Russia Today..... Trustworthy?

Status
Not open for further replies.

PowerSlug

New Member
Hey guys, This is my second post. I heard about this place and Mick West on the JRE podcast. I came to alot of conclusions for myself that were discussed on the podcast, like for example 9/11 and building 7, prior to listening. And it was refreshing hearing a sane person explain things with a mind set similar to my own.

Forgive me if this isn't the right section for this particular question. But what do you all think about Russia Today as a reputable source of information? So far since it first came around, it seems to have ballooned around stories involving conspiracy theories. And wow, is it ever anti-everyone who isn't russia or a close ally. I also find it kinda funny how this news station completely avoids anything bad coming from the east, in particular russia of course, especially during the time putin was voted in. I haven't done alot of research yet on how the news station came about, but even Al Jazeera did a small bit on how it's state-run propaganda. If this is true, what does this say about all those conspiracy theorists who are guests on a somewhat regular basis, like alex jones and of course, max keiser who actually works directly for them? there is something odd that surrounds this news station, not sure what yet. Any thoughts?


Here is Al Jazeera's video about RT.




After doing a youtube search, seems RT has done the same thing towards Al Jazeera now. lol.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
RT seems strongly biased towards presenting the US in a bad light. So while they sometimes have some interesting perspectives, everything they do has to be viewed through that filter. Somewhat similar to Fox News.

Not quite as bad as PressTV though.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
RT is a wholly government owned channel - as such is can probably be completely trusted to toe the Govt line.

Many private channels might do the same too - but at least with RT you know it will never change!!
 

FreiZeitGeist

Senior Member.
Forgive me if this isn't the right section for this particular question. But what do you all think about Russia Today as a reputable source of information?

Russia Today gives some Conspiracy-Believers that kind of information they want to hear, so it must be serios for them.

Russia Today is owned by the state and for shure controlled by the russian leaders. Russian MEdia in general is not really free. Jounalist critisizing the Gouvernment to much can be arrrested or even killed under unusual circumstances. For Details see this short summary from "Reporters without Borders" http://en.rsf.org/report-russia,131.html or the list of Journalists killed in Russia on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_Russia


@Mick

You know this guy who seems to be an credible "Expert in AStronomy", don´t you? ;)

 

John Smith

Banned
Banned
If I was in Russia, I would lean toward American media to get a more rounded outlook of Russia's policies and issues. In the same way, in United States, I lean more toward RT than American media (corporate media to be more accurate), to get a more rounded outlook of America's (and their corporate interest's) policies and issues.
 
Last edited:

MikeC

Closed Account
While I can sympathise with not wanting to view most US media, why would you go to an admitted Russian Govt propaganda site for a "more rounded view" of anything other than Russian propaganda?:confused:

Why is Russian government propaganda more palatable to you than US media propaganda?
 

John Smith

Banned
Banned
While I can sympathise with not wanting to view most US media, why would you go to an admitted Russian Govt propaganda site for a "more rounded view" of anything other than Russian propaganda?:confused:

Why is Russian government propaganda more palatable to you than US media propaganda?
Because they touch on things outside of the extremely limited spectrum of allowed opinion and talking points of corporate media. There is propaganda too. The trick is to watch both streams and weed out the propaganda from both sides to get a better rounded view. There is propaganda coming from both sides, but there is also truth buried in that propaganda. It's about finding that balance.
 

John Smith

Banned
Banned
They may sledgehammer their points, but they do highlight real issues such as corruption in financial industry and Wall Street which warrant attention while there is a complete black out in US corporate media. Here is a segment that I just found on Wall Street corruption..


One of the top comments:
I'm a US citizen and highly approve of this report! It speaks volumes on the financial and governmental corruption that infests America.
 
Last edited:

PowerSlug

New Member
Somewhat similar to Fox News.
That's a scary thought to me, atleast most people who watch or read Fox news know alot of it is BS. But from what I've seen so far, people follow RT alot more religiously. All you have to do is read youtube comments or comments on their website.
 

FreiZeitGeist

Senior Member.
They may sledgehammer their points, but they do highlight real issues such as corruption in financial industry and Wall Street which warrant attention while there is a complete black out in US corporate media.

But Russia Today will never speak about corruption in Russia. Corruption in Russia is so much common that nobody trusts in russian Police. Thats the reason why there where so much videos from the meteor some months ago. Nearly every cardriver has a camera on his windshield - to have an evidence if a corrupt policemen try to make him guilty.

This Station is named "Russia Today" - so it should report what´s happening in "Russia today". Why they doesn´t report about their own Corruption?

I really wish that some of the Consiracy-Theorists using RT as a quality-Source would spend some time in russia. They would feel how democratic and free russia today really is. (it´s not)
 

John Smith

Banned
Banned
But Russia Today will never speak about corruption in Russia. Corruption in Russia is so much common that nobody trusts in russian Police. Thats the reason why there where so much videos from the meteor some months ago. Nearly every cardriver has a camera on his windshield - to have an evidence if a corrupt policemen try to make him guilty.

This Station is named "Russia Today" - so it should report what´s happening in "Russia today". Why they doesn´t report about their own Corruption?

I really wish that some of the Consiracy-Theorists using RT as a quality-Source would spend some time in russia. They would feel how democratic and free russia today really is. (it´s not)
If I was in Russia, I would lean toward American media to get a more rounded outlook of Russia's policies and issues. In the same way, in United States, I lean more toward RT than American media (corporate media to be more accurate), to get a more rounded outlook of America's (and their corporate interest's) policies and issues.
 

Noblelox

Member
Back in the day I used to listen to Radio Moscow. At first I appreciated the different slant on world news and hated the UK's beep beep beep beeps over of certain news stories. It made me very suspicious of our Gov. Like all things new they become old and you see through the politics. Like a new job, your mad keen at first but after a bit you spot the back stabbers and power players. I guess what I'm saying is RT (Russia Today) is OK if you want a different perspective on an issue but you have to be mindful of where that perspective comes from. It's like a biased tabloid news paper. It's certainly not broad sheet. Personally I prefere Al Jazera, Europe today and even Bloomburg for a different slant.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Back in the day I used to listen to Radio Moscow. At first I appreciated the different slant on world news and hated the UK's beep beep beep beeps over of certain news stories. It made me very suspicious of our Gov. Like all things new they become old and you see through the politics. Like a new job, your mad keen at first but after a bit you spot the back stabbers and power players. I guess what I'm saying is RT (Russia Today) is OK if you want a different perspective on an issue but you have to be mindful of where that perspective comes from. It's like a biased tabloid news paper. It's certainly not broad sheet. Personally I prefere Al Jazera, Europe today and even Bloomburg for a different slant.

Perhaps one should also add something more in the middle, like the BBC, or Irish Times:
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
RT is a wholly government owned channel - as such is can probably be completely trusted to toe the Govt line.
So the advertisers pay the Russian Govt to advertise on there... or does RT funnel the money back to the Russian Gov or does the Russian Govt allow RT to run as a private company but 'tell it what to say'... which is the way it works?

It is rare that RT criticises Russia but it does have people on who do criticise Russia, notably the lesbian/gay laws and Pussy Riot but it does normally focus on the West's shortfalls and hypocrisy. But who in their right mind would rely on RT's word without checking it out for themselves... about the same percentage of people who would rely on Foxy News without getting a second opinion.

The BBC is hardly impartial in the main, although it does occasionally put out some hard hitting, unbiased investigations.
 
Last edited:

Arcesilaus

New Member
So the advertisers pay the Russian Govt to advertise on there... or does RT funnel the money back to the Russian Gov or does the Russian Govt allow RT to run as a private company but 'tell it what to say'... which is the way it works?

As I understand it, RT is a part of an autonomous non-profit organization (ANO) called TV Novosti; it receives most of its funding (300 million dollars in 2012) straight from the Russian Federal Budget. ANOs provide services in fields like culture, education, law, etc., are allowed to generate income to achieve their goals (so RT holds onto its ad revenue), and have some degree of autonomy from their founders. What the last part means is that, on paper at least, RT has no special obligation to follow what its founders (such as RIA Novosti) say.
RT does take its cues directly from Moscow for sensitive issues, a good example being during the Ossetian War, some of its founding members, such as the current editor-in-chief, Margarite Simonyam, are definitely Putin loyalists, and there are numerous instances of journalists being punished for trying to cover the wrong topics. However, there's also a fair amount of self-censorship. Many journalists at RT are recruited straight out of college, so there's a lot of pressure to impress the management in order to either rise in the ranks or stay onboard long enough to transfer to other international networks.

Federal Law on Non-Profits (see Article 10 for ANOs):
http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-REF(2013)037-e (Article 10)
CJR article on RT:
http://www.cjr.org/feature/what_is_russia_today.php?page=all
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
As I understand it, RT is a part of an autonomous non-profit organization (ANO) called TV Novosti; it receives most of its funding (300 million dollars in 2012) straight from the Russian Federal Budget. ANOs provide services in fields like culture, education, law, etc., are allowed to generate income to achieve their goals (so RT holds onto its ad revenue), and have some degree of autonomy from their founders. What the last part means is that, on paper at least, RT has no special obligation to follow what its founders (such as RIA Novosti) say.
RT does take its cues directly from Moscow for sensitive issues, a good example being during the Ossetian War, some of its founding members, such as the current editor-in-chief, Margarite Simonyam, are definitely Putin loyalists, and there are numerous instances of journalists being punished for trying to cover the wrong topics. However, there's also a fair amount of self-censorship. Many journalists at RT are recruited straight out of college, so there's a lot of pressure to impress the management in order to either rise in the ranks or stay onboard long enough to transfer to other international networks.

Federal Law on Non-Profits (see Article 10 for ANOs):
http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-REF(2013)037-e (Article 10)
CJR article on RT:
http://www.cjr.org/feature/what_is_russia_today.php?page=all
Thanks. That sounds about the sum of it. But having said that, a reasonable person would allow an element of propaganda in assessing output and use that to make an informed decision when assessing the equally propagandised output from western TV.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Thanks. That sounds about the sum of it. But having said that, a reasonable person would allow an element of propaganda in assessing output and use that to make an informed decision when assessing the equally propagandised output from western TV.

That was a nice summation of the RT situation.

Perhaps you could provide one that shows just as clearly how "western TV" is "equally propgandised"?

It should be easy enough for the BBC for example....
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
That was a nice summation of the RT situation.

Perhaps you could provide one that shows just as clearly how "western TV" is "equally propgandised"?

It should be easy enough for the BBC for example....

As I said, the BBC and PBS do some excellent in depth documentaries from time to time. However they do tend to give precedence to 'official lines', which is understandable but when you consider 'official lines' often are propagandised, the BBC as a whole cannot be completely unpropagandised.

i.e.
http://worldnewscurator.com/2013/02/25/propaganda-wars-bbc-radio-blocked-in-china/
and
http://bpc-world.co.uk/2011/05/bad-news-from-the-bbc-part-1-replete-with-imbalance-and-distortion/
Operation Mockingbird is a good example of western media propaganda.

Also

But does it tell the 'truth'? All media say they tell the 'truth' and not one says, 'We are only going to tell you what we want you to know'

I suggest that anyone who wants to know the truth, 'has their work cut out' and needs to utilise a whole range of news sources to discern what is actually the 'truth'.
 
Last edited:

MikeC

Closed Account
All news sources "spin" the info one way or another - it is impossible to be perfectly objective.

So I was more after the evidence of systemic political interference than individual examples.

For example the BBC has a charter that REQUIRES there be no political interference - however one might find instances of subtle pressure being applied?? And example might be the breaking story that the BBC Trust is under some threat due to redundancy payment disputes, and also the recent sex scandal involving Jimmy Saville, subsequent management turnover, and the possibility of the licence fee becoming non-compulsory.

contrast this with RT's admitted policy that criticism of the Russian PM and President is not allowed (behind a paywall but you can get 7 days free) and even Russians sometimes acknowledge that it is not so much passively "following the official line" as being an active propaganda outlet and its expenditure is at eth expense of even the pretense of a free press -

(source)

now there are certainly thoroughly biased news media in the west that are little more than active propaganda mouthpieces for some political faction or other - I'm not going to deny it because I believe it is true. However IMO (and AFAIK) none of the state broadcasters come close to being anything like RT.com.
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
the BBC has a charter that REQUIRES there be no political interference
The D-notice was applied immediately Chernobyl's nuclear accident plume made for the UK, and nothing was spoken or written about the lethal ash cloud for at least three weeks, while it passed over our heads. If that was what it did - don't ask me, for I couldn't possibly know. (I don't know if anyone's checked whether Brits glow in the dark).

So that "charter" wasn't worth that much, was it?
 
Last edited:

David Fraser

Senior Member.
Are you saying the plume did not hit the UK as it did albeit slightly dispersed. It hit within the first week.
http://www.hpa.org.uk/Topics/Radiat...RadiationTopics/RadiationIncidents/Chernobyl/
(Sorry I can't quote but go down to the paragraph about the UK)

IIRC it was greatly played down with some sources claiming the dust was blown from the Sahara. The fallout buggered up sheep farms in the Lake District and Scotland for years.
 

Noblelox

Member
I know you guys are not after individual examples of western proaganda but this is a classic example.


Although they (western news) didn't say this guy was squashed the inference was there. My wife, for example, was convinced he was squashed as it was never clarified at the time....and as far as I'm aware never has.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
The KGB had a program of encouraging conspiracy theories as a means to destabilise America from within.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitrokhin_Archive#Disinformation_campaign_against_the_United_States
One can easily see the logic of this being continued, especially through internet forums where constant false flag and conspiracy accusations aid those with interests against America. It doesn't matter that they are without substance, they serve the purpose of stirring up people, and there are people just eager and waiting for some cause to take up to express their discontent with the government.
RT is definitely aimed at this audience.


ETA informative ATS thread...
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread963050/pg1
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
Yes. Funny how it attacked the sheep (and cows) and missed everything else. We were lucky, weren't we?

It was about then that a desire to leave the UK grew within me.


And we have Fox for balance.o_O
Don't forget about the Welsh sheep as well. Amazing how we humans are so resistant to radiation and the the sheep etc are not.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-17472698

Then there is Dounreay pumping irradiated material out to sea and it washing back up.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/2547981.stm
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
I know you guys are not after individual examples of western proaganda but this is a classic example.


Although they (western news) didn't say this guy was squashed the inference was there. My wife, for example, was convinced he was squashed as it was never clarified at the time....and as far as I'm aware never has.
Good point about the propaganda of just showing misleading clips but we also cannot forget that hundreds died in the square and it is still 'illegal' to talk about or commemorate it in China.

But having said that China is changing rapidly.
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I know you guys are not after individual examples of western proaganda but this is a classic example.


Although they (western news) didn't say this guy was squashed the inference was there. My wife, for example, was convinced he was squashed as it was never clarified at the time....and as far as I'm aware never has.

At the time it was absolutely clarified. Every time that clip was shown they also showed the other guys come up and lead him away. Here's an example from the time:

"Tank Man" starts at 2:10
http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/52086829#52086829

It's only in the years since that it has been reduced more to just an iconic still image.
 

Noblelox

Member
At the time it was absolutely clarified. Every time that clip was shown they also showed the other guys come up and lead him away. Here's an example from the time:

"Tank Man" starts at 2:10
http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/52086829#52086829

It's only in the years since that it has been reduced more to just an iconic still image.

Yep, just checked and got a different version http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8047516.stm conforming your post but from the BBC. Goes to show how powerful repeating that image is because I don't remeber "Tank Man" getting away. I only ever remember the short edited version which, as I said earlier, leads to the impression the guy was squished.
 

JeffreyNotGeoffrey

Active Member
What happened to him? From what I understand he was disappeared into a re-education camp. Quite frankly I think I would prefer squishing by tank to a re-education camp.
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
Then there is Dounreay
You haven't mentioned Seascale. Or was it Sellafield? Or WIndscale? You get funny when you get old. Different words appear to mean the same thing.

Certain wind currents take the dusts of a sea's edge and carry them aloft. In valleys, eddies and vortices form which propel the air, whether aloft or at ground level. At the centre of any vortex is a place of low pressure, with wind speeds almost at rest. In such conditions small yet massive particles have a tendency to settle. The net result is that, over time, isolated regions of the countryside will experience a higher than normal level of "background radiation".

You could picnic there. But, either in Lancashire, Cumbria, Northern Ireland, the southwest coast of Scotland, North Wales, or Anglesey, I'd recommend a radiation meter. All these nuclear plants leak. Not necessarily on a regular basis, they don't. But there will always be another accident just as soon as standards drop. And they occasionally do. It's human nature.

Anyway, the Irish Sea is hot. Not so that it would kill you to swim in it, but more insidiously, by wind transport and your desire for a sheltered picnic.
 
Last edited:

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
If anyone has anything of a parity for indepth debate on Syria from Fox or CNN, I would like to see it. I haven't seen anything like it from MSM. It's all Assad guilty, U.S ready to strike in punishment... along the lines put forward by Mark Levine from Washington. The other side needs stating as well. Even with all the MSM brainwashing, people are not swallowing the propaganda... and about time too.

 
Last edited:

Boodles

Banned
Banned
You haven't mentioned Seascale. Or was it Sellafield? Or WIndscale?

Anyway, the Irish Sea is hot. Not so that it would kill you to swim in it, but more insidiously, by wind transport and your desire for a sheltered picnic.

Surprisingly little* talk of Fukushima this last week (on the planet), given that it is leaking a whopping 15 times more Tritium today then it was... the day before yesterday. Yet the world press talks of Japan's offence at a French cartoon?

*No coverage... A bit like that benign Russian cloud that annoyed sheep.

http://fukushima-diary.com/2013/09/...e-tank-area-1-5-times-much-as-one-day-before/
 
Last edited:

Elfenlied

Member
That was a nice summation of the RT situation.

Perhaps you could provide one that shows just as clearly how "western TV" is "equally propgandised"?

It should be easy enough for the BBC for example....
But is that a useful comparison? What is the purpose of RT, was it a propaganda initiative or a reaction to foreign news media? Maybe it's more relevant to compare with how the Western media report on Russia, to see whether there is any bias to counter.

My daily newspaper De Standaard (one of the two Flemish "quality" newspapers according to the EJC http://ejc.net/media_landscapes/belgium), has probably published enough articles about Pussy Riot to fill a weekend edition. In contrast, when in Ingushetia a suicide bomber killed seven policemen at the funeral of their collegue who was shot by terrorists days before, the article was smaller than the Calvin & Hobbes cartoon. Every election is by definition rigged, and articles on Russian elections are really reporting the accusations by the opposition. Every journalist who dies is assumed to have been killed by Putin's men (I wonder why an enemy of Putin would bother to give any interviews, shooting the journalist would be much more effective)...

Same is true for news from China: three to four times a month there will be a big story from "our correspondent in China". About how they are hacking our computers, how they are taught in school to hate the Japanese; when a baby is killed it's always the culture and the government policy that is responsible. Last month there was a two page story about a woman who had attempted suicide, clearly it was the slave labor in the iphone factory that drove her to it. Elections are rigged, when a politician is arrested for corruption, you get one line about the actual accusations, the rest is about political intrigue, you know, the real reason for the arrest...

Femen were brave women fighting against oppression when they were active in the East, now they protest in Western Europe they are dumb, naive, manipulated bitches. I haven't seen much uproar or protest by western politicians about the French putting them on trial for their protest in Notre Dame.
 

Steve

Senior Member.
Just another example how RT is trying to undermine the US by poisoning the minds of CTs who then become the real false-flaggers from inside their own country.
 

Noblelox

Member
Just another example how RT is trying to undermine the US by poisoning the minds of CTs who then become the real false-flaggers from inside their own country.

I hate to be derogatory but this Daniel Bushell's accent is grating and somewhat chav. Perhaps that's his audience demographic. Oh well! At least he didn't pronounce TH as F. And who's this 87% he talks about? 87% of conspiracy theorists?
 

Elfenlied

Member
You haven't mentioned Seascale. Or was it Sellafield? Or WIndscale? You get funny when you get old. Different words appear to mean the same thing.

Certain wind currents take the dusts of a sea's edge and carry them aloft. In valleys, eddies and vortices form which propel the air, whether aloft or at ground level. At the centre of any vortex is a place of low pressure, with wind speeds almost at rest. In such conditions small yet massive particles have a tendency to settle. The net result is that, over time, isolated regions of the countryside will experience a higher than normal level of "background radiation".

You could picnic there. But, either in Lancashire, Cumbria, Northern Ireland, the southwest coast of Scotland, North Wales, or Anglesey, I'd recommend a radiation meter. All these nuclear plants leak. Not necessarily on a regular basis, they don't. But there will always be another accident just as soon as standards drop. And they occasionally do. It's human nature.

Anyway, the Irish Sea is hot. Not so that it would kill you to swim in it, but more insidiously, by wind transport and your desire for a sheltered picnic.
But we all know who was responsible for that, Richard bloody Burton!!
(at 5:32)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mick West RT Promoting Flat Earth? Flat Earth 31
N Explained: "Jellyfish object" video in Russia [Rocket Launch] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 11
A Explained: UFO Filmed from a Helicopter in Kamchatka, Russia. May 31, 2021 [Fake] UFOs and Aliens 2
Mick West Claim: Julian Assange offered pardon to "Lie" for Trump Current Events 20
Stefan Leahu Russian ammo depot explosion near Achinsk, Krasnoyarsk Current Events 14
Mick West Russian Nuclear Sub Fire Kills 14, Current Events 9
Mick West Russia Predicts US Will Use Fake Chemical Attack In Syria as Pretext for Missile Attacks Current Events 9
Mick West Alex Jones Deplatforming and Related Conspiracy Theories Current Events 49
Mick West "UFO" Crash in Russia Near World Cup Match - Rocket Part UFOs and Aliens 4
Whitebeard Sergei Skripal 'Nerve Agent' Attack Current Events 46
MikeG Debunked: Podesta Received $35 million from Russia Conspiracy Theories 5
jim oberg Strange cloud UFO over Russia November 2011 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
MikeG Massive Deployment of American Tanks Against Russia Conspiracy Theories 14
S Claim: Russian radar would have picked up MH17 missile Flight MH17 15
Mick West Did Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev say "World War"? General Discussion 28
txt29 Claim: harvesting energy from Schumann resonances and Earth's EM field (ADGEX) Science and Pseudoscience 27
Mick West Debunked: CyberBerkut Video Supposedly Showing Staged ISIS beheading of Foley Conspiracy Theories 37
M Claim: Robert Parry: Australian 60 Minutes fudged evidence to pin blame on Russia Flight MH17 21
SabreSaint Debunked: Russia to supply weapons to Mexico Conspiracy Theories 19
D RF humaid convoy to Donbass unloaded weapons and ammo 30th Nov 2014 General Discussion 0
Gridlock Russian DashCam 'Explosion' General Discussion 6
cmnit Debunked: No persistent contrails in Russia Contrails and Chemtrails 67
Josh Heuer MH17: Russia Claims Ukranian military plane flying nearby before incident Flight MH17 121
MikeC Claims of Russia rigging the Crimean referendum General Discussion 11
Tobes Debunked: Movie producer Nathan Folks claims bombing false flag, Voice of Russia says blood too red Boston Marathon Bombings 137
Emeline "Alien Creature Caught in Russia" [Slender Man Hoax] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 6
nanotchi Debunked: Iran claims Snowden Documents Proving “US-Alien-Hitler” Link Stun Russia [Sorcha Faal] Ghosts, Monsters, and the Paranormal 2
JFDee Meteorite trail near Chelyabinsk, Russia Contrails and Chemtrails 48
G Russia practices weather modification by spraying cement m-500 Contrails and Chemtrails 1
deirdre PSA: Mick West discusses Flat Earth on Joe Rogan (JRE) show today Flat Earth 8
steve holmes Why only one contrail today? Contrails and Chemtrails 8
Mick West Why Were There Contrails Today, But Not Yesterday? It's the Weather! Contrails and Chemtrails 21
Critical Thinker Psychology Today article: 'Reasoned Sense would be better than Common Sense' Practical Debunking 0
Critical Thinker Article in Psychology Today: The Art of Positive Skepticism Practical Debunking 0
AluminumTheory Conspiracists and Skeptics: (in your opinion) What is Wrong with the World Today? General Discussion 4
Neil Pennington No planes today Contrails and Chemtrails 0
TWCobra Where is the Stratosphere today? Contrails and Chemtrails 96
Related Articles





































Related Articles

Top