ADVERTISEMENT

The Twitter Files

Ponca Dan

MegaPoke is insane
Gold Member
Dec 7, 2003
20,494
19,221
113
I do not have a Twitter account so my access to the Files has been reliant on links provided by others. I have mostly seen the reports by Matt Taibbi and occasionally Bari Weiss.

One of the biggest surprises to me was to learn that initially the folks at Twitter were very reluctant to participate in the Russia, Russia, Russia scam being forced on them by the intelligence services (the FBI was the “bellybutton” of the scam as one agent put it), and Democrat politicians (as File 14 exposes). I had assumed the people at Twitter were fully on board with the intelligence services drive to destroy Donald Trump. It does seem some of the Twitter higher ups joined in the scam with enthusiasm, but it was not universal throughout the company. Later it seems it became more company-wide, but it took a degree of threatening pressure from the FBI and the Democrats to get there.

That came as a surprise to me. Has anyone else noticed it?
 
What was it Schumer told the world?

Something like the intelligence community having the ability to screw you six ways to Sunday.
It’s interesting you referred to that. In his latest issue of *System Update* on Rumble, Glenn Greenwald points to the interview where Schumer uttered those words as the defining interview of the noticeable breakdown of journalistic integrity in America. He is aghast that Rachael Maddow not only agreed with Schumer but openly cheered the clear evidence that we’d become a police state. He is utterly forlorn to witness the death of traditional anti-government excess which has been so much a part of what used to be leftist thought.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OUSOONER67
It’s interesting you referred to that. In his latest issue of *System Update* on Rumble, Glenn Greenwald points to the interview where Schumer uttered those words as the defining interview of the noticeable breakdown of journalistic integrity in America. He is aghast that Rachael Maddow not only agreed with Schumer but openly cheered the clear evidence that we’d become a police state. He is utterly forlorn to witness the death of traditional anti-government excess which has been so much a part of what used to be leftist thought.

I was shocked he said it out loud when referencing a sitting President.

I was more shocked how it was just brushed off without thinking of the implications.

If they’ll take out our President, there aren’t any lines they won’t cross.
 
I do not have a Twitter account so my access to the Files has been reliant on links provided by others. I have mostly seen the reports by Matt Taibbi and occasionally Bari Weiss.

One of the biggest surprises to me was to learn that initially the folks at Twitter were very reluctant to participate in the Russia, Russia, Russia scam being forced on them by the intelligence services (the FBI was the “bellybutton” of the scam as one agent put it), and Democrat politicians (as File 14 exposes). I had assumed the people at Twitter were fully on board with the intelligence services drive to destroy Donald Trump. It does seem some of the Twitter higher ups joined in the scam with enthusiasm, but it was not universal throughout the company. Later it seems it became more company-wide, but it took a degree of threatening pressure from the FBI and the Democrats to get there.

That came as a surprise to me. Has anyone else noticed it?
Yes, Twitter was having multiple stories released about canning conservatives. Same with Facebook and Google. It wasnt a secret.
 
I was shocked he said it out loud when referencing a sitting President.

I was more shocked how it was just brushed off without thinking of the implications.

If they’ll take out our President, there aren’t any lines they won’t cross.
Here’s a 10 minute segment of the Greenwald show I was talking about. Unfortunately it comes after his showing of the Maddow/Schumer interview, although he references it early on. This should be on national tv every night. But, alas, it’s being ignored. At our peril. You should watch this:



 
Last edited:
OuR sLow 1o will be along directly to say what they always say, "ThAtS DiFfErEnT" and its all just another "RiGhT WiNg CoNsPiRaCy ThEoRy"
Right Cank?

giphy.gif
 
OuR sLow 1o will be along directly to say what they always say, "ThAtS DiFfErEnT" and its all just another "RiGhT WiNg CoNsPiRaCy ThEoRy"
Right Cank?

giphy.gif
You may be correct, they may come along sooner or later. What so flabbergasts me is the “Slow 10,” as you call them, think of themselves as leftists and progressives, but they are completely blind to the fact they have become the new right. They cheer our participation in war, call for financing it wherever the security state desires; they cheer for the empowerment of the surveillance state, are obsessed with the hunger for more censorship and furious against any voice that objects. Those have traditionally been viewed as right-wing thinking, while unrelenting opposition has traditionally been left-wing practice. It is ironic that authoritarianism they advocate - dare I call it fascism? - has always been considered a reason for leftist opposition. But today they embrace it with loving care. People like Glenn Greenwald are the real leftists, they have not abandoned the values. The Slow 10 usually sneer at those leftist/liberal values, fully unaware they have been manipulated into becoming what they say they hate.
 
Here’s a 10 minute segment of the Greenwald show I was talking about. Unfortunately it comes after his showing of the Maddow/Schumer interview, although he references it early on. This should be on national tv every night. But, alas, it’s being ignored. At our peril. You should watch this:




Thanks dude.

There weren’t any changes after the Church Committee other than intellegence getting better at hiding what they were doing.

Mockingbird is alive and well.

Cointelpro and FamilyJewels is the same shit they’re pulling on Trump and Musk.

Shamrock is even bigger.

It’s not going to change either.

They’re so much more advanced than we can know.
 
You may be correct, they may come along sooner or later. What so flabbergasts me is the “Slow 10,” as you call them, think of themselves as leftists and progressives, but they are completely blind to the fact they have become the new right. They cheer our participation in war, call for financing it wherever the security state desires; they cheer for the empowerment of the surveillance state, are obsessed with the hunger for more censorship and furious against any voice that objects. Those have traditionally been viewed as right-wing thinking, while unrelenting opposition has traditionally been left-wing practice. It is ironic that authoritarianism they advocate - dare I call it fascism? - has always been considered a reason for leftist opposition. But today they embrace it with loving care. People like Glenn Greenwald are the real leftists, they have not abandoned the values. The Slow 10 usually sneer at those leftist/liberal values, fully unaware they have been manipulated into becoming what they say they hate.


So when @2012Bearcat rambles on about easily-manipulated leftists…he is actually talking about you and yours…


boom-mind-blown.gif



How did you handle such an offensive revelation…what with your dementia-laden passive aggression and all…and whatnot…


Man…sucks to be Dan tonight…..be easy on him.






carry on
 
So when @2012Bearcat rambles on about easily-manipulated leftists…he is actually talking about you and yours…


boom-mind-blown.gif



How did you handle such an offensive revelation…what with your dementia-laden passive aggression and all…and whatnot…


Man…sucks to be Dan tonight…..be easy on him.






carry on

Get back in the basement biscuit boy, you're really flashing your ass with this stupidity.
 
So when @2012Bearcat rambles on about easily-manipulated leftists…he is actually talking about you and yours…


boom-mind-blown.gif



How did you handle such an offensive revelation…what with your dementia-laden passive aggression and all…and whatnot…


Man…sucks to be Dan tonight…..be easy on him.






carry on
I have not thought of myself as an advocate of right-wing or left-wing thought since at least 1968. It has been a revelation to me recently how in many respects the two sides have reversed political positions. Opposition to war, opposition to widespread government surveillance of the citizenry, hard core advocacy of free speech, all things that used to be the hallmark of leftist ideology, are things seen only by the “far right” today. (With the exception of the dwindling numbers of old school liberals like Glenn Greenwald.) Embracing authoritarianism comes from the left, including the far left. The only conclusion one can legitimately draw is that people who think they are left wing in reality have become the new right.
 
tumblr_n4ubivzRmB1ssnqqgo1_400.gif



Too easy of a target. No substance…an empty vessel of laziness.







carry on
I hope you realize you’re describing your own participation on this thread. As someone who claims to be of high intelligence you have displayed none of it. It’s difficult to have a meaningful conversation with you when your comments are substance free.
 
I have not thought of myself as an advocate of right-wing or left-wing thought since at least 1968. It has been a revelation to me recently how in many respects the two sides have reversed political positions. Opposition to war, opposition to widespread government surveillance of the citizenry, hard core advocacy of free speech, all things that used to be the hallmark of leftist ideology, are things seen only by the “far right” today. (With the exception of the dwindling numbers of old school liberals like Glenn Greenwald.) Embracing authoritarianism comes from the left, including the far left. The only conclusion one can legitimately draw is that people who think they are left wing in reality have become the new right.
This all depends on what you consider left right. Never did find this as good way of trying to establish position on a political scale.

I would suggest you define your left right scale.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LAY THE WOODY
This all depends on what you consider left right. Never did find this as good way of trying to establish position on a political scale.

I would suggest you define your left right scale.
I’m too lazy to delve deeply into definitions. I’ll go with the old-time explanation of a libertarian (which I have considered myself to be since roughly 1968). I was/am extreme “right-wing” on the economic scale: hard core laissez faire free marketeer, and extreme left-wing on social issues: hard core anti-government interference in one’s personal life (which includes being anti-war, anti-government surveillance, and strong advocate for free speech, etc.).

I’m fully aware that some groups that people call extreme right-wing, take the John Birch Society as an example, have the same anti-war etc. attitude, but in general those have been considered elements of left-wing thinking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LAY THE WOODY
Denial is a river in Africa. Acceptance is the first step forward.


Proud of you. Dan.







carry on

Hey, have you put together that list of people I can trust to give me verified truth yet?

Please bro, I’m out here in the darkness just reading everything.
 
I’m too lazy to delve deeply into definitions. I’ll go with the old-time explanation of a libertarian (which I have considered myself to be since roughly 1968). I was/am extreme “right-wing” on the economic scale: hard core laissez faire free marketeer, and extreme left-wing on social issues: hard core anti-government interference in one’s personal life (which includes being anti-war, anti-government surveillance, and strong advocate for free speech, etc.).

I’m fully aware that some groups that people call extreme right-wing, take the John Birch Society as an example, have the same anti-war etc. attitude, but in general those have been considered elements of left-wing thinking.
Anti-government interference is right-wing.

If you scale authoritarian to the left free society to the right, those are right-wing policies.

If you scale socialism to the left and capitalism to the right, those are right-wing ideas.

The problem you have is it all doesn't just fit on a left right scale; you have to make multiple scales to make it work to judge position in politics.

A free society is by nature anti-government surveillance, free speech and anti-war. These are right wing ideals when presented as authoritarian vs free society. Free societies also gravitate to capitalism, as socialism is by nature authoritarian.

You my friend are an extreme right-wing ideolog.

R.3a9fc1e702c9e617df11b9c77bc02b1e



Most republicans have a position for government involvement in things (not a free society), which moves them more to the center with the Democrats taking the left-hand spectrum of the chart. It's why I laugh when people say Biden is centrist, he is about as left as you are right. Over time Dems and Republicans just move left and right on the scales. Right now, Dems are pegged left and moving as fast they can farther left, dragging Republicans with them. As dems move left so do Republicans. There are many of us trying to pull the scales back right as we have seen what going all the way left can do to country, and we want no part of that. This is the infighting you are seeing in the Republican party. If the republicans can be dragged to the right then the dems will do so as well, and the steady path off the deep end of society can be stopped, but its only the begining. It needs to be dragged back.

All of this is all predicated on how you learned to scale politics in the first place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iasooner2000
Anti-government interference is right-wing.

If you scale authoritarian to the left free society to the right, those are right-wing policies.

If you scale socialism to the left and capitalism to the right, those are right-wing ideas.

The problem you have is it all doesn't just fit on a left right scale; you have to make multiple scales to make it work to judge position in politics.

A free society is by nature anti-government surveillance, free speech and anti-war. These are right wing ideals when presented as authoritarian vs free society. Free societies also gravitate to capitalism, as socialism is by nature authoritarian.

You my friend are an extreme right-wing ideolog.

R.3a9fc1e702c9e617df11b9c77bc02b1e



Most republicans have a position for government involvement in things (not a free society), which moves them more to the center with the Democrats taking the left-hand spectrum of the chart. It's why I laugh when people say Biden is centrist, he is about as left as you are right. Over time Dems and Republicans just move left and right on the scales. Right now, Dems are pegged left and moving as fast they can farther left, dragging Republicans with them. As dems move left so do Republicans. There are many of us trying to pull the scales back right as we have seen what going all the way left can do to country, and we want no part of that. This is the infighting you are seeing in the Republican party. If the republicans can be dragged to the right then the dems will do so as well, and the steady path off the deep end of society can be stopped, but its only the begining. It needs to be dragged back.

All of this is all predicated on how you learned to scale politics in the first place.
Let me help you out…you’re really terrible at this…




Inset13.png
 
Let me help you out…you’re really terrible at this…




Inset13.png
Interesting spectrum, albeit seriously flawed. Communism and Fascism are elements of "total government." Anarchism is absence of government. Total government control cannot in any way be identified as an element of absence of government. A competent spectrum would have Communism and Fascism together on one end of the spetum and Anarchism on the other.
 
Interesting spectrum, albeit seriously flawed. Communism and Fascism are elements of "total government." Anarchism is absence of government. Total government control cannot in any way be identified as an element of absence of government. A competent spectrum would have Communism and Fascism together on one end of the spetum and Anarchism on the other.

Dan…your and others’ incessant need to sway the goalposts…or say fvck it and dig em up and just move em if you can’t win…

is thoroughly entertaining haha.



You’re LItEraL LeE going to try to paint the far right as an absence of government? lol…oh boy…Dan, even the most laissez-faire environment isn’t devoid of government. That’s just fvcking stupid.






carry on
 
Dan…your and others’ incessant need to sway the goalposts…or say fvck it and dig em up and just move em if you can’t win…

is thoroughly entertaining haha.



You’re LItEraL LeE going to try to paint the far right as an absence of government? lol…oh boy…Dan, even the most laissez-faire environment isn’t devoid of government. That’s just fvcking stupid.






carry on
Point to where I said your notion of the far right (fascism) is for absence of government, please. By the way there is an entire school of thought that argues the only way a laissez faire society can exist is if government is absent. It generlly goes by the moniker of "anarcho-capitlism." And I repeat: absence of government (anarchism), whether it be anarcho-socialism or anarcho-capitalism is the exact opposite of total government (communism or fascism). The argument between communists and fascists is not a moral one of whether government intervention in society is a good thing, they both believe it is. The argument is over which side gets to lord it over everybody else.
 
Point to where I said your notion of the far right (fascism) is for absence of government, please. By the way there is an entire school of thought that argues the only way a laissez faire society can exist is if government is absent. It generlly goes by the moniker of "anarcho-capitlism." And I repeat: absence of government (anarchism), whether it be anarcho-socialism or anarcho-capitalism is the exact opposite of total government (communism or fascism). The argument between communists and fascists is not a moral one of whether government intervention in society is a good thing, they both believe it is. The argument is over which side gets to lord it over everybody else.
Dan you nailed it as to why Fascist and Communists have a tendency to hate each other. It's not that they are much different on the scales, it's that one authoritarian must not allow another authoritarian. There is only room for one, and each will do anything to hold power. It's like putting two type A personalities in the same room, they will each try to cancel each other out. Or you could say it's like putting two apex predators in the same area. One will die, the other will be the apex predator.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iasooner2000
The problem with this is it’s linear; I was taught this same thing way back before laptops, as a circular argument wherein the further you go each direction you end up with Hitler in Stalin’s lap (or vice versa)
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT