FBI Reportedly Looking At Breitbart, InfoWars As Part Of Russia Probe - Polidicks

[img]https://res.cloudinary.com/tpm/image/upload/c_fill,g_face,w_482,h_267,f_auto,q_auto,fl_lossy,dpr_2.0/wpilrafnclp5e1f0s39g.jpg[/img] [quote] The FBI’s Counterintelligence Division is looking into the role far-right news sites including Breitbart, InfoWars and the Kremlin-backed RT might have played in Russia’s influence campaign during the U.S. presidential election, McClatchy reported Monday. Automated computer bots strategically deployed unabashedly pro-Trump articles, which often contained falsehoods, from those sites on social media at moments when Trump’s campaign was flagging, anonymous FBI sources told McClatchy. The probe reportedly is looking at whether those publications willingly coordinated with Russian operatives in promoting their stories. [/quote] [url="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/fbi-probing-infowars-breitbart-russia"]TalkingPointsMemo[/url]

Woah what? I know all those sites are bullshit but it would suprise me if Infowars or Breitbart were directly coordinating with Russia (RT obviously is). Unless I am missing the point?

I can understand why they would investigate that but I don't want them to push the narrative that all dissent is due to russian influence

"...and the Kremlin-backed RT might have played in Russia’s influence campaign during the U.S. presidential election," I see the FBI have finally become masters of the bloody obvious. RT has been wholly owned by the Russian government since 2014 or thereabouts. Would be surprised if Breitbart or Infowars were specifically working with the Russian government, tbh I think they just really like Putin and his policies in general.

The only one that would surprise me is infowars tbh what could a polite water filter sales man have to do with russia?

[QUOTE=Dr.C;51991906]I can understand why they would investigate that but I don't want them to push the narrative that all dissent is due to russian influence[/QUOTE] At the same time, how golden would it be if InfoWars, a conspiracy website, was actually involved in a conspiracy?

What I'm scared of is the Alt-right being cracked down as thoughtcrime.

[QUOTE=Waffle cones.;51992028]It's very fortunate for you that this delusional, self-victimizing fantasy is all you have to worry about while millions will face actual problems at the hand of our government as a result this administration, such as losing health coverage, losing citizenship, losing civil rights, etc.[/QUOTE] I'm not alt-right, but Start cracking down on Alt-right as thoughtcrime leads down a slippery slope.

[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51992128]I'm not alt-right, but Start cracking down on Alt-right as thoughtcrime leads down a slippery slope.[/QUOTE] Considering the fact that the alt rights favored politicians basically control the government right now, this is never going to happen. I don't even think the FBI can even do anything to these outlets if they simply find Russian influence. If the alt right count being told that their favored media outlets are propaganda as being persecuted with thought crime, they've become as ridiculous and histrionic as the worst of the oppression-Olympics competitors on the left.

[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51991977]What I'm scared of is the Alt-right being cracked down as thoughtcrime.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51992128]I'm not alt-right, but Start cracking down on Alt-right as thoughtcrime leads down a slippery slope.[/QUOTE] This article was about how these specific "news" sources were being investigated for possible external influences. How does that even translate to "thoughtcrime?" take a breath, read the articles. not everything is a consipiracy

[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51992128]I'm not alt-right, but Start cracking down on Alt-right as thoughtcrime leads down a slippery slope.[/QUOTE] Again, why worry about a fallacious slippery slope fantasy when there are rights ALREADY being violated and and stomped on? [editline]21st March 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51992128]I'm not alt-right, but Start cracking down on Alt-right as thoughtcrime leads down a slippery slope.[/QUOTE] Also i will reiterate, and any sane person would agree, that rights must be defended regardless of ideology so rest assured if injustice starts swinging towards altrighters people of goodwill will rise against that injustice just as thoroughly as those currently, actually being victimized. Further, i think its worth noting that NO MATTER your beliefs, ideology, political leanings, the threats posed by the powerful will impact all, and the effects surely wont discriminate by republican or democrat, liberal or conservative. Its time to recognize abuses of power are against the interest of everyone in light of our common humanity and universal deservedness of dignity and respect and that seeking a more just society demands we overcome petty enforced differences and labels.

[QUOTE=luverofJ!93;51992781]Again, why worry about a fallacious slippery slope fantasy when there are rights ALREADY being violated and and stomped on? [editline]21st March 2017[/editline] Also i will reiterate, and any sane person would agree, that rights must be defended regardless of ideology so rest assured if injustice starts swinging towards altrighters people of goodwill will rise against that injustice just as thoroughly as those currently, actually being victimized. Further, i think its worth noting that NO MATTER your beliefs, ideology, political leanings, the threats posed by the powerful will impact all, and the effects surely wont discriminate by republican or democrat, liberal or conservative. Its time to recognize abuses of power are against the interest of everyone in light of our common humanity and universal deservedness of dignity and respect and that seeking a more just society demands we overcome petty enforced differences and labels.[/QUOTE] Isn't the Alt-right's entire ideology based around an ideal of racial segregation and "America for WASPs"? I highly doubt that 'people of good will' will do much to defend them. After all, why go out of one's way to defend the rights of those who wish for nothing more than to take away the rights of others?

[QUOTE=archangel125;51992830]Isn't the Alt-right's entire ideology based around an ideal of racial segregation and "America for WASPs"? I highly doubt that 'people of good will' will do much to defend them. After all, why go out of one's way to defend the rights of those who wish for nothing more than to take away the rights of others?[/QUOTE] That whole "I will defend your right to say what you want even if it deeply offends me" business is not a sword that only swings one way. Even if they don't deserve it, the rule of law applies to meme-guzzling alt-rightards and that includes freedom of speech. Persecuting them would merely confirm their message, as horrible as it is.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51992830]Isn't the Alt-right's entire ideology based around an ideal of racial segregation and "America for WASPs"? I highly doubt that 'people of good will' will do much to defend them. After all, why go out of one's way to defend the rights of those who wish for nothing more than to take away the rights of others?[/QUOTE] I agree despicable things like that should be remedied. It goes without saying that there is clearly huge variance in the altright movement between say young men who are casually sympathetic to viewpoints such as "mens issues are ignored by modern feminism" and those who are rebranded racialists who are obsessed with racial miscegenation, support neonazi groups, etc. There is are varying levels of radicalism and blanket statements are obviously unsuitable, and lead to untenable generalizations, which lead to further divisiveness and polarization. The line in the sand is perhaps between those who happen to believe ignorant things and those who actively engage in perpetuating injustices against others, i.e. the right to be a wrong asshole versus actively harming others based on extremist racialist ideology. Its all based on ignorance, and criminal acts and injustice must be dealt with but i dont believe its absurd to state that we should defend the rights of those who believe in ignorant things assuming they are not actively harming others or society in criminal ways. Surely we shouldnt leave them high and dry just for believing ignorant things? I cant believe any person, or group are irredeemable and that ignorance can not be remedied by greater education on a societal level. Again, we shouldnt let labels fool us. Though the latest arrangement of power may call itself one thing, that does not protect say, rural republicans from suffering as well as any other group just because they happened to vote for this government. The sooner we recognize that we all stand to lose from destabilisation and inequalities the sooner we may find we are not so different after all, and that everyone fundamentally wants a good life, and in that kind of recognition is the power to overcome barriers of race, class, ideology and even ignorance. We'll never get there though if we buy into the black and white, totalizing view that there are irreconcilable differences between us and our fellow citizens.

[QUOTE=luverofJ!93;51992868]I agree despicable things like that should be remedied. It goes without saying that there is clearly huge variance in the altright movement between say young men who are casually sympathetic to viewpoints such as "mens issues are ignored by modern feminism" and those who are rebranded racialists who are obsessed with racial miscegenation, support neonazi groups, etc. There is are varying levels of radicalism and blanket statements are obviously unsuitable, and lead to untenable generalizations, which lead to further divisiveness and polarization. The line in the sand is perhaps between those who happen to believe ignorant things and those who actively engage in perpetuating injustices against others, i.e. the right to be a wrong asshole versus actively harming others based on extremist racialist ideology. Its all based on ignorance, and criminal acts and injustice must be dealt with but i dont believe its absurd to state that we should defend the rights of those who believe in ignorant things assuming they are not actively harming others or society in criminal ways. Surely we shouldnt leave them high and dry just for believing ignorant things? I cant believe any person, or group are irredeemable and that ignorance can not be remedied by greater education on a societal level. Again, we shouldnt let labels fool us. Though the latest arrangement of power may call itself one thing, that does not protect say, rural republicans from suffering as well as any other group just because they happened to vote for this government. The sooner we recognize that we all stand to lose from destabilisation and inequalities the sooner we may find we are not so different after all, and that everyone fundamentally wants a good life, and in that kind of recognition is the power to overcome barriers of race, class, ideology and even ignorance. We'll never get there though if we buy into the black and white, totalizing view that there are irreconcilable differences between us and our fellow citizens.[/QUOTE] When I refer to the ideology of the alt-right, I refer to the ideology as laid out by its founder and the one who coined the term Alt-right in the first place, White nationalist and arguable Neo-Nazi Richard Spencer. Anyone who identifies as alt-right, then, should be aware of the connotations of the term.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51993351]When I refer to the ideology of the alt-right, I refer to the ideology as laid out by its founder and the one who coined the term Alt-right in the first place, White nationalist and arguable Neo-Nazi Richard Spencer. Anyone who identifies as alt-right, then, should be aware of the connotations of the term.[/QUOTE] Youre right, his definition (and all associated with that realm of thinking) do indeed need to be considered along the lines your exploring. but also since the broader alternative right is still a nascent and vaguely defined group of people with similar but non-uniform beliefs and principles, its still worth considering that there are those who dont necessarily fit that bill specifically but who are still in that realm of ideology. Perhaps we could say Alt-Right (with capitals) could refer to Spencers more formalized definition and the broader stream of thought that is less formalized as the general alternative right. These being the often young, white male nonreligious conservatives who grew up on internet spaces like pol and else the rest. Thats the group Im speaking more to.

I thought Alex Jones was just a conman selling survival gear and vitamins

Wouldn't that be the funniest goddamn thing if Infowars turned out to be part of a Russian conspiracy?

[QUOTE=Disgruntled;51994730]Wouldn't that be the funniest goddamn thing if Infowars turned out to be part of a Russian conspiracy?[/QUOTE] Well, I don't think they mean Russian conspiracy in the sense that they're necessarily knowing participants. Russian agents simply pass them stories that they know these outlets won't bother fact-checking, they publish them, mission accomplished.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51994753]Well, I don't think they mean Russian conspiracy in the sense that they're necessarily knowing participants. Russian agents simply pass them stories that they know these outlets won't bother fact-checking, they publish them, mission accomplished.[/QUOTE] Nah, I wanna see Alex Jones outed as a Ruskie turncoat. That'd be the biggest slap to the memers that've been pushing his schlock.

I'm sure Alex will use this as proof that the illuminati are preparing to send their psyops kill teams after him.

[QUOTE=xagnu;51995210]I'm sure Alex will use this as proof that the illuminati are preparing to send their psyops kill teams after him.[/QUOTE] Tell them to hurry up already.