Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
wvParticipantSome things, though, I don’t agree with him. There;s this kind of smug more pure than pure thing among some leftists that causes them to veer off into conspiracy theories. It used to be all you had to deal with was right-wing conspiracy theories. Now there are left-wing conspiracy theories aimed at the left. It’s not the same as it was 10-15 years ago.
———————
Yeah, i know you dont like the conspiracy stuff. I dont mind it, because ive gotten to the point where I’ve been drenched by so many lies and so much propaganda, in this system, that i have trouble telling what’s real and whats not anymore. I’m often in a position of being skeptical of the conspiracy…and skeptical of the ‘official’ story, both…..
w
vIt’s never that either/or, though. “Official” v. conspiracy. You can see through a lot of that stuff. Otherwise we’re just admitting that programmed efforts to distort things always win.
For example, why on earth would I even want to be critical of the women’s march on Washington. What is accomplished by that, except some kind of prissy divisiveness? Just do your thing right alongside the other things and then see where it all ends up.
I see it like this. There is no “pure program.” We’re not like Lenin’s communist party. There are many things at once, from different angles and places, and their cumulative effect is what matters. Unless people WANT a doctrinally pure, organized Lenisist party. Which to me would be a disaster.
I have no trouble spotting conspiracy theories, btw. There’s usually an “edge” to them that just feels wrong.
Like, it’s not enough that Hillary was an establishment dem who was never good on economic issues. I am now supposed to debate whether she had a lower level party aid assassinated? (??!!) 10 or 15 years ago, that kind of stuff did not happen. Conspiracy inventing was right against left, not left against left.
To me, and speaking just for myself and how I tend to see it, surrendering when it comes to seeing through obvious conspiracy bs is the same as just giving up in general, IMO. It accomplishes nothing. It’s defeatism. If we’re going to be defeatist, then, why bother. If you’re defeatist why not just join the establishment and reap the benefits they offer. Why go through all the stress of opposing them.
Okay done soapboxing.

For now.
…
============
Why criticize the march? Well, in the video the woman critiquing the march is Medea Benjamin a co-founder of Code Pink. She was asked by the interviewer “why has it been so hard to build an anti-war movement…at the womens march in Washington our wars abroad werent even mentioned…?”And Medea sez “…no, they didnt even mention it in the platform, and we called them, we tried, and we couldnt even get that in the platform of the women’s march. Its just extraordinary….they said it was controversial.”
The vid is about FIXING fissures in the left-movements.
w
v
wvParticipant
wvParticipantSome things, though, I don’t agree with him. There;s this kind of smug more pure than pure thing among some leftists that causes them to veer off into conspiracy theories. It used to be all you had to deal with was right-wing conspiracy theories. Now there are left-wing conspiracy theories aimed at the left. It’s not the same as it was 10-15 years ago.
———————
Yeah, i know you dont like the conspiracy stuff. I dont mind it, because ive gotten to the point where I’ve been drenched by so many lies and so much propaganda, in this system, that i have trouble telling what’s real and whats not anymore. I’m often in a position of being skeptical of the conspiracy…and skeptical of the ‘official’ story, both…..
w
v
wvParticipantI think he’s about as good as it gets in comedy/politix these days.
w
vPS, i watched this. At the 18:20 mark there’s some criticism of the women’s march leaders. Thot it was interesting. No big thing, just thot it was interesting.
wvParticipant
wvParticipantI wonder if there will be a seven day waiting period
before people can have ray guns.w
v
wvParticipantO’donnel conspiracy theory…
=============
Thats the first thing that crossed my mind when i heard about the bombings.We’ll never know, i guess.
w
v
wvParticipantAny word at all yet on whether there is any evidence that Assad was responsible for the gas attack or whether there even was a gas attack?
Is it likely we will ever know who did what?
w
v
wvParticipant
wvParticipantApril 8, 2017 at 8:27 am in reply to: Browns wide receiver Kenny Britt trash-talking the Rams #67113
wvParticipantI’m guessing Britt is gonna apologize for all that,
once he sobers up and the powers-that-be talk to him.w
v
wvParticipantLee Camp (the RT guy that zn and i have been wrastling about) became rather famous when he appeared on Fox News and said this. It went very viral:
“A festival of Ignorance”
wvParticipantWade likes CBs.
========
Any draft thots, Ag?
w
v-
This reply was modified 9 years, 4 months ago by
zn.
wvParticipantRT is NOT monolithic. There’s good RT and bad RT. You would know that if you actually watched more of it.
Why should I invest myself in it at all? I like my sources of info, which are very wide. In other words, is there any particular reason I should care? Especially since my first instinct would be to verify anything they say, which is a lot of work and time. So I don’t see the point in bothering. I keep saying there’s plenty out there so who needs em.
I do know that russian takes on the conflicts in syria influenced some things I did watch, and I found it to be worse than useless…it was actually aggressively bad.
We may just have to not see eye to eye on this. Or, I could have you poisoned. That would be very russian I think.
Are all russians, like you, dedicated Seattle fans?
Just curious. I don’t judge.
..
================
Why invest the time? Because its fucking FUNNY. This guy is like John Oliver or Jon Stewart, etc. It…is…funny. And accurate. And he is ANTI-trump. Not every RT show is pro-trump.w
v
wvParticipantYou didnt watch
it.w
vYou didn;t make a case for it. It;s the bloody Putin Russians. I think it’s naive to pretend that outside their own borders they turn into these apostles of free thinking and genuine news.
There are all kinds of good analysts out there, for example, who have shown how much the BBC is agenda-driven. Why all of a sudden is Russian state-sponsored news escaping the same criticism we bring to the BBC?
And not only is it of necessity tainted, it’s not necessary to even go there. There’s nothing they could ever provide that wouldn’t be provided better by others who don’t have a state-sponsored taint.
We also wouldn’t recommend Radio America to people. Well there’s a reason for that.
The Russians don’t stop being who they are anymore than the american agenda stops being the american agenda on Radio America.
.
============
You are doing a movie review of a movie you didnt watch.
RT is NOT monolithic. There’s good RT and bad RT. You would know that if you actually watched more of it.
And again, i dont care where good info comes from. If its good, its good. Some of RT is good. And i like the fact that, that good-RT-stuff is hitting the american airwaves.
I wouldnt recommend radio america to people but i would recommend the Daily Show.
w
v-
This reply was modified 9 years, 4 months ago by
wv.
wvParticipantI dont care where it comes from. I wouldnt care if it came from North Korea or Mordor. If its good stuff, its good stuff. Why do you care where its from?
Because it’s NOT good stuff. It’s tainted and deliberately misleading. And that is because of where it comes from. Russians have no investment in bringing real revealing news to us, when they don’t even bring it to themselves. They have an investment in their slant and agenda.
There are all kinds of good analysts out there, for example, who have shown how much the BBC is agenda-driven. Why all of a sudden is Russian state-sponsored news escaping the same criticism we bring to the BBC?
And not only is it of necessity tainted, it’s not necessary to even go there. There’s nothing they could ever provide that wouldn’t be provided better by others who don’t have a state-sponsored taint.
..
============
You didnt watch
it.w
v
wvParticipant
wvParticipantWell if they can swing a Sherman for Tru
trade I will be fine with that.Sherman can throw all the tantrums he wants
as long as he shuts down WRs.w
v
wvParticipantYou can’t find that kind of thing, if not better, elsewhere?
Without the taint of being a propaganda outlet for a right-wing authoritarian oligarchy?
….
=====================
I dont care where it comes from. I wouldnt care if it came from North Korea or Mordor. If its good stuff, its good stuff. Why do you care where its from?
Its aimed at young American voters. Thats a good thing. Where’s the down side?
And btw, WATCH this one. Tell me what you think without regard to where its from.
w
v
-
This reply was modified 9 years, 4 months ago by
wv.
wvParticipant
wvParticipantSteve Martin from 68
wvParticipantFwiw, RT on Syria:
link:https://www.rt.com/news/383785-us-missiles-syrian-army/
wvParticipantI think DeVega is right about what white liberals get wrong about racism to a fair degree.
But I think Bernie knows that even while he downplays it. Bernie is clearly committed to avoiding name-calling, and “gutter” politics, or the appearance of it. He relentlessly looks to forge alliances, and that’s to his credit, I think. So he knows full well a lot of Trump’s appeal is to racists, but he knows nothing is gained by saying so. That’s my opinion.
————
dittow
v
wvParticipantI like it, but they sure need to find another good CB.
I guess we are all looking forward to seeing the new Wade Phillips Defense.
The Greg Williams Defense was spectacular sometimes, but it was a mess sometimes too. It would be nice to see some consistency.
w
v
wvParticipantWhat’s your take on the Syrian strike, WV?
—————
I dont have a take on it yet. Just found out about it a few mins ago.
My big-picture-take iz that none of the gangster states would be doing anything in the middle-east if there weren’t a whole lot of Oil in the region 🙂
Fwiw?
w
v-
This reply was modified 9 years, 4 months ago by
wv.
wvParticipant“…That same assessment apparently goes on to report that these Russian hackers stole “large volumes of data from the DNC” in May of 2016. That information was then first posted online in June 2016.”
Here’s how i see this. (exaggerated to make a point):
1 Ganster-state-Russia, interfered (in a relatively tepid way) in Gangster-state-America’s election.2. The main-way gangster-state-russia ‘interfered’ was to excavate and publish TRUE emails and info from private Gangster-DNC-files.
3 Gangster-Trump, and his gangster minions, of course, aided and abetted and lied about these tactics, and the tactics probably did have some-unknown effect on the rigged-pro-corporate-election between gangster-Hillary and gangster-Trump.
4. This all happened within a context — that context being that the US-gangster-state has ‘interfered’ in many many many elections in other nations for decades and decades. The US-gangster state has probably interfered in Russia’s elections in the past, though i haven’t studied on that there issue.
5. So, in sum, we have gangsters in russia, gangsters in the DNC, gangsters in the GOP, cold-war-gangsters in the CIA/NSA, gangsters in the Kremlin, Gangster-Banksters, Gangster-Oligarchs, Gangster-Plutocrats…all fighting over gangster-controlled-intellectual and physical terrain. And we have various gangster-media factions supporting various gangster-factions in the Big-Gangster-Game.
And all this is vaguely known by the ‘citizens’ on some nebulous level, but basically the public is too propagandized by all the gangster-elements to really figure anything out. The bewildered herd is more bewildered than ever.
w
v
wvParticipantComedy has changed a lot since them there golden-years.
w
v
wvParticipantRussia is a gawd-awful right-wing authoritarian oligarchy. How is your Russian news on criticizing Russia?
That part is key for me. Russia is a hard-right autocracy, and it supports neo-fascists throughout Europe, in hopes of getting them elected. And your question above is the right one to ask. Does RT ever even question Russia’s own oligarchical practices? Does it go after Russia’s own pollution, corruption, violence, imperialism, etc.?
We definitely need strong critiques of our own ills. American imperialism needs to be critiqued and opposed, ferociously. But I’m highly skeptical of media outlets which seem to only concentrate on America, and no one else. And that brings us to Wikileaks: They ONLY go after America, and in recent years, just Democrats. Can anyone make an honest case that America is alone in the world when it comes to imperialist actions, destruction of eco-systems, government and corporate malfeasance, etc. etc.?
And by that, I’m saying it needs to be “both/and” not “either/or” as ZN mentions above. It’s not an excuse like “But mommy, mommy!! Joey did it too, waaaaaaaaaghhhh!” I’m saying attack imperialism, warmongering, empire expansion, inequality, the acceptance of poverty, hunger, homelessness, etc. etc. everywhere it exists. Everywhere. No one gets to skate on that. Not America. Not Russia. Not China or any of dozens and dozens of nation which promote, defend or at least allow evil.
And that’s the real “solidarity” in all of this. That’s the real potential for a righteous leftist revival. No cherry-picking. Just as we should be all about “social inclusion,” we need to be equal-opportunity fighters against injustice, regardless of source.
===============
I agree RT doesnt go after Russia. It has zero to say about Russia. Fair enough. But also, SO WHAT. Oftentimes their critiques of the US are right-on.
And if US-citizens only watch the MSM they never get any critique of the US that goes outside of the Dem vs Rep crap.And yes, Russia is all the things you and zn say. Its a gangster state. So is the USA. Maybe it takes one gangster state to critique the other.
w
v
wvParticipantRussia is a gawd-awful right-wing authoritarian oligarchy. How is your Russian news on criticizing Russia?
A lot of critiques I see of american policy from a purely russian perspective are complete bs. From top to bottom. And the same goes for the non-Russians they sponsor too. They’re especially bad when it comes to things like Syria.
And of course I am not one of those who thinks that that means american MSM is okay. It’s not an “either/or” thing.
There are sources available to us on everything that are far better than both. So I don’t see the point in paying any attention to the Russians at all. It’s all pro-Russian self-justifying agenda stuff. Of all the things to pay attention to, why them?
Again it’s not either/or and I don’t see the value in what they do, at all. I did just fine without them even during the run-up to the Iraq war. Cause. Again. They’re bad and it’s not either/or. There’s lots of valuable ways around both of them.
I don’t see the value in it. To me they’re just one more problem among others. It’s like, okay as if we didn’t have enough to do we have to sort through that, too.
Nothing pro-Russia serves any good purpose of any kind, IMO. I don’t see the point.
.
————-
Well that just sounds to me like you havent actually watched any of the good RT vids.
w
v
wvParticipantJust looking at the US PRIMARIES — most citizens voted for Rubio, Cruz, Hillary, Trump, etc — but what percentage out of all that, voted for Bernie? In the primaries.
Cause whatever number that is,
is the scorecard right now. Thats where were at.w
v -
This reply was modified 9 years, 4 months ago by
-
AuthorPosts

