Jump to content

GW Hayduke

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1686
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by GW Hayduke

  1. 8 hours ago, Hook1997 said:

    or you would get called names by both.  You can post a view you express on one topic and they know nothing about what you think on other topics and everyone who doesn’t agree with will call you a nazi, socialist, ect 

    Holy fucking shit. My grandpa served during WWII and was a top notch man's man.  Dude built his house with his own hands.  He passed what he knew down to his grandkids. He was a true reflection of one of our greatest generations.  I am so fucking glad he is no longer around to see how "conservative" Americans have turned into such gaping pussies.  You are concerned about being called names?  You are concerned about being misunderstood?  Are you fucking for real?  Please tell me you are being sarcastic and just trolling. Please!  And people are upvoting your weakass shit.

    What the fuck is wrong with you people?  Seriously. Where did all of this victimhood come from?  Do you ever look in the mirror and think to yourself, "Oh my god! I am giant pussy!"  Have you ever pondered on why you turned out this way?  Was it the way you were raised?  Did mommy tell you that you were always right? Is it the cable news show you watch nightly?  Maybe the social media you consume?  Whatever happened, please share so we can dissect and understand so that our children don't turn into giant gaping pussies.  

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Like 2
  2. 3 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

    https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4104828

    This is where some of this might be going.  NIH/Fauci funded EcoHealth(middle man) which it appears may have been using those funds to fund GoF research at WIV.  this is where Paul is going with Fauci and I believe Fauci is being coy about funding GoF at WIV.   I believe Fauci already admitted to some funding for WIV.

    there are emails where Fauci is communicating with someone and that person says it appears a portion of the virus potentially looks engineered.   that person ends up writing a paper that says it isn't.  Could there be a cover up there?  who knows but I wouldn't put it past them because it does them no good to confirm the virus was partially engineered/not completely natural.

    Ok. Thanks for providing.

    The accusation against fauci is that he lied to congress by saying he didn’t know the origin when he actually did know.  The source you provided indicates scientist said the virus looked potentially engendered, but then a few months later published a paper saying the virus was not engineered. That interesting stuff but isn’t evidence he lied, from my understanding. 

  3. 10 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:


    https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost.com/2021/05/25/fauci-admits-nih-funding-of-wuhan-lab-denies-gain-of-function/amp/

    Yea you can’t study bats in fairfax county Virginia because I guess there’s too many rules and restrictions. The honest guys in China will handle it…then blame it on the bats if it escapes.

    That’s the plan. Ready break!

    Your claim was that Fauci stated to congress that he didn’t know the origin but that the emails prove he did know and that he was lying. At least, that was what it seemed you were claiming. 

    I didn’t see that claim supported by the NY post article.  Can you point where?  Did it link the subject email, but I missed it?

  4. 9 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

    Are you this unaware?  JFC.  Why am I not surprised...

    All GOF research goes through Faucci.  He is the godfather of GOF research.  Over 15 years more than $230M went into the these labs.  Specifically, ACE2 receptors in human lung tissue to try and prevent and predict the next pandemic. 

    In 2014 Obama shut him down citing safety concerns. 

    In 2017 he quietly re-opened the research and much of the research moved to Wuhan...on his own, without WH approval

    In 2018 the lab was cited for safety violations

    Faucci is THE premier actor in GOF research.  He controls all the NIH and other grant money; including the $3.7M grant most recently approved for GOF research on the horsehoe bats.  We are learning that he knew from day one this was a genetically created virus from the labs he helped fund.  Jesus, when it first broke, Robert Redfield, head of the CDC and respected virologist told us it came from a lab....and he was castigated, called a racist, etc.  

    These emails clearly illustrate Faucci trying to cover his own ass for an outbreak he himself predicted could very well happen back into 2012, but thought the research too valuable to stop.  

    It is possible you've cracked this thing wide open.  I'm thinking of the Pelican Brief.  It would be in your interest to lay low for a while. Paste this isn't a word document on a secure laptop.  Then add sources.  Get back to us if they haven't gotten you by then.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
    • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
  5. 6 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

    Are you this unaware?  JFC.  Why am I not surprised...

    All GOF research goes through Faucci.  He is the godfather of GOF research.  Over 15 years more than $230M went into the these labs.  Specifically, ACE2 receptors in human lung tissue to try and prevent and predict the next pandemic. 

    In 2014 Obama shut him down citing safety concerns. 

    In 2017 he quietly re-opened the research and much of the research moved to Wuhan...on his own, without WH approval

    In 2018 the lab was cited for safety violations

    Faucci is THE premier actor in GOF research.  He controls all the NIH and other grant money; including the $3.7M grant most recently approved for GOF research on the horsehoe bats.  We are learning that he knew from day one this was a genetically created virus from the labs he helped fund.  Jesus, when it first broke, Robert Redfield, head of the CDC and respected virologist told us it came from a lab....and he was castigated, called a racist, etc.  

    These emails clearly illustrate Faucci trying to cover his own ass for an outbreak he himself predicted could very well happen back into 2012, but thought the research too valuable to stop.  

    Wow man.  

    At first glance, this looks crazy as shit. Are all of these facts readily known by people here?  Do you have any sources?  Where were you first exposed to these ideas and this narrative?  I'm not saying this isn't true, but feels a bit batshit without context or support.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  6. I see that Fox News headlines are indicating some in the GOP are calling for Fauci's firing.

    I see a lot of the folks in here fired up that something scandalous has happened.

    I appreciate folks including images of emails.  I read this thread and didn't see anything.  What am I missing?

    This feels similar to all the DNC and hillary email drops that were perceived as negative for Hillary and Dems.  

    Charlie Brown Football GIF

    • Hook 'Em 4
  7. 3 minutes ago, mchookem said:

    maybe? i actually do remember reading years ago about a study done by i believe Boston University that found that when confronted with facts that countered a deeply held belief (in the case of the study it was specifically politics), the subjects would basically double-down on the incorrect belief rather than accept factual evidence to the contrary. 

    this reinforces that obviously, but i like understanding what is actually happening in the brain, which is cool. plus, it's very funny 😄

    ...and this is the flipside to understanding what's happening in people's brains, and why it seems so hopeless. short of deprogramming, there's not much to be done - a not insignificant segment of the population is basically checked out from reality and there's a physical reason why that can't be fixed. we joke about 'their brains are broken'...but they kinda really are. 😕

     

    I agree with the idea that some brains are broken in that they have developed cravings for dopamine, which keep them looking for libtard ownage within their restricted information bubble.  Deprogramming is the correct term to use.

    I don't think it is hopeless but I do think hard action is required to stop the expansion of propaganda and then to reverse it.  It would require protecting people from being susceptible to propaganda, destroying the tools and systems used by propagandists - driving them into the shadows, and getting people to expand their information bubbles.

  8. 6 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:




    Of course, they say the same things about you, that you life in an information bubble, that the Dems from Pelosi on down have weaponized propaganda etc...

    Of course.  That narrative fits for them.  It doesn't make it true though. Just because one thinks both sides are the same, doesn't mean that both sides are in fact the same.

    Propaganda exists to some degree everywhere, everyone is susceptible in some degree to propaganda, and everyone is to some degree in an information bubble; however, only one side is substantially captured in an alternative reality flooded with conspiracy theories and magical thinking.  Only one side believes in the Big Lie.  Only one side (28%) believes government is controlled by a cabal of pedophile cannibals.  Only one side is overly acceptable to doublethink - the Jan 6th insurrections were antifa and also just tourists, voter fraud was rampant and overturned elections but the GOP's statewide successes were legitimate. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  9. The question seems to be: why has a substantial percent of the US population been captured by misinformation, disinformation, propaganda, conspiracy theories, and magical thinking? IMO the answer includes the below three elements.

    - People susceptible to propaganda: Segments of our population were educated before social media and the internet and do not have a grounded understanding of how to digest and process information put in front of them.  There is also the low educated who weren't able to pick up the needed critical thinking skills and media skills.  They do not understand the methods of weaponized propaganda. They do not understand they are in an information bubble. 

    - Weaponized propaganda: The GOP and right wing powers are well funded. They have the ability to craft narratives and push those narratives with a high degree of effect. Their narratives are pushed by right wing leaders and echoed throughout the information landscape, including talk radio, cable news, twitter, facebook, youtube, podcasts, reddit, and religious groups. These narratives use fear-based identity politics (immigration, race, socialism) and wedge issues (abortion, guns) to tap into people's genetic predisposition towards tribalism.  Algorithms, social media, and personalized advertising amplify this effect. Think Cambridge Analytica.  Troll farms pushing these narratives through social media have been a thing for years.  Foreign actors also play a role in funding and pushing these narratives.  The "vast right-wing conspiracy" directed at the Clintons is an early elementary example of this. 

    - Information bubbles: People allow themselves to only be exposed to information that supports their preexisting ideas.  People experience positive brain chemistry when presented things supporting their beliefs.  It is hard and uncomfortable to be challenged; thus, it is easier to avoid counter information than it is to consume and critically consider. Information sources link each other giving the false impression that ideas are widely supported or accurate. Certain search algorithms exist (youtube) that push people deeper into rabbit holes.  

    A succinct answer is probably something like the right uses weaponized propaganda to control people susceptible to propaganda and place them within media bubbles that then result in large populations being within alternative realities.  

    • Hook 'Em 2
  10.  

    1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

    I have a question for #both sides. Why will people bend over backwards, believe in conspiracy theories, read in signs from clouds, when it benefits their team but when presented with evidence, or testimony under oath, or as Spender Trillby would say “hard data”, they won’t believe it? 
     

    This isn’t just about politics. This relates to sports teams. Anything really. 

    Solid question.

    Someone should explore the overlap between those who believe Qanon's conspiracy theories (15% of Americans) and those who believe Russia didn't meddle in the 2016 election to elect Trump (IDK the percent but there are few folks who fit that bill in this thread).  If we addressed whatever the causes underlying those beliefs, the US would be much better.    

  11. 10 hours ago, Bevo said:

    Yeah, I have pretty much eliminated politics from my daily conversations and activities and am happier for it. I go to the voting booth but otherwise keep my opinions to myself. Thank god I'm not a celebrity because they get baited: If they keep their opinions to themselves, their opinions are assumed.

    I think one of the reasons folks sometimes make assumptions about celebrities is because the audience is exposed to them in ways that feel human, even though it is just their job and they are acting, it still feels that way.  We see them in emotional moments and get a connection to them.  After that, it is probably felt/assumed they have human like traits that tend left on the political spectrum. 

    I see you mentioned earlier that you don’t discuss politics.  I recommend you at least read about it to stay informed while diversifying your media consumption. For national happenings, I’m a fan of the Newshour by PBS. It’s presented in video, and it’s free, online, and well produced.  It has none of the spin or exaggeration of cable news, so it might feel a bit boring.  For Texas happenings I recommend the Texas Tribune.

    • Hook 'Em 4
  12. 3 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

    I think you hit the nail on the head with respect to the situation needn't being overshadowed with Belarus and Russia. Unfortunately, in retrospect, my posts detracted from that, and to be honest, in the time since I have posted about it I have actually felt quite bad about it. To the degree that I wanted to hop back on and acknowledge it. It truly is irrelevant what his attachment to Azov was, and I genuinely do not want to come across as someone who linked the criminal treatment of him by Lukashenko to his past connections. In my mind I wasn't doing that, and while I know that I stated that multiple times in my threads, in retrospect it definitely came across that way. While I do link all of these things together in my mind as part of the continuing Russia/West tensions, it was not the place to do so here.

     

    Now, for background as to why I often get involved with the Ukraine-Russia topic, (and have for years, going back to TOS) my honest position is that I am very concerned on this particular conflict. I know it well. I deal with it to some degree professionally and I have had many discussions as of late on it within my profession (government relations attorney) on the topic of "things here in Europe are not trending in the right direction".  We are heading for a major realignment geopolitically, IMO, and I pray we get there with as minimal pain as possible. As I have posted in other threads, it is precisely something like this Ukraine-Russia tension that start big wars, as they are both unreliable in their own ways, and in my opinion, in the current environment it is a powder keg waiting to happen. And if you are like me, sometimes you feel like the only thing that you can do in this world is to type shit out, as insignificant as it is, to the few places where you think someone will listen. It is silly, but it is human. And I am in a period of frustration on this subject and to be very honest, this board is about the only place in my life where I can do that freely.

     

    In my mind, this Russia/Belarus/Ukraine trifecta of disaster has the potential to rupture the transatlantic alliance like no other, and I think that is an inevitability unless the powers of Europe, the US and Russia come to some type of arrangement on it. I see things like what happened in Ukraine last month, and this hijacking, all as part of the positioning here and it is not a simple situation. There is absolutely no military solution here and playing games with guns here is going to be disastrous. In my opinion, mistakes made here could easily have consequences for the world far, far more devastating than Iraq did and I feel that the US leadership is deliberately down-playing the degree in which Ukraine is crumbling under the current leadership and under the weight of vigilante lawlessness that is all over the country. There are a variety of reasons for that, none of them good.

     

    As is clear from my posts, I despise Azov with a passion. While perhaps they played a justified role at the outset, they are a boil that should have been lanced long ago and now they have only increased their influence. I have watched as they have become increasingly oppressive in Ukrainian life, actively recruiting Neo-Nazis from across Europe, re-injecting a very dangerous ideology into a continent that quite frankly, isn't immune to such things taking hold. I think they need to be reigned in and I think our leadership is in a position to greatly influence just that. But I fear that our pathetic politicians won't. I do not see them as something that American taxpayers should be funding, or justifying; I do not see them as harmless, and I do not see them as insignificant. I see them as the latest iteration of US-funded fascism/extremism and I believe that our approach to the Ukrainian situation is foolish and will not end well. But that is for another time.

     

    But, to illustrate my point re Azov, this article in The Nation is - in my opinion - is the best summary of what is actually going on over there. It is highly sourced, verified and accurate. It is two years old, but nothing has changed for the better.

    So that said, again, apologies for being seen as muddying the waters.

     

     

     

    I would sweat it. I would try and delete the one nazi shirt pic if possible.

  13. 22 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

    I don't think that I claim anything has been covered up.

    The BBC article was great. Thanks for linking enough times for me to get off my lazy ass and read it.

    From GW Hayduke:

    I'm not sure how much this post intends to describe my position. You may speaking generally, but I'll be clear.

    I don't have an opinion about Protasevich's alleged involvement with the Azov Battalion. The discussion is interesting but not critical to my opinion about the situation with Belarus and Russia.

    I also don't have a solidly formed opinion about Shady Ray. I'm neither an entrenched defender nor a prosecutor of this person. I did learn from what he posted. I'm interested in how you and WW are engaging him, but I'm a little surprised at the seeming hostility. Perhaps I'm being naive. If he's a propagandist, he's a remarkably deft one in hiding his intentions.

    Oddly, if his intent was to focus the debate on the color of Protasevich's hat, he seems to have succeeded with y'all. I'm not being dismissive. Your queries about sources and intentions are smart. 

    The issues at the moment in this debate go to Shady's intentions and the true leanings of Protasevich. How either resolves does not really impact my opinion on the larger issue as stated in my first post.

     

    You had indicated that Shady's take on news coverage resonated with you. I was pointing out western journalism was addressing the alleged unsavory aspects of the journalist and why I believed they covered it the way they did in that piece. 

    I apologize for any hostility to anyone including Shady.  Ideally any hostility would have been toward positions and sources of information, but I'm sure I was personal at some point.

    I doubt it would add value to label anyone a propagandist.  I'm more interested in where he got some of his information and how he formed some of his opinions.  

    Initially, I saw a flood of unsupported facts weaved into a narrative that seemed to generally fit something that could be considered pro-russian. As I read it all in some detail, it became clear that a lot of the information he was presenting wasn't too relevant or surprising.  A lot of it was about the journalist having ties to the west, that he was involved in protecting Ukraine from the Russians, and that there is a ukrainian militia with an inappropriate number of supremacists.  I think the more controversial stuff was with linking the journalist to fascism. 

    I was a bit uncomfortable not knowing where much of his information was coming from.  Some of his initially stated sources didn't really turn out. Rather than the soldiers pic coming from the journalist's own FB feed, it came from a random russian woman on russia's versions of FB. The UN report didn't say what he said it said.  Not really that big a deal IMO and mostly harmless.

    He also dropped the doctored picture of the journalist in a nazi shirt, which was kind of a big deal.  At this point I'm assuming it was doctored and the product of a propagandist. He wouldn't tell me where he got it. I couldn't find it by searching google.  The shirt pic was critical because it was the only actual real tie between the journalist and fascism.   

    • Hook 'Em 1
  14.  

    2 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

    Thanks for compliment, GW. I perceive the same about you. 

    I don't feel like I see the waters as having been muddied. I have not changed my stance on action against Lukashenko and Belarus because of the broader discussion of Protasevich. Shady's position on news coverage resonates with me. Idiot World is only dimly lit by TV news outlets.

    We have fallen into what I mention earlier and you state here; we find ourselves arguing about the purity of a man who has become a symbol. I'll take Shady at his word that he doesn't believe the purity of Protasevich should matter to Western response to the act of piracy ordered by the outlaw leader of an outlaw state.

    I wonder if you felt the same qualm I did when Shady first posted. I thought, maybe it's best not to mention this because it will confuse the hoopleheads. Maybe we should stay silent about this alleged part of the captive's history.

    But that would become a self-propagating cycle of hiding facts and, in effect, endorsing deceit. Information must flow freely (I know you're not proposing any restraint/constraint on the press) and we just have to take our chances with public opinion, willful distortions by bad actors, and political posturing from our leaders. It's part of the mess we create as an alternative to authoritarian rule.

    Shady's post did start a discussion that could muddy the water for many. I see no reason to conclude that was his intent. If it was, it's a very subtle manipulation that dares to include a very pointed condemnation of those whom would be protected by such a deceitful stratagem.

    I do think your points and those of WW 965 are worthwhile. I don't conclude what y'all do, but I respect the position.

    I get that we should all be weary of news sources, coverage, and narratives, but I just want to note that the BBC article I've provided a couple times was straight forward in disclosing the situation between the journalist and Azov.  IMO since the BBC doesn't seem to feel the guy is a fascist or was ever part of a fascist group, they just cover it from the angle of how pro-Lukashenko press was covering.  From what I've seen throughout this thread, there is no evidence this guy should be labeled as a "fascist" or "neo-nazi," and thus his very loose ties to a group that has some limited ties to fascism is largely irrelevant to the immediate incident.    

    Quote

    Belarusian authorities have muddied the waters over the detention of Mr Protasevich and how the Ryanair flight was forced to land.

    Aside from a new air traffic control transcript that contradicts the version of events given by Belarusian state TV, the pro-Lukashenko press has portrayed the dissident journalist as an extremist with right-wing sympathies.

    Belarus Segodnya, a newspaper published by the presidential administration, has claimed that Mr Protasevich was a mercenary who fought in eastern Ukraine with the nationalist Azov Battalion, which has been accused of neo-Nazi links.

    Mr Protasevich confirmed in an interview last year that he had spent a year in the conflict-hit Donbas region and was wounded, but said he was covering the conflict as a journalist and photographer.

    A former commander of the Azov unit has backed Mr Protasevich's version of events, confirming that he spent time with them as a journalist and was wounded.

     

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57239521

  15. 4 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

    What do you need beyond the Wolfsangel and annual SS glorification? Do you need the UN to condemn them as Extreme Right? Do you need the ADL to do so? How about members of the EU Parliament? How about the Simon Wiesenthal Center? Am I leaving any out? Or is it still arguable? Are going to just say "Neo-nazi" affiliated isn't the same as actual "Neo-Nazis"? OK, we can agree to disagree.

    The good news is that you are finally providing sources. The bad news is they either don't say what you think they say or they don't add anything new that wasn't already captured on their wiki page I shared earlier.  IMO this is legit muddying up the waters. 

    It isn't clear how your first source, the UN report on human rights issues, is documenting that the "UN is condemning" Azov as "extreme right."  The group is mentioned 4 times in passing, zero times in the executive summary, and zero times in the conclusions and recommendations.  They clearly make zero conclusions about that group and at no time did the UN "condemn as extreme right."    

    Your second source from the ADL does disclose Azov has members who are white supremacists and labels them as a "a Ukrainian extremist group and militia." That is also all disclosed in the wiki entry I provided earlier.  

    Your third source is a question asked by a czech politician and member of the communist party and has zero relevance to anything.  

    Your forth source doesn't add anything new.  We've already established that there are white supremacists in their ranks and that should do a better job of regulating that in their group - it is the same issue noted as why the US paused funding to the group.

     

    38 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

    Perhaps Andriy Biletsky, the head of Azov's military and political wings, who I quoted earlier supporting Roman Protasevich's claim of being a journalist with no work-product, was just confused as to Fascism when he said ON THE FUCKING RECORD: "It is the Ukrainian nation's mission to lead the white races of the world in a final crusade against semite-led untermenschen". 

    That isn't a quote from the subject journalist.  That is a quote from a ukrainian politician that was once part of Azov. It is established that there are white supremacists in Ukraine.  We've established there are some in Azov. There are some in Ukrainian military.  So what?  

     

    41 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

    Oh, I guess because he publicly made the statement 2010, it was worthwhile to continue to fund and arm him for four years after Minsk was signed and defend his unit's Neo-Nazism as "arguable".

    Are you still talking about a random ukranian politician and not the subject journalist?  What do you think this establishes that hasn't been established long ago?

    45 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

    Here is Bellingcat on this group of "arguable" Nazis:

    That is another piece about a single person in Azov.  That isn't new.

     

    47 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

    With respect to your question regarding the selfie and his FB page, you raise a very good point that I will admit that I took for granted. I have seen posts on this on various sites, including journos that I very much trust, but I admit that is something that I may have overlooked. I absolutely stand by the link to the V-Kontakte page. It is absolutely consistent with the other images published in the Belsat article that I linked to, and I am not going to discount it simply because it is VKontakte. But I definitely need to look into the selfie. Sincere appreciation for pointing that out.

    Thanks for being straight forward about the t-shirt pic.  The reason that is of issue is because that piece of evidence is the only real direct link between the journalist and any sort of actual real fascist type thought or action. Everything else you have presented is just second degree ties of arguable strength. 

     

    50 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

    That doesn't change the fact that his own father in 2020, his commander yesterday, and other comrades acknowledge his affiliation with Azov...regardless of whether that was fighting or a non-publishing journalist - and in my opinion, his affiliation with them is news. I cite once again to one of the highest rated think-tanks on the area, Jamestown...https://jamestown.org/program/belarus-stages-what-it-sees-as-major-security-operations/

    None of that is news or in dispute.  Should I link the BBC article again.  We are all on the same page with everything you have provided.  Nothing is new or surprising to the conversation.  It all seems to be about muddying up the waters.  

    57 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

    And my point goes much more to our support of Azov than it does demanding the fair treatment and release of this kid.

    The situation isn't about Azov - except for those attempting to tie the imprisoned journalist down as a fascist - i.e., muddy the waters so people's hearts might feel both sides are same.  Literally no else gives a shit about Azov at this moment. 

    • Like 2
  16. 5 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

    I do not believe the 'both sides' are the same argument is what is going on here. It's a discussion about how tangled some of this gets because the world is not cut and dried (unless it's dead). No one is arguing that the topmost argument is the move by Lukashenko was egregious and deserves the most attention. However, shouldn't we also have a conversation about the undercurrents that are at work here? The disinfo by Russia because of their moves, but also their involvement in funding fascist groups not only in adjacent countries, but fascist groups stateside and secessionist movements as well. They've scrubbed some of it, but one of the leading movements for Texas secession is again, Russian funded.

    Perhaps it is my naivete, but as a 'weaker' country, Russia does a way better job in sussing out our weak spots in that regard than we ('oh, it can't happen here') do and I'd like to learn more. It's difficult though, because social media is not only 'sketch' as the teenagers would say, but the language barrier becomes an issue. I have reservations when I read msm accounts and even some of the foreign policy tracts simply due to knowing that the CIA (as Mike Pompeo says), 'lies, cheats, and steals.'

    So I appreciate having the discussion even if it can go back and forth.

    I mean, we're having a discussion elsewhere on this forum about corruption in the Senate (insider trading), the House (accused human trafficking of minors), and the WH (laundry list of egregious behaviors including perhaps money laundering by the former president). But all of those pale next to an attempted coup/insurrection/sedition in order to overthrow election results and retain power.

     

    We had this discussion about Navalny as well. He is going to die in prison because Putin et al see him as a threat. Russia deserves whatever punishment comes their way for that.

    I think Lukashenko's press and Shady Ray's narrative is clearly to muddy the waters until we in the west begin to feel both sides are the same.  Shady Ray's primary beef is that western press doesn't label the journalist as a fascist. His whole two degree relationship narrative is intended to establish the kid is a fascist.***    If we feel he is just another fascist, then why should we care if he is improperly imprisoned?  Which sounds better, imprisoning a dissenter/journalist or imprisoning just another fascist?  

    The language barrier combined with potentially seedy social media sources does cause confusion as you mention.  IMO when an entire narrative is composed of potentially seedy social media sources sprinkled in with some unsourced odd claims (like the journalist never published pics that showed Azoz as negative) along with unsourced irrelevant claims (like the journalist worked for a group that received US funding), major red flags go up for me.

    *** of critical importance IMO is that none of his evidence is that this guy did any fascist type actions or has every expressed any fascist type speech.  There is no evidence that this guy promoted ideals that the jews should be slaughtered, that whites are superior, or any sort of actual real hate speech.  Nothing is directly tied to the journalist. All the evidence is about his supposed "links to" or "ties with" others.  

    • Like 1
  17. 1 hour ago, Shady Ray said:

    The picture of him in Azov fatigues was from the linked Vkontakte account (Russian FB), which is locked, but still there. You can see the timestamp from 2015, and, if you have the stomach to fight through the revulsion triggered by modern-era Nazi rallies that your tax dollars paid for, just sift through the hundreds of images showing how many people turned out to support National Socialists in Ukraine in 2015. Let there be no doubt that there is significant Nazi support in Ukraine. MAGA-type chuds galore...it is honestly stunning how similar the physical features/demeanor is.

     

    https://vk.com/photo-72444174_368416418

     

    The rest was linked through Jake Hanrahan - a verified, real-deal actual "embedded reporter" who received the DuPont award for excellence in journalism out of Columbia U School of Journalism for his work on international hate groups, served jail time in Turkey after being embedded with the Kurds fighting the Turks - who is one of the best reporters on the planet when it comes to guerrilla warfare, on the ground with Ukrainians in Donbas, on the ground in Syria, Gaza, Myanmar etc. And, who, by the way has probably the best podcast out there on disinformation, the bullshit known as Q, weapons trafficking, etc. He ain't gonna toe the line of either side, but he is legit. 

     

     

    There are other links relating to his likeness from Bellingcat contributor, Oleskiy Kuzmenko, which to me seem more tenuous for sure. Although the image of the cover of Black Sun has absolutely been verified as coming from that date, as there are plenty of archival records from back then showing the same cover, the imaging that Black Sun uses on their covers is traditionally filtered, so I would not stand behind that.

     

    https://www.bellingcat.com/author/oleksiykuzmenko/

     

    And you go to my point...metadata can be manipulated and disinformation is absolutely out there, it is not as cut and dry as we would like. So I am more than happy to be wrong. In fact, I would love to be. I would love to see some journalism from him showing that he was a journalist while with Azov.

     

    I would love to be wrong about the fact that he is standing alongside an individual with glasses in front of the guy that (at least from the photos from 2015, looks exactly like Protasevich), Stanislav Goncharov, who is now in jail on the charges of "inciting hatred against another race", which frankly is a stunning, stunning charge given his ink, but who did a front-page interview on Belsat.TV, (oh, which is a media organization directly funded by YOUR US tax dollars), in which he showed off his lovely tattoos, and justified them saying, "I support the idea of National Socialism...it is the only form of life." And honestly, I would give this guy 100% the benefit of the doubt as a freedom fighter had it not been for the fucking hitler and auschwitz homage tattooed across his fucking back.

     

    https://naviny.belsat.eu/ru/news/otstante-ot-tatuirovok-on-priehal-pomogat-dobroe-slovo-pro-terror-mashinu/

     

    And I am not reading propaganda here...I am reading directly from the headlines "Get over the tattoos, a word from the Terror Machine" from the publication, Belsat.TV, that our taxpayer dollars fund. The outlet actually often does outstanding work...but they don't apparently have a "Nazi" filter on their code of journalistic conduct, but for the sake of this discussion, I feel their timestamps and image archives are pretty solid.

     

    You can auto translate if you would like, but here are the choice photos and translations directly from that US-supported publication back in 2016, which is absolutely consistent with the Azov thread I posted above.

     

    So if the Russians manipulated it, they would have had to manipulated half his face back when this article was published back in 2016, 5 years before he was illegally arrested. I took the direct photo image from the US-funded publication...oh, and notice the weapon.

     

    Spoiler for NSFW content. And let's put it this way, the "88" tattooed across his chest is something that I am not allowed to send as a German permanent resident, so you can look that up yourself if you don't know it. You can see the imagery on it.

      Reveal hidden contents

     

     

    azov-natsist-2.jpg.a930577ed5141b482637ff8a1360acae.jpg

     

     

    E2ZT5TrWYAEkFMv.jpg.f9e76567493740b9be0d1f32864a6b97.jpg

     

     

    Teror-1.jpg.71c66397e17e64be4b13ef3828f9b023.jpg

     

     

     

     

    m31wgs2t5zc-xvbp7-355x800-1-355x800-2.thumb.jpg.430b3474d4174318cf917269eadaf8bb.jpg

     

    E2V2_jpXoAQSJzO.jpeg.bce2c74e8037c7b4b1b44d17a34fa89b.jpeg

     

     

     

    *twins=brothers here. She is clearly gender language meaning "it" for us English speakers.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Take of this what you will, but my point remains...we fund Nazis. We fund Ukrainian Nazis and we fund Belarusian Nazis. And our media owes us the truth about what we are doing.

     

     

    Screen Shot 2021-05-30 at 2.29.53 PM.png

    Screen Shot 2021-05-30 at 2.30.45 PM.png

    Also, you had previously stated the soldiers pic was from his own FB feed.  How do you know it was from his own feed? The russian FB link is apparently for a random russian chick named Irina.  I'm not that familiar with how FB operates or how russian FB operates.

     

     

  18. I get it. Your position is that Azoz is full-blown neo-nazi group.  Stir up the bottom sediment a little bit.  

    5 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

    Azov is neo-nazi.

     

    5 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

    they should include mentioning the years in which he was imbedded in a nazi-organization.

    Come on man. This is all about the question of degree. They are part of the national guard of Ukraine.  They literally kill russians and protect against russian aggression.  Do members within Azoz have ties to white supremacy? Yes.  Have they had funding withheld because the group hasn't regulated their members on that front? Yes.  Does that make them a "neo-nazi group?" No. They are a national militia protecting against the russians with members tied to neo-nazis and have not taken steps to properly regulate.  Our military has white supremacists within their ranks also and our military has been tasked with doing a better job with rooting them out.  

    Quote

    Despite accusations that the group is anti-Semitic, some members of the Jewish community in Ukraine support and serve in the Azov Battalion. One of its most prominent members is Nathan Khazin, leader of the "Jewish hundreds" during the 2013 Euromaidan protests in Kyiv.[91] Its commander Andriy Biletsky declared that he is not racist or antisemitic. In an interview he explained that he regards Israel and Japan as role models for the development of Ukraine.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azov_Battalion

    Stir up the bottom sediment a little bit more.  

    18 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

    If you are going to actually come in here and tell me the Azov's linkage to national socialism is tenuous, then I am not quite sure what to do about that

    I'm not telling you it is tenuous.  I'm telling you the degree is arguable. Then, I'm also telling you the degree of relationship between the journalist and Azoz is also arguable.  Then, I'm pointing out to you that your narrative is a pro-dictator muddying the waters narrative with highly questionable sources.  

     

    7 minutes ago, Shady Ray said:

    You aren't going to get me to defend Lukashenko or fucking Putin...but unlike you, I understand that there are fascists who we support in Ukraine and I would like to at least it mentioned that he was alongside them. 

    Yes. Muddy the waters until both sides are the same.  

    And again, why haven't you provided your source for the T-shirt pics?

×
×
  • Create New...