Russian network RT must register as foreign agent in US

a reply to: DJW001

Claiming that the Steele dossier is false ?

Well since this your thread feel free to update it accordingly :
If you don't think Donald Trump has ties to Russia, you need to watch this

Making unsubstanciated claims that reporting you don't like is false or misleading ?

That's what you are doing with RT. Unfortunately for you, there is no US special commision to investigate RT reporting but well one arouind the claim that RT is at the forefront of Russian disinfo. And that has been investigated and proven as the misleading statement made by the US mainstream media, not the other way around.

Misleading American readers ?
From the fact that Hilary can't handle the fact that she lost ?
From a convenient Russian scapegoat ?
From the real culprits ?
From the mirage of American exeptionalism ?
From what ?
From the official narative - but not from truths nor facts.

As you happen to take the liberty of making personal accusations against others posters :

a reply to: TonyS

Registering as a foreign agent won't cease RTs publication. Gosh you guys..there's another end of the pool you know...where there are steps and the subject isn't over your heads. No let's just dive into the deep end.

Nowhere did it say they would restrict the content. Or black out the publication at all.
But everybody let's get indignant and make extreme claims of censorship that simply doesn't exist in the real world and sure as hell doesn't exist in this story.

The registration would not stop the organization from operating, but requires regularly submitted paperwork that lists its sources of foreign government-tied revenue and the contacts it makes in the United States, and it would require any reporting to be labeled as being influenced or financed by the Russian government

Hey maybe read more than the headline huh?

Look at all the little communists coming out of the closet here. Whoopie.

a reply to: Sillyolme

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Funny how every time I post a link to this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Someone follows with a lengthy quote and video crammed post that kicks the page over. I believe there is a term of art for that technique....

a reply to: DJW001

You are free to believe your own BS.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Look at all the little communists coming out of the closet here. Whoopie.

They are not communists:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: DJW001

You are free to believe your own BS.

And you are fre to believe yours. Do you really believe?

a reply to: DJW001

You claims are based on the fact that you pretend to know what is in Putin's head ... suffice to say.
I'd rather listen to him, and use critical thinking.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Because KGB agents never lie?

a reply to: DJW001

Less often than representative of US alphabet agencies as recent actuality has shown.
It's just that the US has bigger staff, budget, and that you should feel concerned by the fact you are American not Russian ... or did you move to Canada ?

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: DJW001

Less often than representative of US alphabet agencies as recent actuality has shown.
It's just that the US has bigger staff, budget, and that you should feel concerned by the fact you are American not Russian ... or did you move to Canada ?

a reply to: DJW001

Care to explain ?

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: DJW001

Care to explain ?

You are hilarious! Now I know for certain you don't believe a thing you say.

a reply to: DJW001

No, I'm serious. Excuse me in advance to use RT as source, but it is the topic of the OP.
Ex :

NYT retracts claim that ‘17 US intelligence agencies’ verified Russian DNC email hack

What is the most problematic for you ?

A) Alphabet agencies were inaccuretly reported as having announced yetanother-unproven batch of Russian ingerence by a suposedly respectable representative of the MSM
B) The said agencies didn't contradict the false statement of theirs being reported by the press. (For the record when Alex Jones stated that there was child labor on Mars the NASA issued a denial the day after, when the NYT innacurately claims that the entire intelligence community is stating that Russia did anything questionable - radio silence ... ).
C) There is nothing inaccurate in RT's reporting of the event
D) Other.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

The NYT corrected itself. When was the last time RT did? I suppose you believe that America's "alphabet agencies" spend a larger portion of capital on propaganda than the Kremlin does? And that Americans have been brainwashed by their anti-Russian propaganda?

ETA: Note the correction still affirms that the intelligence community affirms the Russian meddling. The reporter got the number wrong because they assumed that the DCI spoke for all of them. In fact, all four agencies that investigated agreed.

a reply to: DJW001

As your personal example does show, yes some Americans are still lured by neo-McCarthyst hysteria, despite the constant stream of delusion the 'Muh-Russia' narative is dealing with atm.
But I guess - you didn't really deny - that you still have high hopes in Mueller. As long as he is still active and doing things, people will speculate about what the outcome of his work might be.

RT issues some correction for its newsbrief too from time to time, google and you'll find, all articles have publishing date and some also feature a 'last updated' mention. Like most the web publishing medias. Now, did the whole press who simply copy/pasted the sensationalist announce of the NYT issued a denial as well on that matter ?
The problem is : how many people will see the retraction? The original will remain in most people's memory and that is the point.
Did the same MSM representatives issue corrective statements when they were at the forefront of the Iraq-WMD hoax that still has consequences today ?

Among the 4 remaining agencies, the FBI was still relying on a crowdstrike report - yet another questionable attitude - report that proved to be ...
"Something Stinks Here" - CrowdStrike Revises, Retracts Parts Of Explosive Russian Hacking Report

Blame Russia if you want, meanwhile the real culprits are still on the run.
At this stage, which ghosts of the russian-collusion narrative are you still trying to hang on to ? What are the FACTS, because "well-informed anonymous source claimed in MSM that Rusia ..." has proven its real value so far.



Speaking of the NYT :

NYT - Project Veritas

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Zerohedge? You're killing me!

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Lest I be accused of trolling, let me explain, for the benefit of others, that the Kremlin maintains several tiers of propaganda. The state controlled domestic media provide a mix of half truths and outright lies sweetened with mindless entertainment. Since the Kremlin needs to maintain reliable news sources for the "outside world" if they are going to attract foreign investment and exchange technologies, RT, RIA Novosti, and Sputnik use journalistic tricks to mislead casual consumers of news.

They use careful attributions to spread information they know to be false, while retaining an appearance of objectivity. Often, this uses rhetorical questions to make implicit claim, then cite impressive sounding sources that are, in fact, Kremlin propaganda mills.

For example: Headline: Does Hillary Clinton eat babies? The body of the article will then say "According to noted Eurasianist journalist Vladimir Niemorov, doctors at the St. Petersburg research institute have analyzed Hillary Clinton, and have concluded she is showing definite symptoms of kuru, a disease caused by consuming human flesh. This may be confirmation of the internet rumors that she eats babies."

Now, they didn't actually say Hillary eats babies, but they used the weight of authority and rumor to imply she does.

Also, note the "updating" a story is not at all the same thing as retracting it.


ETA: Then there are outlets that have no need of credibility... like globalresearch, zerohedge, and so forth.

a reply to: DJW001

When did RT published that Hilary Clinton eats baby ? I'd like to see that one - sound like Alex Jones stuff.
My guess is that we have another batch of DJW/deep state disinfo here bacause all I've been able to find on RT website is this :

Next they’ll be saying Russians are coming to eat our babies!

And everything you don't like for not abiding to the American exeptionalism narative is - as of you - a Kremlin sponsored entity ... how convenient.