KMFJD
Lifer
- Aug 11, 2005
- 30,031
- 45,271
- 136
Telesur (stylised as teleSUR) is a Latin American terrestrial and satellite television network headquartered in Caracas, Venezuela and sponsored primarily by the government of Venezuela,[1] with additional funding from the governments of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Uruguay.[2] It was launched in 2005, under the government of Hugo Chávez, with the aim of being "a Latin socialist answer to CNN"
seems legit to me
To maintain his claim the interim presidency, Mr. Guaidó needed to be re-elected as head of the Assembly on Sunday, according to analysts inside and outside the country. His victory was expected, since the opposition controls the legislative body.
But at the last minute, members of the National Guard prevented Mr. Guaidó and other supporters from entering the Assembly’s building. Video footage showed Mr. Guaidó attempting to climb over the spiked metal fence to gain entry to the building where the vote would be held.
Inside, Mr. Maduro’s party swore in as head of the Assembly a legislator named Luis Parra, a former member of the opposition who turned against Mr. Guaidó after the Assembly leader opened a corruption claim against him. There was no vote count.
Maduro or Guaido neither were elected so what's the diff? I mean the us could work with the opposition down there but they icky social democrats....Uhmm, no. That's actually a further coup attempt by Maduro to destroy the last remaining democratic institution in Venezuela. Maduro had the police/army block the majority opposition from the national assembly and then had his loyalists proclaim a new president of the assembly while nobody else could get in.
Venezuela’s Maduro Claims Control of National Assembly, Tightening Grip on Power (Published 2020)
It was the last political institution in opposition hands. Now President Nicolás Maduro’s has moved closer to total control of the state.www.nytimes.com
So yeah, at this point Maduro has become a full on dictator.
Maduro or Guaido neither were elected so what's the diff?
Guaido's coalition had a majority in the national assembly, how would he not have the votes?
Also, that reporter whose tweets you are citing works for RT, which is Russian state propaganda.
I know RT is russian propaganda....i'm just posting the absurdity of this whole thing , there are no good sides in this issue, just different levels of shit.
RT is no worse than the BBC, MSNBC, Fox News, or the New York Times. It's perfectly fine to use it as a source. It has a point of view and is prone to biases, same as the others.
It's kind of amazing that any rational thinking person would look at the current incarnation of Pravda and the New York Times and say they are equally credible. I mean for christ's sake the editor in chief of RT explicitly described the network as a tool to wage information warfare against the western world, lol.
Al Jazeera, BBC, NPR?Which news sources that are critical of American foreign policy do you think are credible?
Why do you think RT is remotely credible?Which news sources that are critical of American foreign policy do you think are credible?
Which news sources that are critical of American foreign policy do you think are credible?
Why do you think RT is remotely credible?
RT is no worse than the BBC, MSNBC, Fox News, or the New York Times. It's perfectly fine to use it as a source. It has a point of view and is prone to biases, same as the others.
Use your words. I'm not going to follow some rabbit hole of links.
This is a deflection, you've made the claim that literal Russian propaganda outfits, designed for the express purpose of information warfare, are as credible as internationally acclaimed independent media, which is frankly bonkers.
Regardless, while I think US papers often give excessive credence to US government policies and that is a form of institutionalist bias, they are not in the business of purposefully spreading disinformation like RT is. As an example of a few news sources that are critical of US foreign policy but are generally credible we have, Al Jazeera, Le Monde, and Der Spiegel. Al Jazeera is the one that's the most suspect on that list considering the Qatari government appears to exert at least moderate influence on their coverage but it is still nothing like RT.
No, it was a deflection when you turned the debate onto RT itself.
Pointing out that you don't consider a news source credible unless it is broadly aligned with American interests is a perfectly fair point.
Al Jazeera, Le Monde, and Der Spiegel are more likely to be critical of the US foreign policy than the New York Times, but I would not say they are broadly critical.
Ironic considering that Fox News was the one that interviewed her. NYT and CNN quoted her words. Is it on them for failing to fully identify someone they quoted? Or on Fox News for not divulging the information in the first place? Shall we start railing against all news organizations who don't fully investigate the backgrounds of every single person they quote, regardless if they were the one that interviewed them or not?
Fox News for example presented Alinejad – who appeared on the network on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday – as an “Iranian journalist” or “Iranian journalist and activist,” missing a key detail about her biography: she’s paid by the U.S. government. CNN, and New York Times columnist Bret Stephens also quoted her without acknowledging her government funding.
That was a fail on that interviewer, or CNN if she was told to not mention it. It hardly makes CNN a mouthpiece of the US govt though. Fox had her for what, 3 or 4 interviews and didn't bring it up? That sounds like more than an oversight.Fox News wasn’t the only network to give Alinejad a platform. CNN’s Fareed Zakaria had Alinejad on his show, GPS, on December 22 to discuss the month-long protests and introduced her only as “an Iranian Activist in exile” without disclosing that she is paid by the U.S. government.
No. Evaluating whether or not a source is credible is a bedrock foundation of any reasoned debate. I'm sad that you don't know that.
This is of course a lie and you know it. You should be ashamed of yourself for this sort of nonsensical diversion. I do not consider RT credible for the same reason I do not consider Fox News credible despite their strong alignment with US foreign policy. They are not credible because reporting news accurately is not their primary goal.
Oh okay.