HOME | DD
Phracker — Russia
by-nc
[NSFW]
#cnn #coldwar #crimea #donaldtrump #mainstreammedia #media #msm #russia #trump #ukraine #war #hotwar #warwithrussia #russiainvestigation #orangemanbad #crimearegion
Published: 2018-11-26 01:46:32 +0000 UTC; Views: 2529; Favourites: 37; Downloads: 2
Redirect to original
Description
CNN is completely obsessed with Russia, much like how they were completely obsessed with Iraq in early 2003. That's their function after all: build the case for war with a foreign country so that the military-industrial complex can be maintained. They have shown time and time again that they have a simple militaristic agenda: make the American people fear and hate a foreign country to justify a future war with that country. That's why they're so upset that Trump is in office. I mean, how many wars has he started since his inauguration? Zero. That's why he must go. He's not funding the military-industrial complex, and thus he's not fulfilling his primary duty as president - a duty that it is CNN's sole mission to augment. CNN is not a pro-leftist outlet. They are a pro-war outlet and nothing else.This work is public domain. Please feel free to spread it around. I do not want credit or recognition for it. I only want to fight tyranny and deception and protect freedom.
Related content
Comments: 62
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
And could you kindly show a single example of anyone on CNN calling for a hot war with Russia? Oh, that's right, you can't, because this is entirely fictional.
You really think the Russians are going to launch a preemptive attack on the US because we're investigating their interference in our elections? Seriously? You're really arguing that we should leave a traitor in the Oval Office because if we did anything about it, it'd make the Russians mad at us?
Since when did conservatives become cowards? Reagan would be ashamed of the lot of you.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Like I said, they're pulling the exact same schtick that they pulled with Iraq. The whistleblower papers about the Iraq war reveal how the government methodically used the mainstream media to build the case for war in the months leading up to it. Just because they don't say it outright doesn't mean they're not trying to suggest it. The media does a lot of propaganda where they convince people of something not by saying it outright but by suggesting it in their language, their coverage, etc. Subliminal messages are used all the time in politics, and if you're paying attention, you can sniff them out. So stop playing dumb.
And I'm not a conservative. If I were, I wouldn't have made these:
Freeloaders by Phracker
👍: 1 ⏩: 1
I really don't care how you label yourself. I care what you say and do. And you're defending Trump and Putin.
You said it yourself - during the run up to the Iraq War it was the Bush Administration that distorted the intelligence to push the nation to war, not the media. And afterwards the media (including CNN) spent quite a lot of time self-flagellating for not challenging what the Administration was saying. Well, not Fox News, but they're not real journalists over there.
In Iraq, it was the Administration that did the pushing. Now you're alleging that CNN is doing it in spite of the wishes of the Administration. In Iraq, it was Bush's explicit intent to go to war. Now you're alleging some secret conspiracy. Even if what you're saying were true, it wouldn't be anything like what happened in Iraq.
Not to mention that one could reasonably argue for a profit motive to go to war in Iraq. There's no profit to be had for anyone in a war with Russia. Such a war would mean the end of the world and everyone knows it.
And the bottom line is that you have absolutely no evidence of any kind whatsoever of any such intent on CNN's part. CNN is reporting that the Russians attacked us because that's what happened. We all saw the hacked emails. We all saw Trump ask the Russians to attack us. The Intelligence Community Assessment and the Mueller indictments go into quite a lot of detail of the specifics of the who, how, what, and when of it. There is no rational basis for denying it.
This is just more of the same old "Journalists are evil because truth is what we want it to be!" crap. It's stupid and childish.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, and there are people who were in the CIA who say that the CIA killed Kennedy and 9/11 was an inside job. Do you believe them?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Of course not.
Shall we proceed down the rabbit hole to the Roswell aliens or Admiral Richard Byrd's secret mission to contact the civilization living inside the hollow earth in 1947?
There's reality and then there's fantasy, and you need to learn to tell the difference.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nl5NW9…
Let me repeat: These are CIA officials, coming forward and saying "My organization, the one whose secrets I am privy to, committed these crimes." What's it gonna take to convince you?
Yeah, I can tell the difference between fantasy and reality. That's why I don't mindlessly believe everything the government and media say.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Actual evidence. Some lunatic babbling on Youtube is not evidence.
So if some guy claiming that the CIA killed Kennedy is credible, is it also credible when Allen Greenfield claims that he had a conversation with Werner von Braun where von Braun claimed that the Nazis had help from aliens?
Riiiiight, because you absolutely shouldn't believe people who spent their professional lives tracking down evidence, sifting through documents, interviewing witnesses, and generally actually corroborating their information. Because that's totally unreliable! Wild guessing is the only way to the truth.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
This isn't "some lunatic". This is a former CIA operative blowing the whistle on his own organization. Are you not listening?
And you realize that that same exact argument could be applied to people confessing to Mueller that they colluded with Trump? That's what I'm getting at here: You'll believe word-of-mouth evidence when it comes from a Russia whistleblower, but not when it comes from a US government whistleblower.
And you're the one who's uncomfortable with the truth, since you object to people telling the truth about what Hillary Clinton did. Hillary Clinton lost because people knew the truth about her. That's why you guys are upset at the Russian hackers. They exposed the truth.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Answer the question. Do you believe that the Nazis got help from aliens?
This is someone who claims to be a former CIA operative on a Youtube video. Do you have any confirmation of that? At all? Anyone can set up a webcam and say they worked for the CIA.
Anyone who tries to apply the same argument to the Mueller investigation simply has no idea how a special prosecutor or a grand jury actually works. For one thing all testimony to a grand jury is under penalty of perjury. If you lie on a webcam nothing happens. If you lie to a grand jury you go to prison. For another the testimony of one person involved in a criminal act against the others given as part of a plea deal is not admissible in court as evidence unless it's corroborated. That's in any criminal proceedings. Mueller is not going to bring charges against anyone one one person's word. That's just not how it works. when Mueller brings an indictment that means that he has multiple witnesses, documentation, a money trail, and so on. Just read the indictments he's already brought. They found the servers the Russians used, their bank accounts, who they paid and when and for what, the groups they started, the protests they organized, and so on and so on.
Oh, I'm well aware that Hillary Clinton has done some questionable stuff. Like funneling money from state Democratic parties to her campaign before she had the nomination sewed up. But that's not illegal and that's not why you lot voted for a crook and a traitor. You guys are so damned insecure about your manhood that you'll believe crazy stuff like Pizzagate if it'll give you an excuse to hate Clinton and vote against her.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Do you believe that the Nazis got help from aliens?
If I hear aliens saying that their species helped the Nazis, yes, I'll believe it. But so far I haven't.
This is someone who claims to be a former CIA operative on a Youtube video. Do you have any confirmation of that? At all? Anyone can set up a webcam and say they worked for the CIA.
This isn't someone with a webcam, dumbass. It's obvious you didn't actually watch the video, because it shows someone on a stage at a conference giving a speech on what he witnessed while in the CIA.
Anyone who tries to apply the same argument to the Mueller investigation simply has no idea how a special prosecutor or a grand jury actually works. For one thing all testimony to a grand jury is under penalty of perjury. If you lie on a webcam nothing happens. If you lie to a grand jury you go to prison.
Again, this isn't "some guy with a webcam". This is a video tape of a public conference with thousands of people attending.
For another the testimony of one person involved in a criminal act against the others given as part of a plea deal is not admissible in court as evidence unless it's corroborated. That's in any criminal proceedings. Mueller is not going to bring charges against anyone one one person's word. That's just not how it works. when Mueller brings an indictment that means that he has multiple witnesses, documentation, a money trail, and so on. Just read the indictments he's already brought. They found the servers the Russians used, their bank accounts, who they paid and when and for what, the groups they started, the protests they organized, and so on and so on.
So 9/11 doesn't have multiple witnesses? What about the hundreds of people who said that they heard explosions as the towers collapsed? What about the people who said they heard a bomb go off in the basement even before the planes hit?
Oh, I'm well aware that Hillary Clinton has done some questionable stuff. Like funneling money from state Democratic parties to her campaign before she had the nomination sewed up. But that's not illegal and that's not why you lot voted for a crook and a traitor. You guys are so damned insecure about your manhood that you'll believe crazy stuff like Pizzagate if it'll give you an excuse to hate Clinton and vote against her.
I don't believe Pizzagate, for the same reason I don't believe some random woman who says she was raped by someone just as he's about to get elected: It has an obvious political motive. I'm not a Conservative, as I already stated. I did not vote for Trump either. You're making a hell of a lot of assumptions.
And if I'm insecure in my manhood, then why do I take pictures like these?
Mature Content
Mature Content
Mature Content
Mature Content
Mature Content
By Myself by Phracker Hot Girl Selfie by Phracker
You're talking to a proud trap, buddy boyo. You have no argument.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
kkkessy doesn't make assumptions: she KNOWS. She is God. Whatever she says you are is what you are. Don't you know this already?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Of course I didn't watch it - did you actually expect me to? I expect my crazy conspiracy theories to have at least the production values and entertainment value of something on the History Channel.
So why do you find stories about bombs in the World Trade Center credible but not stories about aliens in the Third Reich? They're both wild speculation based on a few unverified accounts with zero supporting evidence.
And stop treating Youtube like it's something more than glorified rumor mill. It's not. Random stuff on Youtube is no different than something you heard some half drunk guy babbling about at the neighborhood bar.
Reality is under no obligation to make sense to you or me or anyone else. The test of whether something is true or not is evidence, not whether it sounds right.
Oh, and very hot, BTW.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So why do you find stories about bombs in the World Trade Center credible but not stories about aliens in the Third Reich? They're both wild speculation based on a few unverified accounts with zero supporting evidence.
No, they're not. One is wild speculation while the other is eyewitness evidence based on the accounts of people who were actually there when it happened. If you search on the Internet, you can find video footage of people in New York on 9/11 saying that they heard explosions from the Twin Towers as they fell.
And stop treating Youtube like it's something more than glorified rumor mill. It's not. Random stuff on Youtube is no different than something you heard some half drunk guy babbling about at the neighborhood bar.
Stop treating TV like it's something more than a glorified propaganda mill. It's not. Random stuff on TV is no different than something you heard some half drunk guy babbling about at the neighborhood bar.
Reality is under no obligation to make sense to you or me or anyone else. The test of whether something is true or not is evidence, not whether it sounds right.
Oh, I've given you evidence, and there's far more out there if you just look for it. The evidence for 9/11 being an inside job includes not only eyewitness accounts, but also forensic evidence, expert testimony, and findings published in well-respected scientific journals. The evidence that 9/11 was an outside job consists mostly of the US government's word and some random article from Popular Mechanics that people keep quoting. And there are similar mountains of evidence for JFK being assassinated by the CIA, not least of which is the fact that the US government blocked the release of the JFK assassination documents at the last minute. I mean, "If you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide." as you Statist morons always say.
But of course none of this will ever convince you. No matter how much scientific, forensic, and eyewitness evidence I present you with, you will just block it out as "conspiracy nonsense". Because you are so thoroughly brainwashed by Statist propaganda that your brain has developed Freudian defense mechanisms to prevent any contradicting evidence from getting in.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
She says: 'It's not the equivalent of drunken ramblings of some guy at a bar. '
But she believes Papadopalous about Trump.
'Credibility matters. Qualifications matter. Competence matters. Professionalism matters. You want to be taken seriously as someone who knows what they're talking about but you're too damn lazy to put in the work to earn that credibility.'
jim acosta!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I especially like these two lines:
>I'm perfectly willing to consider new evidence.
>Some random person running their yap on Youtube is not evidence
Says she's perfectly willing to consider new evidence, but then in the very next sentence she dismisses the evidence I provided for a made-up reason ("It's just a random person on YouTube." when I've told her time and time again it's a former CIA operative at a conference attended by thousands of people). Someone's doing some serious mental gymnastics here.
In any case, I've decided to stop responding to her, because I feel like I'm fighting a wall here. She's just another NPC who happens to know a lot of big words.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I will also add, that 'new evidence' in her book is anything that confirms her bigoted beliefs.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
She may 'know' the big words, but she has NO concept of what they actually mean.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
-_- Each of the twin towers massed around 4.5 x 10^8 kg with a height of 415 meters. That's about 9 x 10^11 Joules of gravitational potential energy. In terms of TNT explosive equivalence that's about 220 tons of TNT. That's about 1% of the energy released by a Hiroshima sized nuclear weapon. That much energy being released in a matter of seconds is going to produce what any reasonable person would call an explosion. There are few, if any, people who could tell the difference between an explosive device going off and the simple process of a building that large collapsing just by ear.
It's been a long time since I looked into the September 11th stuff, but as I recall everything that happened is completely consistent with a structural collapse caused by the failure of structural members due to the heat of the fires caused by the planes. There's nothing to this truther stuff. There just isn't.
And you can search around the internet and find literally anything. No matter how silly.
Information from real journalists is not a propaganda mill. It's not the equivalent of drunken ramblings of some guy at a bar. Journalists go to school for years to learn how to do their jobs right. The put in long hours tracking down and confirming sources. Finding the truth takes actual work. While I realize you're butthurt that you sitting on your chair pulling crap out of your ass is not treated the same as stories that have months of grueling work put into them, that's the way it is, grow up and deal with it.
I'm actually really interested in things like the JFK assassination. And there are unanswered questions about that. But the idea that the CIA would be involved in the assassination of a President, even in the bad old days of the early 60's, is pretty out there. And there's no evidence to support it. I'm also interested in things like UFO's. And there have been some really strange incidents for which the extraterrestrial hypothesis cannot reasonably be dismissed. That's not the same as saying that there are definitely aliens buzzing around.
It seems to me that you're the one making all kinds of assumptions about me here. And when it comes to Freud, I'd say that you're projecting to an extraordinary degree. I'm perfectly willing to consider new evidence. Some random person running their yap on Youtube is not evidence. And no amount of wishing on your part is going to make it evidence. Credibility matters. Qualifications matter. Competence matters. Professionalism matters. You want to be taken seriously as someone who knows what they're talking about but you're too damn lazy to put in the work to earn that credibility.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You won't believe, dud, but our news programms in Russia are talking 'bout problems from USA, or war with US, Russia surrounded by enemies and another bullsh
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I like how actually cover up their own past with Iraq
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
USA government is necessarily "kind to citizens" either. The legal system is often very corrupt, some states are extremely corrupt, there are a lot of nasty things going on which the USA mainstream media generally doesn't report much on. Don't believe what you see in Hollywood movies.
Russia actually is surrounded by enemies.
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/wordp…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
This. We literally live under martial law right now, and it's going to get worse with the government and media working very hard to get rid of the Constitution. It's not a full-on totalitarian state, but we're getting pretty fucking close.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
How are you living under martial law?
You have freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom to vote, freedom of thought, your media isn't censored for political opinions, your journalists are not locked up when they insult your president.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
"...freedom of speech, freedom to vote, freedom of thought, your media isn't censored for political opinions, your journalists are not locked up when they insult your president..." ))) Several journalists / lawyers have just launched an investigation into the Clinton family's ties to the Saudis. And then they died, who the milk was poisoned, someone infarction, someone was shot(3 bullets in the head and the heart - obviously accidentally). Freedom...
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Yeah, they died after trying to investigate a crooked political gang. How is that reflective of the entire USA and USA government?
That's like saying the USA is under martial law and lacks freedoms because a mafia gangster killed some people who tried to investigate him.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I read different articles where it is told that the USA military and police state. The election of the President, Senate, Congress is a fiction. One of the persons changes, and the ruling elite does not change. Accordingly, foreign and domestic policy does not change, only the nuances change. Also recently the arrival in public policy not of professionals, and often just fools is obvious.
What only is the call of the Congresswoman by russian jokers - Putin staged a coup in Limpopo and appointed a dictator Iboleat (it is russian children tale). The Congresswoman (Maxine Waters) believed and promised intervention of the President in this outrageous act of Russia)))
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Interesting. Where'd you get this from?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Links of course it is necessary to look, so just do not give( in Cuba Internet is very slow and not everywhere). But it was in the European press and in the American press. Certainly not the mainstream media. You easier to find about murder and death. The deaths were investigated by the FBI and the police-recognized as a coincidence. There is a suspiciously high mortality rate among the Clinton, Bush and presidential administrations interested in these ties with the Saudis.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That's not what martial law is though. Martial law is when law enforcement is militarized.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Define militarised.
Where is the border of that?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, currently, if they suspect you of being a dissident, they'll send a helicopter full of armored federal agents with military grade machine guns to your house, regardless of whether or not you're actually armed. That's if you're on American soil. If you're not, they'll just send a sniper drone to summarily execute you without trial.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
If that were true, every alternative media face in the USA would be dead already.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, the armed military cops are mostly for hacktivists and people who expose government and corporate corruption to the public. They can't do that with people who simply say stuff (although they did manage to do it with Barrett Brown). That's why they're currently working very hard to get rid of the First Amendment.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"hacktivists and people who expose government and corporate corruption to the public."
vs
"They can't do that with people who simply say stuff"
That's contradictory. Which is it? Alternative media folks have been exposing corporate and government corruption for decades - and it's so rare that anyone gets raided and slaughtered for it, that I can't think of one right off the top of my head.
"That's why they're currently working very hard to get rid of the First Amendment."
The Democrats were doing that. Trump doesn't appear to have any interest in doing so, regardless of the crap from CNN and Jim Acosta acting like an asshole.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
They raided and jailed Barrett Brown for aggregating publicly available data on corporations that made them look bad.
Also, the Republican Party was trying to get rid of free speech long before the Democrats. Remember the Patriot Act?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Barret Brown being harassed and imprisoned by the FBI doesn't show that the USA is under martial law. I'm not sure you understand what martial law actually is.
The Patriot Act despite all it's nastiness still doesn't mean that the USA is under martial law, but it's a way better example than your mention of Barrett Brown. You score a point.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Just another crappy news outlet. That's why I just stick with watching anime, reading and playing games. The news is depressing so I'd rather not trouble myself with it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Russia will invade Europe, Russia threatens the US and the world))) Russia's military budget is 40 billion dollars. Military budget the US >1 trillion dollars (including hidden articles) + military budgets the EU, Japan, Australia....But Russia is to blame)))
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, mass media fearmongering is never accurate, and it mostly consists of corporate elites projecting their own malice onto other world leaders.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Malice not only on the leaders of the countries, on people too.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Obama started 7 wars during his administration.
Trump hasn't started even 1.
So far, calling Trump "pro-war" is ridiculous. Reagan also increased military spending, how many wars did Reagan start? None.
Actions speak louder than any of the bullshit from the haters.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>