Could this be the end of telnet BBSing? Maybe! But those slimy creatures won't
be able to stop Fidonet unless they rip out all the phone lines.
Could this be the end of telnet BBSing? Maybe! But those slimy creatures won't
be able to stop Fidonet unless they rip out all the phone lines.
I must have missed something. No one here recently tried to shut off access due to opinions about COVID.
Do we need a "disinformation board?"
Everyone knows what that's about; they don't want us to know the truth about stuff, they don't want us to speculate, and they want us to believe whatever the media says.
Obama was angered by the 2020 election; he was angry because half of America voted for Trump. He was irritated with how the media's brainwashing campaign still sorta failed (despite Biden's victory.)
How can we help Obama (and other members of the Reptilian Brotherhood) overcome their anguish? By silencing naysayers of the media!
It's fine to put up a sign depicting Nancy Pelosi sitting on a heat rock, but if you start asking questions about covid origins, on the internet then you're a threat to the ruling class.
Could this be the end of telnet BBSing? Maybe! But those slimy creatures won't be able to stop Fidonet unless they rip out all the phone lines.
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: CompuBBS | Ashburn VA | cfbbs.scinet-ftn.org (1:275/99)
"The goal is to bring the resources of (DHS) together
to address this threat," Mayorkas said during the hearing, adding that the department is focused on the spread of disinformation in minority communities ahead of the 2022 midterm elections.
Reptilian-to-human translation: "We don't want to lose any black votes."
But they totally will... :)
The censorship can work on the internet because there are 4 or 5 huge companies
who have actually been asking for this, along with all of the major media outle
s. There are no centralized chokepoints on Fidonet who would be willing to do >he government's bidding.
The censorship can work on the internet because there are 4 or 5 huge companies who have actually been asking for this, along with all of the major media outlets. There are no centralized chokepoints on Fidonet
who would be willing to do the government's bidding.
It was all fun and games so long as administration-friendly people were running all of the big social media platforms. Truth was small potatoes and not a problem. Now that someone who wants a place for "free speech" is in charge of one of the larger platforms, it is suddenly the government's job to do something about social media "disinformation."
Exactly! And so far I haven't heard a decent explanation of why this "disinformation board" is suddenly so necessary. Psaki also has yet to explain what is meant by "disinformation."
Exactly! And so far I haven't heard a decent explanation of why this "disinformation board" is suddenly so necessary. Psaki also has yet to explain what is meant by "disinformation."
Have you or someone you know been impacted by "internet disinformation?" Could it be worse than covid? There's more white house focus on internet disinformation than there is on combating covid.
The censorship can work on the internet because there are 4 or 5 huge companies who have actually been asking for this, along with all of the major media outlets. There are no centralized chokepoints on Fidonet who would be willing to do the government's bidding.
That's fine for us BBS people, but the majority of the world is going to stick with Facebook, because that's what the Biden regime allows.
Facebook has a special button for liberals to press when they see something that goes against the Democrat grain.
Exactly! And so far I haven't heard a decent explanation of why this "disinformation board" is suddenly so necessary. Psaki also has yet to explain
what is meant by "disinformation."
Have you or someone you know been impacted by "internet disinformation?" Could
it be worse than covid? There's more white house focus on internet disinformation than there is on combating covid.
"Disinformation" is anything that doesn't align with the
administration's goal.
The short of it is that the only thing she likes about it is that at
least the administration is finally showing their true selves.
Otherwise, she equates it to the propaganda ministries that several dictatorships have and/or have had in the past.
Synchronet has upvote and downvote capabilities, and you can unsubscribe (unfollow) from any echo you don't like. If you are real smart, you can use QWK mail and set up a twit filter in the Multimail reader.
Well, the lady who is in charge of this new board (I don't remember her name), apparently released a Tik Tok video where she sings a jingle about what disinformation is. Although I don't know if she meant for it to
come off this way, but the gist of it is that "disinformation" =
whatever the government says it is.
Other than that, I personally don't know anyone who has been seriously impacted by internet/social media "disinformation." That said, now that there is a "disinformation board," I have no doubt at all that many will be impacted by "disinformation."
Aaron Thomas wrote to Mike Powell <=-
Yes, Tulsi said it perfectly. Something she didn't mention though: Look
at how full of it the Biden admin has been about their "initiatives." Remember when they said they were going to go door-to-door with
vaccines? That never happened. The insane radicals who construct this administration have a colorful wishlist, and they often share their horrible plans with us, but then they never even carry them out.
Even if they found a way to control the exchange of ideas over the internet domestically, they couldn't suppress the rest of the world.
(Now would be a perfect time for a foreigner to build a social network
to facilitate us.)
Yes, Tulsi said it perfectly. Something she didn't mention though: Look at how
full of it the Biden admin has been about their "initiatives." Remember when they said they were going to go door-to-door with vaccines? That never happened.
The insane radicals who construct this administration have a
colorful wishlist, and they often share their horrible plans with us, but then
they never even carry them out.
More than likely, one of Joe's bosses got a little too excited about Musk's Twitter purchase and over-reacted. "Joe, please tell everyone that we're gonna
crack down on non-narrative stuff on the internet.." <- It's not gonna happen.
Even if they found a way to control the exchange of ideas over the internet domestically, they couldn't suppress the rest of the world. (Now would be a perfect time for a foreigner to build a social network to facilitate us.)
Your prediction will be accurate. I don't know anyone who's specifically been victimized by internet disinformation either, but I know a handful of victims of what I'll call media disinformation. We should ask congress for a television media disinformation board. That's where the bulk of the lies about
covid originate.
So, using your door-to-door example, if there was already a process in place to go door-to-door and give vaccines, the Left would have used it.
But because there was no such process in place already, the Left would have needed to create it - and they are incapable of doing so.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
They're reluctant to waste money on the American people. Have you ever seen a snake do something nice for a human? Dogs & cats like to cuddle. But turtles, snakes, and aligators are self-centered; they don't even
care for their young ones. No "I caught a mouse for ya," just dead, starring eyes, waiting for you to let your guard down, so they can pull you under the water.
I've often thought that Lefties are closer to animals than humans.
Many of them like animals more than they do their fellow humans.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
You might be on to something.
I like animals, but I don't like to keep animals in my home as pets.
My wife (major conservative woman) don't like animals in the house
either. In fact, I've never even seen her pet a dog before.
Are there any conservative dog-lovers??
My wife (major conservative woman) don't like animals in the house either. In fact, I've never even seen her pet a dog before.
Are there any conservative dog-lovers??
animals at all and especially dogs. She does not hate them, but she does not like being approached by them.
My wife (major conservative woman) don't like animals in the house either. I fact, I've never even seen her pet a dog before.
Are there any conservative dog-lovers??
I know several who like animals to varying degrees. I like other people's dogs but, like you, don't want them in the house and don't really want one of my own (I don't think I would give it enough attention).
I know other conservatives/Republicans who have pets, including dogs indoors. I also know one, my father's wife, who does not seem to like animals at all and especially dogs. She does not hate them, but she does not like being approached by them.
Even if they found a way to control the exchange of ideas over the internet domestically, they couldn't suppress the rest of the world.
I forgot about military vets with dogs that help with PTSD, and cops with dogs. I don't think any veterans or police are liberal (why would they be?
I forgot about military vets with dogs that help with PTSD, and cops
with dogs. I don't think any veterans or police are liberal (why
would they be?
i've actually seen a lot of liberal veterans on facebook. they are usually screwballs.
Yes, I've seen liberal vetrans and I'm friends with a couple on Facebook-t are in the minority but they are around. Now police is another thing - I don't see *any* where I live, but I know in more liberal areas of the coun more are. The whole "defund the police" movement must has thrown them for loop. Same thing with the feminists that disagreed with the Trans stuff. Lifetime liberals suddenly shunned and called murderers and bigots. ---------------------------------------------------------
animals at all and especially dogs. She does not hate them, but she does
not like being approached by them.
I forgot about military vets with dogs that help with PTSD, and cops with K-9 dogs. I don't think any veterans or police are liberal (why would they be?)
I can relate to your dad's wife. Dogs are cute, and they do good deeds, but they get awfully stinky when they get wet, they get hair all over everything, they bark too much, they destroy stuff, and if they get hungry enough, they'll
eat ya ;)
I know other conservatives/Republicans who have pets, including dogs indoors. I also know one, my father's wife, who does not seem to like animals at all and especially dogs. She does not hate them, but she does not like being approached by them.
i'm not democrat so i guess that makes me conservative to democrats.
i'd like to have a dog but we have a bunch of cats.
i have fish that i've been breeding for years and I have rats.
another thing is when i was a kid i had to give up my dog when we moved and he
was my best friend. i wouldn't want to do that ever again.
If you don't think that a government can influence topics in other counties, y
should look at the influence China has over our media, sports, and entertainm
t industries.
Al Thompson wrote to Aaron Thomas <=-
Even if they found a way to control the exchange of ideas over the internet domestically, they couldn't suppress the rest of the world.
Not overtly, perhaps. But I don't doubt that they would supress as much
as they could, and put out propaganda to counter anything they don't
like.
On 05-06-22 08:38, Ron L. <=-
spoke to Al Thompson about Re: Disinfo Board <=-
Suppressing the facts on the "big" media platforms creates the
impression that the facts are "conspiracy" - which feeds into the propaganda. (That's one of the reasons you almost never hear on the "news" of people using legally owned firearms to defend themselves.
The media wants to push the Narrative that no one needs to own a gun.)
propaganda. (That's one of the reasons you almost never hear on the "news" of people using legally owned firearms to defend themselves.
The media wants to push the Narrative that no one needs to own a gun.)
Why would the conservative media supress that sort of news? Why don't
you hear it on those sources?
propaganda. (That's one of the reasons you almost never hear on thegun.)
"news" of people using legally owned firearms to defend themselves.
The media wants to push the Narrative that no one needs to own a
Why would the conservative media supress that sort of news? Why don't
you hear it on those sources?
Come to think of it, I am not sure I have heard such a story on FOX News but, then again, I don't watch TV news networks that much. That kind of story usually winds up on the local news, though, and I have also read about them in print magazines that I would not consider to be left-leaning.
I only watch local news, because I figure it's good to have an idea of the wea
er, traffic and road problems, etc. I think most of our local news is fairly biased. I've heard several stories of local people defending themselves or so
one with a firearm.
| Sysop: | Xerxes |
|---|---|
| Location: | Azle, Texas |
| Users: | 119 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 102:33:32 |
| Calls: | 3,018 |
| Calls today: | 0 |
| Files: | 155 |
| U/L today: |
0 files (0K bytes) |
| D/L today: |
0 files (0K bytes) |
| Messages: | 293,598 |
| Posted today: | 0 |