Red Mosquito

BurtReynolds wrote:The real purpose of these articles is to jumble any dissension in together with the most extreme white supremacy in order to discredit any and all dissension, and it doesn't stop with only right wing dissension.

Nothing is ever argued on merit. There’s always a “real reason why,” which always happens to coincide perfectly with a sense of being aggrieved or threatened, and subsequently becomes the conversation instead.

This article isn’t about memes turning people into Nazis. It’s about the techniques that extremists weave together in the interest of radicalizing others. And the opposite of “opposing increased government surveillance” isn’t “don’t talk about extremism anymore.”

I can understand why someone might be uninterested in the topic. Whatever. What I don’t understand is being bothered that the reporting exists at all.

McParadigm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:The real purpose of these articles is to jumble any dissension in together with the most extreme white supremacy in order to discredit any and all dissension, and it doesn't stop with only right wing dissension.

Nothing is ever argued on merit. There’s always a “real reason why,” which always happens to coincide perfectly with a sense of being aggrieved or threatened, and subsequently becomes the conversation instead.

This article isn’t about memes turning people into Nazis. It’s about the techniques that extremists weave together in the interest of radicalizing others. And the opposite of “opposing increased government surveillance” isn’t “don’t talk about extremism anymore.”

I can understand why someone might be uninterested in the topic. Whatever. What I don’t understand is being bothered that the reporting exists at all.

I'm not interested in taking it on its merits when it's not produced in good faith. When your headline is "memes to race war" then the article ties all these disparate groups and ideologies together as if they are the same thing (which is the REAL purpose of the article), I don't have to treat it as honest journalism.

Everyone uses these techniques to persuade, especially when they don't have the keys to more powerful propaganda outlets like what passes for our media. It's not suddenly news that white supremacists try to use the same techniques. Worrying about that specifically is for boomers.

Why wouldn't I be worried about these types of articles? They're divisive, dishonest propaganda made by very powerful people, designed to keep us afraid of each other and stifle dissent. Of course I'm bothered by it. I dont understand why you wouldn't be interested.

BurtReynolds wrote:the article ties all these disparate groups and ideologies together as if they are the same thing

More "of a type" than "the same thing," but I'm receptive to the idea that some of the example figures or groups listed in the article are unfairly included.

Can you explicitly name the groups that you feel shouldn't have been included in an article about how digital content is utilized by people seeking to radicalize others? And explain why you disagree with their inclusion? That would be a good way to demonstrate why you feel the article is flawed, without always having to lean on "everyone I disagree with is lying about what they believe. Their arguments are inorganic covers for OBVIOUS and DUPLICIT personal ambitions."

(which is the REAL purpose of the article)

Exactly.

It's not suddenly news that white supremacists try to use the same techniques.

I'm still trying to find a reason why "white supremacists continue trying to use digital strategies to radicalize others" would be a reason it shouldn't be reported on. What ongoing issues in American life do we ever just decide to not talk about anymore?

I'm still trying to find a reason why "white supremacists continue trying to use digital strategies to radicalize others" would be a reason it shouldn't be reported on. What ongoing issues in American life do we ever just decide to not talk about anymore?

Should it be reported on over and over for years? It's narrative creation, not reporting. I'm not going to pretend that it's groundbreaking, vital journalism every time it pops up.

tragabigzanda wrote:Wait Burt are you suggesting they’re not using these digital strategies to recruit? That the core thrust of the article is somehow false?

I'm saying that I don't care and neither should you, and their definition of a "white supremacist neo nazi" is whatever they need it to be, and that there is a larger, meta-reason why these articles show up, and it has nothing to do with educating people on real threats and everything to do with normalizing tyrannical measures like the one mentioned in the tweet I posted.

Here's a conspiracy theory for you: when you see "Senior editor at The Washington Post" in someone's bio, you can rest assured that they are 100% a CIA asset.

no i will not explain

BurtReynolds wrote:Here's a conspiracy theory for you: when you see "Senior editor at The Washington Post" in someone's bio, you can rest assured that they are 100% a CIA asset.

They have been pretty open in lobbying for end to end encryption getting banned.

When did you leave the brotherhood, trag?

I think he’s still up there in Montana, actually.

tragabigzanda wrote:i grew up with this dude

A man left a bullet-riddled car with three dead men inside it at the ER. They were all in the Aryan Brotherhood, feds say.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2 ... buquerque/

I still cannot understand how drugs get into prisons and if the guards are being paid to do it where in the ever-loving fuck is the money coming from?

Also why do they allow known gang members to congregate with each other in prison. They should be spaced apart, different eating and rec schedules, etc.

Just put me in charge JFC

Bammer wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:i grew up with this dude

A man left a bullet-riddled car with three dead men inside it at the ER. They were all in the Aryan Brotherhood, feds say.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2 ... buquerque/

I still cannot understand how drugs get into prisons and if the guards are being paid to do it where in the ever-loving fuck is the money coming from?

Also why do they allow known gang members to congregate with each other in prison. They should be spaced apart, different eating and rec schedules, etc.

You do know how many prisoners are in any given prison? There are going to be overlaps. There’s no way to separate them in any way that will make it less dangerous

I would figure it out

Some prisons ask the prisoners if they have any gang affiliation upon intake. They intentionally house them together, with the (not unreasonable) assumption that housing Aryan Brotherhood members with Crips will result in more fights and deaths.

Trust me I got this

I'm in. Let's do it, Bammy!

Holy shit, watch this video and check out how this newscaster pronounces the word "atrocities," and then stick around for stuff that's slightly less offensive: https://www.nbc15.com/2021/08/10/nazi-s ... p-sturgis/