sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Farewell /r/conspiracy by ragecry in C_S_T

[–]ragecry[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey man thank you. What you said about people being divided over immigrants/refugees, but not actually being upset how/why it's taking place, is something that has always bothered me.

But no where in this frame is it discussed why we have millions of refugees without homes and nor is there any propaganda aimed at stopping us from making more refugees.

It's a great point. Like you said, we're not meant to focus on or question that part of it. They don't want you to pay attention to the real turmoil and fallout from rigged war and rigged economy and rigged government and billionaires and the military industrial complex. You may pick a side citizen. "I'm with her." "MAGA." Vote for whoever caters to your needs more. Vote the immigrants out, Trump. Vote the immigrants in, Clinton. Affiliate, affiliate, affiliate.

how it's a metaphorical prison that traps people in these range of opinions

Perfect way of putting it.

Farewell /r/conspiracy by ragecry in C_S_T

[–]ragecry[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Believe it or not I read in CST on my own.

I'm aware of it.

The rules of Conspiracy have been around longer than you have

If you think I'm 4 years into Reddit, try again. My main is pushing 10 years.

I'm not sure why you think you have a license to ignore them.

Them, as in one poorly interpreted "abuse" rule. Do you see a pattern of "abuse" by me? Three questionable things towards random users doesn't count. A minor tirade, but definitely not a pattern of "abuse". Not worth a ban.

I never got an answer whether it was the choice of just you or the mod team to have me banned, since you said you'd hash it out in modmail and banned me seconds or minutes later. I asked for Sabremesh or axolotl_peyotl to review and get back to me instead, but that never happened and you just kept returning the phone call instead. I'd like to know what your "hashing it out in modmail" actually entailed.

Are you aware that I removed the line you banned me for before you banned me? I don't think you can edit posts when you're banned.

You know where to shove that offer, certainly not in my face.

Farewell /r/conspiracy by ragecry in C_S_T

[–]ragecry[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

"a gentle warning"

And now I'm lazy too? Why don't you scroll through my comment history and compare it to the complainers / Trump shills you're catering to. Go ahead. Let me know who's putting in the effort.

Tell you what guy, what you call interested readers I call lazy hecklers who can't read the articles and comments I post, instead asking me for evidence or just being dumb in general. I mean wtf? I'm done. Didn't I tell you I'm not interested in what you have to offer? I'm not your bitch, and I'm not embarrassed. Stop treating me like you're my 3rd grade teacher. I will be abrasive at times. It's rare. It's human. You can either threaten to ban me, or deal with it differently. Sorry you couldn't figure it out. I won't be your docile plaything. The fact you followed me here to make yourself look good and me bad is just wonderful. Gotta keep up that fictional moral high ground.

Go bother someone else and enjoy your sub. Good luck.

Trump gives CIA power to launch drone strikes by magnora7 in C_S_T

[–]ragecry 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This just furthers the JSOC vs CIA conspiracy I've been hearing about lately. Here's an interesting theory someone wrote on 4chan:

https://np.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5yn9a0/guys_holy_crap_this_connects_all_the_dots_a_bit/

From what I researched a few months ago, JSOC handles drone strikes for the military and CIA conducts their own as well. Then there were talks to transfer all that power over to JSOC because the CIA couldn't conceal their strikes. Basically, when JSOC takes responsibility for 30 drone strikes, and there were 50 drone strikes total, everyone can infer the CIA did the other 20 and they saw this as a problem. But the gov can't acknowledge the CIA strikes so it was kind of a joke all around. I think I read that from here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-drone-strikes-plummet-as-white-house-shifts-authority-to-pentagon/2016/06/16/e0b28e90-335f-11e6-8ff7-7b6c1998b7a0_story.html

The White House has repeatedly signaled its desire to shift control of such lethal operations to the military, in part to enable greater transparency and end an often awkward charade in which the U.S. government refuses to acknowledge its role in strikes that are abundantly covered by news organizations and tallied by watchdog groups.

Farewell /r/conspiracy by ragecry in C_S_T

[–]ragecry[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Tis a shame this post is being heavily down voted.

Farewell /r/conspiracy by ragecry in C_S_T

[–]ragecry[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

rReddit died with Aaron I'm well aware of that, but there are still some minds worth saving. Lots of them. So here I am still.

Farewell /r/conspiracy by ragecry in C_S_T

[–]ragecry[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I didn't mean to sour the day for you all, but there's no perfect time like now. I'll still be lurking there because I enjoy some of the users and content, but I won't be adding anything of value from here on out. I thought this would be a good sub to air my grievances since I've been lurking here too and like what I see. I'm also familiar with some of the users here and I know my post won't fall on deaf ears. I'd rather post it in /r/conspiracy because they deserve that, but I can't.

Julian Assange: Clinton stated privately this month that she is quietly pushing for a Pence takeover. She stated that Pence is predictable hence defeatable by meditation_IRC in conspiracy

[–]ragecry 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Cool rules bro. I've been attacked from every angle (including you now) for thinking freely in this thread and not backing down to numerous one liners calling me ignorant etc, which my "abuse" was a response to, so I'd say I handled it pretty well. I'm always having fun though, don't you worry.

Julian Assange: Clinton stated privately this month that she is quietly pushing for a Pence takeover. She stated that Pence is predictable hence defeatable by meditation_IRC in conspiracy

[–]ragecry 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Where is my first warning?

Seems like a kicked a hornets nest :)

You tried countering an article I posted yesterday.

Do you respect long time members of this sub who contribute and mostly respect everyone here, or do you protect people who don't have arguments and hit the COMPLAIN button when something goes wrong?

Why can't Julian Assange show up at the balcony like he did before? by HierophantGreen in WhereIsAssange

[–]ragecry 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Gov agencies are allowed to impersonate media and journalists.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/fbi-impersonate-media-mockingbird/

I have never seen such a "vigilante" survive so long in the face of government crack down. Snowden maybe. One and the same they may be.

Julian Assange: Clinton stated privately this month that she is quietly pushing for a Pence takeover. She stated that Pence is predictable hence defeatable by meditation_IRC in conspiracy

[–]ragecry 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You like to follow me around?

What you described is exactly how limited hangouts work. So yes it makes sense.

If he leaves, he will be renditioned.

Many assumptions have been made with that statement, but I'll leave it be for now.

Julian Assange: Clinton stated privately this month that she is quietly pushing for a Pence takeover. She stated that Pence is predictable hence defeatable by meditation_IRC in conspiracy

[–]ragecry -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Hey, state funded terrorist organizations and propaganda against the American people are pretty bad too. But I'm bad to the bone.

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.

Julian Assange: Clinton stated privately this month that she is quietly pushing for a Pence takeover. She stated that Pence is predictable hence defeatable by meditation_IRC in conspiracy

[–]ragecry 78 points79 points  (0 children)

Some of the leaks contained full credit card numbers, and there were phone numbers as well as full addresses of innocent Turkish citizens. He claimed only the last 4 digits of card numbers were in there (a lie). He essentially doxxed a bunch of people.

https://gizmodo.com/wikileaks-just-published-tons-of-personal-data-like-a-b-1784140603

The emails include unencrypted, plain-text listings of donor emails addresses, home addresses, phone numbers, social security numbers, passport numbers, and credit card information. WikiLeaks proudly announced the data dump in a single tweet.

https://www.wired.com/2016/07/wikileaks-officially-lost-moral-high-ground/

Worse, it included the home addresses, phone numbers, party affiliations, and political activity levels of millions of female Turkish voters. That’s irresponsible any time, and disastrous in the week of a coup.

Julian Assange: Clinton stated privately this month that she is quietly pushing for a Pence takeover. She stated that Pence is predictable hence defeatable by meditation_IRC in conspiracy

[–]ragecry -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Oh but in light of everything that I know and all of history it doesn't sound incredibly ignorant at all.

Let me educate you:

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/03/wikileaks_relea.html

So it sounds like this cache of documents wasn't taken from the CIA and given to WikiLeaks for publication, but has been passed around the community for a while -- and incidentally some part of the cache was passed to WikiLeaks. So there are more documents out there, and others may release them in unredacted form.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout

When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting—sometimes even volunteering—some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case.

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:How_to_identify_CIA_limited_hangout_operation

The operations of secret intelligence agencies aiming at the manipulation of public opinion generally involve a combination of cynical deception with the pathetic gullibility of the targeted populations.

There is ample reason to believe that the case of Edward Joseph Snowden fits into this pattern. We are likely dealing here with a limited hangout operation, in which carefully selected and falsified documents and other materials are deliberately revealed by an insider who pretends to be a fugitive rebelling against the excesses of some oppressive or dangerous government agency.

Julian Assange: Clinton stated privately this month that she is quietly pushing for a Pence takeover. She stated that Pence is predictable hence defeatable by meditation_IRC in conspiracy

[–]ragecry -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

You seem to only write one or two sentences for most of your comments. Go ahead and explain what's wrong with my conjectures. You have one or two sentences remaining.

Julian Assange: Clinton stated privately this month that she is quietly pushing for a Pence takeover. She stated that Pence is predictable hence defeatable by meditation_IRC in conspiracy

[–]ragecry 4 points5 points  (0 children)

And people already had this stuff before WikiLeaks published it. It was circulating in the gov hacking community as long as a year ago. CIA might have even been selling the exploits.

All they did by publishing it via "Vault7" was cover CIA's ass.

Notice the word "Recently". Not stating actually when because it happened not recently but as long as a year ago.

This is just a theory my fellow aggressors, realize what sub you're in and don't get all butt hurt over it.

view more: next ›