Rolling Stone:US Army Deploys Psy-Ops on US Senators

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

And, as for the motivation of military men seeking the limelight for selfish motivation, they're a dime a dozen. The networks are strewn with Lt. Colonels that will take just about any position on a topic so long as it pays well.

---

Why does Yoni hate our military? :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

Why does Yoni hate our military? :lol

---

And y'all wonder why I become snarky and resort to ad hominem. Usually, it proceeds from nonsensical rhetoric such as this.

I'll try not to be baited.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

And y'all wonder why I become snarky and resort to ad hominem. Usually, it proceeds from nonsensical rhetoric such as this.

I'll try not to be baited.

---

:lol

lobbying?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

Look, I never said there wasn't an issue, I just don't see one. And, nothing in the article or in this thread convinced me otherwise.

---

Fair enough, but there were a few signs you read in haste. Enough that your dismissiveness comes off as more temperamental than learned, even now. Your rejection of material it is clear you barely read in the first place, is not very compelling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

Is what was done unsavory? Maybe to some but, so is Congressmen and Senators traveling to countries and negotiating with other world leaders to undermine the aims of the United States executive branch and that happens -- even though it is arguably illegal and unconstitutional.

---

Bush era violations of the Logan Act still upset you? Ok. This relates to the current discussion how, please?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

I'm just not convinced a crime took place. Maybe it should be investigated by real criminal investigators instead of being tried in the media.

---

Well and good, but we mainly trade in opinion here.
The discussion has no time to wait for the legal facts to be established, that can take years. Anyway, the discussion itself relates to the underlying actions.

You may limit yourself to legal certainties if you wish, but it is absurd to expect much emulation in free-flowing, wide ranging conversations between adults.

Sidebar related to: Smith-Mundt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Fair enough, but there were a few signs you read in haste. Enough that your dismissiveness comes off as more temperamental than learned, even now. Your rejection of material it is clear you barely read in the first place, is not very compelling.

---

I figured any salient detail would be elucidated here. But, you're right, I did read in haste -- after discovering in the first page -- the article wasn't going to point to any specific illegalities but would, instead, rely on the allegations of an aggrieved tattler.

I saw the narrative developing. And, since you didn't come up with any specific acts being alleged, either; I can only conclude my judgment, in not wasting more time closely studying the article, was accurate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Bush era violations of the Logan Act still upset you? Ok. This relates to the current discussion how, please?

---

The selective outrage of the Left. It seems the left is willing to construct awful conclusions about the acts of Republican administrations based on the slimmest of innuendo while completely failing to notice the blatant acts of the Left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Well and good, but we mainly trade in opinion here.

The discussion has no time to wait for the legal facts to be established, that can take years. Anyway, the discussion itself relates to the underlying actions.

You may limit yourself to legal certainties if you wish, but it is absurd to expect much emulation in free-flowing, wide ranging conversations between adults.

---

And, my opinion is, absent an specific allegation if criminal wrongdoing, I'm not buying it. It appears, on the surface, to be another liberal attempt at smearing an effort with which it simply disagrees.

The article doesn't allege a crime it crafts a narrative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Sidebar related to: Smith-Mundt.

---

Can't get the link to work. May be my browser as I'm having trouble with other domains and sites. Will try later.

(still works for me, boss)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

I figured any salient detail would be elucidated here. But, you're right, I did read in haste -- after discovering in the first page -- the article wasn't going to point to any specific illegalities but would, instead, rely on the allegations of an aggrieved tattler.

---

Who got railroaded by the army for making a principled stand. There's a story there for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

I saw the narrative developing. And, since you didn't come up with any specific acts being alleged, either; I can only conclude my judgment, in not wasting more time closely studying the article, was accurate.

---

Your prerogative of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

The selective outrage of the Left. It seems the left is willing to construct awful conclusions about the acts of Republican administrations based on the slimmest of innuendo while completely failing to notice the blatant acts of the Left.

---

Classic projection. You do the very same thing with striking regularity. Your apparent unawareness of your own resemblance to the hypocrisy you claim to despise, is very striking too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

And, my opinion is, absent an specific allegation if criminal wrongdoing, I'm not buying it. It appears, on the surface, to be another liberal attempt at smearing an effort with which it simply disagrees.

---

Loyal, principled soldiers got smeared for making a principled stand. Just saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

The article doesn't allege a crime it crafts a narrative.

---

Fair enough, but so what? This whole forum is narrative and nothing but.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Who got railroaded by the army for making a principled stand. There's a story there for sure.

---

Or so we're told.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Your prerogative of course.

---

Of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Classic projection. You do the very same thing with striking regularity. Your apparent unawareness of your own resemblance to the hypocrisy you claim to despise, is very striking too.

---

You don't list any examples but, how you characterize me would not be affected by my knowing and responding to such claims...so, have at it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Loyal, principled soldiers got smeared for making a principled stand. Just saying.

---

Exactly...just saying. That's all the Rolling Stone did, as well. Just said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Fair enough, but so what? This whole forum is narrative and nothing but.

---

This forum isn't the Rolling Stone Magazine.

Quote:

---

This forum isn't the Rolling Stone Magazine.

---

Nobody said it was. Do you like arguing with nobody?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Nobody said it was. Do you like arguing with nobody?

---

Obviously.

Between what real posters actually say and what nobody says, you choose to refute what nobody says. Which is totally your prerogative.

Ignoring the plain meaning of what other posters say in favor of your own rather obvious twistification of what they say is an irritating habit and not a little discourteous.

Nor does it serve any broader purpose of understanding or moving the conversation. Quite the contrary: it is a hazard that often impedes it.

There are real posters here, Yoni, should you choose to engage them.

Paying attention to what they actually say on a putative discussion board is a fairly minimal/basic level of courtesy, don't you think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Between what real posters actually say and what nobody says, you choose to refute what nobody says. Which is totally your prerogative.

---

You're the nobody advancing the Rolling Stone's narrative...it's not your narrative or opinion, it's something you read and believe.

Holy shit! I pull up one post, to respond, only to find out you've had some sort of posting spasm. What's the matter, do you think this is Twitter and, therefore, each post is limited by word count?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

There are real posters here, Yoni, should you choose to engage them.

Paying attention to what they actually say on a putative discussion board is a fairly minimal/basic level of courtesy, don't you think?

---

Nobody in here is real. Nobody. Not even me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

Holy shit! I pull up one post, to respond, only to find out you've had some sort of posting spasm. What's the matter, do you think this is Twitter and, therefore, each post is limited by word count?

---

lol. Not at all.

Others have accused me of post padding, but in truth sometimes I just prefer to keep my posts short.

Put my original words back in:

What an awesome way to make a story.

Take actual quotes, arrange the facts, leave out others...

Instant story to fit the Rolling Stone's agenda!

At no time is the colonel quoted as saying he was asked to use his skills on the congressmen.

Dignitaries include local tribesmen and other people of influence in the region.

--Add edit--

Let me change this:

At no time is the colonel quoted as saying he was asked to use his skills on the congressmen.

to this:

At no time is the colonel quoted as saying the general asked to use his skills on the congressmen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

Nobody in here is real. Nobody. Not even me.

---

We're all brains in vats, or something like that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildly Wrong

At no time is the colonel quoted as saying he was asked to use his skills on the congressmen.

---

Quote:

---

According to Holmes, the general wanted the IO team to provide a "deeper analysis of pressure points we could use to leverage the delegation for more funds." The general’s chief of staff also asked Holmes how Caldwell could secretly manipulate the U.S. lawmakers without their knowledge. "How do we get these guys to give us more people?" he demanded. "What do I have to plant inside their heads?"

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

We're all brains in vats, or something like that?

---

Or are we on the 13th floor?