Who was it on here telling us Reuters was an above the fray strictly the facts news organization?

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/...896827513868734?s=46

You mean as opposed to jumping to the conclusion that the lemmings are supposed to, based on a twitter post by St Elon, and no other facts whatsoever? Pavlov must be laughing his head off.

Im sure the US govt pays various agencies for news services, I'll reserve judgement until more information is available....

And I will make sure to keep you abreast.

quote:

Im sure the US govt pays various agencies for news services,

Why would they? News is just news isn’t? Reporting of facts and events?

Brits are used to it Lane so you are not gonna win that argument with them but you are absolutely right about gov should stay from any contact /money deals with news

Nothing compares to fuckbooks scams!

I’ll take Reuters.

You guys can keep using cites that say JAG arrest citizen IGs.

Right on cue^^^good boy!

Musk is lying.

Link

And the contract was first awarded under the Administration before Joe Biden, anybody remember who that was?

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Who was it on here telling us Reuters was an above the fray strictly the facts news organization?

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/...896827513868734?s=46

Please, you rely on the South African Nazi for news.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Im sure the US govt pays various agencies for news services,

Why would they? News is just news isn’t? Reporting of facts and events?

Because the apparent recipient is Thompson Reuters Special Services, a company which provides data and research services to organisations including governments according to their website...but sure, yes its undoubtedly a front for a govt social engineering program

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
And I will make sure to keep you abreast.

...yeas, Elon has been so reliable in the crap he says or posts ... Gaza condoms ... Swedish spree shooting... but you carry right on.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/mone...72cde746f8a04f&ei=28

Reuters Is Musk and Trump’s Latest Target—But There’s a Hilarious Catch
Story by Josh Fiallo • 3h • 2 min read

Oppps...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/c...-hoaxes-spread-on-x/

"Musk reposted a claim on X made by Mario Nawfal, who has 2 million followers and hosts the “Roundtable Show” on X Spaces, who alleged the Department of Defense made a $9 million payment to Reuters for a “large scale social deception” project, citing the USASpending.gov website.

Though the Department of Defense did make a $9 million payment, it was actually issued to Thomson Reuters Special Services—the data and research arm of Reuters, not the newsroom—and the project was not to deceive society, as Musk’s post may imply. The project, according to the Defense Department’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, was to fund research for “automated defense against social engineering attacks.” Trump also attacked “Radical Left Reuters” on Truth Social and demanded the organization return the money—though the payment was issued during his first term ."

foot, meet mouth...

Twitter/X … a cesspit of misinformation where idiots repost other idiots rubbish, used to guide the lemmings.

quote:

the Department of Defense did make a $9 million payment, it was actually issued to Thomson Reuters Special Services—the data and research arm of Reuters, not the newsroom—and the project was not to deceive society, as Musk’s post may imply. The project, according to the Defense Department’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, was to fund research for “automated defense against social engineering attacks.”

I will wait and see how this pans out in the end before retreating. How many times have we seen money spent with one arm of an entity only to eventually see “services” rendered by a separate arm — a legal form of laundering.

Secondly, “automated defense against social engineering attacks,” sounds like a code phrase for propaganda to me. Can you tell me exactly what “automated defense against social engineering attacks” is?

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

the Department of Defense did make a $9 million payment, it was actually issued to Thomson Reuters Special Services—the data and research arm of Reuters, not the newsroom—and the project was not to deceive society, as Musk’s post may imply. The project, according to the Defense Department’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, was to fund research for “automated defense against social engineering attacks.”

I will wait and see how this pans out in the end before retreating. How many times have we seen money spent with one arm of an entity only to eventually see “services” rendered by a separate arm — a legal form of laundering.

Secondly, “automated defense against social engineering attacks,” sounds like a code phrase for propaganda to me. Can you tell me exactly what “automated defense against social engineering attacks” is?

Nobody thought you would give up the Kool-Aid that easily Lane, you are a faithful follower. A sheep or maybe a lemming.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

the Department of Defense did make a $9 million payment, it was actually issued to Thomson Reuters Special Services—the data and research arm of Reuters, not the newsroom—and the project was not to deceive society, as Musk’s post may imply. The project, according to the Defense Department’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, was to fund research for “automated defense against social engineering attacks.”

I will wait and see how this pans out in the end before retreating. How many times have we seen money spent with one arm of an entity only to eventually see “services” rendered by a separate arm — a legal form of laundering.

Secondly, “automated defense against social engineering attacks,” sounds like a code phrase for propaganda to me. Can you tell me exactly what “automated defense against social engineering attacks” is?

Nope, sorry. All I have been able to do is have a look at the information available rather than just taking a Musk retweet on X as gospel.

I'd be the first to admit that we don't know what that phrase means, but bear in mind that this revelation is about a payment which seems to have been made in Trumps first term.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

the Department of Defense did make a $9 million payment, it was actually issued to Thomson Reuters Special Services—the data and research arm of Reuters, not the newsroom—and the project was not to deceive society, as Musk’s post may imply. The project, according to the Defense Department’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, was to fund research for “automated defense against social engineering attacks.”

I will wait and see how this pans out in the end before retreating. How many times have we seen money spent with one arm of an entity only to eventually see “services” rendered by a separate arm — a legal form of laundering.

Secondly, “automated defense against social engineering attacks,” sounds like a code phrase for propaganda to me. Can you tell me exactly what “automated defense against social engineering attacks” is?

A classic case of:

ob·fus·ca·tion
/ˌäbfəˈskāSH(ə)n/
noun
noun: obfuscation; plural noun: obfuscations
the action of making something obscure, unclear, or unintelligible.
"when confronted with sharp questions they resort to obfuscation"

Lane's critical thinking skills are on full display again

Musk getting money like a hooker during shore leave from the Fed Government.

Reuters not doing anything wrong, and Dr. Easter might think about it all.

You keep looking at Twitter. I’ll stick w Reuters.

quote:

Originally posted by nute:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

the Department of Defense did make a $9 million payment, it was actually issued to Thomson Reuters Special Services—the data and research arm of Reuters, not the newsroom—and the project was not to deceive society, as Musk’s post may imply. The project, according to the Defense Department’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, was to fund research for “automated defense against social engineering attacks.”

I will wait and see how this pans out in the end before retreating. How many times have we seen money spent with one arm of an entity only to eventually see “services” rendered by a separate arm — a legal form of laundering.

Secondly, “automated defense against social engineering attacks,” sounds like a code phrase for propaganda to me. Can you tell me exactly what “automated defense against social engineering attacks” is?

Nope, sorry. All I have been able to do is have a look at the information available rather than just taking a Musk retweet on X as gospel.

I'd be the first to admit that we don't know what that phrase means, but bear in mind that this revelation is about a payment which seems to have been made in Trumps first term.

I will agree it was made in his first term. But he protested it and this time doing something about it.

quote:

Reuters not doing anything wrong,

Like the Little Lord of Louisville would have a clue.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by nute:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

the Department of Defense did make a $9 million payment, it was actually issued to Thomson Reuters Special Services—the data and research arm of Reuters, not the newsroom—and the project was not to deceive society, as Musk’s post may imply. The project, according to the Defense Department’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, was to fund research for “automated defense against social engineering attacks.”

I will wait and see how this pans out in the end before retreating. How many times have we seen money spent with one arm of an entity only to eventually see “services” rendered by a separate arm — a legal form of laundering.

Secondly, “automated defense against social engineering attacks,” sounds like a code phrase for propaganda to me. Can you tell me exactly what “automated defense against social engineering attacks” is?

Nope, sorry. All I have been able to do is have a look at the information available rather than just taking a Musk retweet on X as gospel.

I'd be the first to admit that we don't know what that phrase means, but bear in mind that this revelation is about a payment which seems to have been made in Trumps first term.

I will agree it was made in his first term. But he protested it and this time doing something about it.

ob·fus·ca·tion
/ˌäbfəˈskāSH(ə)n/
noun
noun: obfuscation; plural noun: obfuscations
the action of making something obscure, unclear, or unintelligible.
"when confronted with sharp questions they resort to obfuscation"

It is only unclear for the dimwitted. For the rest of us…looks pretty clear the old DOD was buying propaganda from Reuters.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
It is only unclear for the dimwitted. For the rest of us…looks pretty clear the old DOD was buying propaganda from Reuters.

Oh, we see clearing, exactly how you try to muddy the waters.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

the Department of Defense did make a $9 million payment, it was actually issued to Thomson Reuters Special Services—the data and research arm of Reuters, not the newsroom—and the project was not to deceive society, as Musk’s post may imply. The project, according to the Defense Department’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, was to fund research for “automated defense against social engineering attacks.”

I will wait and see how this pans out in the end before retreating. How many times have we seen money spent with one arm of an entity only to eventually see “services” rendered by a separate arm — a legal form of laundering.

Secondly, “automated defense against social engineering attacks,” sounds like a code phrase for propaganda to me. Can you tell me exactly what “automated defense against social engineering attacks” is?

It's already "panned out" and you can go ahead and admit that you were wrong for accepting Musk and trump's lies about it. TRSS, the entity that entered into the contract is completely separate from Reuters news.

Asked for comment, Thomson Reuters Special Services chief executive Steve Rubley said in a Thursday statement to CNN that “recent public discourse” has “inaccurately represented the nature of the business between TRSS and the Department of Defense,” and has incorrectly conflated Reuters News with TRSS, a separate legal entity that has its own board of directors and “operates independently from Reuters News.”

“TRSS has provided software and information services to U.S. government agencies across successive administrations for decades, to assist in identifying and preventing fraud, supporting public safety, and advancing justice,” Rubley said.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/13...act-check/index.html

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Reuters not doing anything wrong,

Like the Little Lord of Louisville would have a clue.

One would think the greatest equine surgeon in Texas would recognize horse manure when he sees it, but here we are.

How much is Musk up front Trump Administration. The last count is over 10 million plus a big ole contract. No big deal he is the head of a department of the Administration.

Go read some more Twitter.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
It is only unclear for the dimwitted. For the rest of us…looks pretty clear the old DOD was buying propaganda from Reuters.

Oh come on Lane, that’s quite a skewed conclusion to draw from what we know, certainly not one which anyone objective would reach.

Trump has a hard on for any media outlet which doesn’t fawn over everything he says. As he is utterly inconsistent, and frequently inaccurate, and frequently flat out lies it’s no surprise that any outlet with any integrity is going to point his foibles out from time to time. The man is so thin skinned and insecure it would surprise me if he hasn’t got a list of everyone he feels has slighted him.

Elon seems to have jumped on the band wagon, and let’s face it he comes out with things which are blatantly incorrect too, so the pair of them dislike the WSJ, AP, Reuters etc.

Musk posed a loaded question on X which got the misleading response from some some right wing fan boy. Musk, instead of checking it, just retweeted it, or maybe he knew it was misleading ( in his position he could have had it checked and a full report on it inside 5 mins) at which point Trump picked up on it.

Based on the info we have It’s misleading and incorrect. It’s aimed squarely at generating outrage at Reuters from the lemmings. No disrespect to you but you just blindly posted it on too. What’s the term for that now, as I assume it’s not retweeted any more … reX’ed?

Why on earth would Trumps administration pay anyone for propaganda , Trump just makes up anything he wants to reinforce what’re he is talking about at the time. He doesn’t need propaganda, he just makes it up on the fly.

It’s certainly not him objecting to it in his last term and taking action now. If he truly believed what that post is trying to convey, or was aware of what it proports to be actually happening he would have been sounding off about it for the last 4 years.

Reuters snd the AP are real. Twitter and Mysk are fiction.

The fact our Equine Surgeon got dipped is his own doing.

Lane is apparently incapable or unwilling to do One Minute of Research.

I not caving. The money was spent with an arm of Reuters and “automated defense against social engineering attacks,” sounds like a code phrase for propaganda to me.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
I not caving. The money was spent with an arm of Reuters and “automated defense against social engineering attacks,” sounds like a code phrase for propaganda to me.

I'm glad to see the new tariffs have not impacted your wardrobe choices, the tin foil hat remains in place under the MAGA ball cap.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
I not caving. The money was spent with an arm of Reuters and “automated defense against social engineering attacks,” sounds like a code phrase for propaganda to me.

I owe you an apology, I thought you were a reasonably intelligent person willing to believe bullshit that aligns with your ideology.

Obviously, you're just willing to believe bullshit that aligns with your ideology.

I'm sorry.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
I not caving. The money was spent with an arm of Reuters and “automated defense against social engineering attacks,” sounds like a code phrase for propaganda to me.

I'm not sure what the phrase means either. Let's parse it, shall we?

"Automated defense" today probably requires an AI overseer. The term doesn't mean much to me, and the context doesn't help.

What is a "social engineering attack"? Does it mean by or against social engineering? What social engineering are they talking about?

The phrase is ambiguous; that is, reasonably susceptible to more than one meaning. One such meaning is that it does refer to fighting or using propaganda. I don't find the context to give much guidance.

To me it looks like gobbledegook fabricated by bureaucrats. They sometimes do that to hide their true motives. Or maybe they want an AI so they can put their feet up and snore.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
I not caving. The money was spent with an arm of Reuters and “automated defense against social engineering attacks,” sounds like a code phrase for propaganda to me.

I'm not sure what the phrase means either. Let's parse it, shall we?

"Automated defense" today probably requires an AI overseer. The term doesn't mean much to me, and the context doesn't help.

What is a "social engineering attack"? Does it mean by or against social engineering? What social engineering are they talking about?

The phrase is ambiguous; that is, reasonably susceptible to more than one meaning. One such meaning is that it does refer to fighting or using propaganda. I don't find the context to give much guidance.

To me it looks like gobbledegook fabricated by bureaucrats. They sometimes do that to hide their true motives. Or maybe they want an AI so they can put their feet up and snore.

quote:

In the context of information security, social engineering is the psychological manipulation of people into performing actions or divulging confidential information. A type of confidence trick for the purpose of information gathering, fraud, or system access, it differs from a traditional "con" in the sense that it is often one of the many steps in a more complex fraud scheme.[1] It has also been defined as "any act that influences a person to take an action that may or may not be in their best interests."[2]

Link

An "automated defense" would likely be a built-in system that detected signs of social engineering and alerted the user or blocked the approach.

Reuters vs. Elon again.

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/...375607079059629?s=46

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Reuters vs. Elon again.

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/...375607079059629?s=46

Ketamine Musk is at it again!

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Reuters vs. Elon again.

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/...375607079059629?s=46

So let me get this straight, you are trying to make the case that Reuters has lied about this mineral deal ... based on evidence of a Musk post, the guy who has been repeatedly caught lying in his posts (see above - Gaza condoms, Swedish spree shooting, propoganda payments etc), and in support of a president who lies pretty much every day.

However much I disagree with your politics I cannot believe that you fail to see the hypocrisy in your position on this.

Starlink is so integral to the Ukrainian ability defend itself that this would be a huge incentive to force Ukraine to sign this so called mineral deal. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if this threat had been made given the way the US under Trump has been acting.

quote:

Originally posted by nute:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Reuters vs. Elon again.

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/...375607079059629?s=46

So let me get this straight, you are trying to make the case that Reuters has lied about this mineral deal ... based on evidence of a Musk post, the guy who has been repeatedly caught lying in his posts (see above - Gaza condoms, Swedish spree shooting, propoganda payments etc), and in support of a president who lies pretty much every day.

However much I disagree with your politics I cannot believe that you fail to see the hypocrisy in your position on this.

Starlink is so integral to the Ukrainian ability defend itself that this would be a huge incentive to force Ukraine to sign this so called mineral deal. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if this threat had been made given the way the US under Trump has been acting.

2 things:
1) The owner of Starlink states it didn’t happen while Reuters quotes anonymous sources. Which one has more credibility?

2) Post up some cut-and-dry Musk lies. I wang to see them. If you are going to call the man a liar…bring the evidence.

Three things:

1) Musk has said various things which are not true in the recent past. What make this any different?

2) Ive given you examples above. You can google them yourself.

3) You are scratching about trying to prove that Reuters, AP etc lie, yet you seem completely unconcerned by the lies which pour from Trumps mouth.