Do Your Research? Why? Research Is Overrated.

“Do your research?” seems to be the latest fashion on internet comment threads for trying to undermine sombody’s contribution without actually being able to write a rebuttal or construct an argument challenging what they have offered. It has replaced “Do the math,” or the rather silly “Do the science,” but like them only shows the person using it is sadly deficient in rhetorical skills.

I came across an article today which employed the “do your research” technique without actually using thise words. It was about the appointment to the US Supreme Court of Justice Kavanaugh, and the attempt to block his elevation by a woman named Christine Blasey Ford, who accused the judge of sexually assaulting her over 30 years ago at a student drinking party. Blasey Ford could not remember the date or location of the alleged offence, nor could she produce any witnesses to back her allegation, in fact those she named as witnesses denied any knowledge of an offence having taken place. As the US Supreme Court is not important to us in Britain this story serves as an illustration of how people on the internet, on TV and Radio news and in the newspapers try to manipulate opinion.

In an article titled “Ford Wins Credibility Battle but Not The War” the author argues that tratification of Kavanaugh’s appointment should have been blocked because Blasey Ford was a more credible witness. Using the usual liberal / left wing trick of stating his opinion as if it is an uncentastable fact he cited Kavanaugh’s answers to three questions put to him by senator Joe Kennedy (yeas one of The Kennedy’s but not one of The Dead Kennedys,)

The three questions and Kavanaugh’s answers were:

Kennedy asked Kavanaugh to swear before God and country to a series of questions he was about to ask him.

Kavanaugh agreed to do so.

First, Kennedy asked Kavanaugh if he had sexually assaulted Ford. Kavanaugh responded with what he perceived to be evidence that he did not do it. It was a Democratic conspiracy to destroy his reputation.

Next Kavanaugh was asked if he had violated Ms. Ramirez. He answered with more of what he considered proof that he did not do it. Again, it was an allegation orchestrated by the Democrats.

Third, he was asked if he had exposed his penis to a third woman. Again, Kavanaugh offered what he considered evidence that he did not do this act. Namely, it was a conspiracy made up by a porn actress’s lawyer.

The problem with Kavanaugh’s answers to Sen. Kennedy is that a truthful answer would have been a simple yes or no.

Had Kavanaugh looked Kennedy in the eyes and answered no, I would have graded him as equally credible or more credible than Ford. He did not. I believe Dr. Ford and not Judge Kavanaugh.

How does this relate to “Do your research?”

What the writer is asking us to do here is believe his version of the exchange instead of doing our research. Kennedy’s questions, taken out of context and without reference to what had been said previously still do not lead an unbiased person to concur with the author’s opinion. In fact Kavanaugh had already denied the allegations many times, and in rhetorical terms he is refusing here to dignify the most lurid version of Blasey Ford’s accusation with a denial. It is moot to suggest Kavanaugh failed to provide proof that he did not perpetrate the acts he is accused of, in legal terms it is impossible to prove a negative and therefore the burden of proof rests on the accuser.

Christine Blasey Ford, a Democratic Party activist, a vociferous critic of Donald Trump (who appointed Kavanaugh to the supreme court, an appointment that was seen as hugely damaging to the Democratic Party, and a feminist, did not report the assault at the time it is alleged to have taken place, or mention it for thirty years as Kavanaugh rose through the ranks of the US judicial system to its pinnacle. That in itself, and the timing of her accusation should arouse suspicion about her credibility. But to liberals, interested only in disrupting the Trump presidency it doesn’t.

And had the author done his research, he would have known that Blasey Ford, far from being the credible adversary in this case, was, according to classmates, not the shy ingenue she and her supporters claimed but an enthusiastic party girl and something of a raver. In fact the college yearbook for that year makes an oblique reference to her reputation. So while it is likely that someone did once push their genitals in her face at a party, it is also understandable that she might have trouble remembering who and at what party.

Such cheap tricks are how politics is played now. If only people who say (or imply,) “Do your research,” would first do their research.

 

 

 

View at Medium.com

Liberal News Site BuzzFeed Pilloried On Social Media After Fake News ‘bombshell’ on Mueller & Trump

buzzfeed fake newsPresident trumps Buzzfeed Cohen story: Source: themindunleashed.com

Social media site Twitter has been a leading force in witch hunt by the US liberal left to impeach President Trump, constantly calling on the Special Counsel team headed by Obama appointee Robert Mueller to trigger the impeachment process they believe would result in Trump being removed from office, even though the Mueller inquiry has produced no evidence of ‘high crimes and misdemeanours’ against the president.

Since Trump’s vicory in the 2016 election wild accusations that he collaborated with the Russian government have been flung about by Democrat politicians, liberal media organisations and Hollywood luvvies, none of which have been supported by a shred of credible evidence.

The latest fiaso occurred this week, when the strongly liberal buzzfeed online news site ran a story that proof had ben obtained of Trump ordering his lawyer to lie to Congressional investigators. Left leaning news channels and print media went into meltdown, claiming that it wad the ‘smoking gun’ that linked Donald J Trump and Vladimir Putin in a conspiracy to steal the election from Hillary Clinton. The excitement was shortlibed however, Mueller himself stated the BuzzFeed report claiming Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen lied to Congress on his boss’ orders was “not accurate.”

Or to use a buzz phrase, it was Buzzfeed FAKE NEWS.

Twitter having been set alight by the BuzzFeed story that claimed to have proof that President Donald Trump directly instructed his former attorney, Michael Cohen, to lie before Congress on his plans to build a hotel in Moscow that would have seen him meeting Russian officials, was reignited when Mueller shot it down.

After the “bombshell” was picked up (to a great extent uncritically) by the mainstream media, which floated impeachment through a legion of ever-ready pundits, it was beautifully ironic that the scoop was busted by the office of Special Counsel Robert Mueller himself.

Gov. Mike Huckabee tweeted:
@GovMikeHuckabee
Breaking Wind from CNN! Buzzfeed will change it’s name to “Buzzard Feed” because it proudly stands by its discredited, un-sourced, and utterly laughable Fake News about @realDonaldTrump so even after rebuke by Mueller it eats dead, rotted flesh of the roadkill of their story.

Facing a torrent of ridicule and derision, BuzzFeed tried to stand by its claims while others on the left rallied round. BuzzFeed Editor-in-Chief Ben Smith called on Mueller to clarify what exactly he had denied. “We stand by our reporting and the sources who informed it,” he tweeted.

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews (who famously “felt a tingle run up his leg” when he heard Obama speak, – no suggestion of political bias on his part then,) argued that the report being inaccurate “does not mean it is not true,” while NBC’s Ken Dilanian said Mueller denied only that part of the report that said he had obtained Trump organization documents supporting the allegations. He did not publish his evidence of course.

The New York Times, still bleeding after being beaten up in a Fake News scandal of its own, debunked the story, citing a person familiar with Cohen’s testimony, who told them that the disgraced former lawyer “never implied the president had pressured him to lie to Congress.”

Trump himself saw the craptangle as an opportunity, which he charateristically grabbed to remind the U.S. public it was Buzzfeed that first published “the totally discredited” Steele Dossier.” BuzzFeed published the former British spy’s largely fabricated evidence of Trump’s links to Russian businessment in January 2017. “A very sad day for journalism, but a great day for our Country!” Trump tweeted.

RELATED:

On Fake News And Where It Originates From

Google Algorithm For ‘Fact Checking’ Fake News Almost Exclusively Targets Conservative Media

Trump blasts ‘sleazebag operatives’ for ‘Russian blackmail’ smears.

Pavlov’s cat

UK government’s Fake News Department

Leaked Documents Reveal Facebook’s Biased, Convoluted Censorship Policies

Since the 2016 US Presidential election, when the phrase ‘fake news’ entered the vernacular, Facebook has employed thousands of human moderators tasked with identifying what is and is not acceptable content to be posted on the censorious social media website. These humans were not employed to replace the ‘Artificial Intelligence’ automated moderation system the nerdocracy that runs Facebook had previously relied on, but to make the judgements ‘Artificial Intelligence’ cannot (because far from being intelligent, it is as abjectly effing stupid as the nerds that probram the algorithms. It has come to light in leaked documents obtained by The New York Times that Facebook’s human moderators are doing a lousy job, promoting fake news while censoring truthful reports, because they  have been relying on outdated, inaccurate and biased “maze of PowerPoint slides” to police global political speech, according to the trove of 1,400 internal documents inspected and reported on by The New York Times

Moderators who have worked for Facebook admit they often rely on Google Translate to read posts, and are put under pressure to achieve targets by making decisions on the acceptability of content within a matter of seconds, just as call centre customer service agents are required to clear down calls quickly, according to the report.

The guidelines for moderators, reviewed every other Tuesday morning by “several dozen Facebook employees who gather over breakfast,” according to Facebook public relations propaganda, areare filled with “numerous gaps, baises and outright errors,” according to the Times.

Moderators were once told, for example, to remove fund-raising appeals for volcano victims in Indonesia because a co-sponsor of the drive was on Facebook’s internal list of banned groups. In Myanmar, a paperwork error allowed a prominent extremist group, accused of fomenting genocide, to stay on the platform for months. In India, moderators were mistakenly told to flag for possible removal comments critical of religion. –NYT

The guidelines, set by “mostly young engineers and lawyers,” must be interpreted by Facebook’s fleet of mostly outsourced moderators which employ largely unskilled workers, “many hired out of call centers.”

(Illegal migrants working on zero hours contracts perhaps? – editor)

Moderators have expressed frustration at rules they say don’t always make sense and sometimes require them to leave up posts they fear could lead to violence. “You feel like you killed someone by not acting,” one said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he had signed a nondisclosure agreement. –NYT

According to Facebook executives, they are working diligently to rid the platform of “dangerous” content.

“It’s not our place to correct people’s speech, but we do want to enforce our community standards on our platform,” said Facebook senior News Feed engineer. “When you’re in our community, we want to make sure that we’re balancing freedom of expression and safety.”

The company’s head of global policy management, Monika Bickert, meanwhile, said that the company’s primary goal was to prevent harm – though perfection “is not possible.”

“We have billions of posts every day, we’re identifying more and more potential violations using our technical systems,” said Bickert. “At that scale, even if you’re 99 percent accurate, you’re going to have a lot of mistakes.

Indeed it is not, but can an organisations whose senior management have been only too willing to use the company’s position to promote the left wing, globalist causes they support, ever be trusted toensure balanced treatment for political and social commentary which challenges the idea and values their corporate leaders want to impose on the world?

And since Facebook’s set of rules are more or less a patchwork of Excel spreadsheets and unorganized PowerPoint presentations, there is no single master file or reference guide. ing to the Times, “Moderators must sort a post into one of three “tiers” of severity. They must bear in mind lists like the six “designated dehumanizing comparisons,” among them comparing Jews to rats.” Facebook insists the files are only for training, but moderators say they are used as day-to-day reference materials.

One document sets out several rules just to determine when a word like “martyr” or “jihad” indicates pro-terrorism speech. Another describes when discussion of a barred group should be forbidden. Words like “brother” or “comrade” probably cross the line. So do any of a dozen emojis. –NYT

“There’s a real tension here between wanting to have nuances to account for every situation, and wanting to have a set of policies we can enforce accurately and we can explain cleanly,” said Bickert, who added “We’re not drawing these lines in a vacuum.”

The Times concludes that entrusing to Facebook the task of policing of what they consider extremism or disinformation intrudes into sensitive political matters worldwide – “sometimes clumsily.”

“Facebook’s role has become so hegemonic, so monopolistic, that it has become a force unto itself,” said Balkans expert Jasmin Mujanovic. “No one entity, especially not a for-profit venture like Facebook, should have that kind of power to influence public debate and policy.

The full New York Times report can be read here.

****************************************************************

Fascism Spreads From Tech Corporations To Finance Sector As Mastercard Blocks Conservative Clients
Blocking payments to individuals or groups by financial service firms because of their political views impedes freedom of speech in a free society, journalist Ben Swann has told RT, following reports that MasterCard is allegedly on course to censor the far-right by blocking payments from supporters. READ MORE >>>

German politician calls on facebook to abolish free speech
A German politician has given the clearest indication yet that the political elites of the free world are ideologically much closer to Adolf Hitler’s National Socialists than the social liberalism they claim to support. Free speech is the basis of all liberal democracy. Heiko Maas, the German justice minister has has written to the Facebook it removes “xenophobic and racist” anti-migrant posts from its website and apps., has written to the company to demand an urgent review of its policy over hate messages.

Free Speech Is Being Murdered By The Media And Left Wing Authoritarianism
Without free speech there is no democracy. Without democracy there is no freedom. But all over the developed world free speech is under attack from politically correct politics. It is time to start resisting, do not believe the propaganda published by mainstream media, question everything and make up your own mind. as The Buddha said, “Believe nothing you read or are told unless it agrees with your own experience and common sense.”

Artificial Intelligence: Nearly nine million British jobs could be lost to AI by 2030?

Farage Reckless Facing Rabid Left Wing Fanatics
Following the defection to UKIP of Conservative MP Mark Reckless, who yesterday shocked the media and political establishment (everyone else knew it was on the cards.) by announcing his switch from con to Kipper from the podium at the closing session of UKIP’s conference, the Kippers latest recruit and his new leader yesterday faced angry but ineffectual protests

Farage Reckless Facing Rabid Left Wing Fanatics

Following the defection to UKIP of Conservative MP Mark Reckless, who yesterday shocked the media and political establishment (everyone else knew it was on the cards.) by announcing his switch from con to Kipper from the podium at the closing session of UKIP’s conference, the Kippers latest recruit and his new leader yesterday faced angry but ineffectual protests

Obama administration ‘blocking’ information from the press

Uncovering information that should be available to the public has become increasingly difficult under the presidency of Barack Obama, an Associated Press bureau chief says. In some cases, it surpasses the secrecy of the George W. Bush administration. The White House’s penchant for secrecy does not just apply to the federal government, according to AP’s Washington bureau chief, Sally Buzbee.

Western Hypocrisy In Reporting News about Ukraine And Russia

The opening paragraph of a CNN report on the latest developments in the crisis in Ukraine illusrate perfectly the hypocrisy of Western media in the way they cast Russia as the danger to world peace and America as bringer of freedom and democracy. In fact in the crisis over the US attempt to draw Ukraine into NATO the positions taken by the USA abd Russias are the opposite of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

Scandal hit Rotherham ‘deleted abuse files’

In a move that puts them among the contenders for lying, self serving shits of the decade, but still in a league of their own un terms of complete and utter shittiness, it has emerged that the scum sucking scab lice of Rotherham Council’s controlling Labour group and the public servants they employed had deleted files in order to cover up their complicity in the blatant and systematic child abuse perpetrated under the noses of council officials.

Centralized power – the worst of all possible worlds

The centralization of power over the past few decades in nations of the developed world has led to the evolution of a sociopathic managerial class formed mainly from the old petite bourgoisie who have now gravitted to public sector careers where their delusions of social status and the unaccountability of office lead them to abuse such power as they have.

Kick Political Correctness Out Of Football

As another football versus politiocally correct authoritarianist brings ‘the beautiful game’ even further into disrepute, we wonder is it time to kick politically correct authoritarianism out of sport.

Intrusive Surveillance Technology, Internet control freaks and The Orwell-Huxley-Dick Dystiopianometer

Are privacy campaigners right to be worried about intrustive internet technology and the massive databases that log our behaviour and parse the data for patters that enable us to be targeted for advertising? Should we bee worried by surveillance or are those that raise doubts just scaremongering? The Orwell-huxley-Dick dystopianometer is rising.

So Who Is Anti – science? Those Who Question Climate Change Or Those Who Would Abolish Free Speech

It was looking as if the global warming scare was dead, then that Nazi shit Barack Obama, seeing his dream of being President Of The World slipping away, gave his science whores enough money to enable them to kick some life back into it. Now the “science” lobby, unable to put together an convinging argument against their challengers are demanding the abolition of free speech.

New World Order War On free Speech Comes To Britain – Guardian editor accused of treason

The right to free speech is under threat from intolerant, authoritarian elitists, call them The Illuminati, New World Order, Scientific Dictatorshgip, Global Elite, whatever. Their goal is absolute power and they know that while the right of free speech, the free press and free access to information exist they cannot succeed.

How academic debate is suppressed on science topics like Climate Change, GMOs, Pesticides and Toxicity of medicines
Intellectual intolerance and the supposed superiority of the scientific education have led not just to the politiciisation of science but to it’s being seduced by corporate money and political power. Science was ever fascism’s whore of course and the egos of scientists are easily bought. This has led to a very unhealthy emergence of dogmas and orthodoxies and an intolerance of the dissent that is essential if scientific research is to have any credibility.

Phobophobia – Fear Of Being called Phobic?

Homophobia is not fear of homosexuals but fear of thec same thing which does not make sense. Just as politically correct thinking uses the word bigot nonsensically so it’s accusations of phobia are irrational – as irrational as the groundless fear familiar to those who suffer the recognized medical conditions called phobias.

The Importance Of Free Speech And A Free Press

Politicians around the developed world including leaders of the two most powerful democracies, Barack Obama and David Cameron have been falling over themselves to join the attack on free speech. On subjects as diverse as climate…

How Google Tried And Failed To Fix 2016 US Election For Hillary Clinton

Over the past two years, since Donald Trump unexpectedly defeated Hillary Clinton to become President Of The United States we have suffered an almost daily barrage of fake news from liberal and left leaning news sources about how the Russians, in collaboration with the Trump campaign, hacked servers, used bots to flood Facebook with pro Trump propaganda and swung the election for Trump.

These players have of course produced no evidence to back up their lurid allegations. There is plenty of evidence however, that Silicon Valley teach giants abused their dominance of digital media to disseminate pro – Clinton propaganda, in violation of US electoral law.

Here’s the latest story via Information Clearing House:

Email Shows How Google Tried To Help Elect Clinton

Watch:

An email obtained exclusively by ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ reveals that a senior Google employee deployed the company’s resources to increase voter turnout in ways she believed would help Clinton win the election.

Posted September 11, 2018

Are You Tired Of The Lies And Non-Stop Propaganda?

Get Your FREE Daily Newsletter

No Advertising – No Government Grants – This Is Independent Media

==See Also==

Note To ICH Community

We ask that you assist us in dissemination of the article published by ICH to your social media accounts and post links to the article from other websites.

US Dept. of Homeland Security Created Fake narrative On Russian Interference In Elections.

Picture: ConsortiumNews.com

The narrative of Russian intelligence attacking state and local election boards and interfering with the outcome of U.S. elections has achieved near-universal acceptance among establishment media and political organisations.  And now it has been accepted by the Trump administration’s intelligence chief, Dan Coats, as well.

But the real story behind that narrative reveals that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) created and developed an account of events that was designed deliberately to spread false information and cause fear and panic. 

DHS staff, in collusion with people whose involvement in industrial espionage, compiled a report suggesting hackers linked to the Russian government could have targeted voter-related websites in many states and then leaked a sensational story of Russian attacks on those sites. Had it been made clear that the whole thing was fabricated, yes they COULD have hacked the system, security was lax at best, but there is no evidence anyone did interfere with voting. The facts would have revealed a different story. When state election officials began asking questions, they discovered that the DHS claims were false and, in at least one case, laughable.

The National Security Agency and special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigating team, which has been conducting a witch hunt against the Trump administration since shortly after the election in 2016, have also claimed evidence that Russian military intelligence was behind election infrastructure hacking, but on closer examination, those claims turn out to be speculative and misleading as well. Mueller’s indictment of 12 GRU military intelligence officers does not cite any violations of U.S. election laws though it claims Russia interfered with the 2016 election.

On Sept. 29, 2016, a few weeks after the hacking of political websites in Illinois and Arizona, ABC News sensationalised the story with a headline: “Russian Hackers Targeted Nearly Half of States’ Voter Registration Systems, Successfully Infiltrated 4.” The story itself reported that “more than 20 state election systems” had been hacked, and four states had been “breached” by hackers suspected of working for the Russian government. The story cited only sources “knowledgeable” about the matter, hinting that those who were pushing the story were eager to hide the institutional origins of the information. Again no evidence was offered to support the allegations.

Behind that sensational headline the real story was of a government department playing inter – departmental politics by seeking to establish its supremacy within the national security state apparatus on cybersecurity, despite its limited resources for such responsibility.

RELATED:


Media’s hyping of Russia threat a ‘grotesque absurdity’ says veteran investigative reporter John Pilger

UKIP Call to ‘Defend Free Speech’ Against ‘Globalist Elite’ After Social Media Purges

We reported last week that Britain’s most undemocratic and authoritarian Prime minister to date, Theresa May, was planning to set up a committee of MPs and government officials to monitor and advise on shutting down ‘fake news’ internet sites. They would use a definition of fake news that embraced satire, parody and comedy.

The UK Independence Party (UKIP), currently enjoying a resurgence in polls as support for both government and officials weakens, has urged UK citizens to defend free speech in the West after big tech firms are rumoured to have collaborated with governments to remove non – conformist websites, including InfoWars and Tommy Robinson, from social media.

On Monday, Apple, Facebook, Pinterest, Spotify, and Google-owned YouTube removed content from InfoWars and its owner Alex Jones, saying he and the website violated their policies against hate speech and harassment.

Supporters of the ban say Mr Jones is a conspiracy theorist (he is,) who deserves to be silenced (he doesn’t), while critics have claimed the purge is an attempt to interfere in the U.S. midterm elections and described it as a form of “political censorship”. It is a move that is likely to backfire as Trump is gaining in popularity ahead of the US mid term elections in November and the 2016 experients shows his supporters are far less likely to reveal their voting intentions than the virtue signalling democrats.

On Tuesday anti – Islamification activist Tommy Robinson was expunged from Facebook’s Instagram platform. He has already been banned from Twitter but still has an un-verified Facebook page with approaching a million followers, which he fears will be next.

In a statement, UKIP said: “These are private companies but the politically correct establishment is acting through corporations hand in glove to snuff out anything the globalist elite do not like.

“Free speech is under threat in the West, and we must stand firm in defence of it, otherwise, all dissenting voices will be muzzled.”

UKIP itself, which has won the last European Parliament election in Britain and remains the nation’s most significant party in that assembly, has also been the target of censorship by big tech firms.

The party’s leader and Gerard Batten MEP and one of its representatives in the London Assembly were “shadow banned” on Twitter last month, making it hard for most users to see their messages and severely restricting their reach on the platform.

UK Government wants complete control of online control to censor ‘unreliable’ news sources

British state needs complete online media control and wants to decide which news sites are ‘reliable’ – report

Demanding news websites be ranked on ‘perceived reliability’ by a state-sanctioned body and controlled by ‘impartiality’ rules, as well as suggesting social media firms fund education for citizens on what news to trust, are recommendations included in a parliamentary enquiry interim report.

The Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee, made up of anti-Brexit MPs, believe that satire and parody should be included in the definition of ‘Fake News’.

fake-news1

fake-news2

Other calls for all political ads to be registered, significant increases in fines for perceived wrongs during campaigns, including holding social media platforms responsible for ‘fake news’ on their platforms, are also in the report.

The remain MPs report also wants all political advertising to be declared in a public register with all ads to come with an imprint so it is clear where they originated.

READ MORE at Voices of Europe