Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Snopes is garbage

Any given fact-checking exercize from Snopes or elsewhere can and probably should attract skeptical attention, if not careful re-analysis each time. Elements of left political bias show in subject, tone, style and especially what is lit up on an outlet's "radar."

It's possible to generalize too far with a demonological approach ...

In-bubble, out-bubble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Carol,

Snopes is garbage just like the other fact-checkers in the mainstream.

They keep getting busted, just like Andy Ngo busted Snopes in TG's post.

Do you know why they are garbage? They are owned by the same people who own the mainstream media.

They exist to support the oligarchy's political agenda, not check facts.

Well, they do some correct fact-checking (about things like Big Foot) in order to keep the illusion going. But on the important political stuff, they simply fudge and, when needed, make shit up.

Michael

Big Foot is real!

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, william.scherk said:

It's possible to generalize too far with a demonological approach ...

In-bubble, out-bubble.

William,

That is, until they steal a presidential election in a manner where people see the cheating with their own eyes and somehow keep the courts from looking at evidence, while the entire class of people in the bubble talk about how fair things were.

I repeat, Snopes is garbage. It's a propaganda outfit and nothing more. And I'm not just relying on the public controversies. I've read enough crap on that site to come to my own conclusions.

You can defend Snopes and use it as a source. I won't.

That's the same thing as polishing a turd. You can make it shine, but it's still a turd.

Michael

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Peter said:

You are weird. And I may never contact you again on OL.

Like the great Bobby Brown says, prerogatives everybody has them .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following article plus video is a simple act of identification, but one that, I believe makes the Deep State vulnerable.

It's a look at how the same people own the major competing conglomerates in the world. And don't forget, these conglomerates are in bed with the government the world over. This is the crony corporatism system.

Monopoly: An overview of the Great Reset – Follow the Money

Quote

If you’ve been wondering how the world economy has been hijacked and humanity has been kidnapped by a completely bogus narrative, look no further than this video by Dutch creator, Covid Lie.

What she uncovers is that the stock of the world’s largest corporations are owned by the same institutional investors. They all own each other. This means that “competing” brands, like Coke and Pepsi aren’t really competitors, at all, since their stock is owned by exactly the same investment companies, investment funds, insurance companies, banks and in some cases, governments. This is the case, across all industries.

btw - A transcript of the video and the video itself are included in the article.  

 

image.png

 

I, personally, think Bitcoin is going to be the undoing of this system (and I will be writing muchly about this over time), but the MAGA movement will help a lot. It already started by making them show their hand too soon with the 2020 election fraud.

As to the dark side (spooks and endless wars for profit) of the Deep State, how will they be able to do their dastardly deeds when the money for them runs out?

:) 

Watch the video or read the transcript. This stuff is important to know.

Michael

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/13/2021 at 11:45 AM, caroljane said:

Your deep-fried words with crowslaw, sir...

Would Ike fries with that?

Still not and never will be President.

#Maricopa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BREAKING – IT’S HAPPENING! Arizona Election Workers are Running Ultra-Violet Ballot Testing on Maricopa Ballots


"As we reported previously — Inventor and data analyst Jovan Hutton Pulitzer has a process and the patents surrounding the process where he can identify fraudulent ballots based on the paper used, creases in the paper, the ink on the forms, and other characteristics. Pulitzer can identify fraudulent votes, which will ultimately result in the accurate results of the 2020 election when only valid votes are accounted for."

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/04/breaking-happening-arizona-election-workers-running-ultra-violet-ballot-testing-maricopa-ballots-video/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ThatGuy said:

Pulitzer can identify fraudulent votes, which will ultimately result in the accurate results of the 2020 election when only valid votes are accounted for."

Yet, those voters about to be nullified should be spoken to, to verify his technique for fraud protection. There is an interesting scrabble word, "iff," which means if and only if. If the "possibly fraudulent voters" verify it wasn't them and if 'dead" voters cannot be contacted, then We The People have a case which could be decided fairly at the level of SCOTUS.      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Peter said:

Yet, those voters about to be nullified should be spoken to, to verify his technique for fraud protection. There is an interesting scrabble word, "iff," which means if and only if. If the "possibly fraudulent voters" verify it wasn't them and if 'dead" voters cannot be contacted, then We The People have a case which could be decided fairly at the level of SCOTUS.      

Peter,

No need to speak to some voters about bogus ballots.

Why?

If a mail-in ballot doesn't have a crease from being folded, it was never mailed. Extra-huge envelopes were not used for mailing. That means the voter (if he or she can be identified) never received the ballot by mail nor sent it back by mail.

And that's just one ballot. How about if there is a stack of 'em in a row?

I don't think anyone needs to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out what happened.

:) 

Besides, the paper ballots are separated from the voter's ID (which is only on the envelope for mail-in ballots) during the counting. So there's no way to see who voted for which candidate.

On a side note, here is an indication of how things are going from the inside.

"The Data will change history." This, from an actual auditor after a 12 hour shift. He may have an excess of humility, but he's clear about what he is seeing.

:) 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another video covering the Arizona election audit by one foul-mouthed dude (called The Salty Cracker :) ). So you have been advised.

I'm going with it because of his enthusiasm and, also, to blow off a little steam now that the Great Dismantling of the Biden junta is starting to happen for real. After the several months long shitstorm, I think we all deserve to blow off a little steam.

Incidentally, identifying hidden marks from the printing companies is probably similar to what they did for office printers to put Reality Leigh Winner in jail. She is the one who got caught leaking classified info to The Intercept) in jail. In her case, though, The Intercept botched a lot of things, including, apparently, letting the NSA have copies of the documents for verification.

But that was then. Now is at hand and it's going to get fun.

AUDIT WORKERS RUN ULTRA-VIOLET BALLOT TESTING ON AZ BALLOTS

image.png

As you might have suspected, I like this dude and have watched him for a few months. But, man does he cuss. That's why I've never share a video of his on OL up to now. Talk about a USP (unique selling proposition)...

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re:  The claim that Antifa was going to riot post-Chauvin trial, no matter the outcome: looks like they were just biding their time...

"On 23 April, #antifa rioted again during Portland's state of emergency (declared since Chauvin trial conclusion). Antifa targeted immigrant-owned businesses & threw a rock through the window of a local resident. "
 

https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=301665

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, ThatGuy said:

 

 

35 minutes ago, ThatGuy said:

Or, they were just biding their time...

"On 23 April, #antifa rioted again during Portland's state of emergency (declared since Chauvin trial conclusion). Antifa targeted immigrant-owned businesses & threw a rock through the window of a local resident.

If that is rioting,how would you characterizeJan.6..?  If throwing one rock through a window of a private home and "targeting" businesses ,- Iwill assume Mr. Ngo means "protesting in front of them", and will report breaking and other damages as they occur - If that is rioting, what is  your one word description of Jan. 6?

Noun or verb, your choice. Present participles accepted.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ThatGuy said:

Meanwhile, Portland Democratic mayor can't blame it all on Trump anymore, or continue to look the other way and deny/evade the reality of Antifa, and is now "begging for help"...
 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/portland-mayor-asks-public-help-unmask-members-self-described-anarchist-mob

Is this your answer?  Um, "Portland mayor begging for help in unmasking violent black blocs" is a lot more than one word, and off topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ThatGuy said:

 

 

They promoted big bad riots which did not ensue...at least, you predicted them on their say-so. What does May 1st, which who knows will even come to pass, have to do with my question which was about the past. A comparison of similar actions by two groups. Already happened. One word answer.

 

 

,

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The police  in Portland declared a riot. Is that your answer? Since that was a riot, and I asked you to compare Portland antifas actions to Capitol "patriots'" actions, and you don't want to answer me, where do I go for an Answer?   

I could ask AndyNgo,,but as the only credible reporter in Portland he is way too busy to bother with questions from foreign riffraff.

Compare and contrast, bro . You can do it. I have faith in you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, caroljane said:

The police  in Portland declared a riot. Is that your answer?

Carol, solve this dilemma. An anarchic, space expedition of 1000 people agree to found an anarchic community, in a place claimed by no country, perhaps in space or perhaps on Earth. With scientific upgrades and news from earth, sperm banks and frozen eggs the continued genetic diversity and viability of the colony should be guaranteed. Their dilemma is how do they agree to no government, yet continue to guarantee all 1000 people will respect individual rights and NOT resort to the initiation of force, over time, residing in the same geographical location?

Their temporary solution is that all 1000 sign a contract before relocating. They consent. But there is no *consent of the governed* because a contract is not a government. They all just agree to abide by the contract. They simply agree this is a consent to be free. They agree on arbitration if disputes arise. For the general tranquility, they count on the continued rationality and benevolence of a majority of the 1000 people to “obey” the contract they signed.

But what if a majority decides that a minority of one or more, is misbehaving, and must stop their behavior, and the misbehaver refuses to stop? What if two individuals have a disagreement and neither side likes the arbitrated result? What if they have kids, and the kids refuse to sign the contract? What if the kids misbehave?  Will families abide by the contract, when their kids won’t sign or misbehave, or will they fight to save their kids from exile or imprisonment? What if the kids form secret societies upon reaching their teenage years, as all kids do, and they think their parents are fools? What if two splinter groups form? What if there is war? Does the original contract still pertain? Will Rationality prevail? If you agree to take the assignment, prophesize the outcome, Carol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, caroljane said:

If that is rioting,how would you characterizeJan.6..?

Carol,

Mostly peaceful, no guns used except for cops, a setup by small group of thugs (mostly on the left, but a paltry few on the fringe right), a media shitstorm in collusion with the thugs and, of all things, in collusion with the establishment politicians. (For example, Pelosi gave a standdown order to the capitol police, who not only obliged, they invited the public in.)

This is a literary trope as old as mankind: appearance versus reality.

You are squarely in the appearance camp because all you know is what they show you. I have been to Trump events and MAGA events and watched live unedited broadcasts (by new organizations livestreaming rather than the fake news media edited versions) of more Trump rallies than I can recall, including Trump's speech on Jan. 6 and the walk over to the capitol. So I know what they look like. They NEVER look like what the fake news media shows.

Try to do this in good faith (or not). Count the number of photos you have seen of that capitol event (roughly), then try to count the number of times you have seen those images on TV and social media for how many months. You might notice that there are not many images, but the same ones are repeated countless times.

If it was such a violent MAGA event, why does the anti-Trump media have such a scant store of images, and many of them posed at that?

:) 

If one does not look, one surely cannot see...

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Peter said:

Carol, solve this dilemma. An anarchic, space expedition of 1000 people agree to found an anarchic community, in a place claimed by no country, perhaps in space or perhaps on Earth. With scientific upgrades and news from earth, sperm banks and frozen eggs the continued genetic diversity and viability of the colony should be guaranteed. Their dilemma is how do they agree to no government, yet continue to guarantee all 1000 people will respect individual rights and NOT resort to the initiation of force, over time, residing in the same geographical location?

Their temporary solution is that all 1000 sign a contract before relocating. They consent. But there is no *consent of the governed* because a contract is not a government. They all just agree to abide by the contract. They simply agree this is a consent to be free. They agree on arbitration if disputes arise. For the general tranquility, they count on the continued rationality and benevolence of a majority of the 1000 people to “obey” the contract they signed.

But what if a majority decides that a minority of one or more, is misbehaving, and must stop their behavior, and the misbehaver refuses to stop? What if two individuals have a disagreement and neither side likes the arbitrated result? What if they have kids, and the kids refuse to sign the contract? What if the kids misbehave?  Will families abide by the contract, when their kids won’t sign or misbehave, or will they fight to save their kids from exile or imprisonment? What if the kids form secret societies upon reaching their teenage years, as all kids do, and they think their parents are fools? What if two splinter groups form? What if there is war? Does the original contract still pertain? Will Rationality prevail? If you agree to take the assignment, prophesize the outcome, Carol.

Eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now