Is the BBC totally compromised?

[ngb1066]

I think gringo's posts are very well argued and persuasive.

[gringo]

I think gringo's posts are very well argued and persuasive.

   Given that your living/profession is forming coherent and persuasive arguments then I am flattered that you believe so, Neil.
   

[David1819]

I think gringo's posts are very well argued and persuasive.

Is that the same Gringo who tried to argue that Russia had no involvement in Ukraine while Russian tanks were filmed rolling into the Ukranian city of Luhansk?

https://streamable.com/nejnl

 

[gringo]

Is that the same Gringo who tried to argue that Russia had no involvement in Ukraine while Russian tanks were filmed rolling into the Ukranian city of Luhansk?

https://streamable.com/nejnl

 

    I argued that there was no Russian invasion of Ukraine which is true. I had a look through the thread you refer to earlier today. I am surprised that you bring it up as it wasn't your finest hour. Your lack of knowledge and understanding apparent to any objective observer.
     You were literally all over the place and in all honesty had your arse handed to you, your ignorance of geopolitics displayed for all to see. Not that ignorance in itself is necessarily bad, most of the population are ignorant when it comes to world affairs and geopolitics. You however attempt to pass off your 5 minutes reading of wikipedia and a you-tube video as if you are informed enough to engage in debate about matters of which you have no knowledge and no understanding of wider context.
    Your attempts to draw some form of moral equivalence between minor border disputes in Georgia etc., that lasted days and resulted in a handful of deaths, and the 17 years and ongoing wars of aggression launched by US/UK et al in their "War on Terror" which have resulted in millions of deaths, many more millions injured and countless millions of displaced people being one of your more laughable efforts at showing your knowledge. To demonstrate "Russian aggression" that particular gem.
    Your pretence at understanding international law where you selectively quoted from international lawyers to support your stance only for it to turn out that the opposite was true when the quote was given in full being another. The whole thread a demonstration of the shallowness of your understanding.
    What is noticeable is that you haven't responded to the debunking of your "theory". Best divert onto something else and hope I don't notice that you just dropped your half baked assumptions.
    Here is the thread you refer to, David. Happy reading 

     http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6518.360.html
 

[David1819]

    I argued that there was no Russian invasion of Ukraine which is true. I had a look through the thread you refer to earlier today. I am surprised that you bring it up as it wasn't your finest hour. Your lack of knowledge and understanding apparent to any objective observer.
     You were literally all over the place and in all honesty had your arse handed to you, your ignorance of geopolitics displayed for all to see. Not that ignorance in itself is necessarily bad, most of the population are ignorant when it comes to world affairs and geopolitics. You however attempt to pass off your 5 minutes reading of wikipedia and a you-tube video as if you are informed enough to engage in debate about matters of which you have no knowledge and no understanding of wider context.
    Your attempts to draw some form of moral equivalence between minor border disputes in Georgia etc., that lasted days and resulted in a handful of deaths, and the 17 years and ongoing wars of aggression launched by US/UK et al in their "War on Terror" which have resulted in millions of deaths, many more millions injured and countless millions of displaced people being one of your more laughable efforts at showing your knowledge. To demonstrate "Russian aggression" that particular gem.
    Your pretence at understanding international law where you selectively quoted from international lawyers to support your stance only for it to turn out that the opposite was true when the quote was given in full being another. The whole thread a demonstration of the shallowness of your understanding.
    What is noticeable is that you haven't responded to the debunking of your "theory". Best divert onto something else and hope I don't notice that you just dropped your half baked assumptions.
    Here is the thread you refer to, David. Happy reading 

     http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6518.360.html

Since you keep criticising my sources I would like to see you try and find a reason to dismiss this one.

This is the official website of the "Donetsk People's Republic" one of the two Russian proto states in the Ukrainian Donbass region.

https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=search&rurl=translate.google.co.uk&sl=ru&sp=nmt4&u=https://glava-lnr.info/content/gosudarstvennaya-simvolika&xid=17259,15700022,15700124,15700149,15700168,15700173,15700186,15700201&usg=ALkJrhhaaB0SnKfeP5_9J7CaNf5UxfoVpw

I find the national anthem rather telling.

Our Motherland, our Power.

We will keep your name in our hearts.

And the power of the people will be sanctified

In our one and strong union.

There will be brotherhood in it, honor and freedom,

And Cathedral, glorious Russia!


LMAO!!

Russian Tanks rolling around. Russian Ruble is Offical currency and "glorious Russia!" is the national anthem of the land. This is on territory that is supposed to be Ukraine. You want to tell me there has been no Russian invasion?

[gringo]

Since you keep criticising my sources I would like to see you try and find a reason to dismiss this one.

This is the official website of the "Donetsk People's Republic" one of the two Russian proto states in the Ukrainian Donbass region.

https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=search&rurl=translate.google.co.uk&sl=ru&sp=nmt4&u=https://glava-lnr.info/content/gosudarstvennaya-simvolika&xid=17259,15700022,15700124,15700149,15700168,15700173,15700186,15700201&usg=ALkJrhhaaB0SnKfeP5_9J7CaNf5UxfoVpw

I find the national anthem rather telling.

Our Motherland, our Power.

We will keep your name in our hearts.

And the power of the people will be sanctified

In our one and strong union.

There will be brotherhood in it, honor and freedom,

And Cathedral, glorious Russia!


LMAO!!

Russian Tanks rolling around. Russian Ruble is Offical currency and "glorious Russia!" is the national anthem of the land. This is on territory that is supposed to be Ukraine. You want to tell me there has been no Russian invasion?

    I have addressed your latest diversion in the "Russia" thread where your alleged invasion has already been discussed/debunked.
   Back to what you are attempting to divert from in this thread.
   Do you still consider as a viable "theory" the idea that a novichok agent from old Soviet stock was lost control of at some undefined time and location and then used an unknown number of years later mixed by unknown persons at an unknown lab but they were definitely Russian?
    You haven't addressed this after I answered your questions regarding degradation. Are we to take it that you now realise that your theory is "highly unlikely" to paraphrase Theresa May and the Foreign Office.
   

[David1819]

    I have addressed your latest diversion in the "Russia" thread where your alleged invasion has already been discussed/debunked.
   Back to what you are attempting to divert from in this thread.
   Do you still consider as a viable "theory" the idea that a novichok agent from old Soviet stock was lost control of at some undefined time and location and then used an unknown number of years later mixed by unknown persons at an unknown lab but they were definitely Russian?
    You haven't addressed this after I answered your questions regarding degradation. Are we to take it that you now realise that your theory is "highly unlikely" to paraphrase Theresa May and the Foreign Office.
 

Diversion? 

I simply have no need to reply. Nor can I justify wasting time and energy on this because nothing logical that I bring up will have any significance to you. It does not sink in and as a result there is no effective debate.

How do you win an argument with an idiot?
Who is the idiot? It is not very wise to try to argue with an idiot. There is no chance of winning.

PS: I cannot stand Theresa May.

[gringo]

Diversion? 

I simply have no need to reply. Nor can I justify wasting time and energy on this because nothing logical that I bring up will have any significance to you. It does not sink in and as a result there is no effective debate.

How do you win an argument with an idiot?
Who is the idiot? It is not very wise to try to argue with an idiot. There is no chance of winning.

PS: I cannot stand Theresa May.

   You often have no need to reply when you can't answer. And resort to ad hom attacks. I'm surprised you haven't called me a conspiracy theorist and invoked the tinfoil hat yet.
    To answer your question. The best way win an argument with an idiot is to ignore their diversions and not move on until whatever the latest crazy assertions they are passing off as informed opinion have been satisfactorily addressed.
    The "Catch 22" in this is that the idiot cannot back up his idiotic assertions, on the obvious grounds that the assertions are idiotic, and at this point the idiot flounces off muttering under his breath.

[lookout]

Let's just get on with the World cup in Russia and " pretend " nothing happened.

[Roch]

I see we are now being prepped by Israel / USA / BBC for action to be taken against Iran.  Well that wasn't very predictable was it? 

[Roch]

I agree mainly, though I do like the radio channels and also the fact that I don't have to sit through adverts.

I can only stand listening to Radio 4 and Radio 4 Extra.

I'm unusual in that I listen to plays, documentaries & investigations and some retro broadcasts from previous decades. I rarely have music on the radio.

[maggie]

I see we are now being prepped by Israel / USA / BBC for action to be taken against Iran.  Well that wasn't very predictable was it?

God help us!

[lookout]

Iran has always been a thorn in the side.

[lookout]

I can only stand listening to Radio 4 and Radio 4 Extra.

I'm unusual in that I listen to plays, documentaries & investigations and some retro broadcasts from previous decades. I rarely have music on the radio.

There's nothing wrong with that Roch,I watch Vintage TV for films with documentaries from the '50's.

[gringo]

God help us!

I see we are now being prepped by Israel / USA / BBC for action to be taken against Iran.  Well that wasn't very predictable was it?

  At this point in time we should be grateful that Russia, Iran et al have consistently refused to respond to the bait of the outrageous, criminal aggression and provocations of  the NATO crime syndicate. Had the Russians been as aggressive as our government like to tell us they are, we would already be turned to radioactive ash. It has been apparent to many observers for some time that Russia and partners are playing a longer game and are methodically working towards their own objectives
    Resources and transit routes are the main driver of the Nato sponsored aggression. Russia, Iran and Syria between them have vast resources and control of the transit routes to Europe. Israel's designs on the occupied Golan Heights adds another twist to the interests at play in the Syrian War. This control of routes and resources is the driver of our aggression. To believe that our intervention is for any humanitarian concern for anyone displays an unquestioning credulity beyond measure.
    The aggression shown by NATO countries is off the scale criminality and our governments actions should shame us all. Those who decide "my country right or wrong", are the "useful idiots", not those willing to criticise and call to account our own representatives criminal actions.
    The ones being attacked as Putin or Assad apologists, useful idiots, the enemy within, conspiracy theorists or whatever other smears are being bandied about, are the ones we would all be well advised to listen to.
    The apologists for war criminals are much nearer to home and in fact are the same useful idiots who history has shown to be apologists for any war, anywhere as long as we are the aggressors, dropping humanitarian bombs on whatever country we happen to have designs on at that particular time.
     It appears that time is running out on the NATO empire. How else to explain the suicidal desire to attack Iran. Hopefully the Iranians and Russians can prevent this aggression because the repercussions of any attack could escalate rapidly and catastrophically.
     The current situation is, in my view,potentially the most dangerous in my lifetime.