Should Twitter reveal old Twitter's role in spreading disinformation about the Hunter Biden laptop?

[Revoltingest]

What wild-eyed socialist liberal Democrat first talked about that? Of course it was this anti-capitalist loonie

Spoiler: The answer to my question

Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower who happened to be a 5 star general and in a position to know what was going on.

During World War II, he served as Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force in Europe and achieved the five-star rank of General of the Army. He planned and supervised the invasion of North Africa in Operation Torch in 1942–1943 as well as the invasion of Normandy (D-Day) from the Western Front in 1944–1945.

He was a politician trying to score points.
He offered no evidence.
You take his words on faith?

Liberals love him & his pandering because
it lets their politicians off the hook when they
wage useless wars.
"Oh, we can't blame Hillary for her vote to
start & continue the wars....it's the Military
Industrial Complex! She can't help herself!"

 

[sun rise]

He was a politician trying to score points.
He offered no evidence.
You take his words on faith?

Liberals love him & his pandering because
it lets their politicians off the hook when they
wage useless wars.
"Oh, we can't blame Hillary for her vote to
start & continue the wars....it's the Military
Industrial Complex! She can't help herself!"

We all know your love for Hillary and how obsessed you are with her just like some others I won't mention.

And along with that you ignore history (I presume you know that Ike used that expression in his FAREWELL address as he finished up being president. He was making a historical point about large defense industry and the risks thereof. But to turn it around, present well-research evidence that "Liberals love him" and present the citation for that quote.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence—economic, political, even spiritual—is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together. [emphasis added]

 

[Revoltingest]

We all know your love for Hillary and how obsessed you are with her just like some others I won't mention.

Well, she does wear a pantsuit well.
Is that why you also obsess over her,
& immediately rush to her defense?

And along with that you ignore history (I presume you know that Ike used that expression in his FAREWELL address as he finished up being president.

He was still a politician.
They don't exit that mode easily.
Are Presidents always honest?
Do they always grok things correctly?

He was making a historical point about large defense industry and the risks thereof. But to turn it around, present well-research evidence that "Liberals love him" and present the citation for that quote.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence—economic, political, even spiritual—is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together. [emphasis added]

You & other lefties still proffer that conspiracy
theory, yet provide no evidence whatsoever.
Tis a convenient ruse to excuse the hawks you
vote for time after time, while blaming Pubs &
the ghostly MIC cabal that allegedly pulls the
strings of marionets in government.
Gonna blame George Soros next?

 

[sun rise]

Well, she does wear a pantsuit well.
Is that why you also obsess over her,
& immediately rush to her defense?

He was still a politician.
They don't exit that mode easily.
Are Presidents always honest?
Do they always grok things correctly?

You & other lefties still proffer that conspiracy
theory, yet provide no evidence whatsoever.
Tis a convenient ruse to excuse the hawks you
vote for time after time, while blaming Pubs &
the ghostly MIC cabal that allegedly pulls the
strings of marionets in government.
Gonna blame George Soros next?

You pretend to quote something but that was just a troll. You don't answer my questions but just repeat yourself using logical fallacies with "ALWAYS".

Got it. You're not being serious here. I'm ignoring anything else you post in this thread accordingly.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Criminal or otherwise, it's one of the left's
unsupported conspiracy theories.

True, but Trump is partially to blame since he did say at one point that if given the chance he would have gone along with the Russians. Later he did claim that he was joking. If that was true his joking voice is exactly the same as his sincere voice.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Hillary lost because of one person...

That's true. Both parties scraped the bottom of the barrel for that election.

 

[Revoltingest]

You pretend to quote something but that was just a troll.

You're not as literate as I'd given you credit for.
I used a device, ie, an obviously over-the-top
invented quote to express a state of mind.
Perhaps after this lesson, you'll understand
when I use it again.

You don't answer my questions but just repeat yourself using logical fallacies with "ALWAYS".

I don't think you'd know a real fallacy even
if you bit it on the ankle.

Got it. You're not being serious here. I'm ignoring anything else you post in this thread accordingly.

I'm quite serious...with a wee
bit'o fun in the mix. Don't be
so easily peeved, eh.

 

[Revoltingest]

True, but Trump is partially to blame since he did say at one point that if given the chance he would have gone along with the Russians.
Later he did claim that he was joking. If that was true his joking voice is exactly the same as his sincere voice.

The exact quote?

 

[Revoltingest]

That's true. Both parties scraped the bottom of the barrel for that election.

True dat.
Imagine the Dems running a candidate
so uninspiring that even Trump beat her.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The exact quote?

Do you really need it?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

He was a politician trying to score points.
He offered no evidence.
You take his words on faith?

Liberals love him & his pandering because
it lets their politicians off the hook when they
wage useless wars.
"Oh, we can't blame Hillary for her vote to
start & continue the wars....it's the Military
Industrial Complex! She can't help herself!"

If they properly understand the MICC, it should in no way exonerate politicians since they are a contributing factor to the whole.

Many large scale industries have similar problems, be they Pharma, Oil, etc. The level of money, the ability to directly impact state economies by where and to whom contracts are awarded, the projections of a number of truly enormous companies based on estimated military spending, and the shared incentive to grow the pie...

This is neither unique to the US, nor to the military, but the US military is a strong example of it.

I won't bother citing evidence, so it's up to you what you think, but I have a reasonable amount of exposure to the industry from the supply side, albeit primarily within Australia, and more one step removed with a variety of other military groups, including the US.

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you really need it?

I've found that people often remember an
inaccurate inference of a quote, rather than
the quote itself. So if it's to be discussed, yes.

 

[Revoltingest]

If they properly understand the MICC, it should in no way exonerate politicians since they are a contributing factor to the whole.

Many large scale industries have similar problems, be they Pharma, Oil, etc. The level of money, the ability to directly impact state economies by where and to whom contracts are awarded, the projections of a number of truly enormous companies based on estimated military spending, and the shared incentive to grow the pie...

This is neither unique to the US, nor to the military, but the US military is a strong example of it.

I won't bother citing evidence, so it's up to you what you think, but I have a reasonable amount of exposure to the industry from the supply side, albeit primarily within Australia, and more one step removed with a variety of other military groups, including the US.

If MIC Conspiracy fans won't bother citing
evidence, this strongly suggests its lack.

BTW, I once worked on the "supply side" too
(military aircraft). This gives me no expertise.
I base my argument upon 2 things....
1) Lack of evidence that the MIC exercises
the claimed level of control over government.
2) The better explanation for so many wars
is that voter elect & re-elect war mongers.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I've found that people often remember an
inaccurate inference of a quote, rather than
the quote itself. So if it's to be discussed, yes.

BTW, I once worked on the "supply side" too
(military aircraft). This gives me no expertise.
I base my argument upon 2 things....
1) Lack of evidence that the MIC exercises
the claimed level of control over government.
2) The better explanation for so many wars
is that voter elect & re-elect war mongers.

You might not have been following our conversation. My post had nothing to do with the MIC.

 

[Revoltingest]

You might not have been following our conversation. My post had nothing to do with the MIC.

I get confused a lot.
It's fixed now....I think.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I've found that people often remember an
inaccurate inference of a quote, rather than
the quote itself. So if it's to be discussed, yes.

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing, I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press,” Trump said in a July 27, 2016 news conference.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

If MIC Conspiracy fans won't bother citing
evidence, this strongly suggests its lack.

*shrugs*
You're entitled to your opinion. I'm not presenting evidence because in all of these situations there are NDAs quite early in the supply chain process, and providing much quickly makes things specific enough to be recognisable.

But just to clarify my position;
1) I deliberately used the term MICC, not MIC. Congress is part of this issue, not a victim of it, and voters supporting Hawks (simplistically) is also part of it.
2) I didn't use the term conspiracy because on the whole I don't see it as such. There are simply too many parties rewarded for certain types of behaviour which can lead to overspends within the sector. That included politicians, and generals.

Without crossing boundaries relating to specific contracts or situations, I've been involved in deals around maintenance systems for various defence forces, with deal values of 9 figures, just around software and related services.
At that point, major defence forces aren't generally buying 'a maintenance system' but are instead effectively buying a supply chain, part of which includes the maintenance system, but the larger part being the production and maintenance backbone itself, which both produces and maintains the weapons/logistical equipment/whatever.

There is a huge amount of political lobbying at that point. If the production facilities are in state A vs B it literally impacts on employment figures in a material way. If the software provider is domestic vs foreign, there's a whole new paradigm, some of which is sensible (data sovereignty in fact) and some of which is simply political scare-mongering (data sovereignty as a political football)

The lobbying is by the manufacturer, the maintenance company (which may be the same or different, and is commonly a whole supply chain web), the software provider, the politicians, trade unions, and more.

It's not a conspiracy, for all that there are shared interests. It's capitalism, but at a scale that can directly impact on political process.

I've worked for a domestic provider, and for a 'foreign' provider, and you best believe that the messaging from a political point of view is vastly different, and bears little resemblance to reality.

Anyway...you have your own experiences, and that's fine. I'm not trying to convince you, just saying what I've seen.

BTW, I once worked on the "supply side" too
(military aircraft). This gives me no expertise.

I claim no expertise either. There were meetings beyond me, and I only ever saw the ramifications.
But I think I did gain some insight.

I base my argument upon 2 things....
1) Lack of evidence that the MIC exercises
the claimed level of control over government.
2) The better explanation for so many wars
is that voter elect & re-elect war mongers.

Kinda agree with these points. I use the term MICC, and the government (and even opposition politicians) are a force exuding pressure, not victim of it (in my experience).
And I think 2 is true. Just not the only factor.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Elon Musk has restored the real purpose of such social media.

Remind us we're animals?

 

[Estro Felino]

Remind us we're animals?

No. Freedom of speech.

 

[SomeRandom]

No. Freedom of speech.

Yeah and he’s exposed himself as a giant loser in the process. Advertisers have largely abandoned ship as the trolls come out in force, bullying, harassing and otherwise degrading others. Hiding behind “mah free speech” like the cowards they are.
I never used Twitter before, so I couldn’t care less. But it’s been beyond amusing to watch the show.