4 ms·
This is from RT, which is directly funded by the Russian government.
by funkmonk 14y ago
This is from RT, which is directly funded by the Russian government.
- redthrowaway 14y agoThat's a red herring. The facts of the case remain as stated.
- daniel-cussen 14y agoThis reminds me of the Soviet claim in response to American criticism of human rights violations. "And you are lynching Negroes", the claim went, from the thirties on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes Point being, RT and similar Chinese outlets talk openly and fairly on issues USA hates to talk about as sovereign PR retaliation. Overall, the effect is positive: world powers muckrake each other and compete to see who can look least bad in the eyes of the World.
- mc32 14y agoAt which point the retort should have been, to follow that logic, and you starve millions to death! [1] The thing is while an opposite viewpoint is desirable, their viewpoints tends not to be balanced but rather lean far 'the other way'. Let's say the 'truth' is 5, we claim 7, they claim it's -1. So, on balance, you're not getting the 5 by adding their viewpoint. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
- sesqu 14y agoFor argument's sake, let's say the 'truth' is 5, you claim -1, and they claim 7.
- mc32 14y agoYes, except, one government goes out of its way to retaliate lethally[1] against its journalists who counterargue the government line. So, given that, I think we're the 7s and they're the -1s. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_Russia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_R...