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.

 

Discussion About The Putin Stealthy Coup Rumors Mega-Thread...

page: 7
37
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
And I'm disappointed at the entire issue. This is abject speculation masquerading as journalism, as Phage's first post in the original thread stated. This kind of speculation is exactly why ATS is not taken seriously.


Not taken seriously by who? And why would you care? I ask because I've seen quite a few different people express this same feeling and I don't get it. Isn't this a forum where people come and 'talk'?

What would you consider as 'taken seriously'? Any media/news station on cable tv?? If that's the case, you know the majority of the people do NOT take them seriously I hope, if they even bother to watch. I haven't watched any news channel for over a year and I don't miss it a bit.

Neither do most others as they are caught in lie after lie, ratings are diving, and will continue to do so as the older generations pass on.

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years."

He went on to explain:

"It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries."

-- David Rockefeller, Speaking at the June, 1991 Bilderberger meeting in Baden, Germany




posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 10:59 PM
link   
SkepticOverlord, does that mean that someone could have made a thread in the "Breaking News Forum" about the blue/black-white /gold dress. I mean, twitter and Facebook were almost broken with the amount of posts about that dress.
I also have to say that I definitely believe that had (most) any other members made a thread about a rumor circulating on social media, you know as well as I do that thing would be in the Hoax bin after a few hours. As to weather or not Putin is alive/dead, or if a coup had happened, I guarantee we would have heard about it immediately when it happened.



posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: thesmokingman

Really? You're trying to obfuscate the issue into presuming that something like should be eligible for Breaking Alternative News? That's a significant stretch.

Additionally, as has been stated, the thread did not originate with social media rumors, but quickly evolved into coverage of the twitter storm sparked by the news item referenced in the opening post.



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Journalism was a profession of reporting facts.
Today Journalism is about creating sensationalism.
Why? better TRP rating, better income..enough already.
Who cares whether the story that creates the said hype is true or false?

The mega thread presents a dangerous precedent, where anyone can post a story under the headline of rumor & post it in any forum they like.
If it turns out to be fake, so what.. it was noted as a rumor, which could be true or false & can never be a hoax

I've been on ATS a long time, perhaps 5 years after lurking i registered.
But today's scene is a far away from where it was. The 'journalism' of yesteryear has been replaced with 'sensationalism' of today.
Granted there was actual research done, but it was done in a manner to justify the rumor.
Search hard enough for something & you will find it.

Social media can take anything viral.
That is not a premise for anything to be credible, or to state that it's can't be a hoax

Like someone pointed out early in this thread, the mega thread could be responsible for generating all the hype & the buzz in social media.
A sensational story keeps people coming in to this site, clicking baits..

If not the hoax bin, the gray area would certainly be a good place.
Or perhaps, create a 'rumors' forum where nothing can be binned.

You got to do what you got to do Skeptic Overlord, that's how life is today.
But i would prefer this site to be the last bastions of truth, if any would ever remain.
That beats having a bank full of money.

Again, all of the above is just my thoughts since you created this thread in defense of the other.

edit on 17-3-2015 by letmeDANz because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 12:51 AM
link   
a reply to: letmeDANz

ATS is not "journalism" It's a forum and things that are untrue get posted here all the time. Perhaps if you don't like a thread don't click on it?



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 12:53 AM
link   
That's an exceptionally high horse you have there.


originally posted by: letmeDANz
Journalism was a profession of reporting facts.

I'd like to add that in it's purest sense, it was more about finding the facts.



Today Journalism is about creating sensationalism.
Why? better TRP rating, better income..enough already.
Who cares whether the story that creates the said hype is true or false?

Journalism is still about finding and reporting facts. Actual professional journalism is rare today. You're describing contemporary news, not journalism.



The mega thread presents a dangerous precedent, where anyone can post a story under the headline of rumor & post it in any forum they like.
If it turns out to be fake, so what.. it was noted as a rumor, which could be true or false & can never be a hoax

Since when did a segment of members require professional journalistic standards from a website of casual non-journalists (ATS) where the primary focus is speculating on what mainstream news isn't telling us?



Social media can take anything viral.

Incorrect.



Like someone pointed out early in this thread, the mega thread could be responsible for generating all the hype & the buzz in social media.

Highly improbable, if not impossible. ATS does not have that level of clout.



If not the hoax bin, the gray area would certainly be a good place.

The topic is not a hoax. There have been dozens of stories (and some threads about those stories) over the past few months from analysis talking about rumors of turmoil at the Kremlin. Those didn't get, "oh, just a rumor, toss it into hoax," comments. But suddenly, mix in social media and...





But i would prefer this site to be the last bastions of truth, if any would ever remain.

Firstly, there was no non-thruth being reported. Everything mentioned in the thread was actually happening. Please explain how the reporting in the thread was any different than any other thread on a big topic, where so much is happening in real time?

The only difference: Twitter.



edit on 17-3-2015 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 01:39 AM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

i thought the thread was ok

(much better than this shocker: link)

i think the problem was the forum it was posted in - maybe a new forum should be started for this sort of thing

if it was in a 'social media rumours' forum and titled 'has putin been neutralised by a "stealthy coup"?' you would have probably got a lot less grief



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 04:39 AM
link   
I have Twitter, I am not averse to it, I use it professionally as an artist.

I post regularly on ATS and I realise that ATS having a Twitter page is par for the course in this day and age.

Having threads dedicated to rumour development on Twitter in the News forum is something that doesn't sit as easy.

No dinosaur here, but it seemed to lack integrity and looked very much like sensationalism which is the very thing that brings many ATS members here; a respite from the MSM lack of integrity and sensationalism and the ability to communicate higher order thinking.

It wasn't an inappropriate topic, it was worth discussing, perhaps as a conspiracy. I think if it was just less sensational and in a more appropriate forum it wouldn't have got the stick it did.

Members will say, and rightly so, an aspect of double standards from ''you can't say BS /sh** but we can'', ''you can't link RT as we think it's 'propaganda' but we will then applaud it and hire a guy from there whilst singing his praise'' to ''your thread will get moved /binned /thrown in hoaxed but if we do the same it won't''.

Expecting high standards is a matter of integrity and many members do care for the site and expect such, if it wasn't for the quality and integrity of many such members there wouldn't be the membership there is today, people join because of these very qualities, at least the decent long standing members do that contribute worthy content.



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 04:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Chickensalad

Leads me to believe that without your mega thread and all the speculation involved therein, this whole story was a non-issue for the rest of the world.

No, SO...I think your guilty of perpetuating speculation in the wrong forum and by ATS standards this was a Hoax plain and simple.

Eta- I think theres an obvious reason as to why no respected journalist was picking this up and running with it. You would think that if there was merit to the speculation then anybody with a press badge would be all over it trying to be the first to break the news.



Then you don't read much. I saw reports regarding "putin is missing" with plenty news outlets, Simple google search negates what you said.
Unless CNN, BBC, ABC New York times to name a few don't count?

edit on 17-3-2015 by zazzafrazz because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 08:06 AM
link   
a reply to: CagliostroTheGreat




As for the troglodytes afraid of social media... get used to it. Its not going anywhere anytime soon.


I don't think anyone is afraid of it or is naive to think its going away anytime soon.

Personally , i think social media is great for some things , but unfortunately it is also an exceptional tool for spreading rumors and gossip as we recently saw with the Putin fiasco.

IMO where social media really shines as a news source is when it has raw live video footage of an ongoing event. If not , I treat it as entertainment and nothing more..

Looking back at the Putin fiasco: The end result so far has been, that the majority of the information that was being reported turned out to be false via so called insiders,social media, and fringe websites.

Oddly enough the Putin fiasco appears to have been the one instance where traditional media actually shined and kept rumors to a minimum?

The question that some have from what I have seen in the posts is: should Social media be a valid news source for the breaking news forum despite being labeled as rumor?

It appears that SO thinks it should be and since he is the owner and we are his guest than I think their really isn't much to discuss. Personally , I go back and forth on it .



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 08:12 AM
link   
a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Very well said. This pretty much sums up how I feel about it as well. I came to this forum seeking truth, and find what I believe to be many times, thinking the astute members and mods did a good job of putting bs where it belongs.

It is not that I didn't enjoy this thread, I did immensely. It was so exciting. There were pieces of truth, amid the speculation. I was chomping at the bits to call some friends to tell them what I knew, before reported by the MSM. I am thankful I waited, and didn't blow my own credibility. I came so close, as this was presented as Breaking News.

It has nothing to do with Twitter or whatever media. I understand it was made clear from the get-go this was Rumor, it just needed to be in a forum other than Breaking News, as was indicated by several Members from the start. That is the way I though it worked.



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

You are part of an elite few on this site that I give a LARGE amount of respect to when reading. But, on this, I think you may be going overboard. I do see the point of not having a rumor in the "breaking news forum" and I think Phage (also on that list) pointed that out with good intentions. But regardless of where it was posted, these are the kind of threads that make ATS what it is. Presenting a story, looking for any and all facts to drive the information is what we all do here. We aren't journalists. We aren't professionals in this arena, but we are as a group, able to make sense of things amazingly quick.

With respect,
ND



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   
People, we're talking about the Breaking Political News forum, not the Breaking Alternative News forum. It's traditionally been the Breaking Alternative News forum that has somewhat higher standards for originating source, not the Breaking Political News forum.

Also, as has been mentioned, several times, one mention on a social media site isn't news (depending on the source), thousands of mentions is news.

And no, there won't be a "Rumors" forum. With the exception of a few forums on ATS, most of them cover rumors in their various categories.



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord



It's traditionally been the Breaking Alternative News forum that has somewhat higher standards for originating source, not the Breaking Political News forum.


and yet you let this thread run in 'breaking alternative news'

the putin thread was infinitely better sourced than that

having said that i still think there is something significant in putin's disappearance - i get the impression they were deliberately playing up the mystery

i definitely favour shenanigans over illness at the moment- he did look a bit ropey at his brief reappearance however




posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: aynock
and yet you let this thread run in 'breaking alternative news'

I'm not familiar with that thread (don't presume I see more than 10-15% of threads), but don't immediately see the issue. Looks to be an original interview with a newsmaker.



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

i meant 'you' the staff in general

just trying to understand the rules




posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord




The topic is not a hoax. There have been dozens of stories (and some threads about those stories) over the past few months from analysis talking about rumors of turmoil at the Kremlin. Those didn't get, "oh, just a rumor, toss it into hoax," comments. But suddenly, mix in social media and...

Mr. Overlord. I must respectfully disagree with the above statement. If it did not indeed happen, but was reported to have as you claim, it definitely does qualify as a hoax. It did not happen, period. I made a well thought out thread a few months ago, that was thrown in the hoax bin. The thread was about Ebola being manufactured as a bio-weapon by the US. It was a journalist(a real one), that reported this and was claimed by others as well. I didn't even claim it as fact, just asked ATS about the possibility that it was possible. Thread was very interesting then BOOM! Into the hoax bin.
Also, I believe the above poster had a GREAT idea with adding a Rumors forum for just this type of instance. We should be able to speculate from all angles of a story, even if they are not what we are "being told". I mean come on, you mean to tell me if it is NOT reported by the MSM, then it is garbage and false? Like they have never lied to us before? The MSM being controlled by mostly by seven Jewish-Americans. Trust me, they do have an agenda. I thought that ATS was a place where all were welcome to "speculate" on theoretical angles, and to deny the ignorance of the "Official Story"? That should mean everyone, not just a few.
edit on 17-3-2015 by thesmokingman because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesmokingman
If it did not indeed happen, but was reported to have as you claim, it definitely does qualify as a hoax.

What are you claiming "didn't happen?"



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: thesmokingman
If it did not indeed happen, but was reported to have as you claim, it definitely does qualify as a hoax.

What are you claiming "didn't happen?"





That there was no attempted coup...unless I missed something, which is possible?



posted on Mar, 17 2015 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: thesmokingman

That's neither been confirmed or denied. The mere fact that Putin is now in public doesn't automatically mean a coup didn't happen. The gaggle of real analysts (Stratfor today) seeing strong signs of turmoil "at the palace" seems to grow every week. And Stratfor specifically laid out how Putin would remain a figurehead for six-months if the Oligarchs neutralized his power.

The sudden escalation of Russian military is actually a strong indication that more hawkish hands may now involved. It was precisely the scenario laid out by coverage of a Stratfor study a few months back where Putin still appeared to be in charge.

The jury is far from out.




top topics



 
37
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join