Home Music Articles Forums Blog Chat More...      

add to bookmarks
Prev Topic | Next Topic

Author
Posts
(Read 6654 times)
MikeRobinson
Forum Full Member


Registered: 08/29/11
Posts: 941
Location: Chattanooga, TN United States
 
Re:Mueller vs. Edward R. Morrow
Friday, December 28 2018 @ 08:25 AM CST

Rules of Debate:
Do not criticize the individual speakers – criticize what they say.


J.A.Stewart
Forum Full Member


Registered: 11/13/04
Posts: 4650
Location: Somewhere In Time, USA
 
Re:Mueller vs. Edward R. Morrow
Friday, December 28 2018 @ 10:28 AM CST


MY LATEST: A demo version of my Work-In-Progress DAILY GRIND
magnatone
Forum Full Member


Registered: 02/08/08
Posts: 4475
Location: N/A
 
Re:Mueller vs. Edward R. Morrow
Friday, December 28 2018 @ 10:35 AM CST

Quote by: J.A.Stewart




my most recent song: "First Light (solo piano)"
Ed Hannifin
Forum Full Member


Registered: 05/24/05
Posts: 3525
Location: , MA USA
 
Re:Mueller vs. Edward R. Morrow
Friday, December 28 2018 @ 11:20 AM CST

Quote by: mr_mordenus
Quote by: chikoppi


TO EVERYONE ELSE

Yes. I know I am intentionally belaboring a thread on a subject no one wants to continue. It's evident at this point that if posts of this sort remain unchallenged then the authors will interpret the absence of challenge as tacit consent and will continue to proliferate them.

I will not initiate any post not directly related to music and music production.

Likewise, if there is no further reply to this post I will happily, abruptly, and decisively quit the subject.



There was a time, once years ago, when I commended you (in private) for your astonishing level of patience, persistence and relentless intelligence in countering a never-ending barrage of misinformed nonsense in a forum here. I asked how you managed to not only keep countering the idiocy but, more importantly, how you did so with such poise and control. I'm often considered a fairly patient individual but what you do had me dumbfounded.

But you replied exactly as you said above: "if posts of this sort remain unchallenged then the authors will interpret the absence of challenge as tacit consent and will continue to proliferate them."

That was something that made a huge impression with me. Silence will be treated as assent. Or, at least, a lack of disagreement. And I felt a little tiny spark of realization that this was important; this has to happen in the little places, the unimportant forums and employee lunch rooms and informal places where the liars have come to speak freely and loudly and relentlessly. For if nobody else says anything there, those lies can then become the fabric of what everyone hears everywhere.

And now, in my own little circles, I'll speak up. Not to argue, not to confront, but simply to speak up and serve notice that tacit assent is not happening. I'm not in your league, Chikoppi, but perhaps the differences made by speaking truth to misinformation can have a cumulative effect.

Thanks for the intelligence, the patience and the relentless will to keep at it. I'd treat you to a pecan pie if I were anywhere near Chicago.

***Chikoppi 2020 *****



Beautiful.

I appreciate everyone who has doggedly persisted in presenting facts, and doing it politely and with good grace.


"We have to remember...when it's surrender that's called for, it's not surrender of your brains. It's surrender of your ego. It's a different thing." --Bruce Cockburn
MikeRobinson
Forum Full Member


Registered: 08/29/11
Posts: 941
Location: Chattanooga, TN United States
 
Re:Mueller vs. Edward R. Morrow
Friday, December 28 2018 @ 02:14 PM CST

I sorely regret having started this thread before such an audience that proved to be quite hostile to this opinion, and then to me for having the audacity to express it.   I will not make this mistake again.   (Please enjoy your never-ending “Brace for Impact” threads – all of them.)

It is not “misinformation” to express an opinion that you don’t agree with.   It is a grave mistake to repeatedly shoot the messenger.   I am not alone in my opinion, and never have been.   My thoughts are neither original nor un-shared.

Early 2019 will prove to be an interesting period because there is a growing consensus among very well-placed people in the field of justice that something has gone very wrong, and that they do not want any such thing to become precedent.   If you look over the totality of what has been done, what has been said about and in anticipation of it, and at what dreadful personal cost and abusive (are they illegal?) tactics by which it has been achieved – even bankrupting an Army General and forcing him to “admit” to treason literally to avoid homelessness – well, that should alarm you.   That should scare the pants off of you.   Of course, maybe it doesn’t.

But, for a great many people, including many who long ago accepted (gasp!) the 2016 election results, it does ... and they are determined to keep their pants on, thank you.

And no, it is not “misinformation” to say that it does.   This is, quite simply, not what they want their justice system to be doing, now or in the future.   And they have the power to change it.   The institution of American justice is quite sacred to them.   It matters more to them than any one Mr. Mueller.

Over to you for the last word.   I’m done.   Really, this time.
SmokeyVW
Forum Full Member


Registered: 06/13/06
Posts: 7178
Location: N/A
 
Re:Mueller vs. Edward R. Morrow
Friday, December 28 2018 @ 04:32 PM CST

Quote by: MikeRobinson
I sorely regret having started this thread before such an audience that proved to be quite hostile to this opinion, and then to me for having the audacity to express it.   I will not make this mistake again.   (Please enjoy your never-ending “Brace for Impact” threads – all of them.)

It is not “misinformation” to express an opinion that you don’t agree with.   It is a grave mistake to repeatedly shoot the messenger.   I am not alone in my opinion, and never have been.   My thoughts are neither original nor un-shared.

Early 2019 will prove to be an interesting period because there is a growing consensus among very well-placed people in the field of justice that something has gone very wrong, and that they do not want any such thing to become precedent.   If you look over the totality of what has been done, what has been said about and in anticipation of it, and at what dreadful personal cost and abusive (are they illegal?) tactics by which it has been achieved – even bankrupting an Army General and forcing him to “admit” to treason literally to avoid homelessness – well, that should alarm you.   That should scare the pants off of you.   Of course, maybe it doesn’t.

But, for a great many people, including many who long ago accepted (gasp!) the 2016 election results, it does ... and they are determined to keep their pants on, thank you.

And no, it is not “misinformation” to say that it does.   This is, quite simply, not what they want their justice system to be doing, now or in the future.   And they have the power to change it.   The institution of American justice is quite sacred to them.   It matters more to them than any one Mr. Mueller.

Over to you for the last word.   I’m done.   Really, this time.

MikeRobinson
Forum Full Member


Registered: 08/29/11
Posts: 941
Location: Chattanooga, TN United States
 
Re:Mueller vs. Edward R. Morrow
Friday, December 28 2018 @ 06:39 PM CST

Thank you, Smokey, for ensuring that my final post to this ill-advised thread has been correctly captured in its entirety, lest I should dare to change it – which I won’t.

I would also like to specifically clarify that the parties whom I refer to in the final paragraphs are members of the justice community, not [just] persons (such as myself ...) with no professional connection to it.   And, that their concerns are not merely focused on the next several weeks, but the next many decades.   To them, “precedent” is everything.


As of this post, I will(!) respond no further, whatever might be the provocation.   “Frankly, my dear ...”   I no longer find reason to prosecute my opinions at this colored venue.
chikoppi
Forum Full Member


Registered: 04/02/04
Posts: 2057
Location: N/A
 
Re:Mueller vs. Edward R. Morrow
Friday, December 28 2018 @ 07:39 PM CST

Quote by: MikeRobinson
I sorely regret having started this thread before such an audience that proved to be quite hostile to this opinion, and then to me for having the audacity to express it.   I will not make this mistake again.   (Please enjoy your never-ending “Brace for Impact” threads – all of them.)

It is not “misinformation” to express an opinion that you don’t agree with.   It is a grave mistake to repeatedly shoot the messenger.   I am not alone in my opinion, and never have been.   My thoughts are neither original nor un-shared.


When you state something as a "fact," that is not an "opinion." Facts are not subjective. To invoke an axiom: You are entitled to your own opinion. You are not entitled to your own facts.

When you subject people to assertions of fact, often made with hyperbolic emphasis, you should expect those who disagree to voice their disagreements. Others are as free to respond, critique, and otherwise judge your speech as you are to present it.

Lastly, lots of people believe lots of things. That doesn't make those beliefs any more correct. Many people can be wrong about the same thing at the same time, and often are.

Quote by: MikeRobinson
Early 2019 will prove to be an interesting period because there is a growing consensus among very well-placed people in the field of justice that something has gone very wrong, and that they do not want any such thing to become precedent.   If you look over the totality of what has been done, what has been said about and in anticipation of it, and at what dreadful personal cost and abusive (are they illegal?) tactics by which it has been achieved – even bankrupting an Army General and forcing him to “admit” to treason literally to avoid homelessness – well, that should alarm you.   That should scare the pants off of you.   Of course, maybe it doesn’t.


There is no evidence of a "growing consensus." There is your desire for that to be true and there are cherry-picked anecdotes that you went in search of. You can make all the assumptions and predictions you like, but these are not facts.

You continue to misrepresent the Flynn case. He never "admitted" to treason. He admitted to and was charged with lying to the FBI and Mueller recommended no prison time in return for his cooperation with the investigation.

As to what Flynn was doing, it was far more than repeatingly failing to disclose his contact and negotiations with the Russian ambassador. He solicited more than $500K in laundered money from Turkey while working as advisor to the Trump Campaign, secretly conspired with Turkish officials to kidnap and transport a political rival in circumvention of US extradition laws, accepted multiple undisclosed payments from foreign entities during the time he was attending national security briefings, repeatedly failed to disclose foreign contacts, and more.

District Judge Sullivan (a Reagan appointee), who possessed full knowledge of the scope of Flynn's deeds, said at the sentencing hearing: "Arguably you sold your country out. I can't hide my disgust, my disdain." Flynn is no victim.

What should scare the pants off you is that our National Security Advisor, with access to the highest degree of intel, ability to shape international policy, and with direct access to the President, was at the same time profiting personally from a pattern of complicity with foreign actors to deceive our government.

Quote by: MikeRobinson
But, for a great many people, including many who long ago accepted (gasp!) the 2016 election results, it does ... and they are determined to keep their pants on, thank you.


Apparently, those same people are determined to keep their eyes and ears screwed shut.

No one is disputing the election results.

"Attempting" to influence an election in cooperation with a foreign power is a crime, whether or not the election was actually influenced.

So, to be clear, the election results were legitimate AND crimes were committed, the full extent of which we don't yet know.

Quote by: MikeRobinson
And no, it is not “misinformation” to say that it does.   This is, quite simply, not what they want their justice system to be doing, now or in the future.   And they have the power to change it.   The institution of American justice is quite sacred to them.   It matters more to them than any one Mr. Mueller.


"The Institution of American justice" means that everyone, regardless of office, is subject to it. It means no one is above the law. It means thorough due process.

"Precedent" is set IN COURT.

Quote by: MikeRobinson
Over to you for the last word.   I’m done.   Really, this time.



For anyone interested in a book recommendation, I've begun reading "The Skeptics Guide To The Universe: How to know what's really real in a world increasingly full of fake." It is an update of sorts to Carl Sagan's "Demon Haunted World." Written by a Clinical Neurologist at Yale School of Medicine, it covers critical thinking and epistemology. It's actually a fun and breezy read, full of good insights, and written without the usual scientific and philosophic jargon. Amazon

“Ya, that idea is dildos.” Skwisgaar Skwigelf
GET SONG FEEDBACK --> MacJams Critics Circles
MikeRobinson
Forum Full Member


Registered: 08/29/11
Posts: 941
Location: Chattanooga, TN United States
 
Re:Mueller vs. Edward R. Morrow
Friday, December 28 2018 @ 10:25 PM CST

I'm very sorry that it has come to this ... but it has:



Feel free to continue to talk about your precious universe.
 
dimm witness
Forum Full Member


Registered: 04/21/04
Posts: 1369
Location: pismo beach, california
 
Re:Mueller vs. Edward R. Morrow
Friday, December 28 2018 @ 11:31 PM CST

“Putin aimed to spread ‘discord and disunity’ within the United States and between Western allies, whom he saw as a threat to Russia's interests.”
— Steele dossier

Putin succeeded