Sputnik Will Be Broadcast in 30 Languages Next Year

RogerB

Crusader
Yes, this gentleman is telling his story on RT, therefore he is factual and believable

Meanwhile, this woman on RT is just spewing Western propaganda and lies.

[video=youtube;55izx6rbCqg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55izx6rbCqg[/video]

Being the second RT anchor who has spoken out, on air, against Russia's actions

It is correct to think that Western media lies at the behest of certain powers. It is foolish to think that foreign-owned press do not.

More stupidity for you . . .

Umm, have we not noticed that RT left the lady's rant up there for all to see? . . . Like, is that not a good example of honest journalism . . . hell, they even did not complain about her factual errors a la mixing the issues of the USSR (probably dated from around 1956 in Hungary) with today's Russia, and the bullshit about the network "whitewashing the actions of Putin" . . .

Frankly, to me she demonstrated she is a bimbo with her posed "outrage" . . . .it was her mother who toughed it out from Hungary . . . this woman may as well be angry at Angela Merkel for what Himmler did in WW2 . . . like it does help if one gets into present time and deal with the correct people!

And that last line in red of yours is more of the misdirection effort to pose as some sort of brilliance . . . who is presenting that they think that foreign-owned media does not lie???

Like, umm, what does this paragraph mean to you that was written in the opening post of this thread?

At least, it will be a counter-balance to the lies and propaganda fed us by the US and EU main stream media. And this point I feel is of immense importance . . . for too long, we in the west have only had the predominance of one source of information and it has warped the minds of those who succumbed to it.
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
Yes, correct . . . WTF with the introduction of this kind of "think" of it being a false flag by the Russians . . . that kind of inventive mind is the kind of bullshit that turned me off working for the UN in the '70's . . . they had too many poseurs pranching about trying to be clever to each other with none having the balls to call the other on the bullshit.

What I said was:
What is the probability of Ukrainian military making videos of themselves committing war crimes, versus the probability of Russians dressing themselves up as Ukrainians to stage a propaganda video?

as an invitation to discussion. Arnie made a good comment. You chose to respond like a cranky curmudgeon.
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
And that last line in red of yours is more of the misdirection effort to pose as some sort of brilliance . . . who is presenting that they think that foreign-owned media does not lie???

OK, then we're in agreement on the point that both Western and Russian media can be liars, that neither side's pronouncements should be taken as necessarily the truth (or necessarily a lie) and that it can take some digging and analysis to figure out where the truth actually is. Cool.
 

Lone Star

Crusader
OK, then we're in agreement on the point that both Western and Russian media can be liars, that neither side's pronouncements should be taken as necessarily the truth (or necessarily a lie) and that it can take some digging and analysis to figure out where the truth actually is. Cool.

I'm really amazed at the number of members on ESMB who seem to take RT as Gospel Truth. I mean....really? It's for all intents and purposes Pravda redux.

It would be just as ridiculous for Russians to believe everything they see and hear on ABC, or NBC, CNN, FOX, BBC, etc.... I doubt any of the Russians are that silly. Americans? Well, unfortunately, some of us are that silly. Oh, and Ozzie expats. Can't leave them out.

With all the different ways to get the truth these days it just boggles my mind that some of you seem to hang on every word spouted by RT as though it is automatically trustworthy. :duh:
 

RogerB

Crusader
In the context of being alert to what information one is being fed by one's information sources . . . and, "who lies to ya baby!" (umm, Kojak never told me "who loves ya, baby" that I recall . . . he just asked the question assuming I would dub in an answer:p)

Anyhow, I got this email in my traffic this morning . . . it does not have a link to YouTube as they usually do, so this is it. It deals with the "Top Five Worst CIA Ops" (worst as in most evil and hidden behind the lies they used on us)

It quotes and cites CIA's own documents and players involved.

BrasscheckTV Report
===================

The CIA's greatest hits

They probably killed a president, but that's not all they've been
up to.

A run down of their Top Five big hits.

Video:

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/27412.html

- Brasscheck TV

P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV with your
friends and colleagues.

================================

Miss a broadcast?

All Brasscheck TV broadcasts are backed up on
Facebook and Twitter

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/BrasscheckTV
 

eldritch cuckoo

brainslugged reptilian
...

11135.jpg


http://www.pawelkuczynski.com/Strona-g-owna/Home/index.php
 

RogerB

Crusader
Oh, say it ain’t so! This man says Obama and his minions set out to deliberately DECEIVE you honest Americans!!!

I’m shocked! I tell you, shocked!

A few years ago the gov line was that the “recession is over” and “American small business is the engine of economic growth” and “small businesses are our biggest employers” . . . . and now, guess what they have most hit with the latest idiot think? You guessed it, small business who can’t now and won’t now be taking on full time employees precisely because of the ObamaCare cost impacts!!! (Though that's not the point of this article, it is a point made elsewhere.) Only in America can government screw things up so royally . . . though I do know other govs do try hard to outdo them!

The Wall Street Journal this morning

Another ObamaCare Deception
As Jonathan Gruber knows, the health-care law is a tax machine. The ‘Cadillac’ levy will hit the middle class.

By
TEVI TROY
Nov. 16, 2014 6:12 p.m. ET

Jonathan Gruber, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist, is making himself a household name, and not in a good way. A series of videos have emerged in recent days showing Mr. Gruber—an architect of the Affordable Care Act—telling college audiences that major parts of the law were designed purposely to mask its true cost to individual Americans.

As Mr. Gruber put it, speaking last year at a conference at the University of Pennsylvania: “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, you know, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass.”

One example cited by Mr. Gruber is the so-called Cadillac tax, as the ObamaCare excise tax on high-value employer health plans is known. The tax, which he helped devise and will take effect in 2018, imposes a 40% levy on individual health plans worth more than $10,200, and on family plans worth more than $27,500. As Mr. Gruber’s remarks were unearthed last week, economist Mark Wilson and I released a study of the excise tax that shows he is right about its deceptive design. The tax is likely to hit many people who don’t have high-end coverage.

Mr. Gruber says in one video that his real aim was to reduce the tax break available to those who get employer-sponsored insurance, about 170 million Americans. He lamented that it would be hard to persuade Congress to reduce people’s tax breaks: “You just can’t get through. It’s politically impossible.” True enough—the excise tax does the job instead. It is a stealthy way to reduce the tax preference for health care without taking it away from employers.

Mr. Gruber also noted that the real impact of the tax would fall on individual Americans: “We just tax the insurance companies, they pass on higher prices that offsets the tax break we get, it ends up being the same thing. It’s a very clever, you know, basic exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the American voter.” In another video that surfaced on Friday, he explained that the only way to get rid of the tax preference for employer-sponsored insurance was “by mislabeling it, calling it a tax on insurance plans rather than a tax on people, when we all know it’s a tax on people who hold those insurance plans.”

Our study bears this out. While the tax is designed to be paid by companies, employees or consumers will see significant increases in costs. These cost increases will be passed on in several ways. Large employers who are subject to the excise tax in 2018 will pay an average of more than $2,700 per employee a year from 2018 to 2024. As Mr. Gruber admits, and basic economics confirms, this cost will be passed on to consumers or to employees in higher prices and lower compensation.

More at the above link . . .
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
Our study bears this out. While the tax is designed to be paid by companies, employees or consumers will see significant increases in costs. These cost increases will be passed on in several ways. Large employers who are subject to the excise tax in 2018 will pay an average of more than $2,700 per employee a year from 2018 to 2024. As Mr. Gruber admits, and basic economics confirms, this cost will be passed on to consumers or to employees in higher prices and lower compensation.
Companies look at the total cost of an employee (salary, benefits, facilities, etc) versus the value of what the employee produces. If the value of an employee's production does not exceed the cost of having him as an employee, the employee's job is in trouble.

If costs per employee go up $2,700, that puts a lot of pressure on the low-end, entry-level jobs. Rather than raise prices, many businesses will decide to either outsource or automate those low-end jobs out of existence, or (in retail/restaurant businesses) cut operating during times of day when inadequate amount of business occurs.
 

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
Roger, I would agree that politicians and media in the USA and elsewhere in the US are in the business of lying. Noam Chomsky has written more extensively on this than anyone else.

Without defending or attacking Obama, I'm not sure what anti-Obama posts are doing on a thread about Sputnik.
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
Roger, I would agree that politicians and media in the USA and elsewhere in the US are in the business of lying. Noam Chomsky has written more extensively on this than anyone else.

Without defending or attacking Obama, I'm not sure what anti-Obama posts are doing on a thread about Sputnik.

It's not so much about Obama, as about the complicity of the US media in pushing the administration's agenda, concealing the real effects of this massive program, and not fulfilling their proper role in exposing scams.

What Gruber said about the effort made to conceal the reality of the legislation was true. It could not have been done without the media's going along with it.
 
Top