I have been doing my due diligence to investigate the legitimacy of a new media source here on reddit and also a politician from the internet party in New Zealand, and I am being called names while the questeions are evaded.
A similar exchange can be found here: https://steemit.com/video/@suzi3d/gz0t9cw2
Suzie's response, as she upvoted posts about facebrak censorship, is that she shouldn't have to ever repost her horrifying ordeal at the hands of New Zealand's secret police, because it was posted 'in real time' on facebrak. Links to her interview page on her website were, for me at least over my vpn, with which i have very few other problems, were broken.
No explanation given, no other sources given, I was just called a bunch of names for asking questions.
Don't you find that odd? Here is my exchange with ms. vos, where she also refuses to address any questions, posts irrelevant links that claim to answer my question, and then more ad hominem. I am, apparently, a shill? But for what?
I simply made the comparison of disobedient media to sites like zerohedge, that seem to never actually criticize trump beyond to say at least he's not a democrat etc, which is basically what Fox News/Hannity et all, have been running with 24/7 the last few months.
note: link to this exchange below.
Hi
I have been checking out disobedient's page over the last few days and I am not yet prepared to trust you as a media source.
I do not see any real evidence of disobedience here, in fact I find it odd that in the entire u.s. politics section there is nothing critical of trump, whatsoever. Your site reads like zerohedge(a known russian propaganda outfit that happens to have a few true things posted also)
The pattern is the same across this and many sites:
-no mention of trump and alfabank or blackrock
-no mention of trump and the panama/paradise papers
-no mention of his finances and known debts to russian oligarchs/mafia
-no mention of trumps actual mafia background, i.e. roy cohn
-no mention of the obstruction of justice, emmoluments, or treason
Meanwhile there is still on your site an obsession with the dnc/clinton which one might expect from sites like fox news.
I am aware of your work with suzie3d, she mentioned your site in response to questions I posed to her which she has not yet answered.
Her claims about state surveillance and harassment are of great interest to me and I am seeking more specifics on these, and the only story on disobedient media has no real details.
I have long been suspicious of Kim Dotcom as his story doesn't really add up to me, and he has been innaccurate about many things. Wikileaks also exhibits clear bias against the united states and refrains from any leaks that would be inconvenient for instance, to vladimir putin.
I would like all manner of discussion of these ideas to be committed to the blockchain, feel free to address my concerns here in this comment.
I am preparing a longer post on how I perform basic checks on these popup media sites, many of which have been demonstrated to be shallow propaganda sites i.e. yournewswire.com
There are numerous journalists and sources that I trust implicitly who I have been following for years, including Matt Taibbi and Chris Hedges.
I suppose you could say, in general, that I do not see any evidence from your site as being very disobedient.
Also I read the article denying the dutch hack of the russian hackers, and I found it to be unconvincing. Like if the russian hackers were sharks and you could only see their dorsal fins, the reporter adam is like someone saying 'but really do we KNOW they are sharks? how do they know their ip addresses if they are underwater' etc.
To say that there is no russian hacking entity operating at that location, and that they did NOTHING to affect the american election or news, is simply beyond naive and I cannot respect anyone who takes this stance.
Whoever leaked the podesta emails, I have given up on knowing. I personally think it could have been seth rich, the awan brothers, russian crackers, or someone we haven't even heard of. The issue for me is not that they were released, but that during the same time frame there was absolutely zero things released about trump's extremely corrupt past.
for the record, i find hillary and trump nearly equally disgusting and supported bernie sander, who is the actual victim in all of these scandals, which is hardly ever mentioned.
$0.11
1 vote
Reply Edit
·
[-]
elizbethleavos (52) · yesterday
I mentioned Trump in a number of articles, actually:
Op Ed: Political Division Is A Hysterical Charade Maintained By Corporate Press
Screen Shot 2018-01-30 at 11.34.06 PM.png
Op Ed: After Treatment Of Domestic Critics, Western Support For Iranian Protestors Rings Hollow
Screen Shot 2018-01-30 at 11.37.57 PM.png
Op-Ed: Yemen Proves The Economy Of Death Is Bi-Partisan
Screen Shot 2018-01-30 at 11.37.15 PM.png
The rest of your issues seem to be stemming from a lack of reading & comprehension skills. I'm sorry to say I can't help you much there. Also your comment re: sharks, while amusing, does not at all relate to the facts of the matter. Which you can't address without making a fool of yourself, which is why you chose the dorsal fin metaphor.
Your assessment of our being "disobedient" seems to pin ironically on obeying the establishment line on Russia. Adding to your dismissal of the issues stemming from the earth shattering proof of DNC corruption, this indicates that you define disobedience as obedience to the establishment narrative, which you will never see from us. If you dislike that, feel free to not read our material.
$0.05
5 votes
Reply
·
·
[-]
mindhawk (51) · yesterday
Your criticism of trump is half-hearted at best.
From your linked article, which is not about trump but the typical fox news style 'pox on both their houses, but especially the democrats'
"Disobedient Media recently reported on establishment Democrats’ subversion of the Democratic process in the 2016 Primary race, and their attempts to deflect from the revelation of their corruption by focusing exclusively on the largely discredited Russian hacking narrative. Allegations of Russian hacking, then Russian collusion....."
and
"However, the hysteria that was whipped up in the press regarding Trump was belied by the open hypocrisy of those exact individuals who promoted it. As noted by The Intercept, a large number of supposedly fierce anti-Trump Democrats who had...."
It seems in trying to point out how much you criticize trump, you suggested an article in which every criticism of trump also had to criticize the democrats, even more, in the same sentence.
I scan the rest of this article for anything mentioning the actual most important criticisms of trump, his career of indebtedness to people who are not american, his open ties to known mafia, etc and all you seem to say is that 'he's just like the democrats.'
This is a whitewash and can simply not be independent journalism. When it comes to the democrart they can be pure evil, but when it comes to trump he is just indicative of the bipartisan failure of endemic plutacracy and so it's kindof forgiveable right? (wrong)
Your personal attack on my reading comprehension notwithstanding, you have completely failed my initial investigation into your media outlet and can expect to be included in the yournewswire category of things in my further investigation into popup propaganda parading as journalism or movement politics on steemit!
Thanks for your very revealing response! I am glad it is in the blockchain that 'disobedient' media is just another trump/russia apologist site. I bet your real funders are quite generous, good for you! /s
$0.11
1 vote
Reply Edit
elizbethleavos (52) · 16 hours ago
Shill:
Calls me a Russian propogandist with no evidence because I express opinions they don't like.
Calls me a Trump/ Republican apologist, says I have never written a bad word about Trump ever ever ever.
-When shown articles where I have indeed criticized Trump, whines "That's not ENOUGH."
accuses me of receiving nefarious funding when I am 100% reader supported and have received no money from any outside group whatsoever. A mite inconvenient for your smear angle.
However, I am glad your idiocy is firmly placed into blockchain. :)
$0.03
3 votes
Reply
[-]
mindhawk (51) · 13 hours ago
idiocy? shill?
read my work, frankly, it puts your entire website of however many people to shame:
https://steemit.com/surveillance/@mindhawk/privacy-workshop-3-you-are-a-channel
A shill could not make that, it's waaaaay too much work.
I simply stated that your evidence of criticizing trump included IN EVERY SENTENCE equivalent criticisms of democrats WHO DO NOT EVEN HOLD POWER.
That's exactly what zerohedge and numerous other sites do, and what hannity does who still talks about hillary every day while Trump destroys the country.
How can you not see that? How can you not notice the overwhelming evidence that trump is actually owned by russia? He let the frickin head of russian intelligence into the country just because.
So you DID NOT show me articles where you criticized trump, you showed me trump apologist articles. Look up that word 'apologist', it means you are ultimately saying he's not that bad because someone else is worse, it's utterly naive moral relativism. As a journalist how can you not know the meaning of these words?
I simply asked about your funding, I did not accuse you of anything. You are putting like dozens of words into my mouth, and THAT IS what shills and agents do btw.
They misconstsrue everything. I started out with an open mind, I wasn't impressed with your site when I first saw it the other day. I have right and reason to be skeptical.
But the responses from you inform me that not only are you NOT a journalist, you don't know how to read.
lol you should stop doing whatever it is you are doing, you're not fooling anyone but already brainwashed Hannity flunkies.
My work speaks for itself, your work is sloppy and half-assed and absolutely doesn't live up to it's, albeit dumb, name 'disobedient.' lol, just stop, it's not going to fly, you're wasting your time whatever it is you are trying to do with your rehashing of what snowden has already released to the public.
That is also something agents do who pose as real people, which is present old information like its new.
Look in the mirror, change your life, whatever you're doing is making it worse.
$0.00
Reply Edit
[-]
suzi3d (55) · 10 hours ago
Writing nasty comments on other people's blogs is the worst possible way to promote your work. It reeks of desperation.
$0.01
1 vote
Reply
·
[-]
buzzbait (44) · 5 hours ago
And jealousy... lol
$0.01
1 vote
Reply
[-]
mindhawk (51) · 55 seconds ago
Actually, calling me nasty, an idiot, a shill, and 'not nice' are the only rude things that have happened in my exchange with you and ms vos, and those are all on your side, which is well documented.
Meanwhile, my polite if pointed questions regarding you and ms vos have been 100% evaded, which is peculiar don't you think?
1 why are you defending ms vos when you didnt even attempt to answer my questions on your own blog?
2 why does your interview page not load that you sent me?
3 if 'disobedient media' was crowdsourced, why don't you just provide links to whatever indiegogo or whatever that you used?
4 when asked, why did you not simply provide some specific accounts of your alleged harassment at the hands of law enforcement in a blog post, as I have personally done regarding my account of my harassment?
5 if you are so 'disobedient' why are you relying on facebrak and youtube, who are giant pillars of the surveillance state? Why is youtube the only repository for the accounts of what happened, especially if you yourselvs are claiming on disobedient media that google and facebrak are censoring such content?
6 if ms vos is so disobedient, and this is still my main question, why doess she give trump a pass on everything he has done while he has been president, and everything he did as a 'businessnessman' prior to being president? Why is he only discussed in comparison to the democrats, who at this time don't even control a single branch of government? If you wanted to attack someone in the democratic party with power, why not Schiff who today is the one in direct conflict with the republican party? What does hillary have to really do with anything at this point?
7 if you are journalists and politicians as stated, why do you respond to basic questions about your story and work with immediate ad hominem attacks? are you not aware that there IS an actual epidemic of fake popup propaganda sites like yournewswire and that it is simply normal diligence to look into such claims and organizations? Why all this guff like I'm hurting your feelings and 'being nasty?' (believe me when I get nasty you will know it lol)
6 if you are an internet party leader and trying to be a disobedient media, why have you not even for a second considered my post history(which I might add is much longer and more detailed than your own) before calling me a shill? Do you you really think shills or government agents would be providing instructions for how to evade surveillance? Do you really think a shill would provide explicit instructions on how to be a pirate or how to secure your personal computer?
I am open to discussion about all of this, and more, it just seems you and miss vos evade, obfuscate and resort to name calling at the drop of a hat. This has been my experience attempting to counter actual shills on reddit and facebrak and other sites for nearly a decade now, and you should know that you are following their patterns. With this knowledge, a non-schill would try to maybe be more forthcoming and straightforward, address the actual stated issues etc., stop with the namecalling and dismissing inquiry prior to consideration.
These tactics of misdirection, obfuscation and intimidation are well known, documented, techniques of private security and fbi/cia/whatever paid online shills as described in The Global Intelligence files, which you would have at least read about by now in Privacy Workshop #1 if you were even the slightest bit curious about the tens of thousands of words of essays I have posted to steemit regarding the issues you yourself claim are important to you.
Frankly, you are the one who seems desparate, to get out of this conversation, to evade scrutiny, to change the subject, to discredit me with personal attacks.
And it's not going to work, I'm not going to sit around silently and watch you and ms vos parade as journalists and anti-establishment figures when you are really just parroting sentiments and previously released information.
You could of course earn my respect by actually backing up a single claim of yours, in your what, 2 week old account?
Please, politely respond with the details I am asking for, if you can. Otherwise you are out of your league even talking with me and should just get ready for the extended post I'm going to make that will elucidate the evidence of what the facts have revealed you to actually be.
Thanks! Looking forward to your detailed response!
So steemit, I'm declining payout on this one to demonstrate my lack of desparation(lol) and how I simply want to get answers to my questions.
The best method, since basically Socrates(ever heard of him?), for someone to determine the allegiances and intentions and nature of someone that you can't meet in person and don't know very well, is simply to see how they respond to questions. Anyone who says 'how dare you question me' or immediately attacks your person, or who presents answers that are non-answers, or calls their friends to 'back them up' still without addressing the original questions, basically, these people are highly suspect.
I am available in this non-monetized post to answer all concerns regarding this exchange, and examine all evidence presented regarding the true nature of Disobedient Media and Suzie Dawson, who is last I heard seeking political asylum in Russia.
Please, educate me! I'm all ears! Let's discuss!