"Pre-Packaged" BBC News Report of War Breaking-out Between Russia ...truncated

I watched it and a few others like it.

Just seemed like an exercise in what if, rather than a hoax.

To be honest, it's a lot less creepy than the actual pre recorded broadcasts etc to be used in the event of an actual nuclear attack.

Like this one, for instance.

www.bbc.co.uk...

Or this

www.bbc.co.uk...

a reply to: notmyrealname

If fighting war is likened to reporters, are military who lost their lives in war merely news reporters?

a reply to: notmyrealname

Damned scary post, OP. Why do you think all this war propaganda is being used by BBC and others? Brexit related? Warmongering for 4th of July?

a reply to: BO XIAN

I understand that the New York Times has a massive headline ready announcing THE RAPTURE and 2ND COMING OF CHRIST

You understand from 1) God telling you or 2) you have insider info???

....do tell....you're keeping us in suspense....

a reply to: notmyrealname

Yeah, so NATO has been fine with Russia all the time and accepted a mutually agreed upon 'buffer zone' until some brainiac gets the idea that they need a new superpower enemy and incites a coup in Ukraine,

Interesting because NATO had nothing to do with Ukraine, and if they wanted to get at Russia they would have accepted Ukraine when they applied the first time...but they didn't so they obviously don't want to get at Russia that bad.

As for your coupe...love that propaganda Russia started because their boy was being impeached, that his own political party was part of doing.

Russia responds much in the way that the US would respond to a crisis on their border and now Eastern European NATO members get new "defensive" weapon system while NATO amasses offensive forces all around Russia while citing "Russian Aggression".

Except they caused the crisis...take a little gander at what they had to say months before the first protests in Ukraine even started...

Then president knew the people wanted to be part of the EU but Russia didn't want to lose out to them, so they strongarm Ukraine into staying with Russia against what the people wanted and were promised by the president at the time.

"For the first time in our history more than 50% of people support European integration, and less than 30% of the people support closer ties with Russia," said Poroshenko. "Thank you very much for that Mr Glazyev."

And here is Russia's response...

Glazyev, speaking on the sidelines of the discussion, said the exact opposite was true: "Ukrainian authorities make a huge mistake if they think that the Russian reaction will become neutral in a few years from now. This will not happen." Instead, he said, signing the agreement would make the default of Ukraine inevitable and Moscow would not offer any helping hand. "Russia is the main creditor of Ukraine. Only with customs union with Russia can Ukraine balance its trade," he said. Russia has already slapped import restrictions on certain Ukrainian products and Glazyev did not rule out further sanctions if the agreement was signed.

The Kremlin aide added that the political and social cost of EU integration could also be high, and allowed for the possibility of separatist movements springing up in the Russian-speaking east and south of Ukraine. He suggested that if Ukraine signed the agreement, Russia would consider the bilateral treaty that delineates the countries' borders to be void. "We don't want to use any kind of blackmail. This is a question for the Ukrainian people," said Glazyev. "But legally, signing this agreement about association with EU, the Ukrainian government violates the treaty on strategic partnership and friendship with Russia." When this happened, he said, Russia could no longer guarantee Ukraine's status as a state and could possibly intervene if pro-Russian regions of the country appealed directly to Moscow. "Signing this treaty will lead to political and social unrest," said the Kremlin aide. "The living standard will decline dramatically … there will be chaos."

www.theguardian.com...

And the protests and subsequent removal of Yanukovych was indeed not anything to do with NATO, as it was the entrance into the EU that caused Russia's government to act like a little bitch because someone didn't want to stay under their proxy rule any longer.

SO before making comments you should at least try and get the facts straight.

While you are chewing on that, let's look at NATO members "Aggression" on the sovereign nations....

Please do, but you should understand that just because a country is a NATO member they can and do act as their own country that doesn't have to involve NATO.

SO just as Turkey acted against Russia for violating their airspace, and that didn't involve NATO.

Notice the glaring difference in how many countries NATO members have decimated lately?

SO what is your definition of decimated?

dec·i·mate ˈde-sə-ˌmāt

Simple Definition of decimate

: to destroy a large number of (plants, animals, people, etc.)

: to severely damage or destroy a large part of (something)

www.merriam-webster.com...

Now exactly what NATO countries would fit that?

a reply to: NewzNose

Damned scary post,

It's a hoax...meaning it isn't a real newscast or even anything from the BBC.

SO why is it so damned scary?

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

before making comments you should at least try and get the facts straight.

You should at least try to not bully members. This comment was not necessary and not meant to move the thread forward.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

the OP clearly noted it is a hoax, as it clearly is.
You must have overlooked that part.

a reply to: NewzNose

You should at least try to not bully members. This comment was not necessary and not meant to move the thread forward.

So asking one to get their facts straight is bullying...nice to know.

As for moving the thread along...it's a hoax not really going to move very far.

a reply to: NewzNose

the OP clearly noted it is a hoax, as it clearly is. You must have overlooked that part.

I wasn't addressing the OP, as I was addressing why you consider a hoax so scary...it is a very simple question.

SO how about addressing the question posed rather than trying to deflect it?

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

I admire you for your passionate work on pushing propaganda. You never seem to slow down, even a bit. That's some dedication.

And you're right. NATO didn't had anything to do with the illegal coup in Kiev. The west did.

a reply to: notmyrealname

DOOM!
But it's quite interesting the youtube channel only has this one video in different editing and an English sounding name. They even admit in the comment it's designed to scare.
Russian production? RT?

Found his birthday announcement on facebook. Goatee beach? Ha! Is that real?

You brits are killing me... goatee beach

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

It was a newspaper or magazine article 40+ years ago.

a reply to: NewzNose

Thanks for your kind help on this thread. Sincerely.

I don't think of the video as a hoax, however.

A hoax, to me, would be to deliberately fool someone or a group or populace.

This, to me, was an exercise of whatever purpose, with the public in general.

It may have been to alert folks to looming potentials or looming realities.

It may have been a social experiment.

I don't know.

But it was obviously and admittedly an exercise per its design and presentation. The authors did not attempt to put it forward as the real thing--wisely.

So I would not call it a hoax.

This site tends to have a pack of dogs that seem to have an incestuous relationship with the term "hoax." They seem to have orgasmic delights every time they can slap a thread or OP poster with the term regardless of the evidence.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

An exercise is not a hoax.

It's scary because the MSM geopolitical news has been very much in this ball park for months.

And, the various major players that the oligarchy is manipulating on the world stage have increasingly been moved in ways that appear to be setting up WW3 for real in the not distant future.

Folks may not be paying attention; may be ignorant; may have normalcy bias; may be clueless about such realities but that doesn't change the realities involved . . . nor does it change the oligarchy's determination to light off WW3 in the not distant future.

a reply to: NewzNose

I don't know didly about the folks who made the video.

They may have a personal agenda to wake people up to looming geopolitical realities.

They may be playing social influencing games or research.

It may be a somewhat covert government/oligarchy effort to alert the global populace to looming events in their typical "sportsmanlike" way that fits their notion of 'fairness' or some such before they implement another level of evil.

I don't know. It was interesting. I figured it would have an interesting splash on ATS.

a reply to: NewzNose

Trouble is . . . the so called "facts" hounds . . . not all of them . . . some of them are genuinely interested in merely knowing the truth and not believing falsehoods as truth.

But a sizeable percentage--probably more than half of the more RABID "facts" hounds on ATS seem to be seriously RAD afflicted folks hell-bent on a contrarian stance on virtually anything . . . who seem to feel more satiated and orgasmic the more assaultive they can be about "the facts."

It is as though . . . since Daddy wasn't adequately loving, available, affectionate etc. their formative years, they have had a deep and intense bitter gritch deep in their souls for all daddy/authority figures/experts etc. etc. etc. ever since. And, they are determined to make said authority figures PAY AND PAY LOTS for their earlier lacking what they were due. That's the best hypothesis I can come up with for such 2 year old fit throwing behavior.

In the case of this OP, the stakes are all the greater because of the content.

Nobody of a shred of sanity wants the OP to have the least bit of validity. Particularly insecure RAD afflicted folks therefore have an intense added motivation to try and shred and trash everything they can about the OP . . . with great prejudice.

The facts, at that point, hardly matter. The very pressing emotional goal is to trash the super anxiety producing stimulus ASAP and as strongly as possible--almost at all costs.

Besides, they seem to think that the sport of SHOOT THE MESSENGER FIRST and deal with reality/facts later--to be great sporting fun.

a reply to: notmyrealname

I'm torn about that.

Mostly I think we ought to tend to our own knitting in our own sphere.

However, the oligarchy in charge of the USA and the planet is determined to move the geopolitical puzzle pieces toward its goals rather ruthlessly regardless of the details.

And . . . it seems that the script they have written is for the West to tweak Russia and China until WW3 erupts on cue in the not distant future.

a reply to: dragonridr

I don't think those details matter that much to the folks playing with the geopolitical puzzle pieces.

Sometimes appearances and impressions on a public stage work as well as realities.

They seem determined to tweak the bear until they provoke him into attacking us back. What a thrill. Sigh.

a reply to: MrSpad

I'd still love to introduce you to your paragarphing "Enter" key.

Your points sound quite reasonable, to me.

I just don't think they matter, in the long run.

The oligarchy seems to have written the script whereby the West pokes at Russia in whatever ways seem fun and fitting at the time . . . until such time as Russia is triggered/released to attack the West back in a full scale nuclear attack launching WW3.

I have little to no doubt of that script's reality. I just pray that full implementation is delayed as long as possible.