Why do so many DUers trust the Russian Times?

[SkyDaddy7]

It concerns me when I see so many on DU trust the reporting the Russian Times does...I also wonder how many know there is not a free press in Russia & all RT is is a mouth piece for the Kremlin...And they give voice to delusional conspiracy theories like the ones Alex Jones spreads.

Just thought I would put this out there.

[RegieRocker]

1. and ours and other MSM's are any different?

[SkyDaddy7]

12. UH yes! It might not be what we want it to be...

But our government is not killing reporters to force ONLY positive coverage of Obama! I wanted to laugh at what you said but the sad fact is you probably believe it.

WOW?!?!?

[RegieRocker]

15. Back at ya!

[freshwest]

21. I have a question

You signature indicates Iranians need to be liberated.

Who do you think is best suited for the job?

[fascisthunter]

24. good catch

[SkyDaddy7]

59. The Iranian People just as my signature suggest...

And you?

[jotsy]

51. Wow...lot a that going around.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13qWADMfQnQ>

Now before you go asking why this isn't MSM linked, I entered MSNBC in the google search, nothing came up. That I guess is one answer to your original question.

[Ozymanithrax]

2. In Russia, the Press falls under government control...

Here, the Press has, primarily, corporate masters.

Many people turst the Russian government more than international corporations.

[RegieRocker]

16. The corporations control our government, the corporations

own the media, so.......

[Ozymanithrax]

19. I don't agree...

Corpoartions have an influence on our government that is out of proportion, but to say the control it is inaccurate, in my opinion.

Corporations and government arn't the same thing.

[RegieRocker]

26. The US government is a corporation.

[Ozymanithrax]

27. See U.S. Constitution.... n/t

[RegieRocker]

38. Don't need to review the Constitution. Review this

Cornwall Law University School
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/usc_sec_28_00003002----000-.html

TITLE 28 > PART VI > CHAPTER 176 > SUBCHAPTER A > § 3002
Prev | Next
§ 3002. Definitions
How Current is This?
As used in this chapter:
(1) “Counsel for the United States” means—
(A) a United States attorney, an assistant United States attorney designated to act on behalf of the United States attorney, or an attorney with the United States Department of Justice or with a Federal agency who has litigation authority; and
(B) any private attorney authorized by contract made in accordance with section 3718 of title 31 to conduct litigation for collection of debts on behalf of the United States.
(2) “Court” means any court created by the Congress of the United States, excluding the United States Tax Court.
(3) “Debt” means—
(A) an amount that is owing to the United States on account of a direct loan, or loan insured or guaranteed, by the United States; or
(B) an amount that is owing to the United States on account of a fee, duty, lease, rent, service, sale of real or personal property, overpayment, fine, assessment, penalty, restitution, damages, interest, tax, bail bond forfeiture, reimbursement, recovery of a cost incurred by the United States, or other source of indebtedness to the United States, but that is not owing under the terms of a contract originally entered into by only persons other than the United States;
and includes any amount owing to the United States for the benefit of an Indian tribe or individual Indian, but excludes any amount to which the United States is entitled under section 3011 (a).
(4) “Debtor” means a person who is liable for a debt or against whom there is a claim for a debt.
(5) “Disposable earnings” means that part of earnings remaining after all deductions required by law have been withheld.
(6) “Earnings” means compensation paid or payable for personal services, whether denominated as wages, salary, commission, bonus, or otherwise, and includes periodic payments pursuant to a pension or retirement program.
(7) “Garnishee” means a person (other than the debtor) who has, or is reasonably thought to have, possession, custody, or control of any property in which the debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest, including any obligation due the debtor or to become due the debtor, and against whom a garnishment under section 3104 or 3205 is issued by a court.
(8) “Judgment” means a judgment, order, or decree entered in favor of the United States in a court and arising from a civil or criminal proceeding regarding a debt.
(9) “Nonexempt disposable earnings” means 25 percent of disposable earnings, subject to section 303 of the Consumer Credit Protection Act.
(10) “Person” includes a natural person (including an individual Indian), a corporation, a partnership, an unincorporated association, a trust, or an estate, or any other public or private entity, including a State or local government or an Indian tribe.
(11) “Prejudgment remedy” means the remedy of attachment, receivership, garnishment, or sequestration authorized by this chapter to be granted before judgment on the merits of a claim for a debt.
(12) “Property” includes any present or future interest, whether legal or equitable, in real, personal (including choses in action), or mixed property, tangible or intangible, vested or contingent, wherever located and however held (including community property and property held in trust (including spendthrift and pension trusts)), but excludes—
(A) property held in trust by the United States for the benefit of an Indian tribe or individual Indian; and
(B) Indian lands subject to restrictions against alienation imposed by the United States.
(13) “Security agreement” means an agreement that creates or provides for a lien.
(14) “State” means any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the United States.
(15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States.
(16) “United States marshal” means a United States marshal, a deputy marshal, or an official of the United States Marshals Service designated under section 564.

So many things under the Federal Government are corporations.

So the Fed's dna is 90% corporation and 10 % not. Yea that makes it not a corporation.

[Jackpine Radical]

32. Thanks, Regie.

Saved me the bother of typing more or less the same thing.

[fascisthunter]

3. should we turn on Fox Newz?

that is, fascist News

[scarletwoman]

4. I've never heard of the "Russian Times". What are you talking about? (nt)

[IDemo]

5. I've seen no posters referencing the "Russian Times"

I do frequently check in on China Daily, though. Al Jazeera as well.

[KG]

6. in America, you read Russian Times; in Russia, Russian Times reads you.

[John Q. Citizen]

10. +1

[Starry Messenger]

7. Why wouldn't they have a "free press"?

It's probably just as "free" as ours. :shrug:

[MrMickeysMom]

8. What about this RT?

http://www.articleslounge.com/live-tv-channels/watch-live-high-quality-streaming-rt-english-news-tv-online-free/

[MrMickeysMom]

13. What about this excellent show from RT?

http://maxkeiser.com/

I don't see that they carry RT on my cable line up, but at least I can check out some of the shows through the internet.

[John Q. Citizen]

9. Because the vast majority of us are Latvians? No, my friend, that's just a coincidence.

But seriously, this belongs in the lounge

[stevedeshazer]

11. That's funny. I've never heard of it.

:shrug:

[Agony]

14. Do you mean RussiaToday?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NSL4CAePWQ

[MrMickeysMom]

20. I think that's what he meant...

I don't see many of the same kinds of shows on my cable channels.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BlueCaliDem]

18. This is the first time I've heard about "The Russian Times". eom

[Warren Stupidity]

36. No 'we' all read and quote it avidly here.

But we keep it on the DL.

[MrMickeysMom]

22. Hey....

Where'd ya go?

[dennis4868]

23. What did the Russian Times say?

If it was an anti Obama article many people here will definitely believe it....

[peacetalksforall]

28. No, not a newspaper. It is RT TV. Videos are provided within du as the

links provided because of what is being said by a guest or host. They talk straight. Kind of spin-less if you're looking for facts. There is a lesson here for someone. I posted above that I have heard nothing that set off my credibility alarm the way cnn or fox or cnbc ABC etc, can set it off. So far, so good. I haven't had that much experience, but they get to the point and the issues they cover are prescient.

[peacetalksforall]

25. I have a very sensitive credibility alarm. I haven't watched anything

in the dozen or so videos that that set off the alarm - NONE!

When I watch cororate tv, the alarm goes off within 5 minutes or less.

Take a look at wiki -

"In the US, it is available to digital customers of Time Warner Cable of New York and New Jersey, Channel 135.<19> Portions of RT are shown on MHz Worldview. Since MHZ Worldview is shown as a digital subchannel for some PBS stations (in addition to being available on DirecTV), this makes RT available on digital terrestrial television in the United States. MHz Networks, which owns MHZ Worldview, does a complete simulcast of RT on one of the digital subchannels of WNVC, one of the two stations it owns in Northern Virginia.

In January 2010, RT became available in major cities in Western Canada through Shaw Cable. It started being available a couple of months earlier in major cities in Eastern Canada through Rogers Cable."

Did you catch Time Warner? A good deal for Time Warner? - or is Time Warner also keeping them close for espionage purposes?

"History
RT was launched as Russia Today by an autonomous non-profit organization in 2005. However, much of the funding to this organization, ANO TV-Novosti, is injected from the Russian Federal Budget (2.4 Billion Rubles in 2007).<5> In 2007, RT’s monthly audience share exceeded that of CNN and Bloomberg TV among NTV-PLUS satellite subscribers in Moscow. In August 2007, RT was the first channel in television history to report live from the North Pole. In 2008, RT’s average monthly reach in Russia indicated a growth rate of 82% within just six months. Over the same period, the channel’s average daily reach grew by 46%. In the same year, the monthly audience among those who have access to or are aware of RT’s broadcasts on Time Warner Cable in NYC exceeded that of BBC America by 11%. The daily audience of RT exceeds that of Deutsche Welle tenfold, within the same network.<6>

"RT America
Based in RT's Washington, DC Bureau, RT America also has studios in New York, Miami and Los Angeles. RT America's broadcast operations began in January 2010. Currently the network only broadcasts in the afternoon and evening. RT America focuses on covering the Americas from an international and Russian perspective.<8>"

[RKP5637]

39. I watch RT here occasionally, as well as Al Jazeera via Roku.com on cable via

TV. Their coverage seems fair to me. I don't find anything outrageous, it's generally concise, to the point and well done IMO.

[Warpy]

29. It's not like the performance of our own media have been all that reliable

and we seem to have come to a point where they're equivalent with the Russian Times. In any case, I'd say most of us trust, but try to verify, meaning the trust is sharply limited.

[baldguy]

30. Call me when they start distorting the news.

[mmonk]

31. Because we're all commies?

I gather you mean Russia Today or RTAmerica? They have journalists from here (the US) and studios here for broadcasting (like BBC America).

[Warren Stupidity]

that would be red baiting for 500 Alex

[Octafish]

33. It's more trustworthy than Roger Ailes.

Same with the rest of Corporate McPravda.

[1badjedi]

34. Funny that you mention AJ

I used to browse his sites once upon a time. I knew the majority of stuff there was off the wall and some of his followers were off their rockers, but I felt the need to keep track of things that were not being said elsewhere. Then obama started campaigning for president. It didn't take long for me to start seeing all this wild stuff about obama being an elitist and how he had plans not to fix america but destroy it. I stopped reading then because I got wrapped up in the good feeling of the hope and change campaign. Now the funny part is, dark comedy for sure, there were things he was right about. Not all but enough that I should have listened when I was told. Had I listened I surely wouldn't be feeling so duped today. I guess it was easier for me to mock that which I would not believe than to do some research and find out why he was saying those things at all.

I'll leave it at that because I know that name and his beliefs are not acceptable around here. But after 2 years of obama's shenanigans I am back to browsing.

[RKP5637]

41. I listen AJ sometimes. I don't find all he says off the wall either. Sometimes it's

a little edgy, but sometimes I think he's right on track. Given the way the world is today I think one needs lots of news sources.

[1badjedi]

44. It's better to listen

and think about what is being said than to ignore it completely. At least I have finally come to that conclusion after dismissing information I didn't agree with or believe for most of my life. It's better to know of something and find it to be wrong than to not know and have a house fall on ya.

[RKP5637]

46. Yep!!! Exactly!!! n/t

[quinnox]

35. Never heard of them, but are Fox news and Whitehouse.gov any better?

I mean, some DUers on "our" side seem to treat sources like Whitehouse.gov as gospel, while the other side treats what Fox news says as the real truth.

Whats the difference between that and what you say the Russian Times does?

[WilliamPitt]

37. Chris Hedges used to write for them

If memory serves.

Reason enough.

[scarletwoman]

40. Um, Chris FLOYD used to write for the MOSCOW Times.

Methinks your memory ain't serving too well.

[WilliamPitt]

45. Thank you.

You are quite correct.

[scarletwoman]

47. Please allow me to apologize for being rather snarky.

I wanted to edit my post after I wrote it, but I thought it would be dishonest to do so, in case you'd already seen it, (my dear ;) ).

What I wished I had said instead was simply: "Is that who you mean?"

Again, sorry for being unnecessarily snarky.

sw

[WilliamPitt]

55. The "my dear" thing

got put in automatically by Safari. D'oh.

:hug:

[scarletwoman]

56. Must be the Rhett Butler version of Safari.

:D

[WilliamPitt]

57. Derp.

:P

:hug:

[peace13]

42. IMO US 'news' is at the bottom of the barrel. n/t

[GSLevel9]

43. most RUSSIANS don't trust the RT, lol... nt

[EFerrari]

48. Sometimes media outlets are only screwy in one direction.

The San Francisco Chronicle is pretty liberal on national stuff for example, but the local stuff is reported and editorialized much more conservatively.

[jotsy]

49. Because Thom Hartmann has earned my trust.

Many venues for news is out there, RT is not the Russian Times, I believe it stands for Russia Today. And in the case of Mr. Hartmann's show, The Big Picture, it's actually referred to as RT America. I find humor in the irony of labeling in this instance, tyvm.

<http://www.youtube.com/user/TheBigPictureRT>

[mmonk]

50. Correct.

I too look for his work there as well.

[inna]

52. lol, what nonsense. "a mouth piece for the Kremlin", "delusional conspiracy theories" - lol,

where do you even get these ideas?

Btw, I presume you're referring to "Russia Today" (better known as RT), I've never heard of "the Russian Times".

RT is excellent and it's probably 100 times more open and trustworthy than any of our mainstream corporate propaganda channels.

But to each their own, I guess. :shrug:


http://www.youtube.com/user/TheBigPictureRT#p/u/5/IHOHEOeejos

[Bluebear]

53. This is the first time I have heard of "Russian Times", let alone "so many DUers" trusting them.

[johnlucas]

54. I guess it's because they can't trust the New York Times

Can't really trust any media that goes on word alone.
The Wikileaks way is the future.
And even THEN don't take what you see as the gospel.

John Lucas

[Starry Messenger]

58. Did the OP ever come back?

I wanted to know more about the Capitalist menace of the non-commie Russkies. :shrug:

[rucky]

60. By "so many" do you mean 2 or 3?