Russia's Influence On The American Election
Comments
-
When something is mainstream, then people just call it what it is. My old company used to stock these generic Post-It notes called Stickie Pads. They sucked. Now I work at a company that uses actual 3M Brand Post-It notes. They are great. I don't walk around all day calling them mainstream post-it notes though. That would be stupid. They are just fucking post-it notes. Only an moron, or possibly a hipster, would refer to them as mainstream.Free said:
Mainstream news is minimal partisan bias?? If anyone believes that garbage they will believe anything.CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
If you don't want bias, either turn on international news or just simply kill your TV. Good God.0 -
Major FACE PALM.CM189191 said:
High standards:polaris_x said:
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
-The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization
-The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas:
-Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price?
-NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization.
-BBC is a British public service broadcaster
-AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
Mainstream media is owned by 6 corporations. I'll say it again. Mainstream media is privately owned by only six corporations. And just because they win Pulitzer Prize does not mean they're not biased, nor accurate!
Seriously, do your own research and find out the truth. These media stations that you cite as reputable, prize winners, non-biased? You are being fooled into thinking such a thing. Wake up. This is why we have so many people believing what they hear on the news.0 -
I hear the international news suggestion often, and I do actually read international news as well. But my question is, why do you think international news is immune from bias? It certainly can provide a different way of viewing something, and maybe even cover stories that aren't being covered in US mainstream news, but news is created from people who work for companies. People naturally have bias, and companies have agendas, whether domestic or international. And the chart above in the reputable and analytical to complex area, including the gray circle, do contain international sources - BBC, The Economist & The Guardian, all of which I enjoy reading.Free said:
Mainstream news is minimal partisan bias?? If anyone believes that garbage they will believe anything.CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
If you don't want bias, either turn on international news or just simply kill your TV. Good God."I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/080 -
Can you provide some examples of where you get your reliable news from?Free said:
Major FACE PALM.CM189191 said:
High standards:polaris_x said:
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
-The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization
-The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas:
-Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price?
-NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization.
-BBC is a British public service broadcaster
-AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
Mainstream media is owned by 6 corporations. I'll say it again. Mainstream media is privately owned by only six corporations. And just because they win Pulitzer Prize does not mean they're not biased, nor accurate!
Seriously, do your own research and find out the truth. These media stations that you cite as reputable, prize winners, non-biased? You are being fooled into thinking such a thing. Wake up. This is why we have so many people believing what they hear on the news.0 -
6 privately owned corps own ALL of that media you believe.jeffbr said:
Exactly. If the media in the grey circle aren't considered solid and reliable sources of news, then were should we be looking? I'm curious about where polaris goes for unbiased, high standard, agenda-free reporting. I read alternative sites to get differing perspectives, but also rely on reputable sources like those in the gray circle to give me the basis of the story.CM189191 said:
High standards:polaris_x said:
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
-The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization
-The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas:
-Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price?
-NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization.
-BBC is a British public service broadcaster
-AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
https://www.google.com/search?q=media+owns+six+corporation&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/251193/how-the-news-works0 -
NPR is biased toward establishment. Even PBS, who used to be public (and awesome) is now owned by corporations due to lack of funding at one point years ago.polaris_x said:
I don't really have the time to point out everything ... i'll just say that these media outlets continue to support the neo-liberal movement that despite it's outward appearance - ultimately serves the corporate agenda ...CM189191 said:
High standards:polaris_x said:
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
-The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization
-The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas:
-Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price?
-NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization.
-BBC is a British public service broadcaster
-AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
where is the independent reporting on syria? ... these outlets often support state-sponsored terrorists because it suits its agenda ... why is it that americans support the "rebels" in syria? ... why is it that all the reporting makes Assad the bad guy? ... a sovereign country that's last election saw over a 70% turnout that resulted in over 70% voting for this president ... why do americans think its ok to fund rebel groups that are in cahoots with ISIS? ... why do these media outlets perpetuate the notion that this is some kind of civil war when it is a terrorist uprising supported by the US and Saudi Arabia?
and since when do pulitzer prizes mean anything? ... they are other newspapers handing out awards to each other ...
the only media outlet i'm not sure of is npr0 -
I'm aware.Free said:
6 privately owned corps own ALL of that media you believe.jeffbr said:
Exactly. If the media in the grey circle aren't considered solid and reliable sources of news, then were should we be looking? I'm curious about where polaris goes for unbiased, high standard, agenda-free reporting. I read alternative sites to get differing perspectives, but also rely on reputable sources like those in the gray circle to give me the basis of the story.CM189191 said:
High standards:polaris_x said:
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
-The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization
-The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas:
-Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price?
-NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization.
-BBC is a British public service broadcaster
-AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
https://www.google.com/search?q=media+owns+six+corporation&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/251193/how-the-news-works
Tell me which of the 6 own Thomson Reuters, NPR, BBC & AP again?
What is the appropriate amount of companies to ensure appropriate competition? Look at nearly any industry and a handful of dominant companies likely make up 90%.0 -
With due respect, you know nothing about the media.CM189191 said:
When something is mainstream, then people just call it what it is. My old company used to stock these generic Post-It notes called Stickie Pads. They sucked. Now I work at a company that uses actual 3M Brand Post-It notes. They are great. I don't walk around all day calling them mainstream post-it notes though. That would be stupid. They are just fucking post-it notes. Only an moron, or possibly a hipster, would refer to them as mainstream.Free said:
Mainstream news is minimal partisan bias?? If anyone believes that garbage they will believe anything.CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
If you don't want bias, either turn on international news or just simply kill your TV. Good God.0 -
With due respect, I'm not sure you understand how to use the phrase "With due respect".Free said:
With due respect, you know nothing about the media.CM189191 said:
When something is mainstream, then people just call it what it is. My old company used to stock these generic Post-It notes called Stickie Pads. They sucked. Now I work at a company that uses actual 3M Brand Post-It notes. They are great. I don't walk around all day calling them mainstream post-it notes though. That would be stupid. They are just fucking post-it notes. Only an moron, or possibly a hipster, would refer to them as mainstream.Free said:
Mainstream news is minimal partisan bias?? If anyone believes that garbage they will believe anything.CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
If you don't want bias, either turn on international news or just simply kill your TV. Good God.
But, please, enlighten me. What don't I know about the media.
0 -
That's true, they are not immune to bias. But you watch international news and you hear news stories about our country that won't get aired here. Here, they couldn't show caskets coming home from the war. We couldn't see any real news from wars that we've been fighting in. I like Aljazeera and BBC, though I'm sure BBC is biased to a point. But they don't bias to a political party or an ideology. They have no reason to. We really do live in a bubble over here in the US. International stations are more globalized in their news generally.jeffbr said:
I hear the international news suggestion often, and I do actually read international news as well. But my question is, why do you think international news is immune from bias? It certainly can provide a different way of viewing something, and maybe even cover stories that aren't being covered in US mainstream news, but news is created from people who work for companies. People naturally have bias, and companies have agendas, whether domestic or international. And the chart above in the reputable and analytical to complex area, including the gray circle, do contain international sources - BBC, The Economist & The Guardian, all of which I enjoy reading.Free said:
Mainstream news is minimal partisan bias?? If anyone believes that garbage they will believe anything.CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
If you don't want bias, either turn on international news or just simply kill your TV. Good God.0 -
^^^
I read Aljazeera fairly often along w/ other sites. I just can't put my finger on why it feels like I shouldn't be.
They cover a lot of things but it feels like I am doing something wrong by getting info from them.
Does this make sense to anyone?
0 -
Do you feel a sense of obligation to American news? You shouldn't, no one should if they're seeking factual news.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:^^^
I read Aljazeera fairly often along w/ other sites. I just can't put my finger on why it feels like I shouldn't be.
They cover a lot of things but it feels like I am doing something wrong by getting info from them.
Does this make sense to anyone?0 -
Reuters was formally owned by the Rothschild family, now owned by the Tompson Reuters Corporation. Reuters owns AP, and they supply the 6 corps that own the rest mainstream media. All of it privately owned.CM189191 said:
I'm aware.Free said:
6 privately owned corps own ALL of that media you believe.jeffbr said:
Exactly. If the media in the grey circle aren't considered solid and reliable sources of news, then were should we be looking? I'm curious about where polaris goes for unbiased, high standard, agenda-free reporting. I read alternative sites to get differing perspectives, but also rely on reputable sources like those in the gray circle to give me the basis of the story.CM189191 said:
High standards:polaris_x said:
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
-The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization
-The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas:
-Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price?
-NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization.
-BBC is a British public service broadcaster
-AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
https://www.google.com/search?q=media+owns+six+corporation&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/251193/how-the-news-works
Tell me which of the 6 own Thomson Reuters, NPR, BBC & AP again?
What is the appropriate amount of companies to ensure appropriate competition? Look at nearly any industry and a handful of dominant companies likely make up 90%.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.molonlabemedia.com/2016/05/06/media-ap-reuters-owned/amp/?client=safari
https://www.google.com/search?q=who+owns+reuters&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
NPR:
http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/dont_forget_the_facts_about_np.phpAnd here’s the breakdown for NPR itself, for FY 2005-2009. NPR is funded in large part by the fees that the member stations pay it for the right to play NPR programs (like Morning Edition, All Things Considered, etc.) and by corporate sponsorships. NPR actually does not receive any government funding for its operations costs.
The media used to be a public service. (think Walter Cronkite). The minute it became privately owned by corporations is when they started controlling the content and that was whatever they wanted to supply.0 -
The media used to be a public service. (think Walter Cronkite). The minute it became privately owned by corporations is when they started controlling the content and that was whatever they wanted to supply.Free said:
Reuters was formally owned by the Rothschild family, now owned by the Tompson Reuters Corporation. Reuters owns AP, and they supply the 6 corps that own the rest mainstream media. All of it privately owned.CM189191 said:
I'm aware.Free said:
6 privately owned corps own ALL of that media you believe.jeffbr said:
Exactly. If the media in the grey circle aren't considered solid and reliable sources of news, then were should we be looking? I'm curious about where polaris goes for unbiased, high standard, agenda-free reporting. I read alternative sites to get differing perspectives, but also rely on reputable sources like those in the gray circle to give me the basis of the story.CM189191 said:
High standards:polaris_x said:
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
-The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization
-The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas:
-Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price?
-NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization.
-BBC is a British public service broadcaster
-AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
https://www.google.com/search?q=media+owns+six+corporation&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/251193/how-the-news-works
Tell me which of the 6 own Thomson Reuters, NPR, BBC & AP again?
What is the appropriate amount of companies to ensure appropriate competition? Look at nearly any industry and a handful of dominant companies likely make up 90%.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.molonlabemedia.com/2016/05/06/media-ap-reuters-owned/amp/?client=safari
https://www.google.com/search?q=who+owns+reuters&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
NPR:
http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/dont_forget_the_facts_about_np.phpAnd here’s the breakdown for NPR itself, for FY 2005-2009. NPR is funded in large part by the fees that the member stations pay it for the right to play NPR programs (like Morning Edition, All Things Considered, etc.) and by corporate sponsorships. NPR actually does not receive any government funding for its operations costs.
Again, not anything I'm not unaware of.
College of Media at University Illinois is widely regarded as one of the world's top institutions for media education in various rankings. QS World University Rankings ranked its Media Studies program seventh in the world. My Libby-Lib-Lib-Liberal Arts education provided me the good fortune of attending many of these professors classes.0 -
The media used to be a public service. (think Walter Cronkite). The minute it became privately owned by corporations is when they started controlling the content and that was whatever they wanted to supply.Free said:
Reuters was formally owned by the Rothschild family, now owned by the Tompson Reuters Corporation. Reuters owns AP, and they supply the 6 corps that own the rest mainstream media. All of it privately owned.CM189191 said:
I'm aware.Free said:
6 privately owned corps own ALL of that media you believe.jeffbr said:
Exactly. If the media in the grey circle aren't considered solid and reliable sources of news, then were should we be looking? I'm curious about where polaris goes for unbiased, high standard, agenda-free reporting. I read alternative sites to get differing perspectives, but also rely on reputable sources like those in the gray circle to give me the basis of the story.CM189191 said:
High standards:polaris_x said:
I do not consider the majority of media in the grey circle to meet high standards ... they also perpetuate the corporate agenda ...CM189191 said:I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the fake news spectrum:
...thoughts?
-The New York Times has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization
-The Washington Post has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year, second only to The New York Times' seven awards in 2002.[8] Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards.
Corporate Agendas:
-Thomson Reuters Corporation is a multinational mass media and information firm. What agenda could they possibly have other than to provide accurate and timely information at a reasonable price?
-NPR is an American privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization.
-BBC is a British public service broadcaster
-AP is an American multinational nonprofit news agency
These are reputable news organizations.
https://www.google.com/search?q=media+owns+six+corporation&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/251193/how-the-news-works
Tell me which of the 6 own Thomson Reuters, NPR, BBC & AP again?
What is the appropriate amount of companies to ensure appropriate competition? Look at nearly any industry and a handful of dominant companies likely make up 90%.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.molonlabemedia.com/2016/05/06/media-ap-reuters-owned/amp/?client=safari
https://www.google.com/search?q=who+owns+reuters&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
NPR:
http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/dont_forget_the_facts_about_np.phpAnd here’s the breakdown for NPR itself, for FY 2005-2009. NPR is funded in large part by the fees that the member stations pay it for the right to play NPR programs (like Morning Edition, All Things Considered, etc.) and by corporate sponsorships. NPR actually does not receive any government funding for its operations costs.
This may very well be the second dumbest thing I read today. Maybe the first. Care to expound upon exactly when the media was a "public service?"09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
^^^
What was the first if this was the second?
Inquiring minds want to know.0 -
Read through the threads, threads, threads of today, day, day. You can figure it out, I have faith.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:^^^
What was the first if this was the second?
Inquiring minds want to know.09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
I'll take a bite.Halifax2TheMax said:
Read through the threads, threads, threads of today, day, day. You can figure it out, I have faith.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:^^^
What was the first if this was the second?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Are you consistently confounded by rebuttals that mix mainstream media thinking along w/ personal opines?
0 -
This thread
There has been no specific, persuasive evidence shared publicly about the extent of Putin's role or knowledge of the hacking.
But Democrats theorize that no such wide-scale espionage operation could have been launched without Putin's approval.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/obama-trump-putin-hacking-allegations-1.38986000
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help