WRONG. YOU HAVE UNWITTINGLY BECOME A PART OF THE NWO CONTROL. YOU HAVE SIGNED A DEAL WITH EVIL YOURSELF. THE SOVEREIGN STATE IS ALL THAT MATTERS. WE MUST FIGHT THE GLOBALIST AGENDA. WE ARE WINNING THAT FIGHT. FARAGE, BREXIT, TRUMP, LE PEN AND MORE. NEXT WE MUST FIGHT CULTURAL MARXISM. TRANSGENER IS A MENTAL HEALTH DISORDER AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH. THE FAMILY SHOULD BE PROTECTED. WESTERN CHRISTIAN VALUES MUST BE PROTECTED. PEDOPHILIA CAN NOT BE NORMALIZED MUCH LESS INSTITUTIONALIZED. DONALD J TRUMP IS A HERO, A PATRIOT, HE IS A BRAVE MAN WHO RISKED HIS LIFE FOR THE PEOPLE OF THIS WORLD. PUTIN, TRUMP, FARAGE, LE PEN AND MANY MORE ARE RISKING THEIR LIVES AND REPUTATIONS FIGHTING THE NWO AND THEIR CULTURAL CONTROL MACHINE. HOW CAN YOU SAY FIGHTING FOR SOVEREIGNTY IS A BAD THING?! WE HAVE 8 YEARS TO TURN THIS WORLD AROUND AND RETURN POWER TO NATION STATES. JOIN ME. DON'T UNWITTINGLY FIGHT FOR THE NWO. BREAK THE PROPOGANDA CONTROL.
My profile? Dig away. I encourage it. And a side note, all content of the comment aside, having a wall of text all in caps just makes your comment obnoxious and annoying to read.
Its purposely obnoxious. Im not digging through youe profile i just ran it through reddit investigator and as predicted you have no conspiracy history all /r/politics history.
Trump, Le Pen, Farage etc are just as much puppets of the NWO as are Obama, Clinton, Merkel etc. They're just a little bit lower down the ladder from Soros, the Rockefellers, and Rothschilds. They're two sides of the same coin. Their aim is to get you to hate those who vote for the "other guy", whatever side you think you're on, instead of them. But really they are all the enemy, and we, the regular people, are all on the same side. I don't blame you for falling victim to this trap because I feel victim to it to. Billions of people fell victim to it. But it's not or fault, so I forgive you as I forgave myself. We need to unite against them, not wage a phony war between ourselves.
If you truly believe trump is on your side, then please at least stay skeptical. The 100% faith and loyalty to a particular person or party is what got the world into this mess in the first place. Don't fall victim to it yet again. If he's legit, then a healthy dose of skepticism will help with transparency and boost his credibility. But if he's not then skepticism will bring that to light. Just think how you would feel if after all the time and effort you put into supporting him he turns heel and fucks you in the arse just like all the politicians before him have. It would be emotionally devastating. Blind faith is dangerous. Just don't put all your eggs in one basket.
Don't regret your actions. Regret that he wasn't who he said he was if you're to regret anything. You fell victim to believing the lie that he was who he said he was, and that's not your fault. If you'd had voted any other way you would not be the you that you are right now, today. Every action you've ever made was necessary to get you to right here, right now. To get to you writing your comment , and me writing this reply. Do you regret being here now, knowing what you know, and thinking how you think? The past is the past, unchangeable, helpless and needless to regret. It doesn't help you or anyone else to regret it. It only holds you back. Accept that it happened, learn from it, and use it as a tool - a stepping stone - to get you to your next destination. Use it to plan your future. We can always reflect on our past actions and always find something new among them by utilising what we know now and thus gain new perspectives. Combine a bit of knowledge from now with a bit of information from the past and voila! You made some wisdom! Our minds are creation machines! Don't chain them down with regrets. Let them thrive in boundless openness. An open mind is a learning mind.
How much censorship is there that you notice day to day? Is it like in the US where critical opinions are just shouted down, or are you actively censored like in the UK where you can be arrested for saying certain things on social media?
The government blocks sites left and right... I basically had to leave the country to install a VPN on my laptop. They said the censorship is for blocking porn and drugs, but most of it is just things that don't align with the government. And most people here don't really care, or just don't talk about it
You're right, I'm just a Nigerian Prince and I need you to do a favor for me. You can make 1 million dollars, but you need to pay a 285 dollar fee first.
So you're not going to check? Just do it. I can guarantee you won't find a post at a time during which I should be sleeping in Russia. Just do it. Check Every. Fucking. Post.
I'm about to go to bed now... Which reminds me, If you look at every post and comment, look at the time stamp and you'll see that I'm in a Russian timezone. There's your proof.
You know there are eleven time zones in Russia right? Right now it's 1:09 am. And I really want to sleep now so I'll probably respond to you when I wake up
They said the censorship is for blocking porn and drugs
that's how it always works. but yeah- from this side it looks like you just live in a more overt kleptocracy/ oligarchy than over here. Which I what makes me wonder why it seems our foreign policy goals are to push you even closer to China...
Putin is the least of evils that we could have. Putin does have large popular support, he's done a lot of great things for the country, especially considering how bad of a state it was in when he assumed office. He is corrupt, no doubt about it, however that's the only way the country functions. You can't root out corruption just yet, it has to be a slow process, which is currently underway. The rest of world is corrupt as well, but it's more concentrated on top, as this and many other subs indicate. Our corruption is also in the middle, where middle men make money on bureaucracy, because sometimes when you want stuff done quick (doesn't have to be illegal), you pay extra.
You can see some Russians accusing Putin of heinous crimes and generally opposing him. I can't blame them, since they are right. But he's the necessary evil. He has authority, he has respect from those who matter. I'm certain that once he's gone (election in 2018 would be his last term most likely), the country will go to shit, unless he has some plans in place. This year would be very important for us, because there are major shifts in the elite atm. We'll see how it goes
Medvedev has fallen out of favour completely. Recently, one of deputy ministers close to Medvedev had been arrested for allegedly taking a bribe from Rosneft to make a favourable decision regarding the acquisition of Bashneft (large but not the largest oil company in Russia). Interesting fact: he's been arrested and detained for 6 hours without any legitimate reason, then after such reason appeared, he was trialed and everything. He was not jailed, just got home confinement. The whole thing was possibly just a scare act to show who's the boss. So this particular strategy won't work this time. There's pretty much a consensus among politologists that this is going to be Putin's last term, and I'm not qualified enough to doubt them.
What kind of politician will Russia choose in their next election? A right wing nationalist hawk? Or do you think they won't go with a hawkish pick, and pick someone more reserved like Putin again?
it's all very much unclear at this point. I'm sure there are multiple candidates from different areas of the state like, so whichever group gets ahead in terms of influence, a candidate from that group would lead the country. Just so you understand, the Russian State isn't singular - there are multiple power groups that are in constant motion and there is competition among them to gain as much reach over Russian assets (companies mainly) and power. So whichever group prevails would most likely result in a successor.
I'm might be wrong, though, not really an expert in all those political moves and stuff, only recently started exploring this area. Take with a pinch of salt
Well, at least Putin seems to have a very strong commitment to Russia and is very "Russia first". In the States we've got nothing but leaders who seem to always put " Mr Global" first and screw America.
Professor Filip Kovacovic does a segment on Russian newspapers over on Newsbud that gives a good feel for the Russian media and therefore what the average person believes:
This is a very good topic... I always had a bad case of the Red Scare for most of my life... until one day I started expressing how dangerous and powerful and bloodthirsty Russia was in a large chatroom... several people from around the globe corrected me... Russian speaking up about how it was miserable there for a lot of people... in no small part due to the misconception that they are some sleeping giant. It seemed honest and heartfelt... and made me rethink my beliefs and dig deeper. This was years ago... it is possible the room was infiltrated with communist disinfo agents... but I had a good long conversation with some english speaking russians and people who had visited. I came out if it feeling sorry for Russia more than being scared.
My story is entirely anecdotal, but your approach is good... This probably isn't the time or place for it... though. But maybe you could get away from reddit and check a less shill infested place to ask around.
Your story may be anecdotal, but it rings true. What I've found is people can share a common human bond, regardless of nationality, if they are willing to look at the condition of the world without the filter of government.
I agree regarding your last point, just sick of seeing all the Russia Hacked hysteria, figured I'd give a chance for any humans here to put in a word or two. ;)
As a person who watches both sides very closely, I can say this:
Russia hacking the US elections would only work as an excuse if the popular vote was for Trump. Only the electorate voted him in. Which means it makes no fucking sense, unless the majority of electorates were bribed up the ass.
Let's say the DNC was hacked by the Russians for one second. It doesn't fucking matter, because the DNC did the stupid shit they said they didn't do. They lied, covered it up terribly, and blame everyone but themselves. Period.
You know it is possible to be disgusted with the DNC's actions and be pissed regarding how those actions were illegally discovered and revealed. Whoever hacked/phished/leaked/whatever is definitely banking on arguments such as yours, "it doesn't fucking matter because..." Moving forward, campaigns and other scheming elites will just up their cyber-security, not mass forward emails full of corruption like 7th graders. They'll just hide it better now. They win.
What?? No they don't win. They are more afraid of the masses now. They now know that we too can watch them. They are watching us, and we are watching them. This is a game-changer.
maybe not such a game changer
just a very vigorous sweep it under the rug, and for next time: they've just learned a simple lesson - in future encrypt your emails
Trump has publicly stated that he believes that Russia did indeed do the hack and his defense secretary has publicly stated that the US needs to defend itself against Russia.
I'm definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real basis for it.
That is a little real politik for my tastes, but it's not quite "punish a patsy". He's saying the bar of evidence he'll need to consider someone disloyal is low.
That is a little real politik for my tastes, but it's not quite "punish a patsy".
How is a link to a real email "real politik"? That's utter bullshit.
He's saying the bar of evidence he'll need to consider someone disloyal and fit for public admonition is low.
No, he's saying the bar is at zero. He literally said he would make an example of a suspected leaker with no real basis.
And his intent is to send a message and tighten the screws inside the organization (their concern throughout the conversation is the number of loose cannons rolling around), not to affect the coverage of the hacking.
This email occurred before even a word of hacking was being spread. They new they had internal leakers. I outright CHALLENGE you to find a single email prior to this where they mention a SUCCESSFUL HACK.
No, you're just faced with the challenge of finding any example of "yes, we got hacked" prior to losing the election, even within their own "hacked" communications.
I don't care about the DNC taking responsibility for being hacked. I'm just saying your notion that the DNC just tried to "pin it on a patsy" is too broad of an allegation. But, then again, nuance doesn't fare well here.
I don't care about the DNC taking responsibility for being hacked.
Because they haven't. Even after they left the door wide open, letting everybody on the planet have access to their democratic database complete with all their SSNs, Addresses, income levels, answers to their political questions... Nope, not a single peep about any kind of responsibility for their TOTAL INCOMPETENCE. They have to now toe the party line of "Russian Haxors!!!", not because it's true, but because it's the only way the democratic party can survive.
I'm just saying your notion that the DNC just tried to "pin it on a patsy" is too broad of an allegation.
Fail again. That's not what I said. I said PODESTA SAID IT, not that the DNC did it. And I PROVED IT. And you don't like it.
But, then again, nuance doesn't fare well here.
What you really mean, is that you can't even win on semantics with this one. Stick your nuance up your ass.
Well, before the election he completely denied that Russia did any hacking. He has since changed his position and is now sticking with it consistently.
nobody's talking about them anymore because they were talked about massively already despite them not warranting that amount of attention? i'd be worried if people WERE still rehashing something that was done by a person who lost the election and will be a historical footnote.
Maybe he is a "republican" because he realized it'd be easier to win the primary against Bush and Cruz than to win the rigged game vs Hillary on the DNC side.
The DNC was probably accessed by every intelligence agency in the world. That's their job and every nation is spying on the others constantly. But it's absolute nonsense to suggest that it was Russia who published the information in order to manipulate the election when all signs point to it being an insider leak
Where are all these signs pointing to an insider leak besides sketchy sources and unsubstantiated theories about Seth Rich? The methods in which the information was hacked show it could have come from anyone and wouldn't necessitate an insider. It's actually more unlikely a staffer could obtain the leaked info without a hack like that.
He said the Russians, our own three-letter agencies, and "other people" could have hacked the DNC, HRC, Weiner, Huma, Podesta, etc. – because they were sloppy and it was too easy. He's also said that he likes Putin and wants to be liked back. It's sweet, actually.
Exactly. The electoral vote went to Trump. This should easily lead people to see that the mainstream media is collaborating together on a massive propagandized storyline with the 'Russian Hacking.'
The problem is that people don't know how to properly research anymore. They don't go to libraries. They don't research history/references/alternate theory. They are plugged into the mainstream social media news sphere via their TV and their smartphones.
People lost the ability to critically think. Hell, half the time I say something I may be wrong, but I'm thinking outside the narrative. That is what people lost. They can't understand fake news because they literally haven't thought of the possibility of it being fake... Like ever. Very new concept for them compared to many of us.
Not sure exactly. I do know that we teach people differently. History used to be regarded as the most important class back in the 50s. Before the 80s, news was just exactly as it happened with no commentary. Families would discuss these topics. Communities would figure out their opinions on them.
We have kids in college who are angry at the system, but don't know exactly who to be angry at, or what exactly about... Because colleges are more concerned with using all of that feeling in class rather than figuring out solutions... Or to protest the same way people did decades ago even though the avenue and environment has changed.
So many examples, but not exactly a point in time when it flipped.
I think it's been progressive ever since the invention of inventions. The more comfortable life may seem, the more people believe it to be true. Like a frog in a pot of water slowly rising in temperature.
That or raising people not to be racist/sexist etc. its a social and interpersonal problem. We all have equality of opportunity, but people are bitching about not having equality of outcome. No governing system can change that, it starts at home and not raising a future ceo or hr manager that wont pay you fair etc.
I don't believe its because we raise them that way. I think its a social construct combining: media/family/culture/location.
We fear what we do not understand. But there have been many studies that prove how easy it is to change these views. There was one about a black man that befriended a KKK member to show the world what tolerance and understanding looks like. Within a couple months they were best friends and he quit the KKK.
You put a bunch of regular people on a stage from all different creeds to talk about topics without a scheduled set of questions made up by the mainstream media... and people will see just how similar they really are.
As someone who recently graduated from a fairly prestigious college. I was so surprised at how dull the learning experience was. Aren't colleges supposed to be the pinnacle of free thought & discussion? Basically take notes, study, take test, graduate with very little deviation.
Sure I have. Loads of them. You have to take the good with the bad though. You can hunt and peck through archives and find lots of amazing stuff; books predicting the cold war (or something like it) written before even Hitler took power; opinion pieces eviscerating the Fed from day one; but that's not really representative of what the media environment was like day to day. Fake news isn't something that sprouted in our lifetime. Ever read a William Randolph Hearst biography? And it's not just people today who are distracted with celebrity nonsense either. After all, Kim Kardashian is only this generation's Peggy Hopkins Joyce. And not every reporter was an H.L. Mencken. or an Edward R. Murrow. And even if they were, it wouldn't mean that the average person wasn't more interested in that day's pro wrestling results.
On top of this lack of ability to critically think, often a distain for a mainstream media outlet like CNN will bolster trust in an alt news source such as Brietbart or worse a commentator like Alex Jones, which is equally as dangerous and in some cases more so. Many people fail to see that no source of opinion should be fully submitted to, but that's what people do, they submit full trust.
I don't think there's been any big push to suggest Russia literally hacked the voting. Just that their hacking damaged the side they wanted to lose, while (possibly) withholding info that could damage Trump/the RNC.
I'm constantly told that I'm being manipulated by CNN. I haven't even owned a TV in 5 years. I don't know anyone under 30 years old (outside media professions) who watches CNN. I mostly just look at Yahoo's front page while at work, and do my own research on whatever controversial stories I see.
In other words, yeah, any Russian influence leading to changes in popular vote by state could have very well changed the results of the electoral college.
My reasoning... is that Hillary won the popular vote. There is no hacking of a system that is still mostly on paper that could account for the timing of just a few million votest the morning after.
What is more likely, that Russia did a magic trick? Or that the DNC is full of shit? Occam's Razor.
Now if you were to say "Russia influenced" the election, that is totally different. And I'm pretty sure every business, whether its a country or a corporation; influences as many elections as possible. Can't even imagine how many metaphorical cans of caviar and Krystal were sent between these rich shit-bags.
This isn't much but my Uber driver the other day was a Russian international student studying at one of the local colleges.
He was very loyal to his country and loved Russia. He kept saying how much better Russia was than US and that Putin was an amazing president. He thought the US made up a bunch of stuff to get the American people mad at Russia again. Though he admitted he didn't doubt Russian intelligence had info on the Americans and the presidential election.
I have been reading a lot of Russian news and watching a lot of Putin speeches/interviews, to try to get a good handle on their POV. I have to admit, I agree with the majority of it and would rather read their Propaganda over ours any day. I also have to admit there is a good possibility they are just more talented at it.
At some point, you start looking at anything opinionated as a form of propaganda, and stop associating the term propaganda with its pejorative meaning.
Really though, it's that I think our propaganda isn't based on the truth. Like how the "rebels" in Syria are moderate and don't have links to AQ. The so called Russian propaganda were the first ones to call out the rebels for being linked to AQ, then our media followed suit after enough people caught on. See what I'm saying? The supposed "Russian propaganda" probably isn't even Russian. I'm not literally saying I love Russian propaganda. This sub would be considered Russian propaganda a lot of the time by our MSM.
I'm glad you can enjoy and believe an openly state run media. I prefer to trust media that comes from a country that doesn't suppress dissenters, regardless of their bias.
Oh I forgot that Fox News and Breitbart, and other "right" wing media got shut down during Obama. And look, left wing media is allowed now as well. Poor us, so oppressed.
My point is that the truth isn't well represented by the right or left wing medias in our countries. I think RT does a much better job for the most part.
Because its controlled by the state? And has only one view point? You don't see why having two sides might give you a better picture than one controlled side? Screw having liberals and conservatives give me their opinion, just tell me what dear leader wants me to know. Pathetic.
Now you're straw manning me. You're acting as if I took the position that state run media is superior to private media. I never said that, I just think RT has been more truthful lately.
My point is that the truth isn't well represented by the right or left wing medias in our countries. I think RT does a much better job for the most part.
When RT reports that the rebels have ties to AQ and aren't moderate, and it takes our media years until they decide that is true and decide to quit lying, you spawn my kind of response. Everything is propaganda, everyone has an agenda, and I think Russia has been more truthful lately.
YOu'd be better off informing a new mind and engaging a new mind in actual debate (these happens sometimes albeit rare these days) than argue with a shill purposely missing the point though :)
you're wrong about almost everything, and you're a walking demonstration of how the Russians could influence the American election without hacking ANYTHING, because they already have you reading their propaganda and thinking it's TRUTHFUL.
No I'm not wrong dude. I'm talking about the large segment of our press that just parroted Obama and praised his policy the whole time. I realize there was the odd reporting about ISIS and extremist rebels. The problem was it was glossed over and not part of the commonly promoted narrative.
You're 100% wrong. I've known about the complex relationships between the various factions in Syria since 2012, and that's from American "MSM," not RT. if you think the USA Today/CNN dumbed-down-for-the-masses style of reporting is representative of the entirety of the American free press, I guess I could see where you're coming from. otherwise, you're just wrong.
Complex relationships between the numerous warring factions in Syria and the governments that back each. These include Assad's government, "moderate" rebels, ISIS, the Kurds, and even other extremists that aren't aligned necessarily aligned with ISIS.
most people on this sub refer to the American press in general as "MSM." if you disagree with that characterization, good on you. I don't watch CNN or read USA Today, but I do read the WSJ/NYT/WaPo and numerous other online and print publications.
I just showed you an article from WaPo directly conflicting with your claim that only RT was reporting on the connections between the rebels and ISIS. I can find articles from the other sources I mentioned, as well, but I have a feeling that I could find 100 articles and you'd still claim they weren't the "narrative."
Those articles did exist but then why the simultaneous support for Obama's policy on WaPo? I just read the article by the way, I swear nobody wanted to realize that they weren't worthy of being armed when they needed to. It wasn't the narrative being promoted by CNN and all the big guys. Even WaPo kids were all about arming the moderate rebels and taking out Assad. Bro, I'm right here. Our media sucked ass. It would have been better, gasp, if we all just read RT on that issue.
The "big guys"? WaPo is the biggest guy, along with NYT. and you're reading these articles as being in FAVOR of something. WaPo is reporting on what happened here, not being "all about" it. if you can't tell the difference between op-eds and news, I don't know what to tell you.
I said why the simultaneous support for Obama's arming of rebels if they are going to run that kind of article detailing the problems with that kind of a policy? Other dishonest media overshadowing that particular piece. It wasn't the narrative of moderate rebels that was touted the majority of the time, you and 3 other people getting informed by that article and remembering it doesn't shape the general consensus.
You're just saying what you think the narrative was, but you're wrong, and your opinion on the narrative is clearly flawed since you are also a person who gets your news from RT.
Prove that I am wrong then lol. Explain the blasphemous articles about how arming the moderates will be great. Why did kids still believe that shit even in 2016? Like, I know a guy who would have advocated giving rebels even more guns in 2016, when it's pretty much all Islamists at that point.
Again, you're saying "articles," but you're clearly talking about op-eds if they were saying anything "would be great." and it's weird as fuck that you keep referring to people as "kids"
article, op-ed, potato, tomato, whatever dude. Way to not explain or prove me wrong at all. I am weird as fuck that's why I call the little chillins who believe CNN kids.
I mean, this right here makes it clear why you think RT is truthful. articles about what is happening in Syria and op-eds that argue for a specific course of action in Syria are very different. if you don't know the difference, no wonder you have such a problem determining what's truthful.
I was referring to both, and I meant both. I just use the term as a catch all for anything published on a news page. Now explain it and prove me wrong. Your bloviating means nothing sir. You will never win lol.
Yeah I was wrong on one point but not really overall. Nobody can explain the question of why people were buying into the idea that we should arm the rebels. It was the poor op-eds I suppose, it was clear given the reported information that it was a risky proposal. RT made it simple as hell to see that, straight from the beginning, so I still give them props. They never ran some glowing op-ed about how we need to help the moderates win the war, they always questioned the veracity of the claim that there were any moderates to support at all. Much better IMO. At least I learned something from all this muck.
I can only assume that you believe the Russians did not attempt to influence the American election, and because RT says the same, you believe RT to be "more truthful."
But when you assume you make an ass of you and I. Apparently even Trump agrees with the intelligence he was briefed about Russia probably being the hackers so why wouldn't I? I'm still not sure and neither are our intelligence agencies. I never read much RT to be completely honest lol.
Pretty funny how the upvotes are going in this conversation. As if r/conspiracy thinks that Fox vs CNN aren't both propaganda outlets pumping out bullshit on both sides to create a false sense of opposition, a false choice. Folks, Fox, CNN, NPR, MSNBC, etc. are all US propaganda, just as much as RT is for Russia.
Your point is clear: You and your upvoters are dupes who believe "dissenting opinions" aren't propaganda that exists to limit discourse to what TPTB deems acceptable. If they didn't maintain this illusion, you and many other Americans would feel all media is too one-sided. The truth is it already is and has been for a long time.
Thanks for cracking the code for me, I was definitely a sheep who only watched CNN. Luckily this subreddit is filled with these woke people who'll change the world because what they believe is the absolute truth, couldn't be any other way.
If dissenting opinions were actually tolerated here, as you believe, we wouldn't have all this "fake news" bullshit. Which outlet is more honest, the Kremlin that tells you "here's the only news you need" or the US "here, you have 2 different opinions (that we approve of), isn't freedom wonderful? Just ignore that 3rd outlet, they're fake!". It's totally understandable why someone would feel the former is less shady.
Key word ignore it. YOU can still look at it. It is not banned. The only fake news that will lose add revenue is the actual fake, bot run sites. Neither one of those is honest. The way you guys fold for some authoritarian news system is horrifying, but I have faith you are a tiny minority.
It goes nowhere because all you do is make shit up and assume bullshit in every one of your replies:
I called you a sheep who only watches CNN? wtf?
People in this sub believe the absolute truth, couldn't be any other way - wtf? people are sifting through info trying to find truth, but nobody makes this claim
-Info is banned in Russia, and not here. Riiiight.
-"The way you guys fold" "You are a tiny minority" - you're just pinning bullshit on people without any reasons or info as to our (or my) actual beliefs.
You're so far out of your mind you have to make up some stories in your head to fit your own narrative instead of just taking things at face value. Try not being so full of shit sometime, you might get something out of these threads.
I believe a minority of people such as yourself think openly state run media is more open. I think it is folding to them to just accept that as the greater "truth."
Except, I didn't say that AT ALL. I'm saying they're equally as bad, equally as closed, the US just does a better job disguising it because suckers like you keep falling for it. Believing such idiocy like "oh there's 2 sides, the truth must be in the middle somewhere."
RT is garbage. people who say RT is "better" than anything instantly lose all credibility. it's absurd to me that a person who considers him/herself a skeptic would turn around and claim that a state-run media outlet is better than a free press.
State-run and well run are not mutually exclusive things. That's just the way it's played out for issues I ever read RT about, like Syria back in 2014.
they should be for anybody who fancies himself a skeptic. RT in english exists for one reason, and it's to present "news" to western readers/viewers in a way that pushes the Russian government's goals.
So you're point is that I should just doubt RT simply because it's state run, and I should never be able to overcome that doubt by corroborating and validating their claims and evidence, because I am a true skeptic.
One of the Russian government's goals is to have a media that appears valid to the rest of the world, so they are playing a long game in which they cannot lie or spin facts much, and it showed in their coverage of American policy regarding the Syrian civil war. You have CNN and others clinging to the moderate rebel myth when the main fighting force has been ISIS for a while. Even Jon Kerry admits that the US wanted to help Daesh overthrow Assad even if it meant a Daesh government. That's not the narrative promoted in the mainstream media sir.
But there spin wouldn't have us arming groups that end up surrendering to/joining ISIS. Therefore I give them a thumbs up. I like their propaganda more... my original statement. Full circle up in this bitch.
It is not "bad," per se. I appreciate it for what it is. I understand why it exists and I don't fault the Russians for doing what they've been so good at doing for basically a century now. That said, I would never get my news from RT.
Here I have linked to a wide variety of sources, all with different agendas within the American media and different levels of credibility depending on your point of view. Take your pick, or have more if you desire.
First link is dumb, they said it was probably just a glitch. Second link, whatever, it's kind of funny, I didn't know RT was so new. I like that they yelled at Glenn Beck because he's a fag.
Putin is a very intelligent Man and I AGREE with much of what he and his Media says. However, I am not stupid enough to BELIEVE it all. Both sides are using Propaganda to paint and undermine the other.
HIS MEDIA should be a red flag, but you do you buddy. Can't believe a person on conspiracy would say that about any state run media but I think I know where you migrated from.
Some of our media does. Some of our media has been going against him. The point being at least our country doesn't shut down news. If we were Russia there would be no Fox News or Breitbart, or right ring bloggers with a dem in change.
I agree with you to some degree, but assuming that all journalist that die is Russia is because of Putin is similar to assuming Andrew Breitbart was murdered because he was attempting to expose Pedoesta or believing in the Clinton body count.
I'm not even talking about conspiracy assassinations. Media critical of the current regime over there is suppressed. Hell, even every day Russians have to be careful about being openly critical. If you value that, whatever. But don't turn our country in to that.
Ok, well I think we got a little off subject here. I was discussing what each side is saying in regards to the other - in what looks to be a buildup to war, informational or otherwise. Obama and US IC keep provoking by saying that Russia rigged the election (without evidence) and is going to pay. Russia keeps saying "no we did not" and we do not want war.
I place more trust in the dozen or more intelligence agencies than Russia. Why would they ever admit to it if they did it? Again, I don't know why people think Russia is some bastion of truth. They should pick up a history book.
It's not going to lead to war. Neither side has anything to gain and they both know that.
False. The Military Industrial complex has everything to gain, as does the Global Power structure by crippling the last 2 remaining white nationalist powers. If the goal of Globalism is a centralized worldwide Power/Bank, a ruling class, population control, etc., then a war between Russia and the US makes perfect sense. I think you are being a bit naive, especially here, where you know we like to discuss Conspiracies.
How much money did Trump accept from Wallstreet and Energy companies? Find that out and than look at how much Hillary accepted. Trump is not owned, but he is smart enough to know that he still needs a few foxes.
We don't know, he releases nothing about his financial information. Who does he owe money to? Why doesn't he disclose anything? Why can't he remove himself from his corporation? Why does he say he has nothing with Russia yet has on air taped interviews saying he does, and his own son saying a significant portion of their business is located there?
I would be worried, but since younger generations are overwhelmingly liberal and white nationalism isn't returning, I'm not. He'll get impeached within 4, or continue on as the president with the lowest initial approval ratings since the 80's, and one that less than 28% of the voting age people voted for, and someone else will step in. I'm not sorry your dream is a fantasy.
Ok buddy. Stay in your safe zone of thought if that makes you feel better. r/politics is a great place for that: complete censored Propaganda. In case you are not aware a mass awakening has been taking place Worldwide. The establishment is crumbling and if Trump is at all successful liberalism will completely die. Liberalism used to be a good thing: free thought, education, social equality and anti-establishment but somewhere along the line it just turned into the opposite: a fascist disease.
I don't know why you think I have a safe space, what I said is an actual fact. I don't see any mass awakening taking place, and I really don't see these large numbers of white nationalists you would need. I don't see any evidence of it dying, I see a hiccup. You can simply look at the numbers.
Dude, are you seriously trying to turn this discussion into racist thing? I mentioned "white Nationalist" because it is a fact that Russia and US are still "white Nationalist" Countries. Countries where the majority of the population is still white and Patriotic. Countries that the failing Globalists would love more than anything to take both the "white" and the "nationalism" out of, which a war would between the 2 would do. How can you say Hiccup after Brexit, Trump winning, and populist movements in much of the rest of Europe pushing to leave the EU as well? Rightfully so, Countries should not be controlled by outside Bureaucratic interests and should protect their cultures and economies. Maybe we have a different idea of what 'liberalism' currently is. Hopefully, we can both agree that it has lost it's identity somewhere along the line.
No, I'm saying the extreme forms of liberalism that people love to hate are in all parties, such as the neonazis on the far right. Yes, a man was elected where less than 25% of all possible voters cast a ballot for him. Less people voted for him than the other horrible candidate, and his approval is historically low. I don't believe the new movements will lead anywhere, and I do not see any evidence of liberalism dying, unless you simply mean the most extreme far left fringe of it.
Which IMO was absolutely incredible after over a year of relentless lies and attacks by MSM, along with every other major establishment trying to stop him. Truly a movement of the people. Free thinkers, who saw through all the lies.
Komsomolskaya Pravda – mass circulation, left-leaning daily
Trud – left-leaning daily
Argumenty i Fakty – popular weekly anti Putin
Kommersant – daily, news and business-orientated
Moskovskij Komsomolets – popular daily
Nezavisimaya Gazeta – pro-opposition privately owned daily
Novaya Gazeta – daily, known for its investigative journalism anti Putin slant
Vedomosti – daily financial and analytical newspaper
RBC Daily – daily financial and analytical newspaper
The New Times – weekly independent newspaper
Expert - weekly business magazine contains anti Putin OpEds
Russian reporter - weekly sociopolitical magazine
Ogonyok - socio-political and literary illustrated weekly magazine
Tekhnika Molodezhi - monthly popular science and literary magazine
Literaturnaya Gazeta - weekly literary and socio-political sometimes anti Putin slant mostly neutral
Zhizn - weekly tabloid covers anti Putin claims corruption so on
This list is from the Press Freedoms website. They list countries by the levels of press freedoms within them.
The main reason Russia is listed low on the press freedoms table is that the Chechens murder investigative reporters and others for exposing corruption, such as the fact Russia has had to pay off the Chechens to avoid another war.
If we were Russia there would be no Fox News or Breitbart,
(That moment when companies are getting support from government officials to claim certain websites are fake news, and that now those websites are in the process of having ads removed from their sites - while MSM that promotes bullshit news suffers no penalty because it fits the narrative, even if it is bullshit)
Your country definitely does shut down news. All American media is owned by 6 corporations. 2 of those corporations are majority owned by one family (see the Redstones) The other 4 are majority owned by old wealthy families and financial interests.
While Putin's media is tailored to his liking, there's a good chance his interests lie in the betterment of his country and it's people. American media has no allegiance other than to absurdly wealthy family and friends of it's owners, their interests are specifically against you, the common man. They abhor you and seek only to deceive you so you don't realize they are conglomerating the entire world to establish a NWO.
Oh look. Among the hordes of "left wing" redditors who jump at the "russian hacking", "intervention", etc, we got a skeptical one who asks us to be skeptical of all propaganda.
/r/conspiracy is currently one of the most pro-government subreddits. I mean, if you compare /r/politics and /r/conspiracy today with one year ago, it's almost like they swapped content.
Living in a country where Russia threatens our capitol with nuclear bomb run training several times a year, who've seen a Russian band imprisoned for months for critizing Putin and a political opposition thrown to jail, it's frankly scary to watch Americans democratically decide to end democracy.
they are just more talented at it then our Government/Media currently is.
They can do it more directly. In this country you basically have to buy people out, make sure everyone in the staff serves the party line. Plus, the Russkis assassinate journalists more often.
What do you think about Ukraine? Did Russia promote propaganda in the east and get the people to revolt or did the people do it of their own accord because they didn't like the Euromaidan movement and the new president?
Did the new president and party target the people in eastern Ukraine before they seceded? Did they call them treasonous, say they would go after them, before Russia intervened and they seceded?
Do you think Russia should have intervened the way they did? They forced the parliament to hold a referendum about seceding, should they have let it happen organically? Would it have happened at all otherwise? What would have happened to the separatists if Russia never intervened?
What do you think about Ukraine? Did Russia promote propaganda in the east and get the people to revolt or did the people do it of their own accord because they didn't like the Euromaidan movement and the new president?
I think it was a little of both. The new president was a very shady individual. According to some sources, once he became president his net worth grew 10 fold. There was also this event. Pay particular attention to Trade Unions House fire. While unclear who was the real culprit, the interesting thing that there was no investigation and nobody was found guilty of it. Surely torching people alive, no matter which side of the barricades they are on, should warrant at least an investigation and people should be held accountable. There were also a number of laws such as this one. ctrl+f for "domestic separatism". This is highly unconstitutional, even by Russian standards.
Basically, the new government was a pile of shit. Not only were they not loyal to Russia (which is what our higher-ups care about), they are horrible towards own people.
Did the new president and party target the people in eastern Ukraine before they seceded? Did they call them treasonous, say they would go after them, before Russia intervened and they seceded?
I'm not sure I have any valid info on this one, but my previous point should partly illustrate it.
Do you think Russia should have intervened the way they did? They forced the parliament to hold a referendum about seceding, should they have let it happen organically? Would it have happened at all otherwise? What would have happened to the separatists if Russia never intervened?
I kinda think that it was the right move, however hypocritical it may be. The new government was illegally installed there (external funding was rather obvious). We always considered Ukrainians our brothers, a lot of people still have relatives there. It's a real shame what state disinformation does to gullible people. After the whole thing, real brothers from Ukraine and Russia were ready to jump at each other (was a witness of this myself, through friends). So the intervention was a) to protect our geopolitical interests (e.g. don't let Ukraine be a NATO country so that US wouldn't put their bases that close to the border) and b) to actually do something about unlawful government that was trying to force the country to assimilate into the West, which would never ever happen, but they for some reason couldn't see it. I don't have all the information about Ukraine, as it is very hard to actually find reputable sources, since we're so close to the issue and are very biased.
DISCLAIMER I might also be very biased towards my own country, but that's the vision quite a few people share. So take everything with a pinch of salt
That link about domestic separatism really confirms my suspicions that Kiev was targeting the separatists unfairly. It sucks to hear that the propaganda wars tore families and friendships apart. Sounds about right to me, you echoed a lot of the same opinions I've heard before. Thank you for your response!
Check (this)[https://www.rt.com/shows/sophieco/ukraine-revolution-usa-support-246/]. RT is obviously biased, but you could try to dig up some more info yourself in more neutral sources. I'm certain something would pop up. However, I can't be sure myself that it's all 100% legit to blindly trust it. Just kind of a thing you should keep in mind as a very likely possibility, especially considering that US intelligence has being doing similar stuff since forever (those claims are backed up by proper sources).
I'm not paranoid about RT being a source. They have proven to be good lately IMO.
So the US spawned the revolution to try and get Ukraine into the EU and NATO. It's all very intuitive when you consider the warpath we were on. If Hillary had been elected, we might already have been at war with you guys over stupid hacks.
This still remains a possibility, actually. Even though Trump seems to favour Russia, his seat is not so secure. He might still be impeached and then Hillary would assume office, which would mean a lot of bad, cause she's as crooked as it gets. Let's not get our hopes up just yet.
If he is impeached or assassinated, Mike Pence will be the next in line. I don't think he would stray too far from Donald's positions out of respect, but I suppose there is a small chance he would start listening to the likes of McCain and Fiorina and we could still end up at war. I highly doubt that will happen, but maybe this is the calm before the storm, you're right.
Thing is that it doesn't matter what a certain politician believes, because it depends on the funding. Politicians are just a face most of the time. But I won't go too deep into that, I'm not informed enough to have a firm opinion on this topic.
Impeached for what? Are there murmurs about some impeachable offense? Also, Hillary wouldn't assume office, Pence would. Though who knows where he would land on the issue.
I'm not old enough to have witnessed Yeltsin's rule, so I can't really say, but judging by the state of the country after he left office, Putin has done way better. Yeltsin basically privatized the entire country for the fractions of what it was really worth, which led to a disastrous economy. On the flip side, Putin really wants to bring back the former glory of USSR and make Russia a world superpower once again (making it great again, you see). It might be a dangerous path, but it's hard to imagine Russia not striving for that. I think it's in our blood by this point.
How are Russian citizens responding to US troops landing in Poland?
As an American, I am outraged that they are doing this - it looks really bad, and this is happening while our media continues to say that Russians are the aggressors.
Thanks for answering questions! Really interested to get some real discussion outside of the media.
I've been too busy these couple of days to actually know what people think of such a recent event, but it just reinforces the "us vs them" mentality that we've got here. Basically a large chunk of people believe that everything that's bad in the country is because US is always plotting against us. It's actually makes some sense, because the sanctions (not the sanctions themselves, but counter-sanctions on import of certain goods like good cheese) makes everybody's life much harder. Economy deteriorates, the budget pillow (government savings) is practically gone, so shit's about to get down for real for us. I live in the capital atm and it's kinda alright here, but remote regions suffered quite a lot.
Despite the pessimism, Russia won't break like that. In the end, we, like a phoenix, will rise from the ashes new and strong nation.
Jokes aside, the country has been forced to change. The power elite is in motion. So hopefully, the change will result in better and more balanced economy and higher standard of living for all of us.
Sorry for getting off-topic, but I think I've answered your question
I have have a question if you would be so kind. To you guys, does it seem like Russia is gearing up for a war with the US? Is the "us vs them" mentality towards the US government or does it include the general population (to the average person, not just you). I guess that's two questions, hope I'm not asking too much.
I don't think we straight up gearing up for war. Everybody understands that there's a different war going on, the war on information that is. We're generally pretty chill and peaceful people, minding our own business. I think the general mood is more like struggle with day to day stuff. Nobody wants war, nobody needs it. Unlike US, our GDP isn't that dependant on selling weapons and fueling wars to no end, so it's not in our interest to engage in any sort of conflict. Syria was a way to get rid of a lot of old ammo for rifles, cannons, planes etc. Not the main purpose, of course, but also worth mentioning.
For your second question it's definitely against the government. If you were to come to Russia, nobody would do anything to you. People are people everywhere, so the decent folk realise that. We're all getting screwed by the system. Some are more, some are less. But deep inside we're not evil. So if you try to show interest in our culture, our language, you'll notice that people would be very open to you, regardless of your nationality. Hope that answers your questions.
One thing that really blew me away about Russia is that their national debt is only $150 billion. Even after the Cold War and the sanctions, they're definitely doing something right.
Even Russians don't live close to other Russians, their country is fucking huge. But yeah I imagine the political views of people living in the countries adjacent to Russia like Belarus or Ukraine have a very different view of Russia than the average Russian does.
I have a neighbor who is Russian, has been here 12 years. She says that Putin is a lunatic and needs to disappear, but is also extremely pro-Trump. In her words, "America has had enough of these pussies!"
I hate both Donald Trump and Putin. They are both idiots, and are full of greed and corruption. Putin has such deep ties with the oil industry, it's no wonder Donald Trump put the CEO of Exxon as secretary of state. It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
Also, I'm glad Clinton lost, but I really would have liked to have seen Bernie Sanders won instead.
Get real. They are people just like us. They are divided just like us. I side with Putin and Farage and Trump. The Nation state is everything. Sovereignty is everything.
Nothing related to hacking or US elections, but just a little observation.
My mother is Russian, my father is Lithuanian. I was born and raised in Lithuania, but spent the last 12 years living in London, UK. I tend watch Lithuanian news most of the days just to stay up-to-date on current events and I have noticed that over the past six months or so the amount of fear mongering about Russia has been ridiculous.
Every single day there's a story about Russia planning to invade the Baltics, story about how Russia fucks with freedom in the US, story about how we should invest millions into defence to arms ourselves against Russians.
There's a mass hysteria in the state that is fuelled by mainstream media. Head over to /r/lithuania and you will see that there's thread after thread about upcoming Russian invasion and how we should all be ready.
The thing is, for a small country like Lithuanian, there are far greater and more important social and economic issues that actually matter, but media is diverting everyone's focus on some perceived threat of Russians.
Peasant party won, but they didn't get the majority, therefore a coalition had to be formed and using your own words all parties are in bed together.
At the first glance they do seem a bit different and more progressive, but once again coming back to the whole rhetoric related to Russia, some of their policies are just ridiculous and very nationalistic.
For example to promote nationalism each year the government wants to gift schoolchildren a folk costume. Such policy would cost the government tens of millions of euros per year. Thing is, in years time the costumes will be outgrown and the whole exercise will be rendered useless. Think about it. When you was 14 did you really give a shit about wearing folk costumes?
Another example is the reintroduction of mandatory military service (conscription). All young males, after high school, will have to serve the country for 9 months. Now, I'm not a pacifist and do value military, the fact is that there's no fucking need for this. Once again, millions of euros will be wasted on something that has no positive net effect for the economy. Germany, US, Russia and the rest of the states that have powerful military forces have developed economies where the military industrial complex creates jobs, exports and brings in tax revenue. For a tiny Baltic state shit like this is useless and the whole rhetoric behind this reintroduction of military conscription is that we need to be ready in case Russians will attack.
The country is literally dying. Young, educated men and women are flocking to Western Europe, States or Australia. SMEs that create most of the jobs in the economy are being raped by bureaucratic and archaic tax system.
Who am I to say this, but in my eyes this whole anti-Russian rhetoric in Western MSM distracts the majority from issues that really matter. We should be focusing on education, on the young, on creating jobs and empowering individuals that do so. We shouldn't be blowing millions of euros on nationalism and some perceived threats.
I can't imagine why it wouldn't be considered an act of heroism on Russia's part if they had been the ones to let us all know just how disgusting these people are.
Can't read the rest because they all lay out the reasons why RT is a propaganda machine. The first link was simply a notable thing that happened involving RT.
I have an old Marine buddy that moved to Russia about 3 years back to help take care of his wife's mother. I talk to him about this a lot. He basically says Russians think we are all mindless idiots that don't think for ourselves. We just wait for legacy media to make up our minds for us. All of the Russia slamming our govt and legacy media are spewing is just laughable. At the same time, they are nervous because war is not fun for anyone.
At some point, you start looking at anything opinionated as a form of propaganda, and stop associating the term propaganda with its pejorative meaning.
Putin is a very intelligent Man and I AGREE with much of what he and his Media says. However, I am not stupid enough to BELIEVE it all. Both sides are using Propaganda to paint and undermine the other.
No I'm not wrong dude. I'm talking about the large segment of our press that just parroted Obama and praised his policy the whole time. I realize there was the odd reporting about ISIS and extremist rebels. The problem was it was glossed over and not part of the commonly promoted narrative.
I mean, this right here makes it clear why you think RT is truthful. articles about what is happening in Syria and op-eds that argue for a specific course of action in Syria are very different. if you don't know the difference, no wonder you have such a problem determining what's truthful.
I'm definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real basis for it.
That is a little real politik for my tastes, but it's not quite "punish a patsy". He's saying the bar of evidence he'll need to consider someone disloyal is low.
272 comments
n/a brimstone18 2017-01-13
I would also like to know this.. Actually I think about this a lot.
n/a russian321 2017-01-13
Putin is evil, Trump is evil, Clinton is evil, god damn they are all FUCKING EVIL
n/a NoahWebstersGhost 2017-01-13
Welcome to the Evil Party, where we insist on you paying for everything all the time, every time.
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
WRONG. YOU HAVE UNWITTINGLY BECOME A PART OF THE NWO CONTROL. YOU HAVE SIGNED A DEAL WITH EVIL YOURSELF. THE SOVEREIGN STATE IS ALL THAT MATTERS. WE MUST FIGHT THE GLOBALIST AGENDA. WE ARE WINNING THAT FIGHT. FARAGE, BREXIT, TRUMP, LE PEN AND MORE. NEXT WE MUST FIGHT CULTURAL MARXISM. TRANSGENER IS A MENTAL HEALTH DISORDER AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH. THE FAMILY SHOULD BE PROTECTED. WESTERN CHRISTIAN VALUES MUST BE PROTECTED. PEDOPHILIA CAN NOT BE NORMALIZED MUCH LESS INSTITUTIONALIZED. DONALD J TRUMP IS A HERO, A PATRIOT, HE IS A BRAVE MAN WHO RISKED HIS LIFE FOR THE PEOPLE OF THIS WORLD. PUTIN, TRUMP, FARAGE, LE PEN AND MANY MORE ARE RISKING THEIR LIVES AND REPUTATIONS FIGHTING THE NWO AND THEIR CULTURAL CONTROL MACHINE. HOW CAN YOU SAY FIGHTING FOR SOVEREIGNTY IS A BAD THING?! WE HAVE 8 YEARS TO TURN THIS WORLD AROUND AND RETURN POWER TO NATION STATES. JOIN ME. DON'T UNWITTINGLY FIGHT FOR THE NWO. BREAK THE PROPOGANDA CONTROL.
n/a TheRealJasonsson 2017-01-13
It's okay grandpa, Susan should be back with your meds any minute now
n/a floridalegend 2017-01-13
Lol, capslock means your PASSIONATE!
n/a dlandis13 2017-01-13
LOUD NOISES!!! I LOVE LAMP
n/a TheRealJasonsson 2017-01-13
NO SLEEP TILL HIPPO
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
Dank memes. Me_irl. Lol lizards!
n/a TheRealJasonsson 2017-01-13
My profile? Dig away. I encourage it. And a side note, all content of the comment aside, having a wall of text all in caps just makes your comment obnoxious and annoying to read.
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
Its purposely obnoxious. Im not digging through youe profile i just ran it through reddit investigator and as predicted you have no conspiracy history all /r/politics history.
n/a ChewSoap2016 2017-01-13
Eww gross.
n/a ImAHedgehog812 2017-01-13
Is this for real or parady?
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
Its real friendo.
n/a Ieuan1996 2017-01-13
Trump, Le Pen, Farage etc are just as much puppets of the NWO as are Obama, Clinton, Merkel etc. They're just a little bit lower down the ladder from Soros, the Rockefellers, and Rothschilds. They're two sides of the same coin. Their aim is to get you to hate those who vote for the "other guy", whatever side you think you're on, instead of them. But really they are all the enemy, and we, the regular people, are all on the same side. I don't blame you for falling victim to this trap because I feel victim to it to. Billions of people fell victim to it. But it's not or fault, so I forgive you as I forgave myself. We need to unite against them, not wage a phony war between ourselves.
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
Yes we need to unite against them by protecting the sovereign nation state.
n/a Ieuan1996 2017-01-13
If you truly believe trump is on your side, then please at least stay skeptical. The 100% faith and loyalty to a particular person or party is what got the world into this mess in the first place. Don't fall victim to it yet again. If he's legit, then a healthy dose of skepticism will help with transparency and boost his credibility. But if he's not then skepticism will bring that to light. Just think how you would feel if after all the time and effort you put into supporting him he turns heel and fucks you in the arse just like all the politicians before him have. It would be emotionally devastating. Blind faith is dangerous. Just don't put all your eggs in one basket.
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
I have no blind faith. I don't regret supporting Obama.
n/a Horus_Krishna_5 2017-01-13
wait what? I voted Obama in 08, regret it. well not that it mattered much but I did do it.
n/a Ieuan1996 2017-01-13
Don't regret your actions. Regret that he wasn't who he said he was if you're to regret anything. You fell victim to believing the lie that he was who he said he was, and that's not your fault. If you'd had voted any other way you would not be the you that you are right now, today. Every action you've ever made was necessary to get you to right here, right now. To get to you writing your comment , and me writing this reply. Do you regret being here now, knowing what you know, and thinking how you think? The past is the past, unchangeable, helpless and needless to regret. It doesn't help you or anyone else to regret it. It only holds you back. Accept that it happened, learn from it, and use it as a tool - a stepping stone - to get you to your next destination. Use it to plan your future. We can always reflect on our past actions and always find something new among them by utilising what we know now and thus gain new perspectives. Combine a bit of knowledge from now with a bit of information from the past and voila! You made some wisdom! Our minds are creation machines! Don't chain them down with regrets. Let them thrive in boundless openness. An open mind is a learning mind.
n/a ruleten 2017-01-13
he typed it in caps it must be true!
n/a User_Name13 2017-01-13
Removed, violation of rule 6 of /r/conspiracy.
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
Fair enough
n/a know_comment 2017-01-13
are you in Russia?
How much censorship is there that you notice day to day? Is it like in the US where critical opinions are just shouted down, or are you actively censored like in the UK where you can be arrested for saying certain things on social media?
n/a russian321 2017-01-13
The government blocks sites left and right... I basically had to leave the country to install a VPN on my laptop. They said the censorship is for blocking porn and drugs, but most of it is just things that don't align with the government. And most people here don't really care, or just don't talk about it
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
Bullshit. You are fucking /r/theredpill user. Everything you have ever posted is anti trump bullshit. I don't think you're a Russian at all.
n/a russian321 2017-01-13
You're right, I'm just a Nigerian Prince and I need you to do a favor for me. You can make 1 million dollars, but you need to pay a 285 dollar fee first.
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
Explain this comment then.
n/a russian321 2017-01-13
Lol. Are you serious? It was a joke. I was just making fun of OP in that comment. I forgot to add the /s.
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
Hahahaha ok bud.
n/a russian321 2017-01-13
So you're not going to check? Just do it. I can guarantee you won't find a post at a time during which I should be sleeping in Russia. Just do it. Check Every. Fucking. Post.
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
I don't need to. Snoopsnoo did it for me. Your only activity is during US daylight hours.
n/a russian321 2017-01-13
Seriously? Okay, whatever.. you fucking caught me! /s
n/a russian321 2017-01-13
I'm about to go to bed now... Which reminds me, If you look at every post and comment, look at the time stamp and you'll see that I'm in a Russian timezone. There's your proof.
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
Russian time zone you say? Sleep good sweet prince.
n/a russian321 2017-01-13
?
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
What time zone do you claim to be in, what time is it where you're from?
n/a russian321 2017-01-13
You know there are eleven time zones in Russia right? Right now it's 1:09 am. And I really want to sleep now so I'll probably respond to you when I wake up
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
Yeah I realize that, that's why I asked which timezone you were in bud.
n/a Horus_Krishna_5 2017-01-13
sometimes I post at 1 am eastern standard time I guess that means I'm russian
n/a ruleten 2017-01-13
that's not how proof works
n/a jojo2108 2017-01-13
what does it matter that he posts on theredpill?
n/a Horus_Krishna_5 2017-01-13
redpill makes him look trustworthy. but usually red pillers admire trump for being successful but realize he's out for himself. like they are as well.
n/a know_comment 2017-01-13
that's how it always works. but yeah- from this side it looks like you just live in a more overt kleptocracy/ oligarchy than over here. Which I what makes me wonder why it seems our foreign policy goals are to push you even closer to China...
n/a mrcassette 2017-01-13
It's the same thing that's coming in slowly in the UK too now...
n/a fuufnfr 2017-01-13
And how do you and others Russians feel about Putin? Are opinions as strongly divided as they are in the West?
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
Putin is the least of evils that we could have. Putin does have large popular support, he's done a lot of great things for the country, especially considering how bad of a state it was in when he assumed office. He is corrupt, no doubt about it, however that's the only way the country functions. You can't root out corruption just yet, it has to be a slow process, which is currently underway. The rest of world is corrupt as well, but it's more concentrated on top, as this and many other subs indicate. Our corruption is also in the middle, where middle men make money on bureaucracy, because sometimes when you want stuff done quick (doesn't have to be illegal), you pay extra.
You can see some Russians accusing Putin of heinous crimes and generally opposing him. I can't blame them, since they are right. But he's the necessary evil. He has authority, he has respect from those who matter. I'm certain that once he's gone (election in 2018 would be his last term most likely), the country will go to shit, unless he has some plans in place. This year would be very important for us, because there are major shifts in the elite atm. We'll see how it goes
n/a DrDarkMD 2017-01-13
Can he and Medvedev not do another role swap and then swap back again in another 4 years?
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
Medvedev has fallen out of favour completely. Recently, one of deputy ministers close to Medvedev had been arrested for allegedly taking a bribe from Rosneft to make a favourable decision regarding the acquisition of Bashneft (large but not the largest oil company in Russia). Interesting fact: he's been arrested and detained for 6 hours without any legitimate reason, then after such reason appeared, he was trialed and everything. He was not jailed, just got home confinement. The whole thing was possibly just a scare act to show who's the boss. So this particular strategy won't work this time. There's pretty much a consensus among politologists that this is going to be Putin's last term, and I'm not qualified enough to doubt them.
n/a DrDarkMD 2017-01-13
Fascinating stuff, I really wonder who his successor could be. Thanks for the reply.
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
We wonder that ourselves :)
n/a RaresHero 2017-01-13
In Russia the term of the president is 6 years long as far as I know
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
What kind of politician will Russia choose in their next election? A right wing nationalist hawk? Or do you think they won't go with a hawkish pick, and pick someone more reserved like Putin again?
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
it's all very much unclear at this point. I'm sure there are multiple candidates from different areas of the state like, so whichever group gets ahead in terms of influence, a candidate from that group would lead the country. Just so you understand, the Russian State isn't singular - there are multiple power groups that are in constant motion and there is competition among them to gain as much reach over Russian assets (companies mainly) and power. So whichever group prevails would most likely result in a successor.
I'm might be wrong, though, not really an expert in all those political moves and stuff, only recently started exploring this area. Take with a pinch of salt
n/a fuufnfr 2017-01-13
Thanks for the insights.
Well, at least Putin seems to have a very strong commitment to Russia and is very "Russia first". In the States we've got nothing but leaders who seem to always put " Mr Global" first and screw America.
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
It's like Russia first, but also my mates are firster. Don't forget that :)
Should you have any other questions, fire away
n/a russian321 2017-01-13
I hate Putin. He has very deep ties with the oil industry, which is probably why Trump chose the CEO of Exxon to be the secretary of state.
n/a Horus_Krishna_5 2017-01-13
oil = money = power
n/a DrMarunkiePhD 2017-01-13
Professor Filip Kovacovic does a segment on Russian newspapers over on Newsbud that gives a good feel for the Russian media and therefore what the average person believes:
Russian Newspaper Monitor
n/a Ninjakick666 2017-01-13
This is a very good topic... I always had a bad case of the Red Scare for most of my life... until one day I started expressing how dangerous and powerful and bloodthirsty Russia was in a large chatroom... several people from around the globe corrected me... Russian speaking up about how it was miserable there for a lot of people... in no small part due to the misconception that they are some sleeping giant. It seemed honest and heartfelt... and made me rethink my beliefs and dig deeper. This was years ago... it is possible the room was infiltrated with communist disinfo agents... but I had a good long conversation with some english speaking russians and people who had visited. I came out if it feeling sorry for Russia more than being scared.
My story is entirely anecdotal, but your approach is good... This probably isn't the time or place for it... though. But maybe you could get away from reddit and check a less shill infested place to ask around.
n/a thesarl 2017-01-13
Your story may be anecdotal, but it rings true. What I've found is people can share a common human bond, regardless of nationality, if they are willing to look at the condition of the world without the filter of government.
I agree regarding your last point, just sick of seeing all the Russia Hacked hysteria, figured I'd give a chance for any humans here to put in a word or two. ;)
n/a phroztbyt3 2017-01-13
As a person who watches both sides very closely, I can say this:
Russia hacking the US elections would only work as an excuse if the popular vote was for Trump. Only the electorate voted him in. Which means it makes no fucking sense, unless the majority of electorates were bribed up the ass.
Let's say the DNC was hacked by the Russians for one second. It doesn't fucking matter, because the DNC did the stupid shit they said they didn't do. They lied, covered it up terribly, and blame everyone but themselves. Period.
n/a paulie_purr 2017-01-13
You know it is possible to be disgusted with the DNC's actions and be pissed regarding how those actions were illegally discovered and revealed. Whoever hacked/phished/leaked/whatever is definitely banking on arguments such as yours, "it doesn't fucking matter because..." Moving forward, campaigns and other scheming elites will just up their cyber-security, not mass forward emails full of corruption like 7th graders. They'll just hide it better now. They win.
n/a HorusNoon 2017-01-13
What?? No they don't win. They are more afraid of the masses now. They now know that we too can watch them. They are watching us, and we are watching them. This is a game-changer.
n/a maulynvia 2017-01-13
maybe not such a game changer just a very vigorous sweep it under the rug, and for next time: they've just learned a simple lesson - in future encrypt your emails
n/a phroztbyt3 2017-01-13
George Sauros just lost a billion dollars because the people fucked up his prediction.
While it's not what I'd consider a win because now we have a big orange tictac as a president, we proved that from now on, this show is improv.
n/a thatlostshakerofsalt 2017-01-13
but that does make me smile.
n/a darkd1ldo 2017-01-13
probably lost more in potential future cash flows if hill became prez
n/a tindergod 2017-01-13
Trump has publicly stated that he believes that Russia did indeed do the hack and his defense secretary has publicly stated that the US needs to defend itself against Russia.
n/a Preacher_1893 2017-01-13
Link to the Trump saying Russian did the hacking?
n/a tindergod 2017-01-13
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2017/jan/11/donald-trump-press-conference-president-elect-video
What he actually said was:
"As far as hacking - I think it was Russia. But I think we also got hacked by other countries and other people."
n/a bowie747 2017-01-13
Trump said it, but I think he's just playing the game. He can't start defending Assange and Russia during a press conference.
He may even himself believe that Russia did it. That doesn't change the fact that we all know they didn't do it.
The pieces of strange stories fit together so nicely when you realise that it's all a game by TPTB to retain their own power.
n/a tindergod 2017-01-13
What?
n/a yastru 2017-01-13
delusions of grandeur
n/a Ronaldjpierce 2017-01-13
Who?
n/a arachnopussy 2017-01-13
I mean, we have Podesta himself saying that they need to punish a patsy if they can't find the leaker...
n/a ReturnOfSamopotamus 2017-01-13
Where?
n/a arachnopussy 2017-01-13
https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/36082
n/a ReturnOfSamopotamus 2017-01-13
That is a little real politik for my tastes, but it's not quite "punish a patsy". He's saying the bar of evidence he'll need to consider someone disloyal is low.
n/a arachnopussy 2017-01-13
How is a link to a real email "real politik"? That's utter bullshit.
No, he's saying the bar is at zero. He literally said he would make an example of a suspected leaker with no real basis.
This email occurred before even a word of hacking was being spread. They new they had internal leakers. I outright CHALLENGE you to find a single email prior to this where they mention a SUCCESSFUL HACK.
n/a ReturnOfSamopotamus 2017-01-13
You're not really comprehending what I'm typing so I'll just stop now.
n/a arachnopussy 2017-01-13
No, you're just faced with the challenge of finding any example of "yes, we got hacked" prior to losing the election, even within their own "hacked" communications.
n/a ReturnOfSamopotamus 2017-01-13
I don't care about the DNC taking responsibility for being hacked. I'm just saying your notion that the DNC just tried to "pin it on a patsy" is too broad of an allegation. But, then again, nuance doesn't fare well here.
n/a arachnopussy 2017-01-13
Because they haven't. Even after they left the door wide open, letting everybody on the planet have access to their democratic database complete with all their SSNs, Addresses, income levels, answers to their political questions... Nope, not a single peep about any kind of responsibility for their TOTAL INCOMPETENCE. They have to now toe the party line of "Russian Haxors!!!", not because it's true, but because it's the only way the democratic party can survive.
Fail again. That's not what I said. I said PODESTA SAID IT, not that the DNC did it. And I PROVED IT. And you don't like it.
What you really mean, is that you can't even win on semantics with this one. Stick your nuance up your ass.
n/a ReturnOfSamopotamus 2017-01-13
K.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
He also said, "Well, it could have been somebody else." but yeah he did accept the intelligence agency conclusion.
n/a tindergod 2017-01-13
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2017/jan/11/donald-trump-press-conference-president-elect-video
What he actually said was:
"As far as hacking - I think it was Russia. But I think we also got hacked by other countries and other people."
Proper quotes are really important. It's interesting that Trump constantly gets misquoted on this item.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
He was in an interview when he responded the way I said. It was a different occasion. What's notable is that he is being pretty consistent.
n/a tindergod 2017-01-13
Source?
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
Can't find, but I remember it. Sorry.
n/a aiapaec 2017-01-13
K
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
gud shitpost
n/a bowie747 2017-01-13
He definitely said something of the sort about the Hillary emails before the election occurred. Maybe at a few of his rallies or during a debate.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
Well, before the election he completely denied that Russia did any hacking. He has since changed his position and is now sticking with it consistently.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
nobody's talking about them anymore because they were talked about massively already despite them not warranting that amount of attention? i'd be worried if people WERE still rehashing something that was done by a person who lost the election and will be a historical footnote.
n/a phroztbyt3 2017-01-13
And I should believe him why? Just 10 years ago he was a Democrat... You know why? Because the president was a Democrat. He's establishment.
n/a LeakyTrump 2017-01-13
Maybe he is a "republican" because he realized it'd be easier to win the primary against Bush and Cruz than to win the rigged game vs Hillary on the DNC side.
n/a dizzee_raskolnikov 2017-01-13
The DNC was probably accessed by every intelligence agency in the world. That's their job and every nation is spying on the others constantly. But it's absolute nonsense to suggest that it was Russia who published the information in order to manipulate the election when all signs point to it being an insider leak
n/a Ronaldjpierce 2017-01-13
If there was nothing to hide this would not have been a problem. People are so fucking dense
n/a RuPaulver 2017-01-13
Where are all these signs pointing to an insider leak besides sketchy sources and unsubstantiated theories about Seth Rich? The methods in which the information was hacked show it could have come from anyone and wouldn't necessitate an insider. It's actually more unlikely a staffer could obtain the leaked info without a hack like that.
n/a MrMarmot 2017-01-13
He said the Russians, our own three-letter agencies, and "other people" could have hacked the DNC, HRC, Weiner, Huma, Podesta, etc. – because they were sloppy and it was too easy. He's also said that he likes Putin and wants to be liked back. It's sweet, actually.
n/a tindergod 2017-01-13
No, he thinks Russia did it. Not that they could have done it.
Don't you see the difference?
n/a MrMarmot 2017-01-13
Maybe we listened to different press conferences.
n/a tindergod 2017-01-13
This one. At 00:47
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2017/jan/11/donald-trump-press-conference-president-elect-video
n/a HorusNoon 2017-01-13
Exactly. The electoral vote went to Trump. This should easily lead people to see that the mainstream media is collaborating together on a massive propagandized storyline with the 'Russian Hacking.'
The problem is that people don't know how to properly research anymore. They don't go to libraries. They don't research history/references/alternate theory. They are plugged into the mainstream social media news sphere via their TV and their smartphones.
So sad...
n/a phroztbyt3 2017-01-13
The fuck is a library?
People lost the ability to critically think. Hell, half the time I say something I may be wrong, but I'm thinking outside the narrative. That is what people lost. They can't understand fake news because they literally haven't thought of the possibility of it being fake... Like ever. Very new concept for them compared to many of us.
n/a NoahWebstersGhost 2017-01-13
Freedom.
n/a Horus_Krishna_5 2017-01-13
costs a buck oh 5
n/a FrogManJoness 2017-01-13
When exactly was this golden age before critical thought was lost?
n/a phroztbyt3 2017-01-13
Not sure exactly. I do know that we teach people differently. History used to be regarded as the most important class back in the 50s. Before the 80s, news was just exactly as it happened with no commentary. Families would discuss these topics. Communities would figure out their opinions on them.
We have kids in college who are angry at the system, but don't know exactly who to be angry at, or what exactly about... Because colleges are more concerned with using all of that feeling in class rather than figuring out solutions... Or to protest the same way people did decades ago even though the avenue and environment has changed.
So many examples, but not exactly a point in time when it flipped.
I think it's been progressive ever since the invention of inventions. The more comfortable life may seem, the more people believe it to be true. Like a frog in a pot of water slowly rising in temperature.
n/a Jag_Slave 2017-01-13
Most have a deer in the headlights look if you ask one simple question: What laws do you want passed/removed to fix it?
Crickets.
n/a phroztbyt3 2017-01-13
Laws? Nah that doesn't work. You can't pass logical laws in an unjust system.
We need a new framework of thinking. The best example is Elon Musk's unschool.
n/a Jag_Slave 2017-01-13
That or raising people not to be racist/sexist etc. its a social and interpersonal problem. We all have equality of opportunity, but people are bitching about not having equality of outcome. No governing system can change that, it starts at home and not raising a future ceo or hr manager that wont pay you fair etc.
n/a phroztbyt3 2017-01-13
I don't believe its because we raise them that way. I think its a social construct combining: media/family/culture/location.
We fear what we do not understand. But there have been many studies that prove how easy it is to change these views. There was one about a black man that befriended a KKK member to show the world what tolerance and understanding looks like. Within a couple months they were best friends and he quit the KKK.
You put a bunch of regular people on a stage from all different creeds to talk about topics without a scheduled set of questions made up by the mainstream media... and people will see just how similar they really are.
n/a Jag_Slave 2017-01-13
Good reply. I think you have opened my eyes to another dimension of a similar thought.
n/a Bisquie 2017-01-13
But..but..but...fight the power?
n/a Meat_Monster 2017-01-13
As someone who recently graduated from a fairly prestigious college. I was so surprised at how dull the learning experience was. Aren't colleges supposed to be the pinnacle of free thought & discussion? Basically take notes, study, take test, graduate with very little deviation.
n/a Ronaldjpierce 2017-01-13
Have you ever heard some old radio shows or news clips? Everything has been dumbed straight the fuck down.
n/a FrogManJoness 2017-01-13
Sure I have. Loads of them. You have to take the good with the bad though. You can hunt and peck through archives and find lots of amazing stuff; books predicting the cold war (or something like it) written before even Hitler took power; opinion pieces eviscerating the Fed from day one; but that's not really representative of what the media environment was like day to day. Fake news isn't something that sprouted in our lifetime. Ever read a William Randolph Hearst biography? And it's not just people today who are distracted with celebrity nonsense either. After all, Kim Kardashian is only this generation's Peggy Hopkins Joyce. And not every reporter was an H.L. Mencken. or an Edward R. Murrow. And even if they were, it wouldn't mean that the average person wasn't more interested in that day's pro wrestling results.
n/a BozuOfTheWaterDogs 2017-01-13
A mind cemetery.
n/a outtanutmeds 2017-01-13
They Google.
n/a fat_osvaldo 2017-01-13
I think the key to all of this is Syria.
n/a HorusNoon 2017-01-13
Operation Timber Sycamore
n/a godlameroso 2017-01-13
The MSM is owned by the military industrial complex, think about why they wanted Clinton(no fly zone in Syria, Libya, Yemen, Benghazi, ties with SA).
Think about why they're trying so hard to undermine Trump, why they wanted Hilary so bad.
n/a dokidokipanic 2017-01-13
On top of this lack of ability to critically think, often a distain for a mainstream media outlet like CNN will bolster trust in an alt news source such as Brietbart or worse a commentator like Alex Jones, which is equally as dangerous and in some cases more so. Many people fail to see that no source of opinion should be fully submitted to, but that's what people do, they submit full trust.
n/a RuPaulver 2017-01-13
I don't think there's been any big push to suggest Russia literally hacked the voting. Just that their hacking damaged the side they wanted to lose, while (possibly) withholding info that could damage Trump/the RNC.
I'm constantly told that I'm being manipulated by CNN. I haven't even owned a TV in 5 years. I don't know anyone under 30 years old (outside media professions) who watches CNN. I mostly just look at Yahoo's front page while at work, and do my own research on whatever controversial stories I see.
n/a HorusNoon 2017-01-13
You might enjoy the investigative journalist on YouTube going by the username of George Webb.
n/a facelesspantless 2017-01-13
I don't understand your reasoning. The electoral college electors simply voted in line with the popular votes for their corresponding states. The problem with the electoral college, according to some (most?) people, is that the individual votes of Americans in some states have more clout than the individual votes of Americans in other states. For example, the vote of an American in Wyoming is "worth" 3.18 times the vote of the average American for purposes of the electoral college, but the vote of an American in Texas is worth only 79%.
In other words, yeah, any Russian influence leading to changes in popular vote by state could have very well changed the results of the electoral college.
n/a phroztbyt3 2017-01-13
My reasoning... is that Hillary won the popular vote. There is no hacking of a system that is still mostly on paper that could account for the timing of just a few million votest the morning after.
What is more likely, that Russia did a magic trick? Or that the DNC is full of shit? Occam's Razor.
Now if you were to say "Russia influenced" the election, that is totally different. And I'm pretty sure every business, whether its a country or a corporation; influences as many elections as possible. Can't even imagine how many metaphorical cans of caviar and Krystal were sent between these rich shit-bags.
n/a MarlboroMundo 2017-01-13
This isn't much but my Uber driver the other day was a Russian international student studying at one of the local colleges.
He was very loyal to his country and loved Russia. He kept saying how much better Russia was than US and that Putin was an amazing president. He thought the US made up a bunch of stuff to get the American people mad at Russia again. Though he admitted he didn't doubt Russian intelligence had info on the Americans and the presidential election.
n/a PresidentDonJTrump 2017-01-13
I have been reading a lot of Russian news and watching a lot of Putin speeches/interviews, to try to get a good handle on their POV. I have to admit, I agree with the majority of it and would rather read their Propaganda over ours any day. I also have to admit there is a good possibility they are just more talented at it.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
Wait you said you agree with their propaganda and would rather read it? Why believe any propaganda?
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
At some point, you start looking at anything opinionated as a form of propaganda, and stop associating the term propaganda with its pejorative meaning.
I'm in exactly the same boat as that guy.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
Cool
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
Really though, it's that I think our propaganda isn't based on the truth. Like how the "rebels" in Syria are moderate and don't have links to AQ. The so called Russian propaganda were the first ones to call out the rebels for being linked to AQ, then our media followed suit after enough people caught on. See what I'm saying? The supposed "Russian propaganda" probably isn't even Russian. I'm not literally saying I love Russian propaganda. This sub would be considered Russian propaganda a lot of the time by our MSM.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
And you are allowed to have that opinion.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
RT is a lot better than our MSM. I'll take them any day.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
I'm glad you can enjoy and believe an openly state run media. I prefer to trust media that comes from a country that doesn't suppress dissenters, regardless of their bias.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
And what country is that? There isn't one lol. We're all suppressed dissenters, except on RT where some of our views are well represented.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
Oh I forgot that Fox News and Breitbart, and other "right" wing media got shut down during Obama. And look, left wing media is allowed now as well. Poor us, so oppressed.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
My point is that the truth isn't well represented by the right or left wing medias in our countries. I think RT does a much better job for the most part.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
Because its controlled by the state? And has only one view point? You don't see why having two sides might give you a better picture than one controlled side? Screw having liberals and conservatives give me their opinion, just tell me what dear leader wants me to know. Pathetic.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
Now you're straw manning me. You're acting as if I took the position that state run media is superior to private media. I never said that, I just think RT has been more truthful lately.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
You said truth is more representative when it's run by a state run media.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
Read it again without reading into it so hard lol
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
I don't see how. You've said ours isn't based on truth, and imply their "propaganda" is.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
When RT reports that the rebels have ties to AQ and aren't moderate, and it takes our media years until they decide that is true and decide to quit lying, you spawn my kind of response. Everything is propaganda, everyone has an agenda, and I think Russia has been more truthful lately.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
Source that they were years ahead?
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
https://www.rt.com/news/187580-isis-deal-syrian-rebels/
n/a Rayfloyd 2017-01-13
Common CTR tactic to cling on to details and play dumb willfully...
Not saying that guy is but I think your point is very clear and concise, he's just playing dumb.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
Yeah I know, I really don't have anything better to do than argue lol
n/a Rayfloyd 2017-01-13
YOu'd be better off informing a new mind and engaging a new mind in actual debate (these happens sometimes albeit rare these days) than argue with a shill purposely missing the point though :)
You do you though :p Cheers mate!
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
I am not playing dumb, and his point was not proven. In fact it was disproven further down in this chain.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
Oh hey look, the American mainstream media reported in 2013 on how some of the rebels were ISIS.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/09/26/did-the-window-for-arming-syrian-rebels-just-close/?utm_term=.4993744f44ba
you're wrong about almost everything, and you're a walking demonstration of how the Russians could influence the American election without hacking ANYTHING, because they already have you reading their propaganda and thinking it's TRUTHFUL.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
No I'm not wrong dude. I'm talking about the large segment of our press that just parroted Obama and praised his policy the whole time. I realize there was the odd reporting about ISIS and extremist rebels. The problem was it was glossed over and not part of the commonly promoted narrative.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
You're 100% wrong. I've known about the complex relationships between the various factions in Syria since 2012, and that's from American "MSM," not RT. if you think the USA Today/CNN dumbed-down-for-the-masses style of reporting is representative of the entirety of the American free press, I guess I could see where you're coming from. otherwise, you're just wrong.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
Are you sure you're reading MSM? When you cut out USA Today and CNN it's starting to get hard to call it MSM anymore isn't it?
And what do you mean you know about the complex relationships between the various factions? What did you read? I doubt it wasn't misleading.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
Complex relationships between the numerous warring factions in Syria and the governments that back each. These include Assad's government, "moderate" rebels, ISIS, the Kurds, and even other extremists that aren't aligned necessarily aligned with ISIS.
most people on this sub refer to the American press in general as "MSM." if you disagree with that characterization, good on you. I don't watch CNN or read USA Today, but I do read the WSJ/NYT/WaPo and numerous other online and print publications.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
None of those sources are really great either, they will definitely be full of propaganda about something as important as Syria.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
I just showed you an article from WaPo directly conflicting with your claim that only RT was reporting on the connections between the rebels and ISIS. I can find articles from the other sources I mentioned, as well, but I have a feeling that I could find 100 articles and you'd still claim they weren't the "narrative."
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
Those articles did exist but then why the simultaneous support for Obama's policy on WaPo? I just read the article by the way, I swear nobody wanted to realize that they weren't worthy of being armed when they needed to. It wasn't the narrative being promoted by CNN and all the big guys. Even WaPo kids were all about arming the moderate rebels and taking out Assad. Bro, I'm right here. Our media sucked ass. It would have been better, gasp, if we all just read RT on that issue.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
The "big guys"? WaPo is the biggest guy, along with NYT. and you're reading these articles as being in FAVOR of something. WaPo is reporting on what happened here, not being "all about" it. if you can't tell the difference between op-eds and news, I don't know what to tell you.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
I said why the simultaneous support for Obama's arming of rebels if they are going to run that kind of article detailing the problems with that kind of a policy? Other dishonest media overshadowing that particular piece. It wasn't the narrative of moderate rebels that was touted the majority of the time, you and 3 other people getting informed by that article and remembering it doesn't shape the general consensus.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
You're just saying what you think the narrative was, but you're wrong, and your opinion on the narrative is clearly flawed since you are also a person who gets your news from RT.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
Prove that I am wrong then lol. Explain the blasphemous articles about how arming the moderates will be great. Why did kids still believe that shit even in 2016? Like, I know a guy who would have advocated giving rebels even more guns in 2016, when it's pretty much all Islamists at that point.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
Again, you're saying "articles," but you're clearly talking about op-eds if they were saying anything "would be great." and it's weird as fuck that you keep referring to people as "kids"
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
article, op-ed, potato, tomato, whatever dude. Way to not explain or prove me wrong at all. I am weird as fuck that's why I call the little chillins who believe CNN kids.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
I mean, this right here makes it clear why you think RT is truthful. articles about what is happening in Syria and op-eds that argue for a specific course of action in Syria are very different. if you don't know the difference, no wonder you have such a problem determining what's truthful.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
I was referring to both, and I meant both. I just use the term as a catch all for anything published on a news page. Now explain it and prove me wrong. Your bloviating means nothing sir. You will never win lol.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
I've already won, you think RT is truthful.
and you're failure to understand how the news works is concerning, since you're not the only person who doesn't get it.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
Are you good at shooting?
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
So, you were proven wrong. RT did not break this "years ahead" of American media. I have no idea what you were thinking.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
Yeah I was wrong on one point but not really overall. Nobody can explain the question of why people were buying into the idea that we should arm the rebels. It was the poor op-eds I suppose, it was clear given the reported information that it was a risky proposal. RT made it simple as hell to see that, straight from the beginning, so I still give them props. They never ran some glowing op-ed about how we need to help the moderates win the war, they always questioned the veracity of the claim that there were any moderates to support at all. Much better IMO. At least I learned something from all this muck.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
...kids arming rebels? wat
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
The kids were all about it. I didn't say they actually do it.
Weak knee-jerk response.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
what kids? what in the world are you talking about?
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
lol
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
I can only assume that you believe the Russians did not attempt to influence the American election, and because RT says the same, you believe RT to be "more truthful."
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
But when you assume you make an ass of you and I. Apparently even Trump agrees with the intelligence he was briefed about Russia probably being the hackers so why wouldn't I? I'm still not sure and neither are our intelligence agencies. I never read much RT to be completely honest lol.
n/a dissdigg 2017-01-13
Pretty funny how the upvotes are going in this conversation. As if r/conspiracy thinks that Fox vs CNN aren't both propaganda outlets pumping out bullshit on both sides to create a false sense of opposition, a false choice. Folks, Fox, CNN, NPR, MSNBC, etc. are all US propaganda, just as much as RT is for Russia.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
My point is dissenting opinions are actually tolerated, and between two sides you can form your own picture.
n/a dissdigg 2017-01-13
Your point is clear: You and your upvoters are dupes who believe "dissenting opinions" aren't propaganda that exists to limit discourse to what TPTB deems acceptable. If they didn't maintain this illusion, you and many other Americans would feel all media is too one-sided. The truth is it already is and has been for a long time.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
Thanks for cracking the code for me, I was definitely a sheep who only watched CNN. Luckily this subreddit is filled with these woke people who'll change the world because what they believe is the absolute truth, couldn't be any other way.
n/a dissdigg 2017-01-13
If dissenting opinions were actually tolerated here, as you believe, we wouldn't have all this "fake news" bullshit. Which outlet is more honest, the Kremlin that tells you "here's the only news you need" or the US "here, you have 2 different opinions (that we approve of), isn't freedom wonderful? Just ignore that 3rd outlet, they're fake!". It's totally understandable why someone would feel the former is less shady.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
Key word ignore it. YOU can still look at it. It is not banned. The only fake news that will lose add revenue is the actual fake, bot run sites. Neither one of those is honest. The way you guys fold for some authoritarian news system is horrifying, but I have faith you are a tiny minority.
n/a dissdigg 2017-01-13
Wait, you think Russians don't have internet and aren't able to find 3rd party news? lol.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
By all means please continue to think Russia has a more free press, this is going nowhere.
n/a dissdigg 2017-01-13
It goes nowhere because all you do is make shit up and assume bullshit in every one of your replies:
I called you a sheep who only watches CNN? wtf?
People in this sub believe the absolute truth, couldn't be any other way - wtf? people are sifting through info trying to find truth, but nobody makes this claim
-Info is banned in Russia, and not here. Riiiight.
-"The way you guys fold" "You are a tiny minority" - you're just pinning bullshit on people without any reasons or info as to our (or my) actual beliefs.
You're so far out of your mind you have to make up some stories in your head to fit your own narrative instead of just taking things at face value. Try not being so full of shit sometime, you might get something out of these threads.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
I believe a minority of people such as yourself think openly state run media is more open. I think it is folding to them to just accept that as the greater "truth."
n/a dissdigg 2017-01-13
Except, I didn't say that AT ALL. I'm saying they're equally as bad, equally as closed, the US just does a better job disguising it because suckers like you keep falling for it. Believing such idiocy like "oh there's 2 sides, the truth must be in the middle somewhere."
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
You're right, I'm absolutely confusing your initial argument with the other ones I've been having. Had to scroll to the top.
n/a wilzmcgee 2017-01-13
You don't believe the state has anything to do with this?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZVv2AOCnaA
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
RT is garbage. people who say RT is "better" than anything instantly lose all credibility. it's absurd to me that a person who considers him/herself a skeptic would turn around and claim that a state-run media outlet is better than a free press.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
State-run and well run are not mutually exclusive things. That's just the way it's played out for issues I ever read RT about, like Syria back in 2014.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
they should be for anybody who fancies himself a skeptic. RT in english exists for one reason, and it's to present "news" to western readers/viewers in a way that pushes the Russian government's goals.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
So you're point is that I should just doubt RT simply because it's state run, and I should never be able to overcome that doubt by corroborating and validating their claims and evidence, because I am a true skeptic.
One of the Russian government's goals is to have a media that appears valid to the rest of the world, so they are playing a long game in which they cannot lie or spin facts much, and it showed in their coverage of American policy regarding the Syrian civil war. You have CNN and others clinging to the moderate rebel myth when the main fighting force has been ISIS for a while. Even Jon Kerry admits that the US wanted to help Daesh overthrow Assad even if it meant a Daesh government. That's not the narrative promoted in the mainstream media sir.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
it's been demonstrated that RT has lied and spun things as hard as it can. if you believe that it hasn't, they already have you, comrade.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
But there spin wouldn't have us arming groups that end up surrendering to/joining ISIS. Therefore I give them a thumbs up. I like their propaganda more... my original statement. Full circle up in this bitch.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
Da, they've got you. when do you return to the motherland?
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
How is it even bad tho?
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
It is not "bad," per se. I appreciate it for what it is. I understand why it exists and I don't fault the Russians for doing what they've been so good at doing for basically a century now. That said, I would never get my news from RT.
http://gizmodo.com/russian-propaganda-mysteriously-cut-into-c-spans-web-fe-1791133632
http://www.cjr.org/feature/what_is_russia_today.php
http://littleatoms.com/russia-today-piers-robinson
https://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/how-the-truth-is-made-at-russia-today
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/12/the-truth-about-russia-today-is-that-it-is-putins-mouthpiece/
http://time.com/rt-putin/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/dec/27/russia-propaganda-machine-gains-on-us/
Here I have linked to a wide variety of sources, all with different agendas within the American media and different levels of credibility depending on your point of view. Take your pick, or have more if you desire.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
But you never said it's bad tho, so it's okay.
First link is dumb, they said it was probably just a glitch. Second link, whatever, it's kind of funny, I didn't know RT was so new. I like that they yelled at Glenn Beck because he's a fag.
Can't read the rest because fuck that lol.
n/a PresidentDonJTrump 2017-01-13
Putin is a very intelligent Man and I AGREE with much of what he and his Media says. However, I am not stupid enough to BELIEVE it all. Both sides are using Propaganda to paint and undermine the other.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
HIS MEDIA should be a red flag, but you do you buddy. Can't believe a person on conspiracy would say that about any state run media but I think I know where you migrated from.
n/a PresidentDonJTrump 2017-01-13
LOL, have you not noticed 'OUR' Media worshiping Obama on a daily basis for the last 8 years?
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
Some of our media does. Some of our media has been going against him. The point being at least our country doesn't shut down news. If we were Russia there would be no Fox News or Breitbart, or right ring bloggers with a dem in change.
n/a PresidentDonJTrump 2017-01-13
I agree with you to some degree, but assuming that all journalist that die is Russia is because of Putin is similar to assuming Andrew Breitbart was murdered because he was attempting to expose Pedoesta or believing in the Clinton body count.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
I'm not even talking about conspiracy assassinations. Media critical of the current regime over there is suppressed. Hell, even every day Russians have to be careful about being openly critical. If you value that, whatever. But don't turn our country in to that.
n/a PresidentDonJTrump 2017-01-13
Ok, well I think we got a little off subject here. I was discussing what each side is saying in regards to the other - in what looks to be a buildup to war, informational or otherwise. Obama and US IC keep provoking by saying that Russia rigged the election (without evidence) and is going to pay. Russia keeps saying "no we did not" and we do not want war.
I agree with the latter. I do not want war.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
I place more trust in the dozen or more intelligence agencies than Russia. Why would they ever admit to it if they did it? Again, I don't know why people think Russia is some bastion of truth. They should pick up a history book.
It's not going to lead to war. Neither side has anything to gain and they both know that.
n/a PresidentDonJTrump 2017-01-13
False. The Military Industrial complex has everything to gain, as does the Global Power structure by crippling the last 2 remaining white nationalist powers. If the goal of Globalism is a centralized worldwide Power/Bank, a ruling class, population control, etc., then a war between Russia and the US makes perfect sense. I think you are being a bit naive, especially here, where you know we like to discuss Conspiracies.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
Okay. I see where this is going now. White nationalism. (((Globalist))) Good thing ol Trump has all these anti globalists in his cabinet huh
n/a PresidentDonJTrump 2017-01-13
Yes that is a good thing. I think the US and Russia should work together to destroy to protect culture and destroy the disease of Globalism
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
...Goldman Sachs will not help you do that. Oil companies will not help you do that.
n/a PresidentDonJTrump 2017-01-13
How much money did Trump accept from Wallstreet and Energy companies? Find that out and than look at how much Hillary accepted. Trump is not owned, but he is smart enough to know that he still needs a few foxes.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
We don't know, he releases nothing about his financial information. Who does he owe money to? Why doesn't he disclose anything? Why can't he remove himself from his corporation? Why does he say he has nothing with Russia yet has on air taped interviews saying he does, and his own son saying a significant portion of their business is located there?
I would be worried, but since younger generations are overwhelmingly liberal and white nationalism isn't returning, I'm not. He'll get impeached within 4, or continue on as the president with the lowest initial approval ratings since the 80's, and one that less than 28% of the voting age people voted for, and someone else will step in. I'm not sorry your dream is a fantasy.
n/a PresidentDonJTrump 2017-01-13
Ok buddy. Stay in your safe zone of thought if that makes you feel better. r/politics is a great place for that: complete censored Propaganda. In case you are not aware a mass awakening has been taking place Worldwide. The establishment is crumbling and if Trump is at all successful liberalism will completely die. Liberalism used to be a good thing: free thought, education, social equality and anti-establishment but somewhere along the line it just turned into the opposite: a fascist disease.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
I don't know why you think I have a safe space, what I said is an actual fact. I don't see any mass awakening taking place, and I really don't see these large numbers of white nationalists you would need. I don't see any evidence of it dying, I see a hiccup. You can simply look at the numbers.
n/a PresidentDonJTrump 2017-01-13
Dude, are you seriously trying to turn this discussion into racist thing? I mentioned "white Nationalist" because it is a fact that Russia and US are still "white Nationalist" Countries. Countries where the majority of the population is still white and Patriotic. Countries that the failing Globalists would love more than anything to take both the "white" and the "nationalism" out of, which a war would between the 2 would do. How can you say Hiccup after Brexit, Trump winning, and populist movements in much of the rest of Europe pushing to leave the EU as well? Rightfully so, Countries should not be controlled by outside Bureaucratic interests and should protect their cultures and economies. Maybe we have a different idea of what 'liberalism' currently is. Hopefully, we can both agree that it has lost it's identity somewhere along the line.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
No, I'm saying the extreme forms of liberalism that people love to hate are in all parties, such as the neonazis on the far right. Yes, a man was elected where less than 25% of all possible voters cast a ballot for him. Less people voted for him than the other horrible candidate, and his approval is historically low. I don't believe the new movements will lead anywhere, and I do not see any evidence of liberalism dying, unless you simply mean the most extreme far left fringe of it.
n/a PresidentDonJTrump 2017-01-13
Which IMO was absolutely incredible after over a year of relentless lies and attacks by MSM, along with every other major establishment trying to stop him. Truly a movement of the people. Free thinkers, who saw through all the lies.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
We have differing views on success then, along with other parts of this comment.
n/a Absalem 2017-01-13
Total invention and lies. You have been swallowing the NWO anti Russian propaganda buddy.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
Sure. Give me some real critical anti Putin russian papers please.
n/a Absalem 2017-01-13
Izvestia – popular daily
Komsomolskaya Pravda – mass circulation, left-leaning daily
Trud – left-leaning daily
Argumenty i Fakty – popular weekly anti Putin
Kommersant – daily, news and business-orientated
Moskovskij Komsomolets – popular daily
Nezavisimaya Gazeta – pro-opposition privately owned daily
Novaya Gazeta – daily, known for its investigative journalism anti Putin slant
Vedomosti – daily financial and analytical newspaper
RBC Daily – daily financial and analytical newspaper
The New Times – weekly independent newspaper
Expert - weekly business magazine contains anti Putin OpEds
Russian reporter - weekly sociopolitical magazine
Ogonyok - socio-political and literary illustrated weekly magazine
Tekhnika Molodezhi - monthly popular science and literary magazine
Literaturnaya Gazeta - weekly literary and socio-political sometimes anti Putin slant mostly neutral
Zhizn - weekly tabloid covers anti Putin claims corruption so on
This list is from the Press Freedoms website. They list countries by the levels of press freedoms within them.
The main reason Russia is listed low on the press freedoms table is that the Chechens murder investigative reporters and others for exposing corruption, such as the fact Russia has had to pay off the Chechens to avoid another war.
n/a hadhad69 2017-01-13
Lol, pravada is well known kremlin propaganda. I could Google the rest and come to a similar conclusion.
Putin murders journalists, have you been asleep for a decade?
https://cpj.org/killed/europe/russia/
n/a GodlessKillingBear 2017-01-13
This is actually what they want.
n/a Technocroft 2017-01-13
(That moment when companies are getting support from government officials to claim certain websites are fake news, and that now those websites are in the process of having ads removed from their sites - while MSM that promotes bullshit news suffers no penalty because it fits the narrative, even if it is bullshit)
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
You didn't read what Facebook is going to do, did you. They meant bot run websites that produce actual, fake, word salad articles.
n/a caitdrum 2017-01-13
Your country definitely does shut down news. All American media is owned by 6 corporations. 2 of those corporations are majority owned by one family (see the Redstones) The other 4 are majority owned by old wealthy families and financial interests.
While Putin's media is tailored to his liking, there's a good chance his interests lie in the betterment of his country and it's people. American media has no allegiance other than to absurdly wealthy family and friends of it's owners, their interests are specifically against you, the common man. They abhor you and seek only to deceive you so you don't realize they are conglomerating the entire world to establish a NWO.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
Again, I'm surprised that someone thinks that a single state run news entity is somehow better, but to each their own.
n/a urwonderful 2017-01-13
Oh look. Among the hordes of "left wing" redditors who jump at the "russian hacking", "intervention", etc, we got a skeptical one who asks us to be skeptical of all propaganda.
The irony
n/a Urtidig 2017-01-13
/r/conspiracy is currently one of the most pro-government subreddits. I mean, if you compare /r/politics and /r/conspiracy today with one year ago, it's almost like they swapped content.
Living in a country where Russia threatens our capitol with nuclear bomb run training several times a year, who've seen a Russian band imprisoned for months for critizing Putin and a political opposition thrown to jail, it's frankly scary to watch Americans democratically decide to end democracy.
n/a skeeter1234 2017-01-13
They can do it more directly. In this country you basically have to buy people out, make sure everyone in the staff serves the party line. Plus, the Russkis assassinate journalists more often.
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
Yo, I'll be happy to answer any specific questions, can't be bothered to write an essay just yet.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
What do you think about Ukraine? Did Russia promote propaganda in the east and get the people to revolt or did the people do it of their own accord because they didn't like the Euromaidan movement and the new president?
Did the new president and party target the people in eastern Ukraine before they seceded? Did they call them treasonous, say they would go after them, before Russia intervened and they seceded?
Do you think Russia should have intervened the way they did? They forced the parliament to hold a referendum about seceding, should they have let it happen organically? Would it have happened at all otherwise? What would have happened to the separatists if Russia never intervened?
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
I think it was a little of both. The new president was a very shady individual. According to some sources, once he became president his net worth grew 10 fold. There was also this event. Pay particular attention to Trade Unions House fire. While unclear who was the real culprit, the interesting thing that there was no investigation and nobody was found guilty of it. Surely torching people alive, no matter which side of the barricades they are on, should warrant at least an investigation and people should be held accountable. There were also a number of laws such as this one. ctrl+f for "domestic separatism". This is highly unconstitutional, even by Russian standards.
Basically, the new government was a pile of shit. Not only were they not loyal to Russia (which is what our higher-ups care about), they are horrible towards own people.
I'm not sure I have any valid info on this one, but my previous point should partly illustrate it.
I kinda think that it was the right move, however hypocritical it may be. The new government was illegally installed there (external funding was rather obvious). We always considered Ukrainians our brothers, a lot of people still have relatives there. It's a real shame what state disinformation does to gullible people. After the whole thing, real brothers from Ukraine and Russia were ready to jump at each other (was a witness of this myself, through friends). So the intervention was a) to protect our geopolitical interests (e.g. don't let Ukraine be a NATO country so that US wouldn't put their bases that close to the border) and b) to actually do something about unlawful government that was trying to force the country to assimilate into the West, which would never ever happen, but they for some reason couldn't see it. I don't have all the information about Ukraine, as it is very hard to actually find reputable sources, since we're so close to the issue and are very biased.
DISCLAIMER I might also be very biased towards my own country, but that's the vision quite a few people share. So take everything with a pinch of salt
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
That link about domestic separatism really confirms my suspicions that Kiev was targeting the separatists unfairly. It sucks to hear that the propaganda wars tore families and friendships apart. Sounds about right to me, you echoed a lot of the same opinions I've heard before. Thank you for your response!
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
Ukraine is a tragedy, victim of political play. I wish certain individuals would just stick to ruining their own country instead of involving others
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
Who was funding the Euromaidan movement in Ukraine? You said there was external funding, I had never heard that. Was it EU members?
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
Check (this)[https://www.rt.com/shows/sophieco/ukraine-revolution-usa-support-246/]. RT is obviously biased, but you could try to dig up some more info yourself in more neutral sources. I'm certain something would pop up. However, I can't be sure myself that it's all 100% legit to blindly trust it. Just kind of a thing you should keep in mind as a very likely possibility, especially considering that US intelligence has being doing similar stuff since forever (those claims are backed up by proper sources).
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
I'm not paranoid about RT being a source. They have proven to be good lately IMO.
So the US spawned the revolution to try and get Ukraine into the EU and NATO. It's all very intuitive when you consider the warpath we were on. If Hillary had been elected, we might already have been at war with you guys over stupid hacks.
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
This still remains a possibility, actually. Even though Trump seems to favour Russia, his seat is not so secure. He might still be impeached and then Hillary would assume office, which would mean a lot of bad, cause she's as crooked as it gets. Let's not get our hopes up just yet.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
If he is impeached or assassinated, Mike Pence will be the next in line. I don't think he would stray too far from Donald's positions out of respect, but I suppose there is a small chance he would start listening to the likes of McCain and Fiorina and we could still end up at war. I highly doubt that will happen, but maybe this is the calm before the storm, you're right.
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
Thing is that it doesn't matter what a certain politician believes, because it depends on the funding. Politicians are just a face most of the time. But I won't go too deep into that, I'm not informed enough to have a firm opinion on this topic.
n/a John_Dexter 2017-01-13
Impeached for what? Are there murmurs about some impeachable offense? Also, Hillary wouldn't assume office, Pence would. Though who knows where he would land on the issue.
n/a grndzro4645 2017-01-13
On the flip side of all that do you feel safer with a Putin administration or a Yeltsin one?
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
I'm not old enough to have witnessed Yeltsin's rule, so I can't really say, but judging by the state of the country after he left office, Putin has done way better. Yeltsin basically privatized the entire country for the fractions of what it was really worth, which led to a disastrous economy. On the flip side, Putin really wants to bring back the former glory of USSR and make Russia a world superpower once again (making it great again, you see). It might be a dangerous path, but it's hard to imagine Russia not striving for that. I think it's in our blood by this point.
n/a ronintetsuro 2017-01-13
How are Russian citizens responding to US troops landing in Poland?
As an American, I am outraged that they are doing this - it looks really bad, and this is happening while our media continues to say that Russians are the aggressors.
Thanks for answering questions! Really interested to get some real discussion outside of the media.
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
I've been too busy these couple of days to actually know what people think of such a recent event, but it just reinforces the "us vs them" mentality that we've got here. Basically a large chunk of people believe that everything that's bad in the country is because US is always plotting against us. It's actually makes some sense, because the sanctions (not the sanctions themselves, but counter-sanctions on import of certain goods like good cheese) makes everybody's life much harder. Economy deteriorates, the budget pillow (government savings) is practically gone, so shit's about to get down for real for us. I live in the capital atm and it's kinda alright here, but remote regions suffered quite a lot.
Despite the pessimism, Russia won't break like that. In the end, we, like a phoenix, will rise from the ashes new and strong nation.
Jokes aside, the country has been forced to change. The power elite is in motion. So hopefully, the change will result in better and more balanced economy and higher standard of living for all of us.
Sorry for getting off-topic, but I think I've answered your question
n/a ronintetsuro 2017-01-13
Not off topic at all! Thanks for taking the time to answer, very appreciated.
n/a sillypants45 2017-01-13
I have have a question if you would be so kind. To you guys, does it seem like Russia is gearing up for a war with the US? Is the "us vs them" mentality towards the US government or does it include the general population (to the average person, not just you). I guess that's two questions, hope I'm not asking too much.
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
I don't think we straight up gearing up for war. Everybody understands that there's a different war going on, the war on information that is. We're generally pretty chill and peaceful people, minding our own business. I think the general mood is more like struggle with day to day stuff. Nobody wants war, nobody needs it. Unlike US, our GDP isn't that dependant on selling weapons and fueling wars to no end, so it's not in our interest to engage in any sort of conflict. Syria was a way to get rid of a lot of old ammo for rifles, cannons, planes etc. Not the main purpose, of course, but also worth mentioning.
For your second question it's definitely against the government. If you were to come to Russia, nobody would do anything to you. People are people everywhere, so the decent folk realise that. We're all getting screwed by the system. Some are more, some are less. But deep inside we're not evil. So if you try to show interest in our culture, our language, you'll notice that people would be very open to you, regardless of your nationality. Hope that answers your questions.
n/a thesarl 2017-01-13
I just wanted to say thank you for your well thought out and clear responses, it was a pleasure reading them!
n/a Werpogil 2017-01-13
No problem, always happy to share our side of the story!
n/a caitdrum 2017-01-13
One thing that really blew me away about Russia is that their national debt is only $150 billion. Even after the Cold War and the sanctions, they're definitely doing something right.
n/a DozenMinds 2017-01-13
Russian people don't understand what's going on, but their opinions are as divided as in the West.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
A lot of Russians comment on RT articles. Go look at RT and their comment section. Anyone with a Cyrillic name (русский) is probably Russian.
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-01-13
Even Russians don't live close to other Russians, their country is fucking huge. But yeah I imagine the political views of people living in the countries adjacent to Russia like Belarus or Ukraine have a very different view of Russia than the average Russian does.
n/a AbortionBurger 2017-01-13
I have a neighbor who is Russian, has been here 12 years. She says that Putin is a lunatic and needs to disappear, but is also extremely pro-Trump. In her words, "America has had enough of these pussies!"
n/a PuffPuff74 2017-01-13
... and Trump is pro-Putin. Go figure.
n/a Horus_Krishna_5 2017-01-13
maybe she just thought trump was a lesser evil compared to Hillary
n/a russian321 2017-01-13
I hate both Donald Trump and Putin. They are both idiots, and are full of greed and corruption. Putin has such deep ties with the oil industry, it's no wonder Donald Trump put the CEO of Exxon as secretary of state. It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
Also, I'm glad Clinton lost, but I really would have liked to have seen Bernie Sanders won instead.
n/a PolandPole 2017-01-13
How about the FACT that Trump got pissed on by Russian hookers? Refute that
n/a skatalon2 2017-01-13
Fact
n/a skatalon2 2017-01-13
Where did you read that? oh, the internet? hmm...
n/a eljordan6 2017-01-13
Clapper already did.
n/a DonaldsonTrumpington 2017-01-13
Tfw Buzzfeed is fact
n/a 333bbbggg 2017-01-13
Wife is Russian. Thinks it's all complete bullshit. All of her friends do as well.
n/a GitmoNationSlave 2017-01-13
Get real. They are people just like us. They are divided just like us. I side with Putin and Farage and Trump. The Nation state is everything. Sovereignty is everything.
n/a f3ynm4n 2017-01-13
Nothing related to hacking or US elections, but just a little observation.
My mother is Russian, my father is Lithuanian. I was born and raised in Lithuania, but spent the last 12 years living in London, UK. I tend watch Lithuanian news most of the days just to stay up-to-date on current events and I have noticed that over the past six months or so the amount of fear mongering about Russia has been ridiculous.
Every single day there's a story about Russia planning to invade the Baltics, story about how Russia fucks with freedom in the US, story about how we should invest millions into defence to arms ourselves against Russians.
There's a mass hysteria in the state that is fuelled by mainstream media. Head over to /r/lithuania and you will see that there's thread after thread about upcoming Russian invasion and how we should all be ready.
The thing is, for a small country like Lithuanian, there are far greater and more important social and economic issues that actually matter, but media is diverting everyone's focus on some perceived threat of Russians.
n/a mvdl86 2017-01-13
A bit off topic, but can give us some insight on the Lithuanian 'peasant' party and their recent win?
Are you hopeful for the change of power, or is it similar to the U.S. where all parties are in bed together?
What changes can we expect to see in Lithuania?
Thanks.
n/a f3ynm4n 2017-01-13
Peasant party won, but they didn't get the majority, therefore a coalition had to be formed and using your own words all parties are in bed together.
At the first glance they do seem a bit different and more progressive, but once again coming back to the whole rhetoric related to Russia, some of their policies are just ridiculous and very nationalistic.
For example to promote nationalism each year the government wants to gift schoolchildren a folk costume. Such policy would cost the government tens of millions of euros per year. Thing is, in years time the costumes will be outgrown and the whole exercise will be rendered useless. Think about it. When you was 14 did you really give a shit about wearing folk costumes?
Another example is the reintroduction of mandatory military service (conscription). All young males, after high school, will have to serve the country for 9 months. Now, I'm not a pacifist and do value military, the fact is that there's no fucking need for this. Once again, millions of euros will be wasted on something that has no positive net effect for the economy. Germany, US, Russia and the rest of the states that have powerful military forces have developed economies where the military industrial complex creates jobs, exports and brings in tax revenue. For a tiny Baltic state shit like this is useless and the whole rhetoric behind this reintroduction of military conscription is that we need to be ready in case Russians will attack.
The country is literally dying. Young, educated men and women are flocking to Western Europe, States or Australia. SMEs that create most of the jobs in the economy are being raped by bureaucratic and archaic tax system.
Who am I to say this, but in my eyes this whole anti-Russian rhetoric in Western MSM distracts the majority from issues that really matter. We should be focusing on education, on the young, on creating jobs and empowering individuals that do so. We shouldn't be blowing millions of euros on nationalism and some perceived threats.
n/a mvdl86 2017-01-13
Thank you for replying.
n/a thatlostshakerofsalt 2017-01-13
I can't imagine why it wouldn't be considered an act of heroism on Russia's part if they had been the ones to let us all know just how disgusting these people are.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
Can't read the rest because they all lay out the reasons why RT is a propaganda machine. The first link was simply a notable thing that happened involving RT.
n/a filmfiend999 2017-01-13
We all Russians down here.
n/a andronicii 2017-01-13
Putin is Trumpuppet's master, soon all will be revealed to Americans, but by then it will be too late for democracy in America.
n/a Jamesbaxter7474 2017-01-13
On RT, they think the claims have no verifiability.
n/a webofslime 2017-01-13
Russian conspiracy theories include Putin being a pawn for the NWO, which fits, if you consider how the Uranium One deal went down.
n/a rageforth 2017-01-13
I have an old Marine buddy that moved to Russia about 3 years back to help take care of his wife's mother. I talk to him about this a lot. He basically says Russians think we are all mindless idiots that don't think for ourselves. We just wait for legacy media to make up our minds for us. All of the Russia slamming our govt and legacy media are spewing is just laughable. At the same time, they are nervous because war is not fun for anyone.
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
At some point, you start looking at anything opinionated as a form of propaganda, and stop associating the term propaganda with its pejorative meaning.
I'm in exactly the same boat as that guy.
n/a PresidentDonJTrump 2017-01-13
Putin is a very intelligent Man and I AGREE with much of what he and his Media says. However, I am not stupid enough to BELIEVE it all. Both sides are using Propaganda to paint and undermine the other.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
Sure. Give me some real critical anti Putin russian papers please.
n/a aiapaec 2017-01-13
K
n/a yastru 2017-01-13
delusions of grandeur
n/a NWOShill1 2017-01-13
No I'm not wrong dude. I'm talking about the large segment of our press that just parroted Obama and praised his policy the whole time. I realize there was the odd reporting about ISIS and extremist rebels. The problem was it was glossed over and not part of the commonly promoted narrative.
n/a ChetSt 2017-01-13
I mean, this right here makes it clear why you think RT is truthful. articles about what is happening in Syria and op-eds that argue for a specific course of action in Syria are very different. if you don't know the difference, no wonder you have such a problem determining what's truthful.
n/a ReturnOfSamopotamus 2017-01-13
That is a little real politik for my tastes, but it's not quite "punish a patsy". He's saying the bar of evidence he'll need to consider someone disloyal is low.
n/a slyburgaler 2017-01-13
We have differing views on success then, along with other parts of this comment.