its not a question of IF but WHEN. The old KGB is back in charge via Putin and only NATO and the USA stand in the way with a russian invasion of Eastern Europe.

I recall when Reagan was inaugurated that the iranians released their american hostages the moment he was sworn in. They had the measure of Carter, but not Reagan. When Trump gets into power, Putin will start looking at when to invade. And given that King Trump seems to think that the President gets weekends off - he is not working on saturday or sunday - It is distinctly possible he will start the invasion tomorrow... when NO ONE is in charge.

AuntieM wrote on Jan 20^th, 2017 at 8:33am:


I wish that instead of quoting Trtump verbatim, the journos could just turn it into proper speech. The man seems incapable of communicating succintly and articulately.

I still go for my prediction of a Russian Invasion. Putin and Trump are good mates. His Secretary of State has major business interest in Russia and Trump hates NATO.  Trump might as well ring up Putin and INVITE him to invade.

Marla wrote on Jan 20^th, 2017 at 8:51am:


so out with the conspiracy theories... Well you will be at home with Donald. He is a agreat fan - and beleiver - in conspiracy theories. Vaccines, 911, Birther and probably moon-landings and perhaps even a flat-earther.

Longy...will you leave the forum as f your dud prediction is wrong??? 😄

Marla wrote on Jan 20^th, 2017 at 8:58am:


You might try a more cogent and detailed argument that that single sentence.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2017 at 9:02am:



Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,


No.

Marla wrote on Jan 20^th, 2017 at 9:03am:


That's as good a surrender as it gets. If you cant make an argument in support of your claim then dont make the claim in the first place.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2017 at 8:50am:


I'm one of the 94% of Americans who don't trust the media. I would be absolutely delighted if the pundits and infotainment celebrities were sacked and replaced with transcriptionists.

I don't want idiots "interpreting" my politicians. I'm just fine with hearing from the horses asses, directly.

AuntieM wrote on Jan 20^th, 2017 at 10:57am:


I would agree that we could do with less opinion and more hard-cold fact. But how does that translate to being 'untrustworthy'?   My concern is that while fake news has suddenly become a serious problem, an even bigger problem is that a lot of people inherently trust unreliable sources and news items that are clearly false. They do this because they don't 'trust' the main stream media.

So instead of chosing to use their brains and keep their minds open when reading the media, they choose to throw it all away and replace it with utter garbage and clear lies all because it suits their beliefs.

Some fool shoots up a restaurant because he read that it was being used as a front for Clintons child-sex ring. How many other more ons believed it and just didnt act.  the entire Trump campaign was founded on lies and fake news and 60million people swallowed it hook line and sinker.

Do I trust the media to be unbiased? absolutely not. Do I beleive they lie? no i dont. Do I trust infowars? not for a moment. Do they lie? only every time they publish

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2017 at 12:29pm:




Could not have said it any better myself.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 20^th, 2017 at 12:31pm:



Thanks bojack.  I am actually deeply concerned that there are growing numbers of people who happily refute anything in the real media while gullibly swallowing any garbage they read on the internet. How do you ever discuss and debate a question with anyone if the source of information is limited to 'what I read on the internet'.

AuntieM wrote on Jan 20^th, 2017 at 12:42pm:



If you want to prove me wrong then make an actual case with actual facts. But no, you wont. You will just jump up and down and scream louder hoping that the volume of your rant will somehow make your case proven.

ONE FACT debunks a thousand beliefs. Or at least it used to. Now, in the mind of the ignorant and gullible, ONE BELIEF trumps any fact. And yes, the pun was deliberate.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2017 at 12:44pm:



There are a range of websites that when quoted I instantly now its BS, because the site is renowned for pedlling that nonsense. Infowars is one, natural news is another.

AuntieM wrote on Jan 20^th, 2017 at 12:48pm:



Oh, it is definitely YOUR problem. If you cannot support your beliefs without at least some evidence then you are essentially confirming that it is bogus.  Why wont you at least try and support your beleif? All you have done is make a single sentence statement and then think that it is all you have to say for it to be accepted as truth. You have no idea!

When will Russia invade Eastern Europe? Never if it doesn't fall to Islam.

Former Newspaper Editor Who Exposed CIA Found Dead

Posted on January 15, 2017 by Baxter Dmitry in News, World // 42 Comments
Dr Udo Ulfkotte, the former German newspaper editor whose bestselling book exposed how the CIA controls German media, has been found dead.
   
Dr Udo Ulfkotte, the former German newspaper editor whose bestselling book exposed how the CIA controls German media, has been found dead. He was 56.



Ulfkotte was an editor at Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, one of the largest newspapers in Germany, when he published Bought Journalists, the bestselling book that cost him his job and perhaps his life.

German media, who were banned from reporting on his work in recent years, are reporting he died of “heart failure”.

Acknowledging that his life was under threat, Ulfkotte explained that he was in a better position than most journalists to expose the truth because he didn’t have any children who could be threatened.

Speaking to the Russian newspaper Russian Insider, Ulkfotte said: “When I told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (Ulfkotte’s newspaper) that I would publish the book, their lawyers sent me a letter threatening with all legal consequences if I would publish any names or secrets – but I don’t mind. You see, I don’t have children to take care of.“

His fears for a war in Europe, lead him to his decision to tell the truth about corporate media being controlled by intelligence services on behalf of the financial class.

“I’ve been a journalist for about 25 years, and I’ve been educated to lie, to betray, and not to tell the truth to the public,” Ulfkotte told Russia Today. “I was supported by the Central Intelligence Agency, the CIA. Why? Because I am pro-American.”


“The German and American media tries to bring war to the people in Europe, to bring war to Russia. This is a point of no return, and I am going to stand up and say… it is not right what I have done in the past, to manipulate people, to make propaganda against Russia.”

Ulfkotte said most corporate media journalists in the United States and Europe are “so-called non-official cover,” meaning that they work for an intelligence agency. “I think it is especially the case with British journalists, because they have a much closer relationship. It is especially the case with Israeli journalists. Of course with French journalists. … It is the case for Australians, [with] journalists from New Zealand, from Taiwan, well, there is many countries,” he said.



Ulfkotte’s book Bought Journalists became a bestseller in Germany but, in a bizarre twist which Ulfkotte says characterizes the disconnect caused by CIA control of the western media, the book cannot be reported on by the German press.

Ulfkotte said: “No German mainstream journalist is allowed to report about [my] book. Otherwise he or she will be sacked. So we have a bestseller now that no German journalist is allowed to write or talk about.”

Among the stories Ulfkotte says he was ordered by the CIA to plant in his newspaper was a fake story that Libyan President Moammar Gaddafi was building poison gas factories in 2011.

“The German and American media tries to bring war to the people in Europe, to bring war to Russia,” he told RT.

“This is a point of no return, and I am going to stand up and say … it is not right what I have done in the past, to manipulate people, to make propaganda against Russia, and it is not right what my colleagues do, and have done in the past, because they are bribed to betray the people not only in Germany, all over Europe. … I am very fearful of a new war in Europe, and I don’t like to have this situation again, because war is never coming from itself, there is always people who push for war, and this is not only politicians, it is journalists too. … We have betrayed our readers, just to push for war. … I don’t want this anymore; I’m fed up with this propaganda. We live in a banana republic, and not in a democratic country where we have press freedom.”

http://yournewswire.com/german-newspaper-editor-exposed-cia-dead/

Liars don't care. Relax.

Says the man who uses "Comedy Central" as his news source and disparages transcripts of interviews from The Times.

Right.

Goodnight, Gracie.

I don't see why so many Westerners buy Ukraine's claim to the Crimea. Does anyone believe the Charge of the Light Brigade was made against Ukraine troops? The war was an invasion of Russia by the Anglo-French-Turks. The Crimea was only Ukraine during the late Soviet period because Khrushchev was Ukrainian. So the Russians lost their naval base when the USSR folded. It was only a matter of time before they wanted it back.

But to return to the "Invasion of Eastern Europe." What would be the strategic advantage? Access to the Baltic is offset by the bottleneck in the Danish Straits, and Russia already has access to the Atlantic. Poland and the Czech republic are not exactly plums of the world economy, and even if they increased a buffer zone, it would be at one hell of a price. This is not 1940, when a field campaign could win a war. Russian diplomacy has never had the John Wayne swagger/ultimatum style of the US and NATO. I suspect they are far more adept at using other people to achieve their aims. Russia has completely compromised US policy in the Middle East at very little cost. That is not Obama's fault, it is the conceit Of American foreign policy and the pathetic public notion that world strategy is about good guys and bad guys. 

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2017 at 1:41pm:


Yes, warm water ports are desirable, but I thought we were talking about the invasion of Eastern Europe. Yes, Russia is expansionist, but I don't see anything in my post that indicates otherwise.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 21^st, 2017 at 1:41pm:


Is Russia expansionist?
The truth is Russia is contractionary. Its now about 30% smaller than it was a 100 years ago.
A warm water port - yes that was the reason given by the Western press for Russia's invasion of Afghanistan in the 80's.
Another BS story.
You are full of sh*t longweekend. Go away and never come back.

Richdude wrote on Jan 21^st, 2017 at 2:54pm:


I don't remember that being the case (apart from the fact that Af-stan is not even close to the sea) I recall that Soviet intervention was to prop up the Marxist government in Kabul, which was just a tiny bunch of intellectuals who had been to the West.

That was an interesting situation, because it suggested what would happen if a Red Chinese domino effect had come up against the Islamic Republics of Malayasia and Indonesia before it got to Australia. So, Phuc-u Bob Menzies and Harold (All the way with LBJ) Holt.