It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: ScientificRailgun
If anyone is naive enough to believe that Russia would broadcast it's actual Military strategy to the World...
There is not much I can say really.
How is it a false pretense. It's state sponsored TV, it's CLEARLY propaganda. "Satire" or not. Again, if the U.S. did the same, it would be impossible to silence all the voices on here screaming Propaganda. Why apply the standard to one nation and not the other.
originally posted by: sosobad
a reply to: ScientificRailgun
You are OK with threads being started on false pretense s as long as they are anti Russian?
originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: sosobad
You do know that if the U.S. Government pulled the same crap, "satire" or not, all the of the Russophiles here would be pointing fingers and screaming about an impending invasion, propaganda, brainwashing, etc.
originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
How is it a false pretense. It's state sponsored TV, it's CLEARLY propaganda. "Satire" or not. Again, if the U.S. did the same, it would be impossible to silence all the voices on here screaming Propaganda. Why apply the standard to one nation and not the other.
originally posted by: sosobad
a reply to: ScientificRailgun
You are OK with threads being started on false pretense s as long as they are anti Russian?
Okay, let's apply the same logic to a hypothetical U.S. Network. Say there was a U.S. TV Station that was joint owned by Bank of America, and also by one of Obama's close personal friends. And they broadcast a "satire" piece about invading Mexico, Canada, and South America. What would be your thoughts on that broadcast?
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
How is it a false pretense. It's state sponsored TV, it's CLEARLY propaganda. "Satire" or not. Again, if the U.S. did the same, it would be impossible to silence all the voices on here screaming Propaganda. Why apply the standard to one nation and not the other.
originally posted by: sosobad
a reply to: ScientificRailgun
You are OK with threads being started on false pretense s as long as they are anti Russian?
State sponsored? So because the media outlet that produced is owned by a Bank that is owned by some guy that shakes hands with Russian movers and Shakers... it is State sponsored.
I guess any Hollywood film depicting American superiority would be called State sponsored since Hollywood is democrat?
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
State sponsored? So because the media outlet that produced is owned by a Bank that is owned by some guy that shakes hands with Russian movers and Shakers... it is State sponsored.
I read the Onion frequently, but it's not owned by the largest bank in America and close personal friends of US leadership. If such a channel WERE to exist, I'd call it what it is. Propaganda. Hell, in a previous thread I called a report by U.S. MSM about Putin having Aspergers blatant propaganda. I call propaganda when I see it.
originally posted by: sosobad
a reply to: ScientificRailgun
In said situation would you be calling it propaganda? Or would you treat it as satire? I hope you never stumble upon The Onion.