All Activity

No… they don’t… Again, the particular podcast in question is linked directly to Russian state sponsored media and has frequent guests that are so corrupted as to have registered under the foreign agents act or to have been flat disbarred/disgraced or fled western countries and now shill so as not to be extradited. These aren’t viable/reliable sources of perspective just because they enjoy internet popularity. These are highly compromised individuals providing an outlet for a foreign power’s influence campaign which is designed to erode confidence and cause civil resistance and government disfunction. And no… you don’t need to listen to a broad depth of content from an Alex Jones type character to know it’s nonsense and bullshit. Similarly you don’t need to listen to not just pro but deliberate government controlled/influenced media to “get the real story” or whatever other BS. That’s like choosing to eat what is clearly a turd in between two slices of bread to find out for sure if you do or don’t like the taste. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Definitely.

I’ve noticed this as well, many moderately political hot women I knew got much uglier the more outspokenly liberal and progressive they get. Weird.

I'm not worried about the fines. Its a general decay in the company since I started with them back in 2003. It was nice to have overseas for insurance and a military 'friendly' company. Since then the products and customer service has plummeted. If I can have my money in one location it makes it easier.

Right, at this point it would be harder to find one that hadn’t been fined.

where else you gonna go? https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/vanguard-fined-providing-misleading-account-statements-its-customers-2023-06-01/ https://www.barrons.com/advisor/articles/massachusetts-fines-fidelity-750-000-for-rubber-stamping-options-applications-d1e1c9c6

I've listened to the Duran podcast a bit, likely because it got brought up here. It certainly takes the general viewpoint that things are going badly for Ukraine/The West and well for Russia. 99.8% of what I've read, heard and watched since 2022 takes the general viewpoint that things are going well for Ukraine/The West and badly for Russia. Wars will always be accompanied by propaganda on both sides. As someone predisposed to look at news from a pro-American (and certainly not pro-Russian) perspective when this all kicked off, I've become more aware day by day that the news getting blasted to essentially all Americans/Westerners who don't bother to dig deeper is often less reliable than purported. This assessment will not get me many upvotes, but gearhog and Bashi have a point.

My man, I say this with more experience than 69% of the people here...you abso-fucking-lutely are wasting your time here. I would know!

inter component transfer is never allowed? This would be a switch to AD after or during attending UPT as an AFRC hire. E.g. someone who got hired by a reserve unit and completes pilot training but wants to switch to AD for whatever reason

Wasn't USAA Bank fined $140 million a couple of years ago?

I wasn't going to, but I am now. I want to see for myself what it is you're so afraid of. Actually, you do need to listen to something to understand it. Otherwise, aaagain.... you're only regurgitating someone else's conclusion. As I said, we also have intel and propaganda campaigns. Would you say those are more or less robust than those of Russia? I say more. It's also a well documented fact that those tools have been used on our own citizens. I don't give the first flying fuck about any Russian politician, soldier, or citizen. The direct threat they pose to my life is insignificant compared to my own government and people who would advocate for censorship. And I'm definitely not going to allow them or you dictate to me what I can and can't think. Wish no one would listen to Duran? Wish in one hand, shit in the other, and see which one fills up first. Perhaps you saw it, but I posted this earlier today. It's an excerpt taken from the The Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787. John Madison, June 29th. You should read some of it if your online bias check website deems it safe for you. The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people. It is perhaps questionable, whether the best concerted system of absolute power in Europe could maintain itself, in a situation, where no alarms of external danger could tame the people to the domestic yoke. What I am suggesting here is nothing new. This was a big issue 237 years ago among our founding fathers as much as it was an issue a thousand years ago. That you so aggressively, yet naively assert that we have only the most noble of intentions on a rapidly growing list of conflicts is just proud ignorance. If I want the truth, I have to consider the perspective of someone on the outside looking in. I have a strong marriage of 26 years. Due in large part in our ability to listen and try to understand another perspective even though it may be flawed. I'm not wasting my time here. The ideas I'm submitting are for your benefit least of all. You're unreachable. You can go listen to or not listen to whatever you want. Participate in your own delusional projection of calling other people shills while simultaneously engaging in it yourself. Do not care. What you are is a generic amalgamation of bad faith and bad reasoning. Sort of boiled down Great Value version of every neocon in position of power, and I have the opportunity challenge it. Some people may not agree, but I think it's going really well.

Dibs

Your exact statement “there isn’t enough time” Those are your words as to why you don’t cull more sources to form a broad collective understanding (you know what we do in the intelligence disciplines). So you’re going to waste that finite resources to listen to a podcast with direct ties to Russian media that has the aforementioned hosts on. Again, we don’t need to listen to Jones/Tucker/Maddow’s episode on a subject to understand the slants and bad research or blatant fabrications that will be baked into it. Because it isn’t news. Duran has exactly that problem only worse because of their direct ties to a geopolitical foe with an active IA campaign against NATO, Europe in general, and our own country/population. If you’re dumb enough to have to sit and listen too it in order to attempt to discover what’s real and what’s fake or highly corrupted in that, you’re wasting time, same as you’re doing here. But if you want to listen to Scott Ritter be interviewed in his opinions don’t waste the rest of your time here. You’ve got big important “facts” to discover. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

False. You didn't answer those questions. You just named a few more sources that shouldn't be listened to without substantiating it. Now you're telling me to Google your defense. "Whatever pops up on Google Search results is what my position is." LOL Really? You can't form an original critical thought of your own? "If you want to know what I think, Google it." For the third time, you should reread your posts before you hit submit reply. Your standard for intellectual honesty is "Do you agree with me?". If content doesn't agree with your opinion, it's obviously Russian propaganda. If someone listens to that content, they're obviously a shill. And you're calling me a contrarian? Ridiculous and hypocritical. Of course I am aware of all the Russian IA. But you act as if coming into contact with it carries the same risk as getting herpes from your mom. We're all adults and we can discern the risks and bad information. Have you not also read the chilling ways in which our own Intel agencies influence public opinion? I'm not talking about Russians. F them. I mean the ways in which our govenment manipulates our people. It's out there classifed and unclassifed. "Google it." At this point, it's obvious you don't even know what the "in depth analysis" is. You've adopted a weak position and you'd rather die defending it than abandon it an seek a better one. Par for the neocon adjacent. Another dodge. Accuse me of "playing victim" for asking a question, so as to not answer the question again. I'm subscribed to Zeihan and have been since someone else on this forum recommended him about a year ago. He has some great points. He also comes up with some BS while stumbling through the mountains. I also read and have even posted content from those other sources here on this forum. Yes, there's a lot of good stuff, but there's some questionable stuff as well. I'll read it all. Again, you appear to outsource all of your bullshit detection to third party internet websites. Media bias checks? Why wouldn't you just read it for yourself and decide? You're like drop-shipper of BO.net. You're just marketing and selling other peoples products, or critical thinking skills.

So now you want to play the “I was just asking a question” victim card? There are multiple alternatives mentioned in the just last few pages not alone this whole thread. Podcasters like Peter Zeihan Think tanks like Institute for study of war CSIS Brookings institute Council on foreign relations… Or maybe just use any number of media bias checks that exist that would tell you things like business insider and dubiously linked podcasts probably isn’t the place to be getting in depth truthful foreign policy analysis. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like the part where you cut the entire part of my post out answering the questions you are now asking. Go google the names I mentioned that appear on the Duran and tell us why we should listen to them peddle their argument. Like I said I don’t think for a second you are arguing from a point of intellectual honesty, I think you’re just trying to be contrarian and are willing to ignore all the declassified info on Russian IA operations and demand further context to meet some impossible threshold. As was mentioned directly above, I don’t need to care if Alex Jones also thinks the sky is blue, there are plenty of places I can find the same information from somebody that doesn’t think things like chemtrails are making the frogs gay. Getting your “in depth analysis” of the Ukraine war from a podcast with direct ties to Russian state media/propaganda and acting like you’re informed because of it falls in that same category. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There's not enough hours in the day to read all the things I want to read or watch. To be efficient with my time, I make personal choices as to where I get the most value. You likely do the same, but I wouldn't apply a label to you because of where you sift through info. I also wouldn't spend more time ridiculing you for where you seek info than it would take for me to read what you'd be referring to. In this case, the podcast that has his panties in a twist looks to be about 20 min long. The title is "Preventing Ukraine Collapse during the US election." That could be the title of any Western Neocon slanted podcast. Lawman isn't ignoring information that doesn't meet a standard, he's waving his arms like a crazy person shouting "Don't look over here!". At some point, one has to ask, "Well... why?" Now I want to know what you're acting all weird about. So if the content hasn't met a standard, can I at least know what the standard is? Maybe a few examples? That's not an unreasonable request. Pretending to be indignant because someone has the audacity to ask what your problem or why the content hasn't met your standard, doesn't automatically grant you credibility. If one of the standards is having an active interest in the conflict, shouldn't we condemning a few US media outlets as well? That's just a test for hypocrisy. If Lawman is unwilling or unable to name any, then he's a hypocrite, and deserves to be relegated to the status of RT, Pravda, and the like. He is no more honest than they.

AFICT it is not possible. AD UPT accessions policy explicitly disqualifies AFRC officers. Maybe there are specific one off cases/programs I'm unaware of.

That progressive liberalism can be hard on a woman. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

WTF happened??

While I agree with the concept of debating the content and not the source, the only realistic way to do anything useful is to filter out sources that do not meet a certain standard. Being correct sometimes is not a high enough standard. As an example, it is unrealistic to expect someone to spend time disproving the many insane things Alex Jones says regularly. Even though he's right sometimes, and even though he's right sometimes when everyone else is burying the story. It's just the peril of dealing with unlimited information. As an intermediate solution, you can ignore a source with an obvious bias. A sort of "recusal" for media. I'm this case, it's rational to discard Russian-government-controlled media when discussing a war Russia is waging. Yeah, they'll be right sometimes. Too bad so sad. There's not enough time in the day to vet sources with a huge bias when other sources exist. I wouldn't trust the Ukrainian press releases either, nor waste time with them.

What is this, a half dozen or so exchanges we've now had? Each time, I ask what is the specific information you're disputing. Each time, you dodge the question and choose the ad-hominem tactic. You're just keep repeating a fallacious argument. Let's look at the information in a vacuum and evaluate the thing you're upset about. So what's it like on the inside of an actual vault? Do you get to see who killed JFK? Is there a top secret file on the Duran that enlightens you to something you can only allude to, but not actually say. I wouldn't know, but I'm mystified and super impressed. Where did you get this screen shot? What was in the video? What did he say that was wrong? The best defense against bad information is good information, not no information. As should be apparent, I thoroughly... thoroughly... enjoy challenging an opposing viewpoint. A lot. I wouldn't be pursuing this if I didn't know for a fact your position was weak. I know it is because you won't go anywhere near the crux of the issue. You're trying way too hard to dismiss any threatening information wholesale before it's heard, even by you, by attacking the source. I'll even concede to you it's possible that the vast majority of info coming from these sources completely fabricated, but it's impossible that all of it is. I'll wade through a ton of BS to find an ounce of truth, even yours. What is the Russian propaganda being peddled here that you have a problem with? You've made it abundantly clear where that information is being broadcast from, I just want to know what the information is that you don't like. Let's dispense with your haughty condescending ego performance around RT and get down to brass tacks. So, let me repeat the question: What is the Russian propaganda being peddled here that you have a problem with?

the same "privately owned" US news outlets who have CIA officers on the payroll?

No kidding, and your lack of access would be why those of us finding your repeated defense of state sponsored propaganda so eye rolling. Why would we mention clear state funded propaganda like RT when discussing a podcast as radioactive as Duran Gee I wonder. Its owner writes for Russia News Now. Their chief operators all have ties to Russian media having either hosted or worked in those circles before. It has guests on like Scott Ritter to tell you how bad things from Ukraine is, or Cyrus’s Jannessen to provide you in depth analysis on China. If you believe that kind of discourse from sources as bad as that isn’t somehow tainted you’re part of the problem in circumventing Russia and China in their active influence campaigns. You don’t need to go listen to a disgraced spy/convicted pedo who repeatedly bad mouths his country to applause by the Russians to know what he is attempting to package. Duran isnt bringing you some informed perspective because they buck the norm, they are a tool of information warfare. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow. Nice. Finally getting rid of USAA totally