Irish MEPs are moderately pro-Russian?

O

Oscurito

Why is RT almost always described at "Kremlin backed" while the BBC is not described as "House of Commons-backed" or government backed?

It is well known that working at the BBC has provided cover for UK intelligence agency assets in the past.

For that matter, RTE should also always be described as Dail-backed, or government-backed (with a threat of imprisonment facing citizens that do not comply with government orders to support the propaganda outlet financially deserving a mention too).

All that aside, what about freedom of speech and expression? It seems Europe's commitment to it is as weak as ever...
Considering, just for example, the sort of grilling government politicians get from Jeremy Paxman and the sterling exposés done by Panorama over the years, the answer to your first question is kind of obvious.

RTE's tradition isn't quite as proudly independent but they can and do challenge government policies and their outcomes.
 


O

Oscurito

I'm pretty sure that you're well aware of previous agreements between the US and Russia that the US have reneged upon.

Anyway, let me put it to you this way:

If you awoke in the morning to the news that the Mexican government had been feeling a little threatened by the US, what with everything Trump has said etc, and they had asked Russia to move 50,000 Russian troops and plenty of state-of-the-art rockets, tanks etc to Mexico to 'make them feel safer', as is their sovereign right, being an independent country free to join any alliance of their choosing, then you'd know exactly why NATO's actions are seen as provocative and aggressive.

Wouldn't you ;)
Nothing that Trump (buffoon though he is) has said compares with what the Russians have done. However, if the Mexicans wanted to do that, that would be their right.

What were the terms of these agreements? What did both sides concede?

I'm posting the link below as a wee reminder that you stillhaven't backed up your assertion in this post:
http://www.politics.ie/forum/eu/252851-irish-meps-moderately-pro-russian-3.html#post10758760
 

Ruadh

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2015
Messages
2,491
Jeez this is a whole new level of crazy. Kudos to the French, Portuguese, Italians, Austrians and Greeks for down-voting it.

The looney-toons report on which the resolution is based compares Russian news organisations to ISIL, and says Putins trolls on social media are "challenging democratic values". Heck, they want to see the pro-Fine Gaelers on here :)

Its one thing to say we dont like them Rooskies, but to claim as the report does that Russian propaganda is "damaging the minds of Europeans" is just a step away from "the Communists are stealing our precious bodily fluids."

I guess this has something to do with the popularity of Russia Today. The cold reality is that most of the so-called "dangerous views and information" aired on RT are by presenters, contributors and pundits — westerners, not Russians, and I dont believe they are being handed a script. So its not Russians who will be punished by restrictions on what can be broadcast, but us.

This looks like a last-ditch effort to keep sanctions in place against Russia. How embarrassing for Brussels.
All the more embarrassing since the sanctions are doomed.
The Russians are dangerous to the Baltics and neighbouring countries but to hear the neo liberal order warning is a sham motivated by loss of power not by the interests of the European working class.
 

parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
14,747
The effect of Roop's propaganda was not only to shift Britain towards the right, but also to coarsen and simplify public discourse. .
Hugh Trevor-Roper predicted it decades ago.
He had no illusions about Murdoch: ‘He aims to moronise and Americanise the population … wants to destroy our institutions, to rot them with a daily corrosive acid.’


Neal Ascherson reviews
 

parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
14,747
I had you in mind when I wrote my last post. You explained nothing. You made one broad-brush allegation that you still haven't substantiated.

What you refer to as NATO expansion has actually been several countries exercising their free and sovereign right to be independent countries and form or join alliances as they choose. And you know what, if Russia hadn't been the neighbourhood bully for so long, those countries probably never would have considered joining NATO.

America was planning to expand NATO since the 1990s. America saw its chance when Russia was in chaos under Yeltsin. Financed by Arms Corporations
 

kerdasi amaq

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2009
Messages
4,706
Europe has a simple choice; establish friendly relations with Russia or be forever ruled by the sewer rats of Wall Street. Which should Europe choose?
 

parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
14,747
Ha, it would be their right, yes, and you would be the first one shouting how it would be America's right to get them the fu** out of Mexico. Actually, before you'd even get the words out there'd be F-15s dropping bombs all over Mexico, and you'd be rushing to defend them :)

America has invaded lots of its neighbours over the past decades
 

Truth.ie

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
27,354
Nothing that Trump (buffoon though he is) has said compares with what the Russians have done. However, if the Mexicans wanted to do that, that would be their right.

What were the terms of these agreements? What did both sides concede?

I'm posting the link below as a wee reminder that you stillhaven't backed up your assertion in this post:
http://www.politics.ie/forum/eu/252851-irish-meps-moderately-pro-russian-3.html#post10758760
What exactly have the Russians "done"?
Apart from saving ethnics and minorities in Crimea and Syria from imminent bloodshed?
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,741
Europe has a simple choice; establish friendly relations with Russia or be forever ruled by the sewer rats of Wall Street. Which should Europe choose?

Overly enthusiastic.

Europe doesnt have to choose between Russia or the US. Thats how we've been screwed over, by making false choices.

Russia is an attractive trading partner, and should be trusted no further than that. The US hegemony has damaged us, politically and economically. It also helped us in earlier days.

Personally, I wouldnt piss on either Putin or Trump. They are both nationalist strong men, which of course appeals to Piesters with their yearning for a Chief. Both are quite smart, but not that smart.

Europe if it has a future should look neither to Moscow nor Washington.
 
O

Oscurito

Ha, it would be their right, yes, and you would be the first one shouting how it would be America's right to get them the fu** out of Mexico. Actually, before you'd even get the words out there'd be F-15s dropping bombs all over Mexico, and you'd be rushing to defend them :)
No, I wouldn't.
 
O

Oscurito

What exactly have the Russians "done"?
Apart from saving ethnics and minorities in Crimea and Syria from imminent bloodshed?
Invasion and occupation of parts of sovereign states such as Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine. Carving out of unrecognised territories in those states and using these occupied territories to further undermine the rump states.
 

Ardillaun

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
13,133
Europe doesnt have to choose between Russia or the US. Thats how we've been screwed over, by making false choices.

Russia is an attractive trading partner, and should be trusted no further than that. The US hegemony has damaged us, politically and economically. It also helped us in earlier days.

Personally, I wouldnt piss on either Putin or Trump. They are both nationalist strong men, which of course appeals to Piesters with their yearning for a Chief. Both are quite smart, but not that smart.

Europe if it has a future should look neither to Moscow nor Washington.
Putin will exploit any weakness or disunity in Europe he finds. We can only hope Trump's handlers won't let him get too friendly with Vlad.
 

Polly Ticks

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2016
Messages
3,268
I suspect that a good deal of the anger about Russian propagandists, and I dont hesitate for one moment to call them that, is that they are much better at this game.
I agree that they are propagandists. Some people also seem to forget that Russia is the world's second largest arms manufacturer.

A list of the world’s top 10 arms exporters, along with their respective shares of global exports between 2010 and 2014, from SIPRI:

United States: 31%
Russia: 27%
China: 5%
Germany: 5%
France: 5%
U.K.: 4%
Spain: 3%
Italy: 3%
Ukraine: 3%
Israel: 2%
See the entire study from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
I don't understand why anyone would run into Russia's arms as though they are going to be our saviours.. they are as much as risk to us any other 'great power.'

I'm not sure that the Russians have to be (or are) all that much better at it.. just that Western media has had such a cozy relationship with the political establishment and have so little real dissent to deal with that any alternative message at all sends them into conniptions.

The Internet also makes sustained dissent and counter propaganda possible from anywhere in the world 24/7 (a function previously performed less effectively by radio), which further adds to the establishment meltdown and their sense that they are losing control.

Neither the EU nor the Clintonites can blame the Russians for the establishment losing the trust of the people...they have done it all by themselves.
 

Ardillaun

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
13,133
In Canada, the Ukraine threads on the CBC website were overrun by Putinbots during the early days of the invasion. They just swamped the discussion.
 

Truth.ie

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
27,354
Invasion and occupation of parts of sovereign states such as Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine. Carving out of unrecognised territories in those states and using these occupied territories to further undermine the rump states.
Kiev politicians were literally threatening to kill Russian ethnics in Ukraine.
Putins intervention was humanitarian.
He did what Jack Lynch hadnt the balls to do, which was to send troops to save his fellow citizens
 

Ardillaun

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
13,133
Kiev politicians were literally threatening to kill Russian ethnics in Ukraine.
Putins intervention was humanitarian.
He did what Jack Lynch hadnt the balls to do, which was to send troops to save his fellow citizens
And Putin protects non-Russian 'ethnics' in Russia? Does he consider their wishes to secede?
 

Ruadh

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2015
Messages
2,491
Overly enthusiastic.

Europe doesnt have to choose between Russia or the US. Thats how we've been screwed over, by making false choices.

Russia is an attractive trading partner, and should be trusted no further than that. The US hegemony has damaged us, politically and economically. It also helped us in earlier days.

Personally, I wouldnt piss on either Putin or Trump. They are both nationalist strong men, which of course appeals to Piesters with their yearning for a Chief. Both are quite smart, but not that smart.

Europe if it has a future should look neither to Moscow nor Washington.
I would add it has damaged us socially as well setting as it did greed even above society.
 

JacquesHughes

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
1,385
So, the further you are from Russia, the less preoccupied you are with, 'Russia is a problem'.
 
O

Oscurito

Kiev politicians were literally threatening to kill Russian ethnics in Ukraine.
Putins intervention was humanitarian.
He did what Jack Lynch hadnt the balls to do, which was to send troops to save his fellow citizens
Your eagerness to gulp down big buckets of propaganda is quite startling.

According to civil rights groups, however, the Kremlin's account of anti-Russian persecution is a dark fairytale – "entirely fictional", as one put it. It is, they say, a made-up scenario scripted in Moscow for state TV, and now played out on the ground by pro-Russian activists and bussed-in professionals. Russian propaganda has been extremely effective, they add.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...list-attacks-russia-supporters-kremlin-deaths
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom