Will Russia invade the Ukraine?

[JackyJoll]

Or ex-leaders are irrelevant - we don't see May, Cameron, Blair, Obama being afforded regular air time or demanding column inches.

We do still hear Blair’s opinions on current matters.

[demographic]

We do still hear Blair’s opinions on current matters.

I think I see the issue here.

Most of them have the decency to make themselves scarce anyway.

[DefTrap]

I think I see the issue here.

It wasn't much of a trap to fall into, was it?

The point is, you're not the Premier any more, nobody's interested in listening to your she-it and you have to try really fecking hard to squeak above the parapet. Blair has, but let's be honest, our interest in him is one of curiosity as he doesn't wield any power - he's not being silenced and yes he doesn't have the decency to feck right off (possibly because he wasn't -that- old when he moved on).

Getting back to Trump, CNN enjoyed ripping the piss out of him through every moment of his sad tenure. Ever since he shut up about his election defeat they couldn't have given a toss, there's no reason to show him humiliating himself every day as an -ex- president.

[Mr. Dazzle]

I dunno...if you want comment on the ins and outs of international politics, who is better to offer some punditry than former world leaders who no longer have any skin in the game? It's like Gary Lineker.

Assuming said leaders got to their positions by being competent and well versed in the subtleties of the topic of course

[Druid]

It is a shame people who develop influence for one thing think that makes them an authority on everything.

This is particularly ironic given the number of political and military experts who have posted in this thread.


Oh...

[Screwdriver]

The point is, you're not the Premier any more, nobody's interested in listening to your she-it and you have to try really fecking hard to squeak above the parapet. Blair has, but let's be honest, our interest in him is one of curiosity as he doesn't wield any power - he's not being silenced and yes he doesn't have the decency to feck right off (possibly because he wasn't -that- old when he moved on).

Getting back to Trump, CNN enjoyed ripping the piss out of him through every moment of his sad tenure. Ever since he shut up about his election defeat they couldn't have given a toss, there's no reason to show him humiliating himself every day as an -ex- president.

You see that's the point. I couldn't care less what Trump has to say about current events, as you say, he is no longer in power.

He never was really in power. He was constantly being hounded by partisan apparatchiks sponsored by the real power behind the throne. He was upsetting the gravy train. It is quite an extraordinary web of deceit and you can't have some whistle blower come in and upset the natural order.

Is no one even slightly suspicious that Trump was so vilified to the extent of being impeached for daring to ask Zelenskyy wtf the Biden mafia had been up to in Ukraine. Why "unbeknown" to the then V.P. his drug addict son was being paid MILLIONS by a corrupt oil and gas company (Burisma). That story was completely covered up, hidden and even denied prior to the election. It is only now being slowly drip fed into the public conscience as the sheer weight of truth trickles through the barrier of lies which protect Biden and the rest of the swamp creatures who are bleeding America dry.

CNN weren't "enjoying ripping the piss", they were literally being paid to obfuscate.

It is a matter of fact that the former president has been censored, silenced and shadow banned from every single big tech corporate monster and the privately owned mainstream media. THAT is the issue which concerns me, not the individual, nor what he might have to say but the fact that it is clearly so important to stop him from being heard.

[Mussels]

I agree that censorship in the west is an issue and Meta allowing death threats against Putin was hypoctitical.
That will come back and bite Meta in future legislation plans and ranting (that's what it looks like) about Trump's stolen election has little to do with the current war in Ukraine.

[Screwdriver]

It is a shame people who develop influence for one thing think that makes them an authority on everything.

This is particularly ironic given the number of political and military experts who have posted in this thread.

Oh...

I don't think there are any actual influencers here. People who have garnered so much fame that whatever (I mean literally whatever) these public figures say will be seen by millions. Google and FaceBook et. al. spotted this some time ago. As did Amazon, Apple, Twitter etc. etc. ad infinitum.

People are like sheep, you can herd them and if you push them hard enough and long enough in a consistent direction with fearmongering, state sponsored "factcheckers" and newspeak, the tidal wave of opinion becomes irresistible. Any hard nuggets of contrary "opinion" can just be weeded out, silenced and censored with a smear campaign thrown in for good measure. Back in the day when good old Joe Biden was rubbing shoulders with the KKK you'd have to wear a bag over your head with pitchforks and rope in hand to be classed as "racist". Now all you have to do is park your truck on a bridge or criticise the narrative we're all being spoon fed.

I personally don't care what Gary Lineker "thinks" about the situation in Syria any more than I would believe a single word from some teenage bimbo being paid by the Biden corporation to explain why gas prices and rampant inflation are not his fault.

Yes I have an opinion of my own and no, it does not line up with the media narrative. I am under no illusion that my views are held in any high regard, in fact rather than even bother to address the warning signs which George Orwell foresaw decades ago, much easier to just call me a "nutter". Maybe I should be silenced though, you know just in case...

[irie]

Ignore me too, no probs. It's what you do anyway with anyone who disagrees with you or, perish the thought, knows more than you about anything!

"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people." - Giordano Bruno

Bruno was burnt at the stake in 1600 by the Catholic Church. You won't know what for of course, so I'll help you out. He was executed mainly because of his belief in cosmic pluralism engendered by his own and others observation of the cosmos, and he refused to recant. Very much like your own views, much akin to religious beliefs, which incorporate non-objective and unverifiable conspiracy theories from which you have created a self-consistent but false view of the world.

The above also applies to you Screwdriver.

Given that there is no such thing as completely unbiased reporting, it is difficult to see how you can both assert that you know "the truth" which others can not see. You are both saying that you can deduce what others can not. Bluntly, you are deluding yourselves that you know better than others.

Iccy and Screwdriver joined at the hip!

It is a shame people who develop influence for one thing think that makes them an authority on everything.

This is particularly ironic given the number of political and military experts who have posted in this thread.

Oh...

I don't think there are any actual influencers here. People who have garnered so much fame that whatever (I mean literally whatever) these public figures say will be seen by millions. Google and FaceBook et. al. spotted this some time ago. As did Amazon, Apple, Twitter etc. etc. ad infinitum.

People are like sheep, you can herd them and if you push them hard enough and long enough in a consistent direction with fearmongering, state sponsored "factcheckers" and newspeak, the tidal wave of opinion becomes irresistible. Any hard nuggets of contrary "opinion" can just be weeded out, silenced and censored with a smear campaign thrown in for good measure. Back in the day when good old Joe Biden was rubbing shoulders with the KKK you'd have to wear a bag over your head with pitchforks and rope in hand to be classed as "racist". Now all you have to do is park your truck on a bridge or criticise the narrative we're all being spoon fed.

I personally don't care what Gary Lineker "thinks" about the situation in Syria any more than I would believe a single word from some teenage bimbo being paid by the Biden corporation to explain why gas prices and rampant inflation are not his fault.

Yes I have an opinion of my own and no, it does not line up with the media narrative. I am under no illusion that my views are held in any high regard, in fact rather than even bother to address the warning signs which George Orwell foresaw decades ago, much easier to just call me a "nutter". Maybe I should be silenced though, you know just in case...

[Screwdriver]

The above also applies to you Screwdriver.

Given that there is no such thing as completely unbiased reporting, it is difficult to see how you can both assert that you know "the truth" which others can not see. You are both saying that you can deduce what others can not. Bluntly, you are deluding yourselves that you know better than others.

Iccy and Screwdriver joined at the hip!

Hmm. I thought I was being quite careful NOT to claim my self declared opinions represent "the truth". In fact, if you read the above, in my defence, I explicitly state that these are my opinions which I further "admit" do not line up with the media narrative or spin as we used to call it.

Ironically however, the thrust of my argument is not that "my truth is better than your truth" but that any discussion which dares to appear contrary to this narrative will be shut down or the dissenting speaker derided for being a fool.

You know, exactly what you're attempting to do here.

[Horse]

Ironically however, the thrust of my argument is not that "my truth is better than your truth" but that any discussion which dares to appear contrary to this narrative will be shut down or the dissenting speaker derided for being a fool.

I have, on occasion, changed my views based on what has been posted on the board.

However much I might not agree with alternative views, if they are presented and justified, then they deserve to be considered.

However, a recent series of 'justifications' (whatever the actual facts) (not by you) went:
- don't believe everything you read, you're looking at the wrong sources
When asked where to look instead, the response was
- you wouldn't see it anyway without my life experiences

Followed soon after by posting of a BBC link as supporting evidence.

The first two points might be both correct, but a changing narrative doesn't support believing the views expressed.

[Screwdriver]

However, a recent series of 'justifications' (whatever the actual facts) (not by you) went...

So you are replying to a comment I made because of "something else" that "someone else" said?

[DefTrap]

CNN weren't "enjoying ripping the piss", they were literally being paid to obfuscate.

It is a matter of fact that the former president has been censored, silenced and shadow banned from every single big tech corporate monster and the privately owned mainstream media. THAT is the issue which concerns me, not the individual, nor what he might have to say but the fact that it is clearly so important to stop him from being heard.

CNN weren't trying to obfuscate anything, they showed trump make a fool of himself repeatedly and unedited live from the white house. It was hilarious.

I'm not seeing what he's being censored on and I'm amazed you conspiracy wallers didn't make more of a fuss about it when he was in power. Now he's an ex president why should anyone care if you think he's still being censored? It must hurt going from being the centre of attention to being an irrelevance

[Screwdriver]

CNN weren't "enjoying ripping the piss", they were literally being paid to obfuscate.

It is a matter of fact that the former president has been censored, silenced and shadow banned from every single big tech corporate monster and the privately owned mainstream media. THAT is the issue which concerns me, not the individual, nor what he might have to say but the fact that it is clearly so important to stop him from being heard.

CNN weren't trying to obfuscate anything, they showed trump make a fool of himself repeatedly and unedited live from the white house. It was hilarious.

I'm not seeing what he's being censored on and I'm amazed you conspiracy wallers didn't make more of a fuss about it when he was in power. Now he's an ex president why should anyone care if you think he's still being censored? It must hurt going from being the centre of attention to being an irrelevance

Finally we agree! It WAS hilarious. I remember the first coveefee Twitter which was an absolute first for a sitting president. He was raw, he was entertaining and he was an asshole.

Again, I agree, you are not seeing where he is being censored. No one is...

[mangocrazy]

So aside from the vitriol and character assassination, what exactly is it in Arnie's message that you disagree with? I cannot disagree with a single word he said. Now I realise that in your eyes that makes me a deluded running dog of the capitalist ubermasters, but I completely fail to see why his message prompted such a foaming rant from you.

A crowd mobbed the senate, they broke into a building to protest against a demonstrably unfair election (don't get me started). As such yes, they should be prosecuted to the last letter of the law, have the book thrown at them.

But that didn't happen. Not a single one has been charged with "insurrection". Instead, they were rounded up and thrown in jail where they still reside.

The whole thing stinks. This inexplicable "insurrection" is the pretext by which the entire establishment, government, big tech, mainstream media maintain complete censorship of the previous president of the USA. To be fair, it is pretty impressive to be able to silence such a popular ex-president. Impressive and yet at the same time, an indictment of the authoritarian regime the democratic party have carved out for themselves.

They are destroying America while lining their own pockets. A year ago people were asking what on earth has that got to do with us here in the UK. Yeah, well, look around. Lap dogs like our fat friend Arnie are responsible for this mess. And yes, in my opinion, that includes Putins decision to invade Ukraine. America is weak and that does not bode well for the Western world.

So because Arnie mentioned the term 'insurrection' - clearly a trigger word for you - as a by-the-by comment, you totally ignore the main thrust of his message which was to try and talk directly to the Russian people about the Ukraine invasion?

I would describe this as deliberately missing the point.

[DefTrap]

Finally we agree! It WAS hilarious. I remember the first coveefee Twitter which was an absolute first for a sitting president. He was raw, he was entertaining and he was an asshole.

Again, I agree, you are not seeing where he is being censored. No one is...

If his Twitter account is an example of censorship, he did it to himself.

I'm not sure raw, entertaining and asshole should be the primary prerequisites for presidency. In a two party system I'm not surprised that could be a winning formula though, shades of Boris innit?

[Yambo]

Again, I agree, you are not seeing where he is being censored. No one is...

It is entirely possible then, that he is not being censored.

[Screwdriver]

Again, I agree, you are not seeing where he is being censored. No one is...

It is entirely possible then, that he is not being censored.

So this is fake news? From Twitter??

https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/c ... suspension

...and July 2021

"Former president Donald Trump is suing Facebook, Twitter and Google’s YouTube, as well as their respective chief executives, in lawsuits alleging “unlawful censorship” of Americans.

Trump on Wednesday said he would lead class actions against chief executives Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey and Sundar Pichai, as well their Big Tech platforms."


From: https://www.ft.com/content/86c98f3b-7d2 ... b4b0839c66

Naturally, timing is a key element here. All you have to do is pick and choose exactly when and for what you decide to suspend, hide or delete a comment. Once the "danger" is past, just switch it back on like nothing happened.

Once Google has decided to censor your output, anything you want to post on the web can easily be "shadow banned". A sneaky move that doesn't even tell you it's not showing you something which actually might turn up several pages beyond where any right minded person would even bother to scroll. Past the Iranian regimes live commentaries, way beyond Saudi owned UK media propaganda, look see, it's not banned, we just stuck it where you can't find it...

FWIW, this is actually the very first time I have even tried to find Trump related stuff. I don't actually care to hear what he has to say, I'm more concerned that big tech has so much power it can "ban" the most powerful man on the planet at their whim.

As one senator famously quipped to Zuckerberg, "who the hell voted for you"

[slowsider]

Again, I agree, you are not seeing where he is being censored. No one is...

It is entirely possible then, that he is not being censored.

So this is fake news? From Twitter??

https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/c ... suspension

...and July 2021

"Former president Donald Trump is suing Facebook, Twitter and Google’s YouTube, as well as their respective chief executives, in lawsuits alleging “unlawful censorship” of Americans.

Trump on Wednesday said he would lead class actions against chief executives Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey and Sundar Pichai, as well their Big Tech platforms."


From: https://www.ft.com/content/86c98f3b-7d2 ... b4b0839c66

Naturally, timing is a key element here. All you have to do is pick and choose exactly when and for what you decide to suspend, hide or delete a comment. Once the "danger" is past, just switch it back on like nothing happened.

Once Google has decided to censor your output, anything you want to post on the web can easily be "shadow banned". A sneaky move that doesn't even tell you it's not showing you something which actually might turn up several pages beyond where any right minded person would even bother to scroll. Past the Iranian regimes live commentaries, way beyond Saudi owned UK media propaganda, look see, it's not banned, we just stuck it where you can't find it...

FWIW, this is actually the very first time I have even tried to find Trump related stuff. I don't actually care to hear what he has to say, I'm more concerned that big tech has so much power it can "ban" the most powerful man on the planet at their whim.

I presume you are at least as concerned that big tech made him the most powerful man on the planet in the first place.

[Yambo]

Again, I agree, you are not seeing where he is being censored. No one is...

It is entirely possible then, that he is not being censored.

So this is fake news? From Twitter??

https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/c ... suspension

...and July 2021

"Former president Donald Trump is suing Facebook, Twitter and Google’s YouTube, as well as their respective chief executives, in lawsuits alleging “unlawful censorship” of Americans.

Trump on Wednesday said he would lead class actions against chief executives Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey and Sundar Pichai, as well their Big Tech platforms."


From: https://www.ft.com/content/86c98f3b-7d2 ... b4b0839c66

Naturally, timing is a key element here. All you have to do is pick and choose exactly when and for what you decide to suspend, hide or delete a comment. Once the "danger" is past, just switch it back on like nothing happened.

Once Google has decided to censor your output, anything you want to post on the web can easily be "shadow banned". A sneaky move that doesn't even tell you it's not showing you something which actually might turn up several pages beyond where any right minded person would even bother to scroll. Past the Iranian regimes live commentaries, way beyond Saudi owned UK media propaganda, look see, it's not banned, we just stuck it where you can't find it...

FWIW, this is actually the very first time I have even tried to find Trump related stuff. I don't actually care to hear what he has to say, I'm more concerned that big tech has so much power it can "ban" the most powerful man on the planet at their whim.

As one senator famously quipped to Zuckerberg, "who the hell voted for you"

In your second (FT) link why have the FT put the word 'censorship' in inverted commas?

Is it because it may not be censorship but simply that a the owner of facebook doesn't want Trump as a member of his facebook platform. You know, like a publican putting his pub out of bounds to soldiers.