Why bother posting Russia Today videos anymore?

[Shankapotomus]

Yea, sometimes what they say jibes with what we already think and know but, given that we now know it is basically a propaganda arm for the Right Wing Putin regime, why associate DU with that source?

[Cha]

1. K

[petronius]

4. &

(Just wanted to fill in the pattern between posts 1 and 2... )

[Bobbie Jo]

12. !

[Cha]

47. R

[baldguy]

2. R

[mopinko]

3. indeed

[Snarkoleptic]

5. On the upside, RT gives Thom Hartmann's "The Big Picture" a platform.

Thom has said they don't intrude in his content or programming.

[eShirl]

7. of course not

frankly, it makes me question his credibility

[okaawhatever]

8. +100 nt

[Snarkoleptic]

29. I listen to his radio show on an almost-daily basis and

believe his worldview and progressive message are refreshing and untainted across all of the media platforms he uses.
He's intellectually honest and speaks from a deep well of knowledge and experience.

Have you listened to his radio show or watched his RT bits?
I question everything and feel Thom is extremely credible and intellectually honest.

[eShirl]

37. only portions, 2 or 3 times over the years

not nearly enough to have any kind of feel for his work

[freshwest]

51. Listened to him daily on community access television and radio for years.

He's for Democrats, equal rights, a secular state and our causes. He's against the GOP, Tea Party, Libertarians and Koch brothers.

He's a DUer and he reads what we write here and has commented on it on his show. Progressives are being run out of media in every venue and they have to take what they can get.

Look at how many times some have been amazed to see Schultz and Maddox talk about our causes and then interview some lying neo-con shill. That's because they'd be tossed off the air if they refused, just as Olberman and Donahue were if they didn't allow these guys on their shows to dispute progressive viewpoints, and have to give them equal time, when they are only there because the owners say so.

Here's a sample of his work on the the con job that this nation has been subjected to for years. He posted the video and the transcript as well. I say he is an honest intellectual. not a media gadfly nor an opportunist. He did a program on the Kochs long before Reid and Sanders made news about them, back in 2012:

Thom Hartmann: Conservative Millennials, Boomers & Libertarians all being Conned

thomhartmann - Jul 26, 2012

Multigenerational political influence by a very narrow special interest group is rare, but we're seeing it played out right now in front of us. A billionaire family - the Kochs - have gone from influencing my father's generation, to my generation, to my kids' generation - and very few Americans realize it. Daddy Koch - Fred - made his first millions palling around with Joe Stalin in the Soviet Union in the 1920s and 1930s. As the fascists rose to power in Europe in the 1930s, he was an enthusiastic supporter of Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, who invented the word "fascist," meaning essentially the takeover of democratic governments by big business interests. Mussolini went so far as to dissolve the Italian parliament, and replace elected politicians with representatives of each district's largest corporations. Fred Koch and Mussolini both particularly hated the trade unionists and their sometimes allies, the communists. So after Mussolini, along with his ally Hitler, lost World War II against America, Fred Koch brought the anti-communist pro-business-running-goverment - what some would call "facist" - torch to America big time, helping start the John Birch Society.

Two of their biggest efforts are pretty well known. After the Supreme Court ruled, in 1954, in the Brown versus Board of Education case, that segregation in schools was unconstitutional, the John Birch Society put up billboards all across America calling for the impeachment of the Chief Justice of the Court, Earl Warren. Daddy Fred Koch was very concerned about the integration of our schools - in fact, he wrote, "The colored man looms large in the Communist plan to take over America." With JFK's election, Fred Koch's John Birch Society went off again - this time against JFK. Using rhetoric not that different from the "secret Muslim" plots the Tea Party promotes about Obama, in a 1963 speech Fred said that " infiltrate the highest offices of government in the U.S. until the President is a Communist, unknown to the rest of us.”

When JFK was scheduled to come to Dallas that year, the JBS distributed flyers saying, "Wanted, for Treason" all around the town two days before his arrival. On the day JFK was assassinated, large ads ran in the Dallas newspapers attacking Kennedy as being soft on Castro, among other things. That was my dad's generation. Daddy Koch died, and his sons Charles and David took over the family business of promoting the business and billionaire takeover of our American government.

They're doing it with a two-pronged attack. For people over forty, they're funding the Tea Party through a variety of groups, most notably Americans for Prosperity and Freedomworks. And for people under forty, they're funding Libertarian think tanks, like the Charles Koch Foundation (which was renamed as the Cato Institute), and the Reason Foundation, where David Koch is a trustee, which happily embraces a new generation of young people with the idea that "freedom" means the "freedom" to buy politicians and the "freedom" to pollute. For the young people, of course, the Libertarians throw in the "freedom" to smoke dope and hire a hooker, but those are just bones being cynically tossed to young potheads and young protoge's of Dick Morris.

But the Koch's have been inside the Libertarian movement from its beginning - 32 years ago this year, David Koch was the Libertarian Party's official candidate for Vice President of the United States. It's really pretty incredible, but it's all true. The main agenda of the Koch's John Birch Society was to enhance the power and control of our government by big business and billionaires, while fighting organized labor and people like me who were protesting the Vietnam War. The main agenda of the Koch's Tea Party is to get millionaires elected to Congress and have them cut taxes and regulations for Koch Industries and other polluting corporations, while fighting organized labor and people like me who were protesting the Iraq War.

And the main agenda of the Koch's Libertarians - again, funded and trained by the Koch Brothers - is to keep intact the power of big money over our government, cut taxes and regulations on billionaires and polluting industries, while fighting organized labor and people like me who are protesting the corporate takeover of the United States of America. Three generations of Americans, all duped by the same billionaire family. Three generations buying into the idea that "what's best for industry and billionaires is best for America" - and that government is our "enemy" rather than something that our nation's founders fought and died to create for all of "We The People" And, increasingly, it's not just the Koch family. The Walton family - whose combined wealth is greater than 40 percent of all Americans - funded a covert campaign to rename the estate tax as the "death tax" and lobbied so hard they got the estate tax eliminated entirely in 2010.

Senator Bernie Sanders pointed out yesterday that - so far - we know of 26 billionaires - worth over $146 billion - who have already "invested" or committed to invest over $561 million dollars in this election cycle - most of it to defeat Democrats who want to raise their taxes. The good news is that young people are waking up and realizing that the Libertarian hustle the billionaires are feeding them is just that - a hustle. Just like Tea Partiers are waking up to their having been had by billionaires who want to privatize their Social Security. Hopefully, soon, America will regain its sanity and we'll go back to viewing cranky billionaires the way my Dad's generation did - as Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower did - when Eisenhower referred to their ilk as "small in number and stupid" They're not stupid any more, and if we really value American traditions, we really must push back on this kind of power and influence in American politics.

I have no problem with that and the facts there can be easily proven. He has a Wikipedia page that has a lot about him:



Thomas Carl "Thom" Hartmann (born May 7, 1951) is an American radio host, author, former psychotherapist,[2] entrepreneur, and liberal political commentator. His nationally syndicated radio show, The Thom Hartmann Program, began in March 2003, and airs in the United States. It has 2.75 million listeners a week, and is one of the top progressive talk radio programs.[3]

Hartmann's 2002 article, "Talking Back To Talk Radio",[4] became part of the original business plan of Air America Radio, and he started his radio program out of his home in Vermont in March 2003. He moved to the network on February 19, 2007. On March 1, 2009, Hartmann moved syndication of his show to the former Jones Network, now owned by Dial Global. The radio show is also broadcast on community/non-profit stations via Pacifica Radio and Free Speech TV. In 2008 Hartmann started a daily TV show, The Big Picture. The show began on Free Speech TV, and has also been shown on the RT news network since 2012.

I suspect his syndication of his show is why he is not being forced to toe the party line for Putin.

Many more interesting things at the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thom_Hartmann

Some links say he is now being listened to in 55 million households. Not a fringe guy, he's a regular liberal and progressive.

He always posts this link in reference to overturning Citizens United:

https://movetoamend.org/

His show are on in more than one place, not just RT:

The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann on RT TV & FSTV "live" 9pm and 11pm check for local listings at:

http://www.thomhartmann.com/tv

He can be heard on iTunes as a podcast:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-big-picture-with-thom/id409140538#

He provides a venue that would not otherwise be given by corporate media, for one of the most popular Democratic senators at DU:

Brunch with Bernie on the Thom Hartmann Show

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/must-read/brunch-with-bernie-on-the-thom-hartmann-show

I have no problem with him and with the sorry state of media in this country, our voices are being silenced. AFAIK, Hartmann is not a Putin supporter. His concern is the USA. America is in deep trouble, on the verge of losing everything.

Hope that is the kind of information you and others are looking for to make a decision about him. I don't watch RT, put don't mind downloading podcasts about things of interest from his show. Of course I have all the ones from the White House to see what is going on, since the media refuses to give him voice. Obama has not ignored anything, but looking at media, you'd think he was on a permanent vacation.

Gotta go.

[KoKo]

97. Huge Recommend for Read!

[iamthebandfanman]

30. Thom OWNS his show..

unlike others on RT...
so not really sure what influence they could have...

Thom saw it as an opportunity to reach more people , im sure..

[Snarkoleptic]

36. He's also a frequent poster on DU.

I'm perplexed that his posts seem to sink here. Maybe it's confirmation bias clouding my perspective as I tend to agree with much of what he says.
We need more progressive voices like his IMHO.

[MADem]

104. Because he's a fake progressive. First he looks at the purse.

"Owns his own show," my ass.

He owns something that is worthless; it is something he can't bring to market unless he's kissing PUTIN's ass to get it on PUTIN's airwaves-- and he does that ass kissing on a regular basis. He defends Putin's policies and he has lost all his credibility.

It's sad when twenty something news presenters have more integrity than this guy does. They at least felt the vomit rising in their throats and did what any thinking person with a conscience would do--and that's quit.

His worst decision was to to take the money in exchange for his integrity. Once you lose that integrity you aren't getting it back.

Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas.

[Shankapotomus]

55. I like Thom too

But Putin could be using him to establish a front of legitimacy.

[MADem]

53. YET... Or "So he says..."

Let him say one word against the Pooster, though, and he's toast, fini, kaput and he loses that sweet paycheck.

He dances to the Kremlin's tune. Even if he doesn't admit it.

He censors himself because to speak against Putin is to bite the hand that clearly feeds him. He's not really free to say what he likes and he knows it.

[KoKo]

98. He owns his own show and rents the space in RT's DC Studios...

What in the world would cause you to say such a thing about Thom?

[MADem]

101. RT "broadcasts" him and he has no audience if he doesn't have the

distribution provided to him by Putin, himself. What's the point of "owning your own show" if you can't get it to market except by Putin's airwaves? I mean, come on.

Hartmann has in the past defended Russia on issues like gay rights, saying that Russia is not as bad as Saudi Arabia in terms of gay rights while pointing out that the United States did to give women the right to vote until 1920.

That's some sick shit. He's basically told us that he sold his soul. Not progressive--an opportunist selling bullshit to progressives. He knows the formula but doesn't really walk the walk.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/10/1283668/-Thom-Hartmann-Sticking-with-RT-despite-Resignations-over-Putin-s-Actions-in-Ukraine

Why would you pretend that there isn't a symbiotic relationship there when there clearly is?

Everyone knows it and many find it troubling.

[KoKo]

113. Who is the "everyone" who knows it? You seem in favor of censorship.

That Corporate owned Commercial filled US Cable/Satellite/Dish MSM NEWS and Clear Channel dominated RW Talk Radio are the only sources for truth.

Is the only "truth" what you and the anonymous "everyone" (you mention) ionly what you declare it is? You would wish to deny people the right to make up their own minds about what they read, watch and listen to and want these sources to be added to a "DU" List of "Unapproved Sources?"

Is that what you hope will happen? "The List of Unapproved Sources" pinned to the top of every Forum and Group?

[polly7]

122. I've asked over and over for a list of

Approved Sources .............. I got, crickets.

[KoKo]

124. I know...and remember when Firedoglake

was constantly trashed here as unacceptable...and yet its been up on DU Blogroll for years.

[sabrina 1]

115. Really? Abby Martin did and she's still there. Plenty of coverage on the

huge protests against Putin on RT when they occurred. Didn't see much of them anywhere else, actually.

If you're going to comment on something it helps if you know something about it don't you think?

[MADem]

123. Yeah--shows how much YOU know about that. The nail that sticks up gets hammered down.

Last edited Mon May 26, 2014, 01:27 AM - Edit history (1)

Abby Martin, a journalist also working for the network, also made headlines when she went off script to denounce Russia’s military presence in Crimea.

Her remarks led to the station releasing a statement saying they would be sending her to Crimea “to give her an opportunity to make up her own mind from the epicentre of the story”.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-crisis-putin-awards-prokremlin-journalists-medals-for-their-objective-coverage-of-crimea-9325664.html
They used to send 'em to SIBERIA. But hey, keep waving those pompoms!


But wait.....there's MORE:

Those praising Martin would do well to acquaint themselves with the entirety of her work. Before being hired by RT, Martin was a prominent voice in the 9/11 conspiracy movement, which seems to be a job qualification for RT given the amount of airtime it gives to fringe views. In a 2008 video of a 9/11 Truth Movement protest, Martin can be seen stating that the attacks were an “inside job.” She knows this, she said, because, “I’ve researched it for three years and every single thing that I uncover solidifies my belief that it was an inside job and that our government was complicit in what happened.” On her program, she regularly gives air to outrageous conspiracy theories, including the notion that water fluoridation is a pernicious government plot to poison unsuspecting American citizens, an old bugbear of the extreme right-wing John Birch Society. She has also accused Israel of using “Hitler’s methods … to maintain a Jewish majority.”

....Indeed, far from damaging the propaganda efforts of the Russian government, Martin’s momentary act of nonconformity plays right into the Kremlin’s hands. RT will now be able to hold up her 60-second departure from the official script as evidence of its editorial independence, as further proof of its vital role as a “counter-hegemonic” news source in a world inundated by corrupt and corporate “Anglo-Saxon media.” Think of Martin as the puppet opposition in a dictatorship, created and sustained by the powers that be as a façade of democracy with which to dazzle credulous Western observers, a practice that Putin has himself perfected. Like Moscow’s citing its right to “protect” Russian minorities in Ukraine as a pretext for its occupation of Crimea, Martin’s act of pseudo-dissidence is a good old-fashioned false flag.

You always take the bait though, so I'm not surprised you're cheerleading this nutcase.

[MohRokTah]

85. that actually makes me question Thom Hartmann's credibility.

He tends to get mired in the woo any way. That RT gives him a platfrom makes me question why I ever listened to him in the first place.

[sabrina 1]

6. Why post anything from the Corporate Media anymore?

They RARELY say anything that jibes with what we think and know about but, given that we know it is basically a propaganda arm of Wall St why associate DU with it? Actually I thought we had decided that a long time ago.

Btw, I watch RT and find their reporters from all over the world to be extremely credible and will continue to do so. I rarely watch the Corporate Media, there are so many sources now where we can actually get real news, why anyone watches them is beyond me.

Is there anything specific about RT's reporting that you have found to be not credible, not 'jibing' with many other sources? I see these posts but never anything specific.

Not that it matters, the internet is a big place and people will watch and read whatever they want to.

This reminds of the Right Wing hatred for Al Jazeera when they were reporting on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. We defended them airc, I remember donating to them at the time just to show that we Liberals will not stand for censorship.

But what about RT specifically are you talking about, and do you trust the Corporate Media?

[1000words]

10. Exactly

It's all propaganda. Might as well sift through each side's narrative and figure the truth is somewhere in between.

[NuclearDem]

21. Down with the corporate media!

Pay no attention to the massive aerospace and defense conglomerate and the single largest natural gas producer in the world who share an owner with RT.

Unfortunately, those are my only two choices, seeing as how there are no other media outlets anywhere on Earf. I am now sad.

[sabrina 1]

23. Al Jazeera, funded by the ruler of Qatar yet managed to provide some of the best coverage

of Bush's war. Which is why he hated them of course. Truth is threatening to those who have things to hide. Terrorist reporters, Saddam lovers who watched them, it's all so familiar.

I'm glad to be immune to the old 'you're a putin/saddam/whatever/whoever' routine. I wish someone would pay for better propaganda. Dragging out the same old familiar attacks on the Left, it's always on the Left, have you noticed, is just sad.

Qatar is one of our closest allies now. They provide us with 'proxy' soldiers for our various 'proxy wars'.

We are all being duped, the left, the right. In a few years, Putin will be our bff and the loyal partisans will be scratching their heads, just as we were when we found out that Clinton was 'like a son to Babs Bush'.

So in the meantime, I just feel sad when I see people on our side now being manipulated the way the other side was.

In the meantime, I will stick to my principles, that way I don't have to twist myself into a pretzel to explain any flip flops to anyone.

RT at least has war correspondents. Does the Corporate media have any War Correspondents? I think we dispensed with real journalists in favor of the smiling, blond, blue-eyed 'stenographers' telling what we should eat and wear and what we don't need to bother our beautiful minds with. But I could be wrong, I haven't watched watched our discredited, corporate media since they were cheering for Bush and his wars.

[iamthebandfanman]

34. Every 'news' outlett

that caters to certain viewpoints has an agenda...
whether that's propaganda or just making money...

I don't mind RT..
but anyone who thinks they aren't bias is kidding themselves...
they are state funded.. that's a fact.

an argument about mainstream media in the states versus RT is about as silly as picking sides in the Ukraine struggle.. :p
corruption versus corruptions.. just in different forms :p

[tech3149]

59. Media bias? of course!

The thing is that you realize the bias. RT and Al-Jazeera report on stories with a broader scope that ANYTHING we get from US commercial media. They also report on many more important stories.

Have you ever followed This is Hell? The host does a four hour show of long format interviews with people who would never get a platform on any commercial media. One of the main reasons is they actually know something about the subject and can take the time to really dive into the weeds to explain it.
One of the things that really demonstrates the difference between US commercial media and what the rest of the world sees and thinks was what the host called the Nine Circles of Hell.
He would post the nine most important news stories he found from worldwide media that were truly important and then comment on the fluff that was presented by the network TV in the US. The US media in all formats doesn't even provide us with junk food news, it's just toxic bile.

The thing with outlets like RT and AJAM is they were demonized in the US as propaganda even before they went on the air. That was just playing the ref's. Any information outlet that challenges the US-centric story line just has to be trying to bend our brains.
The fact that US media is privately owned doesn't preclude it from selling a story that is in no way representative of the truth. They got big money and want to protect it.
I sort of think one of the problems with alternative news sources in the US is that those sources challenge the dominance of information as presented by US media. Ever hear of Operation Mockingbird?

Think of media in the US as another aspect of the "full spectrum dominance" that seems to have infected Washington think for way too long.

[Shankapotomus]

24. You haven't seen this?

http://m.

[sabrina 1]

38. Of course I've seen it, the Neocon puppet who, before joining RT, interned for Sean Hannity on

Fox News. She wasn't getting along very well on RT professionally. She was turned down by Al Jazeera when she applied for a job there. She was prime for manipulation by the warmongering Neocons who are looking for another 'enemy' to start a profitable war with.

And they used her.

How sad when people just to along with the sensational without looking deeper into what is really going on.

Before you associate yourself with this unfortunate woman, I suggest you read this article in its entirety:

How Cold War Hungry Neocons Stage Managed Liz Wahl's Resignation


All the Right Wing Neocons, the war mongers, the liars and profiteers who are frightened that because of their Iraq War debacle the war weary public will stop the flow of money to them are now focusing on a renewal of the old Cold War.

They despise Obama, accusing him of being 'soft on Putin', a 'Putin Lover' like me I suppose!

Read the entire article, if you want to know a little about what is really going on, or don't.

But I would not be using this woman to try to bolster any case against anything.

I'm actually shocked that you brought this up, unless the Left has suddenly become part of the PNAC/Neocon Warmongering contingency and I missed it.

[Shankapotomus]

56. Oh

Never mind.

[sabrina 1]

66. Love that woman. Certainly no neocon puppet there.

[KoKo]

99. Liz Wahl who was outed as a buddy of the Conservatives?

You missed the background of the stunt she pulled. It's posted in V&MM here on DU. Mike Panantonio did a show it and there are links in that post thread about her whole "incident."

Google her and you will find it if you don't want to go through the V&MM..

[pnwmom]

45. RT is Russian government media. n/t

[sabrina 1]

46. You mean it is funded by the Russian Govt. Like the BBC is funded by the UK Govt and Al Jazeera is

funded by the wealthy ruler of Qatar and our media is funded by six Corporations and PBS is funded by people like the Koch Bros.

What is your point?

[pnwmom]

48. The Russian government is more repressive than the UK government.

RT is its propaganda arm.

[Texas Elvis]

72. What proof do you have that the Russian government is more repressive

aside from here say? Also I've seen many BBC stories that carried water for the Uk government that bordered on propaganda.

[pnwmom]

83. From the Human Rights Watch. Russia's record is demonstrably worse.

Some highlights.

http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2014/country-chapters/russia

In June 2013, parliament unanimously adopted a law banning promotion among children of “propaganda of nontraditional sexual relationships,” meaning lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) relationships. Violators risk stiff fines, and in the case of foreigners, up to 15 days’ detention and deportation. Beginning in 2006, similar laws outlawing “propaganda of homosexuality” among children were passed in 11 Russian regions.

SNIP

In June 2013, President Vladimir Putin signed a law imposing a maximum three-year prison sentence for publicly “insult[ing] the feelings of religious believers.” The law provides no clear definition of acts or speech considered “insulting.” The law is yet to be enforced.

SNIP

According to the Memorial Human Rights Center, one of Russia’s most prominent independent rights groups, from January to June 2013, eight people suffered abduction-style detentions by government agencies in Dagestan, with five still unaccounted for at time of writing. Ramazan Abdulatipov, Dagestan’s new leader, abandoned the “soft power” counterinsurgency policies of his predecessor, including a commission for return of insurgents to peaceful life and promoting dialogue with Salafi Muslims. In 2013, persecution by law enforcement officials of Salafis increased. Unprosecuted abuses, including torture, abductions, and attacks against suspected insurgents and their families served to alienate Salafi communities. To combat “extremists,” the authorities condoned the rise of people’s militias, which have driven some Salafis to flee their homes.

In July, unidentified assailants shot dead Akhmednabi Akhmednabiev, an independent journalist and critic of abuses by law enforcement and security agencies. The official investigation, ongoing at time of writing, acknowledged that he was killed because of his journalism. Prior to the murder, Akhmednabiev reported to the authorities death threats he received, but they did not take adequate steps to investigate. Akhmednabiev is the second journalist covering counterinsurgency issues murdered in less than two years in Dagestan. The 2011 killing of Khadzhimurad Kamalov remains unresolved.

SNIP

At time of writing, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) had issued over 200 judgments holding Russia responsible for grave human rights violations in Chechnya. At least three pertain to violations that law enforcement officials perpetrated under Kadyrov’s de facto con

[Texas Elvis]

87. Human Rights Watch is not the most unbiased source these days.

Have you seen the criticism on their Wiki page? Even from their own founder. Also did you know that the US placed 139th on their list of worst violators out of 193 countries? And that almost all of the top 10 worst countires had some form of US involvement that aided in their deterioration?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/03/human-rights-risk-atlas-2014-violations-maplecroft_n_4374133.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Human_Rights_Watch

[pnwmom]

88. I'll take the Human Rights Watch over RT any day. n/t

[Texas Elvis]

92. If that's the case I'll refer you to page 640

of their report covering the numerous infractions by the United States. http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/wr2013_web.pdf Do notice that we are 54 countries away from being on top with violations related to minority and gay rights, renditions, death sentencing, illegal detentions and more prisoners than any other country on the planet.

[pnwmom]

94. I didn't say we had a great record. But Russia's is demonstrably worse than ours or the UK's.

[L0oniX]

111. Because corporate owned media is so ...superior and truthful.

[bahrbearian]

69. Right On

[L0oniX]

112. DU battles over which media is better or worse ....silly.

Government controlled media or corporate government controlled media. While the masses contemplate over which of the two are worthy of our attention I have other priorities like figuring out the wisdom of sayings such as: It's always the darkest just before the light. or It just goes to show you ...you never know.

[951-Riverside]

9. Well said. Tired of that Anti-American Anti-Freedom Putin/Hitler Propaganda Being Posted Here

PUTIN IS SATAN.

GLEN GREENWALD IS A TRAITOR ALONG WITH SNOWDEN. THEY LET THE TERRORISTS WHO ATTACKED US ON 9/11 AND RUSSIAN COMMIES KNOW OUR METHODS!!!!

HERE'S A SUGGESTION: IF YOU LIKE RUSSIA TODAY SO MUCH WHY DONT YOU GO LIVE THERE, BUCKO?

RT SHOULD BE BANNED FROM THE US!!!!!

OOO-RAH! AMERICAN PRIDE BABY!

[sabrina 1]

16. Lol, it reminds me of the Right Wing and Al Jazeera. They HATED them, called them 'terrorists'! Lol!

After all, what red blooded American would watch a network funded by an AYRAB!!

RT reporters are being shot, imprisoned in that haven of Democracy we are supporting in Kiev.

Same thing happened to Al Jazeera Reporters.

I support those reporters who are American, European, Australian, African, Russian just doing their jobs just as I supported the Al Jazeera Reporters who were also doing their jobs.

It's tragic to see this mindset here on DU. I know one thing, if Bush was in the WH, RT would be the most popular news agency on DU, just as Al Jazeera was back then.

They have a huge following on Twitter from all over the world, so it's sad to see this pettiness here against people whose lives are being threatened by our 'allies' in Kiev. We were outraged when the same thing happened to Al Jazeera reporters.

I am immune to those who try to censor news. I was called a traitor, a 'terrorist supporter' for speaking up for Al Jazeera, so I will simply have a feeling of deja vu when I am called a 'Putin Lover' here and smile at the hypocrisy of it all.

[Puzzledtraveller]

49. It's some Twilight Zone shit here these days anymore isn't it.

Unreal, someone complaining about things being "un-american" . How many guffaws and groans did that term elicit in the bush years?

[m-lekktor]

62. i thought calling folks unamerican for criticizing the government was a right wing thing.

it's creepy as hell and should have no place on a so called progressive board. i guess people were taking notes from free republic 10 years ago so they could use them now when a DEM admin is in office.

[KoKo]

100. And remember when Hillary Clinton said she wished there were more Al Jaeera's?

So even Hillary thought at least Al Jazeera was not worth a censor.

[sabrina 1]

108. Yes, but she changed her mind since then.

[rhett o rick]

32. Ban the books, ban the sources, ban what I dont like because I know best.

You do know this is a liberal message board? If you like banning, post on a conservative board.

[pampango]

63. Putin's anti-Americanism (indeed the right's in general) is irrelevant. His anti-liberal values

are not. Indeed much of the current Russian critique of the US and Europe is that they have strayed too far from 'traditional family values', promote the 'gay agenda' and abortion on demand, support supra-nationalism over good ol' conservative nationalism and secularism over fundamental religion. The current Russian leadership believes in a strong military and a focus on restoring national pride and respect. Sounds kind of like our neo-cons and Reagan's "morning in America" BS back in the day.

Much of the global left is anti-American but they are not anti-liberal. Indeed they are anti-American because they realize that the US is not liberal enough by a long shot.

[okaawhatever]

11. There are people here who are pro-Putin and Russia, anti-America. RT and RIA are the sources that

tell them what they want to hear. Luckily for us there aren't that many of them and most of them aren't American so it's not like they're a significant portion of the Democratic party. Most of the Americans I see aligned with Putin and Russia are the socialists (not European) who I guess have an affinity for the Soviet style government.

[1000words]

13. Hahahahaha ...

Subtle.

[sabrina 1]

19. You mean like there were people here who were pro-Saddam, anti-America because they watched

Al Jazeera that 'told them what they wanted to hear'? I am a Democrat who supported Al Jazeera and now support RT when the Right Wing called me a 'Saddam Lover' and 'Anti-American'.

Do you support the shooting or RT reporters btw? Do you support the imprisonment of RT reporters in Kiev by our 'democratic allies' there? I know we all here on DU, were outraged when Al Jazeera reporters were shot, tragically some killed, and imprisoned during the Bush era. But the Right Wingers cheered for their imprisonment and the attacks on them.

It's not working, the attempt to censor, just as it didn't work when the Bush gang tried to stop people from watching that 'terrorist', anti-American network, Al Jazeera. The banned Al Jazeera from American TV and they will ban RT also, which won't matter at all as most people continued to watch Al Jazeera, even more so BECAUSE of the censorship here. And the same thing will happen with RT.

Btw, what did you think of Al Jazeera?

[rhett o rick]

35. "Btw, what did you think of Al Jazeera?" I think you should have asked that first.

Saved yourself some trouble. I am guessing they are a Wolf Blitzer fan.

[polly7]

58. I'm pro Russia every bit as much as I'm pro any country in the world.

It takes a really dull intellect to state that the people of any nation are represented by one man, or one government.

It takes an even duller one to yell out 'Putin /Hussein/Gaddafi lover!' whenever you hear something that challenges your teeny, narrow view of the world.

I do wonder why so many people here post propaganda in favour of the 1%/IMF/corporate rulers and those who support them though.

One more thing ......... if you're so upset about people 'who aren't even Americans' commenting on international matters, why not ask in the ATA for us to be blocked here once and for all. I get so tired of not knowing whether we're welcome to post, or not.

[joshcryer]

76. I don't recall people posting Saddam state TV propaganda.

Even those against the invasion could laugh at "Baghdad Bob."

It used to be that DUers could see propaganda for what it was, but I'm not so sure these days.

[polly7]

80. Wtf are you talking about?

Why would anyone have posted 'Saddam state TV propoganda' for you to even object to?

I saw your posts re Libya ...... months and months of them, even after it was proven many were outright lies. You're right, I'm not sure some are capable at all of deciding what's truth and what isn't .......... thankfully, most here are.

[joshcryer]

81. RT is Russian state TV propaganda.

I covered bad stuff the rebels did and I'm pretty sure you didn't follow my threads and said as much yourself.

RT never covered the anti-Putin protests and how United Russia thugs beat protesters with impunity.

Love it when you bring up Libya though, it's always when defending bigoted groups.

[polly7]

82. No, I followed your threads, and said so.

I've pointed out to you many times how false many of those posts were, as did others.

I asked what Hussein propaganda had to do with any of this? No answer - you brought it up?

I don't love anything about that horror in Libya. I was sickened at the rah-rahing as it was happening, including all the gruesome cartoons and high-fiving while migrants were being raped, tortured and massacred as well as the torturing and sodomy of Gaddafi in the street - something no-one here would defend doing to a dog, let alone a human being - up until now, as Libya has turned into a cesspool of suffering for millions.

What bigoted group am I defending - Russia??? I'll defend the people of Russia every bit as vehemently as any other people. Funny how you pick and choose which human beings are worthwhile .... well, actually not so funny, you seem to cheer on the overthrow of any people who aren't beholden yet to the IMF and who guard their own resources, I've noticed quite a bit of hatred for Venezuela as well.

[joshcryer]

86. Fascist ultra bigots are not worth defending.

I don't recall corrections by you in my threads, and if I did get corrections I accepted them.

Mind you, I didn't fill my threads with WSWS puff pieces, didn't use far right wing sources like Jobik (which as no surprise is mouthing off about Ukraine), and swore off twitter for the most part after I realized twitter is home for liars and psychopaths. At most it's useful to find stories but they must be confirmed.

It's the same exact group defending Putin, too. Just go to the neo-stalinist Bell Forum.

[polly7]

89. Nah ......... you didn't accept them at all. You doubled down, most times.

Who is defending Putin here?

I see many people defending against the right wing fascist bullshit, and absolutely absurd claims such as: 'Russia invaded and took Crimea!!!', despite a vote of people every bit intelligent enough to know what lives they want to live and who were against the IMF and brutal austerity the coup supporters favour but couldn't allow come to a vote by all Ukrainian citizens. That isn't defending 'Putin'. But I do understand how supporting austerity, the IMF and relinquishing control of resources that benefit all in any nation requires an opposing bogeyman - Hussein, Gaddafi, Chavez, Maduro, Putin, etc. etc. etc. I don't believe liars and psychopaths have any regard whatsoever for the actual people fighting and dying in these situations.

[joshcryer]

95. Yes I did.

The fact that you call it a coup just shows you've brought the Kremlin line. The very argument that Russia didn't invade Crimea is so beyond ridiculous I am at a loss of words.

It's seriously unbelievable how the truth is so twisted.

[polly7]

96. Lmfao.

A coup is a coup is a coup! I don't need to buy 'any' line to see what happened right in front of my own eyes. And the lie that Russia 'invaded Crimea' is exactly the same crapola you used to justify the horror of Libya.

You're a real hoot (not really).

[Duckhunter935]

107. So Russia

did not invade Crimea with unmarked troops and vehicles prior to the vote? Russia did not seize Ukraine military facilities and naval assets after illegally blockading them in port? Even after Putin himself admitted it.

WOW, you are off the deep end in swallowing some of this bullshit

Will it still be a coup after the elections that were called by the interim government that was voted in by the democratically elected Rada after the previous president left the country with stolen assets. Even his own political party voted to replace him.

[sabrina 1]

109. No, they didn't. Unless you have something more than your own opinion to prove it.

DU generally deals with known facts. Please post some known facts that back up what appears to be only your opinion and I will happily change mine.

[Duckhunter935]

114. Yes, it is called facts

http://www.smh.com.au/world/russia-sinks-ship-to-block-ukrainian-navy-entry-to-black-sea-20140307-hvghs.html

www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_3128816587&feature=iv&src_vid=QaxZvUsCm9o&v=GUe62fXalRc

Putin admits Russians invaded Crimea, breaking his counties agreement with Ukraine

But in return for giving up its nukes, Ukraine wanted some security assurances—leading to the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. The memorandum, signed by then-Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma, along with Bill Clinton, Boris Yeltsin, and John Major, required that the signatories “respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine” and “refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine.”

According to Ukraine’s new government and its Western backers, Vladimir Putin has now egregiously violated the commitment made by his predecessor to respect Ukraine’s “existing borders.”

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_world_/2014/03/19/the_budapest_memorandum_in_1994_russia_agreed_to_respect_ukraine_s_borders.html

The impeachment, which was backed by 328 of the 447 deputies, argues that Yanukovich abused his powers.

The Ukrainian parliament, which decisively abandoned Yanukovich after loyalists defected, declared on Saturday the president constitutionally unable to carry out his duties and set an early election for May 25.

Deputies in the assembly stood, applauded and sang the national anthem.

Even his own party voted to remove him from power and install an interim government.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/02/ukraine-parliament-ousts-president-yanukovich-2014222152035601620.html


What facts do you have saying this did not happen?

[Duckhunter935]

118. tell that to the Crimean Tartars

“The Russian authorities have allowed armed groups that have been behind some brutal attacks against the Tatars to operate freely in Crimea. They have alienated Crimean Tatars by harassing Tatar leaders, threatening to dissolve their highest representative body, and restricting their rights to freedom of assembly and expression.

“Up to 7,000 Tatars have fled Crimea already. Those who have stayed face the unenviable choice of having to give up their Ukrainian citizenship and accept a Russian one or become ‘foreigners’ in their homeland.”

Following World War II, nearly quarter of a million people were deported to remote parts of the Soviet Union, purportedly for collaborating with the German occupying force during World War II. Nearly half of them are believed to have died from starvation or disease as a direct result from the deportation. They were allowed to return to the Crimea only in the late 1980s.

http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/crimean-tatars-risk-persecution-and-harassment-new-crimea-2014-05-23

Deportation of the Crimean Tatars

The state-organized and forcible deportation of the Crimean Tatars from the Crimean Peninsula by the Soviet Union in 1944 was ordered by Joseph Stalin as a form of collective punishment for alleged collaboration with the Nazi occupation regime in Taurida Subdistrict during 1942-1943. The event is also known as Sürgünlik in Crimean Tatar (meaning "exile&quot .[citation needed]

A total of more than 230,000 people were deported, mostly to the Uzbek SSR. This included the entire ethnic Crimean Tatar population, at the time about a fifth of the total population of the Crimean Peninsula, besides smaller number of ethnic Greeks and Bulgarians. A large number of deportees (more than 100,000 according to a 1960s survey by Crimean Tatar activists) died from starvation or disease as a direct result of deportation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Crimean_Tatars

was anything I posted not true? Prove it..........

[polly7]

119. Horrible what the Crimean Tatars went through ...

what does it have to do with a majority vote by the people of Crimea today not wishing to live under right-wing fascist rule and brutal IMF austerity, and who choose to rejoin with a country with their shared culture and identity?

[Duckhunter935]

120. They are still there today

and will once again be living under the heal of Russia. It has already started. The long rich Tarter culture was pretty much destroyed by Russia but that is fine with you I guess.

[polly7]

121. No, mistreatment of ANYONE is not 'fine with me'.

Ugly, shitty thing to say. Are you proud of the long, rich native indigenous culture in North America being destroyed - you must be?!! What have you done recently to help those people???

A majority of the Crimean people voted to be part of Russia. I hope with all my heart that human rights issues are addressed and improve for them and every other people suffering.

[Texas Elvis]

90. I remember people attempting to stop the march to war against Iraq.

Before David Bloom the reporter died of a pulmonary embolism MSNBC ran a story about an Iraqi scientist whose home was raided and searched for documents that would supposedly reveal Saddams restarted nuclear program. They showed US operatives destroying this guys home and taking him into custody. Of course many people who read the UN's own report on Iraq weapons program dismantling from the first Iraq war knew this was a lie and that it was all for the cameras.

The US government was lying to us all and many of us didn't fall for it. We did look to other sources for info and Iraqi sources obviously would have come in handy had someone cared to truly verify them. Instead we have a million people dead or injured, 5000 US families missing a loved one, 2 trillion dollars that could have been used to save American lives flushed down the toilet and a new unstable Iraq that is no better than the one before with more people being blown to bits everyday. Maybe it's time to look in the mirror Josh. We ain't no saints.

The real question is who is benefitting from all this war and bloodshed the US is involved in around the globe? We are the most militaristic country with our fingers in more conflicts than any other country in the world. It's sad that this is what the US has become. I think the military industrial complex is where we need to look. Eisenhower said it and it's come true.

You keep saying look over there Josh, I think you should be looking over here.

[Strelnikov_]

116. Well said n/t

[closeupready]

14. Thank you, agreed.

[quinnox]

15. Thank you citizen. I believe only WhiteHouse.gov videos should be posted!

If you watch RT, I have but one question for you - Why do you hate America?

[hrmjustin]

17. RT is not allowed in LBN.

Last edited Sat May 24, 2014, 12:46 AM - Edit history (1)

I don't take it that serious.

[sabrina 1]

20. The Corporate Media is allowed in LBN. Which is why I don't read anything in LBN. In fact

I believe I have it blocked. No point wasting time on Corporate Propaganda.

I don't watch propaganda from our Corporate Media, we all know it is controlled by a few corporations and lied us into a tragic war that never would have happened had we had an actual free press.

I take foreign media far more seriously than I take the Corporate Media, which seems to be what most people around the world feel. Our corporate media is among the least trusted now among the world's population. How sad is that?

What did you think of Al Jazeera during the Bush years? The Right were saying the same things about AJ that the left is now saying about RT. And how do you feel about the shooting and imprisonment of RT reporters by the Kiev government just as we shot and detained Al Jazeera reporters during the Bush era?

I remember being called a Saddam lover for supporting Al Jazeera back then, it only made more determined to watch them. Now I am called a 'Putin supporter' right here on DU no less. The hypocrisy is simply stunning.

[hrmjustin]

22. foreign media is good to watch because you get a broader perspective.

LBN does not allowed state news agencies I believe. I am not a host in LBN anymore so there might be exceptions.

I don't trust RT because it is supported by putin. It doesn't mean it should be completely ignored or that it is wrong for others to trust them.


I don't know your position on Putin but I understand how you dislike being called a supporter. I think you have contributed to this plsce for many years and should be respected for it.

[sabrina 1]

25. I don't care about Putin, he's a politician. I care about PEOPLE. I doubt he was very happy with RT

back when they were reporting on how unpopular he was and the only network that I found covering the massive protests against him. Or maybe he doesn't care, who knows?

RT is an excellent news source, as are many other foreign media. They hire excellent war correspondents from all over the world, the same format as Al Jazeera once did.

Those reporters are professionals, as were the Al Jazeera reporters. The are NOT influenced by Putin, an Irish reporter gets a job with RT and does his/her job as a war correspondent. American reporters who cannot find work in our corporate media because we don't hire actual journalists anymore, get a job working for Al Jazeera or CCTV or RT and are given the freedom, which ours were not, see Ashley Banfield, to report what they SEE.

I am certain that the British RT Reporters are simply doing their job and will not continue to work for a network that stifles their work. Same thing with South African reporters. Are they all 'Putin lovers'? Were all of Al Jazeera's foreign correspondents, Saddam lovers?

To see this narrow mindedness here on DU is just sad. Maybe you should spend a few weeks watching these reporters, who are risking their lives to do the job they trained for and appear to be free to report freely on what they are seeing.

Al Jazeera reporters were KILLED by the Bush gang. This week an RT reporter was SHOT by our 'allies' in Kiev. Why? I am even more impressed with those reporters than I was before, it takes a lot of courage now to be a war correspondent since Bush made it okay to KILL and TORTURE reporters.

But that's just me, the more someone tries to stop me from doing something, the more suspicious of their motives I become.

[NuclearDem]

27. Derping into a tripwire flare is not the same as being shot.

Geraldo did it better, and at least he had a silly mustache to go with it.

[sabrina 1]

39. So you support the Bush policy of imprisoning and shooting at Reporters? You weren't clear so

I'm asking. I want to know where DU is going these days. I remember similar snarky comments regarding the attacks on Al Jazeera journalists during the Bush years. NOT from Democrats of course. So could you clarify your position on the imprisonment and physical attacks on war correspondents?

Thanks in advance.

[NuclearDem]

60. I think you should get a refund on that Logic 101 course.

The reporter was never shot at, his own dumb ass tripped a damn flare.

No I'm not alright with journalists being attacked. Good God, Sabrina, you're really just not even trying anymore are you?

[sabrina 1]

65. You have a link to that from a reliable source?

He was shot in the stomach, air-lifted out of Ukraine eventually on a German medical plane. I would like to see the source you are using if you don't mind.

Three Russian reporters were kidnapped and detained, one since has been released. I am familiar with that reporter who has always been professional in his reporting. Was not surprised when I heard he had been taken prisoner.

The other two have not been released as far as I know.

The Western media's coverage of this aspect of the conflict, is so biased, so contrary to what people are seeing with their own eyes, it isn't worth using even to fact check anything.

There are now calls for the protection of journalists in Ukraine so many have been injured, attacked and detained.

Nice 'democracy' we are helping to create over there, a lot like all the others we have been creating over the past number of decades.

All they had to do was hold an election. But certain entities did not trust an election to get what they wanted. Now we are seeing why.

[Texas Elvis]

73. I'm confused by your animosity towards that reporter.

He was in a war zone approaching troops and he tripped a flare which made him think he was being shot at. You act as if you or anyone else would act differently. I think anyone in that scenario would be scared out of their mind. I would assume you have never experienced the heightened fear and adrenaline levels that come with your life being at stake in combat zones where you can actually die rather than just sit at your keyboard eating a bag of potato chips and having a coke. Why the hostility towards a journalist covering a story? Just because they report for what you consider a news network that "you" don't trust?

Your attitude is one of self absorption and seems lacking in empathy for someone who is supposedly on the liberal left. Here is that video for other posters who want to see what your make fun of.

I will add that if people watch this young mans You Tube channel they will see that he has constantly been on the ground in Ukraine reporting non stop and uploading for the last three months. Now ask yourself why our own mainstream media couldn't spend the time or money to do the very same thing. Personally I commend this guy as he seems very brave and unselfish in these situations. I wish the US media had people like him.

[Texas Elvis]

74. Here is the latest video from Graham Phillips

it seems he was released from captivity and went right back to doing what he was doing previously. In this video taken on May 22nd, he asks Right Sector directly if they are fascists.

[hrmjustin]

28. I have RT and Al Jazeera and I watch them. I just am not a fan of RT.

I am not a fan of the crew in Kiev or the Separatists.

[sabrina 1]

41. Were you a fan of Al Jazeera? Are you a fan of our own Corporate Media? I am not a fan

of ANYONE, never was, not even movie stars. I AM a fan of the truth. I am a fan of news media that give voice to all sides of an issue, as RT does. And Al Jazeera and before they were crushed by Tony Blair on behalf of his BFF Bush, the BBC, but sadly theyl, like our own media have been pretty much muzzled.

Not sure why you chose the word 'fan' as it is not a word I would associate with the news media btw. I do get to see Liberal commentators, presumably off limits on our media, on RT. Amy Goodman has been featured on Rt, I have yet to see her on any US media other than NPR. It's a thrill to be able to listen to Noam Chomsky and Thom Hartmann among other great liberal voices on the media, finally. I thoroughly enjoy the uninterrupted interviews with world leaders and other interesting and influential people of all stripes, conducted by brilliant young female reporters who actually seem to know what they are talking about, on RT.

And I know for a fact that if Bush was in the WH there is not a single member here who would not be as interested in being able to see these liberals on the media as I am. As they were when Al Jazeera was doing what RT is now doing.

[hrmjustin]

42. I like Al Jazeera.

[sabrina 1]

43. Al Jazeera sold out. They were at one time one of the best news organizations

in the world. But they lost credibility during the Libya invasion of NATO. The ban on their network here was lifted, but they have never recovered their credibility after the revelations, people noticed their coverage of that conflict being very different from their usual standard of journalism, and it turned that people were correct. They are now mediocre at best. Same think will probably happen to RT when we decide that being friends with Russia in our best interests.

[hrmjustin]

44. Unfortunately media in this country is in bed with the powerful.

[tech3149]

61. Unfortunately, I agree with you as far as AJAM

At their launch they came out of the gate strong. I found it to be great coverage of important stories. I don't think it was more than a few months that they seemed to go off the cliff following US media. Might be they hired too many former NBC "journalists". It seemed like they were following the story lines presented by US media.

[polly7]

64. +1000. nt.

[NuclearDem]

18. Because it's watched by a million bajillion viewers.

Plus confirmation bias makes me feel all warms and fuzzies.

[nomorenomore08]

26. I see your point, but as others have noted, nearly all "news" is propaganda to some degree.

So yeah, RT sucks, but I don't see how they're really worse than the "other guys."

[TampaAnimusVortex]

71. You got that right... its why I stopped watching any mainstream news.

If a current event bubbles up to the surface through the various pages or social networks I'm on, and I'm interested - Ill go to 10 different sites to research it, including those I don't agree with - specifically because I don't want to live in a hermetically sealed ideological bubble.

[rhett o rick]

31. Why dont you make a list of what sources you dont like? Or just trash the threads and

leave us to use our own judgement. This is a liberal message board.

[Iliyah]

33. One thing tho

my children and theirs and so forth will not have to be subject to the lack of democracy like the past, i.e. history.

[Warpy]

40. Watch the good stories and take them with a pound of salt

They're certainly no worse than the disinformation, lying by omission, and celebrity stalking that passes for corporate network news here.

[BainsBane]

50. They can post all they want

I'm just not going to watch or read the stuff.

[Corruption Inc]

52. Got something against free speech?

If there's some Russian propaganda you have a problem with go ahead and say what it is, I bet most people would agree with you. If you're going to post hit pieces with no basis in reality, it just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

[pampango]

54. The same reason we post FOX News and Glenn Beck videos here? To show how screwed up Obama is?

Actually, AFAIK no one posts videos from FOX News, Beck or any number of other right wing sources (except perhaps to show how lunatic the makers of the video are). If anyone did, I suppose you could present it as posting a diversity of views accompanied by, one would hope, an opinion as to why the video was based on fear and emotion (classic right wing stuff) rather than on facts and history.

Since FOX, Beck and RT all promote a nationalistic, authoritarian, anti-gay, "family values", fundamentalist, neo-con view of the world, we should take them for what they are worth (not much) and use them to understand what is going on in the heads of conservatives (again, not much). Now that's a tall order.

When folks post videos from FOX, Beck or RT, not to mock them, but to support their view of the world, well that says more about the poster than it does about the source of the video. RT is doing its job for the people that fund it (conservatives to be sure), just like Beck and FOX News are doing.

[joshcryer]

75. This. RT tells us about the character of the posters.

It does not surprise me when compulsive liars post RT as real news.

[KoKo]

102. You are calling fellow DU'ers who read and post about RT..Compulsive Liars?

Do you hear what you are saying? That sounds like a call out of fellow DU'ers. I'm not going to alert on you...but, you should be ashamed of yourself.

[joshcryer]

103. That's people who post RT and push it as true when it's not.

What other word could be used to describe posting untrue things when they're not true?

[KoKo]

110. It's another view/opinion. And our MSM is so biased towards MIC that reading

other news sources helps to have balance. RT is not the only other source...but, RT America tends to deal with issues our MSM won't deal with: Monsanto, Fracking, Civilian Drone Strikes, Expansion of US Military into other countries without declaration or war, NSA Spying, War Crime issues of the War on Terror, Bradley Manning Trial, Civil Rights Issues, etc.

Issues we used to care about as Democrats under Bush that are still important to some of us Democrats and there's not much news about those issues if one focuses on US MSM for their news.
BBC, German, French and Irish TV are also good sources for international news.

[freshwest]

106. I agree, but I just posted one above. He's the only one I'd post from RT.

You just threw one of my biggest supporters under the bus!

~ Barack Obama

[bemildred]

57. To annoy the government. nt

[backscatter712]

67. RT is Putin's own version of FOX News.

It's pure propaganda.

[KoKo]

125. Actually it's closer to MSNBC. The shows tend to skew Democratically.

Issues that the Dem Left care about. But, more cutting edge with diversity of guests than what one would find on MSNBC.

[JoeyT]

68. While we're picking out discredited sources, I nominate

every paper or channel that acted as cheerleaders in the run up to the Iraq war for the right wing George Bush regime.

[bemildred]

70. +1. nt

[KoKo]

105. Well said.. Remembering Judith Miller and the others who covered up

the Bush lies and took their information straight from their friends (sources) in the WH.

[Enrique]

77. we should just stick to watching "Morning Joe"

oh wait, we already do.

[Shankapotomus]

79. That's just for laughs, though.

[Cha]

84. Not me.. I don't watch that bullshit. But Stephen Colbert saw this and called out his bullshit

for us.

Colbert Mocks Scarborough For Trusting His 'Gut' Over Nate Silver's 'Math'

http://crooksandliars.com/heather/colbert-mocks-scarborough-trusting-his-gut

[bvar22]

78. Why bother posting anything from CNN, MSNBC, NBC,....

... CBS, ABC, FOX or any of the other Corporate Approved Outlets.
You will only get their Corporate Approved propaganda supporting the enrichment of the 1%.

[Katashi_itto]

91. Thanks for telling us what is not the approved channel to watch Comrade.

[Shankapotomus]

93. Actually, it was a question

not an attempt to direct anyone. I was curious since it had been in the news recently and I was wondering why others here seemed to still regard RT as a credible source.

[Warpy]

126. How utterly silly

RT has done some good stories. It would be a mistake to miss them because of some silly "We have always been at war with Eurasia" sentiment, more appropriate to the McCarthy era.

I'll watch what I want to, thanks, and you can continue to look down your long blue nose while you tune into corporate bullshit on US media and think it's somehow more pious.

[Shankapotomus]

127. This is not some "We have always been at war with Eurasia" sentiment

Wow, dude. Watch what you want.

[Warpy]

129. Of course it is

but people need insight to see it.

[Shankapotomus]

130. All I wanted to know was why

some people at DU still think RT is clean. Maybe I made an assumption based on recent news events but I wasn't trying to undermine your news source. I was under the genuine and sincere impression RT wasn't a reliable news source. If you think it's a clean news source that's good enough for me.

[MohRokTah]

128. I won't give RT clicks. Ever.

So if somebody is trying to make a point with anything from RT, they may as well be Fox News people because I ain't watchin' that shit.