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: ScientificRailgun
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: DJW001
a reply to: sosobad
It is SATIRE, the only reason you agree with it is because it is anti Russian
Is the target of the satire Russia? Or is it an attempt to make a threat look like a harmless joke?
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: sosobad
It is SATIRE, the only reason you agree with it is because it is anti Russian
Is the target of the satire Russia? Or is it an attempt to make a threat look like a harmless joke?
originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: sosobad
originally posted by: dollukka
a reply to: BornAgainAlien
Ukraine recaptured Debaltseve which is strategically important town because railway and highway between Donetsk and Luhansk go through it. Now Ukraine has to withdraw from there and who is going to benefit from that.. you guess.
Ukraine crisis won´t be over with second agreement it is only buying time.
originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: jude11
Really? I certainly haven't seen a state-sponsored video showing how the U.S. would invade various European/South American/Etc countries. But I live in Japan so maybe I missed that broadcast.
gentlewindd:Уровень слога и построения смысловых идиом в тексте на уровне передовицы сайта "Центрального новостного агентства КНДР" по непримиримости.
13/02/2015, 14:51
Специально посмотрел оригинал на англ. в доменной зоне dot gov(домен государственных учреждений и служб) whitehouse.gov и переводчики точно перевели накал агрессивности и пафоса этого отчета-стенограммы.
Американцы могут гордиться своими конгрессменами и политиками. Еще чуть-чуть и догонят Ким Чен Ына.
Ответить
inosmi.ru...
originally posted by: DJW001
originally posted by: DJW001
You mean you failed to read what you linked to again. The "satire" seems to be suggesting that if European leaders don't come to Russia to celebrate the end of the sSecond World War, Russia will attack them. You Don't see this as a veiled threat? reply to: sosobad
Even though the claims are shown to be false, many people will just read the OP and leave believing it's the truth.
satire
[sat-ahyuh r]
1. the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.
2. a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule.
Don't you forget to grab more screen captures