Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is a nice narrative, but has not been consistent with how counter-disinformation has been applied in the contemporary US. It matters less what you say than who is making you say this. For example the founders of Tenet Media were indicted for allegedly conspiring with Russia. Those featured on the channel, such as Tim Pool and Dave Rubin, received millions of dollars from Russia sources for spreading narratives that happened to align exactly with Russian propaganda. This should have raised major red flags as their videos typically received modest viewership (in the order of 10k). The DOJ had every opportunity to indict them as well. However, because it's unlikely that it could be proven that they were knowingly conspiring with Russia, so they were free to go.


> because it's unlikely that it could be proven that they were knowingly conspiring with Russia

it's called innocent until prove guilty for a reason, it's the system working as intended.

And the US have exploited it too and are still doing it.

As an example, read the transcript of Victoria Nuland conversation about the future of Ukraine during the time President was someone NATO disliked for not being anti Russian enough.

Nuland: OK. He's now gotten both Serry and [UN Secretary General] Ban Ki-moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and to have the UN help glue it and, you know, *Fuck the EU*.

Did Nuland pay for saying it? Of course not. On the contrary, she was awesomely compensated for her work.


Why should one be surprised that the US Department of State is involved in geopolitics?

Your example further reinforces my point that content matters less than who is saying this content. You quoted a phone call that was very likely to be have intercepted by Russian intelligence and quickly disseminated on Russian-owned media, yet you're freely posting this on an American website.


> Why should one be surprised that the US Department of State is involved in geopolitics?

It is absolutely not!

It is surprising to me that people believe the USA are victims and not the greatest instigators of geopolitical unrest of the past 80 years (at least).

> You quoted a phone call that was very likely to be have intercepted by Russian intelligence

Nahhh

The Russian intelligence simply put it in the open, but who actually intercepted Nuland is unknown.

The point is we perfectly know that the USA are waging wars to also punish Europe, but it cannot be said, because platforms are all from the US and follow US directives.

That's why people also followed in love with tik tok, it was a breath of fresh air, finally few things that we all know are true (Nuland transcription just prove it) could finally be said (again: never used the platform, that's what people I know have said to me and I know a lot of regular people, white collars, regular jobs, kids and all the rest. They simply understand that American social networks and American propaganda have become so unbelievably false that it's baffling)

> yet you're freely posting this on an American website.

Am I?

Have you noticed my name is a generated random string?

Do you ever wonder why people like me do that?


> it's called innocent until prove guilty for a reason, it's the system working as intended.

That principle applies to laws, in order to minimize the chance of abuse when investigating criminal and civil charges.

This is not the same. This is about national security, and specifically enforcing national security policies. You do not need presumption of innocence to determine if you should embargo a country, expell a diplomat, and ban a suspicious supplier from your critical infrastructure.


> You do not need presumption of innocence to determine if you should embargo a country

Are you saying that US decision makers are the ones to blame here?

> and ban a suspicious supplier from your critical infrastructure.

I don't think China controls through tik tok what country the US should or should not embargo...


Being conservative, marrying, raising children and being nationalistic does not align with Russian propaganda.

Similarly, all so called "far-right" parties that are supposedly financed by Russia in the EU ultimately are in favor of national interests.

Similarly, Ukrainian nationalists are in favor of Ukrainian interests.

If it came to a war between Russia and the EU, who would fight? Not the chicken hawks of the Green Party, but the "Deplorables" who vote "far-right".

The entire Russian influence narrative was concocted by the Neocons who had moved from the Bush era Republicans to the Democrat party. Now everyone realizes that perhaps China and Russia had financed culturally left organizations all along, which is entirely in line with the historic behavior of the Soviet Union. So everyone abandons ship now and pledges allegiance to Trump.

Regarding the division to the US population: That is in the interests of the established two parties, so no one looks too closely what is actually happening.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: