Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 10:30:33 AM

Login with username, password and session length

The integrity initiative

Started by biggytitbo, December 04, 2018, 02:23:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

hummingofevil

Quote from: BlodwynPig on January 21, 2019, 11:32:05 PM
What has Putin achieved that the liberals and russiaphobes haven't already succeeded in with this nonsense? I see no gains for either the US or Russia in the short-term at least.

Aside from any intentional policy advantage like Syria or whatever just the general amusement of a country falling over itself to implode due to there being an actual fuckwit in The Whitehouse. Trolling as we might say I'm these modern times.

I'm completely open minded either way but the Trump/Farage/Assange/emails/Hillary stuff must surely have some basis in reality. Wikileaks somehow gathers a load of classified information and it just happens to perfectly fit a narrative that absolutely suits the GOP.

This is what I can't get my head around. You three are all clearly very knowledgeable and clued up on this stuff but to me I can't get past idea of yes absolutely our lot are cunts but applying same criteria their lot are too.

I am genuinely open minded to be proved wrong. If it's just a case of our bullshit is worse that their bullshit because I disagree with the motivations then there is surely some evidence that aspects of Putin's leadership show he's a bit of a wrong 'un. It's not ALL propaganda surely.

If you a Russian dissident and you sat there siding with the West, thinking the Russia government are an authoritarian state and your mate comes along and goes "nah man, it's all UK propaganda, Putin's just defending our interests" and you don't believe him because you think the stories are spun the you would still be wrong to conclude that the UK government ARENT a bunch of cunts.

—-

Maybe I need to concentrate more on small details. The thing I've really noticed today is how easily any reporting of criticism of UK government on issues unrelated to Russia (like poverty or the fuckwitted approach to Brexit) is immediately framed as anti-UK propaganda. On that I agree with you all.

Paul Calf

Two the nations that are his harshest critics have edged themselves towards civil war, and Europe is tied up in its own internal bickering. I'd say that was a result for him.

BlodwynPig

Blodwyn = Gut
Biggy = Heart
Pepotamo = Head

Paul = Another part of the anatomy

*just kidding Paul, we're all on the same side (the back side)*

greenman

Quote from: hummingofevil on January 21, 2019, 11:46:51 PMMaybe I need to concentrate more on small details. The thing I've really noticed today is how easily any reporting of criticism of UK government on issues unrelated to Russia (like poverty or the fuckwitted approach to Brexit) is immediately framed as anti-UK propaganda. On that I agree with you all.

Honestly though I think this is the main reason why relations with Russia have declined. I mean yes Syria has happened more recently but jockeying for influence in the middle east has never really stopped has it? whats changed is the rising tide of anti establishment feeling in the US/UK and the inability of controllable politicians/media to stop it.

Whilst crossing over into apologism is something you need to look out for I don't think the "enemy of my enemy" approach many on the left take for example on the Trump/Russia stuff is smart as your potentially feeding a monster that's just as likely to be turned against you in the future.

biggytitbo

There is literally no link between Trump and Putin. At most we have some peripheral business ties between Trump and his circle  and dodgy Russian businessmen. But hardly uniquely Russian, plenty of dodgy Saudis and Israelis and many more. Trump is a pretty dodgy businessman after all.


Deosnt seem to matter how each story that trump is a stooge or asset or whatever imploded, or how he s launched an array if anti Russia policies not seen since the cold war. None of it matters, because the narrative is all that matters,
not the facts.


biggytitbo

Quote from: greenman on January 22, 2019, 05:08:49 AM
Honestly though I think this is the main reason why relations with Russia have declined. I mean yes Syria has happened more recently but jockeying for influence in the middle east has never really stopped has it? whats changed is the rising tide of anti establishment feeling in the US/UK and the inability of controllable politicians/media to stop it.


I actually do think the main reason is Syria, but yes this is a huge part of it too, and increasingly so.

greenman

Quote from: biggytitbo on January 22, 2019, 06:51:18 AMI actually do think the main reason is Syria, but yes this is a huge part of it too, and increasingly so.

It seemed to me that neo McCarthyism really got going years after Syria had kicked off, I spose you could argue perhaps when it became clear Assad wasn't going to lose?

It seems to match up much more closely to the rise of Corbyn, Sanders, Trump, Brexit, etc, whilst the latter two are the main targets at present again I think its just as likely the left will be targeted more extensively when its viewed as being as big a threat.

Urinal Cake

I think the real reason has more to do with embarrassment than anything. Russia the bastard child of the West is fucking shit up and making the West look slow, hypocritical and weak.

By attempting to create links between Russia and anti-Establishment factions  I think will not work in the long run due to two factors. Firstly, this is the age of 'feeling' if people feel something that's all that matters. Secondly, the red scare does not exist. Communism failed and Russia is not a Communist country.


biggytitbo

The extent to which the American Empire were enraged by Russia blocking its regime change plans in Syria and Iran cannot be underestimated, that more than anything ramped up the new cold war we are seeing now, and inspired this vast anti-Russia propaganda machine. But that machine has also proven to be tailor made for combatting the simultaneous 'threat' of anti-establishment and leftist media and politicians that have emerged in the West in the last 5 years. Preferably by conflating the two things - so no Western voices now that speak out against the crimes of  NATO, US imperialism, the collapsing forces of neoliberalism or the traditional media can be anything other than a voice of the Kremlin trying to bring down Western democracy. In a different age it might have been more effective, but I just don't think enough people are buying it, thankfully.

Pepotamo1985

Quote from: hummingofevil on January 21, 2019, 11:17:15 PM
What was the extent of communication between Trump

That's unclear but at most it seems there was minimal contact between some individuals in the Trump milieu and Russian state representatives. Trump overall though is the most overtly foreign 'compromised' President I think we've ever seen though -  up to his nuts in Israel, the Gulf States, etc. from the word go. Usually it takes a while for these dodgy relationships to be forged or identified.

Quote from: hummingofevil on January 21, 2019, 11:17:15 PM
to what level did Russians attempt to interfere with elections.

Also, it's increasingly clear there was no Russian interference in the US election - or if there was, the effort was meagre and extremely ineffective. The Internet Research Agency is a clickbait marketing firm that conducted most of its political activities after the election and only jumped on it opportunistically, as a way of getting more eyes on its various websites for ad revenue. To date no persuasive evidence has been unearthed of any 'deep' Russian effort to swing the result - despite seemingly the entire US intelligence establishment, a special counsel investigation and a legion of journalists spending over two years (and a great deal of money) trying to identify one.

On that subject, this is why I've never, ever had any faith in the Mueller investigation - Trump's (obviously empty) statements on the campaign trail gave a lot of vested US establishment interests jitters, so of course the country's vast spying networks looked intensely into his background and the backgrounds of everyone associated with him. If they'd found anything vaguely damaging in respect of his/their relationship with Russia, they would've leaked it. The idea Mueller and his investigators will be able to find something by 'following the money' the CIA/FBI/NSA/etc. couldn't find by pressing a button on a computer is absolutely ludicrous.

Quote from: hummingofevil on January 21, 2019, 11:17:15 PM
I've always assumed Trump is a useful idiot to Putin and he knows if Trump is there he is literally incapable of being competant in the job so it's a Russia win by default.

I can say with a high degree of confidence the Russians were very much hoping their relationship with the US/the West would be greatly improved after Trump's election. His positive statements about Russia in the first months of his Presidency were very warmly received and there was a feeling they were on the cusp of a real breakthrough, but then the Syria bombing happened and they've been quite dejected ever since, and their pivot towards the East has been ramped up significantly.

This is what the 'RussiaGate' stuff is all about to my mind - bouncing Trump into a tougher stance on Russia, forcing him to prove he's not in the Kremlin's pocket. It's very interesting the British state was so heavily involved in developing and perpetuating that narrative - https://sputniknews.com/europe/201901181071610324-russiagate-integrity-initiative-wood/. Shades of the start of the Cold War.

Pepotamo1985

#280
Quote from: biggytitbo on January 22, 2019, 06:49:17 AM
There is literally no link between Trump and Putin.

The only aspect of the 'RussiaGate' story that's ever intrigued me at all is the interest the KGB had in Trump in the 1970s/80s due to his marriage to Ivana, and Trump's visit to Moscow in 1987.  The former doesn't mean much - most of the 'intelligence' Ivana's father gave to the Czech security services was utterly low grade, and a testament to how little the East knew about/understood the West ("Ivana says it is certain George Bush will win the 1988 election") - but it does indicate Trump was very much on the Kremlin's radar and a person of interest a very long time ago.

The trip to Moscow is much more substantive - it comes at a time when we know from leaked documents the KGB was going on a determined recruitment drive, trying to cultivate influential assets in the Western world, and the type of person they were looking for was someone vain, unfaithful, dim and obsessed with money (which, y'know, is a description of Trump). The Soviet ambassador to the US met Trump, buttered him up (the ambassador's daughter said this was a deliberate cultivation exercise) and invited him to Russia. Trump goes, announces he's going to build a Trump Tower in the capital, and upon his return stays he'd like to run for President. Again, I'm not sure this means much, and I don't believe this was the start of a long-running clandestine relationship between Trump and the Kremlin, but it's certainly striking.

hummingofevil

Thanks for these replies. It's important I stop every now and again and try to consolidate as the information comes so thick and fast.

biggytitbo

The answer to that is in what you said previously -

QuoteThe idea Mueller and his investigators will be able to find something by 'following the money' the CIA/FBI/NSA/etc. couldn't find by pressing a button on a computer is absolutely ludicrous.

It's also ludicrous that the CIA/FBI/NSA wouldn't already have known if he was genuinely compromised by a hostile state power before he ran. Trump isn't a politician but he's been operating around the higher echelons of politics and business for 40 years, they'll have a fat file on him, including copious blackmail material (maybe some of Epstein's material), and if there was any suggestion he was involved with Putin he would never have been allowed to run in the first place.

What was in it for Putin anyway? He had no more reason to know Trump would win than anyone else - Hillary got millions more votes than him and most people can now see Trump only won because of the vagaries of the US system and the fact Hilary ran an unbelievably bad and complacent campaign. Now he has won, Putin is getting the most comprehensive set of anti-Russia policies since the cold war for his money - not exactly a good return is it?

Pepotamo1985

Yes of course, and Trump's uber-harsh line on Moscow is testament to the fact they don't have kompromat on him of any kind.

It's also interesting how much the 'interference' narrative has evolved/degraded over time - first it was 'THE RUSSIANS WON IT FOR TRUMP', then 'THE RUSSIANS HELPED TRUMP WIN', then 'THE RUSSIANS TRIED TO WIN IT FOR TRUMP', now it's 'RUSSIA TRIED TO EXPLOIT DIVISION IN AMERICAN SOCIETY'. Looking forward to the next capitulation with baited breath. Even Luke Harding now suggests the Russians actually expected Hillary to win but by a small margin, and intended to exploit that.

BlodwynPig

'RUSSIA IS NOT SO FAR AWAY FROM THE USA!!! JUST ACROSS THE BERING STRAIT!!"

biggytitbo

I love 'RUSSIA TRIED TO EXPLOIT DIVISION IN AMERICAN SOCIETY', its the ultimate evidence free, one size fits all way to blame them for anything. That's basically Cadwallders accusation whenever RT write anything about British politics, even if it's just accurately quoting Liam Fox and some other politicians in an entirely uncontroversial article.

They genuinely seem to think Russia, or anyone remotely connected with Russia, should not be allowed to say anything about the US or UK, a set of ultra hardline rules that of course don't apply the other way round.

BlodwynPig

Quote from: biggytitbo on January 22, 2019, 03:12:39 PM
I love 'RUSSIA TRIED TO EXPLOIT DIVISION IN AMERICAN SOCIETY', its the ultimate evidence free, one size fits all way to blame them for anything. That's basically Cadwallders accusation whenever RT write anything about British politics, even if it's just accurately quoting Liam Fox and some other politicians in an entirely uncontroversial article.

They genuinely seem to think Russia, or anyone remotely connected with Russia, should not be allowed to say anything about the US or UK, a set of ultra hardline rules that of course don't apply the other way round.

This almost seems like it's occurred as a sudden reaction rather than a slow build up over years. Be interesting to read the books on the subject in the post-post-apocalyptic haze.

Urinal Cake

I think the establishment sees two elements to this strategy. The first is to create a parochial attitude of how dare foreigners mess up democracy. The second which is tied to the first is to create stronger foreign interference laws so they can eliminate, invalidate or cast doubt on people and institutions.

Russia unfortunately does make a very good bad guy with the murdering of dissidents. But I think the more simple reason is that they didn't buy anyone off like the Qataris and Al-Jazeera, Saudis etc. Maybe they were counting on Trump to eventually make a deal.

Pepotamo1985

Quote from: Urinal Cake on January 23, 2019, 03:23:47 AM
Russia unfortunately does make a very good bad guy with the murdering of dissidents.

Of the various murders attributed to Putin, I seriously doubt he sanctioned or even approved of most of if not all of them. Nemtsov is a particularly obvious example of a killing that the Kremlin would never have ordered, for obvious reasons - yet it's consistently trotted out as proof Russia is this evil, vicious state. Coverage of the World Cup was particularly interesting in this regard - the Western media had spent the previous year talking up how dangerous Russia was and the high likelihood of foreign fans being attacked or murdered (there was even that BBC documentary about football hooliganism in Russia that strongly implied Putin might possibly could maybe secretly run the firms and was planning to set them on English tourists), but were flummoxed when it was a total success. This didn't stop them reflecting on how much of a disaster it could have been afterwards though, or indeed running hysterical headlines every day of the tournament about potential violence. The Guardian was particularly bad, with one article literally suggesting the only reason there hadn't been racist chants in the stadiums/attacks on the streets was the teams Russia had played up to that point weren't black enough.

In other news, II have locked their Twitter. I suspect they're going to shut down (ie rebrand).

biggytitbo

That thing about Putin having journalists or other troublesome figures murdered, beyond innuendo and memes, is not backed up by any kind of reliable factual evidence. It exists in the same universe as Vince Foster, Danny Casolaro, Michael Hastings and Seth Rich. If any of them were Russian the msm we be all over it, because they were American its just a far fetched conspiracy theory.

biggytitbo

I guess the thing with II is in what form will they reconstitute themselves? Go more secretive, or less?

Pepotamo1985

Quote from: biggytitbo on January 23, 2019, 12:03:46 PM
If any of them were Russian the msm we be all over it, because they were American its just a far fetched conspiracy theory.

Indeed, and it's amazing to see all these 'TOP 10 PEOPLE PUTIN HAS PERSONALLY MURDERED' lists, which look like they should be on InfoWars (and be about the Clintons), in 'credible' mainstream outlets.

biggytitbo

Yes, and you see supposed serious journalists like Cadwalladr posting those mad organograms straight out of youtube conspiracy theory videos all the time now, they have truly taken over the asylum.


Not to mention how they have spent the last 2 and a half years writing literally thousands of false news stories and breathless, unhinged op-eds indulging the biggest conspiracy theory of modern times - that a hostile foreign power was controlling the US president. Then they then have the gall to lecture us about conspiracy theories, and demonise those who are suspicious about Syrian gas attacks of Skripal.

biggytitbo

Another msjor blow to alternative media https://twitter.com/GordonDimmack/status/1088825865222410240


By conspiracies they don't just mean 9/11 and the moon landings of course. In fact they dont mean that at all, they mean any one quesrioning the malignant role of Israeli lobbyists in western politics, russiagate, the latest US regime change operation, the stuff Pep does etc etc.


As that guy points out,  the last time YouTube tweaked their algorithms, traffic to CNN, msnbc et al, with their establishment friendly conspiracy theories, rocketed.

BlodwynPig

Quote from: biggytitbo on January 25, 2019, 05:38:07 PM
Another msjor blow to alternative media https://twitter.com/GordonDimmack/status/1088825865222410240


By conspiracies they don't just mean 9/11 and the moon landings of course. In fact they dont mean that at all, they mean any one quesrioning the malignant role of Israeli lobbyists in western politics, russiagate, the latest US regime change operation, the stuff Pep does etc etc.


As that guy points out,  the last time YouTube tweaked their algorithms, traffic to CNN, msnbc et al, with their establishment friendly conspiracy theories, rocketed.

It'll be like the good old days when you had to do a Mulder "Search for the truth"

Pepotamo1985

Quote from: biggytitbo on January 25, 2019, 05:38:07 PM
Another msjor blow to alternative media https://twitter.com/GordonDimmack/status/1088825865222410240

It's extremely suspicious all these 'fact-checking'/'credibility rating'/'media monitoring' sites are being so promoted at the moment - there's been so many mainstream news segments/articles on them, especially the ones based in Eastern Europe - and even more suspicious they're all directly connected to national security establishment figures and organizations. Unsurprisingly, they consider any independent resource critical of the West or offering a more balanced view of state-mandated enemies like Russia, Venezeula, Syria or Iran to be propaganda, and all mainstream outlets to be totally legitimate. NewsGuard is probably the most terrifying, with plans to make their 'nutrition label' browser extension compulsory for all social media apps, tablets, smartphones, computers (including libraries/unis/schools).

BlodwynPig

Is the lack of fuss because these entities (II, NewsGuard) aren't obviously government initiatives. If that 'nutrition label' dictum was announced by May, it would come under heavy scrutiny and serious push back, at least by the public, one would think.

biggytitbo

And again we have the usual sorry spectacle of so called progressives cheering it on because it gave the Daily Mail a 1 star rating, just as they cheered when Alex Jones was kicked off social media. When will they learn these are just loss leaders and if you ever indulge a bunch of spooks and warmongers deciding what we can and can't see they won't just stop with obvious bad stuff, they will go for anything that remotely challenges their total control over what information we can access.

Buelligan

Quote from: hummingofevil on January 21, 2019, 11:46:51 PM
Aside from any intentional policy advantage like Syria or whatever just the general amusement of a country falling over itself to implode due to there being an actual fuckwit in The Whitehouse. Trolling as we might say I'm these modern times.

I'm completely open minded either way but the Trump/Farage/Assange/emails/Hillary stuff must surely have some basis in reality. Wikileaks somehow gathers a load of classified information and it just happens to perfectly fit a narrative that absolutely suits the GOP.

This is what I can't get my head around. You three are all clearly very knowledgeable and clued up on this stuff but to me I can't get past idea of yes absolutely our lot are cunts but applying same criteria their lot are too.

I am genuinely open minded to be proved wrong. If it's just a case of our bullshit is worse that their bullshit because I disagree with the motivations then there is surely some evidence that aspects of Putin's leadership show he's a bit of a wrong 'un. It's not ALL propaganda surely.

If you a Russian dissident and you sat there siding with the West, thinking the Russia government are an authoritarian state and your mate comes along and goes "nah man, it's all UK propaganda, Putin's just defending our interests" and you don't believe him because you think the stories are spun the you would still be wrong to conclude that the UK government ARENT a bunch of cunts.

—-

Maybe I need to concentrate more on small details. The thing I've really noticed today is how easily any reporting of criticism of UK government on issues unrelated to Russia (like poverty or the fuckwitted approach to Brexit) is immediately framed as anti-UK propaganda. On that I agree with you all.

I tend to agree with this.  I tend to think that people who think this "war" is between "The West" and "Russia/Putin" are mistaken.  IMO, it's between the gangsters and oligarchs, the elite, the privileged and The ROTW. 

Encouraging the little people to choose a team is just another way they use to divide and conquer.

Beware the men with golden doors, for they are cheating someone, you can trust that. 




Solidarity to the workers and raise a glass to their eventual triumph, all the little people cleaning the toilets behind the golden doors, let us unite and let us bring these murderous evil parasites down.  Shake them off our back, get their lies out of our ears and live in a clean peaceful new world, where everyone eats enough and bombs are not built.

biggytitbo

Phili Cross and others are shit editing the wikipedia page (despite his ban) of Rania Khalek, who is quite a good anti-war, left wing journalist, to say she is a putin troll and an anti-semite, and anyone trying to revert their edits is getitng locked out - https://twitter.com/leftworks1/status/1090160109962039296


Thus anyone who searches for her name form now on, the first thing that will appear on google is a gross smear against her. Welcome to 1984.