Zone1 Intellectual Honesty

[candycorn]

Are you actually telling me you have never heard that said?

Quote please

 

[alang1216]

You cannot examine evidence that has been destroyed and/or was never provided or otherwise compromised. So it is not intellectually dishonest to wonder what the outcome would have been had everybody been 100% ethical and wanted the American voters to be confident the election was honest and on the up and up.

When does believing something that has a the lack of convincing evidence become intellectually dishonest?

 

[alang1216]

Are you actually telling me you have never heard that said?

I've only heard it when the Right accuses the Left of saying it.

 

[Kilroy2]

I will stand by my definition.

Intellectual honesty can be applied in politics or in partisan issues but it certainly is not confined to that.

So the definition you pulled off the internet as the first thing Google showed you is incomplete and probably intellectually dishonest in itself implying that it only applies to problem solving with the implication that partisanship is a factor in it.

Maybe the person who wrote that believed it and was not being intellectually dishonest. But few Google or 'woke' inspired definitions are really accurate these days.

Intellectual honesty can be applied in politics or in partisan issues but it certainly is not confined to that.

You lost in your first statement.

Believing that Trump has intellectual honesty.

During President Donald Trump’s first three months in office, his administration has targeted dozens of former officials who criticized him or opposed his agenda.

In April 2025, Trump directed the Department of Justice to investigate two men who served in his first administration, Miles Taylor and Chris Krebs, because they spoke out against his policies and corrected his false claims about the 2020 election that he lost.

Trump demands loyalty and the Trump Truth is all that matters well at least there are a few standing with him on the USMB no matter what.

Such loyalty

More than revenge: Here's why the Trump is really targeting his own former officials

During President Donald Trump’s first three months in office, his administration has targeted dozens of former officials who criticized him or opposed his agenda. In April 2025, Trump directed the Department of Justice to investigate two men who served in his first administration, Miles Taylor...

www.alternet.org

 

[80zephyr]

Quote please

Here you go. Someone being deliberately dishonest.

 

[80zephyr]

I've only heard it when the Right accuses the Left of saying it.

And another one being deliberately dishonest.

 

[80zephyr]

I've only heard it when the Right accuses the Left of saying it.

 

[80zephyr]

I've only heard it when the Right accuses the Left of saying it.

 

[alang1216]

And another one being deliberately dishonest.

I think we can all agree that trans men (women who think of themselves as men) can get pregnant. Am I right? I think your issue is that libs accept that trans men exist.

 

[80zephyr]

I think we can all agree that trans men (women who think of themselves as men) can get pregnant. Am I right? I think your issue is that libs accept that trans men exist.

Trans men do not exist.

 

[alang1216]

Trans men do not exist.

View attachment 1113300

If that is the case, libs don't say that men can become pregnant and, I repeat, I've only heard it when the Right accuses the Left of saying it.

 

[80zephyr]

If that is the case, libs don't say that men can become pregnant and, I repeat, I've only heard it when the Right accuses the Left of saying it.

Ask a lib what a woman is.

 

[alang1216]

Ask a lib what a woman is.

And they might reply, "do you mean legally, genetically, biologically, or mentally"

 

[sparky]

intellectual dishonesty is no more than an escape from reality

walk a mile on the shoes of those who never can

~S~

 

[80zephyr]

And they might reply, "do you mean legally, genetically, biologically, or mentally"

I mean in reality. Which is the only way.

 

[MisterBeale]

Do you still believe that given that the FBI Director and Deputy Director both came out today stating that they have been through all the files and evidence and are convinced it was a suicide? (They both acknowledged they knew their opinion wouldn't be popular with many. )

And could anything change our mind?

If the narratives of the government are true, then they would have no problem releasing the files and evidence to prove it. As it is, their narratives aren't, so they won't.

They won't do it with the Epstein files, nor, as has been seen, they will never give us all the complete information regarding the JFK dealio. Even though congress mandated that they need to, and they still are in defiance of the law.



Now, if the bureaucracy did release the files the prove their case, and the evidence was reviewed by non-governmental independent investigators as factual, sure, I would change my mind and admit I'm nothing but a paranoid kook.

IMO, only normies bleev the government and corporations doesn't lie to us.

And after that whole scamdemic bullshit, I am amazed folks still aren't wise to what the hell is going on.

Lee Harvey Oswald More than a Lone Nut? JFK Reporter Jeff Morley on Shocking CIA Revelations​

Apr 2, 2025

What Happened to the Epstein Files?​

Apr 24, 2025

Covid Origins: After Years of Crushing Dissent, Government Backtracks on Lab Leak Hypothesis​

Feb 28, 2023

 

[sparky]

Many of you were aware if the exchange between Jesus and Pontius Pilate

even He could not escape reality via truth..........~S~

 

[MisterBeale]

Without a quote, one has to assume you’re making that up.

 

[sparky]

this is why i keep cheap whisky handy Mr B......~S~

 

[longly]

I've been wrong before, and I have no problem admitting it. However, I see that’s not the case with everyone. I notice a lot of intellectual dishonesty, and as far as I can tell, most of it is in support of some agenda—usually political.

I consider myself an amateur historian, and it really bothers me when people distort history. For over 100 years, Afro-centrist scholars claimed that ancient Egypt was a Black nation. However, recent DNA evidence has demonstrated that this is not true. In fact, ancient Egyptians were more closely related to the people of the Middle East and even Eastern Europe than to those of sub-Saharan Africa.

Yet, there are still people who contend otherwise, and it's enough to drive a history lover crazy."