Sunday, June 18, 2017
Allow me to explain. Everyone who follows me or has friended me here, especially those who know me in real life, knows that I don't follow any particular political party. This gives me the freedom to call out BS when and where I see it. It doesn't matter to me if it's Democrats or Republicans, I call it out. I've even written blogs and other posts critical of the Libertarian Party; they're not a major player, but they're trying to be. And perhaps they had a hand too, a small one, in getting Trump elected.
Now on to the matter at hand. I've been posting a variety of things in the so-called "No BS Forum", covering corruption of both major parties and individuals within those parties. A few weeks ago, the owner of the group, one Gary Gambino, stated in comments that he did not want an echo chamber. Another member, a hard-core supporter of Hillary Clinton named John Fotia, responded that there was something to be said for echo chambers.
Fotia, Victoria Cash, and others have refused repeatedly to engage in civil discussion. They call my posts fake news, even when shown proof from other sources that it's not fake. Fotia even called Alternet, a mainstay of the left, a questionable source. Why? Because the article he was responding to detailed the corruption of the DNC, specifically Clinton and Shultz. He's done the same with other progressive sources, ones that are rated highest on the media bias checking website, https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ , for the same reason.
Perhaps a week after that, I was booted from the group. A day later, through the intervention of a good friend, Kris Haynes, I was reinstated.
Today I was attempting to be civil and engage in discussion, as I usually am, but the people there don't want discussion, especially if it's about Hillary Clinton, Debbie Wassermann-Shultz or Donna Brazile, the ringleaders of the corruption within the Democratic Party. Instead, they attacked me and my posts with ad hominems and deflections to things that are totally irrelevant to the topic of the post. And out of nowhere, I'm banned again. Not only that, Gary, the group owner, blocked me from PM'ing him to ask why.
But I'd lay odds that not one of those actually engaging in these attacks has been treated the same, or even given a warning.
So. I'm posting this blog in the two other groups Gary owns. I fully expect it to be deleted and for me to be booted from those groups as well. And that's okay. Because now I know that Gambino has no interest in open debate of issues. He wants echo chambers all around. He's proven it by kicking me out of the so-called "No BS Forum". Twice. And he's not even man enough to take a PM asking for an explanation of his actions.
Here's a kick in the pants for anyone who is able to think for themselves. My posts, as I've said, have been called fake news, bogus sources, and other things along those lines, in spite of the verifiable facts and truth they contain. However, I live and write by a single axiom. It's been stated clearly in three distinct ways.
First, by Mohandas Gandhi: "The friend you must cultivate is that part of your enemy that knows the truth."
Second, by Malcolm X: "I am for Truth, no matter who speaks it."
And third, by my Teacher, Dr. David M. Berry: "Truth is Truth, even out of a liar's mouth."
No, I'm not mad. I'm actually happy. I learned a valuable lesson that I should have learned long ago. Something about casting pearls. It's in the Christian Bible, if you want to look it up. But I'm through with this nonsense.
I hope Gary Gambino and the other residents of his total BS echo chamber have a nice life as the Democratic Party self-destructs by staying with corporate sycophants as their chosen candidates instead of real progressives.
I am, and I shall remain, a proud independent, thinking for myself rather than letting the Establishment do it for me.
© 2017 by Don Rice Jr.
Wednesday, June 7, 2017
So here's the declassified summary of the "report" released by DHS in January:
Let's break it down, shall we?
Items 1 - 6 are so much "he said, she said" statements with no evidence to back them up:
1. Officials *believed* hackers were associated with Russian intel agencies.
2. A hacking group *possibly* linked to the agency...
3. Investigators *believe* that the G.R.U., or a hacking group known as Fancy Bear or A.P.T. 28...
4. A self-proclaimed hacker that investigators *say* was a “persona” created by the G.R.U.
5. Investigators *say* it is a front for the Russian hackers...
6. The report released on Jan. 6 *said* that intelligence officials “assess with high confidence..."
Now, from item 7 onward, we have a lot of actions being taken and discussed based on the above "he said, she said" statements:
7. Dozens of newspapers, television stations, bloggers and radio stations around the United States... pursued reporting based on the hacked material, significantly increasing the effects of the cyberattack.
8. Note the disclaimer on the DHS website "report":
"The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) *does not provide any warranties of any kind* regarding any information sontained within."
9 - 11: Minimal detail about the effects on the election, with no reference to the veracity or lack thereof of the emails leaked. Those ieffects included the forced resignation of DWS.
Conclusion based on available facts, without the innuendoes and suppositions inherent in this kind of bogus reporting:
If the emails are not so bad, like the Establishment actors and supporters claim, then release the original emails to point out where the analysts are wrong. But they haven't done that, and I predict they won't do that. Why? Because the emails have electronic validation markers added by email software that verify authenticity. Those markers, I would wager, would also verify that those who are critical of the DNC are right to be so.
Further, there would have been no reason for Shultz to resign.
Critical reading and thinking, combined with knowledge of words and language, are wonderful tools only if one bothers to use them.
© 2017 by Don Rice Jr.