Skip to main content

Irrefutable Proof, RT Is Better than Western Media, Lets Examine The Facts!

Many people are mysteriously still harboring under the misguided delusion that western mainstream media provides news rather than propaganda that can be financially linked to the establishment mainstays, and I'd like to propose that those of you who fall into that category need a wake up call.

Make important points with fun pics!

At the end of the day, there is no better endorsement than knowing how much time Hillary Clinton, the wicked witch of the west, spent being a groupie during her days heading the State Department as Secretary Of State

Cut your losses, take the knock now rather than swallowing a larger and infinitely more bitter pill later on. I am not suggesting that Russian TV is bias free, I simply would like to weigh in on the most important geopolitical events in the last five years and compare the calls made AS EVENTS WERE GOING DOWN, with how they turned out afterwards.  This is the only barometer of caliber that I can conceivably base a logically reasonable case on.

This simple exercise will reveal a conclusion I leave the reader to draw by themselves.....

Libya, NATO's most dramatic blunder, a destroyed nation and terrorist hotbed:

David Cameron Gloats Over His Success in 2011

RT nails it in their prediction of civil war to follow:

CNN challenges Ron Paul who heeds caution and is left red faced by history...

The Decline of the Ukraine under the West and (relative) rise of Crimea under Russia:

CNN's phantom Russian takeover of Ukraine that just never seemed to happen....

Meanwhile 95% of Crimean's have spoken:

I think history has settled the matter.


Well, just turn on the news....

Here's a clue

Oh yeah and this...

Join the dots.

Popular posts from this blog

Dīvide et imperā: How To Defeat The Most Effective Social Control Weapon In Human History

Many different empires, cultures and nations have existed in history and while the details, styles, values and aesthetics keep changing, the core structure remains unchanged. In order to benefit from social coperation and steal reward in excess of the labour and value you invest, you cannot take it by brute  for extended periods of time without facing the wrath of the crowds. The crowds need to give it to you willingly or unknowingly. There was one exception to this synopsis, the Feudal System  but there is more to that than people realise, it's a post for a later day and deserves full scrutiny and parrellels do manifest. The support of the home crowd is also needed to win wars. No army has ever been effective fighting under duress, they would assemble, arm  and immediatly turn on you.

Before the current reigning Judeo-Christian Anglo American Empire of today there were other more monolithic empires that the loosely ideologically aligned old money banking dynasties, globalists an…

Scientific Consensus is that Consensus is overturned 100% of the time

Everything you know is wrong. There is a very good reason why science succeeds more often than politics does.  Unlike politics, It's not a consensus or a vote,  it's actually method.  The scientific method. Anyone who has read this blog before probably knows I'm a lifelong science junkie as well as someone who spends thousands of hours breaking down the the political and economic agendas behind the special interest groups that guide public policy.  In many ways I'm actually uniquely qualified to tie these angles together in ways not well understood by the overwhelming majority of people.  That actually includes scientists. Scientists are notoriously naive in the political and economic forces that drive the human world.

For example if you are of the opinion that the earth has one moon, the earth revolves around the sun etc you are already wrong. Well sort of. The politicpl world is black and white, the scientific world is nuanced, see…

CO2 is not a pollutant, it is greening the earth!

Whatever your persuasion is on CO² and AGW, nobody disagrees on the tremendous benefit it provides plant life. Many of the past famine disasters and desertification has CO² decline listed as a contributor.

I feel I've already blown the notion that humans are the main cause of climate change out of the water. Or rather I've used the reasoning of others and put it together in a convenient outline. See my previous post above for starters.  However, I recognize that humans do increase CO² levels, no matter how tiny. Increases are likely to be very short lived because the earth has an effective feedback mechanism, but we can apparently get small increases, and it's been put forward on very poor science that this is a bad thing. That assertion hinges completely on bad models. More on that in the bottom most link.  Model's and the measurement sample dates are dubious at best.

Furthermore, the main increase in CO²  as…