I probably just misunderstood what you mean by “front”. I read it as something like a feigned appearance. Maybe I’m just having trouble understanding how a something can be both openly avowed (not covert) and yet non-openly avowed (a front) at the same time.
I agree with USAID being a tool for soft power. So are many things, like Hollywood. Doesn’t mean Hollywood is a CIA operation.
I probably just misunderstood what you mean by “front”.
Sure.
I read it as something like a feigned appearance.
That would be the long and short of it.
Maybe I’m just having trouble understanding how a something can be both openly avowed (not covert) and yet non-openly avowed (a front) at the same time.
Definitely don’t look up these terms, they might be above your reading level:
ulterior motives
chess for the intermediate player
palace intrigue and scheming eunuchs
I agree with USAID being a tool for soft power.
Great!
So are many things, like Hollywood. Doesn’t mean Hollywood is a CIA operation.
Putting aside the equivocation, that’s a lousy counterexample. Are you just going to pretend like propaganda doesn’t exist?
I still don’t get what a non-covert front is. You said USAID is a front for CIA operations and it isn’t covert when it does these operations.
Like I’m picturing a pizza parlor which is a front for a mafia operation, but instead of being covert, it is open. So it says “Mafia’s Pizza” instead of “Tony’s Pizza”. Are you thinking USAID is something like that?
Propaganda certainly does exist. I never said that it didn’t. I’m disputing that USAID is a CIA operation and not an independent organization with it’s own goals and directives.
That’s a term you made up, so that’s a classic “you problem”!
You said USAID is a front for CIA operations and it isn’t covert when it does these operations. […] Like I’m picturing a pizza parlor which is a front for a mafia operation, but instead of being covert, it is open. So it says “Mafia’s Pizza” instead of “Tony’s Pizza”. Are you thinking USAID is something like that?
Again, you’re the one coming up with this. Stop thinking. You aren’t good at it.
Propaganda certainly does exist. I never said that it didn’t.
Great!
I’m disputing that USAID is a CIA operation and not an independent organization with it’s own goals and directives.
Honestly, this looks like you don’t have any evidence to show that USAID is a front for the CIA, so you are resorting to ad hominum as a way to save face.
Hey, buddy, listen. I’m sorry. I didn’t mean it like that. Sorry if I hurt your feelings. I love the CIA. And USAID. Really, I do. Please don’t accuse me of ad hominum [sic], that would break my heart. And evidence? Of course, there’s no evidence. The US is a perfect little angel; everything it does is moral and good. It’s just that big old meanie trump making a mess of things, that’s all. Does that make it better?
To be honest, not really. Usually when there is a claim it goes, I believe that X is true because of Y reasons. Not what ever this is that you are attempting.
Buttcoin is the future of online butts. Buttcoin is a peer-to-peer butt. Peer-to-peer means that no central authority issues new butts or tracks butts.
A community for hurling ordure at cryptocurrency/blockchain dweebs of all sorts. We are only here for debate as long as it amuses us. Meme stocks are also on topic.
nah what’s happening here is I am making claim X. Then you go: are you claiming Y? Prove it! And then I go: no. Then you start talking all this shit about covert CIA ops and mafia pizza joints and whatever, showing no signs of understanding that I said X. What choice do I have but to conclude that you are an idiot
I probably just misunderstood what you mean by “front”. I read it as something like a feigned appearance. Maybe I’m just having trouble understanding how a something can be both openly avowed (not covert) and yet non-openly avowed (a front) at the same time.
I agree with USAID being a tool for soft power. So are many things, like Hollywood. Doesn’t mean Hollywood is a CIA operation.
Sure.
That would be the long and short of it.
Definitely don’t look up these terms, they might be above your reading level:
Great!
Putting aside the equivocation, that’s a lousy counterexample. Are you just going to pretend like propaganda doesn’t exist?
I still don’t get what a non-covert front is. You said USAID is a front for CIA operations and it isn’t covert when it does these operations.
Like I’m picturing a pizza parlor which is a front for a mafia operation, but instead of being covert, it is open. So it says “Mafia’s Pizza” instead of “Tony’s Pizza”. Are you thinking USAID is something like that?
Propaganda certainly does exist. I never said that it didn’t. I’m disputing that USAID is a CIA operation and not an independent organization with it’s own goals and directives.
Well, at this point, you’re just being obtuse.
That’s a term you made up, so that’s a classic “you problem”!
Again, you’re the one coming up with this. Stop thinking. You aren’t good at it.
Great!
Good for you!
Honestly, this looks like you don’t have any evidence to show that USAID is a front for the CIA, so you are resorting to ad hominum as a way to save face.
Hey, buddy, listen. I’m sorry. I didn’t mean it like that. Sorry if I hurt your feelings. I love the CIA. And USAID. Really, I do. Please don’t accuse me of ad hominum [sic], that would break my heart. And evidence? Of course, there’s no evidence. The US is a perfect little angel; everything it does is moral and good. It’s just that big old meanie trump making a mess of things, that’s all. Does that make it better?
To be honest, not really. Usually when there is a claim it goes, I believe that X is true because of Y reasons. Not what ever this is that you are attempting.
please for the love of basilisk read the sidebar
Shhh my amusement has not run out yet
How is that relevant?
nah what’s happening here is I am making claim X. Then you go: are you claiming Y? Prove it! And then I go: no. Then you start talking all this shit about covert CIA ops and mafia pizza joints and whatever, showing no signs of understanding that I said X. What choice do I have but to conclude that you are an idiot
Then show supporting evidence for your X then?