Kirk Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 12 hours ago, thplinth said: Pretty fucked up... 10 people killed in 30+ shootings in one city in one day... If only there was a good person with a gun ti stop him. WTF is up with that country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted July 16, 2020 Share Posted July 16, 2020 https://www.businessinsider.com/israel-hoping-iran-confrontation-before-november-election-sources-2020-7?r=DE&IR=T Israel keeps blowing up military targets in Iran, hoping to force a confrontation before Trump could be voted out in November, sources say Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 7 hours ago, phart said: https://www.businessinsider.com/israel-hoping-iran-confrontation-before-november-election-sources-2020-7?r=DE&IR=T Israel keeps blowing up military targets in Iran, hoping to force a confrontation before Trump could be voted out in November, sources say A more general point and not related specifically to this story but this is a great example of a story based entirely on "a source said". I've gotten to the stage where I pretty much dismiss *any* story which consists solely of off the record briefings from unattributable and anonymous sources as being hearsay. For me, it's the way that's this particular UK government seems obsessed with off the record briefings - that of course can't be verified and can be resiled from should they turn out to be proven to be inaccurate or unpopular without any comeback. That's not to say that off the record comments are useful and can often be hugely enlightening but if all you do is repeat what the sources say and don't offer either any verification or analysis then it's not journalism in my book. I know nothing about this particular journalist - I'm not saying the article isn't accurate or inaccurate - but it comes across as the sort of client journalism that the likes of Laura Kuennesberg and Robert Peston have been accused of carrying out on behalf of 10 Downing Street. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 (edited) True, all the nuclear and military sites could just be coincidentally blowing up themselves and the numerous Iran sympathetic journalists in the press are using it to blame media friendless Israel as a way to stick it to Trump. Or indeed watergate wasn't journalism Edited July 17, 2020 by phart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 36 minutes ago, phart said: True, all the nuclear and military sites could just be coincidentally blowing up themselves and the numerous Iran sympathetic journalists in the press are using it to blame media friendless Israel as a way to stick it to Trump. Or indeed watergate wasn't journalism Sorry, but Watergate was proper investigative journalism, digging deep, interviewing people on and off the record, following up leads, asking questions. I assume you are talking about Deep Throat, AFAIK, he was never quoted in any of the Washington Post stories, even as an unattributed source.o if you look at this story in particular, then you could see that it's something that anti-Trump/anti-Israeli people might want to get into the public domain to discredit him, similarly though it's also something you could see pro-Trump people wanting to push as it speaks to his base. As I said, there's nothing wrong with using anonymous sources in the general case, but when an article consists solely of unattributable quotes and isn't backed up by any verifiable facts, then the question to ask is - who is pushing this line, for what reason and who benefits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 6 hours ago, aaid said: Sorry, but Watergate was proper investigative journalism, digging deep, interviewing people on and off the record, following up leads, asking questions. I assume you are talking about Deep Throat, AFAIK, he was never quoted in any of the Washington Post stories, even as an unattributed source.o if you look at this story in particular, then you could see that it's something that anti-Trump/anti-Israeli people might want to get into the public domain to discredit him, similarly though it's also something you could see pro-Trump people wanting to push as it speaks to his base. As I said, there's nothing wrong with using anonymous sources in the general case, but when an article consists solely of unattributable quotes and isn't backed up by any verifiable facts, then the question to ask is - who is pushing this line, for what reason and who benefits. Almost every single quote on covert actions is from an anonymous source. What's your contention , Israel isn't blowing up Iranian bases or the reasoning behind it. The reasons aren't the story, the act is the story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 18 minutes ago, phart said: Almost every single quote on covert actions is from an anonymous source. What's your contention , Israel isn't blowing up Iranian bases or the reasoning behind it. The reasons aren't the story, the act is the story. The Iranian regime isn't exactly short of enemies, there are any number of possible candidates, foreign or domestic, including Israel. You can also see that pointing the finger at Israel and Trump would be a narrative that Iran would like to push. This article could be true, it could be sources with insight, who know what's going on. On the other hand, it could be false and could be the same sources trying to establish a narrative that suits their agendas. You can't tell from this article which one of those it is, that's the problem with unattributable sources, and that's my point about this article. It tells us nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 1 hour ago, aaid said: The Iranian regime isn't exactly short of enemies, there are any number of possible candidates, foreign or domestic, including Israel. You can also see that pointing the finger at Israel and Trump would be a narrative that Iran would like to push. This article could be true, it could be sources with insight, who know what's going on. On the other hand, it could be false and could be the same sources trying to establish a narrative that suits their agendas. You can't tell from this article which one of those it is, that's the problem with unattributable sources, and that's my point about this article. It tells us nothing. Times of Israel has Israeli's politicians talking about Yossi Cohen leaking it. https://www.timesofisrael.com/liberman-appears-to-accuse-mossad-head-of-leaking-israeli-role-in-iran-attacks/ Others have spoken about it ambigiously on the record "Amos Yadlin, the head of the Institute for National Security Studies, and a former head of IDF military intelligence, tweeted Friday that, “According to foreign sources, it appears that the prime minister focused this week on Iran rather than [his plan for West Bank] annexation. This is the policy I’ve been recommending in the last few weeks.” The article i posted was just a summation of the events. The actual story itself has a lot more folk commenting on it https://www.vox.com/2020/7/17/21325985/iran-israel-explosion-natanz-nuclear-missile unsourced, sourced, American, Israeli, Iran and beyond. If the big takeaway for you is "I pretty much dismiss *any* story which consists solely of off the record briefings from unattributable and anonymous sources as being hearsay" then fair enough. Then dismiss it. Time will tell how effective a technque that is for filtering reality. However I personally think the story is another huge escalation in the region which could tilt it back into turmoil and that's the context in which i'm discussing it. Considering deliberate ambiguity is an Israeli doctrine waiting for someone to go on the record just isn't feasible in covert operations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 20 minutes ago, phart said: Times of Israel has Israeli's politicians talking about Yossi Cohen leaking it. https://www.timesofisrael.com/liberman-appears-to-accuse-mossad-head-of-leaking-israeli-role-in-iran-attacks/ Others have spoken about it ambigiously on the record "Amos Yadlin, the head of the Institute for National Security Studies, and a former head of IDF military intelligence, tweeted Friday that, “According to foreign sources, it appears that the prime minister focused this week on Iran rather than [his plan for West Bank] annexation. This is the policy I’ve been recommending in the last few weeks.” The article i posted was just a summation of the events. The actual story itself has a lot more folk commenting on it https://www.vox.com/2020/7/17/21325985/iran-israel-explosion-natanz-nuclear-missile unsourced, sourced, American, Israeli, Iran and beyond. If the big takeaway for you is "I pretty much dismiss *any* story which consists solely of off the record briefings from unattributable and anonymous sources as being hearsay" then fair enough. Then dismiss it. Time will tell how effective a technque that is for filtering reality. However I personally think the story is another huge escalation in the region which could tilt it back into turmoil and that's the context in which i'm discussing it. Considering deliberate ambiguity is an Israeli doctrine waiting for someone to go on the record just isn't feasible in covert operations. Firstly - Amos Yadlin isn't speaking on the record - he's also just quoting sources. Secondly - all you did was post a link to the story and copy the headline, you didn't give any sort of context, maybe if you had have done, that might have been helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 24 minutes ago, aaid said: Firstly - Amos Yadlin isn't speaking on the record - he's also just quoting sources. Secondly - all you did was post a link to the story and copy the headline, you didn't give any sort of context, maybe if you had have done, that might have been helpful. Tweeting something from your twitter account is on the record i would say. Twitter being a public forum. I used the newspaper article as an illustration of what was being said/done, I wanted to discuss the event, not what's peoples personal opinions are about claims made by unamed sources and how closely one can tie that to Laura Kussenberg's type of reporting. So I had to step back and establish why I was happy to put weight into what the article was talking about. But by all means don't discuss it until at such time that we get an official statement admitting to internationally illegal covert operations. The Lavon affair was 51 years before any admission. Maybe if we're lucky we can discuss these sets of incidents in 2065. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted July 20, 2020 Share Posted July 20, 2020 This is excellent (so far). Some really profound points that will make you think. Black Wisdom Matters - Part One: The Promise of Black Politicians https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJ4Kd... Black Wisdom Matters - Part Two: Good Intentions of the Welfare State https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1s2Is... Black Wisdom Matters - Part Three: The State of Racism in America https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rRHm... Black Wisdom Matters - Part Four: The Impact of Culture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Uh2z... Black Wisdom Matters - Part Five: Slavery, Guilt and Reparations https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oumE2... Black Wisdom Matters - Part Six: The Clamor for School Choice https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCB5x... Black Wisdom Matters - Part Seven: The Fruits of Affirmative Action https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOWxT... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted July 27, 2020 Share Posted July 27, 2020 (edited) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/27/us-rightwing-extremists-attacks-deaths-database-leftwing-antifa Anti-fascists linked to zero murders in the US in 25 years As Trump rails against ‘far-left’ fascism, new database shows leftwing attacks have left far fewer people dead than violence by rightwing extremists This research effort aimed to identify the scope, nature, and orientation of the terrorism threat in the United States. To analyze this, we compiled a data set of 893 terrorist incidents occurring in the 50 U.S. states and Puerto Rico between January 1, 1994, and May 8, 2020.This time period was selected in order to provide context on the history of domestic terrorism in the United States in recent decades, and in particular to allow analysis of how the current right-wing threat compares to the last major wave of right-wing violence in the 1990s. The data set begins in 1994 rather than earlier in the decade due to sourcing challenges. We relied heavily on START Global Terrorism Database (GTD) data for the early years of the data set, and due to data loss, a full record of incidents in 1993 is unavailable. https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/200616_Jones_Methodology_v3_0.pdf Edited July 27, 2020 by phart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumnio Posted August 4, 2020 Share Posted August 4, 2020 https://www.axios.com/full-axios-hbo-interview-donald-trump-cd5a67e1-6ba1-46c8-bb3d-8717ab9f3cc5.html Donald Trump is a genuine idiot, its scary how incoherent and moronic he is. He also says Epstein was killed, or committed suicide in jail 🙄 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted August 4, 2020 Share Posted August 4, 2020 https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2020/winner Tempted? Those are pretty generous odds for an incumbent president. I am hoping he does something (more) stupid to get the odds up a bit because come election time I still think he is going to slaughter Biden (the guy can barely get a coherent sentence out) . About the only way I see Biden winning is if they are forced to do mail-in voting 'due to the virus'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted August 4, 2020 Share Posted August 4, 2020 36 minutes ago, kumnio said: https://www.axios.com/full-axios-hbo-interview-donald-trump-cd5a67e1-6ba1-46c8-bb3d-8717ab9f3cc5.html Donald Trump is a genuine idiot, its scary how incoherent and moronic he is. He also says Epstein was killed, or committed suicide in jail 🙄 I only watched for as long as it took him to use the word 'tremendous'. So 3 minutes 32 seconds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted August 4, 2020 Share Posted August 4, 2020 56 minutes ago, kumnio said: He also says Epstein was killed, or committed suicide in jail 🙄 Might be one of the most sensible things he has ever said? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted August 4, 2020 Share Posted August 4, 2020 Biden is almost certainly cognitively impaired, reckon Trump will win, be close though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted August 4, 2020 Share Posted August 4, 2020 Loads of dodgy voting shit electoral shit going on as well. The whole thing is a shit show, I don't think it will be close , I think Biden will walk it even though he is also a terrible candidate, but who the fuck knows really. The shit coming out about Kushner and Covid , if this election doesn't have a huge turnout I would be amazed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumnio Posted August 4, 2020 Share Posted August 4, 2020 If the election was now, I’d back Biden to win something like 35 states and humiliate Trump in the electoral college. But if Trump gives him a doing in the debates, it could be different. Biden is, IMO one of these people that, the less exposure the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted August 4, 2020 Share Posted August 4, 2020 I seem to recall reading that in the primaries, Trump got more votes (when he was standing unopposed) than all the democrat candidates combined (who were actually duking it out for the nomination). I'd like to see Jesse Ventura take a run. He could out-Trump Trump. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumnio Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-53671679/joe-biden-why-the-hell-would-i-take-a-cognitive-test He might not want to take the test, but he has failed at the interview stage anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 That was painful to watch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 Can we make cognitive tests mandatory for the TAMB? Who should we nominate to be first up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 The cognitive test that Trump took was taken by a journalist and it had questions like "Picture of an elephant" and then asked what is this? Why the fuck Trump boasts about passing that i have "no idea", well it's easy his re-election hinges on him proving he is less cognitively impaired than Joe Biden so it's an election tactic. America should have paid more attention to it's politics. Now they didn't and they have a choice between 2 loons, mental. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.5eeaf0fbe501ba3c868c32fd77caef1f.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.