Thread: How dangerous is Vladimir Putin?

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnasty2017

And funny how schmucks like you actually believe the blinkered, myopic, partisan shite your favoured propaganda leads you to believe.

FOH

Unlike you Albert, I tend to read a plethora of subjects from across the political and cultural spectrum.

As opposed to watching RT and believing every piece of Vlad's shit like the gullible little fool that you are.

Nah..you're a one-trick pony.

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnasty2017

Nah..you're a one-trick pony.

Yeah, that's the "little fool" part of "gullible little fool" speaking.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

are not state-controlled propaganda and have editorial independence.

they decry the " mainstream media " but are happy to latch onto every story about arab rape gangs etc

those who are admiring vlads empire I suggest they should read - https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/...ng-is-possible

Originally Posted by baldrick

they decry the " mainstream media " but are happy to latch onto every story about arab rape gangs etc

those who are admiring vlads empire I suggest they should read - https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/...ng-is-possible

Like I said, gullible.

Not to irritate the nation ( and Harry as well) listening to the independent media not controled by state
the RT will be pulled

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Not to irritate the nation ( and Harry as well) listening to the independent media not controled by state
the RT will be pulled

Does anyone know what this idiot is on about?

Happy Birthday Putin, today you are 65

Originally Posted by baldrick

those who are admiring vlads empire I suggest they should read - https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/...ng-is-possible

I've not read the book so far. Is it purely on The LORDS period of leadership or more historical? Has The LORD improved the situation or just carried on as prior leaders?

Originally Posted by OhOh

If you actually read some of the items posted here, by at least me and possibly others, you might find some differences in quoting facts and named sources, less possibles, uncertainties and responsibilities for accuracy.

There are differences in the quality of "reporting", fact checking, accountability, a more thorough, more detailed analysis and possible outcomes. All of which tends to increase ones ability to "swallow" the proffered morsel.

Correct. There is a big difference between reputable news sources and the fucking dross you post all the time from Vlad's personal TV station or other whackjob websites.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Correct. There is a big difference between reputable news sources and the fucking dross you post all the time from Vlad's personal TV station or other whackjob websites.

A news source may be "reputable", when reputing only the negative about the adversaries, whilst the negative about himself will be "humbly" omitted.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by Klondyke
Not to irritate the nation ( and Harry as well) listening to the independent media not controled by state
the RT will be pulled

Does anyone know what this idiot is on about?

Red Scare redux? US imposes World War II-era ‘foreign agents’ designation on Russia media

The Soviet-era McCarthyism that swept America in the mid-20th century was mere child's play compared to the Russophobic hysteria now running amok in the land, where Russian media is even being required to identify itself with a Nazi-era designation.

This week, during a session of the Russian Federation Council’s Interim Committee on the Protection of Sovereignty, RT’s Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan explained that according to the channel’s lawyers, the US branch staff could face harsh penalties if RT fails to follow through with the demands.

“We received a letter from the US Department of Justice, demanding that we register as a foreign agent. By October 17 we must ‘whip ourselves’ and say that we are a foreign agent,” Simonyan said, adding that “[our] lawyers tell us that if we [RT’s American branch] do not register as a foreign agent, arrests of our employees, seizure of property will follow – absolutely serious things.”

As was the case with the expulsion of Russian diplomats in the US, which led to tit-for-tat actions, Moscow may have no choice but to impose retaliatory measures against US news outlets operating on Russian territory.

“Our [Russian] legislation envisages a possibility of imposing retaliatory restrictions against the… media of the states that have restrictive [regulations] specifically limiting the professional activities of Russian journalists,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said at the meeting.

What is especially disconcerting about these latest developments is that they were decidedly unnecessary and avoidable.

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/405940-ru...oreign-agents/

Some empire our Vlad has now, control of Russia and the USA. Really should get more credit for winning the game of thrones.

Originally Posted by buriramboy

Some empire our Vlad has now, control of Russia and the USA. Really should get more credit for winning the game of thrones.

And Crimea.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by buriramboy
Some empire our Vlad has now, control of Russia and the USA. Really should get more credit for winning the game of thrones.

And Crimea.

And the Saudi Arabia as well...

Vlad is the dragon lady in Games of Throne

Trump is Tyrion Lannister

and Hillary is of course Cersei Lannister

Originally Posted by OhOh

One wonders how ameristani/UK/democratic free press/TV/newspapers/Global News providers" would survive without their "exclusive briefings" from "unnamed" and therefore fake, official services members".

Because everything RT says is true eh?

Gullible fool.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Because everything RT says is true eh?

Gullible fool.

Boom, you did it again, double irony here when you believe verbatim any articles from the NYT

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Because everything RT says is true eh?

One wonders who believes "everything", wherever it's published. One can have ones own standards of belief, irrespective of an articles source. But then one would have to make a decision, not all appear to have that ability.

For example:

1. Read the articles headline - Does the headline topic interest you, does the headline reinforce ones previously held opinion. Lots of decisions even before one decides to actually read the article.

2. Does the article contain a reporters own view or does it include checkable quotes, are the quotes of a person of power, is the person reinforcing previously held positions or has their position been changed, is the quoted person in a position where they may be able to act. If the article only contains the reporters own views do they have a record of following or leading the discussion? If the article is reinforced only with "statements" from unnamed , persons of no authority, position or record of achievement they are of no relevance and fake.

3. Does the article correspond to the headline or does it backtrack and include, usually near the end, that the above 3,000 word article (paid by word count usually) a sentence or two refuting the headline, you know just to cover their own "professional" integrity?

4. Never put a person or publisher on "ignore". One day they may see the light and there is an opportunity. Does one gloat or welcome the lost sheep back into the fold?

5. Does the poster or article creator make you smile, spit out your coffee normally? If so decide whether to take a chance. Reply and offer a guiding hand.

6. Ignore points 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. because one is maybe "a senior member" or doesn't really give a fuck.

One can have ones own standards of belief, irrespective of an articles source. But then one would have to make a decision, not all appear to have that ability.

Or one can be an OhOh and just assume that if it's RT it must be true, and everything that contradicts it, false.

That avoids having to make decisions completely.

Originally Posted by Dragonfly

Boom, you did it again, double irony here when you believe verbatim any articles from the NYT

Buttplug, with your pitiful command of English, you are excused anything you believe.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Or one can be an OhOh

No. 5 for you.