Page 2 of 2

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 12:29 pm
by jfish26
jfish26 wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 9:14 am
Shirley wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 7:03 am zzling scientist?💙
@mikes121212

The incident at the bridge and the almost gleeful reporting by many republican pundit’s including members of congress was disgusting and wrong. Will we hear an apology,; no of course not! They will just move on to the next lie! Ooh yeah they blamed Joe Biden’
It’ll be more cynical than that. I think you’ll see some Rs twist their own thirsty overreaction into a “but who could blame the folks for assuming the worst in Joe Biden’s America? We are all living in fear.”
Already getting in range here.

https://x.com/ronfilipkowski/status/172 ... PzNG4aOfKQ

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 12:40 pm
by Shirley
jfish26 wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 12:29 pm
jfish26 wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 9:14 am
Shirley wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 7:03 am zzling scientist?💙
@mikes121212

The incident at the bridge and the almost gleeful reporting by many republican pundit’s including members of congress was disgusting and wrong. Will we hear an apology,; no of course not! They will just move on to the next lie! Ooh yeah they blamed Joe Biden’
It’ll be more cynical than that. I think you’ll see some Rs twist their own thirsty overreaction into a “but who could blame the folks for assuming the worst in Joe Biden’s America? We are all living in fear.”
Already getting in range here.

https://x.com/ronfilipkowski/status/172 ... PzNG4aOfKQ
A comment under that tweet:

Hoodlum 🇺🇸
@NotHoodlum

You should always scream fire in a crowed theatre, just in case one pops up. 🥴

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 12:52 pm
by Shirley
twocoach wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 11:02 am
DCHawk1 wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 10:11 am
jfish26 wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 9:14 am

It’ll be more cynical than that. I think you’ll see some Rs twist their own thirsty overreaction into a “but who could blame the folks for assuming the worst in Joe Biden’s America? We are all living in fear.”
This should be easy,: "Yesterday, I concluded, erroneously but based on early law enforcement reports, that the incident at the northern border was linked to terrorism. On this Thanksgiving Day, I am eternally thankful that it wasn't terrorism and that more people were not hurt. My deepest gratitude to the men and women of the border patrol who handled the situation bravely and brilliantly and help to keep us all safe. God bless them. God bless you. And God bless America. Go Cowboys!"
What "early law enforcement reports"? There is zero mention of such a statement by local authorities in any coverage by the local Niagara Gazette. If they have numerous interviews with people who saw smoke from a nearby 7-11 then I feel pretty strongly that if such a statement was made that it would have shown up in one of their numerous posts about the incident.
I get your point twocoach, but eventually we all get punked by the internet.

And as much as DC and I have disagreed over the years, malicious intent isn't something I'd associate with him.

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 12:57 pm
by jfish26
twocoach wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 11:02 am
DCHawk1 wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 10:11 am
jfish26 wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 9:14 am

It’ll be more cynical than that. I think you’ll see some Rs twist their own thirsty overreaction into a “but who could blame the folks for assuming the worst in Joe Biden’s America? We are all living in fear.”
This should be easy,: "Yesterday, I concluded, erroneously but based on early law enforcement reports, that the incident at the northern border was linked to terrorism. On this Thanksgiving Day, I am eternally thankful that it wasn't terrorism and that more people were not hurt. My deepest gratitude to the men and women of the border patrol who handled the situation bravely and brilliantly and help to keep us all safe. God bless them. God bless you. And God bless America. Go Cowboys!"
What "early law enforcement reports"? There is zero mention of such a statement by local authorities in any coverage by the local Niagara Gazette. If they have numerous interviews with people who saw smoke from a nearby 7-11 then I feel pretty strongly that if such a statement was made that it would have shown up in one of their numerous posts about the incident.
DC can speak for himself, of course, but I think his point is that an only-modestly-bad-faith walkback here would be to make reference to shadowy “early law enforcement reports” (never you mind that the issue was either the failure to vet those reports, or possibly having made them up entirely).

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 1:09 pm
by twocoach
Shirley wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 12:52 pm
twocoach wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 11:02 am
DCHawk1 wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 10:11 am

This should be easy,: "Yesterday, I concluded, erroneously but based on early law enforcement reports, that the incident at the northern border was linked to terrorism. On this Thanksgiving Day, I am eternally thankful that it wasn't terrorism and that more people were not hurt. My deepest gratitude to the men and women of the border patrol who handled the situation bravely and brilliantly and help to keep us all safe. God bless them. God bless you. And God bless America. Go Cowboys!"
What "early law enforcement reports"? There is zero mention of such a statement by local authorities in any coverage by the local Niagara Gazette. If they have numerous interviews with people who saw smoke from a nearby 7-11 then I feel pretty strongly that if such a statement was made that it would have shown up in one of their numerous posts about the incident.
I get your point twocoach, but eventually we all get punked by the internet.

And as much as DC and I have disagreed over the years, malicious intent isn't something I'd associate with him.
Then why double down with his statement on what these scumbag politicians who got duped said with: "Yesterday, I concluded, erroneously but based on early law enforcement reports, that the incident at the northern border was linked to terrorism..."

They don't get to lie again to "apologize" for their earlier intentionally inflammatory false statement. No one based their beliefs off of "early law enforcement reports that the incident was linked to terrorism". I've looked for them and to date, have not been a le to locate them. They based them off of social media posts that CLAIMED that local law enforcement made such statements.

If I am wrong, I just admit that I am wrong. It happens; we can't see or know everything. Don't pass the blame off to others.

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 1:21 pm
by twocoach
The day I see a politician post a retraction that says "I shared information I wanted to be true because it supported my beliefs. I made no effort to determine whether or not was true and it has turned out that it was not true at all" is the day I gain some measure of respect for them.

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 1:32 pm
by jfish26
twocoach wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 1:21 pm The day I see a politician post a retraction that says "I shared information I wanted to be true because it supported my beliefs. I made no effort to determine whether or not was true and it has turned out that it was not true at all" is the day I gain some measure of respect for them.
But, you’re not the audience.

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 1:56 pm
by Shirley
twocoach wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 1:09 pm
Shirley wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 12:52 pm
twocoach wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 11:02 am

What "early law enforcement reports"? There is zero mention of such a statement by local authorities in any coverage by the local Niagara Gazette. If they have numerous interviews with people who saw smoke from a nearby 7-11 then I feel pretty strongly that if such a statement was made that it would have shown up in one of their numerous posts about the incident.
I get your point twocoach, but eventually we all get punked by the internet.

And as much as DC and I have disagreed over the years, malicious intent isn't something I'd associate with him.
Then why double down with his statement on what these scumbag politicians who got duped said with: "Yesterday, I concluded, erroneously but based on early law enforcement reports, that the incident at the northern border was linked to terrorism..."

They don't get to lie again to "apologize" for their earlier intentionally inflammatory false statement. No one based their beliefs off of "early law enforcement reports that the incident was linked to terrorism". I've looked for them and to date, have not been a le to locate them. They based them off of social media posts that CLAIMED that local law enforcement made such statements.

If I am wrong, I just admit that I am wrong. It happens; we can't see or know everything. Don't pass the blame off to others.
Once again, you do have a point.

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 1:58 pm
by Shirley
jfish26 wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 1:32 pm
twocoach wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 1:21 pm The day I see a politician post a retraction that says "I shared information I wanted to be true because it supported my beliefs. I made no effort to determine whether or not was true and it has turned out that it was not true at all" is the day I gain some measure of respect for them.
But, you’re not the audience.
^^^

Kind of helps you understand why the republican party has been so dedicated to anti-intellectualism for the last half century.

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 2:07 pm
by jfish26
This should be required reading.

It is really, really important to understand that this is neither the start nor the end of the damage Fox has done. This is right smack in the middle: selling conspiratorial poison to poison addicts you have carefully cultivated. This is a perfect example of the closed-loop, self-reinforcing nonsense that…well, that half of my dinner table tonight deeply and truly and irretrievably believes.

How Fox Went From Car Crash to Terrorist Attack to Train Wreck in a Matter of Hours

https://www.meidastouch.com/news/how-fo ... r-of-hours
Where you get your news matters, and yesterday highlighted this fact vividly. News broke earlier in the day about an incident involving a vehicle at the US-Canada Rainbow Bridge border crossing. Fox News initiated coverage around 1:15 PM EST, framing it initially as a truck-related incident with mention of an explosion, but with limited details. However, things took a turn when Fox aired statements from their reporter, Alexis McAdams, claiming a high-level police source described the explosion as a terrorist attack, stating the vehicle contained 'a lot of explosives.' Subsequently, Fox escalated their coverage, devoting all their attention to the incident, largely based on this single source.

Fox baselessly began employing the term 'Islamic terrorism,' describing hypothetical scenarios regarding potential casualties if the vehicle had advanced. They continued to tell their audience that the vehicle contained explosives. Fox Host John Roberts even speculated that the premature detonation of the vehicle might be attributed to the driver's insufficient expertise in handling explosives.

Republican Presidential Candidate Vivek Ramaswamy was then brought on. He attempted to use the incident to promote his candidacy, emphasizing how he has been 'sounding the alarm' about the northern border, which he labeled a 'mounting crisis.' Ramaswamy later shared the interview on social media.

[Vivek’s embedded tweet, which includes video of the Fox coverage:]
We have a major crisis at the southern border, but Democrats and Republicans alike are ignoring a fast-growing crisis at our *northern border.* In early October, I visited our vulnerable northern border. The total number of illegal crossings here last January surpassed the preceding January apprehensions for the past 12 years *combined.* Human trafficking, drug smuggling, and illegal border crossings are all up sharply. We are a nation of laws – and when people abuse our laws, they must face penalties for their actions. What’s happening now at both our southern and northern borders is a direct attack on the rule of law in America.
Roberts began to ask questions about the origins of the people in the car.
Roberts: We don't know how long the people who perpetrated this attack have been in this country. Did they recently come across? Did they come into the country legally? Did they come across illegally and claim asylum? Were they some of the nearly 1 million got-aways who come into this country? Were they radicalized in this country? Were they radicalized at all? Did they come into the country that way? There are so many questions yet to be answered...
While Fox engaged in what could be described as reckless and irresponsible reporting, other networks demonstrated more caution. CNN initially covered the incident, describing it as a crash and refraining from drawing any conclusions about its nature. MSNBC also approached the story cautiously, but at 2:15 PM EST, they informed viewers that law enforcement sources stated the vehicle had hit a structure at a high speed, caught fire, and exploded. Importantly, they emphasized one key point: an initial sweep of the vehicle did not indicate that there were any explosives.

However, this news didn't dissuade Fox from perpetuating their narrative of a terrorist attack. They persisted in claiming the car was loaded with explosives, citing a high-level police source. Additionally, they alleged that the occupants intended to drive the vehicle toward the border patrol building.

Former Trump Administration spokesperson, Morgan Ortagus, reflected on how the incident reminded her of her time in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[video]

Ortagus began to speculate that the incident was a result of “open and porous borders” and ISIS-K having a foothold in Afghanistan.

During her appearance, Alexis McAdams interrupted to announce, according to sources, that officials were searching for a second vehicle. This information circulated on X, formerly known as Twitter. McAdams continued to assert that the incident was part of a planned terrorist attack.

Former Homeland Security Advisor to George W. Bush, Frances Townsend, joined the Fox broadcast via phone and speculated that the incident could have been carried out by jihadists or a lone wolf, citing Fox's claim that the car was filled with explosives.

Ortagus returned to the Fox coverage, suggesting a potential link between the incident and Hamas and TikTok. She noted her previous warnings, since the October 7th attacks, about sophisticated propaganda circulating on TikTok and other social media platforms in favor of Hamas.

At this point, MSNBC Reporter Ken Dilanian posted on social media that four law enforcement officials had informed his colleagues that the incident was not being called terrorism and reiterated that there were no explosives found in the car. CNN began to report that the vehicle had been traveling at a high rate of speed, went airborne, and then burst into flames on impact. Tom Winter at MSNBC viewed a video of the fire at the incident and offered his insight, which would turn out to be very accurate.

[video]

Meanwhile, back on Fox News, John Roberts started to speculate that the car was actually coming from Canada into the United States and began to wonder what their real potential target was. Retired NYPD inspector Paul Mauro said the incident hadn’t really been confirmed as a terrorist attack but said if it was, the suspect would possibly be a lone wolf, radicalized online, sympathetic to the likely Gazan cause.

As the next show began on Fox at 3:00 PM EST, the host, Trace Gallagher, told their audience the vehicle contained a 'ton' of explosives based on their sources. Alexis McAdams was brought back on to reiterate that sources told her that this was an attempted terrorist attack, and the car was 'packed' full of explosives. McAdams said a high-level source informed her that the vehicle was told to go into another lane so that they could get a closer look at the vehicle, and at that point, the vehicle tried to 'veer head-on' into a border patrol building.

Immediately after that, Fox appeared to alter course somewhat, reporting that the vehicle slammed into a concrete obstacle, but they still described the vehicle as being 'full of explosives.'

Fox News guest Aaron Cohen joined the broadcast and was asked what he made of the incident. Cohen said, 'Well, what I'm seeing here is what Khamenei of Iran, the Ayatollah, has been calling for over the last 40 days. The same thing with Hezbollah leader Nasrallah. They're calling for a systematic global jihad with everybody who stands with Hamas' ideology. I'm not surprised that this terror attack that's gone public here…' Cohen added that he doesn’t believe in coincidences and the alleged attack on the bridge might be part of something larger.

At this point, it appears that they might have realized their reporting wasn’t accurate, but in one of the most cringeworthy scenes possible, Gallagher seems a bit reluctant to drop the claim about explosives entirely. From tons of explosives, the description now diminishes to maybe a few explosives or no explosives.
Gallagher: The car was never on the actual bridge. We're being told that it was one time spotted at a 7-11 and going at a high rate of speed… and that in some capacity, this thing either lost control or deliberately went at a fence and crashed and exploded. We told you earlier that there was an explosion because there were explosives inside the car. Authorities are apparently walking that back just a little bit saying it's unclear if there were explosives or how many explosives… Is there a potential that this thing was going at such a high rate of speed that it was going towards the bridge that might possibly— it had maybe few explosives or no explosives and still created this explosive event at the bridge? 
Alexis McAdams eventually provided somewhat of a walk back attributing the flames to a crash.

[video]

McAdams then appeared to walk back the claims about a terrorist attack suggesting it was a stolen vehicle instead.

[video]

Fox News Host Dana Perino then informed their audience that Governor Kathy Hochul said there was no indication that the incident was a terrorist attack.

[video]

Chaffetz then appeared to suggest that the inaccurate reporting from Fox was a result of The Biden Administration’s handling of the border.

[video]

So, how did this happen? It’s not entirely clear. We know Fox ran a story that it was forced to walk back and didn’t exercise enough caution in their reporting. What is clear is that Fox attempted to frame a possible car accident as a terrorist attack, rushed to suggest it was perpetrated by Islamic terrorists or undocumented migrants, and then blamed Biden for their recklessness when they were proven wrong.

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 6:00 pm
by DCHawk1
twocoach wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 1:09 pm
Shirley wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 12:52 pm
twocoach wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 11:02 am

What "early law enforcement reports"? There is zero mention of such a statement by local authorities in any coverage by the local Niagara Gazette. If they have numerous interviews with people who saw smoke from a nearby 7-11 then I feel pretty strongly that if such a statement was made that it would have shown up in one of their numerous posts about the incident.
I get your point twocoach, but eventually we all get punked by the internet.

And as much as DC and I have disagreed over the years, malicious intent isn't something I'd associate with him.
Then why double down with his statement on what these scumbag politicians who got duped said with: "Yesterday, I concluded, erroneously but based on early law enforcement reports, that the incident at the northern border was linked to terrorism..."

They don't get to lie again to "apologize" for their earlier intentionally inflammatory false statement. No one based their beliefs off of "early law enforcement reports that the incident was linked to terrorism". I've looked for them and to date, have not been a le to locate them. They based them off of social media posts that CLAIMED that local law enforcement made such statements.

If I am wrong, I just admit that I am wrong. It happens; we can't see or know everything. Don't pass the blame off to others.
My God, you're a cunt.

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 8:23 pm
by twocoach
DCHawk1 wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 6:00 pm
twocoach wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 1:09 pm
Shirley wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 12:52 pm

I get your point twocoach, but eventually we all get punked by the internet.

And as much as DC and I have disagreed over the years, malicious intent isn't something I'd associate with him.
Then why double down with his statement on what these scumbag politicians who got duped said with: "Yesterday, I concluded, erroneously but based on early law enforcement reports, that the incident at the northern border was linked to terrorism..."

They don't get to lie again to "apologize" for their earlier intentionally inflammatory false statement. No one based their beliefs off of "early law enforcement reports that the incident was linked to terrorism". I've looked for them and to date, have not been a le to locate them. They based them off of social media posts that CLAIMED that local law enforcement made such statements.

If I am wrong, I just admit that I am wrong. It happens; we can't see or know everything. Don't pass the blame off to others.
My God, you're a cunt.
To some people, I am sure I seem to be. I am perfectly fine with some people not liking me.

Re: Sigh...

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2024 11:27 am
by RainbowsandUnicorns
Could have posted this on many other threads but it made me "Sigh".
THIS is America in the eyes of many in the world.

https://twitter.com/TRIGGERHAPPYV1/stat ... 1387488260