If thou gazest long into the Pit, the Pit will also gaze into thee

#143

How did I miss this?

#142

:puke-front: :puke-front:

#141

free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ Your videos are crap John D.

Maybe you will like this one better.

#140

Your videos are crap John D.

#139

This hits it on the head in my opinion. And this lady has the BEST accent.

#138

MarcusAu wrote: ↑ So in the final analysis no one could find any evidence of Kavanaugh assaulting Stollznow.

Didn't somebody say that the Democrats have the emails proving it all?

#137

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ I’ve often wondered whether Baxter got his thirty bucks.

I miss that glorious bastard Mykeru. Why does he never write?

#136

I’ve often wondered whether Baxter got his thirty bucks.

#135

So in the final analysis no one could find any evidence of Kavanaugh assaulting Stollznow.

#134

#133

My last post on this thread (probably):
https://dailystormer.name/justice-kavan ... ow-whores/

#132

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ Apologies. I was referencing the ‘shirtless one’ video.

.......

Having poked till my free articles ran out, can someone explain to me why the WaPo and NYT are considered less partisan than Fox News?

It all depends on who you ask. Conservatives think Wapo and the failing New York Times are extremely biased. Leftists think Fox is extremely biased. I used to watch more left leaning shows for my daily news and for many years watched PBS's News Hour every day. Now I find the News Hour to be truly unwatchable. I think I have changed, but also the News Hour has changed. They can't even report straight news correctly in my opinion. My goto now is the first half of Fox's Special Report. The first part of the show is pretty much an okay news summary. The second half is opinion which I often skip.

In general I will almost never read anything in Wapo. I have read so much complete shit there that I just avoid them. The NYT sometimes gets my eyeballs, but not very often.

The Wall Street Journal is the best MSM source, by far, in my opinion. They did write that shitty hit piece on Pewdepie which was really bad, but they have avoided repeating this mistake recently.

#131

I see the FBI took a knee before Trump and produced a fake report - as expected. Clearly the investment in Russian collusion paid a dividend beyond a mere election win.

Hmmm. “Mueller”. Rings a bell.

:burn:

#130

free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑
Brive1987 wrote: ↑ Apologies. I was referencing the ‘shirtless one’ video.

.......

Having poked till my free articles ran out, can someone explain to me why the WaPo and NYT are considered less partisan than Fox News?
WaPo and NYT have both hard journalism as well as magazine features like lifestyle that have a lot of opinion pieces as well as editorials that should be considered as opinion. A fair amount of the opinion pieces are advocacy writing. Their journalism is usually pretty good although they do make mistakes from time to time they are reasonably good at sticking to the facts and avoiding bias.

Maybe. Their websites didn’t display any of this depth of nuance.

#129

DemonRats. :lol:

But it’s opinion over argument. Not necessarily bad opinion.

Republican Femdom. Could be a thing ......

#128

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ Apologies. I was referencing the ‘shirtless one’ video.

.......

Having poked till my free articles ran out, can someone explain to me why the WaPo and NYT are considered less partisan than Fox News?

WaPo and NYT have both hard journalism as well as magazine features like lifestyle that have a lot of opinion pieces as well as editorials that should be considered as opinion. A fair amount of the opinion pieces are advocacy writing. Their journalism is usually pretty good although they do make mistakes from time to time they are reasonably good at sticking to the facts and avoiding bias.
Fox News has a few reporters that identify as journalists. Shep Smith is reasonably good at staying factual and even handed for instance, Bret Baier and Chris Wallace aren't bad all the time but sometimes I think cross the line into bias.
The rest of them aren't journalists but are highly biased advocates or more accurately propagandists. Hannity has himself admitted he is not a journalist. They don't give a shit about balanced reporting or even fact checking. They are somewhere in between repeating extremist Republican talking points and making up BS for Trump to tweet about. A typical example:

I bet you like her, she's kind of an older even nuttier Fath Goldy. :P

#127

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ Apologies. I was referencing the ‘shirtless one’ video.

.......

Having poked till my free articles ran out, can someone explain to me why the WaPo and NYT are considered less partisan than Fox News?

WaPo and NYT have both hard journalism as well as magazine features like lifestyle that have a lot of opinion pieces as well as editorials that should be considered as opinion. A fair amount of the opinion pieces are advocacy writing. Their journalism is usually pretty good although they do make mistakes from time to time they are reasonably good at sticking to the facts and avoiding bias.
Fox News has a few reporters that identify as journalists. Shep Smith is reasonably good at staying factual and even handed for instance, Bret Baier and Chris Wallace aren't bad all the time but sometimes I think cross the line into bias.
The rest of them aren't journalists but are highly biased advocates or more accurately propagandists. Hannity has himself admitted he is not a journalist. They don't give a shit about balanced reporting or even fact checking. They are somewhere in between repeating extremist Republican talking points and making up BS for Trump to tweet about. A typical example:

I bet you like her, she's kind of an older even nuttier Fath Goldy. :P

#126

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ I was referencing the ‘shirtless one’ video.

An understandable choice....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLlaSoozZbM

PS Ultimately dogs may have more of an effect on our lives than supreme court justices. And in a good way too.

#125

Apologies. I was referencing the ‘shirtless one’ video.

.......

Having poked till my free articles ran out, can someone explain to me why the WaPo and NYT are considered less partisan than Fox News?

#124

From 2012? You have been a long term fan.

#123

John D wrote: ↑
CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
John D wrote: ↑
Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:23 am

MarcusAu wrote: ↑
John D wrote: ↑ Also, the Logan's Run solution would solve the problem of my occasional thoughts of suicide
I'm sure the dog(s) would miss you.

Possibly some people here as well.
A very pretty brunet in a white frock (wearing no bra by the way) just popped by and said "Carrousel".

PS - my wife and I actually had a constructive discussion yesterday and we have decided to get one dog. If we think the new dog "needs" another dog in it's life we will consider a second dog. So, it is working out so far.
Congrats. I accidentally ended up owning a dog a couple weeks back. I'm quite pleased with her.
Cool.... and for an update. My wife and I are going to pick up our new mutt tomorrow. She is about 15 pounds of Pekingese and some kind of spaniel. My wife is head-over-heals in love with her already.... and... we are worried something will go wrong with the deal...haha. These rescue people are tricky to work with sometimes so we hope all goes well.

When we were trying to adopt a stray from a rescue once they actually asked us what we would do with the dog if we got a divorce. I said "We will never divorce so that is not a question I can answer." and the bitch says.... "Well you can't know that for sure so I need an answer." and I said "I have no concept of what my decisions would be regarding a divorce because I will never get a divorce." Needless to say... they ended up telling us we couldn't adopt the dog we wanted because he had separation anxiety and we were not home 100% of the time. I was pretty upset that day.

Yeah, that's the main complaint about our local shelter. Also that people pick out a dog, bond with them, and then are told another dog would be a better match. I suppose most are doing their best, but I am sure some are on a power trip. Good luck.

Oh, one thing that seemed to endear me to the staff- I brought in food and treats for the other shelter dogs. They warmed up quickly. And the poor dogs seemed to need some treats in their lives,

#122

MarcusAu wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 02, 2018 10:30 pm

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Congrats. I accidentally ended up owning a dog a couple weeks back. I'm quite pleased with her.
And what does she think of you?

Judging by her reactions, she seems quite fond of me and the family. The cats still remain unsure, but as I write this, I'm having the head cat and my ridiculously tiny dog share my lap. So I'm calling it a win. She is an 8yo Yorkshire Terrier. I found her trotting down my sidewalk last August, fed her and tried to find her owners. Couldn't find them, so I took her to the Humane Society, where she had extensive medical work, including losing most of her teeth and a fractured jaw. I stated if she remained unclaimed, I would adopt her. Surprisingly, nobody did. She is very sweet, very affectionate and loves to snuggle. My family is quite smitten with her, though I'd always pictured owning a retriever, I am very fond of her as well.

#121

The FBI are hot on the case of investigating Kavanaugh. If they were any more lax you would think they were the UK police investigating muslim rape grooming gangs. Apparently. up to 40 people have come forward to make statements that have been ignored.
One article on this:
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-des ... -kavanaugh

#120

John D wrote: ↑ The shirtless one is wearing a shirt and I now agree with him on this topic. I think Dr. Ford is a liar. I can't be 100% sure.... but I no longer consider her testimony convincing.

Here is one with no shirt and no leather jacket. Needs moar lipstick, still one of his best videos.

#119

Sweaty-knickers interview.

#118

The shirtless one is wearing a shirt and I now agree with him on this topic. I think Dr. Ford is a liar. I can't be 100% sure.... but I no longer consider her testimony convincing.

#117

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
John D wrote: ↑
Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:23 am

MarcusAu wrote: ↑
John D wrote: ↑ Also, the Logan's Run solution would solve the problem of my occasional thoughts of suicide
I'm sure the dog(s) would miss you.

Possibly some people here as well.
A very pretty brunet in a white frock (wearing no bra by the way) just popped by and said "Carrousel".

PS - my wife and I actually had a constructive discussion yesterday and we have decided to get one dog. If we think the new dog "needs" another dog in it's life we will consider a second dog. So, it is working out so far.
Congrats. I accidentally ended up owning a dog a couple weeks back. I'm quite pleased with her.

Cool.... and for an update. My wife and I are going to pick up our new mutt tomorrow. She is about 15 pounds of Pekingese and some kind of spaniel. My wife is head-over-heals in love with her already.... and... we are worried something will go wrong with the deal...haha. These rescue people are tricky to work with sometimes so we hope all goes well.

When we were trying to adopt a stray from a rescue once they actually asked us what we would do with the dog if we got a divorce. I said "We will never divorce so that is not a question I can answer." and the bitch says.... "Well you can't know that for sure so I need an answer." and I said "I have no concept of what my decisions would be regarding a divorce because I will never get a divorce." Needless to say... they ended up telling us we couldn't adopt the dog we wanted because he had separation anxiety and we were not home 100% of the time. I was pretty upset that day.

#116

d4m10n wrote: ↑
Brive1987 wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 01, 2018 6:11 pm
Sans material evidence, it’s a balance of probability thing.
If I knew Brett and Mark were little shits ..
If I knew Christi was a paragon ..
If Brett and Mark were immediately and obviously unconvincing
If there was past record of assault ..
So . . . if you were to come to believe Christine really did show up at the gathering which Brett mentioned in his calendar (July 1st, 1982) then it would simply come down to whether you find her to be more credible than him?

We do have at least a few reasons to question his credibility at this point:

https..://twitter.com/FoxReports/status/1046594546333896704

https..://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1046910679914094592

https..://twitter.com/NBCPolitics/status/1047132979120803840

After 35 years I’d be shelving breathless (1 beer) smoking gun accusations. Your original scenario had the advantage of immediacy. This new hypothetical is, of course, just that.

#115

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Congrats. I accidentally ended up owning a dog a couple weeks back. I'm quite pleased with her.

And what does she think of you?

#114

John D wrote: ↑
Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:23 am

MarcusAu wrote: ↑
John D wrote: ↑ Also, the Logan's Run solution would solve the problem of my occasional thoughts of suicide
I'm sure the dog(s) would miss you.

Possibly some people here as well.
A very pretty brunet in a white frock (wearing no bra by the way) just popped by and said "Carrousel".

PS - my wife and I actually had a constructive discussion yesterday and we have decided to get one dog. If we think the new dog "needs" another dog in it's life we will consider a second dog. So, it is working out so far.

Congrats. I accidentally ended up owning a dog a couple weeks back. I'm quite pleased with her.

#113

#112

#111

Brive1987 wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 01, 2018 6:11 pm
Sans material evidence, it’s a balance of probability thing.
If I knew Brett and Mark were little shits ..
If I knew Christi was a paragon ..
If Brett and Mark were immediately and obviously unconvincing
If there was past record of assault ..

So . . . if you were to come to believe Christine really did show up at the gathering which Brett mentioned in his calendar (July 1st, 1982) then it would simply come down to whether you find her to be more credible than him?

We do have at least a few reasons to question his credibility at this point:

#110

Brive1987 wrote: ↑
d4m10n wrote: ↑
Brive1987 wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:51 pm
In this case we know they were together. We can assess their character in timely context. We know Christi demonstrated an observable reaction. There is a substantiated basis for the complaint. Failing material evidence, you would need to fill out your scenario to allow for a more subjective balancing of the information. At the moment your story is consistent with everything from rape to false accusation based on an underlying grievance.
If we did know Mark, Brett, and Christi were in the house at the time, what could possibly convince you to believe her version of events rather than theirs?
Sans material evidence, it’s a balance of probability thing.
If I knew Brett and Mark were little shits ..
If I knew Christi was a paragon ..
If Brett and Mark were immediately and obviously unconvincing
If there was past record of assault ..

But this is hypothetical. With BK we aren’t even on first base and 35 years have passed. It’s game over, man.

download.jpg: (8.01 KiB) Downloaded 95 times

#109

d4m10n wrote: ↑
Brive1987 wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:51 pm
In this case we know they were together. We can assess their character in timely context. We know Christi demonstrated an observable reaction. There is a substantiated basis for the complaint. Failing material evidence, you would need to fill out your scenario to allow for a more subjective balancing of the information. At the moment your story is consistent with everything from rape to false accusation based on an underlying grievance.
If we did know Mark, Brett, and Christi were in the house at the time, what could possibly convince you to believe her version of events rather than theirs?

Sans material evidence, it’s a balance of probability thing.
If I knew Brett and Mark were little shits ..
If I knew Christi was a paragon ..
If Brett and Mark were immediately and obviously unconvincing
If there was past record of assault ..

But this is hypothetical. With BK we aren’t even on first base and 35 years have passed. It’s game over, man.

#108

My apologies to Muslims...

#107

Brive1987 wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:51 pm
In this case we know they were together. We can assess their character in timely context. We know Christi demonstrated an observable reaction. There is a substantiated basis for the complaint. Failing material evidence, you would need to fill out your scenario to allow for a more subjective balancing of the information. At the moment your story is consistent with everything from rape to false accusation based on an underlying grievance.

If we did know Mark, Brett, and Christi were in the house at the time, what could possibly convince you to believe her version of events rather than theirs?

#106

This is good... the report from the Republic prosecutor who questioned Ford.
https://www.axios.com/brett-kavanaugh-r ... 9a711.html

#105

d4m10n wrote: ↑
Brive1987 wrote: ↑I refer you back to JohnD’s MarkC video above, which cogently argues that we are missing an objective basis to assess unsubstantiated accusations.
I need to know what you mean by unsubstantiated here. If a teen girl stomps down the stairs at Tommy's house party and announces to everyone present that Brett and Mark just pinned her to a bed and groped her, is that claim substantiated or unsubstantiated? How about if Mark and Brett deny anything untoward happened? If you go with unsubstantiated (as I expect you will) then what possible evidence could she adduce?

Well here’s another definition.

substantiate: support with proof or evidence

In this case we know they were together. We can assess their character in timely context. We know Christi demonstrated an observable reaction. There is a substantiated basis for the complaint. Failing material evidence, you would need to fill out your scenario to allow for a more subjective balancing of the information. At the moment your story is consistent with everything from rape to false accusation based on an underlying grievance.

#104

d4m10n wrote: ↑
John D wrote: ↑ Jesus fucking Christ.
The question was whether you would characterize a particular claim as substantiated or unsubstantiated.

If a teen girl (let's call her Christi) stomps down the stairs at Tommy's house party and announces to everyone present that Brett and Mark just pinned her to a bed and groped her, is that claim substantiated or unsubstantiated? If you go with unsubstantiated (as I expect you will) then what possible evidence could she adduce?

Really... fuck you. You actually like to have stupid pedantic bull shit discussions about the definition of words..... you are part of the reason why most people hate atheists. a-hole.

#103

John D wrote: ↑ Jesus fucking Christ.

The question was whether you would characterize a particular claim as substantiated or unsubstantiated.

If a teen girl (let's call her Christi) stomps down the stairs at Tommy's house party and announces to everyone present that Brett and Mark just pinned her to a bed and groped her, is that claim substantiated or unsubstantiated? If you go with unsubstantiated (as I expect you will) then what possible evidence could she adduce?

#102

No need to cuss now Jeb D. :naughty:

#101

d4m10n wrote: ↑
Brive1987 wrote: ↑I refer you back to JohnD’s MarkC video above, which cogently argues that we are missing an objective basis to assess unsubstantiated accusations.
I need to know what you mean by unsubstantiated here. If a teen girl stomps down the stairs at Tommy's house party and announces to everyone present that Brett and Mark just pinned her to a bed and groped her, is that claim substantiated or unsubstantiated? How about if Mark and Brett deny anything untoward happened? If you go with unsubstantiated (as I expect you will) then what possible evidence could she adduce?

You are actually a fucking idiot.... seriously. I can't even understand how you could build this question in your brain. It is not even worth discussing... but... I just had to spend the time telling you what my opinion is of this particular and completely idiotic question. It is like Bill Clinton changing the definition of "is".

Definition of unsubstantiated
: not proven to be true : not substantiated

Jesus fucking Christ.

#100

Brive1987 wrote: ↑I refer you back to JohnD’s MarkC video above, which cogently argues that we are missing an objective basis to assess unsubstantiated accusations.

I need to know what you mean by unsubstantiated here. If a teen girl stomps down the stairs at Tommy's house party and announces to everyone present that Brett and Mark just pinned her to a bed and groped her, is that claim substantiated or unsubstantiated? How about if Mark and Brett deny anything untoward happened? If you go with unsubstantiated (as I expect you will) then what possible evidence could she adduce?

#99

free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ It appears that when Kavanaugh declared that all the bad questions people have been asking him is a plot by the Clintons, he apparently forgot to mention the real leaders of the cabal:
https://dailystormer.name/evil-jews-tra ... ng-circus/

Kav's left-wing conspiracy theory defense beggars belief, but I suppose there is nearly always an even crazier theory on offer.

#98

free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ I like this Kavanaugh better than the pussy that spent all of his college years studying, doing sports, and going to church.

42663246_1054617424701127_6279247207568769024_n.jpg: (33.29 KiB) Downloaded 149 times

#97

Never a bad thing.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/proxy ... 54-h415-nc

And I’d take the 300 quid option.

#96

Blonde looks like she has been taking makeup tips from Morticia Addams.

But speaking of appreciating traditional culture - i've been thinks of where to holiday in the British Isles...Slough looks promising....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sUXKX8nCw0

#95

so. When will they be lampooning Ford?

These people are boringly partisan to a fault.

Here is Blonde wondering on what basis the country can stand together on the basis of shared values.

#94

#93

#92

It appears that when Kavanaugh declared that all the bad questions people have been asking him is a plot by the Clintons, he apparently forgot to mention the real leaders of the cabal:
https://dailystormer.name/evil-jews-tra ... ng-circus/

#91

I like this Kavanaugh better than the pussy that spent all of his college years studying, doing sports, and going to church.

#90

Bring the hand towel.

#89

BK highlighted the self obvious non-professional implications of not getting a promotion because you are considered to be a rapist. In case it wasn’t obvious, we already have calls for him to be secured away from teenagers.

I refer you back to JohnD’s MarkC video above, which cogently argues that we are missing an objective basis to assess unsubstantiated accusations. Which of your “many” factors would you bring into play here?

#88

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ I have very clear memories of a happy consensual teenage event in September 1982.

This sounds like a pleasurably memorable moment, if I'm picking up what you're putting down...but what I'm getting at here is that some moments are much more memorable than others.

Brive1987 wrote: ↑What would be your methodology for assigning probability to these claims such that a positive claim’s veracity is in proportion to the harm such a finding would have?

I can think of many factors we ought to weigh when it comes to believing or rejecting some specific claim, but probable harm is not really one of them unless we are specifically empowered to act on our beliefs.

For the record, though, failing to receive a prestigious position with life tenure when you already have life tenure in a slightly less prestigious position isn't high up on the list of possible harms. A far more serious harm would be believing accusers when life and liberty are on the line.

#87

d4m10n wrote: ↑
Brive1987 wrote: ↑ I thought Kaiser (sic?) was a required participant?
I mentioned her above. Not sure what you mean by "required" here.

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ I’m saying it would be nice if the people who were meant to be at the party could acknowledge the baseline social event happened.
That would be nice, yes, but it is entirely unreasonable to expect anyone to remember a social gathering from July 1982 unless something very memorable happened (to them) at the time.

Just last week, I was tagged by an old classmate in a photo from high school.

20180928...._185243.jpg

I recognize the young woman in the photo, but I could not tell you where we were or when or why. (Best guess is some sort of field trip.)

Brive1987 wrote: ↑I know this is a job interview and not a court trial. But the job is an important one and it’s being thrown by an accusation of criminality within a political hot-war.
Are you willing to argue that it was wrong for Blasey Ford to come forward, even if her memories of that evening were substantively correct?

I don’t know Ford’s motives for coming forward, though I do know her strong political leanings. I don’t know whether she’s donating or pocketing her million bucks gofundme. The moral territory is ambiguous.

The Kayser thing is just that neither is mentioned in diary. Not a deal breaker.

I have very clear memories of a happy consensual teenage event in September 1982. I can even recall that the Redford move “the candidate” was on in the background. Memory is weird.

What would be your methodology for assigning probability to these claims such that a positive claim’s veracity is in proportion to the harm such a finding would have? Imagine you are writing a procedures manual for the Senate.

#86

I say next we try some witch swimming,

#85

John D wrote: ↑ This is pretty damn interesting.

https://www.instyle.com/news/brett-kava ... ge-decoded

#84

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ I thought Kaiser (sic?) was a required participant?

I mentioned her above. Not sure what you mean by "required" here.

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ I’m saying it would be nice if the people who were meant to be at the party could acknowledge the baseline social event happened.

That would be nice, yes, but it is entirely unreasonable to expect anyone to remember a social gathering from July 1982 unless something very memorable happened (to them) at the time.

Just last week, I was tagged by an old classmate in a photo from high school.

20180928_185243.jpg: (80.92 KiB) Downloaded 230 times

I recognize the young woman in the photo, but I could not tell you where we were or when or why. (Best guess is some sort of field trip.)

Brive1987 wrote: ↑I know this is a job interview and not a court trial. But the job is an important one and it’s being thrown by an accusation of criminality within a political hot-war.

Are you willing to argue that it was wrong for Blasey Ford to come forward, even if her memories of that evening were substantively correct?

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Believe Survivors - Stollznow Memorial Thread