search results matching tag: abby

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (92)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (4)     Comments (52)   

Animals Who Don't Care About Their Bodies

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Let me guess….now that Justice Sonia Sotomayor is caught using her staff to help sell books, Supreme Court ethics matter, Justice John Roberts should reverse his 2011 decision to not have any ethics rules at all for justices, and she should be disbarred, right?
But not the MAGA judges who all took tens of millions in free gifts from people with cases before the court, who have completely delegitimized the court and damaged its reputation beyond repair.

FYI-

Double the expected jobs, 1/3 of the expected inflation. Those revised job numbers you said would go down went up. Revised July (2nd quarter) GDP is 2.3%, well above predictions of .5%-.9%. Also, wages are now outpacing inflation by 1.6% and rising! Ready to go blue? 😂

PS- Ray Epps is now sueing Fox for slander for accusing him of being the leader of an fbi plot to cause Jan 6 and frame MAGA, even though they knew he was MAGA with no ties to any federal organization, not fbi, cia, oss, or irs. He hired the lawyer that Dominion used, and has the testimony of Abby Grosberg, Tucker’s ex senior executive producer…so expect another 8 figure settlement for more MAGA lies.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Fox producer Abby Grossberg has just filed two lawsuits, one for hostile work environment/sexual discrimination and one alleging Fox lawyers encouraged her to commit perjury under oath in her deposition for the Dominion case….and now they’ve got Smartmatic too.
Not good when, before the trials start, the defendant’s witnesses say they committed perjury at the direction of the defendant and the entire defense is based on perjury, but that’s exactly where Fox is today. Enjoy!

NSA Whistleblower: Government Collecting Everything You Do

Peter Joseph & Abby Martin on Abolishing Capitalism

bcglorf says...

Abby Martin participating with this makes sense. For those unfamiliar, her schtick before was working for Russia Today.

The same way Russia is fond of funding the extreme ends of Antifa and Unite the right clowns. Funding popular dissent and dissatisfaction with America and capitalism is super. However many nuts listen to Zeitgeist crazies may be small, but if that group doesn't overlap with the Antifa crowd, and doesn't overlap with the KKK crowd and doesn't overlap with those outraged by the latest wikileaks 'discovery' it all adds up to a lot of people. It's pretty much public record that Russian intelligence is happily and eagerly funding as many of these organizations they can to foment dissent and dissatisfaction.

It's not some paranoid conspiracy to say this plays into the the hands of America's enemies, it's a fact that is being proven in court. That doesn't mean there aren't piles of truths out there being dug up that make America and it's systems look bad and flawed, but spinning it to make people as angry as possible, and feeding those truths along with as many lies as the target audience will swallow is 'great' propaganda.

So that's a long winded version of declaring this video as russian funded propaganda.

Negative Repercussions of the Repopulation of Deer Species

"We Have Monthly Ắbortion Quotas" Planned Parenthood

Are You Normal?

lurgee (Member Profile)

USA and russian relations at a "most dangerous moment"

vil says...

@enoch
I did my best :-) I honestly feel threatened by this attitude of feeding the bear crumbs and pretending he is a friend. Also cant help liking Abby, so very disappointed.

@newtboy
For russia Assad is a (replaceable) puppet, bolstering Assad is just using that puppet for their own needs. ISIS is a threat because it directly supports terrorist groups within Russia. Sending in their air force and that coal powered smoking joke of an aircraft carrier was a military excercise with minimal losses and huge political and home security gains. Expensive though.

One cant just send in a task force to take out a dictator simply because one believes it would be the right thing to do. Countries generally have a limitless supply of local mafioso would-be dictators or religious leaders which the local population prefers to foreign rule. Religion and politics are just a thin veil for local tribal wars. In spite of Syria being a fairly civilised country before the current events I doubt there was ever a "democratic" alternative to Assad. Sometimes you just get lucky and the dictator decides he wants democracy (South Korea, Chile, Gorbatchev inadvertently).

F**k the whole middle east actually IMHO, twice. The Kurds never get any love from anyone and they´ve survived in the middle of this crazy shitstorm for millenia. Yet they will never have a country of their own. Even "Palestinians" created only in the last few decades appear to be closer to that goal. Not fair at all.

USA and russian relations at a "most dangerous moment"

vil says...

Pretty much interview scripted by Putin personally.

Why the drama about US - russian relations if the russians supposedly are not dangerous and Putin is not evil.

Building a case to sell Poland and the Baltic countries to Putin. Worked like a charm with Hitler and Czechoslovakia before WWII. Poland these days does not even have a border with Russia proper, only with what used to be Koenigsberg. Poland is part of NATO and if Abby and her friend the professor want to give that up then it is them who are pushing us all closer to a war (cold or not).

Ukraine has already exploded. Putin has already taken 1/3 of the country breaking bilateral treaties. Cant get much worse, hard to imagine how the US can get involved, Trump notwithstanding.

Syria - its basically over, except for the humanitarian and human rights catastrophe. Putins ally won - a slightly pyrrhic victory perhaps, but for the meantime Assad stays. Did they level cities or liberate them? Hard to tell the difference. Probably both. That said US involvement in the middle east is a grave shitstorm.

This awesome "analysis" somehow misses the biggest current problem of NATO - Turkey - possibly because Putin does not have a good handle on Turkey yet so its off-limits. Also Pakistan/India and North Korea does not get a mention for the same reason - no chance to push Putins agenda.

NATO might have reassured Gorby it had no intention to spread. It is important to understand that Warsaw pact countries generally accepted Russians as saviours from German occupation, by the 1970s this had changed firmly to perceiving Russians as occupants, political persecutors and economic idiots.

After the economic collapse of the USSR (supposedly somehow caused by Ronald Reagan :-) all these countries needed reassurance that the Russians were not coming back. The only possible reassurance was joining NATO. If that meant breaking a promise made to an ex-representative of a no longer existing country, that is fine by me. If NATO had promised not to spread to Mother Theresa I would be more concerned.

The problem with the Ukraine is that we (EU) made an offer that put them in danger (from Putin) and we could not back that up with real economic or military assistance. Dumb move. But also Ukrainian politics is an incredible mess and simply too many ethnic russians live there giving Putin a strong nationalist base.

RT -- Chris Hedges on Media, Russia and Intelligence

radx says...

What kind of balance are you speaking of? For the sake of argument, I'll assume that you mean spending somewhat equal time and effort on different sides of an argument.

That kind of balance can be expected from a news outlet. Many of them, especially American ones, overcook is massively by refusing to make judgements on the validity of opposing arguments. If argument A is backed by empirical evidence and argument B is smoke and mirrors, argument B should receive ridicule, not the same kind of respect that A receives.

Now, applying this kind of balance to individuals strikes me as wierd. They are not obliged to give a balanced view: they are obliged, as journalists, to present facts, and offer interpretations. The issues we're talking about here are not disputes between neighbours. We are talking about the war on terror, macroeconomics, propaganda, things of the utmost importance. And the media is doing a woeful job at presenting any dissenting view.

Thing is, you can get the major consensus narrative from countless news outlets out there. Want to here about the supposed benefits of multinational trade agreements? The NYT and the WaPo have dozens upon dozens of articles with praise of TTIP and TPP. If, however, you would like to hear about the consequences of previous trade agreements, or just some hard math on the numbers they like to throw in there, you won't find any. You'll have to go to Dean Baker at the CEPR, to Yves Smith at NakedCapitalism, you'll read Rick Wolff's take on it.

These people do everything in their power to restore the balance that the media drowned in buckets of party-line puff pieces. People recognise RT for propaganda, but somehow think propaganda stops when ownership is private.

Try to find proper articles about the global assassination program (drone warfare) and its effect on sovereign people abroad -- won't find anything in the media, you'll have to go to Jeremy Scahill.

Try to find proper articles about the desolation brought to communities in the developed world by (the current form of) capitalism, the epidemic of loniliness, the breaking apart of the social fabric, the monetarisation of every aspect of life -- silence. What about the slavery-like conditions it creates through indebtedness? The absurd inequality? Nothing.

What about the massive atrocities in Jemen? There was plenty about the atrocities committed by Russia in Syria, but when Saudis use US weapons to destroy an entire country, mum's word.

There is no balance in the media. They are the gatekeepers of knowledge, and anything outside the establishment's agreed upon consensus is ignored, marginalised, ridiculed, or straight up demonized.

CJ Hopkins had a great piece at Counterpunch the other day, titled Why Ridiculous Official Propaganda Still Works. He puts it more succinctly than I ever could. Reality doesn't matter, not for the mainstream media. The narrative matters.

And that's why I listen to dissenting voices like Chris Hedges, Abby Martin or Thom Hartmann, even when they are employed by a state propaganda outlet.

bcglorf said:

Here's the counter balance though, how much time, detail and effort have all of those groups combined given to any positive outcomes of America or Capitalism(as represented by America). How much time, detail and effort have all of those groups combined given to the evils of any alternatives or opposing forces that would or did fill the voids were America isn't involved? It's crickets all around..

President Trump: How & Why...

radx says...

*doublepromote

Superb quality, this one.

The Blame Cannons are already in firing position. It's the fault of Glenn Greenwald and David Sirota, of Abby Martin and Kevin Gosztola, of Bernie and his BernieBros, of WikiLeaks and Assange, and Putin most of all.

Anything but 40 years of fuck-the-plebs politics.

Gratefulmom (Member Profile)

enoch (Member Profile)



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon