- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics

Chromdome35
Favorite team: | Arkansas ![]() |
Location: | NW Arkansas |
Biography: | |
Interests: | |
Occupation: | |
Number of Posts: | 7577 |
Registered on: | 11/27/2010 |
Online Status: | Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: 1923 season two
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/24/25 at 1:26 pm
It started last season when the ghost freighter hit the boat and capsized it. By definition, it's a ghost freighter; it isn't moving under power; it should be just drifting.
We have held off watching Landman because we don't want to get sucked into another Taylor Sheridan storyline filled with bs that he abandons in a season or two.
But have you seen him ride?
We have held off watching Landman because we don't want to get sucked into another Taylor Sheridan storyline filled with bs that he abandons in a season or two.
But have you seen him ride?
re: Trump suggests US could join British Commonwealth
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/22/25 at 10:57 pm
Another story that sounds like total BS.
How would this be America first in any way? More likely for the UK to join the states than the other way around. (that won't happen either)
How would this be America first in any way? More likely for the UK to join the states than the other way around. (that won't happen either)
re: So...the EV utopia/dreamland is about to enter purgatory
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/22/25 at 3:11 pm
Replaceable battery packs seems like would be a good way to make refueling quick. Pull in and a robot pulls the low batteries and replaces with charged batteries. You are on your way in minutes.
re: Saturday SEC Baseball
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/22/25 at 2:36 pm
Whoever is running the camera behind home plate in the Razorback game should be fired.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 4:42 pm
Yes and Russia knows that. I get the criticism Trump has taken for how we have approached the negotiations; however, I bet you won’t hear the media railing against the Europeans for their show of weakness.
re: If Trump could do this I would be euphoric!
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 3:46 pm
Nobody is defending them dumbass.
They are pointing out that if we start sending American citizens to foreign prisons for breaking American laws, it opens up a door we don't want to open. Would you have been ok with the Democrats sending the J6 people to El Salvadorian prisons??? Of course not.
They are pointing out that if we start sending American citizens to foreign prisons for breaking American laws, it opens up a door we don't want to open. Would you have been ok with the Democrats sending the J6 people to El Salvadorian prisons??? Of course not.
re: LGBTQHDTV+ Safety Grade Ratings by State.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 3:42 pm
quote:
How are Arky, tenn, georgia and s.c. ahead of Massachusetts?
I don't know, but I know we can do better. I expect no better than a D or F.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 3:32 pm
I've been struggling to find a word that best describes the Europeans. Feckless is the best word I can see.
They have relied on the US to protect them for so long they can no longer defend themselves.
They have relied on the US to protect them for so long they can no longer defend themselves.
re: WWII Questions about the ETO in fall of '44.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 2:49 pm
According to ChatGPT
Following the conclusion of Operation Market Garden in late September 1944, the Allied forces continued their offensive operations along the Western Front, encountering both successes and challenges.?
Pritzker Military Museum & Library
Post-Market Garden Activities:
Battle of Aachen: In October 1944, U.S. forces engaged in intense urban combat to capture the German city of Aachen. This battle marked one of the first major assaults on German soil and resulted in the city's capture after heavy casualties on both sides. ?
Wikipedia
Battle of Hürtgen Forest: Starting in September and extending over several months, American forces attempted to breach German defenses in the Hürtgen Forest. The dense terrain and fortified German positions led to prolonged and costly engagements. ?
Changes in Battle Lines and Advances:
Advances in Lorraine: The U.S. Third Army, under General George S. Patton, conducted operations in the Lorraine region of France from September to December 1944. Despite logistical challenges and stiff German resistance, they managed to push forward, capturing key locations and inflicting significant enemy casualties. ?
Wikipedia
Siegfried Line Engagements: Allied forces confronted the formidable German defensive network known as the Siegfried Line. Operations during this period aimed to penetrate these defenses, leading to several hard-fought battles with varying degrees of success. ?
Overall Progress:
Between late September and mid-December 1944, the Allies made measured progress into German-held territories. While they faced formidable defenses and challenging terrain, their persistent efforts resulted in the gradual erosion of German positions, setting the stage for subsequent offensives.
Darth can probably give you a better summary.
Following the conclusion of Operation Market Garden in late September 1944, the Allied forces continued their offensive operations along the Western Front, encountering both successes and challenges.?
Pritzker Military Museum & Library
Post-Market Garden Activities:
Battle of Aachen: In October 1944, U.S. forces engaged in intense urban combat to capture the German city of Aachen. This battle marked one of the first major assaults on German soil and resulted in the city's capture after heavy casualties on both sides. ?
Wikipedia
Battle of Hürtgen Forest: Starting in September and extending over several months, American forces attempted to breach German defenses in the Hürtgen Forest. The dense terrain and fortified German positions led to prolonged and costly engagements. ?
Changes in Battle Lines and Advances:
Advances in Lorraine: The U.S. Third Army, under General George S. Patton, conducted operations in the Lorraine region of France from September to December 1944. Despite logistical challenges and stiff German resistance, they managed to push forward, capturing key locations and inflicting significant enemy casualties. ?
Wikipedia
Siegfried Line Engagements: Allied forces confronted the formidable German defensive network known as the Siegfried Line. Operations during this period aimed to penetrate these defenses, leading to several hard-fought battles with varying degrees of success. ?
Overall Progress:
Between late September and mid-December 1944, the Allies made measured progress into German-held territories. While they faced formidable defenses and challenging terrain, their persistent efforts resulted in the gradual erosion of German positions, setting the stage for subsequent offensives.
Darth can probably give you a better summary.
re: Trump suggest sending Tesla vandals to El Salvador prisons
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 1:31 pm
quote:
I'm not gonna commit a violent crime, or vandalize another humans property.
Then you are safe until the Democrats decide your opinions or actions are illegal and send you to a Venezuelan prison.
I think they should punish the Tesla Terrorists to the fullest extent of the law, but shipping US citizens to El Salvador prisions is a no-go. If you can't understand why that's a terrible idea, there is nothing else I can say about it.
re: Trump suggest sending Tesla vandals to El Salvador prisons
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 12:58 pm
If they are not US citizens, then send them to El Salvador. If they are US citizens, put them in US jails.
Think down the road people, do you want a future Democratic administration to be able to send you out of the country?
ETA: Those people downvoting...what would your reaction have been if they sent the J6'ers to El Salvador prisons?
Think down the road people, do you want a future Democratic administration to be able to send you out of the country?
ETA: Those people downvoting...what would your reaction have been if they sent the J6'ers to El Salvador prisons?
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 12:53 pm
I won't argue about it anymore, but that is just Mike Benz's opinion of Rand; it does not constitute the truth; it is simply an opinion that aligns with your bias; that's all it is.
Your response is just more firehose bs. You're exposed; we all see you and your posts for precisely what they are.
Your response is just more firehose bs. You're exposed; we all see you and your posts for precisely what they are.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 12:30 pm
None of that invalidates the legitimacy of the "firehose of falsehood" tactic. Just because it is from a US government-aligned resource doesn't make it wrong.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 11:19 am
Question:
Tell me more about the "firehose of falsehood" tactic
Answer:
The "firehose of falsehood" is a disinformation strategy that’s as fascinating as it is insidious—think of it as a relentless torrent of misinformation designed to drown out reason. It’s a term coined by researchers at RAND Corporation, particularly in a 2016 study by Christopher Paul and Miriam Matthews, to describe a propaganda model they observed in Russian information operations. Let’s unpack how it works and why it’s so effective.
At its core, the firehose tactic is about volume, speed, and shamelessness. Instead of crafting a single, airtight lie, it blasts out a flood of claims—some true, some half-true, many outright false—across multiple channels at once. Picture a social media account like @MyLordBebo posting dozens of times a day: a video of Putin looking strong, a meme mocking NATO, a dubious stat about Ukrainian corruption—all hitting X, Telegram, and beyond in rapid succession. The sheer quantity overwhelms, making it hard for anyone to fact-check everything before the next wave hits.
Speed is key. These messages don’t linger for scrutiny; they’re churned out faster than critics can respond. Russian state media like RT or Sputnik exemplify this—pushing conflicting narratives (e.g., “Ukraine bombed its own people” then “It was a false flag”) within hours. The goal isn’t consistency; it’s saturation. By the time one claim’s debunked, three more are trending. On X, this might look like a trending hashtag buried under bots and proxies, as seen in 2016 U.S. election meddling tracked by the Mueller report.
What makes it stand out is its brazenness. Unlike traditional propaganda, which might aim for plausibility, the firehose doesn’t care if you spot the lies. It thrives on contradictions—say, claiming Russia’s winning in Ukraine while also saying the war’s a Western hoax. This shamelessness wears down trust; if everything’s suspect, why bother sorting truth from fiction? RAND noted this in Russian coverage of MH17’s downing in 2014: dozens of theories (Ukraine did it, CIA planted evidence) flooded airways, muddling the narrative.
Effectiveness comes from psychology and scale. Psychologically, it exploits our cognitive limits—people can’t process endless claims, so they disengage or pick what fits their biases. Scale-wise, it leverages modern platforms: X posts, Telegram channels, even YouTube shorts. The 2022 Ukraine invasion saw this in action—pro-Kremlin accounts flooded feeds with war footage, some real, some staged, all pushing doubt about Ukraine’s resolve. Clemson University’s 2024 study of X bots found similar patterns: high-frequency posts from networks amplifying Russian lines.
Historically, it’s tied to Soviet “active measures,” but the digital age turbocharged it. The Internet Research Agency’s 2016 election trolling—thousands of posts daily across fake accounts—is a textbook case. Today, it’s evolved with AI and deepfakes, making the firehose harder to douse. Critics like the EU’s DisinfoLab say it’s less about convincing and more about confusing—success isn’t belief, it’s apathy.
In short, the firehose of falsehood is a deluge of deceit, fast and loud, meant to exhaust rather than persuade. It’s a strategy @MyLordBebo’s output could fit—high volume, mixed veracity, Kremlin-friendly vibes. Ever notice how some accounts just never stop? That’s the firehose at work. What do you think—seen it play out anywhere else?
/end
Hello John Barron
Tell me more about the "firehose of falsehood" tactic
Answer:
The "firehose of falsehood" is a disinformation strategy that’s as fascinating as it is insidious—think of it as a relentless torrent of misinformation designed to drown out reason. It’s a term coined by researchers at RAND Corporation, particularly in a 2016 study by Christopher Paul and Miriam Matthews, to describe a propaganda model they observed in Russian information operations. Let’s unpack how it works and why it’s so effective.
At its core, the firehose tactic is about volume, speed, and shamelessness. Instead of crafting a single, airtight lie, it blasts out a flood of claims—some true, some half-true, many outright false—across multiple channels at once. Picture a social media account like @MyLordBebo posting dozens of times a day: a video of Putin looking strong, a meme mocking NATO, a dubious stat about Ukrainian corruption—all hitting X, Telegram, and beyond in rapid succession. The sheer quantity overwhelms, making it hard for anyone to fact-check everything before the next wave hits.
Speed is key. These messages don’t linger for scrutiny; they’re churned out faster than critics can respond. Russian state media like RT or Sputnik exemplify this—pushing conflicting narratives (e.g., “Ukraine bombed its own people” then “It was a false flag”) within hours. The goal isn’t consistency; it’s saturation. By the time one claim’s debunked, three more are trending. On X, this might look like a trending hashtag buried under bots and proxies, as seen in 2016 U.S. election meddling tracked by the Mueller report.
What makes it stand out is its brazenness. Unlike traditional propaganda, which might aim for plausibility, the firehose doesn’t care if you spot the lies. It thrives on contradictions—say, claiming Russia’s winning in Ukraine while also saying the war’s a Western hoax. This shamelessness wears down trust; if everything’s suspect, why bother sorting truth from fiction? RAND noted this in Russian coverage of MH17’s downing in 2014: dozens of theories (Ukraine did it, CIA planted evidence) flooded airways, muddling the narrative.
Effectiveness comes from psychology and scale. Psychologically, it exploits our cognitive limits—people can’t process endless claims, so they disengage or pick what fits their biases. Scale-wise, it leverages modern platforms: X posts, Telegram channels, even YouTube shorts. The 2022 Ukraine invasion saw this in action—pro-Kremlin accounts flooded feeds with war footage, some real, some staged, all pushing doubt about Ukraine’s resolve. Clemson University’s 2024 study of X bots found similar patterns: high-frequency posts from networks amplifying Russian lines.
Historically, it’s tied to Soviet “active measures,” but the digital age turbocharged it. The Internet Research Agency’s 2016 election trolling—thousands of posts daily across fake accounts—is a textbook case. Today, it’s evolved with AI and deepfakes, making the firehose harder to douse. Critics like the EU’s DisinfoLab say it’s less about convincing and more about confusing—success isn’t belief, it’s apathy.
In short, the firehose of falsehood is a deluge of deceit, fast and loud, meant to exhaust rather than persuade. It’s a strategy @MyLordBebo’s output could fit—high volume, mixed veracity, Kremlin-friendly vibes. Ever notice how some accounts just never stop? That’s the firehose at work. What do you think—seen it play out anywhere else?
/end
Hello John Barron
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 11:16 am
Followup question
Are the posts of @mylordbebo consistent with a channel that is dedicated to amplifying Russian propaganda?
Answer:
Let’s analyze whether @MyLordBebo’s posts align with a channel dedicated to amplifying Russian propaganda. I’ll break this down by examining the account’s content, style, and patterns, drawing on what’s known about Russian propaganda tactics, while keeping my assessment grounded and clear.
@MyLordBebo’s posts—based on its X activity and Telegram presence—consistently focus on themes that mirror Kremlin narratives. The account frequently highlights the Russia-Ukraine conflict, often framing Russia favorably while casting Ukraine, NATO, and the West as aggressors or hypocrites. For example, it’s posted content praising Putin’s control over oligarchs, questioning Ukraine’s use of Western aid (e.g., implying it funds leisure rather than defense), and mocking Western leaders like Biden or Zelenskyy. These align with documented Russian propaganda goals: undermining support for Ukraine, sowing distrust in Western institutions, and portraying Russia as a victim or victor.
The style is telling too. The account uses a high-volume, rapid-fire approach—over 25k posts since 2019—mixing videos, memes, and biting commentary. This “firehose of falsehood” tactic, identified by RAND as a Russian disinformation hallmark, overwhelms with quantity over nuance, aiming to confuse or exhaust skepticism. Posts often blend real footage with skewed captions (e.g., a video of Ukrainians partying framed as proof the war’s “fake”)—a method seen in Kremlin-backed ops like the Internet Research Agency, where partial truths amplify distorted narratives. The anti-woke, anti-establishment veneer—seen in jabs at LGBTQ+ issues or “liberal hypocrisy”—also echoes Russian efforts to exploit Western cultural divides, as noted in U.S. State Department reports.
Engagement patterns bolster the case. With 343k X followers and 400k+ on Telegram, @MyLordBebo’s reach is significant, and its posts rack up millions of views. X users and outlets like Voice of America flag it as a pro-Kremlin vector, pointing to retweets by sympathetic accounts and its habit of amplifying Russian state media tropes (e.g., NATO expansion as provocation). While it occasionally posts humor or personal takes, these feel like seasoning to maintain authenticity, not a departure from the core mission.
Could it just be a lone contrarian? Possibly. The account’s anonymity and funding pleas (Ko-Fi, crypto) suggest a small operation, and its pre-2022 activity shows it wasn’t born solely for the Ukraine war. But its consistency—pushing Kremlin-aligned takes daily, especially post-2022—matches the dedication of state-sponsored channels. Russian propaganda doesn’t always need direct Kremlin control; it thrives on “useful idiots” or proxies who amplify willingly. Studies from Clemson and ProPublica show similar accounts time posts to Russian workdays, a subtle clue @MyLordBebo might share if analyzed deeper.
Posts on X reinforce this perception. Users call out @MyLordBebo for whataboutism (e.g., deflecting Russian actions by citing Western flaws), a classic Russian tactic, and for spreading unverifiable claims—like Ukrainian prisoners forced into propaganda—without evidence. While not conclusive, this sentiment reflects how its output reads to observers: as a megaphone for Moscow’s line.
In short, yes, @MyLordBebo’s posts are highly consistent with a channel dedicated to amplifying Russian propaganda. Its themes, tactics, and reach fit the playbook—whether it’s a witting tool or an eager echo. Without backend data (e.g., IP traces), I can’t prove state ties, but the alignment’s striking. What’s your take—see anything in its posts that bucks this trend?
/end
I haven't heard of the "Firehose of Falsehood" before, but it's certainly consistent with JB's posting habits.
Are the posts of @mylordbebo consistent with a channel that is dedicated to amplifying Russian propaganda?
Answer:
Let’s analyze whether @MyLordBebo’s posts align with a channel dedicated to amplifying Russian propaganda. I’ll break this down by examining the account’s content, style, and patterns, drawing on what’s known about Russian propaganda tactics, while keeping my assessment grounded and clear.
@MyLordBebo’s posts—based on its X activity and Telegram presence—consistently focus on themes that mirror Kremlin narratives. The account frequently highlights the Russia-Ukraine conflict, often framing Russia favorably while casting Ukraine, NATO, and the West as aggressors or hypocrites. For example, it’s posted content praising Putin’s control over oligarchs, questioning Ukraine’s use of Western aid (e.g., implying it funds leisure rather than defense), and mocking Western leaders like Biden or Zelenskyy. These align with documented Russian propaganda goals: undermining support for Ukraine, sowing distrust in Western institutions, and portraying Russia as a victim or victor.
The style is telling too. The account uses a high-volume, rapid-fire approach—over 25k posts since 2019—mixing videos, memes, and biting commentary. This “firehose of falsehood” tactic, identified by RAND as a Russian disinformation hallmark, overwhelms with quantity over nuance, aiming to confuse or exhaust skepticism. Posts often blend real footage with skewed captions (e.g., a video of Ukrainians partying framed as proof the war’s “fake”)—a method seen in Kremlin-backed ops like the Internet Research Agency, where partial truths amplify distorted narratives. The anti-woke, anti-establishment veneer—seen in jabs at LGBTQ+ issues or “liberal hypocrisy”—also echoes Russian efforts to exploit Western cultural divides, as noted in U.S. State Department reports.
Engagement patterns bolster the case. With 343k X followers and 400k+ on Telegram, @MyLordBebo’s reach is significant, and its posts rack up millions of views. X users and outlets like Voice of America flag it as a pro-Kremlin vector, pointing to retweets by sympathetic accounts and its habit of amplifying Russian state media tropes (e.g., NATO expansion as provocation). While it occasionally posts humor or personal takes, these feel like seasoning to maintain authenticity, not a departure from the core mission.
Could it just be a lone contrarian? Possibly. The account’s anonymity and funding pleas (Ko-Fi, crypto) suggest a small operation, and its pre-2022 activity shows it wasn’t born solely for the Ukraine war. But its consistency—pushing Kremlin-aligned takes daily, especially post-2022—matches the dedication of state-sponsored channels. Russian propaganda doesn’t always need direct Kremlin control; it thrives on “useful idiots” or proxies who amplify willingly. Studies from Clemson and ProPublica show similar accounts time posts to Russian workdays, a subtle clue @MyLordBebo might share if analyzed deeper.
Posts on X reinforce this perception. Users call out @MyLordBebo for whataboutism (e.g., deflecting Russian actions by citing Western flaws), a classic Russian tactic, and for spreading unverifiable claims—like Ukrainian prisoners forced into propaganda—without evidence. While not conclusive, this sentiment reflects how its output reads to observers: as a megaphone for Moscow’s line.
In short, yes, @MyLordBebo’s posts are highly consistent with a channel dedicated to amplifying Russian propaganda. Its themes, tactics, and reach fit the playbook—whether it’s a witting tool or an eager echo. Without backend data (e.g., IP traces), I can’t prove state ties, but the alignment’s striking. What’s your take—see anything in its posts that bucks this trend?
/end
I haven't heard of the "Firehose of Falsehood" before, but it's certainly consistent with JB's posting habits.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 11:11 am
Grok 3 on @mylordbevo
Question:
Tell me about the @mylordbebo account
Answer:
Let’s take a closer look at the @MyLordBebo account and piece together what we can about it. I’ll analyze it based on available tools and insights, keeping this as clear and factual as possible.
@MyLordBebo is an X account with a sizable presence—currently sitting at around 343k followers as of recent reports, though that number can shift daily. Its bio reads: “Anti Woke, Anti hypocrisy, Anti fake news!” paired with links to a Telegram channel (“Lord Bebo & Friends”), a Ko-Fi donation page, and cryptocurrency wallets for support. The account also mentions a non-political humor sidekick, @myfunnybebo. It’s been active since at least 2019, racking up over 25k posts, many of which pull in significant engagement—millions of views and reactions aren’t uncommon.
Content-wise, @MyLordBebo focuses heavily on geopolitical hot topics, especially the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Posts often feature videos, images, or commentary that align with pro-Russian narratives—think praise for Putin, criticism of Western aid to Ukraine, or highlighting alleged Ukrainian missteps. It’s not subtle: you’ll see clips of Putin scolding oligarchs captioned with admiration, or posts questioning the legitimacy of Ukraine’s war efforts, like implying aid money funds partying in non-combat zones. Beyond that, it dips into broader “anti-woke” territory—mocking LGBTQ+ issues, cheering figures like Trump or Hungary’s Orban, and railing against Western hypocrisy.
The account’s style is provocative and high-volume, a hallmark of influence-driven social media. It’s got a Telegram companion with over 400k subscribers, pushing similar content—translations of Russian statements, war footage, and biting takes on Western policy. The “Lord Bebo” persona is anonymous, verified on X, and leans on a mix of humor, outrage, and curated media to keep followers hooked. Funding pleas via Ko-Fi and crypto suggest it’s a sustained operation, possibly a one-man show or a small team.
Now, about that Russian angle—there’s no smoking gun proving state control, but the vibes raise eyebrows. The account’s creation in 2019 predates the 2022 Ukraine invasion, but its focus sharpened post-conflict, mirroring Kremlin talking points: NATO’s to blame, Ukraine’s corrupt, the West’s weak. External sources, like Voice of America, flag it as a textbook example of emergent pro-Kremlin voices on X—newly verified, anonymous, and relentless in pushing narratives that erode trust in U.S. aid or Ukraine’s resolve. Its engagement patterns—retweets from like-minded accounts, rapid-fire posting—hint at coordination, though that’s circumstantial.
Could it be a lone ideologue? Sure. But the scale, consistency, and alignment with Russian disinformation tactics (think “firehose of falsehood” from RAND studies) suggest more. Linguistic quirks or sourcing from obscure Telegram channels might hint at origins, but without deeper forensics—like IP traces or leaked docs—it’s educated speculation. Posts on X call it out as propaganda, and while that’s not proof, the sentiment’s loud: this isn’t a casual observer.
In short, @MyLordBebo is a polarizing, well-followed X account that blends anti-Western snark with pro-Russian leanings, wrapped in an “anti-fake news” bow. It’s either a passionate contrarian or a cog in a bigger influence machine—likely both. Want me to dig into specific posts or patterns next?
Question:
Tell me about the @mylordbebo account
Answer:
Let’s take a closer look at the @MyLordBebo account and piece together what we can about it. I’ll analyze it based on available tools and insights, keeping this as clear and factual as possible.
@MyLordBebo is an X account with a sizable presence—currently sitting at around 343k followers as of recent reports, though that number can shift daily. Its bio reads: “Anti Woke, Anti hypocrisy, Anti fake news!” paired with links to a Telegram channel (“Lord Bebo & Friends”), a Ko-Fi donation page, and cryptocurrency wallets for support. The account also mentions a non-political humor sidekick, @myfunnybebo. It’s been active since at least 2019, racking up over 25k posts, many of which pull in significant engagement—millions of views and reactions aren’t uncommon.
Content-wise, @MyLordBebo focuses heavily on geopolitical hot topics, especially the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Posts often feature videos, images, or commentary that align with pro-Russian narratives—think praise for Putin, criticism of Western aid to Ukraine, or highlighting alleged Ukrainian missteps. It’s not subtle: you’ll see clips of Putin scolding oligarchs captioned with admiration, or posts questioning the legitimacy of Ukraine’s war efforts, like implying aid money funds partying in non-combat zones. Beyond that, it dips into broader “anti-woke” territory—mocking LGBTQ+ issues, cheering figures like Trump or Hungary’s Orban, and railing against Western hypocrisy.
The account’s style is provocative and high-volume, a hallmark of influence-driven social media. It’s got a Telegram companion with over 400k subscribers, pushing similar content—translations of Russian statements, war footage, and biting takes on Western policy. The “Lord Bebo” persona is anonymous, verified on X, and leans on a mix of humor, outrage, and curated media to keep followers hooked. Funding pleas via Ko-Fi and crypto suggest it’s a sustained operation, possibly a one-man show or a small team.
Now, about that Russian angle—there’s no smoking gun proving state control, but the vibes raise eyebrows. The account’s creation in 2019 predates the 2022 Ukraine invasion, but its focus sharpened post-conflict, mirroring Kremlin talking points: NATO’s to blame, Ukraine’s corrupt, the West’s weak. External sources, like Voice of America, flag it as a textbook example of emergent pro-Kremlin voices on X—newly verified, anonymous, and relentless in pushing narratives that erode trust in U.S. aid or Ukraine’s resolve. Its engagement patterns—retweets from like-minded accounts, rapid-fire posting—hint at coordination, though that’s circumstantial.
Could it be a lone ideologue? Sure. But the scale, consistency, and alignment with Russian disinformation tactics (think “firehose of falsehood” from RAND studies) suggest more. Linguistic quirks or sourcing from obscure Telegram channels might hint at origins, but without deeper forensics—like IP traces or leaked docs—it’s educated speculation. Posts on X call it out as propaganda, and while that’s not proof, the sentiment’s loud: this isn’t a casual observer.
In short, @MyLordBebo is a polarizing, well-followed X account that blends anti-Western snark with pro-Russian leanings, wrapped in an “anti-fake news” bow. It’s either a passionate contrarian or a cog in a bigger influence machine—likely both. Want me to dig into specific posts or patterns next?
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 10:54 am
Grok 3
Question:
What is the ukrainian peoples opinion of Zelensky? What is his approval rating by month since the start of the war? Does the publics opinion vary by region of Ukraine, if so, break that down.
Answer:
Let’s dive into your questions about Ukrainian public opinion on President Volodymyr Zelensky, his approval ratings since the Russia-Ukraine war began, and any regional variations. I’ll provide a clear, detailed response based on the most reliable data available up to March 21, 2025.
Ukrainian Public Opinion of Zelensky
The Ukrainian people’s opinion of Zelensky has evolved significantly since Russia’s full-scale invasion began in February 2022. Initially, his leadership during the crisis earned him widespread admiration, both domestically and internationally, for his resolve and refusal to flee Kyiv. Over time, however, factors like prolonged war fatigue, military setbacks, and domestic challenges have influenced public sentiment. Despite these pressures, Zelensky remains a figure of resilience for many, though his popularity has seen fluctuations.
Surveys consistently highlight his strengths—intelligence, patriotism, and leadership—while criticisms often center on unfulfilled promises (like ending corruption or the Donbas conflict pre-2022) and the ongoing war’s toll. Recent polls suggest a majority still trust him, with a notable uptick in support following tensions with U.S. President Donald Trump in early 2025, reflecting a rally-around-the-flag effect when Ukraine feels externally challenged.
Approval Rating by Month Since the Start of the War
Tracking Zelensky’s approval rating month-by-month requires aggregating data from various polls, primarily from the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), Gallup, and other reputable sources. Approval ratings typically measure trust or job approval, and I’ll use these interchangeably where appropriate, noting the data points available up to March 2025. Since continuous monthly data isn’t fully detailed in all sources, I’ll provide key snapshots and trends, interpolating where necessary based on broader patterns.
February 2022 (War Begins): Pre-war approval was around 37% (KIIS, late 2021). Post-invasion, it surged to ~90% (KIIS, May 2022), reflecting a rally effect as Zelensky became a wartime leader.
May 2022: 90% (KIIS), a peak driven by his defiance and global support.
September 2022: 84% (Gallup), still near record highs as Ukraine reclaimed territory.
December 2022: 84% (KIIS), sustained high support into the first winter of war.
February 2023: 90% (KIIS), maintaining strong approval a year into the conflict.
July 2023: 81% (Gallup), slightly down but robust amid ongoing resistance.
December 2023: 62% (KIIS), a notable drop as war fatigue set in and the 2023 counteroffensive faltered.
February 2024: ~60% (extrapolated from Gallup’s 60% in August 2024), reflecting a gradual decline.
May 2024: 56% (KIIS), further erosion as challenges mounted.
August 2024: 60% (Gallup), a slight recovery but well below wartime peaks.
October 2024: 70% (Statista/IRI), up from February, possibly tied to battlefield developments or policy shifts.
December 2024: 52% (KIIS), a low point before Trump’s January 2025 inauguration.
February 2025: 57% (KIIS, Feb 4-9 survey), a 5-point rise from December, countering Trump’s 4% claim.
March 2025: 67% (KIIS, Feb 14-Mar 4 survey), a 10-point jump post-Trump spat, reaching 72% in some polls (Ipsos/The Economist, Mar 5-10).
Trend Summary: Zelensky’s approval soared to 90% in 2022, dipped to the low 60s by late 2023, hit a trough around 52% in late 2024, and rebounded to 67-72% by March 2025. Gaps in monthly data are filled by assuming gradual shifts between known points, consistent with war-related events and public mood.
Regional Variations in Public Opinion
Public opinion on Zelensky does vary across Ukraine’s regions—West, Center, East, and South—due to cultural, linguistic, and proximity-to-conflict differences. However, detailed monthly breakdowns by region are sparse, so I’ll synthesize available data and trends up to March 2025.
Western Ukraine (e.g., Lviv): Historically pro-European and nationalist, this region has consistently shown the highest support for Zelensky since 2022. In August 2024, Gallup reported approval at 67%, compared to the national 60%. KIIS’s February 2025 poll noted trust as “more or less uniform” across regions, suggesting the West likely exceeds the 57% national average, possibly near 65-70%. By March 2025, with the national rise to 67-72%, the West could be in the 75-80% range, bolstered by its strong anti-Russian stance.
Central Ukraine (e.g., Kyiv): Home to the capital, this region mirrors national averages closely due to its political and media influence. Gallup’s 2024 East-West split implies Central approval aligns with the 60% national figure in August. KIIS’s February 2025 uniformity claim suggests 57% here, rising to 67-72% by March. Support may be tempered by elite skepticism and war fatigue but buoyed by Zelensky’s presence in Kyiv.
Eastern Ukraine (e.g., Kharkiv, excluding occupied Donbas): Closer to the front lines, this region has been more critical. Gallup’s August 2024 data showed a drop from 84% in 2023 to 56%, the steepest decline nationally, reflecting war’s direct impact. KIIS’s February 2025 survey didn’t contradict this, suggesting trust around 50-55%, below the 57% average. By March, with the national uptick, it might reach 60-65%, though skepticism persists due to losses and Russian-speaking populations’ complex views.
Southern Ukraine (e.g., Odesa): Often a mix of pro-Ukrainian and pragmatic sentiments, the South’s approval likely tracks slightly below the Center. In 2023, Gallup showed broad support (81% national), but by August 2024, it may have been ~58-60%. February 2025’s 57% national trust suggests parity here, rising to 65-70% in March. Proximity to Crimea and economic disruption could moderate enthusiasm.
Regional Notes: Pre-war, Eastern and Southern regions were less supportive due to Russian ties, but the invasion unified opinion initially. By 2024-2025, the East shows the most decline, per Gallup, while the West remains a stronghold. KIIS’s 2025 claim of uniformity may reflect a wartime leveling, though historical patterns and Gallup’s data suggest persistent, if muted, regional gaps. Occupied areas (Crimea, parts of Donbas) are excluded from polls, skewing results toward government-controlled regions.
Conclusion
As of March 2025, Ukrainians largely view Zelensky positively (67-72% approval), a recovery from late 2024’s 52% low, driven by external pressure and his wartime role. Since February 2022, his approval peaked at 90%, fell to the 50s-60s amid prolonged conflict, and now trends upward. Regionally, the West is most supportive (likely 75-80%), the East least (60-65%), with Center and South near the national average (67-72%). These figures reflect a resilient, if war-weary, public backing a leader under extraordinary strain.
Question:
What is the ukrainian peoples opinion of Zelensky? What is his approval rating by month since the start of the war? Does the publics opinion vary by region of Ukraine, if so, break that down.
Answer:
Let’s dive into your questions about Ukrainian public opinion on President Volodymyr Zelensky, his approval ratings since the Russia-Ukraine war began, and any regional variations. I’ll provide a clear, detailed response based on the most reliable data available up to March 21, 2025.
Ukrainian Public Opinion of Zelensky
The Ukrainian people’s opinion of Zelensky has evolved significantly since Russia’s full-scale invasion began in February 2022. Initially, his leadership during the crisis earned him widespread admiration, both domestically and internationally, for his resolve and refusal to flee Kyiv. Over time, however, factors like prolonged war fatigue, military setbacks, and domestic challenges have influenced public sentiment. Despite these pressures, Zelensky remains a figure of resilience for many, though his popularity has seen fluctuations.
Surveys consistently highlight his strengths—intelligence, patriotism, and leadership—while criticisms often center on unfulfilled promises (like ending corruption or the Donbas conflict pre-2022) and the ongoing war’s toll. Recent polls suggest a majority still trust him, with a notable uptick in support following tensions with U.S. President Donald Trump in early 2025, reflecting a rally-around-the-flag effect when Ukraine feels externally challenged.
Approval Rating by Month Since the Start of the War
Tracking Zelensky’s approval rating month-by-month requires aggregating data from various polls, primarily from the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), Gallup, and other reputable sources. Approval ratings typically measure trust or job approval, and I’ll use these interchangeably where appropriate, noting the data points available up to March 2025. Since continuous monthly data isn’t fully detailed in all sources, I’ll provide key snapshots and trends, interpolating where necessary based on broader patterns.
February 2022 (War Begins): Pre-war approval was around 37% (KIIS, late 2021). Post-invasion, it surged to ~90% (KIIS, May 2022), reflecting a rally effect as Zelensky became a wartime leader.
May 2022: 90% (KIIS), a peak driven by his defiance and global support.
September 2022: 84% (Gallup), still near record highs as Ukraine reclaimed territory.
December 2022: 84% (KIIS), sustained high support into the first winter of war.
February 2023: 90% (KIIS), maintaining strong approval a year into the conflict.
July 2023: 81% (Gallup), slightly down but robust amid ongoing resistance.
December 2023: 62% (KIIS), a notable drop as war fatigue set in and the 2023 counteroffensive faltered.
February 2024: ~60% (extrapolated from Gallup’s 60% in August 2024), reflecting a gradual decline.
May 2024: 56% (KIIS), further erosion as challenges mounted.
August 2024: 60% (Gallup), a slight recovery but well below wartime peaks.
October 2024: 70% (Statista/IRI), up from February, possibly tied to battlefield developments or policy shifts.
December 2024: 52% (KIIS), a low point before Trump’s January 2025 inauguration.
February 2025: 57% (KIIS, Feb 4-9 survey), a 5-point rise from December, countering Trump’s 4% claim.
March 2025: 67% (KIIS, Feb 14-Mar 4 survey), a 10-point jump post-Trump spat, reaching 72% in some polls (Ipsos/The Economist, Mar 5-10).
Trend Summary: Zelensky’s approval soared to 90% in 2022, dipped to the low 60s by late 2023, hit a trough around 52% in late 2024, and rebounded to 67-72% by March 2025. Gaps in monthly data are filled by assuming gradual shifts between known points, consistent with war-related events and public mood.
Regional Variations in Public Opinion
Public opinion on Zelensky does vary across Ukraine’s regions—West, Center, East, and South—due to cultural, linguistic, and proximity-to-conflict differences. However, detailed monthly breakdowns by region are sparse, so I’ll synthesize available data and trends up to March 2025.
Western Ukraine (e.g., Lviv): Historically pro-European and nationalist, this region has consistently shown the highest support for Zelensky since 2022. In August 2024, Gallup reported approval at 67%, compared to the national 60%. KIIS’s February 2025 poll noted trust as “more or less uniform” across regions, suggesting the West likely exceeds the 57% national average, possibly near 65-70%. By March 2025, with the national rise to 67-72%, the West could be in the 75-80% range, bolstered by its strong anti-Russian stance.
Central Ukraine (e.g., Kyiv): Home to the capital, this region mirrors national averages closely due to its political and media influence. Gallup’s 2024 East-West split implies Central approval aligns with the 60% national figure in August. KIIS’s February 2025 uniformity claim suggests 57% here, rising to 67-72% by March. Support may be tempered by elite skepticism and war fatigue but buoyed by Zelensky’s presence in Kyiv.
Eastern Ukraine (e.g., Kharkiv, excluding occupied Donbas): Closer to the front lines, this region has been more critical. Gallup’s August 2024 data showed a drop from 84% in 2023 to 56%, the steepest decline nationally, reflecting war’s direct impact. KIIS’s February 2025 survey didn’t contradict this, suggesting trust around 50-55%, below the 57% average. By March, with the national uptick, it might reach 60-65%, though skepticism persists due to losses and Russian-speaking populations’ complex views.
Southern Ukraine (e.g., Odesa): Often a mix of pro-Ukrainian and pragmatic sentiments, the South’s approval likely tracks slightly below the Center. In 2023, Gallup showed broad support (81% national), but by August 2024, it may have been ~58-60%. February 2025’s 57% national trust suggests parity here, rising to 65-70% in March. Proximity to Crimea and economic disruption could moderate enthusiasm.
Regional Notes: Pre-war, Eastern and Southern regions were less supportive due to Russian ties, but the invasion unified opinion initially. By 2024-2025, the East shows the most decline, per Gallup, while the West remains a stronghold. KIIS’s 2025 claim of uniformity may reflect a wartime leveling, though historical patterns and Gallup’s data suggest persistent, if muted, regional gaps. Occupied areas (Crimea, parts of Donbas) are excluded from polls, skewing results toward government-controlled regions.
Conclusion
As of March 2025, Ukrainians largely view Zelensky positively (67-72% approval), a recovery from late 2024’s 52% low, driven by external pressure and his wartime role. Since February 2022, his approval peaked at 90%, fell to the 50s-60s amid prolonged conflict, and now trends upward. Regionally, the West is most supportive (likely 75-80%), the East least (60-65%), with Center and South near the national average (67-72%). These figures reflect a resilient, if war-weary, public backing a leader under extraordinary strain.
re: Any info on what Trump and Hegseth will be talking about from the Oval Office this morning
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 9:07 am
quote:
Everywhere I look it just says that the White House hasn't released the subject to the media but surely there's a leak or two out there.
Something to do with the military is my guess.
re: Designed loss by Tony V
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 9:04 am
So Tony V is such a little bitch he can't make a change to his lineup without having to throw a game to create an excuse? Is that what you are saying, because that sounds like what you are saying.
re: Musk set to get access tomorrow to top-secret US plan for potential war with China
Posted by Chromdome35 on 3/21/25 at 8:15 am
This was probably an anti leak op.
Popular