4 ms·

I don't want to be too rude, but you are being willfully ignorant if you believe it's not happening. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/16/us/politics

I don't want to be too rude, but you are being willfully ignorant if you believe it's not happening. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/16/us/politics/russia-propaganda-election-2016.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/16/us/politics/r... https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/now-available-more-200-000-deleted-russian-troll-tweets-n844731?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/now-available-more... You're free to debunk these and a hundred other sources, but there's something there. Do you really belive an ex KGB officer doesn't use some KGB tactics? That a nation with major economic disadvantages isn't going to rely on alternative methods of attack? Not looking to get into a whataboutist argument. The US has done shady stuff, plenty of it. Propaganda is in no way limited to the Russians.

scottlocklin 9y ago
Go look up the term "Gish Gallop" -that's the substance of the "Russia is responsible for everything I don't like" conspiracy theory you're writing your dissertation on. I agree there is something there: just like there was "something there" when these same clowns were selling us the Iraq war. The "something" isn't actual evidence which exists in the corporeal world: it's manufactured nonsense. I mean, the very absurdity of the accusations on display here: OMG RUSSIANS DID THINGS ON TWITTER AND SOCIAL MEDIA. FWIIW same story with the "all of our intelligence agencies agree" dossier; basically, Russia Today exists. Russia Today, now listed under FARA laws. Somehow the WSJ and WaPo Saudi/Israeli amen chorus manages to escape FARA -wonder how they managed to do this?
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  "Gish gallop" is a term for a technique used during debating that focuses on overwhelming one's opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments. That's not Gish Gallop. That's two sources that you didn't bother responding to. My conspiracy involves data, yours is blanket denial. Don't understand your motivations. Can we not be realists about how countries behave? I see nothing incompatible with Russia's actions in the recent past (annexing Crimea with unmarked soldiers) and the use of propaganda. But again, the difference is, I'm willing to test this. Do you just assume it's false without testing? Noticed in your other post that you called Khodorkovsky a "murderous clown". To my knowledge, his sin was being an oligarch who got on the wrong side of putin, went to jail for it, and now is a critic of him. Who did he murder? Why do you call him that? Do you believe putin (whom there is evidence that has killed political opponents) is guilty of this, too? Just trying to understand your motivations.
  - scottlocklin 9y ago
    Khodorkovsky is a murderer, and anyone who denies this either doesn't know what he's talking about, or works for the same people that tout him in the media. All the "everything I don't like about the world is Russia's fault" gorp is gish gallop. The two things you linked are literally a clownish witch hunter indicting Russian nationals for ... trolling people on twitter. I do not take this seriously. The fact that anyone is physiologically capable of meeting this with other than hysterical laughter at the bald faced absurdity of it will probably remain beyond my ken.
AsyncAwait 9y ago
I believe his point was that even IF some ads were purchased, it’s not that big of a deal, since the potential negative impact isn’t that great and is done regularly by other countries that we curiously don’t seem to be outraged about, like KSA and Israel, which is a valid point and honestly in that context, pointing at the Russians seems a tad xenophobic, just because Russia isn’t under our sphere of influence. I also feel like it’s important to point out that this has nothing to do with defending Putin, but whether you’re willing to let your fear of the Ruskies deprive people of free speech rights, because by proxy of private companies being required to censor ie RT, it’s also having a chilling effect on independent creators on YouTube and elsewhere, so if you support all this because of fear of the Russians wanting to destroy Western democracy, in a way you’re letting them win.
Profragile 9y ago
Which country, do you believe, don't do everything in their power to impact elections in other countries which they have to deal with? Why wouldn't Russia want someone in the US who is already working with them vs someone new who they don't know they can trust? https://youtu.be/XsFR8DbSRQE https://youtu.be/XsFR8DbSRQE

scottlocklin 9y ago

Go look up the term "Gish Gallop" -that's the substance of the "Russia is responsible for everything I don't like" conspiracy theory you're writing your dissertation on. I agree there is something there: just like there was "something there" when these same clowns were selling us the Iraq war. The "something" isn't actual evidence which exists in the corporeal world: it's manufactured nonsense. I mean, the very absurdity of the accusations on display here: OMG RUSSIANS DID THINGS ON TWITTER AND SOCIAL MEDIA. FWIIW same story with the "all of our intelligence agencies agree" dossier; basically, Russia Today exists. Russia Today, now listed under FARA laws. Somehow the WSJ and WaPo Saudi/Israeli amen chorus manages to escape FARA -wonder how they managed to do this?

aaron-lebo 9y ago
"Gish gallop" is a term for a technique used during debating that focuses on overwhelming one's opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments. That's not Gish Gallop. That's two sources that you didn't bother responding to. My conspiracy involves data, yours is blanket denial. Don't understand your motivations. Can we not be realists about how countries behave? I see nothing incompatible with Russia's actions in the recent past (annexing Crimea with unmarked soldiers) and the use of propaganda. But again, the difference is, I'm willing to test this. Do you just assume it's false without testing? Noticed in your other post that you called Khodorkovsky a "murderous clown". To my knowledge, his sin was being an oligarch who got on the wrong side of putin, went to jail for it, and now is a critic of him. Who did he murder? Why do you call him that? Do you believe putin (whom there is evidence that has killed political opponents) is guilty of this, too? Just trying to understand your motivations.
- scottlocklin 9y ago
  Khodorkovsky is a murderer, and anyone who denies this either doesn't know what he's talking about, or works for the same people that tout him in the media. All the "everything I don't like about the world is Russia's fault" gorp is gish gallop. The two things you linked are literally a clownish witch hunter indicting Russian nationals for ... trolling people on twitter. I do not take this seriously. The fact that anyone is physiologically capable of meeting this with other than hysterical laughter at the bald faced absurdity of it will probably remain beyond my ken.

AsyncAwait 9y ago

I believe his point was that even IF some ads were purchased, it’s not that big of a deal, since the potential negative impact isn’t that great and is done regularly by other countries that we curiously don’t seem to be outraged about, like KSA and Israel, which is a valid point and honestly in that context, pointing at the Russians seems a tad xenophobic, just because Russia isn’t under our sphere of influence. I also feel like it’s important to point out that this has nothing to do with defending Putin, but whether you’re willing to let your fear of the Ruskies deprive people of free speech rights, because by proxy of private companies being required to censor ie RT, it’s also having a chilling effect on independent creators on YouTube and elsewhere, so if you support all this because of fear of the Russians wanting to destroy Western democracy, in a way you’re letting them win.

Profragile 9y ago

Which country, do you believe, don't do everything in their power to impact elections in other countries which they have to deal with? Why wouldn't Russia want someone in the US who is already working with them vs someone new who they don't know they can trust? https://youtu.be/XsFR8DbSRQE https://youtu.be/XsFR8DbSRQE