Goings-on in North Korea

[Joe]

I once linked to the Rude Pundit(NSFW).

And I'm to the right of Forty Two, according to the test.



I'm not alt-right, I'm just right.

[Hermit]

But at least he's normal right, and not alt right...

I dunno about that. He has on numerous occasions linked to "news" sites that have been known to peddle alt-right conspiracy nonsense like pizzagate, birtherism, and crisis acting. If he's not alt-right, he's at least alt-right adjacent.

"Numerous" occasions? Oh, come on. Stop it. I linked to a video that was on some site like infowars - but the video was the video - I never linked to any such "alt right conspiracy" website as proof of anything.

No, you stop it. Stop downplaying the extent to which you use these far-right garbage websites to support your arguments and your ideology.

As Hermit has shown here:
http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 7#p1745717
you have a long history of linking to extreme, hyperpartisan, far-right websites that are well known for playing fast and loose with the truth.

And his list isn't comprehensive.

You have linked to Newsbusters on 24 occasions:
http://www.rationalia.com/forum/search. ... ewsbusters
NewsBusters, a website "dedicated to exposing & combating liberal media bias" is owned by L. Brent Bozell III who is a far-right looney who once said Obama looks like a "skinny ghetto crackhead".

A forum search for "zerohedge" yields 14 results with your name on them:
http://www.rationalia.com/forum/search. ... =zerohedge

Zero Hedge's content has been classified as "alt-right", anti-establishment, conspiratorial, and economically pessimistic, and has been criticized for presenting extreme and sometimes pro-Russian views.

You once linked to True Pundit:
http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 0#p1684090
True Pundit, like all these other sites that you like, is pure trash:
https://truepundit.com/video-outspoken- ... nt-bureau/

And of course you linked to a Mike Fucking Cernovich video for god's sake.

I'm sure I could find more if I wanted to keep digging, but that'll do for now.

Just own up to it, dude. Admit to what you are, and stop trying to pass yourself off as something that you obviously aren't.

What's the bet Faulty Too will do another lap around "I only link to the true stuff in those sites", followed by "you lefties always link to stuff in left wing sites"? The fact that both have been dealt with already will not deter him.

[pErvinalia]

The Guardian is going to get a mention, as if it is in anyway like Fox News and the other shit he reads/watches.

[NineBerry]

yesmac.jpg

If there is one thing the North Koreans will appreciate, it's a Bic Mac, Fries and a Coke!

[Forty Two]

I once linked to the Rude Pundit(NSFW).

And I'm to the right of Forty Two, according to the test.



I'm not alt-right, I'm just right.

Just barely - we're both on the line there. And, it's probably a function of how strongly held one position or another is. Plus, as I have a distinctly non-authoritarian bend, that tends to also render me slightly left on some issues.

Calling me "far right" is just a slur, basically. I'm not far right, and never have been far right, and I'm decidedly liberal on many issues. On some issues, I lean less liberal and perhaps would even be considered to the right, but then again, that's true of most people.

[Forty Two]

No, you stop it. Stop downplaying the extent to which you use these far-right garbage websites to support your arguments and your ideology.

As Hermit has shown here:
http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 7#p1745717
you have a long history of linking to extreme, hyperpartisan, far-right websites that are well known for playing fast and loose with the truth.

The Devil, as usual, is in the details here. Note, Hermit provides his links in January, 2018, but the most recent example he provides is from well over a year earlier, in November of 2016.

Take the first link that Hermit presented there, from November, 2016, goiong on two years ago. The post is providing support for the proposition that there was voter intimidation against Trump voters. The only "infowars" link is a video. It's not an article. It's a video. I cited the Daily Mail for a basic article about the backlash against the Trump election. The Daily Caller article I cited refers to the Twitter eruption of threats and calls for Donald Trump to be murdered. I cited Mediaite to show the various incitements to violence against Trump and Trump supporters. The issue then, almost two years ago, was the change in tune from the left once calling for "civility in public discourse" and an end to "martial rhetoric" to openly calling for violence and the murder of a Presidential candidate. The next link Hermit presented was from August, 2016, which was also a video -- this time an interview with Julian Assange.

That's it - that's the long line of examples of me citing hyperpartisan conspiracy theories.

The other links are from 2012 and 2010, lol, posts by Coito Ergo Sum - Those are all rather neutral posts -- basically referring to some point or another, but in no way adopting or expressing any conspiracy theory. They are videos, a report on a Rasmussen poll as to how many Americans think the government has the consent of the governed, and a point of law about Obama going back on a threat to veto a particular law.

If that's your proof that I'm some kind of conspiracy nutter, then it's some weak tea, I'll tell you that. I urge everyone to please click there, and then click on the links Hermit provides, and by all means, tell me which ridiculous conspiracies are being advocated.

And his list isn't comprehensive.

You have linked to Newsbusters on 24 occasions:

Lol, that list provides 34 total hits over 8 years. I haven't bothered to count how many of them are actually mine, but many of them are links in posts by other people.

Starting with the most recent, I pointed out, for example - https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/bi ... s-10-weeks - it's an interesting point on how many times CNN and such interviewed Stormy Daniels' lawyer, and discussing the focus of the mainstream media. You're not going to find such an article on CNN, because it's blasting CNN for its reporting. What's the big deal about citing this?

The second example is an article, again attacking the major media, about their unwillingness to report on the House of Representatives foreign relations committee finding that there is no evidence of collusion between Trump and the Russians. https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/ni ... n-findings What's the big deal about citing this?

Another example was about the push to blow up monuments - not just Confederates -- but things like "Mount Rushmore." http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... s#p1723007 What's the big deal about citing this?

Another was a summary of the media's near unanimous presentation of Trump's candidacy as a "joke" - https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/ri ... ement-joke What's the big deal about citing this?

One was a link to an article about Ted Turner who advocated that men would be banned from public office.

What's wrong with discussing these articles? Do they sound like far right conspiracy theory claptrap?

And some of them are not even me -- I look at the list and Sean Hayden linked to newsbusters on the list, and Tero linked to Newsbusters here - http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... s#p1695242 Rainbow linked to a picture from Newsbusters. And, after the first page of hits, we're back to like 2013 and as far back as 2010. This hardly seems like a damning list of heavy reliance on Newsbusters as a source. This entire forum has a total of 34 hits of the link "newsbusters" in nearly 8 1/2 years and a few of them are attributable to you and Hermit complaining about the links.

Just own up to it, dude. Admit to what you are, and stop trying to pass yourself off as something that you obviously aren't.

I'll let anyone look at my posting history and judge for themselves. Your motive is obvious. You and the other AtheismPlus types personalize all your arguments. It's all about sullying the names of those who you think hold the wrong political views. Have at it, buddy, but the list you're trying to pawn off as so damning is just a milquetoast list of references, videos, citations, that are not even remotely "alt right" positions on anything.

For the record, I don't dispute the criticisms of Infowars and such -- much of what they talk about is pure insanity. But, I haven't linked to insane bits. Where I linked to them, it's basically jus a video, or a short summary with a link to a more mainstream cite. And, these paltry few, modest references span years of posting, and are a few sprinkles out of many thousands of posts.

But, if you're someone who wants to paint me as some sort of racist, alt-right, confederate flag waving Nazi, you'll do what you doing now.

[Scot Dutchy]

[Joe]

I once linked to the Rude Pundit(NSFW).

And I'm to the right of Forty Two, according to the test.



I'm not alt-right, I'm just right.

Just barely - we're both on the line there. And, it's probably a function of how strongly held one position or another is. Plus, as I have a distinctly non-authoritarian bend, that tends to also render me slightly left on some issues.

Calling me "far right" is just a slur, basically. I'm not far right, and never have been far right, and I'm decidedly liberal on many issues. On some issues, I lean less liberal and perhaps would even be considered to the right, but then again, that's true of most people.

I don't take those tests seriously, Forty Two, but with tongue firmly in cheek, I shall refer to you as "Lefty" and offer your score as proof you're soft on Russia.

[Forty Two]

Oh, no, I just don't have differences of opinion, I really am just evil incarnate.

[Joe]

Well then, I suggest the occasional "bwahaha" in your posts to cement your credentials.

[Hermit]

But, I haven't linked to insane bits.

What's the bet Faulty Too will do another lap around "I only link to the true stuff in those sites"

Check

followed by "you lefties always link to stuff in left wing sites"?

Faulty is losing his edge. That's all I can say.

The other links are from 2012 and 2010, lol, posts by Coito Ergo Sum

Now you're just trolling rEV.

[pErvinalia]

I love how he's still ambiguous about whether he's CES or not. He just can't come out and say, "yes, that's me, 42 is a sock"..

[Seabass]

The only "infowars" link is a video. It's not an article. It's a video.

There are seven. Seven Infowars links. Not one. Seven.

Mother of god, I've never seen denial like this. I've never encountered anything like it. This is nuts.

What you've just done would be like Crumple claiming he never posts music videos, followed by someone providing links to all the times he's posted music videos, followed by Crumple responding with, "It was just that one time. Just that one video."

I now feel I should apologize to Galaxian and Superuniverse for comparing you to them. They ain't got shit on you. I think you might be suffering from some kind of psychosis or something.

[tattuchu]

I once linked to the Rude Pundit(NSFW).

"In another interview with his anus remora, Sean Hannity..."

And I'm to the right of Forty Two, according to the test.

I'm not alt-right, I'm just right.

I love taking tests! So here are my results.
Not sure if I passed

chart.png (15.2 KiB) Viewed 2671 times

[pErvinalia]

Last time I did it I was more or less in the very bottom left corner square. I think I was either one square towards the right, or one square towards authoritarian. I might not be as left or libbo these days, but I'd still be well entrenched in the lower left part of the lower left quadrant.