JUst looked at RT.com, not what I was expecting. - Page 17

General » General Discussion

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - JUst looked at RT.com, not what I was expecting. (Page 17 of 19)

Posted: 4/8/2022 3:25:48 PM EDT

[#1]

Quote History

Quoted:

Ukraine is the third most corrupt in Europe. Russia is the first. Worldwide the disparity increases. In some rankings Ukraine is less corrupt than Mexico.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

"Rocket man" gets 100%. It's just a matter of who "counts" the votes. The guy who taught them that was their "neighbor".

In a country plagued by corruption (3rd in the world?), do you believe in election results?

Ukraine is the third most corrupt in Europe. Russia is the first. Worldwide the disparity increases. In some rankings Ukraine is less corrupt than Mexico.

I'm thinking back through the hundreds of history books I've read discussing various wars and I'm having a hard time remembering when corruption came into the conversation when dealing with nations relations with one another. Corruption is everywhere. It's here too. I'm just trying to understand why it's relevant to this discussion.

Posted: 4/8/2022 3:27:05 PM EDT

[#2]

Quote History

Quoted:

Put the goalposts down. This entire line of discussion is dragging on because you have taken great pains to be overly dismissive of the work of multiple, independent sources of data and analysis which are corroborated by multiple other individuals working in independent official channels which often arrive at the same conclusions well in advance of public notice through media channels.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I thought about who touches the information.

In RT's case, since it belongs to the Russian state, any information will pass by a censor's desk at some point, if not multiple times, between someone writing it and it being published.

In the satellite imagery case, who touched that data between the photos/videos were taken and then they reached the intended audience?

So, I think we are all talking about chain of custody.

I always find this line of questioning information interesting because you are pretending as if you, a regular dude on the street, will actually ever have enough information about something like this to know the "truth". Newsflash: What you think you are entitled to is a fantasy. You will never be given access to classified data about this from either side. You will never see how things work behind the scenes to determine which information you are allowed to see. Your choice as a human being is either to live with the fact that you will always be partially in the dark, or continue to complain about the reality over which you have no control over. All of that wailing and gnashing of teeth to try to figure out whether the US media or the Russian media is lying to you is a stupid exercise in futility. It also doesn't matter one bit. You either agree with what Russia is doing as a human being and as an American, or you don't. Trust of media has zero to do with it. If you want to read RT so that you can see Russia's made up justification for the war, have at it. If you want to read the New York Times to see what propaganda Ukraine and the State Department is putting out to justify giving weapons to the Ukraine, have at it. The only relevant question is whether giving Ukraine weapons serves US strategic interests. You won't find the answer to that in any media source.

And, because of that, "regular dudes on the street" have to swallow any bs that's spit on them?

Gee, wouldn't it be nice if there were mechanisms by which to validate information without relying on official sources?

Definitely. And that's what we are discussing here.

And just because sometimes there's no agreement about the information credibility, it does not mean that is it "Russian talking points" as some try to imply.

If it's RT, it's literally Russian talking points. Dancing around it or glossing over that fact doesn't make it go away. You have been told a 100% truth that this is the most well documented conflict in history and you are making an active choice to ignore a wealth of high confidence OSINT work in favor of headlines that line up with what you choose to believe.

If you go back, no one is questioning that RT is the Russian side, or propaganda.

What is being questioned is the information presented to the American public, which also comes from very questionable sources.

Therefore, as OP suggested, using RT to help figuring out where the truth really is might not be a bad idea. I haven't gone to that website yet but might take a look.

The truth will be hidden somewhere between what the MSM and its cohorts have been vomiting and what Russia and China have been spitting.

The difficult part is filtering the useful stuff from the trash.

You are crafting a strawman from a false dichotomy that the only sources of information available are MSM and whatever its positional antithesis might be. You should not do that.

I used "MSM and cohorts" as a general descriptive. I agree there are many more sources in between the two extremes.

The big problem is how to find them.

Even in this very website it is not easy to figure out what is real and what is not, mostly when there's a group hellbent on painting anyone and anything that do not flow with "free Ukraine!" narrative as "Russian propaganda".

I read a couple posts talking about threads that try to impartially discuss what's going on using intelligence and military expertise. Where are they?

Some that were started to discuss the backstage of that war were quickly trashed by that nonsensical discussion.

Those threads aren't anywhere you can get at them because the torrent of idiocy in GD drove them elsewhere where there are better noise filters and better contributors. GD should probably take a break to ponder that dynamic.

So, that leaves only GD, which will keep doing its "GD thing" to discuss this, since the filtered threads aren't accessible to everyone. And, for the obvious reasons, the discussions will keep going all over template.

What makes me curious is why some members, usually the same ones, tend to show up in the threads that try to discuss the whys and other issues that do not go with the official "free Ukraine!" narrative and trash them with "Russian propaganda", "Putin lovers", etc. and nothing useful to contribute. That males those members no different than those fanatical leftists and just show a desperation to hide the actual truth. Let alone that their credibility is already trashed.

However, for me, the worst part is that all this only diverts the attention from much worse things happening at home and if they are not fixed ASAP the US will go the same way of Ukraine, if not worse.

This may come as something of a shock, but people might actually get trashed with "Russian propaganda" when they are echoing actual Russian talking points.

What is "Russian propaganda"?

Suddenly, the media, politicians, and even some once-reputable government agencies that lie through their teeth are telling the truth (i.e. "free Ukraine!" narrative). I once even got a member telling me that "soros was doing a good thing now by going against Putin". So, can I say that "Putin is doing a good thing for going against soros"? The latter is currently a much bigger problem for the US than the first, as well as several of the US politicians backing Ukraine.

Furthermore, a many people once criticizing and censoring others because of "Russian collusion" ended-up exposed as the ones doing it.

I suspect you may be overthinking the problem if you are struggling with a definition of Russian propaganda.

Just want to set expectations and terms & definitions since it appears that anything that goes against the "free Ukraine!" narrative is labeled as "Russian propaganda".

Roland's response notwithstanding, your continued use of "free Ukraine! narrative" is pointedly dismissive. We're using the term "Russian propaganda" in a literal sense in that people are, deliberately or otherwise, taking stances and repeating talking points that directly align with Russian statements or interests.

This is a very vague and broad definition. Using the same metrics, one can also say that the "free Ukraine!" narrative uses MSM and typical leftist talking points, which are also based in lies as the Russian's.

Furthermore, as I also compared before, if aligning with the gang (e.g. soros, hillary, pedo Joe, etc.) that is promoting the invasion in the US' southern border is OK because it's "convenient" ("enemy of my enemy..."), then one can use the same argument that Russia is an ally by convenience, since it's against that gang (assuming it really is - jury still out). After all, the southern border invasion is a much more pressing issue for the Americans.

However, I do not agree with partnerships with the devil.

And I also do not see anyone here defending Putin or Russia. Therefore, if, by coincidence, it matches some "Russian talking points", it just shows that the "free Ukraine!" talking points being questioned are bs and do not hold water to a point that a simple "Russian talking point" easily challenges them.

Sun Tzu is a real thing and ignoring or censoring opposing views usually lead to bad results. The Russian's Keystone Cops performance in this war, if really happening, could have been caused by Putin only keeping "yes men" on his side, which is typical of autocrats.

That's a lot of non sequitur to justify ignoring that the people that you are talking about haven't once cited MSM as a source.

You probably missed the folks quoting CNN, WaPo and alike. Even read a post saying that "this time the MSM was telling the truth" while others were defending soros.

So, there's that.

And it's not "non-sequitur", unless you want to focus on the tree and not the forest.

Put the goalposts down. This entire line of discussion is dragging on because you have taken great pains to be overly dismissive of the work of multiple, independent sources of data and analysis which are corroborated by multiple other individuals working in independent official channels which often arrive at the same conclusions well in advance of public notice through media channels.

This is, ironically enough, the exact same argument you can get, completely at random, from Shareblue trolls on any random social media thread, by posting "There was widespread election fraud". It never fails - post that phrase on any political thread, and you will get pretty much this same argument, verbatim. "You refuse to believe it despite the fact that multiple independent sources which have all been corroborated and even the results of right wing audits, and multiple recounts, all indicate there was NO cheating.......

Posted: 4/8/2022 3:27:22 PM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:

Not quite. The first part is correct. However the US version of the NWO means that the US ceases to exist as we know it, and becomes more like the EU including high as fuck taxes, no guns, and the abandonment of the concept of citizen individual "Self Determination" in favor of citizens being subjects of an Elite class who believes they are our moral and intellectual betters. Kind of like some of you on this forum.

Because of this, the movement toward a "NWO" is unacceptable.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

It appears that his "progress" has been towards the WEF goals and keeping Ukraine as its money laundering machine. One of Ukraine's politicians openly declared they were fighting for the New World Order. Like several others, I'm not buying that "corruption fight" speech. If anything, he only wants to switch Ukraine's puppet masters.

When Europeans say new world order they mean the Pax Americana and an international order based on rules. It’s the world that the US created jn 1945.

Not quite. The first part is correct. However the US version of the NWO means that the US ceases to exist as we know it, and becomes more like the EU including high as fuck taxes, no guns, and the abandonment of the concept of citizen individual "Self Determination" in favor of citizens being subjects of an Elite class who believes they are our moral and intellectual betters. Kind of like some of you on this forum.

Because of this, the movement toward a "NWO" is unacceptable.

You know they said this? You were there? You speak Ukrainian well enough to translate the "NWO" to that degree? You've spoken to Ukrainians and they've told you this is what they mean by NWO?

Posted: 4/8/2022 3:27:26 PM EDT

[#4]

Quote History

Quoted:

hard to believe you are still in here carrying on as you are after 3 days...

really not sure what you think. the continuous circular arguments are tiring. mature people who are independent thinkers are not going to abandon their own faculties of critical thinking and assessment, and all a sudden allow afcom OSintBros to start dictating what they should believe and think. maybe that works in the closed military sub-forum, idk

one can only guess your motivations and agendas. the inflated sense of self-importance coming out of your camp is cringeworthy

View Quote

It's called patriotism and love of country (this country for the smart asses).

Posted: 4/8/2022 3:28:23 PM EDT

[#5]

Quote History

Quoted:

You have made a complete fool of yourself, and I have helped. I don't need any help...hell, I barely have to try. You literally don't even have an argument. All you do is say "muh twitter" and try to poke holes in my arguments by saying they're circular without demonstrating how.

Seriously, you're not smart enough for me to need help to embarrass.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

If the last several years on this site have proven anything at all, it's that "independent thinkers" more often than not are anything but.

someone must have cried out for his backup

You have made a complete fool of yourself, and I have helped. I don't need any help...hell, I barely have to try. You literally don't even have an argument. All you do is say "muh twitter" and try to poke holes in my arguments by saying they're circular without demonstrating how.

Seriously, you're not smart enough for me to need help to embarrass.

Somewhere, at some time, I've seen some say something to the effect of "when someone has to resort to personal attacks, they've lost the argument".

Posted: 4/8/2022 3:28:35 PM EDT

[#6]

Quote History

Quoted:

Jesus, I didn't think you were this stupid. Zelensky was elected in a majority vote simple "election". Biden had to win a handful of swing states to steal the election due to the Electoral College system we have. Two entirely different systems, two entirely difference necessities to obtain the same result.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

After seeing how it works in 2020, aren't they the same?

Zelenskyy go what, 73% of the vote? Biden only needed to steal .5% to win. You’re in lala lane and we need you to come back to planet earth.

Jesus, I didn't think you were this stupid. Zelensky was elected in a majority vote simple "election". Biden had to win a handful of swing states to steal the election due to the Electoral College system we have. Two entirely different systems, two entirely difference necessities to obtain the same result.

So now the election was stolen due to the electoral college.

I'm sure the irony is lost on you that the EC is why Trump won in '16 and the liberals said the EXACT same thing you're saying now lmao.

Posted: 4/8/2022 3:29:24 PM EDT

[#7]

Quote History

Quoted:

I'm thinking back through the hundreds of history books I've read discussing various wars and I'm having a hard time remembering when corruption came into the conversation when dealing with nations relations with one another. Corruption is everywhere. It's here too. I'm just trying to understand why it's relevant to this discussion.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

"Rocket man" gets 100%. It's just a matter of who "counts" the votes. The guy who taught them that was their "neighbor".

In a country plagued by corruption (3rd in the world?), do you believe in election results?

Ukraine is the third most corrupt in Europe. Russia is the first. Worldwide the disparity increases. In some rankings Ukraine is less corrupt than Mexico.

I'm thinking back through the hundreds of history books I've read discussing various wars and I'm having a hard time remembering when corruption came into the conversation when dealing with nations relations with one another. Corruption is everywhere. It's here too. I'm just trying to understand why it's relevant to this discussion.

Exactly. It's not relevant. Every single country on the planet is corrupt to some degree.

Posted: 4/8/2022 3:30:46 PM EDT

[#8]

Quote History

Quoted:

So now the election was stolen due to the electoral college.

I'm sure the irony is lost on you that the EC is why Trump won in '16 and the liberals said the EXACT same thing you're saying now lmao.

View Quote

Roland...just in case you didn't know...when you find particularly distracting posters if you hover over user info there's this option to 'ignore user.' Just sayin. Much grey on my screen. Peaceful.

Posted: 4/8/2022 3:31:34 PM EDT

[#9]

Quote History

Quoted:

Somewhere, at some time, I've seen some say something to the effect of "when someone has to resort to personal attacks, they've lost the argument".

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

If the last several years on this site have proven anything at all, it's that "independent thinkers" more often than not are anything but.

someone must have cried out for his backup

You have made a complete fool of yourself, and I have helped. I don't need any help...hell, I barely have to try. You literally don't even have an argument. All you do is say "muh twitter" and try to poke holes in my arguments by saying they're circular without demonstrating how.

Seriously, you're not smart enough for me to need help to embarrass.

Somewhere, at some time, I've seen some say something to the effect of "when someone has to resort to personal attacks, they've lost the argument".

You think pointing out that someone is embarrassing themselves is a personal attack?

You absolutely cannot be serious right now

Posted: 4/8/2022 3:32:16 PM EDT

[#10]

Quote History

Quoted:

Roland...just in case you didn't know...when you find particularly distracting posters if you hover over user info there's this option to 'ignore user.' Just sayin. Much grey on my screen. Peaceful.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

So now the election was stolen due to the electoral college.

I'm sure the irony is lost on you that the EC is why Trump won in '16 and the liberals said the EXACT same thing you're saying now lmao.

Roland...just in case you didn't know...when you find particularly distracting posters if you hover over user info there's this option to 'ignore user.' Just sayin. Much grey on my screen. Peaceful.

Yeah I know, I hate to live in an echo chamber though, but I'm getting close to ignoring these...nice people.

Posted: 4/8/2022 3:34:08 PM EDT

[#11]

I would encourage you guys to read these two articles, its about 10 minutes of reading.

From the horses mouth- Chrome will auto translate.
https://ria.ru/20220403/ukraina-1781469605.html

A historians prospective on the above.
https://snyder.substack.com/p/russias-genocide-handbook?utm_medium=email&s=r

Posted: 4/8/2022 3:37:28 PM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:

This is, ironically enough, the exact same argument you can get, completely at random, from Shareblue trolls on any random social media thread, by posting "There was widespread election fraud". It never fails - post that phrase on any political thread, and you will get pretty much this same argument, verbatim. "You refuse to believe it despite the fact that multiple independent sources which have all been corroborated and even the results of right wing audits, and multiple recounts, all indicate there was NO cheating.......