padijun posted:

umm, She Might Be a Liberal though...

GalacticAcid posted:

You're grotesque.

Mr. Lobe posted:

Yes Liberals deserve lovely romantic partners, specially the type who talk about giving to charities like it was a merit badge of the soul

Kunster posted:

There was this exchange between Felix and a friend of his a few days ago where folk pulled their politics entirely from the Current Affairs Hamilton article so much that they started antagonizing kids and "normie" teachers with it that outright started with said friend saying there was a "ArthurChu-inification" of Chapo Fans, that in a way kinda revealed this.

I don't know, it gets somewhat worrying when Felix outright voices concern for matters in Saudi Arabia and that's seen more like a wacky shtick than something that outright affects people.

Kunster posted:

There's this weird perception of how folk see the podcast that would flourish I feared since episode 1, on which when the dry boys in a way are now stuck on this position (Amber and maybe Brendan aren't as affected by this) where they have to be somewhat cartoony versions of themselves in people's minds. The fact people had kind of a weird denial stage where Felix outright tweeted out he didn't mind tankies as much (When you can clearly tell he shares a lot of their politics and wasn't just fond of Red and Phil, which seems to be the general stance around them) or when Matt went to that videogames podcast suddenly I started seeing more far more hatred towards him, despite the interview being far, far less antagonistic. And turns out those fears are kinda becoming reality, so to speak? There was this exchange between Felix and a friend of his a few days ago where folk pulled their politics entirely from the Current Affairs Hamilton article so much that they started antagonizing kids and "normie" teachers with it that outright started with said friend saying there was a "ArthurChu-inification" of Chapo Fans, that in a way kinda revealed this.

I don't know, it gets somewhat worrying when Felix outright voices concern for matters in Saudi Arabia and that's seen more like a wacky shtick than something that outright affects people.

Kunster posted:

There's this weird perception of how folk see the podcast that would flourish I feared since episode 1, on which when the dry boys in a way are now stuck on this position (Amber and maybe Brendan aren't as affected by this) where they have to be somewhat cartoony versions of themselves in people's minds. The fact people had kind of a weird denial stage where Felix outright tweeted out he didn't mind tankies as much (When you can clearly tell he shares a lot of their politics and wasn't just fond of Red and Phil, which seems to be the general stance around them) or when Matt went to that videogames podcast suddenly I started seeing more far more hatred towards him, despite the interview being far, far less antagonistic. And turns out those fears are kinda becoming reality, so to speak? There was this exchange between Felix and a friend of his a few days ago where folk pulled their politics entirely from the Current Affairs Hamilton article so much that they started antagonizing kids and "normie" teachers with it that outright started with said friend saying there was a "ArthurChu-inification" of Chapo Fans, that in a way kinda revealed this.

I don't know, it gets somewhat worrying when Felix outright voices concern for matters in Saudi Arabia and that's seen more like a wacky shtick than something that outright affects people.

Bryter posted:

Have I had a stroke or *sees avatar* ah nope, just another Kunster post

SMP posted:

I don't think anyone thinks it's just a joke, but it's pretty hard to follow anything he says about the Saudis or the region if you aren't knowledgeable already.

Famethrowa posted:

is it violence if everytime I see her name the phrase "Flat Shanley" pops into my head?

Jonas Albrecht posted:

https://twitter.com/adequateGF/status/876984717563834370

Punkin Spunkin posted:

"Safety absolutists"
These absolute motherfuckers

fatherboxx posted:

Twitter is a genuine threat to mental health of anyone who uses it for anything more than pubcrawl reports, regardless of their intellect or wokeness (sorry, class consciousness). Lot of folks need a regular reality check.

Kunster posted:

And turns out those fears are kinda becoming reality, so to speak? There was this exchange between Felix and a friend of his a few days ago where folk pulled their politics entirely from the Current Affairs Hamilton article so much that they started antagonizing kids and "normie" teachers with it that outright started with said friend saying there was a "ArthurChu-inification" of Chapo Fans, that in a way kinda revealed this.

Clipperton posted:

the only things it's good for are callouts and slapfights, and the very occasional truly sick burn (that is immediately lost in time like tears in the rain). it's horrible

icantfindaname posted:

who listens to this podcast who doesn't also follow 15 twitter accounts about eurasian and middle eastern geopolitics?

at a minimum you should be listening to mark ames's podcast too

SMP posted:

please i am only just now beginning to understand how england's politics works

TetsuoTW posted:

And dril tweets, you fucker.

Bryter posted:

Have I had a stroke or *sees avatar* ah nope, just another Kunster post

fatherboxx posted:

Twitter is a genuine threat to mental health of anyone who uses it for anything more than pubcrawl reports, regardless of their intellect or wokeness (sorry, class consciousness). Lot of folks need a regular reality check.

Clipperton posted:

the only things it's good for are callouts and slapfights, and the very occasional truly sick burn (that is immediately lost in time like tears in the rain). it's horrible

Halloween Jack posted:

Is Twitter in a situation like Uber where they're living on borrowed time despite their popularity?

Halloween Jack posted:

Is Twitter in a situation like Uber where they're living on borrowed time despite their popularity?

Joementum posted:

Yes. They have a bunch of revenue, but it can't pay for staff, most of which are sales people working to generate that revenue, which would decrease if they were laid off.


Making all the avatars into circles is somehow not changing this situation.

X-Ray Pecs posted:

Somehow the platform that allows Nazis to openly discuss the racial superiority of white people but shadowbans you for tweeting "gently caress you" at said Nazis is struggling to sell itself off or bring in new revenue.

Kunster posted:

It's this one right?

https://twitter.com/d_m_elms/status/874770622202560512

The thread itself works also as a fun coffee break read.

MikeCrotch posted:

People seem to get really upset about the fact that 90% of British politics is based off of stuff some lord said once in the 18th century that has become tradition (until someone on a whim decides it isn't tradition anymore).

quote:

Sure. I don't wish to spend the considerable time required to tear this thing apart. So let's just take 2 short segment and go over it with a fine tooth comb & you can think, research, and judge for yourself.

First I want highlight a propaganda technique used in the initial part dealing with Assad.

In the initial part of the "documentary" we are presented with a sourpuss Assad, who posthumously ("big word" alert ;-) is raised to the role of 1 of 2 contenders (along with Kissinger) as the authors of the mess that is that part of the world. Just these two characters. (!)

Right after the images of that carnage we are shown a laughing Assad and then Assad born on shoulders of Syrians celebrating. The suggestion being planted is that these two snippets are from after that attack. Of course we (I) have no way of knowing if in fact these two snippets are even remotely related to that event. That is one technique.

Regarding the same event, we are told Hizballah was responsible. Here is history net on who actually claimed responsibility (and even the heavily political Wikipedia agrees) but we are told in this "documentary" that is was another group:

http://www.historynet.com/1983-beirut-bombing-the-blt-building-is-gone.htm

And given that these matters are very hot topics, we are faced with conflicting narratives of what actually happened, who really benefitted, etc. I frankly do not know as I'm just you, part of the captive audiance of the monsters in world. But if you recall, we're told US military was pushed out of Beirut and only Syria wanted US out.

http://www.wrmea.org/1995-march/israel-charged-with-systematic-harassment-of-u.s.-marines.html

So let's now look at a somewht less controversial topic - the cyber punks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Gibson
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromancer (<< 1984 - remember that date.)

I could not believe my ears when we are told by the droning narrator @37:20 that "in cyberspace there were no laws and" -- get this -- "no politicians to protect you". Seriously? Politicians to protect us? Also note, he doesn't say "to protect us", he says "to protect you". PsyOps.

"But then" @ 37:40 (and note the strange musical ping), "but then a strange thing happend. A new group of visionaries in America took Gibson's idea of a hidden secret world and transformed it [PING] to something completely different. They turned it into a dream of a new dream utopia". So this, according to lying sack propagandists at BBC happened AFTER Gibson's 1984 novel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Xanadu (<< 1960)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Lib/Dream_Machines (<< 1974)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hackers:_Heroes_of_the_Computer_Revolution (<< a look back in 1984)

"CALIFORNIA" @ 38:02 -- oh this is good ..

"They turned Gibson's ideas on its head". Lying sons of bitches (small enough words for ya, ZekeBriarcliff?). Gibson cames decades after them. "they reinvented it as a new safe world where radical dreams can come true".

Starting @ 39:00 we go on a "trip" to the 60s and LSD. And look who we have, it's CIA's own Timothy Leary:

http://www.alternet.org/drugs/cloak-dropper-twisted-history-cia-lsd

Isn't it odd that clever mr. Curtis fails to mention CIA? I mean for God's sake, everybody and their mommy should know this, but not our droning narrator. Not a peep.

Then this "documentary" proceeds to blackwash EFF. After we are shown druggies tripping on LSD he segways to John Perry Barlow @ 41:00

You know, personally I don't know this guy and it is entirely possible that he was on the same payroll as dear Timmy, but when I see that JPB @ 41:11 is subtitled "Electronic Frontier Foundation", my blood boils:

https://www.eff.org/

This technique is called "blackwashing". In your mind, should you be a simpleton like ZekeBriarcliff, EFF is the product of drugged out hippies. Does BBC stop their "programming" here to point out EFF is one the more important organizations today fighting for our digital rights? No. That would not jibe with their intended "programming".

Anyway, I'll stop here as I stopped watching at this point.

Hope this has been helpful. DO NOT take my word for it. Look into the facts YOURSELVES. God Bless!

Race Realists posted: