Cracking down on fake news

by Ben Reilly Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:00 am

First topic message reminder :

Following the example of Mark Zuckerberg, who is quite notably Jewish, I wish to fight back against the fake news is that is making debate impossible, undermining our collective ability to discern the truth, and enabling tyrannical, intolerant and corrupt dictatorships not only in the United States but around the world.

To that end, let's begin discussion of sources that should not be allowed as original sources on NewsFix. Two that I've already named are non-negotiable -- Daily Wire and Infowars. These (and the rest) may only be used in article comments, not as the OP.

The basic criteria for a trustworthy news organization is really simple -- does it issue good-faith corrections, or does it not? As I've said ad infinitum et nauseum, everybody makes mistakes. If you're trying to be factual, you correct your mistakes. If you don't care about the truth, you don't bother correcting your inaccuracies, because they were the whole point all along.

Because so many people have falsely claimed that I'm merely cracking down, Hitler-style, on views I don't like, let's throw in some left-wing sites that were also identified -- BY SNOPES.COM -- of having spread falsehoods about Trump. They are:

www.truthexam.com - for falsely claiming Trump was bringing back "Negro" as an official U.S. government ethnic designation (in fact, it's still used on some forms)

shareblue.com - for falsely claiming Trump violated respectful protocol during a U.S. military ceremony.

This, as I have to point out again, is my forum. I wouldn't come to your house and try to persuade you to do something that goes against your ethics. Please don't try to persuade me that I should allow my forum to be used by people who want to fool the public.

Come get me.

Cracking down on fake news - Page 2 Giphy

Cracking down on fake news - Page 2 Giphy

by Guest Wed Mar 21, 2018 11:07 pm

sassy wrote:
Didge wrote:Again. I do not think any media sites should be banned.

Just do as I easily do, expose they are bollocks, but countless have been posted by Sassy and I have to ask, is why is Ben then not keeping to his no rule?

For example

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t23851-what-did-the-salisbury-physician-mean-by-no-patients-have-experienced-symptoms-of-nerve-agent-poisoning#457504

This one, is from a conspiracy theorist, Holocaust denier, thrown out of labour for antisemitism (not that this part will bother Ben, as he allows that).
Again this was false

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t23831-the-madness-of-jacob-rees-mogg-he-has-cash-invested-in-a-blacklisted-russian-bank

Here is another and actually a person that does suffer with mental health issues. He is another conspiracy loon and also connected to antisemites. No evidence to back up any of the claims

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t23760-ex-uk-ambassador-makes-an-observation-that-unravels-the-russian-spy-story

So why is Ben not acting?

Just for once, I'm going to reply specifically to dumb-dumb. I presume from that, dumb-dumb thinks that George Smiley
‏ @georgescircus is George Galloway (who BTW has never denied the Holocaust)

Well dumb-dumb, George Galloway's twitter handle is George GallowayVerified account
@georgegalloway

George Smiley
@georgescircus is:

A bee keeper engaged by the Overseas Committee for Academic Research

What a plonker Rodney lol

I am not talking about the antisemite George Galloway, but the article is from Mike Sivier, his website, which is fake news. He certainly is a holocasut denier and was thrown out of labour

You claimed the company was blacklisted, its not in the UK

I see you had no answer to the other two and the fact that your defense is George gallowwy, just about the biggest quisling going in this country, the mouthpiece of Iran, hamas and Hezbollah says it all

You always read my replies sassy, you just simple are to dumb to challenge me

by Guest Wed Mar 21, 2018 11:11 pm

So sassy yet again lying, as the site is Mike Sivier;s

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/about/

Labour has denied that an alleged Holocaust denier is being readmitted into the party. The Sunday Times had reported that Mike Sivier, 48, was being let back into the party after his suspension last year for comments about Jews and Zionism. However, a source told Metro.co.uk that his membership wasn’t being reinstated. A tweet from Labour MP Anna Turley also confirmed this.

Anna Turley MP

@annaturley
Have had clarification from the party that this article is not correct in saying that he has been re-admitted. I hope the NCC will make the right final decision in this case. Will watch with interest. https://twitter.com/annaturley/status/960072609697292288 …

http://metro.co.uk/2018/02/04/labour-denies-holocaust-denier-let-back-party-7286600/

by 'Wolfie Thu Mar 22, 2018 12:27 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Maddog wrote:

I doubt WND will be allowed much longer either.

There is a site called mediabiasfactcheck.com ... purporting to give fair and independent review/rating of other 'news media' sites, on how factual they are and the level of spin/bias used etc...

For a laugh... have a look at how they rate 'dailywire' and then have a look at how they rate 'snopes'...!

Then have a look at the WND link I posted above, to see what is said about mediabiasfactcheck.com ...!!!

Most amusing!!!

What is truly amusing, is that Tommy keeps on refrring to his beloved neo-nazi and fascist propaganda blogsites as if they were some kind of relutable "news" sources...

Neither WND nor Daily Liar can be considered as any kind of neutral or even-minded source when you look at the blatantly extremist rubbish they keep posting -- the likes of Stalin, Goebbels and Mao would all be mightily impressed with their misinformation and balderdash efforts..

by eddie Thu Mar 22, 2018 3:54 pm

Didge, I don’t know why you have to bring it all on to this thread. If you see something which you think is breaking the rules why don’t you simply report it?

by Lurker Thu Mar 22, 2018 4:17 pm

Some people today really enjoy believing lies over truth. It reinforces their stereotypes and racist beliefs. Nothing will change their polluted brains, but fake news has no place on any reputable news site, which should include newsfix. If you love the lying tabloids that pollute your brain, then please stay on their site and stay off this one.

by Andy Thu Mar 22, 2018 4:43 pm

eddie wrote:Didge, I don’t know why you have to bring it all on to this thread. If you see something which you think is breaking the rules why don’t you simply report it?

You have to remember that Didge has an obsessive hatred of both Labour and Corbyn.
He will only relent when Corbyn is dead and buried and Britain is a one party right wing state.

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 5:06 pm

eddie wrote:Didge, I don’t know why you have to bring it all on to this thread. If you see something which you think is breaking the rules why don’t you simply report it?

lol, I knew i would get some cock and bull reply

I have reported them via this thread

Ben was so keen to remove fake news from this forum

As seen that was bullshit and again it was a ruse by Ben

Again I do not want to see any media sites banned, I am simple and easily proving a point

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 5:10 pm

Angry Andy wrote:
eddie wrote:Didge, I don’t know why you have to bring it all on to this thread. If you see something which you think is breaking the rules why don’t you simply report it?

You have to remember that Didge has an obsessive hatred of both Labour and Corbyn.
He will only relent when Corbyn is dead and buried and Britain is a one party right wing state.

You see Eddie, more fake news above, but sadly, this Andy is a bot. Where there is not much you can do about that.

by Andy Thu Mar 22, 2018 5:19 pm

That's a first. A bot?
10 years on forums.
Sky.
ADO.
FLOP.
NF.
Dogs.
Cannadda.

You really are as weird as you appear!

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 5:20 pm

Angry Andy wrote:That's a first. A bot?
10 years on forums.
Sky.
ADO.
FLOP.
NF.
Dogs.
Cannadda.

You really are as weird as you appear!

Cleary a Russian bot I would say, judging by the poor defense above

Laughing

by eddie Thu Mar 22, 2018 6:43 pm

Didge wrote:
eddie wrote:Didge, I don’t know why you have to bring it all on to this thread. If you see something which you think is breaking the rules why don’t you simply report it?

lol, I knew i would get some cock and bull reply

I have reported them via this thread

Ben was so keen to remove fake news from this forum

As seen that was bullshit and again it was a ruse by Ben

Again I do not want to see any media sites banned, I am simple and easily proving a point

I don’t think you understood my point due to not listening properly.

You should have reported the links the minute you thought they broke the rules.
The moderators don’t see everything, didge.

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:33 pm

eddie wrote:
Didge wrote:

lol, I knew i would get some cock and bull reply

I have reported them via this thread

Ben was so keen to remove fake news from this forum

As seen that was bullshit and again it was a ruse by Ben

Again I do not want to see any media sites banned, I am simple and easily proving a point

I don’t think you understood my point due to not listening properly.

You should have reported the links the minute you thought they broke the rules.
The moderators don’t see everything, didge.

Well you have now, have you not, so what is the need of me reporting?

You see, that is just plain absurd to say to report something, one of the moderators has seen

Like I say, I am proving a point.

So dont give me crap about not listening, that is just piss poor Eddie

Again, I stand by my view, I do not want any site banned. This is to show that Ben was indeed being disingenuous. I should have guessed when yet again he whitewashed antisemitism with Veya the other day, but then he has record.

We had Sexy, wish Hitler had finished the Job on jews, no action taken.

Sassy claim that Jews do not suffer antisemitism, claiming they are not semitic (antisemitism again). Cleary thus not even understanding the unique hate antisemitism is. Also ignoring the blatant fact many semtic Jews were ethnically cleansed from the Middle East. Again no action taken.

The most recent with Veya saying, if the vast majority of Jews are Zionists, then they deserve every hate and prejudice they can get.

This is just a number of examples. Where if i do something wrong I am rightly punished. I do not even want them punished, but simple condemned for such hate and antisemitism

What I see is a pattern by Ben, how he continually whitewashes antisemitism. Its more than likely why he made that sick holocaust joke about me ending up in an oven.

Again, he can of course prove me wrong and live up to his claim of banning fake news media sites.

But dont tell me I need to report anything, when there is this very thread about this very subject

The man has zero integrity.

by eddie Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:38 pm

If he doesn’t see it, or none of the other mods see it, how can we do anything about it? Do you see what I am trying to say to you?

As for the rest of your post, I’ll leave it to him to comment.

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:42 pm

eddie wrote:If he doesn’t see it, or none of the other mods see it, how can we do anything about it? Do you see what I am trying to say to you?

As for the rest of your post, I’ll leave it to him to comment.

You have now seen it and you are a moderator are you not?

Or are you going to ignore these sites that breach the rules on fake news?

You still dont grasp it do you Eddie?

I dont want any sites Banned, as I back Free Speech.

Some of us know very well why Ben did it

by eddie Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:46 pm

Well if it was his mission to get smelly banned then somehow that mission failed, did it not? Smelly is still a very active and welcome member.

So what’s your point?

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:49 pm

eddie wrote:Well if it was his mission to get smelly banned then somehow that mission failed, did it not? Smelly is still a very active and welcome member.

So what’s your point?

Did I say he wanted him banned?

Never did, what did I say?

You want to know my point, after explaining it?

Like I say, happy that Ben proves me wrong on these fake news sites and keeps to his word.

by eddie Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:54 pm

Didge wrote:
eddie wrote:Well if it was his mission to get smelly banned then somehow that mission failed, did it not? Smelly is still a very active and welcome member.

So what’s your point?

Did I say he wanted him banned?

Never did, what did I say?

“Frankly, I think you made up that rule, to simple push smelly out.”

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t23842-jeremy-corbyn-mocked-by-his-own-mps-after-claiming-russia-should-be-given-the-right-to-test-nerve-agent-itself

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:57 pm

eddie wrote:
Didge wrote:

Did I say he wanted him banned?

Never did, what did I say?

“Frankly, I think you made up that rule, to simple push smelly out.”

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t23842-jeremy-corbyn-mocked-by-his-own-mps-after-claiming-russia-should-be-given-the-right-to-test-nerve-agent-itself

Do you understand the difference between pushing someone out compared to banning?

He knew smelly would not back down from posting the sites that he had banned

Hence pushing him out

Get it?

by eddie Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:59 pm

Yes I get that you forgot what you said and then I found what you said and now you’re doing that thing that you do where you pretend something else.

Semantics, didge. I’m aint stupid mate.

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:03 pm

eddie wrote:Yes I get that you forgot what you said and then I found what you said and now you’re doing that thing that you do where you pretend something else.

Semantics, didge. I’m aint stupid mate.

It seems you are very stupid

I even said the same on this very thread

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t23842-jeremy-corbyn-mocked-by-his-own-mps-after-claiming-russia-should-be-given-the-right-to-test-nerve-agent-itself

Gelico grasped it and agrees with me

So clearly you do not understand

Pushing someone out is in regards to ensuring they do not have a platform for their sites they adhere to.

By stopping him posting such sites, knowing he wont, pushes him into a courner

He was basemented by Ben when he continued to post them and thus left

Hence pushing him out

Now do you understand dummy?

by eddie Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:07 pm

it doesn’t really matter, does it? You want to win some moral victory because you’re bored or something and eventually I’ll get bored with you or highly irritated and then you can claim an even higher moral victory.

I’ll let Ben deal with the rest of this, seeing as your post is directed at him and I can’t be arsed to go round in circles anymore.

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:11 pm

eddie wrote:it doesn’t really matter, does it? You want to win some moral victory because you’re bored or something and eventually I’ll get bored with you or highly irritated and then you can claim an even higher moral victory.

I’ll let Ben deal with the rest of this, seeing as your post is directed at him and I can’t be arsed to go round in circles anymore.

So you are going to ignore these fake news sites then

What a surprise

Maybe you need to try and learn what people are saying to you

It might help

You also missed the part, where i said I would be happy for Ben to prove me wrong, so clearly, not trying to gain any moral victory. Just simple have him be consistent. In regards to the rule he made on fake news.
I did offer a better solution on this which he ignored. As again I do not want to see any sites banned.

P.S. Why did you not condemn Veya for his views on Jews?

You got the report and read this?

by Ben Reilly Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:32 pm

Didge wrote:
eddie wrote:it doesn’t really matter, does it? You want to win some moral victory because you’re bored or something and eventually I’ll get bored with you or highly irritated and then you can claim an even higher moral victory.

I’ll let Ben deal with the rest of this, seeing as your post is directed at him and I can’t be arsed to go round in circles anymore.

So you are going to ignore these fake news sites then

What a surprise

Maybe you need to try and learn what people are saying to you

It might help

You also missed the part, where i said I would be happy for Ben to prove me wrong, so clearly, not trying to gain any moral victory. Just simple have him be consistent. In regards to the rule he made on fake news.
I did offer a better solution on this which he ignored. As again I do not want to see any sites banned.

P.S. Why did you not condemn Veya for his views on Jews?

You got the report and read this?

I'm not the all-seeing eye of God, you moron -- if you see something, say something.

I work at an office now and I don't have free time to waste on this petty bullshit. So if you see somebody posting fake news, notify me or another admin and we'll get to it when we can.

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:35 pm

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:
Didge wrote:

So you are going to ignore these fake news sites then

What a surprise

Maybe you need to try and learn what people are saying to you

It might help

You also missed the part, where i said I would be happy for Ben to prove me wrong, so clearly, not trying to gain any moral victory. Just simple have him be consistent. In regards to the rule he made on fake news.
I did offer a better solution on this which he ignored. As again I do not want to see any sites banned.

P.S. Why did you not condemn Veya for his views on Jews?

You got the report and read this?

I'm not the all-seeing eye of God, you moron -- if you see something, say something.

I work at an office now and I don't have free time to waste on this petty bullshit. So if you see somebody posting fake news, notify me or another admin and we'll get to it when we can.

lol so insulting and giving piss poor excuses

Quelle surprise

As I said, you can easily prove me wrong on acting on fake news sites

I thought this was what this thread was for.

Again, I do not want any site banned

I did offer you a much better solution, on when an article has been exposed as fake what to do

So I am not going to notify you

You have the thread here and its up to you whether you are consistant or not on fake news websites.

The ball is in your court

by Ben Reilly Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:49 pm

Didge wrote:
Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:
Didge wrote:

So you are going to ignore these fake news sites then

What a surprise

Maybe you need to try and learn what people are saying to you

It might help

You also missed the part, where i said I would be happy for Ben to prove me wrong, so clearly, not trying to gain any moral victory. Just simple have him be consistent. In regards to the rule he made on fake news.
I did offer a better solution on this which he ignored. As again I do not want to see any sites banned.

P.S. Why did you not condemn Veya for his views on Jews?

You got the report and read this?

I'm not the all-seeing eye of God, you moron -- if you see something, say something.

I work at an office now and I don't have free time to waste on this petty bullshit. So if you see somebody posting fake news, notify me or another admin and we'll get to it when we can.

lol so insulting and giving piss poor excuses

Quelle surprise

As I said, you can easily prove me wrong on acting on fake news sites

I thought this was what this thread was for.

Again, I do not want any site banned

I did offer you a much better solution, on when an article has been exposed as fake what to do

So I am not going to notify you

You have the thread here and its up to you whether you are consistant or not on fake news websites.

The ball is in your court

Oh, you mind-numbing numb-fuck. You report via the PM button, like you always have reported every other little thing here that didn't quite sit perfectly with your whiny ass.

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:54 pm

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:
Didge wrote:

lol so insulting and giving piss poor excuses

Quelle surprise

As I said, you can easily prove me wrong on acting on fake news sites

I thought this was what this thread was for.

Again, I do not want any site banned

I did offer you a much better solution, on when an article has been exposed as fake what to do

So I am not going to notify you

You have the thread here and its up to you whether you are consistant or not on fake news websites.

The ball is in your court

Oh, you mind-numbing numb-fuck. You report via the PM button, like you always have reported every other little thing here that didn't quite sit perfectly with your whiny ass.

So antisemitism, which i have always been consistent on fighting against. As well as racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Muslim hatred, is little things to you.

I know you think so, that is blatantly obvious and why you never act. All I wanted was a condemnation, but you are thick like thieves when it comes to your buddy.

This is the first report for months

Like I say, the ball is in your court to be consistent on fake news

Listen little hard man behind your PC. I really am not going to be bothered about your pathetic insults

I am simple pointing out you are not being consistent on fake news and also even worse on antisemitism.

A growing problem in the world today

When are you going to learn from history on how many times Jews have been on the receiveing end of hate, oppression, ethnic cleasning and genocide and in so many countries

For you to belittle that, shows you clearly do not care for such problems

by Original Quill Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:59 pm

Didge wrote:So antisemitism, which i have always been consistent on fighting against. As well as racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Muslim hatred, is little things to you.

Cracking down on fake news - Page 2 Prank-laughing-man-closeup-portrait-handsome-young-businessman-covering-his-mouth-pointing-someone-something-32373831

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 9:00 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:So antisemitism, which i have always been consistent on fighting against. As well as racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Muslim hatred, is little things to you.

Your photo did not work Quill

Laughing

by Original Quill Thu Mar 22, 2018 9:02 pm

Didge wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Your photo did not work Quill

I know. I think it was too large, even though I downsized it. It was funny.

by eddie Thu Mar 22, 2018 9:05 pm

eddie wrote, earlier on: You should have reported the links the minute you thought they broke the rules.
The moderators don’t see everything, didge.

Should be the end of the discussion really.
But I bet it won’t be.

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 9:06 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:

Your photo did not work Quill

I know. I think it was too large, even though I downsized it. It was funny.

I am sure it was mate

Cool

by Lurker Sun Mar 25, 2018 2:38 pm

Fake News was invented by Fox. Republicans ought to be proud of that. Fake News is all they live for. Fox has spewed bullshit venom for decades. That's how the RNC controls their lemmings.

by Fred Moletrousers Sun Mar 25, 2018 7:07 pm

Lurker wrote:Fake News was invented by Fox. Republicans ought to be proud of that. Fake News is all they live for. Fox has spewed bullshit venom for decades. That's how the RNC controls their lemmings.

No it wasn't. It was probably "invented" by Romans spreading "fake news" about Druids and was honed to perfection by one Herr Doktor Josef Goebbels not all that long ago.

It is a practice now pursued with enthusiasm by politicians on both the Left and the Right.

by Original Quill Sun Mar 25, 2018 10:37 pm

Fred M. wrote:It is a practice now pursued with enthusiasm by politicians on both the Left and the Right.

Not on the Left. There is no motive to lie on the part of politicians on the left. Their agenda is problem solving, to improve life for all. There is no reason for leftists not to be completely transparent.

On the other hand, the politicians on the Right serve special interests, as against the interests of all people. There are not enough of the special interest people to provide sufficient votes, so that politicians on the Right must use deception to gain enough votes to win elections.

One of the (auxiliary) lies they tell is: every politician lies! They do this to cover their own tracks, to besmirch everyone else in order to normalize their own reputation for lying, and I s'pose, because misery loves company.

by Tommy Monk Sun Mar 25, 2018 10:53 pm

Quill... you are completely delusional if you believe that load of bollocks!!!

by Fred Moletrousers Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:37 am

Original Quill wrote:
Fred M. wrote:It is a practice now pursued with enthusiasm by politicians on both the Left and the Right.

Not on the Left. There is no motive to lie on the part of politicians on the left. Their agenda is problem solving, to improve life for all. There is no reason for leftists not to be completely transparent.

On the other hand, the politicians on the Right serve special interests, as against the interests of all people. There are not enough of the special interest people to provide sufficient votes, so that politicians on the Right must use deception to gain enough votes to win elections.

One of the (auxiliary) lies they tell is: every politician lies! They do this to cover their own tracks, to besmirch everyone else in order to normalize their own reputation for lying, and I s'pose, because misery loves company.

What? Are you being serious, Quill? Did you never hear, for example, of the activities of two UK Labour Party spin doctors Charlie Whelan and Damian McBride?

They were exposed as being behind a plot to smear not only Tory MPs but also their wives and families with the aim of deliberately wrecking political careers and even marriages. They invented false scurrilous "rumours" which they then hawked around red-top tabloid newspapers and placed in left-leaning websites - and even the BBC! (I happen to know quite a bit about that particular incident because one of their victims was my own constituency Tory MP whose marriage actually collapsed because of false rumours...and the regional BBC reporter they "tipped off" - unsuccessfully because he wasn't stupid and immediately rumbled them - was an old pal of mine.)

Or the infamous "dodgy dossier" during the period of the previous Labour administration. The senior spin doctor whose paw prints were all over that one was a Left wing zealot who had previously been political editor of a sycophantic Labour-supporting tabloid who knew exactly how to play the system. And he's still at it to this very day.

Please don't try to convince me that that sort of thing does not happen in your Republican and Democratic parties...any more than I would attempt to convince you that it does not happen within our own Conservative Party machine.

by eddie Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:48 pm

Hahahahahaha I love how Quill thinks everyone on the left is exactly the same and can be lumped into a neat package labelled “Completely free of flaws”.

That’s like lumping another group of people together, say, Californians, and labelling them “Empty airhead wannabe actors who say ’Heeeeeey Duuuuude’”

It’s just stupid. It just makes a mockery of what you’re trying to really say.

by Fred Moletrousers Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:21 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

Quill... you are completely delusional if you believe that load of bollocks!!!

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman..."

William Jefferson Clinton, 42nd President of the United States (Democratic Party)

by Original Quill Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:41 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

Quill... you are completely delusional if you believe that load of bollocks!!!

Tom, I don't see you refuting it. You are not presenting any argument against it. Presumably, if you had any refutation, you would offer it. You don't; thus, the logic of the argument stands.

I think you are so used to believing in platitudes and presumptions that persuasive logic fails in your mind. Someone says, all politicians lie, and you nod, not because the argument is convincing, but because the words are familiar. Remember? That's why Gobbles said one must repeat a lie so often.

Fact is, to a thinking person an argument based on active logic is refreshing. Analyzing politics according to interests is logical...and persuasive. Politicians seek votes. You lie to voters only when you are working at cross purposes to them. The party that is representing their interests has only to tell them what, and how they are doing: the truth. The party that is representing interests adverse to the voters must hide what he is doing. Hence it's axiomatic that representatives of special interests will always be the liars.

I will state again, because it bears repeating: the lie that all politicians lie is a position taken only by the liars themselves...and you only hear it from conservatives. It's a self-justifying statement, that eases the conscience of the liar. How many times do you hear someone caught, say, shoplifting saying: everyone does it!

by eddie Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:53 pm

Not all politicians lie but most do. Eventually.

by Original Quill Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:55 pm

Fred Moletrousers wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

Quill... you are completely delusional if you believe that load of bollocks!!!

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman..."

William Jefferson Clinton, 42nd President of the United States (Democratic Party)

That's the exception that proves my point. While having sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, Clinton deviated from representing the interests of the people, to representing his own selfish interests. As soon as he redirected his interests, [everyone in unison], He had to lie!

Can I put it in simpler terms? Shall we analyze what it means to lie? You only lie because the truth hurts you...you want to conceal the truth. The party that genuinely represents the people has no need for excuses. The truth may be bad news, but your own motives are not in question. Only the party that works against the interests of the voters must misrepresent himself. Special interests are not general interests.

by Fred Moletrousers Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:15 pm

eddie wrote:Not all politicians lie but most do. Eventually.

In my time in newspaper journalism I interviewed countless politicians, from chairmen of local councils to the Prime Minister (John Major, as it happens) and always I kept in the back of my mind, the unasked question "why is this person lying to me?"

Cynical? Yes. Disrespectful of office? Certainly. Overly suspicious? Every time.

The reason was that as a journalist I was asking the questions which, in my professional opinion, members of the public would ask given the opportunity...and knowing the reputation of politicians as a breed for obfuscation and terminological inexactitude (as Churchill so famously described lies) and everything in between, I suggest that my approach was fully justifiable. After all, politicians are seeking our endorsement and votes and with the spoils go status, celebrity and often material gain...and we all saw during the parliamentary expenses scandal just how our faith in them was rewarded!

Oh, and yes...journalists sometimes lie too. As do lawyers. And doctors. And clerics. And bus drivers. And hairdressers. And....and...and...

by eddie Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:20 pm

Fred Moletrousers wrote:
eddie wrote:Not all politicians lie but most do. Eventually.

In my time in newspaper journalism I interviewed countless politicians, from chairmen of local councils to the Prime Minister (John Major, as it happens) and always I kept in the back of my mind, the unasked question "why is this person lying to me?"

Cynical? Yes. Disrespectful of office? Certainly. Overly suspicious? Every time.

The reason was that as a journalist I was asking the questions which, in my professional opinion, members of the public would ask given the opportunity...and knowing the reputation of politicians as a breed for obfuscation and terminological inexactitude (as Churchill so famously described lies) and everything in between, I suggest that my approach was fully justifiable. After all, politicians are seeking our endorsement and votes and with the spoils go status, celebrity and often material gain...and we all saw during the parliamentary expenses scandal just how our faith in them was rewarded!

Oh, and yes...journalists sometimes lie too. As do lawyers. And doctors. And clerics. And bus drivers. And hairdressers. And....and...and...

Green from me. You’re a great poster, Fred.

by Fred Moletrousers Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:43 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Fred Moletrousers wrote:

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman..."

William Jefferson Clinton, 42nd President of the United States (Democratic Party)

That's the exception that proves my point. While having sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, Clinton deviated from representing the interests of the people, to representing his own selfish interests. As soon as he redirected his interests, [everyone in unison], He had to lie!

Can I put it in simpler terms? Shall we analyze what it means to lie? You only lie because the truth hurts you...you want to conceal the truth. The party that genuinely represents the people has no need for excuses. The truth may be bad news, but your own motives are not in question. Only the party that works against the interests of the voters must misrepresent himself. Special interests are not general interests.

On the contrary, it proves my point. Clinton, whom we must assume represents the Left from your standpoint, lied , and whether it was to "protect his own selfish interests" as you claim or whether it was in the hope of protecting the interests of the Democratic Party whose standard bearer and electroral victor he was is a moot point.

The simple and inalienable fact is that he lied. He lied to Senators. He lied to Congress members. He lied to his party and its tireless workers. He lied to the people who voted for him. And he lied to his own wife and family.

BTW, I really liked Clinton. A lot. Had I been American I would have voted for him even though he did, er, lie.

So far as the UK is concerned Blair, the leader of the Labour Party (which when I last looked was widely regarded as being to the Left of the political spectrum) lied. Alistair Campbell, his chief spin doctor, lied - and in their case their lies actually resulted in people in this and other countries dying.

The Left wing spin doctors Whelan and McBride lied....one could go on and on.

Sorry Quill, I admire your loyalty to your political stance and your skilled advocacy. But you are 100 per cent wrong in this instance.

by Fred Moletrousers Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:47 pm

eddie wrote:
Fred Moletrousers wrote:

In my time in newspaper journalism I interviewed countless politicians, from chairmen of local councils to the Prime Minister (John Major, as it happens) and always I kept in the back of my mind, the unasked question "why is this person lying to me?"

Cynical? Yes. Disrespectful of office? Certainly. Overly suspicious? Every time.

The reason was that as a journalist I was asking the questions which, in my professional opinion, members of the public would ask given the opportunity...and knowing the reputation of politicians as a breed for obfuscation and terminological inexactitude (as Churchill so famously described lies) and everything in between, I suggest that my approach was fully justifiable. After all, politicians are seeking our endorsement and votes and with the spoils go status, celebrity and often material gain...and we all saw during the parliamentary expenses scandal just how our faith in them was rewarded!

Oh, and yes...journalists sometimes lie too. As do lawyers. And doctors. And clerics. And bus drivers. And hairdressers. And....and...and...

Green from me. You’re a great poster, Fred.

Thanks Eddie...much appreciated. I wish I could post more because there are some really interesting debates here at present, but I'm afraid that my health and concentration are, er, somewhat limited and frail at the moment.

by eddie Mon Mar 26, 2018 7:51 pm

Well, you seem perfectly grand to me. I like seeing you around Lord Fred. sunny

by Original Quill Mon Mar 26, 2018 8:01 pm

Fred M. wrote:On the contrary, it proves my point. Clinton, whom we must assume represents the Left from your standpoint, lied , and whether it was to "protect his own selfish interests" as you claim or whether it was in the hope of protecting the interests of the Democratic Party whose standard bearer and electroral victor he was is a moot point.

You go astray when you dismiss “his own selfish interests.” Clinton cannot be “assumed to represent the Left” when he abandons the Leftist cause to represent himself. Clearly, you identify the distinction in your own post, yet you deny it. Fred, that’s illogical.

Fred M. wrote:The simple and inalienable fact is that he lied. He lied to Senators. He lied to Congress members. He lied to his party and its tireless workers. He lied to the people who voted for him. And he lied to his own wife and family.

He lied in a deposition, to a court reporter. Don’t be such a drama queen. You can’t evade the frivolousness of it.

I don’t know about Arkansas, but in California lying under oath is a felony. It got Clinton disbarred and impeached. However, lying under oath is a lightweight felony, made all the lighter because the subject matter was frivolous, and most people passed it by. The Senate refused to convict him.

Fred M. wrote:Sorry Quill, I admire your loyalty to your political stance and your skilled advocacy. But you are 100 per cent wrong in this instance.

You haven’t begun to refute my thesis, Fred. Clinton lied about a personal matter, not as a representative of a political interest. I am simply restating a universal truth, and not any logic specific to politics. It’s you who must defend the hackneyed platitude, posed as a universal truth: all politicians lie.

My thesis is that someone who has no need to lie, does not have the motive to lie. That’s so self-evident that it’s almost a tautology. It’s essentially a causation argument: if one has a motive to lie, it causes one to lie. It follows that if one has no motive to lie, there is no cause to lie.

Only then do we apply that universal truth to politics. The Left represents common interests, whereas the Right represents only special interests. Common interests cannot conflict with the common weal, whereas special interests can and do conflict with the common weal. When that conflict arises, the Right is motivated to lie.

Your thesis—all politicians lie—originates from the urge to cover one’s tracks. Knowing the Right’s propensity to lie, they invent the faux claim that all people who are like them lie. The truth is quite apart from than that. Only people with a motive to lie, will resort to lying.

BTW, I still haven’t heard the internal mechanics of your argument. Why is mendacity common to politics, and unrelated to motives?

by Fred Moletrousers Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:52 pm

Christ on a bike (at which point I will confess my sins, confess to blasphemy and say twenty Hail Marys as penance) but now I've heard it all!

If you are the democratically elected Head of State of the most powerful nation on earth and lie not only to your own governmental administration but also to your supposedly independent judiciary (in this country we call that "perjury" and you stand a fair chance of being shut in a cell with the keys out of reach for several years) then that is considered to be "frivolous" and that anyone demonstrating the temerity to question your action risks being ridiculed as being "a drama queen."

But only, of course, if you also happen to be the democratically-elected Left Wing leader of "the people" and who, naturally, has only their interests at heart.

If, however, you are of the reviled Right, then your "frivolity" will be regarded as being so heinous and in the interests solely of the plutocracy as to warrant you being condemned without trial or impeachment and subject not only to public revulsion and opprobrium, but also to being hanged, drawn and quartered (not necessarily in that order).

All I can say is thank Christ I live in Britain where we at least have a straight choice between Tories and Labour, and where we can expect and know that the buggers will all be inveterate liars.

by Original Quill Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:57 pm

Fred M. wrote:If you are the democratically elected Head of State of the most powerful nation on earth and lie not only to your own governmental administration but also to your supposedly independent judiciary (in this country we call that "perjury" and you stand a fair chance of being shut in a cell with the keys out of reach for several years) then that is considered to be "frivolous" and that anyone demonstrating the temerity to question your action risks being ridiculed as being "a drama queen."

My comment about drama queen goes to your histronics, in lieu of logical argument. Now, as to Bill Clinton, keep in mind that my point is about a political party--or even a political persuasion--and not about any one individual. When I say the RW has a motive to lie, I'm talking about the mechanics of their position and activities. As for individuals, anyone can put himself in a position where the temptation is to lie...especially if one cheats on his wife.

But, how is that politically relevant? Did it buy any votes? Did it change diplomatic relationships? Does it increase taxes? Did it pass any laws at all? Bill Clinton's dalliance was a little dicking around with a young woman. What goes on within Bill Clinton's pants has nothing to do with the Leftist party in America.

On the other hand, to pass a bill that lowers taxes for the rich by billions, while passing another bill that increases defense spending by billions, means that the poor and middle class will have to bear the burden and pay more. That's wealth-shifting, working against the interests of the poor and middle class. That's an example of favoring the special interest over the common weal. That is truly political.

Nothing about Bill Clinton's dick favors any political faction. It's just coincidence that he came upon a motive to lie. As I say, my point goes to a political persuasion, not to any one individual. The Legion that wants to work against the well-being of the many, is going to have to do something to garner votes. Lying about what you are doing is the only way the RW can get elected.

by Original Quill Mon Mar 26, 2018 11:04 pm

Fred M. wrote:If, however, you are of the reviled Right, then your "frivolity" will be regarded as being so heinous and in the interests solely of the plutocracy as to warrant you being condemned without trial or impeachment and subject not only to public revulsion and opprobrium, but also to being hanged, drawn and quartered (not necessarily in that order).

Ask yourself, is there (as Kant would say) a 'necessary connection' between the action and favoring special interests? That's the fulcrum of the issue. On the tax example above, there's clearly a necessary connection. But what is the necessary connection between Clinton's dick and politics? Clearly, nothing.

I'm not saying there are not reasons to lie other than politics--Clinton clearly had one. I'm saying, there's nothing about LW politics that motivates one to lie, while there clearly is something with RW politics that gives rise to a motive to lie.

by Sponsored content