this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
248 points (98.8% liked)

World News

32348 readers
415 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RoseTintedGlasses@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

[I got a bot to automatically delete all my comments over 1 month old so you can’t see this comment anymore]

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

That should tell you what America's goals ultimately are.

[–] CloutAtlas@hexbear.net 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Tucker should be sanctioned for being a bowtie wearing shit eating reactionary named "Tucker" first and foremost.

[–] Melina@hexbear.net 11 points 9 months ago
[–] RonPaulyShore@hexbear.net 12 points 9 months ago

Another demonstration of the vaunted Western Values^TM^

[–] M68040@hexbear.net 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Okay I don’t really like this bootleg Cold War thing we’ve got going on but any outcome where Tucker Carlson gets harmed is one I can accept

[–] huf@hexbear.net 5 points 9 months ago

first they came for the carlsons and i was .... i cant

[–] ComRed2@hexbear.net 8 points 9 months ago

Cucker was in danger of sliding into irrelevance after the fox news firing. His twitter show was a failure too. He knew he needed to do something big to stay relevant and this is that thing. He'll be able to ride it for a while but after it fizzles out, he'll need to come up with the next attention-grabbing scheme. It's all about keeping the grift going. He doesn't give a shit about any of this, It's all about the money and the fame.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 6 points 9 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Carlson's work in Russia could see the former Fox News host in hot water with the EU, Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian Prime Minister and current member of the European Parliament, told Newsweek.

Explaining his motive for the interview, Carlson said in a video statement on Tuesday: "Most Americans have no idea why Putin invaded Ukraine or what his goals are now."

If deemed sufficient, the EAS can then present the case to the European Council—the body made up of EU national leaders—which takes the final decision on whether to impose sanctions.

One European diplomatic official, who did not wish to be named as they were not authorized to speak publicly, told Newsweek that any future travel restrictions would likely require proof that he is linked to Moscow's aggression, something that "is absent or hard to prove."

The content of Carlson's interview with Putin is not yet clear but, given the pundit's long-time defense of aspects of Russian policy, critics expect it to be sympathetic to Moscow.

"First of all, it should be remembered that Putin is not just a president of an aggressor country, but he is wanted by the International Criminal Court and accused of genocide and war crimes," MEP Urmas Paet, who previously served as Estonia's foreign minister, told Newsweek.


The original article contains 765 words, the summary contains 213 words. Saved 72%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (5 children)

How long before he announces a Trump interview as well. Mule transporting information between Russians.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

My favorite thing about the interview is when he literally told Putin to "shut the fuck up and get back to the script" when he started talking about the Nazis being bad. Like shit man, if you didn't have the soft power you had I don't think you'd be leaving Russia after that one.

It was wild in general seeing Putin as not being the most wicked man in the room, which isn't hard when the other person is probably one of the most notorious neo-nazi propagandists in America who literally quit their golden job because they asked him to hide the racism a bit better.

[–] n0m4n@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

I have followed 'news' from Russian outlets such as RT and Sputnik, being recast as Right wing talking points within hours. This is not just recent, it has been going on for years. Hamilton68 documents examples. The parallels of this propaganda being sown to the lies dispensed to Ukraine to sow dissention is obvious. It is a cheap warfare, and it works. Tucker was and is in the trade of packaging Russian propaganda as news. He should be labeled as such. Carlson was discredited and fired by Fox. Spreading lies, admitting to doing so on archived tapes, and iirc, sexual harassment was in his part of the discovery on Fox's $780M settlement. In short, Tucker Carlson is on record for knowingly spreading lies, for personal monetary benefit. This is more of the same. I hope every person watches Carlson, knowing that Carlson reports what enriches him, not truth. Carlson has a transparent agenda. The unanswered question is who pays Carlson. That will be obvious by who's boots that Carlson's reports shine.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 4 points 9 months ago

This is in part one of those situations where your argument amounts to question-begging. The reason being, just as a test: What if Russia was on the correct side of the war, would this still be coherent? Is there any contradiction in these Russian publicity outlets publishing correct information that is then opportunistically used by the rival party to the current US administration to discredit the latter?

If you already assume slava ukra'ini and that reactionaries have some magical inability to say things that are true, you can make a coherent story, but I would argue that the antithesis is at least as coherent a story.

I'm sure RT, etc. also publish bullshit that is also used by the right just as readily, but imo the Russian center-right can get by on policy wrt Ukraine by simply reporting facts faithfully, because theirs is a position [shared by much of the Russian left as well] that is only more justified as historical context increases and actors are more closely scrutinized. I was objectively late to the party when, in 2018, I was reading about the CIA backing Azov, but still I saw reality completely recast leading up to the invasion and thereby I had some advantage over the liberals who seem to believe that Ukraine is Palestine despite the fact that it's Ukraine slaughtering ethnic minorities.

It doesn't help that Ukraine can't seem to find pictures of its military that don't include fascist symbols, or that they absolutely wear their banderite bullshit on their sleeve if you actually listen to them speak. You can just report on these things faithfully and make the Ukrainian government and especially its military look monstrous to many viewers.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›