2020 US Election - Let The Games Begin!

Yupo

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Enlisted military largely lean Right. God and Country types. Sworn to uphold Constitution and all that. I suspect the higher one goes up the ranks, the more one becomes accustomed to lying, to political expedience, to necessity of virtue signaling to keep the job. There are filters and ethics tests in place to be sure only the desired types make it to the very top. Once in a while someone slips past the filters, but they get rid of them when they find them, or so I think. Eventually they self-identify because of their ethics. Sometimes you'll see a whole bunch of such top tier people removed, like after Benghazi, for not following orders to stand down.
 

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
I've now spent more than 2 minutes and I'm not finding this second view (sans creepy pic). Went to Foxnews and that interview isn't up anymore - used search and nothing recent coming up (did note he was fired for sex misconduct though). Googled and found where he was part of 4-way conversation that appears to be the above - but not seeing the wider angle that would show the far wall w/o the photoshopped pic, just this:
That second one definitely looks photoshopped to me. The painting is one of the infamous 'pizzagate'-related paintings.
 
D

Deleted member 4737

Guest
Enlisted military largely lean Right. God and Country types. Sworn to uphold Constitution and all that. I suspect the higher one goes up the ranks, the more one becomes accustomed to lying, to political expedience, to necessity of virtue signaling to keep the job. There are filters and ethics tests in place to be sure only the desired types make it to the very top. Once in a while someone slips past the filters, but they get rid of them when they find them, or so I think. Eventually they self-identify because of their ethics. Sometimes you'll see a whole bunch of such top tier people removed, like after Benghazi, for not following orders to stand down.
I assure you those tests do not exist, as EVERYONE in the military is the most outstanding moral person in the world (at least that's what they tell everyone). People are chosen for promotion based on previous experience (the ability to get things done and/or brown nose your evaluator) as well as networking. It is a good ol' boys club, and while many can squeak through, anyone wishing to advance in a military career will learn to keep their mouth shut and tow the line.

You are correct with many of them leaning right, but in the obama administration the military was more concerned with complying with far left liberal idealogies. For me, this resulted in death by powerpoint classes telling me not to rape people. Other classes usually involved how to do what someone wants if they are offended, and how to report someone if you are offended.

Just what I've seen with my own two eyeballs anyways.
 

Yupo

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I assure you those tests do not exist, as EVERYONE in the military is the most outstanding moral person in the world (at least that's what they tell everyone). People are chosen for promotion based on previous experience (the ability to get things done and/or brown nose your evaluator) as well as networking. It is a good ol' boys club, and while many can squeak through, anyone wishing to advance in a military career will learn to keep their mouth shut and tow the line.

You are correct with many of them leaning right, but in the obama administration the military was more concerned with complying with far left liberal idealogies. For me, this resulted in death by powerpoint classes telling me not to rape people. Other classes usually involved how to do what someone wants if they are offended, and how to report someone if you are offended.

Just what I've seen with my own two eyeballs anyways.
I'm talking about the very top tiers, way above ranks of Colonels, and same probably true for civil service. I could be wrong of course. I've heard this many times from what I consider to be very good sources.
 
D

Deleted member 4737

Guest
I'm talking about the very top tiers, way above ranks of Colonels, and same probably true for civil service. I could be wrong of course. I've heard this many times from what I consider to be very good sources.
Getting promoted above the rank of major or 0-4 in the US military is based solely on networking. This greatly affects where you will serve and what you will do.

Above the rank of Col you are pretty much a politician. Your moral standing and how it affects your career is still based on your willingness to go with the crowd (which could be left, middle, right, or usually chaos based on who you have to network with).

At these ranks, you have your own teams who do everything for you. This includes driving, paying your bills, laundry, cooking, PR teams, lawyers, etc.

These guys aren't allowed to look bad. That's why when a Col rapes someone they get to retire instead of going to prison.

My overall point is that the morality of individuals at these ranks is based on the individuals, not the institution. There are good ones and bad ones. I will say, though, that the US military overall favors those who are narcissistic go getters.
 

mbww

Jedi
Ha! That’s a good one to ponder on.

Captain Kirk’s ‘cheating’ maybe is not that simple, and his justification “I don’t believe in no-win scenarios” while true, is just a soft cover.

The story and logic lead us to believe that Kirk passed the test in a no-win scenario because he was persistent enough until he found an out-of-the-box solution.

The story does provide the clue that Kirk introduced a ‘subroutine’ - disabling enemy ships’ shielding to make the feat possible. Which wasn’t actual cheating, because otherwise he would have been disqualified, and wasn’t a small thing either, because no other candidate could figure it out before him. And that’s why he’s Captain Kirk:)

Or, by focusing on a positive outcome he produced such a tremendous effect that it altered the conditions of the challenge somehow, which made possible his winning in an impossible scenario at third attempt, when others wouldn’t even give it a second try given the obvious impossibility to win. The stuff of legend, huh?

But...The key word in the story is ‘simulation’. It wasn’t a real-life scenario, it was just a game. As such, any glory is just vanity, plus if it’s just a simulation it must be confined within a strict set of bland algorithms that never change no matter how strong your positive mind is, unless he’s Yoda. So, maybe Kirk didn’t pass the test after all...

Then, what’s the point of still giving the same test that nobody can pass to young cadets, and how did the legend about Kirk passing the test came to be?

That reminded me of the famous Google and other tech co’s crazy interview questions from the late ‘90s and 00’s era such as: How many golf balls can you fit in a bus? or You’re the captain of a pirate ship, how do you divide the bounty without getting whacked?...

Purportedly, they were not interested in the answer, but in the logic and demeanor you follow when addressing such a question. Similarly, the Kobayashi Maru test was probably just testing the reaction of candidates during the simulation - cadets’ reaction under pressure, and their coping with fear and defeat, after. As such, Kirk probably did pass the test after all. And... that’s why he’s Commander Kirk:))
 

Rhythmik

Jedi Master
They 'let' him win. Which was not exactly the case, but they did find a way to make use of his presidency to advance the agenda. Anyway, some thoughtful analysis in this discussion. Jones outlook seems to have matured. He also takes on some responsibility for what happened on Jan. 6th.
Don't know if I'd use thoughtful analysis and Alex Jones in the same breath.
When Q first came onto the scene, Jones was singing its praises and even claimed to be in contact with the source. Jones is a grifter who makes wild claims and doesn't take accountability for completely changing his story (just like Q).
 

Pecha

Jedi Master
FOTCM Member
Don't know if I'd use thoughtful analysis and Alex Jones in the same breath.
When Q first came onto the scene, Jones was singing its praises and even claimed to be in contact with the source. Jones is a grifter who makes wild claims and doesn't take accountability for completely changing his story (just like Q).
To my knowledge, he wasn't a Q person from the start. I used to watch his shows a few years ago and he has always had a negative outlook on Q. I thought it was because he was taking attention away from his show as another conspiratorial platform.

If he was a ever a Q praiser, he wasn't one very long.
 

Rhythmik

Jedi Master
To my knowledge, he wasn't a Q person from the start. I used to watch his shows a few years ago and he has always had a negative outlook on Q. I thought it was because he was taking attention away from his show as another conspiratorial platform.

If he was a ever a Q praiser, he wasn't one very long.
Yeah exactly, he was losing viewers to the new Q movement so he tried to corral his people back by saying that Q was a legitimate source and that he was in contact with the Q team. He even brought on "one of the guys behind Q" for a phone interview. I don't really listen to Jones so don't know how long he was Q-grifting but I did see that in the early days.
 
Top Bottom