More Huffington Post Bullshit

[SkepticalMetal]

h ttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/chez-pazienza/ron-paul-boston-marathon_b_3197004.html

I don't know why I even bother sharing this dreck, as it's quite evident these toads are full-time trolls.

[green73]

I saw this a couple days ago. I was heartened by a lot of the comments.

[SkepticalMetal]

I saw this a couple days ago. I was heartened by a lot of the comments.
I'm assuming they were pro-libertarian, which is cool. Honestly, I was half-expecting to see a "U MAD?" at the end of this guy's condescending dribble.

[eric_cartman]

what a crappy article. not even a good attack piece.

all it said was "ron paul bad... police good.... oh, btw ron paul's a racist"

[cajuncocoa]

I'm assuming they were pro-libertarian, which is cool. Honestly, I was half-expecting to see a "U MAD?" at the end of this guy's condescending dribble.
Done. :D

[UpperDecker]

They call us paranoid, I call them utterly delusional. The militarization of our police forces is being televised right in front of their faces and it still doesn't register with them.

[sailingaway]

The responses are in Ron's forum, with pictures, video and interviews:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?412942-A-response-Lawrence-O-Donnell-smear-of-Ron-Paul-claiming-only-voluntary-Boston-searches

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?413146-MUST-see-video-response-MSNBC-Ron-Paul-is-a-Paranoid-Liar-quot-No-Guns-Pointed-at-Families

[Carson]

The link in your post is broken but maybe they got this one right. Though I didn't think much about it till recently. I even Google'd the effective range of double oo buck shot.

Joe Biden Says No Need To Own Assault Weapons: 'Buy A Shotgun!'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/19/joe-biden-guns_n_2719330.html



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCWdCKPtnYE

[anaconda]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCWdCKPtnYE

Very respectable cover:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIZ1QAwkZSg

[Carson]

Thanks anaconda,

Peter Paul and Mary were more my older brothers generations music though I remember them on the radio pretty regular. I haven't listened to them in a long time.

[SkepticalMetal]

Why does it say that my post was edited by sailingaway?

[Ender]

Why does it say that my post was edited by sailingaway?

SHE BROKE THE LINK.

[SkepticalMetal]

And why would she do that?

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Is this more of the shit trying to debunk Ron Paul on everything because of a technicality of what a tank is?

[Anti Federalist]

And why would she do that?

Because "link throughs" increase "hits" and that increases ad revenue.

Why do you want to put money in the pockets of our enemies?

[SkepticalMetal]

Because "link throughs" increase "hits" and that increases ad revenue.

Why do you want to put money in the pockets of our enemies?
I didn't realize that, but I would have preferred that person actually telling me rather than editing my own post, which I hold to be somewhat unethical regardless of what the link would do. On that note, people didn't have to click the link.

[kcchiefs6465]

If it's a negative story, always break the link. As I understand it, posting the link here increases their 'web presence.' They are higher up on search results. Kind of like advertising the negativity if you don't break it. People going there and reading it (generating ad revenue) is secondary.

I'm sure sailingaway was only trying to be helpful. It isn't unethical or censoring your post so much as it is trying not to advertise or 'pump up' hit pieces.

[SkepticalMetal]

I see. I apologize if I might have jumped to conclusions on that one, as I wasn't even quite sure how my post had been edited in the first place. Even so, I certainly wouldn't want to help the statists generate revenue.

[DamianTV]

Why does it say that my post was edited by sailingaway?

Its nothing against you, its against organizations that are Anti Ron Paul. In technical terms, there is a thing called an HTTP Referer, so when someone clicks on the link posted in our forum, they can recognize it as having come from RonPaulForums.com. That is really the only reason to "break the link". We can still get there, but they are now unable to see that visits to that page are coming from this forum.

[SkepticalMetal]

Its nothing against you, its against organizations that are Anti Ron Paul. In technical terms, there is a thing called an HTTP Referer, so when someone clicks on the link posted in our forum, they can recognize it as having come from RonPaulForums.com. That is really the only reason to "break the link". We can still get there, but they are now unable to see that visits to that page are coming from this forum.
Okay. I apologize again for jumping to conclusions.

[DamianTV]

Okay. I apologize again for jumping to conclusions.

No prob. Lots of people, even technical people dont know that.

Im going to add a bit more on this to focus for a moment on Privacy.

Another problem with Lack of Privacy is that the information you receive can be customized based on what is already known about you. For example, say HuffPo was really upset at Ron Paul Forums, they could actually customize their story so that the content we view when we click on our forum links to HuffPo can be completely different than a link someone else clicks on from another website. The intent is cause you to have a biased opinion of the content that is presented to you.

A good examle of this is googling Egypt. If you live in the US, the information you might see on Egypt would just tell you about the Pyramids of Egypt. However, if you lived in Egypt, your headline of the day might be GOVT OVERTHROWN. Completely different content based on what someone else knows about you. They dont want you to know about some act of violece currently ongoing, but to those that obviously already know, they dont try to hide it.

People establish opinions based on the information they get. A while back, the worlds largest recorded protest ever took place in Mexico. Our MSM did not report on the event, and nearly no one in the US knew about it. A protest of 10 million people I would have to agree is World News Worthy.

THis is the ULTIMATE form of Censorship, which is a form of Mind Control. Another example might be that HuffPo posts a news article on Gun Control. Links from the RPF site might say something like "the bill is expected to die in the house". Another person clicks on a link in a different site, and this person is known to be very pro gun grab. The content they might be shown could simply say "the bill is expected to be passed by the house and signed into Law by Obama". Telling people what they WANT to hear is a very effective way to passivy large groups of people.

There are a lot of other consequences of not having any Privacy, but I cover those types of topics pretty frequently so Im not going to bother to address those topics in this post.

A lot of the Censorship that occurs with a Lack of Privacy is done algorythmicly. An algorythm decides what content you are going to be shown. I wont even bother to explain the process, but to say that the flow of information to you is different than the flow of information to someone else.

So let me ask everyone this question: do you feel comfortable in a world where the information you have access to is intended to pacify you?

This is why many of our links are broken. To do that, just change http in your link to hxxp. To "fix" the link, just change the XX pack to TT and hit enter. That gets rid of the HTTP Referer coming from this site. Same as tryping in an address straight into your address bar (not googling, direct manual entry, copy and paste is fine as well). It depends greatly on the site as well. A small personal blog wont need to have the link purposefully broken, but something like HuffPo that has the opposite point of view from most of our liberty loving members is information that can be used to censor the flow of information.

[kcchiefs6465]

Great info damiantv. Must spread some rep around. I was unaware of all that. Thanks for taking the time to spell it out.

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

h ttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/chez-pazienza/ron-paul-boston-marathon_b_3197004.html

I don't know why I even bother sharing this dreck, as it's quite evident these toads are full-time trolls.

Holy fuck! According to the Huffington Post, I'm a "nihilistic hipster??" Does that mean I get to wear plaid, sip lattes, and listen to emo shit music?

We're coool. :-P

[SkepticalMetal]

Holy shit! According to the Huffington Post, I'm a "nihilistic hipster??" Does that mean I get to wear plaid, sip lattes, and listen to emo shit music?

We're coool. :-P
I thought hipsters generally held liberal views...? Or perhaps that's just my lack of popular cultural exposure speaking. Or perhaps I got it right and this is more Huffington Post regurgitation.

Probably the last one I said.

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

The reeealy cool hipsters don't have political views. It's so cliche, ya know

[DamianTV]

The reeealy cool hipsters don't have political views. It's so cliche, ya know

Actually, only the people that express political opinions that are endorsed by the current powers that be are the only ones "authorized" to have a political point of view at all. Everyone elses voice and vote is considered invalid by reason of conflict of interest with the Status Quo.