Putin declares four areas of Ukraine as part of Russia

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Ukraine isn’t in my hot list neither is Covid , but a balanced debate without being called Smugeratti or a conspiracy theorist is why the subject is being discussed.

Out of curiosity, can you name any examples on conspiracy theories ( it must be at least 50 )on either of the subjects you have mentioned which have turned out to be false?

One or two things I reckon.

---

So, clapping the NHS has even less to do with Ukraine than I suspected it did, so, once again, why mention it?

It’d be interesting serving on a jury with you because our concepts of what constitutes something being proven vary enormously.

If you want some barmy conspiracy theories, just spent a few minutes reading the Covid thread started in 2020.

The term "conspiracy theory" has definitely become part of what we may call the "culture wars", with people deploying it as a means to shut people down.

As if in 2020 or even 2021 we knew anything about the vaccine really. I took it, I encouraged others to as well, but I can understand why people were sceptical and I think as a society we need some scepticism, and science definitely needs it to.

This technocratic idea that experts, scientists or whoever cannot be questioned isn't really how expertise and science evolves. They absolutely should be challenged, more so than others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

The term "conspiracy theory" has definitely become part of what we may call the "culture wars", with people deploying it as a means to shut people down.

As if in 2020 or even 2021 we knew anything about the vaccine really. I took it, I encouraged others to as well, but I can understand why people were sceptical and I think as a society we need some scepticism, and science definitely needs it to.

This technocratic idea that experts, scientists or whoever cannot be questioned isn't really how expertise and science evolves. They absolutely should be challenged, more so than others.

---

Scepticism and questioning are good.

But paranoid inventions, social media trolling, denial of historic events and achievements (moon landings, the ISS, vaccine suppression of killer diseases), fabricated 'evidence' to back political or social agendas, outright racism and sexism posing as independent thought, and a constant attack on people who have become experts in a field and know things in favour of morons who have never mastered a subject and know nothing.... are not good.

The attack on experts and the 'conspiracy theories' that they are all on some sinister (WEF?) payroll seeped out of the alt right social media sphere and ended up with Michael Gove! The experts who should be called out are the ones in the pockets of Big Oil and Big Pharma - but they are the ones (along with Truthpaste's sad stable) who are championed by political conspiracy theorists.

This may all be some part of culture wars - but to my mind it is much more about a political struggle for hearts and minds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

The term "conspiracy theory" has definitely become part of what we may call the "culture wars", with people deploying it as a means to shut people down.

As if in 2020 or even 2021 we knew anything about the vaccine really. I took it, I encouraged others to as well, but I can understand why people were sceptical and I think as a society we need some scepticism, and science definitely needs it to.

This technocratic idea that experts, scientists or whoever cannot be questioned isn't really how expertise and science evolves. They absolutely should be challenged, more so than others.

---

We'll all be pleased to know that Science needs some scepticism, thanks for letting us know. Science is questioned every single second of every single day, because that's how science works, without the questions there is no science.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

Scepticism and questioning are good.

But paranoid inventions, social media trolling, denial of historic events and achievements (moon landings, the ISS, vaccine suppression of killer diseases), fabricated 'evidence' to back political or social agendas, outright racism and sexism posing as independent thought, and a constant attack on people who have become experts in a field and know things in favour of morons who have never mastered a subject and know nothing.... are not good.

The attack on experts and the 'conspiracy theories' that they are all on some sinister (WEF?) payroll seeped out of the alt right social media sphere and ended up with Michael Gove! The experts who should be called out are the ones in the pockets of Big Oil and Big Pharma - but they are the ones (along with Truthpaste's sad stable) who are championed by political conspiracy theorists.

This may all be some part of culture wars - but to my mind it is much more about a political struggle for hearts and minds.

---

Jon, we have entered a 'New Democracy' (i'm at it now) basically, it's one where you can think and say what the **** you like on any given subject, without an ounce of knowledge or experience, and still be expected to be taken seriously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

We'll all be pleased to know that Science needs some scepticism, thanks for letting us know. Science is questioned every single second of every single day, because that's how science works, without the questions there is no science.

---

:hehe:

Exactly. I've no idea who has said that experts shouldn't be questioned. And yet, on here, if you question someone saying that the vaccine caused black eyed babies or people to turn into Bluetooth transmitters, your card is marked seemingly forever

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

Scepticism and questioning are good.

But paranoid inventions, social media trolling, denial of historic events and achievements (moon landings, the ISS, vaccine suppression of killer diseases), fabricated 'evidence' to back political or social agendas, outright racism and sexism posing as independent thought, and a constant attack on people who have become experts in a field and know things in favour of morons who have never mastered a subject and know nothing.... are not good.

The attack on experts and the 'conspiracy theories' that they are all on some sinister (WEF?) payroll seeped out of the alt right social media sphere and ended up with Michael Gove! The experts who should be called out are the ones in the pockets of Big Oil and Big Pharma - but they are the ones (along with Truthpaste's sad stable) who are championed by political conspiracy theorists.

This may all be some part of culture wars - but to my mind it is much more about a political struggle for hearts and minds.

---

Agreed!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

We'll all be pleased to know that Science needs some scepticism, thanks for letting us know. Science is questioned every single second of every single day, because that's how science works, without the questions there is no science.

---

Exactly. And yet we had a period where questioning things on COVID such as the effectiveness of masks, the health and social cost of isolation vs. treatment of a pandemic, the source of the outbreak and the effectiveness of a vaccine etc were dismissed as conspiracy theories and that isn't a healthy situation, and you seem to agree with me on that 👍

As you can see below. In 2020 we were told to ignore the conspiracy theories and scientists know what happened. Four years later it seems it likely wasn't a conspiracy theory and the scientists were wrong.

So it's good that it was challenged and it's good to have an open mind on these things.

June 2020: Ignore the conspiracy theories: scientists know Covid-19 wasn't created in a lab.
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...false-pandemic

January 2025: CIA says lab leak most likely source of COVID outbreak
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd9qjjj4zy5o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Exactly. And yet we had a period where questioning things on COVID such as the effectiveness of masks, the health and social cost of isolation vs. treatment of a pandemic, the source of the outbreak and the effectiveness of a vaccine etc were dismissed as conspiracy theories and that isn't a healthy situation, and you seem to agree with me on that ��

As you can see below. In 2020 we were told to ignore the conspiracy theories and scientists know what happened. Four years later it seems it likely wasn't a conspiracy theory and the scientists were wrong.

So it's good that it was challenged and it's good to have an open mind on these things.

June 2020: Ignore the conspiracy theories: scientists know Covid-19 wasn't created in a lab.
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...false-pandemic

January 2025: CIA says lab leak most likely source of COVID outbreak
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd9qjjj4zy5o

---

Those stories don't mean quite what you have interpreted them as.

The first says it's not "created" from a lab.
The second says, with low confidence, it could have been "leaked" from a lab.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

Scepticism and questioning are good.

But paranoid inventions, social media trolling, denial of historic events and achievements (moon landings, the ISS, vaccine suppression of killer diseases), fabricated 'evidence' to back political or social agendas, outright racism and sexism posing as independent thought, and a constant attack on people who have become experts in a field and know things in favour of morons who have never mastered a subject and know nothing.... are not good.

The attack on experts and the 'conspiracy theories' that they are all on some sinister (WEF?) payroll seeped out of the alt right social media sphere and ended up with Michael Gove! The experts who should be called out are the ones in the pockets of Big Oil and Big Pharma - but they are the ones (along with Truthpaste's sad stable) who are championed by political conspiracy theorists.

This may all be some part of culture wars - but to my mind it is much more about a political struggle for hearts and minds.

---

I think many things we are told are open to debate. If our own political parties lie to the electorate then no wonder the electorate has misgivings about what is reported.

The problem is , because many people have been brainwashed by the media ( both for and against) then it’s difficult to understand the reality especially when a significant portion of conspiracy theories are at worst half truths.

What is certain though is the UK media are hardly impartial which is what it should be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Those stories don't mean quite what you have interpreted them as.

The first says it's not "created" from a lab.
The second says, with low confidence, it could have been "leaked" from a lab.

---

My entire point is that we should be open minded and not definitive on these things when we don't know the full story.

Nothing is absolutely definitive. That's kinda my point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

The problem is , because many people have been brainwashed by the media ( both for and against) then it’s difficult to understand the reality especially when a significant portion of conspiracy theories are at worst half truths.

---

It was suggested that large numbers of the global media who were financed by USAID have been pushing specific propaganda narratives, but that's probably just another conspiracy theory?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

At least two.... but I expect the true number is in the high dozens for Covid alone.

I will go with the BBC on these:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/52847648

I don't think Ukraine has inspired as many conspiracy theories - even around casualty levels - more different political views and analysis.

---

I don’t think anyone believes the two conspiracy theories on the link you have mentioned.

I do recall that it was mentioned masks were useless and unnecessary - fact

The vaccine didn’t prevent transmission - fact

The average age of a Covid death was 82 “where Covid was mentioned on the death certificate” - fact

PCR tests were not designed for mass testing resulting in huge numbers of false positives - fact PCR tests

Lockdowns did more harm than good - fact

Bill Gates is not a scientist- fact

My body my choice- fact

Articles like this are trending https://x.com/cartlanddavid/status/1...LhmySD2aRt-GNg

taxpayers paid for the creation of the Covid-19 virus through USAID and then paid the mainstream media to brainwash them about masks, vaccines, and lockdowns?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

It was suggested that large numbers of the global media who were financed by USAID have been pushing specific propaganda narratives, but that's probably just another conspiracy theory?

---

Who by? You?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Who by? You?

---

This was world wide news last week after the white house press secretary announcing news organisations receiving money from USAID

It has been claimed some outlets have received the following

POLITICO: $34.3M
NY TIMES: $50M
ASSOCIATED PRESS: $19.5M
REUTERS: $9M
$220,000 from the Department of State just last year.
BBC: British Government TV received $3.3M

The BBC response to this

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/pr...lease/4-feb-25

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MOZZER2

This was world wide news last week after the white house press secretary announcing news organisations receiving money from USAID

It has been claimed some outlets have received the following

POLITICO: $34.3M
NY TIMES: $50M
ASSOCIATED PRESS: $19.5M
REUTERS: $9M
$220,000 from the Department of State just last year.
BBC: British Government TV received $3.3M

The BBC response to this

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/pr...lease/4-feb-25

---

Oh no , not another conspiracy theory that is true :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Oh no , not another conspiracy theory that is true :hehe:

---

Imagine that, victims of propaganda not knowing they were victims of propaganda. It explains a lot though!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Oh no , not another conspiracy theory that is true :hehe:

---

except it's not true - the BBC didn't receive USAID money.
a charity that the BBC runs called BBC media action received .obey from USAID. it has nothing to do with the BBCs budget.

the charity is set up to champion press freedom in parts of the world where there is none. and as such is probably a good means of extending soft power of the west.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

except it's not true - the BBC didn't receive USAID money.
a charity that the BBC runs called BBC media action received .obey from USAID. it has nothing to do with the BBCs budget.

the charity is set up to champion press freedom in parts of the world where there is none. and as such is probably a good means of extending soft power of the west.

---

What part of the world? Which journalists? Can you link us to some of their articles, so that we can examine their journalism?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MOZZER2

This was world wide news last week after the white house press secretary announcing news organisations receiving money from USAID

It has been claimed some outlets have received the following

POLITICO: $34.3M
NY TIMES: $50M
ASSOCIATED PRESS: $19.5M
REUTERS: $9M
$220,000 from the Department of State just last year.
BBC: British Government TV received $3.3M

The BBC response to this

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/pr...lease/4-feb-25

---

Thanks for some clarification on Gluey’s cryptic clue, but we’re back in what constitutes a fact territory again aren’t we. I’ll need plenty of convincing before I accept anything this White House, including “saviour of democracy” Musk, says as fact.

At the very least, there are two sides to this argument, so here is something from the page you linked to counter the Trump regime’s words.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/pr...ishop-feb-2025

The differing standards for what is a fact (it depends completely on which “side”the person saying it is on) is a consistent strand through the “independent thinkers’” postings on here.

President Zelensky wants to form a European army to fight against Russia on the Ukraine battlefield.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tC_5ryXY7U

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

except it's not true - the BBC didn't receive USAID money.
a charity that the BBC runs called BBC media action received .obey from USAID. it has nothing to do with the BBCs budget.

the charity is set up to champion press freedom in parts of the world where there is none. and as such is probably a good means of extending soft power of the west.

---

Attachment 6447

Just look through funding contributions made to the BBC in the last 5 years tells you all need to know.


It’s a really hard gig on here but it’s expected :hehe:

lets get back to basics

What is the purpose of USAID ? The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is the principal U.S. agency to extend assistance to countries recovering from disaster, trying to escape poverty, and engaging in democratic reforms

to me that's a worthwhile exercise but why does it gave money to news outlets raises one's eyebrow . just doing a bit of digging and to put it into another context

USAID programs funds US interest media in more than 30 countries

The agency funds at least 6,200 journalists, 707 “news outlets” and 279 media-sector “civil society organizations . The 2025 foreign aid budget included $268 , 376,000 allocated to congress to support independent media

that type of money should go to helping poverty around the world no wonder DOGE is making this top of there shopping list !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Attachment 6447

Just look through funding contributions made to the BBC in the last 5 years tells you all need to know.


It’s a really hard gig on here but it’s expected :hehe:

---

funding contributions for the BBC, or from BBC media action, a charity that they run?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Attachment 6447

---

This is exactly how the MAGA movement started.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

funding contributions for the BBC, or from BBC media action, a charity that they run?

---

The BBC claims to be editorially independent, but they receive funding from the British government, They received millions in funding from Bill Gates, they have received funding from USAID.They are not independent, they are paid propagandists. Their election coverage was hardly independent either neither was their Covid response.

What’s not to like ��

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

The BBC claims to be editorially independent, but they receive funding from the British government, They received millions in funding from Bill Gates, they have received funding from USAID.They are not independent, they are paid propagandists. Their election coverage was hardly independent either neither was their Covid response.

What’s not to like ��

---

do you understand the difference between the BBC and the charity BBC media action?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

do you understand the difference between the BBC and the charity BBC media action?

---

Yes I do, do you understand that the BBC is not impartial and losing nearly 50,000 licence payers a month ?

I agree that article pivots somewhat, however do you not agree that it doesn’t receive funding from bill gates , the government and the like ?

Do you not agree that the fact checker Marianna Spring lied on her CV ?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...on-lied-on-cv/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Yes I do, do you understand that the BBC is not impartial and losing nearly 50,000 licence payers a month ?

I agree that article pivots somewhat, however do you not agree that it doesn’t receive funding from bill gates , the government and the like ?

Do you not agree that the fact checker Marianna Spring lied on her CV ?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...on-lied-on-cv/

---

some horrible double negatives there.

for clarity, are you saying that bill gates and USAID have madi contributions to the BBC budget or made contributions to the BBC run charity BBC media action?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

some horrible double negatives there.

for clarity, are you saying that bill gates and USAID have madi contributions to the BBC budget or made contributions to the BBC run charity BBC media action?

---

They have made numerous contributions to the BBC “charities” but don’t you think that may influence their decision making process in other areas , as that’s usually what happens in charity events and programmes. You’re not that naive are you ?

Don’t you do business events etc. How many times was Bill Gates on BbC Tv and media during Covid ? As far as I know he is as qualified as me or you or anyone else regarding vaccines and science yet his name was mentioned on a daily basis.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/ab...0many%20others.

https://x.com/citizenfreepres/status...LhmySD2aRt-GNg

This may explain it better for you as you’re not grasping the details very well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

They have made numerous contributions to the BBC “charities” but don’t you think that may influence their decision making process in other areas , as that’s usually what happens in charity events and programmes. You’re not that naive are you ?

Don’t you do business events etc. How many times was Bill Gates on BbC Tv and media during Covid ? As far as I know he is as qualified as me or you or anyone else regarding vaccines and science yet his name was mentioned on a daily basis.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/ab...0many%20others.

---

no I don't think that making a donation to BBC media action charity has any influence on the editorial content of the BBC itself. they are entirely separate budgets and the BBC media action has a tiny budget compared to the BBC.

if you can show otherwise then please do as it would be a huge scandal and you would probably win a pullizer prize.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

no I don't think that making a donation to BBC media action charity has any influence on the editorial content of the BBC itself. they are entirely separate budgets and the BBC media action has a tiny budget compared to the BBC.

if you can show otherwise then please do as it would be a huge scandal and you would probably win a pullizer prize.

---

I don’t think it’s a huge scandal or a surprise, and the link I posted pretty much sums up what most people think

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Attachment 6447

Just look through funding contributions made to the BBC in the last 5 years tells you all need to know.


It’s a really hard gig on here but it’s expected :hehe:

---

The money distribution network is very complex as the intention is to hide the identity of the final payment destination, which is sometimes themselves! Rjk doesn't know what he is talking about, as he himself is a regular victim of propaganda. For example, a news source will say a certain organisation isn't doing anything wrong , and then Rjk will be on here quoting that very same news source as proof that said organisation isn't doing anything wrong. Rinse & repeat :hehe:

Whatever people think about funding media organisations abroad, you can certainly see why American voters would be able to think of far better things to spend it on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

The money distribution network is very complex as the intention is to hide the identity of the final payment destination, which is sometimes themselves! Rjk doesn't know what he is talking about, as he himself is a regular victim of propaganda. For example, a news source will say a certain organisation isn't doing anything wrong , and then Rjk will be on here quoting that very same news source as proof that said organisation isn't doing anything wrong. Rinse & repeat :hehe:

---

it's not that complex, just a bunch of "independent thinkers" have got very exercised about BBC funding since Elon Musk erroneously posted on twitter that USAID funds the BBC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Attachment 6447

Just look through funding contributions made to the BBC in the last 5 years tells you all need to know.


It’s a really hard gig on here but it’s expected :hehe:

---

please do provide a link that shows the BBC funding for the last 5 years, and why it is problematic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

it's not that complex, just a bunch of "independent thinkers" have got very exercised about BBC funding since Elon Musk erroneously posted on twitter that USAID funds the BBC.

---

So you know more than the computer scientists who are actually running the DOGE algorithms? Is there no end to your talent? :biggrin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

please do provide a link that shows the BBC funding for the last 5 years, and why it is problematic

---

I think that’s something you could do quite easily.

Why do you think the corporation is losing 50,000 license payers a month and it’s being overlooked by new audiences?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

I think that’s something you could do quite easily.

Why do you think the corporation is losing 50,000 license payers a month and it’s being overlooked by new audiences?

---

if It's that easy then please send me the link