Why Belarus Is About To Get Interesting

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

It's the product of the journalist's work. I don't play ideological top trumps by throwing quote processed by third party individuals.

Yes you do! Whenever you quote globalresearch.com.

I do rely on something called critical analysis.

I have seen no evidence of that.

A news should never be dismissed because of it's sole source.

On the contrary, if there is only a single source it should be regarded as unconfirmed, and therefore suspect. In fact, some sources are known to be completely unreliable. How do we know that this journalist is any better than Sorcha Faal?

Didn't I use bilderberg-sponsored links as well ?

Only when you can misinterpret them to suit your agenda.

No, as you never explained why you felt that your personal consideration of the current situation in Belarus is supposedly more accurate than what a citizen of the said country may have to say about it.

The journalist was reporting his perception of events. I'm pretty sure he was not present at any meeting held privately between Lukaschenko and Lavrov, so all he is doing is repeating the official story uncritically. Am I not entitled to form my own opinion?

So, you don't agree with what the guy has to say but you consider it's spinning information anyway.

But I agree with the facts he presents; that Russia will not get all the bases it wants. I disagree with his interpretation of the facts: that it was a mutual decision. As I said, he was not present at the talks and is, at best, parroting his own source.

Why do you say the journalist is pro-Russian ?

Because he presents the facts in a way designed to save Russia face. If he were pro Belarussian, he would have portrayed it as a heroic move by Lukaschenko.

originally posted by: DJW001
I don't know about that. Democratic republics can be unpredictable.


For those who try to manipulate them, for others they're just supposed to be democratic.

Completely backwards, of course. Democracies are unpredictable because people are unpredictable. Fascist states like Russia and Syria are extremely predictable because they are thoroughly manipulated from above.

No, I mean the electoral process will grant him another mandate because the majority of people living in Belarus think he should be the next President.

Do you honestly believe that? Do you honestly believe that people overwhelmingly vote someone into power decade after decade because they think he's the best man to run the country?

Do you support meddling with electoral process ?

Absolutely not, but I do support the freedom of speech. Foundations that educate people about democracy are not meddling with the electoral process, they are strengthening it. As for US hackers allegedly interfering with the recent Russian elections, perhaps Vladimir Churov is making that claim in order to make good on his earlier claim:

The head of the Central Election Commission has told reporters that certain “foreign foundations” were planning provocations on the upcoming nationwide Election Day and promised that law enforcers would soon publish documented proof.

“We have information about the activities of some foreign foundations, including activities on Russian territory aimed at thwarting the voting process in certain Russian regions,” Vladimir Churov said at a Wednesday press conference in Moscow.

Official Russian News Organization.

It is now 15:00 in Moscow on the last business day of the week. I assume we will be seeing that watertight evidence some time in the next two hours.Keep checking here.

Why do you consider that isolating the said countries is likely to put them on the path for more democracy ?

Where do I say that I do? I believe in engagement, not isolation.

Sorry but your own government recognizes the virtues of dialogue as well.

Why are you sorry? I'm actually happy that this administration is beginning to reach out to Cuba and Iran... even though I have friends who suffered because of those regimes.

originally posted by: DJW001
Yes you do! Whenever you quote globalresearch.com.

Please share with us the list of the news sources that should be blacklisted in the name of democracy and freedom of speech.

originally posted by: DJW001
I have seen no evidence of that.

That's because you must know about critical analysis in order to be able to spot it.

originally posted by: DJW001
On the contrary, if there is only a single source it should be regarded as unconfirmed, and therefore suspect. In fact, some sources are known to be completely unreliable. How do we know that this journalist is any better than Sorcha Faal?

What previously posted information do you want to double-check ?

originally posted by: DJW001
Only when you can misinterpret them to suit your agenda.

Which bilderberg-sponsored source did I misinterpret ?

originally posted by: DJW001
The journalist was reporting his perception of events. I'm pretty sure he was not present at any meeting held privately between Lukaschenko and Lavrov, so all he is doing is repeating the official story uncritically. Am I not entitled to form my own opinion?

Are journalists attending every single meeting taking place in the Oval office ?

originally posted by: DJW001
But I agree with the facts he presents; that Russia will not get all the bases it wants. I disagree with his interpretation of the facts: that it was a mutual decision. As I said, he was not present at the talks and is, at best, parroting his own source.

Why do you consider it's a journalist interpretation if indeed it was a mutual decision ?
Do you have any facts to present or is it just your interpretation ?

originally posted by: DJW001
Because he presents the facts in a way designed to save Russia face. If he were pro Belarussian, he would have portrayed it as a heroic move by Lukaschenko.

Can you have a consideration of things that is not based on the Russian/American antagonism ?
Is there a place between Pro-Russian/Anti-American and Pro-American/Anti-Russian ?

originally posted by: DJW001
Completely backwards, of course. Democracies are unpredictable because people are unpredictable. Fascist states like Russia and Syria are extremely predictable because they are thoroughly manipulated from above.

Elected politicians should be taking decisions as of their pre-electoral announcements/promises. That's where the predictability comes from.

originally posted by: DJW001
Do you honestly believe that? Do you honestly believe that people overwhelmingly vote someone into power decade after decade because they think he's the best man to run the country?

I don't have the ambition to pretend that I know what the Belarussians think.
At least Lukaschenko has the experience of the job.

originally posted by: DJW001
Absolutely not, but I do support the freedom of speech. Foundations that educate people about democracy are not meddling with the electoral process, they are strengthening it. As for US hackers allegedly interfering with the recent Russian elections, perhaps Vladimir Churov is making that claim in order to make good on his earlier claim:

...

Once again, who pays the elections observers. It's scary when you realise that institution like the OSCE or the NED are serving Soros agenda.

originally posted by: DJW001
Where do I say that I do? I believe in engagement, not isolation.

It never appeared obvious to me.

originally posted by: DJW001
Why are you sorry? I'm actually happy that this administration is beginning to reach out to Cuba and Iran... even though I have friends who suffered because of those regimes.

How about Russia ?

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Please share with us the list of the news sources that should be blacklisted in the name of democracy and freedom of speech.

The idea of a blacklist is completely alien to me. I urge people to read widely. It doesn't take long before you can spot a writer's agenda.

That's because you must know about critical analysis in order to be able to spot it.

"I know you are, but what am I?" Why don't you provide an example of your critical thought. All I've seen from you is parroting of Fascist media points.

What previously posted information do you want to double-check ?

What is this in reference to?

Which bilderberg-sponsored source did I misinterpret ?

What sources do you consider to be "Bilderberg sponsored?" Provide a link to one of your posts that uses one and I'll be happy to oblige.

Are journalists attending every single meeting taking place in the Oval office ?

Which is why journalists in America preface statements with phrases like: "According to a White House official..." When they speculate, they make it clear it is speculation: "Some pundits are saying...."

Why do you consider it's a journalist interpretation if indeed it was a mutual decision ?

Because that's what "analysis" means:

Analysis of recent news on the Russian base in Belarus paints a slightly different picture. Minsk and Moscow gave up plans to put Russian fighter jets next door to NATO member states. Russia will get only one base in Babruysk, and later than it had originally planned.

Original source. [Emphasis mine. --DJW001

Do you have any facts to present or is it just your interpretation ?

No, just my own analysis. Russia has been taking advantage of Belarus because the EU does not approve of its Fascist government. It starting to look like Belarus is starting to look west.

Can you have a consideration of things that is not based on the Russian/American antagonism ?

All the time. It just so happens that this thread is about Russian/Belorussian relations, and most analysts seem to think that they are cooling. Why are you trying to drag America in to this? Luschenko is looking towards Europe not the US. Oh, wait, I forget that you think everything that happens is because of America's plotting.

Is there a place between Pro-Russian/Anti-American and Pro-American/Anti-Russian ?

Yes, though you will never find it so long as you remain fixed on the Anti-America axis. (And "axis" i the perfect word for it.)

a reply to: DJW001

Hey, you're skipping more and more often bits of my replies ... can't you negatively comment every single thing I say ?

I felt some the discomfort while you're dealing with your own contradictions but I'd really like to know, in scope of this thread : what's so embarrassing for you agenda about the renewal of dialogue between the US and the Russians ?

I - on the other hand - will comment everything you said - if necessary :

originally posted by: DJW001
The idea of a blacklist is completely alien to me. I urge people to read widely. It doesn't take long before you can spot a writer's agenda.

You have no blacklist but globalresearch.com - at least - is on it.
Hypocrite.

originally posted by: DJW001
"I know you are, but what am I?" Why don't you provide an example of your critical thought. All I've seen from you is parroting of Fascist media points.

This is a reply about a previous statement of mine related to critical analysis.
How can you perform critical analysis with a supposedly non-existing blacklist featuring entries anyway ?

originally posted by: DJW001
What is this in reference to?

My previous quote you didn't reply in a comprehensive way probably.

originally posted by: DJW001
What sources do you consider to be "Bilderberg sponsored?" Provide a link to one of your posts that uses one and I'll be happy to oblige.

I don't mean to drift the thread on the of the bilderberg. There are enough threads on ATS about them.
I provided a link in previous post to a picture 'mapping' the connections within the bilderberg to various US companies. If you agree to consider it and unless you negate the bilderberg's existense or the fact that Soros is part of it, you can see various media companies listed on it. I linked some of them, the Washington post is the first one I came across. The picture is quite large.
Which western-sourced article did I misinterpret anyway ?

originally posted by: DJW001
Which is why journalists in America preface statements with phrases like: "According to a White House official..." When they speculate, they make it clear it is speculation: "Some pundits are saying...."

Why didn't you react in the same way to the highly speculative nature of the information provided by the OP then ?

originally posted by: DJW001
Because that's what "analysis" means:

Analysis of recent news on the Russian base in Belarus paints a slightly different picture. Minsk and Moscow gave up plans to put Russian fighter jets next door to NATO member states. Russia will get only one base in Babruysk, and later than it had originally planned.

Original source.

Minsk and Moscow ... so it's a mutual agreement between Belarus and Russia, right ?

originally posted by: DJW001
No, just my own analysis. Russia has been taking advantage of Belarus because the EU does not approve of its Fascist government. It starting to look like Belarus is starting to look west.

And in order to make you statement more convincing you skipped the answer to this previous question :
Why do you feel that your personal consideration of the current situation in Belarus is supposedly more accurate than what a citizen of the said country may have to say about it ?

originally posted by: DJW001
All the time. It just so happens that this thread is about Russian/Belorussian relations, and most analysts seem to think that they are cooling. Why are you trying to drag America in to this? Luschenko is looking towards Europe not the US. Oh, wait, I forget that you think everything that happens is because of America's plotting.

I'm European, I oppose America's messing in Europe in favour of the interest of it's own oligarchs. I don't mind if it's on the eastern or western side of the former iron curtain.

originally posted by: DJW001
Yes, though you will never find it so long as you remain fixed on the Anti-America axis. (And "axis" i the perfect word for it.)

So you didn't rewatch the Jimmy Carter video and still think America can only be righteous ... You don't have to do your fascist/nazi ranting for that.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Hey, you're skipping more and more often bits of my replies ... can't you negatively comment every single thing I say ?

There are character limits, but I'll try.

I felt some the discomfort while you're dealing with your own contradictions but I'd really like to know, in scope of this thread : what's so embarrassing for you agenda about the renewal of dialogue between the US and the Russians ?

I'm not the one with contradictions, you are. You claim that you favor democracy and are opposed to Nazism, yet you idolize dictators, admire military aggression (except by the United States, of course) and find Jews irritating.

I - on the other hand - will comment everything you said - if necessary :

Okay.

You have no blacklist but globalresearch.com - at least - is on it. Hypocrite.

I don't think you understand what the expression means. Globalresearch,com is welcome to post whatever it wants. Because anyone with functioning brain cells can readily see what its biases are, it can be a valuable source of information. Mostly, it tells you what its agenda wants you to believe. On the other hand, if by "blacklist"you just mean that you don't trust the source, then you've blacklisted all sources "owned" by the Bilderbergs, hypocrite.

This is a reply about a previous statement of mine related to critical analysis.
How can you perform critical analysis with a supposedly non-existing blacklist featuring entries anyway ?

Critical analysis is what makes it possible to read posts on the internet and divine their truthfulness or the degree of bias, That's why a blacklist is unnecessary. Critical thinking is what allows one to read the propaganda at globalresearch.com and use it to understand Kremlin policy!

originally posted by: DJW001
What is this in reference to?


My previous quote you didn't reply in a comprehensive way probably.

Was that supposed to be helpful?

I don't mean to drift the thread on the of the bilderberg. There are enough threads on ATS about them.
I provided a link in previous post to a picture 'mapping' the connections within the bilderberg to various US companies. If you agree to consider it and unless you negate the bilderberg's existense or the fact that Soros is part of it, you can see various media companies listed on it. I linked some of them, the Washington post is the first one I came across. The picture is quite large.

The problem is that there are two "Bilderbergs," just like there are two "Freemasons," two "Catholic Churches," and two "Jews." There is the actual one that exists in the real world, and there is the fantastical one that exists in the imagination of paranoiacs. In the real world, the Bilderberg Group is basically an exclusive club for the rich and/or powerful. It exists to allow influential people to network with one another. They do not necessarily have the same political or economic views, but their annual meetings allow them to communicate and reach understandings. Anyway, is it surprising that a club that exists to allow people to network with one another would appear to be at the center of a huge network?

Then there is the second Bilderberg. This is an imaginary force of evil in league with Satan, Reptilian Extraterrestrials, or both. Let's apply some critical thinking here. You linked to an image hosted on bibliotechpleyades.com. Am I correct in assuming you consider this to be a reliable source? What do you make of this:

www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer_anunnaki/reptiles/reptiles13.htm

...or this...

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

...or this...

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

Now don't get me wrong... I don't think that site should be censored or blacklisted. On the contrary, it is even funnier than The Onion in its way. The problem is, some people who lack critical thinking abilities take these things seriously. They can become delusional and harm themselves or others.

Which western-sourced article did I misinterpret anyway ?

Don't worry, I'll point it out the next time you do it. By the way, I tried doing a quick search for posts where you linked to a "Bilderberg" source, but all of your links turn out to be Neo-Nazi. Why is that?

Why didn't you react in the same way to the highly speculative nature of the information provided by the OP then ?

How do you order me to react? My entry into the thread had to do with the way Russian fellow travelers over-inflate the importance of the BRICs "alliance." I don't think I've bothered to comment on the OP at all, as it is speculation.

Minsk and Moscow ... so it's a mutual agreement between Belarus and Russia, right ?

That's what the analyst would have you believe.

And in order to make you statement more convincing you skipped the answer to this previous question :
Why do you feel that your personal consideration of the current situation in Belarus is supposedly more accurate than what a citizen of the said country may have to say about it ?

The citizen of said country is living in Berlin and relying on news reports like the rest of us. I'm sure he has a deeper understanding of Belorussian politics than I do but, as I have patiently explained, he was not privy to the actual negotiations. All he really knows is what he's read in the newspapers, and some of them are probably Bilderberg.

I'm European, I oppose America's messing in Europe in favour of the interest of it's own oligarchs. I don't mind if it's on the eastern or western side of the former iron curtain.

And yet you don't mind Russia messing with Europe towards its own ends. Why?

So you didn't rewatch the Jimmy Carter video and still think America can only be righteous ... You don't have to do your fascist/nazi ranting for that.

Where do I ever even imply that America can only be righteous? We've gotten our hands dirty all over the world... but you refuse to acknowledge that we can also be a force for good. If it wasn't for the United States, Belgium might still be ruled by the Third Reich. Oh, wait... now I get it.

a reply to: ufoorbhunter

There is a significant number of Russian citizens who have joined ISIS and who are actively fighting with them, mainly coming from the north Caucus region.

a reply to: Xcathdra

There is a significant number of Russian citizens

Why you are telling just half of the story. Indeed there are significant numbers of Chechen extreme muslims and muslims from Dagestan which joined Isis. But they were radicalized with the help of Saudia, Qatar, Turkey and ... yes USA.

a reply to: kitzik

Because there are a significant number of Russian citizens fighting for ISIS. Feel free to link to your sources where the US is training the Russians.

Any chance you get to try and blame the US and other countries is getting old, especially when you make the claim yet fail to support it.

Its good to know that you think Russia is really that incompetent though. Welcome back... I thought your other account was banned?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Because there are a significant number of Russian citizens fighting for ISIS. Feel free to link to your sources where the US is training the Russians.

Let's be clear: there are quite a lot Chechen nationals with Russian Federations official papers. There are also many French, German and British home grown jihadist fighting today on ISIS side.

USA have a long history starting from Afghan mujaheddins supporting and nurturing militant islam factions. USA is often declaring them later as a terrorist groups officially. This is the policy of USA in the last 30 years.

I have no other accounts and was never banned.

USA giving political asylum to dubious persons which are considered terrorists in Russia.
www.wnd.com...

It gave asylum to Tzarnaev brothers, those snakes can bite average american citizens too, but US goverment is willing to take the risks for the greater benefit in geopolitical games. Asylum cases are just an open part ( and may be you can argue that some of those people deserving political asylum) but there is also of a lot of secret CIA operations and fundings.

originally posted by: DJW001

I'm not the one with contradictions, you are. You claim that you favor democracy and are opposed to Nazism, yet you idolize dictators, admire military aggression (except by the United States, of course) and find Jews irritating.

In order to better advocate them, you should provide us a list of crimes for which 'being jewish' is an excuse.

originally posted by: DJW001
I don't think you understand what the expression means. Globalresearch,com is welcome to post whatever it wants. Because anyone with functioning brain cells can readily see what its biases are, it can be a valuable source of information. Mostly, it tells you what its agenda wants you to believe. On the other hand, if by "blacklist"you just mean that you don't trust the source, then you've blacklisted all sources "owned" by the Bilderbergs, hypocrite.

No, I showed you that I mentioned the Washington post earlier.
I don't like Fox news. I hope you don't consider everybody who thinks the same is a fascist nazi.
I don't dismiss Fox news just for being Fox news. Let's take Megyn Kelly for ex., I generally totally dislikes her analysis but, if I had to take stance in her debate against Trump, I'd rather be on her side. In the same way, I really liked her when she shot down in flames Cheney and his daughter about the Irak war legacy.

originally posted by: DJW001
Critical analysis is what makes it possible to read posts on the internet and divine their truthfulness or the degree of bias, That's why a blacklist is unnecessary. Critical thinking is what allows one to read the propaganda at globalresearch.com and use it to understand Kremlin policy!

Are your analysis based on divination ?

originally posted by: DJW001
The problem is that there are two "Bilderbergs," ...

Your original request was :
"What sources do you consider to be "Bilderberg sponsored?" Provide a link to one of your posts that uses one and I'll be happy to oblige. "
As I said earlier the Washington post for ex. Bought in 2013 by Jeff Bezos, notorious Bilderberg member.
Are you happy to oblige ?

originally posted by: DJW001
Don't worry, I'll point it out the next time you do it. By the way, I tried doing a quick search for posts where you linked to a "Bilderberg" source, but all of your links turn out to be Neo-Nazi. Why is that?

Why are you fabricating facts ? Where did I mention panamza articles ? How many times and in how many other threads did I mention them ? I won't pretend it to be zero, but how many times (I thing they were all related to the Paris shootings earlier this year)? Why do you consider panamza neo-nazis ?

originally posted by: DJW001
How do you order me to react? My entry into the thread had to do with the way Russian fellow travelers over-inflate the importance of the BRICs "alliance." I don't think I've bothered to comment on the OP at all, as it is speculation.

I'm not ordering you to do anything but I'm happy we agree on the speculative nature of the OP.

originally posted by: DJW001
The citizen of said country is living in Berlin and relying on news reports like the rest of us. I'm sure he has a deeper understanding of Belorussian politics than I do but, as I have patiently explained, he was not privy to the actual negotiations. All he really knows is what he's read in the newspapers, and some of them are probably Bilderberg.

Hence the virtue of doing a comparaison with non-bilderberg sources.
And thus, hence the virtue of having newssources that are independent from the Bilderberg.
Why to you consider that the only way to refute an embarassing fact is to discredit its source ?

originally posted by: DJW001
And yet you don't mind Russia messing with Europe towards its own ends. Why?

There aren't that much Russian lobbies corrupting Europe.
Russia needs to be painted as 'big bad Russia', otherwise NATO has simply no reason to exist.
By the way, I have to ask it for the 4th time as you still didn't reply to the following question :
What's so embarrassing for you agenda about the renewal of dialogue between the US and the Russians ?

originally posted by: DJW001
Where do I ever even imply that America can only be righteous? We've gotten our hands dirty all over the world... but you refuse to acknowledge that we can also be a force for good. If it wasn't for the United States, Belgium might still be ruled by the Third Reich. Oh, wait... now I get it.

Mutti Merkel and her austerity policies is not the most popular european leader (exept among oligarchs) but only idiots feels the need to do some nazi ranting against her for that.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

In order to better advocate them, you should provide us a list of crimes for which 'being jewish' is an excuse.

Why bother? You seem to think being Jewish is a crime in itself.



Mmmmm... feel the hate...

No, I showed you that I mentioned the Washington post earlier.

I still can't find that quote.

I don't like Fox news.

Neither do I.

I hope you don't consider everybody who thinks the same is a fascist nazi.

On the contrary, I suspect Americans who watch Fox News are crypto-fascists because of its ultra-nationalism. Obviously, ultra-nationalists from other countries will not like Fox's American ultra-nationalism.

I don't dismiss Fox news just for being Fox news.

Good; you're starting to learn. Although it is filled with lies, analysis of the lies can tell you what the Republican Party's political strategy is.

Let's take Megyn Kelly for ex., I generally totally dislikes her analysis but, if I had to take stance in her debate against Trump, I'd rather be on her side. In the same way, I really liked her when she shot down in flames Cheney and his daughter about the Irak war legacy.

I have no idea what you're talking about. I am ignoring the current political circus. Everyone knows Trump will cut a deal at the convention.

Are your analysis based on divination ?

No, my divination is based upon the critical analysis of facts. (See above.)

As I said earlier the Washington post for ex. Bought in 2013 by Jeff Bezos, notorious Bilderberg member.
Are you happy to oblige ?

Ah, yes! Jeff Bezos, notorious AshkeNAZI Jew....

Why are you fabricating facts ? Where did I mention panamza articles ? How many times and in how many other threads did I mention them ? I won't pretend it to be zero, but how many times (I thing they were all related to the Paris shootings earlier this year)? Why do you consider panamza neo-nazis ?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

(I don't have time to track down all your references, but Panamza is linked to Alain Soral, who is in turn linked to Kontre Kulture, and if your Nazi detector doesn't pick up on this one it must be broken.

I'm not ordering you to do anything but I'm happy we agree on the speculative nature of the OP.

Now all we have to do is wait for events to play out.

Hence the virtue of doing a comparaison with non-bilderberg sources.
And thus, hence the virtue of having newssources that are independent from the Bilderberg.

Do you really believe there is such a thing? There is information and disinformation. If you believe that the Bilderbergs are a grand unified conspiracy, they must control them all.

Why to you consider that the only way to refute an embarassing fact is to discredit its source ?

Why do you think that a chart from a website that posts articles about aliens from invisible planets controlling human destiny is a fact?

There aren't that much Russian lobbies corrupting Europe.

Correct; they prefer old fashioned bribery and blackmail, although they are happy to support Fascist and Neo-Nazi organizations, as I have explained here. Or do you not consider organizing and funding Nazis to be corrupting?

Russia needs to be painted as 'big bad Russia', otherwise NATO has simply no reason to exist.

Not necessarily, although Putin is certainly doing his best to oblige. NATO and Russia could be fighting Islamic terrorism together, but that's not going to happen now. Instead, he's sending Russian fighters to Syria where they might "accidentally" shoot down a NATO jet. (Which he will then claim is a false flag.)

By the way, I have to ask it for the 4th time as you still didn't reply to the following question :
What's so embarrassing for you agenda about the renewal of dialogue between the US and the Russians ?

Why do you keep asking a question I have already answered three times? Do you not read other people's posts at all? I do not find dialogue between the United States and the Russian Federation embarrassing at all. On the contrary, I embrace it. It may wind up saving Russian lives if Putin knows what is good for his people and does it.

Mutti Merkel and her austerity policies is not the most popular european leader (exept among oligarchs) but only idiots feels the need to do some nazi ranting against her for that.

Where did that come from? What does it have to do with anything?

Didn't someone post to an item on rt.com claiming that the United States was interefering in the Russian elections? And that the Election Commissioner would have startling proof by the end of last week? Well, here's the official word:

www.rt.com...

You can't make this stuff up.

originally posted by: DJW001
Why bother? You seem to think being Jewish is a crime in itself.

As if I was the one who is trolling about the Jewishness of individuals in order to advocate them ...
I have other pictures in my collection as well.

originally posted by: DJW001
I still can't find that quote.

In this post, in reply of your previous trolling about anti-russian hooliganism.
Click the 'Netherlands' link.

originally posted by: DJW001
Good; you're starting to learn. Although it is filled with lies, analysis of the lies can tell you what the Republican Party's political strategy is.

I will kindly remind you that I had to refresh your memory about the existence of critical analysis.
You will hardly find me defending the GOP.

originally posted by: DJW001
Ah, yes! Jeff Bezos, notorious AshkeNAZI Jew....

So thanks to the jewishness of individuals some don't even need to be a convicted criminal like Soros to be out reach for criticism ?

originally posted by: DJW001
www.abovetopsecret.com...

(I don't have time to track down all your references, but Panamza is linked to Alain Soral, who is in turn linked to Kontre Kulture, and if your Nazi detector doesn't pick up on this one it must be broken.

Is mentioning the site existence and the fact that it is being targeted by French censorship authority a move against freedom of speech and democracy ?

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
IMO, the French gov is more specifically targeting the websites of Dieudonné, Alain Soral, Panamza and likes. In other words, sites that are mainly critics of Israel.

originally posted by: DJW001
Do you really believe there is such a thing? There is information and disinformation. If you believe that the Bilderbergs are a grand unified conspiracy, they must control them all.

I remember that you accused me of misinterpreting sources but could not provide a single example.

originally posted by: DJW001
Why do you think that a chart from a website that posts articles about aliens from invisible planets controlling human destiny is a fact?

In reply to : Why to you consider that the only way to refute an embarrassing fact is to discredit its source ?
So discredit and ranting is what your arguments are made of.

originally posted by: DJW001
Why do you keep asking a question I have already answered three times? Do you not read other people's posts at all? I do not find dialogue between the United States and the Russian Federation embarrassing at all. On the contrary, I embrace it. It may wind up saving Russian lives if Putin knows what is good for his people and does it.

I never refuted your ability to produce empty statements vaguely related. This is actually the first time you provide a real answer to the said question. You never really gave the impression you embraced dialogue.

There is one statement of you I won't try to refute :

originally posted by: DJW001
The technique has actually gotten me a death threat, which I am forwarding to the Mods. The truth hurts.

I can perfectly understand that you managed to irritate people up to a point where they end up sending you death threats. The Mods have better thing to do, like probably consider the statements of individuals who obviously have no interest about a specific subject are just here to troll.

originally posted by: DJW001
My entry into the thread had to do with the way Russian fellow travelers over-inflate the importance of the BRICs "alliance." I don't think I've bothered to comment on the OP at all, as it is speculation.

In order to advocate the virtues of constructive dialogue with anyone who is ready to stay on topic, I announce that Vladimir Putin and the President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko took part in the second Forum of Russian and Belarusian regions on 17 - 18 September in Sotchi.

I can't unfortunately provide no source because ... you know ...
If you are interested in the outcome of the said forum, find info wherever it pleases you.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Yes, Russia is building an airbase in Belarus. It's not like Lukaschenko has any choice, is it?

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

I can perfectly understand that you managed to irritate people up to a point where they end up sending you death threats.

In other words when people irritate you, like the Jews do, you want to kill them. That ends this off topic discussion.

a reply to: DJW001

Do you have kids ?
Kids are the best gift anyone can get in life. You'd do everything for your kids.
But, no matter how much you love them, kids can be irritating too.
You just don't want to kill them for that.
Do you know when a kid is the most irritating ?
As most parent could confirm, it's not when he crap his pants or refuse to eat, it's when he just can stop whining for no obvious reason.

Now feel free to satisfy your ego by having the last word answering the following question :
WTF do you think you are to feel entitled to judge anyone on an individual basis on this forum ?

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

I do not judge anyone. Just because I have made you aware of how other people see you, that does not mean anyone is judging you but yourself. In fact, I have urged you to "own" your politics. You will be happier, and no longer feel the need to be so defensive. Now, let's return to topic. Automakers intent on provoking NATO by moving his forces closer to member territories. Why do you think he is exposing the Russian people to the risks that entails?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

I do not judge anyone. Just because I have made you aware of how other people see you, that does not mean anyone is judging you but yourself. In fact, I have urged you to "own" your politics. You will be happier, and no longer feel the need to be so defensive. Now, let's return to topic. Automakers intent on provoking NATO by moving his forces closer to member territories. Why do you think he is exposing the Russian people to the risks that entails?

ETA: How did autocorrect turn Putin into Automakers?

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
WTF do you think you are to feel entitled to judge anyone on an individual basis on this forum ?

WTF does any of this have o do with the topic, which is Belarus?