[AnonX93]

Originally Posted by Faust ↗

I merely showed that her fact checkers are bullshit. In case anybody believed it, like she did or does, i don’t even care about her but this topic should be without lies or bullshit is all. Again, if any of you have/had any proof of an actual RT.com ‘lie’ then i would have liked to read it.

The EU could have said: “Look here, this is where RT.com lies and this is why you should not trust them”

They probably have entire floors devoted to that shit.

Yet all they could do was: “we don’t need any examples, just like that woman (?) on DR.com, we just know in our hearts that russia is lying so yeah we have to protect our citizens so we will fine any ISP that does not block the website”

I could post all the legit proof that RT lies but all you would do is say all my proof is false so why even argue with you. Nobody respects you enough to waste time talking with you.

You don’t debate in good faith and make things personal when you look like an idiot (which is all of the time). You’re not “enlightened” just a 44 year old troll living in Germany beating your dick like it owes you money at every piece of propaganda you eat from Russian sponsored media.

[WonderMomma]

Originally Posted by AnonX93 ↗

I could post all the legit proof that RT lies but all you would do is say all my proof is false so why even argue with you.

^ Yep. There's no point. It's a lost cause.

[duntez]

Originally Posted by AnonX93 ↗

I could post all the legit proof that RT lies but all you would do is say all my proof is false so why even argue with you. Nobody respects you enough to waste time talking with you.

Idk, I actually AM interested to find out how bad they are. If your evidence has been proven wrong, then it should mean something no? I wasn’t saying RT is trustworthy, but I’m curious now. Can you post in your opinion the biggest RT lie here and I’ll gladly check it out.

[Stefan800]

Duntez, maybe there is no big lie from RT, but they manipulate the readers in believing thing in russias favour. For example, read this: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institu...aponising-news

[duntez]

Originally Posted by WhiskeyOutpost ↗

Interesting. An opinion I heard on it, Germany and Russia gas contracts were not dissolved and Russia got out of the contract by the NS (Nordstream) pipe being destroyed because they need the goods because of the war. Haven't read much on it.

German Minister of Energy ( I think) Robert Habeck mention “take or pay” contract yesterday if I’m not mistaken

[Faust]

Originally Posted by Stefan800 ↗

Duntez, maybe there is no big lie from RT, but they manipulate the readers in believing thing in russias favour. For example, read this: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institu...aponising-news

From your own source:

“
European and North American democracies

RT and Sputnik coverage of European and North American democracies – including the UK, US, France, Germany, Sweden, Italy and Ukraine – was overwhelmingly focused on issues of social and political dysfunction, including coverage of the negative effects of immigration largely extracted from local news sources, repackaged and translated for English-speaking audiences.”

Sounds fair? What should they do otherwise lol


As for:

“RT and Sputnik published 138 separate and contradictory narratives about the Skripal poisoning across 735 articles in the four weeks following the incident, incorporating the views of a "parallel commentariat" and amplifying Russian government sources.”

This has to be fucking bullshit, use your head:

4 weeks so 28 days. 735 articles in 28 days? That means about 25 fucking daily articles supposedly on the topic of the skripal poisoning? An article every hour for 28 days straight? Again this is complete bullshit.

What I did was: I found and actual lie in an article. So a few of those across different articles and I don’t trust the publication anymore.

You should do the same, if you ever find a single error in an RT article, then use incidents like that to distrust them. Not because some bullshit article told you they wrote 700+ articles in 4 weeks with what is essentially different perspectives.

[pastinho]

Anyone know the results from the lugande, donbabwe and the rest of banana republics in eastern ukraine ? 99% or 98% willing in the referendum to join russia ? Is the announcement by V.Botox not until friday ? Thx in advance.

[WonderMomma]

Originally Posted by pastinho ↗

Anyone know the results from the lugande, donbabwe and the rest of banana republics in eastern ukraine ? 99% or 98% willing in the referendum to join russia ? Is the announcement by V.Botox not until friday ? Thx in advance.

[WonderMomma]

Originally Posted by Stefan800 ↗

Duntez, maybe there is no big lie from RT, but they manipulate the readers in believing thing in russias favour. For example, read this: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institu...aponising-news

As you can see, sometimes people are so far entrenched in bullshit, it's hard to see their way out of it and they spend most of their time nitpicking what you present them. They completely ignore anything you say, just ready to pounce on what they can to prove a point.(not referring to you Duntez).

It's impossible to have a productive discussion with close minded people who are just looking to pick your argument apart at every and any turn. It's useless to do so when they won't consider or weigh any of the opposing argument.

I give you credit, Duntez, for that as well. At least you're willing to consider views that oppose yours. There is certainly plenty of information out there. You just have to take it all in, try to weigh everything and stick with your instincts about what makes the most sense.

A few things I found on a quick search. Keep in mind I'm not going to do the legwork to find out who runs/owns these sources for this post. My point in posting them is the sheer amount of like information that's out there.

Sometimes in gaging the validity of a story, even though I believe that all mainstream media are wholly unreliable, if there is a plethora of sources for the same story all saying, in their unique way, the same thing... that's a good sign.

https://www.mediaite.com/online/rt-i...-it-seriously/

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...ks-in-the-west

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf (RT mentions start on page 3)

https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinio...omment-3583239

https://fortune.com/2017/09/17/russi...rt-propaganda/

https://www.thearticle.com/rt-is-put...o-appear-on-it

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ine-ofcom-fine

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/03/...y-rt-is-dying/

https://thebulletin.org/2020/11/here...-the-election/

https://www.politico.eu/article/russ...nformation-rt/

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/01/10838...-high-wire-act

http://littleatoms.com/russia-today-piers-robinson

https://www.newsnationnow.com/danabr...an-propaganda/ (a former RT correspondent)

Quote from a Quora post: https://www.quora.com/What-is-RT-TV-...hannel?share=1

So It [RT] provides news reports that are often solid, legitimate news stories. But weaved in between and among those reports are subtle manipulations of the information so that a particular report may appear to be factual and is therefore accepted, but additional ‘facts’ or interpretations are added to provide a different point of view.

A good example of the ‘smartness’ of its approach can be found in the fact that two of its hires are Julian Assange and Larry King. Makes it seem like any other news outlet with a variety of presenters, right?

Another good example is the murder of Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich. The murderers were never found and there was no clear motive. So, because he was a DNC staffer, the political conspiracy world lit up. Fox News took up some of those conspiracy theories and was sued and eventually had to settle a lawsuit with the family. RT took up some of those same conspiracy theories, but because it was a based in Russia, no lawsuit or legal action could stop it.

I also did a google search for any sources proving RT was NOT propaganda and is legitimate. I didn't find any. https://www.google.com/search?q=proo...client=gws-wiz

I also want to reiterate my sentiment that mainstream media overall is a tool for propaganda and brainwashing. Everywhere. This includes CNN, FOX, MSN, etc... they're just not run/funded [directly] by the American government. RT is definitely no exception and IS run/funded by a government body.

I am now officially done talking about RT.

[Faust]

“ Anyone know the results from the lugande, donbabwe and the rest of banana republics in eastern ukraine ? 99% or 98% willing in the referendum to join russia ? Is the announcement by V.Botox not until friday ? Thx in advance.”

How many pro-ukrainian people have been living in separatist regions after 8 years of civil war. How high do you expect this percentage? I’d say no more than 1 in 20 people living there is pro ukraine. They would not want to be shelled, nor have to speak the majority language in those regions: Russian so many would have left.

How many separatist people are living there still after 8 years of civil war? And how many of those do you expect to vote on favour of a government that has been killing them for 8 years?

Let’s say 5% of pro-Ukrainian people are left. Ever single one is threatened by Ukraine for even daring to take part in any referendum with up to 15 years in jail.

How many of the 5% do you expect to vote? Half of them? Sure. So let’s say 2-3% vote to stay with Ukraine.
That would leave 97-98% as a realistic percentage.

The image is 13 years before the civil war btw, it is from Wikipedia so probably fake
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia...ne#2001_Census