Cont: Trump et al continued “2020 election” conspiracy theories

Status
Not open for further replies.
smartcooky said:
Seekrit Sauce.

Sorry, unless they are prepared to put their name behind their opinion, they are not a source.
Click to expand...

It's sort of like bigfooters citing "reports" as if some rando credule's story of things going blurry in the woods holds gravitas. Again, claims are not evidence no matter how many claims there are; claims require evidence.
 
Checkmite said:
Nobody is contesting the election result in Tennessee, so why would a hypothetical election fraudster set off a bomb there as opposed to, say, Michigan or Georgia?
Click to expand...


So far no reason. That could change if voting machines were in there. I said it was some FB person's idle musing.
 
Checkmite said:
Well, this wouldn't really be a "false flag attack" because it was just a bit of creative writing, insofar as "Operation Northwoods" never actually happened.
Click to expand...



True and Operation Northwoods has helped many uninformed scoffers grasp the fact that FFA exists in the minds of men.
 
Bubba said:
I think they omitted this one:


Operation Northwoods
Operation Northwoods was a proposed false flag operation against the Cuban government that originated within the U.S. Department of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States government in 1962. The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency or other U.S. government operatives to both stage and actually commit acts of terrorism against American military and civilian targets, blaming them on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba.

More at "Wikipedia"
Click to expand...

Something that I think is fairly common sense--conspiracies and false flag events do indeed occur. This does not mean that you can credibly suppose the existence of one without evidence of that particular one.
 
Bubba said:
So far no reason. That could change if voting machines were in there. I said it was some FB person's idle musing.
Click to expand...

So what led you to be so eager to bring "the idle musings of some FB person" here as if it it deserved consideration without further confirmation?

This one guy I saw on facebook was sure it had to do with chemtrails. Should I be digging into that here?
 
gnome said:
So what led you to be so eager to bring "the idle musings of some FB person" here as if it it deserved consideration without further confirmation?

This one guy I saw on facebook was sure it had to do with chemtrails. Should I be digging into that here?
Click to expand...
My neighbor's sister's best friend's chihuahua saw bigfoot stealing Trump votes from a van full of Jimmy John's sandwiches.

Why don't you believe me?
 
Meadmaker said:
Yep. It's just like all those other false flag attacks, like.........uhhhmmmm.......you know. Those others.
Click to expand...

Just to poke at the concept... false flag operations certainly have happened a number of times in the past. I've been under the impression that the term itself comes from a practice of hostile ships hoisting a friendly flag to lure in/get close to prey, for that matter. That certain groups love to invoke such without any actual evidence and little to no real justification beyond that it would be unpleasant to accept does not negate that.

Bubba said:
Please see above.
Click to expand...

Hmm? You specified to compare the two. So I did. What you poked towards in the "above" of your post has little relevance to that.


Bubba said:
Well, the difference in the search results are rather "noteworthy".

Google is already known for (proven) restricting info for political motives

False Flag Attacks are the epitome of "political motive".

Googles search results for "List false flag attacks" does not include the attacks which DuckDuckGo lists, although some there are unproven assertions.

Its fair to say google downplays the existence of false flag attacks. That is political.

A sample of a more balanced view, with dozens of instances:
Click to expand...

It's possible that your searches came up with a different list than mine, given how Google search, for example, works at last check. There wasn't much meaningful difference on the first pages, for me, as noted, so no, I'm not seeing a meaningful downplay of the existence of false flag attacks via google. Given that wikipedia's page on such was literally the top of the list for Google, and that includes examples of such, your accusation looks like utter bs from here.

Also, you citing Hang The Bankers doesn't actually help your case much.

Overall, we rate Hang the Bankers a Questionable Source based on the promotion of conspiracies and an extreme right-wing bias in reporting.
Click to expand...

That false flag operations exist does not automatically mean that any particular conspiracy theory that invokes them is credible, of course. Also, it's probably worth noting that any real or imagined denial of false flag as a tactic these days is exactly because of how flagrantly it's been misused by people who are truly not concerned with the way things actually are compared to how concerned they are with gaining the psychological/emotional benefits offered by figuring out/believing/pushing conspiracy theories. That you cite conspiracy theory pushers who are reasonably likely to be frantically trying to undo the damage that they and the rest of those like them have done to their credibility by making a big deal out of a triviality isn't actually all that helpful to your case.
 
Last edited:
Bubba said:
So far no reason. That could change if voting machines were in there. I said it was some FB person's idle musing.
Click to expand...

I'm sure there were lots of voting machines in there. Tons and tons of them. Your FB friend just blew this case wide open and now Trump will get to stay president.
 
gnome said:
Something that I think is fairly common sense--conspiracies and false flag events do indeed occur. This does not mean that you can credibly suppose the existence of one without evidence of that particular one.
Click to expand...



The wisest investigator must consider all possibilities.


Those who finally learn FFA is a real thing and always a possibility gain awareness and wisdom, and they can never unsee that truth.

I sure wont be calling on you to investigate a bombing that has political ramifications.


I'm not referring to Nashville. Some FB nobody did that.
 
gnome said:
So what led you to be so eager to bring "the idle musings of some FB person" here as if it it deserved consideration without further confirmation?
Click to expand...


What do you have against looking into possibilities?

Lemme guess, you adore CNN.
 
Aridas said:
Just to poke at the concept... false flag operations certainly have happened a number of times in the past. I've been under the impression that the term itself comes from a practice of hostile ships hoisting a friendly flag to lure in/get close to prey, for that matter. That certain groups love to invoke such without any actual evidence and little to no real justification beyond that it would be unpleasant to accept does not negate that.



Hmm? You specified to compare the two. So I did. What you poked towards in the "above" of your post has little relevance to that.




It's possible that your searches came up with a different list than mine, given how Google search, for example, works at last check. There wasn't much meaningful difference on the first pages, for me, as noted, so no, I'm not seeing a meaningful downplay of the existence of false flag attacks via google. Given that wikipedia's page on such was literally the top of the list for Google, and that includes examples of such, your accusation looks like utter bs from here.

Also, you citing Hang The Bankers doesn't actually help your case much.



That false flag operations exist does not automatically mean that any particular conspiracy theory that invokes them is credible, of course. Also, it's probably worth noting that any real or imagined denial of false flag as a tactic these days is exactly because of how flagrantly it's been misused by people who are truly not concerned with the way things actually are compared to how concerned they are with gaining the psychological/emotional benefits offered by figuring out/believing/pushing conspiracy theories. That you cite conspiracy theory pushers who are reasonably likely to be frantically trying to undo the damage that they and the rest of those like them have done to their credibility by making a big deal out of a triviality isn't actually all that helpful to your case.
Click to expand...



You'll go far with that. Running to mediabiascheck or snopes etc isnt exactly doing your own research on FFA. Did you even read the list of (claimed) FFA?
 
Last edited:
Aridas said:
How far as it taken you?
Click to expand...


I know better that to trust a search engine known for restricting access to information, for one thing.

It sounds like you havent learned that. Its probably not your fault.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

.....

Where the hell is the Durham Report?
Click to expand...

Over at Townhall, the ultra conservative web site, over the past several months many of the commenters, when discussing election fraud, would say something like, "Just you wait till the Durham report comes out?" Like the Dems with the Mueller report, they pinned their hopes on the fact that a Republican doing an investigation was bound to find all sorts of hanky-panky. And, like the Dems, they got zip. Boo-Hoo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom