Unpopular prediction: After this show burst onto the scene with an insane debut season, I think S2, whilst offering more surprises and intrigue, will be one of consolidation, and a lot of the Trump hysteria will gradually dissipate.
Luv Putin performing assassinations in U.K. and nobody giving a shit.
The UK is a pathetic joke. This isn't the first time this has happened but this is particularly bad, given that 20 innocent bystanders may have been exposed to the nerve agent too.
But we'll probably respond to this the same way we did last time: make a stink about it then do nothing. The British way.
Can't see that as anything other than a win for Trump if it actually happens. Thoughts?
It's actually terrible.
He'd be the first President in a long ass time to agree to meet him
This isn't going to do shit to take away their nuclear weapons or whatever he's shouting
It helps them establish themselves as an equal and a country to be taken seriously, he's essentially giving them credibility
Well, the US engages with plenty of controversial regimes on a regular basis. Sometimes it yields positive results, such as the Iran Nuclear deal.
Surely it's a good thing that there's a chance of stopping or delaying North Korea gaining nuclear capabilities through diplomacy? Otherwise all that will be left is a military response.
I'll grant you this though; if the meeting definitely happens it's unlikely anything will come of it. Kim Jung probably just wants a seat at the big table, and he will no doubt use the meeting for propaganda purposes back home.
For what it's worth, South Korea's president seems to be happy that North and South are engaging with each other for the first time in years.
"Before composing new fairy tales," she said, the U.K. should explain previous cases of Russians who have died on British soil -- such as Alexander Litvinenko, a former Russian intelligence official and Putin opponent who was poisoned in London in 2006.
Brass. Balls.
Quote
Russia's foreign ministry accused U.K. officials and the British media of trying to using Skripal in a premeditated campaign to discredit Russia before it hosts the FIFA World Cup this summer.
Yep, people are dying from a nerve agent, but what all this outrage is really about is the fucking football.
Eh, I don't think this is anything new. I remember seeing similar compilations years ago of news anchors seemingly reading from the same script despite been part of different networks.
I just don't think this is new. News organisations have always been biased and many serve as nothing but propaganda. There are some good outlets obviously, but you'd be hard pressed to find one that isn't at least slightly biased one way or the other (and it's perfectly naturally for any outlet to be slightly biased)
Can't agree that the 'don't trust the MSM' stuff is bullshit though. So many outlets peddle nothing but propaganda, right and left. A common tactic seems to be lying by omission. Two outlets can report the same story, but paint a completely different picture of events by omitting key facts.
I think the only way to get past it all is to get your news from multiple sources.
And there are plenty of new sources online. I know it's controversial, but Alt Media is one such source. It's hugely popular and growing all the time, seemingly at the expense of the traditional media.
Not to say there aren't peddlers of bullshit online too (some of them are the worst offenders). I think the same principle applies, listen to as many different perspectives as possible, and hopefully that way you'll get the most accurate version of events.
Tbh, I don't really subscribe to the view that we live in especially bad times when it comes to fake news. I don't buy this notion that we live in 'Post Truth' times or any of that. If anything, we live in a time when anyone can inform themselves on a subject if they are willing to dig deep enough. The internet has freed us in that regard. We're not confined to Newspapers or TV anymore.
If the Presidents Twitter account is a public forum then those same people involved in that ruling would have to concede that Twitter itself is a public forum, and therefore banning popular conservatives from the platform is also a violation of free speech.
Or would Twitter be considered a private company again in that instance?
