• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Trump orders media blackout at EPA

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Just heard Elijah Cummings on CNN saying he has documents from the Trump admin to these agencies also barring them from speaking to any elected official. Given that there are whistle blower programs through elected officials that's a hard one to enforce.

On a related note, apparently Trump has brought Orwells 1984 back to the best sellers list (not kidding).
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
There weren't a few kids breaking a few windows, a whole section was burned out. Innocent people were harmed by direct action and that can directly be related to Brown being shot. If you recall there were two dominant views. Either the cop shot him or Brown was guilty. Know which side I took? Neither. Why? Because the situation was emotionally charged and almost void of established facts. But that didn't matter. Real innocent people were substantially harmed.
Click to expand...

You're focusing on some property damage and the facts of an individual incident that sparked the unrest. The total damage in Baltimore looks like it was around $9 million (just from googling). That's a nice NYC brownstone. You may disagree with me on this, but when a group of people is being systemically repressed, I don't really give a shit about property damage.

Now why does this mean that I support racist police actions there? Because I didn't want punishment of anyone before an investigation or because I didn't want the town burned? Which is view is awful?
Click to expand...

I didn't say you supported racist police actions, I said you cared less about them than you did the bloody noses and broken windows. That's far from supporting, and while I STRIDENTLY disagree, It is a whole other world from people who would look at that and say that Police should use more violence.

I'll tell you my opinion, the awful opinion is that which justifies harm to others.
Click to expand...

It's not a justification, it's a recognition of the fact that violence is the inevitable result of the conditions in the ghettos. Coates is writing here about violence aimed at Police, but his point applies equally at the riots: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...ear-certainty-of-anti-police-violence/490541/

The closest conclusion to mine that I know of is from Eric Holder, who found that it was the officer which was backed by the facts and that racism in Ferguson is a serious issue. As far as I know Holder hasn't come out saying that firebombing wasn't a big deal.
Click to expand...

I wonder if Eric Holder thinks that firebombing in urban ghettos is a bigger problem than policing and systemic racism. I'm going to guess no.

So I guess that may make me a conservative because I don't buy one side, or a liberal because I don't support police racism. But me and Holder we seem to be "those people all alike" to some.
Click to expand...

I'd guess that anyone living in those conditions would see anyone who doesn't support them as opposing them, but as I said above, I draw a bright line between someone like you, who I disagree with on this issue, and someone that actually supports the violence.
 
Blackjack200 said:
It's not a justification, it's a recognition of the fact that violence is the inevitable result of the conditions in the ghettos.
Click to expand...

There is nothing whatsoever inevitable about it and you excusing it away thusly is just as racist as anything someone in KKK robes has ever done. This aren't brute animals acting on instinct, they're human beings with free will and morals and always will be no matter how damn poor they are.
 
Haven't read the whole thing so may have been posted already, but this may be worse than banning twitter postings etc.

The Associated Press ?@AP
BREAKING: Trump administration mandating EPA scientific studies, data undergo review by political staff before public release.
Click to expand...

Looks like they are aiming to scrub the data etc. Fvck him if true.

Edit: https://mobile.twitter.com/AP/status/824374557893083146
 
MomentsofSanity said:
Just heard Elijah Cummings on CNN saying he has documents from the Trump admin to these agencies also barring them from speaking to any elected official. Given that there are whistle blower programs through elected officials that's a hard one to enforce.

On a related note, apparently Trump has brought Orwells 1984 back to the best sellers list (not kidding).
Click to expand...

So it's a matter of days or weeks until the "Left" begins buying into the Fema Camps story?
Alex Jones must be giddy over these recent doomsday converts.
 
UglyCasanova said:
The Associated Press ?@AP
BREAKING: Trump administration mandating EPA scientific studies, data undergo review by political staff before public release.
Click to expand...

Looks like they are aiming to scrub the data etc. Fvck him if true.

Edit: https://mobile.twitter.com/AP/status/824374557893083146
Click to expand...

That's putting the cart before the horse.
Politics should follow scientific study.
Not scientific study following politics.​

Trump is certainly making mistakes here, and I would be glad to see such rules defeated.
I believe the Press Secretary was, today, arguing with the press over whether such silencing was taking place.
I want them hammered on that.
 
The politicization of science is undermining the credibility of Academia.
https://www.cato.org/publications/c...n-science-is-undermining-credibility-academia

"In a recent and wonderful New York Times essay, John Tierney documented the pervasive left-leaning bias of the social sciences in particular and academia in general, which he persuasively painted as the home of tired ideological groupthink. No doubt his essay was an eye-opener for anyone without much experience in the ivy morass, even as it came up short in its search for causation."
It's not a new thing.
 
I agree not new, both sides are guilty ands it's having a disasterous effect on America's scientific standing in the world. Politics and science don't mix. I hope people really hold his feet to the fire over this.
 
UglyCasanova said:
I agree not new, both sides are guilty ands it's having a disasterous effect on America's scientific standing in the world. Politics and science don't mix. I hope people really hold his feet to the fire over this.
Click to expand...

no. both sides are not guilty of this. THis is laissez-faire reality engagement at this point. Come on man, grow up already. You seem halfway flipped now, finally posting something demonstrably negative about Trump actions.

Don't sink back to "This is kinda normal, really."

Absolutely nothing is normal about data filtering through political parties. FUCKING NOTHING.
 
Puffnstuff said:
Could alternative facts change the way that the EPA collects evidence? Will Trump installed shills stand before polluted waterways with dead fish floating on top of them and declare that they are the healthiest they've been in decades? Stay tuned for this and more on as Trump's Alternative World Turns - America's newest soap opera.😛
Click to expand...

The fish are tired and simply sleeping.
 
imported_tajmahal said:
The politicization of science is undermining the credibility of Academia.
https://www.cato.org/publications/c...n-science-is-undermining-credibility-academia

"In a recent and wonderful New York Times essay, John Tierney documented the pervasive left-leaning bias of the social sciences in particular and academia in general, which he persuasively painted as the home of tired ideological groupthink. No doubt his essay was an eye-opener for anyone without much experience in the ivy morass, even as it came up short in its search for causation."
It's not a new thing.
Click to expand...

Yeh, the right wing has been putting out the "Libruhl Academia!" song & dance since at least the 60's.

As Colbert offered, facts do have a liberal bias, which explains everything, including likely efforts by the Trump Admin to suppress them. What you don't know can't hurt you, right?
 
zinfamous said:
no. both sides are not guilty of this. THis is laissez-faire reality engagement at this point. Come on man, grow up already. You seem halfway flipped now, finally posting something demonstrably negative about Trump actions.

Don't sink back to "This is kinda normal, really."

Absolutely nothing is normal about data filtering through political parties. FUCKING NOTHING.
Click to expand...


There should be nothing normal about using selective data to further a political agenda and scrubbing the facts if you don't like what they say, but yeah both sides do it. Republicans far more so than Democrats admittedly, they've earned the distinction of being the anti-science party. But it's foolish to think that one party is the good guys and always goes the straight and narrow.

And there is plenty negative about Trump and I'll certainly call it as it is each and every time. This forum is so blindly patisan that I don't think for many it's possible to see their side in a negative light or look at an issue objectively.
 
Jaskalas said:
That's putting the cart before the horse.
Politics should follow scientific study.
Not scientific study following politics.​

Trump is certainly making mistakes here, and I would be glad to see such rules defeated.
I believe the Press Secretary was, today, arguing with the press over whether such silencing was taking place.
I want them hammered on that.
Click to expand...

Do you honestly think the Trump administration is going to change in the future ?

Apparently not, some people bought it and he is going to break it.
 
UglyCasanova said:
There should be nothing normal about using selective data to further a political agenda and scrubbing the facts if you don't like what they say, but yeah both sides do it. Republicans far more so than Democrats admittedly, they've earned the distinction of being the anti-science party. But it's foolish to think that one party is the good guys and always goes the straight and narrow.

And there is plenty negative about Trump and I'll certainly call it as it is each and every time. This forum is so blindly patisan that I don't think for many it's possible to see their side in a negative light or look at an issue objectively.
Click to expand...

Here is the thing: there is no more room for objectivity in the New World Trump: Federated States of Bigly Patriotism. Information is only ever to be filtered through windows tinted in the shade of Trump.
 
UglyCasanova said:
Haven't read the whole thing so may have been posted already, but this may be worse than banning twitter postings etc.



Looks like they are aiming to scrub the data etc. Fvck him if true.

Edit: https://mobile.twitter.com/AP/status/824374557893083146
Click to expand...

OK, went looking for a follow up and it "appears" that this is a temporary gag until Friday involving current data published on the website,

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-epa-studies-20170125-story.html

EPA spokesman (original AP source), says that there is "no mandate to subject studies or data to political review."

Looks like it isn't the worst possible outcome. But, I would love to see some wayback machine captures of text on those studies' pages prior to the blackout, and then after they go back up. 😉
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top