Marion Morrison
Diamond Member
- Feb 10, 2017
- 59,298
- 16,870
- 2,190
- Banned
- #41
Go to hell.
(Kidding! I'm kidding, of course.)
I've noticed this is a slap-before-you-get-slapped kind of board. Not that I mind a slap fight. Some people need one.
Where do you check facts?
- Thread starter ricechickie
- Start date
ricechickie
Gold Member
- Thread starter
- #42
Not always available, but you're right.
- Sep 16, 2012
- 78,348
- 75,485
- 3,605
Actually, funny you should mention Factcheck.
The whole reason I left the last forum I was at YEARS ago, back in 2012, during the re-election campaign of Obama, was because it was Factcheck that debunked Obama's whole birther conspiracy.
They were the ones that put out his phony birth certificate.
See, I study non-profit foundations. Factcheck is a arm of the Annenberg policy project. They were the ones that helped get R. Reagan elected by putting the elder Bush on the ticket. Without Annenberg, Reagan could not have been elected. Same for Obama.
Now, I don't know if many folks remember, but the elder Bush, was a CIA chief. This whole Obama thing had nothing to do with him not being born in the US, but it actually had to do with the fact that he was CIA as well. They wanted to hide the fact that he was CIA from their liberal base. They also wanted to hide the fact that he was connected to the CFR and the ruling elites.
When I posted this info, the last forum I was at took their site off-line for 48 hours, deleted all my posts concerning this issue, and then instituted a policy where the mods. and admin could review any post that was being made before it could be posted.
I left for a more, how shall we say, "liberal" forum? lol Funny thing, at that forum, the membership was politically more liberal, and here, every one is a raging conservative. It's funny how real liberal policies make folks act. But that's the nature of classical liberalism.
The very first post I made here was concerning this issue. The moderation and administration has since deleted that post.
ricechickie
Gold Member
- Thread starter
- #45
See, that's hilarious, because if you say, to back up an argument, that you used your heart and mind and common sense, won't you get shredded? And rightfully so. We all think we've got those things.
I, personally, would be told that my heart doesn't enter into it, I don't have a mind, and that I wouldn't know common sense if it bit my ass.
I've been told that even when I use sources with facts.
ricechickie
Gold Member
- Thread starter
- #46
See, without any fact-checking at all, this sounds like tinfoil hat territory.
Marion Morrison
Diamond Member
- Feb 10, 2017
- 59,298
- 16,870
- 2,190
- Banned
- #47
the link you provided, and did not read thoroughly....
STATES that snopes, politifact, factcheck.org, TruthorFiction are ALL good fact checkers and are NOT BIASED
- Sep 16, 2012
- 78,348
- 75,485
- 3,605
Oh yeah, I know.
Back when I posted it, it had all the facts to back it up. You can look it up yourself and find all the information you want. What part don't you believe?
Marion Morrison
Diamond Member
- Feb 10, 2017
- 59,298
- 16,870
- 2,190
- Banned
- #51
*snip Too tired for this right now.the link you provided, and did not read thoroughly....
STATES that snopes, politifact, factcheck.org, TruthorFiction are ALL good fact checkers and are NOT BIASED
If Politifact is owned by The Tampa Bay Times, The Times is an entirely leftist rag and always has been. That's something I just know.
Last edited:
EvMetro
Platinum Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 10,362
- 6,820
- 970
Fact checking sites are pretty much all run by the left. I have learned to research everything as if I am an attorney being paid a fee to defend my political opponent, and do everything possible to find every plausible path that shows my political opponent correct. I have learned to be EXTREMELY careful when researching something that satisfies my confirmation bias. I research everything on the internet, and of course I make the extra effort to research it the way my political opponent will, as well as the way my ideology calls for.
I started out on Metacrawler back in 1995 when the Internet was still new.
Then when Google came along I switched over to it due to its rave reviews.
Now you can google (verb form -- not capitalized) almost anything and within about 30 mins Google (noun form -- this gets capitalized) will have something on it.
Then I consider the source. PBS and BBC are usually pretty good. The other mainstream are marginal. Any off the wall sources that I have never heard of get no credibility.
From there you need to apply the laws of logic and look for fallacies and eliminate the fallacies.
List of fallacies - Wikipedia
Then when Google came along I switched over to it due to its rave reviews.
Now you can google (verb form -- not capitalized) almost anything and within about 30 mins Google (noun form -- this gets capitalized) will have something on it.
Then I consider the source. PBS and BBC are usually pretty good. The other mainstream are marginal. Any off the wall sources that I have never heard of get no credibility.
From there you need to apply the laws of logic and look for fallacies and eliminate the fallacies.
List of fallacies - Wikipedia
ricechickie
Gold Member
- Thread starter
- #54
That somehow a birth certificate would link Obama to the CIA.
- Sep 16, 2012
- 78,348
- 75,485
- 3,605
Ah, that part.
Yeah, that I just reasoned out for myself. You can take that or leave that. What other reason could the establishment have for sealing off all of his records? I have investigated, or tried to investigate every truthful thing about his past.
Everyone comes up with bupkiss. The only people that have pasts wiped clean like this are intel. agents.
Added to that, Obama has a known intel past, he has worked for CIA companies (BIC), his parents were CIA, etc. Why else would all the records be sealed?
It's just simple logic.
The Chosen One
CRB | The Chosen One, by Angelo M. Codevilla
. . .All in the Family
In the 1950s and '60s few cared where, say, the State Department or foundations such as Ford ended and the CIA began. The leading members of the U.S. government's influence network moved easily from public to private stations and vice versa. Here are a few examples. Howard P. Jones, U.S. ambassador to Indonesia between 1958 and 1965—arguably the chief planner of the coup that removed the Sukarno regime—became chancellor of the University of Hawaii's East-West Center. Ann Dunham's second husband, Lolo Soetoro, returned from the East-West Center to Jakarta to help in the struggle that the coup had begun. Another of Ann's employers, the Ford Foundation's international affairs division, was led by Stephen Cohen, who had come to Ford from the directorship of the International Association of Cultural Freedom, previously known as the Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), which organized countless left-leaning American academics into a corps (lavishly financed by the CIA) to promote social democracy around the world, and to staff many of the councils on foreign relations that spread around America in the 1950s. Among the participants were countless actual and future college presidents, including Richard C. Gilman, who ran Occidental when young Barack Obama enrolled there in 1979. In those years, any number of companies were CIA fronts, including Business International Corporation, which gave young Obama his first job after graduation from college. Perhaps these are only coicidences. More importantly, U.S. international corporations in general had countless officers who were proud cooperators with U.S. covert activities abroad. Any serious attempt to sketch this network would result in something like an x-ray of the American ruling class's skeleton.
The point here is that this network was formed precisely to help the careers of kindred folk, while ruining those of others, and to move the requisite money and influence unaccountably, erasing evidence that it had done so. Exercising influence abroad on America's behalf—the network's founding purpose—never got in the way of playing a partisan role in American life and, of course, of taking care of its own.
As I pointed out in my book Informing Statecraft (1992), when Congress first authorized the U.S. government's various influence activities abroad it worried loudly and mostly sincerely that these activities might "blow back" onto American political life: The U.S. government, so went the widely accepted argument, might have to say and do all sorts of things abroad, train and deploy any number of operatives in black arts on the whole country's behalf, knowing that these activities and operatives might well be distasteful to any number of Americans at home. Because the U.S. government must not take a partisan part in U.S. domestic life—so went the argument of an era more honest than our own—it must somehow isolate its foreign influence network from domestic life. But preventing blowback was destined to be a pious, futile wish, especially since many of those in the influence network were at least as interested in pressing their vision of social democracy on America as they were in doing it to other countries. Foremost among these was Cord Meyer, who ran CIA's covert activities in "international organizations" beginning in 1954. Between 1962 and 1975 he directed or supervised all CIA covert action. Meyer explained what he was about in his book Facing Reality (1980).
Meyer and his upscale CIA colleagues considered themselves family members of the domestic and international Left. They believed that America's competition with Soviet Communism was to be waged by, for, and among the Left. Their strategy was to fight the Soviet fire by lighting and feeding socio-political counter-fires as close to it as possible. This meant clandestinely giving money and every imaginable form of U.S. government support to persons as far to the political and cultural left as possible, so long as they were outside Soviet operational control. American leftists were best fit to influence their foreign counterparts this way. Paradigmatic was the Congress for Cultural Freedom, which spawned and fed many "voluntary" organizations at home and abroad with U.S. influence and money. Its director, Michael Josselson, was so little distinguishable from the Communists, his leftism so anti-American, that the U.S. chapter of CCF disaffiliated in protest. Alas, CIA's fires eventually went out of control and singed American life.
Among the many U.S. organizations founded and fed by Meyer's Covert Action staff were the National Students' Association (NSA) and the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). In the late 1950s the CIA and foundation executives like Meyer (and below them operatives like the Dunham family) were surprised when these groups were taken over by the radical elements within them and became the so-called New Left. By 1961, when Barack Obama, Jr., was born, these organizations' connections or lack thereof with Communist parties had already become irrelevant. That is because whereas old-line liberals like Meyer felt only mild disdain for what they supposed to be the American people's ignorance, whereas their vision for America was only a more complete Rooseveltian New Deal, these New Leftists had adopted, more virulently than the Communists, the Marxist analysis that American society as it exists is based on "power relationships" (economic, racial, and sexual) that they believe must be overturned entirely. In short, the New Left saw America as a cancer upon the globe and themselves as the surgeons. It is impossible to overstate the importance of this attitude.
Not all government-sponsored leftists adopted this attitude about America. Already in 1962, before the Vietnam War, Michael Harrington felt conscience—bound to lead people who called themselves "Democratic Socialists of America" out of SDS, NSA, and other organizations that had become thoroughly anti-American. By the mid-1960s these organizations, into which CIA had poured so much money, which it had sustained so energetically with its network of influence, had come entirely into the hands of upscale activists like William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, who called themselves "Weathermen." These children of Meyer's rich, well-connected friends worked to defeat America in the Vietnam War, planted terrorist bombs, and murdered police. Other CIA-funded organizations underwent similar radicalization and internecine splits. In 1967, Ramparts magazine's revelation of many leftist groups' dependence on CIA caused the U.S. government to shift its funding of such organizations or their leaders to other agencies—primarily those waging the so-called "war on poverty." By the 1970s, the people whom CIA had endowed with money and prominence in American domestic life as part of its covert action abroad were grinding their ideological distinctions against one another while engaging in "community organizing" here in America.
These factions and organizations, personifying leftisms of varying virulence, bid for recruits. Young Barry Obama was one of those who affiliated pretty much with the leftward-most among them. . .
- Sep 16, 2012
- 78,348
- 75,485
- 3,605
Iceweasel
Diamond Member
"The police state is alive and well"? No thanks.
- Sep 16, 2012
- 78,348
- 75,485
- 3,605
Last edited:
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Couple Aborts Baby With Alleged Down Syndrome but Refuses to Put Dog Down With Terminal Cancer- Started by ChristisKing
- Replies: 2
-
-
Kennedy centre loses case against Musician who refused to play there- Started by Tommy Tainant
- Replies: 0
-
Zone1 The Power of Obedience and Discernment- Started by TemplarKormac
- Replies: 1
-
