[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45490480]Explosions statement about fox not being state owned and therefore more reliable than RT. I argue they are both bad on this topic since they will both spin data for their respective side.[/QUOTE]
he said fox hates the current administration, how does that point to him saying they're reliable?
you sound really ignorant of what fox broadcasts, have you watched even 5 minutes of it? it's pretty much the opposite of RT in a lot of ways
[editline]d[/editline]
RT is arguably worse though since it actively supports a morally bankrupt government
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45490480]Explosions statement about fox not being state owned and therefore more reliable than RT. I argue they are both bad on this topic since they will both spin data for their respective side.
The othergay saying
This comparison suggest 1 is 1000 times worse than the other. I argue that no, the gap between them, in this case, is much smaller.
The biggest difference between state owned and non state owned occurs on reporting of internal matters.
As I said for a polarised thing like this Fox will spin its stories to be against Russia and against the rebels.
State owned media for a country opposing Russia would do the same thing.
As a follow up to this.
People say don't post RT.
I say don't post any source which is clearly impartial and bias.[/QUOTE]
So you are essentially going "lalala I can't hear your news reports" Why do you even comment then? Give us a news source that isn't biased then.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45490480]
This comparison suggest 1 is 1000 times worse than the other. I argue that no, the gap between them, in this case, is much smaller.[/QUOTE]
You can argue that all you want but I am fairly certain most people here think that's BS.
[QUOTE=Thlis;45490452]Source it then, I am sure we would be glad to see actual proof.[/QUOTE]
Here is some
Satillite photos of Ukrainian owned missile system on the day of the incident.
[img]http://rt.com/files/news/2a/94/c0/00/snimok_ekrana_2014-07-21_v_18.47.57.png[/img]
Full press briefing from Russia about their evidence, showing flight paths as well as releasing more photos.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSpeo5RcQQo[/media]
Sources:
[url]http://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-provides-photos-that-kiev-forces-deployed-buk-missiles-in-east-ukraine-radar-proof-of-warplanes-in-mh17-vicinity/5392453[/url]
[url]http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-plane-russia-ukraine/[/url]
Once again I urge you to at least consider sources other than western ones. And please don't take any of what I posted as absolute truth, go look for yourselves. See what completely separate sources such as Al Jazeera or others are saying. By only trusting one sides story you doing yourself a disservice and are setting yourself up to be lied to and manipulated. I often see on the internet people being accused of being "putins cronies", "Russian shills" for even [i]suggesting[/i] that the US version of events may not be entirely true, but if you only listen to one set of media coverage, what makes you any different from these supposed shills? The only way to get the big picture of what is happening in the world is to separate yourself from your personal alliances and look at the story from many different perspectives.
The Ukrainian army have been reporting Artillery attacks from Russia for awhile now, but more details are propping up and there could possibly be some truth to what a lot would presume hysterical claims.
Russians shelling Ukraine from the Russian town of Gukovo
[url]http://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2014/07/16/7032104/[/url]
Russian soldiers boast on VK
[url]https://twitter.com/euromaidan/status/491997024737570816[/url]
[url]http://cs620429.vk.me/v620429164/ea66/k14ggwJC9qk.jpg[/url]
[quote]"Been shelling Ukraine the entire night"[/quote]
Ukrainian troops shelled by artillery
[video=youtube;ps5igAd0Wfs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ps5igAd0Wfs[/video]
Ukrainian-Russian border guard report
[url]http://www.kmu.gov.ua/control/en/publish/article?art_id=247478696&cat_id=244314975[/url]
Make what you will, but this Is just a small amount of whats out there at the moment
[QUOTE=mix999;45490677]
Here is some
Satillite photos of Ukrainian owned missile system on the day of the incident.
[IMG]http://rt.com/files/news/2a/94/c0/00/snimok_ekrana_2014-07-21_v_18.47.57.png[/IMG]
Full press briefing from Russia about their evidence, showing flight paths as well as releasing more photos.
Sources:
[URL]http://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-provides-photos-that-kiev-forces-deployed-buk-missiles-in-east-ukraine-radar-proof-of-warplanes-in-mh17-vicinity/5392453[/URL]
[URL]http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-plane-russia-ukraine/[/URL]
[/QUOTE]
It's funny how your sources are RT and a website that hosts these wonderful articles
[URL]http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-911-attacks-keeping-the-lid-on-the-lie-media-response-to-the-growing-influence-of-the-911-truth-movement/5373217[/URL]
[URL]http://www.globalresearch.ca/911-truth-in-2014-is-a-breakthrough-possible/5374524[/URL]
You call this solid physical proof? You give us a website run by this guy?
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky#References[/url]
[QUOTE=Rofl_copter;45490519]he said fox hates the current administration, how does that point to him saying they're reliable?
you sound really ignorant of what fox broadcasts, have you watched even 5 minutes of it? it's pretty much the opposite of RT in a lot of ways
[editline]d[/editline]
RT is arguably worse though since it supports a morally bankrupt government[/QUOTE]
You misunderstand me.
You'll notice I used stuff like
[quote] in this case[/quote]
this and
[quote]for a polarised thing like this[/quote]
and
[quote]The biggest difference between state owned and non state owned occurs on reporting of internal matters.[/quote]
I have tried to make it clear that on some things Fox will argue against the government.
On things like this though, where the majority of the US population, nearly all the US politicians dislike Russia and the Rebels Fox's coverage will be bias.
I hope this has cleared it up a little, apologies if I have presented it in a bad way.
[quote=thlis]
So you are essentially going "lalala I can't hear your news reports" Why do you even comment then? Give us a news source that isn't biased then.[/quote]
Yes this is exactly what I am doing. I have even gone so far to make a script which replaces any content from websites I don't like or posts I don't like with la la la. This way when I pass them through my text to speech software all I get is the sweet sound of music.
[quote=thlis][quote=mdeceiver79]This comparison suggest 1 is 1000 times worse than the other. I argue that no, the gap between them, in this case, is much smaller.[/quote]You can argue that all you want but I am fairly certain most people here think that's BS.[/quote]
I think you don't want to think any differently so make no effort to acknowledge my argument. We should probably waste no more of each others time.
[editline]24th July 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Thlis;45490710]It's funny how your sources are RT and a website that hosts these wonderful articles
[URL]http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-911-attacks-keeping-the-lid-on-the-lie-media-response-to-the-growing-influence-of-the-911-truth-movement/5373217[/URL]
[url]http://www.globalresearch.ca/911-truth-in-2014-is-a-breakthrough-possible/5374524[/url]
You call this solid physical proof?[/QUOTE]
Its must be so nice to just dismiss everything you see. Those images came from the Russian government by the way. Dismiss that and you might as well dismiss any satellite photos from the US as well.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45490753]
Its must be so nice to just dismiss everything you see.[/QUOTE]
Coming from the person that claims Western media outlets are as biased as RT and other Russian state owned sites.
Yes, I tend to dismiss websites when the post articles claiming 9/11 was a conspiracy and when their director is a commentator on RT.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45490826]Not all western outlets. Please this is not the first time you have outright lied about something I have said.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45490270]
The American people have been brought up nearly their entire lives being told Russia is the bad guys, they find it reassuring to hear so and so by telling people Russia are the bad guys Fox will get more views.
Eg. A paper sticking up for Russia would be laughed off as "russia propaganda" or some nutty conspiracy magazine. No body would read it in the US.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45490270]
The whole
not state owned => reliable
is utter fallacy.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45490826]
Please stop attributing lies to me, I'm going to sleep now and won't be about to denounce them.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Thlis;45490776]Coming from the person that claims Western media outlets are as biased as RT and other Russian state owned sites.
Yes, I tend to dismiss websites when the post articles claiming 9/11 was a conspiracy and when their director is a commentator on RT.[/QUOTE]
Not all western outlets. Please this is not the first time you have outright lied about something I have said.
I post sources for most of the stuff I post, usually from western sources. It would be ridiculous of me to use sources I dismiss as in-factual.
"hey guys heres some news. I don't believe it though."
Please stop attributing lies to me, I'm going to sleep now and won't be about to denounce them.
[QUOTE=mix999;45490441]Overall though I would say Russia has more physical proof released[/QUOTE]
There is [I]no[/I] Russian "proof" that they're not using these sites for artillery shipment/use/training. Which is to be expected, because that's a massive negative that would be impossible to prove without continuous third-party observation from months ago through to now. I wouldn't expect any nation to try such a thing this far into a conflict.
[QUOTE=Thlis;45490710]It's funny how your sources are RT and a website that hosts these wonderful articles
[URL]http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-911-attacks-keeping-the-lid-on-the-lie-media-response-to-the-growing-influence-of-the-911-truth-movement/5373217[/URL]
[URL]http://www.globalresearch.ca/911-truth-in-2014-is-a-breakthrough-possible/5374524[/URL]
You call this solid physical proof? You give us a website run by this guy?
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky#References[/url][/QUOTE]
You clearly missed the points of my post. The physical proof is provided by the Russian government, these are just a couple of the english language sources that reported on what they revealed. I'm sorry that the more mainstream sources ignore press releases that contain at least some physical proof like satellite imagery and radar.
Secondly you shouldn't only look at the source, but also where the information is coming from. In both Russias and the Unites States cases the information is coming from the respective government entities. All the sources, English and Russian, are reporting on what their governments say instead of doing any investigations of their own, bringing me back to my comment earlier in the thread of this being a he said she said situation.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45490753]You misunderstand me.
You'll notice I used stuff like
this and
and
I have tried to make it clear that on some things Fox will argue against the government.
On things like this though, where the majority of the US population, nearly all the US politicians dislike Russia and the Rebels Fox's coverage will be bias.
I hope this has cleared it up a little, apologies if I have presented it in a bad way.
Yes this is exactly what I am doing. I have even gone so far to make a script which replaces any content from websites I don't like or posts I don't like with la la la. This way when I pass them through my text to speech software all I get is the sweet sound of music.
I think you don't want to think any differently so make no effort to acknowledge my argument. We should probably waste no more of each others time.
[editline]24th July 2014[/editline]
Its must be so nice to just dismiss everything you see. Those images came from the Russian government by the way. Dismiss that and you might as well dismiss any satellite photos from the US as well.[/QUOTE]
i have no idea what you're saying anymore
[QUOTE=mix999;45490896]I'm sorry that the more mainstream sources ignore press releases that contain at least some physical proof like satellite imagery and radar.[/QUOTE]
Yes, I find it extremely weird that major sites that thrive on controversy would ignore articles that conspiracy wackjob sites would pick up.
[QUOTE=Thlis;45490710]It's funny how your sources are RT and a website that hosts these wonderful articles
[URL]http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-911-attacks-keeping-the-lid-on-the-lie-media-response-to-the-growing-influence-of-the-911-truth-movement/5373217[/URL]
[URL]http://www.globalresearch.ca/911-truth-in-2014-is-a-breakthrough-possible/5374524[/URL]
You call this solid physical proof? You give us a website run by this guy?
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky#References[/url][/QUOTE]
going balls deep
9/11 was an inside job though
This thread is way to confusing. I'll ask the definitive question. Is it true/confirmed that they're firing rounds into Ukrainian borders?
[QUOTE=ZyreHD;45490940]This thread is way to confusing. I'll ask the definitive question. Is it true/confirmed that they're firing rounds into Ukrainian borders?[/QUOTE]
According to "biased" news sites: Yes.
According to Russian sites: No.
According to sites that claim 9/11 was a conspiracy and that Kennedy was killed by the CIA: No.
Wahoo! An act of war.
[QUOTE=ZyreHD;45490940]This thread is way to confusing. I'll ask the definitive question. Is it true/confirmed that they're firing rounds into Ukrainian borders?[/QUOTE]
The only confirmation of this so far has been from the US State Department, all other media sources are quoting it.
[editline]Edited:[/editline]
[QUOTE=Thlis;45490984]According to "biased" news sites: Yes.
According to Russian sites: No.
According to sites that claim 9/11 was a conspiracy and that Kennedy was killed by the CIA: No.[/QUOTE]
You're still shying away from what I was saying. ALL of the sources are getting their info from more or less the same places, what changes is how they interpret it and if they believe it. Until there is some investigative journalism done or some more information released the only true source right now is the State Department. Usually for something in the news to be confirmed more than one entity has to independently confirm it unless there is hard physical evidence provided.
[QUOTE=Rofl_copter;45490519]he said fox hates the current administration, how does that point to him saying they're reliable?
you sound really ignorant of what fox broadcasts, have you watched even 5 minutes of it? it's pretty much the opposite of RT in a lot of ways
[editline]d[/editline]
RT is arguably worse though since it actively supports a morally bankrupt government[/QUOTE]
Fox News is reliable in terms of not liking anything at all done and/or condoned by anyone who isn't a bible-totin' conservative republican.
[QUOTE=mix999;45490058]Interesting, I would like to see some footage or evidence though, or at least a couple more sources. Fox is pretty much the RT of America.
[editline]Edited:[/editline]
From the globe and mail:
“We have new evidence that the Russians intend to deliver heavier and more powerful multiple rocket launchers to the separatist forces in Ukraine, and have evidence that Russia is firing artillery from within Russia to attack Ukrainian military positions,” State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said. Harf, speaking at a regular media briefing, said the information was based on intelligence reports. [b]“I can’t tell you what the information is based on,” [/b] she said.
The US keeps doing this "just trust us" thing without providing any solid proof.[/QUOTE]
the proof is probably highly classified satellite and spy-plane reconnaissance photos and the people who need to be in the loop are seeing these photos
CNN are now running this story.
[QUOTE=mix999;45490896]You clearly missed the points of my post. The physical proof is provided by the Russian government, these are just a couple of the english language sources that reported on what they revealed. I'm sorry that the more mainstream sources ignore press releases that contain at least some physical proof like satellite imagery and radar.
Secondly you shouldn't only look at the source, but also where the information is coming from. In both Russias and the Unites States cases the information is coming from the respective government entities. All the sources, English and Russian, are reporting on what their governments say instead of doing any investigations of their own, bringing me back to my comment earlier in the thread of this being a he said she said situation.[/QUOTE]
I can't see how anyone can honestly claim that these photos and that video are "proof". There are plenty of ways those could be falsified and the general public has no way of telling.
Russia's government and its news media are very cognizant of the fact that people will irrationally dismiss arguments if it doesn't fit their preconceived notions. By creating a veneer of legitimacy through photos and videos that don't actually mean anything, they muddy the waters and give russian nationalists crackpot theories to latch onto.
I don't mean to say similar practices aren't used by the US, but I honestly think you should re-evaluate what you consider evidence. I'm so sick of people coming in here and claiming that the so-called evidence that Russia has released is somehow more substantial than that of the opposition.
I'm not trying to defend Russia or anything, but this looks a bit silly. Why would they shell Ukraine? This isn't very helpful for rebels, but can call another huge shitstorm against Russia. If they want to blow something up, they can easily send some special forces, and i doubt that ukrainian army in it's current condition can cause them any problems or catch them. More than that, in this scenario then can easily say that it was separatists.
So, i don't really know what to think. I'd better just wait for some official proofs\disproof, i guess.
[QUOTE=antianan;45495916]I'm not trying to defend Russia or anything, but this looks a bit silly. Why would they shell Ukraine? This isn't very helpful for rebels, but can call another huge shitstorm against Russia. If they want to blow something up, they can easily send some special forces, and i doubt that ukrainian army in it's current condition can cause them any problems or catch them. More than that, in this scenario then can easily say that it was separatists.
So, i don't really know what to think. I'd better just wait for some official proofs\disproof, i guess.[/QUOTE]
They could shell Ukraine for a couple reasons. It's already been thought that the rebels had Grads, one of which was supposedly recaptured/destroyed by the Ukrainian military. By spamming Grads from over the border, they can somewhat plausibly claim that it was someone else.
Sending spetsnaz is hard. As tough as they are, they are basically guaranteed to take casualties, and if any were to get captured or even killed, they could be a serious liability for the Russian government.
These are just my guesses, of course. Without knowing the places in question firsthand, it's always hard to say whether these videos are legit.
[QUOTE=zin908;45490124]Oh my god, now we get to see all the Russian apologists backpedal at warp speed.[/QUOTE]
the obama administration said the russians are up to no good! checkmate "Russian apologists"!
[QUOTE=antianan;45495916]I'm not trying to defend Russia or anything, but this looks a bit silly. Why would they shell Ukraine? This isn't very helpful for rebels, but can call another huge shitstorm against Russia. If they want to blow something up, they can easily send some special forces, and i doubt that ukrainian army in it's current condition can cause them any problems or catch them. More than that, in this scenario then can easily say that it was separatists.
So, i don't really know what to think. I'd better just wait for some official proofs\disproof, i guess.[/QUOTE]
Why did Ukraine shell Russia? Or why did someone shoot the MH17? Dumb shit happens for no reason sometimes
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;45496677]Why did Ukraine shell Russia? Or why did someone shoot the MH17? Dumb shit happens for no reason sometimes[/QUOTE]
There's a difference. Ukraine shelling Russian town can be a mistake, there's a conflict going on on your side of the border, and artillery is being used. Miscalculation can happen.
MH17, again, can be a mistake. Rebels employ AA defenses on regular basis, so one miscalculation can happen here too.
On our side of the border, no artillery firing happen regularly, no conflict going on, so lobbing a couple of shells over to your side would require specific order and a target. Such an act can't possibly be a mistake.
[QUOTE=gudman;45497078]There's a difference. Ukraine shelling Russian town can be a mistake, there's a conflict going on on your side of the border, and artillery is being used. Miscalculation can happen.
MH17, again, can be a mistake. Rebels employ AA defenses on regular basis, so one miscalculation can happen here too.
On our side of the border, no artillery firing happen regularly, no conflict going on, so lobbing a couple of shells over to your side would require specific order and a target. Such an act can't possibly be a mistake.[/QUOTE]
I agree. I don't think it's an accident. MH17 was an accident, as in nobody probably ment to shoot down a civil plane, but it wasn't an accident that what we are led to believe are "just a bunch of rebels" have somehow gotten hold of modern weaponry, tanks, APCs, AA and all that other stuff.
Makes me have this eerie feeling as if we're on the brink of a major military conflict again. Like maybe this was how the world felt when Poland was invaded by Germany. Everyone holding their breaths, or being worried like we are now, and it suddenly escalated out of control.
Putin seems to be willing to go balls deep into this whole mess. He wants Ukraine, wether the whole world disagrees or not. I was somewhat comforted by the fact that he was doing it under the table, by supplying rebels who operate under Russian order, but not under Russian flag.
It was a sign to me, that he didn't want to be directly associated with it, unless it was succesful. Now that MH17 happened, and reports of Russians shelling Ukraine targets appear I keep feeling like a world war is coming closer every day.
I just hope the worlds population has civilised beyond the point of being propagandised into war, now that there is the internet and multiple sources to check.
I don't want a big or even world war. Hope I'm very wrong here.
With what is happening in Israel, I doubt anyone can do anything but watch, less either get called a hypocrite or involved in 2 possibly lengthy wars.
[QUOTE=iFail;45496217] As tough as they are, they are basically guaranteed to take casualties[/QUOTE]
Well, the whole point of special forces is that they are trained enough to take minimum casualties. Yeah, there is always a risk, but they can still disguise themselves as rebels in case of being captured or killed.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
