Russian Tensions
- This topic has 5,312 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 3 weeks, 2 days ago by
.
-
Posts
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_C._Johnson. Pure QANON
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Turner. Another QANON
https://theconversation.com/why-the-alt-right-believes-another-american-revolution-is-coming-153093.The so called new American revolution and son of the new American revolution they are just ultra right wingers followers of Donald Trump, and conspiracionists, and some of their ideas have been adopted by left-wingers
The Tea Party died but its reactionary ideas are still alive and they have penetrated others movements, and they have penetrated the world of Journalism, and they have been spread to other countries, there are branches of QANON in Russia
An article on the propaganda war
Another analysis of the possible fall in support for Ukraine in the USA
https://www.alternet.org/2022/11/support-for-ukraine-could-dwindle/
“As TS likes to lecture people about using unbiased sources I thought I’d check this one.
The website is run by Larry C Johnson who describes himself as a veteran of the CIA and the State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism.”
Yes, so he has served in the belly of the beast and knows how the sausage is made. His analysis of the Ukraine/Russia conflict is excellent.
“He appears to be a Trumpite and an anti-vaxxer.”
His views on Trump and vaccines are irrelevant to the topic of Russia/Ukraine. Edward Snowden and Scott Ritter are also conservatives. Does that disqualify them as sources of information? Or what about Newton, who believed in alchemy, or Darwin who was a racist? As far as physics and biology are concerned their views stand the test of time.
“An example of his style is:
Now we know where TS has plagiarised his writing style from.”
Lol. My style is my own. No need to plagiarise.
“Larry’s source for this Brit story seems to be the Hal Turner show.
Hal Turner turns out to be a US far-right blogger and convicted felon, Holocaust denier, white supremacist and conspiracy theorist who spent 2 years in prison for demanding the assassination of government officials and threatening 3 federal judges.
All ad hominem. But anyways, Hal Turner is not the source of the claim. Kim Dotcom is. He’s offered no evidence for his claim so it can not be verified. Having said that, Russia does say they have evidence that the UK is responsible.
https://www.rt.com/russia/565720-truss-phone-hack-pipelines/
Someone blew up the pipeline. The most likely explanation it being a joint British/US operation.
“Never mind his argumentative evasions, you’ve got to admire the balls-out effrontery of someone who comes on here to criticise our use of western sources and then dredges up sources like this.”
Larry dropped the ball on this one. Not gonna lie. But this slip aside, his analysis has been spot on.
“He is taking the piss and you all know it.”
That’s true. Because you aren’t serious people.
“I’m amazed you bother with him. There are far better ways to help the socialist project than wasting time on self-indulgent trolls.”
Hehe, I feel exactly the same way about you guys.
“If you want, I can suggest some.”
I’m sure it involves a lot of repetitive wrist work and Kleenex.
Moderator notice
Once more to prevent any escalation I remind posters of
7. You are free to express your views candidly and forcefully provided you remain civil. Do not use the forums to send abuse, threats, personal insults or attacks, or purposely inflammatory remarks (trolling). Do not respond to such messages.
Please take heed of “Do not respond to such messages”. It stops with True Scotsman’s parting barb.
“His views on Trump and vaccines are irrelevant to the topic of Russia/Ukraine. Edward Snowden and Scott Ritter are also conservatives. Does that disqualify them as sources of information? Or what about Newton, who believed in alchemy, or Darwin who was a racist? As far as physics and biology are concerned their views stand the test of time.”
___________________________________________________
How amusing. So TS, having criticized socialists for using sources like the Guardian (even though he has used western sources like Reuters!), now defends his use of comments made by right-wing trumpites and the like, on the grounds that their politics are irrelevant to the “facts” they report on. So if the Guardian reports that Putin has a personal fortune of 1 billion are we to dismiss this out of hand because it is just…er… the Guardian, a liberal bourgeoise rag, TS?
“How amusing. So TS, having criticized socialists for using sources like the Guardian (even though he has used western sources like Reuters!)”
And remind me, what was the ONE Reuters article I’ve linked to about? Nothing controversial I’m sure. The Guardian, which you lot constantly link to, is the mouthpiece of the British
establishment. A socialist reads it to discover nothing but the official propaganda line of US/EU imperialism. People who credulously accept the propaganda lines therein are either dupes, useful idiots or a combination of both.“now defends his use of comments made by right-wing trumpites and the like”
The author’s political opinions are irrelevant to the topic. Poisoning the well is a version of the ad hominem fallacy. Look it up. Learn something.
“So if the Guardian reports that Putin has a personal fortune of 1 billion are we to dismiss this out of hand …?”
I thought you said he was a gajillionaire “richer” than Elon Musk? Do try and get your story straight. But anyways yes, dismiss what the Guardian says out if hand because it’s a lie. I’ve already explained why it’s a lie and provided evidence in support of my position.
“Thurs at 10 pm on Channel 4, How To Survive A Dictator, about Mugabe.”
Lol. Europe is a garden and the rest of the world is a jungle. Let’s listen to the gardener talk about the dark savages over there. Totally not racist imperialism I swear.
I thought you said he was a gajillionaire “richer” than Elon Musk? Do try and get your story straight. But anyways yes, dismiss what the Guardian says out if hand because it’s a lie. I’ve already explained why it’s a lie and provided evidence in support of my position.
____________________________________________
I never said that and you have done nothing of the sort.
According to you anything that the Guardian writes must ipso facto be nonsense because the Guardian is a trashy liberal paper. However, you feel quite free to quote and endorse trashy far-right commentators like “Russia-Insider” and others. Yet you feel offended when socialists point out the utter hypocrisy of you doing precisely that while arguing that just because they are far-right commentators does not mean what they say is not true. Well, by the same token just because The Guardian is a liberal bourgeoisie paper (we agree on that) does not mean that what it says is not at times correct, does it now?
But TS is revealing here a conspiracist trait. Conspiracists have no discernment. We socialists can read, watch or listen to anyone, and we use discernment to separate what is likely or unlikely, true or false. Conspiracists don’t have that ability, which is probably why TS isn’t paying attention to any substance here. Like a conspiracist, he is simply an ideology-follower, with everything simplistically black and white.
“I never said that and you have done nothing of the sort.”
Well, if not you, one of your Guardian Bros most certainly did. I did provide evidence. I linked to an article debunking the claim.
“According to you anything that the Guardian writes must ipso facto be nonsense because the Guardian is a trashy liberal paper.”
No, not “anything”. The film and TV reviews can sometimes be quite edifying. No, it is any story dealing with official enemies of the Euro-American alliance that ” ipso facto be nonsense”. Now, pay attention child, the Guardian is not a “news” paper it is an organ of state propaganda. Just like a hand grenade will never be a vacuum cleaner, the Guardian will never be a “news” paper. The role of the Guardian is not to act as a venue for the expression of free ideas it is an apparatus for manufacturing consent. Can you understand that or am I moving too fast? Now, the blog I linked to is not a propaganda organ of the state but the sincerely held views of an analyst intimately familiar with military affairs and the goings on of the deep state. His views, or any similar, will never, ever be printed in the Guardian because they contradict the imperialists’ narrative. Capisce? Can you understand the difference?
“However, you feel quite free to quote and endorse trashy far-right commentators like “Russia-Insider” and others.”
Far-right is Nazi. Lol. Neither Russia Insider or Larry Johnson are Nazis so let’s tone down the hyperbole a bit, eh? At any rate your statement is ad hominem which is another way of saying faulty thinking. Never a surprise on this forum!
“Yet you feel offended when socialists point out the utter hypocrisy of you doing precisely that while arguing that just because they are far-right commentators does not mean what they say is not true.”
I am not offended and you are not socialists you are liberals LARPing as such.
“Well, by the same token just because The Guardian is a liberal bourgeoisie paper (we agree on that) does not mean that what it says is not at times correct, does it now?”
When it comes to official enemies it will never be correct. It will always omit, decontextualise, fabricate and obfuscate but never tell the truth. Ever.
“But TS is revealing here a conspiracist trait.”
And what trait would that be?
“Conspiracists have no discernment. We socialists can read, watch or listen to anyone”
Except Larry Johnson, right? Lol. Psst, you’re not a socialist, you’re a liberal posing as one.
“and we use discernment to separate what is likely or unlikely, true or false.”
Well, considering you’re wrong about pretty much everything I think that’s open to debate.
“Conspiracists don’t have that ability, which is probably why TS isn’t paying attention to any substance here.”
You know conspiracies exist, right? The Holocaust was a conspiracy, you’re aware of that, no? In fact, conspiracy is one of the most common
brought charges in courts of law. There are literally hundreds of thousands of them committed every day. Lol“Like a conspiracist, he is simply an ideology-follower”
And you’re free of ideology? Lol
“with everything simplistically black and white.”
Some things are that simple. Most aren’t but some are.
You’re a Holocaust-denyer?
Re: manufacturing consent, isn’t that also the role of the Russian state? If not, why are opposition journalists and news stations silenced?
Yes, we are free of ideology. We are people who have come together because of points of agreement about society. We don’t sing from any songsheet handed down by a leadership.
“You’re a Holocaust-denyer?”
Lol. Way to miss the point. Here, take a participation trophy.
“Re: manufacturing consent, isn’t that also the role of the Russian state? If not, why are opposition journalists and news stations silenced?”
We’re talking about the Guardian brah. What are you, five years old? You can’t stick to one line of reasoning for more than 30 seconds?
“Yes, we are free of ideology.”
Erm, this word “ideology”, it doesn’t mean what you think it means.
“An ideology is a set of opinions or beliefs of a group or an individual. Very often ideology refers to a set of political beliefs”
So the above definition doesn’t apply to you? You have no beliefs? Lol.
“We are people who have come together because of points of agreement about society.”
I know, you are liberals posing as socialists.
“We don’t sing from any songsheet handed down by a leadership.”
You do. Your song is titled “We are pure as driven snow flakes, real existing socialists are bad”.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.