Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? " Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes " Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? " NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? " I know one thing he will be dining out on it for years. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? " Yes, will be riveting in my opinion, unless Tucker goes soft. Bold move in my opinion | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? " Of course he's right to do it if he chooses. I will definitely be watching. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? " Yes and I am gearing up to hear what he has to say as MSM do not put his side of the story, they just do the same old he is bad we are good good must overcome bad. Be good to hear a different narrative. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked. "I think current circumstances suggest otherwise. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? " No that's for current Nato members to decide. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? No that's for current Nato members to decide." And if current NATO members are happy for them to join? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked.
I think current circumstances suggest otherwise."And people scratch their heads when the Russian federation take a defensive posture towards an alliance of nations with cold war mentality. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked.
I think current circumstances suggest otherwise.
And people scratch their heads when the Russian federation take a defensive posture towards an alliance of nations with cold war mentality. "What was defensive about invading Ukraine? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked.
I think current circumstances suggest otherwise.
And people scratch their heads when the Russian federation take a defensive posture towards an alliance of nations with cold war mentality.
What was defensive about invading Ukraine?"Why was NATO bought into existence.? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked.
I think current circumstances suggest otherwise.
And people scratch their heads when the Russian federation take a defensive posture towards an alliance of nations with cold war mentality.
What was defensive about invading Ukraine?
Why was NATO bought into existence.? "I believe I asked my question first? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked.
I think current circumstances suggest otherwise.
And people scratch their heads when the Russian federation take a defensive posture towards an alliance of nations with cold war mentality.
What was defensive about invading Ukraine?
Why was NATO bought into existence.?
I believe I asked my question first?"It all started when the russian speaking lpr and the dpr regions where occupied by the Russian federation to prevent the inhabitants from being shot by snippers daily. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked.
I think current circumstances suggest otherwise.
And people scratch their heads when the Russian federation take a defensive posture towards an alliance of nations with cold war mentality.
What was defensive about invading Ukraine?
Why was NATO bought into existence.?
I believe I asked my question first?
It all started when the russian speaking lpr and the dpr regions where occupied by the Russian federation to prevent the inhabitants from being shot by snippers daily."Ah yes, a great act of mercy to annexe The Crimea. It began much earlier than that btw. Putin was working on eastern Ukraine in the early 2000’s. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked.
I think current circumstances suggest otherwise.
And people scratch their heads when the Russian federation take a defensive posture towards an alliance of nations with cold war mentality.
What was defensive about invading Ukraine?
Why was NATO bought into existence.?
I believe I asked my question first?
It all started when the russian speaking lpr and the dpr regions where occupied by the Russian federation to prevent the inhabitants from being shot by snippers daily.
Ah yes, a great act of mercy to annexe The Crimea.
It began much earlier than that btw. Putin was working on eastern Ukraine in the early 2000’s."Cool, now if you would kindly answer my question. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked.
I think current circumstances suggest otherwise.
And people scratch their heads when the Russian federation take a defensive posture towards an alliance of nations with cold war mentality.
What was defensive about invading Ukraine?
Why was NATO bought into existence.?
I believe I asked my question first?
It all started when the russian speaking lpr and the dpr regions where occupied by the Russian federation to prevent the inhabitants from being shot by snippers daily.
Ah yes, a great act of mercy to annexe The Crimea.
It began much earlier than that btw. Putin was working on eastern Ukraine in the early 2000’s.
Cool, now if you would kindly answer my question. "You’ve still not answered mine. Nothing about invading Ukraine was ‘defensive’ - you know it as well as I do. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked.
I think current circumstances suggest otherwise.
And people scratch their heads when the Russian federation take a defensive posture towards an alliance of nations with cold war mentality.
What was defensive about invading Ukraine?
Why was NATO bought into existence.?
I believe I asked my question first?
It all started when the russian speaking lpr and the dpr regions where occupied by the Russian federation to prevent the inhabitants from being shot by snippers daily.
Ah yes, a great act of mercy to annexe The Crimea.
It began much earlier than that btw. Putin was working on eastern Ukraine in the early 2000’s.
Cool, now if you would kindly answer my question.
You’ve still not answered mine.
Nothing about invading Ukraine was ‘defensive’ - you know it as well as I do.
"You are not going to answer then. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked.
I think current circumstances suggest otherwise.
And people scratch their heads when the Russian federation take a defensive posture towards an alliance of nations with cold war mentality.
What was defensive about invading Ukraine?
Why was NATO bought into existence.?
I believe I asked my question first?
It all started when the russian speaking lpr and the dpr regions where occupied by the Russian federation to prevent the inhabitants from being shot by snippers daily.
Ah yes, a great act of mercy to annexe The Crimea.
It began much earlier than that btw. Putin was working on eastern Ukraine in the early 2000’s.
Cool, now if you would kindly answer my question.
You’ve still not answered mine.
Nothing about invading Ukraine was ‘defensive’ - you know it as well as I do.
You are not going to answer then."NATO was setup postwar to protect against the threat from the Soviet Union and other hostile nations (which could have included Germany, it was thought). You know that, though. I’m just unsure why you think invading Ukraine was an act of defence. (Of course I don’t believe you actually think that, because it’s the thought of a political impotent) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? NATO should of been disbanded when the curtain cracked.
I think current circumstances suggest otherwise.
And people scratch their heads when the Russian federation take a defensive posture towards an alliance of nations with cold war mentality.
What was defensive about invading Ukraine?
Why was NATO bought into existence.?
I believe I asked my question first?
It all started when the russian speaking lpr and the dpr regions where occupied by the Russian federation to prevent the inhabitants from being shot by snippers daily.
Ah yes, a great act of mercy to annexe The Crimea.
It began much earlier than that btw. Putin was working on eastern Ukraine in the early 2000’s.
Cool, now if you would kindly answer my question.
You’ve still not answered mine.
Nothing about invading Ukraine was ‘defensive’ - you know it as well as I do.
You are not going to answer then.
NATO was setup postwar to protect against the threat from the Soviet Union and other hostile nations (which could have included Germany, it was thought).
You know that, though.
I’m just unsure why you think invading Ukraine was an act of defence. (Of course I don’t believe you actually think that, because it’s the thought of a political impotent)"Then Ukraine wanted to protect the inhabitants of the regions who were being shot by shelling the area. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? Yes absolutely. Dialogue is always better then no Dialogue. What Russia has done is wrong but understanding why is important. Nato should not have pushed east in bad faith like it did. Yes Should Eastern European nations not be free to decide whether they want to join NATO or not? No that's for current Nato members to decide. And if current NATO members are happy for them to join? " Then they can join.. It's just a bad idea and against the original idea of Nato. Why let a country in that can not contribute to the joint defence of Nato and that would be likely to encourage aggression against Nato? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An absolute conspiracy theorist wet dream. If putin wants to say anything there is no shortage of independent European news outlets yet he uses an American ego. Some people on here need to be careful what they seem to wish for! " erm perhaps he wants to speak to the american public more than the european public seems as americans dont really take that much notice of europe why wouldnt he use him, | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Carlson will end up being charged with espionage, that seems to be how the US works. " Only if he can spell it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An absolute conspiracy theorist wet dream. If putin wants to say anything there is no shortage of independent European news outlets yet he uses an American ego. Some people on here need to be careful what they seem to wish for! erm perhaps he wants to speak to the american public more than the european public seems as americans dont really take that much notice of europe why wouldnt he use him, " CNN have asked to interview him on countless occasions. Feckin Lord Haw Haw springs to mind. Anyway I'm away, enjoy the echo Chambers | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Looking forward to this. Going to be partisan as fuck but will be interesting to see. " If it doesn’t show Putin in a totally positive light then Carson better only stay on the ground floor of hotels for the rest of his life. And stay away from people with umbrellas! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An absolute conspiracy theorist wet dream. If putin wants to say anything there is no shortage of independent European news outlets yet he uses an American ego. Some people on here need to be careful what they seem to wish for! erm perhaps he wants to speak to the american public more than the european public seems as americans dont really take that much notice of europe why wouldnt he use him, CNN have asked to interview him on countless occasions. Feckin Lord Haw Haw springs to mind. Anyway I'm away, enjoy the echo Chambers " haha why the fuck would he talk to cnn, they were one of the biggest pushers of russia collusion that was proved to be a fantasy of killary pmsl | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An absolute conspiracy theorist wet dream. If putin wants to say anything there is no shortage of independent European news outlets yet he uses an American ego. Some people on here need to be careful what they seem to wish for! erm perhaps he wants to speak to the american public more than the european public seems as americans dont really take that much notice of europe why wouldnt he use him, CNN have asked to interview him on countless occasions. Feckin Lord Haw Haw springs to mind. Anyway I'm away, enjoy the echo Chambers haha why the fuck would he talk to cnn, they were one of the biggest pushers of russia collusion that was proved to be a fantasy of killary pmsl" erm perhaps he wants to speak to the american public I'll leave that there for you to ponder hahaha | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"An absolute conspiracy theorist wet dream. If putin wants to say anything there is no shortage of independent European news outlets yet he uses an American ego. Some people on here need to be careful what they seem to wish for! erm perhaps he wants to speak to the american public more than the european public seems as americans dont really take that much notice of europe why wouldnt he use him, CNN have asked to interview him on countless occasions. Feckin Lord Haw Haw springs to mind. Anyway I'm away, enjoy the echo Chambers haha why the fuck would he talk to cnn, they were one of the biggest pushers of russia collusion that was proved to be a fantasy of killary pmsl erm perhaps he wants to speak to the american public I'll leave that there for you to ponder hahaha " if he wants to speak to the us public he wants to steer clear of cnn then there viewing is falling off a cliff, msnbc or fox if he wants to have a big audience, but saying that tucker seems to get more viewers than them aswell | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I expect an hour of Tucker deepthroating Putin penis. He will not be asking real questions surrounded by KGB thugs. Especially since the American is already a spokesman for the Kremlin back in the States. "Anything that even remotely embarrasses Putin, or questions the validity of the Russian position and Carlson would not be returning to the US. It can only be right to interview Putin if it can be done robustly and Tucker Carlson would know exactly what would await him if he asked the wrong questions. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I expect an hour of Tucker deepthroating Putin penis. He will not be asking real questions surrounded by KGB thugs. Especially since the American is already a spokesman for the Kremlin back in the States.
Anything that even remotely embarrasses Putin, or questions the validity of the Russian position and Carlson would not be returning to the US.
It can only be right to interview Putin if it can be done robustly and Tucker Carlson would know exactly what would await him if he asked the wrong questions."Naa he will be alright their military grade nerve agent does not work. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I expect an hour of Tucker deepthroating Putin penis. He will not be asking real questions surrounded by KGB thugs. Especially since the American is already a spokesman for the Kremlin back in the States. "It probably would not take much to deepthroat Putin. I reckon his tiny dick is the root of so many problems not just for the shortarse himself but for the world! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well."" They are also blaming the the European farmers strikes on the russian federation, the finger pointing is comical.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I expect an hour of Tucker deepthroating Putin penis. He will not be asking real questions surrounded by KGB thugs. Especially since the American is already a spokesman for the Kremlin back in the States.
It probably would not take much to deepthroat Putin. I reckon his tiny dick is the root of so many problems not just for the shortarse himself but for the world!" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well."" Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda" Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next." A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth." I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. " Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. " I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. " Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… " By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on." Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? " ignore popular opinion at your peril.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.." You are of course right. The human race continuously fails to learn from its mistakes because people simply don’t want to follow or understand history. As Goebbels quite accurately said (words to the effect) that there was no point in trying to convince intellectuals because they could never be won over. The ordinary (presumably poorly educated) worker however could easily be won over. This concept is being played out today in front of our very eyes and too many are just not joining the dots - either because they can’t, or they just don’t want to. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.." This forum is so shite that I can’t even use a greater than/less than symbol? Popular opinion does not trump fact. No matter how much wankers like Carlson want it to. He bullshits for money and clicks. Lies brazenly and says ofsoua things for content. Some may view that as acceptable, but we should expect higher standards in our media. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.. You are of course right. The human race continuously fails to learn from its mistakes because people simply don’t want to follow or understand history. As Goebbels quite accurately said (words to the effect) that there was no point in trying to convince intellectuals because they could never be won over. The ordinary (presumably poorly educated) worker however could easily be won over. This concept is being played out today in front of our very eyes and too many are just not joining the dots - either because they can’t, or they just don’t want to." Are you putting yourself in the thick uneducated band. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.. This forum is so shite that I can’t even use a greater than/less than symbol? Popular opinion does not trump fact. No matter how much wankers like Carlson want it to. He bullshits for money and clicks. Lies brazenly and says ofsoua things for content. Some may view that as acceptable, but we should expect higher standards in our media." you are missing the point | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? " What did he say? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? What did he say?" I was talking to the other chap. Feel free to look it up, there’s plenty of info out there. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? What did he say? I was talking to the other chap. Feel free to look it up, there’s plenty of info out there. " I was asking you, of course, you're under no obligation to answer. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.. This forum is so shite that I can’t even use a greater than/less than symbol? Popular opinion does not trump fact. No matter how much wankers like Carlson want it to. He bullshits for money and clicks. Lies brazenly and says ofsoua things for content. Some may view that as acceptable, but we should expect higher standards in our media. you are missing the point" Not missing the point at all. You seem accepting of a ‘journalist’ spreading mistruths bevause some of the public lap it up. That’s not acceptable in any walk of life. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.. This forum is so shite that I can’t even use a greater than/less than symbol? Popular opinion does not trump fact. No matter how much wankers like Carlson want it to. He bullshits for money and clicks. Lies brazenly and says ofsoua things for content. Some may view that as acceptable, but we should expect higher standards in our media. you are missing the point Not missing the point at all. You seem accepting of a ‘journalist’ spreading mistruths bevause some of the public lap it up. That’s not acceptable in any walk of life." tosh... Read what is written, think and reply it actually helps flow of discussion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.. This forum is so shite that I can’t even use a greater than/less than symbol? Popular opinion does not trump fact. No matter how much wankers like Carlson want it to. He bullshits for money and clicks. Lies brazenly and says ofsoua things for content. Some may view that as acceptable, but we should expect higher standards in our media. you are missing the point Not missing the point at all. You seem accepting of a ‘journalist’ spreading mistruths bevause some of the public lap it up. That’s not acceptable in any walk of life. tosh... Read what is written, think and reply it actually helps flow of discussion. " No. Explain it to me like I’m 5. What good can possibly be expected to come from Carlson interviewing Putin? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.. This forum is so shite that I can’t even use a greater than/less than symbol? Popular opinion does not trump fact. No matter how much wankers like Carlson want it to. He bullshits for money and clicks. Lies brazenly and says ofsoua things for content. Some may view that as acceptable, but we should expect higher standards in our media. you are missing the point Not missing the point at all. You seem accepting of a ‘journalist’ spreading mistruths bevause some of the public lap it up. That’s not acceptable in any walk of life. tosh... Read what is written, think and reply it actually helps flow of discussion. No. Explain it to me like I’m 5. What good can possibly be expected to come from Carlson interviewing Putin? " My spidey sense is tingling or my jedi master light sabre is telling me it needs a recharge but i reckon the interview will be embarrassing even jaw dropping. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.. This forum is so shite that I can’t even use a greater than/less than symbol? Popular opinion does not trump fact. No matter how much wankers like Carlson want it to. He bullshits for money and clicks. Lies brazenly and says ofsoua things for content. Some may view that as acceptable, but we should expect higher standards in our media. you are missing the point Not missing the point at all. You seem accepting of a ‘journalist’ spreading mistruths bevause some of the public lap it up. That’s not acceptable in any walk of life. tosh... Read what is written, think and reply it actually helps flow of discussion. No. Explain it to me like I’m 5. What good can possibly be expected to come from Carlson interviewing Putin? " Have you watched it? Why have you got this point of view without watching it, and yes I know q1 was rhetorical. The fact it is driving so much interest regardless of opinion, suggests it is something that people / networks / governments are conflicted about. Let it unfold, before nailing your flag to the post. I can't be clearer than that | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.. This forum is so shite that I can’t even use a greater than/less than symbol? Popular opinion does not trump fact. No matter how much wankers like Carlson want it to. He bullshits for money and clicks. Lies brazenly and says ofsoua things for content. Some may view that as acceptable, but we should expect higher standards in our media. you are missing the point Not missing the point at all. You seem accepting of a ‘journalist’ spreading mistruths bevause some of the public lap it up. That’s not acceptable in any walk of life. tosh... Read what is written, think and reply it actually helps flow of discussion. No. Explain it to me like I’m 5. What good can possibly be expected to come from Carlson interviewing Putin? Have you watched it? Why have you got this point of view without watching it, and yes I know q1 was rhetorical. The fact it is driving so much interest regardless of opinion, suggests it is something that people / networks / governments are conflicted about. Let it unfold, before nailing your flag to the post. I can't be clearer than that" I have unfortunately seen Carlson’s work, and he is as we all know, a spreader of conspiracy theory and nonsense. In short - he’s not a journalist. He’s not even close. The idea that he’s miraculously going to become one is naive. On the other side, we have Putin, a man who doesn’t speak to the west. A man who has proved time and again that he has no care for the wellbeing of his citizens, and everyone is disposable to him if they serve him no direct purpose. A man who has no problem in spreading misinformation and breaking international laws. He’s not going to reveal anything worthwhile or of interest. This is a sham. You know it, I know it. Tucker Carlson knows it (but it’ll get him a zillion clicks) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.. This forum is so shite that I can’t even use a greater than/less than symbol? Popular opinion does not trump fact. No matter how much wankers like Carlson want it to. He bullshits for money and clicks. Lies brazenly and says ofsoua things for content. Some may view that as acceptable, but we should expect higher standards in our media. you are missing the point Not missing the point at all. You seem accepting of a ‘journalist’ spreading mistruths bevause some of the public lap it up. That’s not acceptable in any walk of life. tosh... Read what is written, think and reply it actually helps flow of discussion. No. Explain it to me like I’m 5. What good can possibly be expected to come from Carlson interviewing Putin? Have you watched it? Why have you got this point of view without watching it, and yes I know q1 was rhetorical. The fact it is driving so much interest regardless of opinion, suggests it is something that people / networks / governments are conflicted about. Let it unfold, before nailing your flag to the post. I can't be clearer than that I have unfortunately seen Carlson’s work, and he is as we all know, a spreader of conspiracy theory and nonsense. In short - he’s not a journalist. He’s not even close. The idea that he’s miraculously going to become one is naive. On the other side, we have Putin, a man who doesn’t speak to the west. A man who has proved time and again that he has no care for the wellbeing of his citizens, and everyone is disposable to him if they serve him no direct purpose. A man who has no problem in spreading misinformation and breaking international laws. He’s not going to reveal anything worthwhile or of interest. This is a sham. You know it, I know it. Tucker Carlson knows it (but it’ll get him a zillion clicks)" Watched it or going down the normal leftist cancel it, because you know the outcome? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.. This forum is so shite that I can’t even use a greater than/less than symbol? Popular opinion does not trump fact. No matter how much wankers like Carlson want it to. He bullshits for money and clicks. Lies brazenly and says ofsoua things for content. Some may view that as acceptable, but we should expect higher standards in our media. you are missing the point Not missing the point at all. You seem accepting of a ‘journalist’ spreading mistruths bevause some of the public lap it up. That’s not acceptable in any walk of life. tosh... Read what is written, think and reply it actually helps flow of discussion. No. Explain it to me like I’m 5. What good can possibly be expected to come from Carlson interviewing Putin? Have you watched it? Why have you got this point of view without watching it, and yes I know q1 was rhetorical. The fact it is driving so much interest regardless of opinion, suggests it is something that people / networks / governments are conflicted about. Let it unfold, before nailing your flag to the post. I can't be clearer than that I have unfortunately seen Carlson’s work, and he is as we all know, a spreader of conspiracy theory and nonsense. In short - he’s not a journalist. He’s not even close. The idea that he’s miraculously going to become one is naive. On the other side, we have Putin, a man who doesn’t speak to the west. A man who has proved time and again that he has no care for the wellbeing of his citizens, and everyone is disposable to him if they serve him no direct purpose. A man who has no problem in spreading misinformation and breaking international laws. He’s not going to reveal anything worthwhile or of interest. This is a sham. You know it, I know it. Tucker Carlson knows it (but it’ll get him a zillion clicks) Watched it or going down the normal leftist cancel it, because you know the outcome?" Cancelling and not watching are different things. Tucker and Putin have the right to have their little MAGA porn-fest, and the whole world has the right to choose to watch or not. I look forward to people fact-checking it live | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda Carlson is at zero risk of coming to any harm. And why are you so fearful of hearing what Putin has to say? All we get is Western propaganda. We’ve been told for two years now that Ukraine is winning and that Russia has made a terrible mistake. Yet support for Ukraine is drying up, and this past week Zelensky has sacked two of his top military people. That’s not the behaviour of a regime that is winning. Anybody with a pea for a brain can see what’s happening. So I’d be interested to hear what Russia’s perspective is and maybe somewhere we might be able to ascertain the actual truth of what is going on and what might come next. A right wing propagandist interviewing a right wing dictator isn’t going to ascertain any truth. I’m surprised that you are so small minded about it. Personally I’m always interested to hear what other people think. Let’s see what the viewing figures are. Love island gets lots of viewers. Doesn’t mean it’s worth watching. I’ve made my thoughts on Carlson clear. He’s not a valid source for information. He’s a propagandist and a dangerous one at that. I’m not sure he provides information. He just asks people questions. It’s what journalists used to do. Not sure that any credible journalists used to race bait and spread conspiracy theories… By “credible journalists” you mean people like the BBC, Sky, CNN, MSNBC whose role nowadays is actually not to ask any questions, not to investigate or delve or go where the facts take them, but simply to push a narrow agenda which all of them agree on. Pushing a narrow agenda? Avoidance of facts? What did Carlson say about the Jan 6th riots? Or the great replacement theory? ignore popular opinion at your peril.. This forum is so shite that I can’t even use a greater than/less than symbol? Popular opinion does not trump fact. No matter how much wankers like Carlson want it to. He bullshits for money and clicks. Lies brazenly and says ofsoua things for content. Some may view that as acceptable, but we should expect higher standards in our media. you are missing the point Not missing the point at all. You seem accepting of a ‘journalist’ spreading mistruths bevause some of the public lap it up. That’s not acceptable in any walk of life. tosh... Read what is written, think and reply it actually helps flow of discussion. No. Explain it to me like I’m 5. What good can possibly be expected to come from Carlson interviewing Putin? Have you watched it? Why have you got this point of view without watching it, and yes I know q1 was rhetorical. The fact it is driving so much interest regardless of opinion, suggests it is something that people / networks / governments are conflicted about. Let it unfold, before nailing your flag to the post. I can't be clearer than that I have unfortunately seen Carlson’s work, and he is as we all know, a spreader of conspiracy theory and nonsense. In short - he’s not a journalist. He’s not even close. The idea that he’s miraculously going to become one is naive. On the other side, we have Putin, a man who doesn’t speak to the west. A man who has proved time and again that he has no care for the wellbeing of his citizens, and everyone is disposable to him if they serve him no direct purpose. A man who has no problem in spreading misinformation and breaking international laws. He’s not going to reveal anything worthwhile or of interest. This is a sham. You know it, I know it. Tucker Carlson knows it (but it’ll get him a zillion clicks) Watched it or going down the normal leftist cancel it, because you know the outcome? Cancelling and not watching are different things. Tucker and Putin have the right to have their little MAGA porn-fest, and the whole world has the right to choose to watch or not. I look forward to people fact-checking it live" noble  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Watched it or going down the normal leftist cancel it, because you know the outcome?" It’s also bizarre to say ‘the normal leftist cancel it’ when the right have a frothing fit when a classic film is made but beloved character is portrayed as a minority. Snowflakes don’t belong exclusively to either side of the political spectrum. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Watched it or going down the normal leftist cancel it, because you know the outcome? It’s also bizarre to say ‘the normal leftist cancel it’ when the right have a frothing fit when a classic film is made but beloved character is portrayed as a minority. Snowflakes don’t belong exclusively to either side of the political spectrum. " I agree things can be cancelled right and left, do you see why I was saying you were cancelling though? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose " There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility." *sigh* The story was widely reported. You can Google it. Did bots have an effect? Who knows. Can anyone here prove either way? No they can’t. Is those type of electoral tactic here to stay? Yes it likely is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility." People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. " Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t." Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true!" You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t." "17,410,742 votes to leave and 16,141,241 to remain, a margin of 1,269,501 votes". Some people have a real issue on this forum with being factual.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true!" Why red? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I think from reading alot of this thread, many are completely unaware of the events in Ukraine over the last 20 years. The 2014 coup and their actions onwards essentially the start of recent events." shhhh you cant say that,it only started a cpl of years ago according to most media and ukraine supporters | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! Why red?" Almost certainly Ladas, painted red to disguise them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. " Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. " Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? " Someone mentioned twitter bots and you brought Brexit into the debate. And then stated "It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." You then went on to say it can't be proved. So you're pushing something you know hasnt be proven, ergo, conspiracy. Do better mate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? Someone mentioned twitter bots and you brought Brexit into the debate. And then stated "It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." You then went on to say it can't be proved. So you're pushing something you know hasnt be proven, ergo, conspiracy. Do better mate. " The impact can’t be proved - but the existence can. And since it’s cheap marketing for political parties, it’s something that will be used going forward. It can be used to spread misinformation with ease. I fail to see what I’ve said there that’s incorrect? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? Someone mentioned twitter bots and you brought Brexit into the debate. And then stated "It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." You then went on to say it can't be proved. So you're pushing something you know hasnt be proven, ergo, conspiracy. Do better mate. The impact can’t be proved - but the existence can. And since it’s cheap marketing for political parties, it’s something that will be used going forward. It can be used to spread misinformation with ease. I fail to see what I’ve said there that’s incorrect? " The existence of Russian bots spreading misinformation about Brexit can be conclusively proven? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? Someone mentioned twitter bots and you brought Brexit into the debate. And then stated "It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." You then went on to say it can't be proved. So you're pushing something you know hasnt be proven, ergo, conspiracy. Do better mate. The impact can’t be proved - but the existence can. And since it’s cheap marketing for political parties, it’s something that will be used going forward. It can be used to spread misinformation with ease. I fail to see what I’ve said there that’s incorrect? The existence of Russian bots spreading misinformation about Brexit can be conclusively proven?" The existence of Twitter bots can be proven, and there was a slant towards leave - that much is known for fact. And I said bots ‘can’ be used to spread misinformation. As a matter of fact I believe some were used for this purpose - but that’s dependent upon your definition of ‘misinformation’. https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2017/10/13500-strong-twitter-bot-army-disappeared-shortly-after-eu-referendum-research-reveals | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? Someone mentioned twitter bots and you brought Brexit into the debate. And then stated "It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." You then went on to say it can't be proved. So you're pushing something you know hasnt be proven, ergo, conspiracy. Do better mate. The impact can’t be proved - but the existence can. And since it’s cheap marketing for political parties, it’s something that will be used going forward. It can be used to spread misinformation with ease. I fail to see what I’ve said there that’s incorrect? The existence of Russian bots spreading misinformation about Brexit can be conclusively proven?" I'm building a case to expose the FAB bots.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." Elon musk clearly supports trump Elon musk bought twitter as his own media channel Trump has agreed to pull out and hand Ukraine to Putin in exchange for electoral support This interview was concocted to give the bots ammunition to persuade America that Putin is the Messiah and therefore they should support Trump. Possibly all coincidence lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? Someone mentioned twitter bots and you brought Brexit into the debate. And then stated "It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." You then went on to say it can't be proved. So you're pushing something you know hasnt be proven, ergo, conspiracy. Do better mate. The impact can’t be proved - but the existence can. And since it’s cheap marketing for political parties, it’s something that will be used going forward. It can be used to spread misinformation with ease. I fail to see what I’ve said there that’s incorrect? The existence of Russian bots spreading misinformation about Brexit can be conclusively proven? The existence of Twitter bots can be proven, and there was a slant towards leave - that much is known for fact. And I said bots ‘can’ be used to spread misinformation. As a matter of fact I believe some were used for this purpose - but that’s dependent upon your definition of ‘misinformation’. https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2017/10/13500-strong-twitter-bot-army-disappeared-shortly-after-eu-referendum-research-reveals" Absolutely no mention of Russia in that article. Furthermore: "We didn’t find evidence that bots helped spread fake news. Instead, they were invested in feeding and echoing user-curated, hyperpartisan and polarizing information." You, of course didn't mention Russia but the person you were replying to did. That's the conspiracy part I've asked you about. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The only reason putin invited him and noone else is because tucker is russian friendly, so as a result, to further spread russias propaganda, also tucker actually believes that the war in 2014 was also started by the west and as well this war too, how can one think that?" Russia not only has bots but obviously has agents all over the world, if they can kill someone in a park in England they can have a friendly reporter in the US. There is a distinct possibility they will have one of their agents as POTUS (for the second time) and in my opinion they had one of their lesser intelligent agents installed as PM of the UK who didn't even bother to change his forename from Boris. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The only reason putin invited him and noone else is because tucker is russian friendly, so as a result, to further spread russias propaganda, also tucker actually believes that the war in 2014 was also started by the west and as well this war too, how can one think that? Russia not only has bots but obviously has agents all over the world, if they can kill someone in a park in England they can have a friendly reporter in the US. There is a distinct possibility they will have one of their agents as POTUS (for the second time) and in my opinion they had one of their lesser intelligent agents installed as PM of the UK who didn't even bother to change his forename from Boris." I don’t think they need to install an agent in the US. They’ve just got Biden. Putin has to be stopped from talking after over 2 hours discussing global affairs. Biden spends five minutes recounting his conversations with dead French Presidents then needs to have a nap. The West is a laughing stock. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The only reason putin invited him and noone else is because tucker is russian friendly, so as a result, to further spread russias propaganda, also tucker actually believes that the war in 2014 was also started by the west and as well this war too, how can one think that? Russia not only has bots but obviously has agents all over the world, if they can kill someone in a park in England they can have a friendly reporter in the US. There is a distinct possibility they will have one of their agents as POTUS (for the second time) and in my opinion they had one of their lesser intelligent agents installed as PM of the UK who didn't even bother to change his forename from Boris." you do realise the russian collusion thing was proved to be a fantasy of unhinged hillary, | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? Someone mentioned twitter bots and you brought Brexit into the debate. And then stated "It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." You then went on to say it can't be proved. So you're pushing something you know hasnt be proven, ergo, conspiracy. Do better mate. The impact can’t be proved - but the existence can. And since it’s cheap marketing for political parties, it’s something that will be used going forward. It can be used to spread misinformation with ease. I fail to see what I’ve said there that’s incorrect? The existence of Russian bots spreading misinformation about Brexit can be conclusively proven? The existence of Twitter bots can be proven, and there was a slant towards leave - that much is known for fact. And I said bots ‘can’ be used to spread misinformation. As a matter of fact I believe some were used for this purpose - but that’s dependent upon your definition of ‘misinformation’. https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2017/10/13500-strong-twitter-bot-army-disappeared-shortly-after-eu-referendum-research-reveals Absolutely no mention of Russia in that article. Furthermore: "We didn’t find evidence that bots helped spread fake news. Instead, they were invested in feeding and echoing user-curated, hyperpartisan and polarizing information." You, of course didn't mention Russia but the person you were replying to did. That's the conspiracy part I've asked you about. " The person who mentioned Russia is the person apparently in denial about the existence of bots, so I’m not sure what your point is? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! Why red? Almost certainly Ladas, painted red to disguise them." Do they still make Ladas? Why would red disguise them? You’ve lost me! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? Someone mentioned twitter bots and you brought Brexit into the debate. And then stated "It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." You then went on to say it can't be proved. So you're pushing something you know hasnt be proven, ergo, conspiracy. Do better mate. The impact can’t be proved - but the existence can. And since it’s cheap marketing for political parties, it’s something that will be used going forward. It can be used to spread misinformation with ease. I fail to see what I’ve said there that’s incorrect? The existence of Russian bots spreading misinformation about Brexit can be conclusively proven? The existence of Twitter bots can be proven, and there was a slant towards leave - that much is known for fact. And I said bots ‘can’ be used to spread misinformation. As a matter of fact I believe some were used for this purpose - but that’s dependent upon your definition of ‘misinformation’. https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2017/10/13500-strong-twitter-bot-army-disappeared-shortly-after-eu-referendum-research-reveals Absolutely no mention of Russia in that article. Furthermore: "We didn’t find evidence that bots helped spread fake news. Instead, they were invested in feeding and echoing user-curated, hyperpartisan and polarizing information." You, of course didn't mention Russia but the person you were replying to did. That's the conspiracy part I've asked you about. The person who mentioned Russia is the person apparently in denial about the existence of bots, so I’m not sure what your point is?" You must be reading a different conversation. The person who you responded to shoehorning Brexit into this is definitely not in denial of bots. That person was who mentioned Russian bots. Are you Joe Biden in disguise? BTW, whilst we're on the Twitter subject, do you or don't you have Twitter? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The only reason putin invited him and noone else is because tucker is russian friendly, so as a result, to further spread russias propaganda, also tucker actually believes that the war in 2014 was also started by the west and as well this war too, how can one think that? Russia not only has bots but obviously has agents all over the world, if they can kill someone in a park in England they can have a friendly reporter in the US. There is a distinct possibility they will have one of their agents as POTUS (for the second time) and in my opinion they had one of their lesser intelligent agents installed as PM of the UK who didn't even bother to change his forename from Boris. I don’t think they need to install an agent in the US. They’ve just got Biden. Putin has to be stopped from talking after over 2 hours discussing global affairs. Biden spends five minutes recounting his conversations with dead French Presidents then needs to have a nap. The West is a laughing stock." Biden suited Putin at the last election which is why he got in, he wanted an idiot in charge when he invaded Ukraine then replace him with Trump who hands him Ukraine on a plate. Not terribly complicated | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The only reason putin invited him and noone else is because tucker is russian friendly, so as a result, to further spread russias propaganda, also tucker actually believes that the war in 2014 was also started by the west and as well this war too, how can one think that? Russia not only has bots but obviously has agents all over the world, if they can kill someone in a park in England they can have a friendly reporter in the US. There is a distinct possibility they will have one of their agents as POTUS (for the second time) and in my opinion they had one of their lesser intelligent agents installed as PM of the UK who didn't even bother to change his forename from Boris. I don’t think they need to install an agent in the US. They’ve just got Biden. Putin has to be stopped from talking after over 2 hours discussing global affairs. Biden spends five minutes recounting his conversations with dead French Presidents then needs to have a nap. The West is a laughing stock. Biden suited Putin at the last election which is why he got in, he wanted an idiot in charge when he invaded Ukraine then replace him with Trump who hands him Ukraine on a plate. Not terribly complicated " If it wasn't down to the Russians who in their right mind would have a choice of president come down to trump or biden lol (one is a criminal and the other has Alzheimer's...Jesus wept) And who would vote for Boris without being coerced ? (Clown, liar, cheat) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? " De-platforming journalists is undemocratic and against modern Western values. That interview was not a journalist, but a sycophant worshipping his idol. It's a tough one. On balance, wee need to allow a platform for those we disagree with, and counter with dialogue (up to a point). Otherwise we're Russia and China. There do need to be limits, bit that interview doesn't cross the line. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? Someone mentioned twitter bots and you brought Brexit into the debate. And then stated "It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." You then went on to say it can't be proved. So you're pushing something you know hasnt be proven, ergo, conspiracy. Do better mate. The impact can’t be proved - but the existence can. And since it’s cheap marketing for political parties, it’s something that will be used going forward. It can be used to spread misinformation with ease. I fail to see what I’ve said there that’s incorrect? The existence of Russian bots spreading misinformation about Brexit can be conclusively proven? The existence of Twitter bots can be proven, and there was a slant towards leave - that much is known for fact. And I said bots ‘can’ be used to spread misinformation. As a matter of fact I believe some were used for this purpose - but that’s dependent upon your definition of ‘misinformation’. https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2017/10/13500-strong-twitter-bot-army-disappeared-shortly-after-eu-referendum-research-reveals Absolutely no mention of Russia in that article. Furthermore: "We didn’t find evidence that bots helped spread fake news. Instead, they were invested in feeding and echoing user-curated, hyperpartisan and polarizing information." You, of course didn't mention Russia but the person you were replying to did. That's the conspiracy part I've asked you about. The person who mentioned Russia is the person apparently in denial about the existence of bots, so I’m not sure what your point is? You must be reading a different conversation. The person who you responded to shoehorning Brexit into this is definitely not in denial of bots. That person was who mentioned Russian bots. Are you Joe Biden in disguise? BTW, whilst we're on the Twitter subject, do you or don't you have Twitter?" As I’ve said before, I have a Twitter with my band, but not a politics one (and not for around a year now). My old account was banned (at 11.4k  ) and when I setup a new one I got grassed up and banned again | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? Someone mentioned twitter bots and you brought Brexit into the debate. And then stated "It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." You then went on to say it can't be proved. So you're pushing something you know hasnt be proven, ergo, conspiracy. Do better mate. The impact can’t be proved - but the existence can. And since it’s cheap marketing for political parties, it’s something that will be used going forward. It can be used to spread misinformation with ease. I fail to see what I’ve said there that’s incorrect? The existence of Russian bots spreading misinformation about Brexit can be conclusively proven? The existence of Twitter bots can be proven, and there was a slant towards leave - that much is known for fact. And I said bots ‘can’ be used to spread misinformation. As a matter of fact I believe some were used for this purpose - but that’s dependent upon your definition of ‘misinformation’. https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2017/10/13500-strong-twitter-bot-army-disappeared-shortly-after-eu-referendum-research-reveals Absolutely no mention of Russia in that article. Furthermore: "We didn’t find evidence that bots helped spread fake news. Instead, they were invested in feeding and echoing user-curated, hyperpartisan and polarizing information." You, of course didn't mention Russia but the person you were replying to did. That's the conspiracy part I've asked you about. The person who mentioned Russia is the person apparently in denial about the existence of bots, so I’m not sure what your point is? You must be reading a different conversation. The person who you responded to shoehorning Brexit into this is definitely not in denial of bots. That person was who mentioned Russian bots. Are you Joe Biden in disguise? BTW, whilst we're on the Twitter subject, do you or don't you have Twitter? As I’ve said before, I have a Twitter with my band, but not a politics one (and not for around a year now). My old account was banned (at 11.4k ) and when I setup a new one I got grassed up and banned again "Just wondered as on the transphobe thread you said you didn't have Twitter. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? Someone mentioned twitter bots and you brought Brexit into the debate. And then stated "It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." You then went on to say it can't be proved. So you're pushing something you know hasnt be proven, ergo, conspiracy. Do better mate. The impact can’t be proved - but the existence can. And since it’s cheap marketing for political parties, it’s something that will be used going forward. It can be used to spread misinformation with ease. I fail to see what I’ve said there that’s incorrect? The existence of Russian bots spreading misinformation about Brexit can be conclusively proven? The existence of Twitter bots can be proven, and there was a slant towards leave - that much is known for fact. And I said bots ‘can’ be used to spread misinformation. As a matter of fact I believe some were used for this purpose - but that’s dependent upon your definition of ‘misinformation’. https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2017/10/13500-strong-twitter-bot-army-disappeared-shortly-after-eu-referendum-research-reveals Absolutely no mention of Russia in that article. Furthermore: "We didn’t find evidence that bots helped spread fake news. Instead, they were invested in feeding and echoing user-curated, hyperpartisan and polarizing information." You, of course didn't mention Russia but the person you were replying to did. That's the conspiracy part I've asked you about. The person who mentioned Russia is the person apparently in denial about the existence of bots, so I’m not sure what your point is? You must be reading a different conversation. The person who you responded to shoehorning Brexit into this is definitely not in denial of bots. That person was who mentioned Russian bots. Are you Joe Biden in disguise? BTW, whilst we're on the Twitter subject, do you or don't you have Twitter? As I’ve said before, I have a Twitter with my band, but not a politics one (and not for around a year now). My old account was banned (at 11.4k ) and when I setup a new one I got grassed up and banned again
Just wondered as on the transphobe thread you said you didn't have Twitter. "And *I* don’t have an account. The band one is used for posting gig videos and stuff. We all four have access | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not watched it yet. Is it worth my time? I am curious what the shorty tiny dick egotist had to say though." He comes across as thoughtful and willing to be part of a global collaboration of trade and friendship. Full on PR that will resonate with many. On Ukraine, he basically isn't happy how the land was given away and wants it back. He was asked if there was a likelihood of him invading other countries such as Poland, the pause on answering that was uncomfortably long, which made the answer of no, a challenge to believe. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Carlson is interviewing Putin. The interview will be available in full on Carlson’s own website and on X. The MSM and Western politicians will be in meltdown. Personally I’m interested to hear what Putin has to say. And despite our apparently “free press” we aren’t likely to hear it anywhere else. But is Carlson right to do this? De-platforming journalists is undemocratic and against modern Western values. That interview was not a journalist, but a sycophant worshipping his idol. It's a tough one. On balance, wee need to allow a platform for those we disagree with, and counter with dialogue (up to a point). Otherwise we're Russia and China. There do need to be limits, bit that interview doesn't cross the line." Very true | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" On Ukraine, he basically isn't happy how the land was given away and wants it back. " Aww. Poor baby. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The BBC and other media is already straw manning Tucker for not challenging Putin enough. Our media and Russian media both have one thing in common, they want to control narrative. We would much prefer to listen to what someone has to say, even Putin, and make up our own minds. It's strange listening to Putin, as he seems to be much more direct in his answers and doesn't seem to just parrot a line like our politicians do." The reporting on this by the BBC is awful. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He's still a dick by the way." A teeny tiny micro dick I reckon. The root of all problems | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"On 23rd Feb 2022 Putin stated Russia would not invade Ukraine. What happened on the 24th Feb 2022 ? Why would anyone care what he has to say ? " After his comment last night, he definitly wants to invade Poland and the other Slav states. And he wants Orban to take over part of Ukraine | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I think from reading alot of this thread, many are completely unaware of the events in Ukraine over the last 20 years. The 2014 coup and their actions onwards essentially the start of recent events.shhhh you cant say that,it only started a cpl of years ago according to most media and ukraine supporters " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putin spent 30 minutes talking about the history of Ukraine, he only wanted to mention it briefly but droned on for over half an hour being remarkably selective in what he chose to mention. That theme continued it finally came to the second world war, it was curious that he chose not to mention the assistance the USSR gave to Nazi Germany, instead talking about a German-Polish alliance. The Soviet invasion of Poland wasn't mentioned, nor was the large quantity of Soviet oil which fuelled the Nazi war machine for the opening stages of the war. Further on, despite Carlson repeatedly bringing up NATO expansion, Putin barely mentioned it. The invasion of Ukraine was not about NATO, despite previous claims made by Putin himself which Carlson brought up. Carlson had a narrative to sell to his audience, which fell on deaf ears. It seemed like it was a bit of an own goal on Putin's part to not latch onto the NATO expansion being scary to little Russia myth. It is important there is an ongoing dialogue with Russia and Carlson did what was widely expected. What we can take from it is what Putin really thinks of Ukraine, that it is an artificial state. His grievances towards Ukraine will likely mirror how he feels about other European states. I'm glad he interviewed Putin, there can be no more room for appeasement for a such a crazed lunatic. I can only hope that Europe will take Putin at his word, he has told us all what he thinks, sent thousands to be slaughtered for what he thinks and will continue to do so until he is defeated. The US can no longer be counted on for European security, irrespective of the outcome of the Presidential election, it is therefore up to European states to preserve and protect Europe. We are a part of that, we are a European state, you cannot change geography. Putin, however, seems keen to change national borders, not through self-determination but through acts of war. More will come if he isn't stopped. " Nicely put. I am certain Trump will pull out of Ukraine and the Republicans will follow like sheep. It is then very likely that Putin will continue to roll west with his armies when he does, unless he is stopped. The USA will have to reassess how it views a future with a Russia controlling Europe, including Britain, with allies in China, Iran, India, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria etc etc. I can see the whole of north Africa falling in time to Russia and its allies. Then MAGA will have no one to sell to. The USA will go into decline and history, when it is written, will point it's immovable finger at MAGA and Trump. Such is politics. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putin spent 30 minutes talking about the history of Ukraine, he only wanted to mention it briefly but droned on for over half an hour being remarkably selective in what he chose to mention. That theme continued it finally came to the second world war, it was curious that he chose not to mention the assistance the USSR gave to Nazi Germany, instead talking about a German-Polish alliance. The Soviet invasion of Poland wasn't mentioned, nor was the large quantity of Soviet oil which fuelled the Nazi war machine for the opening stages of the war. Further on, despite Carlson repeatedly bringing up NATO expansion, Putin barely mentioned it. The invasion of Ukraine was not about NATO, despite previous claims made by Putin himself which Carlson brought up. Carlson had a narrative to sell to his audience, which fell on deaf ears. It seemed like it was a bit of an own goal on Putin's part to not latch onto the NATO expansion being scary to little Russia myth. It is important there is an ongoing dialogue with Russia and Carlson did what was widely expected. What we can take from it is what Putin really thinks of Ukraine, that it is an artificial state. His grievances towards Ukraine will likely mirror how he feels about other European states. I'm glad he interviewed Putin, there can be no more room for appeasement for a such a crazed lunatic. I can only hope that Europe will take Putin at his word, he has told us all what he thinks, sent thousands to be slaughtered for what he thinks and will continue to do so until he is defeated. The US can no longer be counted on for European security, irrespective of the outcome of the Presidential election, it is therefore up to European states to preserve and protect Europe. We are a part of that, we are a European state, you cannot change geography. Putin, however, seems keen to change national borders, not through self-determination but through acts of war. More will come if he isn't stopped. Nicely put. I am certain Trump will pull out of Ukraine and the Republicans will follow like sheep. It is then very likely that Putin will continue to roll west with his armies when he does, unless he is stopped. The USA will have to reassess how it views a future with a Russia controlling Europe, including Britain, with allies in China, Iran, India, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria etc etc. I can see the whole of north Africa falling in time to Russia and its allies. Then MAGA will have no one to sell to. The USA will go into decline and history, when it is written, will point it's immovable finger at MAGA and Trump. Such is politics. " It could also be that Putin has recognised his army is significantly weaker than he was told and there's little chance they could take on the west in the next 10 years. Next time they WILL be prepared | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The only reason putin invited him and noone else is because tucker is russian friendly, so as a result, to further spread russias propaganda, also tucker actually believes that the war in 2014 was also started by the west and as well this war too, how can one think that?" Because the west (America) has started numerous political coups all around the world. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. Can we prove that 200 red cars driving past Buckingham Palace on the afternoon of 23 June 2016 swung the result? No!! But sounds persuasive! Maybe some of them were driven by Russians! Conclusive if true! You’re awfully defensive about your leave vote, aren’t you? Dream on. It’s almost eight years ago. And here you are still bleating and whining, and talking about Russian bots in the politics forum of a swingers website. You do realise it’s pathetic right? Someone mentioned Twitter bots - that’s how conversation works, right? You usually laugh at conspiracy theories. Why not this one? Twitter bots aren’t a conspiracy - that’s why I mentioned the article about them disappearing. We can argue about whether they’re effective, but not about whether they exist. Specifically Russian bots won the brexit battle is a conspiracy. The Brexit battle was won by Remain, only the won it for the wrong side. Who claimed that Russian bots won the Brexit battle? Someone mentioned twitter bots and you brought Brexit into the debate. And then stated "It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now." You then went on to say it can't be proved. So you're pushing something you know hasnt be proven, ergo, conspiracy. Do better mate. The impact can’t be proved - but the existence can. And since it’s cheap marketing for political parties, it’s something that will be used going forward. It can be used to spread misinformation with ease. I fail to see what I’ve said there that’s incorrect? The existence of Russian bots spreading misinformation about Brexit can be conclusively proven? The existence of Twitter bots can be proven, and there was a slant towards leave - that much is known for fact. And I said bots ‘can’ be used to spread misinformation. As a matter of fact I believe some were used for this purpose - but that’s dependent upon your definition of ‘misinformation’. https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2017/10/13500-strong-twitter-bot-army-disappeared-shortly-after-eu-referendum-research-reveals Absolutely no mention of Russia in that article. Furthermore: "We didn’t find evidence that bots helped spread fake news. Instead, they were invested in feeding and echoing user-curated, hyperpartisan and polarizing information." You, of course didn't mention Russia but the person you were replying to did. That's the conspiracy part I've asked you about. The person who mentioned Russia is the person apparently in denial about the existence of bots, so I’m not sure what your point is? You must be reading a different conversation. The person who you responded to shoehorning Brexit into this is definitely not in denial of bots. That person was who mentioned Russian bots. Are you Joe Biden in disguise? BTW, whilst we're on the Twitter subject, do you or don't you have Twitter? As I’ve said before, I have a Twitter with my band, but not a politics one (and not for around a year now). My old account was banned (at 11.4k ) and when I setup a new one I got grassed up and banned again
Just wondered as on the transphobe thread you said you didn't have Twitter.
And *I* don’t have an account. The band one is used for posting gig videos and stuff. We all four have access " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putin spent 30 minutes talking about the history of Ukraine, he only wanted to mention it briefly but droned on for over half an hour being remarkably selective in what he chose to mention. That theme continued it finally came to the second world war, it was curious that he chose not to mention the assistance the USSR gave to Nazi Germany, instead talking about a German-Polish alliance. The Soviet invasion of Poland wasn't mentioned, nor was the large quantity of Soviet oil which fuelled the Nazi war machine for the opening stages of the war. Further on, despite Carlson repeatedly bringing up NATO expansion, Putin barely mentioned it. The invasion of Ukraine was not about NATO, despite previous claims made by Putin himself which Carlson brought up. Carlson had a narrative to sell to his audience, which fell on deaf ears. It seemed like it was a bit of an own goal on Putin's part to not latch onto the NATO expansion being scary to little Russia myth. It is important there is an ongoing dialogue with Russia and Carlson did what was widely expected. What we can take from it is what Putin really thinks of Ukraine, that it is an artificial state. His grievances towards Ukraine will likely mirror how he feels about other European states. I'm glad he interviewed Putin, there can be no more room for appeasement for a such a crazed lunatic. I can only hope that Europe will take Putin at his word, he has told us all what he thinks, sent thousands to be slaughtered for what he thinks and will continue to do so until he is defeated. The US can no longer be counted on for European security, irrespective of the outcome of the Presidential election, it is therefore up to European states to preserve and protect Europe. We are a part of that, we are a European state, you cannot change geography. Putin, however, seems keen to change national borders, not through self-determination but through acts of war. More will come if he isn't stopped. Nicely put. I am certain Trump will pull out of Ukraine and the Republicans will follow like sheep. It is then very likely that Putin will continue to roll west with his armies when he does, unless he is stopped. The USA will have to reassess how it views a future with a Russia controlling Europe, including Britain, with allies in China, Iran, India, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria etc etc. I can see the whole of north Africa falling in time to Russia and its allies. Then MAGA will have no one to sell to. The USA will go into decline and history, when it is written, will point it's immovable finger at MAGA and Trump. Such is politics. It could also be that Putin has recognised his army is significantly weaker than he was told and there's little chance they could take on the west in the next 10 years. Next time they WILL be prepared " I do not share your optimism. Europe is continuing in kidding itself over its prepardness for war. Our Challenger III tanks will only enter service in 2027, by which time they will likely be outdated, our army is facing a very serious recruit shortage and our navy is having to scrap ships due to its shortage of recruits. It's a similar story in Germany, the federal government are reportedly considering a plan to allow EU nationals join the armed forces, such is the shortage of German recruits. The French are no strangers to recruitment shortages either and, with the Belgians, also suffer a chronic ammunition shortage. EU aid to Ukraine was supposed to reach 1,000,000 rounds of 155mm artillery shells. They are on course to miss that target by a third. In other European countries, it's even worse. Hungary are the obvious bogeyman but what will test the leaders of other European states far more will be the Austrian election later this year. The right-wing FPÖ (whose first leader was an SS officer no less) is currently led by someone who wishes to see the sanctions upon Russia lifted and walked out of an address by Volodymyr Zelensky. Their party has a very slender polling lead but if successful, he would strike a serious hammer blow to European support for Ukraine and the West more generally. It isn't all bad news but Europe cannot continue to bury its head in the sand. Defence spending is going to have to go up. The European Union will have to be either less centralised, in order to allow the more hawkish countries to get on with the task at hand, or become more centralised without the wolves dressed as sheep. It isn't all bad news but what's being done is a fraction of what's required. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. "17,410,742 votes to leave and 16,141,241 to remain, a margin of 1,269,501 votes". Some people have a real issue on this forum with being factual.." So…what’s the swing on a binary vote where the margin is 1.2 million? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. "17,410,742 votes to leave and 16,141,241 to remain, a margin of 1,269,501 votes". Some people have a real issue on this forum with being factual.. So…what’s the swing on a binary vote where the margin is 1.2 million? " How much of the advertising over Brexit benefits which people voted on turned out to be true ? How could people not be swayed when they base their vote on what they have been told and much of it by social media ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not watched it yet. Is it worth my time? I am curious what the shorty tiny dick egotist had to say though." I just watched it. Some was pretty cringe. Some of it was interesting. Viewing it as a piece of theatre, it's interesting to see what questions were permitted, and how it was set up, etc. Not sure it was all that informative. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putin spent 30 minutes talking about the history of Ukraine, he only wanted to mention it briefly but droned on for over half an hour being remarkably selective in what he chose to mention. That theme continued it finally came to the second world war, it was curious that he chose not to mention the assistance the USSR gave to Nazi Germany, instead talking about a German-Polish alliance. The Soviet invasion of Poland wasn't mentioned, nor was the large quantity of Soviet oil which fuelled the Nazi war machine for the opening stages of the war. Further on, despite Carlson repeatedly bringing up NATO expansion, Putin barely mentioned it. The invasion of Ukraine was not about NATO, despite previous claims made by Putin himself which Carlson brought up. Carlson had a narrative to sell to his audience, which fell on deaf ears. It seemed like it was a bit of an own goal on Putin's part to not latch onto the NATO expansion being scary to little Russia myth. It is important there is an ongoing dialogue with Russia and Carlson did what was widely expected. What we can take from it is what Putin really thinks of Ukraine, that it is an artificial state. His grievances towards Ukraine will likely mirror how he feels about other European states. I'm glad he interviewed Putin, there can be no more room for appeasement for a such a crazed lunatic. I can only hope that Europe will take Putin at his word, he has told us all what he thinks, sent thousands to be slaughtered for what he thinks and will continue to do so until he is defeated. The US can no longer be counted on for European security, irrespective of the outcome of the Presidential election, it is therefore up to European states to preserve and protect Europe. We are a part of that, we are a European state, you cannot change geography. Putin, however, seems keen to change national borders, not through self-determination but through acts of war. More will come if he isn't stopped. Nicely put. I am certain Trump will pull out of Ukraine and the Republicans will follow like sheep. It is then very likely that Putin will continue to roll west with his armies when he does, unless he is stopped. The USA will have to reassess how it views a future with a Russia controlling Europe, including Britain, with allies in China, Iran, India, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria etc etc. I can see the whole of north Africa falling in time to Russia and its allies. Then MAGA will have no one to sell to. The USA will go into decline and history, when it is written, will point it's immovable finger at MAGA and Trump. Such is politics. It could also be that Putin has recognised his army is significantly weaker than he was told and there's little chance they could take on the west in the next 10 years. Next time they WILL be prepared " Russia will regrow its army but Putin comes from a culture of, it does not matter how many die so long as I acheive my aim. In time they will win if they set about it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. "17,410,742 votes to leave and 16,141,241 to remain, a margin of 1,269,501 votes". Some people have a real issue on this forum with being factual.. So…what’s the swing on a binary vote where the margin is 1.2 million? How much of the advertising over Brexit benefits which people voted on turned out to be true ? How could people not be swayed when they base their vote on what they have been told and much of it by social media ?" That’s the stuff we’ll never be able to answer (about voters being swayed). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The amount of Russian propaganda bots on what was formerly twitter is mind boggling. All part of Elons plan I suppose There was a story about Twitter bots mysterious disappearing or changing names following the Brexit referendum. It’s something that I suspect will have to be contended with in every election we have now. Yes that will be why Remain lost. Russian bots on Twitter. Anything but accept responsibility. People who voted against Brexit should accept responsibility for people voting for Brexit? This is a new one. Fair play to you. Can we prove that bots/misinformation swung the result? No we can’t - but with a 700k swing being the difference, it would be a bold statement to say it definitely didn’t. "17,410,742 votes to leave and 16,141,241 to remain, a margin of 1,269,501 votes". Some people have a real issue on this forum with being factual.. So…what’s the swing on a binary vote where the margin is 1.2 million? How much of the advertising over Brexit benefits which people voted on turned out to be true ? How could people not be swayed when they base their vote on what they have been told and much of it by social media ? That’s the stuff we’ll never be able to answer (about voters being swayed)." I think opinion polls since would be a good indication | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What would we have made about a cosy fireside chat with that nice Mr Hitler in 1939?" We had one. Neville Chamberlain went there. "Peace for our time" We were all amazed, he lied!!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it starts.... European lawmakers are considering slapping Kremlin propagandist Tucker Carlson with sanctions, including a travel ban, after Carlson conducted an "interview" with Vladimir Putin. Uy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek: "As Putin is a war criminal and the EU sanctions all who assist him in that effort, it seems logical that the External Action Service examine his case as well." Again this stems from the fact that to be a journalist means that you get to the heart of issues by asking hard questions as well as easy questions and then you probe. As most journalists in Russia who have asked hard questions are either dead or in prison, Carlson would know what he was risking by asking hard questions. Therefore all he is doing is broadcasting and legitimising Kremlin propaganda" Julian Assange comes to mind | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does it appear odd to anyone that no one appears to be refuting any claims, but instead try to discredit Carlson?" The claims have been debunked. The Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement discrediting 10 of the claims made by Putin in the interview. You can read them in English here: https://www.gov.pl/web/diplomacy/mfa-statement-on-president-vladimir-putins-10-lies-on-poland-and-ukraine-which-were-not-rectified-by-tucker-carlson-interview-of-8-february-2024 It has also been pointed out (repeatedly) that Gorbachev refuted the idea there was an agreement that NATO would not expand Eastwards. You can watch him refute it here: https://twitter.com/revishvilig/status/1755881331425259626?t=AxljvYa34MKrcXRkAjs00Q&s=19 Newsweek, in addition to the French newspaper Le Monde, have also confirmed Zelensky's father was born in 1947. Thus, could not possibly have fought as a frontline soldier against the Nazis. You can read that here: https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-vladimir-putin-zelensky-father-world-war-ii-tucker-carlson-1868479 What you have said is completely untrue. Many of Putin's claims have been completely debunked. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putin spent 30 minutes talking about the history of Ukraine, he only wanted to mention it briefly but droned on for over half an hour being remarkably selective in what he chose to mention. That theme continued it finally came to the second world war, it was curious that he chose not to mention the assistance the USSR gave to Nazi Germany, instead talking about a German-Polish alliance. The Soviet invasion of Poland wasn't mentioned, nor was the large quantity of Soviet oil which fuelled the Nazi war machine for the opening stages of the war. Further on, despite Carlson repeatedly bringing up NATO expansion, Putin barely mentioned it. The invasion of Ukraine was not about NATO, despite previous claims made by Putin himself which Carlson brought up. Carlson had a narrative to sell to his audience, which fell on deaf ears. It seemed like it was a bit of an own goal on Putin's part to not latch onto the NATO expansion being scary to little Russia myth. It is important there is an ongoing dialogue with Russia and Carlson did what was widely expected. What we can take from it is what Putin really thinks of Ukraine, that it is an artificial state. His grievances towards Ukraine will likely mirror how he feels about other European states. I'm glad he interviewed Putin, there can be no more room for appeasement for a such a crazed lunatic. I can only hope that Europe will take Putin at his word, he has told us all what he thinks, sent thousands to be slaughtered for what he thinks and will continue to do so until he is defeated. The US can no longer be counted on for European security, irrespective of the outcome of the Presidential election, it is therefore up to European states to preserve and protect Europe. We are a part of that, we are a European state, you cannot change geography. Putin, however, seems keen to change national borders, not through self-determination but through acts of war. More will come if he isn't stopped. Nicely put. I am certain Trump will pull out of Ukraine and the Republicans will follow like sheep. It is then very likely that Putin will continue to roll west with his armies when he does, unless he is stopped. The USA will have to reassess how it views a future with a Russia controlling Europe, including Britain, with allies in China, Iran, India, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria etc etc. I can see the whole of north Africa falling in time to Russia and its allies. Then MAGA will have no one to sell to. The USA will go into decline and history, when it is written, will point it's immovable finger at MAGA and Trump. Such is politics. " Neither Russia nor the USA will rule the world at the end. But if I had to choose one, The western gender wars newly founded religion is the end of humanity if the west succeeded in its quest of forcefully converting the rest of the world. We have a better chance to survive as a species with a nuclear war. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does it appear odd to anyone that no one appears to be refuting any claims, but instead try to discredit Carlson? The claims have been debunked. The Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement discrediting 10 of the claims made by Putin in the interview. You can read them in English here: https://www.gov.pl/web/diplomacy/mfa-statement-on-president-vladimir-putins-10-lies-on-poland-and-ukraine-which-were-not-rectified-by-tucker-carlson-interview-of-8-february-2024 It has also been pointed out (repeatedly) that Gorbachev refuted the idea there was an agreement that NATO would not expand Eastwards. You can watch him refute it here: https://twitter.com/revishvilig/status/1755881331425259626?t=AxljvYa34MKrcXRkAjs00Q&s=19 Newsweek, in addition to the French newspaper Le Monde, have also confirmed Zelensky's father was born in 1947. Thus, could not possibly have fought as a frontline soldier against the Nazis. You can read that here: https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-vladimir-putin-zelensky-father-world-war-ii-tucker-carlson-1868479 What you have said is completely untrue. Many of Putin's claims have been completely debunked. " What I've have said is completely untrue? Come back to me when every single claim over the course of 2 hours has been debunked by the relevant people. I'm not here saying Putin was telling the truth but I see something in others attacking the messenger. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does it appear odd to anyone that no one appears to be refuting any claims, but instead try to discredit Carlson? The claims have been debunked. The Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement discrediting 10 of the claims made by Putin in the interview. You can read them in English here: https://www.gov.pl/web/diplomacy/mfa-statement-on-president-vladimir-putins-10-lies-on-poland-and-ukraine-which-were-not-rectified-by-tucker-carlson-interview-of-8-february-2024 It has also been pointed out (repeatedly) that Gorbachev refuted the idea there was an agreement that NATO would not expand Eastwards. You can watch him refute it here: https://twitter.com/revishvilig/status/1755881331425259626?t=AxljvYa34MKrcXRkAjs00Q&s=19 Newsweek, in addition to the French newspaper Le Monde, have also confirmed Zelensky's father was born in 1947. Thus, could not possibly have fought as a frontline soldier against the Nazis. You can read that here: https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-vladimir-putin-zelensky-father-world-war-ii-tucker-carlson-1868479 What you have said is completely untrue. Many of Putin's claims have been completely debunked. What I've have said is completely untrue? Come back to me when every single claim over the course of 2 hours has been debunked by the relevant people. I'm not here saying Putin was telling the truth but I see something in others attacking the messenger." 'No one appears to be refuting any claims' That is what you said. It was completely untrue. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does it appear odd to anyone that no one appears to be refuting any claims, but instead try to discredit Carlson? The claims have been debunked. The Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement discrediting 10 of the claims made by Putin in the interview. You can read them in English here: https://www.gov.pl/web/diplomacy/mfa-statement-on-president-vladimir-putins-10-lies-on-poland-and-ukraine-which-were-not-rectified-by-tucker-carlson-interview-of-8-february-2024 It has also been pointed out (repeatedly) that Gorbachev refuted the idea there was an agreement that NATO would not expand Eastwards. You can watch him refute it here: https://twitter.com/revishvilig/status/1755881331425259626?t=AxljvYa34MKrcXRkAjs00Q&s=19 Newsweek, in addition to the French newspaper Le Monde, have also confirmed Zelensky's father was born in 1947. Thus, could not possibly have fought as a frontline soldier against the Nazis. You can read that here: https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-vladimir-putin-zelensky-father-world-war-ii-tucker-carlson-1868479 What you have said is completely untrue. Many of Putin's claims have been completely debunked. What I've have said is completely untrue? Come back to me when every single claim over the course of 2 hours has been debunked by the relevant people. I'm not here saying Putin was telling the truth but I see something in others attacking the messenger. 'No one appears to be refuting any claims' That is what you said. It was completely untrue." Not 'compeltely' untrue being that some are indeed trying to discredit the messenger. You could just said 'actually there has been some people refute' and point me to those instead of making shit up. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does it appear odd to anyone that no one appears to be refuting any claims, but instead try to discredit Carlson? The claims have been debunked. The Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement discrediting 10 of the claims made by Putin in the interview. You can read them in English here: https://www.gov.pl/web/diplomacy/mfa-statement-on-president-vladimir-putins-10-lies-on-poland-and-ukraine-which-were-not-rectified-by-tucker-carlson-interview-of-8-february-2024 It has also been pointed out (repeatedly) that Gorbachev refuted the idea there was an agreement that NATO would not expand Eastwards. You can watch him refute it here: https://twitter.com/revishvilig/status/1755881331425259626?t=AxljvYa34MKrcXRkAjs00Q&s=19 Newsweek, in addition to the French newspaper Le Monde, have also confirmed Zelensky's father was born in 1947. Thus, could not possibly have fought as a frontline soldier against the Nazis. You can read that here: https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-vladimir-putin-zelensky-father-world-war-ii-tucker-carlson-1868479 What you have said is completely untrue. Many of Putin's claims have been completely debunked. What I've have said is completely untrue? Come back to me when every single claim over the course of 2 hours has been debunked by the relevant people. I'm not here saying Putin was telling the truth but I see something in others attacking the messenger. 'No one appears to be refuting any claims' That is what you said. It was completely untrue. Not 'compeltely' untrue being that some are indeed trying to discredit the messenger. You could just said 'actually there has been some people refute' and point me to those instead of making shit up. " You stated no one appears to be refuting claims. That is completely untrue. That and that alone. I have not argued no one is out for Carlson. What I have done is point out that many of the claims have been discredited by a wide variety of people and organisations. Thus debunking you saying 'no one' was refuting 'any' claims. Why is that difficult to understand? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does it appear odd to anyone that no one appears to be refuting any claims, but instead try to discredit Carlson? The claims have been debunked. The Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement discrediting 10 of the claims made by Putin in the interview. You can read them in English here: https://www.gov.pl/web/diplomacy/mfa-statement-on-president-vladimir-putins-10-lies-on-poland-and-ukraine-which-were-not-rectified-by-tucker-carlson-interview-of-8-february-2024 It has also been pointed out (repeatedly) that Gorbachev refuted the idea there was an agreement that NATO would not expand Eastwards. You can watch him refute it here: https://twitter.com/revishvilig/status/1755881331425259626?t=AxljvYa34MKrcXRkAjs00Q&s=19 Newsweek, in addition to the French newspaper Le Monde, have also confirmed Zelensky's father was born in 1947. Thus, could not possibly have fought as a frontline soldier against the Nazis. You can read that here: https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-vladimir-putin-zelensky-father-world-war-ii-tucker-carlson-1868479 What you have said is completely untrue. Many of Putin's claims have been completely debunked. What I've have said is completely untrue? Come back to me when every single claim over the course of 2 hours has been debunked by the relevant people. I'm not here saying Putin was telling the truth but I see something in others attacking the messenger. 'No one appears to be refuting any claims' That is what you said. It was completely untrue. Not 'compeltely' untrue being that some are indeed trying to discredit the messenger. You could just said 'actually there has been some people refute' and point me to those instead of making shit up. You stated no one appears to be refuting claims. That is completely untrue. That and that alone. I have not argued no one is out for Carlson. What I have done is point out that many of the claims have been discredited by a wide variety of people and organisations. Thus debunking you saying 'no one' was refuting 'any' claims. Why is that difficult to understand?" You quoted my whole post and said it was 'completely untrue', so you either struggle with comprehension or you should edit quotes to speak about the parts you want to cherry pick. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does it appear odd to anyone that no one appears to be refuting any claims, but instead try to discredit Carlson? The claims have been debunked. The Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement discrediting 10 of the claims made by Putin in the interview. You can read them in English here: https://www.gov.pl/web/diplomacy/mfa-statement-on-president-vladimir-putins-10-lies-on-poland-and-ukraine-which-were-not-rectified-by-tucker-carlson-interview-of-8-february-2024 It has also been pointed out (repeatedly) that Gorbachev refuted the idea there was an agreement that NATO would not expand Eastwards. You can watch him refute it here: https://twitter.com/revishvilig/status/1755881331425259626?t=AxljvYa34MKrcXRkAjs00Q&s=19 Newsweek, in addition to the French newspaper Le Monde, have also confirmed Zelensky's father was born in 1947. Thus, could not possibly have fought as a frontline soldier against the Nazis. You can read that here: https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-vladimir-putin-zelensky-father-world-war-ii-tucker-carlson-1868479 What you have said is completely untrue. Many of Putin's claims have been completely debunked. What I've have said is completely untrue? Come back to me when every single claim over the course of 2 hours has been debunked by the relevant people. I'm not here saying Putin was telling the truth but I see something in others attacking the messenger. 'No one appears to be refuting any claims' That is what you said. It was completely untrue. Not 'compeltely' untrue being that some are indeed trying to discredit the messenger. You could just said 'actually there has been some people refute' and point me to those instead of making shit up. You stated no one appears to be refuting claims. That is completely untrue. That and that alone. I have not argued no one is out for Carlson. What I have done is point out that many of the claims have been discredited by a wide variety of people and organisations. Thus debunking you saying 'no one' was refuting 'any' claims. Why is that difficult to understand? You quoted my whole post and said it was 'completely untrue', so you either struggle with comprehension or you should edit quotes to speak about the parts you want to cherry pick. " Your post relied upon the notion that claims were not being debunked. They have. Thus it was completely untrue. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does it appear odd to anyone that no one appears to be refuting any claims, but instead try to discredit Carlson? The claims have been debunked. The Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement discrediting 10 of the claims made by Putin in the interview. You can read them in English here: https://www.gov.pl/web/diplomacy/mfa-statement-on-president-vladimir-putins-10-lies-on-poland-and-ukraine-which-were-not-rectified-by-tucker-carlson-interview-of-8-february-2024 It has also been pointed out (repeatedly) that Gorbachev refuted the idea there was an agreement that NATO would not expand Eastwards. You can watch him refute it here: https://twitter.com/revishvilig/status/1755881331425259626?t=AxljvYa34MKrcXRkAjs00Q&s=19 Newsweek, in addition to the French newspaper Le Monde, have also confirmed Zelensky's father was born in 1947. Thus, could not possibly have fought as a frontline soldier against the Nazis. You can read that here: https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-vladimir-putin-zelensky-father-world-war-ii-tucker-carlson-1868479 What you have said is completely untrue. Many of Putin's claims have been completely debunked. What I've have said is completely untrue? Come back to me when every single claim over the course of 2 hours has been debunked by the relevant people. I'm not here saying Putin was telling the truth but I see something in others attacking the messenger. 'No one appears to be refuting any claims' That is what you said. It was completely untrue. Not 'compeltely' untrue being that some are indeed trying to discredit the messenger. You could just said 'actually there has been some people refute' and point me to those instead of making shit up. You stated no one appears to be refuting claims. That is completely untrue. That and that alone. I have not argued no one is out for Carlson. What I have done is point out that many of the claims have been discredited by a wide variety of people and organisations. Thus debunking you saying 'no one' was refuting 'any' claims. Why is that difficult to understand? You quoted my whole post and said it was 'completely untrue', so you either struggle with comprehension or you should edit quotes to speak about the parts you want to cherry pick. Your post relied upon the notion that claims were not being debunked. They have. Thus it was completely untrue." You're clearly still struggling with the English language so I'll leave it there. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh no putins had a chance to air russias propaganda, oh well suppose it makes a change from european/american propaganda,you really think either side is telling normal people the whole truth of whats going on, " That's really the interesting point of the interview. An insight to what Russian people are being told. I wonder if the Russian people have an insight to what we're being told. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh no putins had a chance to air russias propaganda, oh well suppose it makes a change from european/american propaganda,you really think either side is telling normal people the whole truth of whats going on, That's really the interesting point of the interview. An insight to what Russian people are being told. I wonder if the Russian people have an insight to what we're being told." probably not, and until tc nterviewed him we had no idea what he had to say, do think its funny he is getting called a traitor even though loads of news channels been trying to get an interview, comes across as jealousy | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"At the end of the day, it seems like it's just a stunt by Trump supporters especially Elon Musk and being trumpeted by thousands of fake Twitter accounts as a new dawn. " I'm not sure it created any harm other than put MSM networks out of joint, and reinforce already held beliefs about Putin and Carlson. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"At the end of the day, it seems like it's just a stunt by Trump supporters especially Elon Musk and being trumpeted by thousands of fake Twitter accounts as a new dawn. I'm not sure it created any harm other than put MSM networks out of joint, and reinforce already held beliefs about Putin and Carlson. So twitter isnt now MSM ?" I thought X was an app for the general public to post stuff and gain followers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
