Faucist der Furhrer to force jews ..er ..the unvacinated to accept experimental medical procedures

Discussion of current events
User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 5893
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Faucist der Furhrer to force jews ..er ..the unvacinated to accept experimental medical procedures

Post by Sertorio » Mon Sep 13, 2021 1:19 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Sep 12, 2021 5:34 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Sep 12, 2021 3:34 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Sep 12, 2021 12:37 pm
China Uncensored is from the same organisation as Epoch Times. I'm sympathetic to their anti-CCP stance, but to be honest they're not much more of a reliable source than the tankie drivel Sertorio posts.
I am still waiting for you to show us any bit of my "tankie drivel" which is not based on facts. But I suppose I am asking too much, seeing that you will be unable to deliver...
I can't recall anything you've posted lately that wasn't "analysis", i.e., opinion -- other than a few forward looking predictions of how formidable China's future military technology will supposedly be someday.
Opinion based on facts but which, as opinion, you are entitled to disagree with. And counter with an analysis of your own. That's what makes interchange interesting.

User avatar
Apollonius
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Faucist der Furhrer to force jews ..er ..the unvacinated to accept experimental medical procedures

Post by Apollonius » Fri Nov 12, 2021 9:31 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Sep 12, 2021 12:37 pm
China Uncensored is from the same organisation as Epoch Times. I'm sympathetic to their anti-CCP stance, but to be honest they're not much more of a reliable source than the tankie drivel Sertorio posts.


What do you have against The Epoch Times? Two people I read, Conrad Black and Theodore Dalrymple, regularly are frequently published by them.

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 2518
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Probably DCA, YYJ, or DOM
Contact:

Re: Faucist der Furhrer to force jews ..er ..the unvacinated to accept experimental medical procedures

Post by SteveFoerster » Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:13 am

Apollonius wrote:
Fri Nov 12, 2021 9:31 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Sep 12, 2021 12:37 pm
China Uncensored is from the same organisation as Epoch Times. I'm sympathetic to their anti-CCP stance, but to be honest they're not much more of a reliable source than the tankie drivel Sertorio posts.


What do you have against The Epoch Times? Two people I read, Conrad Black and Theodore Dalrymple, regularly are frequently published by them.
Their agenda is clearly ideological rather than journalistic. And I'm not the only one who sees it, e.g., https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-epoch-times/
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: https://newworld.ac

User avatar
Apollonius
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Faucist der Furhrer to force jews ..er ..the unvacinated to accept experimental medical procedures

Post by Apollonius » Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:02 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:13 am
Apollonius wrote:
Fri Nov 12, 2021 9:31 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Sep 12, 2021 12:37 pm
China Uncensored is from the same organisation as Epoch Times. I'm sympathetic to their anti-CCP stance, but to be honest they're not much more of a reliable source than the tankie drivel Sertorio posts.


What do you have against The Epoch Times? Two people I read, Conrad Black and Theodore Dalrymple, regularly are frequently published by them.
Their agenda is clearly ideological rather than journalistic. And I'm not the only one who sees it, e.g., https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-epoch-times/


I don't do "fact-checkers":


What fact checkers get wrong - Gavin Haynes, UnHerd, 12 November 2021
https://unherd.com/2021/11/what-fact-ch ... get-wrong/


They pretend to be objective — while peddling progressive politics


... A hundred years ago, Ludwig Wittgenstein eviscerated the “logical positivist” philosophical movement, which wanted to create an algebra of human meanings. He showed how there was no single way of coding a statement so that it could be parsed as “true” or “false” that didn’t in turn leave it subject to huge error bars of ambiguity. If only someone had passed the message onto the fact checking industry, it might have saved everyone some time.

If there’s no such thing as objectivity, there’s still impartiality. And fact checkers can’t even manage that. They were meant to bring back the rigour that had been throttled out of journalism. Instead, they’re most comprised of sweaty 23-year-olds in graduate jobs rummaging through the usual partisan sources, then comparing them with the often progressive-partisan fact mills of Wikipedia then spitting out the appropriate Woozle. No wonder many have intuited that a red flag from a fact checker actually denotes “things that might be true but are unsayable in the present climate”.

One solution proposed by the Cornell duo of Williams and Ceci involves leaning into that polarised political climate. Rather than having a single set of fact checkers, you should have two rival teams, recruited precisely for their ideological differences. But even here, the authors are quite gloomy in their prognosis. We shouldn’t imagine that this will get us to the “truth”, they warn. But it will at least reveal the underlying human biases that might be skewing our perception of it.

That might turn out to be a more useful function than they realise. The problem that confronts all of us is to neither lapse into cynicism about the existence of facts, nor slip into hubris about our ability to see them. In order to do that, we need to treat fact-checkers not as arbiters, but as just another branch of the media-political system that it seeks to impose its writ upon. Perhaps sensing that the game is up — or merely sensing that they have to expand to fit the donor funds on offer — fact checking orgs have increasingly begun to write what are essentially articles. In other words, they’re ripe to be red flagged, ripped apart or rinsed by others.

User avatar
Apollonius
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Faucist der Furhrer to force jews ..er ..the unvacinated to accept experimental medical procedures

Post by Apollonius » Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:06 pm

Included in the article.






Lots of interesting stuff on that Glenn Greenwald Twitter feed.

neverfail
Posts: 7601
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Faucist der Furhrer to force jews ..er ..the unvacinated to accept experimental medical procedures

Post by neverfail » Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:54 pm

Doc wrote:
Thu Sep 09, 2021 3:32 pm
Wow! Crowds in front of our Opera House? That photo must have been taken BEFORE our most recent lockdown.

(BY the way Doc: out here we did NOT have a nightmare lockdown. What you had over there instead was a nightmare pandemic.) :)

neverfail
Posts: 7601
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Faucist der Furhrer to force jews ..er ..the unvacinated to accept experimental medical procedures

Post by neverfail » Fri Nov 12, 2021 1:09 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Fri Sep 10, 2021 7:51 am
Doc wrote:
Thu Sep 09, 2021 3:32 pm
Joe Biden just announced that companies with over 100 employees will be required by the labor dept to require their employees take experimental medical vaccines.
So firstly and most importantly, I oppose mandates. If you're foolish enough not to want to be protected against a disease that's easy to catch and has a nontrivial mortality rate, then it's your funeral.
No Steve. Your view is steeped in an "every man is an island unto himself" kind of radical individual. What I would suggest instead is that you owe it to your fellow man to contribute to lessening the spread of the Covid virus by taking appropriate measures against catching it yourself. That includes social distancing, wearing masks in public and becoming vacinated.

It is as well that the US now has a President willing to take charge this way - unlike his fuckwit of a predecessor who was unfit to organise a national response.

Imposing a rule re. businesses employing a workforce of more than 100 must ensure that they get vacinated may seem intrusively authoritarian but in the case of your country might be a necessary belated remedy - in light of the one year lagtime (Trump's final year in office; that permitted the virus to spread virtually unmitigated). Unfortunately you cannot rely upon all individuals to do the right thing of their own volition. If you could then the USA would have no need a code of criminal law.

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 6259
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Faucist der Furhrer to force jews ..er ..the unvacinated to accept experimental medical procedures

Post by Doc » Fri Nov 12, 2021 7:11 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:13 am
Apollonius wrote:
Fri Nov 12, 2021 9:31 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Sep 12, 2021 12:37 pm
China Uncensored is from the same organisation as Epoch Times. I'm sympathetic to their anti-CCP stance, but to be honest they're not much more of a reliable source than the tankie drivel Sertorio posts.


What do you have against The Epoch Times? Two people I read, Conrad Black and Theodore Dalrymple, regularly are frequently published by them.
Their agenda is clearly ideological rather than journalistic. And I'm not the only one who sees it, e.g., https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-epoch-times/
Show me any news organization that is not ideological driven rather than journalistic.

Take the Kyle Rittenhouse case we have been seeing for the last 14 months. The vast majority of so called "journalists" have been claiming is is a White supremacist racist for the entire time.

Then lets talk about just the last few days where "The paper of record won a STAY of a court order from being deposed by lawyers for Project Veritas in PV's lawsuit against the times on Nov 9th. On Nov 10th the FBI raids the homes of staff members and founders takes all records and electronic devices they can find INCLUDING PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN PV AND ITS LAWYERS. All based on the supposed dairy of Joe Biden's daughter that was in the possession of the FBI for a year proceeding the raid because it was given to PV and PV could not verify it So turned it over to the Law enforcement. PV Tried to give it back to Bedin's daughter but her lawyer refused to accept it. The FBI told James Keefe, PV founder, not to report on the subpoena and raid. One hour after which the NYTs started calling PV reporters and asking them to comment on the NYT story about them. SO the FBI turned around and GAVE the NYT the information from its raid on PV employees So of which as I said was privileged communications between PV and its lawyers. WHICH THE NYT TURNED AROUND AND PUBLISHED IN ITS UNFIT FOR TOILET PAGER RAG TODAY.

Is that what you call journalism Steve?

That is not journalism That it the POS RAG NYTs being exactly what it is. Extreme Ideological toilet paper.

So do you or anyone else here care to defend the indefensible? ;)


https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/11/ ... t-veritas/
The FBI and the New York Times Collude against Project Veritas
By Andrew C. McCarthy

November 12, 2021 7:59 PM

W ant to understand how outrageous Friday’s New York Times coverage of the FBI’s seizure of Project Veritas’s proprietary documents is? Just imagine what the Times would be saying if what is happening to PV were happening to . . . well . . . the Times itself.

What if federal prosecutors had had the temerity to seek, and managed to obtain, court-authorized search warrants against Times reporters, on the allegation that the paper was in possession of evidence of a crime — perhaps even that some of its reporters were somehow complicit in the crime? The screams of bloody murder from West 40th Street would be audible across America.

Let’s start with the government leaks.

The reason that prosecutors and police are permitted covertly to seek judicial warrants to seize evidence, and that the courts keep the government warrant applications under seal, is that investigations are supposed to be kept confidential. This is to protect people who have not been charged with crimes — their privacy and their presumption of innocence. Government agents are not permitted to publicize such information, much less selectively leak it to the press. The information does not belong to them. They are given a legal privilege to acquire access to it for investigative purposes only.
More in FBI

Main Steele Dossier Source Pleads Not Guilty to Lying to FBI
Durham Is Steadily Exposing the Real ‘Russia Collusion’ Scandal
What to Make of Durham’s Latest Indictment

Moreover, as no one knows better than the Times, there are special considerations when the government targets the press in a search or other information demand. A free-press right is guaranteed in the First Amendment. Amazingly under the circumstances, the Times’ default position — at least when rights of the Times and the rest of the media-Democrat complex are at stake — is that our constitutional system is threatened if the government demands or seizes information from reporters.

In point of fact, this is not true. The First Amendment prohibits the government from telling the press what it can publish — i.e., no prior restraints. Yet members of the media have the same obligations as every person in this country to provide evidence if demanded by a lawful subpoena. The government has the same power to seize evidence from reporters as from ordinary citizens.

Because of the constitutional recognition of free-press rights, the Justice Department (DOJ) has internal guidelines that require high-level approval before prosecutors and the FBI may demand information from the media. The guidelines discourage such demands unless the case is important and there is no alternative source. But that is discretionary government restraint, not mandatory. The media regularly advocate “press shield” laws precisely because the Constitution does not empower journalists to withhold information and guarantee confidentiality to their sources.

So, contrary to a lot of overheated commentary by PV sympathizers in conservative media, it is not a violation of the Constitution for the Justice Department — specifically, the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), working with the FBI — to seize documents and other items from PV members. It is stunning, however, to find Times reporters, of all people, cheerleading this investigative gambit and publishing its fruits.

Let’s back up.

Reportedly, the government’s investigation revolves around a diary that was stolen from President Biden’s 40-year-old daughter, Ashley. A website called National File later published what it described as portions and has claimed to have the complete diary.

I confess to being curious about the basis relied on by the Justice Department — evidently, the Trump Justice Department, in October 2020, at then-candidate Biden’s request — to open a criminal investigation. The stealing of personal items from a non-government official is not a federal crime.
All Our Opinion in Your Inbox

NR Daily is delivered right to you every afternoon. No charge.

To be clear, I am curious; I am not saying it was necessarily improper for the Justice Department to look into the theft. Joe Biden, at the time, was not just a former vice president, for whose protection the government is responsible; he was running for (and favored to win) the presidency. While we don’t know all the relevant facts, it is thus easy to conjure up legitimate federal interests in the robbery investigation.

Sometimes, for example, there is federal-government jurisdiction for robbery — if, for example, stolen items involve federal-government materials or such interstate-commerce items as narcotics. It could be a federal crime to transfer or sell stolen items in interstate commerce. A theft involving a close family member of a high government official (or candidate for high office) could also be part of a bigger scheme; there could be a federal crime if the robbery of his daughter signaled a threat to Biden’s own safety, perhaps, or an effort to blackmail or extort him.

So we’d be getting out over our skis to pronounce that the FBI and federal prosecutors had no business looking into the robbery. Plus, it’s not like the Justice Department went off on its own hook here. A federal district court judge issued a search warrant. That is only supposed to happen if there is probable cause to believe that a federal crime has occurred (or is occurring) and that the location to be searched probably contains evidence of that crime.

Now, yes, judges sometimes get it wrong on warrants. The vast majority of the time, though, once the pertinent facts are known, it turns out that the judge had a solid legal basis for issuing warrants. And a federal judge knows very well, just as the Justice Department knows very well, that search warrants targeting journalists — even such unconventional journalists as PV staffers — are fraught with constitutional implications. I bet we will learn that the search warrants were sought and granted only after very careful consideration at the FBI, DOJ, and the court. With due respect to PV founder James O’Keefe, we should not assume that his public explanations, which understandably cast PV in a favorable light, are necessarily the whole story here.

All that said, it is not a crime for journalists to come into possession of unlawfully converted documents. And it is to be expected that journalists zealously guard their right to publish such materials — or at least to consider doing so. We see this play out often when Times reporters receive classified leaks from intelligence officials — it being both against the law for government officials to disseminate the information to unauthorized persons, and potentially criminal for the press to publish national-defense secrets (though doubts about constitutionality make such a prosecution highly unlikely).

So why isn’t the press closing ranks around Project Veritas? Because the so-called mainstream media despise PV.

That, too, is to be expected: PV uses against the Left, very much including against left-leaning media, the Left’s own sandbag tactics — e.g., covert investigation, spying informants who pretend to befriend the people they investigate, and selective publication of the fruits of the investigation in order to paint the target in the worst possible light. If Saul Alinsky had been a right-winger, James O’Keefe would be his favorite student. But PV’s unpopularity cannot mean that it does not merit the status of journalist, with all of the free-press protection that status implies.

O’Keefe concedes that PV came into possession of the diary. He says PV elected not to publish it after becoming aware of it through “tipsters.” To the extent that PV had physical custody of the diary, or some part of it, or a copy of it, O’Keefe says, “Project Veritas gave the diary to law enforcement to ensure it could be returned to its rightful owner.”

Regardless of whether that turns out to be a true and complete version of events, it is highly irregular for investigative journalists to be subjected to such intrusive government investigative tactics as search warrants. Furthermore, if what has been reported by the Times is indicative of the scope of the searches permitted by the court, then clearly the warrants were not narrowly tailored to authorize seizure only of evidence related to the stolen diary. To the contrary, the FBI grabbed extensive PV work product and attorney-client communications.

Thus does the Times report today:

Project Veritas has long occupied a gray area between investigative journalism and political spying, and internal documents obtained by The New York Times reveal the extent to which the group has worked with its lawyers to gauge how far its deceptive reporting practices can go before running afoul of federal laws.

The documents, a series of memos written by the group’s lawyer, detail ways for Project Veritas sting operations — which typically diverge from standard journalistic practice by employing people who mask their real identities or create fake ones to infiltrate target organizations — to avoid breaking federal statutes such as the law against lying to government officials.

Two of the Times’ A-team national reporters, Adam Goldman and Mark Mazzetti, then elaborate in detail on advice that PV has received from its lawyer, in connection with PV investigations going back for years. In the main, the advice is what you’d expect: How to navigate the perils of collecting information through ethically questionable tactics that skate along the razor’s edge between the legitimate and the lawless — something you’d be right to suppose that the Times knows a thing or two about.

Significantly, what has been leaked to the Times, and what the Times has editorially chosen to publish, is not confined to the Ashley Biden–diary investigation. The Times is heedless of Project Veritas’s right to counsel and to the constitutionally based confidentiality of its attorney-client communications. Given how the Times would react were the shoe on the other foot, which is hardly inconceivable, this is shocking. Not surprisingly, SDNY judge Analisa Torres, the Obama appointee who issued the search warrants, has now abruptly ordered the government to stop extracting materials from the PV operatives’ digital files. Plainly, the Justice Department is running roughshod over PV’s right to counsel.

I can only assume the Gray Lady’s judgment is skewed. It is not so much reporting a newsworthy story as exploiting the opportunity for full-bore scrutiny of PV as a journalistic enterprise. And scrutiny with barely disguised disdain: Because of PV’s political motivations, which the Left finds noxious — which, in fact, have resulted in prominent progressive figures and institutions being targeted, sometimes to their humiliation — PV operatives are somehow unworthy of being regarded as reporters, presumed to enjoy constitutionally driven deference from government investigators.

Judge Torres should be infuriated by the leaks to the Times. And she should do more than merely fulminate.

The judge should order the SDNY’s Biden-appointed U.S. attorney, Damian Williams, to provide the court, immediately, with affidavits detailing communications with the media from every prosecutor, FBI agent, and support staffer who is either involved in the investigation or has had access to the items seized from the current or former PV officials. Judge Torres should ask that Attorney General Merrick Garland immediately refer the matter to Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz for a thorough investigation of how the search-warrant information came to be transmitted to the Times.

Garland and Horowitz should announce that the Justice Department will conduct the investigation requested by the court, and Horowitz should be given the affidavits so his office can hit the ground running. Judge Torres should ask for periodic updates to stress to the Justice Department and FBI that the court is troubled by the government’s apparently pretextual exploitation of coercive judicial processes in order to fuel media coverage. That coverage has imperiled the constitutional rights of PV members to freedom of the press, due process, privacy, and assistance of counsel.

You don’t need to love Project Veritas to be offended by the blatant government leaking of confidential investigative information and by the Times’ hypocritical coverage: the crown jewel of American journalism branding PV as a lower caste, not entitled to the presumptions of privacy and legitimacy that the Times demands for its own information-collection practices.
But right the Epoch Times is "ideological" not journalism because the founder is a member of Falum Gong. That created the Epoch Times be a counter to the massive CCP propaganda machine A machine that does not give a damn about telling the truth. IE No lie is too big to tell if it benefits the CCP and it has the slightest chance to find a audience to believe it.

This is the same Falun Gong whose member the CCP is persecuting and imprisoning in side of CHINA. Killing it members to harvest their organs and your beloved credible "Journalists" said nothing about any of this for year and still don't say much for some reason. GEE I wonder what that reason could be? :roll: :roll: :roll:

https://thenewamerican.com/top-u-s-medi ... ist-china/
Top U.S. Media Outlets “Compromised” by Communist China
by Alex Newman January 4, 2021
As for China uncensored. No Steve they are not employed by the Epoch Times. China uncensored has been in existence.

https://www.chinauncensored.tv/about
It’s the Information Age! Except in China—it’s the Misinformation Age. The Chinese Communist Party controls the “China message” through direct censorship, incentives for self-censorship, and outright propaganda. And if none of those work, they’ll arrest you or kick you out of China.

​As a result, domestic and foreign journalists alike struggle to report on and get published certain stories about China—especially those that are critical of the CCP, or that highlight the CCP’s oppressive treatment of its people.

Host Chris Chappell, Producer Matt Gnaizda, and Humor Ninja Shelley Zhang are all former China journalists who seek to cover topics in a way that is both accurate in detail and correct in the larger context. In 2012, they decided to turn to comedy to make China news more engaging for people around the world. Thus, China Uncensored was born.

With as much a focus on solid research as satirical humor, the China Uncensored team does their best to show compassion for the people who endure the CCP’s oppression, tolerate different opinions, and respect traditional Chinese culture.

​China Uncensored is available to watch on this website and on YouTube.

​China Uncensored is part of an extremely small media empire that includes America Uncovered and the China Unscripted podcast. All three shows are produced by America Uncovered LLC, an independently owned company based in New York.
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 3519
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Faucist der Furhrer to force jews ..er ..the unvacinated to accept experimental medical procedures

Post by Milo » Fri Nov 12, 2021 7:56 pm

Doc, your sources have a bad tendency to publicize select motions in a case, and not comment on the actual, outcome!

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 6259
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Faucist der Furhrer to force jews ..er ..the unvacinated to accept experimental medical procedures

Post by Doc » Fri Nov 12, 2021 8:44 pm

Milo wrote:
Fri Nov 12, 2021 7:56 pm
Doc, your sources have a bad tendency to publicize select motions in a case, and not comment on the actual, outcome!
Like I asked Steve. Show me a new source that you feel is not ideological. Or more to the point that does not have an agenda other than telling the truth and the whole truth.

And what about the FBI NYT and Project Veritas? As a lawyer this should be absolutely horrifying and outrageous to you. Yet you just selectively excluded comment about it and declined to comment on it......
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

Post Reply