Comments by "" (@indonesiaamerica7050) on "FRONTLINE PBS | Official" channel.

  1.  @matthew-jy5jp  It's hilarious that you can't back up your junior high school level smack talk with anything but an emoticon.
    17
  2.  @Matt-cr4vv  Holy cow. How does your rant even make sense in reality? Comey should have been fired by Obama or by Trump on day one. There's no question about it.
    9
  3. Rosenstein knew he was right when he wrote it. He didn't know just how massive the Social Justice rebellion would be. Neither did I. The stupidity revealed since then still takes my breath away.
    6
  4. Frontline has been going downhill, fast, since September 11, 2001. All of PBS is now run entirely by PC Critical Theorists. They're totally incorrigible and totally convinced that they are Master Expositors of all humanity.
    6
  5. Truth never needs to be described as such unless there is some uncertainty about it. Why so confident about something you're so uncertain about?
    5
  6. This video is full of nothing but agitation propaganda from triggered fools. She's scared of just about everything. OK. How does that make her an expert on anything? She's just another pied piper of "journalism".
    5
  7.  @christinaleuchtmann2085  Care to rephrase?
    4
  8.  @kanikileprohi8924  First rule is learning to correctly parse good from evil on an objective spectrum. That means you have to know how things are supposed to work nominally. In a liberal Republic it means you get to vote on representatives and sometimes they keep certain promises but they are evil of they promise to deliver something to you that you didn't rightly earn. US politicians are not to deprive others of "natural" rights as listed in the US Constitution. And the corollary to that is you have to know which elected leaders of "special Constitutional prerogatives" while in office. You have to know which ones are lying to you when they make magical promises. PBS sides with magical materialism, AKA Critical Theory Marxism. Because it works for them. They are an unhinged "will to power" cult. Just like the DNC.
    4
  9.  @David_Lloyd-Jones  You people are crazy.
    3
  10. Trump is not an autocrat. You people are crazy. And you never denounce the actual autocrats, like FDR.
    3
  11.  @somnathbanerjee2057  AI has no will to replace humans. That's because AI has no will. Full stop. It has no selfish interests. It has programs and rules that humans set for it.
    3
  12.  @patrickharrison4421  Bolton tried to kill you. Sure. Because of Capitalism and Patriarchy. Right?
    3
  13.  @aaronm8143  Move to Texas and start your own business.
    3
  14.  @jackandhisgoose9435  They're good but it's a cult's "objectivity". They do their best the way that they understand "two sides" theory. They still make lots of mistakes but seem to "capture the spirit" of the false choices.
    3
  15.  @StellarFella  Arbitrary autocrats like FDR?
    3
  16.  @David_Lloyd-Jones  Your delusional analogies draw from historical facts. Idiot. You are insane. You can't demonstrate in any way at all that you can distinguish between fact and delusion. You defended your delusions as analysis. Lol. That's not going to do it.
    2
  17.  @David_Lloyd-Jones  More idiocy. You've got an endless supply, apparently.
    2
  18.  @David_Lloyd-Jones  And you still can't tell fact from fiction nor respond intelligently about actual controversies being discussed. Your rhetoric is inherently delusional and regressive. Trump never threatened to pack SCOTUS but an autocrat like FDR would and did. See, that's how serious people support their verdicts and analogies. You rant from your triggered mind and project your own parasitic value system on to targets identified by your cult.
    2
  19.  @tjk9263  That's weird because her allies are always hyping "population bomb" control. They're not against "Climate Change." They're against anyone that opposes their paranoid cult.
    2
  20. It's just a Turing machine being played with by a bunch of demagogues. Artificial intelligence would be better described as imitation intelligence. The goal is to imitate, not replace humans in any meaningful sense. The idea was to use the Turing decryption machines to then issue British and US contrived orders down the command chain after disrupting the original instructions in a way that the recipients would believe that whatever sense of character the recipients "read between the lines" that the imitation instructions would be believable. Conceptually, it's the same as having someone like Amazon or Apple answering your questions but trying to achieve a standard not just that you knowingly accept this as a replacement but that you actually believe it comes from an authorized human source. All of this other hyperbole just converses and scares people. The villains are not the machines. The villains are the ones deceiving you about the machines, the threat, and what should be done about this alleged threat. The threat is that "the demos" don't know who is manipulating them. And "algorithms" give organizations "plausible deniability" when they're programmed to distract you from obvious conflicts of interests. "No, it's Science. It was a mistake. We never could have known our 'AI' would help the CCP."
    2
  21.  @patrickharrison4421  The whole reason for the US Constitution's divided government (vertically and horizontally) paradigm is that we're not supposed to blindly trust anyone with government power. We're supposed to judge their actions carefully, as we would expect to be judged. Our schools teach radically different theories, I'm afraid.
    2
  22.  @patrickharrison4421  Stay healthy and look after your immune system and cardio-pulmonary health. The worst you'll have to fear from that particular SARS virus is headaches and a mild fever. The same advice applies to living through cancer treatments. Indoor or outdoor cycling and a healthy diet will take care of most of what you need.
    2
  23.  @BTsMusicChannel  The key to critical thinking is understanding and organizing claims and biases, not pretending that bias doesn't exist or that it's all just competing versions of "community truth." Even your use of of the term "political" shows an unconscious worldview bias.
    2
  24.  @HistroryOnics  OMG. Don't be absurd. "History" is a collection of claims about the past. That is the only categorical thing that anyone can say about it. There's nothing immutable about any claims.
    2
  25.  @BTsMusicChannel  Critics citing selfish interests is not ipso facto evidence of corruption or distortion. You're relying on leftwing "social" pseudo-sciences that "know" that humans can't even be aware of their own selfish interests and therefore they can't develop balanced, objective reportage. Everyone but them, apparently, suffer from this flaw. "Woke" professors and journalists are the Masters of Objectivity, we're to assume, since they "know" how flawed everyone else is.
    2
  26.  @HistroryOnics  Some fact claims are verifiable. The problem is the conflation of inference and verifiable evidence. Most idiots today rattle on only about their pet inferences as "facts" because they can correctly cite, for example, Trump's swearing in date and therefore all of their other claims must be reliable. LOL. The reader is supposed to cull salient facts. That's what we used to teach students before "socialized" schools started organizing "communities" and protecting "victims of Patriarchy" and all of that abject BS.
    2
  27.  @BTsMusicChannel  There's no infinite pool. What's apparently infinite is the imagination of nihilistic, dogmatic critics. If you want to study "A history of A" you put together a thesis (or at least a coherent framework to organize your claims) and give examples with some verifiable, salient facts. And then people comment on it. If the world is populated with enough intelligent critical thinkers they work together to improve the articles and the process of creating them. OTOH, now that schools around the world assume the worst of their students they're instead fed first rate bullshit and then given little awards for trivial accomplishments and told to get a job working for Facebook or Google. In the end they sit around doing nothing but reading "social media" and trying to figure out who is the best political messiah to extort the taxpayers in to paying for their things and giving them cash entitlements for the rest of their lives.
    2
  28.  @SG-hf8pj  You're not even capable of engaging in an information-seeking conversation. "Name calling" has nothing to do with any of it. I criticized "socialized education" doctrines and results. You came along to pretend that your views, that you can't even articulate clearly, are superior, and you sort of attempted to use your cult's pedantic memes to scare off anyone from actually considering my criticisms. You did nothing to attempt to flesh them out or even try to figure out what validity you might find in them. In the process, you exemplified everything that I am pointing out in terms of results. You don't even know how to use a fucking dictionary and instead try to diminish my critiques by using the "buzzwords" term (as a buzz word!) to signal to your groupthink cult to ignore my critiques. You are a perfect exemplar to support my argument. You're totally unaware that in a debate I could fully defend the "Progressive" worldview, relying on Darwinism and related pseudosciences to show (without proper testing) that "disparity" is innate to natural humans and that the closest thing to "social justice" that humanity can achieve is when Enlightened Elites (AKA "democratic Brain Trusts" in the time of FDR) are ruling every polity. WTF would I care about your inane FUD memes when you're clearly a victim of everything that I've mentioned? You know it. All of the readers know it. They simply fear that there are no better choices because they fear that disparity in cognitive abilities is innate. To admit that their theories have not been properly tested is to throw away their entire worldview and submit to doctrines that they hate. IOW, emotional responses with "community truth" justifications. A secular cult that claims "science" without demonstrating any scientific nous. You and your entire cult demonstrates a rejection of progressive scientific knowledge while claiming to be masters. Just as Bruce Jenner "identifies as" female when everyone knows that this is simply an agreed upon lie.
    2
  29.  @StellarFella  You Communists are still pissed off at Putin for going against your Arc of History. LOL.
    2
  30. Target, not product. Target.
    2
  31.  @bsymissy  No. The Civil War never ended. Some slavers turned to the KKK and States' rights while others, sometimes the same people but without their robes on, invented what they call Progressivism, because that put them in charge of the entire legal system. Over time, "globalist" elitists joined in common cause with US elitists. That's what we now call "the left" (which was originally Jacobinism). It is led mainly by elitist "community organizer" lawyers.
    2
  32. @Francis Hubert Don't conflate AI with "robots." "The problem is, humans doing jobs nowadays usually don't have a stake in the company. " Why is that? And whatever happened to Antitrust law?
    2
  33.  @ghg789987  Right. Except that our schools make it seem like the opposite is happening. And it becomes self-fulfilling prophecy.
    2
  34.  @StellarFella  Do you actually know what Artificial Intelligence actually means and its relationship to "compromising material" in the "statecraft" game?
    2
  35.  @TPerm-hj4sf  Better to let the Chinese Communists "peacefully" sweep away every other nation's sovereignty.
    2
  36.  @matthewlvh  Explain the alleged "Republican Party outright lying."
    2
  37.  @johnhalverson1133  LOL. Dude. Learn your own lexicon.
    2
  38.  @tiaan7032  You're supposed to be able to cull fact claims from spin. Changing from channel to channel should make that clear. It's those that live in rigidly protected cultural bubbles that get confused by any contrary views.
    2
  39.  @Third_eyee  They teach Critical Theory and claim it is Scientific Critical Thinking.
    2
  40. The "pandemic" strategy is to allow State governors to deal with domestic management while Trump marshals development of the vaccine and any emerging "best practices" as they evolve. Why do you hate science?
    2
  41.  @katomiler843  Listen, idiot, learn what scare quotes are. According to pretty much every theory on human philosophy, everyone instinctively regards their own views as "rational." The problem today is that there's an academic cult (the same one that dominates the unions and interferes with "Our Democracy" as "Resistance") that validates certain kinds of circular logic as "rational" AKA "Realism." By my (trigger warning! scare quotes ahead!!!) "typing" I alluded to this contradiction where many people study International Relations and "Realpolitik" as "Realism" and then conflate that with "studies" of individuals. Like "stereotyping" Trump as "authoritarian." It's insane. It's institutionalized insanity. Bolton is not a doctrinaire Progressive. But he's clearly triggered by the idiotic "Social Darwinism" theories.
    2
  42.  @David_Lloyd-Jones  Inaccurate? What you wrote is straight up insane. You can't properly parse fact from fiction. You're completely deluded and beyond correction at this time. You are unskilled and unaware.
    1
  43.  @David_Lloyd-Jones  Moron, I already answered your questions. You obviously can't read or write properly.
    1
  44.  @brentjamesonparker  What an idiotic, illogical question. Pretty ironic. Too bad you can't rectify your own fallacious thinking before chiming in.
    1
  45.  @brentjamesonparker  Let me explain something to you. People that go around like you making "labeling" arguments, that never come up with any kind of logical explanation to support the label "accusation" are just about as illogical as it gets. It almost doesn't even matter what you think "straw man" means. It's pretty obvious that you don't know what "straw man fallacy" means. A straw man, logically, is a trope or a model (analytical paradigm) or whatever. You seem to think that with your silly 5 word accusation that you've said something meaningful. What you've telegraphed is that you have no hope of following the conversations without first looking at your own "uncertainty theories" - or more bluntly - your own areas of ignorance. You don't even realize that by your own behavior you're providing an example of many of the problems I've complained about right here. You're triggered by your cult to defend perceived "community interests" (that's a rough translation from Gramsci's Prison Notebooks). That's the only thing anyone can conclude by your contribution here. Another way of putting it is that you're "virtue signaling" to likeminded people. If you want to cry out illogically "straw man something something" over and over again, carry on. That's what you and your cult like to do when you're not carrying bad "social justice" signage to the riots and throwing Molotov cocktails. Identifying you as affected by a cult is not a fallacious "straw man" argument. I'm pointing out the implications of your inane rhetoric. You're perfectly free to show contradictory evidence but choose not to. How about that.
    1
  46.  @brentjamesonparker  Genius.
    1
  47.  Really Doe  You poor deluded thing.
    1
  48.  @OccultDemonCassette  Another delusional lunatic rant. SNAFU
    1
  49.  Really Doe  Moron, I doubt that you can read or reason properly but for the sake of those that can, I already wrote that FDR fits more than any other US President based on historical facts. I'm not the one with a fetish of arguing by labeling. The New Deal and his treatment of Congress, SCOTUS, and his willingness to run for 4 terms, unlike any other US President in history, demonstrates that FDR saw himself as a kind of unique political messiah that was totally closed minded about any opposition to his "New Deal" socialism and approach to foreign policy. You morons have no idea what he was about. Apparently you don't even know what "autocrat" actually means. Did you study any history at all? Do you not ever consider the relevant facts pertaining to your kooky rants? Did it ever occur to you that FDR's relationship with Stalin was more valued than his relationship with the British because FDR was a crazed neo-Marxist Progressive that thought the Communists and their command economy ideas (as in New Deal) were the way of the future for all of the world? Serious scholars that are not afraid to look at history from an unbiased frame can see that FDR had the same beliefs as the Marxists other than his own Christian beliefs and that the USA was regarded as "exceptional" in that it would not need to go through a bloody revolution to achieve the Marxist prophecies for "progress" and so forth. When neo-Marxists denounce "Communism" they're only denouncing their rivals and/or the need for revolution. If you believe in Marx's historical materialism and "progress" you also believe in Communism. You just don't know what he labels mean. As far as Trump as "autocrat" this is literally propagated by neo-Marxist academic lunatics that "make the case" by using "signaling" and "stereo typing" profiling techniques. At best these critiques belong in a conversation about perceptions and leadership styles and how propagation by enemies can spin. But soon you see that they are the ones that regard themselves as "victims" and therefore "enemies" of an elected President. Not just that they're triggered by his speech but that they can't recognize their own childish reactions. As if they really think they can connect him with "autocrats." They obviously don't even understand the meaning behind his rhetoric. What it shows is that the academic class of paid pontificators can make careers out of teaching "criticism" to students and nobody will really see just what a crazed cult they've created over time. John Bolton's fear of Trump is based on his view of "democracy." He's a very good attorney. He's done a good job playing his assigned roles in the past. Kooks don't understand how that works. With Trump, Bolton didn't actually disagree with Trump's policies. He was triggered by his manners that Bolton instinctively profiled like a Progressive kook. Because although he's not a doctrinaire Progressive, he spends so much time with them that some of the Progressive cultural "community sense" has affected his thinking. He fears Trump because he's afraid that, generally speaking, Progressives are right about "the demos" that they regard as idiots. That they are "triggered" and that "capitalists" like Trump only care about profit. It doesn't mean Bolton is afraid of these policy changes. Bolton knows that Communists are far more dangerous. What's amazing to me is that Bolton thinks Trump is in another class from, say, the Bush family. And he is but only in a very superficial sense. The Bush family has raised their children as "conservative Progressives" in that they believe in the Progressive worldview but play a kind of Randian Libertarian role as "conservers of patriotism and stuff" in the US. Progressives think that you're an idiot. Unlike me, they don't blame their own academic doctrines and "public education" establishment. They blame Darwinism. They don't expect students to be able to catch up once they fall behind (or worse, when they show up as "low IQ" from the start). They expect a wide diversity in results from K-12 and try to create "egalitarian learning" so that the students don't notice this wide disparity (that they are partially responsible for). Apparently you've never read and contemplated Orwell's Animal Farm.
    1
  50.  Really Doe 
    1