ...

Clinton Body Count +5 in Just 6 Weeks - YouTube
https://www.youtube....h?v=xb_N02-vh8M
Hillary will stop at nothing to claw her way into the White House; unfortunately, people are dropping dead left ...

Conspiracy Theorists Won't Stop Accusing The Clintons Of Murder ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../hillary-clinton-seth-rich_us_57...
15 aug. 2016 - WASHINGTON ― The woman on the verge of becoming the next president is part of a crime family that has left a trail of dozens of dead bodies

The Clinton Chronicles - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia...nton_Chronicles
The Clinton Chronicles: An Investigation into the Alleged Criminal Activities of Bill Clinton is a 1994 film that accused Bill Clinton of a range of crimes. The video

Clinton Body Count-Clinton friends who've ended up dead-Truth! and ...
https://www.truthorf...clintonfriends/
The People President Clinton Didn't Have to Pardon…Because They're All Dead-Truth! & Fiction! Summary of eRumor:This a list of people associated with Bill

Clinton Body Bags : snopes.com
www.snopes.com › Fact Check

This post has been edited by diana_eva: 2016-December-05, 08:01

[PassedOut]

There are many republican prosecutors in the US. There are a number of republican former prosecutors in congress. There was a special prosecutor investigating the Clintons during the 1990s, and Bill Clinton was impeached. Quite a few FBI agents have made it clear that they loathe the Clintons.

With all this, how could anyone even begin to entertain the idea that the Clintons have avoided prosecution for actual murder? Monica Lewinsky, Benghazi, emails, but not murder? C'mon people, be serious.

[hrothgar]

diana_eva, on 2016-December-05, 07:56, said:

Edit: what google thinks I want to know about "clinton murders"

Kaitlyn claimed that she would be presented by a steady stream of Alt Right content regardless of what she entered into Google.

You are specific googling a fringe theme

Please note: I don't associate "Clinton Murders" with the Alt Right

[kenberg]

sfi, on 2016-December-05, 07:50, said:

Oddly, Planet Money just published a podcast on the fake news concept yesterday, and used this "story" as the basis of the report. Interesting listening.

Link to podcast

Thank you, I read the intro, I have not yet listened to the story.

Sorting out the truth is becoming tricky. For example
https://www.washingt...m=.3b8547270732

I stay off Facebook, I don't download apps onto my phone, I don't tweet. But I am retired and my life is pretty simple, so I have no real need for those things. I think I have a reasonably healthy skepticism. For example, when winston said he had heard that Bannon said only property owners should have the right to vote, I was skeptical. It's an unhappy fact of our current political scene that I cannot totally dismiss it, but I seriously doubt it is true.

Sometime back I said cynicism is bad, skepticism is good. This applies to politics, to buying a car, to statistics, and to quite a few other things.We need to vote, we need transportation, we need data. But! Look before you leap, still water runs deep the song says.

[andrei]

andrei, on 2016-December-02, 09:40, said:

the Internet police is out, looking.

hrothgar, on 2016-December-04, 15:09, said:

By the way Kaitlyn, I can't help but notice that you have a user ID set up on Bridgewinners but that you are blocked from posting because you haven't been able to provide any kind of verifiable ID.

cherdano, on 2016-December-04, 16:08, said:

Btw, what is Kaitlyn's prior account name?

LOL.

Guys, I forgot if I have a BW account, would you check and let everybody know?

[kenberg]

PassedOut, on 2016-December-05, 08:14, said:

There are many republican prosecutors in the US. There are a number of republican former prosecutors in congress. There was a special prosecutor investigating the Clintons during the 1990s, and Bill Clinton was impeached. Quite a few FBI agents have made it clear that they loathe the Clintons.

With all this, how could anyone even begin to entertain the idea that the Clintons have avoided prosecution for actual murder? Monica Lewinsky, Benghazi, emails, but not murder? C'mon people, be serious.

Exactly.

Some things I can see now people get suckered in. This one?

i asked Kailyn (The bridge player who used to be known as Kaitlyn?) just who these people were that were feeding her this. Over the years, I have known some very odd people. We all have, I suppose.

[Kaitlyn S]

hrothgar, on 2016-December-05, 07:51, said:

Kaitlyn, the expression "Alt Right" is a politically correct way to say "Neo - Nazi".

1. If your google feed is has identified that you want to hear a steady stream of alt right memes, then you're a nasty piece of work
2. You are setting up a false equivalence between the "alt right" and Mike's beliefs which you are describing as alt left

Really! On my other forum, when I quote such sites as Fox News and Breitbart, they call them "alt-right".

[PassedOut]

kenberg, on 2016-December-05, 09:13, said:

Over the years, I have known some very odd people. We all have, I suppose.

This reminds me of something that happened back in 2008 while I was still volunteering at our local elections. We had a couple of meetings with the democrats and republicans together to make sure we were all on the same page regarding poll workers from both parties at each precinct, and so on.

After the first of these, I noticed the democrat organizer, a nice young woman, looking uncomfortable in conversation with a very intense middle-aged man, so I walked over to join them. It seems that he was one of her volunteers for making phone calls and going door-to-door, but he had this video tape that he thought proved that 9/11 was an inside job and was pressuring her to take it. I could see that she didn't want to take it but didn't want offend him, so I piped up and offered to take it, view it, and discuss it with him after the next meeting. He was happy and she was happy.

When I got home I got Constance and put the tape on. As you'd expect, it was a sleaze job put out to take money from suckers. A narrator with a deep, somber voice went on and on, pushing absolute foolishness. One of the pieces of "evidence" offered was that the hole in the pentagon was the wrong shape for being hit by a plane, but the right shape for being hit by a missile. The government was covering up the missile attack.

After the next meeting, I handed the guy back the tape and he asked what I thought. I chuckled and asked him what he thought had happened to the plane, if it didn't hit the pentagon. He lowered his voice, looked around, and said, "You tell me!"

When I told him, "It hit the pentagon," he looked disgusted, raised his arms, and walked away.

It doesn't surprise me to find odd people now and then, but I'm starting to be surprised by the sheer number of them. It's sobering.

[Elianna]

Kaitlyn S, on 2016-December-05, 10:15, said:

Really! On my other forum, when I quote such sites as Fox News and Breitbart, they call them "alt-right".

Fox News is rightwing/conservative but not what I would consider "alt-right".

Breitbart is alt-right (even according to the creator).

[mikeh]

Leaving the previous issues to one side, is anyone else here as frightened about China as I am?

Trump's pre-arranged call from the President of Taiwan might have been a calculated poke in the eye at China, altho given that he has taken similar calls from some very unusual, and unsavoury, people in the last few weeks it seems to me likely to have been approved by Trump out of ignorance.

China, predictably, issued a Formal Note...a tool of diplomacy usually addressed by a diplomatic message. Typically that message would have admitted to no wrongdoing, but would have stressed that the US sees China as a valuable player on the international scene.

Instead, Trump unleashes a twitter rant!

I very much doubt that he has any insight into how others, let alone the type of person who has been able to prevail in the intensely competitive environment of Chinese politics, actually think. This is a man who has, many times, boasted that the most important approach to business is that if anyone does you wrong (in your mind), you go back and do worse to him..far worse...you destroy your opponent who did you wrong.

He refuses to attend intelligence briefings, apparently preferring to watch and tweet about SNL. He seems to have never had any interest in history or indeed any subject other than Donald Trump.

WWI came about by mischance, as a result of the interplay of certain individuals, a combination of circumstance, and an inability to communicate. I have read several histories of WWI, and of the era laading up to it, including (most recently) The War that ended Peace.

Trump's apparent inability to understand the problems that the Chinese leaders have, and the difficulty I expect the Chinese leadership to have understanding Trump, create a potential for a horrific misunderstanding over Taiwan.

While I would not expect this to happen, it seems to me that the more Trump pushes China, the more likely it is that China will start to sabre-rattle over Taiwan, and Trump's self-image won't let him back down, at least not when he sees himself as Commander in Chief of the strongest military in the world.

Remember, this is a man who knows war better than his generals, and spurns briefings and won't allow the State Department to help him communicate with foreign leaders.

This is a man who is so ignorant that in conversation with the English PM, he invited her to 'drop by' should she ever 'be in town'. He priised the Phillipino President for his death squad/mass murder approach to fighting drugs, he praised the dictator of Kazhstan in a recent phone call, he admires Hussein, respects the North Korean dictator as a strong man (for murdering his uncle on ascension to power), and slavers over Putin.

Now he is having a pissing contest with China, and should the Chinese fail to learn, quickly, how to manipulate him, we could end up very close to the brink.

[diana_eva]

mikeh, on 2016-December-05, 11:06, said:

Leaving the previous issues to one side, is anyone else here as frightened about China as I am?

Trump's pre-arranged call from the President of Taiwan might have been a calculated poke in the eye at China, altho given that he has taken similar calls from some very unusual, and unsavoury, people in the last few weeks it seems to me likely to have been approved by Trump out of ignorance.

China, predictably, issued a Formal Note...a tool of diplomacy usually addressed by a diplomatic message. Typically that message would have admitted to no wrongdoing, but would have stressed that the US sees China as a valuable player on the international scene.

Instead, Trump unleashes a twitter rant!

I very much doubt that he has any insight into how others, let alone the type of person who has been able to prevail in the intensely competitive environment of Chinese politics, actually think. This is a man who has, many times, boasted that the most important approach to business is that if anyone does you wrong (in your mind), you go back and do worse to him..far worse...you destroy your opponent who did you wrong.

He refuses to attend intelligence briefings, apparently preferring to watch and tweet about SNL. He seems to have never had any interest in history or indeed any subject other than Donald Trump.

WWI came about by mischance, as a result of the interplay of certain individuals, a combination of circumstance, and an inability to communicate. I have read several histories of WWI, and of the era laading up to it, including (most recently) The War that ended Peace.

Trump's apparent inability to understand the problems that the Chinese leaders have, and the difficulty I expect the Chinese leadership to have understanding Trump, create a potential for a horrific misunderstanding over Taiwan.

While I would not expect this to happen, it seems to me that the more Trump pushes China, the more likely it is that China will start to sabre-rattle over Taiwan, and Trump's self-image won't let him back down, at least not when he sees himself as Commander in Chief of the strongest military in the world.

Remember, this is a man who knows war better than his generals, and spurns briefings and won't allow the State Department to help him communicate with foreign leaders.

This is a man who is so ignorant that in conversation with the English PM, he invited her to 'drop by' should she ever 'be in town'. He priised the Phillipino President for his death squad/mass murder approach to fighting drugs, he praised the dictator of Kazhstan in a recent phone call, he admires Hussein, respects the North Korean dictator as a strong man (for murdering his uncle on ascension to power), and slavers over Putin.

Now he is having a pissing contest with China, and should the Chinese fail to learn, quickly, how to manipulate him, we could end up very close to the brink.

Yeah, I mentioned the Taiwan call too upthread. Frightening. I hope Trump will soon be forbidden access to Twitter.

[hrothgar]

Elianna, on 2016-December-05, 10:58, said:

Fox News is rightwing/conservative but not what I would consider "alt-right".

Breitbart is alt-right (even according to the creator).

This very much corresponds to my understanding

[diana_eva]

andrei, on 2016-December-05, 08:56, said:

LOL.

Guys, I forgot if I have a BW account, would you check and let everybody know?

If you would constantly refuse to back up silly claims and keep posting new ones, completely ignoring the previous arguments after others spent time researching for you, yeah.

[nige1]

diana_eva, on 2016-December-04, 16:49, said:

How about if you snuck into a bridge forum, made zero bridge contribution to the bridge community and whined about how you are treated for posting non-bridge stuff in the only off-topic forum of many? Maybe the rest of the community feels you should make some effort to fit in.

Surely it's OK for Jonottowa to choose where he posts.

Rather than making a consistent effort to refute the arguments of Jonottowa and Kaitlyn, the usual gang is abusing them and imputing opinions to them that they haven't expressed. The victims would be hypocrites and masochists to "fit in" with that torrent of insolence.

Thank you for your efforts as Moderator, Diana_eva. But I feel that a moderator doesn't have to agree with the views of a minority to defend it's right to express them

For many foreigners, US politics are an enigma We fear the stampede towards war, driven by the US arms industry Given our concerns, some of us feel that a civilised exchange of facts and arguments would be more appropriate -- and persuasive.

[diana_eva]

nige1, on 2016-December-05, 12:10, said:

Rather than making a consistent effort to refute the arguments of Jonottowa and Kaitlyn, the usual gang is abusing them and imputing opinions to them they haven't expressed. The victims would be hypocrites and masochists to "fit in" with that torrent of insolence, As a moderator, Diana_eva, you don't have to agree with the views of a minority to defend their right to express them. For many foreigners, US politics are an enigma. We fear a stampede towards war, driven by the US arms industry. Given our concerns, some of us feel that a civilised exchange of facts and arguments would be more appropriate.

If I didn't defend their right to express such opinions they would be banned from the Forums. However we cannot stand aside and help legitimize racism or xenophobia. If someone posts something racist I will defend BBFers' right to call them out on it. Being an idle witness in this era of 1-click satisfaction and zero fact check is very dangerous IMO.

[andrei]

diana_eva, on 2016-December-05, 11:15, said:

If you would constantly refuse to back up silly claims and keep posting new ones, completely ignoring the previous arguments after others spent time researching for you, yeah.

Which silly claims are you talking about?

[mikeh]

nige1, on 2016-December-05, 12:10, said:

Surely it's OK for Jonottowa to choose where he posts.

Rather than making a consistent effort to refute the arguments of Jonottowa and Kaitlyn, the usual gang is abusing them and imputing opinions to them that they haven't expressed. The victims would be hypocrites and masochists to "fit in" with that torrent of insolence.

As a moderator, Diana_eva, you don't have to agree with the views of a minority to defend it's right to express them

For many foreigners, US politics are an enigma We fear the stampede towards war, driven by the US arms industry Given our concerns, some of us feel that a civilised exchange of facts and arguments would be more appropriate -- and persuasive.

It's weird how two people can read the same words and derive completely different meanings.

As one of those who 'abuse and impute opinions to' Kaitlyn and, until I put him on ignore, jon, I always at least tried to provide suggestions for how they could, if they were interested, actually find facts relevant to the topic under discussion. I was hardly alone.

Thus in response to one of K's first posts, about the socialist marking, at least two people, not me, pointed out how easy it was to identify this story as a myth. In a similar vein I, and others, have repeatedly challenged K to look behind her assumptions and beliefs.

I do stand somewhat corrected in that I now understand that google will tailor its results to accord with what its computations suggest the searcher wants to see, which is regrettable. However, I also specifically commended some sources as likely to be more reliable than others. The Economist, for example, isn't generally seen as left wing, and indeed is generally fiscally right wing, while socially liberal (an all too rare combination, imo since that is how I see myself).

The NYT has several noted right wing columnists: the fact that David Brooks doesn't like Trump doesn't make him left wing!

Forbes is not exactly a bastion of pinko thinking.

And so on.

By contrast, K. generally fails or refuses to cite sources, and some of the sources she does cite, being Hannity or Jihad Watch, are, shall we say, not exactly reliable (other than being reliably full of crap).

So what you see as abuse, I and (I think) others see as a persistent, if vain, effort to have the person promulgating bizarre ideas do some basic fact-checking.

I have to wonder at how your brain operates if you take that sort of challenge...as in 'look to your sources'....as abuse. I guess I am biased since in my world, when I make an argument, which may have very significant real life impact on individuals and businesses, the Court requires that I provide evidence to support the argument.

I appreciate that to many on both ends of the political spectrum, facts are annoying since they so often contradict our favourite fantasies. Here, the fantasies are all right wing, but I have challenged some of the left wing ideas stated here in other threads....GMO issues and fake therapies often being espounsed by the left as well as the right.

[nige1]

Andrei quotes Winston Churchill, who said:

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter"

The US choice of presidential candidates and the election results seem a poor advert for democracy
Unfortunately, the alternative would be worse