3 ms·

> OG told his online companions that the government hid horrible truths from the public. He claimed, according to the members, that the government knew in advan

by tivert 4y ago

> OG told his online companions that the government hid horrible truths from the public. He claimed, according to the members, that the government knew in advance that a white supremacist intended to go on a shooting rampage at a Buffalo supermarket in May 2022. The attack left 10 dead, all of them Black, and wounded three more. OG said federal law enforcement officials let the killings proceed so they could argue for increased funding, a baseless notion that the member said he believes and considers an example of OG’s penetrating insights about the depth of government corruption. Why is that a "baseless notion" (which is stated in the newspaper's voice)? It might be far-fetched, but this "OG" guy had proven access to top secret documents, and (IIRC) that shooter left all kinds of documents and plans online. It's not inconceivable that "federal law enforcement officials" picked up something that told them a shooting was likely to happen, didn't act, and this guy was privy to some document or conversation about that. Weaseling "baseless" in there reeks of condescendingly making sure to tell the plebs exactly what you want them to think at every opportunity.

v0idzer0 4y ago
[flagged]
- whythre 4y ago
  Seems like every whistleblower can just be called a false flag op, then. Doesn’t seem like a very substantive criticism, so unless you can show these ties you are talking about.
felixgallo 4y ago
'baseless' is perfectly right; there's no basis for it. The guy said he had a theory. Guy goes on to yell racist and antisemitic words while shooting a rifle. Given that there have been literally tens of thousands of ridiculous right wing conspiracy theories over the last few years (plandemic! Hillary executed in gitmo (again)! Biden body double! Deep state! Venezuelan dictators!), and this is the same old Our Enemies Are Amoral Supervillains Who Victimize Us, why should anyone legitimize this one?
- tivert 4y ago
  > 'baseless' is perfectly right; there's no basis for it. No. The issue is: how can you tell that? Do you have top-secret clearance to see what this "OG" guy saw? Do these Washington Post reporters? "Baseless" means it has no foundation at all, not that it has a foundation inaccessible to you. It's impossible for us to reasonably distinguish between those two with this guy. There's a serious possibility he had access to scandalous secrets due to his position and security clearance.
  - felixgallo 4y ago
    and indeed, it has no foundation at all. The aforementioned jew-hating racist who has made these accusations has presented zero evidence, despite theoretically having a position, security clearance, means and motive. So not only is it part and parcel of what has been an avalanche of lunatic right wing jew-hating racist conspiracy theories, but it doesn't even come with a basic sop towards proof. It's dark right wing fantasy cosplay and it's great that the media is beginning to label it as such, rather than legitimize it with 'well gosh it could be true that the FBI is in a grand conspiracy to murder black people for money'.
    - tivert 4y ago
      > The aforementioned jew-hating racist... You keep saying that, but nothing written in the source doesn't go that far. The closest it comes is to say he made a video where he yelled "a series of racial and antisemitic slurs into the camera...," but there's no other context. Saying stuff like that certainly indicates he almost certainly rejects modern liberal identity politics, but it's quite possible he's was just being tastelessly edgy and transgressive for his friends, and nothing presented disconfirms that possibility (though I can't watch the videos through the paywall bypass). I'd expect if it was clear he was a "jew-hating racist" the article would have outright said he was. > ...who has made these accusations has presented zero evidence, despite theoretically having a position, security clearance, means and motive. The accussation was reported secondhand (OG -> interviewee -> journalist). As far as I can tell, this "OG" guy is probably on run or getting ready to be arrested. Proving that claim (apparently made some time in the past) is probably the farthest thing from his mind right now.
mannerheim 4y ago
Back during the Obama administration, one of the reasons (as mentioned in a subsequently leaked memo) the ATF was gunwalking was so that the guns used in subsequent crimes could be pointed to as a justification for expanding ATF powers.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

by tivert 4y ago

v0idzer0 4y ago

[flagged]

whythre 4y ago
Seems like every whistleblower can just be called a false flag op, then. Doesn’t seem like a very substantive criticism, so unless you can show these ties you are talking about.

felixgallo 4y ago

'baseless' is perfectly right; there's no basis for it. The guy said he had a theory. Guy goes on to yell racist and antisemitic words while shooting a rifle. Given that there have been literally tens of thousands of ridiculous right wing conspiracy theories over the last few years (plandemic! Hillary executed in gitmo (again)! Biden body double! Deep state! Venezuelan dictators!), and this is the same old Our Enemies Are Amoral Supervillains Who Victimize Us, why should anyone legitimize this one?

tivert 4y ago
> 'baseless' is perfectly right; there's no basis for it. No. The issue is: how can you tell that? Do you have top-secret clearance to see what this "OG" guy saw? Do these Washington Post reporters? "Baseless" means it has no foundation at all, not that it has a foundation inaccessible to you. It's impossible for us to reasonably distinguish between those two with this guy. There's a serious possibility he had access to scandalous secrets due to his position and security clearance.
- felixgallo 4y ago
  and indeed, it has no foundation at all. The aforementioned jew-hating racist who has made these accusations has presented zero evidence, despite theoretically having a position, security clearance, means and motive. So not only is it part and parcel of what has been an avalanche of lunatic right wing jew-hating racist conspiracy theories, but it doesn't even come with a basic sop towards proof. It's dark right wing fantasy cosplay and it's great that the media is beginning to label it as such, rather than legitimize it with 'well gosh it could be true that the FBI is in a grand conspiracy to murder black people for money'.
  - tivert 4y ago
    > The aforementioned jew-hating racist... You keep saying that, but nothing written in the source doesn't go that far. The closest it comes is to say he made a video where he yelled "a series of racial and antisemitic slurs into the camera...," but there's no other context. Saying stuff like that certainly indicates he almost certainly rejects modern liberal identity politics, but it's quite possible he's was just being tastelessly edgy and transgressive for his friends, and nothing presented disconfirms that possibility (though I can't watch the videos through the paywall bypass). I'd expect if it was clear he was a "jew-hating racist" the article would have outright said he was. > ...who has made these accusations has presented zero evidence, despite theoretically having a position, security clearance, means and motive. The accussation was reported secondhand (OG -> interviewee -> journalist). As far as I can tell, this "OG" guy is probably on run or getting ready to be arrested. Proving that claim (apparently made some time in the past) is probably the farthest thing from his mind right now.

mannerheim 4y ago

Back during the Obama administration, one of the reasons (as mentioned in a subsequently leaked memo) the ATF was gunwalking was so that the guns used in subsequent crimes could be pointed to as a justification for expanding ATF powers.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]