101

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes

« on: April 03, 2025, 12:41:21 PM »

102

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Flat Earth Popularity stronger than ever!

« on: April 03, 2025, 12:22:54 PM »

So buttons on your underwear...you think all the page views are due to bots?

Obviously not all - I mean, we are viewing pages now. But Pete thinks that explains the increase in views.
It's not my view, it's his. You can read his answer as well as I can.

103

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Flat Earth Popularity stronger than ever!

« on: April 03, 2025, 12:03:11 PM »

Is it? If it’s evident then there should be some evidence. Is there?

AATW to lazy to look at the numbers for this site:

Oh dear Lord.
Please tell me that this whole thread isn't just predicated on that. I noticed that some time ago - posts are down but last year a massive increase in page views.
I asked Pete about that and he said:

Also, back to the question of page visits - Google Analytics seems to think our page visits have been slowly decreasing, but not significantly so. Definitely not a 5x increase on there. Similarly, there has not been an increase in search traffic to the forum - that's basically a constant stream.

Of course, the former only captures people who allow Google Analytics to run, but the proportion of real humans there tends to stay pretty steady. So, my current hunch is that the huge increase SMF is seeing is purely bots.

So...

104

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Flat Earth Popularity stronger than ever!

« on: April 03, 2025, 09:24:39 AM »

Yeah. It's fairly easy to observe the shift in public conversation around the subject.

Over what time period? Over 20 years? Well sure. 20 years ago this wasn't even a thing - or not one that I'd ever heard anything about.
There wasn't a public conversation around the subject.
Now it's a thing. So no argument there.
I just wondered what recent change prompted this thread.

I have looked for data and struggled to find anything which backs up the "exponential growth" you have talked about.
I mean, that was possibly true at some point but if it had continued to be the case then it would now be pretty much the mainstream view.
But it isn't.

105

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Flat Earth Popularity stronger than ever!

« on: April 02, 2025, 08:28:02 PM »

After the many years of the naysaying and the supposed "deboonking", flat earth is enjoying an evident resurgence.

Is it? If it’s evident then there should be some evidence. Is there?

106

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: April 02, 2025, 09:37:02 AM »

"Everyone", in general, are also ignorant of exact DoD classification rules and guidelines.

Which continues to be irrelevant.
This was clearly chat which was not meant for the public domain.

Actually in the fuller statement he expands that he's embarrassed that he was associated with a vile journalist

He said "it's embarrassing, yes, we'll get to the bottom of it". The "this" clearly being, if you look at the interview, that Goldberg was included in the group.
He, of course, then goes on to attack Goldberg. Because that's how this administration rolls.

It's not fine.

Oh thank fuck, finally some progress.
So stop flailing around looking at whether this was technically classified information and whether it endangered the mission.
It's not that relevant.
The issue is the lack of seriousness and competence at the highest levels of US government that something like this could happen.

The main problem is that the journalist involved is a known liar

The fact that the person who accidentally got added in to the chat is antagonistic to this administration and that no-one noticed he was in there makes this worse. Although luckily for Waltz, Goldberg may not be a fan of Trump but he has some integrity. You, of course, will dispute that. But let's look at the evidence. Goldberg didn't publish any of the details of the mission until the mission had finished. And he initially planned not to do it at all, he just flagged up that he'd been added in to the chat. He could have kept quiet - who knows, he might have been added in to other chats and seen more things, that would have been a useful source of information for a journalist. But instead he said what had happened so they could fix it. Then when the administration started attacking him and calling him a liar he was like "oh cool, so you'd be OK with me publishing the details?" and they said "er, rather you didn't old chap". After much deliberation he decided to publish given that the mission had been completed and he was being called a liar.

This is the MO of this administration. Everyone antagonistic to them is a liar or a bad person or <insert other pejoratives here>.
It's a trick Trump has pulled for years which has proven depressingly effective - try and disparage and discredit the very people who should be holding him to account, the people who should be scrutinising his words and actions. If Trump can do that then HE becomes the source of truth. He can do anything he likes because the people who should be providing the checks and balances aren't there. I can see why he admires people like Putin. I don't want to go all Godwin's law but holy shit, dude, this is dangerous stuff. It's setting you down a road which I don't think you as a country want to go down.

107

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: April 01, 2025, 08:22:38 AM »

It's wild you think a journalist’s inclusion matters

Everyone thinks that it matters.
Waltz has said he takes full responsibility and has admitted it was embarrassing. There's an investigation going on in to how it happened.
If if doesn't matter then what is he taking responsibility for? Why is it embarrassing? Why does it need investigating?

The only person who doesn't think it matters is you - and you're clearly just trolling. There's is no world, no matter what shape it is, in which you think the accidental inclusion of a journalist into a group chat about a live military operation is fine. Whether what the journalist saw was classified or harmful to the operation isn't actually that relevant. It's the lack of seriousness and basic competence that he got invited in there and no-one noticed. That's the issue you are desperately trying to avoid and pretend you think is fine.
It isn't fine. You know it isn't fine.

The journalist might as well have been included in your weekly catch-up with your therapist.

I'm British, mate. We don't have therapists, we talk to our friends. You should try it.

108

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes

« on: March 31, 2025, 08:55:46 PM »

109

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 31, 2025, 01:08:58 PM »

AATW is quite the expert concerning incompetence, Tom.

I don't think you need to be an expert in anything to know that if you're going to set up a Signal group to talk about a live military operation then you probably shouldn't accidentally invite a journalist in there. I honestly don't think it matters if they were talking about the weather (which they were at one point, come to think of it), surely people at that level should be pretty careful in who they're saying things to. This incident shows a complete lack of competence and seriousness at the very top level of US government. Do you disagree?

110

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 31, 2025, 12:08:41 PM »

thisisfine.jpg

You just keep telling yourself that, fella.
Better that than admitting you just voted a bunch of incompetents in to run your country 

111

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 29, 2025, 09:01:01 AM »

Yes, the Trump administration are all agreed that the Trump administration has done nothing wrong, and never will.

That’s not even true.
They have admitted that this was an almighty cock up. Waltz has said he takes full responsibility and that it was embarrassing

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg12ewv7xyo.amp

What’s he taking responsibility for and why is this embarrassing if they’ve done nothing wrong?

The only person pretending that this is all fine is Tom. He doesn’t believe that, so there’s no point in engaging with him. He treats this place as a debating society. Which is sort of fine on issues where there are genuinely two sides. This isn’t one. There’s no point “debating” with someone who is claiming up is down and wet is dry.

The whole narrative from the White House has been hilarious. Although given that these are some of the people in charge of the most powerful nation on earth it’s a little alarming.

First it was “he’s lying”
So he said words to the effect of “oh, so are you ok with me publishing the whole chat then?”
And they were like “rather you didn’t”.
After much deliberation he decided to publish anyway, based on the fact they were still calling him a liar and the mission had already happened.
All they’re doing now is attacking him and The Atlantic to deflect from what actually happened here.

You can debate whether they should be using Signal for this sort of thing. I’d say “no” given it’s not approved for this use, and it deletes messages.

You can debate whether anything was said which genuinely jeopardised the mission. I’d say “possibly”. But it’s certainly chat they didn’t intend to come in to the public domain.

What cannot be debated or excused is the astonishing fuck up of accidentally inviting a journalist - and one hostile to the Trump administration - into the chat. And then proceeding to chat about a live mission, at no point did anyone notice he was in there. I mean holy shit! It speaks to a complete lack of competence and seriousness at the highest levels of US government.

112

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 28, 2025, 10:53:36 PM »

thisisfine.jpg

Sure it is, fella.
You definitely believe that and aren’t in any way trolling.
And has this happened under Biden you’d obviously be saying the same things.

113

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 27, 2025, 08:40:23 PM »

thisisfine.jpg

Whatever you say, champ.

114

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 27, 2025, 07:39:34 PM »

thisisfine.jpg

Yes yes, you definitely believe that this is fine and there has been no issue here.
The secret to good trolling is not to make it so obvious. You’re a walking Monty Python argument sketch, you’re not arguing in good faith so I’ll leave you to it.

115

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 27, 2025, 07:09:34 PM »

Biden: he's incompetent and shouldn't lead.
Trump's team: Incompetence is fine!

This whole thread has become a this is fine meme from the usual suspects

116

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 27, 2025, 05:12:38 PM »

Who said it was an accident?

Literally everyone.

117

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 27, 2025, 04:20:34 PM »

You are asking everybody here to rely on your professed ability to determine levels of competence within positions of government that you do not occupy, have never occupied, and cannot ever hope to occupy

They added a fucking journalist, who does not have security clearance, to a group chat about an upcoming military operation.
By accident.
And they then proceeded to talk about said operation with the journalist in the group, no-one noticing he was in there.

Are you going to sit there with a straight face and claim that doesn't demonstrate a high level of incompetence?

118

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 27, 2025, 03:25:38 PM »

Makes things worse for who, exactly?

For your country.

The whole world is laughing at you and/or looking on in some horror at the utter clowns you have in charge.
You have incompetence at the highest level of government.
And you have a president who is also incompetent - I mean, he put those people in place. And he doesn't care that his senior staff are incompetent, he just likes that they're sycophantic.

If you don't care how incompetent your senior leaders are then fair enough I guess. And this incident makes clear just how incompetent.
It's a bit of a strange stance though.

119

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 27, 2025, 02:57:20 PM »

Once again, the people that actually matter are okay with it.

Which, as has been explained to you, makes things worse.
Not only are the top levels of your government grossly incompetent, they also don't care about that incompetence.
Not great, is it?

120

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 27, 2025, 02:13:23 PM »

I don't see how this personal liberal view of how operational secrecy should he handled has any merit.

Liberal view 
Honestly, the ridiculous holes you are digging yourself into.

This is nothing to do with anyone's politics. This was a group chat set up to discuss a particular mission.
Leaving aside whether they should be using Signal for this purpose, the point you keep failing to acknowledge is
THEY INVITED A FUCKING JOURNALIST WHO HAD NO SECURITY CLEARANCE IN TO THE CHAT BY ACCIDENT.
And, worse, no-one noticed throughout the chat.

If you think that lack of seriousness and level of incompetence is acceptable at the highest level of the US Government then OK then.
It's a strange position, but OK. If Trump thinks that level of incompetence is acceptable then holy shit!
But this is what happens when you have someone like Trump making appointments based on loyalty rather then competence.

We all know how you'd be posting had this happened on Biden's watch. Stop embarrassing yourself.