Think you KNOW why Russia invaded the Ukraine?
invite response
2022 Feb 26, 5:07pm 7,453 views 219 comments
by GNL ➕follow (1) 💰tip ignore
Please tell us.
« First « Previous Comments 186 - 219 of 219 Search these comments
186
mostly reader
2022 Mar 4, 6:29pm
richwicks says
Your pattern is predictable, so don't pretend to be interested.
It's good to know that you can figure out server setup though. It means that you can find an honest job.
I doubt you. That's why I'm asking for the evidence you claim to have, but are now scrambling for excuses not to produce. I am removing those excuses and when you have no more excuses, I expect you still won't produce them.Oh fuck. That's exactly, EXACTLY what I meant. Once I produce it, what will be your next step? "Prove that it's Ukraine! Prove that those are Russians! Prove that these are not actors! Prove that it's not Deep Fake!"
Your pattern is predictable, so don't pretend to be interested.
It's good to know that you can figure out server setup though. It means that you can find an honest job.
188
latitude38
2022 Mar 4, 6:42pm
Beginning from the post Cold War ,John Hopkins Professor examine the problems between east and west and brings us to today’s stalemate “ not one inch “ Not One Inch: America, Russia, and the Making of Post-Cold War Stalemate https://www.amazon.com/dp/030025993X/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_glt_i_CJB842E8ZNKFV5PGEARN?source=patrick.net
It more or less comes down to two sets of pledges. The first was in early 1990, when the West was still trying to get the USSR to agree to German reunification. It was West German foreign minister, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, who gave a number of speeches assuring the Soviets that there will be no NATO troops on East Germany should reunification be allowed. AS he put it in one address, “An extension of NATO’s territory to the east, that is, nearer to the borders of the Soviet Union, will not happen.” The problem was that his boss, Chancellor Helmut Kohl, completely disagreed with this policy and believed that the West should lock in as many gains as it could before the political climate shifted.
By Feb 1990, James Baker was making similar pledges. It was Baker’s pledge that formed the basis for Russian complaints about broken promises to this day. As Baker told Gorbachev during a trip to Moscow, “Would you prefer to see a unified Germany outside of NATO, independent and with no U.S. forces, or would you prefer a unified Germany to be tied to NATO, with assurances that NATO’s jurisdiction would not shift one inch eastward from its present position?” As was the case with Genschler and Kohl, Baker’s boss, George H. W. Bush, didn’t actually agree with this policy. But that statement by Baker was reportedly treated by Soviet leaders as essentially a US pledge not to expand NATO as long as German reunification was allowed. As Sarotte write, “leaders in Moscow would point to this exchange as an agreement barring NATO from expanding beyond its eastern Cold War border. Baker and his aides and supporters, in contrast, would point to the hypothetical phrasing and lack of any written agreement afterward as a sign that the secretary had only been test-driving one potential option of many.”
The second major area of the Russian complaints are centered around the actual 1997 agreement signed by Boris Yeltsin that more or less gives Russia’s blessing on the expansion of NATO. The episode starts off with a night in Warsaw, when Polish President Lech Walesa managed to persuade Yeltsin to issue a joint statement that the prospect of Poland joining NATO was “not contrary to the interest of any state, also including Russia.” It’s the kind of story that’s the perfect example of how pliable Yeltsin truly was at this point in his presidency. Yeltsin faced immediate domestic backlash on the statement and tried to backtrack by referring back to the 1990 Agreement on German Reunification, arguing that the language in that agreement precluded the expansion of NATO eastward. Therefore, under this interpretation of the agreement, Yeltsin couldn’t endorse the idea of a NATO expansion because the West already agreed that could never happen.
Of course, as we’ll see, the Clinton administration had already explored the legal implications of that 1990 German reunification agreement and concluded that there were no such restrictions. The Germany government agreed with this assessment, although the German Foreign Ministry did acknowledge that Russian claims contained a “political and psychological substance we had to take seriously.” In the end, the US pursued the approach of just trying to bribe Russia with money. Yeltsin ended up signing an agreement that condoned NATO’s expansion later that year. Clinton reportedly couldn’t believe how one-sided the deal was in the end.
The overall picture that emerges is one where, technically speaking, the expansion of NATO may have been legal based on the agreements made. But from an ethical standpoint, these were agreements made in bad faith at a time when Russia was effectively forced to negotiate under a state of national duress:
It more or less comes down to two sets of pledges. The first was in early 1990, when the West was still trying to get the USSR to agree to German reunification. It was West German foreign minister, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, who gave a number of speeches assuring the Soviets that there will be no NATO troops on East Germany should reunification be allowed. AS he put it in one address, “An extension of NATO’s territory to the east, that is, nearer to the borders of the Soviet Union, will not happen.” The problem was that his boss, Chancellor Helmut Kohl, completely disagreed with this policy and believed that the West should lock in as many gains as it could before the political climate shifted.
By Feb 1990, James Baker was making similar pledges. It was Baker’s pledge that formed the basis for Russian complaints about broken promises to this day. As Baker told Gorbachev during a trip to Moscow, “Would you prefer to see a unified Germany outside of NATO, independent and with no U.S. forces, or would you prefer a unified Germany to be tied to NATO, with assurances that NATO’s jurisdiction would not shift one inch eastward from its present position?” As was the case with Genschler and Kohl, Baker’s boss, George H. W. Bush, didn’t actually agree with this policy. But that statement by Baker was reportedly treated by Soviet leaders as essentially a US pledge not to expand NATO as long as German reunification was allowed. As Sarotte write, “leaders in Moscow would point to this exchange as an agreement barring NATO from expanding beyond its eastern Cold War border. Baker and his aides and supporters, in contrast, would point to the hypothetical phrasing and lack of any written agreement afterward as a sign that the secretary had only been test-driving one potential option of many.”
The second major area of the Russian complaints are centered around the actual 1997 agreement signed by Boris Yeltsin that more or less gives Russia’s blessing on the expansion of NATO. The episode starts off with a night in Warsaw, when Polish President Lech Walesa managed to persuade Yeltsin to issue a joint statement that the prospect of Poland joining NATO was “not contrary to the interest of any state, also including Russia.” It’s the kind of story that’s the perfect example of how pliable Yeltsin truly was at this point in his presidency. Yeltsin faced immediate domestic backlash on the statement and tried to backtrack by referring back to the 1990 Agreement on German Reunification, arguing that the language in that agreement precluded the expansion of NATO eastward. Therefore, under this interpretation of the agreement, Yeltsin couldn’t endorse the idea of a NATO expansion because the West already agreed that could never happen.
Of course, as we’ll see, the Clinton administration had already explored the legal implications of that 1990 German reunification agreement and concluded that there were no such restrictions. The Germany government agreed with this assessment, although the German Foreign Ministry did acknowledge that Russian claims contained a “political and psychological substance we had to take seriously.” In the end, the US pursued the approach of just trying to bribe Russia with money. Yeltsin ended up signing an agreement that condoned NATO’s expansion later that year. Clinton reportedly couldn’t believe how one-sided the deal was in the end.
The overall picture that emerges is one where, technically speaking, the expansion of NATO may have been legal based on the agreements made. But from an ethical standpoint, these were agreements made in bad faith at a time when Russia was effectively forced to negotiate under a state of national duress:
189
richwicks
2022 Mar 4, 6:45pm
richwicks
2022 Mar 4, 6:45pm
mostly reader says
I will simply post it.
Remove the meta-data for the GPS and you can post it.
Since this favors the Ukrainian side, the "US side", you can safely post it to youtube. I'd be interested in the comments it receives. Could take some time before it's picked up though.
What is the point of collecting data, if you don't share it?
richwicks saysI doubt you. That's why I'm asking for the evidence you claim to have, but are now scrambling for excuses not to produce. I am removing those excuses and when you have no more excuses, I expect you still won't produce them.Oh fuck. That's exactly, EXACTLY what I meant. Once I produce it, what will be your next step? "Prove that it's Ukraine! Prove that those are Russians! Prove that these are not actors! Prove that it's not Deep Fake!"
I will simply post it.
Remove the meta-data for the GPS and you can post it.
Since this favors the Ukrainian side, the "US side", you can safely post it to youtube. I'd be interested in the comments it receives. Could take some time before it's picked up though.
What is the point of collecting data, if you don't share it?
190
mostly reader
2022 Mar 4, 6:54pm
richwicks says
However, since you are vocal to the point of annoyance, I have a deal for you. I'll post something for which I'll get permission, and you won't be demanding unrealistic proofs. And you'll shut up. Topics on war in Ukraine don't exist on patrick.net as far as you are concerned. You will not post here, or in any other topic, current or future, which is related to Russian invasion in Ukraine. You'll avoid them like the plague. What do you say?
I will simply post it.I am not your entertainment bitch, so I will not post anything "just because you ask me" It won't prove anything to the likes of you, and I don't feel like answering idiotic questions such as "Can you prove that this is not deep fake" or "Why should I believe that it's Ukraine".
However, since you are vocal to the point of annoyance, I have a deal for you. I'll post something for which I'll get permission, and you won't be demanding unrealistic proofs. And you'll shut up. Topics on war in Ukraine don't exist on patrick.net as far as you are concerned. You will not post here, or in any other topic, current or future, which is related to Russian invasion in Ukraine. You'll avoid them like the plague. What do you say?
191
richwicks
2022 Mar 4, 7:02pm
richwicks
2022 Mar 4, 7:02pm
mostly reader says
Why do you collect atrocities of the Russian war machine and keep them to yourself?
There is nothing at all entertaining about war either.
mostly reader says
I'm asking you to do your duty as a human being. If there are humanitarian atrocities being done by a government, it's your duty to expose them.
Julian Assange naively ruined his life expecting people to do something about mafia bullshit though. Be careful, although I doubt the Russians have much of a reach. Be certain to remove the metadata. If they are in a particular apartment or home, be aware of that too. Can't be too careful with the FUCKING SCUM that runs our governments or infests our intelligence agencies.
richwicks saysI will simply post it.I am not your entertainment bitch,
Why do you collect atrocities of the Russian war machine and keep them to yourself?
There is nothing at all entertaining about war either.
mostly reader says
However, since you vocal to the point of annoyance, I have a deal for you. I'll post something for which I'll get permission, and you won't be demanding unrealistic proofs.
I'm asking you to do your duty as a human being. If there are humanitarian atrocities being done by a government, it's your duty to expose them.
Julian Assange naively ruined his life expecting people to do something about mafia bullshit though. Be careful, although I doubt the Russians have much of a reach. Be certain to remove the metadata. If they are in a particular apartment or home, be aware of that too. Can't be too careful with the FUCKING SCUM that runs our governments or infests our intelligence agencies.
192
mostly reader
2022 Mar 4, 7:08pm
The way I'm reading you, concept of "duty as a human being" is quite far away from where you stand.
Do we have a deal or not? Yes or no?
Do we have a deal or not? Yes or no?
193
richwicks
2022 Mar 5, 12:10am
richwicks
2022 Mar 5, 12:10am
mostly reader says
Really?
I'm quite open about my absolute detestation of the government, and I use my actual name to do it.
mostly reader says
Well, I'm not going to be silenced, you said you wanted me to "shut up" - I can't do that. That's very encompassing.
And I'm not going to stop talking about any topic. That demand is ridiculous. Point out when I'm incorrect, but provide reasoning and evidence I am wrong, so I can change my mind. I will, if I have to conclude I'm wrong, and I've had to do that MANY times. If you give me input that contradicts the gaps (and there are many) in my knowledge, of course I will change my viewpoint. I might do it kicking and screaming, but I will, in time. It's not always easy to have a radical shift in a viewpoint, but this one - I don't think it will be difficult.
I'm not going to give you free reign. You may be more knowledgeable about this subject than I am, I understand that, but that doesn't mean I think you're being truthful about it. I know how propaganda works, the best of it, only omits information and gives you a one sided view. It seems entirely reasonable because there is no misinformation involved so there are no contradictions. For example some: small village in Israel is attacked - how horrible, until you find out Israel was attacking a tent settlement for 3 months with weaponry, dumping sewage on their farmland, and cutting down olive trees and the people doing it all originated from that villiage.
Why are you placing conditions on exposing the atrocities of the Russian government? That's a reasonable question to ask, I think.
I've crippled piece of shit companies by being a whistleblower, it's a lot harder to do that with a criminal syndicate like a government though. People don't seem to care about duplicity or criminality in the government, and people in the government sure as fuck don't. People fear the government. They're pussies.
You want to expose the Russian government? Go ahead, I'll help you. But why are you demanding my silence and subservience? NO government is good. I don't care if the Russian government is evil, I'm more worried my government is evil. I have to deal with that evil.
The way I'm reading you, concept of "duty as a human being" is quite far away from where you stand.
Really?
I'm quite open about my absolute detestation of the government, and I use my actual name to do it.
mostly reader says
Do we have a deal or not? Yes or no?
Well, I'm not going to be silenced, you said you wanted me to "shut up" - I can't do that. That's very encompassing.
And I'm not going to stop talking about any topic. That demand is ridiculous. Point out when I'm incorrect, but provide reasoning and evidence I am wrong, so I can change my mind. I will, if I have to conclude I'm wrong, and I've had to do that MANY times. If you give me input that contradicts the gaps (and there are many) in my knowledge, of course I will change my viewpoint. I might do it kicking and screaming, but I will, in time. It's not always easy to have a radical shift in a viewpoint, but this one - I don't think it will be difficult.
I'm not going to give you free reign. You may be more knowledgeable about this subject than I am, I understand that, but that doesn't mean I think you're being truthful about it. I know how propaganda works, the best of it, only omits information and gives you a one sided view. It seems entirely reasonable because there is no misinformation involved so there are no contradictions. For example some: small village in Israel is attacked - how horrible, until you find out Israel was attacking a tent settlement for 3 months with weaponry, dumping sewage on their farmland, and cutting down olive trees and the people doing it all originated from that villiage.
Why are you placing conditions on exposing the atrocities of the Russian government? That's a reasonable question to ask, I think.
I've crippled piece of shit companies by being a whistleblower, it's a lot harder to do that with a criminal syndicate like a government though. People don't seem to care about duplicity or criminality in the government, and people in the government sure as fuck don't. People fear the government. They're pussies.
You want to expose the Russian government? Go ahead, I'll help you. But why are you demanding my silence and subservience? NO government is good. I don't care if the Russian government is evil, I'm more worried my government is evil. I have to deal with that evil.
194
Shaman
2022 Mar 5, 6:05am
Shaman
2022 Mar 5, 6:05am
richwicks says
Pushing the dangerous vax is a human atrocity that our government and specifically Biden did. It’s immoral to require people to take a product that may kill them or intensely injure them in a life altering way. And if the government KNOWS that these adverse reactions are quite common and actively HIDES that data to “reduce vaccine hesitancy,” that’s a moral crime on a whole new level of psychopathy. Our government did all of that. As far as I’m concerned, an invasion of a semi-hostile neighbor state (Putin) is several orders of magnitude less evil than vaxxing your own citizens to death.
If there are humanitarian atrocities being done by a government, it's your duty to expose them.
Pushing the dangerous vax is a human atrocity that our government and specifically Biden did. It’s immoral to require people to take a product that may kill them or intensely injure them in a life altering way. And if the government KNOWS that these adverse reactions are quite common and actively HIDES that data to “reduce vaccine hesitancy,” that’s a moral crime on a whole new level of psychopathy. Our government did all of that. As far as I’m concerned, an invasion of a semi-hostile neighbor state (Putin) is several orders of magnitude less evil than vaxxing your own citizens to death.
195
mostly reader
2022 Mar 5, 8:44am
> richwicks
Predictably, no deal. More BS.
Don't you worry about "exposing Russian government". It's been done and continues to be done. While some numbskulls will continue to state that this is computer graphics, well, they'd do the same regarding the materials that I have. There is nothing for me to gain there. Which is why I offered the deal. Which you rejected, and followed up with more clownery.
Predictably, no deal. More BS.
Don't you worry about "exposing Russian government". It's been done and continues to be done. While some numbskulls will continue to state that this is computer graphics, well, they'd do the same regarding the materials that I have. There is nothing for me to gain there. Which is why I offered the deal. Which you rejected, and followed up with more clownery.
196
richwicks
2022 Mar 5, 4:40pm
richwicks
2022 Mar 5, 4:40pm
mostly reader says
All you do is tell people they are wrong, without explaining how they are wrong.
You claim to have solid proof of atrocities being committed by the Russian government, but you won't reveal it.
mostly reader says
What? By claiming Putin has video evidence of Trump hiring hookers to urinate on a bed?
The propaganda is so fucking laughable, and desperate, and pathetically stupid that anything my government or "news" media claims about Putin is reasonable to reject without even investigating the claim.
We will see in time what happens to Ukraine. If it's like Syria, well, Putin is as much of a monster that our intelligence agencies are - because they are the ones that run our executive branch. Our presidents are just meat puppets of them.
mostly reader says
It takes time to construct CGI, reality can be recorded instantly. The longer there is a wait to expose it, the less credible it is. That is the world we live in. And it's not just CGI either, the Donbass region has been (supposedly) shelled for years - what are we seeing with a still picture of a burned out car or a gutted building?
The WHOLE reason to have everybody armed with a camera, is exposure. When I was a kid, a video camera was a fake toy for pretend. Today, the same exact toy is superior to a video camera in 2000, and costs just as much as that toy and it actually works. It's really an odd time we live in.
mostly reader says
I don't understand why you insist on a "deal".
Fuck the establishment, expose them, and when enough people recognize what fucking garbage we've naively allowed to attain power - remove them.
I was the most ardent absolute atheist you'd ever meet at one point. I HATED religion and would happily demolish a religious person at one point and I was good at it. But there's a real war between good and evil, a lot of people can see this now. What side are you on?
Even if I am certain to lose, I know what side I'm on, and I don't think we'll lose.
The Great Awakening was something that Zbigniew Brzezinski is SAID to have worried about. Basically, if the common people found out what a bunch of fucking garbage our criminal establishment was, they'd all be dead. He worried about that. We've gone through a very tumultuous time in the last 3 decades of technological development, the Internet is FAR more powerful than the Gutenburg press was, and we can record everything now. I'm hoping we're starting to see the start of the death throws of a clearly corrupt and evil establishment.
And if you don't want to help, get out of the way. YOU shut up or not, it's doesn't matter. We've had to deal with disinformation and propagandists for decades - we know they won't go away, but we can design around them. It's like mold doesn't go away, or disease. You can wish it didn't exist, but criminality always will, we just keep making better systems to contain the rot.
> richwicks
Predictably, no deal. More BS.
All you do is tell people they are wrong, without explaining how they are wrong.
You claim to have solid proof of atrocities being committed by the Russian government, but you won't reveal it.
mostly reader says
Don't you worry about "exposing Russian government". It's been done and continues to be done.
What? By claiming Putin has video evidence of Trump hiring hookers to urinate on a bed?
The propaganda is so fucking laughable, and desperate, and pathetically stupid that anything my government or "news" media claims about Putin is reasonable to reject without even investigating the claim.
We will see in time what happens to Ukraine. If it's like Syria, well, Putin is as much of a monster that our intelligence agencies are - because they are the ones that run our executive branch. Our presidents are just meat puppets of them.
mostly reader says
While some numbskulls will continue to state that this is computer graphics, well, they'd do the same regarding the materials that I have.
It takes time to construct CGI, reality can be recorded instantly. The longer there is a wait to expose it, the less credible it is. That is the world we live in. And it's not just CGI either, the Donbass region has been (supposedly) shelled for years - what are we seeing with a still picture of a burned out car or a gutted building?
The WHOLE reason to have everybody armed with a camera, is exposure. When I was a kid, a video camera was a fake toy for pretend. Today, the same exact toy is superior to a video camera in 2000, and costs just as much as that toy and it actually works. It's really an odd time we live in.
mostly reader says
There is nothing for me to gain there. Which is why I offered the deal. Which you rejected, and followed up with more clownery.
I don't understand why you insist on a "deal".
Fuck the establishment, expose them, and when enough people recognize what fucking garbage we've naively allowed to attain power - remove them.
I was the most ardent absolute atheist you'd ever meet at one point. I HATED religion and would happily demolish a religious person at one point and I was good at it. But there's a real war between good and evil, a lot of people can see this now. What side are you on?
Even if I am certain to lose, I know what side I'm on, and I don't think we'll lose.
The Great Awakening was something that Zbigniew Brzezinski is SAID to have worried about. Basically, if the common people found out what a bunch of fucking garbage our criminal establishment was, they'd all be dead. He worried about that. We've gone through a very tumultuous time in the last 3 decades of technological development, the Internet is FAR more powerful than the Gutenburg press was, and we can record everything now. I'm hoping we're starting to see the start of the death throws of a clearly corrupt and evil establishment.
And if you don't want to help, get out of the way. YOU shut up or not, it's doesn't matter. We've had to deal with disinformation and propagandists for decades - we know they won't go away, but we can design around them. It's like mold doesn't go away, or disease. You can wish it didn't exist, but criminality always will, we just keep making better systems to contain the rot.
197
mostly reader
2022 Mar 5, 4:49pm
richwicks says
I don't understand why you insist on a "deal".Of course you "don't understand". Or pretend to "not understand". Do you need me to spell it out for you again, but type slower this time?
198
richwicks
2022 Mar 5, 4:53pm
richwicks
2022 Mar 5, 4:53pm
mostly reader says
Sure go ahead - and type it out slower and spell out out for me.
Explain why you are hiding undeniable evidence of the Russians committing atrocities. Why protect them?
richwicks saysI don't understand why you insist on a "deal".Of course you "don't understand". Or pretend to "not understand". Do you need me to spell it out for you again, but type slower this time?
Sure go ahead - and type it out slower and spell out out for me.
Explain why you are hiding undeniable evidence of the Russians committing atrocities. Why protect them?
199
GNL
2022 Mar 5, 4:54pm
GNL
2022 Mar 5, 4:54pm
richwicks says
Amen and pass the ammo.
But there's a real war between good and evil, a lot of people can see this now. What side are you on?
Even if I am certain to lose, I know what side I'm on, and I don't think we'll lose.
Amen and pass the ammo.
200
mostly reader
2022 Mar 5, 5:02pm
richwicks says
Ok, let's go.
1. This evidence is already plentiful. Twitter is your friend.
2. The only reason that you don't find it "undeniable" is because you question the source, the circumstances, the participants, the location, and cry foul.
3. Specifically me, you already have labeled "fucking Hasbera" - it's apparently a dirty word in your vocab - with implication that I'm on propaganda mission.
4. Because of (3), it makes little sense to contribute to already plentiful information on the subject, because you'll continue to question the source and authenticity just as well. I'd be providing no additional data points.
5. It's actually an effort for me. Because I'd have to contact the people who created the content and ask for permission. Which is a burden. And I'd feel quite silly talking about this nonsense to someone who's in real danger.
6. However, there is merit in shutting up at least one propaganda troll.
7. Because of (6) I offered this deal. I'm ready to go through the inconvenience if I get something back.
I hope that this doesn't overwhelm you to the point that you can no longer set up a server.
P.S. Offer is still valid.
Sure go ahead - and type it out slower and spell out out for me.
Ok, let's go.
1. This evidence is already plentiful. Twitter is your friend.
2. The only reason that you don't find it "undeniable" is because you question the source, the circumstances, the participants, the location, and cry foul.
3. Specifically me, you already have labeled "fucking Hasbera" - it's apparently a dirty word in your vocab - with implication that I'm on propaganda mission.
4. Because of (3), it makes little sense to contribute to already plentiful information on the subject, because you'll continue to question the source and authenticity just as well. I'd be providing no additional data points.
5. It's actually an effort for me. Because I'd have to contact the people who created the content and ask for permission. Which is a burden. And I'd feel quite silly talking about this nonsense to someone who's in real danger.
6. However, there is merit in shutting up at least one propaganda troll.
7. Because of (6) I offered this deal. I'm ready to go through the inconvenience if I get something back.
I hope that this doesn't overwhelm you to the point that you can no longer set up a server.
P.S. Offer is still valid.
201
NuttBoxer
2022 Mar 5, 6:18pm
NuttBoxer
2022 Mar 5, 6:18pm
mostly reader says
Ahh Twitter, the propaganda tool for those who don't like to read. Yeah, saw another patnetter posting shit from a plant backed by a Washington think tank. Great resource, free of all censorship is twatter!
1. This evidence is already plentiful. Twitter is your friend.
Ahh Twitter, the propaganda tool for those who don't like to read. Yeah, saw another patnetter posting shit from a plant backed by a Washington think tank. Great resource, free of all censorship is twatter!
202
mostly reader
2022 Mar 5, 6:33pm
> NuttBoxer
Twitter is a tool. It can be used for good or for evil. If you need help telling apart genuine from propagandist on this particular topic, that I can easily do.
Twitter is a tool. It can be used for good or for evil. If you need help telling apart genuine from propagandist on this particular topic, that I can easily do.
203
GNL
2022 Mar 5, 6:36pm
GNL
2022 Mar 5, 6:36pm
mostly reader says
You already lost with point #1. Twitter is compromised.
1. This evidence is already plentiful. Twitter is your friend.
You already lost with point #1. Twitter is compromised.
204
GNL
2022 Mar 5, 6:37pm
GNL
2022 Mar 5, 6:37pm
mostly reader says
Don't talk about it, do it.
> NuttBoxer
Twitter is a tool. It can be used for good or for evil. If you need help telling apart genuine from propagandist on this particular topic, that I can easily do.
Don't talk about it, do it.
205
mostly reader
2022 Mar 5, 6:59pm
WineHorror1 says
Don't talk about it, do it.Sure. Point to a video and ask my opinion. Or do you need links which I find reputable?
206
mostly reader
2022 Mar 5, 7:11pm
WineHorror1 says
You already lost with point #1. Twitter is compromised.Good thing is that you are not the judge. Twitter is a fucking tool. The fact that they didn't delete a video doesn't make that video untrue. So - do you want my approved list?
207
NuttBoxer
2022 Mar 5, 7:20pm
NuttBoxer
2022 Mar 5, 7:20pm
mostly reader says
You are correct to some extent. But we know from the past two years, and probably before that they censor viewpoints that don't line up with their own. So they are really more of a source than a tool due to the bias. And so far I've only see propaganda on twitter, though that doesn't really make them stand out. I see propaganda almost everywhere to the point that it took me almost a week to find an impartial source who could tell me what was really going on.
I would research your twitter poster, I didn't have to look very far to debunk the ones I've seen posted here. Almost like we repeat what we want to hear..?
Twitter is a tool. It can be used for good or for evil. If you need help telling apart genuine from propagandist on this particular topic, that I can easily do.
You are correct to some extent. But we know from the past two years, and probably before that they censor viewpoints that don't line up with their own. So they are really more of a source than a tool due to the bias. And so far I've only see propaganda on twitter, though that doesn't really make them stand out. I see propaganda almost everywhere to the point that it took me almost a week to find an impartial source who could tell me what was really going on.
I would research your twitter poster, I didn't have to look very far to debunk the ones I've seen posted here. Almost like we repeat what we want to hear..?
208
Bd6r
2022 Mar 5, 7:32pm
Bd6r
2022 Mar 5, 7:32pm
https://nitter.mstdn.social/newkc14?source=patrick.net
Chechen Al Nusra, my favorite news source for last many years (at least 8). They are periodically banned, hence 14 and new in name.
Chechen Al Nusra, my favorite news source for last many years (at least 8). They are periodically banned, hence 14 and new in name.
209
GNL
2022 Mar 5, 7:37pm
GNL
2022 Mar 5, 7:37pm
mostly reader says
Really? They didn't delete any videos that went against the Covid narrative?
WineHorror1 saysYou already lost with point #1. Twitter is compromised.Good thing is that you are not the judge. Twitter is a fucking tool. The fact that they didn't delete a video doesn't make that video untrue. So - do you want my approved list?
Really? They didn't delete any videos that went against the Covid narrative?
210
mostly reader
2022 Mar 5, 7:37pm
NuttBoxer says
P.S. To make it fair: which ones did you debunk?
I didn't have to look very far to debunk the ones I've seen posted here.All of them? Are you sure about that?
P.S. To make it fair: which ones did you debunk?
211
mostly reader
2022 Mar 5, 7:41pm
WineHorror1 says
I'll tackle this from a different angle: are you saying that everything on Twitter is untrue?
Really? They didn't delete any videos that went against the Covid narrative?What I said is unrelated to the fact that they have been deleting videos that went against the narrative.
I'll tackle this from a different angle: are you saying that everything on Twitter is untrue?
212
mostly reader
2022 Mar 5, 7:42pm
Bd6r says
https://nitter.mstdn.social/newkc14?source=patrick.netAl Jazeera looks pretty good in this conflict.
Chechen Al Nusra, my favorite news source for last many years (at least 8). They are periodically banned, hence 14 and new in name.
213
Bitcoin
2022 Mar 5, 7:46pm
Bitcoin
2022 Mar 5, 7:46pm
Its great that we (The western civilized world) seize yachts of fuckin Russians and its great that we destroy the Russian economy (finally!). But its not enough....we need to supply A10 warships and level anything in the Ukraine that looks like Russian. Put an Ukrainian flag on the warships and start kicking Russian butt. Putin is a madman, not in his right mind. Assassinate that fucker and liberate Russia.
214
Patrick
2022 Mar 5, 9:44pm
Patrick
2022 Mar 5, 9:44pm
Shaman says
Amen, brother.
The real criminals are in the US.
As far as I’m concerned, an invasion of a semi-hostile neighbor state (Putin) is several orders of magnitude less evil than vaxxing your own citizens to death.
Amen, brother.
The real criminals are in the US.
215
Patrick
2022 Mar 5, 9:45pm
Patrick
2022 Mar 5, 9:45pm
Bd6r says
I find it a bit hard to understand, probably because I didn't do that well in my one semester of Russian.
https://nitter.mstdn.social/newkc14?source=patrick.net
Chechen Al Nusra, my favorite news source for last many years (at least 8). They are periodically banned, hence 14 and new in name.
I find it a bit hard to understand, probably because I didn't do that well in my one semester of Russian.
216
Ceffer
2022 Mar 5, 10:04pm
Ceffer
2022 Mar 5, 10:04pm
Bd6r says
"Russian filth" "Hallucinating rat schizophrenic Putin" LOL! I would say they have a perspective.
Russia has earned a lot of well deserved hatred, but, then again, so have we.
https://nitter.mstdn.social/newkc14?source=patrick.net
Chechen Al Nusra, my favorite news source for last many years (at least 8). They are periodically banned, hence 14 and new in name.
"Russian filth" "Hallucinating rat schizophrenic Putin" LOL! I would say they have a perspective.
Russia has earned a lot of well deserved hatred, but, then again, so have we.
217
Patrick
2022 Mar 5, 10:25pm
Patrick
2022 Mar 5, 10:25pm
Ceffer says
America definitely seems to have started far more wars and killed a lot more innocent people than Russia in our lifetimes.
Russia has earned a lot of well deserved hatred, but, then again, so have we.
America definitely seems to have started far more wars and killed a lot more innocent people than Russia in our lifetimes.
« First « Previous Comments 186 - 219 of 219 Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,193,193 comments by 13,874 users - komputodo, mell online now