Ukraine: As it happens.

04-09-2014 04:35PM

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

Seriously?? Egg was the one who got banned...???!!

*Presses unfollow

Actually that was an error due to me thinking he was thread banned, however I got the threads mixed up.

My apologies for the confusion.

Peist2007 · 04-09-2014 04:50PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I'm sure you will have proof then the western media outlets, All of them are ran by governments with a narrative in the west ? Governments in the west can only dream of having something like RT. Is odd all the media outlets reporting the same thing. Hey it even maybe true if they are keeping the kind of information coming out. Think its a bit rich coming on here and saying people who either don't believe all these CT or are not agreeing with RT are western obama-bots. This is an Irish based form why would we listen to Obama ?

I never said Russia Today was in any way better. I havent once quoted them or referred to anything they've said. I keep repeating myself here in saying that i dont think any of the sides here are in any way telling the truth. Why are you putting words in my mouth?

Point out one time i have quoted or referred to RT. Go on.

My point is you lads are blindly following what the western media is saying and rubbishing anything coming from the other side. You're conditioned sheep. It would be funny if it wasnt so tragic.

I AM IRISH. I AM NOT RUSSIAN. Merely making my own mind up is all. And trusting John Kerry, NATO, BBC etc is absolutely stupid. They are lying to you. And have been for a long time.

pablomakaveli · 04-09-2014 05:06PM

Peist2007 wrote: »

I never said Russia Today was in any way better. I havent once quoted them or referred to anything they've said. I keep repeating myself here in saying that i dont think any of the sides here are in any way telling the truth. Why are you putting words in my mouth?

Point out one time i have quoted or referred to RT. Go on.

My point is you lads are blindly following what the western media is saying and rubbishing anything coming from the other side. You're conditioned sheep. It would be funny if it wasnt so tragic.

I AM IRISH. I AM NOT RUSSIAN. Merely making my own mind up is all. And trusting John Kerry, NATO, BBC etc is absolutely stupid. They are lying to you. And have been for a long time.

Have you not considered that those you call "sheep" are just doing this as well? Looking at all the facts but coming to a different conclusion to you. "Making their own mind up" as you put it.

Peist2007 · 04-09-2014 05:36PM

pablomakaveli wrote: »

Have you not considered that those you call "sheep" are just doing this as well? Looking at all the facts but coming to a different conclusion to you. "Making their own mind up" as you put it.

But all of the quotes being put up to support said arguments are from all of the usual suspects. Which leads me to think, no, there isnt too much critical thinking going on.

The "sheep" i refer to are those on this thread who will contribute to each of 100s of pages of a thread saying the same mantra daily which they have picked up from the news. I'm not a smug hippy talking about "the man" and "people are sheeple". I am referring to those who seemingly are following this yet still cant fathom they are being duped.

The whole Iraq WMD fiasco has ruined this sort of manipulation for those in power. People simply wont swallow stuff without question anymore. That may be a good thing but it may, as i fear with flight MH17, also be a bad thing as attempts get more and more outlandish to preserve their position. That's what this whole thing is about in my opinion - America's expansionist policies and Russia is refusing to play ball.

Read the comments section of the Guardian on this particular issue. The article will say one thing and the vast majority of the highest recommended comments below it will say something completely different. Why is that? People are waking up to this stuff.

Disagree with me if you like. But dont accuse me of being a Putinbot. It is a weak argument and belies your own bias. Let's discuss America's clearly stated global expansionist policies and how this all ties in. Because that's the issue here.

Gatling · 04-09-2014 05:42PM

Peist2007 wrote: »

Read the comments section of the Guardian on this particular issue. The article will say one thing and the vast majority of the highest recommended comments below it will say something completely different. Why is that? People are waking up to this stuff.

Because some people comment on the guardian website that's proves every one else wrong .

Wonder if the same people said the same about the invasion of Georgia several years back

pablomakaveli · 04-09-2014 05:56PM

Peist2007 wrote: »

But all of the quotes being put up to support said arguments are from all of the usual suspects. Which leads me to think, no, there isnt too much critical thinking going on.

The "sheep" i refer to are those on this thread who will contribute to each of 100s of pages of a thread saying the same mantra daily which they have picked up from the news. I'm not a smug hippy talking about "the man" and "people are sheeple". I am referring to those who seemingly are following this yet still cant fathom they are being duped.

The whole Iraq WMD fiasco has ruined this sort of manipulation for those in power. People simply wont swallow stuff without question anymore. That may be a good thing but it may, as i fear with flight MH17, also be a bad thing as attempts get more and more outlandish to preserve their position. That's what this whole thing is about in my opinion - America's expansionist policies and Russia is refusing to play ball.

Read the comments section of the Guardian on this particular issue. The article will say one thing and the vast majority of the highest recommended comments below it will say something completely different. Why is that? People are waking up to this stuff.

Disagree with me if you like. But dont accuse me of being a Putinbot. It is a weak argument and belies your own bias. Let's discuss America's clearly stated global expansionist policies and how this all ties in. Because that's the issue here.

And again that all based on your assessment of the situation. Other people might assess it differently. You seem to have difficulty grasping this.

Also i didn't call you a "Putinbot" in that post.

No idea where you've got that from.

moxin · 04-09-2014 06:19PM

Peist2007 wrote: »

Read the comments section of the Guardian on this particular issue. The article will say one thing and the vast majority of the highest recommended comments below it will say something completely different. Why is that? People are waking up to this stuff.

There are Putinbots on the Guardian website submitting comments and thumbing up opinions. Beware.

gandalf · 04-09-2014 06:27PM

moxin wrote: »

There are Putinbots on the Guardian website submitting comments and thumbing up opinions. Beware.

I would ignore any comments on the Guardian Website at the moment. It's being swamped.

...The Guardian reports that its “moderators, who deal with 40,000 comments a day, believe there is an orchestrated pro-Kremlin campaign.”...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterhimler/2014/05/06/russias-media-trolls/

Peist2007 · 05-09-2014 12:19PM

gandalf wrote: »

I would ignore any comments on the Guardian Website at the moment. It's being swamped.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterhimler/2014/05/06/russias-media-trolls/

I think if you actually read the comments sections you will see that those arguing in favour of Russia's strategy are far more likely to be presenting facts. I think there are shills on there but they are definitely there from both sides.

Peist2007 · 05-09-2014 12:19PM

Gatling wrote: »

Because some people comment on the guardian website that's proves every one else wrong .

Wonder if the same people said the same about the invasion of Georgia several years back

Didnt say that at all.

Ulysses Gaze · 05-09-2014 12:22PM

gandalf wrote: »

...The Guardian reports that its “moderators, who deal with 40,000 comments a day, believe there is an orchestrated pro-Kremlincampaign”...

Yes...they're called Guardian readers......

Timberrrrrrrr · 05-09-2014 12:25PM

Can't see Putin being happy about this

ht tp://news.sky.com/story/1330777/ukraine-nato-to-form-rapid-response-force

Nato will create a "Spearhead" rapid-response force in response to Russian aggression in Ukraine, it has been announced.

Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen reveaed the plan on the second and final day of the Nato summit in Newport, Wales, where new sanctions against Moscow are also due to be unveiled.

"This decision sends a clear message: Nato protects all allies at all times," he said.

"And it sends a clear message to any potential aggressor: Should you even think of attacking one ally, you will be facing the whole alliance."[/quote

Egginacup · 05-09-2014 12:26PM

pablomakaveli wrote: »

Have you not considered that those you call "sheep" are just doing this as well? Looking at all the facts but coming to a different conclusion to you. "Making their own mind up" as you put it.

That's the problem. They're NOT looking at the facts. They're only listening to propaganda and it is driving their stance.

When John Kerry stated that Assad used sarin nerve gas on Syrian civilians these people of whom you speak didn't look at the facts. They just heard what he said, took it as gospel truth, expressed their disgust and outrage, and insisted that Syria be attacked and invaded.

Others were less gullible and susceptible to lies and propaganda. They were vindicated since everything that Kerry said turned out to be a pack of lies.

Egginacup · 05-09-2014 12:32PM

Gatling wrote: »

Because some people comment on the guardian website that's proves every one else wrong .

Wonder if the same people said the same about the invasion of Georgia several years back

Georgia WASN'T invaded. Georgia, in a show of reprehensible stupidity and at the behest of Washington, attacked South Ossetia. They were roundly and soundly hammered by the Russian Army in 5 hours. And that is a FACT.

That Russia invaded Georgia is NOT a fact. It's propaganda.

Hande hoche! · 05-09-2014 12:34PM

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Yes...they're called Guardian readers......

In fairness, Soviet intelligence used to regard Guardian journalist as useful idiots to an extent.

Gatling · 05-09-2014 12:50PM

Egginacup wrote: »

Georgia WASN'T invaded. Georgia, in a show of reprehensible stupidity and at the behest of Washington, attacked South Ossetia. They were roundly and soundly hammered by the Russian Army in 5 hours. And that is a FACT.

That Russia invaded Georgia is NOT a fact. It's propaganda.

Really , Really

Now in all seriousness really

Timberrrrrrrr · 05-09-2014 12:57PM

Reports: Ukraine And Rebels Agree Ceasefire

ht tp://news.sky.com/story/1330813/reports-ukraine-and-rebels-agree-ceasefire

The Ukrainian government has agreed a ceasefire with pro-Russian rebels in the east of the country, according to reports.

More follows...

Hopefully it will hold.

Gatling · 05-09-2014 01:02PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Reports: Ukraine And Rebels Agree Ceasefire

ht tp://news.sky.com/story/1330813/reports-ukraine-and-rebels-agree-ceasefire

Hopefully it will hold.

It won't as stated by Vladimir putin the ceasefire won't effect Russian forces as there not in Ukraine.

Would be a nice surprise if it did

pablomakaveli · 05-09-2014 01:06PM

Egginacup wrote: »

That's the problem. They're NOT looking at the facts. They're only listening to propaganda and it is driving their stance.

When John Kerry stated that Assad used sarin nerve gas on Syrian civilians these people of whom you speak didn't look at the facts. They just heard what he said, took it as gospel truth, expressed their disgust and outrage, and insisted that Syrian be attacked and invaded.

Others were less gullible and susceptible to lies and propaganda. They were vindicated since everything that Kerry said turned out to be a pack of lies.

Who is this "they" you keep referring to?

As i recall at least on Boards there was a good deal of scepticism with the sarin gas attack.

You do also realize that you're just following a different form of propaganda,in that you've been convinced that everything that comes from a Western nation is a lie or conspiracy.

Elmer Blooker · 05-09-2014 01:17PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Reports: Ukraine And Rebels Agree Ceasefire

ht tp://news.sky.com/story/1330813/reports-ukraine-and-rebels-agree-ceasefire

Hopefully it will hold.

Not a chance in hell of it holding (and I would love to be 100% wrong)
You will NOT find the words "peace" and "ceasefire" in the NATO blood stained handbook. Peace is not good for more sanctions.

Egginacup · 05-09-2014 01:54PM

pablomakaveli wrote: »

Who is this "they" you keep referring to?

As i recall at least on Boards there was a good deal of scepticism with the sarin gas attack.

You do also realize that you're just following a different form of propaganda,in that you've been convinced that everything that comes from a Western nation is a lie or conspiracy.

I'm not following propaganda at all. I recognise it when I see it. I follow facts. Plain and simple.

And I'm not convinced that everything that comes from a Western nation is a lie or a conspiracy. That's seems to be your (and many others') default setting for labelling those who have the cheek to question what is said by those whom you believe no matter what.

Given Washington's, Whitehall's and more broadly NATO's history of lies, propaganda, hubris, contradictions and hypocrisy only a fool would believe all that they said all of the time.

I gave my trust to my leaders and those in the Fourth Estate and they betrayed that trust. It's now gone forever, never to be recovered. If my insistence on facts rather than fiction is a source of irritation for those who still blindly accept what they are told and call me a tinfoiler or conspiracy theorist in a fit of pique and refusal to consider anything other than their entrenched worldview then that's their weakness, not mine.

When some stuffed shirt stands in front of a microphone and delivers some single-digit IQ platitude like "they hate us for our freedoms" and this dross is regurgitated and reiterated by some low-rent hack in a bought-and-paid-for rag then that might be good enough for some people but it isn't good enough for me.

I am aware that there are people out there who are only walking upright on two legs because they see others doing so but these people you just can't reach. You really could piss on their leg and convince them it was raining. I'm talking about people who have some semblance of a functioning cerebrum but can still not bring themselves to break out of their intransigence even when presented with facts contradicting their position. These are the ones who are ultimately in denial terrified of leaving their comfort zone and venturing into unfamiliar territory that would force them to accept uncomfortable truths.

pablomakaveli · 05-09-2014 02:04PM

Egginacup wrote: »

I'm not following propaganda at all. I recognise it when I see it. I follow facts. Plain and simple.

And I'm not convinced that everything that comes from a Western nation is a lie or a conspiracy. That's seems to be your (and many others') default setting for labelling those who have the cheek to question what is said by those whom you believe no matter what they.

Funny you say that, because you certainly have no problem labelling those who question what you say.

Given Washington's, Whitehall's and more broadly NATO's history of lies, propaganda, hubris, contradictions and hypocrisy only a fool would believe all that they said all of the time.

I gave my trust to my leaders and those in the Fourth Estate and they betrayed that trust. It's now gone forever, never to be recovered. If my insistence on facts rather than fiction is a source of irritation for those who still blindly accept what they are told and call me a tinfoiler or conspiracy theorist in a fit of pique and refusal to consider anything other than their entrenched worldview then that's their weakness, not mine.

When some stuffed shirt stands in front of a microphone and delivers some single-digit IQ platitude like "they hate us for our freedoms" and this dross is regurgitated and reiterated by some low-rent hack in a bought-and-paid-for rag then that might be good enough for some people but it isn't good enough for me.

I am aware that there are people out there who are only walking upright on two legs because they see others doing so but these people you just can't reach. You really could piss on their leg and convince them it was raining. I'm talking about people who have some semblance of a functioning cerebrum but can still not bring themselves to break out of their intransigence even when presented with facts contradicting their position. These are the ones who are ultimately in denial terrified of leaving their comfort zone and venturing into unfamiliar territory that would force them to accept uncomfortable truths.

All you showing here is you have a big ego and think you're smarter than people who disagree with you or don't take your version of events.

You're as bad as those you point the finger at but you're completely oblivous to it.

Egginacup · 05-09-2014 02:23PM

Gatling wrote: »

Really , Really

Now in all seriousness really

Yes, REALLY!

Look, why don't you do yourself a favour and do some research on it. You can start with this piece and from there I recommend you start following up the sources and quotes mentioned in the article.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/oct/31/russia-georgia

That's how you get to the bottom of things.

Gatling · 05-09-2014 02:33PM

Egginacup wrote: »

Yes, REALLY!

Look, why don't you do yourself a favour and do some research on it. You can start with this piece and from there I recommend you start following up the sources and quotes mentioned in the article.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/oct/31/russia-georgia

That's how you get to the bottom of things.

The Guardian

See below

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterhimler/2014/05/06/russias-media-trolls/

40,000 pro Russian comments bombarding the guardian a day excuse me if I choose not read Kremlin times aka the guardian

darkpagandeath · 05-09-2014 02:57PM

Egginacup wrote: »

I'm not following propaganda at all. I recognise it when I see it. I follow facts. Plain and simple.

And I'm not convinced that everything that comes from a Western nation is a lie or a conspiracy. That's seems to be your (and many others') default setting for labelling those who have the cheek to question what is said by those whom you believe no matter what they.

Given Washington's, Whitehall's and more broadly NATO's history of lies, propaganda, hubris, contradictions and hypocrisy only a fool would believe all that they said all of the time.

I gave my trust to my leaders and those in the Fourth Estate and they betrayed that trust. It's now gone forever, never to be recovered. If my insistence on facts rather than fiction is a source of irritation for those who still blindly accept what they are told and call me a tinfoiler or conspiracy theorist in a fit of pique and refusal to consider anything other than their entrenched worldview then that's their weakness, not mine.

When some stuffed shirt stands in front of a microphone and delivers some single-digit IQ platitude like "they hate us for our freedoms" and this dross is regurgitated and reiterated by some low-rent hack in a bought-and-paid-for rag then that might be good enough for some people but it isn't good enough for me.

I am aware that there are people out there who are only walking upright on two legs because they see others doing so but these people you just can't reach. You really could piss on their leg and convince them it was raining. I'm talking about people who have some semblance of a functioning cerebrum but can still not bring themselves to break out of their intransigence even when presented with facts contradicting their position. These are the ones who are ultimately in denial terrified of leaving their comfort zone and venturing into unfamiliar territory that would force them to accept uncomfortable truths.

Ok so what part of this is not true.

1 Separatists are shooting down Ukrainian aircraft.
2 They are the only ones shooting down aircraft.
3 Ukraine is not shooting down aircraft as separatists have no air force.
4 A civilian plane goes down in the area separatists have been shooting down Ukrainian aircraft.
5 Separatists taunted publically Ukrainians about "we told you to stop flying over here blah blah"
6 Taunts removed when it was realised a civilian plain was shot down.
7 Panic sets in separatists move to the area and start destroying evidence and messing with bodies.

I would love to know how this is considered propaganda that I am spouting following ? Me thinks it’s just not the right narrative that i should be following...

Autonomous Cowherd · 05-09-2014 03:27PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Ok so what part of this is not true.

1 Separatists are shooting down Ukrainian aircraft.
2 They are the only ones shooting down aircraft.
3 Ukraine is not shooting down aircraft as separatists have no air force.
4 A civilian plane goes down in the area separatists have been shooting down Ukrainian aircraft.
5 Separatists taunted publically Ukrainians about "we told you to stop flying over here blah blah"
6 Taunts removed when it was realised a civilian plain was shot down.
7 Panic sets in separatists move to the area and start destroying evidence and messing with bodies.

I would love to know how this is considered propaganda that I am spouting following ? Me thinks it’s just not the right narrative that i should be following...

No 2 is as yet unproven. Until it is proven to be true it cannot be stated as incontrovertible. Full stop.
No 3 is what is known as a non sequitur...the use of the word ''as'' in the middle implies that the first part is correct because the second part is correct. But in this case it proves to be a fallacy (the non sequitur part) for one cannot say that because the separatists have no air force ergo Ukraine does not shoot down planes. It is a leap too far.

Regarding points 1, 4, 5 6, and 7, because points 2 and 3 remain as yet unproven, one cannot reach an incontrovertible conclusion. As I have said before, Pro Russian separatists MAY indeed be responsible for the tragedy of MH17, but this remains unproven. Ukrainian air force or ground to air missiles may also be responsible. We simply do not KNOW yet. Sanctions and sabre-rattling based upon unproven accusation is at the very least foolish.

Egginacup · 05-09-2014 03:29PM

Gatling wrote: »

The Guardian

See below

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterhimler/2014/05/06/russias-media-trolls/

40,000 pro Russian comments bombarding the guardian a day excuse me if I choose not read Kremlin times aka the guardian

Then don't sneeringly dismiss facts if your not going to read anything that backs up those facts.

You've just demonstrated that you really ought not be taken seriously or responded to. Your Forbes article alludes to PUBLIC COMMENTS that the moderators of the Guardian website say belie a pro-Russian agenda.
The link I posted is to an article WRITTEN in the Guardian. It contains sources for the information contained therein which has gone through a clearing house.

For you to equate the two and use it as an excuse to not follow up on information that lays bare the lie that you still believe then that pretty much says it all.

Don't engage me in discussion anymore.

Gatling · 05-09-2014 03:33PM

Egginacup wrote: »

Then don't sneeringly dismiss facts if your not going to read anything that backs up those facts.

You've just demonstrated that you really ought not be taken seriously or responded to. Your Forbes article alludes to PUBLIC COMMENTS that the moderators of the Guardian website say belie a pro-Russian agenda.
The link I posted is to an article WRITTEN in the Guardian. It contains sources for the information contained therein which has gone through a clearing house.

For you to equate the two and use it as an excuse to not follow up on information that lays bare the lie that you still believe then that pretty much says it all.

Don't engage me in discussion anymore.

Welcome to the the Free Democratic civilised world

Not the Tzarist Vladimir the 1st fan club

Egginacup · 05-09-2014 03:34PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Ok so what part of this is not true.

1 Separatists are shooting down Ukrainian aircraft.
2 They are the only ones shooting down aircraft.
3 Ukraine is not shooting down aircraft as separatists have no air force.
4 A civilian plane goes down in the area separatists have been shooting down Ukrainian aircraft.
5 Separatists taunted publically Ukrainians about "we told you to stop flying over here blah blah"
6 Taunts removed when it was realised a civilian plain was shot down.
7 Panic sets in separatists move to the area and start destroying evidence and messing with bodies.

I would love to know how this is considered propaganda that I am spouting following ? Me thinks it’s just not the right narrative that i should be following...

I can't add anything to Autonomous Cowherd's perfect response. She addresses all your points succinctly.

darkpagandeath · 05-09-2014 03:38PM

Egginacup wrote: »

Then don't sneeringly dismiss facts if your not going to read anything that backs up those facts.

You've just demonstrated that you really ought not be taken seriously or responded to. Your Forbes article alludes to PUBLIC COMMENTS that the moderators of the Guardian website say belie a pro-Russian agenda.
The link I posted is to an article WRITTEN in the Guardian. It contains sources for the information contained therein which has gone through a clearing house.

For you to equate the two and use it as an excuse to not follow up on information that lays bare the lie that you still believe then that pretty much says it all.

Don't engage me in discussion anymore.

Does not work that way I'm afraid this is a discussion board. And in relation to the answers given to my post. Are People insinuating Ukraine orchestrated this event or some kind of CIA black ops ? If people believe in such CT why not Russian Black ops doing the same ?

Ukraine: As it happens.

Comments