Donald Trump, the road that might not lead to the White House!

[8den]

Two useful chrome add ons.

Donald Trump Blocker

The Trumpweb

 

[8den]

Donald Trump's spokesman wore a necklace of real bullets on tv
http://gawker.com/donald-trump-spokesperson-wears-necklace-of-real-bullet-1750310767

 

[existentialist]

Whose sources was I complaining about ?

And what's the problem with the piece, other than your Russophobia . You don't automatically dismiss BBC and Guardian sources ,so your Lols are just the routine , sniffy Anglo Saxon hypocrisy. Waste of breath.

Temper, Temper.

Oh, and you know nothing about me, and most of the assumptions you make in your little monitor-spattering rant are way off base. HTH.

 

[teqniq]

If I criticise a source I do so by pointing to another that contradicts it. Unlike others I don't immediately dismiss it on the basis of nationality and fuck all else.

This quite frankly is bullshit. You have repeatedly rubbished sources that I've posted on the Syria thread without posting sources of your own to refute whatever it is you have an issue with. If I post up stuff that you feel uncomfortable with i.e. there is no easy explanation to hand in your head you ignore the posts in question.

 

[bimble]

Donald Trump's spokesman wore a necklace of real bullets on tv
http://gawker.com/donald-trump-spokesperson-wears-necklace-of-real-bullet-1750310767

Wow. And her response to criticism of her adornment:

 

[J Ed]

Who is the Arch Racist: Hillary or the Donald?

 

[laptop]

 

[two sheds]

I get:


Shame nobody seems to be searching for 'is Donald Trump an alien'

 

[laptop]

Shame nobody seems to be searching for 'is Donald Trump an alien'

I really want to know. I just searched 13 times. Many can play.

 

[two sheds]

I really want to know. I just searched 13 times. Many can play.

Yep I did another 13.

I liked the 'Is Donald Trump dead' I got above, too, and 'Is Donald Trump a serious candidate' which also comes up for me.

 

[bimble]

curious. I get dead but not canadian..

 

[NoXion]

I get this:

 

[littlebabyjesus]

No on the basis it's quite clearly run by the Kremlin and disseminates state propaganda.

Russia's equivalent to the BBC then?

 

[Poot]

I get "is Donald Trump in Home Alone 2?"

Turns out he is.

 

[laptop]

Russia's equivalent to the BBC then?

The quantitative difference is enough to count as qualitative, silly.

For one thing, there's a rather lower death-toll among UK journalists who defy the Party line.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The quantitative difference is enough to count as qualitative, silly.

For one thing, there's a rather lower death-toll among UK journalists who defy the Party line.

I'm not sure I agree. The BBC barely ever employs the kind of journalist who'd get into trouble if the UK were like Russia. ITV has a better record of doing that - giving airtime to people like John Pilger.

I do agree on the need to be cautious with RT, but I don't see that you need to be much less cautious with the beeb.

 

[8den]

Russia's equivalent to the BBC then?

Are you taking the piss?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Are you taking the piss?

No. Especially post-Hutton.

 

[8den]

No. Especially post-Hutton.

If you think you can compare the level of state control of the BBC to Kremlin control of RT you are frankly delusional.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

If you think you can compare the level of state control of the BBC to Kremlin control of RT you are frankly delusional.

Works in a different way, perhaps, but it is most certainly there. And Hutton and its ramifications are one case in point.

One of the main ways in which this operates is the terms and limits set for debates. Both will have points of view not discussed. For instance, the points of view of various economists with non-mainstream takes on the credit crunch - the likes of Steve Keen - don't get any airtime on the BBc. It is as if their pov didn't exist. Keen and others get to argue their cases on RT. On the bbc, people like Keen, who predicted the credit crunch, are sidelined, while jokers who didn't see it coming at all are taken seriously. More subtle form of propaganda, perhaps, but there.

 

[8den]

Works in a different way, perhaps, but it is most certainly there. And Hutton and its ramifications are one case in point.

Bollocks. Pure and simple.

You've said that BBC is equivalent to RT. You've waved in the direction of the Hutton report as proof. RT was and is directly funded by the Kremlin. The 1st station director was a 25you Kremlin appointee with next to no real world journalism. It regularly promotes the exact same party as the state. It avoids criticism of the state like the plague. There is no comparison.

One of the main ways in which this operates is the terms and limits set for debates. Both will have points of view not discussed.

Just because the BBC don't report or carry a point of view doesn't mean that point of view is valid. Plenty of worldviews would insist that they are represented on the BBC and they aren't carried.

For instance, the points of view of various economists with non-mainstream takes on the credit crunch - the likes of Steve Keen - don't get any airtime on the BBc. It is as if their pov didn't exist. Keen and others get to argue their cases on RT. On the bbc, people like Keen, who predicted the credit crunch, are sidelined, while jokers who didn't see it coming at all are taken seriously. More subtle form of propaganda, perhaps, but there.

Speaking of jokers Keen will regularly appear on RT on the Keiser report, a man who regularly propagates conspiracy theories, unsubstantiated rumours, and speculation as facts.

A number of those American and British twentysomething recruits have discovered that unpleasant reality in the course of their reporting. Abby Martin, the host of RT America, protested on air at the support that RT gave to Russia’s invasion of Crimea. Reporter Liz Wahl resigned shortly afterwards for the same reason. Staci Bivens, another RT reporter, said that she had been ordered by editors to write a story arguing the absurd case that Germany was a ‘failed state’. (She refused, which led to her leaving the network.) Overall, past and present employees of RT described a workplace in which reporters and commentators might write original stories only to find them rewritten by senior Russian editors — not to clarify or correct them, but to suit obvious Kremlin interests.

Russia Today is Putin's weapon of mass deception. Will it work in Britain?

 

[Casually Red]

I've reported this homophobic abuse from CR again. Could someone else report it on my behalf.

Go and fuck yourself you little ban mongering free state fucking wanker

 

[Casually Red]

Thank you.

Anyway. For CR

Russia Today: Putin's Weapon in the War of Images - SPIEGEL ONLINE

What Is Russia Today?

How the Media Became One of Putin’s Most Powerful Weapons

Putin’s Propaganda TV Lies About Its Popularity

Like I said go and fuck yourself you little ban mongering free state middle class fucking ban mongering arsehole wanker

Cock off

 

[Casually Red]

If you can explain why he keeps calling me a 81 year tv presenter I'm all ears. He has declined to do.

Because your a middle class free state ban mongering fucking wanker is why

 

[Casually Red]

I've reported this homophobic abuse from CR again. Could someone else report it on my behalf.

Pathetic cunt

 

[Casually Red]

This quite frankly is bullshit. You have repeatedly rubbished sources that I've posted on the Syria thread without posting sources of your own to refute whatever it is you have an issue with. If I post up stuff that you feel uncomfortable with i.e. there is no easy explanation to hand in your head you ignore the posts in question.

Ive ripped the shit out of the shit you post by pointing to alternative sources . You don't like it so you take your gripe onto another thread

Joker

 

[Casually Red]

The quantitative difference is enough to count as qualitative, silly.

For one thing, there's a rather lower death-toll among UK journalists who defy the Party line.

Why is martin ohagan less worthy than wotsername ?

 

[Casually Red]

Works in a different way, perhaps, but it is most certainly there. And Hutton and its ramifications are one case in point.

One of the main ways in which this operates is the terms and limits set for debates. Both will have points of view not discussed. For instance, the points of view of various economists with non-mainstream takes on the credit crunch - the likes of Steve Keen - don't get any airtime on the BBc. It is as if their pov didn't exist. Keen and others get to argue their cases on RT. On the bbc, people like Keen, who predicted the credit crunch, are sidelined, while jokers who didn't see it coming at all are taken seriously. More subtle form of propaganda, perhaps, but there.

They haven't even remotely alluded to why the original piece in question is even wrong material wise.just some rule Britannia bollocks . And wails from a sordid little arsehole calling for a ban.

 

[existentialist]

Because your a middle class free state ban mongering fucking wanker is why

Calm down, dear.

 

[8den]

Because your a middle class free state ban mongering fucking wanker is why

Riggghhhhtttt.....Who pissed in your conflakes.