|
|
Post by Hutchyns on Jun 24, 2024 9:49:12 GMT
BvL It's a relationship that has developed to the stage that the UK mainstream media is adept at self-censoring, as well as sufficiently tuned into the requirements of the British establishment, that I doubt a heavy handed approach from across the pond is often required. But put yourself in the position of an average British Prole whose news only ever reaches him/her through the filter of the UK mass media ..... and the necessary facts are concealed from them so completely that their opportunity to 'wake up' never arises. Consider how successful the British media were at 'ring fencing' the Ukraine story completely around Farage. Almost water tight, elevated to the main story, and played for all it was worth, having been spooked earlier in the week by scare stories that Reform were overtaking the Tories in some parts. 'Farage expresses unallowable opinion, and we've collected a group of people all with the 'right' opinion to denounce him ..... in fact we even went down to the dole office to unearth old Ben Wallace (remember him ?) ..... and Ben says that Farage is definitely wrong !!'Now just imagine if they didn't self censor, and told the truth ...... it would be a non story: 'On Thursday Donald Trump explained that the West, primarily the US via Biden and the Neocons, provoked the current Ukraine conflict. This isn't greatly contentious in the US, it's an opinion held by the person who many polls indicate will be the President of the United States in a matter of months from now. It won't be controversial over there, and Trump's popularity won't plummet overnight'But what happened instead ?. Were the Proles ever informed that Trump had said it on the Thursday, and that Farage had repeated it the very next day, on the Friday ? Of course not .... Trump's name didn't pass their lips, or make it into print ....... it had to be presented as a Farage original ...... and treated as so outlandish and off the wall that Red Rackham and Co would throw their arms up in horror. Make it the lead story .... and remember 100% Farage .... 0% Trump ..... this has to be used as ammunition to help our establishment political parties ...... just because the US didn't bat an eyelid yesterday when Trump said it, it wont prevent us from going completely apoplectic now Farage has parroted him 24 hours later. In defence of the Proles, if the poor sods never get their news in any other form other than through the lens of the British media, they really don't stand a chance. Trump Blames NATO for sparking Ukraine conflict |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jun 24, 2024 12:59:55 GMT
BvL It's a relationship that has developed to the stage that the UK mainstream media is adept at self-censoring, as well as sufficiently tuned into the requirements of the British establishment, that I doubt a heavy handed approach from across the pond is often required. But put yourself in the position of an average British Prole whose news only ever reaches him/her through the filter of the UK mass media ..... and the necessary facts are concealed from them so completely that their opportunity to 'wake up' never arises. Consider how successful the British media were at 'ring fencing' the Ukraine story completely around Farage. Almost water tight, elevated to the main story, and played for all it was worth, having been spooked earlier in the week by scare stories that Reform were overtaking the Tories in some parts. 'Farage expresses unallowable opinion, and we've collected a group of people all with the 'right' opinion to denounce him ..... in fact we even went down to the dole office to unearth old Ben Wallace (remember him ?) ..... and Ben says that Farage is definitely wrong !!'Now just imagine if they didn't self censor, and told the truth ...... it would be a non story: 'On Thursday Donald Trump explained that the West, primarily the US via Biden and the Neocons, provoked the current Ukraine conflict. This isn't greatly contentious in the US, it's an opinion held by the person who many polls indicate will be the President of the United States in a matter of months from now. It won't be controversial over there, and Trump's popularity won't plummet overnight'But what happened instead ?. Were the Proles ever informed that Trump had said it on the Thursday, and that Farage had repeated it the very next day, on the Friday ? Of course not .... Trump's name didn't pass their lips, or make it into print ....... it had to be presented as a Farage original ...... and treated as so outlandish and off the wall that Red Rackham and Co would throw their arms up in horror. Make it the lead story .... and remember 100% Farage .... 0% Trump ..... this has to be used as ammunition to help our establishment political parties ...... just because the US didn't bat an eyelid yesterday when Trump said it, it wont prevent us from going completely apoplectic now Farage has parroted him 24 hours later. In defence of the Proles, if the poor sods never get their news in any other form other than through the lens of the British media, they really don't stand a chance. Trump Blames NATO for sparking Ukraine conflictActually I had no idea Trump said it the day before. I'm aware of Trump's position, which was along the lines of 'If I had been president instead of Biden then there would not have been a Ukraine war'. It is true that America has more political free speech than the UK. They come from a tradition of independent radio stations which are allowed to say pretty much what they want politically. The chap who wrote book i did a thread on about the US controlling the UK pointed out that the US does at least publish all financial and legal information so you can track who bought what industry and how much they paid, and who bought what stock etc. You could figure the picture out if you were an academic, but the public over there seem so dumb it is of little help.
Meanwhile as you say, it looks like our lot are so well trained that they are like keen workers willing to please them as much as possible. Wallice was an obvious example. You can tell he is looking for a consultancy job. The thing is Farage has handled countless attacks of this type so he knows exactly how to play it. Rishi and Co have very little experience in the political side of things. He's just snowed under with so much trouble piling up he can not cope. Reform actually have 3x the finding of the Cons now. All their investors have fled to Starmer. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Jun 25, 2024 6:49:06 GMT
Farage said it long before Trump did - back in 2010 IIRC in the European Parliament. I see Boris has also attacked Farage for saying the EU provoked Putin, but in fact Boris said back in 2016 that the EU had provoked Russia's invasion of Crimea.
It's blindingly obvious that the EU's expansion of its superstate to the East was bound to anger Putin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jun 25, 2024 10:56:46 GMT
Putin threatened Ukraine in 2008 at a NATO summit he was foolishly invited to.
There was a NATO Russia council.
Putin had sought NATO membership himself whilst bombing the fuck out of Chechnya.
He sought an excuse to attack, the EU and NATO gave him things he could claim as excuses.
But he's the one who sent mercs into Donbas and soldiers into Crimea ten years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by thescotsman on Jun 25, 2024 11:18:56 GMT
Farage said it long before Trump did - back in 2010 IIRC in the European Parliament. I see Boris has also attacked Farage for saying the EU provoked Putin, but in fact Boris said back in 2016 that the EU had provoked Russia's invasion of Crimea. It's blindingly obvious that the EU's expansion of its superstate to the East was bound to anger Putin. ...sorry you'll need to explain your argument. EU and UK were awash with Russian money. Russian influence at the top level of the UK Political establishment and UK corporate legal and accountancy firms meant that politicians and shareholders were making money hand over fist; same is true in Europe, Germany espcially was beguiled as they still are to this day along with Austria and Hungary for example. Putin was building pipelines for oil and gas that was feeding the crime syndicates in Russia! Colossal amounts of money. So much money was being made that even the events the of 2014 were greeted with such a lukewarm response - it's as if the whole of Europe agreed with Putin and his views of Ukraine. Who wanted to get in the way of that river of money and influence coming from Russia? So, since the inner circle were making a colossal amount of money out of an expansionist Europe, and Ukraine never existed in the first place, how does that narrative work? What exactly was Russia being threated with? How would a political order based upon a Kantian Cosmopolitan social and economic system threaten Putin's Russia? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2024 14:49:28 GMT
Farage said it long before Trump did - back in 2010 IIRC in the European Parliament. I see Boris has also attacked Farage for saying the EU provoked Putin, but in fact Boris said back in 2016 that the EU had provoked Russia's invasion of Crimea. It's blindingly obvious that the EU's expansion of its superstate to the East was bound to anger Putin. This is the thing, it was predicted by the very people those on here profess to hate and when what they have said suddenly becomes reality they are lied about and attacked. We could debate the rights and wrongs around Putin all day long, but it seems pointless to do so with those who remain devoted to their establishment cult programming that would make Goebbels blush.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jun 25, 2024 18:41:12 GMT
The Mail is gloating right now that the comment from Farage has hit them in the polls by about 2-3 percent in 4 polls taken after the comment was made. It goes to show you that no matter how obvious something is to the likes of us lot, out there in prole land, they just lap up the bullshit. The establishment has put on a theatre show for them and they have obediently complied. Of course I'm not talking about our entire public. It is just the way the maths works. We're at a critical point where Cons and Reform are just about level, so it is the point at which it is most sensitive to influence. It's that boundary chaos zone. You only need about 10-20% of fuckwits to swing it one way or another. Their minds are so shallow they can change with the weather.
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Jun 26, 2024 6:20:15 GMT
Farage said it long before Trump did - back in 2010 IIRC in the European Parliament. I see Boris has also attacked Farage for saying the EU provoked Putin, but in fact Boris said back in 2016 that the EU had provoked Russia's invasion of Crimea. It's blindingly obvious that the EU's expansion of its superstate to the East was bound to anger Putin. . What exactly was Russia being threated with? How would a political order based upon a Kantian Cosmopolitan social and economic system threaten Putin's Russia? Putin is sensitive about any country (or superstate) being in a position to place weapons on its border. The EU has been "cosying" up to Ukraine for years. It's also been talking about an EU army. Putin also believes that the West has broken promises not to expand NATO to the east. The EU's involvement with Ukraine has been a very sensitive issue for Russia for years and the EU should have trodden very carefully - but it didn't. This war could have been avoided if the EU had maintained better diplomatic relations with Russia. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jun 26, 2024 6:23:28 GMT
Thing is this, Putin was hoping for excuses to invade Ukraine, if he couldn't control it by puppet.
There was no promise not to expand NATO eastwards, and Putin himself tried to join. The NATO Russia council was established as part of a process to get Russia into NATO.
But Putin is an empire builder, that's always worked against him.
If Belarus had overthrown the puppet dictator Lukashenko, he'd have invaded Belarus.
He feels a need to kill and steal and control.
The EU and NATO needed to recognise that and advise Ukraine that it would endanger them to have closer relations unless Putin's dictatorship were to collapse.
At the same time sanctions were needed against Russia in the 2000's. Sanctions weren't put in place and a gangster was emboldened.
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Jun 26, 2024 7:02:22 GMT
Thing is this, Putin was hoping for excuses to invade Ukraine, if he couldn't control it by puppet. There was no promise not to expand NATO eastwards, and Putin himself tried to join. The NATO Russia council was established as part of a process to get Russia into NATO. But Putin is an empire builder, that's always worked against him. If Belarus had overthrown the puppet dictator Lukashenko, he'd have invaded Belarus. He feels a need to kill and steal and control. The EU and NATO needed to recognise that and advise Ukraine that it would endanger them to have closer relations unless Putin's dictatorship were to collapse. At the same time sanctions were needed against Russia in the 2000's. Sanctions weren't put in place and a gangster was emboldened. Whether or not NATO or the West gave assurance to the USSR about the expansion of NATO to the east, Putin most definitely believed they did. And that's the only relevant thing. The EU should have known about Putin's sensitivity on this issue and trodden carefully. This war was caused by the EU's diplomatic failure. It could have been avoided. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jun 26, 2024 8:33:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 26, 2024 8:43:47 GMT
The last Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, recalled that the Atlantic alliance was not to advance “as much as a thumb’s width further to the East”. Meanwhile, Der Spiegel concluded after examining the archives and speeches by key figures such as the long-serving German foreign minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher “that there was no doubt that the West did everything it could to give the Soviets the impression that Nato membership was out of the question for countries like Poland, Hungary or Czechoslovakia”. 0 www.thenationalnews.com/opinion/its-dangerous-to-poke-the-russian-bear-too-hard-1.285116 |
|
|
|
Post by piglet on Jun 26, 2024 9:34:44 GMT
Why cant eastern europe join nato, the EU or anybody? Who cares what the Russians want. If being under Russian influence is great, why doesnt eastern europe vote for Russia, not want to leave it? Its because they want 5g, colour tvs, well stocked supermarkets, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 26, 2024 11:00:46 GMT
Why cant eastern europe join nato, the EU or anybody? Who cares what the Russians want. If being under Russian influence is great, why doesnt eastern europe vote for Russia, not want to leave it? It’s because they want 5g, colour tvs, well stocked supermarkets, etc. The answer to that is the Russians do and the Ukraine war is a result of the very opinion that you just posted . Morals and fairness is fine and dandy as long as the ones spouting it are prepared to fight for it . Lets see what happens when we start paying a price . |
|
|
|
Post by thescotsman on Jun 26, 2024 11:59:16 GMT
. What exactly was Russia being threated with? How would a political order based upon a Kantian Cosmopolitan social and economic system threaten Putin's Russia? Putin is sensitive about any country (or superstate) being in a position to place weapons on its border. The EU has been "cosying" up to Ukraine for years. It's also been talking about an EU army. Putin also believes that the West has broken promises not to expand NATO to the east. The EU's involvement with Ukraine has been a very sensitive issue for Russia for years and the EU should have trodden very carefully - but it didn't. This war could have been avoided if the EU had maintained better diplomatic relations with Russia. It's sort of difficult to make an argument for this narrative when even Putin doesn't actually allude to it. In his justification for his (attempted) annexation of Ukraine he is fixated on the ties Ukraine has to the greater Russia. Even in his speech during the Carlson "interview" the main thrust was Putin's cherry picked historical claim that Ukraine was a greater part of the Russian Empire.... "give me two minutes to explain the history...." Putin says to Carlson and 45 minutes later he's still droning on and Carlson is looking totally bemused! Placing weapons near the borders of Russia has not stopped since it started, even today you have SSBNs off the coast of Russia with nuclear weapons so that argument falls on very flat ground, as does the NATO argument which is often trotted out. As an aside, the very same argument could be applied to Russia with it's attempted encirclement of the EU; they now have a strong hold on Syria and have a strong hold over Libya and will (probably unless Ukraine goes bad) strike deals there for land bases and naval facilities, likewise The CAF and Sudan and other African countries where Wagner is operating on an industrial scale. The EU doesn't have an army and even if it did it would not pose a threat to Russia since there is no and never has been any threat to Russia's sovereign territory on the contrary the EU has/had a very open trade policy with Russia which is the basis of the EU's diplomatic reach. The EU has been contemplating an "Army" for some time as a reaction to the incoherent policies of the Trump presidency and potentially a withdrawal of America from NATO or at least a formal notice of non-compliance with Article 5 should Trump or similar Republican gain the Presidency in the short/medium term. You'll need to explain why you think the EU didn't have better diplomatic relations - The EU member countries are the entities which have formal diplomatic ties with Russia not the EU. Even then, based on the actual trading relationships and the terms under which they were carried out it is difficult to see these in any other light than very close. One can merely look at Germany and Austria for example, Gerhard Schroeder (Nordstream 1 and 2) is still a board member of many Russian companies. Karin Kneissl is a very close personal Friend of Putin. But this is all nonsense really when considering the actual question which is why, even if Russia had an issue with the EU, did it decide to invade Ukraine. It's a bit like being pissed off with your neighbour next door because his cat craps on your geraniums so you stomp over the road and beat the crap out of the guy opposite. Makes no sense at all. It's basically common knowledge now that Putin sees the world through a Eurasianist/expansionist lens. He sees the world in terms of what's his and what he want's. He spent 2 years with some very odious characters cherry picking snippets of historical happenings to come up with his quasi-crusading view of the new Russian Empire with himself as the new Czar. He simply doesn't accept the existence of Ukraine as a seperate country. He doesn't accept that they can make decisions and plans and form alliances and conduct diplomacy without his agreement. He views Ukraine merely as a province of his new Russian Empire and he wanted it back. That's all it is. All the rest is smoke and mirrors. |
|
