Shadowgate

Dohnjoe

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

if i wanted to be lied to for 1hr 20 mins like i was an idiot I would watch the GOP convention.

But how do you know its a lie if you haven't watched it, how could someone possibly have the required basic critical thinking and common sense to know such a video is a bunch of far-flung nonsense?

If you haven't watched a video on how everything of Trump's making is actually a giant secret suspiciously vague conspiracy how can you truly know? /s

King Mob

Your posts are becoming incoherent and rambly.

enno99 wrote: »

LOL odd you cant resign yourself to the face he had nothing to do with it you need him/Qanaon whoever to be involved so you can jut use your usual rubbish

But I have already explained to you why Alex Jones and his bull**** farm are relevant here. I've already pointed out that you lied and said they weren't involved.

If someone works for a bull**** farm like Info Wars, then they can't be a good, honest journalist. It's that simple.

You however seem to buy into Info Wars and their propganda, so you don't see why rational people reach this conclusion.

enno99 wrote: »

You even latched on to the antisemite crap for good measure

But antisemites have been clinging onto this video as it is compatible with their conspiracy theories.
To me, and most rational people, it's a red flag.
Are you denying this?

You have previously claimed that all of these antisemites are fake and are plants to discredit the movie...

enno99 wrote: »

Im not watching it because

Then you would have to think for yourself and point out what you find is BS

I don't watch it for the same reason I don't watch UFO videos and flat earth videos.
It's obvious nonsense about a nonsense theory from people who spout nonsense.

enno99 wrote: »

Im not demanding answers its on topic you brought up double standards
then you engage in the same

But you are demanding answers, it is off topic and you haven't actually addressed the points put to you. You're doing your level best to avoid them.

enno99 wrote: »

I mean its only about an hour or so
you have spent probably that amount replying to the thread

And I've asked you several questions that could have been answered with a simple yes or no...

enno99 wrote: »

I guess you would rather have some hack from the NYT do your thinking for you

I suppose I should be getting my news from Info Wars then?
Buy some of those brain force pills too?

ohnonotgmail

Dohnjoe wrote: »

But how do you know its a lie if you haven't watched it, how could someone possibly have the required basic critical thinking and common sense to know such a video is a bunch of far-flung nonsense?

If you haven't watched a video on how everything of Trump's making is actually a giant secret suspiciously vague conspiracy how can you truly know? /s

it is a chance i am willing to take

enno99

King Mob wrote: »

I've already pointed out that you lied and said they weren't involved.






?

Your being really obnoxious
I told you Alex Jones didnt have any input content or monetary

srcoll to the end of the video look at the credits
point out where infowars or Alex Jones are mentioned
Hes an egomaniac do you think he would have his name left out

King Mob

enno99 wrote: »

Your being really obnoxious
I told you Alex Jones didnt have any input content or monetary

srcoll to the end of the video look at the credits
point out where infowars or Alex Jones are mentioned
Hes an egomaniac do you think he would have his name left out

I'm being obnoxious because I keep pointing out how you are misrepresenting me.
That's understandably frustrating.

Like now you are accusing me of saying Alex Jones had creative or financial input. I never claimed any such thing.

I have explained to you many times why he and his bull**** farm are relevant. You've ignore that each time like you've been dodging most points.
You also lied and said they weren't involved for some reason.

If you are getting annoyed, maybe try to stop rushing to misrepresent me and actually engage with my points.

enno99

King Mob wrote: »

I'm being obnoxious because I keep pointing out how you are misrepresenting me.
That's understandably frustrating.

Like now you are accusing me of saying Alex Jones had creative or financial input. I never claimed any such thing.

I have explained to you many times why he and his bull**** farm are relevant. You've ignore that each time like you've been dodging most points.
You also lied and said they weren't involved for some reason.

If you are getting annoyed, maybe try to stop rushing to misrepresent me and actually engage with my points.

Do you have a persecution complex ? I never said that

Only relevant in your head because they had no input to the film in question

Your just being a dishonest weasel

King Mob

enno99 wrote: »

Do you have a persecution complex ? I never said that

I told you Alex Jones didnt have any input content or monetary

I never claimed otherwise.

Why bring it up?

enno99 wrote: »

Only relevant in your head because they had no input to the film in question

But I've explained why they are relevant. You just ignored the point because you can't address it.

They are relevant because Alex Jones and his Info Wars are bull**** merchants.
An honest, competent reporter and investigator would not work for them because they are scumbag propagandists.
The lady you are defending worked for them.
Therefore we know that she is not an honest or competent reporter.

enno99 wrote: »

Your just being a dishonest weasel

Lol. Sure. If that's how you're justifying your constant dodging and misrepresentations.

Dohnjoe

King Mob wrote: »

They are relevant because Alex Jones and his Info Wars are bull**** merchants.
An honest, competent reporter and investigator would not work for them because they are scumbag propagandists.
The lady you are defending worked for them.
Therefore we know that she is not an honest or competent reporter.

"Reporter", "investigative journalist", "documentary film-maker"

Like the "doctor" on the AJ show

King Mob

Dohnjoe wrote: »

"Reporter", "investigative journalist", "documentary film-maker"

Like the "doctor" on the AJ show

At this stage I'm not sure what he's arguing.
Whether she's the only actual honest and competent person who worked for Alex Jones and Info Wars.
Or Alex Jones and Info Wars are as valid and trustworthy as the New York Times.

Both are pretty silly positions.

enno99

King Mob wrote: »

I never claimed otherwise.

Why bring it up?


But I've explained why they are relevant. You just ignored the point because you can't address it.

They are relevant because Alex Jones and his Info Wars are bull**** merchants.
An honest, competent reporter and investigator would not work for them because they are scumbag propagandists.
The lady you are defending worked for them.
Therefore we know that she is not an honest or competent reporter.

Lol. Sure. If that's how you're justifying your constant dodging and misrepresentations.

Jesus wept

King Mob

enno99 wrote: »

Jesus wept

An excellent and verbose rebuttal.
You sure got me alright.
Good job.

My points remain.
This film is obvious bull**** about a bull**** theory by a bull**** artist.
There's too many red flags for rational people to take it seriously.

But the gullible seem to be eating it up and throwing money at her.
Maybe I'm in the wrong business.

Dohnjoe

King Mob wrote: »

But the gullible seem to be eating it up and throwing money at her.
Maybe I'm in the wrong business.

It can be very lucrative, some of these "documentaries" garner millions of views. Jones is a multi-millionaire. Where there's money, there will always be parasites.

King Mob

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It can be very lucrative, some of these "documentaries" garner millions of views. Jones is a multi-millionaire. Where there's money, there will always be parasites.

As Enno and other conspiracy theorists said, nothing wrong with getting paid for your work.

Even if your work is knowingly spreading bull****...

enno99

King Mob wrote: »

.

But the gullible seem to be eating it up and throwing money at her.
Maybe I'm in the wrong business.

You wont have any problem on the bull**** aspect of it

King Mob

enno99 wrote: »

You wont have any problem on the bull**** aspect of it

Why?
Feel free to point to anything I've said that's untrue.

I can point to plenty in your case.

enno99

King Mob wrote: »

Why?
Feel free to point to anything I've said that's untrue.

I can point to plenty in your case.

LOL Thats the problem with trying to be a clever wordsmith weasel you start to believe your own rubbish

King Mob

enno99 wrote: »

LOL Thats the problem with trying to be a clever wordsmith weasel you start to believe your own rubbish

Yup. Insults instead of supporting your accusations.

Pretty typical.

enno99

King Mob wrote: »

Yup. Insults instead of supporting your accusations.

Pretty typical.

Are you saying that bull**** = lies ?

King Mob

enno99 wrote: »

Are you saying that bull**** = lies ?

No. Bull**** isn't necessarily exclusively lying. There's many ways to bull**** including twisting the truth with spin.

Again you are demanding answers to random, poorly written questions, yet still refuse to answer anything but to you.
Again this is pretty typical.

Dohnjoe

enno99 wrote: »

Are you saying that bull**** = lies ?

In the case of these types of conspiracy videos: they'll often use few facts or pieces of info and then carefully frame, spin and distort that to fit a particular narrative, always leaving out key context, and relying heavily on tenuous links. It's highly dishonest stuff.

Once you know the tricks and techniques it's fairly easy to produce anything, at this stage I could make a killer e.g. 9/11 conspiracy video, but unfortunately I have some sort of conscience.

ohnonotgmail

Dohnjoe wrote: »

In the case of these types of conspiracy videos: they'll often use few facts or pieces of info and then carefully frame, spin and distort that to fit a particular narrative, always leaving out key context, and relying heavily on tenuous links. It's highly dishonest stuff.

Once you know the tricks and techniques it's fairly easy to produce anything, at this stage I could make a killer e.g. 9/11 conspiracy video, but unfortunately I have some sort of conscience.

con science? it is all becoming very clear

King Mob

Dohnjoe wrote: »

In the case of these types of conspiracy videos: they'll often use few facts or pieces of info and then carefully frame, spin and distort that to fit a particular narrative, always leaving out key context, and relying heavily on tenuous links. It's highly dishonest stuff.

Or they make the claims veiled enough that they can say one thing, but also have complete deniability about it if it's convenient.

For Example: "Is the Deep State controlled by the Jews?"

They're not actually saying the Jews are behind it. They;re just posing the question.
And on the plus side, you can now appeal to antisemites without openly saying anything antisemitic.

enno99

Dohnjoe wrote: »

In the case of these types of conspiracy videos: they'll often use few facts or pieces of info and then carefully frame, spin and distort that to fit a particular narrative, always leaving out key context, and relying heavily on tenuous links. It's highly dishonest stuff.

Once you know the tricks and techniques it's fairly easy to produce anything, at this stage I could make a killer e.g. 9/11 conspiracy video, but unfortunately I have some sort of conscience.

You mean like CNN and the rest of the "normal media" as you like call them

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCDsBS2Ljqk

CNN Political Analyst Joe Lockhart criticized Nick Sandmann after the Covington Catholic graduate gave his speech during the Republican National Convention Tuesday night, calling him “a snot-nosed entitled kid from Kentucky.”

https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/25/cnn-analyst-attacks-nick-sandmann/

They cant help themselves

The Washington Post on Friday agreed to settle a monster $250 million lawsuit filed by Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann over its botched coverage of his 2019 encounter with a Native American elder.

It’s the teen’s second win in a whopping $800 million defamation battle against a number of news outlets including the Washington Post, CNN, ABC, CBS, The Guardian, The Hill and NBC.

https://nypost.com/2020/07/24/washington-post-settles-250m-suit-with-covington-teen-nick-sandmann/

So you have "normal media" trying to destroy a teenagers life
Scumbags as you guys like to say

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIKhWzP3TC0

Covering up for rapists and paedophiles scumbags
Are all who work for them scumbags ?

Care to guess what they earn Cooper/Cuomo/Madow etc

Just a couple of from a long list

enno99

King Mob wrote: »

I've already pointed out that you lied and said they weren't involved.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hehsQlHxt2M

So he says he wasnt involved in the film

Dohnjoe

enno99 wrote: »

You mean like CNN and the rest of the "normal media" as you like call them

CNN is a news outlet, like Fox news, etc.

These news channels all sit at various points on a spectrum of media quality, some are higher, more accountable, more credible than others

You are referring to a conspiracy video made by an Infowars pundit on Youtube, something that sits at the worst end of that spectrum (is quite possibly right off it). If you have difficulty discerning the difference then you may be the target audience for that type of Youtube conspiracy video.

enno99

Dohnjoe wrote: »

CNN is a news outlet, like Fox news, etc.

These news channels all sit at various points on a spectrum of media quality, some are higher, more accountable, more credible than others

You are referring to a conspiracy video made by an Infowars pundit on Youtube, something that sits at the worst end of that spectrum (is quite possibly right off it). If you have difficulty discerning the difference then you may be the target audience for that type of Youtube conspiracy video.

I just spat our my coffee

enno99

Dohnjoe wrote: »

CNN is a news outlet, like Fox news, etc.

These news channels all sit at various points on a spectrum of media quality, some are higher, more accountable, more credible than others

You are referring to a conspiracy video made by an Infowars pundit on Youtube, something that sits at the worst end of that spectrum (is quite possibly right off it). If you have difficulty discerning the difference then you may be the target audience for that type of Youtube conspiracy video.

Is it ok to be scumbags if your a "news outlet" ?

Dohnjoe

enno99 wrote: »

Is it ok to be scumbags if your a "news outlet" ?

Fox news is pretty bad but I don't know if I'd call them straight up scumbags..

enno99

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Fox news is pretty bad but I don't know if I'd call them straight up scumbags..

And the examples I gave you ?

Dohnjoe

enno99 wrote: »

And the examples I gave you ?

My take-away is: don't watch trashy news like CNN or Fox. And certainly stay away from ultra trashy YT conspiracy videos by ex-models on Infowars that get insto-banned by major platforms for being hot garbage and borderline hate speech